[kiteki]

It sounds like he's comparing RE0 and CK10, Yuin OK3 and OK1, SA5k and Qualia 010, FI-BA-A1 and FI-BA-SS.
 
Similiar sound signature, not similiar sound quality. - just IMHO, but if he thinks the latter, he should at least ask W4 users to test it themselves, or conduct a blind test to prove his point, until then I'm dismissing it along with his remarks that Clip+ is better than HM 801, et cetera...... =]

 

[kiteki]

HIGH_Q is an audio lawyer, he listens only to fact. @ Sony X discussion.
_______
 
On topic for a moment then "The EX600 continue to impress me. They are of that kind that makes you crank up the volume just because they scale so effortlessly, just like the EX1000"
 
Sounds nothing like the EX700, I crank up the volume I start going deaf, and I'm usually quite OK with sibilance and brightness, for example in the SA5k I could crank the volume up high no sweat, and it's famously sibilant.  CK10 likewise, high volume was fine, EX700? Nope, a half hour listening session at high volume and my ears will be ringing like I was at a concert or nightclub.
To be technical though the SA5k had quite a pleasant sibilance, and the EX700 has no "sss" sibilance at all, it's something else less audible, and apparently not as simple as a 6kHz volume spike since the EX600/1000 have that spike as well and no complaints of harshness or high volume fatigue so far, when the time comes that someone has the EX600 and EX700 in their hands this could prove that peaks in FR graphs aren't as revealing to the nature of the sound as they seem on paper.
 
 

 

[kiteki]

Hey, someone trade their EX600/1000/800ST with me, for my EX700, or click on my profile and find something you want.
 
 

 

[kiteki]

 
Quote:

 
Highs
The highs are something I really enjoy about the 800ST. They are refined and extend well. There is no harshness at all and sibilance is only there if its in the recording.
The sense of space and air is impressive. You can hear and feel the reverberation and ambience of the room/hall/studio or whatever it may be. However the details are still preserved.
Compared to the EX90, again the 800ST is on another level. The EX90 feels closed in and a little murky. The SRM-001 however exhibits the same openness and refinement. The Sony might be a little better in the extreme highs though. But of course compared to the SR303, everything just feels a little dark. Like everything has a fine veil over it.
 
Note:
Recently there has been a bit of discussion regarding the difference between the EX600, 800ST and EX1000. I'm sure there are other sonic differences but the main one according to a certain Japanese website claims that the EX1000 has more highs than the EX600 which in turn has more highs than the 800ST. He did a bunch of frequency plots which seemed to back that conclusion up. Other Japanese reports also say similar things, saying the EX1000 highs can be a bit harsh and that the EX600 was more "dumbed down". The guy that tested all 3 said that the sonic signature of the 3 was very similar and one should choose on how much HF he/she wants.
Of course I haven't heard all 3 so I won't comment but I do like the smooth highs of the 800ST.
 

 
 

 

[james444]

Quote:

It seams that you may be mixing information that does not go together.  You are probably mixing RMAA results  and multi-BAs opinions from dfkt?  Are you implying that there is measured data out of multi-BA IEMs sourced from A845 or X?  Can you explain how it is measured then?  Also, are you implying that A845 and X has the same amp inside?  If so, can you prove all this?

Well I didn't claim anything definitive, just said the Sony X might be a problem, so I don't really get the reason for your excitement. Btw. Google is your friend and a search for "A845 RMAA" will easily bring up this link. As for the A845 and X, here's a quote from shigzeo that took me about 30 secs to find:
 
Quote:

The new A series uses the same or very similar output stage as the X. I can chime in on this: the A845 (go ahead and buy mine) doesn't have a good line out, but its HPO is pretty good. If you are a Sony fan, the S-Master is (in either the X or A) smoother than older Sony walkman (take that as you will - I'll not get into why here).

 
And there's a lot more about it in the X and A threads, if you care to look it up.

 

[music_4321]

^ Phew, for a moment I thought you might have ended up being taken to court!

 

[High_Q]

I didn't think there was any reason to call out on something one is absolutely sure about.

  He said that doesn't really constitute a reliable source of information.

 

[james444]

Quick update, I spent the whole weekend using exclusively the Sony EX600 and JVC FX700 for critical listening. Skipped through my favorite classical (Mahler, Brahms, Rachmaninoff, vocal pieces sung by Bartoli and Radavanovsky) and jazz tunes (Stacey Kent, Cassandra Wilson, Dave Holland, Diana Krall, Mathias Eick), listened to folk and folkrock (Al Stewart, Indigo Girls, The Unthanks, Jane Taylor, Mary Black, The Wailin' Jennys) and also included a variety of artists from other genres (Alcest, Brasstronaut, Burial, Marina & the Diamonds, Eagles, Elbow, Markus Schulz, Natalie Merchant, Royksopp, Widespread Panic, Origin, The Necks, Subheim, Brian Eno).
 
To make a long story short: I wasn't able to pick a clear winner between these two IEMs. If pressed I'd give a slight nod to the FX700 for ever so slightly more detail and refinement with some stuff, but the differences in sound quality are actually so small that I'd rather call it a draw.
 
Now, that doesn't mean that both sound the same, they actually have noticably different sound signatures and I concur by and large with Inks' description in this post. But in overall sound quality the EX600 are pretty much on the same level to my ears as the considerably more expensive FX700.
 
So, bottom line, after listening to an eclectic mix of musical genres during many hours, I feel confident saying that the Sony EX600 deserve a place among the finest IEMs I've heard. For €150 they are very good bang/buck, provided you can live with their main weaknesses, which are btw the same as the EX1000's: demanding fit, subpar isolation and wind noise.
 

 

[Confispect]

Which would take the place for best isolation. 

 
 

 

[james444]

^ The EX600 isolate slightly more than the FX700, but I'm using those special DIY-tips (pic in my EX1000 review). Can't get a seal with the EX600/1000 and stock tips.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Quick update, I spent the whole weekend using exclusively the Sony EX600 and JVC FX700 for critical listening. Skipped through my favorite classical (Mahler, Brahms, Rachmaninoff, vocal pieces sung by Bartoli and Radavanovsky) and jazz tunes (Stacey Kent, Cassandra Wilson, Dave Holland, Diana Krall, Mathias Eick), listened to folk and folkrock (Al Stewart, Indigo Girls, The Unthanks, Jane Taylor, Mary Black, The Wailin' Jennys) and also included a variety of artists from other genres (Alcest, Brasstronaut, Burial, Marina & the Diamonds, Eagles, Elbow, Markus Schulz, Natalie Merchant, Royksopp, Widespread Panic, Origin, The Necks, Subheim, Brian Eno).
 
To make a long story short: I wasn't able to pick a clear winner between these two IEMs. If pressed I'd give a slight nod to the FX700 for ever so slightly more detail and refinement with some stuff, but the differences in sound quality are actually so small that I'd rather call it a draw.
 
Now, that doesn't mean that both sound the same, they actually have noticably different sound signatures and I concur by and large with Inks' description in this post. But in overall sound quality the EX600 are pretty much on the same level to my ears as the considerably more expensive FX700.
 
So, bottom line, after listening to an eclectic mix of musical genres during many hours, I feel confident saying that the Sony EX600 deserve a place among the finest IEMs I've heard. For €150 they are very good bang/buck, provided you can live with their main weaknesses, which are btw the same as the EX1000's: demanding fit, subpar isolation and wind noise.
 

What! No Bach, no Bartok, no Radiohead? Shame on you, Mr James444. I'm afraid I cannot take your EX600 impressions seriously anymore.  
 

 

[winkyeye]

Quote:

Quick update, I spent the whole weekend using exclusively the Sony EX600 and JVC FX700 for critical listening. Skipped through my favorite classical (Mahler, Brahms, Rachmaninoff, vocal pieces sung by Bartoli and Radavanovsky) and jazz tunes (Stacey Kent, Cassandra Wilson, Dave Holland, Diana Krall, Mathias Eick), listened to folk and folkrock (Al Stewart, Indigo Girls, The Unthanks, Jane Taylor, Mary Black, The Wailin' Jennys) and also included a variety of artists from other genres (Alcest, Brasstronaut, Burial, Marina & the Diamonds, Eagles, Elbow, Markus Schulz, Natalie Merchant, Royksopp, Widespread Panic, Origin, The Necks, Subheim, Brian Eno).
 
To make a long story short: I wasn't able to pick a clear winner between these two IEMs. If pressed I'd give a slight nod to the FX700 for ever so slightly more detail and refinement with some stuff, but the differences in sound quality are actually so small that I'd rather call it a draw.
 
Now, that doesn't mean that both sound the same, they actually have noticably different sound signatures and I concur by and large with Inks' description in this post. But in overall sound quality the EX600 are pretty much on the same level to my ears as the considerably more expensive FX700.
 
So, bottom line, after listening to an eclectic mix of musical genres during many hours, I feel confident saying that the Sony EX600 deserve a place among the finest IEMs I've heard. For €150 they are very good bang/buck, provided you can live with their main weaknesses, which are btw the same as the EX1000's: demanding fit, subpar isolation and wind noise.
 

Hey James, I've really enjoyed your reviews and found your comments to be very helpful!
How would you compare the EX600s to the SM3s? Also, the EX600s are closed headphones right? So is it mainly the fit issue that is causing the poor isolation?
 
Thanks!
 

 

[james444]

^ Thanks! I'm afraid the Sonys aren't closed. They have tiny vents, which help with their wonderful soundstage, but at the cost of some isolation. It's not completely bad though and I still can wear them even on the subway, but the SM3s isolate significantly better. Speaking of which, it's been a long time since I've heard these, but I'd say the EX600 have leaner mids and upper bass and a bit more emphasis on deep bass. The highs are more forward and sparkly than the SM3's, but without being obtrusive to my ears. They scale extremely well with more juice and frequently make me turn up the volume louder than I'm used to, because they just sound so addictive and almost like full-sized phones, whereas I can't remember the SM3 ever doing that. But like I said, it's been a long time and I'd certainly have to A/B them for a reliable comparison, so take this with a grain of salt.

 

[SpecR1]

Do the 600s still have that white letter fading problem on the 1000s

 

[3602]

Quote:

Do the 600s still have that white letter fading problem on the 1000s

Should not. The EX600 have their letters engraved into the material. I am aware that on the EX1000 the letters are weakly printed.