Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Audio-Technica's New Multidriver IEMs: The ATH-IM Series
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio-Technica's New Multidriver IEMs: The ATH-IM Series - Page 8

post #106 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Music View Post
 

I see. Is the IM04 really bassy though. I don't like a lot of bass. The signature that i'm looking for in my new pair of iem are good clarity, detail, instrument seperation, mid forward with airy vocals (Like sitting in the first row of a concert), big soundstage, neutral bass, treble with some sparkle and good extension but never harsh/sibilant. 

 

Music that I listen to are rock, metal, female vocals, post rock, math rock, shoegaze, punk rock, experimental, jazz, classical, instrumental, pop, r'n'b, and a ittle bit of hip hop and rap. Just to give you some idea of my preferences.

 

EDIT: It's amazing that you stated the IM04 performs technically in the same level as the Parterres which is quite a bit more expensive.


What else have you used in the past? The IM04, even though it has more bass than what I'd personally want, isn't really a "bassy" earphone. It has good bass extension, but the bass isn't overwhelming, and it possesses a lot of natural transparency due to nicely accurate mids. If I had to take a guess (likely not really that accurate), the bass response is about +7.5 dB above Ety-flat. I don't think you'd be disappointed at all --- keep in mind that I probably have higher standards for clarity and transparency than probably more so than 99% of head-fiers.

 

Yes, The IM04 and the Parterre are on a technical level, similar. I think most people, even those with loads of TOTL CIEMs, would be quite impressed by the IM04.

post #107 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 


What else have you used in the past? The IM04, even though it has more bass than what I'd personally want, isn't really a "bassy" earphone. It has good bass extension, but the bass isn't overwhelming, and it possesses a lot of natural transparency due to nicely accurate mids. If I had to take a guess (likely not really that accurate), the bass response is about +7.5 dB above Ety-flat. I don't think you'd be disappointed at all --- keep in mind that I probably have higher standards for clarity and transparency than probably more so than 99% of head-fiers.

 

Yes, The IM04 and the Parterre are on a technical level, similar. I think most people, even those with loads of TOTL CIEMs, would be quite impressed by the IM04.

My current iem's are the RE262, E-Q7 and CK100. I also had the UE900 for quite a while but decided to return them because of the recessed mids. 

post #108 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

Yes, The IM04 and the Parterre are on a technical level, similar. I think most people, even those with loads of TOTL CIEMs, would be quite impressed by the IM04.

 

More so than with the SE846 that, I believe, you also tried? What about the TG!334?

post #109 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Music View Post
 

My current iem's are the RE262, E-Q7 and CK100. I also had the UE900 for quite a while but decided to return them because of the recessed mids. 

 

The IM04 is bassier than all three you have, but so are the IM03 and Parterre.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post  More so than with the SE846 that, I believe, you also tried? What about the TG!334?

 

The 846 has better sub-bass, but it's pretty evenly matched above that. I'd say that the IM04 is the better value, but the 846 has three tunings (two of which I haven't tried).

 

The IM04 is not unlike the 334, though the 334 is richer, more full-bodied, denser. The advantage that the IM04 has is that it has a little more treble presence and a more springy, reactive bass (the 334's bass is a little syrupy). Again, it depends on personal preference. The 334 is richer-sounding, and perhaps a bit more complete overall, but it's not ahead by leaps and bounds.

post #110 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

The IM04 is not unlike the 334, though the 334 is richer, more full-bodied, denser. 

And twice the price, even bought directly in Japan. :(

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

The 334 is richer-sounding, and perhaps a bit more complete overall, but it's not ahead by leaps and bounds.

Mh. Definitely, I'll have to give the IM04 (and IM50) a listen. At JM+, I surmise?

post #111 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post  Mh. Definitely, I'll have to give the IM04 (and IM50) a listen. At JM+, I surmise?

 

Yeah, it's there; I listened to them when I went over to buy the NW-F886... The 334, again, has the FitEar prestige factor. The IM04 is plasticky, though not entirely ugly, while the FitEar has its boutique craftsmanship. But the  IM04 is surprisingly comfortable, and fits better than the 334 IMHO. So yes, the 334 is definitely not worth twice the price --- it's up to the discriminating audiophile to pick the hand-made FitEar over the mass-produced ATH.

post #112 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

Yeah, it's there; I listened to them when I went over to buy the NW-F886... 

Why this DAP?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

The 334, again, has the FitEar prestige factor. The IM04 is plasticky, though not entirely ugly, while the FitEar has its boutique craftsmanship. But the  IM04 is surprisingly comfortable, and fits better than the 334 IMHO. So yes, the 334 is definitely not worth twice the price --- it's up to the discriminating audiophile to pick the hand-made FitEar over the mass-produced ATH.

Discriminating, and rich. :(

 

I don't very much care about its being handmade, but I appreciate the sound.

post #113 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

 

The IM04 is bassier than all three you have, but so are the IM03 and Parterre.

 

I see. I think it should be fine. I think I might just drop the Parterre. Now it's either the IM03, IM04 and Heaven VI. Although I don't think the new AT iem's look as good as the older ones I still think they will isolate better and be more comfortable than the Heaven VI though because of the longish housing.

post #114 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post Why this DAP?

 

Discriminating, and rich. :(  I don't very much care about its being handmade, but I appreciate the sound.


OT, but it's the only 24/192 DAP (I have lots of high-res music that I'm too lazy to resample) that has a UI that's not terrible.

 

Granted, the TO GO! 334 still offers a little something extra and special over the IM04 in terms of sound, but the difference isn't a whole lot. I like the IM04 more than the SE846 (default filter).

post #115 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

 

The IM04 is bassier than all three you have, but so are the IM03 and Parterre.

 

Another question. Does the IM03 and IM04 have a big soundstage and airy vocals?

post #116 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Music View Post  Does the IM03 and IM04 have a big soundstage and airy vocals?


I don't know what your standards for "big" and "airy" are --- care to give me some references?

post #117 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericp10 View Post

Yeah some more burn in I will update it. And that was my fear. Thanks for confirming the Im50 to be bass light.

Oh no, it's definitely not bass-light. It has more than the RE-400.

post #118 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 


I don't know what your standards for "big" and "airy" are --- care to give me some references?

Out of all the iem's i've had the UE900's had the most air and had the biggest soundstage. But on some tracks it sounded hollow, distant and did not have much emotion in vocals. Just wondering are there any iem's that are quite forward but also have a big soundstage.   

 

So if it's the same or greater i'll consider it to be really good.


Edited by Love Music - 12/15/13 at 8:34am
post #119 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Music View Post  Out of all the iem's i've had the UE900's had the most air and had the biggest soundstage. But on some tracks it sounded hollow, distant and did not have much emotion in vocals. Just wondering are there any iem's that are quite forward but also have a big soundstage. So if it's the same or greater i'll consider it to be really good.


I can't predict what you mean by vocals, but I don't think you'd have a problem with respect to forward, "airy" vocals with the IM04. The IM03 has the possibility of sounding a little hollow, however, but I can't guarantee that you'll feel the same way. No issues with soundstage size, either. In general, I don't quibble about size of soundstage unless it's purposely made big, e.g. IE8/80, 1Plus2, etc. For all others, The general rule of thumb for soundstage width is linear treble extension, a reasonable 800-2500 Hz boost ~9-15 dB, and non-recessed 3-4 kHz region, i.e. doesn't drop more than 4.5 dB from the 2.5-2.7 kHz peak. Also, no big phase shifts in the midrange, e.g. sudden 0-90 degree room phase shift. All of this probably doesn't mean much to you, but if I were to guess, you wouldn't have a problem with the vocals or soundstage of either the IM03 or IM04.

post #120 of 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 


The general rule of thumb for soundstage width is linear treble extension, a reasonable 800-2500 Hz boost ~9-15 dB, and non-recessed 3-4 kHz region, i.e. doesn't drop more than 4.5 dB from the 2.5-2.7 kHz peak. Also, no big phase shifts in the midrange, e.g. sudden 0-90 degree room phase shift. All of this probably doesn't mean much to you, but if I were to guess, you wouldn't have a problem with the vocals or soundstage of either the IM03 or IM04.

 

Those are pretty precise rules for soundstage width lol. Is there a place where I could read up on this?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Audio-Technica's New Multidriver IEMs: The ATH-IM Series