[ljokerl]

 
Quote:

^
lol.. sorry was a bit confusing.. ahahaha..
then i said sound balance like sm3, i was more referring to the quantity of lows, mids, and highs, not detail or resolution. specifically i wanted to know what single dynamic driver, with open acoustic, that doesnt lack in terms of quantity, and have a good extension especially at the lower end. Iem that does 'complete' bass is something like vb or ddm, but vb is harsh and dry sounding, ddm is 2 soundstage position issue.
so anyway lets list out 5 of whats u think is smoothest sounding single dynamics that is not offensive, and vented.

I still don't think you're going to come up with a list of five. Let's see - there are only about 10 top-tier dynamics in total (that I've heard):
 
MTPC
MTPG
Monster MD
IE8
IE7
FX700
RE262
RE252
Radius DDM (which you've tried)
Radius W21
Yuin OK1
GR07
 
Discounting anything that's over your $200 limit or not vented, we get:
 
 
IE7
RE262
RE252
Yuin OK1
GR07
 
Dropping anything with significantly less bass impact than the SM3:
 
 
IE7
RE262
GR07
 
But I really wouldn't call the GR07 especially smooth. It is detailed, textured, and a little dry. Does have great extension, though, but really not an SM3-type signature.
 


Quote:

Joker,

 Can you please give a quick comparison between the GR07 and the Brainwavz B2.

I have not heard the final production version of the B2 so I cannot give a proper comparison. I would expect it to sound very close, if not identical, to the DBA-02, but of course noone knows for sure at this point. There was a good DBA-02 vs GR07 comparison in one of the GR07 threads if you're willing to live with that approximation.

 

[Niyologist]

I installed the Comply Foam Tips T-400 (Medium) on my SP51. The results....Better Bass response! It's even better than the Meelec Silicon Ear tips. The bass isn't muddy either, instead it's more textured and it's slightly deeper and bigger. It's also tighter and punchier and especially with the Extreme Bass Port on it. I suggest someone else who is experienced to try this out because I just want to know what I heard is true. 

 

[ljokerl]

Added the Ortofon e-Q5 and Etymotic MC5

 

[UserFriendly]

Can't wait for the Shure SE535 reviews

 

[battleaxe]

Your review really makes me want to go out and find a place to listen to the MC5. Would you say HF5 worth the extra $25(based on what I saw on amazon) over the MC5? 

 

[Ikarios]

Damn you Joker, I just received the GR07 and I've decided I like it more than the Phonaks.... and now you go pop the e-Q5 on me, making it sound like it's all rainbows and butterflies to me

. Just to be sure, the e-Q5 is still a relatively mid-oriented headphone (like the RE262) compared to more neutral IEMs like the GR07 and the grey filter Phonak PFE 122, right? It sounds lik the e-Q5 is a slightly more extended, slightly more neutral version of the RE262. Also, how large are those nozzles compared to something like the CC51? I almost had trouble with the size of the CC51 nozzle and the e-Q5 seems like it's significantly larger than that, which means it probably won't fit in my tiny ear canals.

 

[Anaxilus]

Solid Joker, pretty spot on to how I heard the MC5 and EQ5.  Kudos to your subjectivity not letting the underwhelming factor of the MC5 creep into your score.

 

[MaxwellDemon]

Excellent review, joker! I am glad to see the IEM that introduced me to audiophilia making its debut into your review list. Most of all, I agree with your review.
 
 
Quote:

Your review really makes me want to go out and find a place to listen to the MC5. Would you recommend the MC5 over other Etymotics for a person looking for total package? 

From a person that owned the MC5 (until a friend lost it) and the ER4, I like to think of the MC5 as the introduction to the Etymotic sound signature. I'd hardly call the MC5 as a total package since there are loads of room for improvement over all aspects... but then that depends on what you do mean by a 'total package'.
 
In comparison to the rest of the Etymotic earphones in technical performance, there is no comparison between either the HF5 or the ER4 to the MC5. The MC5 just doesn't compete in the end.
 
Of course, in comparison to its competitors in its price range is a completely different story though...

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I almost had trouble with the size of the CC51 nozzle and the e-Q5 seems like it's significantly larger than that, which means it probably won't fit in my tiny ear canals.

It's 50% thicker by direct comparison.  
 

 

[Ikarios]

Quote:

It's 50% thicker by direct comparison.  
 

Phew, that saves me another couple hundred...
 

 

[ljokerl]

 
Quote:

Your review really makes me want to go out and find a place to listen to the MC5. Would you say HF5 worth the extra $25(based on what I saw on amazon) over the MC5? 

 
 
Absolutely. I liked my HF3 enough to have custom tips made by ACS. It's not as good as my old ER4S but it sounds fine straight out of my phone and is much more practical. Better than the MC5 in every aspect except maybe bass body and thickness, if you're into that sort of thing. 


Quote:

Damn you Joker, I just received the GR07 and I've decided I like it more than the Phonaks.... and now you go pop the e-Q5 on me, making it sound like it's all rainbows and butterflies to me

. Just to be sure, the e-Q5 is still a relatively mid-oriented headphone (like the RE262) compared to more neutral IEMs like the GR07 and the grey filter Phonak PFE 122, right? It sounds lik the e-Q5 is a slightly more extended, slightly more neutral version of the RE262. Also, how large are those nozzles compared to something like the CC51? I almost had trouble with the size of the CC51 nozzle and the e-Q5 seems like it's significantly larger than that, which means it probably won't fit in my tiny ear canals.

The e-Q5 is mid-oriented, yes. Not unbalanced, though. The nozzle is smaller than with the CC51 but the housing is bigger, obviously. I can stretch sony hybrids over the e-Q5 nozzle pretty easily but they definitely won't fit on my CC51.


Quote:

Solid Joker, pretty spot on to how I heard the MC5 and EQ5.  Kudos to your subjectivity not letting the underwhelming factor of the MC5 creep into your score.

Thanks. And yeah, the MC5 is a little bleh, but if I put the RE-ZERO, Xcape V1, and HF3 far out of reach I can enjoy it

. 

 
Quote:

It's 50% thicker by direct comparison.  

 
 
The nozzle or the housing itself?

 

[Anaxilus]

 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
The nozzle or the housing itself?

Housing.  If he just inserts up to the tip on the nozzle it seems it might fall out?  My real-time simulation failed to pass.  

  The nozzle alone is perhaps 1mm thinner than the CC51, I can't imagine what tip you would use to even get it in w/o deformation.  He could use small tri-flanges perhaps over the ear.
 
I think I just realized why Aflac wasn't able to get the low end from the DBA.  

 

[Ikarios]

Quote:

The e-Q5 is mid-oriented, yes. Not unbalanced, though. The nozzle is smaller than with the CC51 but the housing is bigger, obviously. I can stretch sony hybrids over the e-Q5 nozzle pretty easily but they definitely won't fit on my CC51.

Whoops - didn't notice there was even a nozzle. Dumb. Still, given how large they are I don't think they would work in my ears, since they'd stick out like Frankenstein bolts. >$170-220 disaster averted, wallet is happy
At least, it's nothing like the Qjays where the whole thing can potentially disappear in my ear canal. That's nice.
 
Quote:

 
I think I just realized why Aflac wasn't able to get the low end from the DBA.  

Honestly, that may have been it - I always had a little bit of trouble with fit on the DBA-02; the super-soft Hybrid-like tips didn't seal, and neither did the biflanges; only the stock single-flanges and Monster Supertips fit. I thought I was getting a good seal, though, and insertion depth didn't matter even if I shoved em in. I've listened to enough IEMs that I know what a bad seal sounds like and the DBA-02 just didn't sound like a bad seal to me. The Gel Supertips in particular were a great fit; I used them nicely with the CK10s. I also tried Comply T100s (which are basically guaranteed to seal, right?) and that didn't help much.
 
 

 

[battleaxe]

Quote:

Excellent review, joker! I am glad to see the IEM that introduced me to audiophilia making its debut into your review list. Most of all, I agree with your review.
From a person that owned the MC5 (until a friend lost it) and the ER4, I like to think of the MC5 as the introduction to the Etymotic sound signature. I'd hardly call the MC5 as a total package since there are loads of room for improvement over all aspects... but then that depends on what you do mean by a 'total package'.
 
In comparison to the rest of the Etymotic earphones in technical performance, there is no comparison between either the HF5 or the ER4 to the MC5. The MC5 just doesn't compete in the end.
 
Of course, in comparison to its competitors in its price range is a completely different story though...

Let me ask you this then. I tried the ER6i and the SQ wasn't to my liking, it was kind of fatiguing the first minute of trying it. I don't think it was a problem with the one I tired, as I did try on another one with the same results. Would the HF5 or MC5 have similar signature vs the ER6i?

 

[MaxwellDemon]

Quote:

Let me ask you this then. I tried the ER6i and the SQ wasn't to my liking, it was kind of fatiguing the first minute of trying it. I don't think it was a problem with the one I tired, as I did try on another one with the same results. Would the HF5 or MC5 have similar signature vs the ER6i?

I unfortunately haven't heard of the ER6i to make that comparison. If you got fatigued due to the treble, then it is highly likely that Etymotic in general just isn't suitable for you.
 
Again though, I have no idea at all to how the ER6i should or would sound.