lifebot
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Posts
- 93
- Likes
- 11
Does it really have U shape signature? That is a turn off for me. The OP suggests that it's rather balanced.
Two different inputs so far
Two different inputs so far
Does it really have U shape signature? That is a turn off for me. The OP suggests that it's rather balanced.
Two different inputs so far
Does it really have U shape signature? That is a turn off for me. The OP suggests that it's rather balanced.
Two different inputs so far
+1, luckily my friend is still not convinced that mp4nation is a safe seller so I haven't pay for the r1 yet
One other note here, and it's a biggie:
I wish folks on here would take more time to understand that the terminology they are throwing out here is proper. For instance, I've heard the term "U" shaped twice already...and the R1's aren't at all that way. "U" shaped means that the highs and lows are dominant, with little or no mid range at all...and that's not an accurate description for these. The mids may not be perfect, but they are most certainly present and accounted for with the R1's. Get the terminology straight, please, before you use it, thanks.
All U (or V) really means is that the mids are receeded into the background. That is true of the R1. Heck, I consider the PFE 232 V-shaped myself, the R1 are deeper than the PFEs... Balanced refers to the same idea actually (according to |Joker|) where the IEM needs to boost lows and highs to match the response of the human ear. This is a slight dip in the mids (a little less than the PFE IMO) though.
I too have jumped on the R1 bandwagon. Looking forward to giving these a shot and comparing them to my lowly but lovely Sennheiser CX150s.
Fair enough. I just read waaaaay too much on here where folks give a product a quick and fast label, like "U" or "V" shaped....and it sticks like glue to that product even if it isnt anything like it. It's the reason I don't do too many reviews on here, I dont wan't to make the mistake of labeling something, it's kinda annoying really. Folks should just take the time to explain, in detail, what they are hearing, it's the only way to stop labeling from happening.
As for the R1's, I find the mids to be there, just not as detailed as they could be, but the end result, to me, is that they approach being more balanced than recessed, and that's my take on it. I'm not saying your take is wrong, just different than what I hear.
Balanced, totally balanced. The soundstage is very good, with great range. Highs or lows, either is represented very well because of this.The mids are good, but not as crystal clear as much higher priced IEM's...but for the money, these are simply incredible. So worth the puny price, it's not funny. Try 'em out
I recall you totally labeling these as something, hmm... let me find it.
"Balanced", seems to be the label.
I don't have a problem with people labeling earphones as long as the description fits the actual sound. I know you've been around the mp4nation forum for a long time and I trust your opinion; I think your labeling of the R1 as being balanced to be a public service to those who want to know the signature.
But you're also right when you say people should pay a little more attention to detailed reviews.
I guess I'll find out when I get them. Looking forward to them!
How are these worn? Can someone post a pic of them in the ear?
One other note here, and it's a biggie:
I wish folks on here would take more time to understand that the terminology they are throwing out here is proper. For instance, I've heard the term "U" shaped twice already...and the R1's aren't at all that way. "U" shaped means that the highs and lows are dominant, with little or no mid range at all...and that's not an accurate description for these. The mids may not be perfect, but they are most certainly present and accounted for with the R1's. Get the terminology straight, please, before you use it, thanks.