or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Cosmic Ears - new CIEM company with great prices (including Hybrid designs!)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cosmic Ears - new CIEM company with great prices (including Hybrid designs!) - Page 225

post #3361 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainRazer View Post


That's what I exactly got, it 'seems' to get slightly loose when I move around or smile. I had to push it back in to get it to 'feel' right.
I then used plastic food wrap and it seems to improve the seal.
I suggest try wrapping around some plastic wrap and see if it improves.

I think that i kinda a have the same thing with the right canal. Maybe the ear canal part is too short rather then to thin?
post #3362 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krismarzyk View Post


I once asked Phil to send me the FR graph of my BA4r and he did not do this up to date:(

 

I don't think the graphs are "public" ;)

post #3363 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrainferno View Post

I don't think the graphs are "public" wink.gif
I know and I actually somehow understand Phil. But on the other hand I was asking about the graph of my cIEMs, not someone else.

But to be clear I don't have any hard feelings towards Phil:smile:
post #3364 of 5237
I would love to see a FR graph of the BR4R to know if it is reaching the target flat response I'm looking for.
post #3365 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrainferno View Post
 

 

I don't think the graphs are "public" ;)

 

The issue with graphs is that some people draw definitive conclusions from them and they don't tell the whole story. They may give an indication of how an IEM might sound, but what a person hears can be a more subjective experience than that. I can understand any manufacturer not wanting to get into having their IEM's judged on just graphs.

 

I have lost count of the times I have read reviews of IEM's that say things like "and the dropout I expected to hear at 4.5k according to the FR graph, is not apparent..." 

 

I'm not saying graphs don't have their place, I am just saying that they should only be used as an indicator rather than an absolute.

post #3366 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

I would love to see a FR graph of the BR4R to know if it is reaching the target flat response I'm looking for.

That was my goal (i.e. flat response) when I ordered BA4r. I was searching for the cIEM equivalent of ER4s.
post #3367 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krismarzyk View Post

That was my goal (i.e. flat response) when I ordered BA4r. I was searching for the cIEM equivalent of ER4s.

Have you posted impressions yet, especially in regards to an ER-4S comparison? I've only been sporadically following the thread and have missed large chunks.
post #3368 of 5237
No, I didn't post any thorough impresssions yet. I've posted my initial impressions in this thread and in the BA4f review of marleybob. My first impressions are as follows:

a) my BA4r requires approx. 2 db decrease in 60-250 Hz regions and 1db in 30-60 Hz region. Decrease in 60-120 Hz gives more clarity in the highs; decrease in 120-250 Hz gives more clarity for vocals. After those small adjustments my BA4r have this clarity which I was looking for; at the same time they have this nice power/impact and the sound is full (it isn't thin at all as I would expect from reference monitors). Without those adjustments my first impressions were that my BA4r have some sort of veil, in particular in the upper midrange/highs region;

b) as regards direct comparison between my BA4r and ER4s:

- my BA4r have much more fuller sound with a little more impact;

- due to this fullness of my BA4r I tend to think that ER4s are a little bit thin and have somehow a little bit artificial bump in the upper midrange (this bump gives ER4s this superb clarity), although in the ER4 appreciation thread someone suggested that this lack of fullness of the Etys sound results rather from a little bump in 2-4 kHz region and not from the bump in the upper midrange. Previously I considered ER4s as a neutral IEM, but now I start think that BA4r is the neutral one and ER4s is more on the cold/thin side;

- detaility is on pair, maybe BA4r portrays more details, but it is too early to confirm this for sure. Definitely, I can hear more subbass, this rumbling subbass, on BA4r which I've nevered heard of on Etys;

- soundstage is on pair, maybe BA4r plays more in the head instead of behind it.
Edited by shakur1996 - 11/6/13 at 8:03am
post #3369 of 5237
Great, thank you for the impressions! If you don't mind, how does their treble compare?
post #3370 of 5237
Highs are on pair, in particular in terms of detaility and accuracy (maybe my BA4r can produce a little bit more details, but on the second thought maybe this is only my wishful thinking:rolleyes:). Although the highs on my BA4r are a little more smoother (previously I considered Etys highs as smooth).
post #3371 of 5237
Thanks again. This helps paint the picture for me.
post #3372 of 5237

Talking about cIEMs vs full sized headphones. I've recently started listening to my gmp 8.35D again. And the soundstage of that headphone is quite impressive, the audio cues are very clear. Yet listening to over ear headphones is so weird next to listening to cIEMs. The soundstage of the BA4f might be small-ish, but it's very coherent. With the gmp 8.35D sounds are everywhere! I bet I'll have to adjust to the huge soundstage of the AKG K702 anniversaries, which I have incoming.

post #3373 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krismarzyk View Post

- due to this fullness of my BA4r I tend to think that ER4s are a little bit thin and have somehow a little bit artificial bump in the upper midrange (this bump gives ER4s this superb clarity), although in the ER4 appreciation thread someone suggested that this lack of fullness of the Etys sound results rather from a little bump in 2-4 kHz region and not from the bump in the upper midrange. Previously I considered ER4s as a neutral IEM, but now I start think that BA4r is the neutral one and ER4s is more on the cold/thin side;

What do you consider upper midrange? 2-4 khz is upper midrange to me, if 4 khz and up is lower treble.

post #3374 of 5237
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueangel2323 View Post

What do you consider upper midrange? 2-4 khz is upper midrange to me, if 4 khz and up is lower treble.

4-6 kHz is upper midrange, everything above 6 kHz is highs.

http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
Edited by shakur1996 - 11/6/13 at 9:30am
post #3375 of 5237
It's good to read detailed impressions of the BA4.
Except that the resulting temptation to give in and just buy a BA4f makes waiting for the next Cosmic hybrid that much harder.

It's a long shot, but are any owners of the BA4 thinking of getting the HY3? ( or vice-versa ).
I'd love to read a direct comparison.

My HY-TF10, and the HY3 that I had really give me hope for the HY5 being great though.

In the absence of genuine factual info I'd like so speculate wildly:
I wonder what kind of new driver you're waiting for Phil, conventional dynamic?, or micro-drive?.
I ask as I've got a Sony MH1-C that uses a micro dynamic driver, and for the £17 I paid for it it is staggeringly good.
I wonder if any manufacturers have combined micro-drive dynamic drivers with BA's?
They'd presumably take up less room than a conventional D-D?

Do you have any timescale established for either the BA6 or the HY5 yet?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Cosmic Ears - new CIEM company with great prices (including Hybrid designs!)