[psion84]

Hi guys any idea how the h200 compares to the w4/4r? i had the h100 and sold it off after a week.lol. so far impressions from you guys sounds promising.
 

 

[eke2k6]

I'm pretty surprised. It took the main positive trait from the H-100, the "clarity", and added a proper midrange, and fun treble.

 

[PeterDLai]

Anyone willing to start a loaner tour?

 

[hi-fi amateur]

Anyone know where I can buy these?

 

[FlySweep]

Originally Posted by psion84 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Hi guys any idea how the h200 compares to the w4/4r? i had the h100 and sold it off after a week.lol. so far impressions from you guys sounds promising.
 

I can't speak for all of them.. but I've owned the W4.. and I'd take the H-200 over it, ten times out of ten.

I'm pretty surprised. It took the main positive trait from the H-100, the "clarity", and added a proper midrange, and fun treble.

 
Don't know how much use they had before you got them.. but IME, the H-200 (initially) sounded balanced, but somewhat warm/thick.. with treble that was almost recessed.  After a couple of weeks of consistent use, it sounded cleaner, leaner, and possessed better dynamics.  It was much more towards a truly neutral sound than neutral/leaning warm.

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

Hi guys any idea how the h200 compares to the w4/4r? i had the h100 and sold it off after a week.lol. so far impressions from you guys sounds promising.
 

 
Hmm?  The signatures are nothing alike, so this is a bit difficult. I would say that the W4 signature is more neutral than the H-200. The Westone is also warmer and has a greater mid-bass hump than the H-200. The W4 excels in instrument separation and placement of instruments, but I don't necessarily think it has more clarity than the W-200. The dynamic bass driver gives the H-200 a more beautiful timbre and natural sound than the W4. There is more sub-bass too (especially if you use the right tips: try some Phonak silicon tips on the H-200 if you want to hear how much sub-bass it can put out). Technically the W4 may be superior, but it's not blowing away the H-200 by leaps and bounds. Again, this is difficult because I kind of feel like I'm comparing an apple to an orange base on how different the two sound signatures are. Actually the TDK BA200 has more in common with the H-200 than the W4 (although the H-200 handily beats the wonderful sounding BA200 in my opinion). I'll end by saying both the W4 and the H-200 produce top tier sound, but the T-PEOS clearly wins by leaps and bounds when comparing the sound given to you to the price your pay for the IEM. I love the W4. It's been one of my favorites for the longest time, but I sold it and I don't regret it. If I could only have it or the H-200, I would easily choose the H-200. It's a beautiful smooth sounding universal.
 
Quote:

I'm pretty surprised. It took the main positive trait from the H-100, the "clarity", and added a proper midrange, and fun treble.

 
I never heard the H-100, but I took your word for it when you stated it was lacking. And because you didn't like the H-100, I was taking a bit risk on the H-200, but I'm glad I did.

 

[d marc0]

Quote:

 
Don't know how much use they had before you got them.. but IME, the H-200 (initially) sounded balanced, but somewhat warm/thick.. with treble that was almost recessed.  After a couple of weeks of consistent use, it sounded cleaner, leaner, and possessed better dynamics.  It was much more towards a truly neutral sound than neutral/leaning warm.

 
very true! Same experience here... 

 

[FlySweep]

Hmm?  The signatures are nothing alike, so this is a bit difficult. I would say that the W4 signature is more neutral than the H-200. The Westone is also warmer and has a greater mid-bass hump than the H-200. The W4 excels in instrument separation and placement of instruments, but I don't necessarily think it has more clarity than the W-200. The dynamic bass driver gives the H-200 a more beautiful timbre and natural sound than the W4. There is more sub-bass too (especially if you use the right tips: try some Phonak silicon tips on the H-200 if you want to hear how much sub-bass it can put out). Technically the W4 may be superior, but it's not blowing away the H-200 by leaps and bounds. Again, this is difficult because I kind of feel like I'm comparing an apple to an orange base on how different the two sound signatures are. Actually the TDK BA200 has more in common with the H-200 than the W4 (although the H-200 handily beats the wonderful sounding BA200 in my opinion). I'll end by saying both the W4 and the H-200 produce top tier sound, but the T-PEOS clearly wins by leaps and bounds when comparing the sound given to you to the price your pay for the IEM. I love the W4. It's been one of my favorites for the longest time, but I sold it and I don't regret it. If I could only have it or the H-200, I would easily choose the H-200. It's a beautiful smooth sounding universal.
 
I never heard the H-100, but I took your word for it when you stated it was lacking. And because you didn't like the H-100, I was taking a bit risk on the H-200, but I'm glad I did.

 
Interesting take, Eric.. you mentioned you found the W4 to be more neutral than the H200, but also found the W4 to be warmer and have a greater mid-bass hump.  I definitely agree that the W4 is warmer & has a greater midbass hump than the H-200.. and that's why I think the H-200 to be the more neutral-sounding phone of the two.  I hear the H-200's midbass to be noticeably more linear than the W4's "camel back"-inspired bass curve.  I found the W4's (massive) midbass hump to color the sound too extensively with an excessively thick, warm, presentation that left me wanting for better tonal accuracy.  The W4's fairly deep, abrupt dip at 4K took away from upper midrange articulation, as well.  I think the W4 falls in line with what's widely considered the "Westone sound".. but I don't find it all that neutral, to be honest.  IMO, the H-200 sounds much more in line with what I'd consider neutral, though.  My pair will make it's way to Inks/Rin so we can get some objective data to correlate (or disassociate) with our subjective impressions.
 
It's been a while since I've heard the W4, so do take my impressions with a grain of salt, but I feel I remember its signature quite well.  I find the H-200 to sound richer, more linear, better controlled, and possessing better freq. bandwidth than the W4.  The H-200 delivers better realism without using (midbass) warmth to 'goose up' the midrange (see: W4).  The W4 probably had a wider soundstage.. but I'd give the H-200 the edge in soundstage depth and height.  The wider stage allowed the W4's imaging to feel more (open) "headphone"-like, but I didn't feel its imaging was all that precise in terms of being able to clearly pinpoint spatial cues.  Spatial cues had more 'space' to operate in.. but I found their locations to be more 'fuzzy.'  When it comes to nailing what a monitor is about, the H-200 simply sounds more mature, linear, and "professional," to my ears, than the W4 ever did.
 
I think you're spot on about the BA200.. I absolutely (still) love that phone.  The H-200 serves as a terrific upgrade path in terms of sound, IMO.. and avoids the pitfalls of the W4 (though Inks is going to be sending me a modded W4 that he says blows the 'stock' W4 away.. so I might change my tune on it.. haha).
 

Originally Posted by eke2k6 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
..especially since I fcking hate(d) the H-100.

 
Hey Eke..
 

 
Stop picking on the H-100!
 
(yeah.. I still like(d) it.. for some strange reason).
 

 

[Inks]

W4 is crazy flat due to time delay, but yes it's main flaw is its midbass (100ohm helps). Besides the midbass, it's hard to beat, and the midbass is actually well defined by subbass due to its unique delay. Likewise, you'll get a modded W4 to compare eventually

 

[psion84]

Thanks ericp10 and flysweep! detailed and concise insights as always. that's saying a lot about the h200.i may just take the plunge soon.

I was in the same camp as eke.just hated the h100.lol

 

[Lifted Andreas]

Missed some of this thread.

Has anyone compared these to CKS1000?

 

[toxicdrift]

ericp10 did. http://www.head-fi.org/t/642308/t-peos-h-200-new-triple-hybrid-iem-appreciation-thread/840#post_9485490
 
 

The H-200 has opened up beautifully! I love the CKS1000, but spend most of my time listening to the H-200 (when my customs aren't in my ears). The clarity, details, transparency, and richness of bass are stunning. And for those who like bass but claim there is never enough treble, somehow these earphones were tuned to give just the right balance of treble, mids, and bass. Now before someone asks me which one sounds better - the CKS1000 or H-200 - I have to say I can't answer that question because the sound signatures aren't similar at all (instruments, for example, in the CKS1000 sit a bit further back than the H-200, or should say the sound stage). Both are technically brilliant. What I can tell you, however, is that I spend more time listening to the H-200. It's just an easier and smoother listen to the ears. It's like a rich high-end stereo system in your ears.

 

[Lifted Andreas]

ericp10 did. http://www.head-fi.org/t/642308/t-peos-h-200-new-triple-hybrid-iem-appreciation-thread/840#post_9485490

Thanks mate!

Seems that CKS1000 is more aggressive and energetic.

However it's also cheaper if bought from Amazon JP, and might be better for Trance.

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

 
Interesting take, Eric.. you mentioned you found the W4 to be more neutral than the H200, but also found the W4 to be warmer and have a greater mid-bass hump.  I definitely agree that the W4 is warmer & has a greater midbass hump than the H-200.. and that's why I think the H-200 to be the more neutral-sounding phone of the two.  I hear the H-200's midbass to be noticeably more linear than the W4's "camel back"-inspired bass curve.  I found the W4's (massive) midbass hump to color the sound too extensively with an excessively thick, warm, presentation that left me wanting for better tonal accuracy.  The W4's fairly deep, abrupt dip at 4K took away from upper midrange articulation, as well.  I think the W4 falls in line with what's widely considered the "Westone sound".. but I don't find it all that neutral, to be honest.  IMO, the H-200 sounds much more in line with what I'd consider neutral, though.  My pair will make it's way to Inks/Rin so we can get some objective data to correlate (or disassociate) with our subjective impressions.
 
It's been a while since I've heard the W4, so do take my impressions with a grain of salt, but I feel I remember its signature quite well.  I find the H-200 to sound richer, more linear, better controlled, and possessing better freq. bandwidth than the W4.  The H-200 delivers better realism without using (midbass) warmth to 'goose up' the midrange (see: W4).  The W4 probably had a wider soundstage.. but I'd give the H-200 the edge in soundstage depth and height.  The wider stage allowed the W4's imaging to feel more (open) "headphone"-like, but I didn't feel its imaging was all that precise in terms of being able to clearly pinpoint spatial cues.  Spatial cues had more 'space' to operate in.. but I found their locations to be more 'fuzzy.'  When it comes to nailing what a monitor is about, the H-200 simply sounds more mature, linear, and "professional," to my ears, than the W4 ever did.
 
I think you're spot on about the BA200.. I absolutely (still) love that phone.  The H-200 serves as a terrific upgrade path in terms of sound, IMO.. and avoids the pitfalls of the W4 (though Inks is going to be sending me a modded W4 that he says blows the 'stock' W4 away.. so I might change my tune on it.. haha).
 
 
Hey Eke..
 

 
Stop picking on the H-100!
 
(yeah.. I still like(d) it.. for some strange reason).
 

 
 
Hey FlySweep buddy, I think I understand why you hear the W4 the way that you do, and don't consider it as neutral as the H-200. I guess I kind of divide my terminologies of neutral and balance. To me, the H-200 has a more balanced sound and the W4 a more neutral sound. The H-200 has a massive sub-bass (you will get it more a less depending on tips you use and deepness of insertion). Now this sub-bass isn't FXZ200 level (actually it's just shy of being basshead bass in my opinion), but it's enough to take the earphone out of the neutral realm to my ears. yet the overall sound of the H-200 has a great cohesiveness and overall balance. I am planning to get one of the custom cable made in Korea for it and see how that changes the sound. I think I will get the copper plated with silver.

 

[toxicdrift]

so i did some listening vs the stock black cable - unamped direct off an ipod. these are how i hear it and my impressions only.. im also not that good at this lol just want to post them if any1 wants to get an idea..
 
to me, 5N OCC is definitely better ...the black is more laidback.. the copper more forward sounding more engaging.. more detail, better soundstage, instrument seperation is better.. bass has better texture..its definately a upgrade to the black cable. i would totally recomend getting the upgraded cables if ur already happy with the h-200 and want to push them further. . but if ur running these unamped. i would suggest u to get an amp first.. the BH works awesome and will crank these up to crazy loud levels -- the dynamic driver really comes alive with an amp. the h-200 truly scales higher as ur gear keeps getting better. Now im just waiting for my C3 to arrive to complete my rig. sg post is taking their own sweet time!! i hope i get it this week, more pics when i do! posting a better snap for the cable