Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Unique Melody Platform Pure 6 (PP6) - review (1st post), discussion, appreciation, & tour thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Unique Melody Platform Pure 6 (PP6) - review (1st post), discussion, appreciation, & tour thread - Page 29

post #421 of 485

Hi, 

 

I'm not sure if the question was for me, but I haven't heard the TG-334. I've been really impressed with the comments. But, for what it's worth Steve Guttenberg's CNET article comparing the TG334 and the 3A is somewhat misleading. He concluded that the TG334 was clearly better in terms of nearly all SQ metrics. However, the 334 was being fed from an CLAS + ALO MKIII combo and the 3A was sourced by an iPod through its analog input. Not at all an apples to apples comparison. 

post #422 of 485

yes the question was for you. and yes Steve is full if you know what i mean . Somewhere in his article he says the best in the world or some thing like that.

But i do own them and i have to say what he says is true as far as SQ. They put you in the studio with the instruments. They are clearly for a sound engineer . However i like that sound some times if i am in the mood to listen for sounds i never heard  before in a recording.They are extremely revealing. They are also easy to drive and sound pretty good right out of a iphone 4s or 5 but to achieve something really special then you need the good stuff. 

I have a pair of heir 4AI . and the 8A. they are very good, but not as detailed , i guess its the upper mids and treble being more forward.

but even the bass is very detailed, I'm tempted to get custom version but i do not know anyone in japan..

post #423 of 485

So the pp6 bass is just as good if not better than jh3a bass when knobs are down. (based on what i was reading above)

How do they compare if i turn up the bass knob quite a bit (like i mean a lot....more than half way).

How do they compare at such high levels of bass?

post #424 of 485

I cannot say for sure as I would not do that to my 2300.00  ear phones , but I would assume they would start to get distorted 

post #425 of 485

I mean if there is not much bass I have it turned up all the way some what loud , but it is not made for that its expensive but heavy on the detail not bass sorry . I'm sure others will tell you the same .

there are not that many bass heavy like a jh3-16 combo . It's just made for that , I suggested to some one here about the heir 8a there are bass heavy and can produce plenty of it as well. 

post #426 of 485

Hi Yjkimnada, 

 

Yes, the 3A just does bass really well, and the bass enhancement control is extraordinary. Side note, from what I know about the the physics of the electronics you can add as much bass as you like without any fear of damaging the unit. Drivers can be blown, but by things like voltage spikes (also not a concern), not by using the factory designed bass control at whatever level. 

 

As for comparisons with the PP6 bass, I'd stick by my earlier comments. With the bass control significantly engaged on the 3A at, let's say, midpoint (12 O'clock), you will have a consistently heavy bass regardless of program material. I totally agree with Alrainbow, the 3A was made for this. If what you want is that heavy bass all the time the 3A is the way to go, because you can't do this with the PP6. Once you start engaging bass boost on the PP6 it immediately announces itself as artificial. Also, because it's a two-step control you can't attenuate this to a satisfactory compromise between bass and naturalness. The 3A gives you limitless bottom end, and even at high levels it almost sounds like the work of a mastering engineer (that's high praise by the way). 

 

Again, having said that, it is, nevertheless--added bass--so it obviously won't respect the program material. So if you want fidelity to the source the PP6 is better here, because to gain the same accuracy on the 3A you have to disengage the bass control completely and the sound gets a bit thin. The PP6 can remain faithful to the source recording while sounding full in the bass region. It is not weak in the bass, it's just program dependent.

 

So, as I mentioned, it comes down to preferences, if you consistently want to add bass to recordings that don't really have it the 3A is the way to go. That is what it's meant for, the PP6 cannot pull this off successfully. If you want fidelity to the source the PP6 engineers, in my book, have cut the right balances between lower-end fullness and accuracy. 

 

Also, please do bear in mind that the bass region is the foundation to build the entire rest of the sound spectrum, but there are many other components that would go into deciding what is the right unit for you. Ah decisions, decisions, decisions....

 

All the best with your search for sonic bliss. 

post #427 of 485

Thanks for the replies.

 

If I was my former self three years ago, I would have definitely chosen the pp6 over the 3a because, as a 11 year old, I strictly listened to classical and was a transparency freak. I only chose neutral iems, starting with etymotics. Ever since I started middle school, and now starting high school, I indulged myself in the school club life. I became entrenched in the ear-shattering electronic music. I became especially addicted to the club bass that really shook the floors of a room. Ever since, my paradigm for a "perfect" headphone has changed and I have been constantly on the search to reproduce that exact sound in portable headphones (which has been proven to be very difficult because subwoofers just move so much more air).

But anyways, I can clearly see that the pp6 would be a perfect iem for those looking for transparency, neutrality, and faithfulness to the music.

post #428 of 485

Yjkimada, 

 

HI. Just a quick note for you to consider, do remember that club, hip-hop, electronic, etc., are mastered (compression, EQ, etc.) to really bring out a deep, fat bottom end. With this genre, because the low register is in the source, both the 3A and PP6 will deliver bass, that is to say, BASS!

post #429 of 485

yes I understand. But since I listen also classical and jazz, I prefer to have the bottom end always there.

How are other people thinking about the pp6 in other areas rather than bass?
 

post #430 of 485
Thread Starter 

My PP6 review has been posted in the first post of this thread.

post #431 of 485

Interesting review. *Apologies to kunlun, it was the most fitting statement to make*

post #432 of 485

UM Miracle fan here, but the PP6 fills me with utter indifference! LOL

 

Well, it's all part of life's rich tapestry, I suppose.

 

I'm more interested in Fitear 335 or similar, rather than PP6. Just seems over-engineered for not much improvement.

 

Joe, I'll add my voice to the hundreds who've already said this - purleez get some custom UM Miracles to compare all the other CIEMs with. That'd be a Rosetta Stone, comparison-wise, for a great many head-fiers.

 

 

In the meantime, thanks for the PP6 review beerchug.gif

post #433 of 485

Great review Joe~ :)

post #434 of 485

I used to think PP6 might be a nice update for Miracles, but I hate U-shape CIEMs, which torture me a lot.

So just pass it.

Also i want to know how Miracles match against those high end CIEMs such as SE5-ways ...

post #435 of 485
Quote:

Originally Posted by Alias Gu View Post

 

Also i want to know how Miracles match against those high end CIEMs such as SE5-ways ...

 

Miracles have larger soundstage, and airier, less dense, presentation.

 

SE-5 sounds richer and more organic, but smaller.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Unique Melody Platform Pure 6 (PP6) - review (1st post), discussion, appreciation, & tour thread