I sent the cable away to someone that makes cables, with them being so small and my old eyes thought that would be best, that's why I asked for the pin out diagram to pass on to the gentleman that's doing the replacement cable hopefully can get it sorted,
I doesn’t. My 4.4 was reterminated from a 3.5 by Effect Audio. Works perfectly.
As long as L+/L-/R+/R- remain separate [always feasible on >4 wire cables], it can always be reterminated to balanced as a general rule.
I have spoken to the gentleman that did my cable and have been assured that he has connected the wire as per pin out diagram, so looks like the bass attenuator is brokeAs long as L+/L-/R+/R- remain separate [always feasible on >4 wire cables], it can always be reterminated to balanced as a general rule.
Nothing should prevent an original 3.5mm JH cable from going to a 2.5mm at all.
Sorry to Ask, but which JH IEM do you have?
Thanks mate, in this case would be good to keep the attenuator.
https://www.ect.com.hk/en is our distributor in Hong Kong! The only model they do not have is the Sharona, unfortunately.
When I listened to the sharona I had the deluxe edition remastered oasis - wonderwall playing and I swapped between the Layla and sharona I noticed the vocals were placed differently on the sharona the singer was way back in the track but not too far.it still sounded separate from the rest of the music and resolving but when I played other songs none of those vocalist ever felt far instead I’d say vocals were more forward vs the Layla.The point is I found that interesting and and oddity… I think you kinda described this in your impressions when you spoke about compressed. bad recordings etc.Hello, everyone! 'Cross-posting over from the Watercooler IEM thread are my 3-day impressions of JH Audio's brand-new flagship Sharona. I've put them through listening tests, drumming sessions and a few hours behind the mixing console, and here are my thoughts so far.
The Sharona is, in many ways, a spiritual successor to JH’s flagship Layla. It’s an in-ear tuned with a similar end-goal; to present music with the nonchalance, distance and ease of studio monitors. This is perceivable first-and-foremost in its transients. The Sharona is not an in-ear that beautifies, or contrasts, or crisps up, nor is it a monitor with a ton of sharp edges. Instruments aren’t brightened more than they absolutely need to be, and they may be positioned - depending on the track, which we’ll get into later - up to two-or-three rows out from the audience. It’s a monitor that’s overall relaxed, aside from a healthy low-end bump (again, later), and it wouldn’t be out-of-line to call it warm or ever-so-slightly dark.
The reason why it doesn’t quite fit in those camps is because, despite the Sharona’s shier cuts, it is a surprisingly defined, precise-sounding in-ear. The borders between notes are clear, and so are the lines that lift them off the backdrop. It’s all impressively clean for a monitor that doesn’t attempt to tizz or tazz at every opportunity. That’s down to the new Knowles RAU supertweeters, which have given the Sharona about as much top-end extension as an IEM could get. While the Layla, despite its admirable reach, would taper ever-so-slightly at the very end, the Sharona easily crosses that proverbial finish line. It’s got a backdrop that’s, again, as clean and stable as possible. So, despite cymbals and hi-hats sitting further back in the mix, they’re still absolutely there. The question becomes not whether it can resolve those little nuances, because it certainly can, but how much effort the listener can tolerate picking them out. That’s what surveyors of the IEM will have to ask themselves.
That improved definition and precision is what separates it most from the Layla, to my ears. By comparison, JH’s previous flagship will come off fuzzier; instruments ever-so-slightly overlapping, then warm air sneaking in between. The Sharona is much tighter-sounding with stronger holography and left-right separation. And, its soundstage (with appropriately-vast material) is outstanding. I haven’t heard stuff like the Jewel or DC Ti yet, but this one’s definitely up there from what I have heard. The treble tuning is much more linear too; smoothing the Layla’s sometimes-metallic resonant peak, then extending the highs without lifting them to, say, the Jolene’s quantity. Notes are, again, much better-defined, so you’ll basically hear a cleaner-cut, better-resolved, more three-dimensional sound overall against the Layla. The technical leap is stark, to say the least.
This is especially true of the mids, which, despite having a similar tone to the Layla’s, are now much more open, dynamic and defined because of all the changes going on around it. Textures and colors come through much more apparently, and, from a professional’s POV, they’re a lot more source-sensitive too. Going from one track to the next, it’s obvious when, say, track A has a louder lead instrument than track B. On an ensemble arrangement like Snarky Puppy’s Trinity, you can hear the difference in levels and dynamics between the guitar solo, the ad libs, the sax solo, etc. It feeds into the in-ear’s track sensitivity as a whole, which we’ll get into later. As far as the high-mids go, they’ve definitely benefitted from how the rest of the FR’s been jiggled around too. The low-mids don’t cast as much of a shadow on them as the Layla’s do, and the low-to-mid-treble isn’t as far ahead of them either. So, they will get a bigger share of the spotlight in a bigger venue; more so than JH’s in-ears have been able to afford in the past.
Down low is where I feel the Sharona’s most interesting. it’s obviously been tuned with a hefty low-end boost, comparable (at the sub-bass) to about 2-or-3 o’clock on the Layla. Kicks slam hard, and it’s knocking on DD’s door for me. But, I also am not the pickiest when it comes to woofers either, so YMMV. What makes it intriguing to me, though, is how reminiscent it is of a subwoofer in a control room, instead of speakers in an ear canal. My best attempt at describing it is, rather than tight, close-fisted punches, bass notes hit you like open-hand slaps; strong ones. The impacts are a bit spread-out. Then, they disperse cleanly and outwardly (radially) - yet, not too quickly - into the air, so no smoke trails obscure the rest of the FR. It’s a specific presentation that’ll come down to taste, but I’ve personally taken a real liking to it, because of how much it reminds me of listening to the subs in my uncle’s studio. One could see it as an alternate way-in to the territory that DDs have dominated for so long, but with the lightness and agility that only a pack of BAs could pull off.
The tone of the low-end itself should appeal to the majority of DD-heads here. The muscle starts immediately at the sub-bass, which gives it that subwoofer physicality. Then, it’s a steady, linear drop all the way to the lower-mids, so it doesn’t have the mid-bass issue I had with the Jolene, and it’s why it has a meaty, dense sound overall. Again, though, it doesn’t completely cross over to dark or rich territory to me, simply because of how extended that treble is, and how much extra fat or smoke it’s able to mitigate. I can say with confidence, though, that kick drums and toms will sit in front of cymbals and snare crackles about 80% the time, so keep that in mind if you aren’t keen on lots of lows.
Now, I’ve mentioned track sensitivity and source sensitivity numerous times, and it’s because it’s a fairly major aspect of the Sharona’s final sound. On a more compressed track like Dirty Loops’ Rock You, you can hear how tightly-packed it is. The lows struggle to find a place they can sit without stepping on any toes, the mids are kinda stuck dynamically, and the top-end can barely shine amongst it all. Then, each one of those loud rock you! ad libs feels like a punch to the ear drum. Then, like on the EE ODIN, the track overall will look like a meek ball in the middle of the soundscape; the space around it empty and/or unused.
But, play a record like Oz Noy and Ozone Squeeze’s self-titled album, and suddenly you get lots of height and width. The lead vocals move back-and-forth and breathe, and every element jives together without pushing each other down. So, it is one of those in-ears you can get the wrong impression of if you don’t test it with a wide array of music. It can feel as vast, open and elegant, as it can seem small, overwhelmed and dull.
As a little addendum, I also want to talk briefly about JH’s decision to go with IPX connectors this time around. Personally, I love the standard, and it (or JH’s 7-pin) would probably get my vote to replace 2-pin; purely from an ease-and-durability POV. It’s worth noting, though, the IPX sockets the Sharona has are recessed. So, say, the IPX plugs from Effect’s ConX set won’t work on these IEMs, and I’m not aware of any cable brands that offer these plugs either. The safest bet for balanced use would be the balanced cables that JH themselves sell, or reterminating the stock cable to a balanced connector. It’s a bit unfortunate in that regard, but I am relieved to finally use a JH IEM without a bass pod dangling around all the time.
So, that concludes my initial impressions of the JH Audio Sharona. If you’re looking for a Layla 2.0 (with the bass set at 3 o’clock), I think this is as close as you could possibly get. If you want tons of bright, vibrant, bites, this probably won’t be your cup-of-tea. And, if you’re accustomed to all the textural variety that planar, DD and e-stat hybrids have to offer, the Sharona’s all-BA design may lack that extra flavour. But, again, from its unique, control-room-subwoofer lows to its vast, holographic and preternaturally-resolving treble, there’s still tons of new to this in-ear too. I hope that gives you a good-enough picture of what the Sharona sounds like. I’ll start working on the full review in a few weeks, while I finish the couple that are set to launch within that time frame. As always, I hope you guys are all doing well, and I hope you’ve enjoyed. Cheers!
Great first impressions, mate.Hello, everyone! 'Cross-posting over from the Watercooler IEM thread are my 3-day impressions of JH Audio's brand-new flagship Sharona. I've put them through listening tests, drumming sessions and a few hours behind the mixing console, and here are my thoughts so far.
The Sharona is, in many ways, a spiritual successor to JH’s flagship Layla. It’s an in-ear tuned with a similar end-goal; to present music with the nonchalance, distance and ease of studio monitors. This is perceivable first-and-foremost in its transients. The Sharona is not an in-ear that beautifies, or contrasts, or crisps up, nor is it a monitor with a ton of sharp edges. Instruments aren’t brightened more than they absolutely need to be, and they may be positioned - depending on the track, which we’ll get into later - up to two-or-three rows out from the audience. It’s a monitor that’s overall relaxed, aside from a healthy low-end bump (again, later), and it wouldn’t be out-of-line to call it warm or ever-so-slightly dark.
The reason why it doesn’t quite fit in those camps is because, despite the Sharona’s shier cuts, it is a surprisingly defined, precise-sounding in-ear. The borders between notes are clear, and so are the lines that lift them off the backdrop. It’s all impressively clean for a monitor that doesn’t attempt to tizz or tazz at every opportunity. That’s down to the new Knowles RAU supertweeters, which have given the Sharona about as much top-end extension as an IEM could get. While the Layla, despite its admirable reach, would taper ever-so-slightly at the very end, the Sharona easily crosses that proverbial finish line. It’s got a backdrop that’s, again, as clean and stable as possible. So, despite cymbals and hi-hats sitting further back in the mix, they’re still absolutely there. The question becomes not whether it can resolve those little nuances, because it certainly can, but how much effort the listener can tolerate picking them out. That’s what surveyors of the IEM will have to ask themselves.
That improved definition and precision is what separates it most from the Layla, to my ears. By comparison, JH’s previous flagship will come off fuzzier; instruments ever-so-slightly overlapping, then warm air sneaking in between. The Sharona is much tighter-sounding with stronger holography and left-right separation. And, its soundstage (with appropriately-vast material) is outstanding. I haven’t heard stuff like the Jewel or DC Ti yet, but this one’s definitely up there from what I have heard. The treble tuning is much more linear too; smoothing the Layla’s sometimes-metallic resonant peak, then extending the highs without lifting them to, say, the Jolene’s quantity. Notes are, again, much better-defined, so you’ll basically hear a cleaner-cut, better-resolved, more three-dimensional sound overall against the Layla. The technical leap is stark, to say the least.
This is especially true of the mids, which, despite having a similar tone to the Layla’s, are now much more open, dynamic and defined because of all the changes going on around it. Textures and colors come through much more apparently, and, from a professional’s POV, they’re a lot more source-sensitive too. Going from one track to the next, it’s obvious when, say, track A has a louder lead instrument than track B. On an ensemble arrangement like Snarky Puppy’s Trinity, you can hear the difference in levels and dynamics between the guitar solo, the ad libs, the sax solo, etc. It feeds into the in-ear’s track sensitivity as a whole, which we’ll get into later. As far as the high-mids go, they’ve definitely benefitted from how the rest of the FR’s been jiggled around too. The low-mids don’t cast as much of a shadow on them as the Layla’s do, and the low-to-mid-treble isn’t as far ahead of them either. So, they will get a bigger share of the spotlight in a bigger venue; more so than JH’s in-ears have been able to afford in the past.
Down low is where I feel the Sharona’s most interesting. it’s obviously been tuned with a hefty low-end boost, comparable (at the sub-bass) to about 2-or-3 o’clock on the Layla. Kicks slam hard, and it’s knocking on DD’s door for me. But, I also am not the pickiest when it comes to woofers either, so YMMV. What makes it intriguing to me, though, is how reminiscent it is of a subwoofer in a control room, instead of speakers in an ear canal. My best attempt at describing it is, rather than tight, close-fisted punches, bass notes hit you like open-hand slaps; strong ones. The impacts are a bit spread-out. Then, they disperse cleanly and outwardly (radially) - yet, not too quickly - into the air, so no smoke trails obscure the rest of the FR. It’s a specific presentation that’ll come down to taste, but I’ve personally taken a real liking to it, because of how much it reminds me of listening to the subs in my uncle’s studio. One could see it as an alternate way-in to the territory that DDs have dominated for so long, but with the lightness and agility that only a pack of BAs could pull off.
The tone of the low-end itself should appeal to the majority of DD-heads here. The muscle starts immediately at the sub-bass, which gives it that subwoofer physicality. Then, it’s a steady, linear drop all the way to the lower-mids, so it doesn’t have the mid-bass issue I had with the Jolene, and it’s why it has a meaty, dense sound overall. Again, though, it doesn’t completely cross over to dark or rich territory to me, simply because of how extended that treble is, and how much extra fat or smoke it’s able to mitigate. I can say with confidence, though, that kick drums and toms will sit in front of cymbals and snare crackles about 80% the time, so keep that in mind if you aren’t keen on lots of lows.
Now, I’ve mentioned track sensitivity and source sensitivity numerous times, and it’s because it’s a fairly major aspect of the Sharona’s final sound. On a more compressed track like Dirty Loops’ Rock You, you can hear how tightly-packed it is. The lows struggle to find a place they can sit without stepping on any toes, the mids are kinda stuck dynamically, and the top-end can barely shine amongst it all. Then, each one of those loud rock you! ad libs feels like a punch to the ear drum. Then, like on the EE ODIN, the track overall will look like a meek ball in the middle of the soundscape; the space around it empty and/or unused.
But, play a record like Oz Noy and Ozone Squeeze’s self-titled album, and suddenly you get lots of height and width. The lead vocals move back-and-forth and breathe, and every element jives together without pushing each other down. So, it is one of those in-ears you can get the wrong impression of if you don’t test it with a wide array of music. It can feel as vast, open and elegant, as it can seem small, overwhelmed and dull.
As a little addendum, I also want to talk briefly about JH’s decision to go with IPX connectors this time around. Personally, I love the standard, and it (or JH’s 7-pin) would probably get my vote to replace 2-pin; purely from an ease-and-durability POV. It’s worth noting, though, the IPX sockets the Sharona has are recessed. So, say, the IPX plugs from Effect’s ConX set won’t work on these IEMs, and I’m not aware of any cable brands that offer these plugs either. The safest bet for balanced use would be the balanced cables that JH themselves sell, or reterminating the stock cable to a balanced connector. It’s a bit unfortunate in that regard, but I am relieved to finally use a JH IEM without a bass pod dangling around all the time.
So, that concludes my initial impressions of the JH Audio Sharona. If you’re looking for a Layla 2.0 (with the bass set at 3 o’clock), I think this is as close as you could possibly get. If you want tons of bright, vibrant, bites, this probably won’t be your cup-of-tea. And, if you’re accustomed to all the textural variety that planar, DD and e-stat hybrids have to offer, the Sharona’s all-BA design may lack that extra flavour. But, again, from its unique, control-room-subwoofer lows to its vast, holographic and preternaturally-resolving treble, there’s still tons of new to this in-ear too. I hope that gives you a good-enough picture of what the Sharona sounds like. I’ll start working on the full review in a few weeks, while I finish the couple that are set to launch within that time frame. As always, I hope you guys are all doing well, and I hope you’ve enjoyed. Cheers!
It also depends on how you gauge how forward vocals are. If your point of reference is the mid-treble (i.e. the sibilants, attacks or bites of the vocals), then the Layla could be perceived as more forward, because it’s peaky-er there. That’s especially true with a brighter or hotter track. But, if we’re talking strictly about the midrange frequencies, then the Sharona definitely gives them more presence to my ears.
Thanks, man! Yeah, it’s important to note that, despite the Sharona hitting as hard as the Layla at 3 o’clock, it won’t sound as full as the latter at that setting. That’s partly because of the Sharona’s airier treble, but also because of that unique low-end response; how it hits the sides of the stage about as much as it hits the centre. Again, it’s so hard to describe without visuals or without dragging you to my uncle’s studio.
But, yeah, it’s a rad IEM for sure; how many flavors it introduces with a seemingly-familiar driver set.
Hahahah I wouldn’t mind a studio visit.It also depends on how you gauge how forward vocals are. If your point of reference is the mid-treble (i.e. the sibilants, attacks or bites of the vocals), then the Layla could be perceived as more forward, because it’s peaky-er there. That’s especially true with a brighter or hotter track. But, if we’re talking strictly about the midrange frequencies, then the Sharona definitely gives them more presence to my ears.
Thanks, man! Yeah, it’s important to note that, despite the Sharona hitting as hard as the Layla at 3 o’clock, it won’t sound as full as the latter at that setting. That’s partly because of the Sharona’s airier treble, but also because of that unique low-end response; how it hits the sides of the stage about as much as it hits the centre. Again, it’s so hard to describe without visuals or without dragging you to my uncle’s studio.
From your description It sounds a lot like 64audio A18s especially for the treble part which has good extensions but quite restrained quantity wise. Can you please give me some comparison with A18s? By the way you’re my favorite reviewer mate! Keep up the good work! CheersHello, everyone! 'Cross-posting over from the Watercooler IEM thread are my 3-day impressions of JH Audio's brand-new flagship Sharona. I've put them through listening tests, drumming sessions and a few hours behind the mixing console, and here are my thoughts so far.
The Sharona is, in many ways, a spiritual successor to JH’s flagship Layla. It’s an in-ear tuned with a similar end-goal; to present music with the nonchalance, distance and ease of studio monitors. This is perceivable first-and-foremost in its transients. The Sharona is not an in-ear that beautifies, or contrasts, or crisps up, nor is it a monitor with a ton of sharp edges. Instruments aren’t brightened more than they absolutely need to be, and they may be positioned - depending on the track, which we’ll get into later - up to two-or-three rows out from the audience. It’s a monitor that’s overall relaxed, aside from a healthy low-end bump (again, later), and it wouldn’t be out-of-line to call it warm or ever-so-slightly dark.
The reason why it doesn’t quite fit in those camps is because, despite the Sharona’s shier cuts, it is a surprisingly defined, precise-sounding in-ear. The borders between notes are clear, and so are the lines that lift them off the backdrop. It’s all impressively clean for a monitor that doesn’t attempt to tizz or tazz at every opportunity. That’s down to the new Knowles RAU supertweeters, which have given the Sharona about as much top-end extension as an IEM could get. While the Layla, despite its admirable reach, would taper ever-so-slightly at the very end, the Sharona easily crosses that proverbial finish line. It’s got a backdrop that’s, again, as clean and stable as possible. So, despite cymbals and hi-hats sitting further back in the mix, they’re still absolutely there. The question becomes not whether it can resolve those little nuances, because it certainly can, but how much effort the listener can tolerate picking them out. That’s what surveyors of the IEM will have to ask themselves.
That improved definition and precision is what separates it most from the Layla, to my ears. By comparison, JH’s previous flagship will come off fuzzier; instruments ever-so-slightly overlapping, then warm air sneaking in between. The Sharona is much tighter-sounding with stronger holography and left-right separation. And, its soundstage (with appropriately-vast material) is outstanding. I haven’t heard stuff like the Jewel or DC Ti yet, but this one’s definitely up there from what I have heard. The treble tuning is much more linear too; smoothing the Layla’s sometimes-metallic resonant peak, then extending the highs without lifting them to, say, the Jolene’s quantity. Notes are, again, much better-defined, so you’ll basically hear a cleaner-cut, better-resolved, more three-dimensional sound overall against the Layla. The technical leap is stark, to say the least.
This is especially true of the mids, which, despite having a similar tone to the Layla’s, are now much more open, dynamic and defined because of all the changes going on around it. Textures and colors come through much more apparently, and, from a professional’s POV, they’re a lot more source-sensitive too. Going from one track to the next, it’s obvious when, say, track A has a louder lead instrument than track B. On an ensemble arrangement like Snarky Puppy’s Trinity, you can hear the difference in levels and dynamics between the guitar solo, the ad libs, the sax solo, etc. It feeds into the in-ear’s track sensitivity as a whole, which we’ll get into later. As far as the high-mids go, they’ve definitely benefitted from how the rest of the FR’s been jiggled around too. The low-mids don’t cast as much of a shadow on them as the Layla’s do, and the low-to-mid-treble isn’t as far ahead of them either. So, they will get a bigger share of the spotlight in a bigger venue; more so than JH’s in-ears have been able to afford in the past.
Down low is where I feel the Sharona’s most interesting. it’s obviously been tuned with a hefty low-end boost, comparable (at the sub-bass) to about 2-or-3 o’clock on the Layla. Kicks slam hard, and it’s knocking on DD’s door for me. But, I also am not the pickiest when it comes to woofers either, so YMMV. What makes it intriguing to me, though, is how reminiscent it is of a subwoofer in a control room, instead of speakers in an ear canal. My best attempt at describing it is, rather than tight, close-fisted punches, bass notes hit you like open-hand slaps; strong ones. The impacts are a bit spread-out. Then, they disperse cleanly and outwardly (radially) - yet, not too quickly - into the air, so no smoke trails obscure the rest of the FR. It’s a specific presentation that’ll come down to taste, but I’ve personally taken a real liking to it, because of how much it reminds me of listening to the subs in my uncle’s studio. One could see it as an alternate way-in to the territory that DDs have dominated for so long, but with the lightness and agility that only a pack of BAs could pull off.
The tone of the low-end itself should appeal to the majority of DD-heads here. The muscle starts immediately at the sub-bass, which gives it that subwoofer physicality. Then, it’s a steady, linear drop all the way to the lower-mids, so it doesn’t have the mid-bass issue I had with the Jolene, and it’s why it has a meaty, dense sound overall. Again, though, it doesn’t completely cross over to dark or rich territory to me, simply because of how extended that treble is, and how much extra fat or smoke it’s able to mitigate. I can say with confidence, though, that kick drums and toms will sit in front of cymbals and snare crackles about 80% the time, so keep that in mind if you aren’t keen on lots of lows.
Now, I’ve mentioned track sensitivity and source sensitivity numerous times, and it’s because it’s a fairly major aspect of the Sharona’s final sound. On a more compressed track like Dirty Loops’ Rock You, you can hear how tightly-packed it is. The lows struggle to find a place they can sit without stepping on any toes, the mids are kinda stuck dynamically, and the top-end can barely shine amongst it all. Then, each one of those loud rock you! ad libs feels like a punch to the ear drum. Then, like on the EE ODIN, the track overall will look like a meek ball in the middle of the soundscape; the space around it empty and/or unused.
But, play a record like Oz Noy and Ozone Squeeze’s self-titled album, and suddenly you get lots of height and width. The lead vocals move back-and-forth and breathe, and every element jives together without pushing each other down. So, it is one of those in-ears you can get the wrong impression of if you don’t test it with a wide array of music. It can feel as vast, open and elegant, as it can seem small, overwhelmed and dull.
As a little addendum, I also want to talk briefly about JH’s decision to go with IPX connectors this time around. Personally, I love the standard, and it (or JH’s 7-pin) would probably get my vote to replace 2-pin; purely from an ease-and-durability POV. It’s worth noting, though, the IPX sockets the Sharona has are recessed. So, say, the IPX plugs from Effect’s ConX set won’t work on these IEMs, and I’m not aware of any cable brands that offer these plugs either. The safest bet for balanced use would be the balanced cables that JH themselves sell, or reterminating the stock cable to a balanced connector. It’s a bit unfortunate in that regard, but I am relieved to finally use a JH IEM without a bass pod dangling around all the time.
So, that concludes my initial impressions of the JH Audio Sharona. If you’re looking for a Layla 2.0 (with the bass set at 3 o’clock), I think this is as close as you could possibly get. If you want tons of bright, vibrant, bites, this probably won’t be your cup-of-tea. And, if you’re accustomed to all the textural variety that planar, DD and e-stat hybrids have to offer, the Sharona’s all-BA design may lack that extra flavour. But, again, from its unique, control-room-subwoofer lows to its vast, holographic and preternaturally-resolving treble, there’s still tons of new to this in-ear too. I hope that gives you a good-enough picture of what the Sharona sounds like. I’ll start working on the full review in a few weeks, while I finish the couple that are set to launch within that time frame. As always, I hope you guys are all doing well, and I hope you’ve enjoyed. Cheers!
Hello, everyone! 'Cross-posting over from the Watercooler IEM thread are my 3-day impressions of JH Audio's brand-new flagship Sharona. I've put them through listening tests, drumming sessions and a few hours behind the mixing console, and here are my thoughts so far.
The Sharona is, in many ways, a spiritual successor to JH’s flagship Layla. It’s an in-ear tuned with a similar end-goal; to present music with the nonchalance, distance and ease of studio monitors. This is perceivable first-and-foremost in its transients. The Sharona is not an in-ear that beautifies, or contrasts, or crisps up, nor is it a monitor with a ton of sharp edges. Instruments aren’t brightened more than they absolutely need to be, and they may be positioned - depending on the track, which we’ll get into later - up to two-or-three rows out from the audience. It’s a monitor that’s overall relaxed, aside from a healthy low-end bump (again, later), and it wouldn’t be out-of-line to call it warm or ever-so-slightly dark.
The reason why it doesn’t quite fit in those camps is because, despite the Sharona’s shier cuts, it is a surprisingly defined, precise-sounding in-ear. The borders between notes are clear, and so are the lines that lift them off the backdrop. It’s all impressively clean for a monitor that doesn’t attempt to tizz or tazz at every opportunity. That’s down to the new Knowles RAU supertweeters, which have given the Sharona about as much top-end extension as an IEM could get. While the Layla, despite its admirable reach, would taper ever-so-slightly at the very end, the Sharona easily crosses that proverbial finish line. It’s got a backdrop that’s, again, as clean and stable as possible. So, despite cymbals and hi-hats sitting further back in the mix, they’re still absolutely there. The question becomes not whether it can resolve those little nuances, because it certainly can, but how much effort the listener can tolerate picking them out. That’s what surveyors of the IEM will have to ask themselves.
That improved definition and precision is what separates it most from the Layla, to my ears. By comparison, JH’s previous flagship will come off fuzzier; instruments ever-so-slightly overlapping, then warm air sneaking in between. The Sharona is much tighter-sounding with stronger holography and left-right separation. And, its soundstage (with appropriately-vast material) is outstanding. I haven’t heard stuff like the Jewel or DC Ti yet, but this one’s definitely up there from what I have heard. The treble tuning is much more linear too; smoothing the Layla’s sometimes-metallic resonant peak, then extending the highs without lifting them to, say, the Jolene’s quantity. Notes are, again, much better-defined, so you’ll basically hear a cleaner-cut, better-resolved, more three-dimensional sound overall against the Layla. The technical leap is stark, to say the least.
This is especially true of the mids, which, despite having a similar tone to the Layla’s, are now much more open, dynamic and defined because of all the changes going on around it. Textures and colors come through much more apparently, and, from a professional’s POV, they’re a lot more source-sensitive too. Going from one track to the next, it’s obvious when, say, track A has a louder lead instrument than track B. On an ensemble arrangement like Snarky Puppy’s Trinity, you can hear the difference in levels and dynamics between the guitar solo, the ad libs, the sax solo, etc. It feeds into the in-ear’s track sensitivity as a whole, which we’ll get into later. As far as the high-mids go, they’ve definitely benefitted from how the rest of the FR’s been jiggled around too. The low-mids don’t cast as much of a shadow on them as the Layla’s do, and the low-to-mid-treble isn’t as far ahead of them either. So, they will get a bigger share of the spotlight in a bigger venue; more so than JH’s in-ears have been able to afford in the past.
Down low is where I feel the Sharona’s most interesting. it’s obviously been tuned with a hefty low-end boost, comparable (at the sub-bass) to about 2-or-3 o’clock on the Layla. Kicks slam hard, and it’s knocking on DD’s door for me. But, I also am not the pickiest when it comes to woofers either, so YMMV. What makes it intriguing to me, though, is how reminiscent it is of a subwoofer in a control room, instead of speakers in an ear canal. My best attempt at describing it is, rather than tight, close-fisted punches, bass notes hit you like open-hand slaps; strong ones. The impacts are a bit spread-out. Then, they disperse cleanly and outwardly (radially) - yet, not too quickly - into the air, so no smoke trails obscure the rest of the FR. It’s a specific presentation that’ll come down to taste, but I’ve personally taken a real liking to it, because of how much it reminds me of listening to the subs in my uncle’s studio. One could see it as an alternate way-in to the territory that DDs have dominated for so long, but with the lightness and agility that only a pack of BAs could pull off.
The tone of the low-end itself should appeal to the majority of DD-heads here. The muscle starts immediately at the sub-bass, which gives it that subwoofer physicality. Then, it’s a steady, linear drop all the way to the lower-mids, so it doesn’t have the mid-bass issue I had with the Jolene, and it’s why it has a meaty, dense sound overall. Again, though, it doesn’t completely cross over to dark or rich territory to me, simply because of how extended that treble is, and how much extra fat or smoke it’s able to mitigate. I can say with confidence, though, that kick drums and toms will sit in front of cymbals and snare crackles about 80% the time, so keep that in mind if you aren’t keen on lots of lows.
Now, I’ve mentioned track sensitivity and source sensitivity numerous times, and it’s because it’s a fairly major aspect of the Sharona’s final sound. On a more compressed track like Dirty Loops’ Rock You, you can hear how tightly-packed it is. The lows struggle to find a place they can sit without stepping on any toes, the mids are kinda stuck dynamically, and the top-end can barely shine amongst it all. Then, each one of those loud rock you! ad libs feels like a punch to the ear drum. Then, like on the EE ODIN, the track overall will look like a meek ball in the middle of the soundscape; the space around it empty and/or unused.
But, play a record like Oz Noy and Ozone Squeeze’s self-titled album, and suddenly you get lots of height and width. The lead vocals move back-and-forth and breathe, and every element jives together without pushing each other down. So, it is one of those in-ears you can get the wrong impression of if you don’t test it with a wide array of music. It can feel as vast, open and elegant, as it can seem small, overwhelmed and dull.
As a little addendum, I also want to talk briefly about JH’s decision to go with IPX connectors this time around. Personally, I love the standard, and it (or JH’s 7-pin) would probably get my vote to replace 2-pin; purely from an ease-and-durability POV. It’s worth noting, though, the IPX sockets the Sharona has are recessed. So, say, the IPX plugs from Effect’s ConX set won’t work on these IEMs, and I’m not aware of any cable brands that offer these plugs either. The safest bet for balanced use would be the balanced cables that JH themselves sell, or reterminating the stock cable to a balanced connector. It’s a bit unfortunate in that regard, but I am relieved to finally use a JH IEM without a bass pod dangling around all the time.
So, that concludes my initial impressions of the JH Audio Sharona. If you’re looking for a Layla 2.0 (with the bass set at 3 o’clock), I think this is as close as you could possibly get. If you want tons of bright, vibrant, bites, this probably won’t be your cup-of-tea. And, if you’re accustomed to all the textural variety that planar, DD and e-stat hybrids have to offer, the Sharona’s all-BA design may lack that extra flavour. But, again, from its unique, control-room-subwoofer lows to its vast, holographic and preternaturally-resolving treble, there’s still tons of new to this in-ear too. I hope that gives you a good-enough picture of what the Sharona sounds like. I’ll start working on the full review in a few weeks, while I finish the couple that are set to launch within that time frame. As always, I hope you guys are all doing well, and I hope you’ve enjoyed. Cheers!
