Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM64: The Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Earsonics SM64: The Impressions Thread - Page 24

post #346 of 1346

Does the SM3 and SM64 have exactly the same nozzle size (ie, same tip compatibility)?

post #347 of 1346
Yes it does.
post #348 of 1346
Found the earhooks (as they're referred to, on eBay) that supposedly match the ones I received with my GR07 MK II. This is the least expensive price I found on eBay.
post #349 of 1346
Is it just me, or does the treble seem to have more sparkle with further use/burn-in? Unamplified, of course. I'd like to think it's my mind playing tricks on me, but the difference is certainly quite noticeable, as compared to their out-of-the-box sound. In fact, I even double checked just to ensure my iTunes EQ wasn't mistakenly switched on. In any case, I'm not talking day and night here. Just enough to notice.

Makes me wonder just how much better these may sound with further use. Then again, it's just as likely that my mind is becoming more and more accustomed to their sound, and I'm subconsciously listening to areas I hadn't particularly focused on earlier...
post #350 of 1346
I assume u use sm64-v1. In my experience..the v1 without an amp will suffer on the mids. So that the highs will be more appealing and u hear more sparkling. I am not too sure about after burn-in period the highs will be tamed. But when i get used to it with the sound....i feel the highs is more acceptable and smoother although is still sparkling to me.
post #351 of 1346
I understand what you're saying, and it confirms what I've read with regards to the V1. Except, I have a V2. tongue.gif
post #352 of 1346
Aso, the midrange is (IMO) the strongest, most appealing aspect of the SM64 (V2). I can't say I've ever heard better mids out of any other balanced armature.
post #353 of 1346
You ought to look into Final Audio sometime if midrange is your game. I greatly enjoy the midrange of the 64 as well, but FAD takes things to another seductive level
post #354 of 1346
Which particular model might you be referring to?
post #355 of 1346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oof Oink View Post

Aso, the midrange is (IMO) the strongest, most appealing aspect of the SM64 (V2). I can't say I've ever heard better mids out of any other balanced armature.

The next mid range of similar tonality would be TG334. That TG334 has one of the best mid for IEM. After TG334, the next level of mid range would be W3000 NAV for me, This is all mid range focus.

 

And then after all the above, the SR009 has one of the most natural sounding mid I have come across... but cost to much $$$


Edited by Audiowood - 4/30/13 at 11:47am
post #356 of 1346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oof Oink View Post

Which particular model might you be referring to?

I was able to audition the Heaven VI on behalf of a friend here for two weeks. It had the best mids I've heard of any phone in my collection. Really amazing timbre on the FAD VI. I previously thought the Flat-4 and SM64 were about as good as it gets, but there's just something about the FAD sound that is richer to me. I haven't auditioned it yet, but I have on good word (from a member who owns both Heaven S and FIBASS) that the Heaven S is another amazing phone (offering a very good chunk of the TOTL FIBASS' performance) and it's priced rather well.
post #357 of 1346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiowood View Post

The next mid range of similar tonality would be TG334. That TG334 has one of the best mid for IEM.

That's really saying something! Especially considering the staggering difference in price, even with or without the recent Sound Earphones deal in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idsynchrono_24 View Post

I was able to audition the Heaven VI on behalf of a friend here for two weeks. It had the best mids I've heard of any phone in my collection. Really amazing timbre on the FAD VI. I previously thought the Flat-4 and SM64 were about as good as it gets, but there's just something about the FAD sound that is richer to me. I haven't auditioned it yet, but I have on good word (from a member who owns both Heaven S and FIBASS) that the Heaven S is another amazing phone (offering a very good chunk of the TOTL FIBASS' performance) and it's priced rather well.

How is the overall tonality of the VI? Balanced, or rolled-off (at either end)? Also, I've read more than once that the Flat-4's signature is v or u shaped. Sounds quite contrary to the SM64. Is that not the case?

EDIT: answered via PM. Thank you.
Edited by Oof Oink - 4/30/13 at 1:01pm
post #358 of 1346

Damn this hobby is getting expensive... Decided to add one BA-driver IEM to my collection and took a leap of faith with the SM64 (zero experience with EarSonics gear, but at least I live in Europe so it´ll be easy to get the repaired). First impressions after a day of using them are positive, but I won´t lie: when I opened the box my first thought was "I need to return these fast". The build quality is really almost comical for a 400 euro product: cheap plastic that I sure won´t be using at the gym or anywhere where it might take some damage. The packaging looks like the ones in 50 dollar earbuds. Almost no included accessories either, just the cleaning tool, a few (literally) tips, ok carrying case and the IEMs. If you´d show the SM64 and then the Sony EX-1000 to a stranger and let them open the packaging, I´m pretty sure not even 1 out of 100 would think the EarSonics is even remotely near the same price range. That said it´s not all bad: I looked closer and noticed how absolutely full of stuff the shells are: you can see that there is absolutely no empty space inside. The SM64 weighs more than IEMs its size (and build) too. Compare the SM64 with almost any transparent shell BA-driver IEM and I´m willing to bet the EarSonics IEM has more stuff inside. Not only the crossover components take a lot of space, but the BA-drivers in the SM64 in particular are very big for the shell size. The bass driver for example is as long as possible inside the IEM shell. My guess is that the SM64 includes the same amount of internal components most customs do.

 

So in other words it´s the very definition of a very niche audiophile product. High tech audio engineering, assembled by hand in France and then unfortunately put inside a standard cheap bean-type plastic shell. On the other hand at least you know you are paying for the components and R&D. How does it sound though? Well, at first I couldn´t get a seal at all with the included bi-flange tips. After some shuffling I eventually settled on the Comply P-series standard and the Shure foam tips. The nozzle size is 2mm so Westone/Shure tips fit fine, which is a huge plus considering how poor the included tips selection is. I hope I haven´t sounded too negative - at this point I want to say that I of course fully knew in advance that the build quality is poor for the price and that the included accessories are acceptable at best. Sound quality is what matters though and here the SM64 does not disappoint. In fact I´m willing to say it´s the most balanced and best all-rounder IEM in my collection, but I´ve only used it for a day so these are honeymoon comments of course.

 

SQ (some initial thoughts in no particular order): 

 

- It sounds effortless, balanced and you can really crank up the volume without getting a confused or distorted sound. At no volume setting does some frequency start dominating the sound which is something I really like about these.

- Neutral tonality with a little warmth, a light boost in the bass impact frequency range and slightly (nowhere near as much as on Shure for example) forward mids. All in all these are closer to the EX-1000 than the Sennheiser IE800 tuning wise. Mine are V2, the latest edition. It would be neat to hear how the V1 sounds as this is pretty neutral to my ears. I was worried after reading this thread that I might like the V1 more, but make no mistake: this is not a dark & warm style IEM and I love it. The Sony XBA-40 I have sound so horrible compared to the SM64 it´s not even funny. Highs are also NOT significantly rolled off. There might be some roll-off (can´t say as I haven´t heard V1), but this is not the usual stage monitor tuning. The highs extend well and there´s good sparkle. All in all I´d say the Sennheiser HD600 are the closest tuning wise to these, not the HD650.

- First BA I´ve heard that can actually do real subwoofer style sub-bass rumble. The midrange is practically unaffected by the bass. If it bleeds into the mids it´s very slight, nowhere near as much as on the IE800 when used in a silent environment for example.

- Resolution is very high, almost pretty much on par with the Sennheiser IE800.

- I´d take these over a HD600/HD650/K701 any day.

- Very good soundstage and imaging. The music envelops you. It´s not as wide as the EX-1000 (but there´s no treble spike here!), but it´s quite close. Depth isn´t as good as on IE800 (but there´s sub-bass excess), but it´s better than I´ve heard in other BA´s so far.

- Bass punches deep and has very good impact. While I do feel the impact frequencies have been boosted, but it´s not a huge boost and the FR graph posted in that one review is way off: these aren´t a bass-monster IEM like the IE800 are, but can do bass heavy music well.

- Fantastic genre bandwith: I´ve tried everything from Katie Melua to Rammstein and everything sounds good! This is a very good all-rounder.

 

All in all definitely recommended. Purely SQ wise I´d put them in the same category as the Sennheiser IE800 and EX-1000. Just be ready to accept that these are pretty fragile and the plastic shell doesn´t do justice to the beautiful acoustic engineering work.

post #359 of 1346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oof Oink View Post


That's really saying something! Especially considering the staggering difference in price, even with or without the recent Sound Earphones deal in mind.
How is the overall tonality of the VI? Balanced, or rolled-off (at either end)? Also, I've read more than once that the Flat-4's signature is v or u shaped. Sounds quite contrary to the SM64. Is that not the case?

EDIT: answered via PM. Thank you.

 

Well I wanted to know what he said! Especially since I'm "the friend," and because I happen to be selling my Heaven VI. 

 

I didn't think of the F4 as very v-shaped, much like the SM64 is not. I'd agree, I think the sonic signatures are more similar than not. The Heaven VI has taught bass, rich lush mids, and a sparkly high end. Slightly more mid-centric than the SM64 and the F4.

post #360 of 1346
I don't want to post Idsynchrono_24 response without his consent, so I'm sure he'll chime in and share his thoughts with you.

On another note, I purchased the FiiO RC-UE1 as a spare, replacement cable for the SM64, only to discover that the cable is not supported by the SM64. The pins at the end of the cable, even when pushed into the SM64 as deep as they can possibly go, are much too shallow. So, in case anyone else comes across this, I thought I'd share my experience and potentially save someone else the time and trouble. Not to mention, the cable is much too thick and far too heavy, outweighing the earphones themselves, which results in a constant tugging downwards when worn over-ear (as is intended to be worn) .
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM64: The Impressions Thread