[sneaglebob]

I notice that in the cnet review of the klipsch image s4 they have given it a rating of 10 out of 10 for performance, which I have never seen before. But to me it does not sound as good as they say, as it is extremely sibilant and the trebles are distorted. I don't see anything deserving a 10 out of 10 in them. What do you think?

 

[Anaxilus]

I think you should stop caring what cnet has to say.
 
And no, sibilance is never mistaken for SQ.  Never ever ran across that idea b4.

 

[Matt head 777]

I owned the klipsch s4, they were pretty good but one of the drivers decided to vibrate, lose bass, die etc
 
yeah I recall they had a funny sibilance, that means poor quality UNLESS you like it, I didn't lol. But it wasn't a painful or harsh sibilance with the S4.
 
Sibilance generally colours the sound in my definition it sounds unnatural, but in some cases may even have a nice effect...

 

[Spyro]

Yes they do.
 
I remember my very first better than average (cough, cough) IEM was the Sony EX71 at $40.  I was amazed at the treble detail only to find out later it is a crappy siblance monster.  Hurt my ears at higher volumes.  UE Super Fi Pro was another.  Fit can certainly be a factor but you get what you pay for.

 

[sneaglebob]

I completely agree, it's hard to tell if cnet or most  head fiers have more experience
Quote:

Yes they do.
 
I remember my very first better than average (cough, cough) IEM was the Sony EX71 at $40.  I was amazed at the treble detail only to find out later it is a crappy siblance monster.  Hurt my ears at higher volumes.  UE Super Fi Pro was another.  Fit can certainly be a factor but you get what you pay for.

 

 

[bellsprout]

There are cases where the addition of some kinds of distortion, artifacts, unnatural decay, etc causes the sound to be perceived as more detailed or natural, but sibilance always sounds bad.