[Inks]

sounds like he's disappointed, but could be wrong. Seeing the specs and how it's build it looks somewhat promising.

 

[TheMiddleSky]

Quote:

Listening to it.............................first impression is, um, this:

this? more impression please? 

 

[ClieOS]

Quote:

this? more impression please? 

There is more in the review section: http://www.head-fi.org/products/rudistor-imd-3/reviews#4179

 

[DigDub]

had a brief listen to it at jaben. didn't like it at all. sounds muffled and distant.

 

[productred]

Quote:

There is more in the review section: http://www.head-fi.org/products/rudistor-imd-3/reviews#4179

Thanks ClieOS yes that's my review. I said my impression was this: -

 because I was really, really confused (I still am). Why would Rudi release such a product which can be officially certified as a joke even by a non-audiophile? Muffled, veiled, fat yet non-impactful bass, distant mids, no highs at all..........you name it. I don't believe mine is a defect pair since my view is shared by my pal who got it, as well as the person who sold me his pair - yes my pair is second hand, the original owner decided to GIVE IT AWAY after a few minutes listen, even though he paid the full MSRP for it. He didn't even bother to list it for sale.
 
Yes I am really, really confused. In my ~10 years of head-fi life, these 2-3 years proved to be the best since every manufacturer, even those whose products were harshly bashed before, release at least something to uphold its name. I never liked Shure but their new SEXX5 line are good. Monster, for one, release fantastic earphones after its half-success-half-failure in its headphones venture. And believe me there're people around who enjoys Bose because of its sound, not its name. Frankly speaking I haven't heard even one headphone/earphone which I can conclusively call it "bad" for quite some time, just different tastes and different emphasis rules the market variety. But the IMD3................yes I think I'd call it bad. I don't think anyone can possibly like its sound quality (NOT a matter of taste or signature). I can safely say that even the Bose in-ears are superior by a handsome margin (Bose's mids is clearer and its bass, though fat and not deep, is at least quite impactful when you need it). And don't forget it's not exactly cheap. The DDM, though from a manufacturer who had until its release only offered obscure and mediocre computer-oriented earphones, are far superior in sound quality, design, packaging, build quality, and value.
 
I don't understand what's the point of this earphone, which I had quite some anticipation since I learnt of its release when browsing Rudi's website. I'd keep it because I got it for almost no cost - sometimes I'd settle for a laugh with it. Sorry Rudi I like your amps, I really do, and I have to say sorry again - I hope my views would not ruin your reputation because I think your amps are amazing, and I know this is the harshest review I've ever written here at head-fi. But really, I don't understand the IMD-3 and I don't know how I can appreciate them. Maybe you could enlighten me on that.
 
Anyone tried the IMD3 and actually likes them, please chime in and share what you think are its pros, and what music you think they are good at......I don't want to waste it completely, since at least they are quite comfy and looks pretty good.