rajan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2001
- Posts
- 106
- Likes
- 0
I was looking for comparison reviews for these iem's but couldn't find sufficient notes from the board. I was fortunate enough to audition these three recently thanks to David, Wilson and to the big guy who graciously assisted me. I used a md player unamped playing various songs from Boston, Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, James Taylor and U2. I did not detect any hiss from all three iem's out of my md player. Unfortunately, I was pressed for time and I only spent around an hour listening to them.
I have an HD600 and I was looking for something similar. I can hear the veil in this can but like it nonetheless because I feel that I have less listening fatique from the Senn.
First iem I tried was the super.fi 3. Treble and mids were clear (clearer than the HD600) but I felt that in more busy songs, the separation of instruments was constricted. I was not able to critically hear the bass too. I wonder if the superfi.3 can be helped with an amp. The cable is the stiffest among the three and the most dork looking when worn. I therefore gravitated to the two remaining iems.
The um1 have a similar sound signature with the senn amongst the three iem's. The sound is smooth but treble is not as extended as the HD600. Mids are also smooth but not as forward. I can hear the bass but it was weak. I think a higher volume would help but it being an iem, I don't want it to adjust the volume upwards. Putting it on was easy enough and was as low a profile as the d-jays. The cable is the best among the three. It is very pliant and I did not hear any microphonics. I love to love this iem because of its superior comfort and ergonomics unfortunately I need to strain to hear things from it.
I switched between the um1's and d-jays for my final minutes. I kept on wanting to hear the um1's because I was hoping that I would love the sound. Unfortunately, that was wishful thinking. The d-jays was the airiest among the three. There is a semblance of extension on both sides of the spectrum. It is brighter than the um1 and almost as bright as the super.fi 3. However, it did not suffer from constriction on busy songs. Mids are not as forward as I expected them to be. In fact I enjoyed it because voices did not drown with instruments around. They are indeed in front without loosing the instruments behind it. It stayed true to itself in almost all songs as the timbre seems to be real and timing is lifelike. It is easier to put on than the um1 because you do not have to loop it over your ear. Comfort and ergonomics are at par with the um1 except that it has a stiffer cable.
I feel that the d-jays deserve more reviews in this board. I can only surmise that they are sold at very few outlets which is the reason why so few of us can try and listen to them. My other concern is I had a very short listen. If I had more time, I would also like to evaluate if the d-jays will affect my sensitivity to fatigue.
I am also wondering if I gave justice to these iem's. I hope others (Claus/Garret?) who have listened to some of these iem's can chime in here and either correct me or agree with what I heard.
I have an HD600 and I was looking for something similar. I can hear the veil in this can but like it nonetheless because I feel that I have less listening fatique from the Senn.
First iem I tried was the super.fi 3. Treble and mids were clear (clearer than the HD600) but I felt that in more busy songs, the separation of instruments was constricted. I was not able to critically hear the bass too. I wonder if the superfi.3 can be helped with an amp. The cable is the stiffest among the three and the most dork looking when worn. I therefore gravitated to the two remaining iems.
The um1 have a similar sound signature with the senn amongst the three iem's. The sound is smooth but treble is not as extended as the HD600. Mids are also smooth but not as forward. I can hear the bass but it was weak. I think a higher volume would help but it being an iem, I don't want it to adjust the volume upwards. Putting it on was easy enough and was as low a profile as the d-jays. The cable is the best among the three. It is very pliant and I did not hear any microphonics. I love to love this iem because of its superior comfort and ergonomics unfortunately I need to strain to hear things from it.
I switched between the um1's and d-jays for my final minutes. I kept on wanting to hear the um1's because I was hoping that I would love the sound. Unfortunately, that was wishful thinking. The d-jays was the airiest among the three. There is a semblance of extension on both sides of the spectrum. It is brighter than the um1 and almost as bright as the super.fi 3. However, it did not suffer from constriction on busy songs. Mids are not as forward as I expected them to be. In fact I enjoyed it because voices did not drown with instruments around. They are indeed in front without loosing the instruments behind it. It stayed true to itself in almost all songs as the timbre seems to be real and timing is lifelike. It is easier to put on than the um1 because you do not have to loop it over your ear. Comfort and ergonomics are at par with the um1 except that it has a stiffer cable.
I feel that the d-jays deserve more reviews in this board. I can only surmise that they are sold at very few outlets which is the reason why so few of us can try and listen to them. My other concern is I had a very short listen. If I had more time, I would also like to evaluate if the d-jays will affect my sensitivity to fatigue.
I am also wondering if I gave justice to these iem's. I hope others (Claus/Garret?) who have listened to some of these iem's can chime in here and either correct me or agree with what I heard.
