xtasi
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Posts
- 326
- Likes
- 17
I'm curious of any of the 1964 customs need amping.
Hey guys (and ladies if you're here),
Just made it home with the quads in firmly planted in my ears (had one of those trooper's fur caps on and hanging down over my ears so no one knew my joy). First, i would like all customs, you have to make sure these IEMs are firmly place in your ears. I had a loose but snug fit about one tenth of my way home on public transporation, and the quads didn't sound that good to me. I thought maybe there was a defect or something. Then something told me to push down on the bottom end of the IEM, which would make the part that's actually in the ear canal go deeper. POW and WOW! It was like a whole new set of IEMs. Yes, it goes deep, but not too deep where it feels uncomfortable (as I said earlier) like when I try to use triples flange tips on universals.
Okay, here we go with some more detailed impressions on sound: The quads are simply possess some of the best bass I've ever heard in an IEM, easily surpassing the SM3, which was the best I've heard in BA driver until now. It goes deep like the IE8, but beats the IE8 hands down in quality. It gives you the amount of bass that the recording calls for, whereas the IE8 just seems to stay bloated based on my recollection. I mentioned the IE8 first (I know it's not a BA, because someone asked me about that comparison in pm. Now, for Confispect's question comparing the bass of the quad to the FX700. There is nothing like the timbre of the FX700. I think it has a lot to do with its all-wood driver. So, timbre-wise, the FX700 reigns supreme for my ears. Quality-wise, the quads and Fx700 are almost equal, but one does something better than the other. I said the FX700 is better, but clarity and detail is better with the quad. I mean I hear reverb off bass strings being plucked that I've never heard before with the quads. It's clarity is wonderful and the bass guitar notes really reverberate and go down deep. But if the bass is not deep in the music, it will reflect that too. Oh, and it's fast! I was just listening to the Police "Message In The Bottle" and I heard Sting's bass like I have never heard before (this was just on an iPod Nano). But the speed of Copeland's drums and Andy's guitar were right there. These are fantastic and meet my expectations for customs (I can say exceed since I really didn't know what to expect).
Snare drums have great echo and reverb, and the tom tom drums. Now jermng and I discussed this a little bit in pm, and hears things a little different from me. He's definitely coming from a more technical point of listening than I am, but I think these are an audiophile's dream. The best mid drums I've ever heard in an IEM was in the e-Q7. That sound is how I judge all mid-range drums on a kit (it had great tonality and echo and reverberation). The quads meet and surpass the e-Q7. And already said the bass surpass the SM3.
I'm listening to the best of Radiohead now (I use them as a test for all of my IEMs) and the quads are delivering. Acoustic instruments seem to do a tad bit better with the FX700, but again, I haven't listened to enough acoustic music with the quads yet. But I "High and Dry" drums and bass sounded wonderful, but the acoustic guitar struck me as being a bit more natural with the FX700. Not sure about the comparison with the SM3 as of yet.
As for sound signature, not too warms and not very cold. Somewhere in the middle. Vocals are outstanding and seem to possess a lot of details like some analytical IEMs I'ver heard (HF5 comes to mind), but a bit to the warm side of analytical. Horns are in your face and very detailed. I picked this up listening to a Lossless version of Mile Davis' "So What." Bass was there as expected and drums had nice transparency and snap. Cymbals - as project86 and I think jermng said - are a little laid back. It's there with good extension and decay, but it's a bit warmish. It's definitely nowhere near as sharp and cool as the HJE900 or FX700 treble. This may be an issue for some, but whereas I like treble, it's not my favorite part of the sound spectrum. So the treble sounds just right to me. Some may find the treble a bit recessed, but I don't hear that way. I hear it as just right.
Mids. Hmmmm? As I said earlier, Vitaliy told me he designed the quads not have as forward mids as the JH or UE products that are comparable. Does this mean the mids are recessed? No. The mids aren't as forward, for example as the SM3 or SE535, but it's not recessed either. It's just right to my ears. If anything, the vocals seem to be a tad bit more forward than other parts of the mids. So if a singer is being accompanied by piano, that piano sounds like it's playing behind the vocalist somewhat to give the singer room to shine. In "So What," the piano was a bit recessed compared to the other instrument, but clear and transparent. The piano is very upclose and personal with the SM3.
Instrument separation is very nice. The instruments are tall, or nice headstage. As for soundstage, sometimes the quads sound very monitor-like (and they are that), but at other times there is space, especially where there is string instruments in the background. I can get more a medium concert hall feel than I do with the SM3, which always feels like you're in a studio or in a small jazz club right by the stage. The crossover is very nice in the quads. That's it for now. I need more listening time. In spelling errors or words missing, please forgive me. I'm typing fast trying to answer questions and enjoy the music, among a couple of other chores on the computer. I'll clean this post up later. Oh, so far these things sound wonderful straight out of my ipod classics (latestest generations), nano and my Sony S545 (no eq-ing). It sounded the best with Radiohead and the Police out of the Nano. I will connect it to the Fiio E7 and uDAC in a bit.
I understand at Confispect. Dynamic certainly have their own unique thing going on, but the BAs seem to have a clarity and transparency that some Dynamics get quite close to (the FX700), but never hit the mark. It's almost a tie for me comparing the FX700 and quad, but the quad clearly does several things better than FX700 from a technical standpoint. As for BAs, it's quickly becoming apparent that my custom is the best BA IEM I've yet to hear. I'm not saying that definitively yet, but the best BAs I'ver heard (universals of course) are the SM3, e-Q7 (I know it's a hybrid), SE535 and SM2 (no particular order). The quads are putting them all to shame to my ears at the moment. The closes would be the SM3 and SM2. I think the quads give a big more space like the SM2, but with more details and transparency. The Earsonics are definitely warmer sounding BAs.
But if I could only keep one universal - BA or Dynamic - it would be the FX700 dynamic. I would choose it and my custom BA is how I feel at the moment.
Quote:I understand at Confispect. Dynamic certainly have their own unique thing going on, but the BAs seem to have a clarity and transparency that some Dynamics get quite close to (the FX700), but never hit the mark. It's almost a tie for me comparing the FX700 and quad, but the quad clearly does several things better than FX700 from a technical standpoint. As for BAs, it's quickly becoming apparent that my custom is the best BA IEM I've yet to hear. I'm not saying that definitively yet, but the best BAs I'ver heard (universals of course) are the SM3, e-Q7 (I know it's a hybrid), SE535 and SM2 (no particular order). The quads are putting them all to shame to my ears at the moment. The closes would be the SM3 and SM2. I think the quads give a big more space like the SM2, but with more details and transparency. The Earsonics are definitely warmer sounding BAs.
But if I could only keep one universal - BA or Dynamic - it would be the FX700 dynamic. I would choose it and my custom BA is how I feel at the moment.
Figured that, my problem is as they get 'technically' better they get naturally worser another debate for another day. But....these are quite interesting did you post pics? (going back thread wise...) I do need/want a custom sounds like these atrio/ear sonic. Decisions, decisions...
EDIT: Good question I'd like to no this myself....timbre is a extremely needed thing it should never be forgotten. In my book.
As for sound signature, not too warms and not very cold. Somewhere in the middle. Vocals are outstanding and seem to possess a lot of details like some analytical IEMs I'ver heard (HF5 comes to mind), but a bit to the warm side of analytical. Horns are in your face and very detailed. I picked this up listening to a Lossless version of Mile Davis' "So What." Bass was there as expected and drums had nice transparency and snap. Cymbals - as project86 and I think jermng said - are a little laid back. It's there with good extension and decay, but it's a bit warmish. It's definitely nowhere near as sharp and cool as the HJE900 or FX700 treble. This may be an issue for some, but whereas I like treble, it's not my favorite part of the sound spectrum. So the treble sounds just right to me. Some may find the treble a bit recessed, but I don't hear that way. I hear it as just right.
Mids. Hmmmm? As I said earlier, Vitaliy told me he designed the quads not have as forward mids as the JH or UE products that are comparable. Does this mean the mids are recessed? No. The mids aren't as forward, for example as the SM3 or SE535, but it's not recessed either. It's just right to my ears. If anything, the vocals seem to be a tad bit more forward than other parts of the mids. So if a singer is being accompanied by piano, that piano sounds like it's playing behind the vocalist somewhat to give the singer room to shine. In "So What," the piano was a bit recessed compared to the other instrument, but clear and transparent. The piano is very upclose and personal with the SM3.
Instrument separation is very nice. The instruments are tall, or nice headstage. As for soundstage, sometimes the quads sound very monitor-like (and they are that), but at other times there is space, especially where there is string instruments in the background. I can get more a medium concert hall feel than I do with the SM3, which always feels like you're in a studio or in a small jazz club right by the stage. The crossover is very nice in the quads. That's it for now. I need more listening time. In spelling errors or words missing, please forgive me. I'm typing fast trying to answer questions and enjoy the music, among a couple of other chores on the computer. I'll clean this post up later. Oh, so far these things sound wonderful straight out of my ipod classics (latestest generations), nano and my Sony S545 (no eq-ing). It sounded the best with Radiohead and the Police out of the
You're quite welcome @ Region2 and the other guys. That's what we are here for, to share our experiences and opinions. I'll edit and clean up that post later, but I wanted to get some detailed first impressions to my head-fi members as quickly as possible.
These are definitely a bass and mids - focus custom, which gives a lot of weight to the music. For those who prefer the treble and high mids spectrum of music, these might not be for you. That spectrum is there and well represented, and there is neutrality, but the lower end is a focus with these customs. The sound is rich rich rich!! I am loving it!!
You're quite welcome @ Region2 and the other guys. That's what we are here for, to share our experiences and opinions. I'll edit and clean up that post later, but I wanted to get some detailed first impressions to my head-fi members as quickly as possible.
These are definitely a bass and mids - focus custom, which gives a lot of weight to the music. For those who prefer the treble and high mids spectrum of music, these might not be for you. That spectrum is there and well represented, and there is neutrality, but the lower end is a focus with these customs. The sound is rich rich rich!! I am loving it!!
Quote:You're quite welcome @ Region2 and the other guys. That's what we are here for, to share our experiences and opinions. I'll edit and clean up that post later, but I wanted to get some detailed first impressions to my head-fi members as quickly as possible.
These are definitely a bass and mids - focus custom, which gives a lot of weight to the music. For those who prefer the treble and high mids spectrum of music, these might not be for you. That spectrum is there and well represented, and there is neutrality, but the lower end is a focus with these customs. The sound is rich rich rich!! I am loving it!!
So if I am liking the UM3X/SM3, will the treble and high mid on the quad be of same quality or better? Also, I have gotten my TF10 from Amazon and though I find the treble to be excellent, it gets fatiguing after a while. I am trying to understand if the quad is the one that I should go for. Your impression of the mid definitely leaves me wanting to get it more