[midoo1990]

Ok Joe,you win,I can't attack the ck10 FOTM nor do you accept my point of view,and by the way you didn't answer my questions in the post and you missed most of it.Enjoy updating the table with what you only prefer and hear.
P.S:I won't respond to this thread again.

 

[cn11]

Quote:

Originally Posted by average_joe /img/forum/go_quote.gif For me the CK90Pro has the same size soundstage as the CK10, which I do not find lacking. It is a smaller soundstage than the TF10 and IE8 (of course, as nothing I have heard compares), but the stage for me does reach wide when called for. For example, with Hotel CA from Hell Freezes over, some of the clapping is coming from further out than with the TF10 even though the overall front and center stage is not as wide. I chalk this up to perceived listening location. What tips are you using? I am using the MC triple flange. And what differences are you hearing in soundstage with the IE8 and the MD? Note that the tip extenders I am using do increase the soundstage with of the IE8, and without them the IE8 does sound closer to say the Copper and TF10 in soundstage (but still ultimately wider).

With what I hear the CK90Pro fall noticeably behind any other IEM I own in soundstaging, hence my comment.

I settled on Sony Hybrid tips on the CK90Pro's. I can't use any tips that are long, they never work with my ear canals. So triple flanges are out, as well as anything remotely like your 'tip extender mods'- so I'm one person your mod doesn't work for.

 

[chrisssssssss2]

I believe the W3's deserve to be top tier. I've just received them, and without burn-in(although it doesn't really need any...), I can already say that these are my new favorite IEMs. The tight, controlled bass, and sparkling highs say it all. Usually, I find that there's a balancing act between the maintenance of bass and highs, and the Westone 3s do it perfectly. I like them more then the IE7s and IE8s, which are already considered top tier. Add me to the support list for top tier for the Westone 3s!

 

[HONEYBOY]

Alright guys am willing to learn what is meant by X headphone making Y headphone sound veiled in comparison. For instance I do notice a slight bump in clarity when I switch from my IE8 to say a TF10 or CK10 directly. However, to say that the IE8 sound veiled in comparison, am not sure I'll say so. Anyone care to comment? By the way we're on topic I hope. We're talking about "top tier" universals here, thanks!

 

[gameboy115]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HONEYBOY /img/forum/go_quote.gif Alright guys am willing to learn what is meant by X headphone making Y headphone sound veiled in comparison. For instance I do notice a slight bump in clarity when I switch from my IE8 to say a TF10 or CK10 directly. However, to say that the IE8 sound veiled in comparison, am not sure I'll say so. Anyone care to comment? By the way we're on topic I hope. We're talking about "top tier" universals here, thanks!

Yea, I will say IE8 is veiled comparing to other top tier I have heard, including UM3x, SE 530, TF 10 pro, even Image x10 has better clarity than it

 

[Hentai11]

@dweaver

You're making sense, but my criteria tends to be more simple (or simplistic, depending on who you ask.)

I care about one thing: fidelity--can the phones accurately represent the recorded performance, or can they be made to accurately represent it.

The perfect phones are flawlessly accurate, without adjustment. The phones I call top-tier take minor adjustments. The more I need to fix, the more mediocre the phones are.

Hence, my problem with the Golds. To me, in-your-face anything is an instant strike. If I want to push anything, I'll EQ; I don't like phones with built-in distortion.

As for midbass, I get a track with a plucked string bass. A midbass hump pushes the bass forward, and gives it that ghetto-car-stereo buzz. The Golds do it, and the IE8s do it bad.

@average_joe

Top-Tier: FX500, TF10

Near-Top: SE530 (treble rolloff, too-polite bass), IE8 (ginormous midbass, needs more instrument detail)

Quote:

And when you mean the FX500 has a peerless and commanding presentation of all music, are you saying you think it should be alone in the top-tier category and everything else is a step down?

No. In addition to the final sound quality, I'll also consider the amount time I spend squinting at my equalizer to get there. This is my beef with the Golds; great sounding phones, but it was such a slog bringing the sound out that when they started sounding good, I was physically startled.

 

[james444]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentai11 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IE8 (ginormous midbass, needs more instrument detail)

IME once you EQ down the midbass you realize the IE8 has ample detail.

 

[Pianist]

@average_joe: I disagree that SE530 has forward mids. Most Westones, such as UM1, UM2, UM3X and ES3X have forward mids, as well as the Ortofon e-Q7, but SE530 doesn't - it is quite neutral IMO. The mids may seem forward however because the treble is a bit recessed and also because the bass is very fit dependent and may sound weak and or sloppy with a poor fit. I found the sound on SE530 very, very fit dependent at least for my ears - more so than any other IEM I tried.

Also, I think SE530 is the universal IEM with the best mids. GR8 and e-Q7 mids are pretty close, but not quite as good IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentai11 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Near-Top: SE530 (treble rolloff, too-polite bass), IE8 (ginormous midbass, needs more instrument detail)

Did you amp it?

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by average_joe /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which makes me think that your TF10 is better than my TF10 What source do you use for the TF10, as I like it with the Shadow (but the CKs still sound clearer to me), and the iPhone is better than many other sources with my TF10, but still not great IMO. ipod touch - 2nd gen. OK, so, do you want your name as a FX500 supporter, and do you think it is deserving of top-tier status? No, I'm not a supporter and I don't think that it is deserving of top-tier status. And, I took your post about top-tier being due to how much you paid, which is why I put your name by the UM3X. I will add you to the SE530, but do you want to remain a UM3X supporter? I was joshing, and I'm not a supporter of the UM3X. Which full sized? Honestly, I prefer the way IEMs present a cohesive, enveloping presentation, and other than the HD800, I did not get that from full sized headphones, they just didn't have the transparency. ATH-W5000 and HF2. My experience is very different to yours. When I've been listening to these headphones and then switch back to any of my IEMs, the deficiencies of the latter are apparent to me.

My apologies for the responses in bold but I don't have a knack for multi-quoting.

 

[Spyro]

Compared to the GR-8 the Shures sound a bit grainy and slightly tunnel'ish or honky to my ears. Perhaps it's that rolled off treble but I certainly wouldn't call it a creamy smooth sound.

 

[KramitDfrog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by average_joe /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting, I hadn’t thought of that. But how many people will find that vs this that have the same “enthusiast” take? Maybe in the future, though. .... That would probably take more work than this thread. And everyone hears things a differently, making it difficult to “standardize it.” Part of my logic for the format is to not only have the info on the sound, but also have supporters and detractors because for me, I know what people hear things similarly to how I hear it and I can trust their thoughts.

I think it'd have to tie in with this forum - same user accounts, so you know who's opinion you're reading. Something done in conjunction with, not competing against this site would be perfect.

A good example that comes to mind is nuigroup.com - they have both a forum and a wiki. Topics discussed in the forum migrate out to the wiki, so the wiki provides a resource of all the knowledge established by discussion. Great for newbs and fact checking!

It'd be great to do a plug in for the forum software, to add a button that 'wikis' a post, once it's suitable. Stickies on steroids, as wrong as that sounds..

With regards to standardisation - I just mean a recommendation as to what categories to rate a phone on. Most people do the same ones anyway, eg soundscape mid/bass/treble, detail etc. That way a meaningful aggregation of impressions could be done.

A rating plugin would be perfect, that allows everyone to rate on the same scale the same properties, so you could see for instance that the ck10 has an average rating of 9.5/10 for detail with 100 ratings.

Then again, I'm a programmer so I tend to think of a software solution to everything - I'd always rather code a solution than do it myself

 

[Hentai11]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 IME once you EQ down the midbass you realize the IE8 has ample detail.

Ample, sure. Moreover, its midbass is it's ONLY problem--they're a big, beautiful, clear sound otherwise.

But if I were ranking my Big Four (FX500, TF10, SE530, IE8) in detail, they're fourth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianist Quote: Originally Posted by Hentai11 Near-Top: SE530 (treble rolloff, too-polite bass) Did you amp it?

I did, but they got that screamy, overdriven sound that made me stop amping sensitive IEMs.

I've actually grown to respect the SE530 bass after coming off RE0s. But I like tracks with real and true sub-bass--orchestral tracks with lots of bass drums, pipe organs, and gobs of <50hz energy--and you'll hear the weaker phones fail here. The Shures make it through moderate volumes, but throw a fortissimo at them and they fall apart.

It's not fatal--all IEMs do something fairly badly--but that's a dealbreaker for me. If they didn't do everything else so creamily, mine would be in the FS forum.

 

[mvw2]

This thread is chugging along I see, good to see. I've skipped the last 10 pages or so, but I've already covered my comments early and in other threads.

I've never considered the IE8 veiled, even when directly compared to other high end earphones. It is slightly soft on detail and the top end is smoothed, but the presentation is still clear and open. Even when listened back to back against the UM3X or SE530, I simply couldn't call the IE8 veiled. It is softer/smoother on note yet I couldn't call it muffled or really lacking air and space. Sure it's less aggressive and forward then the UM3X or SE530, but that doesn't exactly make it veiled. I've listened to more aggressive, more veiled earphones then the IE8. A good example is Denon's C751. I've kind of come to consider this a poor man's IE8, a similar kind of sound but a bit rougher overall. Stepping between the IE8 and C751 there is a pretty noticeable veiled sense from the C751. It's hard to say why specifically. I find the C751 very transparent, highly articulate, and quite dynamic. I'm not exactly sure what makes the veiled kind of sound. I can say I never previously considered the C751 to be veiled. It was really only noticeable once I started directly comparing it to high end earphones. But comparing among the high end earphones, I don't get any real veiled sense from the IE8, at least not what I would describe as veiled in my context of the word.

I will make a secondary note. As these earphones get better and better, it becomes increasingly important to have a very clean source and clean AND adequate power to drive them. Even earphones with high sensitivity and low ohm loads still benefit from more wattage. I know some of you have complained some about poor bass, incoherence, lack of sound stage perception, harsh sound, etc. A lot of this has to do with the quality of the information you're putting into the earphone. It can be a largely different experience running these high end earphones off line out power through a generic audio player(laptop, walkman, etc.). There can be significant improvements in a LOT of areas once you transition to higher level source material, a quality DAC (if needed) and abundant power (some of these earphones are quite thirsty for power). The big problem is that these earphones can provide a high level of clarity and detail in the information and a lot of this capability can be lost through less then ideal transmission. I know a bunch of you run good hardware, but I know many here also do not. You just have to weigh what you hear relative to what you're running. One can not exactly blame a speaker for a low bitrate song. One can not blame the sound a speaker makes when lacking adequate power. One can not blame a speaker's sound when being played from a mediocre source device. Just be aware of these things.

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mvw2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif This thread is chugging along I see, good to see. I've skipped the last 10 pages or so, but I've already covered my comments early and in other threads.

Then you would have missed my response to your previous post. You will find it on page six, which coincidentally is 10 pages back.

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gameboy115 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yea, I will say IE8 is veiled comparing to other top tier I have heard, including UM3x, SE 530, TF 10 pro, even Image x10 has better clarity than it

I don't regard the IE8 as veiled. This description of the IE8 continues to puzzle me.