[FSNDET]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif The PL30 is slightly mid-forward in nature. If you like that signature it's not at all surpising that the PL50 sounds lacking. The PL50s are also thick-sounding and lack air, even compared to the RE0. Technically I find them vastly superior to the PL30 - more extended, flatter, faster, etc. But I ended up keeping the PL30 and selling the PL50 anyway. Can't argue with personal preferences. Regarding upgrades, I find the RE252 to be a far more natural choice coming from the PL30 than the RE0. It's not as mid-forward but it's got the same airy feel and even better balance without losing out on detail or clarity to the RE0. Of course this comes at a price and a comfort sacrifice but that's just the way it is. You may also like the ViSang R02 though I have yet to finish reviewing them. Very airy earphone, almost open-sounding, and quite cheap.

I don't mean to take this topic off track but how does the ViSang R02 compare to the ViSang R03 ljokerl for SQ? I will be getting a pair of Brainwavz M2's but am curious how the cheaper ViSang R02 compares...

 

[Pianist]

I think the main reason why many people dislike the RE0 is because it lacks dynamic range and makes music sound a bit lifeless/"static."

 

[pinkmoon1972]

Will have to check out the Visangs joker, thanks. After listening to the PL50's I realise how good the RE0's are now pianist, I really regret selling them and will probably buy them again soon. They seem to offer an amazingly neutral and clear window right into the music, I found they just didnt work with anything bassy tho.

 

[james444]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif The PL30 is slightly mid-forward in nature. If you like that signature it's not at all surpising that the PL50 sounds lacking. The PL50s are also thick-sounding and lack air, even compared to the RE0. Technically I find them vastly superior to the PL30 - more extended, flatter, faster, etc. But I ended up keeping the PL30 and selling the PL50 anyway. Can't argue with personal preferences. Regarding upgrades, I find the RE252 to be a far more natural choice coming from the PL30 than the RE0. It's not as mid-forward but it's got the same airy feel and even better balance without losing out on detail or clarity to the RE0. Of course this comes at a price and a comfort sacrifice but that's just the way it is. You may also like the ViSang R02 though I have yet to finish reviewing them. Very airy earphone, almost open-sounding, and quite cheap.

I slightly disagree with this, apart from smaller soundstage and less airiness I do find it a bit surprising that the PL50 sounds lacking to the OP. Both the PL30 and the PL50 are mid-centered and while I can understand the PL50 being described as small (due to lacking soundstage) I cannot relate to them being described as thin. I suspect pinkmoon may not have a good fit/seal.

Regarding the RE252, I agree they would be great upgrade choice from the PL30 as far as sound quality is concerned. However they are $200 and their weird design makes them a somewhat risky hit or miss purchase. They are not intended for over-ear use, quite microphonic when worn downwards and less comfortable than both Soundmagics.

@pinkmoon, before you dismiss the PL50, I recommend you try some other tips, or stuffing something (foam or a smaller silicon tip) under your current tips, hopefully you'll get a better fit/seal this way. You might also need a bit longer for your ears to adjust to the armature sound signature, if you've never heard armature based IEMs before. There are some aspects in which the PL50 are significantly better than the PL30, notably control, detail and speed, so maybe you'll get something out of them if you give them more listening time.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkmoon1972 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Will have to check out the Visangs joker, thanks. After listening to the PL50's I realise how good the RE0's are now pianist, I really regret selling them and will probably buy them again soon. They seem to offer an amazingly neutral and clear window right into the music, I found they just didnt work with anything bassy tho.

Lack of dynamic range is the problem with RE0 IMO, especially in the bass region. That's why a lot of music with heavy bass content sounds wrong on them. Quantity wise, I actually consider RE0 bass heavy with the large double flange tips. That being said, with a good source and amp, RE0 sounds so darn clear detailed and balanced that the lack of dynamics can certainly be forgiven IMO.

 

[pinkmoon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I slightly disagree with this, apart from smaller soundstage and less airiness I do find it a bit surprising that the PL50 sounds lacking to the OP. Both the PL30 and the PL50 are mid-centered and while I can understand the PL50 being described as small (due to lacking soundstage) I cannot relate to them being described as thin. I suspect pinkmoon may not have a good fit/seal. Regarding the RE252, I agree they would be great upgrade choice from the PL30 as far as sound quality is concerned. However they are $200 and their weird design makes them a somewhat risky hit or miss purchase. They are not intended for over-ear use, quite microphonic when worn downwards and less comfortable than both Soundmagics. @pinkmoon, before you dismiss the PL50, I recommend you try some other tips, or stuffing something (foam or a smaller silicon tip) under your current tips, hopefully you'll get a better fit/seal this way. You might also need a bit longer for your ears to adjust to the armature sound signature, if you've never heard armature based IEMs before. There are some aspects in which the PL50 are significantly better than the PL30, notably control, detail and speed, so maybe you'll get something out of them if you give them more listening time.

Yeah Im pretty sure a lot of it is a fit/seal issue but Ive gone through every tip I have and nothing seems to work, they seem to be very dependent on a good fit/seal , Ive found one that works a lot better but its still not right so I think I'm just gonna chuck them on ebay and move on. All part of the fun I suppose

 

[sadhanaputra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which, in the absence of an absolute standard for sound quality, means in fact pretty much the same thing.

I beg to differ

What head/earphones do is reproduce sound. The absolute standard of sound quality, IMHO, would therefore be the extent to which the head/earphones can reproduce the sound closest to the input. Speed, detail, pitch accuracy, all are examples of thing which have 'absolute standard' (i.e. more is better, ceteris paribus).

The thing which confuses us, also IMHO, is the mix-up between "having sound quality" and "having good sound". I totally agree that there is no absolute standard for "good sound".

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkmoon1972 /img/forum/go_quote.gif @ Sadhanaputra- I've never touched the bass knob on PL30 so it will be on the 'clear setting' Have left the PL50's playing all afternoon and coming back to them now they still sound rubbish compared the the 30's, Im not convinced Im getting a great fit tho so will continue fiddling. The thing I like about the 30's is they sound like full size cans, the 50's just dont compare, they just sound small and thin in comparison.

I would imagine that the PL50s really do sound small and thin compared to PL30s.
IIRC the PL50s have BAs, that should be enough to burn them in (there are some instances where BAs benefit from burn-in, but even in those cases it doesn't take very long).

About the fit, just clap your fingers beside your ear. Then you'd know whether you have a good fit

 

[kingpage]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhanaputra /img/forum/go_quote.gif I beg to differ What head/earphones do is reproduce sound. The absolute standard of sound quality, IMHO, would therefore be the extent to which the head/earphones can reproduce the sound closest to the input. Speed, detail, pitch accuracy, all are examples of thing which have 'absolute standard' (i.e. more is better, ceteris paribus). The thing which confuses us, also IMHO, is the mix-up between "having sound quality" and "having good sound". I totally agree that there is no absolute standard for "good sound". I would imagine that the PL50s really do sound small and thin compared to PL30s. IIRC the PL50s have BAs, that should be enough to burn them in (there are some instances where BAs benefit from burn-in, but even in those cases it doesn't take very long). About the fit, just clap your fingers beside your ear. Then you'd know whether you have a good fit

Good fit means the tip fits snugly in your ear pretty much the same as sticking your index finger in.

 

[sadhanaputra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingpage /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good fit means the tip fits snugly in your ear pretty much the same as sticking your index finger in.

Agreed. With a good fit, the seal is perfect thus keeping the bass from bleeding out, something which the OP suspects.

I just don't understand why you quoted my post..

 

[kingpage]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhanaputra /img/forum/go_quote.gif Agreed. With a good fit, the seal is perfect thus keeping the bass from bleeding out, something which the OP suspects. I just don't understand why you quoted my post..

Bad habit I guess...

Usually I do that in reponse or in addition, in this case it was the latter.

Not to mention, it looks fuller that way, instead of having one line I have a bit more content in my post. Call me silly if you want.

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSNDET /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't mean to take this topic off track but how does the ViSang R02 compare to the ViSang R03 ljokerl for SQ? I will be getting a pair of Brainwavz M2's but am curious how the cheaper ViSang R02 compares...

The R02 is a bit airier and wider-sounding. Because of the presentation they have a more spread-out sound and seem to have less bass and less treble than the R03. If the R03 is slightly accented at the low end and then falls off gradually, the R02 is slightly accented at the lower midrange and then falls off gradually on either side. I have reason to think that the R02 and R03 use the same drivers, though this has not been confirmed. They definitely share a sound signature, though with slightly different flavors. Of course the housing of the R02 isn't quite as nice but it's $20 cheaper...

 

[sadhanaputra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingpage /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bad habit I guess... Usually I do that in reponse or in addition, in this case it was the latter. Not to mention, it looks fuller that way, instead of having one line I have a bit more content in my post. Call me silly if you want.

Ah.. I was more used to quotes as part of a dialogue, I guess

Now.. About the PL50s..

 

[Pianist]

I just compared my UE Super.fi 3 to the RE0. The UEs are a single BA design like the PL50. No contest - RE0 is streets ahead in sound quality. But I can see how some people may prefer the UE - their mids are richer and suck you into the music more. But bass, treble, timbre, separation and detail are far superior on the RE0. I don't know maybe Soundmagic PL50 is better than Super.fi 3, but if it is, the difference is probably minimal since both are similar budget BAs.

 

[james444]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhanaputra /img/forum/go_quote.gif I beg to differ What head/earphones do is reproduce sound. The absolute standard of sound quality, IMHO, would therefore be the extent to which the head/earphones can reproduce the sound closest to the input. Speed, detail, pitch accuracy, all are examples of thing which have 'absolute standard' (i.e. more is better, ceteris paribus). The thing which confuses us, also IMHO, is the mix-up between "having sound quality" and "having good sound". I totally agree that there is no absolute standard for "good sound".

Basically I would agree with you, but the crux is, there are so many variables relevant to faithful reproduction of sound (you mentioned just a few). The whole topic is infinitely more complex than just approximating a straight line on a FR-chart and AFAIK there is no instrument to evaluate faithful sound reproduction of IEMs better than the human ear. Which IMO makes statements like "XY has good sound quality" pretty much tantamount to "XY has good sound".

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhanaputra /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would imagine that the PL50s really do sound small and thin compared to PL30s. IIRC the PL50s have BAs, that should be enough to burn them in (there are some instances where BAs benefit from burn-in, but even in those cases it doesn't take very long).

IME the PL50's Siren BAs do sound somewhat different (fuller, thicker) from regular BAs.

 

[sadhanaputra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Basically I would agree with you, but the crux is, there are so many variables relevant to faithful reproduction of sound (you mentioned just a few). The whole topic is infinitely more complex than just approximating a straight line on a FR-chart

I wholeheartedly agree. Flat freq response does not mean a neutral (much less natural) perceived sound.

Quote:

and AFAIK there is no instrument to evaluate faithful sound reproduction of IEMs better than the human ear. Which IMO makes statements like "XY has good sound quality" pretty much tantamount to "XY has good sound".

That is correct, only if the statement comes from a person who has a preference for faithful sound reproduction.. For a basshead, for example, that would not be the case.

Ah well, I've exhausted my opinion on this matter.. Let's just agree to disagree (and not confuse the OP any further

)..

Quote:

IME the PL50's Siren BAs do sound somewhat different (fuller, thicker) from regular BAs.