[Retrias]

you could just get a custom silicon tip and would have no actual danger of encasing the lab 1 entirely in silicone

 

[cooperpwc]

Not necessarily true, for my case anyway. Got JH13FP not too long ago, but despite the 10/10 score from joker and how everybody says how good they sounded, but I dont feel anything special, as a matter of fact they almost got no ear time from me. But, OTOH, the lab1 is truly something special, too bad medium stock tips are fatiguing and not that comfortable after couple hours of use (compared to the custom iem fitting ie. SE5, JH13FP), otherwise it will definitely be the most perfect and an end game headphone for me.

 
Again I highly recommend this comply ring flange mod to resolve Lab 1 fit and comfort issues. They take all the stress off the area where the silicon tip meets your ear. Next I will try the new Comply Custom Wraps placed in the same area. If they work, it will be a simpler solution. I think that they will...
 

 

[ThePrince425]

you could just get a custom silicon tip and would have no actual danger of encasing the lab 1 entirely in silicone

Don't really get this, do you know of anybody who is able to do this? If in Indo, it's not too far haha

 

[Retrias]

a friend did it for his er4p,he is friend with an audiologist in one of the shops

 

[georgelai57]

Don't really get this, do you know of anybody who is able to do this? If in Indo, it's not too far haha

http://www.acousticwerkes.com/custom-sleevetip.html?m

 

[ThePrince425]

http://www.acousticwerkes.com/custom-sleevetip.html?m

This is great! Will check it out over the weekend!

 

[cooperpwc]

 
My kind of guy

 
Ah... I am starting to get very interested in buying the PF X again. My GS-X mk2 is bringing my 160Xs to life and the ten is missing. (I heard it at Jaben in HK some time back and loved it - with the right music.)
 
I also love that you have both PF Xs. To be clear, I think that it is completely insane! But in an impressive way. 

 
If (well, when) I go for it, I will get the X-CC.

 

[nogi replicant]

Hey Cooperpwc, I have been thinking about getting the PFIX for a while. But I would be matching it with my calyx M. I recall you saying they don't play nice together because of the calyx impedance issue. Is this correct?

Also, with music that suits the PFIX (which is limited I know), how would you compare the presentation of that music on the PFIX compared to the Lab 1?

Thanks.

 

[HiFlight]

Hey Cooperpwc, I have been thinking about getting the PFIX for a while. But I would be matching it with my calyx M. I recall you saying they don't play nice together because of the calyx impedance issue. Is this correct?

Also, with music that suits the PFIX (which is limited I know), how would you compare the presentation of that music on the PFIX compared to the Lab 1?

Thanks.

I don't mean to horn in, but I have both the PF-IX and LAB 1. For the genre's that the IX likes, (vocals, jazz, small groups) the sound is unmatched by anything I have owned. The soundstage and imaging is just incredibly realistic, almost holographic. The LAB 1, IMO, comes in a close second with these genre's but is by far the better all-arounder.

One thing I believe adds to the impression of realism that is exhibited by the PF-IX is the fact that there is absolutely no blocking of the ear canal or isolation. This is really how our ears work in real life. Added to this is the fact that once in place, the PF-IX is an incredibly comfortable IEM for me. Once warmed, they just disappear. Folks with small ears need not apply!

 

[nogi replicant]

I don't mean to horn in, but I have both the PF-IX and LAB 1. For the genre's that the IX likes, (vocals, jazz, small groups) the sound is unmatched by anything I have owned. The soundstage and imaging is just incredibly realistic, almost holographic. The LAB 1, IMO, comes in a close second with these genre's but is by far the better all-arounder.

One thing I believe adds to the impression of realism that is exhibited by the PF-IX is the fact that there is absolutely no blocking of the ear canal or isolation. This is really how our ears work in real life. Added to this is the fact that once in place, the PF-IX is an incredibly comfortable IEM for me. Once warmed, they just disappear. Folks with small ears need not apply!

Thanks mate. This is good to hear. The thing that I like about the PFIX is that the ear canal is not blocked and that is how the ear normally hears (as you have said). Glad to hear that you think that with some genres you would pick up the IX over the Lab. I would hate to get the IX and still always pickup the Lab. My poor Parterre's (which are exquisite) get very little ear time now that I have the Lab's. To me the Parterre's are like a crystal clear glass of water, where the Lab's are like my favourite Indian Pale Ale beer (Kaiju Metamorphosis). The water is transparent and refreshing, the IPA beer is full and bold, super tasty, lots of layers of flavour with thick malts + fruity sweet notes. 9 out of 10 times I grab the Lab's over the Parterre's - I guess I just prefer beer over water.
 
Cooperpwc - if you could still chime in re the M/PFIX combo at some stage it would be appreciated.

 

[DarkKnight74]

For those who are thinking of getting the PF IX, you might want to take a look at Amazon Japan:

http://www.amazon.co.jp/final-design-ForteIX-%E3%83%80%E3%82%A4%E3%83%8A%E3%83%9F%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E5%9E%8B%E3%82%A4%E3%83%A4%E3%83%9B%E3%83%B3-FI-DC1602SS/dp/B004WQ1MD2/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1412903260&sr=8-9&keywords=final+audio+design


It's currently on offer for about USD690, though you will still need to add on shipping costs from forwarders such as Tenso. Very limited sets left, and knowing how Amazon works, the price is likely going northwards pretty soon. I suppose these are authentic since they are sold and shipped by Amazon themselves.

 

[cooperpwc]

Hey Cooperpwc, I have been thinking about getting the PFIX for a while. But I would be matching it with my calyx M. I recall you saying they don't play nice together because of the calyx impedance issue. Is this correct?

Also, with music that suits the PFIX (which is limited I know), how would you compare the presentation of that music on the PFIX compared to the Lab 1?

Thanks.

 
 

I don't mean to horn in, but I have both the PF-IX and LAB 1. For the genre's that the IX likes, (vocals, jazz, small groups) the sound is unmatched by anything I have owned. The soundstage and imaging is just incredibly realistic, almost holographic. The LAB 1, IMO, comes in a close second with these genre's but is by far the better all-arounder.

One thing I believe adds to the impression of realism that is exhibited by the PF-IX is the fact that there is absolutely no blocking of the ear canal or isolation. This is really how our ears work in real life. Added to this is the fact that once in place, the PF-IX is an incredibly comfortable IEM for me. Once warmed, they just disappear. Folks with small ears need not apply!

 
I think that HiFlight has done a good job with the comparison.
 
I would add that the Lab 1 is at least a serious contender for fulltime headphone. (You are on a desert island and can only have one headphone...) It does everything.
 
PFIX is not. It is technically bizarre. It has 'unique' ambience, acoustic modeling and frequency response. (Its detractors would substitute other words for unique.) But it has many fans including me. With the right music, it is a special experience. If you are going to buy just one FAD 160X series IEM, the PF IX (1602SS) is in my view a very good choice. It is clean in presentation and as versatile as the series gets. And it has those exquisite mids. 
 
Now as for matching with the M, I have really been waiting on the official adapter but I did make a 1 ohm adapter of my own. Give me some time and I will give it a good listen.

 

[shsh]

   
 
 
I think that HiFlight has done a good job with the comparison.
 
I would add that the Lab 1 is at least a serious contender for fulltime headphone. (You are on a desert island and can only have one headphone...) It does everything.
 
PFIX is not. It is technically bizarre. It has 'unique' ambience, acoustic modeling and frequency response. (Its detractors would substitute other words for unique.) But it has many fans including me. With the right music, it is a special experience. If you are going to buy just one FAD 160X series IEM, the PF IX (1602SS) is in my view a very good choice. It is clean in presentation and as versatile as the series gets. And it has those exquisite mids. 
 
Now as for matching with the M, I have really been waiting on the official adapter but I did make a 1 ohm adapter of my own. Give me some time and I will give it a good listen.

Hi cooper, may I have a comparison of 1601SC vs 1602SS? I'm really interested in the 1601.
 
Thank you.

 

[cooperpwc]

---

So I just pulled out my M, 1 ohm adapter and the PF IX, and went down into the garden to kick back with a coffee and cigar and give it a good listen.
 
First of all: I heard zero evidence of any compatibility issues with the music that I wanted to listen to. I later tested a song that has some opening bass notes that always caused a problem and they still did. 1 ohm was not enough to fix the issue. It is strange though; it is just a few notes at the beginning of that song (The Little Beggar Girl by Richard and Linda Thompson; the perfect test song for this issue) and then everything is fine. Hopefully the adapter Calyx provides will have higher impedance. Again, there were zero issues with the other music I listened to.
 
I listened to some Baroque and it was perfect. Perfect, I say! I will go out on a limb and posit that harpsichord never sounds better. A private church in my head... unbelievable. String ensembles were equally compelling.
 
I then put on Jazz, the Dave Brubeck Quartet. Blue Rondo A La Turk was excellent but the M has a slightly mellow presentation and I was thinking that I preferred the more dynamic sound of the Wyrd + Modi + GS-X mk2 that I was listening to the same song on with the PF IX yesterday. I little more sparkle and definition on the cymbals in particular. Later when I was listening to Take 5, a song with a more "clubby" sound, I could find no fault at all. Exquisite. A private Jazz club in my head. (Edit: Regarding "no fault at all", I realise that I am so used to the PF IX that I just take the paucity of sub-bass for granted. The PF IX will always be the PF IX...) 
 
I put on some acoustic guitar plus vocal material (the bonus disc from Jewel's Sweet and Wild.) The M + PF IX does that kind of music well. The smooth presentation of the M tames the treble edge of Jewel's vocals. Very nice.
 
Then for the heck of it, I put on Joan Osborne's One Of Us. It was... pretty obnoxious. No fault of the M; the Piano Forte IX does not do rock, even light rock like that. Mind you, Joan Armatrading's All The Way From America was better. I didn't like the hard drum slaps at all but the vocals were great. With Rock/Pop, you are best to keep things acoustic and mellow with the PF IX.
 
So I think that the M and PF IX is a great combination when used with the kind of music that suits the PF IX. Once the official adapter comes out, I expect it to get some fair amount of use. (There is still the zero isolation fact of the 160Xs; quiet environments only.)
 
As for the impedance issue, it is so rare that I really have to look for it. I have decided that I don't care very much with the PF IX since the music that the PF IX does well almost never causes the problem. Still I look forward to the adapter.

 

[cooperpwc]

  Hi cooper, may I have a comparison of 1601SC vs 1602SS? I'm really interested in the 1601.
 
Thank you.

 
This is an interesting question that I have been asking myself. Even though I have owned the 1602SS for a long time and the 1601SC for almost a year, I am still not quite sure what to say.
 
I am enjoying these two IEMs with my new home rig more than ever before so I expect that they will be getting a lot of listening time. I will post some thoughts down the road, hopefully soon.