[lee730]

Quote:

What Lee? Given your hatred of the EX1000 I'd have never guessed you'd start dating her sister, who's nearly the same yet tends to be more laid back. LOL. Glad you're enjoying them.

There is a big difference in the treble IMO. I'm not picking up on treble spikes, its smoother less aggressive. Mid-range is more upfront and smooth (more wet and less dry .
 
As I had posted earlier
 
EX1000 = Cruella
 

 
 
MDR-7550 = Cinderella
 

 

[Selenium]

I would never date Cruella's sister. That's what surprises me. You were still willing to give the line another shot.

 

[lee730]

Well I got enough positive reviews from various headfiers who ultimately ran into the same problem with the EX1000 as I did and they had brought the MDR-7550s and preferred it to the EX1000. Basically saying the treble wasn't sibilant like the EX1000 and a better mid-range. Plus hearing they possess the same technical abilities without the flaws. So over 5 headfiers had confirmed the treble issues and some of them had also opted for the 7550 with great results. Most recently a_recording. So after he had also confirmed it I was determined to try it for myself. Sold the FX700s because they don't get enough usage and aren't good for louder volume listening. Only at low volume are they good IMO. I like having the option for both.
 

 

[Inks]

  Conversely there are many headfiers who find the EX1000 to be superior to the 7550s. Anaxilus summed it up well, its missing that sense of air that adds to the EX1000s grand presentation, 7550s sounds closed-in because of the slightly subdued treble. The EX1000 also has a tiny bit more rumble and slightly better instrument separation. 
 
The EX1000 doesn't have offensive treble spikes, like James mentions, its smooth and romantic for the most part, the FX700 has a more boosted treble. What does make it potentially offensive is it's big, though fortunately narrow 5.5k spike in the midhighs (which you can call lower treble though). Even though its narrow, 4-6k regions are very sensitive regions to the ear where sibilance resides, so it can be harsh and sibilant. Fortunately it becomes less offensive as you lower volume because of the ears sensitivity, the 7550s fare far better at higher volumes.
 
The 7550s rids of the sibilance and harshness by dropping the inevitable 5.5k to safe regions, unfortunately it also subdues the treble and midhighs a bit as a result of the tuning, dampening effect. 
 
Both have relatively poor isolation, so its recommended to use them in relatively quiet environments, thus the 1000s spike becomes less of an issue as you are able to turn the volume down. 
 
They both compromise, certainly a close call. 

 

[lee730]

True but Anaxilus himself also found the EX1000s to be sibilant. I'm curious does he still own them? I was under the impression he didn't have them anymore. While the EX1000 may have its own qualities they sure didn't out-weight the negatives in my book. The sound stage is wider on the EX1000 but its not a night and day difference. Same with the bass and treble extension. Not enough of a gain to merit the flaws IMO. At the end of the day what really matters is the items staying power. If it can stay with you for the long run.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

  Conversely there are many headfiers who find the EX1000 to be superior to the 7550s. Anaxilus summed it up well, its missing that sense of air that adds to the EX1000s grand presentation, 7550s sounds closed-in because of the slightly subdued treble. The EX1000 also has a tiny bit more rumble and slightly better instrument separation. 
 
The EX1000 doesn't have offensive treble spikes, like James mentions, its smooth and romantic for the most part, the FX700 has a more boosted treble. What does make it potentially offensive is it's big, though fortunately narrow 5.5k spike in the midhighs (which you can call lower treble though). Even though its narrow, 4-6k regions are very sensitive regions to the ear where sibilance resides, so it can be harsh and sibilant. Fortunately it becomes less offensive as you lower volume because of the ears sensitivity, the 7550s fare far better at higher volumes.
 
The 7550s rids of the sibilance and harshness by dropping the inevitable 5.5k to safe regions, unfortunately it also subdues the treble and midhighs a bit as a result of the tuning, dampening effect. 
 
Both have relatively poor isolation, so its recommended to use them in relatively quiet environments, thus the 1000s spike becomes less of an issue as you are able to turn the volume down. 
 
They both compromise, certainly a close call. 

 
The 7550 & EX1000 are two very, VERY similar sounding phones — I had both at the same time and did a direct comparison between the two. To have stated over, and over, and over, and OVER again that the EX1000 is "garbage" ("Cruella") for over a year now (!) on EVERY single thread on HF where anyone happens to mention the EX1000s, and now suddenly declare "I must say I really like the 7550s" ("Cinderella") is certainly very 'interesting' — in fact, I think it's quite ridiculous. I have my own theories as to why this is so, but I'll keep those theories to myself. That's not to say that some people may have valid reasons to prefer the 7550 over the EX1000.

There are many people out there who love the EX1000 or who at least acknowledge it is indeed an excellent phone (even if they personally prefer something else), and some certainly prefer it over the 7550 (I'm one of those), but it seems they don't have the need to defend the EX1000 every time a single member continually bashes them — although there's also another member who also enjoys bashing the EX1000s but not as often. However, it would sometimes seem that because of the non-stop bashing by this single member with a high-post count, the EX1000 may not be very good or that they may indeed be "garbage".

 

[Inks]

True but Anaxilus himself also found the EX1000s to be sibilant. I'm curious does he still own them? I was under the impression he didn't have them anymore. While the EX1000 may have its own qualities they sure didn't out-weight the negatives in my book. The sound stage is wider on the EX1000 but its not a night and day difference. Same with the bass and treble extension. Not enough of a gain to merit the flaws IMO. At the end of the day what really matters is the items staying power. If it can stay with you for the long run.

 
   
 He did but then finds it isnt offensive at lower volumes. Hes more into customs otherwise I believe the EX1000s and K3003 are his favorite universals. 
 
Its more like 1 flaw (5.5k)on the EX1000 relatively, but  I'll call the 7550s slightly subdued 7-10k treble flaws. They both compromise, do you want a safer, but more glossed-outb sound or a more detailed, but potentially more offensive treble/midhighs. 
 
Agreed with Music though, they are VERY similar, the EX600s as well. 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

 
   
 He did but then finds it isnt offensive at lower volumes. Hes more into customs otherwise I believe the EX1000s and K3003 are his favorite universals. 
 
Its more like 1 flaw (5.5k)on the EX1000 relatively, but  I'll call the 7550s slightly subdued 7-10k treble flaws. They both compromise, do you want a safer, but more glossed-outb sound or a more detailed, but potentially more offensive treble/midhighs. 
 
Agreed with Music though, they are VERY similar, the EX600s as well. 

Sound signature wise yes they are very similar. But in my case the treble was a huge difference. Not a subtle thing but a night and day difference. That is why I was actually taking a risk getting these IEMs. But reading similar experiences with certain other headfiers and hearing their cross-comparisons to the EX1000 put me at ease and tempted me to take that risk. In the end I am very happy I did because these are indeed excellent IEMs.

 

[Inks]

Sound signature wise yes they are very similar. But in my case the treble was a huge difference. Not a subtle thing but a night and day difference. That is why I was actually taking a risk getting these IEMs. But reading similar experiences with certain other headfiers and hearing their cross-comparisons to the EX1000 put me at ease and tempted me to take that risk. In the end I am very happy I did because these are indeed excellent IEMs.

Both are good products, but each have the compromises I mentioned. I prefer the more transparent EX1000 myself (by a bit) since they'll be mostly used in quiet environments for me. 

 

[lee730]

Looks like you are in that Heir tour? I'm interested in hearing comparisons with your current IEMs.
 

 

[a_recording]

I tend to think that the EX1000 has a bit more of a magic sparkle to it that makes it a better choice for a lot of tracks, but on enough tracks the treble sibilance takes me out of the whole experience.
 
The 7550 is a little more conservative / boring. It's amazing how much difference 3db or so can make across the treble range in taking out that sense of 'air'. However the sound is still emotive and beautifully mellow in its own way, and across all the music I listen to its more of a 'safe pair of hands'. I can listen for a long time with great enjoyment, and I really do value that (if for the protection of my ears alone).
 
It's definitely a compromise between the two. The EX1000 is the flashy one that would probably impress more on first listen, but the 7550 holds its own charm over the long run to me.  The longer cable on the 7550 also makes it great for desktop use!

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

 
...It's definitely a compromise between the two. The EX1000 is the flashy one that would probably impress more on first listen, but the 7550 holds its own charm over the long run to me.  The longer cable on the 7550 also makes it great for desktop use!

 
Actually, I personally didn't really find that to be the case (bolded text). I always said at the time that the 7550 was a better all-rounder as the EX1000 is less forgiving of poor recordings and/or (re)masters. However, the EX1000 on well recorded/mastered albums is simply stellar; the 7550 gets very close, but the EX1000, in many instances, actually manages to get there.

Unfortunately, the subject of recording/master quality gets nearly always overlooked and ignored and, instead, we often get the silly nonsense that people must—with these kinds of excellent phones—listen to uncompressed files. Most people don't know just how poorly a lot of their music is recorded/mastered and that the same music using uncompressed files will sound pretty much the same, ie pretty bad. But hey, the power of suggestion, placebo and so much nonsense posted in these forum threads becomes a reality to many people, and they just keep spreading the gospel of nonsense and untruths.

At the time I had both EX1000 & 7550, I decided to keep the EX1000 simply because I had the excellent ES3X to compliment the excellent EX1000s. Had I not had the ES3Xs, I might have well kept the 7550s if that had been the only phone I could have kept at the time.
 
When the EX1000s are fed the 'right' music, it is simply an incredibly and wonderfully unique sounding phone —— in my not so humble opinion.

 

[kwang411]

I bought a EX600 a month ago and was pleasantly surprised by its sound, but the sharp treble has always sorta kept me on my toes at times. Upon finish reading this thread and discovered that the 7550s might be a more suitable pair of phones for me, so I ordered one.
 
Two days ago I received my pair of 7550 and have burned them for about 48 hours. 
Out of the box, they already have the EX600s beat hands down. Like many members have mentioned before, they share a very similar sound signature, but the little differences are definitely noticeable.
 
Treble: This is where the biggest difference between 7550 and EX600 lies. EX600 has a very 'exciting' treble with nice extension, but on several tracks they make me twitch with the sharp treble. Sometimes they could also sound a bit digital and unnatural. 7550, on the other hand, retains that great extension, but there is absolutely no peak or sibilance at all. I've thrown all of my sibiliant tracks at it and I've never heard it once. It's super smooth and super relaxing to my ears. LOVE it.
 
Mids: 7550 mids are definitely more forward than EX600. Not a night and day difference, but just makes everything sound more 'right'. Vocals are more upfront, so they no longer blend into the instruments, which sometimes happens with EX600. It makes cello sound stellar, warm and engulfing. 
 
Bass: More emphasis on the bass with 7550. The bass lines are slightly more defined and easier to pick out for complex jazz pieces. 
 
Soundstage: 7550 is a tiny bit wider than EX600, but quite a bit deeper. Instrument separation is better and I hear more air around instruments, especially for strings. Overall 7550 sounds more 3 dimensional.
 
Details: Being a studio monitor, 7550 obviously has a TON of details, but interestingly the details don't stop me from enjoying the music, they don't scream in my face, I can choose to hear them if I want to.
 
These little changes add up and just makes 7550 that much more musical and realistic sounding to my ears compared to EX600.  It's kinda hard to imagine how much the EX1000 can improve over the 7550. I'm actually quite awestruck but how good the 7550 is, especially coming from ES3X/SE535/HD800. Right now I actually prefer the sound signature of the 7550 to any of my other headphones and even makes me want to sell the SE535.
 
My only gripe with 7550 is the 1.6m cable, it's just way too long for me, but that's just nitpicking

 

[lee730]

Nice to hear kwang. I have to tell you though if you found the EX600 sibilant you will most likely find the EX1000 even worse. The IEM has a slightly more reined sound but at a cost IMO. The mid range is also more dry and distant. It all comes down to preference and weather or not you can hear those treble spikes. Happy listening .
 

 

[kwang411]

Awesome, I have no regrets getting the 7550. 
Really thinking about selling the SE535 though. The vocal/bass ain't as good as my ES3X, details/soundstage/treble not as good as 7550. They all of a sudden seem so mediocre lol