So, been out of town on business for a week. A friend in the city I'm in travels the world. He also knows I'm into earphones. Guess what he surprised me with? The CKN70! Good to have great buddies! Just had a chance to listen to them for awhile this evening, and I happen to have the CKN50, FXZ100 and CKS1000 with me.
First thing first, the CKN70 is quite refined with some serious black space. If it improves (I have no doubt it will), it will be a serious bang for the buck contender. Yet, it falls flat to me base on all of the hype and praise it received from people who heard it straight out the box like I did. Yes, I'm stating it: I felt the CKN70 was overhyped. Is it better than it's little brother, the CKN50? Yes it is, but not by leaps and bounds out of the box. A well burnt in CKN50 is still quite capable. Does it surpass the FXZ100? Geez, this is tricky because I don't' hear the CKN70/50 leaving my FXZ100 in the dust like some claimed upon first hearing it. Yes, I'm going to admit the 70 is more refined, and the mids are incredible (that towers over the FXZ100), But there is something magical in the lower mids and the bass of the the well-burned in FXZ100, that the 70 just isn't touching yet. Maybe it will, but I'm not hearing it. And finally, as good as I think the 70 is and can be, I don't hear it surpassing one of the newer AT flagships, the CKS1000. This well burned-in IEM is just incredible with it's clear bass and seemingly layered mids out of one dynamic driver (albeit the music is tuned to go through some elaborate chamber system that I'm sure help gives the IEM the sound signature and sense of more than one driver). Yes, I'm enjoying the CKS1000 over the FXZ100 (and over the FXZ200 when I owned it).
Then again, none of these sound signatures are similar, except the 70 and 50, so sometimes I think the comparisons are unfair. The 70 is clearer than the FXZ100, but it doesn't sound better yet to me. One other thing, I can't find anywhere on the box or in the papers where it states the 70 is using carbon nanotubes (I know it says that on the AT website, and I could swear I read that about the 50 at one time on the website, but now that's gone). I'm not saying it's not CNT, but I found it interesting that it's not advertised and promoted on the actual product like JVC did theres. If I overlooked it please point it out to me. And this is truly one time where I'm so happy that I'm more into the sound than the physicality of the product, because this cable is irritating to me (just like the 50's cable). The silver housings are beautiful to me though. I can't wait to get home and compare it to the FXD80/70 (which should be late tomorrow evening or early Friday). If you only heard something like the FX40 and want to raise your listening bar at a good price, by all means get a pair of CKN70s. But some of this talk that it surpasses some of the top tiers is a bunch of hogwash. It is one of the best (if not the best) under $100 IEMs out there though, I do believe. Happy listening.
