New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure 846 vs. JH Roxanne's

post #1 of 61
Thread Starter 
Has anyone had the chance to try both? I have a pair of Roxanne's on order, but it's looking like it's going to take another 8-10 weeks, so thinking about saving some money and switching to shure 846.

I have never had a pair of CIEM's but I do have a pair of shure SE 535's and B&W P7's that I like
post #2 of 61

I have the Roxanne, and recently auditioned friend's 846.

 

I have to say JH Audio customer service sucks big time.

 

You should also consider Noble K10 at the same price point (not the 8c or N6, nope. They will try to tell you different model are good for different things, but in fact they are just inferior).

 

This is frequency response of 846:

 

 

Oh well, you get better resale value;) 

 

846 boys, come forth!


Edited by z3r0day - 3/3/14 at 9:14am
post #3 of 61

I had the chance to compare the Shure 846 to a demo version of the K10. It was an easy decision, I bought the Shure. 

post #4 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post
 

I had the chance to compare the Shure 846 to a demo version of the K10. It was an easy decision, I bought the Shure. 

 

 

How dare you talk about the king like that? /sarcasm

post #5 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0day View Post
 

 

 

How dare you talk about the king like that? /sarcasm

 

I thought the Roxanne was the "King". No wait, Roxanne's female so that would make her the "Queen".

 

Someone mentioned something about an SE-5way universal (on another thread), so that would probably be "King".

post #6 of 61

Let's just all agree that they are all very good, but that the Shure is better...:veryevil: 

PS: it didn't matter how hard I tried, I never been able to enjoy the HD800 or LCD2, so that might explain things.;)


Edited by zenpunk - 3/3/14 at 11:50am
post #7 of 61

The 846 is sneaky phat!! Sometimes I think this must be the pinnacle of non-fatiguing sound that close to your eardrum.

post #8 of 61
Thread Starter 
All you guys saying tr shure 846 is the way to go, have you heard/demod the Roxanne?
post #9 of 61

As I've mentioned before, I spoke personally with Steve Guttenberg (who writes The Audiophiliac and for CNET) about his experience with both the 846 and the Roxanne. He told me he preferred the 846 over the Roxanne.

 

Several people have gotten mad about this and made various ad hominem attacks over it. I am simply accurately conveying what a very well respected member of the audiophile community told me of his experience. That's all.

post #10 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by IaHawkeye View Post

All you guys saying tr shure 846 is the way to go, have you heard/demod the Roxanne?

 

For those saying try the 846, the optimal word is "try". It's not zero-sum. You try, you don't like, you return. I don't think that applies to customs.

 

But, you can do like me and wait for the Roxanne universal edition. I'm starting to think though, I may try, I may not. I really like the 846.

post #11 of 61

I don't understand why people bother comparing a universal to a custom. At this level, the difference is really not in the sound. They can both be excellent, and even though one may slightly better satisfy your sound quality expectations, it will not be a game changer like moving up from a low-end or mid-tier IEM.

 

The real difference here is that a universal will always bring along it's fit issues. Longer initial insertion time, cable tug seal loss = longer re-insertion time, exercise/movement/sweat seal loss = longer re-insertion time. Plus the possibility that you are neither a S nor a M, or neither a M nor a L, and the former doesn't seal enough while the latter puts too much pressure. If you are willing to put up with that to obtain a higher resale value, then all power to you.

 

If on the other hand you value more something something that just fits correctly, immediately, then get a custom.

 

At this luxurious four digit price level, for me it's a pretty simple choice. However, if current TOTL universals we're priced say at $500, then it would be a much harder decision.

post #12 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by truckdriver View Post

But, you can do like me and wait for the Roxanne universal edition. I'm starting to think though, I may try, I may not. I really like the 846.

Please do biggrin.gif. Ive wondered how the universal Roxanne sounds with its variable bass and if it compares to the bass of the 846. I have not found a comprehensive review or comparisons of the universal version to other high end uiems.
post #13 of 61
I'd rather spend time in a Gulag then deal with JHA again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
post #14 of 61

Do you guys think JH (or westone, for that matter) will copy Shure's patented low pass filter? You can have all the drivers you want, but if you don't deliver the SE846's amazingly clean and undistorted bass then that's a fail.

 

PATENT-PENDING DESIGN FOR UNPARALLELED LOW END

  • Groundbreaking low-pass filter enables low-end rolloff at ~3 dB at 90 Hz (~10 dB at 250 Hz)—the previously unattainable deep low-end performance of a true subwoofer—without sacrificing clarity or detail
  • Ten precision-welded, stainless steel plates form 4 inches of high acoustic mass pathway, naturally enabling low frequency rolloff to begin at about 75 Hz without distortion or artifacts

http://www.shure.com/americas/products/earphones-headphones/se-earphones/se846-sound-isolating-earphones


Edited by ag8908 - 3/4/14 at 8:56pm
post #15 of 61

Well if the idea is patented, then other companies cannot copy it.  Just depends on what exactly Shure's patent covers.

 

In any case, JH already has their unique selling point: "Freqphase".  I'm sure they are perfectly happy with the crossover on their Roxannes, so I don't seem them needing or wanting to copy Shure's idea for what is basically a mechanical crossover rather than electrical (at least that is how I understand it).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: