Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JVC HA-FX40 | Believe the hype!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JVC HA-FX40 | Believe the hype! - Page 10

post #136 of 185

I sold my second pair of FX40's. Though after 500 hours of blasting them with white and pink noise and sweeps, and HEAVY BASS music, I was able to tame the shrill and harshness of the treble, at the end of the day, the grainyness of the highs and the randomness of SQ presentation of various tracks just left me reaching for other IEM's, despite the wonderful comfort and deep, well rounded bass of these budget babies. The HAFXT90 is just so vastly superior, and you can get them for sub $70.00 nowadays, so I went with those and the TDK IE800. Plus I prefer the sound sig of my Philips SHE3580's to the FX40's. The 40's might be more detailed and deeper bass, but the 3580's are far more refined and engaging for long listening bouts. The 40's are still better than the Brainwavz Delta's though, and slap around the Panasonic's and Monoprice nautilus shells. 

post #137 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by IEMagnet01 View Post
 

I sold my second pair of FX40's. Though after 500 hours of blasting them with white and pink noise and sweeps, and HEAVY BASS music, I was able to tame the shrill and harshness of the treble, at the end of the day, the grainyness of the highs and the randomness of SQ presentation of various tracks just left me reaching for other IEM's, despite the wonderful comfort and deep, well rounded bass of these budget babies. The HAFXT90 is just so vastly superior, and you can get them for sub $70.00 nowadays, so I went with those and the TDK IE800. Plus I prefer the sound sig of my Philips SHE3580's to the FX40's. The 40's might be more detailed and deeper bass, but the 3580's are far more refined and engaging for long listening bouts. The 40's are still better than the Brainwavz Delta's though, and slap around the Panasonic's and Monoprice nautilus shells. 

^ Hmmm do say more!!! :eek: Interesting that no one has made this comparison yet.

 

Great impressions btw!!! Probably is exactly how i feel about them as well. :beerchug:

post #138 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwalcer View Post
 

^ Hmmm do say more!!! :eek: Interesting that no one has made this comparison yet.

 

Great impressions btw!!! Probably is exactly how i feel about them as well. :beerchug:

Do you have the Deltas as well? I found them just a tad bit too congested, and when it comes to having the dominant bass they have, it tended to smother the details I like to hear in my music. They say they have controlled bass, and i guess in some ways they do, but to me the slight bleed into the mids really affected the overall detail and clarity of the mids and the highs were a bit rolled off, so they just didn't measure up to even the slightly recessed mids of the FX40's, and though they are a pretty decent deal for a budget IEM, coupling it with the driver flex the aluminum housings had, I just lost interest in the Delta's rather quickly. Between the clearer mids, and no driver flex, I think the 40's edge out the Delta's for budget value, but again, that's subjective, and dependent on how much tolerance someone has to the "smack" treble of the 40's. 

post #139 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by IEMagnet01 View Post
 

Do you have the Deltas as well? I found them just a tad bit too congested, and when it comes to having the dominant bass they have, it tended to smother the details I like to hear in my music. They say they have controlled bass, and i guess in some ways they do, but to me the slight bleed into the mids really affected the overall detail and clarity of the mids and the highs were a bit rolled off, so they just didn't measure up to even the slightly recessed mids of the FX40's, and though they are a pretty decent deal for a budget IEM, coupling it with the driver flex the aluminum housings had, I just lost interest in the Delta's rather quickly. Between the clearer mids, and no driver flex, I think the 40's edge out the Delta's for budget value, but again, that's subjective, and dependent on how much tolerance someone has to the "smack" treble of the 40's. 


Nope don't own the Deltas but judging by their current hype it seems that they would best the FX40s in all regards, welp maybe not in the bass department since it's touted as more "balanced" sounding.

 

But i am kinda curious in how they sound. Hey since these deltas are not doing it for you, are you interested in a trade for my RHA MA350???

 

If you like the FX40s, these MA350 has a sound signature that is almost exactly the same but is more refined in every aspect, so there is none of that crazy harsh/ bright/ sibilant treble.  If you are just PM me and we can work something out. :beerchug:

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/643666/budget-fi-iem-jvc-fxz200-145-shipped-rha-ma350-vsonic-vc02-sale-all-must-go

post #140 of 185

I would have loved to do that, had you been just a couple days earlier. I sold the Deltas and the FX40's on ebay. 

post #141 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by IEMagnet01 View Post
 

I would have loved to do that, had you been just a couple days earlier. I sold the Deltas and the FX40's on ebay. 


LoL, oh well guess it wasn't meant to be. : P

 

What could have been. :rolleyes:

 

Thanks for the consideration anyways. :beerchug:

post #142 of 185

absolutely!! Anytime. maybe next time we tango in a tangled wire cord?? :L3000:

post #143 of 185
Just got my 40s last week an I agree with most counts.

Burn in has helped as the problem was way too bright out of the box. They definitely hit way above their price point. They've kind I made me bored with looking for new budget IEMs!

I have the deltas also. The deltas IMO are more neutral and perhaps micro detail oriented. They too weren't terribly impressive out of the box but certainly grew on me over time. They're much less V shaped and not as aggressive. One might also say less fun :-)
post #144 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeDoe View Post

Just got my 40s last week an I agree with most counts.

Burn in has helped as the problem was way too bright out of the box. They definitely hit way above their price point. They've kind I made me bored with looking for new budget IEMs!

I have the deltas also. The deltas IMO are more neutral and perhaps micro detail oriented. They too weren't terribly impressive out of the box but certainly grew on me over time. They're much less V shaped and not as aggressive. One might also say less fun :-)

have you listened to the RE-ZERO's yet? I think the UE 500's are actually very fun IEM's. I parted with them because the shape caused quite a bit of driver flex with me. I hated the sound of the UE 600's. Just completely disliked them. 

post #145 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by IEMagnet01 View Post

have you listened to the RE-ZERO's yet? I think the UE 500's are actually very fun IEM's. I parted with them because the shape caused quite a bit of driver flex with me. I hated the sound of the UE 600's. Just completely disliked them. 

Absolutely. Right now I'm preferring the RE zeros to the RE400s.

I'm not a fan of either UE earphones. I suppose I've been spoiled by my TF10s and Ba200s!
post #146 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeDoe View Post


Absolutely. Right now I'm preferring the RE zeros to the RE400s.

I'm not a fan of either UE earphones. I suppose I've been spoiled by my TF10s and Ba200s!

Now that makes me glad I sold them to someone who appreciates them. In all reality, you got the ZEROS for a steal, seeing as they are very limited and now discontinued. The rest can be resold to make back what you paid for the ZEROS? Glad you like. 

post #147 of 185

These are my first IEMS since i join this page, the quality is awesome, i don't know a lot about headphones and i don't have any to compare but the price and quality is good for me :gs1000smile:

post #148 of 185

Some comments on the fx40

 

With the stock tips, the sound space is wide considering the low price of the fx40. Bass sounds tight but the stock tips makes the high sounds harsh. So I guess one way to tame the highs would be to change the eartips to one with a narrower bore. This however, will muffle the bass to a certain extent.

 

 

On the vocals:

 

The fx40 has a very noticeable V-Shaped sound signature and its mids are rather recessed. Hearing female singers reminds me of sandpaper, their voice are thin and edgy. The edginess is due to the bright high bleeding over into the mids, causing most of the female singers to sound sibilant. The same problem applies to male singers singing in a higher key. Male singing in a lower key still suffers from the thin vocal presentation of the fx40. 

 

Vocals overall lacks fullness and isn't natural sounding. Those who likes their vocals lush and clear, whether in ballads or pop songs,  would be quite disappointed with the fx40(like me:().

 

Bass and treble can sound pretty nice on the fx40. The vocals, however, just doesn't cut it for me.

 

Hope my experience can help those who are thinking of getting a fx40.

 

 

(Pardon if I used any wrong description terms. It's my first time posting on head fi :normal_smile :)

post #149 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelloWatic View Post

Some comments on the fx40

With the stock tips, the sound space is wide considering the low price of the fx40. Bass sounds tight but the stock tips makes the high sounds harsh. So I guess one way to tame the highs would be to change the eartips to one with a narrower bore. This however, will muffle the bass to a certain extent.


On the vocals:

The fx40 has a very noticeable V-Shaped sound signature and its mids are rather recessed. Hearing female singers reminds me of sandpaper, their voice are thin and edgy. The edginess is due to the bright high bleeding over into the mids, causing most of the female singers to sound sibilant. The same problem applies to male singers singing in a higher key. Male singing in a lower key still suffers from the thin vocal presentation of the fx40. 

Vocals overall lacks fullness and isn't natural sounding. Those who likes their vocals lush and clear, whether in ballads or pop songs,  would be quite disappointed with the fx40(like me:( ).

Bass and treble can sound pretty nice on the fx40. The vocals, however, just doesn't cut it for me.

Hope my experience can help those who are thinking of getting a fx40.


(Pardon if I used any wrong description terms. It's my first time posting on head fi normal_smile%20.gif)

You hit that bullseye. Couldn't get a better assessment of the FX40. No kind of tips nor burn in assault will remedy the weaknesses of the FX40. They remain exactly as you describe them, so to me they are serviceable, but not a go to IEM for every genre/day use.
post #150 of 185

Throughout this thread, most only mentioned the strength of the Sound Space, Bass and Highs. Hardly anyone had touched on the quality of vocal reproduction by the fx40.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IEMagnet01 View Post
 

...Though after 500 hours of blasting them with white and pink noise and sweeps, and HEAVY BASS music...

 
 If the vocals still sounds weak after long hours of burning in, I believe that that is the best evidence that no amount of burning in can do justice to the singers on        the fx40. 

Edited by MelloWatic - 12/21/13 at 9:55pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JVC HA-FX40 | Believe the hype!