Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The CanalWorks Discussion thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The CanalWorks Discussion thread - Page 3

post #31 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post  Oh I meant the CW-L51a flagship

 

You mean it without the PSTS option? I don't remember what the default sounds like, but my gut instinct is that the NT6 Pro will probably sound more clear, just from the way they're described by users of it. There were a few instances with the L51a PSTS where I was slightly disappointed by the clarity. It's still pretty good, however. I just have extremely high standards for clarity and transparency.

post #32 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

 

You mean it without the PSTS option? I don't remember what the default sounds like, but my gut instinct is that the NT6 Pro will probably sound more clear, just from the way they're described by users of it. There were a few instances with the L51a PSTS where I was slightly disappointed by the clarity. It's still pretty good, however. I just have extremely high standards for clarity and transparency.

 

Seems like we both have similar priorities for certain sq aspects of iems/headphones, I too look for clarity and transparency first and foremost. I'm guessing you're also contemplating getting a pair of some nt6 pros of your own?  :wink_face:

post #33 of 121
Thread Starter 

@tomscy2000 - would you be able to give a ballpark estimate of where the L05QD's bass extension tapers off? 50Hz? Less? More? Treble extension? I know your time with them was limited but I'm still a bit curious.

post #34 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post
 

Seems like we both have similar priorities for certain sq aspects of iems/headphones, I too look for clarity and transparency first and foremost. I'm guessing you're also contemplating getting a pair of some nt6 pros of your own?  :wink_face:

 

I'd consider the NT6, probably not the NT6 Pro. However, my actual frontrunners right now are just like MF's, the UERM and the QD.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinQY View Post  @tomscy2000 - would you be able to give a ballpark estimate of where the L05QD's bass extension tapers off? 50Hz? Less? More? Treble extension? I know your time with them was limited but I'm still a bit curious.

 

I'd have to go listen to the demo again, maybe tomorrow, as I have to take care of some stuff nearby and I'll get back to you.

post #35 of 121

That circuit is a low pass filter, and yeah by replacing the cap with a resistor you have a voltage divider. Is it hooked up to the 2 in series or the ones in parallel? My bet would be the later.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

 

I call dibs on that!

 

 

 

Ah, I see --- from what I've seen, however, series hookup in 2300 drivers is not that heavily inductive and both drivers end up with good bandwidth. Well, honestly, I don't really know what's going on in there; it's tough to examine that stuff closely when the wires overlap each other, but it does somewhat resemble what you mean. To me, it looks most like this, but might be another resistor in place of the capacitor:

 

 

 


(yeah that's FitEar. need something to fit the theme of this thread somehow) 

Are the 2 2354s in series wired similar to the 2 CIs here? This kind of wiring is quite common though, if I remember correctly the JH16 was the first to utilize this configuration, there're also the 8.A, MH335DW, Monet to name a few. It's taking advantage of the fact that all BAs are somewhat like conductors, especially when you move towards the upper end of the spectrum, inductance shoots up significantly. 

 

Btw I'm not really sure what you mean by 'good bandwidth' though. How could you evaluate the woofer's bandwidth while the tweeter is operating at the same time? 


Edited by tranhieu - 9/12/13 at 11:13pm
post #36 of 121

I just listened to the CW-L05QD again, and I continue to be really impressed by its performance. It's imaging is open and spacious, yet its bass line still feels as neutral as an ER4S, but with better texture and extension. I would say roll-off is around 36 Hz. Compared to the ER4P, it is brighter, more sparkly, more open in the topmost registers. Unfortunately, it has that dip in the 9-11k region, but recovers by 12.5k and extends past 16k. Otherwise, it sounds very flat and neutral, with a little bit of a bump in the 3-4k region and less of a bump in the 6k region.

post #37 of 121
Thread Starter 

Would the 9-11k dip be irredeemable or could some good ol' EQ do it justice? 

 

Also jealous that you have someplace around you where these are available for demo-ing.

post #38 of 121
I find them tuning it to have a dip from 9-11k really interesting. Almost every higher end IEM I've heard very recently has had a peak in there to some degree.
post #39 of 121
Thread Starter 

I think the 122s are using the Sonion 2354 and the FR graph shows a peak around 9-11kHz. I've never heard much of a peak with those though.

 

What does that mean? It probably doesn't mean anything. I just thought it'd be neat to note. 


Edited by TwinQY - 9/14/13 at 1:33pm
post #40 of 121

Peaks and nulls have a lot to do with the diameter of tubing/length used, so yeah, it doesn't mean much. Overall, the sound is excellent, still.

post #41 of 121
Wasn't implying poorer sound. Just my intrigue:
post #42 of 121
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

Peaks and nulls have a lot to do with the diameter of tubing/length used, so yeah, it doesn't mean much. Overall, the sound is excellent, still.

 

Would the 9-11k dip be irredeemable or could some good ol' EQ do it justice? 

Might have missed it so I'll try again.

post #43 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinQY View Post  Might have missed it so I'll try again.

 

In general, I'm not a fan of EQ except for broad shelf lifts/cuts, like a high/low pass type of effect. I don't personally like to EQ for isolated points. As an example, one of the few times I use EQ is when I want to "simulate" the RE-272 with my RE-262 by boosting everything above 1850 Hz by 4 dB.

 

Anyway, the softness in that region isn't exactly inaudible, it's just softer. The overall tonal balance of the QD is already skewed bright, so I'm not sure if adding more will make the sound better (from a superficial perspective). As I mentioned, there's a transient spike in the 5.8-6k region that translates to better perceived clarity. Maybe I'm exaggerating the 9-11k range --- it might be narrower, or starts earlier and I just didn't read my spectrogram properly.

post #44 of 121
Thread Starter 

Fair enough, can't fix what isn't broke. 


OP has been slightly updated.

 

Can't find much in the form of custom requests and artwork - I know the option is available but it seems every picture on the Internet seems to have kept them in one of the stock designs. Not that I'm complaining, the stock designs are gorgeous and much more varied than their competitor FitEars (although there's a reason for the latter I guess). Anyone have any luck?

 

I wonder what their thoughts would be on some custom slate/clamshell inlays mimicing Go pieces...I guess that's more on Mr. K's territory though...CW does have more of a professional/systematic stance it seems...not sure how'd that pan out with a distributor in between though...

 

Pictures like these inspire some confidence however.

  

 

I do think faceplates are their forte - there's a crisp, clear-cut design theme/philosophy. Clean edges, clean colors. Just look at this - porcelain white and beautiful. Probably not too difficult to implement but...really, is that the first thing on your mind when you see these?

post #45 of 121

So is CanalWorks your new muse?

 

Last time I talked to you, I believe it was the FitEar C435...unless that's old news :).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › The CanalWorks Discussion thread