[Precogvision]

Also just wanted to share something real quick. Most will know that I'm not a big fan of EQ, but I couldn't help playing around with it on the IE900 because I felt there was a lot of potential being missed. I find the IE900's upper-midrange to sound somewhat muffled and to lack appropriate bite. @toranku and @Banbeucmas helped me set up an EQ in REW that matches it more closely to Crinacle's IEF target. The end result should hit much closer to most listeners' neutral. The IE900's driver is also very capable, so it takes EQ like a champ.

• Frequency: 1360, Gain: -1.3, Q: 1
• Frequency: 2900, Gain: 4.8, Q: 1.25
• Frequency: 4000, Gain: 2.6, Q: 1.95
• Frequency: 5500, Gain: -3.2, Q: 4.90

What about LX vs LXSE?

Haven't heard the original LX, sorry!

 

[MatW]

Haven't heard the original LX, sorry!

For a profilic IEM reviewer like yourself... that is kinda strange no?

Anyway, I'm sort of asking a question I already know the answer to - I believe the consensus is that they are quite similar and that it would probably not make sense to own both.

 

[Musicoflife]

Also just wanted to share something real quick. Most will know that I'm not a big fan of EQ, but I couldn't help playing around with it on the IE900 because I felt there was a lot of potential being missed. I find the IE900's upper-midrange to sound somewhat muffled and to lack appropriate bite. @toranku and @Banbeucmas helped me set up an EQ in REW that matches it more closely to Crinacle's IEF target. The end result should hit much closer to most listeners' neutral. The IE900's driver is also very capable, so it takes EQ like a champ.

• Frequency: 1360, Gain: -1.3, Q: 1
• Frequency: 2900, Gain: 4.8, Q: 1.25
• Frequency: 4000, Gain: 2.6, Q: 1.95
• Frequency: 5500, Gain: -3.2, Q: 4.90

Haven't heard the original LX, sorry!

So, with said EQ, did IE900 sound like a champ?

 

[Precogvision]

So, with said EQ, did IE900 sound like a champ?

I prefer it with the EQ I showed. It can be jarring at first, especially if you've let your ears acclimate to the IE900's stock tonality. But the midrange tonality sounds much more correct with the EQ relative to my neutral.

For a profilic IEM reviewer like yourself... that is kinda strange no?

Anyway, I'm sort of asking a question I already know the answer to - I believe the consensus is that they are quite similar and that it would probably not make sense to own both.

Haha, I think sometimes people forget that I actually haven't been in the hobby for that long. And yeah, I think Damz has heard both of them and gave a comparison. You can also (mostly) tell from the graph that they're just going to be slightly different flavors.

 

[Heo00911]

@Precogvision, do happen to get your hands on the Dita Dream? I heard that it's one of the stronger contenders in technical department (at least as a DD) though the tuning might put off a lot of people. I'm eager to hear your impression on this iem.

 

[Precogvision]

@Precogvision, do happen to get your hands on the Dita Dream? I heard that it's one of the stronger contenders in technical department (at least as a DD) though the tuning might put off a lot of people. I'm eager to hear your impression on this iem.

I have not yet. Maybe if someone wants to loan one for review

I think I’m going to try and hear the Sony MDR-EX1K this weekend.

 

[Damz87]

I think I’m going to try and hear the Sony MDR-EX1K this weekend.

Nice! A classic I just wish it was tuned with a little more bass, and a little less lower/mid treble. But it’s still a great IEM considering it’s age. Would be cool if you can get your hands on an EX800ST as well

 

[Heo00911]

I have not yet. Maybe if someone wants to loan one for review

I think I’m going to try and hear the Sony MDR-EX1K this weekend.

Great! another Iem that I want to hear your review on. A win-win for me XD.

 

[Samuelueluel]

Also just wanted to share something real quick. Most will know that I'm not a big fan of EQ, but I couldn't help playing around with it on the IE900 because I felt there was a lot of potential being missed. I find the IE900's upper-midrange to sound somewhat muffled and to lack appropriate bite. @toranku and @Banbeucmas helped me set up an EQ in REW that matches it more closely to Crinacle's IEF target. The end result should hit much closer to most listeners' neutral. The IE900's driver is also very capable, so it takes EQ like a champ.

• Frequency: 1360, Gain: -1.3, Q: 1
• Frequency: 2900, Gain: 4.8, Q: 1.25
• Frequency: 4000, Gain: 2.6, Q: 1.95
• Frequency: 5500, Gain: -3.2, Q: 4.90

Haven't heard the original LX, sorry!

I often wonder whether the difference between a $100 5/10 IEM and a $2000 8-9/10 IEM is a few EQ bands. Manufacturers must hate EQ .

 

[Heo00911]

I often wonder whether the difference between a $100 5/10 IEM and a $2000 8-9/10 IEM is a few EQ bands. Manufacturers must hate EQ .

Mind you, resolution and dynamic, most of those high end stuffs are very resolving and have good dynamic. Those few EQ bands might help boost a 5/10 to 6 or at most 7, but they won't make it sound as good as that 2000$ iem.

 

[gLer]

I prefer it with the EQ I showed. It can be jarring at first, especially if you've let your ears acclimate to the IE900's stock tonality. But the midrange tonality sounds much more correct with the EQ relative to my neutral.

Question for you regarding PEQ: when you use it, do you use low shelf, high shelf, analog bell...or one of the many other options. This confuses the heck out of me. I'd like to try your adjustments but want to make sure I'm using the PEQ correctly (I have Toneboosters PEQ on UAPP).

 

[Strifeff7]

Also just wanted to share something real quick. Most will know that I'm not a big fan of EQ, but I couldn't help playing around with it on the IE900 because I felt there was a lot of potential being missed. I find the IE900's upper-midrange to sound somewhat muffled and to lack appropriate bite. @toranku and @Banbeucmas helped me set up an EQ in REW that matches it more closely to Crinacle's IEF target. The end result should hit much closer to most listeners' neutral. The IE900's driver is also very capable, so it takes EQ like a champ.

• Frequency: 1360, Gain: -1.3, Q: 1
• Frequency: 2900, Gain: 4.8, Q: 1.25
• Frequency: 4000, Gain: 2.6, Q: 1.95
• Frequency: 5500, Gain: -3.2, Q: 4.90

the 10k peak doesn't bother you ?

 

[Precogvision]

I often wonder whether the difference between a $100 5/10 IEM and a $2000 8-9/10 IEM is a few EQ bands. Manufacturers must hate EQ .

That's a fun question to think about. I'd say most of the 6/7/8/9 in my scoring is baked into technicalities. The IEMs I've ranked 2/3/4 can probably get to my 4 or 5 with EQ. SeeAudio Yume's probably the best example of that. It sports class-leading tonality, but it's not going any higher than a 5 by my metrics. You can't EQ in slam, treble extension, dynamics, etc.

Question for you regarding PEQ: when you use it, do you use low shelf, high shelf, analog bell...or one of the many other options. This confuses the heck out of me. I'd like to try your adjustments but want to make sure I'm using the PEQ correctly (I have Toneboosters PEQ on UAPP).

I don't use any of those settings haha. That would confuse me too. I'm using PowerAmp on my DX300. Shame we can't have nice things on iOS, I would kill for EQ on there.

the 10k peak doesn't bother you ?

Oh, I'm pretty sure that's the coupler resonance peak! I took this measurement using the size small tips all the way at the reference plane. The resonance peak usually shifts up in frequency the deeper you insert the IEM in the coupler. But to the contrary, the IE900 actually starts slopes off at 10kHz in sine sweeps I've run by ear. It's a good example of why you can't really trust the measurements starting from around this point.

 

[RikudouGoku]

I don't use any of those settings haha. That would confuse me too. I'm using PowerAmp on my DX300. Shame we can't have nice things on iOS, I would kill for EQ on there.

The Qudelix 5K blueooth amp/dac has PEQ in its app.

 

[Precogvision]

@Damz87

I'll reply here because I don't want to derail the qdc thread haha. Yes, I've heard three U12Ts. One with the old logo (my personal unit) and two (S2 & S3) with the new logo.

I haven't talked about it because there's always a possibility of unit variance, and I didn't want to imply that there was a stealth revision. That said, the two new logo ones did sound different to me. They noticeably had more bass (both sub-bass and mid-bass) along with some other small differences.

Spoiler: My impressions of S3

I've A/B-ed my personal unit with the S3 unit pretty extensively. The S3 unit was definitely more lively and seemed to have slightly different midrange transients. Not sure if that was the product of small shifts in tonality or an actual driver swap, but later on, Lee from Elysian confirmed that the U12t's drivers haven't changed. Either way, I couldn't tell you which one I liked more between my personal unit and S3; it was really a flip of the coin depending on my mood.

@aaf evo has also graphed a couple of the new U12Ts and they graph like the two new logo ones I have heard. The first U12t that Crin has on his graph tool, presumably an old logo one, matches my personal old logo unit. But at the end of the day it's difficult to say. The differences are small enough to simply be unit variance.