[high-fidelity]

Which is better surely ? IE800 or SE846 ? I'm so curious about 846. I currently have IE800.

 

[dleblanc343]

I much preferred the SE846 to the IE800, and I thought the IE800's were great but realized they're not incredible vs other top flight universals with time.

 

[high-fidelity]

  I much preferred the SE846 to the IE800, and I thought the IE800's were great but realized they're not incredible vs other top flight universals with time.

Is 846 incredible ? 

 

[mark_h]

 
Good write up, disappointing price £949 in uk?!

 

[dleblanc343]

Is 846 incredible ? 

They're my favorite universal, so yes

 

[high-fidelity]

They're my favorite universal, so yes

Thanks for feedback.I wanna buy 846 so much.And I will compare with IE800.And which one is better,it will be stay with me.

 And I will sell it other one. 

 

 

[AGB100]

Thank you for the very thorough review. May I say that many on these forums prefer elevated highs which, in some cases, appear to provide more details or microdynamics - whichever way they express it. One cannot help but be concerned about losses they report in their hearing that is validated by their preferences. Those with severely damaged hearing are likely to be the first to object to my noticing. I'm referring to those who only listen to studio, metal or electronic music v. acoustic music, voices and instruments, recorded in real spaces. I believe that one cannot tell anything about high end components not knowing the sound of the live in various - many - rooms. If one cannot tell apart the differences between one violin v. another, or one Steinway piano vis-a-vis another, one cannot tell much about components other than bloviating personal opinions. Then you have others who cannot afford a product and try to diminish it for that very transparent reason. Usually, not always, there is a reason for the prices and Shure was never a company to overcharge...too many others do exactly that.
 
Your review however appears accurate, as I do have Audeze and the Shure 535 here; again, it is useful and thanks for going through the trouble.
 
These comments btw, not that any of it matters much in these forums, come from a former professional rock n' roller who also studied serious music and worked in a recording studio.  The company Shure is an old one and is highly respected in the pro community for good reasons: manufacturing products with the kind of accurate response pros demand.

 

[Scorpiolol]

IMO 846's bass has improved a lot... but still sounds a little bit unreal for me... 

 

[dleblanc343]

  Thank you for the very thorough review. May I say that many on these forums prefer elevated highs which, in some cases, appear to provide more details or microdynamics - whichever way they express it. One cannot help but be concerned about losses they report in their hearing that is validated by their preferences. Those with severely damaged hearing are likely to be the first to object to my noticing. I'm referring to those who only listen to studio, metal or electronic music v. acoustic music, voices and instruments, recorded in real spaces. I believe that one cannot tell anything about high end components not knowing the sound of the live in various - many - rooms. If one cannot tell apart the differences between one violin v. another, or one Steinway piano vis-a-vis another, one cannot tell much about components other than bloviating personal opinions. Then you have others who cannot afford a product and try to diminish it for that very transparent reason. Usually, not always, there is a reason for the prices and Shure was never a company to overcharge...too many others do exactly that.
 
Your review however appears accurate, as I do have Audeze and the Shure 535 here; again, it is useful and thanks for going through the trouble.
 
These comments btw, not that any of it matters much in these forums, come from a former professional rock n' roller who also studied serious music and worked in a recording studio.  The company Shure is an old one and is highly respected in the pro community for good reasons: manufacturing products with the kind of accurate response pros demand.

Hi there, thanks for your feedback. I am a very critical listener at times, but my #1 process when doing a critique is always to compare to what I deem a natural reproduction of sound. I know what almost all instruments sound like as I am a musician and have many friends who are as well; and I am fortunate for that.
 
My hearing is also very good, as I take care of my ears. I would say that I enjoy a more forward sound in general than a laid-back one, but will always prefer the best of both worlds, something more cohesive. 
 
That's why I prefer the SE846 to the K3003i, albeit being more rolled off in the highs and thicker in the lows/low-mids... because in this case, it's the AKG which is a tad bit overdone in the highs that takes away from what I prefer.

 

[koub78]

Excellent review !
I have both earphones and have the same feelings than dleblanc343.
To be honnest, as I'm a kind of "analytic listener", I do prefer the AKG when recordings are really perfect. Else, the shure sounds better.
For me there are only 2 issues with the AKG :
1/ non removable wires = you have to take care of it or you will spend a lot of money and a lot of time to get it repaired
2/ very detailed = all bad MP3 encoding or low bandwidht streaming radio will sound really bad
 
(by the way sorry for my English... I'm French and I don't have the appropriate wording)
 
Still, when recordings are perfect, the AKG sounds more subtle, more neutral, sounds a little bit better (my opinion of course...)
 
Nevertheless both are really good and even better than the molded earsonics EM3Pro I had few years ago.
 
By the way... looking for some money, I will sell my K3003. Complete package, perfect condition, still under guarantee (until May 2014)
You can try it in Paris where I live and I can send it via DHL or any other express shipping company...
My mail : ka75 @ gmx . net
 
Thanks again for that perfect review and for hesitating buyers I'd say that both devices are worth spending the money on it if you can afford...

 

[Lukalop]

May I ask where on earth you find 24/192kbps music from? + since I mainly use spotify and 360kbps if I were to either of these would the music sound bad? Or is the difference negligible?

Many thanks.

 

[Takeanidea]

Have a listen yourself to a version from spotify and test it against a lossless format such as wav or flac or alac of the same mix of the same recording you are listening to on spotify. If you can hear a difference over several listens then it might be beneficial for you to explore HDTRACKS.COM or some such outlet

 

[azureaura]

Trying to get used to the treble on drum and bass. Great layering though, you can hear what is going on all the time. A neutral to slightly cool presentation imo. Lol at the high filter on these, one for treble diehards?

 

[Aero Dynamik]

May I ask where on earth you find 24/192kbps music from? + since I mainly use spotify and 360kbps if I were to either of these would the music sound bad? Or is the difference negligible?

Many thanks.

I think a good start for anyone to explore whether lossy vs. lossless has any significant importance to you is the Philips Golden Ears challenge. On the "Silver Ears" level you'll find a challenge named "Details - MP3 Artefacts". The toughest test in that challenge is to be able to identify a 128 Kbps MP3. For me (and several others) that was the toughest challenge to finally be able to get my Philips Golden Ears. So, I've decided to stick to 160 Kbps AAC files on my iDevices. It works really well for me as no matter how much I focus or what gear I use it's impossible for me to tell the difference between 160 Kbps AAC and lossless. Of course YMMV, so take your time to investigate it.

BTW, here is some interesting reading from an article:

“I discovered he just imported his entire 2,000 CD collection into iTunes at 160 kbs AAC VBR, and then gave away his CDs.”

The complete article here.

 

[johnwu]

I think a good start for anyone to explore whether lossy vs. lossless has any significant importance to you is the Philips Golden Ears challenge. On the "Silver Ears" level you'll find a challenge named "Details - MP3 Artefacts". The toughest test in that challenge is to be able to identify a 128 Kbps MP3. For me (and several others) that was the toughest challenge to finally be able to get my Philips Golden Ears. So, I've decided to stick to 160 Kbps AAC files on my iDevices. It works really well for me as no matter how much I focus or what gear I use it's impossible for me to tell the difference between 160 Kbps AAC and lossless. Of course YMMV, so take your time to investigate it.


BTW, here is some interesting reading from an article:

“I discovered he just imported his entire 2,000 CD collection into iTunes at 160 kbs AAC VBR, and then gave away his CDs.”


The complete article here.

Thanks for sharing the article.

I have to say, I agree with the authour's view regarding the difference between music lovers and audiophiles.