[Blisse]

Sent my UE11s and impressions to Inearz =for remolding! Hope to hear from them soon

 

[kimvictor]

  KV has a new review up of the SE846.  http://cymbacavum.com/2014/08/20/se846-a-game-changer-for-shure/
 
 
On a related note, an interesting article regarding the low-pass filter design. http://www.audiotechnology.com.au/wp/index.php/shure-se846-in-ear-monitors/
 
Without the ability to add active circuitry, Shure had to resort to the most mechanical of filters. By welding 10 stainless steel plates together, Shure is able to carve out a four-inch long tunnel attached to the output of the low frequency driver. This essentially traps the shorter wavelengths of the unwanted mid-range frequencies and starts to rolloff the low end response above 75Hz, giving you plenty of bass and clear mid range.

These are definitely the best generics I’ve heard. The low-pass filter gives a much better balance to the sound. While other in-ears can sound punchy, they lack low end by comparison. The effect of stacking mid-ranges from multiple drivers gives a compressed, lumpy character that can work fine for some sources but uncomfortably poke your eardrums on others. The SE846 delivers a much more consistent tonal response across the spectrum — more balanced and natural.

 

Thanks for the mention!

 

[Barra]

  KV has a new review up of the SE846.  http://cymbacavum.com/2014/08/20/se846-a-game-changer-for-shure/
 
 
On a related note, an interesting article regarding the low-pass filter design. http://www.audiotechnology.com.au/wp/index.php/shure-se846-in-ear-monitors/
 
Without the ability to add active circuitry, Shure had to resort to the most mechanical of filters. By welding 10 stainless steel plates together, Shure is able to carve out a four-inch long tunnel attached to the output of the low frequency driver. This essentially traps the shorter wavelengths of the unwanted mid-range frequencies and starts to rolloff the low end response above 75Hz, giving you plenty of bass and clear mid range.

These are definitely the best generics I’ve heard. The low-pass filter gives a much better balance to the sound. While other in-ears can sound punchy, they lack low end by comparison. The effect of stacking mid-ranges from multiple drivers gives a compressed, lumpy character that can work fine for some sources but uncomfortably poke your eardrums on others. The SE846 delivers a much more consistent tonal response across the spectrum — more balanced and natural.

How would you compare them to your NT6?

 

[kimvictor]

  How would you compare them to your NT6?

I don't have a NT6, but from my demo, I prefer the SE846's tuning by a mile. NT6 has better technical ability, but SE846 has a really sweet tuning.

 

[SilverEars]

  How would you compare them to your NT6?

I don't have the SE846 anymore and didn't have my NT6 to compare when I had it.  SE846's imaging was an improvement over the SE535 when you compare them directly as you notice how flat the SE535 sounds in comparison to the SE846 when it comes to dimensional sound output like what you notice with TOTL CIEMs.  I'm a treble head, so I wasn't keen on the treble of Shure iems as they seem to overly accentuate the texture of the prominant treble and possibly cover up the finer treble losing some clarity.  I believe lots of people are appreciative of it's bass capability, but can't comment too much as I don't focus much on the bass.
 
So, I think interms of treble performance, I prefer NT6 since it's capable of providing details with clarity, and the treble seems to output much finer detail that the 846.  I thought since NT6 is tuned with less bass emphasis than the pro, it's bass quality would be lack, but I find that if the source is very clean, it outputs bass with very good definition.  I was actually blown away how wide the imaging can get when I ran into the DAC2.  It's the best source I've ran into and with it, NT6 is clearly showing that it scales.
 
I just thought the low-pass filtering the 846 use was different from what's out there and quite interesting how it's done.
 
Honestly, I think the NT6 is end game for me like Zach has said about his pro.  I pretty much lost interest in looking at other iems, and looking into sources at this point since I notice NT6 is very revealing.  It does scale with sources from what I'm experiencing.

 

[Barra]

 

  How would you compare them to your NT6?

I don't have a NT6, but from my demo, I prefer the SE846's tuning by a mile. NT6 has better technical ability, but SE846 has a really sweet tuning.

When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

 

[zachchen1996]

  When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

Yeah, the HUGO is definitely a poor match for the NT-6 Pro. Felt as if the HUGO sucked the life & energy out of it.

 

[SilverEars]

  When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

I notice that the NT6 is source dependent.  Also, it's mastering dependent if the source is transparent IMO.  Which I am really appreciative of.

 

[zachchen1996]

  I notice that the NT6 is source dependent.

 
Definitely, and very much amp dependent too.

 

[kimvictor]

  When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

Warm and super impressive bass and thick rich mids are what I mean by sweet tuning. In terms of clarity and treble, SE846 will fall behind TOTL ciems.

 

[SilverEars]

  When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

Surely you have notice the detailing of the Hugo with the pro.  That's what I immediately noticed it's strengths with my NT6.  Hugo does seem to be resolving with iems that can show off it's resolving capability.  Like Zack says, it probably doesn't react well with amps, but perform better out of it's headphone out.

 

[Barra]

 

  When you say a sweat tuning, are you referring to a thicker more euphoric/euphonic tube like sound, warmer bassy tuning, or what specifically? I have been real interested in the 846 given its reviews, but i don't know if I could get a universal to work with my ears. It has been really hard to get a good seal in demos.
 
BTW, I am finding lately that although my NT6pro keeps its bell like clarity, incredible detail, and blackness between instruments, its tuning changes significantly with different sources. Recently listening through both the HUGO and the Geek Out 1000 for a week, I found that the tuning had completely reversed from dynamic, hard punching, but analytical leaning to a thicker, euphoric, tube-like sound closer to how people describe the SE5.

Yeah, the HUGO is definitely a poor match for the NT-6 Pro. Felt as if the HUGO sucked the life & energy out of it.

At first listen, I was really turned off by the HUGO/NT6pro pairing too. It was overly dark, thick, and it seemed as if all the detail went away and made me think, what the heck?
 
However, over the course of the week I had the HUGO, and with constant listening, I got used to the change in character and began to like it. I found that the detail was still there, but more layered and dimensional than offered on a silver platter offering an even more natural and energetic sound. I typically pair with my X5 to get that rich texturing but it retains the typical NT6pro signature. I would need more time with the HUGO to decide one way or the other but at the end of the week I was liking the experience and hated passing on the HUGO. Another interesting point was even though the HUGO was clearly more refined with better SQ, the Geek Out 1000 was very similar to the HUGO and probably 90 to 95 percent of the way there at 1/7th of the cost. I may try one of those for a while to study further. One final point is that the NT6pro was my go to device for hearing the difference in source and amp given its sensitivity compared to the LCD2 and HD700s. Changes in source were way more apparent with the NT6pro.
 
I guess the reason that I am liking the HUGO difference is that I am trying to find a SE5 substitute as a complementary signature to the NT6pro and what I am hearing through the HUGO is the description used for the SE5. The HUGO seems to offer me the variety is signatures that I seek making my listening more fun and versatile. Maybe I am one of the few that like both signature types.

 

[SilverEars]

Difference I found of Hugo from other sources is that the treble wasn't forward.  Maybe this translates to reduced loudness to the treble output??

 I notice treble can be forward or laid back in the sensee that if the treble is forward, if there is harshness in the recording, it causes fatigue.  Some people say it's bright or forward, which is quite different from what I've experience with it. In regards to this I believe people's impressions has been based on cans which I believe is different from iems. I didn't think it performed as well with cans.
 
Compared to the pro, the NT6 doesn't have the bass emphasis, and it could be providing better transparency of the laid back treble.  Although laid back, it was quite detailed in resolving.  The treble was much finer than what I've experienced with DAPs like the DX90 or the X5.  Even those two have differences in their treble output. With the finer treble, my perception was it's resolving capability.  I've also notice it does well with modern music also, which lead me to think it's not totally transparent source.   A portable source that has the resolvability, dynamics of good masterings, and seems transparent to mastering is the AK240.  I believe when people say it sounds analytical, they are probably referring to it's output from certain genres, but typically better mastering sound more musical from a transparent source since it's outputting the music as it's intended. 

 

[nehcrow]

  Some pictures of Rooth LS-X5 (Universal) Hybrid I have atm.

5 driver assembly:

X2 - BA Highs
X2 - BA Mids
X1 Dedicated dynamic driver. 


 


 

That's the bulkiest thing I've ever seen, What

 

[kimvictor]

  That's the bulkiest thing I've ever seen, What

Dynamic drivers.