Quote:
I have no other IEMs to compare with, except the Sony XBA-3s and Hifiman RE-ZEROs, so this may not be helpful, but Anakchan lent me his 334s for a couple of weeks to try. After listening with them for a while, my full-sized headphones sound very mid-foward and I feel the bass is fairly strong (though not overdone, but I do wonder if they weren't tuned towards iPod or iPhone use) and they have a sharp peak in the treble that brings out sibilance with a lot of music, but is great with jazz and classical. My feeling is that they are very good, but have a sound that reminds me more of when I owned Denons, which have somewhat recessed mids, which is why they give an impression of a wide soundstage.
With that track, by the way, I tend to like listening to small jazz groups with headphones that are somewhat mid forward to bring the instruments closer but have something of a bass kick too. HD-800s can end up giving instruments too much space, for example, but Grados have that closeness and intensity that works very well.
Haven't heard the XBA-3 or RE-ZERO, so can't comment on those. Also, unfortunately, music_4321 and full-sized headphones just don't get on (I've always found cans uncomfortable after only 20-30 mins).
That said, I don't really find the 334s to be necessarily tuned for iPod/iPhone use as you suggest, though they are certainly very easy to drive, perhaps
too easy to drive even — I simply find them to have a particular flavour (colour), and a great flavour at that. But the 334s are not my favourite phone. If I could only keep one phone, it'd be the more mid-centric—and fairly idiosyncratic—1602SS, followed very closely by the 1601SS.
It's interesting you find the 334s (compared to your full-sized phones) to be less mid-forward. I say this because I think the 334's mids are one of its strong suits, though not the best mids I've personally heard. But I find even more surprising that you say the 334s "have a sharp peak in the treble that brings out sibilance with a lot of music" — I couldn't disagree more with that assessment. If anything, I find the 334 to be a reasonably forgiving phone in the upper registers (including upper mids).
While I agree the 334 can be quite good with classical music and jazz (I tend to mostly listen to classical music, BTW), I'd say the 334 is not
that good with orchestral music (the FI-BA-SS, K3003 & F111 render classical orchestral works more faithfully, in my view). I find the 334s, however, do excel with plenty of chamber and solo works, but sometimes the low-end, unfortunately, is a little too pronounced for my liking.
The 334s are great, though, with plenty of modern rock, pop & metal, and make not so good recordings—plenty of which fall into the so-called loudness wars category, and also bright recordings—quite good (or very tolerable unlike the FI-BA-SS, F111 and even, at times, the K3003).
It may seem as if I'm saying the 334 is best with poorly recorded material — no necessarily so, but it is certainly, to these ears, more forgiving and, as I've said before, it is a better all-rounder in many instances, in my view, though I still think the K3003 is an even better all-rounder if one also happens to listen to a fair share of classical music & jazz.
Quote:
Fantastic piece. I am in no position to comment on these comparisons. I will say that this is moving me on the 1602SS.
Yes, the 1602SS (and 1601SS) render this track brilliantly, too, and they do add something (good) that all other IEMs do not.
