[tsn141]

In my opinion, speed not only function of decay time. There is also other things effect speed.
Transient response optimisation is very complicated issue for me.

 

[goodvibes]

 
Yes. I found they slightly changed the name from Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors to Ultimate Ears In Ear Reference Monitors

Exactly what I thought. It is much easier to make 'colored' in-ear or over ear headphones. There is no need for the extensive audio skill level engineers and you can make superb looking CIEM shell with somehow good sound. No audiophile is aware of the simple thing - if you listen to the colored headphone, you will never be sure what the original song sounds like. But when you listen to real reference headphones, you can ALWAYS add any coloration to it with the simple EQs or you can go deeper and transofrm your library with some VST plugins to your taste. Reference headphones can reproduce colored sound easily. But already colored headphones are mostly not possible to 'tune/repair' into the flat (original) sound state. So I don't get the hundreds of "hard-colored" headphones on the market. There is need just for one super-flat-reference model. All the coloration and changes are easily made by the additional effects in the source device.
Sorry for not being more extensive, will try to focus on some more deep expressions later

This is for completely another level debate and for different thread But I can reassure you, that from certain price level any dac/amp/cable does so MINOR changes to the sound, that they are mostly not even measurable. This can be like 1-3% of the whole sound difference and maybe 0% difference for normal user outside head-fi community. But use of any other than flat headphones makes SIGNIFICANT differences in the final sound to anyone on this planet. So no matter if you use the macbook pro integrated output, iPhone 6 Plus or AK240 - you can be sure on the Layla the sound will be almost identical with no coloration on any device. Maybe professional listener will notice smaller soundstage, and some minor differences. But on the same sources connected to any non-reference headphones, you will get completely different sound, which has nothing to do with the original recording.

Hard to tell! to my ears NT6 produce 100% similar quality sound with 6 drivers per side as Layla does. They have only different tuning of the crossovers which makes some mid frequencies sounds emphasised on NT6. In my opinion with some tweaks NT6 can be tuned to match Layla almost identically with the half of the drivers. But thats the question to the electro-mechanic who builds the drivers and whole electronics.

Actually, tuning only goes so far. The best IEMs are those that chose the best compromises. Things like the NT6 JH13 and UERM are likely as optimized as can be right now. NT6 could have a bit less presence, jh13 less low bass and uerm more low bass etc but to do that something else probably gets worse without changing the design beyond tuning. We like them for a reason

and there's also a reason these are all new from crossover design to drivers.
 
What's great about these new JHs is they give the ability to fun them up or compensate for louder environments like live music or airplanes while giving what is arguably a most correct presentation under normal conditions. 

 

[goodvibes]

  Well, I did not see waterfall plot of Layla so I can't comment on it, but typically CIEMs/IEMs considered as reference/analytical are the brigther ones (but this is part of the story), but what's more important they have shorter decay (combined with quicker attack) to create faster sound. NT-6 is the example of such CIEM. According to the waterfall plot for example published on Rin Choi blog they have rather shorter than longer decay; this is somehow confirmed by listening impressions of various listeners. 
 
Can someone please explain to me why the heck CIEMs/IEMs which unnaturally shortens the decay or which have too qucik attack are considered to be true to the recording. IMHO the things are other way around. If a given CIEM cannot reproduce for example the entire reverbancy time of bass why people consider it as reference; IMHO they are not reference.
 
John Culter, I'm curious about your impressions as to the Legend-R.

Optimum Waterfall (spectral decay) plot would be looking at a cliff at all frequencies. The idea of decay in this context as often promoted on headfi is a misnomer. "

The idea behind this measurement is to fire a short signal at a loudspeaker and see what emerges when it stops. Ideally, there should be nothing." What happens in real life is that a transducer is 'tuned' to compensate for what decay does exist or sound overdamped along with amplifier interaction in the real world. When I look at a spectral decay graph I look for sustained ringing  (decay mound) as it's the most likely  undesirable artifact to be noticed. If one range is different than others it will either be enhance or masked in the mix. Your ear is better in this perspective of right or wrong than any graph. Anything other than the original line in a waterfall plot is resonance. It can't be avoided but there is also no optimum amount other than a theoretical none. It's simply how some frequencies relate the others and when there's too much overall it will generally never get quiet enough to show proper dynamic contrast or lowest level info when part of a mixed signal.
 

For instance, sometimes bass will be allowed a longer ring (less damping) to compensate for lack of downward extension to give a more pleasing representation while a device with great extension or even elevated low bass may need to be more damped for a pleasing presentation.

 

[daniel_hokkaido]

I tried the Angie, via a AK120 II with my own tunes as FLAC. 
 
I don't know but I just did not find them compelling. They certainly didn't give much texture to cello strings. 
 
In contrast I tried the ACS Encore demo iem at the show and it really blew me away. Best highs I have ever heard
, even better than the hd800 imo. For the UK head-fi'er you guys need to check ACS out. 

 

[proedros]

  I tried the Angie, via a AK120 II with my own tunes as FLAC. 
 
I don't know but I just did not find them compelling. They certainly didn't give much texture to cello strings. 
 
In contrast I tried the ACS Encore demo iem at the show and it really blew me away. Best highs I have ever heard
, even better than the hd800 imo. For the UK head-fi'er you guys need to check ACS out. 

 
you are not the only one with that opinion , i saw some other people saying this - and the ACS goes for 1/3 of the price

 

[acain]

I tried the Angie, via a AK120 II with my own tunes as FLAC. 

I don't know but I just did not find them compelling. They certainly didn't give much texture to cello strings. 

In contrast I tried the ACS Encore demo iem at the show and it really blew me away. Best highs I have ever heard
, even better than the hd800 imo. For the UK head-fi'er you guys need to check ACS out. 

Wow you liked it more then an over the ear opened back headphone.

 

[goodvibes]

  I tried the Angie, via a AK120 II with my own tunes as FLAC. 
 
I don't know but I just did not find them compelling. They certainly didn't give much texture to cello strings. 
 
In contrast I tried the ACS Encore demo iem at the show and it really blew me away. Best highs I have ever heard
, even better than the hd800 imo. For the UK head-fi'er you guys need to check ACS out. 
 

Sounded a hair lean as setup on the ak120II for me as well but tremendous on the ak240. I heard significant differences between the players on the Angie. After hearing of the new AK players commonality, I found that surprising. I thought the Angie quite revealing of source, perhaps too so for some but I personally appreciate that trait. I suspect turning up the bass knob would help here if wanted. I see someone started an Encore thread. Sounds like a great device. Can't have too many.

 

   
and the ACS goes for 1/3 of the price
 

Actually, Angie and Encore are close in price, likely depending on location. Layla is obviously much more. 

 

[Mimouille]

Well if you take the Mimouille-Welti curve (that is a thing) the SE5 makes you enjoy music. NT6 does that too and excels in clarity and balance, but might lack in bass impact for some. On this same Mimouille-Welti curve, but compensated by the fact that I am still pissed at JH, well the Layla seems awesome, but 2.5k is a bit steep for an iem the size of an apricot that makes you like...well a dork.

I think the custom version might be more ergonomic, but let me tell you, I have the Roxannes, which have as many drivers and I have large ears and canals, and still, they are a tough fit. Not as inconspicuous as my SE5, NT6, 335.

 

[robm321]

I'm more into enjoying music myself. Just sayin... One thing is those things must be for the studio because they seriously make people look like freaks while wearing them. Customs would be the only way to go, but there are too many options and they seem to be an engineering tool more than anything. In 6 months there will be more releases, etc, etc,. Competition is a good thing and there's lots of it constantly releasing. I'll keep my money and live vicariously through this thread until I find something really compelling. But most likely I'll keep listening to my speakers which make all customs seem like overpriced toys

 
I am looking forward to measurements. Tyll?  

 

[Malevolent]

  Thanks for the very informative and complete feedback. Now the key question is : do people want a perfectly flat / neutral to the source iem. I like fairly neutral iems such as my SE5 / NT6 but sometimes like a bit of 335.

 
That is the key question indeed. John Culter's impressions have confirmed that the Layla indeeds performs as intended - a reference IEM. While such sound signatures are preferable at times, for me, I tend to go after slightly warmer earphones with a mildly boosted bass presence. Ultimately, the Layla may not be my cup of tea after all, but they surely warrant a thorough audition.
 
@John Culter Thanks for the expanded thoughts! They were very helpful. In fact, I am more inclined to try the Angie now.

 

[John Culter]

In case anyone will ask for Layla and Angie - neither JH Audio or Astell & Kern mentioned that tips included with the original package are directly Comply T 500.
There is also very handy edition of TX 500 and TSX 500 with the Wax-Guard, which helps a lot - cleaning of those tiny bores is mostly impossible.
 

 

[John Culter]

BTW anyone with more expert opinion on the foam versus silicone tips? I mean tips used on the TOTL universal IEMs.
 
Layla is my first universal, so I have no experience with cheaper IEMs and changing the tips etc.
 
But It is very interesting how the foam tips significantly changes the shape of the sound and makes the high frequencies to fade out. Foam tips provide more isolation and little more bass pressure, but their negative impact on the high frequencies is really very noticeable.
 
I’m not sure how the seal material can be involved in the frequency changes in the ear canal? There is no physical barrier between earphone bores and the ear drum. It is fully understandable that foam makes a better isolation = better seal and the bass frequencies are more prominent, as they have no way to escape from the ear canal. But what the hell makes the high frequencies to disappear?
 
Any ideas?

 

[M-13]

  BTW anyone with more expert opinion on the foam versus silicone tips? I mean tips used on the TOTL universal IEMs.
 
Layla is my first universal, so I have no experience with cheaper IEMs and changing the tips etc.
 
But It is very interesting how the foam tips significantly changes the shape of the sound and makes the high frequencies to fade out. Foam tips provide more isolation and little more bass pressure, but their negative impact on the high frequencies is really very noticeable.
 
I’m not sure how the seal material can be involved in the frequency changes in the ear canal? There is no physical barrier between earphone bores and the ear drum. It is fully understandable that foam makes a better isolation = better seal and the bass frequencies are more prominent, as they have no way to escape from the ear canal. But what the hell makes the high frequencies to disappear?
 
Any ideas?

What your describing is what typically happens to all IEMs I've tried when going from silicone to foam/porous materials. The bass gets boosted and you lose the highs

 

[fiascogarcia]

  BTW anyone with more expert opinion on the foam versus silicone tips? I mean tips used on the TOTL universal IEMs.
 
Layla is my first universal, so I have no experience with cheaper IEMs and changing the tips etc.
 
But It is very interesting how the foam tips significantly changes the shape of the sound and makes the high frequencies to fade out. Foam tips provide more isolation and little more bass pressure, but their negative impact on the high frequencies is really very noticeable.
 
I’m not sure how the seal material can be involved in the frequency changes in the ear canal? There is no physical barrier between earphone bores and the ear drum. It is fully understandable that foam makes a better isolation = better seal and the bass frequencies are more prominent, as they have no way to escape from the ear canal. But what the hell makes the high frequencies to disappear?
 
Any ideas?

I think in a very miniscule version, similar to the effect of room acoustics, the material of the tip that extends beyond the bore of the iem absorbs or reflects the emitted sound wave differently.

 

[tsn141]

The high frequencies, goes in to foam and die at here, however, lower ones not goes that much to foam.