[Dsnuts]

I have had the FXZ200 in my ears the whole day today and there is nothing fatiguing to my ears at all..Even watching movies with explosions and such in between. Yes I am more used to their sound I suppose but at the same time when I hear my other iems. They seem to be lacking in one way or another now. Lol.

 

[eke2k6]

Quote:

 
Yes, I love the ASG-1.2, but I would have to say this bass is better textured and deeper than the ASG-1.2 (especially the sub-bass). Is the entire sound better than the ASG-1.2? They have totally different sound signatures, and are almost tied as far as my listening enjoyment, but as you can see from my sound signature rankings at the bottom, the FXZ100 comes out on top for me. Now I haven't heard the new ASG-2 (with new driver) and all, but from what I heard from the ASG-2/AS-2 demo, I can see that Aurisonics surpassing the FXZ100 in sound quality, but I don't know for certain. Then again, when we get to this level everything is semantics. The Aurisonics are professional in-ear stage monitors, whereas the JVCs are technically brilliant earphones (with a more fun sound). 

 
But I know for a fact that the ASG-1 goes down past 10hz. That's why I'm confused. 
 
All the same, I'll get to hear them in due time.

 

[shotgunshane]

I can EQ my mh1c by -10 to -12db's at 40hz and it is still bass heavy but listenable at that point. I suspect they are boosted between 16db's and 20 db's over neutral at 40hz. That's just simply too much. The Sony extra bass series was awful- bloated, claustrophobic and fatiguing. I certainly hope the JVC is nowhere near these amounts. And this is coming from someone who loves the UM Merlin.

I certainly have an interest as I did love (and miss) the musicality if the fxt90. Maybe I'll get to hear someone's pair on down the road.

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

so is the jvc 100/200 for 'audiophiles' ?  I don't know any audiophiles who like slamming bass (especially in headphones).....not saying the 100 has slamming bass as I haven't heard it yet, but if it does, I'd say it's not for audiophiles....I know,, if it's in the recording it will come across as slamming bass and if it's not it won't. This is what i'm hoping for in any case. Hopefully these guys who are reporting them as 'for bassheads' are listening to their basshead tracks for this conclusion so we who are not bassheads and don't listen to basshead type songs won't find them to be 'for bassheads'. Hopefully it's a chicken and egg type thing and not a case of the chicken making all the eggs bassslamheavy
 
the previous poster mentioned(paraphrase) that 'if you don't like a home stereo with a subwoofer you won't like the new jvc'. Which doesn't makes sense to me because i've heard very nice 'audiophile' stereos that utilize a sub but no way a listener would know this due to 'extra' or 'pounding' bass. And of course i've heard many more stereos that use a sub and clearly you sit there saying to yourself, this stereo is using a sub. If the jvc is the former and a true audiophile listening experience then hooraah! dsnuts seems to be implying that is the case.

 
Everything you wrote seems to imply that you have the sole definition of what a basshead is, but I might suggest everyone doesn't subscribe to your basshead definition. I would consider myself a basshead more than anything else, but I'm certainly not one who prefers "slamming bass" no matter if it's in the recording or not. I also consider myself an audiophile. And there are those audiophiles that I know who do not like a subwoofer, even if it is blended seamlessly into the sound spectrum. Some audiophiles prefer the mids and treble to be more forward than the bass period. Again, I haven't heard the 200 and I stand by what I state about the 100. But instead of you taking everything I stated, you've read into it more and made assumptions about things I did not state or imply to fit your own criteria.

Bottom line, I'll stand by this: the FXZ100 sounds like no other IEM I've heard before, and if mine and other various opinions about the sound isn't good enough you and other perspective buyers, then I highly recommend you take the chance and buy it "unheard" (like we did) and decide for yourself what it sounds like. Or fly to Japan so you can listen to it at a store. Why get agitated, however, because reviewers aren't describing it the way you want it described? Everyone who've have bought and and heard the FXZ100/200 have pretty much stated the same thing: A) to whatever varying degree we all liked what we have heard (most did straight out of the box), and B) to whatever degree depending on the listener, we all agreed these are bass-heavy IEMs. A basshead will like a bass heavy headphone. I'm a basshead, yet I love the sound of the W4, the BA200, the V6 and the GR07, which I wouldn't call basshead IEMs. I significantly dwelled on the "quality" of bass until I was asked specifically about quantity compared to earphones with significant bass. I specifically stated that the XB90 probably has more bass in quantity than the FXZ100 (but not in quality), and that the XB90 had too much bass for my liking. Yet I'm still more of a basshead (base on my definition of what a basshead is). Please, if the descriptions are not satisfying, find a way to hear it for yourself or buy it. 

 

[lotusbloom]

To those who owns the FXZ100/200, how would you compare their bass performance to JVC's FX700s and their sound as a whole? 

 

[Dsnuts]

I would say for guys that want to try these and not worry about bass being too big for you the FXZ100 is the safe bet. It isnt bass light but it is no where near offensive levels. The quality here is so great that I would have a hard time understanding how anyone could find the bass end offensive on the FXZ100.  The FXZ200  I appreciate because these are the fist bass heavy Iem I have heard that have the refinement in the sound like they do.
 
You would think listening to instruments and vocals would somehow be lacking on a bass emphasized phone but that is not the case at all. Instruments and vocals have more depth and weight ultimately more substance in your music, something once you hear it just sounds right and sounds too great to not like. The tuning done here by JVC is nothing short of miraculous because there is nothing that sounds uncontrolled here at all and also the fact the scale of the sound is so big yet has so much to love about the sound. It is more difficult to describe these iems because there hasn't been anything out that sounds like these iems...
 
It is a combination of the intimate earphone higher resolution detailed sound the scale of a fullsized headphone type dynamics and the bass end of a Kelton sub woofer. lol. A freaking frankeinphone!
 
Somehow all of this just works. Both these are by far the best sounding JVC sound I have ever heard by the way.

 

[varyV]

I think I'm a little late to the party...but what the hell...at least I showed up

Can someone compare the bass quality/quantity on the 100/200 vs the fx700? I just sold my pair and am missing it like a newborn child. Any ideas would be helpful towards my next purchase. If someone could A/B the headphones in terms of overall quality, that would be brilliant.

 

[nihontoman]

Quote:

so is the jvc 100/200 for 'audiophiles' ?  I don't know any audiophiles who like slamming bass (especially in headphones).....not saying the 100 has slamming bass as I haven't heard it yet, but if it does, I'd say it's not for audiophiles....I know,, if it's in the recording it will come across as slamming bass and if it's not it won't. This is what i'm hoping for in any case. Hopefully these guys who are reporting them as 'for bassheads' are listening to their basshead tracks for this conclusion so we who are not bassheads and don't listen to basshead type songs won't find them to be 'for bassheads'. Hopefully it's a chicken and egg type thing and not a case of the chicken making all the eggs bassslamheavy
 
the previous poster mentioned(paraphrase) that 'if you don't like a home stereo with a subwoofer you won't like the new jvc'. Which doesn't makes sense to me because i've heard very nice 'audiophile' stereos that utilize a sub but no way a listener would know this due to 'extra' or 'pounding' bass. And of course i've heard many more stereos that use a sub and clearly you sit there saying to yourself, this stereo is using a sub. If the jvc is the former and a true audiophile listening experience then hooraah! dsnuts seems to be implying that is the case.

if you listen to bass light music, then I don't see any problem. guys here say that fxz series have everything and can play any range without problems, so if you feed it music that daoesn't have "offensive" amounts of bass, then you will be satisfied.
 
 
Quote:

 
This is where I feel like I separate myself from the rest of the Basshead Club here. Many of them swear up and down by the Sony XB line which to my understanding has bass quantity, but not so much quality; and thus the mids and highs suffer greatly, which to me isn't good enough for my basshead needs. I'm stuck in a bit of a middle ground, where I'm a basshead, but I NEED the rest of the spectrum to be smoothed out and not so coloured. At the same time, I require extension, quality, and quantity (but not over powering) bass in my headphones. The term for this? Bassphile? Subaudiophile? I don't know. I just know I'm a basshead that doesn't want any shenanigans along the freq response, except for a nice, quality boost in bass.
 
This is where my modded M-100s fit in; despite the slightly LESS recesed mids, it's still not as recessed as stock. Also where I believe the Z1/200s come in. I'm almost certain the Z200s are for me, but I might end up getting both, just for S&G.

 
The thing is, I have the xb90ex and I just love it. I love it because of its brilliant midrange and good relaxed highs that aren't harsh or fatiguing. it has very much bass in terms of quantity but quality doesn't suffer and it is well controlled, very extended. mids and highs definitely not suffer because of it having high quantity bass. besides, if you just listen to "non basshead" music, then it is ok, cause xb90exs just don't play something, if it isn't there. the only thing that sounds like it has too much bass is poorly mastered hip-hop or other bass heavy tracks. 
 
An iem can be very bass heavy, but it doesn't automatically mean that other ranges are hindered by it. I think Dsnuts will agree with me on this one....

 

[tgx78]

Mine is burned-in for at least 24 hours now. I just gave a quick listen.
I can tell bass is tightening up slightly and not as pronounced as before (which is good).
FXZ-100 is definitely a keeper and money well spent. It performs quite well for classical music. 
I am second concert master at 2 different local orchestras and this really gives me close portrayal of being in a concert.
I think if you seat close to cello and contrabass and away 10 rows back this is how you would hear.
Imaging is very good. Soundstage is fairly wide and depth is impressive as well. 
Comparing to XBA-3, JVC's mids and highs are smoother, have better dynamics and noticeably better timbre. 
XBA-3 might have slight upper hand in micro details and speed though.
I am not really good at describing sound in audiophile terminologies, but the bottom line is I am enjoying
FXZ-100 more that almost anything else that I have encountered in last few years.
I think only the Sennheiser HD800 wowed me more and yes it is full size can that costs 7 to 8X more.   

 

[Currawong]

My FX200s arrived. Still as impressive as they were in Tokyo. Too much bass though on some music. I'm listening to Jean-Pierre Mas - (H)ombre which is mastered in a way that emphasises bass a little and it is overwhelming. Highs are a touch harsh, which I expect may go with use. The bass doesn't overwhelm the mids much, despite the quantity of it, except where the track has too much and/or the volume is turned right up.
 
Initially percussion seems to be not quite as good as I remember it but still better than my previous experiences with IEMs prior to the XBA-3s.
 
I fell asleep listening to Magnificat, so that's all I'll say for now.

 

[jnsaudiophile]

My fxz200s are coming! 
 
Quick question, did any of you guys paid for custom fees for this? I didn't modify the value on the Tenso website ~18250 yen 
 
 
Also I own the GR07 and absolutely love it to death. Hopefully this will be more of like an update while I wait for the GR08

 

[esmBOS]

My FXZ200's arrived 1 min ago! Opening the package now! Excitement-level is way over 9000!!

 

[fzman]

Quote:

 
Thanks for the impressions... could you expound on this?  Do you mean by this there's a phase issue at times?
 
I'm somewhat concerned about the bass being a bit much and may do a trade for 100s.

Not a phase issue at all, as far as i can tell - they are both quite coherent.  It's more an attempt to capture the difference in 25 words or less.  

 

[BGRoberts]

Mine are here!
 
5 MINUTE OPEN-BOX LISTEN:
200's- sound "nice".  Lows are a bit loose...JUST a bit.  Mids & highs are smooth.  I hear some more detail than I've heard before.
100's - seem to need more power to hit the same volume as 200's.   solid bass, maybe again a TAD loose.  mids and highs smooth, with a little more clarity...Norah Jones is ALMOST sibilant in places, but hasn't crossed the line.  LOTS of detail.
 
Going to listen to the 100's awhile and put the 200's on burn-in.
 
I'm hyped and happy!
~BG

 

[bhima]

Quote:

Mine is burned-in for at least 24 hours now. I just gave a quick listen.
I can tell bass is tightening up slightly and not as pronounced as before (which is good).
FXZ-100 is definitely a keeper and money well spent. It performs quite well for classical music. 
I am second concert master at 2 different local orchestras and this really gives me close portrayal of being in a concert.
I think if you seat close to cello and contrabass and away 10 rows back this is how you would hear.
Imaging is very good. Soundstage is fairly wide and depth is impressive as well. 
Comparing to XBA-3, JVC's mids and highs are smoother, have better dynamics and noticeably better timbre. 
XBA-3 might have slight upper hand in micro details and speed though.
I am not really good at describing sound in audiophile terminologies, but the bottom line is I am enjoying
FXZ-100 more that almost anything else that I have encountered in last few years.
I think only the Sennheiser HD800 wowed me more and yes it is full size can that costs 7 to 8X more.   

 
 
Love reading about your experience, especially since you work with real orchestras. I have 2 IEM's on their way but they may go back to Amazon and I'll just wait it out till the FXZ100's make their way to the states. Anyone know if these are coming and when? $250 seems a bit high... was hoping for just under $200.