[Epunrated]

if anyone here want to let ur SE Ulti version go, please remember me ^^
so many thanks

 

[proedros]

NT6 is opposite of 5 way.

 
in what way ? i am talking about the se5 ref , not the se5 ult
 
is se5 ref different sounding than NT6 ?
 
@Average Joe can you help out here ?

 

[tupac0306]

   
in what way ? i am talking about the se5 ref , not the se5 ult
 
is se5 ref different sounding than NT6 ?
 
@Average Joe can you help out here ?

He explained the difference of se5 ref vs NT6 in the review (1st page) pretty clearly. 
 
They are totally different sounding monitors.

 

[proedros]

  He explained the difference of se5 ref vs NT6 in the review (1st page) pretty clearly. 
 
They are totally different sounding monitors.

 
i will read it again...
 
i see you have se5 , is it the ult or the ref edition ?

 

[tupac0306]

   
i will read it again...
 
i see you have se5 , is it the ult or the ref edition ?

I have both. But I don't listen to ref any more. 
 
So you gave up on the solar or mentor?

 

[proedros]

  I have both. But I don't listen to ref any more. 
 
So you gave up on the solar or mentor?

 
is se5ult that much better, huh ? 

 
regarding your question : yeah , after reading thousands of pages in here, i found and bought a brand new/2nd hand NT6 and i am 101% satisfied (and at half the price of a solar/mentor ciem, so double win there)
 
my curiosity/upgraditis is tamed (for a little while at least 

)
 

 

[tupac0306]

I am glad you enjoyed the NT6, tamed your desire for a while.  
 
Ult to my ears is better than ref for sure, it's a lot more neutral, accurate and clean. The imaging is more focused and overall more refined. It is a superb complement for NT6. Did that untamed your fire again sotos?

 

[proedros]

  I am glad you enjoyed the NT6, tamed your desire for a while.  
 
Ult to my ears is better than ref for sure, it's a lot more neutral, accurate and clean. The imaging is more focused and overall more refined. It is a superb complement for NT6. Did that untamed your fire again sotos?

 
does tupac stand for The Upgraditis Pause Assassinated Calmly ? 

 
 
on a serious note , thanx for the comparison - i thought that ref would be the more neutral one , but looks like se5 ult is the one i shuld go for if/when i decide to buy something to keep company to my NT6

 

[DeepGroove]

Some perspective on the Ultimate vs Reference.
 
I've recently exchanged my Reference for the Ultimate. The Reference were my favorite IEMs and what I thought to be end-game, but I was curious to hear what the Ultimates were about. 
 
First impressions with the Ultimate:
Details!
Clarity!
Transparency!
Space!
Where is the bass?
 
The Ultimate indeed set a new standard for me in terms of transparency and spacial qualities. If the Reference were dark, someone turned on the light! The consequence of this ultra-transparency is that I can't describe the Ultimate signature - because I can't hear them. All I hear is the source. The Ultimate literally "disappear", and that's quite a feat. The soundstage has also greatly improved, with impressive width and depth. It's a big change from the Reference which sounded small and lacked air. Except in the bass department, where the details and weight are now really disappointing, the Ultimate are technically impressive.
 
However, the sound is now... very light. This is a radical departure from the Reference's rendering, which was dense, full-bodied, and built like a tank. Exit the creamy, mesmerizing vocals: mids are now pure and sharp like cristal.  Exit the rumbling, head-shaking bass: now it's lean and quick. (Coming from the Reference it sadly sounds like a fly fart.)  Exit the intimate soundstage that gave me the impression to be in the studio with the band: now the soundstage depicts a large, open-air stage. It's more comfortable but less personal. Finally exit the muted highs: now they are free, beautifully extended and smooth like a morning mist.
 
This lightness is kind of a problem. First, because the Ultimate a real princess to pair. They don't fare well with the AK240: the sound is too bright and too thin. They work okay with the Hugo, but the notes lack body (maybe they would benefit from the added warmth of a tube amp.) They work better with the warm, analog-sounding Plenue 1, but they quickly reveal the technical limits of this DAP. Tough!

Second, because it is also hard to predict what will sound good. For example. the Mad Max soundtrack sounds fantastic, with great imaging and energy which remind me of the IMAX screening, while the Jurassic Park soundtrack lacks intensity and gravitas. Overall, pop and acoustic work well, and everything bass-driven (e.g. electro) is not enjoyable. 
Third, light notes sometimes go in the way of realism. For example, piano notes just lack the serious weight that stems from a grand piano. Bell-like resonance is still good, but the church bell is now kind of a ringbell...
 
Despite what the name and price suggest the Ultimate are, at least for me, not an upgrade but a “sidegrade”. They are different dish. The best metaphor is the one made by jelt: the Reference taste like a rich chocolate ice cream while the Ultimate taste like a sugar-free sorbet. You gain a more spacious presentation and more clarity but you lose bass quality and quantity and density. The opposite of the Ultimate would be the LCD2, while the Reference stand in between.
 
Do I like the Ultimate? Sure. Do I miss the Reference? Yes. They had more character. They sounded special. The Ultimate sound more "classic". Or maybe I just prefer ice cream to sorbet!

 

[Docterror]

  Some perspective on the Ultimate vs Reference.
 
I've recently exchanged my Reference for the Ultimate. The Reference were my favorite IEMs and what I thought to be end-game, but I was curious to hear what the Ultimates were about. 
 
First impressions with the Ultimate:
Details!
Clarity!
Transparency!
Space!
Where is the bass?
 
The Ultimate indeed set a new standard for me in terms of transparency and spacial qualities. If the Reference were dark, someone turned on the light! The consequence of this ultra-transparency is that I can't describe the Ultimate signature - because I can't hear them. All I hear is the source. The Ultimate literally "disappear", and that's quite a feat. The soundstage has also greatly improved, with impressive width and depth. It's a big change from the Reference which sounded small and lacked air. Except in the bass department, where the details and weight are now really disappointing, the Ultimate are technically impressive.
 
However, the sound is now... very light. This is a radical departure from the Reference's rendering, which was dense, full-bodied, and built like a tank. Exit the creamy, mesmerizing vocals: mids are now pure and sharp like cristal.  Exit the rumbling, head-shaking bass: now it's lean and quick. (Coming from the Reference it sadly sounds like a fly fart.)  Exit the intimate soundstage that gave me the impression to be in the studio with the band: now the soundstage depicts a large, open-air stage. It's more comfortable but less personal. Finally exit the muted highs: now they are free, beautifully extended and smooth like a morning mist.
 
This lightness is kind of a problem. First, because the Ultimate a real princess to pair. They don't fare well with the AK240: the sound is too bright and too thin. They work okay with the Hugo, but the notes lack body (maybe they would benefit from the added warmth of a tube amp.) They work better with the warm, analog-sounding Plenue 1, but they quickly reveal the technical limits of this DAP. Tough!

Second, because it is also hard to predict what will sound good. For example. the Mad Max soundtrack sounds fantastic, with great imaging and energy which remind me of the IMAX screening, while the Jurassic Park soundtrack lacks intensity and gravitas. Overall, pop and acoustic work well, and everything bass-driven (e.g. electro) is not enjoyable. 
Third, light notes sometimes go in the way of realism. For example, piano notes just lack the serious weight that stems from a grand piano. Bell-like resonance is still good, but the church bell is now kind of a ringbell...
 
Despite what the name and price suggest the Ultimate are, at least for me, not an upgrade but a “sidegrade”. They are different dish. The best metaphor is the one made by jelt: the Reference taste like a rich chocolate ice cream while the Ultimate taste like a sugar-free sorbet. You gain a more spacious presentation and more clarity but you lose bass quality and quantity and density. The opposite of the Ultimate would be the LCD2, while the Reference stand in between.
 
Do I like the Ultimate? Sure. Do I miss the Reference? Yes. They had more character. They sounded special. The Ultimate sound more "classic". Or maybe I just prefer ice cream to sorbet!

Interesting read and analysis. The funny thing is, even though I haven't heard the Ref, I felt that my Ult had very good quality bass which was more than acceptable (bassheads need not apply).But I felt the spaciousness was severely lacking! It was almost like all the music was happening in my ears and head and none of it was happening around me, unlike say my Zeus-R or the K10.  
 
Agree about the clarity and transparency. Plus the sound, IMO, was the most 'natural sounding' of all my IEMs to date. 

 

[Barra]

  Some perspective on the Ultimate vs Reference.
 
I've recently exchanged my Reference for the Ultimate. The Reference were my favorite IEMs and what I thought to be end-game, but I was curious to hear what the Ultimates were about. 
 
First impressions with the Ultimate:
Details!
Clarity!
Transparency!
Space!
Where is the bass?
 
The Ultimate indeed set a new standard for me in terms of transparency and spacial qualities. If the Reference were dark, someone turned on the light! The consequence of this ultra-transparency is that I can't describe the Ultimate signature - because I can't hear them. All I hear is the source. The Ultimate literally "disappear", and that's quite a feat. The soundstage has also greatly improved, with impressive width and depth. It's a big change from the Reference which sounded small and lacked air. Except in the bass department, where the details and weight are now really disappointing, the Ultimate are technically impressive.
 
However, the sound is now... very light. This is a radical departure from the Reference's rendering, which was dense, full-bodied, and built like a tank. Exit the creamy, mesmerizing vocals: mids are now pure and sharp like cristal.  Exit the rumbling, head-shaking bass: now it's lean and quick. (Coming from the Reference it sadly sounds like a fly fart.)  Exit the intimate soundstage that gave me the impression to be in the studio with the band: now the soundstage depicts a large, open-air stage. It's more comfortable but less personal. Finally exit the muted highs: now they are free, beautifully extended and smooth like a morning mist.
 
This lightness is kind of a problem. First, because the Ultimate a real princess to pair. They don't fare well with the AK240: the sound is too bright and too thin. They work okay with the Hugo, but the notes lack body (maybe they would benefit from the added warmth of a tube amp.) They work better with the warm, analog-sounding Plenue 1, but they quickly reveal the technical limits of this DAP. Tough!

Second, because it is also hard to predict what will sound good. For example. the Mad Max soundtrack sounds fantastic, with great imaging and energy which remind me of the IMAX screening, while the Jurassic Park soundtrack lacks intensity and gravitas. Overall, pop and acoustic work well, and everything bass-driven (e.g. electro) is not enjoyable. 
Third, light notes sometimes go in the way of realism. For example, piano notes just lack the serious weight that stems from a grand piano. Bell-like resonance is still good, but the church bell is now kind of a ringbell...
 
Despite what the name and price suggest the Ultimate are, at least for me, not an upgrade but a “sidegrade”. They are different dish. The best metaphor is the one made by jelt: the Reference taste like a rich chocolate ice cream while the Ultimate taste like a sugar-free sorbet. You gain a more spacious presentation and more clarity but you lose bass quality and quantity and density. The opposite of the Ultimate would be the LCD2, while the Reference stand in between.
 
Do I like the Ultimate? Sure. Do I miss the Reference? Yes. They had more character. They sounded special. The Ultimate sound more "classic". Or maybe I just prefer ice cream to sorbet!

Even though the majority of people that have had both have concluded the Ult to be a nice upgrade from the Ref, I find myself drawn to the Ref for the reasons you mentioned based on my reading. Already having the transparency of my Hidition NT6pro, I am looking for a more organic companion, but the pro has served me so well that I have not been in a hurry. Now with the Ult available, I am even more hesitant to make a move without being able to hear them first. Wish I could talk the company into a tour, but have failed so far. Will try again soon.
 
My real hold back from a purchase though is dealing with the EU taxes/customs between the US and their refusal to ship directly putting the customs and repair burden squarely on our back.
 

Spoiler: Warning: Political opinion!

Hopefully the EU will end up going away so that we can have free trade without the criminal regulatory activity milking the citizens.

 

[proedros]

  Even though the majority of people that have had both have concluded the Ult to be a nice upgrade from the Ref, I find myself drawn to the Ref for the reasons you mentioned based on my reading. Already having the transparency of my Hidition NT6pro, I am looking for a more organic companion, but the pro has served me so well that I have not been in a hurry. Now with the Ult available, I am even more hesitant to make a move without being able to hear them first. Wish I could talk the company into a tour, but have failed so far. Will try again soon.
 
 

 
i think that se5ult is the better, more 'organic' one 
 
at least this is the impression i get from reading impressions from people who owned both

and someone i pm'ed told me that se5ult is definitely the better ciem and a definite upgrade 

this last review/comparison got me a little confused, actually 

 

[DeepGroove]

   
i think that se5ult is the better, more 'organic' one 
 
at least this is the impression i get from reading impressions from people who owned both

and someone i pm'ed told me that se5ult is definitely the better ciem and a definite upgrade 

this last review/comparison got me a little confused, actually 

 
Ultimate still sound organic, just less than Reference. They have some wonderful qualities. Take my impressions with a grain of salt, as you do with other impressions 

 

 

[Kerouac]

  Some perspective on the Ultimate vs Reference.
 
I've recently exchanged my Reference for the Ultimate. The Reference were my favorite IEMs and what I thought to be end-game, but I was curious to hear what the Ultimates were about. 
 
First impressions with the Ultimate:
Details!
Clarity!
Transparency!
Space!
Where is the bass?
 
The Ultimate indeed set a new standard for me in terms of transparency and spacial qualities. If the Reference were dark, someone turned on the light! The consequence of this ultra-transparency is that I can't describe the Ultimate signature - because I can't hear them. All I hear is the source. The Ultimate literally "disappear", and that's quite a feat. The soundstage has also greatly improved, with impressive width and depth. It's a big change from the Reference which sounded small and lacked air. Except in the bass department, where the details and weight are now really disappointing, the Ultimate are technically impressive.
 
However, the sound is now... very light. This is a radical departure from the Reference's rendering, which was dense, full-bodied, and built like a tank. Exit the creamy, mesmerizing vocals: mids are now pure and sharp like cristal.  Exit the rumbling, head-shaking bass: now it's lean and quick. (Coming from the Reference it sadly sounds like a fly fart.)  Exit the intimate soundstage that gave me the impression to be in the studio with the band: now the soundstage depicts a large, open-air stage. It's more comfortable but less personal. Finally exit the muted highs: now they are free, beautifully extended and smooth like a morning mist.
 
This lightness is kind of a problem. First, because the Ultimate a real princess to pair. They don't fare well with the AK240: the sound is too bright and too thin. They work okay with the Hugo, but the notes lack body (maybe they would benefit from the added warmth of a tube amp.) They work better with the warm, analog-sounding Plenue 1, but they quickly reveal the technical limits of this DAP. Tough!

Second, because it is also hard to predict what will sound good. For example. the Mad Max soundtrack sounds fantastic, with great imaging and energy which remind me of the IMAX screening, while the Jurassic Park soundtrack lacks intensity and gravitas. Overall, pop and acoustic work well, and everything bass-driven (e.g. electro) is not enjoyable. 
Third, light notes sometimes go in the way of realism. For example, piano notes just lack the serious weight that stems from a grand piano. Bell-like resonance is still good, but the church bell is now kind of a ringbell...
 
Despite what the name and price suggest the Ultimate are, at least for me, not an upgrade but a “sidegrade”. They are different dish. The best metaphor is the one made by jelt: the Reference taste like a rich chocolate ice cream while the Ultimate taste like a sugar-free sorbet. You gain a more spacious presentation and more clarity but you lose bass quality and quantity and density. The opposite of the Ultimate would be the LCD2, while the Reference stand in between.
 
Do I like the Ultimate? Sure. Do I miss the Reference? Yes. They had more character. They sounded special. The Ultimate sound more "classic". Or maybe I just prefer ice cream to sorbet!

 
Subbed to this thread this morning and started reading at this page, so logically I immediately noticed your (imo very interesting) post

 
Now before this I was almost sure that I would end up sometimes with a SE5 ult as endgame (based on the raving FFAB review). But after this I'm not so sure about that anymore, as bass (quality & quantity) is also a very important part of the signature to me. Besides that I think I often prefer darker sounding signatures (I also liked the LCD-2 very much) over (too) bright ones => less fatiguing on the ears during long listening sessions
 
Also just read post #1 (AJ's superb SE5 ref review) of this thread and the ref might be more my cup of tea after all...also a bit less painfull (- €330) on the wallet in the end

 

[lookingforIEMs]

Subbed to this thread this morning and started reading at this page, so logically I immediately noticed your (imo very interesting) post :rolleyes:

Now before this I was almost sure that I would end up sometimes with a SE5 ult as endgame (based on the raving FFAB review). But after this I'm not so sure about that anymore, as bass (quality & quantity) is also a very important part of the signature to me. Besides that I think I often prefer darker sounding signatures (I also liked the LCD-2 very much) over (too) bright ones => less fatiguing on the ears during long listening sessions

Also just read post #1 (AJ's superb SE5 ref review) of this thread and the ref might be more my cup of tea after all...also a bit less painfull (- €330) on the wallet in the end

I personally feel that the lcd2 is brighter than the se5ult, from comparing the two in my memory. If that's any indication.