[firesign]

I have a different perspective, perhaps due to the flood of 5 stars rating on head-fi. When I started, I rely on head-fi to know if something is worth buying, and everything is 4 or 5 star “good for the price”. So would this 5 star $50 IEM touch that 4.5 star $200 so that I can wait and save up?

My approach is simple, rank things in absolute sense, and let people decide whether that’s good for money. And to give the ranking a “scale”, I compare stuffs against a few benchmarks.

For example, 4/5 in resolution (“good”) in my rating would land you on something as resolving as a Blessing 2. If you already have a Blessing 2 and you wonder whether that expensive IEM would give you more resolution, just check the resolution rating. If it is also 4/5, then it is in the ballpark at most.

That’s how I dreamed of a rating system when I started.

I have the same opinion, and I think it's the only way for a review and a score to be really useful. The price should not influence the score, neither to raise it nor to lower it.

And of course, there can be many cheap IEMs with a much higher review and rating than more expensive ones.

 

[DaveStarWalker]

Many people need to feel reassured by a high selling price tag.

Myself included...

But in certain cases, some products can break this very human behavior.

I think this is the case of the Fh9... Technically, musically, and industrial quality wise.

 

[Precogvision]

Campfire Audio x AK Pathfinder Impressions

Configuration: 2DD/3BA
Price: $1900
Unit on loan for review courtesy of Headphones.com.

Ten minutes of listening without ever seeing the graph:

• Bass boosted 8-10dB, good amounts of mid-bass with a lower-midrange tilt
• Pinna is around 2kHz
• Upper-midrange seems recessed from around 3-6kHz
• Treble has mid-treble peak, extension isn't the best, starting to roll-off from about 12kHz onwards?

The graph:

The frequency response of the Pathfinder is pretty sketchy and it measures worse than I would have expected by ear. But that said, I don't think it sounds outright bad. The 4.5kHz peak keeps trailing definition to female vocals from being entirely smoothed out, and the Pathfinder actually has decent treble extension after closer listening (the mid-treble and bass emphasis just masks it at times). I do wonder if the Pathfinder is using a new DD from CFA, as it sounds quite different from my memory of the Solaris IEMs, but it could just be the stronger bass shelf talking. In any case, the Pathfinder has a somewhat murky, odd sound that is - at least in my opinion - a ways from being on the correct path, much less the path to improvement. Context? The Pathfinder, despite the distinct naming convention, more or less seems to be the next iteration of the polarizing Solaris. From memory, though, I think the Pathfinder might be a regression from its Solaris brethren. The Pathfinder's staging seems smaller to me; the treble also seems harsher compared to my memory of the OG Solaris' smooth but delightfully sparkly treble. This one's a miss in my book.

Score: 4.5/10

All critical listening was done off of my iBasso DX300 and iPhone 13 Mini with the stock tips and cable.

 

[RikudouGoku]

Campfire Audio x AK Pathfinder Impressions

Configuration: 2DD/3BA
Price: $1900
Unit on loan for review courtesy of Headphones.com.

Ten minutes of listening without ever seeing the graph:

• Bass boosted 8-10dB, good amounts of mid-bass with a lower-midrange tilt
• Pinna is around 2kHz
• Upper-midrange seems recessed from around 3-6kHz
• Treble has mid-treble peak, extension isn't the best, starting to roll-off from about 12kHz onwards?

The graph:



The frequency response of the Pathfinder is pretty sketchy and it measures worse than I would have expected by ear. But that said, I don't think it sounds outright bad. The 4.5kHz peak keeps trailing definition to female vocals from being entirely smoothed out, and the Pathfinder actually has decent treble extension after closer listening (the mid-treble and bass emphasis just masks it at times). I do wonder if the Pathfinder is using a new DD from CFA, as it sounds quite different from my memory of the Solaris IEMs, but it could just be the stronger bass shelf talking. In any case, the Pathfinder has a somewhat murky, odd sound that is - at least in my opinion - a ways from being on the correct path, much less the path to improvement. Context? The Pathfinder, despite the distinct naming convention, more or less seems to be the next iteration of the polarizing Solaris. From memory, though, I think the Pathfinder might be a regression from its Solaris brethren. The Pathfinder's staging seems smaller to me; the treble also seems harsher compared to my memory of the OG Solaris' smooth but delightfully sparkly treble. This one's a miss in my book.

Score: 4.5/10

All critical listening was done off of my iBasso DX300 and iPhone 13 Mini with the stock tips and cable.

I guess "pathfinder" is an appropriate name with all the mountains it has.

 

[WAON303]

Another addition to the list of odd CFA IEMs.

 

[Fargeg]

Campfire Audio x AK Pathfinder Impressions

Configuration: 2DD/3BA
Price: $1900
Unit on loan for review courtesy of Headphones.com.

Ten minutes of listening without ever seeing the graph:

• Bass boosted 8-10dB, good amounts of mid-bass with a lower-midrange tilt
• Pinna is around 2kHz
• Upper-midrange seems recessed from around 3-6kHz
• Treble has mid-treble peak, extension isn't the best, starting to roll-off from about 12kHz onwards?

The graph:



The frequency response of the Pathfinder is pretty sketchy and it measures worse than I would have expected by ear. But that said, I don't think it sounds outright bad. The 4.5kHz peak keeps trailing definition to female vocals from being entirely smoothed out, and the Pathfinder actually has decent treble extension after closer listening (the mid-treble and bass emphasis just masks it at times). I do wonder if the Pathfinder is using a new DD from CFA, as it sounds quite different from my memory of the Solaris IEMs, but it could just be the stronger bass shelf talking. In any case, the Pathfinder has a somewhat murky, odd sound that is - at least in my opinion - a ways from being on the correct path, much less the path to improvement. Context? The Pathfinder, despite the distinct naming convention, more or less seems to be the next iteration of the polarizing Solaris. From memory, though, I think the Pathfinder might be a regression from its Solaris brethren. The Pathfinder's staging seems smaller to me; the treble also seems harsher compared to my memory of the OG Solaris' smooth but delightfully sparkly treble. This one's a miss in my book.

Score: 4.5/10

All critical listening was done off of my iBasso DX300 and iPhone 13 Mini with the stock tips and cable.

A&K x CA Pathfinder? More like, KZ x CA Pathfinder

 

[InvisibleInk]

A&K x CA Pathfinder? More like, KZ x CA Pathfinder

But you know, I really like the ZEX.

 

[DynamicEars]

A&K x CA Pathfinder? More like, KZ x CA Pathfinder

"Just copy ZEX Pro tuning, its tuned by @crinacle !"

"Allright!"

..and they mistaken copy the ZEX tuning, not the pro one.

 

[Skullar]

Campfire Audio x AK Pathfinder Impressions

Configuration: 2DD/3BA
Price: $1900
Unit on loan for review courtesy of Headphones.com.

Ten minutes of listening without ever seeing the graph:

• Bass boosted 8-10dB, good amounts of mid-bass with a lower-midrange tilt
• Pinna is around 2kHz
• Upper-midrange seems recessed from around 3-6kHz
• Treble has mid-treble peak, extension isn't the best, starting to roll-off from about 12kHz onwards?

The graph:



The frequency response of the Pathfinder is pretty sketchy and it measures worse than I would have expected by ear. But that said, I don't think it sounds outright bad. The 4.5kHz peak keeps trailing definition to female vocals from being entirely smoothed out, and the Pathfinder actually has decent treble extension after closer listening (the mid-treble and bass emphasis just masks it at times). I do wonder if the Pathfinder is using a new DD from CFA, as it sounds quite different from my memory of the Solaris IEMs, but it could just be the stronger bass shelf talking. In any case, the Pathfinder has a somewhat murky, odd sound that is - at least in my opinion - a ways from being on the correct path, much less the path to improvement. Context? The Pathfinder, despite the distinct naming convention, more or less seems to be the next iteration of the polarizing Solaris. From memory, though, I think the Pathfinder might be a regression from its Solaris brethren. The Pathfinder's staging seems smaller to me; the treble also seems harsher compared to my memory of the OG Solaris' smooth but delightfully sparkly treble. This one's a miss in my book.

Score: 4.5/10

All critical listening was done off of my iBasso DX300 and iPhone 13 Mini with the stock tips and cable.

It does resemble Solaris in some ways. But i found Pathfinders bass to be pretty good. Its not a neutral iem for sure.
Typical cock up it the treble... It actually would be fairly decent if the peaks were a bit less exaggerated. Why make those peaks shoot through the ceiling. I mean i tried them on my Gryphon. Which usually likes iems with lower/mid treble boost and it was still a touch too much.
If they had those peaks tamed by like 3db it would have been quite ok.
Technicalities were good. But i somehow thought its going to be $1500 not 2k.
CFA's own Supermoon i think is better though and for less.

The way i see it. Its a slight improvement over Solaris X. But the treble peakiness seems to be part of A&K+CFA house sound..

 

[HellaSpooked64]

Greetings again Precog! If you may, could you provide some comparisons between the Helios and the Elysian Diva? Would also appreciate some insight regarding the shell/nozzle size of the universal Diva, if you can recall. Thanks in advance.

Edit: Just stumbled across some news about Elysian's latest IEM release (Gaea?) Maybe you can look into that eventually

 

[podnosimyszafe]

One thing can not be denied, Campfire Audio is the bravest IEM company with their tuning choices. Looking at the graphs, they almost never use the same way of tuning two times.

Also my 2 cents to the discussion that took place on few previous pages: some IEMs are all-rounders and some are the opposite of that. In my experience, the best example of "anti-all-rounder" is CCA CRA. With some tracks it sound mediocre, but with the right album this set is spectacular. It seems that IEMs with "neutral with 5-7 db bass boost" seem to fall into "all-rounders" category, meanwhile more "experimental" tunings (with scoops and boosts here and there) usually place IEMs in "anti-all-rounder" group.

I think this is the best explanation why some sets are universally similarly rated and why some have reputation ranging from mediocre to endgame.

 

[o0genesis0o]

One thing can not be denied, Campfire Audio is the bravest IEM company with their tuning choices. Looking at the graphs, they almost never use the same way of tuning two times.

Also my 2 cents to the discussion that took place on few previous pages: some IEMs are all-rounders and some are the opposite of that. In my experience, the best example of "anti-all-rounder" is CCA CRA. With some tracks it sound mediocre, but with the right album this set is spectacular. It seems that IEMs with "neutral with 5-7 db bass boost" seem to fall into "all-rounders" category, meanwhile more "experimental" tunings (with scoops and boosts here and there) usually place IEMs in "anti-all-rounder" group.

I think this is the best explanation why some sets are universally similarly rated and why some have reputation ranging from mediocre to endgame.

I don’t know. A multi-kilobuck IEM that only sounds good in some limited use cases does not seem like a well designed multi-kilobuck IEM.

 

[firesign]

One thing can not be denied, Campfire Audio is the bravest IEM company with their tuning choices. Looking at the graphs, they almost never use the same way of tuning two times.

...

I think they roll the dices and... whatever comes up.

 

[podnosimyszafe]

I don’t know. A multi-kilobuck IEM that only sounds good in some limited use cases does not seem like a well designed multi-kilobuck IEM.

To clarify, I based my opinion on my experience with IEMs within below $150 budget, since this is the price range I have by far the most experience with. Unfortunately, I do not have a lot of experience with IEMs exceeding this budget. Would not be surprised if my observations would no longer apply to better IEMs, in particular the kilobuck ones.

 

[DaveStarWalker]

I don’t know. A multi-kilobuck IEM that only sounds good in some limited use cases does not seem like a well designed multi-kilobuck IEM.

Though, they are a lot of products that are tuned like this... ...

Lot of (sometime very) polarized tunings in the totl world...