[Pianist]

Quote:

I just read joker's review on the FX700 and according to him it has good soundstage but not the "out-of-the-head feal of the ie8". I guess that just proves how different people perceive soundstage differently. He, also says that they have v-shaped sound, so, I guess that proves my experience with iems and that the ones that have more laid back mids compared to the lows and the hight tend to have better soundstage. I'll still try the fx700 as soon as I have a chance.

 
Well, I disagree with Joker about FX700. I don't think it has a V-shaped response - only slightly elevated bass. The treble is neutral and in line with the mids to my ears. The soundstage of FX700 is much better than on IE8 IMO. Imaging is way more realistic with the FX700 and the soundstage is taller and deeper as well. It has better soundstage not because it is V-shaped, but because it has a high quality wooden housing and driver that resolve locational cues extremely well and also because it is an open back design that allows the driver to "breathe" so to speak, allowing for the proper elimination of any standing waves that may mask detail. The IE8 is also somewhat open, but not as open as FX700.

 

[Spyro]

NOT being an audiophile I try not to over-analyze the concept of "soundstage."  I merely think of it as the "space" of the sounds between the presentation and your ears. (on the stage, versus 1st row, versus 5th row versus 20th row)

 

[Maxvla]

Sound stage isn't a complex concept, it's just hard to explain. Your definition is as valid as any.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

NOT being an audiophile I try not to over-analyze the concept of "soundstage."  I merely think of it as the "space" of the sounds between the presentation and your ears. (on the stage, versus 1st row, versus 5th row versus 20th row)

 
It's not that simple. What about imaging quality? On one headphone it can be sharp and believable, while on another it can be blurry and unrealistic. Or it can be sharp, but with no depth, or blurry but with great depth.
 
While the IE8 sounds fairly sharp and defined in the bass and midrange, I find that its treble is a bit grainy and muddy which has a negative effect on perceived soundstage size and imaging ability. Also, its plastic housing creates some bad echoes that also mask detail and make the sound noticeably boxy. FX700 doesn't suffer from these issues IMO.

 

[swbf2cheater]

Soundstage is nothing but presentation to me, the overall vastness is the most important thing to me these days.  If my headphones do not have a large, vast, deep, wide and tall soundstage, I won't use them.  It's the way your ears pick up on the sound on an X, Y, and Z axis.  Height, Width, and Depth.  
  

 

[elfary]

First of all i think it should be addressed what type of IEM we are talking about (isolating vs non isolating ones). An IE8 is not the same that a Shure SE420.
 
The more isolation you get the less distance to the eardrum and the less soundstage. Thus claims that an IE8 is an IEM with a big soundstage in my brain are processed as the non isolating IEM I8 has a great soundstage (as you can expect). Or the great isolating UM3x has a narrow soundstage.
 
I think the most real and important part of the soundstage is on the recording itself and the playback hardware crosstalk performance and noise floor is essential as well.
 
Even the most lacking soundstage IEM out there (Westone UM3x) does still present a decent one when the recording has a proper built-in one.
 
Then it comes the signal tweaking (frequency/time domains) to 'simulate' a distance that does not exist in the case of a really isolating IEM.
 
That's what i call exaggerating or manufacturing soundstage. Some IEMS do it remarkably well (SE535 of instance). The problem is that in the audio world tweaking something you are harming something else (Kinda like medicines) and the soundstage manufacturing tend to deter of the detail and real timbre of instruments. That's why a SE535 can not compete with an UM3x in that area it has given away in favor of soundstage fabrication.

 

[grahamnp]

I never get the "on stage" or "back of the concert hall" analogies.  I do appreciate an improved soundstage but to me, even if one IEM had twice the soundstage width and depth of another, they'd still be pretty tiny. For this reason, I'd pick almost any other characteristic over soundstage if I were weighing up two earphones.

 

[Mkubota1]

In the context of ear monitors (except K1000, MDR-F1, etc.), soundstage differences are mostly due to tonal and transient qualities.  Even though earbuds may leak and/or let in more outside sound, there is little or no actual delayed crossfeed going on.  Customs have some of the best seal going on, and they can convey soundstage as well as or better than other ear monitors.  For ear monitors, it's more a case of being able to render the soundstage information in the recording.  I think a previous post stated it correctly when (he) broke it down into categories of soundstage reproduction in order of closest to reality:  live performance/ speakers/ headphones/ IEM-earbuds.

 

[adktitan]

Some of you may be interested in 'DarthNuts_Omega2 Review' It will answer a lot of questions and crush many misconceptions. Enjoy.
 
Edit: Found the link
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/40313/stax-sr-007-omega-ii-a-review-after-4-years-of-ownership
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[bcg27]

Quote:

Some of you may be interested in 'DarthNuts_Omega2 Review' It will answer a lot of questions and crush many misconceptions. Enjoy.
 
Edit: Found the link
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/40313/stax-sr-007-omega-ii-a-review-after-4-years-of-ownership
 
 

Wow, that is quite a post. I will have to find time to read all the way through it at some point. 
 

 

[kova4a]

Quote:

Some of you may be interested in 'DarthNuts_Omega2 Review' It will answer a lot of questions and crush many misconceptions. Enjoy.
 
Edit: Found the link
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/40313/stax-sr-007-omega-ii-a-review-after-4-years-of-ownership
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Yeah, that's an interesting opinion but crushing misconceptions and crap, really? We were talking about the myth of soundstage and just got deeper into the rabbit hole. That entire opinion just goes beyond the realm of reality - tonal blandness and harmonic shift, third depth cue??? So, what??? - I should get high and write a review so people can thrust my opinion? Soundstage is and will always be highly individual and no one can tell me which headphones have better soundstage based on made up phrases describing soundstage or headstage or whatever

 

[adktitan]

I will grant you I was being more then a tab melodramatic in my description of the thread/review/thesis...still, there is so much to take away, I believe its a very valuable review..

 

[Confispect]

Quote:

 
So, what??? - I should get high and write a review....

 
Lmao.

 

[Redmetal1897]

Quote:

Some of you may be interested in 'DarthNuts_Omega2 Review' It will answer a lot of questions and crush many misconceptions. Enjoy.
 
 

Quote:

I will grant you I was being more then a tab melodramatic in my description of the thread/review/thesis...

 
LMAO thats brilliant

 

[audionewbi]

Quote:

The seperation in triple-fi gives a nice soundstage feeling; its nice that it manages its highs well too for the subtle live performance noises.
 

+1 however what disappointed me about the TF10 is their built quality!
I might give them another go just because of their excellent sound stage. Not bad for a universal IEM!