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 43

post #631 of 1360

Oh I thought Peter is looking for the star tips. The stock bi-flanges fit me perfectly.

post #632 of 1360

Just finished uploading a new video onto my YouTube channel of my SM64. Something to note, although the video shows my SM64's with Comply's I've since started using Westone Star Tips. The video was shot before I received the Star Tips.

 

 

The following is my final impressions copied and pasted from the description of my YouTube channel. For those interested, I'll be posting a more involved review up on CYMBACAVUM in the next 2 or 3 weeks.


 

Say a big hello to my newest acquisition, the EarSonics SM64 earphone. These are an interesting piece of kit with some interesting little tidbits that set them apart from the rest of the pack.

For starters, while most other pieces of kit are manufactured in China Earsonics decided to keep manufacturing in their own backyard which happens to be France. Although meant for mobile use these IEM's are not low impedance earphones but instead boast a high impedance value of a whopping 98 ohms and a sensitivity value of 122 dB/mW, more on that in a minute. Under the hood we have a triple driver setup with something called a HQ 3 way crossover with impedance corrector which is a crossover design patented by EarSonics.

With the tidbits and specs out of the way it's time to get to the most important part, the sonics. First off, I wouldn't class the SM64 as a sound engineers monitor but instead I class it more along the lines as a very capable fun headphone. What that means is these little babies are rated low on being neutral and instead are rated high on sounding fun. The bass is slightly elevated and sounds lush and full. Even so, the lows do not sound muddy and texture and detail is quite good with very little bleed into the lower mids. Mid and sub bass rumble is very satisfying and the lows can hit quite hard when called upon.

The mids are very forward, mid centric would be a proper description. Like the lows the mids also sound full and lush and electric guitars have a very nice crunch behind them. Detail retrieval, I would rate as good although I wouldn't mind seeing a little more micro detail present in the sigs mids on some songs. Overall tonality for guitars, flutes, violins and piano is also very good and sounds very natural and effortless. Vocals, especially female vocals, also sound natural and these IEM's do quite well with vocal driven music.

The highs are smooth and extend very well giving the overall sig a sense of added space within it's soundstage. They sound clean and clear and display no grain in the upper registers. Transition between the upper mids and lower highs is good and sibilance seems very well controlled leading me to think there's probably a dip somewhere along the 4 to 5000 khz region of the signature. Although highs extend well and sound clean and clear they are not overly boosted. End result, no fatigue during long listening sessions.

Soundstage, the sig sounds wide and tall with acceptable depth giving the listener a out of head listening experience. Although acceptable I still wouldn't mind seeing a little more added depth and layering added into the equation. Even so, the SM64 still pulls off a very satisfying 3D like audio sound. Instrument separation is very good with good space between instruments and I can pinpoint instruments acceptably well within the soundstage.

As mentioned before the SM64 is not a overly sensitive low impedance earphone. The good news, although it's impedance value is 98 ohms it can still be driven to acceptably loud levels on an MP3 player. The bad news, in my experience, it sounded quite sloppy out of my iPod and iPhone. This IEM benefits from amping and is happier when it has a quality mobile amp behind it and will scale up very nicely. Throw in a quality mobile DAC such as the CLAS-db and it's really happy.

although the SM6 isn't an audiophile earphone it is an incredibly fun and involving little IEM. It has a very liquid like smooth sound signature that's very tastefully done. It's very much a genre master that will handle various kinds of music quite well and will make you want to tap your toes every time you have your favorite tunes playing. It's a definite must have IEM for those in the hobby who like to dance around on the fun side of the fence.


Edited by DigitalFreak - 6/8/13 at 11:38pm
post #633 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post

although the SM6 isn't an audiophile earphone it is an incredibly fun and involving little IEM.

Respectfully disagree that the SM64 is not an audiophile earphone, as I personally feel it's every bit as capable of being considered one. Agree with most all else that's written, however. smily_headphones1.gif
post #634 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oof Oink View Post


Respectfully disagree that the SM64 is not an audiophile earphone, as I personally feel it's every bit as capable of being considered one. Agree with most all else that's written, however. smily_headphones1.gif


Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. Just to further clear my view up as to why I said that, I look on the word audiophile in the more puritan sense meaning it has to sound as neutral as possible. I know there's enough people here who would probably want to slug me for saying that but that's how I look at it. Personally, I think the word audiophile is overused nowadays, especially by various marketing departments (I'm looking your way Denon).

 

Thanks for the kind words my man and I hope you enjoyed the writeup and the video. Sorry about the 3rd rate video quality, I really should save up for a decent video camera one day.

beerchug.gif


Edited by DigitalFreak - 6/9/13 at 12:04am
post #635 of 1360

I only know a few (self-described) audiophiles, neither of whom thinks that earphones are capable of producing true audiophile caliber sound.

post #636 of 1360

Not to be rude but lets please save the what is considered audiophile gear discussion for another thread and please stay on topic.

post #637 of 1360

Getting back on topic was exactly my point (which includes not going down the road about the SM64 not being “audiophile gear” or Denon—and their supposed marketing claims).

post #638 of 1360

So....I'm now supposed to hate my SM64?  O.K.

post #639 of 1360
Only if you like 5kHz.
post #640 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post


Well I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. Just to further clear my view up as to why I said that, I look on the word audiophile in the more puritan sense meaning it has to sound as neutral as possible.

Ah. Makes much more sense when put into context. I personally interpret the term audiophile in the very literal sense; audio lover. And on that notion, I'm sure most all of us here are "audiophiles."
post #641 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oof Oink View Post


Ah. Makes much more sense when put into context. I personally interpret the term audiophile in the very literal sense; audio lover. And on that notion, I'm sure most all of us here are "audiophiles."

 

It's defined by many places as a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction.  Basically, someone who's interested in the most accurate sound reproduction possible.  The question of what is accurate, how you achieve accuracy, can still be debated.  Some people feel there is only one road, others feel there can be multiple. 

post #642 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckdriver View Post

Getting back on topic was exactly my point (which includes not going down the road about the SM64 not being “audiophile gear” or Denon—and their supposed marketing claims).


Listen, you can split hairs concerning the language I've chosen in my posts or you can take it for what it's meant to be, someones personal view that differs from yours. Again, I'm not trying to be rude with my rebuttal but only being honest. I'm sorry you didn't like how I approached my rather simplistic final thoughts on the SM64 or my subsequent posts on the term audiophile. I like to try and keep my final thought on gear as simple and straight forward as possible, especially on these boards. All that aside, I stand by what I've written. There's really no reason to bog down the thread with needless argument, let's move on please. Me, and others, I'm sure would be highly interested in your own personal thoughts concerning the SM64. If you have any then please feel free to share them with the community. Thanks.

redface.gif

 

@tinyman392

 

So what do you think? The SM64 is a rather interesting little IEM with the weirdest graphs I've ever seen in comparison to what I'm hearing. What's your take on all this my golden eared friend?wink_face.gif


Edited by DigitalFreak - 6/9/13 at 12:54pm
post #643 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post


Listen, you can split hairs concerning the language I've chosen in my posts or you can take it for what it's meant to be, someones personal view that differs from yours. Again, I'm not trying to be rude with my rebuttal but only being honest. I'm sorry you didn't like how I approached my rather simplistic final thoughts on the SM64 or my subsequent posts on the term audiophile. I like to try and keep my final thought on gear as simple and straight forward as possible, especially on these boards. All that aside, I stand by what I've written. There's really no reason to bog down the thread with needless argument, let's move on please. Me, and others, I'm sure would be highly interested in your own personal thoughts concerning the SM64. If you have any then please feel free to share them with the community. Thanks.

redface.gif

 

@tinyman392

 

So what do you think? The SM64 is a rather interesting little IEM with the weirdest graphs I've ever seen in comparison to what I'm hearing. What's your take on all this my golden eared friend?wink_face.gif

 

I don't mind about your personal views on the SM64 at all. The little debate about what is (and isn't) “audiophile gear” started before my post. I simply meant to point out that the term “audiophile” isn't an agreed upon term. So, it's best to stick with a personal perspective instead of trying to speak for a much larger group (like audiophiles). But moving on.....

 

I did post about the SM64 shortly before I returned it (a few months ago). I auditioned it for about 28 days and while I thought it was very nice, it seemed a little hollow (to me) in the mid-vocal region (and I'm not referring to its transparency).

 

Mid-bass was strong and clear but sub-bass was (I thought) sub-par. The treble was nice with the original tips but since I needed maximum isolation, I used a triple-flange/foam hybrid tip which made the treble seem average (or on par with the SE535).

 

I liked the way the SM64 was essentially the same no matter the source (that I have) whereas the SE535 gets quite “claustrophobic in sound-stage” (particularly with my Apple DAPs).

 

post #644 of 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalFreak View Post

 

@tinyman392

 

So what do you think? The SM64 is a rather interesting little IEM with the weirdest graphs I've ever seen in comparison to what I'm hearing. What's your take on all this my golden eared friend?wink_face.gif

 

Unfortuantely, I probably won't be able to get my hands on the Earsonics.  I contacted them twice, but without reply (I'm sure my request just got ignored, which I'm fine with).  My main reasons for entering this thread was because I saw some things that didn't seem right (maybe I'll refer to it as unfair criticism / defaming).  the SM64 actually has a normal graph outside the dip at the 5kHz. 

 

PS: I don't have golden ears.

post #645 of 1360

Oooh nooo...not this "audiophile" definition and this "graphs" discussions again!.....popcorn.gif

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