[zerocoolhifi]

I would throw the GR02 Bass Edition in there...

 

[Johnny2ears]

Quote:

I would throw the GR02 Bass Edition in there...

I couldn't find that one in europe. Don't trust in ebay buys in this cases, since i don't want to end up with a fake.

 

[Zelda]

Quote:

 
That would be welcome. Makes me wish I could clone myself. 
 
 
Yes, that's pretty much the difference. I do think the sound of the M5 is a hair more impressive overall (as it does have a lot more bass to contend with). It's also cheaper and better-accessorized, and there's a mic/remote version, which is still pretty rare among high-value earphones. I thought I saw the K1 and K2 on ViSang's site in the new release section but I can't find the link right now.  
 

the mic version , Visang VS-K2M , is on ebay

 

[Xinn3r]

Joker, have you had any chance to hear the new JVC FXZ100 or 200?
I'm wondering if it'll be worth it to upgrade from the FXT90

 

[dweaver]

Joker, have you had any chance to hear the new JVC FXZ100 or 200?
I'm wondering if it'll be worth it to upgrade from the FXT90

I'm not Joker but thought I would chime in since I own the FXZ100 and have owned the FXT90. I tried the FXT90 twice and just never enjoyed their sound enough to keep them. I struggled with the upper mids and treble, finding them to grainy and at times harsh. The FXZ100 on the other hand has none of these issues. The mids are full and clean and the treble has no harshness to it. I did have to switch the tips though as the stock tips just do not fit in my ears properly. I will warn you, the FXZ100 do stick out of the ear quite a way if that would bother you. But looks aside they are a clear upgrade in sound in my opinion.

 

[Xinn3r]

double post!

 

[Xinn3r]

Quote:

I'm not Joker but thought I would chime in since I own the FXZ100 and have owned the FXT90. I tried the FXT90 twice and just never enjoyed their sound enough to keep them. I struggled with the upper mids and treble, finding them to grainy and at times harsh. The FXZ100 on the other hand has none of these issues. The mids are full and clean and the treble has no harshness to it. I did have to switch the tips though as the stock tips just do not fit in my ears properly. I will warn you, the FXZ100 do stick out of the ear quite a way if that would bother you. But looks aside they are a clear upgrade in sound in my opinion.

Thanks for the comparison!
The FXT90 is one of my favorite earphones though, easy comfortable fit and very natural timbre, I love how guitars sound on it, bass is perfect amount for me, highs and mids are there, just never really annoyed me, but didn't really wow-ed my either.
To each his own I guess 

 

[Johnny Jumper]

Quote:

 
That would be welcome. Makes me wish I could clone myself. 
 
 
Yes, that's pretty much the difference. I do think the sound of the M5 is a hair more impressive overall (as it does have a lot more bass to contend with). It's also cheaper and better-accessorized, and there's a mic/remote version, which is still pretty rare among high-value earphones. I thought I saw the K1 and K2 on ViSang's site in the new release section but I can't find the link right now.  
 
 
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=define+subpar
 
The iPhone4 is a good source, well above average. The GR07 should be fine straight out of the iPhone. 
 
 
Ha, you've got me. Actually, it's looking like the scale may need re-adjusting in the future, but not for the TF10. 
 
Surprised you haven't heard the TG334 by now. It's an interesting one, that's for sure. 
 
 

If you want enhanced bass a-la CX300 but with better midrange presence, the Brainwavz M2 or Beyer DTX101 would be good choices. The problem with the M5 is that the mids are still a little recessed compared to the bass so it may not be exactly what you're after. The Beta is a little v-shaped as well.
 
If you can give up a bit of bass for better overall balance, the Brainwavz M3 (if you I.vrcan still find them), MEElec CW31, and Soundmagic E30 are all worth considering. The M3 is pricy compared to the others but it really doesn't have many weaknesses sonically, though I still don't like the fit. 

I've been using the MEElec CW31 for a couple of weeks now.  They are becoming my favorite earphones.  They have a larger soundstage than my SE215's and good bass.  They're also comfortable and well built (I stepped on mine by accident and they survived!)
 
JJ

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

 
Well, i really don't mind giving some bass in order to have more detail in the other areas, thats why i'm considering these other options. All of the above i found this weekend, and the price i listed was the cheapest i could find. In tearms of audio, the cx 300 didn't work for me specially in some voice reproduction, not as much in films, but for instance in games, everything sounded really muffled.
 
So, sorry to bother, but 2 questions really pop out for me:
 
1- so the almost 100% price increase in the m3 (m5 beeing 30€ and M3 56€) justifies? I saw some cases where you say that in fact the difference between some moddels is negligible. This is not the case?
2- i was under the impression from what i read here, in forum, is that the E30 is somewhat neutral ^^
 
I don't know if its really possible or not, since i'm new at this, but i would love to experience a warm sound experience like i had with closed-headphones, doesn't have to have a overwhelming bass, i just like to hear the warmth of some artists like Bob Marley in redeption song, or a portuguese artist Jorge Palma in an acustic album with piano and guitar (http://myway.pt.msn.com/#/album/no_tempo_dos_assassinos_ao_vivo_no_teatro_villaret.aspx), but still listen to St. Anger and love it in all its might. Like i said, heard closed-headphones that didnt sound bassy, but felt warm. Sorry, its still hard for me to explain, but guess i mean something that h«falls on the low mids and lows in terms of signatures.
 
 
Maybe you just read this and got the urge to slap me real hard for the discription, but bear with me
 
Agains thanks in advance.

 
It's not that the M3 is necessarily worth the price increase over the M5, it's that I think its sound will suit what you're looking for better. But again, there are other, cheaper options for the more balanced sound including the E30 and CW31. The CW31 is the warmer of these two. The M2 and DTX 101 are on the warm side as well.
 
Quote:

Joker, have you had any chance to hear the new JVC FXZ100 or 200?
I'm wondering if it'll be worth it to upgrade from the FXT90

 
Sorry, haven't heard either yet.

 

[ljokerl]

Updated Dunu DN-17 Crater and DN-18 Hawkeye reviews with impressions of the newly re-tuned versions. The new Crater is noticeably a bit better than the old one, now much easier to recommend. 
 
Quote:

(2C45) Dunu DN-17 Crater


Reviewed Feb 2012

Details: Vented, vocal-oriented earphone from Dunu
Current Price: $76 from ebay.com (MSRP: $76)
Specs: Driver: Dynamic | Imp: 16Ω | Sens: 102 dB | Freq: 16-22k Hz | Cable: 4' L-plug
Nozzle Size: 3.5mm | Preferred tips: Sony Hybrid-style single-flange (stock)
Wear Style: Straight down or over-the-ear

Accessories (5/5) - Single-flange (3 sizes), bi-flange, and Sony Hybrid-style (4 pairs in 3 sizes) silicone tips, airline adapter, ¼” adapter, shirt clip, cleaning cloth, soft pleather carrying pouch, crushproof metal carrying case, and integrated cable wrap
Build Quality (5/5) – The new Dunu earphones continue to amaze with their build quality – solid metal housings boast excellent fit and finish and the new silver cables are terminated by a heavy-duty L-plug. Proper strain relief is present all around. The cable itself is softer and more supple than previous cords but the sheath is somewhat sticky and tangle-prone
Isolation (3.5/5) - Good for a vented dynamic-driver earphone
Microphonics (3.5/5) - Bothersome when worn cable-down; not an issue otherwise
Comfort (3.5/5) – The housings are moderately large and on the heavy side. Nozzles are stepped to allow for a deeper insertion but the front edges are wide, sharp, and potentially problematic for those with smaller ears

Sound (6.8/10) – The DN-17 Crater is a vented earphone tuned specifically for vocal performances. It is not surprising, then, that it is the least bass-dominant of all the Dunu models I’ve tried. The low end of the Crater offers good depth and punch, lagging slightly behind sets such as the DN-16 Hephaes, DN-12 Trident, and Brainwavz M2 in overall bass quantity. It is about as controlled as that of the cheaper Trident, sounding a bit bloated at times, but has a slightly more linear curve with less mid-bass emphasis. Note presentation is slightly on the soft side, resulting in a slight lack of crispness and resolution. There is some texture missing as well, giving the bass a somewhat ‘hollow’ feel with more impact than information.

The midrange of the Crater is prominent and very full-bodied. The balance and presentation are very different from most competing sets - the Crater can easily be called mid-centric despite the ample bass punch and vocals are always upfront, as advertised. Nearly any other earphone sounds thinner in comparison. As with the bass, texture and detail levels are mediocre and the sound has a dull nature, partly due to the underemphasized treble. Indeed, the Crater altogether lacks the increased clarity attained as a result of treble emphasis, relying entirely on natural clarity for intelligibility. The results of not having a very dark background are mixed, sounding excellent on vocal-centric tracks but reverting to an ‘AM radio’ feel with genres relying on heavy instrumentation.

The top end of the Crater is dull and lacks emphasis compared even to the similarly-priced DN-16 Hephaes. Treble extension isn’t bad but detail levels are only on-par with the cheaper DN-12 Trident and there isn’t much crispness or sparkle to the top end. Harshness and sibilance are absent but the treble clearly take a back seat, resulting in a distinct lack of energy. Despite this the Crater has good air that compliments its full, fluid sound well.

The presentation of the Crater is generally forward, especially in the midrange, but the softer note character prevents it from sounding aggressive. The headstage is larger than average and while the positioning is on the vague side, the Crater never sounds congested. Compared to the Dunu Hephaes, the Crater sounds large and full, more of an ‘in-ear speaker’ to the Hephaes’ ‘in-ear earphone’. Interestingly, the Crater is also more sensitive than the previous Dunu dynamics and has a tendency to pick up electrical noise.
 
Updated January 2013 (7.2/10)

An updated version of the Crater has replaced the one I originally reviewed, boasting the same design with improved sound tuning. The new tuning is a major step forward, in essence applying a v-shaped filter over the somewhat mid-centric sound of the original Crater. The resulting sound very different from the original – dynamic and engaging in ways that make the old tuning seem dull and muffled.

The bass, for one, no longer sounds sluggish and uninformative; instead, it is punchy and dynamic, with better extension compared to the original Crater. The overall sound is more balanced and less mid-centric. Clarity is improved and vocals boast better intelligibility despite the lack of midrange emphasis. Added treble presence creates more natural treble energy for a more realistic sound. The less relaxed top end does cause the new Crater to sound less smooth and forgiving, but the slight increase in the potential for sibilance is a worthy tradeoff.

The presentation is where the biggest gains are made – the new Crater is more dynamic and has better soundstage depth and layering. The presentation is now very good overall – broad, yet boasting decent imaging. All in all, the new Crater is notably more competitive when it comes to audio quality – unquestionably an all-around improvement that justifies the price tag.
 
Value (8/10) – The DN-17 Crater carries on Dunu’s trend of offering unparalleled build quality and attention to detail at a low price, but does so with a new, more restrained design. While the original tuning was best suited for those who usually listen with a ‘vocal’ EQ preset applied, the new (as of late 2012) tuning makes the Crater easy to recommend over its DN-18 Hawkeye counterpart.
 
Pros: Very well-built and well-accessorized; full and spacious sound
Cons: Cable can be noisy when worn straight down


(2C46) Dunu DN-18 Hawkeye


Reviewed Feb 2012

Details: Sealed sibling of the DN-17 Crater
Current Price: $60 from ebay (MSRP: $60)
Specs: Driver: Dynamic | Imp: 16Ω | Sens: 100 dB | Freq: 20-20k Hz | Cable: 4' L-plug
Nozzle Size: 3.5mm | Preferred tips: Sony Hybrid-style single-flange (stock)
Wear Style: Straight down or over-the-ear

Accessories (5/5) - Single-flange (3 sizes), bi-flange, and Hybrid-style (4 pairs in 3 sizes) silicone tips, airline adapter, ¼” adapter, shirt clip, cleaning cloth, soft pleather carrying pouch, zippered clamshell carrying case, and integrated cable wrap
Build Quality (5/5) - The new Dunu earphones continue to amaze with their build quality – solid metal housings boast excellent fit and finish and the new silver cables are terminated by a heavy-duty L-plug. Proper strain relief is present all around. The cable itself is softer and more supple than previous cords but the sheath is somewhat sticky and tangle-prone
Isolation (3.5/5) - Good, somewhat limited by the shallow insertion depth
Microphonics (3.5/5) - Bothersome when worn cable-down; not an issue otherwise
Comfort (3.5/5) - The housings are moderately large and on the heavy side. Nozzles are stepped to allow for a deeper insertion but the front edges are wide, sharp, and potentially problematic for those with smaller ears

Sound (6.9/10) – Dunu’s DN-18 Hawkeye is the closed-back sibling of the DN-17 Crater. Unsurprisingly, the two earphones are very similar in overall performance, with the Hawkeye’s being a compromise between the uniquely vocal-centric sound of the Crater and the more consumer-oriented sound of Dunu’s previous dynamic-driver models. While the bass of the Crater is nice and punchy, the Hawkeye offers better depth and more rumble, as well as a touch more impact overall. Note presentation is still a bit soft, resulting in a slight lack of crispness, texture, and resolution, but the greater bass quantity of the Hawkeye makes this less unusual.

The midrange of the Hawkeye, like that of the Crater, is forward and full-sounding. There is more warmth as a result of slightly greater bass bleed but on the whole the bass-midrange balance of the Hawkeye is more even. Detail levels and clarity are average at best but the Hawkeye seems to be a bit more resolving and a touch more crisp, especially when things get busy. There is less upper midrange emphasis with the Hawkeye, though the top end is just as laid-back overall as it is with the Crater. Treble extension is decent but there just isn’t much crispness or sparkle to the top end, resulting in a lack of energy and realism.

The presentation of the Hawkeye, too, is similar to that of the Crater, which is actually more impressive coming from its sealed-back form factor. The soundstage is still rather large and never congested, though the Crater has a touch more air and space. The Hawkeye still sounds ‘bigger’ than the DN-16 Hephaes and most other sealed IEMs, especially those normally found at its price point. Like the Crater, it is also oddly predisposed towards picking up electrical noise - a potential annoyance with sub-par sources such as laptops.
 
Updated January 2013 (7/10)
 
An updated version of the Hawkeye has replaced the one I originally reviewed. As with the Crater, the new tuning strives for a more balanced sound, though the changes are not as drastic with the Hawkeye. While I originally preferred the Hawkeye to the pricier, vented Crater model, it has undergone less dramatic improvement with the revision and the tables have turned.
 
The bass of the new Hawkeye is noticeably tighter but also gives up some of the impact of the original tuning. With this latest revision, the Crater is the bassier of the two earphones, though the Hawkeye still has slightly better extension. Clarity is improved slightly next to the original tuning and the overall sound is more refined and natural. The difference is slight, however – compared to the new Crater the Hawkeye still falls short in detail resolution. It does have smoother and more forgiving treble but at the expense of some of the air and clarity.
 
All in all, the Hawkeye is now the more mid-centric earphone while the Crater emphasizes the bass and treble more for a more balanced overall signature. This means that there is more room for both sets in the lineup but also makes it easy for me to recommend the Crater as the better choice for most genres. 

Value (7.5/10) – The Dunu DN-18 Hawkeye provides spacious, mid-forward sound with enhanced bass punch and a warmer tone. With excellent build quality and well thought-out accessory pack, the DN-18 is a great earphone for those interested in rock-solid build quality with a sound signature focused mostly on the bass and midrange for not very much money.

Pros: Very well-built and well-accessorized; full sound; good bass
Cons: Cable can be noisy when worn straight down; sound lacks some texture and detail; dull treble

 

[ba113leia]

Quote:

I would throw the GR02 Bass Edition in there...

 
 
Those looking ever reaches (just googling "VSONIC IN EUROPE")
 
http://www.digifi.cz/index.php?prod=42

 

[zerocoolhifi]

Quote:

 
 
Those looking ever reaches (just googling "VSONIC IN EUROPE")
 
http://www.digifi.cz/index.php?prod=42

These are the ones:
http://www.lendmeurears.com/product_info.php?cPath=15&products_id=41

 

[Mini0510]

Joker, I received my PFE 232. My first impression is that it sounds slightly more veiled/less clear/transparent (I'm not sure the correct word to describe) than FX700 with gray filter. Apparently, it sounds less veiled to me when I used the black filter, which doesn't seem to agree with your review. I'm satisfied with the sound signature but the presentation not crystal clear. 
Yes, just like you told me, it has less rumble than FX700 in bass, which I'm ok with. I'm happy with the treble quantity and quality. The treble quality is like same as FX700. I thought BA drivers are better in the mid to treble region.
 
Lastly, just wondering, is PFE 232's treble less, equilvalent, or more "brassy" than AKG K3003?
 
Edit: Oh I know why now. I think PFE 232 is recessed or laid back in midrange. I tried to eq the midrange a bit, It seems a little more transparent.
Is there an Iem sound like PFE 232 without recessed midrange? K3003 is too expensive.

 

[Gilly87]

n/a

 

[Amitl]

can anyone please explain to me what is 'driver flex'..?
i read its something about the housing pushing on the driver
but what does it actually sound like???
or...what are the symptoms?