JVC HA-FX800? - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atilio 

 

Thats significant in my book.

Well, ok. But keep in mind that it will probably sound more or less the same for the most part, since the biggest difference is a rather subtle difference.

Subtle differences, especially on treble, can make all the difference.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atilio 

Subtle differences, especially on treble, can make all the difference.
 

FX700's treble is not harsh or sibilant at all. FX800 has a more refined but an increase in treble presence as well. I like that but I just EQ it.

The fx800 is sold in my country (Thailand, selling at approx. 400$), but I'd like to read some reviews from headfi before taking the plunge. From the thread, it seems nobody from here has bought it yet? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mini0510 

I read that it has a larger soundstage and a more refined treble.

 

http://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://bbs.imp3.net/thread-10838018-1-1.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djvc%2Bfx800%2Bfx700%26hl%3Den%26tbo%3Dd%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D606%26tbs%3Dqdr:m&sa=X&ei=qA-0UNekOuO-yQHJkIBI&ved=0CD8Q7gEwAQ

 

http://bbs.imp3.net/thread-10838042-1-1.html

my translation on points of interest:

wire changed to 1.2m 4N OFC cable (from black to shiny silver -_-)

treble less piercing, more refined sounding, no more intense feeling while listening, more relaxing but still sibilant. (in state of current review, fx800 is not burnt in and it is higher in sibilance compared to fx700 burnt in but when both fx800 and fx700 have not been burnt in fx800 seems less sibilant)

soundstage slightly larger

mids as recessed as fx700 if not slightly more recessed (because of the enhanced bass and treble, mids seem uninteresting)

vocals seem thinner (chinese threadstarter comment: not sure if it is my own illusion) -> but doesn't affect threadstarter as he only listens to instrumental soundtracks

too little improvement, unjustified price considering the history of JVC's style with regards to pricing vs quality -> direct translate from the chinese threadstarter's text
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee730 

What a shame. More recessed mids... I was hoping they'd learn and fix that major issue. These IEMs had so much potential IMO if they chould have balanced out the mids and brought more control to the bass and more refinement to the treble. Ah well...
 

have you heard the fx700/fx800 yourself?

i am contemplating between panasonic hje900 and fx700 right now. any advice? :D

i like the bass in hje900 but it's considered muddy sounding overall.

hoping the fx700 can do just as good if not better in bass as hje900 but also worried the mids might be super recessed compared to the hje900s.

Just to clarity, midrange is not mentioned at all in the forum post.

the difference between FX800 and FX700 (based on what I read through almost all the chinese forum posts)

-bass is better controlled, the exact translation is that the user claims FX700's bass is everywhere. FX800's bass is a surrounding feeling. Possibly tighter but I don't think so. Probably the bass is simply a bit difference (better). But the difference is not big.

The biggest difference (still a subtle difference): FX800's treble is more refined. The user seems to hear more treble presence as well. He/she always thought FX700's treble is not pronounced and not refined enough.

Soundstage is a bit bigger, but not as big as EX1000. The user stated that the soundstage of FX800 shouldn't be as big as EX1000. I guess it's somewhat close perhaps.

From what I read, the midrange is the same.

Overall, I don't think it's not much of a difference. For those who heard FX700, the treble shouldn't be considered not refined or harsh. With all the bass, the treble is in the back (usually),

That's why I didn't sell my FX700 and go for the FX800.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mini0510 

Just to clarity, midrange is not mentioned at all in the forum post.

 

the difference between FX800 and FX700 (based on what I read through almost all the chinese forum posts)

-bass is better controlled, the exact translation is that the user claims FX700's bass is everywhere. FX800's bass is a surrounding feeling. Possibly tighter but I don't think so. Probably the bass is simply a bit difference (better). But the difference is not big.

 

The biggest difference (still a subtle difference): FX800's treble is more refined. The user seems to hear more treble presence as well. He/she always thought FX700's treble is not pronounced and not refined enough.

Soundstage is a bit bigger, but not as big as EX1000. The user stated that the soundstage of FX800 shouldn't be as big as EX1000. I guess it's somewhat close perhaps.

 

From what I read, the midrange is the same.

Overall, I don't think it's not much of a difference. For those who heard FX700, the treble shouldn't be considered not refined or harsh. With all the bass, the treble is in the back (usually),

 

That's why I didn't sell my FX700 and go for the FX800.

it's mentioned in the post "中频是唯一的缺憾了，一来继承FX700直白无感情的特点，再者感觉人声远一些了，其实700的人声并不远，但是两端过于刺激使得人声显得相对苍白，有此可知，800算是真的变成了中间凹的的塞子了。实际听起来确实也是乐器容易溢出。还有一点不知道是不是错觉，人声好像薄一点了"

my try at word for word translation again: mids are the only disappointment, continued the legacy of fx700's straight pale and unemotional mids, my perception makes me feel the vocals are slightly further, actually vocals in fx700 is not far but the two ends of bass and treble are too enhanced thus vocals seems pale in comparison, as such, fx800 has really become a "scooped" earphone missing in mids. upon honest listening, instruments easily overflow. and another point, not sure if it's my illusion, vocals seem a little thinner.

Hum... I wasn't even aware of this IEM... While reading through the new HA-DX2000 headphones thread this IEM got mentioned regarding the type of wood that is said to have been used for the cups and that supposedly are the same as the FX800's housing...

Interesting; I really wanted to try the FX700 eventually, but might try and find some FX800 instead.