[ljokerl]

 
Quote:

Hey Joker, what do you think of the SP5pros? They seem pretty terrible in your opinion!?

I don't think they are terrible, just a bit warm and dark for an armature-based earphone. The bass is not as tight as it is on the UE700 and TripleFi and the clarity and detail are 2nd tier. There's also plenty of good to be said about them - they are smooth, impactful, and generally spacious, but they currently cost what, $150? The TF10 can still easily be had for <$200 so I can't think of a single reason to buy the SF5Pro.

 

[kingpintps]

 
Initial impressions are quite stellar ^_^

I was in love with them even before buying, and now finally having them in my ears feels like bliss. I completely agree with the comments in this thread when comparing with q-JAYS. If I try to quantify them in terms of my sound preference, I would say they are almost 25-30% better than q-JAYS. I find them having slightly more quantity and better quality of bass than q-JAYS, but in terms of mids, the CK10 are well ahead. Vocals just come alive on the CK10, whereas they were quite subdued on q-JAYS. The highs are very similar, but CK10 are a lot less sibilant while still keeping slightly better levels of details and treble. Soundstage on the CK10 is definitely much wider but the difference in speed and transparency is quite less (still in favor of CK10)

Overall I couldn't be happier, the build quality is a lot better than q-JAYS and I just love the tiny carry case.

A very nice upgrade and well worth the extra money

I am now wondering if my next step up can only be Customs - because I don't see a point in spending money on any other Universal after the CK10 - the difference in sound cannot be worth it.

How you ever let these go is something that makes we wonder.
Quote:

so how do you like the CK10? I should get mine next week

 
EDIT: NOO..I was just A/Bing them with my q-JAYS on a few more tunes (previously it was on memory), and the CK10 are slaughtering the q-JAYS on almost every track. The sound is a lot more fuller, lively and involving with the CK10. The detail level is definitely also higher and the q-JAYS by comparison sound quite muffled. Money well spent!!

 

[rawrster]

I don't see myself keeping them for that long tbh. It was an impulse buy since I had funds in my paypal. I should have 2 pairs of customs by Monday so after I get the CK10 I'll have to see what I'll be doing.
 
I sold them to fund a pair of customs which I don't regret doing.

 

[kingpintps]

^ excess of pleasures
 
listen to those two customs (which ones are they again?) and then let us know which would be a good upgrade coming from the CK10 sound in your opinion? I want to plan on buying one for next year.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

 
I don't think they are terrible, just a bit warm and dark for an armature-based earphone. The bass is not as tight as it is on the UE700 and TripleFi and the clarity and detail are 2nd tier. There's also plenty of good to be said about them - they are smooth, impactful, and generally spacious, but they currently cost what, $150? The TF10 can still easily be had for <$200 so I can't think of a single reason to buy the SF5Pro.

 
I agree on everything except clarity. The clarity excellent on Super.fi 5 Pro. Better than on any Shure or Westone I tried. Other than that, the Super.fi 5 Pro is a mediocre IEM.
 

 

[james444]

I tend to agree with ljokerl here, to my ears the SF5 Pro were smooth and spacious, but pretty veiled. Compared to a phone like the CK10 I'd even say exceedingly so. But it's been a long time since I had them, so I'm just judging from memory.

 

[shane55]

I agree with everything |joker| (and james444) said about the SF5 Pro. I too found them veiled... and slow (maybe that accounts for the 'smooth' comment).
 
$.02

 

[goodvibes]

same here. I thought the 3 studio better.

 

[Photofan1986]

In my experience, the SF5pro were warm and quite veiled (more so than IE8 imo) but I had a problem with sibilance. Female voices were a real torture to listen to

 
edit: I preferred the SF3, too.

 

[anchorman69]

Can you clarify what you mean by veiled? I have compared it to some Westones and I thought the the SF5pro sounded clearer; the Westones sounded 'muffled' in comparison. Am I mistaken?

 
Quote:

In my experience, the SF5pro were warm and quite veiled (more so than IE8 imo) but I had a problem with sibilance. Female voices were a real torture to listen to

 
edit: I preferred the SF3, too.

 

[Pianist]

Guys, Super.fi 5 Pro sounds clear. It sounds crystal clear (not refined or articulate or detailed, those are different things from clarity). BUT, it has a unbalanced sound with over the top bass and lower treble and not enough mids. Detail is also not very good for a dual driver. By clarity I mean that sound is reproduced in a very clean way. This is most likely due to Super.fi 5 Pro's dual bore design. This creates clarity that rivals that of customs. I was always impressed with this particular quality of the Super.fis. I was unimpressed with everything else about them though.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

Can you clarify what you mean by veiled? I have compared it to some Westones and I thought the the SF5pro sounded clearer; the Westones sounded 'muffled' in comparison. Am I mistaken?

 

Veil means a lack of detail. Super.fi 5 Pro lack detail, especially in the mids. That's compared to other multi driver IEMs and good single drivers. I don't consider IE8 veiled though. Super.fi 3 is also pretty veiled, but it has a more balanced sound signature than Super.fi 5 Pro with better presence in the midrange.

 

[germanturkey]

i always thought veiled meant it sounded like there was cotton between the iem and your ear drum.  like muffled.  for example, see the Klipsch S4.  a good lower end iem.  but when you compare it to say, the CK10, it sounds like you have cotton in your ears.

 

[rawrster]

Quote:

^ excess of pleasures
 
listen to those two customs (which ones are they again?) and then let us know which would be a good upgrade coming from the CK10 sound in your opinion? I want to plan on buying one for next year.

Excess of phones indeed.I can afford it so it works out well. However it depends on what you consider an upgrade. Neither of my customs have the CK10 signature so I'm thinking something from UM or the UE Reference Monitors might fit the bill but I need to hear it first. I'm pretty satisfied with my current customs however which are the 1964 Ears 1964-T and LiveWire Trips.

 

[james444]

Quote:

i always thought veiled meant it sounded like there was cotton between the iem and your ear drum.  like muffled.  for example, see the Klipsch S4.  a good lower end iem.  but when you compare it to say, the CK10, it sounds like you have cotton in your ears.

... and I believe you're right. In my understanding a pair of headphones cannot be clear and veiled at the same time. They may sound clean/undistorted and that's obviously a prerequisite for clarity, but not the same thing in my book. Btw a glossary of audio terms can be found here, but of course that too is rather a collection of opinions than a universal standard and everyone's entitled to their own interpretations.