[Nulliverse]

We hear them similarly s0lar. I'm interested to hear your comparisons!

 

[FieldingMellish]

I like the 161P. Is a great sound.

 

[Gozzer]

Quote:

I just got the A161p in the mail. I am listening for an hour or so.
 
I can understand a slight comparison with JVC FXT90, they share a similar aggression. But the A161p sounds a lot fuller.
Bass hits very powerful, compared to RE0 and B2 it's a lot more powerful. I never listen for bass-details much but I'll try to compare RE0, A161p and B2.
Mids are a bit forward and show good detail. Presentation is not very large but imaging is very good.
 
I haven't heard sibilance but I haven't listened to all my test tracks yet.

Thanks for the comparison. I've become so accustomed to the tighter analical sound, that I'm finding the more bassy IEM's muddy. 
I'm still intersted in trying these, however, the Re-400's are waiting to ship, so they are currenty on the backburner.

 

[s0lar]

Quote:

We hear them similarly s0lar. I'm interested to hear your comparisons!

 
I'll make some time this week(end) to do some detailed comparisons between JVC FX90 and MEE A161p.
I prefer A161p, only disadvantage is that it's a VERY sensitive IEM. Hiss and microphonics galore.

 

[Nulliverse]

Digging up an older thread... it's funny, as after the A161p I also felt compelled to follow the neutral route. First with the Re-272, then the AUD-8X, and now the Rooth LS8+. So, the title of this thread is apt, with the humble A161p serving a very good purpose. 

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

Digging up an older thread... it's funny, as after the A161p I also felt compelled to follow the neutral route. First with the Re-272, then the AUD-8X, and now the Rooth LS8+. So, the title of this thread is apt, with the humble A161p serving a very good purpose. 

 
The A161P is neutral with rolled off highs...  So technically it's warm, a little warmer than the RE-400 actually

 

[Nulliverse]

Indeed. And this is the very reason why it serves as a good intro to more neutral phones, giving a hint of what can be expected, whilst retailing consumer accessibility (warmth). A good balance to achieve.
 
The RE-400 has been on my radar since release... and I would have it by now if my funds were not all used up with CIEMs. 

 

[FlySweep]

Originally Posted by Nulliverse /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
The RE-400 has been on my radar since release...

 
Nulliverse, being that we seems to enjoy a lot of the same phones/signatures (and both have heard much of the AUD line), I can very confidently say you'd like the RE-400.. a lot.

 

[shotgunshane]

Indeed. And this is the very reason why it serves as a good intro to more neutral phones, giving a hint of what can be expected, whilst retailing consumer accessibility (warmth). A good balance to achieve.

The RE-400 has been on my radar since release... and I would have it by now if my funds were not all used up with CIEMs. 

Exactly.

I'm not a fan of the re400 buy many seem to like it.

 

[Nulliverse]

Quote:

 
Nulliverse, being that we seems to enjoy a lot of the same phones/signatures (and both have heard much of the AUD line), I can very confidently say you'd like the RE-400.. a lot.

 
In one fell swoop, Flysweep, your recommendation ended months of successful resistance...
 
Get thee behind me Head-fi!

 

[Mikey01]

I have been away too long from here. Sorry for that. For those who don't know me, I am the owner of the original prototype Eddie Current "Zana Duex" from a few years back. Yes, I still have it. Make me an offer.... I digress!  I would really like to try the Meelectronic A161P's but I have concerns. There description in reviews here sound interesting to me. My primary concern is that I bought into the Amazon review hype for the Meelectric M-Duo and bought them. Burned them in for 50 hours and discerned that they, to my ears, are just another $69 earphone, nothing special and a waist of my time and money. Will the A161P be the same?
 My second concern is that I really don't like neutral earphones and have no business being  interested in the A161P's. However I am interested none the less. I have a small rant on Neutral earphones anyway. Not that they exist. Nor that a lot of people like them. But rather that so many "so called audiophiles" say that they portray what "the artiest really wants you to here in the recording".
I take issue with that as there are several steps and a whole pot load of equipment with a recording room that bias what the artiest wants you to here and what you get. I have heard many a high bitrate recording (band or performance if you will) through high end amps and very analytical earphones. Many time it is just an old popular hippie band or just good old fashion rock N roll. You know damn well that if you here them in person that (for example) they have a good bass player playing through a hefty gazillion watt tube amp with forty seven 22 inch speakers. And no doubt the bass player wants there Momma or groupie girlfriend to be to be able to here them rumble the notes in good measure, out to them. Yet with neutral earphones, many but certainly not all, recordings are portrayed with you wondering if the bass player showed up for work that day. You know dang well you can here em in person..
Take for example Santana, Abraxis I think it is, the one with "Black Magic Woman" in it, I have yet to here it recorded in any recording (including remastered Gold) without the whole recording having a slight vial sound over the whole band. I am part of the Woodstock generation and have heard them in person. The recordings were done poorly and do not do them justice. Through analytical neutral earphones I have heard all the Allman Brother early recordings with the same vial result. I personally have heard them many times at the Ludlow Garage in Clifton (Cincinnati, Ohio) and they sounded overwhelming good.. Seldom do Neutral earphones let the bass be portrayed as it is really done live in the studio. To me, Neutral headphones are lying to your ears just as much as colored sounding earphone are. If you like em, well good. Enjoy them as you should. Just don't tell me that they more accurately portray the music as the artiest wants us to here them.

 

[kova4a]

 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

I have been away too long from here. Sorry for that. For those who don't know me, I am the owner of the original prototype Eddie Current "Zana Duex" from a few years back. Yes, I still have it. Make me an offer.... I digress!  I would really like to try the Meelectronic A161P's but I have concerns. There description in reviews here sound interesting to me. My primary concern is that I bought into the Amazon review hype for the Meelectric M-Duo and bought them. Burned them in for 50 hours and discerned that they, to my ears, are just another $69 earphone, nothing special and a waist of my time and money. Will the A161P be the same?
 My second concern is that I really don't like neutral earphones and have no business being  interested in the A161P's. However I am interested none the less. I have a small rant on Neutral earphones anyway. Not that they exist. Nor that a lot of people like them. But rather that so many "so called audiophiles" say that they portray what "the artiest really wants you to here in the recording".
I take issue with that as there are several steps and a whole pot load of equipment with a recording room that bias what the artiest wants you to here and what you get. I have heard many a high bitrate recording (band or performance if you will) through high end amps and very analytical earphones. Many time it is just an old popular hippie band or just good old fashion rock N roll. You know damn well that if you here them in person that (for example) they have a good bass player playing through a hefty gazillion watt tube amp with forty seven 22 inch speakers. And no doubt the bass player wants there Momma or groupie girlfriend to be to be able to here them rumble the notes in good measure, out to them. Yet with neutral earphones, many but certainly not all, recordings are portrayed with you wondering if the bass player showed up for work that day. You know dang well you can here em in person..
Take for example Santana, Abraxis I think it is, the one with "Black Magic Woman" in it, I have yet to here it recorded in any recording (including remastered Gold) without the whole recording having a slight vial sound over the whole band. I am part of the Woodstock generation and have heard them in person. The recordings were done poorly and do not do them justice. Through analytical neutral earphones I have heard all the Allman Brother early recordings with the same vial result. I personally have heard them many times at the Ludlow Garage in Clifton (Cincinnati, Ohio) and they sounded overwhelming good.. Seldom do Neutral earphones let the bass be portrayed as it is really done live in the studio. To me, Neutral headphones are lying to your ears just as much as colored sounding earphone are. If you like em, well good. Enjoy them as you should. Just don't tell me that they more accurately portray the music as the artiest wants us to here them.

 

I don't really get your point. Are you wondering how the a161p sounds or you're just sharing your opinion on neutral iems? And are you blaming the neutral earphones that a studio recording does not sound as good as a live concert? 
Anyway, the a161p is not exactly analytical or the very neutral. It is fairly balanced but it's more in your face and raw and aggressive. It's a BA but the bass isn't particularly lacking but it's more of a fast a and punchy type than the slower one that has more rumble. You probably should get a dynamic iem for what you want. It's also pretty sensitive so amping it is not a good idea.
How about something like the vsonic VSD1S? It's close to neutral but has a bit of warmth and is smoother and also more spacious sounding than the a161p. It's not as crisp sounding as the a161p but is sounding fuller and more musical.

 

[ouchmyears]

Hello im newer to the forum. But I recently purchased these for $40 on new egg. And I must say I am really impressed with the sound they produce. They sound great for the price. The highs are clear and not over powering. The mids are full and accurate without taking away from or blending in with the highs. And the lows are good strong without being punchy and distorted. They are fairly lound when used even without an amp. But I find their sweet spot for sound to be backed down 3 clicks from the maximum sound level. When played at max volume they do distort and the sound starts to wash together. But they sound amazing with the volume backed down a little bit.

 

[tomato065]

I have a question on the build, if anyone would be kind enough to answer. I recently passed over the A161P in favor of another model as I had no interest in the microphone (and I cant seem to find the Fischer Audio SBA-03 here in the US). Well, I'm considering them again, provided the microphone isn't too heavy or intrusive. I will be running with them on, and would like to cinch the cables behind my neck. From the photos, it looks like I'll be able to do that without the mic getting in the way? Any comments or opinions? Thanks.

 

[loomisjohnson]

mine is scarcely a unique perspective, but i'm impressed enough with these 161s to weigh in. like many others i bought these as the aforesaid "intro to neutrality" and as a contrast to my ever-expanding collection of dynamic iems (fxt90, ts02, eph100 et. al.). my only prior experience with "neutral" iems was shure (forgot the model), which had impressive high-end detail but no real low end and quickly wore out their welcome. i expected the 161s to have similar characteristics, and was wholly unprepared for how much i like 'em. they're not, as i feared clinical and overanalytical; rather they're quite in-your-face and lively. bass quantity and depth is better than i expected, esp. after going back to the stock silicon tips after auditioning with tri-flanges--deep insertion is critical. as many others have noted real subass is missing, but i find myself hearing more bass definition as opposed to merely feeling it--maybe that's what they mean by accuracy. non-fatiguing, at least thus far. these 161s are, for me, a new way of listening, and (as if i didn't have enough bad habits) likely to lead me deeper into the whole BA world.