Looking for IEMs as close as possibly can to ATH M50x
Jul 4, 2016 at 4:32 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 12
Tehianh

Tehianh

New Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 27, 2015
Posts
15
Likes
11
As the title says, I'm looking for a pair of good iems that will carry the sound signature as close as its possible to Audio Technica ATH M50x. I'm not an audiophile, just love my music and m50x but they are too heavy and unwieldy for daily mobile use, especially during summer. I recently bought shure se215 but find them too muddy and bass heavy without any clarity in mid and high.
I'm playing my audio from either rockboxed iPod classic (FLACs), smartphone (Tidal) or pc + GO-DapX (also FLACs) if that helps (plan on getting fiio x5II soon). My budget is roughly 250$.

I'll be grateful for any recomendations and insight. I ain't just looking for quick answer, I want to learn a bit as well.
 
Jul 4, 2016 at 7:12 AM Post #2 of 12
If you are looking for an IEM with exceptional clarity in the mids + highs as well as a controlled but fun bass response I highly recommend checking out the ATH-CKR9. It has some physical shortcomings, but if you can get over them it's quite a steal at the prices you can get it for now. If you want even more bass quantity the CKR10 is also an option.
 
Hope this helps.
 
Jul 4, 2016 at 4:30 PM Post #5 of 12
Currently looking for a good pair of IEMs too. New to Head-Fi and can't really offer insight, but here's a link I found in my research.
http://www.head-fi.org/t/705687/review-of-audio-technica-ath-im01-ath-im02-ath-im03-ath-im04-ath-im50-ath-im70
 
Jul 4, 2016 at 5:14 PM Post #6 of 12
Echobox Finder X-1
 
Jul 6, 2016 at 5:54 AM Post #8 of 12
tehianh said:
  Hello and thanks for the suggestion, I avoided AT IEMs as I didnt wanted to go astray the fanboy way. What physical shortcomings are we talking about here?
Click to expand...


Mainly issues with the cable and the housings can be awkward. Other than that they have a really excellent sound for the price; the IM series is great as well but use a totally different driver configuration (multiple BAs instead of dual dynamic push-pull of the CKR). The IM02 and 03 are known for clarity/transparency with a decent low end response as well; IM02 is a little more analytical (can be bright from some sources, more focus on upper mids) and the IM03 is a little more musical/warm (more focus on low mids vs upper mids).
 
Don't mean to just focus on AT here; so I'll throw in a shout for the Fidue A83 as well which has a similar signature to the IM02 but with an extra dynamic driver thrown in for better bass.
 
Jul 6, 2016 at 8:45 AM Post #9 of 12
k4rstar said:
 
Mainly issues with the cable and the housings can be awkward. Other than that they have a really excellent sound for the price; the IM series is great as well but use a totally different driver configuration (multiple BAs instead of dual dynamic push-pull of the CKR). The IM02 and 03 are known for clarity/transparency with a decent low end response as well; IM02 is a little more analytical (can be bright from some sources, more focus on upper mids) and the IM03 is a little more musical/warm (more focus on low mids vs upper mids).
 
Don't mean to just focus on AT here; so I'll throw in a shout for the Fidue A83 as well which has a similar signature to the IM02 but with an extra dynamic driver thrown in for better bass.
Click to expand...


the IM series is using some weird connectors instead of MMCX. shouldnt I avoid those?
Guys I know that run music shop told me that audio technica is far from natural, but they are called reference - are those two terms different? how different is the signature on natural and reference and how far off from those is ATH m50x?
 
Jul 6, 2016 at 8:48 AM Post #10 of 12
tehianh said:
 
the IM series is using some weird connectors instead of MMCX. shouldnt I avoid those?
Guys I know that run music shop told me that audio technica is far from natural, but they are called reference - are those two terms different? how different is the signature on natural and reference and how far off from those is ATH m50x?
Click to expand...

 
It's pretty ridiculous to classify an entire brand as unnatural or "reference". If reference refers to a flat or uncolored frequency response then the M50X could not be further from reference. On the flip-side I think you would find many that call the IM50 or IM03 natural. These sort of descriptors don't really tell you anything...
 
Yeah it's a little lame to have proprietary cable connections but it's better than having no detachable cable at all, and it's really only an issue should you need to replace the cable.
 
Jul 6, 2016 at 11:25 AM Post #11 of 12
k4rstar said:
   
It's pretty ridiculous to classify an entire brand as unnatural or "reference". If reference refers to a flat or uncolored frequency response then the M50X could not be further from reference. On the flip-side I think you would find many that call the IM50 or IM03 natural. These sort of descriptors don't really tell you anything...
 
Yeah it's a little lame to have proprietary cable connections but it's better than having no detachable cable at all, and it's really only an issue should you need to replace the cable.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant m50x is called as reference and far from natural, not the entire brand. How about Final Audio Heaven IV? I've been suggested that those are pretty close to m50x...
 
Jul 15, 2016 at 9:31 AM Post #12 of 12
I've discovered and tested for a week each Etymotic ER4PT and newer XR (still testing), XR is super close to my perfect sound signature while carrying that extra clarity and separation over m50x and elevated bass presence over ER4PT. I consider the whole case closed and would like to thank you all for all the help I got. If anyone is interested in how XR perform over the PT I'll be glad to answer (without any measurements and such, I'm no reviewer)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top