[shigzeo]

... an unfortunate pair with your ears! Too bad.

 

[james444]

^^ Finally an opportunity to post in defense of the CK100 and another example of how differently we hear. I was very much surprised how a phone this bright can pull off super-smooth treble with hardly any sibilance!

 

[shigzeo]

Indeed. I find it much less fatiguing than a few others which reach way up past 13 000 with spiky treble. This one has a hotter upper mid range. it isn't as smooth as the CK10 though, that is for sure.

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^^ Finally an opportunity to post in defense of the CK100 and another example of how differently we hear. I was very much surprised how a phone this bright can pull off super-smooth treble with hardly any sibilance!

Thank God someone stepped in and ended this senseless bloodshed. So you would describe it as a bright phone then? How does the treble presentation compare to the FX500, which we know is a dynamic but it does have sharp treble and a crystalline presentation to my ears. How does the overall brightness of the CK100 compare to the SE530? This might sound like an odd choice for comparative purposes but even with it's rolled-off highs, I regard the SE530 as a brighter sounding phone overall than the IE8, UM3X and the TF10.

 

[shigzeo]

The CK100 is brighter than the SE530 - that is for sure. And I would call it brighter but less fatiguing than the FX500. Every earphones rolls off, it is just a matter of when and how much the manufacturer pumps up the spec to prove otherwise!

The highs of the FX500 are a little starchier, and can pounce on certain notes more. The CK100, while smoother, is 'hotter': always exciting up top.

 

[iponderous]

Thanks shigzeo. I think I'm leaning towards the CK10, which I know that you also regard highly.

 

[shigzeo]

Yes, the CK10 is in my opinion the best IEM ever made. The CK100 tops it for build, but it is more of a polarising earphones: you will either love it or hate it. Neither are big on bass, but both are excellent choices.

 

[iponderous]

From what I've been reading, the CK10 appears to be a more balanced sounding IEM with perhaps a smidge more bass presence than the CK100. Presumably this is due to the emphasis on upper mids and treble in the CK100 due to its BA configuration?

 

[shigzeo]

The CK10 may have more bass emphasis: whether that is due to it being easier to drive, or because the mids are elevated in the CK100, I have no idea. It is probably the most neutrally balanced IEM I have heard. More so than the tweaky ER4 from ETY and ever so much more smooth.

 

[james444]

@iponderous: Definitely brighter than the SE530, no doubt. As for the FX500, they have great highs extension but also substantial lows as a counterbalance. The CK100's lows are much less in-your-face, still fairly adequate for most genres, but of course the overall tonal balance is tipped towards brightness.

One more observation about the CK100's highs, if you like psychedelic Ambient, e.g. Shpongle and such, I don't think highs can get more spacey and psychedelic than these.

 

[iponderous]

Thanks james444. I'm afraid my knowledge of ambient is limited to lighting and trance - hypnosis.

 

[shigzeo]

drum roll please... (rolls eyes whilst stifling a guffaw)

 

[iponderous]

Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll be here at the Lido every night for the next four weeks.

 

[shigzeo]

I really didn't expect myself to start to enjoy the CK100 with trance. Lo and behold, it is an engaging experience, if somewhat eschewed to intimate space... imagine that, intimate space.

 

[G3n0c|d3]

i enjoyed metallica with CK100.... weird huh?