[ehjie]

I have two suggestions:

1. Fatigue: This term is a bit confusing here. Do you mean how fatiguing the sound signature is? Surely not, I presume it is the opposite - how less fatiguing the sound is. You should instead use the term Listening Comfort. That will be easier to understand.
2. Traillii = Baseline: I think, since the scores are given in respect of how close to Traillii a iem is able to approach, it should be rather termed as Traillii = Target.

Just my 2 cents.

May I chime, This should be kept as it was. The Baseline is an actual working specimen. The target is the ideal reference, i.e. the Harman curve.
Also my 2 cents...

 

[Ace Bee]

May I chime, This should be kept as it was. The Baseline is an actual working specimen. The target is the ideal reference, i.e. the Harman curve.
Also my 2 cents...

The way I see it, baseline is something to improve upon, whereas target is something to achieve. At least that's how it is in the industry I work in. As the scores are given here on the basis of how close to Traillii a iem is able to approach, I believe it should be termed as Target.

And the way you mean it, well, nothing can reach Traillii's performance except Traillii itself, in that way it can be termed as ideal reference as well.

 

[Charlyro222]

What's that case thing? I've suddenly started amassing IEMs and need a nice, neat way to store them (and the tips and cables and such) and this looks great.

https://www.amazon.es/dp/B00FXKO0OE...t_i_TNKXC871A3DFKYVDMCJC?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

 

[ehjie]

The way I see it, baseline is something to improve upon,

Correct

whereas target is something to achieve.

Correct again

At least that's how it is in the industry I work in. As the scores are given here on the basis of how close to Traillii a iem is able to approach, I believe it should be termed as Target.

There is a more ideal target pre se than this set.

And the way you mean it, well, nothing can reach Traillii's performance except Traillii itself,

The Aroma audio Ace can reach the bird's performance, according to @audio123 . he has both.
Looks like a tie...

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-discovery-thread.586909/post-16495431

in that way it can be termed as ideal reference as well.

sure...

 

[ranfan]

I think @Rockwell75 should go and get one, so that way he can do a direct comparison to more accurately measure their relative sound Or get another ruler reference he has at hand

 

[ehjie]

Correct

Correct again

There is a more ideal target pre se than this set.

The Aroma audio Ace can reach the bird's performance, according to @audio123 . he has both.
Looks like a tie...

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-discovery-thread.586909/post-16495431

sure...

And if I were shopping today (I wish, lol) - i'd get the Ace
1. (4) tuning modes
2. less expensive, the savings I could buy an upgrade cable
For me, even @ this level I have practically think, is it worth an extra 1k for a blissful treble, or can I tip roll / upgrade my cable to achieve
a similar effect?
When i was contemplating to buy my 1st flagship in ear headphones, it took me a very long time to decide.
Tremendous amounts of research were made. Multiple queries on reviewers, pms. When i finally decided to buy, the next flagship rolled out, LOL!
Oh well, c'est la vie, I suppose
I'm 100% sure the Bird is superlative in all aspects, I have read here and elsewhere. There is no doubt that is a super flagship level set...

 

[audio123]

Correct

Correct again

There is a more ideal target pre se than this set.

The Aroma audio Ace can reach the bird's performance, according to @audio123 . he has both.
Looks like a tie...

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-discovery-thread.586909/post-16495431

sure...

Yes, that comparison is Ace with stock cable vs Traillii which comes with a customised PW 1960s cable.

However by equipping PW 1960s with Ace, I will take Ace.
Ace + PW 1960s = 6389 USD MSRP
Oriolus Traillii = 6599 USD MSRP

Ace on Ace mode with 1960s vs Traillii:
Bass: Ace
Midrange: Ace
Treble: Traillii
Soundstage: Ace

 

[ian91]

I have two suggestions:

1. Fatigue: This term is a bit confusing here. Do you mean how fatiguing the sound signature is? Surely not, I presume it is the opposite - how less fatiguing the sound is. You should instead use the term Listening Comfort. That will be easier to understand.
2. Traillii = Baseline: I think, since the scores are given in respect of how close to Traillii a iem is able to approach, it should be rather termed as Traillii = Target.

Just my 2 cents.

Have another question - Even though W6.2 scores slightly more than Holocene in terms of Air, Sparkle, & Spaciousness, how come Holocene scores significantly more than W6.2 in terms of Naturalness & Clarity? Do the Air, Sparkle & Spaciousness not go hand in hand with Clarity? I can understand the perception of naturalness may vary from person to person, but the other two are quite objective aspects, not subjective.

I agree with both points here. It's being applied as a target or an ideal reference. All semantics but quite important nonetheless.

 

[Ace Bee]

There is a more ideal target pre se than this set.

Of course there will be, but this comparison is only with Traillii, hence Traillii can be termed as the ideal target only for this context.

The Aroma audio Ace can reach the bird's performance, according to @audio123 . he has both.
Looks like a tie...

Ya of course if Ace was being compared in this comparison then that conflict will arise, but since this comparison is solely with Trailli, that's why I suggested that Traillii should be termed as the ideal target.

 

[Rockwell75]

I have two suggestions:

1. Fatigue: This term is a bit confusing here. Do you mean how fatiguing the sound signature is? Surely not, I presume it is the opposite - how less fatiguing the sound is. You should instead use the term Listening Comfort. That will be easier to understand.

Thanks for the feedback that's a great suggestion.

Have another question - Even though W6.2 scores slightly more than Holocene in terms of Air, Sparkle, & Spaciousness, how come Holocene scores significantly more than W6.2 in terms of Naturalness & Clarity? Do the Air, Sparkle & Spaciousness not go hand in hand with Clarity? I can understand the perception of naturalness may vary from person to person, but the other two are quite objective aspects, not subjective.

Ha...Of all the categories on that chart "Naturalness & Clarity" is the one that bugs me the most, largely because as you say they're sort of fundamentally two different sorts of things. I'll probably be making a couple adjustments to remedy this. This whole thing is a work in progress-- my plan is to keep tweaking it so that it improves its capacity to be a snapshot of the way I hear & perceive things.

That said no I don't consider "air, sparkle & spaciousness" and "clarity" to be the quite same thing, though they do correlate. Classic case in point here would be the Dorado 2020, and IEM that puts out some of the cleanest & clearest sound across the board of any IEM I've heard-- this is often the first thing that jumps out at me about it when I put them in after listening to most other IEMs. I think it has something to do with the ceramic and I talk at some length about it in my review of the Dorado. On the other hand given it's big bass response it doesn't have quite the air and spaciousness of something like the Andromeda 2020. But yeah, I do need to revisit that category. My original intent was to elaborate on each of the categories used in that chart and explain how I interpret them...including possibly some sort of scoring rubric. If I did this for a living I'd probably do that but since this is all just a hobby (and my holidays are over in a few days) it may fall by the wayside for a while.

May I chime, This should be kept as it was. The Baseline is an actual working specimen.

Yeah this is kind of what I meant-- it sort of stands as a reference for me right now given that it's the best thing I've heard as of this particular moment in time.

The way I see it, baseline is something to improve upon, whereas target is something to achieve. At least that's how it is in the industry I work in. As the scores are given here on the basis of how close to Traillii a iem is able to approach, I believe it should be termed as Target.

I think maybe "current reference" may have been more the term I was shooting for. From a semantic perspective I totally get what you're saying here. Ultimately though I don't like the term "ideal target" as it implies there is one ideal all IEMs should be striving for-- which I don't think is true. I think there are many ideals out there for many different types of signature. The Traillii just happens to score higher than anything else I've heard-- so it's really just its score I'm using as a bassline, not the salient qualities of the IEM itself. Sorry if this seems confusing I'm still trying to sort this all out in my head.

And the way you mean it, well, nothing can reach Traillii's performance except Traillii itself, in that way it can be termed as ideal reference as well.

Maybe "current reference" instead of "ideal reference".

I think @Rockwell75 should go and get one

Go and get what...a Traillii?

 

[Ace Bee]

Thanks for the feedback that's a great suggestion.

Ah don't mention it, the chart is a great effort you've made, I'm just trying to enhance it even further.

That said no I don't consider "air, sparkle & spaciousness" and "clarity" to be the quite same thing, though they do correlate. Classic case in point here would be the Dorado 2020, and IEM that puts out some of the cleanest & clearest sound across the board of any IEM I've heard-- this is often the first thing that jumps out at me about it when I put them in after listening to most other IEMs. I think it has something to do with the ceramic and I talk at some length about it in my review of the Dorado. On the other hand given it's big bass response it doesn't have quite the air and spaciousness of something like the Andromeda 2020. But yeah, I do need to revisit that category. My original intent was to elaborate on each of the categories used in that chart and explain how I interpret them...including possibly some sort of scoring rubric. If I did this for a living I'd probably do that but since this is all just a hobby (and my holidays are over in a few days) it may fall by the wayside for a while.

Going by this, do you mean that...it's getting hella confusing, what I think should be is that even though W6.2 has more air, sparkle, and spaciousness, the bigger bass of it holds it clarity back a notch than Holocene, which provides an overall more balanced sound with more perceived clarity? In that sense, are you referring to the clarity of the midrange?

Yeah this is kind of what I meant-- it sort of stands as a reference for me right now given that it's the best thing I've heard as of this particular moment in time.



I think maybe "current reference" may have been more the term I was shooting for. From a semantic perspective I totally get what you're saying here. Ultimately though I don't like the term "ideal target" as it implies there is one ideal all IEMs should be striving for-- which I don't think is true. I think there are many ideals out there for many different types of signature. The Traillii just happens to score higher than anything else I've heard-- so it's really just its score I'm using as a bassline, not the salient qualities of the IEM itself. Sorry if this seems confusing I'm still trying to sort this all out in my head.



Maybe "current reference" instead of "ideal reference".

Yeah 'Current Reference' sounds good.

Go and get what...a Traillii?

I think he was suggesting you to get Aroma Audio Ace.

 

[claud W]

Anyone here ordered a VE EXT? I expect Rocky would be first in line because it is a 2DD + EST IEM. What more could you want. Since it is a VE, I expect it will be done right.

 

[Ace Bee]

Anyone here ordered a VE EXT? I expect Rocky would be first in line because it is a 2DD + EST IEM. What more could you want. Since it is a VE, I expect it will be done right.

Someone posted an initial impression...I think in chinese. Translated, it wasn't very promising.

 

[claud W]

Source, Mr. Ace Bee. This IEM is going to need plenty of power to drive it successfully because of the four EST drivers . It will also need at least 100 hours of break in because of the two DD drivers.

 

[Xinlisupreme]

Someone posted an initial impression...I think in chinese. Translated, it wasn't very promising.

How can you judge an iem at the show?
Mostly weren’t burned ‘cmon.
Also W6.2 doesn’t shine till 170h and it isn’t a brain factor because I own many IEMs and I can compare it with them in any moment.
Who don’t believe on burnin and fine tuning miss many IEMs enjoyment.
I know it’s boring and need to be patient but it’s a part of our hobby.