[momentary_lapse]

Hi All,

I just bought a bose IE triport and the Atrio M5 phones. I am replacing a super fi.3 which causes me a lot of fatigue because of the lack of bass and high highs.

The Bose has a lot of bass and sounds are lower generally. Treble seems to be less and the comfort is superb. I can listen to them comfortably for hours. I did put them on the burn-in for about 10-15 hours last week.

I got the M5's today and I must say the bass is impressive. The treble and clarity is great too but I still feel a bit fatigued when I listened to them for about an hour today. I tried to EQ them but they sound funny with the treble reducer on the ipod.

I have heard so much about the M5's and I would really like to get the best out of them. However the way it is now, the Bose seems better.

Please tell me if there is something I should do to get better sound from the M5's.

Thanks

 

[SONGsanmanwah]

try different tips, a number of options are discussed in the M5 thread

 

[tstarn06]

Don't use any EQ with the Atrios. I have both phones (someone gave me a pair of the Bose IEMs because they didn't like them), and (please no hate mail) the Bose don't sound as awful as others have said (if you boost the EQ a little on the high end). But not close to the Atrios for me. I don't get fatigued from the M5s at all, in fact. But of course, everyone is different. I use the FS foamies, Comply foamies and even the Shure black olives. Of the three, I like the FS first, then the Comply, with Shures third. But they all sound good to me.

 

[momentary_lapse]

thanks.. another thing.. will the sound get better on the M5;s after burn-in?
does it matter whether I burn in with pink noise or just by letting the bass heavy songs play and repeat..

the M5's are much much more comfortable than my super fi.3's?

what is soundstage? is it when the sound seems to be all around you? i feel that more with the M5's than with the bose..

 

[LaBreaHead]

Give the Atrios a chance to burn in -- and give your ears a chance to adapt both physically and sonically to the somewhat unusual looking M5s (which includes trying different tips, as mentioned above). Oh, and iPods are known for not EQ'ing as well as some brands, so varying from a flat setting might introduce more variables than you need in trying to find a sound you like.

Many (most?) canal phones and IEMs place the sound right inside your head; on of the things I noticed from reading the long but informative M5 thread was that some people really appreciate the M5s' ability to provide some soundstage (as you put it, where the sound is all around you).

I do think that a canal phone such as the Bose would probably be easier/simpler to adapt to right away, vs. an IEM that uses a variety of tips and that can be worn with the wire down or up and over the ear.

 

[momentary_lapse]

Thanks a lot LBH.. Ive left the music on with the M5's connected.. will check them out tomorrow now.

i love the detail.. they are the best phones ive heard for all round bass + treble.. ive only tried shure e2c, super fi.3 and bose IE so far..

ill go through the M5 thread too and see what i can glean from there.

 

[tbonner1]

This is surprising as lack of listener fatigue is a strong point of the M5.

Try a pair of the Shure black olive foam tips.

 

[momentary_lapse]

i did some burn-in last night and while listening to the M5's now... i love them!!!!

im using the medium flage tips which came attached with the phones.. i tried the large ones but they hurt too much..

clarity is very good.. bass is good.. highs are not fatiguing .. wow!! i would never buy anything else.. considering the sound quality.. the price is worth it..

im gonna wear them the whole day and see how long beofer i take them off.

the bose isnt as bad as it is made out to seem.. its comfortable..

about soundstage.. is it true that IEM's dont provide as good a sound stage as the phones which cover the whole ear?? why is that?

 

[Aevum]

the bose arent very good, and do little to justify their price, but on the other hand, i think that most of the BOSE flaming is due to people who just ride the wave, so while there might be some people who like the sound produced by the bose headphones and think they are worth the price, i suspect that much of the people who flame the bose never actually listened to them and are just fallowing the "i hate bose" threads,

personaly, i like detail and isolation, so the bose´s arent for me, i rather spend a bit more and get some M5´s or q-JAYS when they come it,

 

[tstarn06]

In agreement. The Bose would be worth, oh, $35-$40. And again, with a little EQing, they aren't the worst canal phones I've heard. I think they are better than the Creative EP630s, for example. I also agree there are a lot of Bose-haters who never heard their phones. I only have them, as I said, because a friend gave them to me.

Anyway, the Bose are not even close to the M5s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aevum /img/forum/go_quote.gif the bose arent very good, and do little to justify their price, but on the other hand, i think that most of the BOSE flaming is due to people who just ride the wave, so while there might be some people who like the sound produced by the bose headphones and think they are worth the price, i suspect that much of the people who flame the bose never actually listened to them and are just fallowing the "i hate bose" threads, personaly, i like detail and isolation, so the bose´s arent for me, i rather spend a bit more and get some M5´s or q-JAYS when they come it,

 

[driftingbunnies]

so i guess you took the jump on the M5's. glad you enjoy them. the M5's definitely get cleaner after you burn them in.

 

[Aevum]

you didnt get my point, the Bose and the M5´s have NO comparison point, the Atrios are way superior, the thing is theres nothing written about taste, and some people might feel that the bose are worth their price, not my opinion, im just saying that alot of the Bose related flaming might be coming from fallowers insted of people who actually had the misfortune of having paid $100 for them,

 

[momentary_lapse]

well... i paid the $100 and i compared the sound and comfort of the bose with the super fi.3 and the M5's.

super fi.3's sounded real clear and detailed right out of the box and didnt seem to change much over the year i had them..

the bose sounded warm and good on the ears for a lot of music but they lacked clarity and sounded funny on other music.. at the same time after about 20-30 hours of burn-in they started sounding better.

the M5's sounded good out of the box.. however i felt that the bass and treble were'nt really going together.. the treble sounded too high.. after 12 hours of burn-in though.. they sound much better.. more detailed than the bose ..the bass is there too .. though the sound is not as warm as the bose.. but i think overall these are better than the bose.. the bose is also more comfortable to wear .

i dont think the bose are not worth their price.. had i not got the M5's.. i wouldve pbly kept the bose over any other $100 phone..

just my 0.02

 

[momentary_lapse]

the bose is going back today

 

[driftingbunnies]

without getting other earphones...bose would definitely beat other earphones...but for 40 bucks more..M5's are definitely more bang for the buck. i got the super fi 3's for my brother and he agreed that there was definitely somthing better about them compared to the bose. wanted to get him some vibes but the super fi's were definitely fun. maybe not worth 100 buck for 60-70 i would definitely buy without thinking.

the only reason the M5's sounded high is because the bose kinda over-exaggerates the bass. so once you switch after hearing the bose a lot you get that feeling. i got the same feeling when i bought my E3g's after the bose. but after burning it in especially by listening to them more...E3g's are definitely a step up to the bose. and then think of the M5's as E3g's detail + bose bass without the bloatedness.