IEM Score List * NEW PLATFORM - POLL *
post-12758304
Post #2 of 349

Hifi2jungle

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
131
Reaction score
50
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Posts
131
Likes
50
Would mind adding the Oriolus? I personally think, it is above Layla 2. 
 
     Share This Post       
post-12758312
Post #3 of 349

Virtu Fortuna

Reviewer: Headfonia
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
754
Reaction score
602
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Posts
754
Likes
602
  Would mind adding the Oriolus? I personally think, it is above Layla 2. 
I didn't get a chance to listen to it I'm afraid. My friend said it competes with K10 so I think your comment meets with his.
 
     Share This Post       
post-12830002
Post #7 of 349

eargasam

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
601
Reaction score
48
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Posts
601
Likes
48
Got a chance to demo the kse1500 yet ?
 
     Share This Post       
post-12830096
Post #9 of 349

flinkenick

Reviewer for The Headphone List
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
3,400
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Amsterdam
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Location
Amsterdam
Posts
3,400
Likes
7,344
Website
theheadphonelist.com
KSE1500 has a very different type of presentation than regular multi BA's that comes with certain pros and cons, you can recognize that typical electrostat sound like the Stax have. It is highly accurate, with great resolution and especially transparency. But the midrange lacks warmth and feels dry compared to BA's, partially since the mid-bass is somewhat attenuated and impact is mostly sub-bass. The treble has that ethereal feel, a little bit thin but very quick. The soundstage is wide, but feels especially so since it is not very tall. So more of a flat/wide. However, these were just brief impressions at Canjam :wink:
 
     Share This Post       
post-12830134
Post #10 of 349

Virtu Fortuna

Reviewer: Headfonia
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
754
Reaction score
602
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Posts
754
Likes
602
Thanks for your impressions mate. I'm sure they have a distinctive sound based on the technology. 
 
Soundstage is not a surprise then, given that it lacks mid-bass. That usually gives a more open and roomy sound. 
 
It would be very very fortunate if I ever get a chance to experience them. I can only hope so :)
 
     Share This Post       
  • Like
Reactions: flinkenick
post-12830797
Post #11 of 349

fzman

Member of the Trade: Music Direct
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
507
Location
Illinois USA
Joined
May 26, 2008
Location
Illinois USA
Posts
1,700
Likes
507
So, here is a question for you folks. I am mean no offense by this, but really am interested in seeing how people respond to this...Given a choice between (yes, you have to pick only one of them-no cheating!):
 
1. A recording of, e.g., five sax players each of which is very precisely positioned in space in all three dimensions, but where they sound more like kazoos, and you can;t really tell them apart sonically
 
 
and
 
 
2. The same recording where you can clearly hear that it is 2 altos, 2 tenors, and a baritone sax, and you can clearly hear the different tone of the specific insturments being played, and the technique of the musicians
 
 
which would you prefer?
 
This all in reference to the 1500 vs. other iems.  
 
     Share This Post       
post-12830961
Post #12 of 349

flinkenick

Reviewer for The Headphone List
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
3,400
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Amsterdam
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Location
Amsterdam
Posts
3,400
Likes
7,344
Website
theheadphonelist.com
I'm missing what part the reference is to the 1500 vs other iems?
 
     Share This Post       
post-12831260
Post #14 of 349

fzman

Member of the Trade: Music Direct
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
1,700
Reaction score
507
Location
Illinois USA
Joined
May 26, 2008
Location
Illinois USA
Posts
1,700
Likes
507
  I'm missing what part the reference is to the 1500 vs other iems?
 
I guess I did not make it even remotely clear-my bad!
 
Most recordings are multi-mono, and any 'soundstage' is really just the result of using pan-pots or the digital equvalent.  Most recordings are not true stereo, and do not really have a soundstage or imaging.  Live concerts don't either, imho.  What concerts and good multi-mono records can have, is natural, authentic timbre, and proper phase coherence-that is, all of the fundamentals and harmonics are lined up properly in time.  (saxes, rather than kazoos).  I think the 1500s do this very well, (So do other single-driver iems like the original Kaede and the Dita, just to name 2.) Lots of multi-B.A. iems sound nice, or pretty, or exciting, but they are more like fun-house mirrors than an open window.  That's OK, and people should seek their bliss, and I am not suggesting otherwise.  For me, my evaluation style is to kind of observe myself observing the sound, and see how I am reacting.  "Gee, this sounds good" is nice, but something like "wow, Clapton almost always plays a Les Paul, wonder why he chose a Gibson SG for this track" is much better.  the gear got out of the way and left me more in touch with the music.  
 
Proably just made it even less clear, but irrespectiveof the connection to the 1500s or anything else, how would you answer my 1 vs. 2 question from my earlier post?
 
     Share This Post       
post-12833406
Post #15 of 349

flinkenick

Reviewer for The Headphone List
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Messages
3,400
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Amsterdam
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Location
Amsterdam
Posts
3,400
Likes
7,344
Website
theheadphonelist.com
   
I guess I did not make it even remotely clear-my bad!
 
Most recordings are multi-mono, and any 'soundstage' is really just the result of using pan-pots or the digital equvalent.  Most recordings are not true stereo, and do not really have a soundstage or imaging.  Live concerts don't either, imho.  What concerts and good multi-mono records can have, is natural, authentic timbre, and proper phase coherence-that is, all of the fundamentals and harmonics are lined up properly in time.  (saxes, rather than kazoos).  I think the 1500s do this very well, (So do other single-driver iems like the original Kaede and the Dita, just to name 2.) Lots of multi-B.A. iems sound nice, or pretty, or exciting, but they are more like fun-house mirrors than an open window.  That's OK, and people should seek their bliss, and I am not suggesting otherwise.  For me, my evaluation style is to kind of observe myself observing the sound, and see how I am reacting.  "Gee, this sounds good" is nice, but something like "wow, Clapton almost always plays a Les Paul, wonder why he chose a Gibson SG for this track" is much better.  the gear got out of the way and left me more in touch with the music.  
 
Proably just made it even less clear, but irrespectiveof the connection to the 1500s or anything else, how would you answer my 1 vs. 2 question from my earlier post?
Think this refers to tonal accuracy and transparency? From my brief experience with electrostats I did get the feeling that they are way more transparent than multi BA's, although BA's felt slightly more natural sounding to me (rather than accurate) due to the midrange warmth. But this is also something I think you need to get used to, the difference in sound. Electrostats just sound so different than what I'm used to, that I'd need some time getting accustomed to it. But after that, it's very well possible I would say that sound is more natural, since it is tonally more accurate. I can't judge on that based on my very limited experience with them.
 
As for your question, it's really hard man :wink: I think presentation and tonality both contribute so much to the experience that it's hard to disentangle. I guess tonality would be more important, even if everything was lumped together so to speak.
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top