Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] MEElectronics A161P - Intro Into Neutrality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Review] MEElectronics A161P - Intro Into Neutrality - Page 5

post #61 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

" both opinions still should hold validity as sound has the unstable tendency to change greatly under the smallest of conditions." Oh so true!

I also agree with your comparison on all counts, Tinyman.

I'll be recieving the TDK IE800 this week, which should make an interesting comparison.

Hm, haven't read too much about the TDK. It should make an interesting comparison.
post #62 of 90

Are my ears broken? After reading so many reviews, I got the A161p in the recent 35% sale, hoping to find an IEM with analytical qualities while still sounding musical and fun... Well let's just say these really let me down. Subpar build quality aside (which is worse than my 20$ Meelec M9s), I found them to be somewhat tinny and congested-sounding, veiled. Listening to a classic tango piece was a real joy, but each time I go back to more "modern" music they sound like they have no detail at all. Maybe it's because the mids are so emphasized. This is my first BA headphone ever but after hearing these I'm not at all convinced that the single balanced armature design is actually that great for headphones. Maybe 2 or 3-way is better but I see no advantage of this single-BA design over dynamics (other than the fact that it is completely closed). I didn't listen to any headphone for a few days and then gave them another listen, and I was right back to my initial impression that they are really veiled. Maybe they're broken. Did anyone make similar observations?

 

Here's a list of the headphones I usually listen to so you can see where I'm coming from:

 

DT 990 (amazing bass and great soundstage but harsh treble and lacking in the mids)

Philips Fidelio x1 (simply amazing, though slightly smaller soundstage than the beyers)

KSC 75 (aggressive, but fun, not super detailed but still satisfying)

Meelec M9 (Bloated Bass and treble emphasis, but great with EQ and very musical, good build and very durable)

Brainwavz M5 (Build quality is only decent but for the sale price they are good, with a warm signature and slightly tinny mids)

 

A161p, compared to all of the above: Mid-centric with barely any detail, warm but in a bad, veiled way, zero foot-tapping qualities, I thought this was going to be an upgrade...

post #63 of 90

I don't know but they might be broken.tongue_smile.gif You might wanna try some tip rolling to see if you like the sound more with another tips. The a161p is warm but is close to neutral, so you might perceive it as thin sounding. It's not congested but it has more of a intimate presentation due to its mid-centric sound, so if you're used to more open and airy sounding headphones with bigger soundstage then this may be the reason you find it congested. Detailing is pretty decent and with a little bit more treble energy it would have been ever better. It doen't have the aggressive detailing of something like the brainwavz B2 but it's definitely not something I would call veiled. As far as single BAs go it's fairly good but the mid-forward presentation might not be for you. There are other single BA iems like ety, for instance,  that have more extended treble and are more airy sounding but at the expense of the bass and is weight. And if you expected foot-tapping then you're looking at the wrong place as while the a161p is fairly musical it's more of warm but accurate iem with pretty flat and quick bass - you want something dynamic with a U or V-shaped signature and bass emphasis.

So the 161p is probably just not your cup of tea bit it is a very good BA iem, especially at discounted price you got it for. Anyway, I still suggest you do some tip rolling and maybe give it few days to see if you'll start to appreciate what it can do - maybe listening to it and not just leaving it in a drawer and returning to it in a week to see if yo ulike it then.

post #64 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by zephyr90 View Post

Are my ears broken? After reading so many reviews, I got the A161p in the recent 35% sale, hoping to find an IEM with analytical qualities while still sounding musical and fun... Well let's just say these really let me down. Subpar build quality aside (which is worse than my 20$ Meelec M9s), I found them to be somewhat tinny and congested-sounding, veiled. Listening to a classic tango piece was a real joy, but each time I go back to more "modern" music they sound like they have no detail at all. Maybe it's because the mids are so emphasized. This is my first BA headphone ever but after hearing these I'm not at all convinced that the single balanced armature design is actually that great for headphones. Maybe 2 or 3-way is better but I see no advantage of this single-BA design over dynamics (other than the fact that it is completely closed). I didn't listen to any headphone for a few days and then gave them another listen, and I was right back to my initial impression that they are really veiled. Maybe they're broken. Did anyone make similar observations?

 

Here's a list of the headphones I usually listen to so you can see where I'm coming from:

 

DT 990 (amazing bass and great soundstage but harsh treble and lacking in the mids)

Philips Fidelio x1 (simply amazing, though slightly smaller soundstage than the beyers)

KSC 75 (aggressive, but fun, not super detailed but still satisfying)

Meelec M9 (Bloated Bass and treble emphasis, but great with EQ and very musical, good build and very durable)

Brainwavz M5 (Build quality is only decent but for the sale price they are good, with a warm signature and slightly tinny mids)

 

A161p, compared to all of the above: Mid-centric with barely any detail, warm but in a bad, veiled way, zero foot-tapping qualities, I thought this was going to be an upgrade...

 

You got a sound you weren't expecting, as the MEE A161 weren't ever described as analytic, IDK who made that statement.  Rather, the highs were actually rolled off a tad.  I think that would explain why you feel the way you do about the IEMs.  

post #65 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

maybe listening to it and not just leaving it in a drawer and returning to it in a week to see if yo ulike it then.

No, that's not at all what I did. 

I listened to them for a good while over the span of several days, and then didn't listen to any headphones for three days. And I felt that I could get used to them but going back to them today for just one song (Placebo - Second Sight) made me realize that they really don't please me.

 

Tip rolling is not usually something I can do because I rarely ever have more than 1 kind that fits my ear with a good seal. Bi- or Triflanges never worked for me, I have a pair of Complies somewhere but I doubt those will fit because they fit on my other IEMs which have a much wider nozzle than the a161p. In the past the only kind that ever fit me were the smallest narrow or wide-bore silicone tips and T400 Comply tips (though isolation and bass punch weren't as good with the Complies)

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

 

You got a sound you weren't expecting, as the MEE A161 weren't ever described as analytic, IDK who made that statement.  Rather, the highs were actually rolled off a tad.  I think that would explain why you feel the way you do about the IEMs.  

I didn't say "an analytic IEM", I said that I hoped it would posess some analytical qualities. Maybe analytic is the wrong word, what I meant is perhaps accuracy, without coloration, to pick out some fine details in the music that you can't hear with bad headphones... 

I'll consider contacting Meelec but I can't imagine that they are really broken. They don't sound broken, they do what they're supposed to but to me they sound neither very natural nor very pleasing...


Edited by zephyr90 - 1/13/13 at 10:18am
post #66 of 90
I'm def with Kova4a on tip rolling. The A161p sounded horrible to me with all the provided tips - I genuinely didn't like the signature or presentation. It even sounded off with all my favorite after market tips. It wasn't until I'd tried an obscure unbranded pair that I found the right match, which brought the sound in line with the descriptions i'd based my purchase on.

I found build quality to be about what I'd expect at the pricepoint.

Let us know how you get on.

Edit: just read above message. There's usually tips being sold cheap / traded on tbe FS forum. I could always post you a few but I'm UK based.

I'm not at all discounting your experience of them, just keen to emphasize that it matched mine until I found the right tips.
Edited by Nulliverse - 1/13/13 at 11:00am
post #67 of 90

I'm actually using meelec grey double-flange balanced tips (the old ones). I just used the core of another iem that is not too thick and covers the whole nozzle, so the "adapter" doesn't slip and move up and down and I really like the fit and sound

post #68 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

I'm actually using meelec grey double-flange balanced tips (the old ones). I just used the core of another iem that is not too thick and covers the whole nozzle, so the "adapter" doesn't slip and move up and down and I really like the fit and sound

 

Funny, as I had lots of those grey balanced double flange, but they didn't pair well with any of my previous iems, so bit by bit I gave them all away. The first thing I thought after realizing that the A161p's stick tips were of no use, was that they should have included those greys. Strange that MEElec make such a wide range of quality tips, yet provide such a limited selection with the A161p.

post #69 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

 

Funny, as I had lots of those grey balanced double flange, but they didn't pair well with any of my previous iems, so bit by bit I gave them all away. The first thing I thought after realizing that the A161p's stick tips were of no use, was that they should have included those greys. Strange that MEElec make such a wide range of quality tips, yet provide such a limited selection with the A161p.

Yeah, I don't know why. They should have included their other single-flange tips (like the one that come with M6) instead of those insanely soft ones included now. Also, don't know why they changed those grey balanced tips as the new ones are too soft and not good at all. I did also try comply t200 but didn't like it at all and what it did to the highs. For some strange reason though decored shure olives work pretty good and are my second most favorite combo with the a161p

post #70 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post

Yeah, I don't know why. They should have included their other single-flange tips (like the one that come with M6) instead of those insanely soft ones included now. Also, don't know why they changed those grey balanced tips as the new ones are too soft and not good at all. I did also try comply t200 but didn't like it at all and what it did to the highs. For some strange reason though decored shure olives work pretty good and are my second most favorite combo with the a161p

 

Yeah, I've been not been tempted to even try complys with the A161p. The only ones I've previously got along with are the TS series, and even then I've had to reverse them to prevent higher frequencies being absorbed by the foam. Interesting what you say about the decored olives though. They're held in high regard by many, and are possibly one of the only tips I haven't tried. May have to give them a go! 

 

I share your bafflement regarding the discontinuation of the balanced greys. I imagine they'd be a damn fine tip paired with the right phone. 

 

Anyhow, I'm still very much enjoying my A161p. The aggressiveness of the bass still takes me by surprise on some tracks. It also still amazes me that one little BA can have such a wide frequency response. I definitely see the appeal of this... how can I call it... 'consumer neutral' signature ;-)

post #71 of 90

Yeah, the decored olives actually work pretty good. I did expect them to sound good coz they did with my philips she9850 and the a161p is pretty much a straight upgrade of it (sadly not of its build quality and looks). I know what you mean my the consumer signature - frankly, if someone said he wants a recommendation for his first BA I would say the a161p is a pretty safe choice in comparison to the ety signature. I can't blame zephyr for having bad hearing though as it's all down to personal preferences - like with that darn jvc s500 that I got recently and now all of my iems sound sub-par to me compared to it. 

post #72 of 90
Thread Starter 

I'd agree with how Kova4a and Nulliverse are describing the sound.  Never heard any congestion.  However I did like all the stock tips... a lot!  The only thing missing is better treble presence for better micro detail.

post #73 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

I'd agree with how Kova4a and Nulliverse are describing the sound.  Never heard any congestion.  However I did like all the stock tips... a lot!  The only thing missing is better treble presence for better micro detail.

Well, the stock tips aren't that bad, actually if you don't mind having your ears raped then the tri-flanges have possible the best treble presentation of the bunch. My only gripe is with the single-flanges - they do sound decent but the silicone is too soft and the large tips are too wide, so if the medium ones are too small then you're left with the multi-flanges as the wide and soft large ones have also bad isolation. Anyway, the a161p's sound isn't that much affected by different tips - most differences are mainly in the treble region and very slightly the bass depth.

post #74 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nulliverse View Post

Anyhow, I'm still very much enjoying my A161p. The aggressiveness of the bass still takes me by surprise on some tracks. It also still amazes me that one little BA can have such a wide frequency response. I definitely see the appeal of this... how can I call it... 'consumer neutral' signature ;-)

 

  I have been eying the A161P for as while now.  After some time I have become accustomed to the fine detailed bass of the likes of RE-0 , HF-5 and B2's,  being satisfied with the bass quantity.

 

 I've read that the A161P have more base, but how does the base detail compare to the above? 

post #75 of 90

I just got the A161p in the mail. I am listening for an hour or so.

 

I can understand a slight comparison with JVC FXT90, they share a similar aggression. But the A161p sounds a lot fuller.

Bass hits very powerful, compared to RE0 and B2 it's a lot more powerful. I never listen for bass-details much but I'll try to compare RE0, A161p and B2.

Mids are a bit forward and show good detail. Presentation is not very large but imaging is very good.

 

I haven't heard sibilance but I haven't listened to all my test tracks yet.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [Review] MEElectronics A161P - Intro Into Neutrality