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 415

post #6211 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by tupac0306 View Post
 

Not the case ;) I actually want to buy a Hugo already..because it's the best pairing with SE5 I have heard so far. But I would not fall off my chair for pairing with NT6 or Roxanne. It has a sense of brightness or harshness, though it's still technically top class. Just try your self :) I didn't like the relatively "distant" mid combining with the upper mid recessed Roxanne, because it will pronounce the upper treble (sibilant) even more. But I guess as long as you listen to well mixed vocals, it should be fine:)

 

 

By the way, would love to hear your impressions on the sound;) 

I believe Rudi has em with Hugo, and I've heard Hugo is bright so could be a good pairing.  I think anything that is bright and recolving could be a worth a shot with these, as the impessions are sounding like it is indeed pretty dark.

 

Since you have the 1p2, you can give us a good idea of the stage on these.  How is the stage on these?  Is it the wide kind like the 334?  Which is more intimate wide.  Or is it 1p2 wide, where it's not intimate, but side.  Kinda like HE-6 wide and HD800 wide, which have differences in how wide of the stage is focused, but can still have spacious sound.

 

How about comparison to TG334?  If these have boosted mids, how is the vocal performance in comparison to the 334?  334 is also dark and can have good amount of bass to add intimate spaciousness to the sound.  Sounds like Rox are even darker than 334.  

 

And lastly, how is it's resolving ability?  

post #6212 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Well after months of wait, they are in my hands, the fit seems perfect, even though they are gigantic. No build issues apparently, but no time to try them as I am at a restaurant.

Congrats Michael For Your JH Rocanne

My JH Roxanne In full black Carbon already 8 Month still not coming yet biggrin.gif
post #6213 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobeau View Post
 

 

 

- bass comes on ~30hz

- fairly flat up until around 2k

- noticable dip from about 2-3k

- gradual increase to a spike ~6k

- dip around 7.5.k

- increase to a spike ~10k

- quick drop to a dip at 11k

- gradual increase to 15k

- gradual decrease to a loss of audbility at ~17k (surely the limitation of my ears)

 

 

 

VOCALS

  • To add fullness to vocals, BOOST at 200 Hz.
  • To reduce muddiness of vocals, CUT at 200 Hz.
  • For more clarity or hardness on voice, BOOST at 3 kHz.
  • Reduce to breathiness, or to reduce "soft sounds" of background vocals, CUT at 3 kHz
  • To disguise out-of-tune vocals, CUT at 3 kHz.
  • For greater vocal presence, BOOST at 5 kHz.
  • To brighten a dull singer, BOOST at 7 kHz, or send them to college.
  • To brighten vocals, BOOST at 10 kHz.
  • To reduce sibilance, which is the "s" sound, on singers, CUT at 7 kHz or at 10 kHz.
  • To brighten vocals by emphasizing breath sound, BOOST at 15 kHz.

EDIT: my bad, didn't realize you were more addressing the Roxanne's pairing w/ the Hugo, which I have not yet heard.

Thanks buddy. I gonna say your note for the frequency spectrum is really accurate! I agree with almost every one of them...This fits exactly my impressions, except the dip at 7.5k. I think the peak around 6-7K is pretty predominate.

 

For sibilance, I am only talking about relative terms, roxanne to my ears is somewhat more sibilant on the wrong songs because of the hump at 6-7k (but it should be noted here that I normally don't use much bass gain, 20% at most). Unfortunately it's one of my most sibilant CIEMs. I have other CIEMs that have linear treble with less harshness and much greater extension. And I am not being cocky here, I think only the people have actually compared different CIEMs (specially the real neutral and balanced ones) can understand what I was referring to (but it seems like you happen to be one of them that can :) ). But I agree, 334 can sound harsh too, specially with the wrong tips, and it's technically not on the same level as roxanne.  Also it has different kind of sibilance. With roxanne, the sibilance isn't to hard to dealt with it's just there one some songs. With 334, the sibilance feels really hot and dry sometimes, sounds like it can really burn your ears.

 

Any thank you very much for the tips for the EQ too. Actually I was very into these type of EQ things several months ago. I literally managed to tune my 1+2 to almost sound like a LCD 3 (signature wise) with very carefully EQing in rockbox. However I gave it up because even though I can fix almost every flaw in the spectrum, it's not "real" sound, rather than a modified one, technical ability is just lacking too much when a earphone is heavily EQed. And not many computer software allow me to eq sound with narrow gap of volume, Q value, and frequency variable bands. I will try the one you suggested.

 

So instead of EQ, I will have to find a source that complements my CIEMs the most, and to my ears, Hugo is one of (if not) the most spacious, dynamic and detailed sources. However although it's neutral, it does sacrifice a little upper-mid fullness to create that large soundstage compared to my Anedio D2 (like dx100 vs 901 situation). And to my ears, roxanne has it's "magical soundstage" because of this too: recessed upper mid (2-3k) and lifted lower treble (6-8k) create this spacious sound with super instruments separation and clarity. However it's just not a perfect earphone for vocals IMO, not at all.So it didn't pair well for Hugo to my ears, but the technical ability is undeniable, specially the bass!

 

Anyways, I enjoy this type of talking, because you are one of the few people that have really good ears and not biased. :beerchug: 

post #6214 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post
 

I believe Rudi has em with Hugo, and I've heard Hugo is bright so could be a good pairing.  I think anything that is bright and recolving could be a worth a shot with these, as the impessions are sounding like it is indeed pretty dark.

 

Since you have the 1p2, you can give us a good idea of the stage on these.  How is the stage on these?  Is it the wide kind like the 334?  Which is more intimate wide.  Or is it 1p2 wide, where it's not intimate, but side.  Kinda like HE-6 wide and HD800 wide, which have differences in how wide of the stage is focused, but can still have spacious sound.

 

How about comparison to TG334?  If these have boosted mids, how is the vocal performance in comparison to the 334?  334 is also dark and can have good amount of bass to add intimate spaciousness to the sound.  Sounds like Rox are even darker than 334.  

 

And lastly, how is it's resolving ability?  

Wow that's a lot of questions, haha

 

Unfortunately I didn't try 1+2 with Hugo because it's broken currently.

 

1+2: 1+2 to my ears still has the widest soundstage width within all my CIEMs/IEMs. But the tuning is very unnatural. recessed 2-3k, lifted 4k, recessed 5k and than largely lifted 9k. then rolled off quickly after 10k. whatever.. The spectrum response create a very large space.however, the instruments can be congested compared to top end CIEMs. Maybe it's because of it's drivers and crossover points. I think you are right about the soundstage of 1+2: large, but side.

 

TG334: I have mentioned pretty much everything in my last post. 334 is another colored earphone. especially in the lower part of spectrum. It has a bump at 250 k. so some vocals sound really very big with lots of chest resonance. But the presence, and "density" (I should say emotions) of vocals are not that great. So it's better at "clear, thin-type" of female vocals than male vocals. In addition, the bass is lacking control and tightness compared to the other two. 

 

In terms of overall brightness, I think 1+2 >> roxanne = 334.  But the distribution of brightness is very different for these three because of different humps in the mid and treble region, so it's really hard to compare. 

 

Resolving ability I would say: roxanne = 1+2 >> 334.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On the other note (if this helps you :tongue_smile:), I don't think you should consider any of these three if you enjoy your NT6. But be careful when investing in Hugo :)


Edited by tupac0306 - 6/21/14 at 3:04pm
post #6215 of 8278

  :beerchug:  Thanks, your analysis is quite helpful.  Your recommendation of NT-6 really hit it, it was exactly what I was looking for.  It's clearly reference CIEM IMO, and I hear it with different sources, and I know it is reference as it outputs what the sources pushes it.  It resolves like no other.  

post #6216 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by bearFNF View Post
 


Leckerton amps work well with them, IME. UHA760 or UHA6s.

 

Yup same here, with UHA6S-MKII.

post #6217 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by rudi0504 View Post

Congrats Michael For Your JH Rocanne

My JH Roxanne In full black Carbon already 8 Month still not coming yet biggrin.gif
It is because I complain all the time, so Jerry is tired of hearing me.
post #6218 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Well after months of wait, they are in my hands, the fit seems perfect, even though they are gigantic. No build issues apparently, but no time to try them as I am at a restaurant.

ah..... then you don't need to do any plastic surgery to make them fit!!! congratulation!

post #6219 of 8278

Ok have been listening just a little, settled the bass at 12:00 . Cannot listen too long as I have a headache. I really like them. Very organic, thick and textured. Will say more when I have time. Not sure about the fit though, right side is a bit tight :(

 

 

post #6220 of 8278
not again...right ear!!!
post #6221 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by tupac0306 View Post

not again...right ear!!!
Well prints were taken close to the time of the NT6...but cannot be sure as today my head hurts.
post #6222 of 8278
I hope it's not the same problem as the right ear of your nt6. I actually have the same right ear problem..whatever the fit of my ciems go wrong..it's always the right ear...left ear fit never failed me once...
post #6223 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by tupac0306 View Post

I hope it's not the same problem as the right ear of your nt6. I actually have the same right ear problem..whatever the fit of my ciems go wrong..it's always the right ear...left ear fit never failed me once...


That's very common.

@Mimoullie: I would continue to listen to them to see if your right ear adjusts. I had this issue very briefly with the very first CIEM I ever tried (general soreness). Ears adjusted, never had pain since.
post #6224 of 8278

My right was intially really tight, was certain I'd be sending them back for a refit.  BTW I have a theory on that (at least for me) - I can open my jaw slightly wider on my right side.  So less tension on the jaw perhaps w/ the bite block on the right side.  I can definitely sense the difference when I open my mouth with IEMs inserted - the right side begins to loose seal first, even though it has more tension w/ mouth closed.

 

Guess you could say it has more 'dynamic range' haha.

 

I took the advice here and wore them non-stop for a couple days (well, about 12 hours each day) and it relaxed to the point where it was 'okay'.  Now 3 months later I can't tell any difference between either ear.  Not sure how I'd feel about doing this if I already owned other CIEMs though.


Edited by bobeau - 6/22/14 at 9:27am
post #6225 of 8278
Quote:
Originally Posted by tupac0306 View Post
 

 And I am not being cocky here, I think only the people have actually compared different CIEMs (specially the real neutral and balanced ones) can understand what I was referring to (but it seems like you happen to be one of them that can :) ). But I agree, 334 can sound harsh too, specially with the wrong tips, and it's technically not on the same level as roxanne.  Also it has different kind of sibilance. With roxanne, the sibilance isn't to hard to dealt with it's just there one some songs. With 334, the sibilance feels really hot and dry sometimes, sounds like it can really burn your ears.

 

Admittedly these are my first CIEMs - but I'm just talking about all headphones/speakers I've had over the years.  

 

I'm not even sure if I'm giving actual sibilance a fair shake here... the worst offender I lived w/ on a daily basis was a GR07, which I never quite got used to (I just listened at a lower volume).  I seem to recall the Ety ER4 being that way too for me, but that was like 10 years ago.  Perhaps a better term would simply be stridency in the highs - the ice pick in yer ear thing, and consequently living w/ it by settling for low volume listening.

 

At the SoCal meet I was surprised how many things had that quality for me at similar volume levels to how I listen to my Roxannes.  Even something like the LCD-Xs did.  Of course the vast majority of things were clearly brighter overall, so it was hard to tell - but some bright devices didn't seem to really do that for me (ie. the UERM).  I feel it's probably something that I'm personally sensitive to around the 8k area, perhaps somewhere north of 10k as well.

 

Long story short - I can listen to the Roxies at high volume for like 8 hour stretches.  I never feel fatigue.  It doesn't matter what I'm listening to.  It's weird.  The only thing I can think of that had this quality for me probably were a set of ATH-L3000s I used on a daily basis for a year and a half.  


Edited by bobeau - 6/22/14 at 9:50am
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"