Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › FitEar TO GO! & Universal Series --- Suyama's custom IEM, made universal!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FitEar TO GO! & Universal Series --- Suyama's custom IEM, made universal! - Page 63

post #931 of 3704
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post

I have found the Senn bi-flange tips to be pretty darn decent on the TG!334's too. But I find Sony Hybrids help bump SQ a tad even over those... I guess there's my choices for #1 & #2 tips on the 334's.

 

I think hybrids would actually constrict highs on the 334; it's not wide-mouthed enough. I haven't tried the Sennheiser bi-flange tips on the 334 yet.

post #932 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

I think hybrids would actually constrict highs on the 334; it's not wide-mouthed enough. I haven't tried the Sennheiser bi-flange tips on the 334 yet.

 

One would think so, for sure, with the narrower opening... but I did a couple long A/B sessions with all the tips I have that I normally have success with: Senn bi-flange, Senn hard foam, UE single flange (this one was right up there too), Sony stock single flange silicone, hybrid, and probably a few others I'm forgetting... and to me the Hybrids had the best treble extension and soundstaging of everything. Must be a weird coupling with my ears or something! Based on shotgunshane's 'tip', I need to track down my Auvio ones.

post #933 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post

and to me the Hybrids had the best treble extension and soundstaging of everything.

 

Is the Hybrid tip the same as the one used in EX1000 also does the UE single flange gives a better treble extension as compared to fitear 334 stock tip? I am looking for a better treble extension.

post #934 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

I don't think you saw a graph comparison between the ER4S and the TO GO! 334. FitEar did publish a graph comparison between the ER4S and the F111 (formerly named the TO GO! 111), and those two models are very similar in response. In that case, yes, the FitEar F111 seems to have achieved a very slightly (I emphasize slightly) more accurate response while at the same time making it easier to drive via portable sources. However, whether this added accuracy is appreciable by ear, I don't know. Most IEMs usually add an extra 5-6 dB of bass boost over the bass shelf response of the ER4S/B because of the psychoacoustic drawbacks of insert earphones (canalphones, IEMs) causing the mind to detect less bass because of the lack of tactile feedback of the outer ear. However, the bass boost will slightly lessen transparency. At the same time, however, there is the potential (potential, not definite) for multi-driver earphones to broadcast more details.

If you want to ask me, subjectively, whether the 334 outstrips the ER4S sonically, I would definitely say yes, but only in certain subjective dimensions, but not by any of the metrics that you required. In terms of response accuracy, the only earphone that has been tested to be more accurate (extremely slight improvement, and not independently verified) than the ER4S is the FitEar F111. I've heard the F111, and while it's excellent, I can't really say it's better than your ER4S, except in terms of driveability.

Awesome info thanks! If I'm reading this right does that mean that the 111 has a 5-6 dB bass boost over the ER4S? Or is it just the 334 with this boost? Or neither?

Also what do you like more subjectively about the 334 over the ER4S? If it does have a bit more bass I could see that as a plus for my tastes.
post #935 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiowood View Post

 

Is the Hybrid tip the same as the one used in EX1000 also does the UE single flange gives a better treble extension as compared to fitear 334 stock tip? I am looking for a better treble extension.

 

Yep, that's them. Regarding UE tips vs. stock, I don't think I'm the best person to give sound comments because when I was using them the 334's would not hold a seal well. 

post #936 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by cn11 View Post

 

Yep, that's them. Regarding UE tips vs. stock, I don't think I'm the best person to give sound comments because when I was using them the 334's would not hold a seal well. 

Ok thanks, I will give a shot. Anything for better treble extension. My last strategy is call ...mind burn-in. biggrin.gif

post #937 of 3704

Just remember, what fits perfectly for my ears might not with yours (therefore not sound so good), and you may think I'm crazy!  bigsmile_face.gif

post #938 of 3704
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiowood View Post  Anything for better treble extension.

 

Perhaps you're too used to the K3003 sound?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnarlsagan View Post

Awesome info thanks! If I'm reading this right does that mean that the 111 has a 5-6 dB bass boost over the ER4S? Or is it just the 334 with this boost? Or neither?
Also what do you like more subjectively about the 334 over the ER4S? If it does have a bit more bass I could see that as a plus for my tastes.

 

No, the F111 has basically an identical FR to the ER4S. It is the 334 that has a 5-6 dB low end boost over the ER4. I personally think that the 334 has a teeny bit too much bass, especially if I exercise a deeper fit. 3-4 dB of boost over the ER4 shelf is my sweet spot. However, the 334 does extend significantly lower than does the F111/ER4S. It also has superior imaging and sense of space. The ER4 separates everything well, but instruments all feel around the same size, even when they're not supposed to. Vocals are slightly gentler on the 334. The 334 is slightly more forgiving. Anyways, these are just some of the things that I thought were advantages the 334 had. You can search for people comparing the 334 and the 111, and you can get a rough idea of the difference between it and the ER4S from that.

post #939 of 3704
Yes i think so too.. but i am selling the akg 3003 for a lack of bass. I am used to th900 cleanliness, sparkle without being hash.
post #940 of 3704

just got a pair from ALO with the ALO cable ... Loving it so far!

post #941 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post

 

A bit OT but I am curious as to why anyone would get a Dacport without the 1 ohm mod. Is it more volume (if this is adjusted accordingly)?

Because it costs $100 more.

post #942 of 3704

Hear's a simple experiment for people that think FR defines a speakers/headphones/earphones sound.  Listen to a set of non crap speakers w/o the grills on.  Remember that sound.  Now put the grills back on and use whatever EQ you like to make it sound like the grills are off.  You can't.

post #943 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

Because it costs $100 more.

 

Ah! I did not know this...

 

Now it makes senses.

post #944 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post

Ah! I did not know this...

 

Now it makes senses.

 

Yeah, for the price of the mod, I decided to sell the DACPort, buy a DACPort LX and put the saved more toward a better amp section.  The UHA6S.  I sold the DACPort LX due to packaging, complexity and cost versus benefit but I do miss it.  One of the few things I sold that I miss.  

post #945 of 3704
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post

 

Ah! I did not know this...

 

Now it makes senses.

 

And it wasn't even an option when I bought mine, on preorder.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › FitEar TO GO! & Universal Series --- Suyama's custom IEM, made universal!