JVC HA-FXT90 Thread
Jul 31, 2012 at 11:06 PM Post #1,606 of 2,211
Quote:
 
Could you please compare the two? Thanks.

 
The CKM500 is nice, and I found them to be in line with what people on the thread are saying.
 
If you want to hear the FXT90, buy the JVC FX40. It's at most 10% behind the FXT90. Very similar sound signature too.
 
Aug 1, 2012 at 1:18 AM Post #1,607 of 2,211
Quote:
 
The CKM500 is nice, and I found them to be in line with what people on the thread are saying.
 
If you want to hear the FXT90, buy the JVC FX40. It's at most 10% behind the FXT90. Very similar sound signature too.

I have the JVC FXD80s. How do you compare the FXT90s to the FXD80s (in terms of bass, mids and highs)?
I feel like the FXD80s have a little too much bass near the mids which slightly overpower the mids.
Love the highs though.
 
Do you think the CKM500s would be more to my liking?
 
I just made a post about it. Thanks in advance.
http://www.head-fi.org/t/620848/iem-recommendation-100-for-an-ath-m50-lover
 
Aug 1, 2012 at 3:02 PM Post #1,608 of 2,211
It's a shame that this great IEM has been getting so little attention lately. Many claim the new FXD80 is superior and cheaper (if I am not mistaken). Well, I haven't heard FXD80, but I have to say that FXT90 is a superb sounding IEM to my ears and an absolutely fantastic bargain at $100 price point. Even if they were to cost 4-5 times as much, I wouldn't say that they are overpriced compared to the current flagships from Shure or Westone. I find FXT90 just as technically proficient as SE535 or Westone 4, or at least the differences are so small that they are really don't warrant the huge price premium at all. FXT90 is an amazingly detailed, spacious and powerful sounding IEM. It provides a sense of depth to the sound that most IEMs, even those costing several times more often don't. The soundstage of FXT90 may not be entirely true to the recording and is a bit compressed in width, but sounds very natural IMO. FXT90 provides a very 3D listening experience and gives weight and depth to instruments and vocals without introducing incoherence to the sound that multi driver balanced armatures do. I find this IEM a great alternative to multi BAs with most of the properties than make multi BAs special - like depth, dynamics, weight and sense of realism, but without the critical flaws that pretty much all multi BAs exhibit to my ears - lack of coherency, unnatural tonality, strange frequency response, excessive dependence of sound quality on fit and tips and other issues. A true winner in my book and it's hard to believe FXD80 could be even better, while costing the same or less.
 
Aug 1, 2012 at 3:21 PM Post #1,609 of 2,211
Hey guys.
 
I've been a lurker mostly.  Decided to post my impressions of the FXT90 which I bought recently.  I also bought the CKS77 but I could write about that one later once I've put more hours on it.
 
I'm not an audiophile, so my descriptions are those of a layperson -- a noob in other words.
 
First, the FXT90.
 
I wasn't initially impressed with them, but I can say they will begin to open up after about five hours of sustained burn-in.  Out of the box they were all bass and treble, with a noticeably recessed midrange.
 
The FXT90s, like a lot of higher end headphones, benefit greatly from a good audio source.  In my case it was initially my Playstation Vita gaming console.  The console has great sound itself, though Sony often seems to limit the volume output of their handhelds so folks won't blow their own heads off.  Having said that, the console isn't capable of pushing these IEMs to an appreciably high level.
 
After about five hours of break-in, I still somehow felt the sound was limited in some way, so like previous IEMs I've owned in the past, I removed the filters from the earpieces which invariably gives me a greater bass signature and slightly clearer treble.  Such was the case with the FXT90s as well.
 
When I connected my headphones to my Cowon iAudio 9 portable audio player and fiddled around with the presets, the FXT90s really started to shine.  The stereo detail and separation are pretty damned good for an IEM.  The overall sound is very clean and these things can be driven quite loud.  The bass, while very strong and tight with good sub-bass representation, is not this IEMs strongest point.  A balanced overall sound is.  Don't get me wrong, these things pound hard and I'd recommend them to bassheads (I listen to Detroit techno) in an instant but if you're after overwhelmingly crushing bass to the exclusion of your mid and high range sound, the FXT90 won't be your first choice.
 
These things seemed to be designed to please a wide variety of listeners.  The sibilance others reported in the treble wasn't an issue I found, but then again I'm not a twenty-something with pristine ears.  Despite that, the impressive fidelity of these things can reproduce some fairly shrill treble tones if your music offers it, but they're not nearly as bad as some have said.  The strong bass hardly bleeds into the mid or highrange tones, even at high volumes, so you'll still hear a clean sound even as the decibles increase.
 
So after that initial five-hour break-in period, I started to notice the midrange come forward a bit, the bass started to resonate a bit more and the soundstage began to widen.  I'm fairly sure the audio separation improved slightly as well too.
 
If anyone still on the fence about these things needs some sort of measuring scales to help your buying decisions, I'll go with a ten scale for each of these factors.  The higher the number, the more prominent the feature.
 
Bass: 9.5
Mid: 7.0
Treble: 9.8
Separation: 9.0
Soundstage: 9.0.
Loudness: 9.5
 
So as you can see by my ratings, what we have in the FXT90 is an IEM with a very balanced and clean sound with very strong bass, not terribly prominent midrange, but great loudness, separation and soundstage for an IEM.  The treble tones are also quite clear, moreso than other IEMs I've tried.
 
Cheers.
 
Aug 2, 2012 at 2:17 AM Post #1,610 of 2,211
Quote:
It's a shame that this great IEM has been getting so little attention lately. Many claim the new FXD80 is superior and cheaper (if I am not mistaken). Well, I haven't heard FXD80, but I have to say that FXT90 is a superb sounding IEM to my ears and an absolutely fantastic bargain at $100 price point. Even if they were to cost 4-5 times as much, I wouldn't say that they are overpriced compared to the current flagships from Shure or Westone. I find FXT90 just as technically proficient as SE535 or Westone 4, or at least the differences are so small that they are really don't warrant the huge price premium at all. FXT90 is an amazingly detailed, spacious and powerful sounding IEM. It provides a sense of depth to the sound that most IEMs, even those costing several times more often don't. The soundstage of FXT90 may not be entirely true to the recording and is a bit compressed in width, but sounds very natural IMO. FXT90 provides a very 3D listening experience and gives weight and depth to instruments and vocals without introducing incoherence to the sound that multi driver balanced armatures do. I find this IEM a great alternative to multi BAs with most of the properties than make multi BAs special - like depth, dynamics, weight and sense of realism, but without the critical flaws that pretty much all multi BAs exhibit to my ears - lack of coherency, unnatural tonality, strange frequency response, excessive dependence of sound quality on fit and tips and other issues. A true winner in my book and it's hard to believe FXD80 could be even better, while costing the same or less.

 
The FXD80 is able to convey more details in the highs, but the mids sound a bit recessed compared to the FXT90. I'm still getting used to it with some recordings. Overall the 80 is better on all the points you mentioned imo. 
 
Aug 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM Post #1,613 of 2,211
Decided to give the FXT90s a try and bought one of the $86 pairs on Ebay, which seemed an amazing price (he says, crossing his fingers). Still one left. I'll report back when I get it. 
 
Aug 25, 2012 at 12:58 AM Post #1,617 of 2,211
The problem that people have with the fxt90 is that the carbon technology was first introduced on fxt90 and was not optimized until it reached the newer fx40 and 80?
 
Aug 26, 2012 at 3:29 AM Post #1,620 of 2,211
By the way.. is there a difference between the japan version and the others? many people mention it like there is a difference..
 
P.S anyone wants to sell their pair you can drop me a pm!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top