ljokerl, could you give a few more words about the sound of the Coby CV-185?
Mar 15, 2010 at 4:27 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 12

Olimoronio

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Posts
896
Likes
15
Especially compared to the JVC Flats, KSC75 and maybe even the JVC HA-RX700.

You haven't reviewed these yet, correct?

Also, the CV215's are the same phone just colored, right?
 
Mar 15, 2010 at 5:14 AM Post #2 of 12

ljokerl

Portables Reviewerus Prolificus
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Posts
10,274
Likes
972
I was planning to post my review of them this week but stupidly made a promise to myself to finally finish up my HD25-1 review first, which I have yet to do.

For what they cost I really like the Cobys. Maybe I've simply become acclimated to crap SQ because of the Kanen and Panasonic headphones that I've reviewed recently, but I've been listening to the Cobys side-by-side with my AKGs and nicer Philips phones and they aren't offensive at all. They don't do anything amazingly well but the sound signature is quite balanced and coherent. They have fair extension on either end, good clarity, good instrumental separation, and so forth. I did A:B them with the KSC75 for my review and they differ quite a bit in what they do right. I'll just post part of that paragraph from my review in its unfinished state:

Quote:

The CV-185 sound less muddy at the low end but also lack the fullness, smoothness, and dimensionality of the KSC75s. They do boast better separation and a more emphasized midrange compared to the KSCs. With the foam pads they are also more balanced and neutral, with treble that lacks the bite and sparkle of the KSC75s but has more convincing tone.


The foam pads in question are radioshack flat foam pads, courtesy of jant71. They change the signature of the Cobys quite drastically, reducing the bass impact of the stock pads (which isn't great to begin with) and bringing forward the treble (which is otherwise quite laid-back).

I don't really think these can compete with a properly-modded RX700 but they probably best the Flats in terms of overall usability. To the credit of the 'flats' their frequency response is pretty even while the Cobys have some spikes here and there. But while they aren't "giant killers" (hate that term) by any means, for what they cost ($10) they really do no wrong.

And yes, as far as I know the CV215 are just different color schemes. I actually do like the way these look. Thay are pretty large but yet very low-profile and understated so they don't draw any attention.
 
Mar 15, 2010 at 5:29 AM Post #3 of 12

Olimoronio

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Posts
896
Likes
15
Thanks a lot, man. I already ordered them after hearing you liked them more than the Flats. So far, the phones that I've heard that you've reviewed I've pretty much agreed with you on.

I'll do a review as well (for good or bad) because brands like these are often mocked and not taken seriously - just see my thread on the full-sized forum about the Coby CV720 that I noticed while looking for these.

I believe that if a company makes a good phone, history be damned, it should be recognized as such.
 
Mar 15, 2010 at 5:37 AM Post #4 of 12

ljokerl

Portables Reviewerus Prolificus
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Posts
10,274
Likes
972
To be honest I never would've picked these up either after owning two sets of Coby IEMs in the past (which were pure, unadulterated crap). I did see the CV720s on J&R's site when browsing for the 215s. At the very least they look quite comfy.

Glad someone else will be able to chime in on these. Maybe this is one fotm that needs to be nipped in the bud.
 
Mar 15, 2010 at 9:26 AM Post #5 of 12

Napilopez

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Posts
1,025
Likes
282
Woah... Coby, making a quality anything? Pigs do fly! XD. Just goes to prove that any company can surprise you in the audio world. I appreciate coby's uber budget efforts, but every product I've had from them have been pretty bad. Interesting.
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 12:57 AM Post #6 of 12

cam94z28

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
357
Likes
12
Aside from the forward mids, which are fairly honky/shouty to me, i like these too. Do the flat pads help in this area, or do they need blu-tak? Also, whats the radio shack P/N or a link?
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 3:12 PM Post #7 of 12

jant71

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Posts
7,262
Likes
4,225
The foam pads fix most of it. The stock pads cause the honk. The pads are these...
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3786220
The large ones are the size. I used both the, small underneath the large, to warm them up a bit. My pair, with continued burn in, became a bit bass light unamped.
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 5:53 PM Post #8 of 12

cam94z28

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
357
Likes
12
I actually thought mine were bass light until I had a few hours on them. The bass suddenly came out, like magic. Hopefully it won't disappear just as quickly.
 
That's sad that the pads cost half as much as the phones. I wonder if the Porta Pro pads would fit. That way I'll have a set I can actually use for something else. Koss.com has pads for any of their phones at a flat rate of $5.
 
Do the phones look wierd with these pads attached?
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 6:16 PM Post #9 of 12

jant71

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Posts
7,262
Likes
4,225
Yeah, for some reason they haven't been selling them separately. Only the big/small combo pack last time I checked(they were separately available there in the past). There might be some out there for cheap somewhere else. I just haven't seen them though. Maybe try ebay.
 
The small are the Portapro size, the large are Grado/Coby size.
 
I think they look better with the foam pads. Very flush against the head with them. 
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 6:36 PM Post #10 of 12

cam94z28

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
357
Likes
12
If it cleans up the upper mids, they're worth a try, even at that price. I was about to try something for internal damping. I like the bass and highs on these quite a bit. They sound especially good on my S:Flo2 with 2.30 FW.
 
Do the pads just stretch over the front, or do they somehow fit in the little groove of the stock pads?
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 6:55 PM Post #11 of 12

jant71

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Posts
7,262
Likes
4,225
I would just put them over and past the groove where the stock pads fit into though they could go in there with a bit more effort. They look nicer going over and just leaving the center part of the housing with the COBY showing.
 
The upper mids are quite clean then and the S:flo2 has the power so they should have enough bass. I only found the bass lacking with weaker players unamped.
 
Aug 28, 2010 at 7:39 PM Post #12 of 12

cam94z28

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Posts
357
Likes
12
The S:Flo2 does have a lot of power. I thought my Sansa Fuze v2 with rockbox was powerful, until I got the S:Flo2. Will try the pads next time I pass by a radio shack.
 
BTW, If yours have become bass light, try tightening the screws. Take a good mini screw driver that fits well, and you can get a lot of leverage on (not those cheap metal "precision" screwdrivers), and tighten all of them until they bottom out. I took one of the cups apart just to see what the drivers looked like. I never touched the other cup, and it was already as loose as the other side with the screws barely tightened down. Even tightened all the way down If I try to "wobble" the front of the cup, there still seems to be a little bit of play. It's like the stock screws aren't really quite long enough. It's worth a shot to see if you can get your bass back. The mids even seem slightly better to me (probably placebo) after making sure mine were tight.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top