Top-Tier Universal IEM Comparison Chart, Frequency Response Charts, & Discussion
Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 AM Post #181 of 785
I would agree with others that IE8 deserve to be in the Top Tier, I really like the MTP Gold but would have to say it and the IE8 are slightly different variations of about the same quality. Personally I am now getting stuck as I really like both IEM's depending on music and sometimes mood. Their differences are intimacy with it's associated detail (MTPG) along with more forward mids especially in the area of high mids versus large sound stage with deeply extended bass with matching extended treble. The IE8 help create the soundstage by distancing the mids which reduces their detail much like what you experience at a concert.

I wrote a fairly lengthy comparison between the two IEM here, one thing though is I am starting to have 2nd thoughts about getting rid of my IE8. I just like the two different styles of the IEM's, now I just have to figure out how to justify 2 $300+ IEM's to my wife... LOL.
Mar 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM Post #182 of 785
OK, so I had my response email waiting for me to his post while I updated the chart on the first page, and bam, my browser decided it didn't want to play nice with Windows.

So, no specific responses tonight. I have updated the chart and removed the top-tier and near-top tier as well as tried to take out preference notes under weaknesses such as bass lite, etc and move them to the notes.

But I was thinking, since I really didn't get much new data that maybe I should rename the thread "The Top-Tier Theory Discussion Thread, now with extra flavor crystals." Can you tell it is late?

So...from what I can remember...Copper transparency:
I listened and compared today. When I get them in that sweet spot, the transparency is very good, on par with the IE8 and better to me than the TF10, but less than the CK10. When I don't get them in the sweet spot they sound more like speakers in each of my ears, always reminding me that I have an IEM in my ear.

Data is very important to form a statistically significant study, and I am trying to make this a study, but the data seems to have dried up. We are not there yet. I was hoping to get enough info so I could analyze the data and see a line in the sand. I guess I have to see if we ever get there.

I had some witty comments (at least they seemed that way when I was typing them), especially about someone questioning why 4 IEMs weren't top-tier, even though they have not heard them, because they have received so much praise. But I have heard them all and they all have major weaknesses IMO.

Thank you all for your posts and I am looking forward to more. And I really hope I get some "unique visitors" that have heard many of these IEMs.
Mar 10, 2010 at 10:08 AM Post #183 of 785
My apologies to shigzeo (and any others I might have offended) with the name calling. I didn't think calling the CK10 the next big thing was name calling, and was not my intention. However, my saying that wasn't based on when it was released, but , since it has only more recently become somewhat fotm (or should that be fot past few m?) with the recent price drop.

I like having different sound signatures. I like listening to many types of music. Hopefully I will like having many different iem's for different purposes.

And I've completely lost track of what point I was trying to make. So I'll just hope you all accept my apology.

Mar 10, 2010 at 3:35 PM Post #186 of 785

Originally Posted by iponderous /img/forum/go_quote.gif
^ Thank you for your constructive criticism Kunlun. You might be correct in terms of sentence construction, but I do understand the meaning of the word fraught and I feel comfortable using it in this context.

Hello. You've still not used the word fraught correctly.

Fraught in an archaic usage simply meant filled, or it refered to materials that had been loaded for transport (freight).

It does not, now, mean anything by itself. To say some that something is fraught or potentially fraught is meaningless in idiomatic English. No one uses fraught by itself to mean "loaded". It is not a common error. It sounds as though you misused a thesaurus or misunderstood a Word-A-Day calendar.

Rather, the word fraught is always used in an idiomatic expression "fraught with", where the substantive is almost always something such as peril, danger or drama.

With this in mind, let's correct your sentence: "There have already been a number of posts explaining why the task that average_joe has undertaken to compile a definitive list of top-tier universal IEMs is potentially fraught with danger."
You could also write that the task was fraught with the potential for disagreement.

You see?
Mar 10, 2010 at 3:46 PM Post #187 of 785
@ mark: Nope (the chart has been changed, but may need a refresh to load the new version vs. the one in cache). I know you have had fit issues with the e-Q7 that made it unusable for you, but you did say the sound was (and if I butcher what you said, please correct me, but I think I remember your point) the best you had heard when you could get a fit.

Another member has PMed me and told me the same, that it is a clear step above the others he has heard, and he has heard all but the W3 on the list. Others seem to share that thought, so the e-Q7, minus the fit issues, may be up there as the only one truly deserving of top-tier status at this time. Well, along with the GR-8 which you should get and see if they fit you better, as it has been reported they are 85-90% the same as the e-Q7 in SQ, but with different ergonomics.
Mar 10, 2010 at 4:06 PM Post #188 of 785
Kunlun - Your usage of the word "fraught" is correct. The archaic meaning of the word was laden and associated with ship's cargo. However, the meaning and usage of the word has evolved. It can be used as an adverb as you have described, however it is quite acceptable in modern English to use the word in the following ways: "there was a fraught silence" or "she sounded a bit fraught". The use of fraught in this context is referring to an anxious state. To say that a situation appears fraught, is fraught, may be fraught or is potentially fraught, is not incorrect usage in today's lexicon, even if you find it unacceptable. It's a living language Kunlun, any linguist will tell you that. I suggest that you try and adapt. Your offer to correct my sentence is not required and is rejected.
Mar 10, 2010 at 4:52 PM Post #191 of 785
interesting joe that you say that the ie8 show"micro details" which isnt the case and some details are completly lost with it and it is very evident in many songs.also intersting you say that the ck10 is "bass lite for some"and you put it under "notes" and not "weakness".you say that the bass improves with deep insertion,i literally jammed them all the way in till at some point i felt they would reach my ear drums and still the bass is not presented as it should be in many songs...infact all songs.

Another thing that i think is wrong with this chart is that it doesnt represent users opinion.what i mean is that for example you put my name in the ck10 box that i dont support the ck10 but in what area?.some of these strength like speed,detail...i support and i am not againest them but some points like imaging I disagree with and is not special from my point of view.

Also you put my name under the fx500 that i support it after modding which is misleading because any possible buyer will think they are not good except when modded and many will not buy them because as you know not many are willing to mess with their iem and void the warranty.And as far as i know you only took James opinion in this matter and you didnt even put the fx500 bass as one of their strongest suite, nor you put their level of detail retreival which is by the way better than the ie8's "micro detail for a dynamic".

IMHO,most of the anaolgy that you wrote and strength and weakness of each iem is affected by your bias toward an iem and your hate to another.And the clear example is the ie8. I dont think anybody talked about how great they are in representing details and how good they are in this area.Also you mentioned that the one of the ck10 strengths its transparency, and yet you neglected the fx500 which its tranparency is as good if not better than the ck10.

Another thing is your choice of wrote under the ck10 weakness that its treble is not as smooth and again you worte under the fx500 that its treble is harsh before modding which isnt the case at all because the ck10 treble is harsher and sharper than the fx500(I didn't mod them by the way). And i think i am not the only one who said so,i think mark said that before me receiving the ck10 and i can dig and find the post.

The last thing i want to say is writing names of the supporters and non-supporters.when for example someone ask an advice for an iem that does a speceific genres well and I say to him"No this iem is not suitable for this genres" He may respond"sure you will say so,I saw that you hate this iem and here is the thread(this thread)".if I were in his shoe,I would also be suspicious and look for another one to give me an advice.And for this reason,if you please Joe I don't want my name on this chart and you can cross out the fx500 if you want because it seems like I am the only supporter for them.

i seem by this post that i am biased towards the fx500 and hate the ck10 which i swear is not the case.i love them both and the ck10 do so much excellent things that it deseves its price,but take a look at how many viewed this thread and how much they will be affected by this chart especially new headfiers that seek for advice and prefered characteristics in an iem.
i will stop ranting now and you will probably ignore this post just as you did for my last one,but i had to say what i have to say....
Mar 10, 2010 at 5:54 PM Post #193 of 785
^^Midoo please don't take this the wrong way, but while I thought you were making interesting points in your post (although the overall tone seemed a little agressive towards my buddy Joe) , it was incredibly painfull to read due to poor punctuation & lack of paragraphs... Could you please edit it (only with comas and periods, and paragraphs), it will only help carry your point across. And please don't think I'm trying to be a mod here, it's just that I had to make extra efforts to read your otherwise interesting post, which I think most won't bother to do.
Mar 10, 2010 at 6:10 PM Post #194 of 785
English is not my first language and I am writing from my iPod touch which is not that good,I will try to edit my post and make it better.and I said before I am not trying to attack Joe here,I respect him very much but I don't agree with him here,that's it.
Mar 10, 2010 at 6:26 PM Post #195 of 785

Originally Posted by ethan961 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Logitech did make changes to the internals of the new triple.fis, so that point of value vs price in a product with a price drop is partially moot in the case of the TF10, and everything has to be compared at street price, or the average going price. That for the W3 is about $300, for example.
I think that every IEM should be reviewed for what it is worth, so in the case of the TF10, about $150. If it still deserves to be a top tier, then so be it, but with Logitech being cheap and changing the internals to give a better price, it doesn't surprise me if the TF10 no longer deserves to be classified as a top tier IEM.

I would love to hear what exactly were the changes made to the internals of the new triple.fis ? Otherwise please refrain from passing your personal assumption as fact.

Users who are viewing this thread