Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Audio Engineering: UE Reference Monitors or FS MG6Pro?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio Engineering: UE Reference Monitors or FS MG6Pro? - Page 2

post #16 of 27
Originally Posted by Xymordos View Post

When I heard the demos the 13 sounds a lot more bloated. 16 was a lot tighter. 16 bass sounds a lot less than the 13s. That was my opinion too.


Also if its +12db on bass...isn't that not very suitable for monitoring?

too? No one has agreed with you. 12db up is only usefull for loud stage use or bass emphasized listening. The jh13 is flatter in the bass than what 6db uo a 50hz would have you think. 6db up on a Etymotic 4p sounds about right in normal listening as long as it stays out of the lower mids. This is a response curve of nothing we're discussion (Westone1) form goldenears.


The reason it's here is to show you the green reference line of what sounds real or natural to them. Notice that the bass is up exactly 6db at 50hz from a measured flat response. I may have different ideas about things needing to be absolutely flat above 12khz like their model but I think the curve is about bass weighting. You already have a jh16 graph, there's an obvious reason why it has 4 woofers.


 Take these all with a grain but the bass response on tests relative to 1khz tend to be similar even if the rest looks different due to weighting etc.

Here's a uerm:




To your original question, uerm is the better option.

Edited by goodvibes - 10/23/12 at 6:57am
post #17 of 27

I'm sorry but each person's ears are the biggest thing affecting their hearing of headphones. To me, JH Audio made the most unbalanced bass monsters possible in the customs world, and the UERM blew me away with their out of this world sound stage.

post #18 of 27

 rolleyes.gif No one said that he or you couldn't prefer something. Just that your bass characterizations are incorrect. He asked about another IEM that has significantly more bass than a JH13. He probably shouldn't go  with that one. LOL Point was that there was an issue with either what you heard or how you heard it. Maybe somebody blew up the tweeters etc. JH13 is close to neutral. JH16 is not. We're just trying to give an overview and nobody agreed that the JH13 had more bass than a jh16. If you don't like the amount of bass a jh16 has, (I don't either but quite like the 13) than you should probably stay away. In a like fashion, the OP should stay with the uerm and not go with the mg6pro.

Edited by goodvibes - 10/23/12 at 4:20pm
post #19 of 27

Sorry, but I only read that he wanted a audio engineering one >< I read in many places that JH13 has a similar signature to UERM. But I still don't know how they sound similar when the JH has so much more bass. I know that generally demos will have more bass (The UERM demo has more than usual bass actually...), but even so JH13 has quite bloated bass. Also what I mean by more bass on the 13 is that there is a lot of reverb and echoes to the bass. On the 16 it is tighter, but heavier.

post #20 of 27

I think there's an issue with the dem you got. Both renown reviewers Tyll and Steve still consider the jh13 their IEM reference. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVTSafas1j0 Of course they won't be for everyone and there's more choices constantly appearing but they're good. I'm quite curious about the 1964 V6.

post #21 of 27

Nah, I think its because the tips often add a lot of bass to them. The EM6 demo sounded as bad as the UM3x, which was extremely veiled. 1964ears demo were quite nice, their Quads especially. Their v6 should be an extremely good iem if it follows the trend of the Quads.

post #22 of 27

Excerpt from my impressions of a JH13 demo unit that I borrowed some time ago:


Originally Posted by james444 View Post




First thing that struck me after putting them in, was how bassy they are. From casual reading I thought these were supposed to be flat, with the JH16 being the basshead version, but I instantly knew that these would have more than sufficient bass for my taste. 




Bass: I thought these were flat but they're not. There's a pronounced emphasis on mid-bass that drowns out most of the deep bass. Even though my FI-BA-SS are single BAs and roll off earlier below 30Hz, they have better deep bass with dubstep and electronica. On Tek One's "Broken String" bass peak is about 50Hz higher than where it should be. Same goes for James Blake's "The Wilhelm Scream". The W4 have significantly less bass quantity than the JH13-D, but are more linear and better suited for this kind of music. Now don't get me wrong, the JH13-D's bass quality is actually very good and impressively dynamic for BAs, but sadly there's that hump that spoils the party for me. ymmv. Side note: I let dfkt listen to these and he confimed my findings. Then he pulled out his Digizoid ZO and surprisingly enough that little thing managed to shift the JH13-D's bass signature more towards deep bass without noticable degradation of sound quality. Impressive.


The CIEM dealer I got them from is among the most experienced and reputable in Germany and a regular on the German HiFi Forum. After he told me that the full custom would at least have the same level of bass as the demos (if not more, due to bone conduction), I backed out of the JH13 deal and borrowed a UERM demo unit. The latter had significantly better balanced bass than the JH13-D and finally convinced me to buy the full-custom UERM, which turned out to sound almost identical to the UERM demos.

post #23 of 27

Thats pretty much what I thought except that the bass on my demo unit was too slow for my tastes. In faster music it'll blur.

post #24 of 27

Vive la difference.bigsmile_face.gif Nothing is for everybody and my point was never about personal preference. Bone conduction should also do more at the lowest frequencies. Point was that the 16 has more bass, not less and why I'm assuming that there was something wrong with his demo. I never recommended the 13 to the OP. All my examples were about 2 things. One: 16 has more bass than 13, not less. Two: 13 is not crap and used as an IEM reference by Tyll of innerfidelity who is generally into flat and has measured and heard more than most. Still personal but the bashing and relation to the 16 were incorrect.

post #25 of 27

FWIW, I do think my JH13s have a little more bass than what I would consider flat. I also think that "flat" has a little more bass than what technically would be considered flat as headphone don't provide the bone conducted and chest and nasal cavity compression low freq info, or the boundry gain of lows in a real room that we're used to listening to with speakers. I don't think there's very much bone conducted info from CIEMs. 


The JH13 that is now being built, however, the one with Freqphase, is quite different, and I would consider it flat. At least in the demo version I heard. The phase-linear characteristic of these are extraordinary, and I would consider it a great purchase for audio pros...a great purchase!

post #26 of 27

I also think they have a little extra and stated same but about what you'd need when not just sitting or some noise in the room. Nice to know the new model is actually better.bigsmile_face.gif And thanks for the great work on your blog. I find it very reliable.

post #27 of 27

The new 16s would sound really attractive! Would like to see a review on their new technology.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Audio Engineering: UE Reference Monitors or FS MG6Pro?