I just want to read more impressions about the K2, it's next on my maybe to get in the future before I die list.
[kiteki review] - Hifiman RE0 / RE252 / RE272 versus other IEM's (post #153)
- Thread starter kiteki
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
- Posts
- 11,029
- Likes
- 6,671
Keep it on topic, guys--and without the personal attacks. Some posts may be deleted here, after a review.
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Here's a little comparison between RE0, RE272, FX700 and e-Q7 that I posted in Mark's RE272 review thread. I know it contradicts some of the claims I made about the RE272 sound before and shows that the only reliable way to compare headphones is to actually AB them:
Today, I had a chance to briefly compare RE0, RE272, FX700 and e-Q7 side by side. To my surprise, RE272 didn't fare quite as well against the other IEMs as I expected them to. I listened briefly to some pop and instrumental on my Clip and Sony players I used the same tips on all the IEMs to make the comparison reasonably fair. The RE0 pair I tested is over a year old and probably has over 1000 hours of burn in on them already. Same with e-Q7. The RE272 and FX700 are mine and have a lot less hours on them. FX700 has around 20-30, while RE272 has around 5-10. Not sure if that's what affected my impressions, but I suspect lack of burn in is not the problem here. At least I don't believe that headphone can change in sound that much with burn in. Yes, small changes are possible, but not huge differences IMO.
But anyway, here's what I found:
FX700 is clearly the least balanced signature of the 4 to my ears - they have a tad too much mid bass and treble emphasis compared to the others and also the bass sounds a bit slow and sloppy. I enjoyed them the least of the 4.
RE272 has the second worst balance for my tastes, although it is significantly better balanced than FX700 and a lot closer in balance to RE0 and e-Q7 than FX700. The problem with RE272 is that I find the sound a little too smooth, the bass lacking some kick, the highs sounding slightly peaky, although generally very smooth and the imaging and micro detail noticeably glossed over - not sharp enough IMO. I thought I could hear more detail with RE272 than with the others when I listened to just the RE272, but for some reason when AB'ing them against the others, I could not hear much if any extra information in my music.
RE0 sounded more balanced to me than the RE272 and as you are already aware when evaluating balance, I am not just considering frequency response, but the overall sound quality and character. The RE0 I tested had the foams inside the nozzles removed and yet it still it sounds darker than my RE272 which has the foams in. However, I found RE0 sharper, more defined sounding than the RE272 with similar or better extension both high and low and similar overall sound quality, at least when driven by such low-fi sources as the Clip. I understand that RE272 is supposed to be more revealing than RE0 and thus supposedly need a better source, but then RE0 is higher impedance, harder to driver and needs more power as well, so this comparison is only useful for those planning to use the IEMs mostly as portables with average consumer grade portable DAPs. Thus, I think RE0 is actually better suited for this application than the RE272 and provides a more fun and energetic sound than the latter without yielding to it in most other aspects of sound quality.
Finally, I found I enjoyed the e-Q7 the most out of the 4. With burn in, the highs on this IEM seem to get smoother and they have no trace of harshness that my newer e-Q7s used to have. I found that e-Q7 seemed to strike the best balance out of the 4 in terms of musicality vs. technical ability. It is fast, detailed, very lively, smooth and textured with excellent sense of space and good dynamics, but it also sounds sharper, better defined than RE272, much better balanced than FX700, more powerful than RE0.
Conclusion: A really unexpected one. It makes me feel like a fool for praising the RE272 too much. I think I will sell FX700 and RE272 and get the e-Q7 and RE0 again. The latter two simply suit my tastes with my sources better.
Today, I had a chance to briefly compare RE0, RE272, FX700 and e-Q7 side by side. To my surprise, RE272 didn't fare quite as well against the other IEMs as I expected them to. I listened briefly to some pop and instrumental on my Clip and Sony players I used the same tips on all the IEMs to make the comparison reasonably fair. The RE0 pair I tested is over a year old and probably has over 1000 hours of burn in on them already. Same with e-Q7. The RE272 and FX700 are mine and have a lot less hours on them. FX700 has around 20-30, while RE272 has around 5-10. Not sure if that's what affected my impressions, but I suspect lack of burn in is not the problem here. At least I don't believe that headphone can change in sound that much with burn in. Yes, small changes are possible, but not huge differences IMO.
But anyway, here's what I found:
FX700 is clearly the least balanced signature of the 4 to my ears - they have a tad too much mid bass and treble emphasis compared to the others and also the bass sounds a bit slow and sloppy. I enjoyed them the least of the 4.
RE272 has the second worst balance for my tastes, although it is significantly better balanced than FX700 and a lot closer in balance to RE0 and e-Q7 than FX700. The problem with RE272 is that I find the sound a little too smooth, the bass lacking some kick, the highs sounding slightly peaky, although generally very smooth and the imaging and micro detail noticeably glossed over - not sharp enough IMO. I thought I could hear more detail with RE272 than with the others when I listened to just the RE272, but for some reason when AB'ing them against the others, I could not hear much if any extra information in my music.
RE0 sounded more balanced to me than the RE272 and as you are already aware when evaluating balance, I am not just considering frequency response, but the overall sound quality and character. The RE0 I tested had the foams inside the nozzles removed and yet it still it sounds darker than my RE272 which has the foams in. However, I found RE0 sharper, more defined sounding than the RE272 with similar or better extension both high and low and similar overall sound quality, at least when driven by such low-fi sources as the Clip. I understand that RE272 is supposed to be more revealing than RE0 and thus supposedly need a better source, but then RE0 is higher impedance, harder to driver and needs more power as well, so this comparison is only useful for those planning to use the IEMs mostly as portables with average consumer grade portable DAPs. Thus, I think RE0 is actually better suited for this application than the RE272 and provides a more fun and energetic sound than the latter without yielding to it in most other aspects of sound quality.
Finally, I found I enjoyed the e-Q7 the most out of the 4. With burn in, the highs on this IEM seem to get smoother and they have no trace of harshness that my newer e-Q7s used to have. I found that e-Q7 seemed to strike the best balance out of the 4 in terms of musicality vs. technical ability. It is fast, detailed, very lively, smooth and textured with excellent sense of space and good dynamics, but it also sounds sharper, better defined than RE272, much better balanced than FX700, more powerful than RE0.
Conclusion: A really unexpected one. It makes me feel like a fool for praising the RE272 too much. I think I will sell FX700 and RE272 and get the e-Q7 and RE0 again. The latter two simply suit my tastes with my sources better.
Danchou
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2011
- Posts
- 61
- Likes
- 10
Gogo kiteki, finish that review!
I really like your way of describin sound! unique, but really imaginary.
I'm a impatient person, gogogo
EDIT: an average of 71 posts per day this week... maybe you should make more use of the edit function
I really like your way of describin sound! unique, but really imaginary.
I'm a impatient person, gogogo
EDIT: an average of 71 posts per day this week... maybe you should make more use of the edit function
kiteki
aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Posts
- 10,617
- Likes
- 174
Time to keep listening.
I'd like to voice my opinion on the Etymotic ER-4PT before I pack it up (trading), I didn't really like the sound very much, but it improved significantly with a 75 ohm adaptor (which turns it into the ER-4S) and brought out it's qualities.
The ER-4S is really much more spacious and impressive, it has fantastically clear highs, I love the decay of shimmering cymbals that just extends upward. Imagine that air on every instrument, piano, vocals, there's a really nice sense of air and decay, it's also fairly accurate.
Detailed, I think lends to this signature, that everything appears rather detailed, however I'd like to counter that and (imho) I think there are details that get caught up in the single driver, what I'm saying is they come from the same point in space, there's isn't much layering or imaging and thus detail suffers in this respect, compared to the CK10 I think the CK10 has more detail, and also more speed, in line with the J-phonic (however the J-phonic has speed in the highs and huge decay in the bass, at the same time).
The "microdetail" however (in the way I perceive that term) reminds me of the Shure SRH-940. Listening to the ER-4S and watching the oscilloscope visualizer in foobar at the same time is really fun.
On the negative side, I find myself analyzing the sounds of the music, intead of enjoying the music, so the enjoyment factor is a bit lower than ideal, the intimacy is low, the bass impact is low, and sometimes it feels like a stream of 1's and 0's, however this was even more true of the ER-4PT, I couldn't hear anything but that "1's and 0's" feeling. If the EX1000 is reading romantic litterature, the ER-4 is reading glossary's and phonebooks.
I'm really quite surprised at how much the adaptor improved the ER-4PT.
This is the first song I heard on the ER-4S (ER-4PT with the 75 ohm adaptor), this song is a great match for the ER-4, and I think my amplifier responds better to higher impedance IEM's (which might be tainting this mini-review, since my amplifier made the ER-4S that much better than it's low ohm counterpart).
The design of the packaging was really quite nice (I like the ETYMOTIC red text on the black box) and the FR sheet is something that I really hope other IEM manufacturers pick up on. Just to clarify, it's a frequency response graph of your IEM, with serial codes on the paper that match the serial codes on the ER-4's themselves, as confirmation.
As a final note the design of the IEM's themselves is horrid, it feels like an insect in your ear and you can't wear them over-ear.
The reason I bought the ER-4? http://sonove.angry.jp, thanks Sonove!
My first song experience on the ER-4S, please listen =)
http://grooveshark.com/#/s/Bittersweet/3Q2Irs?src=5
I'd like to voice my opinion on the Etymotic ER-4PT before I pack it up (trading), I didn't really like the sound very much, but it improved significantly with a 75 ohm adaptor (which turns it into the ER-4S) and brought out it's qualities.
The ER-4S is really much more spacious and impressive, it has fantastically clear highs, I love the decay of shimmering cymbals that just extends upward. Imagine that air on every instrument, piano, vocals, there's a really nice sense of air and decay, it's also fairly accurate.
Detailed, I think lends to this signature, that everything appears rather detailed, however I'd like to counter that and (imho) I think there are details that get caught up in the single driver, what I'm saying is they come from the same point in space, there's isn't much layering or imaging and thus detail suffers in this respect, compared to the CK10 I think the CK10 has more detail, and also more speed, in line with the J-phonic (however the J-phonic has speed in the highs and huge decay in the bass, at the same time).
The "microdetail" however (in the way I perceive that term) reminds me of the Shure SRH-940. Listening to the ER-4S and watching the oscilloscope visualizer in foobar at the same time is really fun.
On the negative side, I find myself analyzing the sounds of the music, intead of enjoying the music, so the enjoyment factor is a bit lower than ideal, the intimacy is low, the bass impact is low, and sometimes it feels like a stream of 1's and 0's, however this was even more true of the ER-4PT, I couldn't hear anything but that "1's and 0's" feeling. If the EX1000 is reading romantic litterature, the ER-4 is reading glossary's and phonebooks.
I'm really quite surprised at how much the adaptor improved the ER-4PT.
This is the first song I heard on the ER-4S (ER-4PT with the 75 ohm adaptor), this song is a great match for the ER-4, and I think my amplifier responds better to higher impedance IEM's (which might be tainting this mini-review, since my amplifier made the ER-4S that much better than it's low ohm counterpart).
The design of the packaging was really quite nice (I like the ETYMOTIC red text on the black box) and the FR sheet is something that I really hope other IEM manufacturers pick up on. Just to clarify, it's a frequency response graph of your IEM, with serial codes on the paper that match the serial codes on the ER-4's themselves, as confirmation.
As a final note the design of the IEM's themselves is horrid, it feels like an insect in your ear and you can't wear them over-ear.
The reason I bought the ER-4? http://sonove.angry.jp, thanks Sonove!
My first song experience on the ER-4S, please listen =)
http://grooveshark.com/#/s/Bittersweet/3Q2Irs?src=5
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Quote:
I think I could say the same about ER4 vs. RE0. ER4 is flatter with less depth and layers. RE0 has more layers and a more realistic, spacious soundstage with a better sense of depth. RE0 is a little slower than ER4 however, but not critically so. I don't think any BA can be faster than ER4, though I haven't heard CK10 or J-phonic. The details that ER4 has don't have a whole lot of depth to them (although I think depth significantly improves with better sources and amps), but the details never get smeared on the ER4, no matter how complex the music is IMO. ER4 is the epitome of speed for me.
I think I could say the same about ER4 vs. RE0. ER4 is flatter with less depth and layers. RE0 has more layers and a more realistic, spacious soundstage with a better sense of depth. RE0 is a little slower than ER4 however, but not critically so. I don't think any BA can be faster than ER4, though I haven't heard CK10 or J-phonic. The details that ER4 has don't have a whole lot of depth to them (although I think depth significantly improves with better sources and amps), but the details never get smeared on the ER4, no matter how complex the music is IMO. ER4 is the epitome of speed for me.
kiteki
aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Posts
- 10,617
- Likes
- 174
The ER-4 + 75 ohm sounded good out of my Yulong U100 Dac/Amp.
What source or DAP are you using with the RE0?
What are the primary improvements after burn-in, in your opinion?
I found the ER-4 fast in a microdetail sense, but not in a monsoon of distinct notes sense, where the CK10 and J-phonic are clearly better.
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Quote:
Well, I don't know. I though the notes on ER4 sounded pretty **** distinct - it had fantastic separation, although little depth. Somewhat similar to RE252 in this regard IMO.
Honestly, I don't know how much RE0 improves with burn in. Burn in is a very slippery phenomenon anyway. All I know is that to my ears my friend's 2 year old RE0 V3 sounds significantly better than the V4 I had. I really wanted to think that my V4 reached the friend's V3 SQ level after a few tenths of hours of burn in, but I just don't think it sounded as good as the V3 even after 100 hours when it broke and I had to send it back for replacement. Still waiting for a new replacement pair of RE0 V4. I REALLY hope it will sound like the friend's V3 eventually. And of course I really hope that it won't break so soon. What version do you have BTW and is it used?
Well, I don't know. I though the notes on ER4 sounded pretty **** distinct - it had fantastic separation, although little depth. Somewhat similar to RE252 in this regard IMO.
Honestly, I don't know how much RE0 improves with burn in. Burn in is a very slippery phenomenon anyway. All I know is that to my ears my friend's 2 year old RE0 V3 sounds significantly better than the V4 I had. I really wanted to think that my V4 reached the friend's V3 SQ level after a few tenths of hours of burn in, but I just don't think it sounded as good as the V3 even after 100 hours when it broke and I had to send it back for replacement. Still waiting for a new replacement pair of RE0 V4. I REALLY hope it will sound like the friend's V3 eventually. And of course I really hope that it won't break so soon. What version do you have BTW and is it used?
Quote:
Good job.
UE buds you can buy from UE directly. I traded away other tips I had with other head-fiers to obtain more UE buds. I like RE0 and RE252 better with them. On ZERO, it made the upper midrange fatiguing, but I other wise liked the improvement as well.
See for yourself.
kiteki
aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Posts
- 10,617
- Likes
- 174
Quote:
They became a whirlpool since they were all coming from the same place, CK10 and J-phonic seperates them better and operates a tiny bit faster I think, ER-4 has better decay than the CK10 and decay and speed are interrelated and mutually exclusive to an extent imho, you can solve this with multiple (different) drivers and it seems like that's what the J-phonic has done since it has one tiny super-fast driver (with less decay in the highs than ER-4) and one huge bass driver. I wonder what drivers the J-phonic is using I have no idea, but apparently they're the same as in 2-xs which has been around for a long time (except there was some debate that the 2-xs become brighter without sensaphonic saying anything, so they might have changed the tweeter driver along the way to the current one, the J-phonic is somewhat bright).
Mind you all this speed stuff is usually only a high preference to me when I play Lunatic Rave 2 (a music/rhythm game), or when I listen to faster electronic music or faster drum patterns and guitar shredding, I think an IEM with good speed (like the CK10) sounds more rhythmical, it's easier to get into the rhythms and that is the addictive part I like, it lends that signature to the overall presentation of the sound, however there are other IEM's without speed that are still very immersive in other flavours which probably take precedence, for instance the J-phonic is fast but I'm not a huge fan of it's overall presentation so I guess it was the whole spectrum of flavours in the ck10 that did it for me and if it didn't have it's speed and had more ER-4-like decay in the highs then it's possible I would have liked it even more! I suppose this is where customs come into play where you can have a ck10 dual-armature driver along with the Ety ER-4 armature that would sound great imho I wonder if such a thing exists...
As for the RE0 mine is used and I have no idea how much burn-in or what version it is.
Quote:
Ok, as you are an A2000X user and recommending me the UE buds on the $79 RE0 I shall blindly follow your advice...
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Quote:
Ok, does it have a small L-shaped plug or large, rounded L-shaped plug? Did you buy it new or used?
As for the RE0 mine is used and I have no idea how much burn-in or what version it is.
Ok, as you are an A2000X user and recommending me the UE buds on the $79 RE0 I shall blindly follow your advice...
Ok, does it have a small L-shaped plug or large, rounded L-shaped plug? Did you buy it new or used?
kiteki
aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Posts
- 10,617
- Likes
- 174
This plug http://www.themindofgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/re0-9.jpg
I traded my ESW9 for an RE0 and I don't think he'd had it for very long, first owner.
I traded my ESW9 for an RE0 and I don't think he'd had it for very long, first owner.
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Quote:
Is it the picture of the pair you have? Because it looks like it has the V1/V2 housing still, which means that it sounds inferior to the V3 and V4, especially unamped.
Is it the picture of the pair you have? Because it looks like it has the V1/V2 housing still, which means that it sounds inferior to the V3 and V4, especially unamped.
kiteki
aka Theta Alpha 1
aka Alpha Zeta 5
aka Alpha Zeta 6
aka Nanocat Systems
And many other aliases
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Posts
- 10,617
- Likes
- 174
Just a random pic from the internet, mine came in the newer yellow plexiglas type box so I don't think it's the oldest version, which comes in a cardboard type box. The housing seems rock solid.
I received a pair of black tips that are like the Shure Olives, just harder, quite nice, I've only used these so far and user "kanuka" says he didn't receive those in his brand new RE0 last week... I guess I have to use the biflanges instead for fairness.
I received a pair of black tips that are like the Shure Olives, just harder, quite nice, I've only used these so far and user "kanuka" says he didn't receive those in his brand new RE0 last week... I guess I have to use the biflanges instead for fairness.
Pianist
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Posts
- 3,994
- Likes
- 113
Yeah, RE0 doesn't come with those tips you are talking about.
Users who are viewing this thread
