Jun 28, 2012 at 3:11 AM Post #46 of 64
Quote:
Upper class 'budget' IEM. 
tongue_smile.gif

200$ IEM shouldn't be considered budget.
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 3:15 AM Post #48 of 64
I thought this was a budget thread ahaha, what happened :P Also they have some pretty good impact and quantity for a BA and more than a few dynamic drivers in these aspects, my opinion of course.
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 8:05 AM Post #50 of 64
They are budget if your names King Jaffe Joffer :D
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 11:23 AM Post #53 of 64
You should review some more good IEMs under $50, and especially under $25. You still don't have the Panasonic RP-HJE355 and RP-HJE450, JVC HA-FX40 and HA-FX101 reviewed.
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 1:25 PM Post #54 of 64
Quote:
But...what if...I have a budget of $170? 
wink.gif

 
The point of the thread was to show the "value" of each IEM at their respective price range not review only "cheap" IEMs but I guess it did started off that way.
 
What do you guys think though - change title, sort by price range, and/or both?

Well, "budget" usually means super-cheap - like, $50<.  It might be a bit misleading once you start reviewing $200 IEMs!
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 2:08 PM Post #55 of 64
maybe the common term "bang for buck" is more fitting!
 
In my opinion, you should maybe think about adding a point-based system like joker. Seeing as these reviews are mostly centered around the cheaper in-ears, 
it's simpler for someone starting out to pick out an earphone based on a few numbers rather than having to read every single review and try to figure out the
vocabulary. Anyways great job!
 
Jun 28, 2012 at 5:19 PM Post #56 of 64
maybe the common term "bang for buck" is more fitting!

In my opinion, you should maybe think about adding a point-based system like joker. Seeing as these reviews are mostly centered around the cheaper in-ears, 
it's simpler for someone starting out to pick out an earphone based on a few numbers rather than having to read every single review and try to figure out the
vocabulary. Anyways great job!


Yeah bang for buck or value for money is a better term to use I think. You could even do a graphics card inspired weighted score, instead of FPS per $ you could do SQ per $ or something of the like....just an idea. MP8320 FTW :D
 
Aug 14, 2012 at 2:29 AM Post #57 of 64
UPDATED
[17] DUNU Hawkeye DN-18
 
ADDED
[20] DUNU Crater DN-17
 
The newly revised DN-18 sounds a bit better than before and IMO better than the more expensive DN-17. Check them out if you enjoy mids!
 
 
A re-order and possibly renaming of this thread is in order soon, just have to finish up with this CX 275.
 
Aug 25, 2012 at 3:19 AM Post #58 of 64
Added
[21] Sennheiser CX 275
 
I missed a couple of posts last time, sorry!
 
 
 
maybe the common term "bang for buck" is more fitting!
 
In my opinion, you should maybe think about adding a point-based system like joker. Seeing as these reviews are mostly centered around the cheaper in-ears, 
it's simpler for someone starting out to pick out an earphone based on a few numbers rather than having to read every single review and try to figure out the
vocabulary. Anyways great job!

 
I'm trying not to use a point system (yet) because I haven't heard enough IEMs to properly grade each one. I try to keep the conclusion super simple and to the point though ;)
 
Yeah bang for buck or value for money is a better term to use I think. You could even do a graphics card inspired weighted score, instead of FPS per $ you could do SQ per $ or something of the like....just an idea. MP8320 FTW 
biggrin.gif
 

True, unless money is not an issue, I think the sound/price ratio is the most important number for me!
 
Sep 15, 2012 at 11:36 AM Post #60 of 64

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top