[Deezel177]

Fast, probably naive question: I have custom Phantoms, and ordered a pair of universal Valkyries to see if I want these as well. After some quick listening, I think the answer is yes: the Phantom and Valks are very different, both great in their own way.

Now to the question: I need to turn the volume up quite a bit on my AK SP1000 for the Valks. On the Phantoms I listen at level ~50, but the Valks need ~70 for the same output (same cable, balanced Janus D). I'm confused since the impedance is higher on the Phantoms – shouldn't it be the other way around?

Sensitivity is a lot higher on the Phantom's too, though. From what I understand, how hard an in-ear is to drive is determined by both.

 

[mr.karmalicious]

Fast, probably naive question: I have custom Phantoms, and ordered a pair of universal Valkyries to see if I want these as well. After some quick listening, I think the answer is yes: the Phantom and Valks are very different, both great in their own way.

Now to the question: I need to turn the volume up quite a bit on my AK SP1000 for the Valks. On the Phantoms I listen at level ~50, but the Valks need ~70 for the same output (same cable, balanced Janus D). I'm confused since the impedance is higher on the Phantoms – shouldn't it be the other way around?

Impedance is only one part of the equation; more important here is the sensitivity, which is quite low on the Valks.

 

[olddude]

They are different IEMs with different internals. It's not necessarily only about impedance.

 

[gnahra]

Impedance is only one part of the equation; more important here is the sensitivity, which is quite low on the Valks.

Yes - end of the day, the reality is that the Valks are harder to drive. I have both the Valks and the LX and have found that to be true. In fact, my DF Cobalt cannot drive the Valks...

 

[mwhals]

Fast, probably naive question: I have custom Phantoms, and ordered a pair of universal Valkyries to see if I want these as well. After some quick listening, I think the answer is yes: the Phantom and Valks are very different, both great in their own way.

Now to the question: I need to turn the volume up quite a bit on my AK SP1000 for the Valks. On the Phantoms I listen at level ~50, but the Valks need ~70 for the same output (same cable, balanced Janus D). I'm confused since the impedance is higher on the Phantoms – shouldn't it be the other way around?

Valkyrie Sensitivity: 96dB @ 1kHz, 1mW
Phantom Sensitivity: 117dB @ 1kHz, 1mW

This is one of the main reasons Valkyrie needs more volume to match loudness with Phantom.

 

[mr.karmalicious]

Valkyrie Sensitivity: 96dB @ 1kHz, 1mW
Phantom Sensitivity: 127dB @ 1kHz, 1mW

The Phantom sensitivity is 32% higher than that of the Valkyrie. Add 32% to a volume of 50 and you get 66, which is not too far off from 70.

careful there—phantom sensitivity is 117db @ 1mW, not 127dB. also, these aren't linear scales...

the difference is 21dB. rough rule of thumb is that every 10dB corresponds to a ~2x change in perceived volume, so by that metric the valkyrie is almost 4 times quieter (at 1mW) than the phantom. this is somewhat alleviated by the fact that these volume levels are at 1kHz:

as you can see, aside from the range from ~150Hz to ~1kHz—where the valkyrie is slightly quieter than the phantom—the valkyrie is always louder than the phantom, by 5-10dB in the sub-bass and by an even larger proportion in most of the midrange and treble.

all this is to say—at 1mW and 1kHz, the valkyrie sounds about 4x quieter than the phantom, but because that also happens to be roughly where the valkyrie is quietest, there are many frequencies where the difference is only around a factor of 2. very roughly, you'd be looking at a factor of ~3x perceived volume difference at the same power level, corresponding to a power difference of (I think) around 30x!

(i don't think i've made any errors here, but people who know more should feel free to correct me)

 

[mwhals]

careful there—phantom sensitivity is 117db @ 1mW, not 127dB. also, these aren't linear scales...

the difference is 21dB. rough rule of thumb is that every 10dB corresponds to a ~2x change in perceived volume, so by that metric the valkyrie is almost 4 times quieter (at 1mW) than the phantom. this is somewhat alleviated by the fact that these volume levels are at 1kHz:



as you can see, aside from the range from ~150Hz to ~1kHz—where the valkyrie is slightly quieter than the phantom—the valkyrie is always louder than the phantom, by 5-10dB in the sub-bass and by an even larger proportion in most of the midrange and treble.

all this is to say—at 1mW and 1kHz, the valkyrie sounds about 4x quieter than the phantom, but because that also happens to be roughly where the valkyrie is quietest, there are many frequencies where the difference is only around a factor of 2. very roughly, you'd be looking at a factor of ~3x perceived volume difference at the same power level, corresponding to a power difference of (I think) around 30x!

(i don't think i've made any errors here, but people who know more should feel free to correct me)

Thanks, it was a typo and I did the calc after I typed out the specs and know decibels are logarithmic. It was a brain fart from this chemical engineer. I fixed it.

 

[soLicitous]

Fast, probably naive question: I have custom Phantoms, and ordered a pair of universal Valkyries to see if I want these as well. After some quick listening, I think the answer is yes: the Phantom and Valks are very different, both great in their own way.

Now to the question: I need to turn the volume up quite a bit on my AK SP1000 for the Valks. On the Phantoms I listen at level ~50, but the Valks need ~70 for the same output (same cable, balanced Janus D). I'm confused since the impedance is higher on the Phantoms – shouldn't it be the other way around?

Someone else explained much better above.

 

[olddude]

I recently took the advice of another Head-Fi'er and put a (used) PWAudio 1960 2-Wire on my Zeus. Now the bass is close to what I heard with the Phantom, with the same great mids and wonderful treble the Zeus is known for. Peter Wong does some kind of magic with his cables.

 

[Spidermanxd]

I recently took the advice of another Head-Fi'er and put a (used) PWAudio 1960 2-Wire on my Zeus. Now the bass is close to what I heard with the Phantom, with the same great mids and wonderful treble the Zeus is known for. Peter Wong does some kind of magic with his cables.

Other manufacturers used gold, platinum, poladium and some other materials that doesn't exist, pw used monkey King hairs, thats why it sound so good

 

[olddude]

Other manufacturers used gold, platinum, poladium and some other materials that doesn't exist, pw used monkey King hairs, thats why it sound so good

Whatever it is, it works.

 

[olddude]

You mean this stuff? It doesn't look long enough for a cable, but since it's magical......

 

[mwhals]

Listened to Michael Jackson‘s Thriller album with Legend X yesterday and Phantom today. For this album, I like Phantom best. Others, I like Legend X best. That is why I have several IEMs. Of course my A12t and Tia Trio sound best with some other music. Variety is the spice of life.

 

[NovaFlyer]

Ahhh I see. I have heard that EE does long nozzles. Was that the factor that needed getting used to?

In my limited experience, my EE CIEMs do have a much longer nozzle as compare to a pair of CIEM JH Audio Laylas I have. It did take some time to get use to my EE CIEMs, but now I can wear them for 4-6 hours at a time. Sorry no pics to show right now, I'll try to take some later this week. BTW, @ajyagle did my impressions as well.

Since my impressions are on file at EE, it's taking an incredible amount of will to not order another CIEM from them with the on-going sale.

Also, big kudos to EE for the raffle and helping folks in their community during COVID-19.

 

[Gavin C4]

]
EE Legend X is a perfect match with Lotoo Paw Gold Touch. Even more fascinating with a touch of Effect Audio's cable. A great cable can spice up your music with your choice of characteristic, this is to fine-tune your setup and give it a final touch.