[soupy]

in this case, I'd go with the Etys as well. If you don't want canalphones, then I'm gonna recommend the Audio Technica CM7's for earphones. The Audio Technica EW9's are nice for your needs too if you don't mind clip-ons.

 

[kin0kin]

can the CM7 rival ety/shure/UE? and if compared with fullsize cans...which one would it be equivalent to?

 

[josimcy]

I would actually be interested in the CM7(ti?) if they offer a noticible difference in clarity and detail compared to my current E888s. Has there been a definitive comparison between the two?

 

[soupy]

there's a nice review for them in the full review section

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=88535

I only listened to them for a brief moment. From that short listen I immediately felt that they were much more detailed than the 888s, but definitely not as warm sounding. I kinda want a pair myself...

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by josimcy I don't need isolation, necessarily. E3s aren't great with the detail? When you say thin for the ER-4's, is it enough to detract from the richness of the sound?

Did someone say no isolation? Did you say you need richness and detail?

Stax SR-001 Mk II.

I've been preaching about these for a while, and people just don't buy it. That's ok, I'll keep preaching. People don't know what they're missing. This is the best sounding canalphone outside of custom-molded IEM's by a considerable margin.

I guess one factor that has detracted from it's success was the lack of isolation and general lack of practicality, as you need to carry around the amp. But if isolation isn't an issue, then I simply don't see any other alternative. The only reason why I would ever prefer ER-4's or E5c's is for their isolation, which admittedly comes in quite handy at times. This, though, is definitely my cup of tea.

So, you're lazy and you don't want to use "search." How does the 001 sound?

It definitely has a shure-ish sound, well on the warm side of tonal balance, with a nice, rich and punchy bass but not even slightly bloated, absolutely breathtaking mids - better than my SR-404, more liquid and transparent, though not quite as resolving, and a very articulate, but also fairly rolled-off treble. Sounds similar to the E5c? It is, sort of. It is far more detailed than the E5c though, and it also has a far better soundstage, with excellent instrument separation and precise imaging. Obviously, it won't do soundstage quite as well as a full-sized can, or rather it shouldn't, but somehow I find that only the SR-404 will beat these in soundstaging (out of the equipment that I am very familiar with). They compress the acoustic space, which is understandable, but portray the relative depth and instrument placement very precisely.

Sound problems? Well, the treble is a bit rolled off, and the bass is slightly lacking in texture. That's it.

get them here:

http://www.audiocubes.com/category/E...II_System.html

the Audio-Technica CM7 is a great earbud, and it's well worth the price, both for the style and the sound. The Stax, though, is in a different class. It should be just outside your budget - $239, with an additional $80 in accessories which you may want to buy later (power supply and step-down transformer). You'll also need a good cable between the amp and your player, since this is a very hi-fi canalphone, and will not tolerate poor equipment. But, you don't need to shell out for all of this at once. Once the system is assembled, you'll have one of the best soundging portables period.

You've been recommended to

 

[kin0kin]

Quote:

To make matters worse, Audio Technica implemented a neat idea that gives you a visual cue as to which bud goes in which ear. The reason this good idea is a bad one is that this visual cue takes the form of a notch cut out of the aforementioned disc. Imagine the shape of PacMan's mouth just before it closes and you're pretty close to what this looks like. In other words, you've got two sharp points.

why man! why...im so close to buying em....now that I imagined how they would cut my ears when lying down....i've really lost the feel of getting them

 

[josimcy]

Sorry, double post. Check below.

 

[josimcy]

So do you all think that the AT-CM7s will be a worthwhile upgrade (clarity/detail speaking) from the E888s??? The price tag is certainly attractive, and I'm not crazy about the canalphones.

 

[BANGPOD]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamdone I stand by the word thin even with a good amp. Any full sized headphone and my sensa as well have much more mids and bass than the etys. This doesn't mean it doesn't exist or even sounds bad, it's just not balanced. The alternatives are way out of his price range.

iamdone --

You cannot call the ER-4P/S thin just because another headphone has more bass than it.
If one headphone has more bass than another, it makes the latter headphone thinner.

There is, in theory, no absolute scale of assessing bass -- only a comparative one at best.
The ER-4P/S -- not balanced, you say? Have you looked at its frequency response graph yet?

I know frequency response graphs are not proof -- but they hold true in the case of the ER-4P/S.
From top to bottom, the ER-4P/S is more balanced than most headphones you can buy -- hands down.

The ER-4P/S is thinner than other headphones you have heard -- but is it absolutely thin? I think not.

Having said that, I believe the ER-4P/S is a great starter headphone.
Despite its hefty "beginner" price, it develops one's audio tastes quickly.
You will know generally what type of sound you like after using them.

I highly recommend it -- if you don't like analytical sound, you will know it.
If you lean towards more musicality, it will become apparent with the ER-4P/S.

Purchase away, my friend.

BANGPOD

 

[josimcy]

I am leaning towards the Audio Technica's CM7ti's, because I don't want to spend a lot of money on the ER-4Ps and then be 1) uncomfortable to the point of annoyed with "canalphones" or 2) be disappointed with any "thinness" or aspect of the sound.

I just want to know if the CM7ti are worth their money as an upgrade from E888s, detail/clarity speaking.

 

[Jonoh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by josimcy I am leaning towards the Audio Technica's CM7ti's, because I don't want to spend a lot of money on the ER-4Ps and then be 1) uncomfortable to the point of annoyed with "canalphones" or 2) be disappointed with any "thinness" or aspect of the sound...

There is no perfect phone for everyone. What is thin to one is accurate to another. That said, it is generally agreed that Etys are amongst the most detailed phones out there. Based on your first post, you sound like someone who should be petitioning for Team Ety however I agree that canalphones are not for everyone. I love my Ety but prefer a full sized headphone for home use.

You need to audition your phones before you buy then or at least buy from someone you can return them to. That is the only way to know if you will like them long term.

 

[holeinmywallet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by josimcy So do you all think that the AT-CM7s will be a worthwhile upgrade (clarity/detail speaking) from the E888s??? The price tag is certainly attractive, and I'm not crazy about the canalphones.

I bought CM7 expecting them to have clarity and detail. They were exactly the opposite of what I expected. Severely veiled, overemphasized boomy bass, I much prefered MX400. I might have tin ears, I might not.

I bought ER4P to use as a portable with my ipod and iriver. I sold them without a second thought mainly because of their great degree of thinness + brightness. To me they completely lack fullness, as if they were specifically made to sound that way. Music through them sounds like hearing through a thin tube. It might have been because I listen at a low to moderate volume, I can't hear the mids and bass in them without turning them up the volume a notch. As far as details are concerned, they do noticibly excel.

 

[iamdone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BANGPOD iamdone -- You cannot call the ER-4P/S thin just because another headphone has more bass than it. If one headphone has more bass than another, it makes the latter headphone thinner. There is, in theory, no absolute scale of assessing bass -- only a comparative one at best. The ER-4P/S -- not balanced, you say? Have you looked at its frequency response graph yet? I know frequency response graphs are not proof -- but they hold true in the case of the ER-4P/S. From top to bottom, the ER-4P/S is more balanced than most headphones you can buy -- hands down. The ER-4P/S is thinner than other headphones you have heard -- but is it absolutely thin? I think not. Having said that, I believe the ER-4P/S is a great starter headphone. Despite its hefty "beginner" price, it develops one's audio tastes quickly. You will know generally what type of sound you like after using them. I highly recommend it -- if you don't like analytical sound, you will know it. If you lean towards more musicality, it will become apparent with the ER-4P/S. Purchase away, my friend. BANGPOD

Not to really get into an arguement because I actually like the etys and definately prefer them over the shure E5. The thinness is there because the highs are boosted so you can't turn the volume up enough to get enough bass without the highs becoming piercing. It is also has a small headspace in which the music sounds like it is mostly coming from within your head than outside of it.

They do clarity and detail amazing and that's why people like them.

 

[KenW]

Another vote for the ety's here. JMO but they're likely the most versatile phones out there. Portable, isolation, and great detail. I'd think they'd be a must for just about any rig.

 

[josimcy]

Aren't there dangers canalphones? I've heard about people's eardrums being damaged or ruptured with canalphones. It makes me a bit reluctant. Plus, I am not really wanting total isolation. I need to hear the phone, people trying to get my attention, etc. Isn't there any compromise in a portable headphone/earphone that provides detail and clarity but not total isolation???