[buffalowings]

Quote:

they sound pretty decent especially for $30
 
feel bad for the suckers who paid $140 retail though 

oh yeah.....

 

[straden]

I just received this and used it on fuze without an amp, oh boy sound is soooo tiny. is this meant to be used with amp?
I mean it looks very portable and figured this would be like IEM.
Even at maxed volume, sound is soooo weak.
I have to look into returning this thing as I don't plan to use amp on the go for while.
If anyone wants this for 30 bucks let me know.

 

[jant71]

No, they are as good as the P372 but not as good as the SQ5. I think it safe to say that they are for the neutral crowd.

 

[shnitz]

By weak, do you mean low in volume, or lacking in the spectrum somewhere?  Mine are definitely very neutral, but I think they sound alright.  I do think that they're heavily overpriced at their $120+ list price, but they seem very competitive here.

 

[bilditup1]

I bought these from the musicians friend, and have been breaking them in a bit. They're better than when I got them, but still kind of tinny. Just to make sure I wasn't crazy (because I haven't done a lot of headphone listening recently that wasn't my IEM), switched off with my Grado SR-60. They sound very, very clear, to be sure, but aren't exactly 'analytical' like my MDR-V6's are. They're still 'warmer' than those phones, yeah (which isn't hard to do) but...I dunno, it's like I'm not there. They're not exactly bad, just different - they made me notice some minor sibilance on the SR60s that I hadn't noticed before. But I still don't like 'em that much. I think it's the bass, and the fact of the headphones being closed - kill the sense of space. I'ma try to break them in a bit more before trying to make a final verdict.
 
Build quality isn't great, but I don't think I've ever bought a phone with really solid build quality - such a thing probably doesn't exist below $100, which is all I've ever paid for phones.

 

[bilditup1]

As others have said - this thing needs to be amped with portable equipment. At 0db on my rockboxed Fuze, these cans are moderately loud, and even quiet for some sources!
Sound is definitely improving after more break-in...and there's still more to go...
 
EDIT: I just realized that I had the attenuator on the damn thing all the way down. Still difficult to drive, but not much more so than others in its class imho. Ugh, this was a dumb 4am statement, sorry!

 

[xtasi]

I have to agree.  Its a more neutral sounding headphone.  I guess this is what dry sounds like...Now I know I dislike dry sounding headphones .
 
If I do bass booster they sound pretty good though.  For $30, these are awesome.  Past $60, I wouldn't buy these.

 

[tdockweiler]

It's funny how with the k430 you need a bass booster and on the k420 I need a bass reducer! I have both and it's amazing how much better the k420 is. I'm trying to sell my k430 on the FS forum, but I may just end up returning them since nobody wants them.
 
Quote:

 
If I do bass booster they sound pretty good though.  For $30, these are awesome.  Past $60, I wouldn't buy these.

 

[jant71]

They are dry like some of there big brothers like the K401/K501. Miniature version of that sound. Big soundstage, well separated, transparent mids, fairly accurate tone. Easy to pick things out and follow them. Not as dynamic or effortless like there bigger brother's are. Nor as refined/technically able. Could use a warm amp to give more body for some peoples' taste. I am fine straight out of my S639 with nearly the same EQ as the Ety MC5.
 
The similarities to the PX200-II show they are competing models. They even improved in a similarly way with burn-in. Both added detail/texture in the bass and mids, the bass separated out, and the treble tone improved a bit. They both became more transparent to a similar degree. Both are too bass light on flat EQ though the quality of the bass is quite good.
 
Like the low bass extension, the imaging, and the separation.
 
 I have a loaner IE7 which tries to be an open phone and fairly neutral sounding. I am glad I bought the K430 and the IE7 was a loaner. If I had bought the IE7 and been loaned the K430, I would not be happy. The K430 has better mids, is bigger and more open sounding. I feel the K430 is a bit better. Both are overpriced at MSRP prices.
 

 

[buffalowings]

Quote:

They are dry like some of there big brothers like the K401/K501. Miniature version of that sound. Big soundstage, well separated, transparent mids, fairly accurate tone. Easy to pick things out and follow them. Not as dynamic or effortless like there bigger brother's are. Nor as refined/technically able. Could use a warm amp to give more body for some peoples' taste. I am fine straight out of my S639 with nearly the same EQ as the Ety MC5.
 
The similarities to the PX200-II show they are competing models. They even improved in a similarly way with burn-in. Both added detail/texture in the bass and mids, the bass separated out, and the treble tone improved a bit. They both became more transparent to a similar degree. Both are too bass light on flat EQ though the quality of the bass is quite good.
 
Like the low bass extension, the imaging, and the separation.
 
 I have a loaner IE7 which tries to be an open phone and fairly neutral sounding. I am glad I bought the K430 and the IE7 was a loaner. If I had bought the IE7 and been loaned the K430, I would not be happy. The K430 has better mids, is bigger and more open sounding. I feel the K430 is a bit better. Both are overpriced at MSRP prices.
 

IE7 is the lesser of the two?!?!?...they can't compare with my westone 3's but what can you expect at 10 times less than the price of the westones

 

[jant71]

The IE7 was not as good as the W2 let alone the W3. No top tiers need be worried

! Totally different form factors anyway. Just something I noticed.

 

[buffalowings]

Quote:

The IE7 was not as good as the W2 let alone the W3. No top tiers need be worried

! Totally different formed factors anyway. Just something I noticed.

purchasing lower tier headphones alway makes me feel good....(rubs belly)

 

[bilditup1]

After two more days of break-in with dweaver's file (the one that starts with brown noise) and some minor eqing on the low-end, these are much more pleasant to my ears. The clarity is sometimes hauntingly good, with brass especially, but some things that would otherwise really send shivers down my spine come across as bland - attacks on string instruments for example. Not a jaw-droppingly good value, but an OK entry-level phone that stows nicely. Nobody should ever pay more than $20-$30 for one of these though, considering the downsides (feels cheap, needs eq, fits small on the ears, ears get warm after a while), and I would point them toward the Porta-Pros or something like that instead.

 

[buffalowings]

Quote:

After two more days of break-in with dweaver's file (the one that starts with brown noise) and some minor eqing on the low-end, these are much more pleasant to my ears. The clarity is sometimes hauntingly good, with brass especially, but some things that would otherwise really send shivers down my spine come across as bland - attacks on string instruments for example. Not a jaw-droppingly good value, but an OK entry-level phone that stows nicely. Nobody should ever pay more than $20-$30 for one of these though, considering the downsides (feels cheap, needs eq, fits small on the ears, ears get warm after a while), and I would point them toward the Porta-Pros or something like that instead.

the sound SQ is improved when they're amped (I used a total airhead)the clarity is good, but IMO they seem a bit grainy as well, could use a smoother presentation

 

[xtasi]

Changed the title.
 
I would much rather prefer a smoother, more lush mid presentation, but these are still fine.  I sometimes feel that its missing a lot of warmth...or maybe its just mid-bass.  I don't know, but without that warmth/mid-bass I can hear a lot more details.  A bit of a trade-off coming from my previous basshead cans.
 
BTW tdock, I apologize that you didn't like the K430.  Feel bad that you wasted $30.