Monster Turbine Pro vs. Shure Se 530 vs. Sennheiser CX 870
Jun 30, 2010 at 6:43 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 20

Nycknicks105

New Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Posts
16
Likes
0
I'm at odds over here. I'm currently in the market for some new IEM's and I dont know which ones to pick up. I know the Sennheisers seem to be the odd man out out of the three I mentioned. I'm just looking for something to use with my iPod classic 160gb. I listen to almost every kind of genre possible, I'm not selective.
 
What I want out of the headphones are:
1. Really good highs
2. Awesome mids
3. Great lows
 
I know It seems like I want some awesome IEM's, but if you guys suggestions let me know please. I'm open to other IEM's besides the ones I listed.
 
Jun 30, 2010 at 6:52 AM Post #2 of 20
if you can find brand new gold's for $175 or less then its worth it
they do pretty much every genre well except bass might be too overpowering in some classical songs
i should get the senns by this week
will post some impressions by then
 
Jun 30, 2010 at 7:04 AM Post #3 of 20
I can get the Golds for $111.98. Do you think they're really worth it?? I absolutely LOVE my Shure SE 210's, but old age got to them. My lead messed up and now one side of the ear doesn't play any music and other times I hear a lot of static. I was thinking about sending it in to Shure, but I don't think the warranty would be covered.
 
Jun 30, 2010 at 4:36 PM Post #5 of 20
It's brand new and directly from Monster.
smile_phones.gif

 
Jun 30, 2010 at 7:56 PM Post #8 of 20


Quote:
What are main differences between the coppers and the golds?


Copper BASS is tight and accurate but the Golds go a touch lower and have a bit more weight and decay.  Coppers have more treble energy and do a better job than the Golds of presenting the detail to you.  The treble energy brings things like electric guitars more to life say in Metal.  Its a balanced V-shape.  The Golds have less treble energy and sound warmer.  The details are there but not as forward and obvious.  They (Golds) are designed to be euphonic in that they can play any genre, any source and any file type and they are still very listenable and enjoyable.  The Coppers will reveal more flaws from your source and material if they are present.  I also find the Coppers to be more fatiguing over longer listening sessions than the Golds which can be worn all day long.  The Copper treble can be tuned w/ tip choice and placement to correct for this though.
 
Jun 30, 2010 at 8:01 PM Post #9 of 20
^
I agree with just about everything but the fatigue part but that is different from one person to another. I also found the cable on the Golds superior to the Coppers.
 
Jun 30, 2010 at 8:58 PM Post #10 of 20


Quote:
^
I agree with just about everything but the fatigue part but that is different from one person to another. I also found the cable on the Golds superior to the Coppers.


I used the black gel tips and sat them right on the precipice of falling out so treble got full extension.  After a few hours I probably could have just pushed them in further to mitigate that.  Instead I opted to swap for my MD's!  
tongue_smile.gif

 
Jul 1, 2010 at 3:35 AM Post #12 of 20


Quote:
I think i might be able to pick the golds then. How do you guys feel about the Shure SE 530?


Some really like them, others like myself don't.  Its not the type of signature that makes you wanna rock out if you catch my drift.  Its more of a relax in a lazy boy, close your eyes and think about the sound type of phone IMO.  I had every Shure IEM out there for years but never really liked any of them.  Others talk like they would sell their kidney for a pair.  Meh... 
 
Jul 1, 2010 at 5:28 AM Post #14 of 20


Quote:
Some really like them, others like myself don't.  Its not the type of signature that makes you wanna rock out if you catch my drift.  Its more of a relax in a lazy boy, close your eyes and think about the sound type of phone IMO.  I had every Shure IEM out there for years but never really liked any of them.  Others talk like they would sell their kidney for a pair.  Meh... 

 
Excuse my ignorance, but what do you mean by signature? I also don't catch your drift. Sorry, I'm sort of a noob.
 
 
Jul 1, 2010 at 5:33 AM Post #15 of 20
Sound signature, which is the way it presents the music. I haven't heard them but they seem to be more of a laid-back, more smooth sound due to treble rolloff and a midrange hump (?)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top