[bobeau]

[delete]

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

So according to rhfactor1 here. You are saying my 160 hours of burn for my HA-S500 might not be enough? I was leaning toward 200 to be acceptable but this does not surprise me one bit..If they improve even 2% more than what they are now I am all for a longer burn in. 
 
For the guys that don't have one. I suggest making a little burn in station to just leave your headphones and earphones burning overnight..Something as simple as a stereo setup with a 3.5 splitter. I use this.
These are cheap but I consider it an essential part of burn in. That is if you own more than one headphone.

A bit of warning is needed here. What you are doing in this case is connecting up to six pairs of headphones to the output of a single amplifier (DAP, phone, amplifier, whatever). As average impedance of IEMs is around 18 ohms, connecting six of them in parallel brings impedance down to 3 ohms ! Consider the fact most ICs found in portable equipment are specified for loads above 100 ohms , which is about six times less load than a single 18 ohm headphone. Making it yet six time harder is not good for the health of an amp in the long run. If you are unsure regarding this: start with a single pair, then add one at the time. Listen for the congestion ,lack of detail or volume decrease with each phone added. Once you hit the spot any of these become objectionable, remove one pair. If you have multiple amps, select for burn in the one you would miss the least in case it ends up in  eternal hounting grounds. Or use more amps with less phones per amp attached.
 
Happy burning in everyone !

 

[bobeau]

Quote:

 As average impedance of IEMs is around 18 ohms, connecting six of them in parallel brings impedance down to 3 ohms !

 
Thanks analogsurviver,
 
So just to be clear, my DF had a maximum output impedance of .8 ohms, so if I'm reading this right even in this type of situation it should still be *alright* but not ideal?  
 
If I'm connecting up a 16 ohm, 20 ohm, 32 ohm, and 50 ohm load at the same time what is the apparent load?

 

[swaffleman]

Honest question: Would you say they have a colored sound or that they are neutral and natural sounding?
 
Also, would these be more of an analytic phone or something to listen to for "fun"? I know there can be crossover, but these days, I find I like something that errs more on the analytic and detailed sound.

 

[Dsnuts]

These have plenty of detail as all carbon nanotube earphones and headphones have but also has a very fun bass end to them. So a little bit of both. Personally I think it is great that JVC tuned them this way. Not too analytical yet not too musical at the same time..Complete and versatile.
 
Musical or not it has great imagery and is detailed enough to pick off little micro details in your music. They sound amazing actually..Something that is unexpected from smaller on ear headphones. For the cost they are no brainer and very versatile for all types of music. If you go by all the impressions. These are impressing everyone and get much better with burn in. Try them out. I doubt you will have had anything like these for what you spend.
 
@bobeau What analog means is it will lower the volume a bit when using splitter. but if your source has plenty of juice it is a non issue. Try it out. I have at least 3 to 5 headphones blaring from my laptop at all times. Works awesome.

 

[LaRzZa]

Quote:

If I'm connecting up a 16 ohm, 20 ohm, 32 ohm, and 50 ohm load at the same time what is the apparent load?

 
1/R = 1/50 + 1/32 + 1/20 + 1/16   =>    R = 1 / 0.16375 =  6.107  ohm    

 

[cute]

Quote:

 
I honestly think you just need to pump up the volume to bring the hours down - get as much energy flowing through them as possible.  What about that guy who burned in his FXD40s for like 300 hours, experiencing little in the way in changes, then blasted them to hell for 24 hours and boom, they were there?
 
The material is strong and probably can take a ton more volume than a paper or plastic dynamics, well above audible distortion levels as long as the driver is not experiencing tearing is should be fine.  The point is to make it as loose as possible to increase transient response, right?  Poor transient response is where all the the bloat and congestion manifests.
 
I have about 60-70 hours on my pair now, about 40 of that with DnB at levels about twice what I listen at.  They've improved in a way that has me stunned.  As they are they leave my FXD80s I picked up from dweaver in the dust, but I'll be subjecting those to the same effort soon.  The bass has subdued a bit, is now sharp and textured and the mids have pretty much lost any hint of congestion.  I can actually turn the volume up a couple notches above my normal listening (very loud, probably over 100 db) before I hear them struggle when they're on ear, of course just for short periods of time.  I can swap these between my GR07s and feel that I'm giving up little in terms of speed or definition, which is crazy as these do still pack a wallop down low.  That a far cry from what I experienced on open box.
 
If any head-fiers are in San Diego let me know.  I work in various coffee shops around the downtown/uni heights area and would be happy to meet up so you could have a listen, just my MBA -> DF -> S500.

 
I agree with this 100%....I initally thought I would be happy with the S500, on open box with EQ settings....now after 80hrs agressive loud "drum and bass". the congestion is going away, sound is smoothing in the mids, and my bass EQ is off.  Look forward to continued improvements.  Won't be doing any transplant or cable upgrades, at least for now!

 

[analogsurviver]

You put it nicely. I believe nanotube diaphragm can take much more than anything used in dynamic transducers hitherto. However, magnetic and  thermal properties are probably pretty much in line with those of more conventional transducers, with similar limitations. For me the greatest allure of nanotubes is their ability to behave in piston motion far better than other materials, hopefully beginning to approach the standard of reproduction achieved by electrostatics. This is no small feat, as electrostatics are driven across their whole surface uniformly, down to the level of the molecule - diaphragm needs not to be stiff in order to move like single piston, all it must provide is ability to support correct electrostatic charge and be tensioned uniformly. Nano technology might close this gap in quality for most people - last n-th degree of performance will remain with the electrostatics, since equal performance from dynamic transducer would require perfect diaphragm material ( infinity stiffness, zero mass ) and that does not and will never exist. This is on theorethical level.
 
In practice, it might be possible to surpass electrostatics with a dynamic transducer. Make or break of electrostatics is not transducer itself, but whatever you are driving it with. Electrostatics are electrically capacitors, and their impedance halves for each increase of frequency by two. Sooner or later you will reach practical limits - it will be either too big, costly or downright dangerous. Correctly implemented nanotube dynamic driver that can be powered much more easily without the above mentioned sooner or later unmenageable high frequency barrier may indeed taken together surpass the performance of presently available electrostatics. 
 
It is for this reason I find the JVC HA-S500 that important - electrostatics will remain expensive for multiple justified reasons and therefore inacessible to most of the people. It may become the first historically remembered headphone that gave truly good sound for very reasonable price to the masses.
 
As a recording engineer I find it very frustrating to hear time and time again my recordings played on ******** equipment - people who do care about music and sound quality generally can not afford high priced audio. Just an example; I know one very promising harphist - imagine how she must have felt after not sucesfully making an audition, to be told after the fact she would have most probably cut it if her instrument was better? Price of admission for that harp? 48K5 Euro. She must still soldier on with existing instrument saving every dime in order to get what would allow her to grow as an artist even more, not to mention increased number of invitations to give recitals - in plain words, to make living from what she likes and does best.
 
Now tell me - which phones she would consider buying - SR009 or HA-S "second/improved generation"?
 
Although by default she would have deserved the future not yet in existance SR017...

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

You put it nicely. I believe nanotube diaphragm can take much more than anything used in dynamic transducers hitherto. However, magnetic and  thermal properties are probably pretty much in line with those of more conventional transducers, with similar limitations. For me the greatest allure of nanotubes is their ability to behave in piston motion far better than other materials, hopefully beginning to approach the standard of reproduction achieved by electrostatics. This is no small feat, as electrostatics are driven across their whole surface uniformly, down to the level of the molecule - diaphragm needs not to be stiff in order to move like single piston, all it must provide is ability to support correct electrostatic charge and be tensioned uniformly. Nano technology might close this gap in quality for most people - last n-th degree of performance will remain with the electrostatics, since equal performance from dynamic transducer would require perfect diaphragm material ( infinity stiffness, zero mass ) and that does not and will never exist. This is on theorethical level.
 
In practice, it might be possible to surpass electrostatics with a dynamic transducer. Make or break of electrostatics is not transducer itself, but whatever you are driving it with. Electrostatics are electrically capacitors, and their impedance halves for each increase of frequency by two. Sooner or later you will reach practical limits - it will be either too big, costly or downright dangerous. Correctly implemented nanotube dynamic driver that can be powered much more easily without the above mentioned sooner or later unmenageable high frequency barrier may indeed taken together surpass the performance of presently available electrostatics. 
 
It is for this reason I find the JVC HA-S500 that important - electrostatics will remain expensive for multiple justified reasons and therefore inacessible to most of the people. It may become the first historically remembered headphone that gave truly good sound for very reasonable price to the masses.
 
As a recording engineer I find it very frustrating to hear time and time again my recordings played on ******** equipment - people who do care about music and sound quality generally can not afford high priced audio. Just an example; I know one very promising harphist - imagine how she must have felt after not sucesfully making an audition, to be told after the fact she would have most probably cut it if her instrument was better? Price of admission for that harp? 48K5 Euro. She must still soldier on with existing instrument saving every dime in order to get what would allow her to grow as an artist even more, not to mention increased number of invitations to give recitals - in plain words, to make living from what she likes and does best.
 
Now tell me - which phones she would consider buying - SR009 or HA-S "second/improved generation"?
 
Although by default she would have deserved the future not yet in existance SR017...

Sorry guys - wrong button. @ bobeau
 
I also see I was beaten to answer your impedance question. It is the correct answer.
 
I meant simply to underline not every amp out there will be happy with 6 phones burning in on it at full cry 24/7.

 

[bobeau]

Quote:

 
@bobeau What analog means is it will lower the volume a bit when using splitter. but if your source has plenty of juice it is a non issue. Try it out. I have at least 3 to 5 headphones blaring from my laptop at all times. Works awesome.

 
Right, I realize that will be the case from passively splitting, just want to make sure it's not creating an unreasonable load for me to really blast things.  As it is I have tons of headroom w/ my DF so getting proper volume should not be an issue.  In practice I'll only be doing 2-3 headphones at a time.
 
BTW, you were not 'effing around on these.  Good job bringing this stuff to the forefront, this may go down as my best value purchase in audio ever.  I am stunned at how nicely they've developed after a good ass-kicking.  

 

[bobeau]

Quote:

Now tell me - which phones she would consider buying - SR009 or HA-S "second/improved generation"?

 
I know, right?   The cool thing is that JVC is clearly taking the more value road here so upcoming circum-aural or open phones (ie. ~50mm) will be interesting if they ever hit the market in the sub $200 price bracket. 

 

[Dsnuts]

Quote:

 
Right, I realize that will be the case from passively splitting, just want to make sure it's not creating an unreasonable load for me to really blast things.  As it is I have tons of headroom w/ my DF so getting proper volume should not be an issue.  In practice I'll only be doing 2-3 headphones at a time.
 
BTW, you were not 'effing around on these.  Good job bringing this stuff to the forefront, this may go down as my best value purchase in audio ever.  I am stunned at how nicely they've developed after a good ass-kicking.  

 
I am wondering just how much of an upgrade the new up coming M-100 is gonna actually be over these. I am sure those will be an upgrade but by how much is the question.  Or a better way to put it. They better be an upgrade. Lol .

 

[bowei006]

Anyone here hear the UE TF10? I just got some money to do some splurging........  I may as well get an IEM 

 

[Dsnuts]

Get yourself a JVC FXD80 instead. Cheaper and better sounding earphone Imo.
 
So I was browsing through the bay. Look at these. lol.




Who says you have to just have all black. These will fit the HA-S500 but cost more than the standard black velours $35 or so.

 

[bowei006]

The FX80 looks good, how do the FXT90 compare to them and would those be more worth it?