[czqdtc]

Talking about 334 vs. ES5
I had 334 for a while (just sold them recently)
Here's my experience:
1. 334 sounds more "romantic" and "realistic",and definitely colored compare to ES5, the former sounds more like a "fun sounding" consumer product while the latter is more like a stage monitor.
2. 334's bass is muddier, slower but punchier than the ES5, also with more weight to it. But none of them are as good as the JH13 in terms of bass texture, extension and impact (actually texture wise ES5 is as good as JH13, but ES5 lacks extension and impact)
3. 334's highs are actually quite bright and there is a hot spot which there (to my ears) that made it sound a bit livelier but there is a little fatigue.
4. 334 has much bigger sound stage (pair with my DX100, I would say 334 and JH13 both sounds more spacious than the ES5), however, the imaging of 334 is just weird...
 
All in all, 334 sounds livelier and more romantic because it's clearly colored, and it actually makes the music sounds better, while ES5 makes the music sounds exactly as what they are.

 

[Idsynchrono_24]

Quote:

 
All in all, 334 sounds livelier and more romantic because it's clearly colored, and it actually makes the music sounds better, while ES5 makes the music sounds exactly as what they are.

I was actually eyeballing your 334 before they were promptly sold off. Could've had a buyer in me man... Anyway, wouldn't this imply that the ES5 are more transparent than the 334 contrary to what's been stated by others that it's the other way around?

 

[czqdtc]

Quote:

I was actually eyeballing your 334 before they were promptly sold off. Could've had a buyer in me man... Anyway, wouldn't this imply that the ES5 are more transparent than the 334 contrary to what's been stated by others that it's the other way around?

In the bass department, I would say yes, ES5 is cleaner.
Also, vocal wise ES5 is cleaner, because the vocal on 334, despite its natural sounding, is colored fore sure, but in a good way.
Overall, I found 334 to be more 3D but clarity wise I don't see one to be superior than the other (maybe ES5 even has the upper hand here)

 

[uelover]

Quote:

Talking about 334 vs. ES5
I had 334 for a while (just sold them recently)
Here's my experience:
1. 334 sounds more "romantic" and "realistic",and definitely colored compare to ES5, the former sounds more like a "fun sounding" consumer product while the latter is more like a stage monitor.
2. 334's bass is muddier, slower but punchier than the ES5, also with more weight to it. But none of them are as good as the JH13 in terms of bass texture, extension and impact (actually texture wise ES5 is as good as JH13, but ES5 lacks extension and impact)
3. 334's highs are actually quite bright and there is a hot spot which there (to my ears) that made it sound a bit livelier but there is a little fatigue.
4. 334 has much bigger sound stage (pair with my DX100, I would say 334 and JH13 both sounds more spacious than the ES5), however, the imaging of 334 is just weird...
 
All in all, 334 sounds livelier and more romantic because it's clearly colored, and it actually makes the music sounds better, while ES5 makes the music sounds exactly as what they are.

 
Just some differences with my impressions:
 
I won't call the 334 colored. It is just better at representing spaces and better at handling dynamics (thus, reproducing a more engaging, realistic and 3D soundstage). On the contrary, due to the thicker mids and slightly rolled off highs on the ES5, I would be more inclined to call the ES5 slightly colored.
 
The 334 is hot in the treble out of the box but after 200hours of run in, it tamed down considerably. The highs are crystal clear and very accurately reproduced - high hats and cymbals of the drums sounded very very realistic.
 
Most CIEMs cannot reproduce the highs that well and there comes the problem when using the 334 as a monitoring earpiece because it is difficult to do a mix for others without the mix sounding like there is a low pass filter on another CIEM.

 

[czqdtc]

334 is not colored? U must be joking.
One example, go listen to Jessie J's do it like a dude.
Her auto-tuned voice is completely messed up/ altered on 334. Actually this is the first time I start to think about 334 is not only colored in the mids, but heavily

 

[Girls Generation]

I think this is all relative.

 

[uelover]

Quote:

334 is not colored? U must be joking.
One example, go listen to Jessie J's do it like a dude.
Her auto-tuned voice is completely messed up/ altered on 334. Actually this is the first time I start to think about 334 is not only colored in the mids, but heavily

 
To say that the 334 is colored (or heavily colored by your argument) is to say that if you were to stand in front of the vocalist or the musical instrument, what you hear directly live with your naked ears and what you hear via the 334 fed with direct signal into a Mic -> Preamp -> Mixer Board -> HP out (unprocessed & pre-eq) must be very different - e.g., timbres are off, FR are off.
 
Post processed and recorded tracks are bad test samples because you don't even know what are all the EQs/Effects/Processings added into the mix before it came to you.

 

[Girls Generation]

I agree... I don't think doing comparisons and commenting on transparency and color with your average pop is very helpful.
Quote:

 
To say that the 334 is colored (or heavily colored by your argument) is to say that if you were to stand in front of the vocalist or the musical instrument, what you hear directly live with your naked ears and what you hear via the 334 fed with direct signal into a Mic -> Preamp -> Mixer Board -> HP out (unprocessed & pre-eq) must be very different - e.g., timbres are off, FR are off.
 
Post processed and recorded tracks are bad test samples because you don't even know what are all the EQs/Effects/Processings added into the mix before it came to you.

 

[Idsynchrono_24]

Thanks for all of the comments regarding the 334 guys. Although I must say, the burn-in comment doesn't sit well with me. Isn't it common knowledge that BAs do not burn in? I mean, how could they? I'm hesitant to believe its crossovers burning in either as the components are miniscule. Either way, I think as with anything, first hand accounts will be the most illuminating, I thank you all again

 

[Girls Generation]

There are many objectivists who say this, and same goes for cables. However, in the end, it's what we hear that matters, not numbers and facts on paper. If we perceive a change in sound over time, then that's that. You must note we are not in any way trying to push this as 'fact' onto you, if you do not agree, it's just our opinion that we're opining about. Further, there are more than just the mechanical aspect of burn in that's at play; your ears/brain is adjusting, or your memory's sound reference is fading away replacing it with the new sound, etc. 
Quote:

Thanks for all of the comments regarding the 334 guys. Although I must say, the burn-in comment doesn't sit well with me. Isn't it common knowledge that BAs do not burn in? I mean, how could they? I'm hesitant to believe its crossovers burning in either as the components are miniscule. Either way, I think as with anything, first hand accounts will be the most illuminating, I thank you all again

 

[czqdtc]

Quote:

 
To say that the 334 is colored (or heavily colored by your argument) is to say that if you were to stand in front of the vocalist or the musical instrument, what you hear directly live with your naked ears and what you hear via the 334 fed with direct signal into a Mic -> Preamp -> Mixer Board -> HP out (unprocessed & pre-eq) must be very different - e.g., timbres are off, FR are off.
 
Post processed and recorded tracks are bad test samples because you don't even know what are all the EQs/Effects/Processings added into the mix before it came to you.

The reason why I used that song is not to show how it represent a good recording, but how off it can be, it sounds vastly different from any other IEMs I tested (JH13,ES5,W4,X10)

 

[Girls Generation]

There could be other factors, and different conclusions. Sounding vastly different than other IEMs doesn't necessarily equate to being 'colored.'

 

[Idsynchrono_24]

Quote:

There are many objectivists who say this, and same goes for cables. However, in the end, it's what we hear that matters, not numbers and facts on paper. If we perceive a change in sound over time, then that's that. You must note we are not in any way trying to push this as 'fact' onto you, if you do not agree, it's just our opinion that we're opining about. Further, there are more than just the mechanical aspect of burn in that's at play; your ears/brain is adjusting, or your memory's sound reference is fading away replacing it with the new sound, etc. 

I'm more liable to subscribe to the latter theory of psychosomatic influence than I am the former. We are all capable of perceiving things differently, yes, just as color blind people can't perceive certain colors, and if perception trumped hard data, then perhaps it's arguable that the world is definitively lacking in certain hues? And that's not even opening up the can of words that is the placebo effect. I think a lot of burn in is accounted for by our gradual acclimation towards a sound signature rather than changes on a mechanical level. I'm not suggesting that this is true for every piece of audio gear, I mean perhaps break in occurs in speakers and headphones, since they have diaphragms that flex, but I can't say the same for cables, armatures etc. Anyway, just my two cents, I'm sure this has been discussed ad infinitum, so no need to address it further 

 

[Girls Generation]

The strange thing is, I don't listen to my cables while it's burning in. I listen to one reference song at 0hours, 50, 100, 150, 200. 50 hours is around a 5 days, so I don't think it's my brain 'adjusting' that's making a difference in my case. 
 
Further, I always ask this whenever someone brings up placebo. If it is indeed placebo, but it does work for the individual (cure illness, perceive better sound) then wouldn't that mean placebo is a good thing? If, hypothetically speaking, custom cables were really meant to induce placebo, and that there is no factual improvement, but the individual perceives a better sound through placebo, doesn't that mean the cable is technically doing its job? Gotta think about this one.
 
I do note that I didn't perceive much, if not any, burn in difference with the ES5. I thought it was opening up, but it wasn't.
Quote:

I'm more liable to subscribe to the latter theory of psychosomatic influence than I am the former. We are all capable of perceiving things differently, yes, just as color blind people can't perceive certain colors, and if perception trumped hard data, then perhaps it's arguable that the world is definitively lacking in certain hues? And that's not even opening up the can of words that is the placebo effect. I think a lot of burn in is accounted for by our gradual acclimation towards a sound signature rather than changes on a mechanical level. I'm not suggesting that this is true for every piece of audio gear, I mean perhaps break in occurs in speakers and headphones, since they have diaphragms that flex, but I can't say the same for cables, armatures etc. Anyway, just my two cents, I'm sure this has been discussed ad infinitum, so no need to address it further 

 

[Idsynchrono_24]

Well, as with anything, experiences are wholly subjective, and all you have to go by is your own empirical experience. The power of suggestion is indeed a powerful thing. Some people might subscribe to hearing is believing, and if you have the money and it makes you happy, more power to you