[SyCo87]

Ugh....I think I might have a problem with my right earpiece. It has a light static sound that I hear once songs get less busy. Anyone else have this problem?

 

[tomscy2000]

  EDIT: I was hoping there was more of a difference between the ATH-CKS77 and the ATH-IM50 as people in the thread suggested, but they're pretty close. Upon further inspecting, the IM50 has nearly if not more bass and it seems to be more crisp then the ATH-CKS77 (SUPERBASS) which has it's price reduced to 40 from 110 (correctly). I favor the replaceable cable, the look, the fit, and the response of the IM50. I'm not quite as blown away as other people have been in this thread, as the CKS77 are still a steal as well... Still IM50.. well worth it.

 
I actually find it more impressive when the bass is EQed down. There's a smoothness of timbre and linearity to the mid-high and treble response that just doesn't occur with IEMs in this price range. The IM50 isn't a giant-killer, but it's very well-rounded, and far better rounded than any of ATH's previous <$100 offerings.
 

  IMHO, the UE900 sounded a lot better to me than the IM04. They are more comfortable and look nicer as well I think. IM03 was a bit more bass forward like the W3. I had a chance to test the IM03 and IM04 two weeks ago and I don't remember being too impressed looking at how much they were being priced at.

 
In which way(s) do(es) the UE900 sound better than the IM04? Personally, I find the IM04 quite impressive on a technical level, and I usually nitpick about technicalities. FWIW, the two have fairly different target response curves, so it could be a subjective preference. The IM04 could use a bass shelf drop to sound "tighter", but I can't find too much else to nitpick about it. The UE900 probably has the edge on it in terms of distortion, though. For bass, the UE900 has that pinhole thing, which makes it sound quite different. A brand new UE900 has a lot more bass than one that has been used and has some minor gunk in the pinhole.
 
With respect to fit, it could go both ways. I find that the IM04 shape fits my ears better than the UE900 does, which I could never get a good fit with except with third-party tips. For the cables, the UE900's cable braid/material is better overall for longevity and ergonomics, but the MMCX connector is failure prone. The ATH connector may be proprietary, but it seems well-conceived.
 
The UE900 is definitely the better value, but I wouldn't peg it as having better sound quality.

 

[MelloWatic]

Is the IM70 or IM50 more suitable for sound monitoring? Why?

 

[Kukyo]

  Is the IM70 or IM50 more suitable for sound monitoring? Why?

So far i've used the IM70 for monitoring at work (Broadcasting) and it does a pretty decent job at it. It is suitable for monitoring, but there's better options for professional use (like the 7506). They have, to my ears, similar responses, either at work, or just using my DX50 as a source. I still prefer the IM70's right now, there's a heat wave going on here, and IEM's are more comfortable than Full Sizes.

 

[MelloWatic]

 
So far i've used the IM70 for monitoring at work (Broadcasting) and it does a pretty decent job at it. It is suitable for monitoring, but there's better options for professional use (like the 7506). They have, to my ears, similar responses, either at work, or just using my DX50 as a source. I still prefer the IM70's right now, there's a heat wave going on here, and IEM's are more comfortable than Full Sizes.

 
Well, the monitoring I planned do is quite basic.
 
Do you feel that the bass over-powers the mids and highs, or it bleed into the mids?
 
Oh, and I noticed that you have a Sansa Clip+. How's the sound when using it with the IM70?

 

[Kukyo]

   
Well, the monitoring I planned do is quite basic.
 
Do you feel that the bass over-powers the mids and highs, or it bleed into the mids?
 
Oh, and I noticed that you have a Sansa Clip+. How's the sound when using it with the IM70?

Not really, it has really even response, and almost no bleed through the range. I liked the response when using them with a UWP-V1 Wireless Lavalier (i was using the URX-P2 receiver for monitoring, the source was a Shure FP33 HO connected to the Transmitter), but i still prefer them for casual listening. They have great resolution for direct sound monitoring, but i prefer the HD25's for that job (despite having 86° F average...).

I'll test with the Clip+, i don't have it now since i gave it to my gf and i'm using solely the DX50, and might edit my appreciations regarding the sound response.

 

[urtv]

So when is AT going to offer their own CIEM?

 

[jonyoo]

   
I actually find it more impressive when the bass is EQed down. There's a smoothness of timbre and linearity to the mid-high and treble response that just doesn't occur with IEMs in this price range. The IM50 isn't a giant-killer, but it's very well-rounded, and far better rounded than any of ATH's previous <$100 offerings.
 
 
In which way(s) do(es) the UE900 sound better than the IM04? Personally, I find the IM04 quite impressive on a technical level, and I usually nitpick about technicalities. FWIW, the two have fairly different target response curves, so it could be a subjective preference. The IM04 could use a bass shelf drop to sound "tighter", but I can't find too much else to nitpick about it. The UE900 probably has the edge on it in terms of distortion, though. For bass, the UE900 has that pinhole thing, which makes it sound quite different. A brand new UE900 has a lot more bass than one that has been used and has some minor gunk in the pinhole.
 
With respect to fit, it could go both ways. I find that the IM04 shape fits my ears better than the UE900 does, which I could never get a good fit with except with third-party tips. For the cables, the UE900's cable braid/material is better overall for longevity and ergonomics, but the MMCX connector is failure prone. The ATH connector may be proprietary, but it seems well-conceived.
 
The UE900 is definitely the better value, but I wouldn't peg it as having better sound quality.

Yes, this was a subjective preference. To me the mid to high range sounded kind of "cheap." My first impression from just looking at the earphone itself might have influenced this opinion just a little bit as it felt and looked cheap as well. I try my best not to judge IEMs on looks as it really should have no relevance (own the SM64 and it looks like a cheap piece of junk made from pure cheap plastic but sounds amazing). I just don't remember the IM03 or the IM04 sounding up to what it's priced for (a lot of overpriced stuff here in Korea compared to the US or UK). Was not too fond of the earguides and cables as well.

 

[MelloWatic]

I'll test with the Clip+, i don't have it now since i gave it to my gf and i'm using solely the DX50, and might edit my appreciations regarding the sound response.

 
Looking forward to the test with Clip+

.

 

[daveatx]

I was hoping there was more of a difference between the ATH-CKS77 and the ATH-IM50 as people in the thread suggested, but they're pretty close. Upon further inspecting, the IM50 has nearly if not more bass and it seems to be more crisp then the ATH-CKS77 (SUPERBASS) which has it's price reduced to 40 from 110 (correctly).

I favor the replaceable cable, the look, the fit, and the response of the IM50. I'm not quite as blown away as other people have been in this thread, as the CKS77 are still a steal as well... Still IM50.. well worth it.

   
I actually find it more impressive when the bass is EQed down. There's a smoothness of timbre and linearity to the mid-high and treble response that just doesn't occur with IEMs in this price range. The IM50 isn't a giant-killer, but it's very well-rounded, and far better rounded than any of ATH's previous <$100 offerings.
 

 
So I took your advice, eq'd the bass down and I think I'm coming around. It was just minutes ago that I was checking the room, looking over my shoulder for a weird noise. Turns out I found a new instrument in one of the songs I listen to regularly :/.. It seems to be a muted bongo in a bass line on the upbeats. I would definitely say that the ATH-IM50 has more clarity then what i was used to... No doubt about it. 

 

[germanturkey]

so any comparisons to the ck10 or ck100?  the expectations started high for this series, but it seems its pretty quickly been brought down to reality.

 

[vlenbo]

  so any comparisons to the ck10 or ck100?  the expectations started high for this series, but it seems its pretty quickly been brought down to reality.

once I get my ck10s back, I'll be able to compare and review the im-02s.
 
For now, have a nice read on the comparison between the ck100pro and the im-02s from the hardware forums.
 
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/headphones-earphones-portable-media-devices-314/audio-technica-appreciation-thread-4032318-51.html
 
read the quoted post.
 
There is a comment that the im-03s are the successor of the ck100pros.
They are basically the same thing, but a bit improved and refined.
 
im-04 is entirely different from At's original ba lineup.
 
If you meant a comparison between the im-50s and im-70s, then I wish I could tell you, but maybe this forum might have information you are looking for.

 

[buihia]

Issit just me or the clarity On the im02 is much higher than im03 for vocals?

 

[vlenbo]

Issit just me or the clarity On the im02 is much higher than im03 for vocals?

sharper, transparent, closer to your face?

 

[buihia]

Yes, and it seems that im03 has a very very slight veil compared to the im02