Introduction:
This is a technical review of the earphone Sony Mdr-Ex1000 (Exk for short). This earphone from 2010s features some unique designs. With balanced performance across the hearing range and an open-sounding neutral tuning it is not hard to understand where all the praises over the years are coming from. In this review we try to discuss what the nature of this earphone is and some of the characters that makes it stand out.
I. Sound quality:
Openness in Sound-staging:
The tuning of the Exk is a diffused-field neutral one. It has a open sounding sound stage. This manifest itself most apparently in the vocals, where the voice of the singer is diffused naturally into the surrounding. That is, instead of being forcefully focused into an area as with some IEM with poor sound staging, the vocalist sounds like he/she is singing in the environment the record is made: be it an open-field or a studio.
Detail and separation:
For detail retrieval, it suffice to say that the Exk is very detailed. As compared to the highly revealing BA IEMs, the Exk has less micro-details. However, the detail retrieval is good enough that the decay of string instruments for example is nicely reproduced. In good recordings the detail reproduction is good enough to reproduce the bouncing of the sound of say string instruments on the piano in an orchestra setting. In busy passages different tracks are reproduced reasonably independently from each other and so there is no mixing or muddling of different musical elements.
Natural vocal timbre:
This is another one of the Exk's strong point: the timbre of vocals are excellent. Vocals, female or male, are both nicely bodied. You can feel the presence of the vocalist and localize it as a sound source in the music space. It sounds like someone is actually singing on stage, instead of an abstract voice being just there. This is still the case for even female treble. Thanks to the balanced tuning of the earphone it has the appropriate thickness at the mid-range and the sufficient detailing capability.
Tonal variations and dynamics:
With great sense of detail and realistic vocal, the Exk sounded romantic when the music is so. The vocal is intimately distant from the listener, offering a personal and emotional performance. With more dynamic tracks, the presentation does not lose its excitement. With its technical prowess it jiggle several tracks with ease while keeping the base beat snappy. Acoustic track reproductions are sympathetic, as the tonal variation of the vocalist is captured and nicely reproduced. In every case the music reproduction is vivid and exciting.
Defined bass note:
The bass from this earphone is impressive, especially considering that it is a small earphone. Bass notes are well defined and well-modulated. What it definitely not is a boomy sound with no definition. One can hear the different pitches in the bass, even when many different tones of bass are simultaneously being reproduced. With a good seal the quantity of bass is enough for the earphone to be entertaining and at the same time keeping the neutral tuning.
Complete package:
For the practicalities, the unit weights at at 9 Gramm, 1/3 as massive as the modern Sony flagship IER-Z1R. It comes in a relatively small size, with a quality genuine-leather carrying case for on-the-go. The cabling is of high quality, with the conductor being 7N oxygen-free-copper. It is supple, nice to the touch and tangle free. The audio jack is nicely machined and polished, with an especially robust gold plating that keeps its shine despite frequent use. The way this earphone fit to the ear is unique: the horizontal plane of the earphone sits perpendicular to the ear cannel. Aesthetically the fit is exotic when seen from untrained layman's (non-audiophile) eyes. Nevertheless it still managed to sit comfortably in the ears without popping off, making long hours of listening enjoyable. One thing to note is that the bright-red felt lining in a black leather box with gold accent from the plated audio plug is a reminder of some of the legendary Sony headphones, like the R10 for instance; it adds a sense of prestige and luxury to the mix.
II. Technical limitations:
Sibilance:
There are resonance peaks in the treble range of the frequency response, causing sibilance. The technical design is to be blamed, but it is understandable.
From the unique technical design, the actual driver of the earphone is placed horizontally relative to the axis of the ear cannel. For those experienced with speakers they would know that the acoustics of the listening room will have a detrimental effect on the sound quality. One of these effects are room modes. Rooms, or any enclosure or chamber for that matter has its own resonance frequencies. When the sound wave inside hits those marks, a peak in the frequency respond is produced. To make matter worst one could try placing a speaker close to and against the wall, that way the sound wave from the speaker did not get to dissipate and so would bounce off even more sharply from the hard wall creating all kinds of annoying resonance peaks.
An analogy would be for someone to speak from a tube. It sounds unnatural in that it is peaky and sibilant.
This is exactly what is going on with this pair of earphone. From the design point of view, due to the technical limitation at the time, in order the achieve a wide chromatic range (the range of notes an instrument can produce), the designers had to settle for a large driver unit. This lead to the need for the horizontal driver placement otherwise the driver won't fit in the ear. (Imagine a flat-head earphone being too big to fit in the ear), forcing a placement of the driver such that it produces its sound perpendicular to the ear cannel. In terms of speaker placement this is analogous to placing the speaker against and facing the wall.
In practice, some tracks would sound sibilant. Treble in general, cymbal hit for example, are less natural sounding when compared to the vocal reproduction. They sounded not as realistic as could be. The listening experience is not deal-breakingly bad unless one choses to focus on the sibilance, in which case it can become very annoying. It is perhaps worth noting that with better recording or source equipment with better treble control and smoothness, the sibilance issues get alleviated ever so slightly.
All in all, it seems fair to say that if this is the trade off for a balanced performance across a wide frequency range, one would arguably take it as the engineers did back when they design this earphone.
III. Conclusion:
We would like to end this review by noting the general merits of this earphone. Perhaps the most fitting, modern description of the Mdr-Ex1000 as an IEM is that it is a vivid, dynamic, and open-sounding, light-weight small IEM that performs on par with mid-range full-size headphones. It has a neutral tuning, with good performance across the whole hearing range. The sonic performance is great with detail, separation, a realistic and well-bodied vocal reproduction, and well-defined bass notes.
Tonally speaking, it sounds dynamic and vivid. It keeps the presentation exciting if needed be, passionate where appropriate, and romantic when the time is just right. For some this is the most valued quality of any piece of audio equipment: the Magical ingredients to sounding good.
As an audiophile, one will realize at some point in the journey towards Audio Nirvana, that Nirvana does not exist. There does not exist a system that is perfect in every sense of the word; there have to be some imperfections. In the case of the Mdr-Ex1000 it was its peaky upper-end and hence the distortion in treble and sibilance. It is up to the reader to decide if the whole package of this earphone and what it offers would outweighs its shortcomings or not.
This is a technical review of the earphone Sony Mdr-Ex1000 (Exk for short). This earphone from 2010s features some unique designs. With balanced performance across the hearing range and an open-sounding neutral tuning it is not hard to understand where all the praises over the years are coming from. In this review we try to discuss what the nature of this earphone is and some of the characters that makes it stand out.
I. Sound quality:
Openness in Sound-staging:
The tuning of the Exk is a diffused-field neutral one. It has a open sounding sound stage. This manifest itself most apparently in the vocals, where the voice of the singer is diffused naturally into the surrounding. That is, instead of being forcefully focused into an area as with some IEM with poor sound staging, the vocalist sounds like he/she is singing in the environment the record is made: be it an open-field or a studio.
Detail and separation:
For detail retrieval, it suffice to say that the Exk is very detailed. As compared to the highly revealing BA IEMs, the Exk has less micro-details. However, the detail retrieval is good enough that the decay of string instruments for example is nicely reproduced. In good recordings the detail reproduction is good enough to reproduce the bouncing of the sound of say string instruments on the piano in an orchestra setting. In busy passages different tracks are reproduced reasonably independently from each other and so there is no mixing or muddling of different musical elements.
Natural vocal timbre:
This is another one of the Exk's strong point: the timbre of vocals are excellent. Vocals, female or male, are both nicely bodied. You can feel the presence of the vocalist and localize it as a sound source in the music space. It sounds like someone is actually singing on stage, instead of an abstract voice being just there. This is still the case for even female treble. Thanks to the balanced tuning of the earphone it has the appropriate thickness at the mid-range and the sufficient detailing capability.
Tonal variations and dynamics:
With great sense of detail and realistic vocal, the Exk sounded romantic when the music is so. The vocal is intimately distant from the listener, offering a personal and emotional performance. With more dynamic tracks, the presentation does not lose its excitement. With its technical prowess it jiggle several tracks with ease while keeping the base beat snappy. Acoustic track reproductions are sympathetic, as the tonal variation of the vocalist is captured and nicely reproduced. In every case the music reproduction is vivid and exciting.
Defined bass note:
The bass from this earphone is impressive, especially considering that it is a small earphone. Bass notes are well defined and well-modulated. What it definitely not is a boomy sound with no definition. One can hear the different pitches in the bass, even when many different tones of bass are simultaneously being reproduced. With a good seal the quantity of bass is enough for the earphone to be entertaining and at the same time keeping the neutral tuning.
Complete package:
For the practicalities, the unit weights at at 9 Gramm, 1/3 as massive as the modern Sony flagship IER-Z1R. It comes in a relatively small size, with a quality genuine-leather carrying case for on-the-go. The cabling is of high quality, with the conductor being 7N oxygen-free-copper. It is supple, nice to the touch and tangle free. The audio jack is nicely machined and polished, with an especially robust gold plating that keeps its shine despite frequent use. The way this earphone fit to the ear is unique: the horizontal plane of the earphone sits perpendicular to the ear cannel. Aesthetically the fit is exotic when seen from untrained layman's (non-audiophile) eyes. Nevertheless it still managed to sit comfortably in the ears without popping off, making long hours of listening enjoyable. One thing to note is that the bright-red felt lining in a black leather box with gold accent from the plated audio plug is a reminder of some of the legendary Sony headphones, like the R10 for instance; it adds a sense of prestige and luxury to the mix.
II. Technical limitations:
Sibilance:
There are resonance peaks in the treble range of the frequency response, causing sibilance. The technical design is to be blamed, but it is understandable.
From the unique technical design, the actual driver of the earphone is placed horizontally relative to the axis of the ear cannel. For those experienced with speakers they would know that the acoustics of the listening room will have a detrimental effect on the sound quality. One of these effects are room modes. Rooms, or any enclosure or chamber for that matter has its own resonance frequencies. When the sound wave inside hits those marks, a peak in the frequency respond is produced. To make matter worst one could try placing a speaker close to and against the wall, that way the sound wave from the speaker did not get to dissipate and so would bounce off even more sharply from the hard wall creating all kinds of annoying resonance peaks.
An analogy would be for someone to speak from a tube. It sounds unnatural in that it is peaky and sibilant.
This is exactly what is going on with this pair of earphone. From the design point of view, due to the technical limitation at the time, in order the achieve a wide chromatic range (the range of notes an instrument can produce), the designers had to settle for a large driver unit. This lead to the need for the horizontal driver placement otherwise the driver won't fit in the ear. (Imagine a flat-head earphone being too big to fit in the ear), forcing a placement of the driver such that it produces its sound perpendicular to the ear cannel. In terms of speaker placement this is analogous to placing the speaker against and facing the wall.
In practice, some tracks would sound sibilant. Treble in general, cymbal hit for example, are less natural sounding when compared to the vocal reproduction. They sounded not as realistic as could be. The listening experience is not deal-breakingly bad unless one choses to focus on the sibilance, in which case it can become very annoying. It is perhaps worth noting that with better recording or source equipment with better treble control and smoothness, the sibilance issues get alleviated ever so slightly.
All in all, it seems fair to say that if this is the trade off for a balanced performance across a wide frequency range, one would arguably take it as the engineers did back when they design this earphone.
III. Conclusion:
We would like to end this review by noting the general merits of this earphone. Perhaps the most fitting, modern description of the Mdr-Ex1000 as an IEM is that it is a vivid, dynamic, and open-sounding, light-weight small IEM that performs on par with mid-range full-size headphones. It has a neutral tuning, with good performance across the whole hearing range. The sonic performance is great with detail, separation, a realistic and well-bodied vocal reproduction, and well-defined bass notes.
Tonally speaking, it sounds dynamic and vivid. It keeps the presentation exciting if needed be, passionate where appropriate, and romantic when the time is just right. For some this is the most valued quality of any piece of audio equipment: the Magical ingredients to sounding good.
As an audiophile, one will realize at some point in the journey towards Audio Nirvana, that Nirvana does not exist. There does not exist a system that is perfect in every sense of the word; there have to be some imperfections. In the case of the Mdr-Ex1000 it was its peaky upper-end and hence the distortion in treble and sibilance. It is up to the reader to decide if the whole package of this earphone and what it offers would outweighs its shortcomings or not.
