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 429

post #6421 of 6853
^^^ Could be wrong but that sounds like someone who knows what he is talking about! smily_headphones1.gif Thanks. Interesting.
Another thought. AFAIK CIEM's are usually acrylic. Except for the carbon fibre Rox which I repeatedly read has only an aesthetic function. Would a more dense or rigid shell not be beneficial? Why no metal CIEM's?
post #6422 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by krismusic View Post

^^^ Could be wrong but that sounds like someone who knows what he is talking about! smily_headphones1.gif Thanks. Interesting.
Another thought. AFAIK CIEM's are usually acrylic. Except for the carbon fibre Rox which I repeatedly read has only an aesthetic function. Would a more dense or rigid shell not be beneficial? Why no metal CIEM's?

Possibly weight, feeling cold or hot in the ear, undesirable resonance, and the moulding process.


Edited by fiascogarcia - 7/23/14 at 1:13pm
post #6423 of 6853


Considering that there are metal-bodied iems, I suppose it is the difficulty/cost of custom manufacture combined with lack of provable advantage. Has anyone demonstrated any sonic disadvantages to acrylic? Don't think so. Having said that, I freely admit I went with CF strictly for the "bling" factor. No reason why anyone with the requisite CNC machinery couldn't offer CIEMs in silver, gold or platinum. Maybe for the Middle East market? Pardon me while I call my banker about a loan... 

post #6424 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by krismusic View Post

^^^ Could be wrong but that sounds like someone who knows what he is talking about! smily_headphones1.gif Thanks. Interesting.
Another thought. AFAIK CIEM's are usually acrylic. Except for the carbon fibre Rox which I repeatedly read has only an aesthetic function. Would a more dense or rigid shell not be beneficial? Why no metal CIEM's?
Jerry shown some of us a prototype of his full titanium ciem on his iPhone last year before he announced roxanne, I would guess that manufacturing difficulty is as high as cf built or even harder...
post #6425 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

Good IEMs typically show distortion near 1% in the low bass and .5% somewhere else in it's range at a 100dB level. Every time you double up a driver distortion drops and that's always better as these sort of levels are clearly in the audible range. You may also help hold off ringing. With an even number of multiple drivers per range, you can siamese them to fully cancel vibration and resonance to further reduce IM distortions and the sort of thing that will show up more when actually playing music than on a steady frequency test. More drivers doesn't necessarily mean better but more drivers used optimally should.

Correct soundstage should come from great phase and group delay characteristics. Big soundstage isn't the same thing. Always sounding big can indicate a phase issue. I should be able to sound intimate as well and always sound focused when the material can be. The way multiple drivers would help this is by dropping the noise (distortion) floor to allow more delineation and space been notes. Still won't work well if phase and time are off. I personally tend to appreciate these qualities more than some minor preferences in frequency response which can be tailored with cables etc. Also, your ear/rain will adjust to minor frequency aberrations if they are smooth in character which means no peaks, dips or significant deviation octave to octave.

But with more drivers, your crossovers presumably have to cover less of the spectrum and are able to be tuned easier than trying to correctly time a smaller number of drivers and keep everything in phase.
post #6426 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trogdor View Post


But with more drivers, your crossovers presumably have to cover less of the spectrum and are able to be tuned easier than trying to correctly time a smaller number of drivers and keep everything in phase.

Roxanne has 12 drivers, but not 12-way crossovers.  It is 3-way, which means  total numbers of speakers are devided up to 3 frequency ranges.  Which means 12/3 = 4 drivers per range.  Which means more than one driver per range.  IEM makers use double woofers probably to boost bass as BA do not move as much air as dynamic drivers, and probably helps lower distortions.  I have a 3 way, 3 drivers one woofer CIEM which is noticibly bass boosted and I hear bass distortions.


Edited by SilverEars - 7/23/14 at 6:03pm
post #6427 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by InfiniteGene View Post

Jerry shown some of us a prototype of his full titanium ciem on his iPhone last year before he announced roxanne, I would guess that manufacturing difficulty is as high as cf built or even harder...
Jerry Harvey certainly likes a challenge!
Mind you lead times would probably mean that you would receive the unit posthumously.
post #6428 of 6853

I just received within the time originally agreed, which by the way is not small, my new JH Audio Custom Roxanne. Despite not living in the U.S., and have done a remote purchase, I was very well treated by email at sales and support team, who I thanks for attention. 
 

And I'm quite impressed with the first contact, whether by size, bigger than he was used to, but mainly by the quality of the piece itself.

Starting that it comes in a nice retangulare box, personalized with my name on it, and a whole site set to receive it (with a location in low relief and formed negative impression of the earphone) and guard them carefully, as by the way it is not cheap....
 

About the sound, I'm still getting used to, but certainly the best I've ever heard, and higher than my previous earphone, which is an excellent Shure 846. The first difference is undoubtedly up to be customized with the mold of my ear, isolation and perfect fit, and with it the bass, which added to the adjustments that we can make are much more present. 
 

I'm still seeing what level of setting the optimum bass level. But unlike others, who like a more neutral sound, I think my tendency is to leave over this setting in the middle, or even a little upward.
 

Something had heard commenting, and that is really true, is that even with this more serious bass, the sound does not lose the detail and quality of middle and treble. 
 

I'm really enjoying it. Good start. I'll send photos and details.

post #6429 of 6853

Saw the JH video again, adn I can actually understand the tech talk at the end of the video.  He explains why he used 4 drivers.  He says by hooking up 4 high frequency drivers in paralell, he is reducing the impedance at the high end, which translates into the the audio player seeing lower load at the high end, which means better treble response. It should sound bright then, but quite the opposite.  :blink:

post #6430 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragoonv View Post
 

How do they compare with Vision Ear customs? Anyone have got some experie

Based on demo sets, I don't like any of the VE. But that's my subjective opinion.

post #6431 of 6853
I don't know if others have noted this but because I've had to get them repaired I noticed that the original universals had a different production method (or at least ended up different). The newer version is a bit larger and rounder. It sounds better in the highs for sure. A quick look through the clear plastic shows slight differences in positioning of drivers.
Either that or the first pair I got was just horribly done.
post #6432 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by GL1TCH3D View Post

I don't know if others have noted this but because I've had to get them repaired I noticed that the original universals had a different production method (or at least ended up different). The newer version is a bit larger and rounder. It sounds better in the highs for sure. A quick look through the clear plastic shows slight differences in positioning of drivers.
Either that or the first pair I got was just horribly done.

Driver position should not affect the sound for Frequency Phase.

post #6433 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by stvc View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by GL1TCH3D View Post

I don't know if others have noted this but because I've had to get them repaired I noticed that the original universals had a different production method (or at least ended up different). The newer version is a bit larger and rounder. It sounds better in the highs for sure. A quick look through the clear plastic shows slight differences in positioning of drivers.

Either that or the first pair I got was just horribly done.
Driver position should not affect the sound for Frequency Phase.

Well regardless of FP the newer set has a lot better treble response and clarity.
post #6434 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post

Roxanne has 12 drivers, but not 12-way crossovers.  It is 3-way, which means  total numbers of speakers are devided up to 3 frequency ranges.  Which means 12/3 = 4 drivers per range.  Which means more than one driver per range.  IEM makers use double woofers probably to boost bass as BA do not move as much air as dynamic drivers, and probably helps lower distortions.  I have a 3 way, 3 drivers one woofer CIEM which is noticibly bass boosted and I hear bass distortions.

Yes, that wasn't my point. My point is you have 4 drivers to deal with various frequencies in that subrange. That yields more accurate phase since each driver can be tuned accordingly instead of having one driver over a larger FR.
post #6435 of 6853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trogdor View Post


Yes, that wasn't my point. My point is you have 4 drivers to deal with various frequencies in that subrange. That yields more accurate phase since each driver can be tuned accordingly instead of having one driver over a larger FR.

Those 4 are wired in parallel for one range of the 3.  For example, JH states that for the high above 4k, the 4 tweeters are wired in parallel to reduce the impedance that the digital audio player sees above 4k.  If there is too much it sees, it will output less.  For example, below is a single driver impedance curve, and it shoots up at the treble, and JH said this on the video that it's hard to tune the treble because of this rise as the DAP will see this rise and wil output the inverse of what it sees of this impedance rise.  Like, "hockey stick" he says.  :p  This rise make treble extension almost impossible because it's exponential rise in impedance with higher frequencies in the treble area.  So the 4 drivers are wired in paralell to drop it from single driver impedance to much lower bringing better extension.  JH did create the TF10pro, and look at the bottom graph of the treble, it's much nicer at the treble. JH apparently knows and aware of impedance. :D The 4 drivers in parallel sounds like a good idea, but did it turn out like how he imagined, or how the consumer would be happy with?  I haven't heard it so I can't say, but some like it and some think it's dark sounding, and Amos did say it sounds like LCD3, which some think is a bit dark also.  But given people say it sounds like LCD3, probably wide stage.  I wonder if mid boost would make it sound wide stage as people say it sounds dark, it's making sense.  If it's dark then mids are boosted.

 

 


Edited by SilverEars - 7/25/14 at 7:30pm
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"