[jp11801]

I also highly recommend the Lola with the Sony TAzh1 es amp/dac. Holy cow as good as the Sony wma1 is as a portable the Sony ES really let's the Lola shine. I've got a Focal Utopia and while very different in presentation the Lola is a compelling alternative to the utopia. It has slightly better timbre in the highs and mids but gives up speed and clarity to the utopia.

 

[jp11801]

Btw silver dragon is great with the Lola if you crave speed and clarity. The bronze is great for warmth and to round out harsher recordings

 

[Edric Li]

Tried the Lola and it doesn't do it for me. I like it's signature, but SQ wise it is still in the same ball park of Roxanne/Layla, which I was a user of. The midrange is indeed magical and airy, but the treble roll-off is the deal breaker for me. Not saying that I want a sparkling treble (otherwise I wouldn't even be interested in JH iems), but I just need it to be there.

I do believe that a dragon cable will bring out the best of it, but I can already see myself preferring that with the layla than with the lola.

 

[Edric Li]

Been living with Layla II, Lola, UE18pro and N5005 for nearly a month now. I have to say I was so wrong.

Lola is better than Layla II in every aspect. Better soundstage, better transparency, better bass (idk why), and, as much as I hate to say it, better tuning. Layla's sound signature feels cheap and raw in comparison.

Both are better than the ue18pro, though.

 

[stevenswall]

Been living with Layla II, Lola, UE18pro and N5005 for nearly a month now. I have to say I was so wrong.

Lola is better than Layla II in every aspect. Better soundstage, better transparency, better bass (idk why), and, as much as I hate to say it, better tuning. Layla's sound signature feels cheap and raw in comparison.

Both are better than the ue18pro, though.

I liked the Lola better than the UE18 and Layla as well... And better than the Tia Forte or whatever it's called when listening to those four with the same five songs at a convention. And the Campfire Andromeda and Vega, Westone models, and basically everything besides maybe the Shure electrosele that did vocals more realistically at RMAF in 2018.

What do you keep the bass at? I'm slightly lower than neutral to help me focus on the mids and highs that I love.

Not sure what it is from a technical perspective, but listening to the transition from midbass to bass in something like Tron Legacy, Solar Sailor, I liked that best on the Lola out of the entire JH audio line, and that was before seeing that the Lola isn't even the most expensive.

If I remember correctly, somewhere Jerry Harvey describes the Layla as a scalpel to be used as more of an analytical tool. Maybe it emphasizes some frequencies the ear is less sensitive to, to help being them out even if it sounds slightly off?

 

[Edric Li]

basically everything besides maybe the Shure electrosele that did vocals more realistically at RMAF in 2018.

Totally agree with you assessments. IMO Campfire has yet to make 1 good IEM, 1964 has yet to make 1 good IEM that justify its price.
I was a user of kse1500. Based on my memory I'd still say Lola is better. I could be wrong though.

What do you keep the bass at? I'm slightly lower than neutral to help me focus on the mids and highs that I love.

I keep bass at 2:30 on Lola and 1:00 on Layla to get the same amount of bass. My WM1Z outputs beautiful bass. Layla has more driver, hence higher sensitivity, hence louder bass. But for whatever reason the 2 bass drivers in Lola just sounds more intimate, more defined, more punchy than the 4 bass drivers in Layla.

If I remember correctly, somewhere Jerry Harvey describes the Layla as a scalpel to be used as more of an analytical tool. Maybe it emphasizes some frequencies the ear is less sensitive to, to help being them out even if it sounds slightly off?

I'd say Layla is the more neutral IEM, as Lola has a slight bump in the upper mids. But to be scalpel-like, the first criteria would have to be overall clarity, transparency and imaging. Lola is just a technically better in those department. Layla sounds congested and muddy in comparison, possibly due to the inferior bass drivers used.

Now I'm really looking forward to the Janis. For one thing, its not acrylic shell so more durable. Same bass and mid drivers (at least that seems to be the case) as the Lola, and possibly better treble. If it ends up less than 2k I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

 

[mwhals]

Is the Lola universal shell the same size, larger or smaller than the Angie II universal? Are they different enough to justify both or are they a good upgrade to my Angie?

 

[Edric Li]

Lola is now #3 on e-earphone's weekly best-sellinng CIEM list. I've heard more than half of the IEMs on this list. Can confirm that they are really good for their prices.

1. UM Maverick II (China)
2. CW L02 (Japan)
3. JH Lola (USA)
4. FAudio Scale (HK)
5. UE 18+Pro (USA)
6. CW L12a (Japan)
7. Lark LSIV (China)
8. Westone ES10 (USA)
9. UE 5Pro (USA)
10. JH Roxanne (USA)

Interesting observation:
1. Maverick, Lola, UE18 and Roxanne are the only 100k+ JPY products on the list.
2. Fitears, QDC, VE (who makes some of my favorite IEM) are not on the list. Maybe cost is a factor here.

 

[mwhals]

Lola is now #3 on e-earphone's weekly best-sellinng CIEM list. I've heard more than half of the IEMs on this list. Can confirm that they are really good for their prices.

1. UM Maverick II (China)
2. CW L02 (Japan)
3. JH Lola (USA)
4. FAudio Scale (HK)
5. UE 18+Pro (USA)
6. CW L12a (Japan)
7. Lark LSIV (China)
8. Westone ES10 (USA)
9. UE 5Pro (USA)
10. JH Roxanne (USA)

Interesting observation:
1. Maverick, Lola, UE18 and Roxanne are the only 100k+ JPY products on the list.
2. Fitears, QDC, VE (who makes some of my favorite IEM) are not on the list. Maybe cost is a factor here.

When I emailed a person in the JH Audio Nashville office asking what they would consider as an upgrade to Angie II, but not Layla, the lady responded with Roxanne. Do you have any thoughts on Angie vs Roxanne vs Lola? I would have thought Lola would have been the better answer, but the lady said it was extremely warm sounding compared to Angie, which is probably true.

 

[Edric Li]

When I emailed a person in the JH Audio Nashville office asking what they would consider as an upgrade to Angie II, but not Layla, the lady responded with Roxanne. Do you have any thoughts on Angie vs Roxanne vs Lola? I would have thought Lola would have been the better answer, but the lady said it was extremely warm sounding compared to Angie, which is probably true.

Angie I is a Layla I with worse imaging and soundstage.
Roxanne I is a Layla I with more midbass and a lot less treble sparkle. And slightly worse imaging.
I have not compared Layla II and Layla I directly, but based on my vague memory, Layla II is slightly brighter.
Lola is a Roxanne I with no midbass bump, but with a upper-mids bump. And with the most warm, massive, engaging and spacious midrange among the sisters. And with the best bass (I'm pretty sure the 2 bass BA is a different model from the 4 bass BA used in the AK models.)

I have not heard Angie II, Roxanne II, Roxanne Performance. I mean I did but not for long enough to give an assessment.


IMO Lola is an upgrade to pretty much everything I've heard, even with the crappy stock cable. I can imaging the Angie II sounds dry, congested and boring next to the Lola. Lola and VE Erlkonig are my end-game (as of today), and I don't even own either.

 

[JamesPTao]

Ok, have a lot of hours on the custom Lola’s. Received a WM1-Z a couple weeks ago. 190 hours on it. Got a balanced cable from Moon Audio. Great service by the way.....

Sounds tremendous for all types of music, and all types of quality recordings. I’m not really qualified to talk about the finer nuances of the sound signature that I’m hearing. The WM1-Z is reported to have a tube like warmth to them. Pared with the Lola’s very smooth, no sibelance at all. Bass is sharp, crisp, impactful. Mids are a blend of everything I want. Treble is there without things you don’t want. Sound stage is large, deep, and almost 3-d.

Sorry for the weak impressions, I know others can do a better job. That being said, 2 thumbs up! Great combo if you can do it....

Leo

I agree with your views of the Lola's. I hadn't thought of them as having that smoother, "tube sound", but you're absolutely right! Paired with the WMZ1, it's a very tube-like experience for sure!

Do you have any experience with the Ue triple fi 10's. Have owned them for years and want to upgrade to a custom iem as o have small ears and they are quite uncomfortable fofor pwriolonger periods. The lola intrigues me. I know they seem to have less speed, depth, and such compared to other modern jh iems but wonder if they would still be a big improvement in all areas compared to my dated triple fi's?

 

[stevenswall]

Do you have any experience with the Ue triple fi 10's. Have owned them for years and want to upgrade to a custom iem as o have small ears and they are quite uncomfortable fofor pwriolonger periods. The lola intrigues me. I know they seem to have less speed, depth, and such compared to other modern jh iems but wonder if they would still be a big improvement in all areas compared to my dated triple fi's?

Adjustable bass, so there's more or less aligned of it, less scooped mids (TripleFi didn't seem too bad with that, though a bit of a U) and on "Circle of Life" my Lola doesn't have the annoying treble peak that made me get rid of the TF10 when the tinkling sound during the latter part of that song played.

 

[MaxwellDot]

So I have just ordered a Universal Lola, from Amazon Japan store. I was hesitant at the standard retail price of USD 1599, but if anyone is interested, new Lolas are being sold at equivalent of USD 1,100 at that Japan Amazon site.. couldn't resist at that price. They will ship outside Japan, but not sure what import duties will apply if you ship to US. Still, I cant imagine, even with any duties, that the total price will be anywhere near the US price of 1599 (even if you are a member of JH crew program, and get their discount, the Lola's will still cost around USD 1450, excluding local taxes). Funny how you can find such pricing differences across Amazon's own global websites...

For the record, I have the JH 16 Pro and the JH Roxannes , so you can see I very much like the "so called" JH Audio house sig: slight bass boost, warm mids, and detailed yet NOT shrill or sibilant trebles (I just hate sibilance, or fatiguing trebles... )

My musical tastes change from one period to the next, lately I have been into a lot of tracks dominated by acoustic guitars + male or female vocals.. So I think I will be in my happy place with the Lola's

 

[JamesPTao]

Adjustable bass, so there's more or less aligned of it, less scooped mids (TripleFi didn't seem too bad with that, though a bit of a U) and on "Circle of Life" my Lola doesn't have the annoying treble peak that made me get rid of the TF10 when the tinkling sound during the latter part of that song played.

Thank you for the reply. Do you think the lola will be a significant upgrade in sq? It is quite a bit of money for me and have been looking at lola and 16b22 pro. Otherwise I have thought of sending the triplefi off to have it custom shelled

 

[JamesPTao]

Back in 2017 I tried the 64 Audio, and Ultimate Ears flagships, as well as all of the JH Audio earphones. My significant other at the time liked the Lola the best out of the JH Audio line, bust was mostly interested in over ears. I also had the Lola as my favorite, and went back and forth a couple of times with each competitor listening to the same songs.

I now own a JH Audio Lola, and going to Rocky Mountain Audio Fest this last year had the chance to compare them to the Westone flagships, Campfire Andromeda, Vega, Come, Shure SE 846, and Shure KSE electrostat, can't remember if it was the 1200 or the 1500.

Of all of those comparisons, I still liked my JH Audio Lola:

-Shure KSE did vocals in a way I liked better. Like adding clarity without sibilance.
-Campfire stuff was nice to see and feel, but would have occasional sibilance I didn't like.
-Westone models seemed like they would be more comfortable as customs since the tip would be soft, but the sound seemed overly smooth. (Little less definition, no sibilance.)

If I did it all over again, I'd not bother with a custom monitor as the three versions JH Audio sent me never fit as well as, and were larger than, the universal version. I'd go with a Westone if I wanted to try a custom again, the KSE if that cable were small and supple and didn't require an extra box, or the Lola again because I think going forward it will likely appeal to even more people as JH Audio is probably working on a 3 way EQ to get that last little bit of frequency response tuning available for users preference.* (I add a few DB of bass.)

Oh, and the Lola has started me on a journey to find the speaker equivalent... I'm now on my 5th pair of speakers, and will likely have to spend $10,000 to get something on par with the Lola from a frequency response standpoint: No audible defects to my ear, the right amount of bass from midbass to sub bass, no peaky trumpets or sibilance, not smoothed or too warm.

*JH Audio cables have 4 connections to each earpiece: Ground, mid, low, high. Theoretically an outboard "crossover" could be made to further refine or adjust the circuit for lows, mids, and highs independent of each other... Similar to the JH3A which had an external crossover. Their connection is also superior to anything else I've seen, and I think UE finally has a competitor, but it's only 2 pins.

Have you listened to the Denton wharfdale 80th anniversary ed bookshelf speakers. Very smooth, warm, non-fatiguing and musical sound