FEARLESS Audio IEM's Discussion/Impressions

[warriorpoet]

Thanks Warrior. I am now using the copper cable recommended by you and it does improves a lot in terms of clarity. I have never used Gu Craftsman b4 and the quality is brilliant for its price so thanks again!) And I can see what you mean now re EST. Will test some more tracks in the coming few weeks.

Man, I love that! That is my absolute favorite all-round cable- it's really excellent in every way!

When you're listening to treble on the Roland, listen for texture and realism. Extension isn't class-leading, but it's very well contextualized. There's a lot of really great detail in the tracks that have it I got to hear for the first time with Roland.

 

[Owludio]

Hi Owludio, you mentioned that treble sounds darker at first, did it improve? I found it darker and even veiled with the expectation that treble would nearly sparkle like any electrostatic driver. I'm happy with all the other aspects of Roland but just a bit surprised by the treble.

To be clear, I'm not just believer in burn in, I'm notorious practitioner of it. I'm yet to see IEM that was COMPLETELY UNAFFECTED by burn in (Or use over time). Even famous New Sony BA that is in ier-m9 required extensive one. First 3 days M9 was as described in one of the review having narrow sound stage and hump @80hz. Was burning it in overnight and on day 3 soundstage started to open. Today It's one of the more open sounding iems I own.
All of that said, I cannot say that Roland changed that much to me due to burn in effect. I kept comparing Roland to LX and M9 and while both of them were notably brighter, that gap seem to have closed substantially and more often than not now when I switch from LX to Roland I don't hear improvement of clarity. I just get more distant vocals and guitar solo. Roland clearly outperforms LX now while 3 days ago LX was shining with extra sparkle in comparison.
If you asked me that question just this morning I could have said that Yes, LX is brighter, not anymore. I have no idea What is going on here. Psichoacoustic Adaptation? Switching to M9 gives me more hot high end but ability to recognize and locate instruments is NOT better. I need more time to figure this out.... OCD kicks in, makes me miss some sparkle but is it real detail or just self deception? While ago experiment was done: Vinyl Turntable recording loving Audiophiles were let to listen to 24/96 digital with some noise mixed to it and they said: "oh yes! now we talking!"....Perplexing

 

[warriorpoet]

To be clear, I'm not just believer in burn in, I'm notorious practitioner of it. I'm yet to see IEM that was COMPLETELY UNAFFECTED by burn in (Or use over time). Even famous New Sony BA that is in ier-m9 required extensive one. First 3 days M9 was as described in one of the review having narrow sound stage and hump @80hz. Was burning it in overnight and on day 3 soundstage started to open. Today It's one of the more open sounding iems I own.
All of that said, I cannot say that Roland changed that much to me due to burn in effect. I kept comparing Roland to LX and M9 and while both of them were notably brighter, that gap seem to have closed substantially and more often than not now when I switch from LX to Roland I don't hear improvement of clarity. I just get more distant vocals and guitar solo. Roland clearly outperforms LX now while 3 days ago LX was shining with extra sparkle in comparison.
If you asked me that question just this morning I could have said that Yes, LX is brighter, not anymore. I have no idea What is going on here. Psichoacoustic Adaptation? Switching to M9 gives me more hot high end but ability to recognize and locate instruments is NOT better. I need more time to figure this out.... OCD kicks in, makes me miss some sparkle but is it real detail or just self deception? While ago experiment was done: Vinyl Turntable recording loving Audiophiles were let to listen to 24/96 digital with some noise mixed to it and they said: "oh yes! now we talking!"....Perplexing

A couple quick thoughts

1. hearing health? I am often congested due to allergies, and have to be really careful about when I'm listening critically

2. How's your seal? Could you have inserted the Rolands differently between listens? I have terrible TERRIBLE ears for this, which is why I'm getting CIEMs

3. In my experience the Roland is very revealing of source material. On some tracks I swear Roland is darker because the track doesn't have a lot of treble. On others, it's brighter because the track is brighter. On all the tracks I listened to, though, the details were always there, just sometimes not in front of everything else.

I hope you nail it down for your sake and the sake of your sanity!

Oh, one more quick thought (and boy am I beating this one into the ground), but the Fearless cable is great at being a variable. That is, it's very poorly constructed and can alter the sound signature. If you haven't yet, I'd replace that with something better

 

[warriorpoet]

Also, y'all, Electro Acousti has flipping BLUE SPC cable. Tell me this won't look incredible with the Roland!

 

[1Q84]

Roland is smaller. And also, T800 treble is not harsh on its own. It's less forgiving. T800 is brighter on the top end even with hybrid copper-spc from KZ that i'm using. I'm immune to the hype of fancy cables. If it sounds better to my ears than $60 one, then I don't care if that's $14 KZ. Stock T800 cables are too bright for my taste. Which of them are you using with your t800?

The stock silver cable and stock tips. I tried some copper cable but the details suffered a bit. There are some songs when the highs get harsh but those are very rare cases to get me bothered. I have some spiral dots on the way for that also.

Do you think the ISN S16 cable might work well with Roland to make it less dark?

 

[Owludio]

A couple quick thoughts

1. hearing health? I am often congested due to allergies, and have to be really careful about when I'm listening critically

2. How's your seal? Could you have inserted the Rolands differently between listens? I have terrible TERRIBLE ears for this, which is why I'm getting CIEMs

3. In my experience the Roland is very revealing of source material. On some tracks I swear Roland is darker because the track doesn't have a lot of treble. On others, it's brighter because the track is brighter. On all the tracks I listened to, though, the details were always there, just sometimes not in front of everything else.

I hope you nail it down for your sake and the sake of your sanity!

Oh, one more quick thought (and boy am I beating this one into the ground), but the Fearless cable is great at being a variable. That is, it's very poorly constructed and can alter the sound signature. If you haven't yet, I'd replace that with something better

Thanks. Yes to all of your points. My sanity is already challenged enough by Roland! Acutely aware of hearing change, mentioned in earlier posts. My hearing swings from hearing the mouse at the same time with my cat (with no one else in the room noticing) to tolerating and even enjoying ASG2, FH7 and even NiceHCK NX7. That's why I have well known(by me) reference sets to compare, compare, compare...
No problem with seal. I'm lucky, that Custom-Universal like it04, t800 & Roland fits like custom. Already found my favorite(for now) cable. The stock was too bassy and too Harmanesk(besides intermittent). And of course listen to the same songs over and over while evaluating.

 

[Owludio]

The stock silver cable and stock tips. I tried some copper cable but the details suffered a bit. There are some songs when the highs get harsh but those are very rare cases to get me bothered. I have some spiral dots on the way for that also.

Do you think the ISN S16 cable might work well with Roland to make it less dark?

Theoretically yes, but we need to consider more than one variable. Surface Conductivity adds up to boost treble but so does Capacitance. And we have transformers in Roland besides other stuff. Also it's harder to drive thicker cables, especially with portables. Hard to predict. I often find that more then 4 core cable makes sound "unclean". Depends on the iem. Roland is growing on me so far. In a few days I might find that it's bright enough already. Like Warriorpoet mentioned, some material makes it sound alot brighter.

 

[redrol]

Ahhh really? Power dac v2 is better than the es100?! How so?

 

[acygni]

Ahhh really? Power dac v2 is better than the es100?! How so?

Es100 is getting older. The fiio btr5 and shanling up4 already may be better options.

 

[wackoip]

Thanks. Yes to all of your points. My sanity is already challenged enough by Roland! Acutely aware of hearing change, mentioned in earlier posts. My hearing swings from hearing the mouse at the same time with my cat (with no one else in the room noticing) to tolerating and even enjoying ASG2, FH7 and even NiceHCK NX7. That's why I have well known(by me) reference sets to compare, compare, compare...
No problem with seal. I'm lucky, that Custom-Universal like it04, t800 & Roland fits like custom. Already found my favorite(for now) cable. The stock was too bassy and too Harmanesk(besides intermittent). And of course listen to the same songs over and over while evaluating.

OMG! I have the same problems(if you call that problems) with you two! I have allergies (really bad sinuses) like Warriors and I do enjoy NiceHCK NX7 sometimes like you (but it sounds weird with some DAPs) !! Umm that blue cable is tempting. Warriors stop it!!!!

 

[gazzington]

I'm considering the Roland or empire ears lx. Anybody have both, and if so what's their opinion if both?

 

[Owludio]

I'm considering the Roland or empire ears lx. Anybody have both, and if so what's their opinion if both?

LX IMHO, is sort of a bass head iem. Way too much bass for anything but dry orchestral & acoustic tracks.
It has great balance and realistic tonality with great sound stage... until you get hit with an earthquake... of strong bass line, that hits like a disaster, ruining all of that. On LX bass smothers everything - goodbye clarity and stage, lights out. It is less of problem on low impedance sources where bass is more controlled, but still...
Roland is a lot smaller, fits better, has little to no driver flex and works great with most portables.
LX isolate surprisingly well for vented design but Roland is completely sealed.
I'm not sure about AAW Canary, otherwise Roland is the only one hybrid I know (of this class), where this was accomplished. Having Roland, I would not buy LX today.
Edit: if ur fun of Empire Ears, why not Valkyrie?

 

[iamkn]

I'm considering the Roland or empire ears lx. Anybody have both, and if so what's their opinion if both?

 

[ezekiel77]

Hi guys, I've given an in-depth listen to the S6Rui. Wonderful performer.

https://www.headphonesty.com/2019/09/review-fearless-audio-s6rui/

 

[twiceboss]

@Owludio so should get a Roland instead? im in the process of returning this (La Hire) and getting other pair from Penon. Again, how's the vocal, mids, and treble