Final Audio Design Appreciation/Discussion Thread - Page 2

Hi,

Just received my FAD Adagio III's and i know that packaging does not mean much but i thought i would get something glamorous with FAD. It is cheaply done. Obviously i care a lot more about sound than anything else so i will wait and see on that but for now i will be doing my unboxing.

This is just an observation, not something that will sway how good i think the earphones are, in fact i do not normally even comment on packaging.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swimsonny 

Hi,

 

Just received my FAD Adagio III's and i know that packaging does not mean much but i thought i would get something glamorous with FAD. It is cheaply done. Obviously i care a lot more about sound than anything else so i will wait and see on that but for now i will be doing my unboxing.

 

Packaging has never been FAD's strong suit, even on their $1000USD+ earphones.

With the Adagio II and III, you'll literally just be taking them out of the box, as they don't even provide a carry case. Pretty quick unboxing video. : P

From the first time I heard the 1601 SS to today, I am still deeply infatuated by the idea of Final Audio. I don't subscribe to some of their design philosophies, and I wish the sound signature of the 1601 allowed for real low and high frequencies out of box, but... still, they are amazing. With the Graham Slee Voyager, they are simply one of the best, widest soundstages and coloured by beautiful imaging i've heard ever at any price. Not reference, but pure enjoyment.

My Adagio III Unboxing:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swimsonny 

Beautiful article! Loved reading it and was really intrigued by the way the tips work!
Pretty lucky to get the time with these I guess and would love to have a play around with these.
Out of curiousty are these now discontinued?

The 1350 M1, 1350 M2, 1601SB, 1601SS, and 1601SC are discontinued.

The 1601 line was presumably replaced by the 1602 Piano Forte VIII, IX, and X. However both the 1601s and 1602s coexisted side-by-side in FAD's catalog for a while, and I think the main reason for phasing out the 1601 was actually due to several incidents of the metal tips coming undone and getting stuck inside peoples' ears. That's why the 1602s have fixed metal tips that don't come unscrewed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuppetFace 

 

The 1350 M1, 1350 M2, 1601SB, 1601SS, and 1601SC are discontinued.

 

The 1601 line was presumably replaced by the 1602 Piano Forte VIII, IX, and X. However both the 1601s and 1602s coexisted side-by-side in FAD's catalog for a while, and I think the main reason for phasing out the 1601 was actually due to several incidents of the metal tips coming undone and getting stuck inside peoples' ears. That's why the 1602s have fixed metal tips that don't come unscrewed.

They have quite a history then. Thanks for clearing that up as the Piano Forte looked very similar to me.

Also how do the metal tips 'seal' in your ear? Looks like it will feel a bit weird.

Going back to Ortofon e-Q5, I realize how thin and neutral it sounds in comparison. Better at sub bass extension. Laid back presentation compared to lively in your face FI-BA-SB's presentation.

I notice some treble spike in FI-BA-SB and bass roll of starting midway of sub bass. Still in the burn in process. Apparently things might change over 100+ hours burn in. I still prefer e-Q5 over FI-BA-SB but for certain tracks FI-BA-SB sounds much better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swimsonny 

They have quite a history then. Thanks for clearing that up as the Piano Forte looked very similar to me.

 

Also how do the metal tips 'seal' in your ear? Looks like it will feel a bit weird.

Fit is one of the biggest issues for me when it comes to the 1602 line. Obviously the metal flange comes in one size and isn't flexible, so it's going to be hit or miss. I'm pretty sure they're not designed to seal fully however, but instead are meant to rest in the ears to allow airflow. This seems to contribute to their unique presentation and staging.

For me personally, they don't insert far enough into the ears for me to feel entirely comfortable with them, and on occasion they've actually slipped out of the ear. I've experimented with cored foam tips, placing them over the flanges to help position them in the ears more securely, however this blocks the airflow somewhat and causes the presentation to be more constricted. On the plus side the bass presence is elevated slightly, but it just diminishes the unique qualities of the earphones too much. It's kind of a tradeoff, and one style might appeal more to some over the other. I've found the best compromise is to leave the foam tips off and use earhooks to wear them over-ear. The allows for the airflow to remain undisturbed, but "props" them up a bit, positioning them in the ears a bit more securely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuppetFace 

 

Fit is one of the biggest issues for me when it comes to the 1602 line. Obviously the metal flange comes in one size and isn't flexible, so it's going to be hit or miss. I'm pretty sure they're not designed to seal fully however, but instead are meant to rest in the ears to allow airflow. This seems to contribute to their unique presentation and staging.

 

For me personally, they don't insert far enough into the ears for me to feel entirely comfortable with them, and on occasion they've actually slipped out of the ear. I've experimented with cored foam tips, placing them over the flanges to help position them in the ears more securely, however this blocks the airflow somewhat and causes the presentation to be more constricted. On the plus side the bass presence is elevated slightly, but it just diminishes the unique qualities of the earphones too much. It's kind of a tradeoff, and one style might appeal more to some over the other. I've found the best compromise is to leave the foam tips off and use earhooks to wear them over-ear. The allows for the airflow to remain undisturbed, but "props" them up a bit, positioning them in the ears a bit more securely.

Yeh i sorta suspected that, especially now there is only one size. The whole idea does sound really nice and from what your saying it seems to work. For how much people like to say they are over priced, the inventive designs of theirs are something you get with no over company, i mean ear buds do not appeal to me but these do.

So there soundstage is huge, are we talking like say the EX1000, ASG-1, IE8 and A03 (I know these all do have differences and flaws in the sound stages) or even bigger, that would be saying something if so!

Actually the fact they may fall out of you ears actually went through my mind and i also feel like you would maybe have to balance them in your ears, i have some crazy thoughts. The ear hook see like they would be the best bet but does that cause a compromise in the comfort? Also do the 1602s not come with the solid silicone tip selection like the 1601. In fact the 1601 seem to have the upper hand in tip selection even if they did get stuck in peoples ears ahaha, thats happened with me using to large bore tips in earphones before.

Sorry for all the questioning but i do not feel like i will be getting to hear these any time soon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swimsonny 

So there soundstage is huge, are we talking like say the EX1000, ASG-1, IE8 and A03 (I know these all do have differences and flaws in the sound stages) or even bigger, that would be saying something if so!

For me the actual size of the soundstage isn't so important, so I tend to not pay as much attention to it. Imaging and dimensional qualities are far more important for me personally. The 1602s have a tremendous sense of depth and a convincing immersive quality. In terms of actual size, it strikes me as larger than most (the EX1000, IE80, etc.) at times, while on other occasions it's not as apparent. It seems to vary a bit depending on the track, which reminds me of the Radius HP-TWF21 more than, say, the A03 which makes just about everything sound grandiose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swimsonny 

The ear hook see like they would be the best bet but does that cause a compromise in the comfort? Also do the 1602s not come with the solid silicone tip selection like the 1601. In fact the 1601 seem to have the upper hand in tip selection even if they did get stuck in peoples ears ahaha, thats happened with me using to large bore tips in earphones before.

The comfort with the earhooks is better for me personally, because they sit in the ears at a better angle, and without them they hang out of my ears too much, so they're less comfortable in general and also because I'm constantly worrying about them.

The 1602 line has no other tips. They come with the single metal tip that is permanently fixed to the monitor housing. The 1601 on the other hand lets you unscrew the metal tip, and when you unscrew it you can then replace it with other more standard-sized tips. You can't really fit many other tips over the 1602's flange because it's so large, which is why I had to core the foam tip to stretch it over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpringBiscuit 

Yes the FI-BASS do have treble spike, for sound staging wise, i felt the PF series have bigger imaging compare with FIBASS, mainly due to their vessel style and insertion of earbud (I could be wrong though, the last try is about 3 months ago.)

I would agree that the presentation of the 1602 Piano Fortes does seem larger than the FI-BA-SS. The field of sound is larger overall, and instruments seem more distant relative to the listener. In terms of precision of imaging (placing the instruments in 3D space) they both seem very good. I think FAD does spatial positioning very well in most of their IEMs.