or Connect
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 355

post #5311 of 8306


All this talk about fit has me concerned. These are my first CIEMs, and thus first ear molds. The audiologist put the bite block in long-way up. I seldom open that wide unless I've been prodded with a sharp object. Even at the time I wondered, but figured she was the expert. Now, will I have to have a refit after waiting six months for my Roxannes? That would be hugely unsatisfactory.

post #5312 of 8306

I came in this thread wishing to learn more about the sound of the new IEMs I purchased, only to find literally every post devoted to either complaints about the custom preparation process, the time it takes to make and deliver them, problems with them once they arrive blah blah blah and -- hilariously -- a bunch of posts touting their superiority to universals, even though they're both just a piece of material and it's impossible as matter of basic physics and sound science for customs to have an inherent superiority over universals.

 

It's like this odd cult.

 

After reading it, I am so glad I got the universals.

 

Why don't you guys start a separate thread for all issues related to your custom Roxannes, so that this thread can be used to discuss the sound/wire choices/daps etc for Roxannes?

post #5313 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 

I came in this thread wishing to learn more about the sound of the new IEMs I purchased, only to find literally every post devoted to either complaints about the custom preparation process, the time it takes to make and deliver them, problems with them once they arrive blah blah blah and -- hilariously -- a bunch of posts touting their superiority to universals, even though they're both just a piece of material and it's impossible as matter of basic physics and sound science for customs to have an inherent superiority over universals.

 

It's like this odd cult.

 

After reading it, I am so glad I got the universals.

 

Why don't you guys start a separate thread for all issues related to your custom Roxannes, so that this thread can be used to discuss the sound/wire choices/daps etc for Roxannes?

 

Why don't you go to the other thread yourself like I said if you want to share your impressions.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/696958/jh-audio-sirens-series-roxanne-impressions-thread

post #5314 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post
 

 

Why don't you go to the other thread yourself like I said if you want to share your impressions.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/696958/jh-audio-sirens-series-roxanne-impressions-thread


Oh sorry. I guess this thread is devoted to exploring all the problems with the custom creation process, and not the Roxannes in general. You should change the thread title though.

post #5315 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by 45longcolt View Post


All this talk about fit has me concerned. These are my first CIEMs, and thus first ear molds. The audiologist put the bite block in long-way up. I seldom open that wide unless I've been prodded with a sharp object. Even at the time I wondered, but figured she was the expert. Now, will I have to have a refit after waiting six months for my Roxannes? That would be hugely unsatisfactory.

Depends on how much change in shape your canals have when your mouth is opened that large. My JH13 impressions were done that way and fit was superb for me, and I've had impressions completely a multitude of other ways as well, but each persons ears are different.
post #5316 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by ag8908 View Post
 

I came in this thread wishing to learn more about the sound of the new IEMs I purchased, only to find literally every post devoted to either complaints about the custom preparation process, the time it takes to make and deliver them, problems with them once they arrive blah blah blah and -- hilariously -- a bunch of posts touting their superiority to universals, even though they're both just a piece of material and it's impossible as matter of basic physics and sound science for customs to have an inherent superiority over universals.

 

It's like this odd cult.

 

After reading it, I am so glad I got the universals.

 

Why don't you guys start a separate thread for all issues related to your custom Roxannes, so that this thread can be used to discuss the sound/wire choices/daps etc for Roxannes?

 

I don't in anyway mean to start an argument with you and I will be honest that this is not what I am replying your post for. But these are my experiences with customs. 

 

My first high end earphones was the SE530 and it was revolutionary.I soon after swore off universals when I got my first custom, a ES5. And from then till now, I have sort of been a CIEM collector. However, this year I have bought two universal earphones after thinking that I would never buy them again. Namely the SE846 and the Roxanne universals. 

 

I think that for a period, people always referred to customs as being more superior then universals because the best manufacturers were only offering their best offerings in a custom option. I think that this is also reiterated by Jerry in his interview by Google. But now manufacturers are also coming out with their designs in the universal fit. This is great. But however, I do not think that tehy will sound the same, when I spoke to the VP of JH Audio and asked if I could reshell my universal Roxannes with them later in the future into a custom, he said no and while the custom and universals uses the same components, but they have different tubes. and he said that the universal with a good fit would be able to sound 95% to that of a custom. So I think they're still getting the real deal? 

 

I must admit I like customs, their fit and their comfort is really much better. even my SE846 is fitted with custom sleeves by Sensaphonics and my Roxannes have also got their custom sleeves from PC Werth in the UK. As for your generalisation that customs all have this problem that you are reading about in this thread, to be honest, I think only the Roxannes have this problem (the wait, built quality and such). I would say normally, a normal custom model or company would have a 10-15% refit/defect rate. You could just talk about the SQ of the Roxanes and such with the other existing users and I am sure that they would reply you and you could ignore all the other guys that have not got theirs yet. Be fair to them, they have paid good money for it and some of them have waited for a really long time its not even funny for them. JH and the other companies need to read some of their feelings and feedbacks to so that it does not occur in the future and hopefully it will improve the whole CIEM industry as a whole so that CIEMs would not be branded as the most pointless, useless and indeed time and thought sucking invention ever.

post #5317 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuachew View Post
 

 

I spoke to the VP of JH Audio and asked if I could reshell my universal Roxannes with them later in the future into a custom, he said no and while the custom and universals uses the same components, but they have different tubes. and he said that the universal with a good fit would be able to sound 95% to that of a custom.

 

How are the tubes different and, if they're just tubes (and not the enclosure itself), why not put the custom tube in the universals? Especially if the tube is causing a 5% decrease in sound quality. This all sounds implausible.

 

If you tell us who this person was, and when he said this to you, perhaps someone could follow up to clarify.

post #5318 of 8306

HI Guys,

 

Just letting you know that I have the Roxanne Universal fit in stock! Just got them in and we have some still available.

 

Todd

Reply
post #5319 of 8306
Tube lengths will be different from custom to universal. The nozzle of a custom is going to fit differently from a universal with a tip. In fact the tube lengths between customs may vary depending on ear anatomy and required driver placement with varying nozzle lengths. Tip size and length on a universal will affect sound as well.
post #5320 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post
 

 

Really you were able to come up with that conclusion by just reading this thread. You must be something special.

 

"special" is a good way to put it :p

post #5321 of 8306

Woop! May!

post #5322 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

Tube lengths will be different from custom to universal. The nozzle of a custom is going to fit differently from a universal with a tip. In fact the tube lengths between customs may vary depending on ear anatomy and required driver placement with varying nozzle lengths. Tip size and length on a universal will affect sound as well.


There's no way any of that is causing a 5% reduction in sound quality. If anything, I've found that universal tips with a shorter tube sound very slightly better than the equivalent universal with a longer tube (like the long tube you see in customs).

 

Edit: If someone at JH Audio actually told people that the universals sound 5% worse than the customs, I can only assume it's his way of falsely rationalizing the higher price needed for all the work required to create a custom tip. If you're selling something for $10 and another for $9, you can't tell the customer than the $9 item is actually better in every way, because no one would buy the $10 item.


Edited by ag8908 - 5/1/14 at 10:54am
post #5323 of 8306
So you obviously don't understand how tube length and insertion depth move resonances, peaks and valleys along the FR. It can cause greater than 5% variation in upper mid and treble very easily. It's not about better but different. You can't make blanket statements about shallow fit being superior, unless you understand the driver design and it's implementation requirements. And ER-4s can't hit its target response with shallow fit. Perhaps this would be some good reading to start with. It's not the driver JHA uses but it's good basic info on many factors but has a section on tube length in particular: http://www.sonion.com/Products/Transducers/Receivers/~/media/Files/Products/Application%20Notes/Transducers/AN_1723_AcuPAss_Rev001.ashx
Edited by shotgunshane - 5/1/14 at 11:15am
post #5324 of 8306

The universals don't go to eleven, I can assure you.

post #5325 of 8306
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post

So you obviously don't understand how tube length and insertion depth move resonances, peaks and valleys along the FR. It can cause greater than 5% variation in upper mid and treble very easily. It's not about better but different. You can't make blanket statements about shallow fit being superior, unless you understand the driver design and it's implementation requirements. And ER-4s can't hit its target response with shallow fit. Perhaps this would be some good reading to start with. It's not the driver JHA uses but it's good basic info on many factors but has a section on tube length in particular: http://www.sonion.com/Products/Transducers/Receivers/~/media/Files/Products/Application%20Notes/Transducers/AN_1723_AcuPAss_Rev001.ashx


I wrote above that my universals sounded better with tips that have short tubes. And you can easily adjust the tube length on a universal anyway. I do see, however, that you are desperately grasping for ways to justify the custom.

 

P.S. To all you customs owners who made a terrible decision to invest in a product with possibly worse sound quality, possibly worse isolation, and definitely a higher price and lower resale value - my universals just came, two days after I paid for them, and they sound awesome.

 

I'll be enjoying them as you sacrifice your time and lives with the custom cult. Enjoy!!!

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"