Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Brainwavz S5 IEM Headphones Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Brainwavz S5 IEM Headphones Review - Page 15

post #211 of 579
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post

I am already hearing a difference from letting them burn in for about 10 hours straight at probably about 25% higher volume than I'd ever listen at. This morning I no longer feel the need for the narrow 3dB cut at 5k, and instead of cutting the bass by 6dB, right now I only have it cut 3dB and it sounds good like this. I've sampled about a dozen or so songs listening at 40-47% volume on my Galaxy S4 and they already sound a ton better.

At 40% and slightly lower volume I could easily get used to using these with no EQ. This is of course due to our own hearing and the fact that at a lower volume a bit more bass is favorable. It's a loudness contour type thing. So that can be another factor that decides if you think these are bass heavy or not.

Believe it. Burn in is the S5's best friend :wink_face:

 

When you get to around 100 hours or so, the signature really levels out quite a bit, still warm, but much better balanced. Everyone on here who hasn't gotten to at least 100 hours burn in haven't heard that yet...patience young padawan's, good things come to those who burn :biggrin: 

post #212 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon2knight View Post
 

It's just so odd that most all of us think the S5's have a more neutral sound to them...but one or two of you think these are so bass heavy. I'm just not hearing it, and I love heavier music, the type that has more than a little bass to it(Metal and Progressive, Jazz, Classic Rock). Mind if I ask what equipment your listening with? Methinks you might have it a little biased towards the low end to hear so much of it. Do keep in mind, when EQ'd towards the low end, the S5's respond well, with deep, rich bass and a solid sound. But when using a source that's more neutral, like for instance an un amped C3, the signature is smooth and rich, not at all biased in either a higher or lower direction. That, of course, is just how I'm hearing it, but I have had these quite awhile(nearly 300 hours now), and it's not changing on me at all anymore.


When we run Brainwavs S5 (or any low impedance IEM for that matter) from Colorfly C3 there's gradual roll downwards from 100Hz in bass (about -2db by 30Hz)

So what this does is take an edge off and lessen bleed into the mid-range, the result is a cleaner further towards neutral IEM.

Remember pages back when I said I use Clip to get true frequency response of an IEM? Well, when I do that they're pretty bassy, but not to the extend some members mention. 

Problem is the mainstreamers like bassy sigs, they'll love it whereas audiophile tend to prefer balance. Suiting everyone is impossible.

That graph is with a 32ohm load.



Edited by H20Fidelity - 7/13/14 at 8:19am
post #213 of 579
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post
 

Doesn't sound right, 


When we run Brainwavs S5 (or any IEM for that matter) from Colorfly C3 there's gradual roll downwards from 100Hz in bass (about -2db by 30Hz)

So what this does is take an edge off and lessen bleed into the mid-range, the result is a cleaner further towards neutral IEM.

Remember pages back when I said I use Clip to get true frequency response of an IEM? Well, when I do that they're pretty bassy, but not to the extend some members mention. 

Problem is the mainstreamers like bassy sigs, they'll love it whereas audiophile tend to prefer balance. Suiting everyone is impossible.


Haha, wow, I seriously was just thinking about that, no joke!

Ever since I started using the C3 I have greatly preferred the sound of the S5's...and I did initially start off with a Rockboxed Clip+ where the sound was darker and deeper, but still not bass head territory. The source will definitely matter here, both music and player. Though I will say that the S5's handle all the changes well, always presenting a good, smooth sound no matter how I've sourced it so far, and that's a pretty good achievement on Brainwavz part as that's not an easy thing to accomplish for under $100.00.

post #214 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon2knight View Post
 

Haha, wow, I seriously was just thinking about that, no joke!

Ever since I started using the C3 I have greatly preferred the sound of the S5's...and I did initially start off with a Rockboxed Clip+ where the sound was darker and deeper, but still not bass head territory. The source will definitely matter here, both music and player. Though I will say that the S5's handle all the changes well, always presenting a good, smooth sound no matter how I've sourced it so far, and that's a pretty good achievement on Brainwavz part as that's not an easy thing to accomplish for under $100.00.



The roll-off in C3 shouldn't be there, some call it laziness in implementation. But it gives the player a unique character which probably contributes to how clean S5 sound for us, we're just taking the edge off, and in this situation used to our advantage. As you use higher impedance IEM / headphone the roll-off will gradually disappear (as you move up impedance it will become less and less) Adding an amp also corrects the point in question completely.

post #215 of 579
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post
 



The roll-off in C3 shouldn't be there, some call it laziness in implementation. But it gives the player a unique character which probably contributes to how clean S5 sound for us, we're just taking the edge off, and in this situation used to our advantage. As you use higher impedance IEM / headphone the roll-off will gradually disappear (as you move up impedance it will become less and less) Adding an amp also corrects the point in question completely.

That's good to know when using other IEM's with the C3, will definitely keep that in mind when testing in the future, thanks.

post #216 of 579

Hmmm... Makes me wonder the frequency response of my Galaxy S4. 

 

My nearfield speaker rig measures like so:

 

This is how I like to listen to speakers, so you'd think that I'd like a slightly bass heavy headphone. My headphone preferences lean more towards the bass modded Q701, and the Vsonic TWFK based GR01, or the Brainwavz S5 with about 3dB taken out from about 200hz on down. Again, my S5's only have about 14 hours on them, so we will see if they keep improving. 

post #217 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonb View Post
 

Hmmm... Makes me wonder the frequency response of my Galaxy S4. 

 

My nearfield speaker rig measures like so:

 

 

This is how I like to listen to speakers, so you'd think that I'd like a slightly bass heavy headphone. My headphone preferences lean more towards the bass modded Q701, and the Vsonic TWFK based GR01, or the Brainwavz S5 with about 3dB taken out from about 200hz on down. Again, my S5's only have about 14 hours on them, so we will see if they keep improving. 


Your S4 measures well with 32ohm loads. though people report problems with 12ohms.

Quite a detailed blog here: http://www.jensign.com/S4Distortion/

With 32ohm's you're almost ruler flat. (Let's remember S5 is 16ohms)

post #218 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post
 


Your S4 measures well with 32ohm loads. though people report problems with 12ohms.

Quite a detailed blog here: http://www.jensign.com/S4Distortion/

With 32ohm's you're almost ruler flat. (Let's remember S5 is 16ohms)

Thanks for that link. That was the most informative review of the audio portion of the Galaxy S4 I've ever seen by far. So I guess the S4 is at least a "very good" audio player. The low impedance issue has also been fixed by a firmware update. I know it also sounds better with Neutron music player over the stock music player app as well. Also good to see the output impedance confirmed to be only 1.2 ohms, that isn't too bad at all really. 

post #219 of 579

Okay I'm right around 150 hours of burn in (combo of regular music, pink noise and heavy drum and bass) and am now not noticing much if any change (I check about every 10 hours or so). Still a lot of bass (and it's fun but a tad too much on some tracks). I don't really do electronic music, EDM or whatever so I'll leave that to others to comment. As far as acoustic music, these are very true to sound and timbre of what real instruments sound like, even hearing much of the harmonics that aren't apparent on lessor headphones. Vocals are very warm and intimate. Very compelling though that same intimacy makes them feel just a tad compressed and narrows the soundstage a little bit on certain tracks. Love the dynamics. A very clean sound in that regard. Did another run this morning with them and confirmed that (worn the way I do) there are little if any microphonics compared to my other IEMs. Will test them later for isolation. My isolation test is wearing them at my rather noisy gym and seeing how loud I have to make them to drown out extraneous noise. LOL

post #220 of 579

Since this seems like the defacto S5 thread, I thought I'd share that I've received a review sample as well.  My initial impressions after 50 hours mirror many of you who are hearing a bass first, yet balanced with treble signature.  I'd go so far as to say, for me, it's a typical V shaped signature- generous, if not prodigious, bass, slightly recessed vocals and very sparkly, yet rolled off treble.  In some ways they remind me greatly of the Panasonic HJE-900.   Bold, rich, dynamic and aggressive. Some have mentioned or hinted at a possible neutral signature and I'd have to strongly disagree.  I put these squarely in ClieOS "balanced" category, from his concise multi-iem comparison thread, which is where he places most of the V sigs he's reviewed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

Balanced
A balanced sound signature is a treble and bass enhanced sound. More bass to compensate for headphone’s lack of tactual bass while more treble to give detail. It can go from mild U shaped FR curve to a more extreme V shaped FR curve, where mid range is often interpreted as recessed. Usually has good soundstage.

Balance-A_resize.jpg

 

 

While these have some similarities to the S1, I'd place the S1 squarely in his Bass category. I'm picking up a bit of sibilance depending on tip and fit. Tips that tend to reduce the bass tend to accentuate the sibilance.  So far the stock grays are best for me.  I did try the vent tape with pinhole mod.  While reducing bass, I felt the driver was consequently over damped and sounded more closed in and restricted.  While leaving the vent untaped makes for a lot more bass, I prefer the more open and airy feel of it untaped. Ultimately I'd use these with some targeted EQ to make them fit my more linear preferences.  More to come...


Edited by shotgunshane - 7/13/14 at 5:00pm
post #221 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by shotgunshane View Post
 

Since this seems like the defacto S5 thread, I thought I'd share that I've received a review sample as well.  My initial impressions after 50 hours mirror many of you who are hearing a bass first, yet balanced with treble signature.  I'd go so far as to say, for me, it's a typical V shaped signature- generous, if not prodigious, bass, slightly recessed vocals and very sparkly, yet rolled off treble.  In some ways they remind me greatly of the Panasonic HJE-900.   Bold, rich, dynamic and aggressive. Some have mentioned or hinted at a possible neutral signature and I'd have to strongly disagree.  I put these squarely in ClieOS "balanced" category, from his concise multi-iem comparison thread, which is where he places most of the V sigs he's reviewed.

 

While these have some similarities to the S1, I'd place the S1 squarely in his Bass category. I'm picking up a bit of sibilance depending on tip and fit. Tips that tend to reduce the bass tend to accentuate the sibilance.  So far the stock grays are best for me.  I did try the vent tape with pinhole mod.  While reducing bass, I felt the driver was consequently over damped and sounded more closed in and restricted.  While leaving the vent untaped makes for a lot more bass, I prefer the more open and airy feel of it untaped. Ultimately I'd use these with some targeted EQ to make them fit my more linear preferences.  More to come...

 

+2, My thoughts largely mirror those of SGS --- I've settled on the large diameter biflange tips.

 

The following is my quick and dirty EQ to adjust the S5 into a "mild U-shape" --- I wasn't on a quest to adjust to dead-neutral, but merely to alter it into a form that I felt would be more suitable for more forms of music. It'll still be most adept at its likely intended target --- mainstream music --- but it's adjusted to give better, clearer presence to vocals, better extension in the highs (so that cymbals and snares sound more nautral), and a less distracting bass response.

 

 

Overall, the transducer inside has a lot of promise --- it provides a clean, low distortion base that is quick on its feet. However, the signature itself is a bit too mainstream-oriented, for better or for worse. This is the kind of signature the Beats Tour would have if it were actually to have good sound quality. Overall, I think it'd be a good transition for listeners used to Beats-esque signatures to one with a higher quality sound. It is not, however, a traditional "hi-fi" signature. The timbre isn't delicate enough.

 

I won't fault the S5 too much because I don't believe Brainwavz intended to market the S5 to hardcore IEM users, but rather to mainstream listeners (after all, that's what the sub-$100 category mostly targets). For the price and the intended consumer, the S5 is spot on in terms of what it delivers as a package. Interestingly, Brainwavz dropped the "Pro" tag from the S5 when it came to market. If Brainwavz were to come along with a "Pro" version of the S5, I think it would garner more support from head-fiers. The interior of the bass chamber would probably have to be tapered more steeply (shouldn't be shortened, as doing so would most likely decrease sub-bass extension) to control bass levels, and they can consider making an upgrade to the driver diaphragm, perhaps to titanium or LCP to move resonance nodes upwards, allowing the timbre to sound more elegant.

post #222 of 579

I do like these D2K and I've had close to 150 hours of burn now.  I'll be posting my impressions in another thread to get more people to recognize these or just simply review them.  Thanks for bringing these to our attention and best to you and this thread.  

post #223 of 579

Still lots of bass but they're calmed down considerably (or maybe I'm getting brain burn in-lol). They are definitely a step up in isolation for me at the gym but after two runs and now weight lifting I do think they definitely need to include a shirt clip. These would make really great stage monitors for vocalists IMO.

post #224 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by shockdoc View Post  Still lots of bass but they're calmed down considerably (or maybe I'm getting brain burn in-lol).

 

It's brain burn-in. No amount of mechanical break-in will take bass down a lot, unless you actually break it.

post #225 of 579
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post
 


When we run Brainwavs S5 (or any low impedance IEM for that matter) from Colorfly C3 there's gradual roll downwards from 100Hz in bass (about -2db by 30Hz)

So what this does is take an edge off and lessen bleed into the mid-range, the result is a cleaner further towards neutral IEM.

Remember pages back when I said I use Clip to get true frequency response of an IEM? Well, when I do that they're pretty bassy, but not to the extend some members mention. 

Problem is the mainstreamers like bassy sigs, they'll love it whereas audiophile tend to prefer balance. Suiting everyone is impossible.

That graph is with a 32ohm load.


I'm curious how it looks with 16ohms and >> 32ohms.  Do you have a link?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Brainwavz S5 IEM Headphones Review