Do the CX300's have the "Sennheiser Sound"?
Mar 10, 2006 at 6:16 AM Post #31 of 80

LedZeppelin

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Posts
124
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gino
OH, so not as good as the E3C. Now I have an idea where the CX300 stands.


oh, yeah, for sure.. your $$$ is not thrown out for nothing..E3c is worth over 100$(I paid 90$ for E3c from dell.com). IMHO, CX 300 is worth no more than $50-60,
k1000smile.gif
escape~~.
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 6:25 AM Post #32 of 80

BodiesOfLight

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Posts
762
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by nsjong
The CX300's should be better. I mean it's TWICE the firggin' price of a EP630.
confused.gif



Not true. Example: KSC75!
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 6:45 AM Post #34 of 80

incognitoedleon

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 7, 2005
Posts
694
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by Falqon
How does "we don't know and can't control it" translate into yes?

I must say, I would love for the speculation to be true, all of the tests raving about these new headphones will show just how easily bias affects such a subjective review as headphones.



Oops! As the kids say nowadays, my bad!
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 8:23 AM Post #35 of 80

LedZeppelin

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Posts
124
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by BodiesOfLight
Is the extra bass of the EP 630 result in muddier sound compared to the CX300?


No. it makes sound deeper, but not muddier. and no sibilence. it handles high pitch smoothly. hearing the lighting thunder in EP 630 is so enjoyable.. Rhapsody album ' rain of a thousand flames'
orphsmile.gif


I would vote EP 630 as more worthy its 25$ price..
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 8:29 AM Post #36 of 80

BodiesOfLight

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Posts
762
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by LedZeppelin
No. it makes sound deeper, but not muddier. and no sibilence. it handles high pitch smoothly. hearing the lighting thunder in EP 630 is so enjoyable.. Rhapsody album ' rain of a thousand flames'
orphsmile.gif


I would vote EP 630 as more worthy its 25$ price..



Cool, I just ordered some at Amazon for $27 shipped.
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 3:19 PM Post #37 of 80

Falqon

Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Posts
71
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by LedZeppelin
2)EP 630 gets way more bass, yes, I am sure. (Surprise me too.)


Please keep us updated after burn in, I'm kinda weary of "way more bass" than already bassy cx300's!
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 3:27 PM Post #38 of 80

BubbaG

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Posts
10
Likes
0
On one of the CX 300 threads, a poster pasted the email response from a Sennheiser rep. The reply said the IE4's are different and that the CX 300's have better highs and bass and are marketed accordingly.

I have the CX 300's and they sound much better than my Sony 51's and more bass than the Shure 2C's, but, the same good mids and highs as the 2C's. The good thing was they cost half the price as the 2C's and are less awkward due to be smaller, lighter and not having the cable on top of the ears.

The IE4's are the exact same as the MD33's if we go by specs. Yes manufacturers do fudge specs- how many times has someone bought headphones with great specs that sounded like $hit? I have, anyways.

Another thing, I am not noticing much sound difference with the Cx 300's and the Shure 3C's. Perhaps it is due to me listending to MP3's at 192K to 256K and so I am constrained sound wise to pick it up. Regardless, I can safely say that I do not hear over three times the cost worth of sound quality, since the CX 300's are $50 to $60 and the 3C's are around $150 to $180.
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 3:39 PM Post #39 of 80

BubbaG

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Posts
10
Likes
0
In regards to the bass of the CX 300's, I too noticed strong bass, though I reduced the bass boost on my Gmini 402 and they sound very good and without too much bass. From a balance of cost and performance, these are the best portable phones I have used. Of course, this is all subjective, since sound the depends on:

1) What device you use

2) What settings

3) The seal you actually get with your ears

4) The depth the buds are put in the ears

5) The Db level and KB used for the MP3's (if playing MP3's)
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 5:25 PM Post #41 of 80

bpm2000

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 23, 2001
Posts
805
Likes
10
Quote:

Originally Posted by BubbaG

Another thing, I am not noticing much sound difference with the Cx 300's and the Shure 3C's. Perhaps it is due to me listending to MP3's at 192K to 256K and so I am constrained sound wise to pick it up. Regardless, I can safely say that I do not hear over three times the cost worth of sound quality, since the CX 300's are $50 to $60 and the 3C's are around $150 to $180.



I'm not sure why people are throwing around this "not worth 3x the cost, 5x the cost" etc.. The name of the game has always been diminishing returns. If you're willing to go that much further, then so be it.
 
Mar 10, 2006 at 5:49 PM Post #42 of 80

bubsdaddy

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 21, 2003
Posts
1,196
Likes
87
Quote:

3) The seal you actually get with your ears

4) The depth the buds are put in the ears


Could you be a bit more specific about this? I have the e2c's and they have to be inserted pretty far to have any bass. How do the EP630's or CX300's compare in fit? Also, does anyone know if the foamies from the E2c will fit the EP630 for better isolation? Is better isolation even needed or do they isolate almost as well at the E2's anyway?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top