[BBY03evo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by intoflatlines /img/forum/go_quote.gif What have you owned? What IEMs have you heard? You say that the JH5 Pro is way below the SR225. How would you compare the JH5 Pro to other IEMs?

Only ones I have had before are.

UE superfi 5 pro
shure e4c
westone UM2

I prefer the JH5 over them.

 

[Elluzion]

hey question:

when i walk or ride my bike, the thumping from my foot gets amplified in my ears and makes it kind of sucky to walk and listen to these or ride a bike....


any ideas????

 

[intoflatlines]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBY03evo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Only ones I have had before are. UE superfi 5 pro shure e4c westone UM2 I prefer the JH5 over them.

I know this might be hard (impossible) to do, but from what you remember, how specifically does the JH5 compare to the SF5 Pro?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elluzion /img/forum/go_quote.gif hey question: when i walk or ride my bike, the thumping from my foot gets amplified in my ears and makes it kind of sucky to walk and listen to these or ride a bike.... any ideas????

This is inherent with any IEM. There is no way to get rid of it.

 

[BBY03evo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by intoflatlines /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know this might be hard (impossible) to do, but from what you remember, how specifically does the JH5 compare to the SF5 Pro? This is inherent with any IEM. There is no way to get rid of it.

First the JH5 bass is more refined and tighter with no muddiness to it at all. Faster sounding...

Top end is improved, its more extended and clean. Vocals are more natural and not directly in your face.

Biggest improvement over the SF5 is JH5 ability to image better and the percussion end is more realistic sounding to me.

 

[dnullify]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBY03evo /img/forum/go_quote.gif First the JH5 bass is more refined and tighter with no muddiness to it at all. Faster sounding... Top end is improved, its more extended and clean. Vocals are more natural and not directly in your face. Biggest improvement over the SF5 is JH5 ability to image better and the percussion end is more realistic sounding to me.

After giving my SF.5 pros a listen i'd agree, except i wouldn't call the SF.5 p muddy in the bass area, more that it tends to blend in when it should be accentuated.

another difference i noticed, is the JH5 really puts you into the music- the soundstage is really close and yet wide.


And Elluzion, personally i wouldn't bike with them in. i frankly can't even hear the bells chime while sitting right under the clock tower, so i wouldn't be able to hear a car honk.

And MaoDi, i'll give that a try later on. Maybe i've got the memory wire bent in the wrong direction, holding the IEM at an awkward position...?

 

[Seva]

Hello fellow Head-Fi'ers! Long time researcher first time poster here.

Over the past year or so, every few weeks I have been looking through the IEM forums for some solid piece of advice or recommendation about the perfect headphone for someone with similar music tastes - hip hop, rock, reggae, pop, jazz - basically everything.

Only recently have I started doing serious research and have come to the JH5 pro. What strikes me about these are the reviews from everyone saying how amazing they are for the price.

My current setup is simply my iPod 5.5G with JVC marshmellows. I was wondering what to expect sound/fit wise when comparing the JH5s to the mashmellows (assuming a good fit). I know the difference between the two is astronomical but I just wanted some opinions.

Thanks! Sorry for the long post, just excited about the thought of having custom IEMs!

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBY03evo /img/forum/go_quote.gif The sound signature is a bit warm. Yet it's still very detailed and not harsh at all. Vocals are nice and clean, but are never in your face. The imaging is nice, especially at the percussion end. I have a lot of different ipods and the JH5 defiantly can reveal the pros and cons of each source. IMO...sound great stright out of a ipod HP jack. I have tried separate amps and found there is no need for them. They have a very realistic sound, almost like being live (well sort of...lol), something I have never experienced in a IEM before! As for a downfall, I would say the sound stage is a bit closed in. Also I would take a bit of warmth away but that is just me... I am also not a huge headphone, IEM guru like most people on here. Give me a real 2 channel speaker setup any day of the week. I would rate them like this, along with factoring in price as well. Scale of 1-10! Highs 8 Mids 8.5 Lows 7.5 imaging 8 Sound stage 7

He/she gave the mids the highest rating...yet the JH5 doesn't even have a mids driver!! Ha! That cracks me up.

 

[rlanger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge /img/forum/go_quote.gif He/she gave the mids the highest rating...yet the JH5 doesn't even have a mids driver!! Ha! That cracks me up.

Because they have no drivers specifically for the mids, does that mean they have no midrange frequency?

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlanger /img/forum/go_quote.gif Because they have no drivers specifically for the mids, does that mean they have no midrange frequency?

I would rephrase that question and replace the bolded part with "excellent midrange." You would think that if an IEM has a dedicated bass driver and a dedicated treble driver, that its bass and treble would be its strongest points. In this case, the listener perceives the mid frequencies as best. Doesn't anyone else find that strange?

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge /img/forum/go_quote.gif He/she gave the mids the highest rating...yet the JH5 doesn't even have a mids driver!! Ha! That cracks me up.

It cracks me up that people think more drivers, or dedicated drivers = better representation of the frequency. Se530 doesn't have a mid-range driver yet it's praised to house one of the most sophisticated mid-range in the universal line.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif It cracks me up that people think more drivers, or dedicated drivers = better representation of the frequency. Se530 doesn't have a mid-range driver yet it's praised to house one of the most sophisticated mid-range in the universal line.

I get your point. However, the se530 has 3 non-mid drivers to compensate for the lack of a mid-driver, whereas the JH5 has only 2. Granted, they're supposedly the latest and fastest drivers. Also, I'm guessing that to further compensate for the lack of a mid-range driver Shure implemented a treble driver whose range is centered closer to the mid-range, therefore having rolled-off treble. Perhaps a good part of why some people like the se530's mid-range, aside from the reasons mentioned above, is that these listeners tend to appreciate that bump in the upper-bass, lower-mid.

 

[intoflatlines]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would rephrase that question and replace the bolded part with "excellent midrange." You would think that if an IEM has a dedicated bass driver and a dedicated treble driver, that its bass and treble would be its strongest points. In this case, the listener perceives the mid frequencies as best. Doesn't anyone else find that strange?

I don't think it's strange at all. Drivers are different, it would be dumb to have a bass and treble drivers, and thus have only treble and bass with no midrange. A lot of it is in the crossover..

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by intoflatlines /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't think it's strange at all. Drivers are different, it would be dumb to have a bass and treble drivers, and thus have only treble and bass with no midrange. A lot of it is in the crossover..

That's pretty much what rlanger said, which I addressed in my reply. I'll rephrase my point: A driver that is dedicated to a the mid-range is likely to be able to render middle frequencies better than having a similarly priced bass driver and a treble driver combined to render frequencies that they were not specifically designed for. There's a reason why all the highest-end IEMs (except the JH10 pro, which was probably designed to have comparable bass to the JH11 & JH13) implement at least one dedicated mid-range driver.

 

[FYJX]

I think you've mistaken, basically all balanced armature drivers don't have a problem with presenting the mid-range frequencies as it's the easiest frequency range to produce. Every BA driver in the industry can handle mid-range frequencies without a problem, so no you don't need a mid-range driver JUST to reproduce the mids. JH Audio three ways don't have a mid-range driver, it's treble, a low, and a full-range. There doesn't need to be a "mid-range" driver cause it's the basic nature of the drivers. But yes, a dedicated driver could increase the "potential" of the mid-range frequencies.

Quote:

the se530 has 3 non-mid drivers to compensate for the lack of a mid-driver

Also, more drivers doesn't mean better. For an example, my JH10X3 hit harder in the lows with a single low driver compared to my Mage which has Dual low drivers.

 

[BBY03evo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tigon_ridge /img/forum/go_quote.gif He/she gave the mids the highest rating...yet the JH5 doesn't even have a mids driver!! Ha! That cracks me up.

I don't get your point at all dude. Who says you must have dedicated midrange driver for the mids to sound great?

It's all in how the drivers and crossover is tuned. Jerry defiantly tunes them great. I'm sure he could make a single driver monitor sound good as well...