As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing clinical about the Layla unless you feel, to quote Emperor Joseph II,
Edited by goodvibes - 4/13/15 at 6:55am
Got the Angie's today. Got to audition both the Angie and Layla at Headfoneshop in Toronto for quite some time. The Angie's are pretty awesome. I couldn't justify the price difference between the Angie and the Layla. To me, the Layla sounded better, but not immensely so, and my impressions that Layla > Angie could be for a number of reasons aside from sheer audio performance (psychological, the quality of my source, my inexperienced ears, the bass pot settings not being directly comparable). Anyways, will like to see where the consensus lands on all of this Angie vs. Roxanne vs. Layla vs. K10 business... but in the meantime, I'm going to have Angie sensually massage my ear canals.
When you have the bass turned up how is the sub-bass compared to the mid-bass. I have been eyeing the Angies up but still saving for them in my hobby fund.
acain, don't think I am well versed enough to really give you a proper analysis. It does go quite low though. It seems to go lower than the Heir 5.0 with better clarity, but less total impact.
When people describe a headphone as "clinical" or "analytical" or say they're good for monitoring, the headphone they're describing tends to be a bit brighter than headphones people describe as "musical." But I've seen several times now people describing the Laylas as both "clinical" and "warm." Weird. Can anyone describe what it is about the sound that makes them seem clinical to you?
You're right, my terminology may have been off. The Layla is definitely a warm sounding IEM. They aren't clinical, as in being biased toward the higher frequencies. However, they sound very lifeless to my ears. It's definitely a great earphone for picking up nuances and micro detail. Its soundstage is also immense, matching the Roxanne's. However, in terms of a musical and fun experience, I found the Layla less than stunning.