[kantana]

About 100 hrs in on my custom Roxannes.  They're opened up a bit and I can definitely say the soundstage in these sound much more like headphones than IEMs.  They project the sound beyond the usual IEMs that don't go beyond the skull.  Not as wide as the HD800 but well beyond the skull.  Hoping another 100 hrs will fully open them up.
Compared to the universals or AKR03 they sound much better, the difficulty of getting a proper fit with those affects the sound too much.  I want to try these in balanced mode from my AK240 but can't find cables anywhere.  Is the only option to buy a spare cable and get it reterminated in 2.5mm TRRS?  Will the 8 cables fit in a 2.5mm jack?

 

[goodvibes]

  Those 4 are wired in parallel for one range of the 3.  For example, JH states that for the high above 4k, the 4 tweeters are wired in parallel to reduce the impedance that the digital audio player sees above 4k.  If there is too much it sees, it will output less.  For example, below is a single driver impedance curve, and it shoots up at the treble, and JH said this on the video that it's hard to tune the treble because of this rise as the DAP will see this rise and wil output the inverse of what it sees of this impedance rise.  Like, "hockey stick" he says.  

  This rise make treble extension almost impossible because it's exponential rise in impedance with higher frequencies in the treble area.  So the 4 drivers are wired in paralell to drop it from single driver impedance to much lower bringing better extension.  JH did create the TF10pro, and look at the bottom graph of the treble, it's much nicer at the treble. JH apparently knows and aware of impedance.

 The 4 drivers in parallel sounds like a good idea, but did it turn out like how he imagined, or how the consumer would be happy with?  I haven't heard it so I can't say, but some like it and some think it's dark sounding, and Amos did say it sounds like LCD3, which some think is a bit dark also.  But given people say it sounds like LCD3, probably wide stage.  I wonder if mid boost would make it sound wide stage as people say it sounds dark, it's making sense.  If it's dark then mids are boosted.
 

 

Impedance wise, TF10 is much worse in the treble and is known to stress DAPs. It also only uses one tweeter. The first curve would not show any deviation of response with a DAP that has a 2 ohm output impedance. The 2nd would show a couple DB reduced output in the treble. Once impedance of the device is 8 or more times the output impedance of a what's driving it, how much it swings means jack. The 1st curve is of a full range driver. Tweeter dedicated drivers will also have a rising impedance but because they can be designed with lower inductance (fewer windings) that rise may not occur at until well past 10Khz. It's variable and can't be categorized. Comes down to choices the execution.

 

[SilverEars]

 
Impedance wise, TF10 is much worse in the treble and is known to stress DAPs. It also only uses one tweeter. The first curve would not show any deviation of response with a DAP that has a 2 ohm output impedance. The 2nd would show a couple DB reduced output in the treble. Once impedance of the device is 8 or more times the output impedance of a what's driving it, how much it swings means jack. The 1st curve is of a full range driver. Tweeter dedicated drivers will also have a rising impedance but because they can be designed with lower inductance (fewer windings) that rise may not occur at until well past 10Khz. It's variable and can't be categorized. Comes down to choices the execution.

That's the way I understood how it reacts to impedance, after watching JH explain it in the video I realized I may have partially understand how impedance works.  If you watch toward the end, he will say the impedance goes up for the tweeter and the dap will see the load as low, and the power will roll off.  He says it will just mirror the hock stick affect.  Quite opposite of what you would expect based on power delivery theory.  What he is saying in the video is the dap is seeing a high load, and it's power output is inversely proportional to the impedance curve.  Either he, who has measured and worked on CIEMs for decades is wrong or us.  Of course for DAP with non-ideal output impedance there will be some loss of power.  What I'm thinking he is saying is that with a DAP of ideal or 0 output impedance it's best to have a treble impedance very low, and not ideal to have a treble load very high which will roll off the power delivery because of the peaking impedance.  I think what this means is there shouldn't be too much load impedance which will roll off the DAP output power(he states that the DAP is see a lower load, but at high frequencies it's much high load, so it rolls off), after all power supplied depends on the impedance of the load, and sensitivity is measured at 1kHz, not of the whole spectrume, so what JH says makes sense.  Of course he is talking about when tuning to get the loudness up at the treble, so when it comes of DAP OI, it's after tune.  For tuning load impedance is of concern, but for us after tune, to retain the original tune the OI is of concern to us.  

 

[Tonyflo]

Question for custom owners -- I've never seen custom Roxannes in person, but I did try the universals at the SF meet last weekend and was a bit shocked by their size. They are literally two "monstrosities" protruding out of your ears. 
 
Is this the case with the customs -- or do they fit into the ear a bit more tightly/compactly? 
 
I know aesthetics is secondary to sound, and I totally agree, but I wonder if anyone else is bothered by this. I'm so used to seeing CIEM's on musicians where they are barely visible... unless you see an up close shot of their ear. But with the Roxannes (the universals at least)... they can be seen a mile away. 
 
If the K10's perform at a similar level (albeit different signature) but in a much smaller, more elegant package -- that seems like a meaningful consideration. To me at least. 
 
Would love to know anyone else's thoughts on this. 

 

[goodvibes]

It's not a matter of him or 'us' being wrong. It's a matter of interpretation. Power capability will go down as impedance rises but that doesn't relate to linearity changing if a device is designed to be linear with that impedance. If it's not it can be tailored a bit by manipulating things to improve the transfer function. There's generally little need for great efficiency above 4Khz since so little music energy is there so it's very unlikely to cause clipping. That said, it's never bad to increase the transfer function or even the efficiency to match they other ranges....as long as it doesn't get so low as to cause nonlinearities or pull too much current and heat. He's not wrong and neither am I. Your take on it is just a bit off target. It's absolutely correct until the amps output impedance are out of an acceptable range like with the example of a TF10 and anything with a higher than 1ohm output impedance. Folks tend to key on a particular example and derive some universal truth from it when it's a bit more complex. He didn't design the tf10 with the same ideas in mind especially at a time when almost everything had a highish output impedance. In fact, the tf10 will be a bit less U shaped with a higher output impedance amp so maybe it was in the mix.

 
Here you go. It's relative. http://en.goldenears.net/1389 

 

[Trogdor]

It's not a matter of him or 'us' being wrong. It's a matter of interpretation. Power capability will go down as impedance rises but that doesn't relate to linearity changing if a device is designed to be linear with that impedance. If it's not it can be tailored a bit by manipulating things to improve the transfer function. There's generally little need for great efficiency above 4Khz since so little music energy is there so it's very unlikely to cause clipping. That said, it's never bad to increase the transfer function or even the efficiency to match they other ranges....as long as it doesn't get so low as to cause nonlinearities or pull too much current and heat. He's not wrong and either am I. Your take on it is just a bit off target. It's absolutely correct until the amps output impedance are out of an acceptable out of range like with the example of a TF10 and anything with a higher than 1ohm output impedance. Folks tend to key on a particular example and derive some universal truth from it when it's a bit more complex. He didn't design the tf10 with the same ideas in mind especially at a time when almost everything had a highish output impedance. In fact, the tf10 will be a bit less U shaped with a higher output impedance amp so maybe it was in the mix.:wink_face:

Here you go. It's relative. http://en.goldenears.net/1389 

Good man!

 

[slick530]

I think if your ear can fit the UF, you should go for that instead of waiting at least 3 months for the custom version (acrylic version). You can alway remold it if you so happen to decide to go custom or sell it if you get tired of the sound. But once you go custom, resell value will at least dropped by 1/3 and that does not include the waiting time and also the possibility of refit. As for the protruding issue, it's not really as bad as it seems. I have normal to small ear canals and they only look slightly bigger than my 535s. I don't know how to upload a photo as I'm new here but I can show you once I know how. Good luck!!

 

[SilverEars]

  It's not a matter of him or 'us' being wrong. It's a matter of interpretation. Power capability will go down as impedance rises but that doesn't relate to linearity changing if a device is designed to be linear with that impedance. If it's not it can be tailored a bit by manipulating things to improve the transfer function. There's generally little need for great efficiency above 4Khz since so little music energy is there so it's very unlikely to cause clipping. That said, it's never bad to increase the transfer function or even the efficiency to match they other ranges....as long as it doesn't get so low as to cause nonlinearities or pull too much current and heat. He's not wrong and either am I. Your take on it is just a bit off target. It's absolutely correct until the amps output impedance are out of an acceptable out of range like with the example of a TF10 and anything with a higher than 1ohm output impedance. Folks tend to key on a particular example and derive some universal truth from it when it's a bit more complex. He didn't design the tf10 with the same ideas in mind especially at a time when almost everything had a highish output impedance. In fact, the tf10 will be a bit less U shaped with a higher output impedance amp so maybe it was in the mix.

 
Here you go. It's relative. http://en.goldenears.net/1389 

You are not getting what was said.  JH is talking about the tuning, and I've brought it up since Trogdor thinks that each individual driver is used for it's own separate frequency range, which it's not what it's meant for.  JH mentions that the 4 drivers for the treble is to lower the impedance, and the triplefi10 which is also tuned by him has lowered impedance at the highs. I brought up the single driver graph is because, that's what he is referring to in the video when he talks about the "hockey stick" affect when a single driver is used.  What you are bringing up is another matter in terms of the output impedance of the DAP affecting the FR which we are all well aware of.  Anyway GV, the way word your points seems to draw out long discussions, the PM feature is useful if you like to further discuss.

 

[dleblanc343]

I've had these for about a month now, and am still super satisfied with the sound, but sometimes I'm unsure about the fit/seal.
 
it is my first CIEM, so I have no basis of comparison.
 
They definitely isolate less than I expected; the Shure SE846 really isolated more than my Roxanne.
 
Fit is nice, but I'm wondering if it shouldn't be more snug. How tight should the nozzles be inside the ear canal?
 
I'd like to hear from other members! 

 
 
It also feels as if the nozzle for my left ear doesn't go deep enough into my canal..

 

[goodvibes]

To expand a bit on the link I gave. You'll see them reference the comparisons to 1Khz which can be a bit misleading. The 4p isn't gaining efficiency in the high frequency from impedance matching the higher output impedance amp. The rest of the range is being relatively reduced.
 
Say that you increase efficiency of the tweeter(s) enough that you need to use a series resistor in front of it. The resistor affects the system as would a higher source impedance while allowing the amp to see an acceptable load and taking advantage of the rising tweeter impedance to reduce the lower ranges of the tweeter more than the higher impedance potion. Even easier to do if parallel tweeters are lowering the impedance the effective driver's impedance. That's the sort of manipulation I was referring to and a perfect example of Jerry and myself both being correct. He's not going to get that specific in an general interview. He's already giving a lot.

 

[goodvibes]

  I've had these for about a month now, and am still super satisfied with the sound, but sometimes I'm unsure about the fit/seal.
 
it is my first CIEM, so I have no basis of comparison.
 
They definitely isolate less than I expected; the Shure SE846 really isolated more than my Roxanne.
 
Fit is nice, but I'm wondering if it shouldn't be more snug. How tight should the nozzles be inside the ear canal?
 
I'd like to hear from other members! 

 
 
It also feels as if the nozzle for my left ear doesn't go deep enough into my canal..

If you were using the olives or triple tips, that's quite possible. Best isolation I ever got was from se530s with olives but my customs aren't that far off. You can wrap some plastic wrap around the stems away from the tip and see if you get more bass or isolation but it's probably fine.

 

[nevin]

I'm waiting for my refund and the money should be in the local dealer's hands in the next ten days or so. 
 
After waited for months (which I'm expecting), JHA told me my order is missing. Ironically, they did receive my ears impression for Roxanne long time ago. After some discussions, someone high up in JHA told my dealer they will make it right and make my Roxanne in July. It turns out no action was done. I'm tired of dealing with such a company with no credit on their own words.
 
Maybe I'm just a nobody. A rockstar pays $1649+$500 (CF) for her Roxanne, I pay the same $2149, I don't see how we are different from a customer point of view. 

 

[dragoonv]

they probably pay less, and JH audio can put their name on their website....

 

[nevin]

  they probably pay less, and JH audio can put their name on their website....

I guess they may even get a pair of Roxanne for free. That make us the one who actually pays for the product, generating the revenue JHA has.

 

[robm321]

Sorry to hear that, Nevin. So unfortunate that things appear to not be changing at JHA.