To the Phantom owners here, has any of you felt that the soundstage was lacking? I imagine that the immersive sound signature is due to the sound stage being more intimate than wide, and so I can't have my cake and eat it too.
@fuhransahis put it
extremely beautifully in his post, so all I'm gonna add to this is the Phantom's soundstage adapts to the track. It does inherently have a thicker, denser and more
filled-in ambience due to its organic tuning, but the sheer expansiveness of the stage will ultimately depend on the mix. I've heard badly-produced pop tracks absolutely cram the stage with little-to-no headroom, but I've also heard classical tracks sound as close to a medium-sized concert hall as I've ever heard.
I'm heartbroken, guys. I sold my Zeus xr adel about a week ago with a ares II+ cable to buy the legend x. Just got it today, and I don't like the signature. I'm bummed out, don't know what to do. I wanted more bass, but I also wanted the clarity from the Zeus'. I don't know the technical terms, but I think it's the strong mids. This situation sucks
I'd recommend you contact EE first to ask if it's possible to swap it out for - as suggested here - a Phantom or an EVR, and whether or not the offer still stands in a week or two. You can then use that time to burn-in the Legend X and decide whether or not you truly want to let go of it. Otherwise, I'd encourage you to experiment with tips. Plus, the HF classifieds aren't a bad place to go either.
Does anyone have a comparison of Zeus xiv vs phantom. I mean the price points are significantly different. Does the phantom compete with the Zeus? Best it? In What terms?
The Zeus-XIV and the Phantom are cousins in a sense, but they have clear discrepancies between them as well. Please keep in mind that the following comparison will be of the non-ADEL Zeus-XIV and not the ADEL variant. The Phantom has a linear bass response further elevated than that on the Zeus-XIV. I remember the Zeus-XIV having a slight mid-bass emphasis, but even though the low-end was clear, airy, well-layered and fast, the Phantom's bass is infinitely more resolving, well-extended and visceral. It's certainly not a
basshead-inclined presentation, but the Phantom's excellent sub-bass extension allows it to have a clear, isolated and physical presence without too much accentuation, rumble, etc. The Phantom's elevation in bass is also responsible for the warmth in its tone and the density of its notes, while the Zeus-XIV (the ADEL variant, especially) forgoes this for an airier and more open response. The midrange is probably where the two are most alike; forwardly-placed, well-resolved, and transparent. But, the Phantom does present vocals and instruments with a more organic tone, while the Zeus-XIV compromises on that a tad for a more apparent/forward presentation of clarity. The Phantom also has a more neutral lower-midrange, while the Zeus's extra chestiness here can cause vocals on some tracks to sound nasal-y, yet pleasingly bodied in others. The treble is where they differ most. The Zeus employs lower-and-upper-treble peaks to boost clarity and air throughout its stage. But, this gives the IEM's overall tone a sense of neutrality, and the 8kHz peak can sound a touch incoherent on some tracks (especially when paired with the lower-midrange bump). The Phantom here is determinedly linear until its eventual roll-off. This means the Phantom forgoes the Zeus's crystalline clarity for a more realistic tone, at the cost of transient attack (or a sense of speed). But, because of the Phantom's excellent treble extension, it competes with the Zeus-XIV spatially. Its soundstage can be just as three-dimensional as the Zeus's can (even though its highly track-dependent), it resolves and organises instruments as well as the Zeus can (although separation is more apparent on the Zeus because of its treble tuning) and the Phantom's bass response exists without congesting the stage too. I think this just about sums it up pretty well.
