So how is the consensus on the CA16 and the CP800 tips? Is it universally-agreed that the CP800 are more desirable? Because it's not so clear-cut to me.
Okay, so I tried the CP100 tips [for the second or third time], and the CP800. With the CA16.
.
CP100
With the CP100, it did bring the mids forward, as promised, but it felt crude. Like it just propelled the mids right up there and it was kind of harsh, coming from the stock tips. I didn't feel as if it led to real improvement in the tracks I was playing, even if I could discern certain registers more readily.
[I didn't like what it was doing with the soundstage either, making it feel kind of 'circular.']
CP800
With the CP800, there was a more subtle boost of the registers that had been quiet. It definitely made most tracks outside of Pamplemoose sound more 'normal' [less treble-scooped]. But I found that the newfound treble was presently a little harsh, once again. At least compared to the warm bath that is the stock tips.
The CP100/800 insert deeper into my ear, and they are stable. But the stock tips stayed still, also. I don't think we should discount the stock tips so much. If CCA was going for a 'warm bath' sound, the stock tips make sense for that purpose.
With the CP800, tracks like Prince's
"While My Guitar Gently Weeps" seem more "correct" or balanced. In fact, CP800 brings the CA16 closer to the BL-03 on this track, and the BL-03 is generally considered a good performer here. But I can't shake that I find the CA16's sound more 'monitor-like' with the CP800 tips. With Pamplemoose, CP800 looses some of that '
ultra-soft gently-tuned warm bath' perfection the stock tips achieve.
.
Also, getting the CP800 on is not a flawless process. I bent the grille a little in the left earpiece pulling that on, so now it's a little out-of-alignment.