kloan
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2004
- Posts
- 1,166
- Likes
- 13
Anyone know if foam tips would round out the treble a bit? I'm finding the upper range just a tad too bright.
Anyone know if foam tips would round out the treble a bit? I'm finding the upper range just a tad too bright.
Only $4? Are these real?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Philips-SHE3590PK-10-In-Ear-Headphones-Pink-/321196697787?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ac8d0a8bb
i feel like this thread has turned into a how great is this iem with EQing to simply how great is this iem...
the iem without eqing isnt that spectacular
Let's just say that the bar for spectacular sound at this price without parametric EQ isn't that high...
(3B34) JVC HA-FX40
The carbon nanotube drivers found at the heart of the FX40 are most impressive in the bass region – the bass is definitely enhanced but far from overbearing. It lacks the absolute extension of sets such as the VSonic GR99 and Philips SHE3580 but still digs plenty deep without jeopardizing control. The treble-heavy nature of the earphones can diminish the relative emphasis placed on the low end but the bass of the FX40 is not to be underestimated – it is quick and impactful, forming a solid backbone for the sound.
Bass bleed is quite low – the Philips SHE 3580 and Brainwavz Beta, two competing v-shaped IEMs, have stronger upper bass response and sound warmer than the FX40. The JVCs are recessed through much of the midrange, though the response picks up towards the upper mids. Vocals, especially male vocals, are too far back in the mix on many tracks. High levels of clarity and detail are probably the most impressive aspect of the mids, though some of the perceived clarity comes from emphasis in the upper midrange and treble. This effect is similar to using a treble booster EQ setting (e.g. BBE’s “Crystal Clear” preset) and highly reminiscent of the far pricier PureSound ClarityOne earphones.
The resolution of the FX40 is still very good but there is another similarity to the PureSound Clarity One – the note presentation is on the thin side. The Philips SHE3580 and id America Spark, for example, both give up a bit of resolution to the FX40 but have a thicker, more fleshed-out note. While both of these earphones also sound colored, their note presentation seems a bit more natural than that of the FX40. The treble of the FX40 is emphasized overall and not entirely smooth but it is not as harsh or sibilant as one may expect from an earphone with enhanced treble response – a little splashy and fatiguing over long listening sessions, but generally tame. The tone is on the bright side, with plenty of energy and a tendency to emphasize cymbal crashes and the initial ‘crack’ of drums. The result of all this coloration, combined with the thinner note presentation, is that the fidelity of the FX40 can swing widely from great to poor depending on track.
(3B37) JVC HA-FX101
Sound (6.2/10) – JVC’s follow-up to the popular FX1X model, the FX101 has no trouble delivering on promises of copious bass despite its smaller 8.5mm drivers. Its low end is not as loose as that of the older FX1X model and yet the FX101 sacrifices nothing in the way of impact or bass depth. Its bass puts it among the hardest-hitting in-ears on the market, though as usual the low end grunt comes at a price. The bass is on the boomy side compared to sets such as the Philips SHE3580 and can be very intrusive. Happily, the FX101 probably won’t be purchased by those looking for anything less than a bass monster.
(3B39) TDK MT300
Sound (5.5/10) – The MT300 is an entry-level earphone with a bass-heavy, consumer-oriented sound. It impresses with the depth and power of its sub-bass response, though there is also mid-bass to match. The bass emphasis of the MT300 gives it a full-bodied, albeit boomy, sound. The Philips SHE3580, which is also rather bass-heavy, keeps its bloat to a minimum due to its thinner, quicker note presentation but the MT300 is not quite so capable, sounding thicker and more bloated.
The weighty low end of the MT300 dominates the sound, producing a veil over the midrange and treble. Comparing the MT300 to the aging MEElectronics M9 reveals a lack of mid-bass bloat - and veiling - with the MEElecs but at the same time shows that the MT300’s mid-bass gives it a warmer, fuller sound with thicker, more natural mids. The midrange of the MT300 is recessed compared to the bass, but not too much so. The mids of the Philips SHE3580, for example, appear more recessed, likely due to its thinner sound and slightly more v-shaped response.
(3A70) Philips O'Neill Tread SHO2200
Sound (6/10) - Philips has focused mostly on style and durability with the O’Neill line but the sound quality of the Tread is still respectable for the asking price. While the marketing materials promise good bass depth, in reality the Tread puts out mostly mid-bass and suffers from mild low-end roll-off. The low end is punchy, however - impact is about on-par with the similarly-priced Klipsch Image S3 and lags just behind Philips’ cheaper SHE3580 model. The SHE3580 also has better sub-bass presence and sounds fuller and warmer. The MEElectronics M9, on the other hand, also has greater bass quantity but lags behind the Tread in quality, sounding boomy and muddy in comparison.
Cons: Slightly cold and thin-sounding; sound does not measure up to cheaper SHE3580 model
(3A81) LG Quadbeat HSS-F420
The midrange of the Quadbeat is clear and detailed, cleaner of bass bleed than the mids of the Philips SHE3580 and Astrotec AM-800, for example. Note thickness is similar to the VSonic VC02 and again lacking some of the fullness of sets like the Sony MH1C and VSonic VSD1.
Now for the Philips SHE 3580
I would first like to thank Joe Bloggs for his review and JupiterKnight who insisted I take a listen to these $9-$14 iems. Please visit this thead and read the review by Joe Bloggs
http://www.head-fi.org/t/561951/philips-she3580-iem-review-10-giant-killers-er-4p-gathering-dust
Oh here we go yet another Fotm.. No pindexter!! You better read his review as I agree with evete about these. These not only compete with the MP8320 easily they compete with the Isurus as well..These put the other cheaper iems in their respective places and simply leaves them behind. The sound quality on these are simply mind blowing.. I was originally going to do a Thermaltake Isurus thread but I had to throw these in here as well..
Anyone that hears these will have nothing to complain about. The size of these little iems are so small they will fit an infant. The only complaint I have is they do have a build quality of a cheaper Iem the cord has memory and is a stiffer rubbery material which does emit some microphonics. But it was the sound quality that floored me. Without a doubt in my mind these are the best sounding headphones Philips makes. I truly doubt they have anything better and to test this I went ahead a purchased these.
Edit 2011-12-26: I know I kind of implied in my review that they need EQ to sound great but you know what? It may all be down to personal preference. AFAICT these have a V shaped sound signatrue but I always have trouble picking out vocals from instruments whichever phones I use so this may just be personal bias kicking in. I showed these to my brother and let him hear it with and without my "setting for everybody" EQ and he even preferred the original sound!
I think I should chime in here - I am one of those who likes the sound of the unEQ SHE3580.
Of course people don't know me from Adam so this is just one opinion.
BUT let me quote a few people with better credentials than me:
joker doesn't use EQ because he doesn't have time to review everything with and without EQ.
Certainly the SHE35XX is not a bad performer without EQ (better than many 'audiophile' products) but it is vastly better with EQ to remove the treble peaks even preserving the v-shape if that's what you prefer.
Quote:Hey joker, I bought the SHE3580 and was looking for an upgrade and was hoping you could help me out. I was looking for something with more bass than the SHE3580, better build quality and slightly better isolation. Any suggestions?
Hmm… that sounds like the Yamaha EPH-100 to me. Great bass with good depth, very good isolation for a dynamic-driver earphone, and the build is pretty solid.
Am I right that the Philips is some 15 USD - and the Yamaha is some 150 USD ? What we're talking about ???
Perhaps it's just my ears and personal preference but I prefer the the unEQ sound
That's fair, I can't tell you what to like or not like.
Thank you for your understanding.
However the main point I was trying to make, regardless of my personal preferences, was people with much better credentials than me -
like ljokerl, are making numerous sound quality references and comparisons with NO EQ
Thanks