Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › New JH Audio flagship! "Siren Series Roxanne"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New JH Audio flagship! "Siren Series Roxanne" - Page 144

post #2146 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerard14ph View Post

Congratulations on your Roxanne VisceriousZERO.beerchug.gif

Thanks wink.gif
post #2147 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by VisceriousZERO View Post


Thanks wink.gif

looking forward to your insights on them.

post #2148 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerard14ph View Post

looking forward to your insights on them.

I put up a few a moment ago:
I'm drawing a few initial impressions here, its definitely a darker sound than the 13s, with the highs just a little bit laid back. Bass is, of course, variant. When I first popped them in they were set to full bass, and I immediately toned it down to around the 10 o'clock area, where there's enough bass and enough detail in the highs (the sound seemed like the highs were pushed back by the bass) that made me enjoy. I do immediately note that they're not as warm as the Kaiser 10s (which are amazing for vocals), but they're more accurate and probably a bit more honest as well. As I noted in my preliminary notes on the Kaiser 10 they're balanced but not neutral. The Roxannes are more in the area of neutral while the balance is probably up to the guy tuning them. I'm going to spend a few more days with them and come back to you guys
post #2149 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post
 

The owner said it wasn't in the top coat so Mython's explanation works. Certainly something to get corrected but definitely not put in box with glue on fingers.


My bad..it seems like someones touched them with gluey fingers before putting on the finishing coat..the fact they have been rushed out and the time of year was the point I was trying to get across!


Edited by martin vegas - 12/27/13 at 9:47am
post #2150 of 8331

[deleted: asking in impressions thread]


Edited by bobeau - 12/27/13 at 9:47am
post #2151 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by martin vegas View Post


My bad..it seems like someones touched them with gluey fingers before putting on the finishing coat..the fact they have been rushed out and the time of year was the point I was trying to get across!
almost perfect smily_headphones1.gif
post #2152 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by martin vegas View Post
 


My bad..it seems like someones touched them with gluey fingers before putting on the finishing coat..the fact they have been rushed out and the time of year was the point I was trying to get across!

If you read Mython's explanation more carefully, there's more to it and they may have just been handles before the resin was fully cured etc. We all agree it needs to get better but it may have been a function of learning how to better care for a new process.

post #2153 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by martin vegas View Post
 


..it seems like someones touched them with gluey fingers before putting on the finishing coat..

 

On that point, I tentatively agree.

 

I should have been more clear in my own description of what may have happened. Just to clarify - my remarks about the resin taking time to harden fully were not meant from the standpoint that the cured resin would be easy to imprint with fingerprints (it would not), but just that in order to successfully remove resin fingerprints, the underlying resin shell would ideally need to be fully hardened (unless one didn't care about the clarity/transparency of the abraded area).

 

I suspect that the composite CIEM shells were laid-up, within their mould, just fine, with no fingerprints having any opportunity to enter the equation.

 

This would then cure, and be removed from the mould.

 

In order for it to be cured sufficiently for the removal from the mould, it would almost certainly have been substantially too hard by that point for finger skin ridges to be able to make any detrimental impression upon it (unless staff were being grossly negligent in rushing the process before the resin had cured, which I highly doubt - *though that kind of scenario is, nonetheless, possible*).

 

I suspect that properly-cured shells, would have been removed from the mould, in appropriate condition, only then, perhaps, being touched by fingers which had uncured resin on them (perhaps staff were working on several different batch stages at the same time - and this does seem possible if they were rushing to manufacture a large number of CIEMs. If you imagine a small production-line scenario, one would, potentially, move back-&-forth between laying-up a new batch, then removing a cured batch, then laying up a new batch, and so-on, so it is very possible that wet resin may have been inadvertently left on fingertips and touched onto a cured set of CIEMs).

 

At this point, in spite of this pair of shells being cured, they would not be at absolutely full hardness, and thus not viable for abrading the resin finger marks from (again, unless one didn't care about the clarity/transparency of the area needing abrading, and of course, clarity is very important for the Roxanne's, so that the carbon fibre weave can be clearly admired by the customer).

 

So, then, the fingerprints may have been left on either due to 1) oversight or 2) not being able to abrade them, for the aforementioned reasons (unless one was to delay dispatching them to the customer, in order to wait longer for full resin hardness to be attained).

 

 


My discussion about this situation is speculative, on my part, based upon personal experience with wet lay-up composite techniques. I wasn't actually there, in JHAs lab, so I cannot be 100% certain, but it does seem to be a plausible explanation.


 

 

I actually have sympathy for both parties, in this situation - I personally would never offer customers full CF shells as an option, because I know just how challenging the manufacture process can be.

 

And from the customer standpoint, it is quite right to feel miffed at such a substantial imperfection after paying a hefty $200 premium.

 

 

I feel JHA will learn a lot from these past couple of months, and I'm confident they will do their best to rectify any such problems. Have they bitten off more than they can chew by offering a $200 full CF option? That's for them to decide, but I don't envy them the stress they've landed themselves in by offering it.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

 

... it may have been a function of learning how to better care for a new process.

 

 

Agreed.

 

None of my discussion is intended in any way to 'bash' JHA labs. They've bitten off a lot and there will be a learning curve. Frankly, I'm impressed at how well they're already managing to create such delicate CF work. No other vendor in the world (that I'm aware of) has dared venture to offer a full CF option.

 

 



Edited by Mython - 12/27/13 at 1:00pm
post #2154 of 8331

Really JH, Really?

post #2155 of 8331
USPS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainRazer View Post



Really JH, Really?
post #2156 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0day View Post

USPS.

 

 

Yeah, double delivery attempt is totally not JHA's doing.

post #2157 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post
 

 

 

Yeah, double delivery attempt is totally not JHA's doing.


"Business Closed" please explain that to me.

post #2158 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainRazer View Post
 


"Business Closed" please explain that to me.

 

I don't know if your delivery destination was 'closed' or not - only you know that, but all z3r0day and I are pointing out is that once it leaves JHA labs, what happens en route to your destination isn't anything to do with them. It's in USPSs hands now, so it's USPS that you need to raise the issue with, rather than JHA.

 

 

 



Edited by Mython - 12/27/13 at 11:50am
post #2159 of 8331

Correct me if I am wrong but that looks like an incoming shipment "TO" JH audio which is in Apopka, FL (where my roxannes originated), "FROM" Miami.  Are you shipping your impressions to JH? I believe they are indeed closed til Jan 2nd...

post #2160 of 8331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post
 

 

I don't know if your delivery destination was 'closed' or not - only you know that, but all z3r0day and I are pointing out is that once it leaves JHA labs, what happens en route to your destination isn't anything to do with them. It's in USPSs hands now, so it's USPS that you need to raise the issue with, rather than JHA.

 

 

 



Destination clearly shows I'm delivering it to Florida (that's where JH office is located apparently).

And I don't live anywhere near Florida.

It's not like I'm receiving the CIEM, I'm actually sending my impressions.

The thing I'm worried is 1st, the impression might change shape if it's kept for too long. 2nd, USPS will send it back to me if JH keep ignoring the package.

And to let you know, sending a package to Florida is not cheap.

If they do send it back to me then I'll have to make another new impression which would require me to pour more money (since the impression will definitely be deformed by the time I received it) and send it back to Florida again (again, more money).

Well, I'll just see if JH will actually accept the package, I've sent mail to JH to cancel my order if they still fail to accept my package.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › New JH Audio flagship! "Siren Series Roxanne"