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 24

post #346 of 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post
 

 

Try these links - 

http://www.head-fi.org/a/describing-sound-a-glossary

http://www.head-fi.org/t/220770/describing-sound-a-glossary (this was the original thread

 

Now let's have a look at what's listed:

 

Warm = Good bass, adequate low frequencies, adequate fundamentals relative to harmonics. Not thin. Also excessive bass or mid bass. Also, pleasantly spacious, with adequate reverberation at low frequencies. Also see Rich, Round. Warm highs means sweet highs.

 

Opposite of warm = cold.  So cold = thin, lacking in bass, not rich.

 

Cold tends to be bright and shrill.

 

   my mistake then , but , i will still call it cold , i think i can write  one on my own . read the disclaimer , he doesnt claim these are the constants or any thing ( though i will agree to most ) . and theres no cold there .

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/412815/cold-and-warm-sound , i like this more on cold .

post #347 of 581

  nothing personal , i hope you are not too serious about it .

post #348 of 581

You can interpret it any way you like :smile:

 

I'm just reiterating to you - that if you use the wrong terminology to describe it, people won't know what you are meaning.

 

EG - if you started calling a grey object red, while everyone else knew to call it grey - then no-one will be able to understand what you mean.

 

It's why the audio terms glossary I linked to exists.

 

But again - feel free to use your own terms.  Just means more people may end up questioning them in the long run, and you could end up confusing people - especially if they are basing buying choices off your comments.

post #349 of 581

I've received my demo S5 earlier this week (thank you Audrey!) and I've been using them at work connected to Foobar>Dragonfly 1.2 and on first impression after 25 hours of burn-in here are some comments from my notes:

 

·         -Fit is comfortable

          -Flat cable not my favorite. Y junction way to big. Cable too thick. 

          -Nice & clear sound

·         -Vocal a bit recess

·         -Spacious presentation

          -Listening volume higher than my normal level. (Recess mid?)

·         -Sound very good with older rock (eg: Foreigner – Urgent)

·         -Bass somewhat elevated but control (eg: Alanis Morisette – Citizen of the Planet)

·         -Piano & cello sound very good.

 

      Also, I've tried them with my Colorfly C3 and like other reported they sounded very good. I can confirmed that the bass was still very well reproduced even taking the low frequency roll-off of the C3.


Edited by Twinster - 7/24/14 at 6:49am
post #350 of 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by suman134 View Post
 

 

   my mistake then , but , i will still call it cold , i think i can write  one on my own . read the disclaimer , he doesnt claim these are the constants or any thing ( though i will agree to most ) . and theres no cold there .

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/412815/cold-and-warm-sound , i like this more on cold .

Well, I have to agree with Brooko on this one. Cold implies a bright and lean sound. If you think that the sound is not so full or lacks body but is on the dark side then cold isn't exactly the right term for it. You can say that it has thin note presentation or that the notes lack weight or something in that line as opposed to something that is thick and lush sounding. Coz a headphone/iem can be warm and still have a thinner note presentation and saying it is cold because the sound isn't full or rich kinda creates a contradiction.

post #351 of 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post
 

Well, I have to agree with Brooko on this one. Cold implies a bright and lean sound. If you think that the sound is not so full or lacks body but is on the dark side then cold isn't exactly the right term for it. You can say that it has thin note presentation or that the notes lack weight or something in that line as opposed to something that is thick and lush sounding. Coz a headphone/iem can be warm and still have a thinner note presentation and saying it is cold because the sound isn't full or rich kinda creates a contradiction.

 

   i might have messed up , i dont have it right now , and had heard it 5 days ago , and in these 5 i had 48hrs with out sleep  and bed ridden with a hairline fracture on my right hand humerus , i might have messed up , hmm . i think i should take few days off .

post #352 of 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by suman134 View Post
 

 

   i might have messed up , i dont have it right now , and had heard it 5 days ago , and in these 5 i had 48hrs with out sleep  and bed ridden with a hairline fracture on my right hand humerus , i might have messed up , hmm . i think i should take few days off .

Nah, just a matter of using other terms to describe what you're hearing. It's a fact that there isn't a unified terminology on head-fi but while everyone can interpret some things differently it's still good to use terms that don't create confusion. Imagine you have 2 equally warm iems but one sounds fuller - if you use "cold" to describe that difference for the average person cold will imply that the iem is less warm not less full or rich sounding. Or even make it a paradox coz how can something be warm and cold at the some time. 

So generally, one should use something like "thinner" or "leaner" or the plain "less full" to describe such a difference. Or one should write about stuff like note thickness and note weight etc. or how the increased bass adds body and richness to the mids and other random stuff that confuses the average person but makes you appear more knowledgeable in their eyes.:D

 

And with this I conclude the introductory lecture for my free course "Describing Sound Like a Boss"

post #353 of 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by kova4a View Post
 

Nah, just a matter of using other terms to describe what you're hearing. It's a fact that there isn't a unified terminology on head-fi but while everyone can interpret some things differently it's still good to use terms that don't create confusion. Imagine you have 2 equally warm iems but one sounds fuller - if you use "cold" to describe that difference for the average person cold will imply that the iem is less warm not less full or rich sounding. Or even make it a paradox coz how can something be warm and cold at the some time. 

So generally, one should use something like "thinner" or "leaner" or the plain "less full" to describe such a difference. Or one should write about stuff like note thickness and note weight etc. or how the increased bass adds body and richness to the mids and other random stuff that confuses the average person but makes you appear more knowledgeable in their eyes.:D

 

And with this I conclude the introductory lecture for my free course "Describing Sound Like a Boss"

 

    its head to believe , i have messed up , lets see , i will ask my brother to fetch it for me . i have the re-400 right now . and yes , why not , let me assess it again . everything feels a bit mixed up for now . i wanna be sure .

   and i like your free course . its good .

post #354 of 581
The biggest issue I have, and it may just be me, is that it is hard to tip roll, they're extra fiddly to put on?
post #355 of 581
Large nozzle does that smily_headphones1.gif
post #356 of 581

I've put my review up in the Head Gear section: 

http://www.head-fi.org/products/brainwavz-s5-in-ear-headphones/reviews/11349

post #357 of 581
post #358 of 581
post #359 of 581
post #360 of 581
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Brainwavz S5 IEM Headphones Review