Listening tests UE10 and Senaphonics 2X

[jjcha]

Hey guys, dunno how this thread changed to this subject.

Not often I'm agreeing with toaster22, but I gotta say, other than the lack of openness/soundstage - the in your ear nature of the custom IEM - I do think they are comparable to high end open phones such as the HD600/650, CD3k/SA5k and Grado RS-1/PS-1.

I know I've been critical in comparisons in the past - my main point was that the Sensaphonics doesn't beat out any of the aforementioned full-sized phones, which all have something sonically special that the Sensas don't. But in terms of raw sonic performance, other than the aforementioned caveat, I think the Sensas do compare with these phones and deserve to be in the same tier (even if they're not at the top of that tier). In fact, one of the strengths of the Sensas is that while it may not have the special strengths of any one of the aforementioned phones, it is certainly pretty well balanced and doesn't suffer from some of the weaknesses that each of the aforementioned open phones have. Well, I still think its treble performance isn't as good as it could be, but that's a point for another thread.

Having said that, each of us here in Tokyo own the Sensaphonics (me, mavis, tk_suki) and we all agree, as great as they are, when we get home we need to take them out and listen to something that isn't entirely in our head. We also are each always looking for good transportable phones - such as the Grado RS-1 - which easily fit into a suitcase for longer business trips. The custom IEM just are too in-your-ear to enjoy in the hotel room.

But I wouldn't say they have a fundamentally lesser sound quality. Just inherent limitations, which are certainly outweighed by their portability/isolation.

Best regards,

-Jason

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula I agree with you, to a point. Yes, if the comparable open headphone can't be used for portable use, the IEM sound quality becomes less of an issue. However, it may not be worth it for some people to spend up to $1,000 for a portable phone that doesn't sound as good as the comparable open phone. For example, as I'm sure many here will attest, it can be very difficult to go to a different or lower quality sound when you've become accustomed to something better for your tastes. So for me, I think it's fair to consider whether the lesser sound quality compared to the comparable open phone is worth the money for the convenience of the portability.

 

[iamdone]

I hope I didn't stear this thread in the wrong direction.

For portable use, I don't think you can do any better than the ue10 with the sensas at a close second (this order is my own preference). I could not see using the Grados as a portable phone. I am tempted to see how the lower end models might work but then the iem might even win soundwise. So while I'm at work and just taking a walk, I'm amazed at the sound I'm hearing. It really is that good. The only time I ever think of comparing them to the RS-1 is when a faster rock song comes on and it just doesn't sound quite right. That's it. Everything else is amazing. As far as the sensas, I think they're great headphones, but just not exactly right for me.

 

[toaster]

and you only put the ue-10 on top when you use an amp, right iamdone?

for me, the minimalist, looking for an ipod-headphone combo, the sensaphonics are the top choice.

again, bitzula, i just don't see the logic of comparing iems to open phones...you keep talking about the "in your head feeling," and putting the iems down for this. it's not really a problem with sound quality, it's a problem with the very nature of canalphones that you are expressing. i just don't think it is fair, or relevant. if someone is looking for the best sound on the go, and that's all, (i do believe that's why most people look into iems...and again, personally i think custom iems offer some of the best sound possible, period) what is the point of talking about 3 or 4 pound headphones that you are only going to wear at home?

of couse iems are going to sound like they are in your head...they go in your head! lets stop holding that against them please.

 

[Blitzula]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 again, bitzula, i just don't see the logic of comparing iems to open phones...you keep talking about the "in your head feeling," and putting the iems down for this.

I "keep talking" about that? Since when?

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 of couse iems are going to sound like they are in your head...they go in your head! lets stop holding that against them please.

Since I'm not on a mission to convince people one way or the other on high end or other IEMs, I don't view the issue the same as you. I don't really get why you even care if people note what some of the advantages/disadvantages of IEMs and comparable headphones are.

 

[iamdone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 and you only put the ue-10 on top when you use an amp, right iamdone? for me, the minimalist, looking for an ipod-headphone combo, the sensaphonics are the top choice.

I've kind of flip flopped on that. While the sensas do sound more musical straight out of the ipod, over time they still just sound too stuffy for me due to the highend rolloff. I only use the sensas when I want to fall asleep to music.

The only reason full size headphones are brought up is that sometimes these iems are mentioned like they are the best period. So people might think you can just buy the ue10 and have the perfect portable and home headphone together. They work great as a home phone but I think you might be missing out if you don't try some fullsized headphones to see the difference. I know there are those who disagree with this.

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 of couse iems are going to sound like they are in your head...they go in your head!

IEMs are not necessarily sounding like they are inside your head.Remember, your receiving eardrums are inside the head all the time.
Try one of the rare binaural recordings, many of them work extremely well with IEMs, better than with fullsize headphones.
The main reason why IEMs are sounding even more wierd regarding soundstage is the total lack of the influence of the pinnae.
With a little help by HRTF equalization, another equalization compensating for standing waves, another equalization compensating for uneven frequenzy response of the balanced armature drivers themself, crossfeed and a tiny amount of reverb high end IEMs might be the best "headphones" available.
Add head tracking and a body-mounted device for visceral bass, and we might be in audio nirvana.

Admittedly not exactly what some of our members would call a straightforward purist approach.

 

[wolfen68]

I've thought of initiating a post a couple of times along the same topic that this thread has turned. I've heard a bunch of IEM's (not all) and have UE5c's now. They are great and I reach for them first if I need isolation or extreme portability....BUT I do not view them as a full size headphone replacement. For home listening, the Grado 225's go on first.

I think a lot of people moving into IEM's have an unreasonable expectation that IEM's are the end all and should be as good as comparable priced full size phones. Don't forget that a lot of what you're paying for is the miniaturization technology and the entry price into a niche market.

If someone buys $500-$1000 IEM's and prefers them more than their $500-$1000 fullsize cans....than I'm glad they're happy. But no one should expect this as a given.

Also...regarding the original topic and statements...I have to echo RP's statement that while the UE5c's have a strong mid bass element, I would not call them overly bassy in any way. Maybe Tyll's set still has the notch filter oft discussed here?

 

[random person]

I agree, as always, with everything Wolfen said!

Expecting IEMs to sound as good as full-sized cans -- well, it's kinda like expecting your full-sized cans to sound as good as your high end speakers. It just isn't going to be the same, and that's ok -- they each have their role to play.

That said, it seems reasonable for people to ask for relative comparisons to things they have had experience with. After all, otherwise no one would have a starting point or any basis for comparison, and we all need that in order to make our purchase decisions.

 

[toaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmopragma IEMs are not necessarily sounding like they are inside your head.Remember, your receiving eardrums are inside the head all the time. Try one of the rare binaural recordings, many of them work extremely well with IEMs, better than with fullsize headphones. The main reason why IEMs are sounding even more wierd regarding soundstage is the total lack of the influence of the pinnae. With a little help by HRTF equalization, another equalization compensating for standing waves, another equalization compensating for uneven frequenzy response of the balanced armature drivers themself, crossfeed and a tiny amount of reverb high end IEMs might be the best "headphones" available. Add head tracking and a body-mounted device for visceral bass, and we might be in audio nirvana. Admittedly not exactly what some of our members would call a straightforward purist approach.

here's something i wrote in a different thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 here's the deal... the way our ears perceive sound (in a nutshell) is: 1) Sounds enter our ears and bounces around the pinna. The pinna is the concave outer part of our ear, before the ear canal. The pinna is responsible for creating nearly ALL acoustical cues. A study was done, where clay was inserted into the pinna, essentially "flattening out" the surface of the ear. All that was left was a hole where the ear canal formed. The rest of the pinna was filled with clay. The subjects who's ears were filled with clay had nearly an impossible time detecting the source of sounds presented around them. 2) The ear canal picks up sounds once they have been ricocheted around the pinna, and then ricochets them some more. Finally you hear the sound. Wow, that's an abbreviated description. Here's the point: Headphones, because they sit around your ears, still allow the pinna to pick up acoustical cues. This adds depth, and creates what we perceive as soundstage. Now, with canalphones the pinna is not active in the listening experience. Here's where it gets interesting though...the good people over at sensaphonics, ultimate ears and likely all other high-end custom iem companies, work hard to recreate the effects of what it sounds like when your pinna plays an active role in hearing music. They do this by modifying the sound output of the canalphones, to artificially create these little reverberations and modifications in sound. In some respects, sensaphonics has succeeded at doing this. (I only mention sensaphonics, cause it's all i personally have heard) The results are actually quite startling at times, because it really does sound like sounds are distant and you can sense the acoustics of the room they were recorded in. It should be noted that each iem company has their own way of recreating these pinna effects. Michael santucci himself actually posted about it back in a thread i started a whiles back. kinda interesting if you can dig it up. anyway, what i will say is that the ability of canalphones to recreate this "open-sound" was certainly not that striking until the sensaphonics. The etys are able to create some sort of space, but it always seemed flat in terms of truly being able to sense room acoustics. The e5's produce deep bass which is visceral and creates an "openness" in its own right. The sensaphonics on the other hand, simply are "wide-open" in comparison. They are fantastic. But, in the end, while headphones will always allow for the pinna part of our hearing to be truly active, canalphones will always offer a somewhat artificial, if any, recreation of these pinna effects. hope that makes some sense.

 

[brianknewbie]

Thanks Tyll for your comparison of the two.

I have UE-10s ready to pick up tomorrow and am glad to read that they are basically the same as the other viable alternative out there