You can try or get them at Zepplin and Co.
I think they have full range of Acoustune for testing and local distributor. It comes with default 3.5mm cable, you can try/buy extra balanced cable from them too.
I would suggest you try different songs and song type.
The soundstage might be big or small depending on songs and recording.
Generally the vocal is more forward.
Its highly detailed on my setup with WM1A.
You can try or get them at Zepplin and Co.
I think they have full range of Acoustune for testing and local distributor. It comes with default 3.5mm cable, you can try/buy extra balanced cable from them too.
I would suggest you try different songs and song type.
The soundstage might be big or small depending on songs and recording.
Generally the vocal is more forward.
Its highly detailed on my setup with WM1A.
I was using CA Andromeda, 1551 is what gets me in to Acoustune, love the tonality and bass.
Then i went to 1650 which i still crave my 1551 tonality but here i got more details.
Then when my 1650 sent for repair i tried 1695 and i got hooked, it has the lows, good speed, great details and highs. It somehow stopped my craving for IEMS.
I was using CA Andromeda, 1551 is what gets me in to Acoustune, love the tonality and bass.
Then i went to 1650 which i still crave my 1551 tonality but here i got more details.
Then when my 1650 sent for repair i tried 1695 and i got hooked, it has the lows, good speed, great details and highs. It somehow stopped my craving for IEMS.
same man , i had doubts about acoustune's newest releases after i tried 1670 , which was a bit shrill and leaner than what i expected .
But then my friend bought this yellow titanium friendo and i tried it....it really grew on me . Funny thing is we hosted a local IEM meeting but my friend and i were the only persons enjoyed this IEM.
Some online impressions 1695 vs 1697 according some audio facebook page.
1697 is more refined, better resolution, layering and width than 1695
1697 has lesser low mids than 1695
1697 sounds thinner than 1695.
1697 is extremely neutral and balanced.
Hey man , how was the 1677 , especially when compared to the original 1670?
To me , 1670 was a good iem , but a bit sharp and shrill in the upper frequency range.
Hey man , how was the 1677 , especially when compared to the original 1670?
To me , 1670 was a good iem , but a bit sharp and shrill in the upper frequency range.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.