Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Final Audio Design Impressions and Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Final Audio Design Impressions and Discussion Thread - Page 48

post #706 of 4383
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

I always thought you determined between L and R using the orientation of the vent holes. With the cords pointed down, the vent holes should point toward the front rather than the back.

 

Yes I noticed that too, since the holes are asymmetrical that works too. The notch is useful if you have bad eyesight, just use your nail to feel for the left bud notch. 

post #707 of 4383

I've been listening to the Heaven VI this morning. A few very early remarks.

 

-FAD has really stepped up their game with regard to presentation. That was always one of their weakest points in the "luxury experience." The Heaven VI comes in a rather ridiculous faux crocodile box, with an obi-style sleeve. Inside they're housed in the same lovely mirror-finished cigarette case as the Heaven IV.

 

-I got the gold finish since I have the PFX in the chrome copper ion finish already, and I wanted these to visually match the Heaven S they're replacing. Let me say pictures don't do it justice. The gold is lovely, and looks really nice with the dark brown (almost black) cable. The base metal is copper. I just worry about the finish wearing off over time like the rose gold on the 1601SC. I think that may be specific to rose gold however, and why FAD hasn't used rose gold since.

 

-Fit is good, just like the Heaven IV.

 

-Sound. These may very well have the nicest overall tonal balance of any FAD BA I've heard save for the mighty FI-BA-SS itself. Going on my memory of the IV, I'd say it has a somewhat similar quality in that overall it's more balanced than the older Heaven models, especially the Heaven S. It doesn't have the sizzly top end of the S, which mind you is rather fun on certain recordings to my ears but can get fatiguing quickly. On the other hand, the VI sounds smoother up top---less splashy---while still retaining the lovely detail of their proprietary single BAs. Compared to the IV however it's a bit more colored in the extremities, so I suppose it occupies a place between the IV and the S in that regard. It has more of that FAD charm compared to the IV, whose biggest criticism by dedicated FAD-heads was being a wee bit too pedestrian (not enough of that FAD magic). It sounds more mature overall compared to the S.

 

-Spatial character of these IEMs is astonishing. Frankly, they're almost (almost) on par with the FI-BA-SS in terms of imaging. Texture is also really impressive.

 

-My biggest crit thus far? They sounds a bit sluggish oddly enough. Didn't expect this. Maybe it's just me this morning, and I'll report more on this when I've had more listening time obviously.

 

* * * * * * *

 

I like where FAD is going. Especially after the [frankly catastrophic] failure of the Muramasa VIII, it's nice to see them actually listening to criticisms. This bodes well for the upcoming Pandora line of fullsized headphones.

 

The Heaven VI seems like a product that stands at the boundary between the more exciting, whacky "older FAD" and their newer more competent, more mature incarnation.

 

REALLY digging these. Much more than I expected given the somewhat tepid (read: good, but bland) Heaven IV.

post #708 of 4383
Quote:
Originally Posted by flkin View Post

I don't recall anyone mentioning this on this thread so I'd though I would:

 

On the Piano Forte 1602 series of headsets (VIII, IX, X), you can determine the L or R bud by looking (or feeling) at the notch on the tiny metal sleeve where the cable joins the body. The side with the notch is the L side. That's pretty useful as I can't see the L and R engraving in dim light.

 

Found this snippet of info on a Japanese website where they also mentioned that since most people's ear shapes are different, you have to adjust the position of each bud in each ear to maximise the sound quality. Does anyone know how to do this? I can't seem to get much variation of sound quality by twisting the bud around. On my  1602ss, the image is slightly biased to the LHS.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

I always thought you determined between L and R using the orientation of the vent holes. With the cords pointed down, the vent holes should point toward the front rather than the back.

 
Both good catches.
 
I am feeling like a dope here. I always looked for the light "final" word on the earpiece which faces backwards. It is even easier to be sure that those vents are facing forwards.
 

400

 

post #709 of 4383

Thanks for the impressions, MuppetFace. Maybe I will get to hear the Heaven VI next week.

post #710 of 4383

I can't find the alligator skin case?

post #711 of 4383

Dead reptiles. Cool.

post #712 of 4383

OK guys and girls, help me out.

 

I've become enthralled with Final Audio's concept. I read the first 12 pages of this thread and skipped here. The fact that the guy, cooper, has given me the best definition of bass I've ever heard, and MF, both, endorse and are enthusiastic about FA make me all the more curious. 

 

cooper brought the PFIX to my attention. And after reading about the emotional attachment to the music the PF can provide, I am incredibly interested. I own both the Sig Pro and the TH900, and love them both, partly due to MF's insight. And MF seems to enjoy the PFIX as well. 

 

I've spent some time looking at the FR curves for the PFIX. To be frank, it's the opposite of the aforementioned headphones. Classical and electronic are my favorites - a universal language of sorts... but tell me... how can the Piano Forte reproduce the reverb of a double bass, or the wooden timbre of the Stradivarius that Joshua Bell plays? Acoustic aside, how does the PF play with electronic, highly processed music? My musical worlds are universes apart. It seems the highs and the lows are significantly rolled off. And I do understand the difference between the schools of thought of natural reproduction versus absorbing - to be brief. 

 

Thanks in advance for your insight. 

post #713 of 4383
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundFreaq View Post

 

 

Hey soundfreaq. 

 

I have the PF VIII on loan, but I think that the two are similar enough for me to weigh in on this.

 

Firstly, the PF coloration is simply beautiful on a lot of tracks, and can take your music to another level. Unfortunately, I didn't like it much for classical or EDM. For me, the bass and highs are too rolled off, and the mids are too present and resonant for me to enjoy those genres. Where the PF really shines for me is live vocal music, where the ambiance and forward mids combine to make magic...except with classical and electronic music.

 

Of course, others may totally disagree biggrin.gif

post #714 of 4383
I have the IX's, they seem to do very well with Kraftwerk if that is the electronic side of things you go for, also for live opera I find them outstanding, likewise stringed instruments. Something like a full symphony is not as good, it is not bad either but one does not get the sense of scale compared to my LCD 2's.. Having said that I have gotten used to that now and just pick up on what it does do really well which is atmosphere of the concert hall
post #715 of 4383

Which portable amplifier or amp+dac would you recommend for use with the Piano Fortes?

 

I like a very euphonic, lush, liquid sound.

post #716 of 4383
That would describe my SR71-B!
post #717 of 4383
Eke and ian, pretty much showcase the differing opinions around here. Smaller, such as chamber music seems to be best? If they can nail jazz, chamber music, and some experimental electronic, like Kraftwerk, my curiosity remains picqued.

Thanks for the info guys.

As "audiophiles" search for the most natural or transparent reproduction, I find it hard to find a link, emotional or not, when the FR is so unconventional. When there is so much "missing." How then is that link made?
post #718 of 4383

I haven't seen an emotional link in neutral FR in IEM's, the Etymotic ER-4's aren't very enthralling, perhaps the STAX SR-009 is, not sure.

post #719 of 4383
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundFreaq View Post

Eke and ian, pretty much showcase the differing opinions around here. Smaller, such as chamber music seems to be best? If they can nail jazz, chamber music, and some experimental electronic, like Kraftwerk, my curiosity remains picqued.
Thanks for the info guys.
As "audiophiles" search for the most natural or transparent reproduction, I find it hard to find a link, emotional or not, when the FR is so unconventional. When there is so much "missing." How then is that link made?

Ahh, but what a graph says is missing does not necessarily mean it is! One of the reasons why this headphone has taken over from all my others is that it does so much, so very well in terms of emotional connection. I never feel I am missing out on anything. Rather in fact gaining information on certain music.

For instance, the seminal Jazz at the pawn shop is a case in point. I have heard that album so many times and yet with the PF's there is so much more deep in the mix detail retrieved. I have not heard any headphone do that except this one, it is like listening through a really really good pair of speakers instead.

When I first got them I thought they were no good with metal (to put this in context I own one metal album!) but once my ears adjusted to the delivery I find I much prefer the way the PF's deliver that album, tool, laterelous.

I would agree that smaller classical music is best with these, especially early music which is wonderful, having said that I still cannot get over how these portray heavy weight opera such as Wagner. I have two ring cycles one of which is the Bohm live '67 recording. The movement of the performers, the way they communicate the story being told once again I have only found as resolving and compelling on a excellent speaker set up

Kiteki, I have limited knowledge of the 009 and a lot of the ER4S. From my recollection I don't feel the 009 is as emotionally involving as the PF's, having said that it does so much so well I would love to have a set!

The ER4S in comparison is still a wonderful IEM, a tad warmer and closed in sounding but is still my go to choice for musical enjoyment with great isolation.
post #720 of 4383
Thanks for the detailed reply. I sure appreciate it. I sure wish I could demo.

The Heaven VI has caught my eye as an introduction to FAD. Looking forward to more impressions from MF. How would it compare to a full blast custom like the JH13?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Final Audio Design Impressions and Discussion Thread