[Brooko]

I'm listening to balanced right now, and had an adapter made to isolate the cable in the equation. Using the DACAMP L1 as the source, the single-ended doesn't have enough power to drive the CL1, so yes, balanced is necessary in this case. For all the talk of needing to amp these headphones, the DACAMP is actually a pretty weak-sauce amp. These IEMs need some current to wake up. I just got these in, so I'll be testing for a bit longer, but if you only listened to the CL1 in single-ended off the DACAMP, you might as well have not heard them at all.

With my adaptors I tried the CL1 with the Aune M1S in both balanced and single ended, the Aune sounds good with it on both, but I haven't done any volume matched critical listening at this point. It's been basically will it play and how does it sound to this point.

LOL Micah - I ended up getting balanced working and was able to measure.

http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-dacamp-l1/reviews/17781

Anyone who suggests that single ended cannot power the CL1 properly either has a broken L1 or is fooling themselves. Check my review. Check the measurements. Power output is practically the same. Oh and frequency doesn't change either. Did you get a defective unit?

 

[jinxy245]

Package received!
 
Let the listening begin...
 
 
 
 
Thanks Everyone!!

 

[Jackpot77]

Evening all - should have my reviews up over the next few days. Unfortunately, the editor on the Head Gear page is playing up with my browser so has deleted the last two attempts I made at posting my CL750 writeup, so once I get it to start behavoing again I can start posting!

 

[Jackpot77]

http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-cl750/reviews/17891
 
First review finished up (the CL750) - bit of a curate's egg for me, as you will see in the review (if you want to read it, obviously!). Dacamp and CL1 to follow. As always, any suggestions/feedback/comments very gratefully accepted!

 

[Delance26]

http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-cl1-ceramic/reviews/17893
 
Link to my CL1 review, sorry it took so long! Life sure has been busy lately!
 
I also apologize for no images, there was a tragedy they are now lost to the world.  Luckily other reviewers have better camera skills than me so it is not much of a loss 

 

 

[potatoe94]

RHA did a pretty substandard job this time , i expected alot better .

RHA DACAMP L1 - http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-dacamp-l1/reviews/17915
RHA CL750 - http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-cl750/reviews/17914
RHA CL1 - http://www.head-fi.org/products/rha-cl1-ceramic/reviews/17910

Thank you RHA anyway for giving me the opportunity to review your new units ~
I apologize if my review turned out unlike they way you might thought would be . 

 

[voxie]

Hey Dude, absolutely no reason for apologies. "If you feel it, it is it" 

 

[noobandroid]

most reviewers had roughly the same thought, RHA slopped out on the new line, except the dacamp

 

[nmatheis]

most reviewers had roughly the same thought, RHA slopped out on the new line, except the dacamp

I think the new IEM are certainly divisive, but think "slopped out" is an odd way to describe it. When I first heard RHA's new TOTL CL1 at RMAF, Iain could tell from the look on my face that I wasn't taken with them. That was out of my LPG. I told him that they removed me of HD800 in their treble presentation. Hyper-detailed, clinical, analytical, take your pick. Then i plugged them into the DACAMP via mini-XLR and adjusted to +1 bass and -1 treble. Much better!

I think CL1 has a lot of potential but needs the right setup and some EQ to be at their best. Again, this reminds me of HD800.

It's a bit funny to me that most people I've encountered don't enjoy HD800 but forgive them. However with an IEM that reminded me of HD800, people are so unforgiving.

Maybe I'm way off in my thinking here?

 

[jinxy245]

I think the new IEM are certainly divisive, but think "slopped out" is an odd way to describe it. When I first heard RHA's new TOTL CL1 at RMAF, Iain could tell from the look on my face that I wasn't taken with them. That was out of my LPG. I told him that they removed me of HD800 in their treble presentation. Hyper-detailed, clinical, analytical, take your pick. Then i plugged them into the DACAMP via mini-XLR and adjusted to +1 bass and -1 treble. Much better!

I think CL1 has a lot of potential but needs the right setup and some EQ to be at their best. Again, this reminds me of HD800.

It's a bit funny to me that most people I've encountered don't enjoy HD800 but forgive them. However with an IEM that reminded me of HD800, people are so unforgiving.

Maybe I'm way off in my thinking here?

I don't think so (that you're off)...I find the default EQ to be hard to live with, but it's definitely adjustable, via the Dacamp especially. I think what bugs some is that you almost HAVE to EQ it in some fashion in order to get it to sound good. I think people cut the Senn a bit more slack because it is a bit closer to the stereotypical flagship...linear...neutral etc. There are some that don't mind the treble spike, and find the extra "detail" pleasing. I think the RHA is a bit more polarizing because A) its RHA and not Sennheiser, and B) there's more of a "V" shape to the tuning (which everyone knows is not for audiophiles...lol). Although not my 1st choice, the CL1 does have a lot going for it (IMO).

 

[nmatheis]

I don't think so (that you're off)...I find the default EQ to be hard to live with, but it's definitely adjustable, via the Dacamp especially. I think what bugs some is that you almost HAVE to EQ it in some fashion in order to get it to sound good. I think people cut the Senn a bit more slack because it is a bit closer to the stereotypical flagship...linear...neutral etc. There are some that don't mind the treble spike, and find the extra "detail" pleasing. I think the RHA is a bit more polarizing because A) its RHA and not Sennheiser, and B) there's more of a "V" shape to the tuning (which everyone knows is not for audiophiles...lol). Although not my 1st choice, the CL1 does have a lot going for it (IMO).

Just for the record, I'd rather stick pencils through my eardrums than be subjected to extended listening through HD800. The most I've ever made it through was maybe one and a half songs with HD800, and that was with a super warm tube amp, lol. Certainly not what I'd call linear. To my ears, they're strongly filled towards the upper end to the point where I find them virtually unlistenable. People took that as a challenge, but they couldn't shake my biad against the HD800...

 

[Brooko]

Just for the record, I'd rather stick pencils through my eardrums than be subjected to extended listening through HD800. The most I've ever made it through was maybe one and a half songs with HD800, and that was with a super warm tube amp, lol. Certainly not what I'd call linear. To my ears, they're strongly filled towards the upper end to the point where I find them virtually unlistenable. People took that as a challenge, but they couldn't shake my biad against the HD800...

 
Thats a combo of your preference to a warmer sound (treble sensitivity) and the 6 kHz peak on the HD800 (well documented).  the difference with the HD800 is its pretty linear throughout the rest of the frequency range, and the peak is only about 10-15 dB above the mid-range (I say only - but to those with sensitivity, this can be huge).
 
I liked the HD800 - but it was a bright headphone.
 
You'd probably enjoy the HD800S Nik - 6 kHz area is mellowed and more warmth in the mid-bass. If you haven't yet, you should try it.
 
The issue with the CL1 is that the peak is a massive 20-25 dB above the mid-range.  So you can't escape it.  It's further into the lower treble (7 kHz) but IMO it kills the natural decay of cymbals etc. The interesting thing is that the Andromeda is almost universally lauded as a reference monitor (I'd agree with that too).  It has great extension - but very little peakiness. And here is the comparison (I flattened it / used a bigger scale then normal - because most people's graphs tend to do this):
 

 
The differences are huge.  The good thing is that RHA have a good palette to start from - because the extension is already there. They just need to control it IMO. If they can tone it down quite a lot - they have the potential for a class leading reference monitor. Personally I'd flatten the sub-bass a bit too, but thats just me.

 

[jinxy245]

Just for the record, I'd rather stick pencils through my eardrums than be subjected to extended listening through HD800. The most I've ever made it through was maybe one and a half songs with HD800, and that was with a super warm tube amp, lol. Certainly not what I'd call linear. To my ears, they're strongly filled towards the upper end to the point where I find them virtually unlistenable. People took that as a challenge, but they couldn't shake my biad against the HD800...

 
 

   
Thats a combo of your preference to a warmer sound (treble sensitivity) and the 6 kHz peak on the HD800 (well documented).  the difference with the HD800 is its pretty linear throughout the rest of the frequency range, and the peak is only about 10-15 dB above the mid-range (I say only - but to those with sensitivity, this can be huge).
 
I liked the HD800 - but it was a bright headphone.
 
You'd probably enjoy the HD800S Nik - 6 kHz area is mellowed and more warmth in the mid-bass. If you haven't yet, you should try it.
 
The issue with the CL1 is that the peak is a massive 20-25 dB above the mid-range.  So you can't escape it.  It's further into the lower treble (7 kHz) but IMO it kills the natural decay of cymbals etc. The interesting thing is that the Andromeda is almost universally lauded as a reference monitor (I'd agree with that too).  It has great extension - but very little peakiness. And here is the comparison (I flattened it / used a bigger scale then normal - because most people's graphs tend to do this):
 

 
The differences are huge.  The good thing is that RHA have a good palette to start from - because the extension is already there. They just need to control it IMO. If they can tone it down quite a lot - they have the potential for a class leading reference monitor. Personally I'd flatten the sub-bass a bit too, but thats just me.

 
You're absolutely correct that I should have used the modifier "more" linear...lol. I was referring to what Brooko was referencing, that the Senn is linear....up until that peak. I haven't personally had a lot of head time with it, but even from brief demos it's obvious the HD800 is a bright headphone. But your preference is duly noted for the record. I've found through the Dacamp, with the treble on -3 and the wax guard Comply tips, (and maybe a -1 on the bass) the CL1 isn't that bad. But @Hawaiibadboy hit the nail on the head, I think (unless I misunderstand him...I'm not trying to put words in his mouth) ...If it comes out of the box sounding like a Chinese knockoff, why would we want to pay premium cash only to have to EQ it?
But the original point nmatheis made is still valid...people do buy the HD800 only to mod, so, back to square one.

 

[nmatheis]

I'm only going on brief audition at RMAF, of which my initial reaction was similar to HD800. I quickly moved the North American tour units on to the other tours participants and will get the chance to form a more reasoned opinion in a few weeks when they make their way back to me.

Brooko: I did try try HD800S back to back with HD800 in a quiet, calm environment with my tracks. I did enjoy HD800S more, but I wouldn't buy either. For that kind of money, I'm buying HEX. Hands-down the best headphone for my tastes I've ever tried.

 

[audio123]

Will there be a revision of CL1 soon with less harsh treble and non recessed mids