[bangraman]

So guys, I'm girding my loins for the perhaps unwise arrival of the V-MODA Remix and Bass Freq earphones. It'll take a while for them to get here so I've been noodling about with a few other earphones... E2c, CX300, FX55, EX71, 81, 90, etc.


Of those I've been paying particular attention to the CX300 due to the recommendations for them.


Now call me crazy, but the CX300's exhibit exactly the same 'crinkly', shrill trebles as the EX71, have a reduced (but not necessarily much more controlled) bass probably because the vent structure is different, and probably once again because of the difference in that area the staging is closer (and IMO, inferior) compared to the EX71. The CX's are clearly much more efficient though but this is the impression I get when I match levels for both (a tube with a modified Sony mini-mic at the other ends takes care of this for me).


What's the general consensus? Have I missed the 'well they're not really much better than the EX71' threads?

 

[sportsnut]

The Shure tips for the E2c clear or semi flex worked wonders for me. Just checked your profile, wow, by what is listed you will know which works for you. For me the grey ultra flex is a winner for moving about. The Clear ones do the trick for sleeping.

 

[Zephyron]

*snaps*
I think you hit the CX300's treble right in the head.

...At least that's what I think from my very brief experience =P

 

[Ticky]

Thanks dude.... I think you just cured this itch I've been having ever since I found out that Sennheiser came out with a new Semi-IEM earbud.

But, now I have a new itch to get an "entry" level Westone, Ety, or Shure to improve my portable listening.

Say... does anyone happen to know which IEM has the least microphonics? I hate wearing the Ety 4S when I'm out and about because of the amplified "thuds" I keeping getting from the cord bouncing against my shirt. I hear that the newer generation of IEMs have softer cords that could alleviate the condition.

 

[KJ_Palmer]

The EX71s sounded very muddy overall to me and were in the end fairly unlistenable. The CX300s sound much brighter and crisper, especially with the classical music I mostly listen to. Not to mention louder - I now don't need to go above AVLS levels on with Sony MDs etc.

To be honest they (the CX300) seem pretty similar to the Senn MX550, which I also like, but with much better isolation. Tastes vary of course, but they're winners in my book, certainly several cuts above the EX71...

 

[barkas]

Even brighter than the EX71? Those are bright to the point of being shrill.

After using Shure e3c for a week, I really can't bring myself to listen to the EX71 again.

 

[Zephyron]

From what I recall, that's true =)

But the feel of the treble signature of the CX300 (to me that is) is very reminiscent of the EX71 though in a way, I felt that it was more open, contrary to what bangraman says about it being closer.

I think source and blah and what not may play a role though?

 

[bangraman]

The 71's don't so much 'burn-in' as 'burn-out'. They go from the similar sharpness that I'm experiencing with the CX300 and degrade fairly rapidly (and exactly how fast this happens depends I'm sure on a number of things) to muddiness over time. It does seem to affect a large number of EX71 users. But then until recently they were almost the only game in town so who knows, there might be similar stories with other phones.


So I take no chances as far as comparisons withe the EX71's and compare like for like. I grabbed yet another fresh pair of EX71's last week. Ah... gotta love those trebles. They just drill through that earwax like miniature needles straight into the teeth-edge-setting centre of the brain

Source might play an issue. Static tests / burn-in are being run on headphone socket of the below, portable tests on the Samsung YP-Z5, Sansa E250 for now. The perception might be different between you and me as I'm comparing phones on a level playing field (i.e. at the same effective volume) when static.

It's just that after all the praise, I was quite surprised to hear considerably more of the EX71 than I wanted to in the CX300. At the moment, I give the thumbs up (slightly) to the JVC FX55 over the CX200 for being more realistic with the capability of the drivers. Interestingly Sony's in-ears shipped with the W800i (which I tried on a hunch) also have a hint of the FX55's about them rather than the EX71 or the CX300 .But anyway, honestly speaking I have to do much more listening in realistic situations as well as matched.


And of course the real question is, just how much of the V-Modas are marketing Bull**** allied to a slightly tweaked OEM product, and how much of it is actually unique? I'm (sort of) looking forward to finding out.

 

[Zephyron]

Your test equipments are frightening o.O

I see the new EX90, CX300, Shure E2, CX300 amongst the fray.

Any initial impressions about how the EX90 sounds?

EDIT:
Yeah, the V-Modas are looking interesting, quite curious as well.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zephyron Your test equipments are frightening o.O I see the new EX90, CX300, Shure E2, CX300 amongst the fray. Any initial impressions about how the EX90 sounds? EDIT: Yeah, the V-Modas are looking interesting, quite curious as well.

My guess is that they are OEM'd and the specs are somehow fudged, but V-Moda is claiming different drivers (including different diameters) to these other low-cost IEM's. The website and the way it's been made visible in the iPod community basically stinks of the dot-bomb marketing bullcrappers I used to barely tolerate until five years ago so excuse me for not being hyper-enthusiastic about the product

The EX90? Well first and foremost... near-zero isolation. The open-backed Qualia 010 has more

I'm not making my mind up about the sound of this in a hurry because first impressions are rather underwhelming given the isolation performance of the phones. Will play with fit, etc before saying much more. I'm also going to get a new one as this one has been gathering dust since just after the launch of the product. At the moment the EX90 strikes me as practically an E2c with no isolation.

 

[Dr.Sade]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJ_Palmer The EX71s sounded very muddy overall to me and were in the end fairly unlistenable. The CX300s sound much brighter and crisper, especially with the classical music I mostly listen to. Not to mention louder - I now don't need to go above AVLS levels on with Sony MDs etc. To be honest they (the CX300) seem pretty similar to the Senn MX550, which I also like, but with much better isolation. Tastes vary of course, but they're winners in my book, certainly several cuts above the EX71...

The Sony EX71 sounds muddy to many people because they don't remove the paper filter from the tube tip; they think the filter is the driver. You'll see that the EX71 driver is behind a mesh metal screen once the filter is removed. The CX300 doesn't have a filter on the tube tip. However both the CX300 and the EX1 have a boosted (extended?) treble and may sound harsh on some unamped portable players. If you want a smooth slightly
warm sound on cheap players neither the CX300 nor EX71 will give you this.

 

[kramer5150]

My EX90 impressions here...
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=181293

IMHO the EX90 sonically is a little better than an unmodded e2c.... more treble and better at resolving details. Although e2c bass is more bloated.

 

[bangraman]

It is a little better than the E2c undoubtedly, but for the practical advantages that the EX90 leaves out it should be a hell of a lot better IMO. Anyway, get to the EX90 later... CX300 talk for now