My review video is up!
I currently have a Sony MH1C, i quite like the sound, just a little too heavy on the low end and the fit is a problem. I'm looking for a something balance/analytical and warm. Based on the reviews, RE-400 seems like a good choice. Any idea where i can purchase it in the UK?
Should be fine since i already got the MH1 if i need some warmth.haha.
Do you know how head-direct charges, tax and shipping rates to the UK? http://www.head-direct.com/Products/?act=detail&id=143
Never bought from an online shop other than from amazon and ebay :/
Or do you have any other IEM to recommend which can easily be found in the UK? Budget around the same as the RE-400.
sorry for delay, had a swimming comp all weekend. I am really sorry as i am not sure how that would all work with them.
I think a great alternative for a analytical IEM would be the Rock IT R-50 (get from top dog earphones) or the Etymotic. I think an ETY is a big jump and the R-50 a bit warmer so i would go with that.
Thanks for the reply, so between RE-400 and the R-50, which one is truer to the source? Cause that would be useful as an alternate monitor for mixing decisions. I've seen comments that the build quality and comfort of the R-50 is not as good as the RE-400 and as it is a newer earphone, i'm leaning more towards the RE-400 .
Got a set of these yesterday. I take the medium size tips, so the giant bi-flange fit me but I'm wondering what the point of the second flange is? I'm tempted to cut it off so the phones don't stick out so much unless there is an advantage to having the driver sit further out from the ear?
I think the other flange improves seal if you don't get perfect seal from the first part of it and should prevent rotation of the tiny IEM, e.g. pointing the nozzle in a wrong direction, making for a more reproducible and secure fit.
What I find curious is the tiny biflange. There seems to be no real reason to have flanges there, as it's not tapered and the "cut" is minimal width and depth. Perhaps if someone has a bend in just the wrong place, so that the single flange is ejected... highly conditional.
I also recommend medium size Comply Ts400 with same depth fit as the large biflange - of course this is much more expensive and somewhat more fiddly, but just as stable. Improves balance slightly by reducing the extra "crunch", shortens the reverberation, improves bass speed - in total, makes for a more analytic take on their sound without changing the tonality much - makes it a tiny bit warmer.
And yes, I found my RE-400 sound to be very dependent on insertion depth. Inserted deeper it gets much warmer and rolled off at the highest end.
Another interesting observation:
FiiO E17 drives these very well yoo, with full bass extension, but more reverberated and with slower bass than the UHA6S mkII - therefore the result is less analytic, less refined.
Slightly "warmer" bass, but not the good kind of warmth; colder mids - sounds like a bit more even order harmonic distortion in lows and odd order harmonic distortion in upper mids.
The difference is relatively subtle, but on par with tip change between Comply and large biflange.
Single-blind AB settings: Comply Ts-400 M, shallow insertion, voltage matched. Both sourced from the same optical SPDIF. Digital volume at max.
Leckerton pot at almost 3/4, 0 dB gain.
E17 is slightly roundabout - via "line out" (amplified, near-zero output impedance) using E9 adaptor (will fix the headphone out jack some day - no time yet), 6 dB gain, volume 50.
USB input does not change the sound.
Custom homemade hand-soldered switcheroo thingy with immeasurable output impedance and low capacitance. (15 pF)
Optical SPDIF split with some unknown chinese brand dumb photodiode+laser diodes optical splitter. (no effect on sound I could hear vs direct; constant delay on all 4 clones)