Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › FitEar Parterre (パルテール) Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FitEar Parterre (パルテール) Appreciation Thread - Page 24

post #346 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by lescanadiens View Post


I love my 3003 and consider it my go-to iem.
So maybe you should buy a 334 so you would have a togo iem on top of your go-to iem.
post #347 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by lescanadiens View Post


I love my 3003 and consider it my go-to iem.
So maybe you should buy a 334 so you would have a togo iem on top of your go-to iem.


You need a Brian Goto cable with that.

post #348 of 646
Actually i find 334 can be satisfying for deep bass tracks but can be a bit fatiguing for my ears after a couple of hours due to presence of bass. If the bass is a bit lighter (that surely would be great).
post #349 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by lescanadiens View Post

Hi music,

Kindly ask, if you try the parterre with the 000 or 001 cable?

 

Hi there lescanadiens,

 

Have only tried the stock cable (don't know what model it is), exactly the same stock cable that comes with the TG334.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lescanadiens View Post


I am juat wondering if it is worth to own 3003 and parterre. Try the 334 but fatigue after a short while.

I love my 3003 and consider it my go-to iem.

 

The quick answer is no (bolded text). The longer answer is, of course, it depends. Like you, and as noted already, the 334s were ultimately not for me. The Parterre's tonal balance is very close to that of the K3003s, so in that sense I'm very happy to own both.

post #350 of 646

music_4321

 

Are you listening to both the K3003 and Parterre off the V200? I really need to get my pair in and really A/B it with the K3003 which I have unlimited access to. I am going by memory and do find the K3003 much richer sounding tonally with more weight throughout the FR compared to the Parterre. Take the trebles, they couldn't be more different to my ears....the K3003 has a lot more weight and a beautiful brassiness that is pretty much unique to it.

 

Anyway let's see when I get the Parterre in the house.................. 

post #351 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkrs01 View Post

music_4321

 

Are you listening to both the K3003 and Parterre off the V200?

 

Yes, mostly (I'd say 85-90% off the V200 and 10-15% off the HPO of my 4G Touch).

post #352 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

Very, very well, IMO, but vocals are not forward... nor recessed, for that matter.

 

I see. I'm still not quite sure about these since I'm coming from IEM's with a forward mid range (EQ-7, RE262 and CK100). I have also tried the UE900 and I liked bit but the vocals was a bit recessed for my taste.

Quote:
Originally Posted by angelo898 View Post

i personally wouldn't reccomend it for rock or vocals


What problems did you have with these genres?

post #353 of 646

vocals are not as sweet i guess, i listen to a lot of classical as well, so it seems like i prefer instruments instead of vocals. that being said, i listen to rock and accoustics on it from time to time

post #354 of 646
Hi music_4321,

Thank you for your reply.
I have similar IEM set up with 3003, PFx, Kaede so i trust your impressions will connect withmy taste somehow.

I guess i will pass on parterre and focus on other possibilities (JH 13 fp, SE 5 or MH 335DW).

Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

Hi there lescanadiens,

Have only tried the stock cable (don't know what model it is), exactly the same stock cable that comes with the TG334.


The quick answer is no (bolded text). The longer answer is, of course, it depends. Like you, and as noted already, the 334s were ultimately not for me. The Parterre's tonal balance is very close to that of the K3003s, so in that sense I'm very happy to own both.
post #355 of 646
The SE5 and 335 sound VERY different to my ears. The 335 is a better tg334, so tighter bass mostly. Compared to se5 it has thicker mids, more bass.
post #356 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Music View Post

I see. I'm still not quite sure about these since I'm coming from IEM's with a forward mid range (EQ-7, RE262 and CK100). I have also tried the UE900 and I liked bit but the vocals was a bit recessed for my taste.

 

For what it's worth, I've owned the CK100 (not the newer CK100 Pro), an IEM that was a very, very close relative of the UM3X. I've never heard the EQ-7 or RE262, but 3 and 4 years ago I enjoyed the UM3X & CK100 a lot. A couple of days ago, I stated that of all the phones I've heard, the 3 I'd keep would be the K3003, Parterre and 1601SS.

The FAD 1601SS and its sibling / twin, the 1602SS (aka Piano Forte IX) are seriously mid-centric phones. Their sonics are so different, that I very rarely recommend these phones. In fact, these phones are so different-sounding that some think they're absolute rubbish, and I can understand where they're coming from when they say so. BUT, for some strange reason, I personally need to have either the 1601 or 1602 in my life — I'd need to have one 160X IEM and either my HD800, K3003 or Parterre, if I was forced to only choose two phones (chances are I'd choose either the K3003 or Parterre because both are truly portable). Seems I'm not alone regarding this very strange love for, and/or addiction to, the 160Xs, as several other owner have expressed a tremendous attachment to the sonics of these very peculiar phones.

Now, the 160Xs could never be described as good all-rounders (too mid-centric AND with rolled-off treble and bass). The CK100 & UM3X are not as drastic-sounding as the 160Xs, but I'd take the 160Xs any day over the ATHs & Westones as the 160Xs are not just about their unique midrange. I would not describe the other two IEMs as good all-rounders, either, as they're a bit too warm, with a very intimate sound which isn't always very realistic.

The Parterre, like the K3003s, are more balanced, more correct from a FR standpoint. Not only are they both excellent all-rounders, but, unlike the CK100 & UM3X, they really sound high-end, more like excellent open-back headphones. The Parterre and K3003 simply play in a different league.

You may ultimately still prefer the CK100, but I honestly doubt most people would. BUT, as it happens with any phone, we already have one person (tomscy2000) who says they prefer the F111 (perhaps tranhieu, too, [I'm not sure about him, though]). To me, the F111 isn't even close sonically to the Parterres; the F111 is a very nice phone, but it not so infrequently sounded unconvincing and two-dimensional to these ears. The Parterre, I find, mimics much more convincingly what I hear in the real world.


Edited by music_4321 - 8/19/13 at 10:43am
post #357 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

For what it's worth, I've owned the CK100 (not the newer CK100 Pro), an IEM that was a very, very close relative of the UM3X. I've never heard the EQ-7 or RE262, but 3 and 4 years ago I enjoyed the UM3X & CK100 a lot. A couple of days ago, I stated that of all the phones I've heard, the 3 I'd keep would be the K3003, Parterre and 1601SS.

The FAD 1601SS and its sibling / twin, the 1602SS (aka Piano Forte IX) are seriously mid-centric phones. Their sonics are so different, that I very rarely recommend these phones. In fact, these phones are so different-sounding that some think they're absolute rubbish, and I can understand where they're coming from when they say so. BUT, for some strange reason, I personally need to have either the 1601 or 1602 in my life — I'd need to have one 160X IEM and either my HD800, K3003 or Parterre, if I was forced to only choose two phones (chances are I'd choose either the K3003 or Parterre because both are truly portable). Seems I'm not alone regarding this very strange love for, and/or addiction to, the 160Xs, as several other owner have expressed a tremendous attachment to the sonics of these very peculiar phones.

Now, the 160Xs could never be described as good all-rounders (too mid-centric AND with rolled-off treble and bass). The CK100 & UM3X are not as drastic-sounding as the 160Xs, but I'd take the 160Xs any day over the ATHs & Westones as the 160Xs are not just about their unique midrange. I would not describe the other two IEMs as good all-rounders, either, as they're a bit too warm, with a very intimate sound which isn't always very realistic.

The Parterre, like the K3003s, are more balanced, more correct from a FR standpoint. Not only are they both excellent all-rounders, but, unlike the CK100 & UM3X, they really sound high-end, more like excellent open-back headphones. The Parterre and K3003 simply play in a different league.

You may ultimately still prefer the CK100, but I honestly doubt most people would. BUT, as it happens with any phone, we already have one person (tomscy2000) who says they prefer the F111 (perhaps tranhieu, too, [I'm not sure about him, though]). To me, the F111 isn't even close sonically to the Parterres; the F111 is a very nice phone, but it not so infrequently sounded unconvincing and two-dimensional to these ears. The Parterre, I find, mimics much more convincingly what I hear in the real world.

I have the same opinion. at first, I expect the F111 has very sparkle treble but I found it even much lesser sparkle than my parterre

post #358 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

For what it's worth, I've owned the CK100 (not the newer CK100 Pro), an IEM that was a very, very close relative of the UM3X. I've never heard the EQ-7 or RE262, but 3 and 4 years ago I enjoyed the UM3X & CK100 a lot. A couple of days ago, I stated that of all the phones I've heard, the 3 I'd keep would be the K3003, Parterre and 1601SS.

The FAD 1601SS and its sibling / twin, the 1602SS (aka Piano Forte IX) are seriously mid-centric phones. Their sonics are so different, that I very rarely recommend these phones. In fact, these phones are so different-sounding that some think they're absolute rubbish, and I can understand where they're coming from when they say so. BUT, for some strange reason, I personally need to have either the 1601 or 1602 in my life — I'd need to have one 160X IEM and either my HD800, K3003 or Parterre, if I was forced to only choose two phones (chances are I'd choose either the K3003 or Parterre because both are truly portable). Seems I'm not alone regarding this very strange love for, and/or addiction to, the 160Xs, as several other owner have expressed a tremendous attachment to the sonics of these very peculiar phones.

Now, the 160Xs could never be described as good all-rounders (too mid-centric AND with rolled-off treble and bass). The CK100 & UM3X are not as drastic-sounding as the 160Xs, but I'd take the 160Xs any day over the ATHs & Westones as the 160Xs are not just about their unique midrange. I would not describe the other two IEMs as good all-rounders, either, as they're a bit too warm, with a very intimate sound which isn't always very realistic.

The Parterre, like the K3003s, are more balanced, more correct from a FR standpoint. Not only are they both excellent all-rounders, but, unlike the CK100 & UM3X, they really sound high-end, more like excellent open-back headphones. The Parterre and K3003 simply play in a different league.

You may ultimately still prefer the CK100, but I honestly doubt most people would. BUT, as it happens with any phone, we already have one person (tomscy2000) who says they prefer the F111 (perhaps tranhieu, too, [I'm not sure about him, though]). To me, the F111 isn't even close sonically to the Parterres; the F111 is a very nice phone, but it not so infrequently sounded unconvincing and two-dimensional to these ears. The Parterre, I find, mimics much more convincingly what I hear in the real world.

 

Thanks Music. I think I understand what you mean about the CK100. Sounds like I might quite like the Parterre, was also thinking about the 334 but I don't really like too much bass, more of a vocal person. Even the CK100 bass is enough for my taste.

Quote:
Originally Posted by angelo898 View Post

vocals are not as sweet i guess, i listen to a lot of classical as well, so it seems like i prefer instruments instead of vocals. that being said, i listen to rock and accoustics on it from time to time

Cool, thanks.

post #359 of 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post

 

A couple of days ago, I stated that of all the phones I've heard, the 3 I'd keep would be the K3003, Parterre and 1601SS.

The FAD 1601SS and its sibling / twin, the 1602SS (aka Piano Forte IX) are seriously mid-centric phones. Their sonics are so different, that I very rarely recommend these phones. In fact, these phones are so different-sounding that some think they're absolute rubbish, and I can understand where they're coming from when they say so. BUT, for some strange reason, I personally need to have either the 1601 or 1602 in my life — I'd need to have one 160X IEM and either my HD800, K3003 or Parterre, if I was forced to only choose two phones (chances are I'd choose either the K3003 or Parterre because both are truly portable). Seems I'm not alone regarding this very strange love for, and/or addiction to, the 160Xs, as several other owner have expressed a tremendous attachment to the sonics of these very peculiar phones.

The Parterre, like the K3003s, are more balanced, more correct from a FR standpoint. Not only are they both excellent all-rounders, but, unlike the CK100 & UM3X, they really sound high-end, more like excellent open-back headphones. The Parterre and K3003 simply play in a different league.
 

 

The 1601SS (which I still own) is definately a "guilty pleasure". It's finicky, odd to wear, critical (IMO) of what tips you use and what it does wrong is obvious the first minute you listen to it. BUT...

 

What it does right is, to me, almost unique among IEM's, from it's expansive sound stage to it's dynamics to its sense of allowing one to hear into dense mixes. I can't bring myself to let it go, at the end of the day. The other favorite IEM's I have (the K3003, Kaede and Sony EX-1000) are certainly more foresquare and honest but the FAD has that certain something. I would love to hear the Parterre, if it's a variation on the K3003, I suspect I would like it quite a bit.

 

I talked more about this at my blog http://theaudiolog.com/2012/08/ but if the 1601SS is the "road less traveled", in my view, it's one worth traveling.

 

Kevin

post #360 of 646

Oh yes, those wonderfully ergonomic 1601s! I'm rather fortunate as I get a fairly good fit & excellent SQ with a cable-over-the-ear fit using the (thick) metal tips. Only thing, though, is the cable is 20cm shorter than the 1602's cable (120cm vs 140cm), so not great when I want to use them with my desktop amp. I get a perfect fit with the 1602s with either a cable-down or over-the-ear fit (prefer the former). If FAD were unapologetic about the 1601's sonics, they were a little more so with the 1602s… and no choice of tips for the 1602s. I can wear my 1602s for hours on end and forget they're in my ears. The fact the ears are allowed to breathe make them one of phones I enjoy using the most—well, apart from the compelling sonics, that is. (Of course isolation is practically non-existent which, luckily for my needs, isn't a bad thing at all).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › FitEar Parterre (パルテール) Appreciation Thread