I agree that the overall tonal balance is absolutely spot on for reference-like with emotion... They're like an SE846 with treble extension and enjoyment.
The timbre for me still sounds a touch more on the BA side than DD, which isn't a problem per se, just something to mention.
The killer for me is the soundstage/imaging. It's lacking and can sound a bit odd at times. It may be my set? (Let's not bring in QC issues) However, after hearing what the IE300 can do soundstage/imaging wise, and they're not known for that, they leave the Timeless standing. My library contains a lot of music requiring good 3D-like stage, so the Timeless are not for me.
Tonality/FR wise though absolutely
The timbre for me still sounds a touch more on the BA side than DD, which isn't a problem per se, just something to mention.
The killer for me is the soundstage/imaging. It's lacking and can sound a bit odd at times. It may be my set? (Let's not bring in QC issues) However, after hearing what the IE300 can do soundstage/imaging wise, and they're not known for that, they leave the Timeless standing. My library contains a lot of music requiring good 3D-like stage, so the Timeless are not for me.
Tonality/FR wise though absolutely
Last edited: