New JH Audio flagship! "Siren Series Roxanne"
Jan 27, 2014 at 10:36 PM Post #3,211 of 8,377
JAG87 - I recently received a pair of J16's that I order on BF and similar to yours, they were too wide at top and stuck out too far.
I sent them back a few days after and they were able to reduce the thickness at the top by 1/4 inch. Now they fit much better and more confortable.
As you can see on yours, there is a lot of empty space at the top that can be made smaller. 
 
If you are 100% satisfied that's all that matters but for me, I knew they could do better, way better thus sent them back.
I can send you some pics if you like for comparison 
 
Best wishes!
 
Jan 27, 2014 at 11:19 PM Post #3,212 of 8,377
  JAG87 - I recently received a pair of J16's that I order on BF and similar to yours, they were too wide at top and stuck out too far.
I sent them back a few days after and they were able to reduce the thickness at the top by 1/4 inch. Now they fit much better and more confortable.
As you can see on yours, there is a lot of empty space at the top that can be made smaller. 
 
If you are 100% satisfied that's all that matters but for me, I knew they could do better, way better thus sent them back.
I can send you some pics if you like for comparison 
 
Best wishes!

 
Hi Jacone, thanks for your input but you can't compare 16s to the RX because of the connector. The connector takes up a lot of space, and if the RX didn't have a much wider profile, the cable would hit against the crus of helix of your ear and probably prevent you from getting a proper seal. The standard connector of the 16s is much smaller and flatter, there should be no reason for them to stick out like the RX.
 
Jan 27, 2014 at 11:20 PM Post #3,213 of 8,377
Must be something wrong with the queue. I ordered on Black Friday and received two weeks ago.
biggrin.gif

 


That is because your is probably not CF.
 
Jan 28, 2014 at 12:47 AM Post #3,216 of 8,377
After more thorough listening, I've think I've changed my mind and I am settling on 2pm. The flat 8am setting is too bright for extended listening. This is why Roxanne kicks ass. The freedom of global adjustment without relying on EQ.
 
Jan 28, 2014 at 12:54 AM Post #3,217 of 8,377
  Just got them... here are my thoughts (any comparison is to JH16s sans FP):
 
1) They are MUCH more sensitive than JH16s. Had to lower my volume limiter on my iOS devices at least 2 button presses or I would blow out my ear drums.
 
2) They are brighter. High frequency response is top notch. Not that the JH16 was bad, but it had a little too much sibilance (4K-8K) and not enough sparkle (12K+). Roxy is much much better!
 
3) Overblown bass of the JH16 is obviously under control with the pot. They came set at 1pm out of the box which is acceptable, but not ideal IMO. My ideal tuning is 8am (flat, or what JH calls 0db). I hear almost no difference between 8am and 12pm (maybe 0 to +2db). 12-2pm is maybe a range of +2 to +6db and 2pm-4pm is maybe a range of +6 to +15db, at which point it sounds like you have 4 subwoofers. Absolutely ridiculous. IMO, flat is perfect for most modern recordings, and up to 2pm is great for unplugged/acoustic, and older recordings that lack bass. Anything after that is just madness.
 
4) They are HUGEEEEE. Wait, let me add more EEEs. They absolutely dwarf the JH16s, are not flush at all (that's not gonna be good for my earmuffs), and poke a good 4-5mm out of my ear. None the less, they are still way more comfortable than any universal, so who cares.
 
5) The nuts are not busted (lol). However it's too early to tell if this is a fixed cable. I will take them out tomorrow on my commute (-21C) and they will be shoved in my jacket pocket during the day, so if they pass that test then we can say JH "may" have gotten to the bottom of the collar issue. But I'll be more certain after a few weeks of this type of usage.
 
6) I don't care for the case much, but if for whatever reason a person does, then this is not acceptable quality for the type of product being sold. But then again, neither was the cheap otterbox they used to give out. You may not tell from my photos (I really didn't put much emphasis on highlighting the flaws), but basically it looks like stvc's. Same finish issues in the CF. I am guessing these problems will be solved once they learn to work with CF. Again, for me it's not an issue. The case will sit somewhere collecting dust.
 
7) I asked for a 64" cable, but what I got does is definitely not a 64" cable. It's 48". But whatever, I'm sure they can remedy this.
 
 
 
Besides everything I've said, I have no fit issues (that's 2/2 perfect fits with JH for me), and they sound great. Absolutely great. I think I'm done with CIEMs for at least 5 years with these.
 
 
 
And now the boudoir shots. Pardon my lacklustre photography, the sun is going down here in TO, these were taken on the window sill. Lol.
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Just saw the is a big hole on your left shell? and colour is White boy?
 
Jan 28, 2014 at 1:09 AM Post #3,219 of 8,377
  I think I see what you are refering too. This is just where the driver is attached to the shell inside. It is common in acrylic shells.

 
It's only inside the shell? It doesn't look like inner part, look more like big out on the surface, if it's surface i think i can't accept this, you are more tolerate than me :p
 
Jan 28, 2014 at 2:00 AM Post #3,220 of 8,377
  I think I see what you are refering too. This is just where the driver is attached to the shell inside. It is common in acrylic shells.

Originally Posted by stvc /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
 
It's only inside the shell? It doesn't look like inner part, look more like big out on the surface, if it's surface i think i can't accept this, you are more tolerate than me :p

 
Think what Mim is saying is that it's the glue or epoxy inside that's gluing the drivers to the inner wall of the shell. It's just clear epoxy, that's all - not a hole. Is that what you're saying Mim?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top