Bowers & Wilkins in-ear headphones = C5
Jul 11, 2011 at 4:16 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 121

vinnievidi

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Posts
828
Likes
26

 
 
 
From Macnn.com:
 
"The in-ear headphones are tailored to runners with a new 'secure loop' that should keep the buds in an ideal position rather than gradually slip out. Even the weighting, made of tungsten, is designed to keep the design comfortable by balancing them towards the head rather than away from it, the company said.
 
A micro porous filter helps recreate some of the effect of open speakers by diffusing the sound even as it cuts back on the amount of outside noise getting in. The C5s have a wide 10Hz to 20kHz frequency range, a 32ohm impedance, and a 118dB signal to noise ratio. Bowers & Wilkins, as a regular iOS supporter, has built in an in-line mic and remote so iPad, iPhone and newer iPod touch owners can make calls or steer tracks.

So far announced in the UK, the C5s are due to reach the country in August for £150 ($239). An American launch isn't yet public, but most of Bowers & Wilkins' audio equipment reaches the US."
 
 
Maybe now they will come out with a set of full-sized audiophile headphones. 
 
 
Here's a link to B&W's official page:
http://bowers-wilkins.aiprx.com/Headphones/Headphones/C5/overview.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Jul 11, 2011 at 5:26 PM Post #2 of 121

rovex

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
169
Likes
13
I expected B and W to expand their range, no surprises here. having said that, I thought they would release a reference headphone by now or a circumaural portable can alongside the p5.
 
Jul 11, 2011 at 5:30 PM Post #3 of 121

vinnievidi

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Posts
828
Likes
26
That was my hope, too.  I liked the P5, though not enough to keep them.  It's not surprising that they went with IEMs though--it's a larger and more lucrative market. 
 
Jul 11, 2011 at 5:34 PM Post #4 of 121

rovex

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
169
Likes
13
And that's what I fear, I can actually imagine these being bass monsters seeing as that's what the Apple people equate as decent these days and what's more being aimed toward runners leaves me with scepticism.
 
Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20 PM Post #5 of 121

vinnievidi

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Posts
828
Likes
26
My guess (which probably means nothing at this moment) is that they will try to squeeze the sound of the P5 into the C5. Anyway, you're probably right that they will probably go for a more mainstream sound signature that matches the performance of the iPhone/iPod.
 
Jul 11, 2011 at 11:46 PM Post #6 of 121
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Posts
854
Likes
56
They look nice. Who knows? They may be the next FOTM.
redface.gif

 
Jul 12, 2011 at 8:51 AM Post #7 of 121

digital analog

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Posts
31
Likes
30
in the overview says
 
 
[tr] [td]
Technical features​
[/td] [td]
Secure Loop design
Micro Porous Filter
Neodymium magnets
CCAW coil
Ultra light 9um thick diaphragm
Transparent twisted cable (OFC)
iPhone compatible remote control
 
Whatever we make, the goal is the same: the most natural, realistic sound possible. With C5, you can take true sound with you wherever you go. C5 is a mixture of long-held acoustic principles and technological advances, key among which is the Micro Porous Filter. This acts a diffuser, enabling C5 to deliver pristine, natural audio, while also providing a more spacious performance than previously possible from in-ear headphones. Together with C5’s noise-isolating design, this allows users to lose themselves in flawless audio.
 
 
 
 
 
It doesnt like a bass head in-ear, especially because of a these micro porous filter, but the presence of a dynamic driver instead of a BA dont give me confidence to believe in a "most natural, realistic sound possible"........
[/td]
[/tr]

 
 
Jul 12, 2011 at 9:17 AM Post #9 of 121

rovex

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Posts
169
Likes
13
If there's one thing they've learned, unless my eyes are deceiving me, is the thicker (OFC) cable on the C5 which was a hot topic of discussion with regards to the P5's embarrassingly thin cable.
 
Jul 12, 2011 at 11:18 AM Post #10 of 121

vinnievidi

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Posts
828
Likes
26
I think it's hard to tell.  The wire does look beefier in the image, but it may be because the driver enclosure is so small in comparison to the P5.  It may end up being the same thickness as the P5, seeing as there is a focus on active wearers.  
 
As for the sound, it is almost irrelevant at this point in speculating on the sound until someone in the UK bites the bullet, buys a pair, and reports back. B&W's marketing literature for the P5 said that it was a natural sounding headphone--which it is not exactly the case.  
 
 
 
Jul 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM Post #11 of 121

xtasi

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 15, 2010
Posts
326
Likes
17


Quote:
If there's one thing they've learned, unless my eyes are deceiving me, is the thicker (OFC) cable on the C5 which was a hot topic of discussion with regards to the P5's embarrassingly thin cable.



I have to disagree.  It looks to me like the thicker part is the memory cable.  If you keep on looking, you'll see the cable thins out after the black part, and that to me looks pretty thin.
 
Jul 18, 2011 at 5:31 PM Post #12 of 121

jmvdigital

New Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Posts
26
Likes
0
Having owned several sets of B&W loudspeakers over the years, I'm interested to see what kind of reviews these get and how they sound. Selling off my Denon D5000s and Meier DAC/amp combo to simplify. Tough shoes to fill with that setup though. 
 
Jul 27, 2011 at 3:16 PM Post #14 of 121

tinyman392

Be nice to noobs, we were all noobs at one point in our life.
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Posts
8,487
Likes
1,479
I just got a pair on the mail today :)  First [short]impressions
 
Bass
Overpowering beyond belief.  The bass is impactful, but borderline muddy and does intrude into the mids a bit.  I really hope that this settles down with burn in.
 
Mids
Recessed compared to the lows.  Somewhat overpowered by the bass, otherwise, timbre isn't the best; it's passable, not great though.  The mids are thicker but lack sweetness.  It really makes me miss all the mids in all my favorite songs.  The mids just didn't make it for me. 
 
Highs
More leveled with the lows (but bass still dominates), so gives the V-shaped sound to them.  The highs have some sparkle, and don't decay too quickly.  It's not harsh at all though, which is a plus.  Details and clarity are both missing here though.  Like the mids, they can still be dominated by the bass.
 
Right now I'm not enjoying these too much, they are passable.  I really hope that burning these suckers in will smoothen them out as these are just way out control right now. 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top