[KuroKitsu]

I'd have to agree with the sentiment that the Hero is nowhere near agressive (thats the Valk). Lively seems like a better descriptor.

The HK reviews were the ones that called it agressive. So I would echo @CL14715 of what volume are people listening at. Personally I used low gain at 5 on the 1A (Also stated on my review on another thread).

 

[Barra]

What DAP are you using it with? We can maybe start to build a reference for which ones don’t work. Their sales info states that it won’t work with Sony DAPs, so we know not to buy it for those, if you’re is Sony it would explain it but if it’s a different type then let us know

Bummer, I just bought one for my sony WM1A. Where does it say that it doesn't work with Sony DAPs? Went to their site and it doesn't say that anywhere that I can find.

 

[MrLocoLuciano]

Jack told me pairing with WM1Z was not the best, but it's working perfectly fine on my heavy modded WM1A switched to 1Z.

 

[gLer]

That graph of the Hero, although not telling all, doesn't appear aggressive to me. As a matter of fact, I listen to them quite often and don't have any issues. I'm beginning to wonder how loud people are listening to IEM's.

Well, the Trio is often described as having aggressive treble (at least compared to some of the 'gentler' 64 Audio IEMs), and judging by the graphs alone, it looks like Hero takes the lower treble of Trio and ramps it up to 10. Unless I'm completely misreading the graph, and without knowing anything about either IEM, I'd say the blue one is quite obviously brighter and likely to sound - at the very least - more lively up top, with two distinct peaks at 6kHz and 8kHz. As to whether or not you hear it that way is a different story, as you may well not be very sensitive to treble in that area, or prefer a livelier sound (in which case it would suit you better than a more relaxed IEM), or you listen at a fairly low volume. I generally listen to IEMs at around 80-85dB, based on very crude measurements, but I'd say moderate to occasionally slightly louder than moderate. Definitely not a low volume listener.

 

[Flappy]

Really interested for your opinions here.

This may not be a popular opinion on this particular thread, but the Hero lost hands down. The Hero's treble is too much/aggressive for me. Sharp and etchy and hard to listen to and in looking at Crinacle's measurement I can see why it didn't work for me. It clearly shows treble peaking (and staying) in an area that bothers my eardrums. Based on the IEM's that a lot of people like, that I found too peaky, I have very sensitive ears. I also found the vocals to be too far forward probably due to the rise in the upper mids. The Nio is overall smoother with more bass and nicely rolled off treble with plenty forward vocals for my ears. I also find the Nio to be much more comfortable to have in my ears as well. And being a "one IEM only" person the Nio will be the one that stays with me. Obviously YMMV as always.

 

[gLer]

here is my thing with graphs - and why i find them a waste of time

say someone comes to you and tells you i have this woman who has 92-60-88 figure

can you tell from that if she is hot or not ? nope, you need to see her and (even better) spend some time with her

so when i said impressions , i mean , putting them in your ears and describing what you hear

cheers

A much better analogy would be a graph of a cake with ingredients along one axis and quantity on another. Just like you can't really tell what an IEM is going to sound like by looking at a graph, you can't really tell what the cake will taste like either. What you can tell, though, is some of the characteristics it might have.

For example, knowing what your favourite cake tastes like, and knowing which ingredients (and how much of each ingredient) is used, you can more or less tell if the cake on the graph is going to taste similar or different to the one you like, and where it might differ. If you don't have a sweet tooth, too much sugar would be a giveaway that this particular cake may not be to your taste, or that too much flower will likely make the cake too dense, or too little water too dry.

Likewise, if your favourite IEM has a certain amount of treble and you know how it's represented on a graph, and a second IEM has clearly more or less, you can start pointing at aspects of the sound of the second IEM that you think may or may not be to your liking, even without hearing that IEM for yourself. Likewise a graph can show anomalies in FR areas that you know you're sensitive (or insensitive to), like a bass hump or midrange dip that may or may to be to your liking, when compared to a known sample, your preferred IEM.

So, going back to reviews and user impressions, if someone calls an IEM bright or lively, and you look at its graph compared to a known quantity, you can tell pretty quickly where that brightness or liveliness is coming from without having heard the IEM. You may not know exactly what it sounds like, or how the different frequencies play on each other in combination with different tips, cables and sources, but it gives you a very good starting point to identify possible strengths and weakness, based on your preferences of course.

 

[gLer]

The Hero's treble is too much/aggressive for me. Sharp and etchy and hard to listen to and in looking at Crinacle's measurement I can see why it didn't work for me.

Only using this as an example of my point above. Not happy with treble - checks graph - sees comparatively elevated treble in FR areas he's sensitive to. Explains why he didn't like the IEM based on what he was hearing and how he was describing it. Doesn't mean you or I will hear it the same way (or be equally bothered by the treble elevation), but that's only because we're not bothered by that particular treble elevation, not because its not there.

 

[CL14715]

This may not be a popular opinion on this particular thread, but the Hero lost hands down. The Hero's treble is too much/aggressive for me. Sharp and etchy and hard to listen to and in looking at Crinacle's measurement I can see why it didn't work for me. It clearly shows treble peaking (and staying) in an area that bothers my eardrums. Based on the IEM's that a lot of people like, that I found too peaky, I have very sensitive ears. I also found the vocals to be too far forward probably due to the rise in the upper mids. The Nio is overall smoother with more bass and nicely rolled off treble with plenty forward vocals for my ears. I also find the Nio to be much more comfortable to have in my ears as well. And being a "one IEM only" person the Nio will be the one that stays with me. Obviously YMMV as always.

It’s not unpopular, it’s your opinion. No one will fault you here for making a decision that best suits you. I referenced this comparison in my review of the Hero. It’s a weird one because I feel like the Nio and Hero were tuned to do completely different things.

64 Audio didn’t have anything universal that lush and warm sounding. The Nio filled that void in the line up. Empire already has the Legend X which I feel beats the Nio technically, as it should being more expensive.. if you doubt me put the LX on a nice SPC balanced cable.

Empire didn’t have anything like the Hero which in my opinion was smart to create as it rounds out the line up more. It’s a budget approach to providing a lively, energetic but just north of reference sound.

 

[mr.karmalicious]

A much better analogy would be a graph of a cake with ingredients along one axis and quantity on another. Just like you can't really tell what an IEM is going to sound like by looking at a graph, you can't really tell what the cake will taste like either. What you can tell, though, is some of the characteristics it might have.

For example, knowing what your favourite cake tastes like, and knowing which ingredients (and how much of each ingredient) is used, you can more or less tell if the cake on the graph is going to taste similar or different to the one you like, and where it might differ. If you don't have a sweet tooth, too much sugar would be a giveaway that this particular cake may not be to your taste, or that too much flower will likely make the cake too dense, or too little water too dry.

Likewise, if your favourite IEM has a certain amount of treble and you know how it's represented on a graph, and a second IEM has clearly more or less, you can start pointing at aspects of the sound of the second IEM that you think may or may not be to your liking, even without hearing that IEM for yourself. Likewise a graph can show anomalies in FR areas that you know you're sensitive (or insensitive to), like a bass hump or midrange dip that may or may to be to your liking, when compared to a known sample, your preferred IEM.

So, going back to reviews and user impressions, if someone calls an IEM bright or lively, and you look at its graph compared to a known quantity, you can tell pretty quickly where that brightness or liveliness is coming from without having heard the IEM. You may not know exactly what it sounds like, or how the different frequencies play on each other in combination with different tips, cables and sources, but it gives you a very good starting point to identify possible strengths and weakness, based on your preferences of course.

I already gave this comment a Like, but I also have to quote it and reply to it just to indicate how strongly I agree with it. Looking at the graph of the Hero, I know that it would fatigue me and give me a headache after about an hour. That doesn't mean that the Hero is bad or wrong or that nobody will like it, and it's not a personal attack on anybody who likes it. There's some room for interpretation, obviously, but the graph is comparable (or higher!) in the treble to sets commonly regarded as "shouty" or "aggressive" or "energetic", even if people do like those sets. This is exactly what Crinacle suggested was the case in his "sneak peak".

It's very frustrating for people who (perhaps) don't understand graphs to interpret their own lack of understanding to mean that no understanding or meaning is possible. The fact that subjectivity exists doesn't somehow invalidate the very concept of measurement or science or cause and effect. Your cake analogy is spot-on (and has the added benefit of not literally objectifying women, but who's counting!).

 

[CL14715]

Well, the Trio is often described as having aggressive treble (at least compared to some of the 'gentler' 64 Audio IEMs), and judging by the graphs alone, it looks like Hero takes the lower treble of Trio and ramps it up to 10. Unless I'm completely misreading the graph, and without knowing anything about either IEM, I'd say the blue one is quite obviously brighter and likely to sound - at the very least - more lively up top, with two distinct peaks at 6kHz and 8kHz. As to whether or not you hear it that way is a different story, as you may well not be very sensitive to treble in that area, or prefer a livelier sound (in which case it would suit you better than a more relaxed IEM), or you listen at a fairly low volume. I generally listen to IEMs at around 80-85dB, based on very crude measurements, but I'd say moderate to occasionally slightly louder than moderate. Definitely not a low volume listener.

I’ve also heard the Trio described as a bass cannon but when it comes down to how it actually sounds, it’s not bass heavy at all. The Hero is just a more dense treble whereas the Trio is a softer treble. They are both energetic but the graph doesn’t distinguish how different the treble sounds. Thus, why I don’t discount graphs entirely but merely use them as a loose reference.

 

[Damz87]

It’s not unpopular, it’s your opinion. No one will fault you here for making a decision that best suits you. I referenced this comparison in my review of the Hero. It’s a weird one because I feel like the Nio and Hero were tuned to do completely different things.

64 Audio didn’t have anything universal that lush and warm sounding. The Nio filled that void in the line up. Empire already has the Legend X which I feel beats the Nio technically, as it should being more expensive.. if you doubt me put the LX on a nice SPC balanced cable.

Empire didn’t have anything like the Hero which in my opinion was smart to create as it rounds out the line up more. It’s a budget approach to providing a lively, energetic but just north of reference sound.

Can you please elaborate on what you find technically superior about the LX over the 64 Nio?

I find the Nio to be a pretty technically proficient IEM. The only area where I feel the Nio may lose out to the LX is the soundstage width. However imaging, transient speed, separation and layering all rival the LX in my opinion. But I’m curious to know your thoughts.

 

[Flappy]

It’s not unpopular, it’s your opinion. No one will fault you here for making a decision that best suits you. I referenced this comparison in my review of the Hero. It’s a weird one because I feel like the Nio and Hero were tuned to do completely different things.

64 Audio didn’t have anything universal that lush and warm sounding. The Nio filled that void in the line up. Empire already has the Legend X which I feel beats the Nio technically, as it should being more expensive.. if you doubt me put the LX on a nice SPC balanced cable.

Empire didn’t have anything like the Hero which in my opinion was smart to create as it rounds out the line up more. It’s a budget approach to providing a lively, energetic but just north of reference sound.

I owned the Legend X at one point. The bass was far too much for me so off they went. I've tried 4 different Empire Ears headphones (LX, Nemesis, Hero and Vantage) and none worked for me for one reason or another. I guess their sound preferences don't line up with mine.

 

[CL14715]

Can you please elaborate on what you find technically superior about the LX over the 64 Nio?

I find the Nio to be a pretty technically proficient IEM. The only area where I feel the Nio may lose out to the LX is the soundstage width. However imaging, transient speed, separation and layering all rival the LX in my opinion. But I’m curious to know your thoughts.

Certainly. As you touched on I do feel the width opens up the signature which is important to me. A lot of bass prominent signatures can sound congested or cramped, the LX tends to avoid this with the right pairing. I think the biggest difference is obviously the bass quality. It’s decay, punch and texture is awesome. Nio isn’t bad at all, I just feel it’s more polished on LX. The mids are a toss up, both possessing great warmth, clarity and technical ability. The LX edges Nio in terms of treble resolution, air and accuracy to me but again we’re splitting hairs here.

 

[Damz87]

Certainly. As you touched on I do feel the width opens up the signature which is important to me. A lot of bass prominent signatures can sound congested or cramped, the LX tends to avoid this with the right pairing. I think the biggest difference is obviously the bass quality. It’s decay, punch and texture is awesome. Nio isn’t bad at all, I just feel it’s more polished on LX. The mids are a toss up, both possessing great warmth, clarity and technical ability. The LX edges Nio in terms of treble resolution, air and accuracy to me but again we’re splitting hairs here.

Thanks

I do agree that the LX bass texture and detail is better than the Nio’s. My big problem with the LX was the bass quantity, but that’s just a tuning preference than a technical issue.

 

[dhc0329]

I was quite impressed with the initial listening on Odin. While having a great potential Odin still requires quite a bit of refinement. The top end needs to loosen up while bottom end needs to tighten up a little. When I first listened Solaris I thought it was a piece of crap but surprised the hell out of me after about 50 hours, so I am hopeful Odin would go beyond that. Odin still sounds great but I want it to continue pleasing me until I am fully satisfied.