Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread - Page 43

post #631 of 2308
9/27/12 at 11:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FullCircle View Post

 

 

Can you share with us at what time the "cracking noise" begins. At 48 Seconds some strange "Techno" jitter begins in the song as the attempt to ad "dub step" like sound quality into the mix.

 

Beyond that, does this occur in other recordings, songs etc?

it starts the second the song starts. It does occur on other songs, but its harder to hear any distortion in some compared to others.

Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #632 of 2308
9/27/12 at 11:43pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhizzo View Post

Hello!

Anyone can compares the Heir Audio 4.Ai with Phonak Audéo 232?

Thanks a lot!

If you look over the last few pages you will see a few comparisons. Anyway, briefly, these are a pair of pretty much neutral sounding IEMs with what some people would say the slightest of bass bumps, to which I am not one of those who found that. The 232 is a v shaped iem and the pair I heard were heavy burned in which causes a lot more bass, there was a huge amount of hours on them.

Starting with bass the 232 have a lot more power and extension with true rumble, they are still fast with good attack and really are pretty heavy and dot have a mid bass focus as the extension is pretty linear, the bass on these is in line with mids and is no where near as powerful but clearly faster and with better texture than the 232 which are more about smoothness in the bass. Extension is also on the side of the Phonaks.

Mids are dipped with the phonak and are not as accurate, clear or detailed as the Heir which are just generally better as far as I am concerned. Even with the dip the Phonaks are not masked or veiled but they do lack a tad of presence compared to the 4.Ai and they are not mid forward by any means.

Treble is actually great on both. Both boast great extension, detail and sparkle but I think we have more detail with the heirs but a more subtle sparkle, maybe the phonak just sounds sparlier due to it being over the mids though.

Soundstage I think is a tad larger on the phonak and presentation and depth is clearly on the heirs side although the phonak is not shabby, same applies for instrument seperation.

I was using Greg filters by the way on the Phonaks.

I prefer the 4.Ai and think they are a tad superior but they are different things. One is for if you want bassy more v shaped sound which still as clarity and string mids while the other is for balance and detail.
Reply
post #633 of 2308
9/28/12 at 12:14am
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamlistening View Post

The 4.Ai's are absolutely wonderful. They are good with every kind of music i listen to( Rock, Jazz, pop, hip-hop ... ) .... Everything about this ( Bass, Mids, Highs) is just right. The resolution is out-standing and they are gorgeous. These are perfect for me .

Thank you Heir Audio ... 

 

Wow. Nice pic. Can I post it on Heir Audio's FB page?

Absolutely :) .... 

Reply
post #634 of 2308
9/28/12 at 4:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post

 

Sounds like you're not using the right sized tips, and going bigger in size doesn't necessarily solve the problem. Try to go down a size and go for the deep fit again, and see if that helps.

I have large and deep ear canals. I tried the smaller tips and they don't seal no matter how deep I push them.  The ear canals on my 1964Quads are scary long!

Reply
post #635 of 2308
9/28/12 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRCMRGN View Post  1964Quads

 

I see why now. They are definitely going to sound quite bass light compared to the the Q or even the ASG.

Reply
post #636 of 2308
9/28/12 at 7:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swimsonny View Post


If you look over the last few pages you will see a few comparisons. Anyway, briefly, these are a pair of pretty much neutral sounding IEMs with what some people would say the slightest of bass bumps, to which I am not one of those who found that. The 232 is a v shaped iem and the pair I heard were heavy burned in which causes a lot more bass, there was a huge amount of hours on them.
Starting with bass the 232 have a lot more power and extension with true rumble, they are still fast with good attack and really are pretty heavy and dot have a mid bass focus as the extension is pretty linear, the bass on these is in line with mids and is no where near as powerful but clearly faster and with better texture than the 232 which are more about smoothness in the bass. Extension is also on the side of the Phonaks.
Mids are dipped with the phonak and are not as accurate, clear or detailed as the Heir which are just generally better as far as I am concerned. Even with the dip the Phonaks are not masked or veiled but they do lack a tad of presence compared to the 4.Ai and they are not mid forward by any means.
Treble is actually great on both. Both boast great extension, detail and sparkle but I think we have more detail with the heirs but a more subtle sparkle, maybe the phonak just sounds sparlier due to it being over the mids though.
Soundstage I think is a tad larger on the phonak and presentation and depth is clearly on the heirs side although the phonak is not shabby, same applies for instrument seperation.
I was using Greg filters by the way on the Phonaks.
I prefer the 4.Ai and think they are a tad superior but they are different things. One is for if you want bassy more v shaped sound which still as clarity and string mids while the other is for balance and detail.

 

I was under impression that BA don't get "burned in".

 

Out of Ai series, 232 is bit closer to 3.Ai (but not really haha).

Reply
post #637 of 2308
9/28/12 at 7:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokyung View Post

I was under impression that BA don't get "burned in".

 

In my experience, they don't. I've been (pleasantly) surprised by the changes in the MG7 (a dynamic driver), on the other hand.

Reply
post #638 of 2308
9/28/12 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post

 

In my experience, they don't. I've been (pleasantly) surprised by the changes in the MG7 (a dynamic driver), on the other hand.

I have the exact same experiences - with an MG7 as well. (Two sets of those actually) Biggest change I've experienced was with the Ultrasone Pro 900 and the 300 hrs of controlled burn-in I did with them, but that's something for another thread smile.gif

Reply
post #639 of 2308
9/28/12 at 11:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokyung View Post

 

I was under impression that BA don't get "burned in".

 

Out of Ai series, 232 is bit closer to 3.Ai (but not really haha).

 

They do, but at a much slower rate.  I had the opposite of what Swim said on my 232...  The bass settled and the sound balanced out a lot more...  

Reply
post #640 of 2308
9/28/12 at 2:12pm
Thread Starter 

The bass of the 232s i have tried is just crazy. I can not mention his name so thats the hint but he uses his a hell of a lot and he said they have gone crazy on bass overload.

Anyway, this discussion i have never seen end well. I believe in burn in on all types of headphones, so do others and some just dont believe it. Its our opinion and nothing is proven and i think we should move away from this topic as it has crippled great threads. Sorry if i sound silly but burn in convo is just a disaster in the making.

Reply
post #641 of 2308
9/28/12 at 2:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swimsonny View Post

The bass of the 232s i have tried is just crazy. I can not mention his name so thats the hint but he uses his a hell of a lot and he said they have gone crazy on bass overload.

Anyway, this discussion i have never seen end well. I believe in burn in on all types of headphones, so do others and some just dont believe it. Its our opinion and nothing is proven and i think we should move away from this topic as it has crippled great threads. Sorry if i sound silly but burn in convo is just a disaster in the making.

 

I didn't get bass increase though, so...  I guess that's just me.  If anything, the bass stablized and the mids came in better.  

Reply
post #642 of 2308
9/28/12 at 2:44pm

Had 232 since its launch date, still sounds the same to my ears.

Reply
post #643 of 2308
9/28/12 at 3:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swimsonny View Post

The bass of the 232s i have tried is just crazy. I can not mention his name so thats the hint but he uses his a hell of a lot and he said they have gone crazy on bass overload.

Anyway, this discussion i have never seen end well. I believe in burn in on all types of headphones, so do others and some just dont believe it. Its our opinion and nothing is proven and i think we should move away from this topic as it has crippled great threads. Sorry if i sound silly but burn in convo is just a disaster in the making.

 

Did he change the filters? After using them for that long, unchanged filters could cause the bass overload. 

 

My pfe232s were like tinymans, the bass settled and mids were better.

Reply
post #644 of 2308
9/28/12 at 3:35pm
Thread Starter 

i do not know and would have to ask him these things but i would think he would replace his filters every so often. However i have already mentioned i do not want this to turn into a burn in discussion and would happily take this to PM or to a more appropriate thread.

Reply
post #645 of 2308
9/28/12 at 4:40pm

just a question, how long did it take for your 4.ai's to arrive? still waiting for mine.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Heir Audio 4.Ai - Appreciation/Impression/Review Thread