New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ultrasone IQ - Page 6

post #76 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorspeaker View Post

lol......extra virgin olive oil? 

 

i would squeeze my comply n insert it in..

then it would expand, n make a good seal a few seconds later.

sounds crude...lol.

ph34r.gif

:) haha...

 

It was actually "Hawaiin Tropic Dark Tanning Oil" :)

 

I find that I can wash my Comply tips with warm water and it cleans them up really nicely. I have done it about five times with one set of tips and only now are they starting to look a bit ragged!

post #77 of 105

I am an Ultrasone fan - have had the Signature Pros for awhile and have been wanting the IQs since they were announced.  When my son's cheap in-ear's stopped working, I did what any good father would do.  I gave him my Shure SE535s and ordered the IQs.  Pure joy.  I must say that the reviews on these were mixed and scared me a bit. But once I found the right tip and got the fit right, the sound was incredible.  I literally joined the forum today after lurking for awhile, and although I love my music, I do not consider myself knowledgable enough to post a review.  Let me just say that the sound is considerably better than the 535s, and that the IQs compare favorably to the Signature Pros.  The sound is different, but different isn't bad.  Little to no compromise in my mind when lugging the big set is impractical.  I'm so impressed with the IQs that I'm thinking of upgrading my portable source from my iPod to the new iRiver AK120 - just trying to figure out how to explain that to my wife :)

 

To address two themes that seem to run through the thread:

 

1 - I have small ears, and the square design fits fine and is comfortable. - I have listened for hours on end with no discomfort.  They lay flat inside my ear - I have fallen asleep on my side with no problems.

 

2 - for me, the Comply medium tips made all of the difference.  I tried quite a few, and was not impressed with the sound until I found the right tip for me.  Also, it took me a few days to consistently place these in-ear - squeeze the Comfy tip, insert, hold on a second, twist a bit - it is second nature now.

 

Wish I knew more and could offer a technical analysis - for me, the price was well worth it.

post #78 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarthToTommy View Post

I am an Ultrasone fan - have had the Signature Pros for awhile and have been wanting the IQs since they were announced.  When my son's cheap in-ear's stopped working, I did what any good father would do.  I gave him my Shure SE535s and ordered the IQs.  Pure joy.  I must say that the reviews on these were mixed and scared me a bit. But once I found the right tip and got the fit right, the sound was incredible.  I literally joined the forum today after lurking for awhile, and although I love my music, I do not consider myself knowledgable enough to post a review.  Let me just say that the sound is considerably better than the 535s, and that the IQs compare favorably to the Signature Pros.  The sound is different, but different isn't bad.  Little to no compromise in my mind when lugging the big set is impractical.  I'm so impressed with the IQs that I'm thinking of upgrading my portable source from my iPod to the new iRiver AK120 - just trying to figure out how to explain that to my wife :)

 

To address two themes that seem to run through the thread:

 

1 - I have small ears, and the square design fits fine and is comfortable. - I have listened for hours on end with no discomfort.  They lay flat inside my ear - I have fallen asleep on my side with no problems.

 

2 - for me, the Comply medium tips made all of the difference.  I tried quite a few, and was not impressed with the sound until I found the right tip for me.  Also, it took me a few days to consistently place these in-ear - squeeze the Comfy tip, insert, hold on a second, twist a bit - it is second nature now.

 

Wish I knew more and could offer a technical analysis - for me, the price was well worth it.

Good to see your post.  This thread very quiet.

I have owned the IQ for about 6 weeks and agree with your impressions.  My source is the AK120 and it is a significant improvement over the iPhone.  Detail is so much better with HD music files.  

So the AK120 would be the obvious next step for you!!!

post #79 of 105
liked the iq sound wise.
post #80 of 105

I still maintain that these have amazing detail and some really juicy Bass if you get a good seal, I also still maintain that they are a great IEM and offer a unique signature.

 

Some of the detail is just incredible as is the width of the sound stage. I have recently taken ownership of a higher end IEM, which did cost twice the price, they do sound twice as good, however that is not to take away from these at all. They have been demoted to Gym use for now, however I still feel that they are not getting as much attention as they warrant, in my very humble opinion.

post #81 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespertine View Post

I still maintain that these have amazing detail and some really juicy Bass if you get a good seal, I also still maintain that they are a great IEM and offer a unique signature.

 

Some of the detail is just incredible as is the width of the sound stage. I have recently taken ownership of a higher end IEM, which did cost twice the price, they do sound twice as good, however that is not to take away from these at all. They have been demoted to Gym use for now, however I still feel that they are not getting as much attention as they warrant, in my very humble opinion.

I agree with you.  The detail is amazing, and seems like it is not getting the proper recognition for its quality.

 

I auditioned the Senn IE800 yesterday and the IQ definitely holds its own compared to the IE800s.  

Wondering which higher end IEM you have adopted to warrant demoting the IQ, Vespertine???

post #82 of 105

I'll bet (a nickel) that Vespertine bought a UE custom.

 

Of the IEMs I've heard (not that many), the soundstage width of the IQ  is second only to the Shure E5.

post #83 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckdriver View Post

I'll bet (a nickel) that Vespertine bought a UE custom.

 

Of the IEMs I've heard (not that many), the soundstage width of the IQ  is second only to the Shure E5.

Lets see if your guess is correct...

I have the Shure E5 too. Not sure about the soundstage, but the IQ blows it away in the detail and the top and bottom end. IMO.

Waiting to try the Shure SE846 to hope for major improvements.

post #84 of 105

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by heyyeh View Post

Lets see if your guess is correct...

I have the Shure E5 too. Not sure about the soundstage, but the IQ blows it away in the detail and the top and bottom end. IMO.

Waiting to try the Shure SE846 to hope for major improvements.

The soundstage of the Shure E5 sucks on the iPod as well as with my other non-Android players. But, when I connect the E5 to my (Voodoo enhanced) Galaxy S1+Headstage Arrow 4G and (most importantly) the Maven Player music app (set to XOME-i mode with the depth to the left of center). The sound is not computer clear but it's big and moves off the ears. It's wide and deep (especially with the E5).

 

I read on the Tralucent 1+2 thread about a reviewer mentioning that he used a rap song with a helicopter sound that seemed real on the 1+2. That prompted me to try a similar test. I used Ghetto Bird by Ice Cube. It has a near constant helicopter sound. Plugging the IQ into the same setup, the helicopter sound was ear level as it traveled from ear to ear. On the E5 the helicopter is overhead and moves from outside of head-range as it travels to beyond the other side of my head (YMMV).

 


Edited by truckdriver - 7/7/13 at 8:37pm
post #85 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckdriver View Post

The soundstage of the Shure E5 sucks on the iPod as well as with my other non-Android players. But, when I connect the E5 to my (Voodoo enhanced) Galaxy S1+Headstage Arrow 4G and (most importantly) the Maven Player music app (set to XOME-i mode with the depth to the left of center). The sound is not computer clear but it's big and moves off the ears. It's wide and deep (especially with the E5).

 

I read on the Tralucent 1+2 thread about a reviewer mentioning that he used a rap song with a helicopter sound that seemed real on the 1+2. That prompted me to try a similar test. I used Ghetto Bird by Ice Cube. It has a near constant helicopter sound. Plugging the IQ into the same setup, the helicopter sound was ear level as it traveled from ear to ear. On the E5 the helicopter is overhead and moves from outside of head-range as it travels to beyond the other side of my head (YMMV).

 

That sounds like a good test to use helicopter sound.  I will try and see what I can learn from it.

Thanks for the suggestion.

post #86 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by heyyeh View Post

I agree with you.  The detail is amazing, and seems like it is not getting the proper recognition for its quality.

 

I auditioned the Senn IE800 yesterday and the IQ definitely holds its own compared to the IE800s.  

Wondering which higher end IEM you have adopted to warrant demoting the IQ, Vespertine???

Tralucent 1plus2 ! 

post #87 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vespertine View Post

Tralucent 1plus2 ! 

I would've lost my nickel. The 1+2 is twice the cost of the IQ?

post #88 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckdriver View Post

I would've lost my nickel. The 1+2 is twice the cost of the IQ?

bigsmile_face.gif Yeah pretty much, well basing on what I paid for both. I bought the IQ in GBP and the 1+2 in USD with an upgraded cable (silver/gold), and doing the conversion, it was almost exactly twice the price I paid for the IQ.

 

Worth every single nickel biggrin.gif

post #89 of 105

Glad to hear you are using your nickels for (sound) results.

 

So, Vespertine, are you getting the front projected sound with the 1+2 (like the reviewer I mentioned earlier described)? The only sound close to a front projection that I've heard in a headphone is with my AKG Q701 playing a Smyth Realiser demo track (and that's not quite in front but more frontal leaning high overhead). That reviewer made the 1+2 sound as if it is quite unique in soundstaging. How does the 1+2 soundstage compare in width to the IQ?

post #90 of 105

OK, I haven't written a review of these yet, but I will start formulating a comparison here, hard to know where to start so thanks for the question.

 

Width of sound stage 1plus2 vs IQ 9. The comparison is difficult to make as I find the IEM's do very different things. The IQ 9 I find can throw extremely wide, but to me now it is like it is throwing to a location that has a lot to do with time rather than distance of the instrument or sound. It is like the IQ 9 has a sound stage so wide that sometimes it almost throws to a point where it separates it from the music. It is a tiny bit out of control with it. I think that this is exciting in itself, and certainly makes up part of why instrument separation on the IQ 9 seems to be really clear also. The IQ 9's sound stage is very lateral I find, impressively so, but it is lateral. The 1plus2's are a completely different story.

 

The review or comment I most identify with at the moment about the 1plus2 is how amazingly similar it is to sitting in front of high end speakers. So I think frontal would most certainly be right. The Sound stage is not necessarily as wide as the IQ 9, it isn't as if the helicopter flies from ear to ear and Doppler effect off into the distance as it would on the IQ 9, it flies in the medial sense also.The1plus2's sound stage is as deep as it is wide, and this I think is partly what makes it so astonishing as an IEM.

 

The IQ 9 is wonderfully clinical, I like it, I like hearing the precision, I like the ultra wide sound stage, and the absolute instrument separation. It is a sound signature that I haven't heard before, and one that I enjoy. However the IQ 9's certainly present the music in its constituent parts very well, which is great, but it is different from the Tralucent 1plus2's. They present the music totally differently, they present it as an orchestra would to my ears, all genres seem to get converted into something else and it is all very very musical. Incredibly for an IEM it totally envelops you and it truly feels as if you are listening to some kind of massive surround sound system. That is what the sound stage is like to my ears on the Tralucent 1plus2's; a huge sound rig.

 

The IQ 9's seem to place sound spatially, the Tralucent 1plus2's seem to allow it to travel spatially. That is a huge difference to my ears. 

 

I have them in now and am listening as bass swells sound like they are coming from behind me on the ground and departing through the top of my skull on a horizontal plane. 

 

I absolutely agree with the reviewer that the 1plus2 is unique in sound staging, and I am glad I have the IQ 9, a hybrid also, for comparison. However I say that it is unique also, and impressive.

 

It is like the Tour De France...you know, a sprinter might be great, and really fast and great to watch...that's cool...and all of those things...

 

He is never going to win it though as he isn't suited for climbing mountains. Doesn't take away the stage wins and the excitement he brought to the race, but everyone wants the yellow jersey really, right?

 

More to come from me writing wise on these 1plus2's, a proper review, but I think it is about time I started to get some notes down, and being prompted with questions is always useful.

 

I cannot see a bass vent truckdriver. I work in noisy environments sometimes. I had them on at a low volume in the engine control room of a very large ship, admittedly it was the control room, but there is still a good rumble down there. Could still hear everything just as I could when at my desk.


Edited by Vespertine - 7/8/13 at 11:18am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: