[Malevolent]

  Look what I just got from my Roxanne  
 
Beat Audio Prima Donna with JH connector and bass adjustment in the splitter, with sheath until the splitter only
 

 

 

 
Nice! Although the bass adjuster looks a little too boxy and large compared to the cable itself. Small issues, anyhow.
 
Anyway, I can't really tell from the pictures, but do they have memory wire at the top, or are they molded this way?

 

[caableguy]

Nice! Although the bass adjuster looks a little too boxy and large compared to the cable itself. Small issues, anyhow.

Anyway, I can't really tell from the pictures, but do they have memory wire at the top, or are they molded this way?

I'm very interested in a review as well sound quality and construction/durability. If they're worth it, then I'm in.

 

[DrSheep]

I'm very interested in a review as well sound quality and construction/durability. If they're worth it, then I'm in.

I think their low end option is perfect if you are just looking for a better build and design than stock (straight plug and adjuster on the y-spliter).  However, for over $500, I would rather go with Toxic.

 

[Sound Eq]

i know i might not get the answer that is not biased to roxanne
 
but lets say the shure 846 is a 8/10 in sq
 
how much would u rate the universal roxanne compared to shure 846
 
are their owner of roxanne who think it might be a little hyped iem as i see so many people selling universal roxanne after owning it for few weeks
 
is the roxanne really something that amazing or not
 
sorry i can not audition roxanne where i live
 
my sought after sound signature is warm, rich, thick, great bass, and no harshness what so ever
 
i listen to electronics and synth and progressive rock

 

[kernel8888]

I think the Angie might fit the bill. It's a bit smoother and less Peaky in the treble making it without a hint of harshness. Sometimes I could detect a hint of sibilance and extra splashiness with the ROXANNE

 

[robm321]

If anything the Roxanne's are under hyped. Because of the almost year long delay, bad customer service, cable issues, and just plain random QC. Most of what you read is negative. Also, having two other "newer" models released right after people got the Roxannes didn't help. They never really did get much hype.
 
That said, their sound seems in line with what your preference is. My preference is more neutral with extended treble, so the Roxanne's are pretty much the opposite. That said, after owning them, I've really learned to appreciate super smooth, refined, forgiving sound. Layered and spacious. I really like the sound signature which is just plain enjoyeable and fun. Not all analytical and trying to be a studio monitor. It is better than the Shures you mentioned.
 
Personally, I won't be buying anymore JH Audio anything after the nightmare I went through with them. So, keep in mind if you buy from them, there is a chance things can work out badly for you. But as far as sound, they are superb.

 

[Sound Eq]

  If anything the Roxanne's are under hyped. Because of the almost year long delay, bad customer service, cable issues, and just plain random QC. Most of what you read is negative. Also, having two other "newer" models released right after people got the Roxannes didn't help. They never really did get much hype.
 
That said, their sound seems in line with what your preference is. My preference is more neutral with extended treble, so the Roxanne's are pretty much the opposite. That said, after owning them, I've really learned to appreciate super smooth, refined, forgiving sound. Layered and spacious. I really like the sound signature which is just plain enjoyeable and fun. Not all analytical and trying to be a studio monitor. It is better than the Shures you mentioned.
 
Personally, I won't be buying anymore JH Audio anything after the nightmare I went through with them. So, keep in mind if you buy from them, there is a chance things can work out badly for you. But as far as sound, they are superb.

 
 
 i wish someone who has the shure 846 and roxanne at the same time can give details in where the roxanne excels
 
and is the roxanne truly an iem that does not sound like an iem
 
also i noticed people selling them so fats after owning them for few weeks only which is bizarre
 
thanks for your kind reply

 

[Sound Eq]

I think the Angie might fit the bill. It's a bit smoother and less Peaky in the treble making it without a hint of harshness. Sometimes I could detect a hint of sibilance and extra splashiness with the ROXANNE

the angie man now this is now contradicting what i read as i love bassssssss and i do not know where i read it that the roxanne bass does not even defeat the bass of the shure , and i read the angie is not even to the level of bass as roxanne

 

[kernel8888]

  the angie man now this is now contradicting what i read as i love bassssssss and i do not know where i read it that the roxanne bass does not even defeat the bass of the shure , and i read the angie is not even to the level of bass as roxanne

I had the roxannes at the same time as the se846, and then the angie at the same time as the Roxanne. The se846 had more boom than the Roxanne, but I didn't feel the Roxanne lacking. As a matter of fact the Roxanne had better texture and slightly more mid bass which I liked, because while the se846 had great bass, the crossover all but eliminates mid bass and to my ears that made them sound somewhat sterile at times. Not sterile as a whole, but just the bass. Sterile might not even be the right word because the se846 is a rich sounding iem.
 
Anyway, the se846 had a thinner note than the Roxanne, and more harshness in the lower treble. The se846 did percussion better than any other iem or headphone ive heard. Tool's drums was amazing on them. While the Roxanne was a bit thicker, it was still spacious and had a much more out of your head feel. Roxanne had better treble extension, but while the se846 had some harshness in the lower treble, the Roxanne had some harshness in the upper treble (to my ears). BUT they are both GREAT IEMS.
 
Now, the angie had a tad less bass at the same setting on the bass dial, but I kept my Roxanne at 11 and my angie at 130-2, and they were quite similar. The angie had a more reverberant mid range that brought back some magic of vocals of the se846. The angie mids are very very musical. The Roxanne has a very musical midrange as well, but the angie is a bit more upfront on vocals. The treble of the angie is incredible. Very smooth, extended, and without a hair of harshness like the se846 and Roxanne had.

 

[kernel8888]

but imo the angie and Roxanne both have better bass than se846, which is really saying something. Better texture and cohesiveness. But they each have their own strengths and excel at different things. Se846 has great bass, vocals, percussion. Roxanne does the out of the head thing the best, very musical, powerful sound. Angie is smooth, refined, cohesive, clean, and has some of the great mid-qualities of the se846.

 

[Mimouille]

However, for over $500, I would rather go with Toxic.

Based on what? To me both are good options. I do not think there will be a huge difference soundwise between Toxic and Beat, as I am not a huge cable believer.

For build quality and ergonomics I prefer beat Audio, but for those for whom this is important, Toxic does offer a thicker wire.

For the 846 and Roxannes comparison, I have the custom version of the Roxannes. The 846 bass has a special texture that I just love, and the mids are really smooth. The Roxannes have much more space, more sparkly highs, the bass is tighter. But they are also much less easy on the ears when the recording is bad.

 

[DrSheep]

Yep they are both good, but I like Toxic's look and how they done the bass adjust better.

 

[Mimouille]

Yep they are both good, but I like Toxic's look and how they done the bass adjust better.

Fair enough 

 

[mysony1]

I

I had the roxannes at the same time as the se846, and then the angie at the same time as the Roxanne. The se846 had more boom than the Roxanne, but I didn't feel the Roxanne lacking. As a matter of fact the Roxanne had better texture and slightly more mid bass which I liked, because while the se846 had great bass, the crossover all but eliminates mid bass and to my ears that made them sound somewhat sterile at times. Not sterile as a whole, but just the bass. Sterile might not even be the right word because the se846 is a rich sounding iem.

Anyway, the se846 had a thinner note than the Roxanne, and more harshness in the lower treble. The se846 did percussion better than any other iem or headphone ive heard. Tool's drums was amazing on them. While the Roxanne was a bit thicker, it was still spacious and had a much more out of your head feel. Roxanne had better treble extension, but while the se846 had some harshness in the lower treble, the Roxanne had some harshness in the upper treble (to my ears). BUT they are both GREAT IEMS.

Now, the angie had a tad less bass at the same setting on the bass dial, but I kept my Roxanne at 11 and my angie at 130-2, and they were quite similar. The angie had a more reverberant mid range that brought back some magic of vocals of the se846. The angie mids are very very musical. The Roxanne has a very musical midrange as well, but the angie is a bit more upfront on vocals. The treble of the angie is incredible. Very smooth, extended, and without a hair of harshness like the se846 and Roxanne had.

I have both CIEM se846 and custom Roxanne, sound wise both are great, but sound judgement on both need to base on types of player, earphone cable, cable connector with portable amp or without.

With all above use can make quite a difference on the sound preference of the earphone.

All the while in the forum everyone are base on what they hear with their own kits.

Therefore is always advisable to bring along theirs kits to the shop and test it out.

 

[Jtyoung]

some impressions a few days after receiving my custom roxannes.
-a bit bigger than my westone es5's but still fine.  they seem bigger at the back of the iem, slimmer at the front.
-solid black acyrlic - build quality is excellent!
-cable - thicker and shorter than I was expecting, but my plussound cable is on its way in anycase.  It does seem like the wires can get a bit loose near the memory wire though.
-comfort - I noticed a nice difference compare to the es5 with its non-acrylic ear canal.  Seems soo easy to insert and get a seal with the rox. Doesn't quite grip as much as the westones do though.  Isolation is a bit less, but still good.
-SOUNDSTAGE!  Holy cow, this is stunning!!  People write about it but nothing can prepare you for its beauty and space around each instrument.  Doesn't feel like iems at all...the space is unbelievable.  Truely beautiful.  It does take a bit of adjustment getting used to this new sensation, but its a very very pleasant adjustment!!!  
-Bass is silky smooth, low, full, detailed, and as full as you like with the control. I love bass, and am soo happy with it on the rox.  Maybe the best thing about the rox...or is it the soundage...or the sense of realism...      
-Treble is certainly all there, shimmers nicely, and seems right for me.  No concerns there and Im sure will improve with burn in. (yes I do find a difference personally with burn-in).
-Midrange... stunning again.  Perhaps a little bit less fullness than the westone, but amazingly lifelike rendition none the less.
Hope this can be of help - by the way Im pairing with Calyx M, and elekit tu882 desktop tube amp sometimes.