Ultimate canal earphone - Prophonic 2X-S, simply enchanting..
Jul 9, 2003 at 10:40 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 23

MadDog

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 16, 2003
Posts
522
Likes
10
I've had the Prophonic 2x-s for about a month and am starting to realize the true value of this truly master-earpiece as the dual drivers get matured. I am just relieved that I have finally found what I have always been hoping for and do not have to spend anymore money and times trying to find ideal headphones for many many years while retaining the ultimate joy of private listening. Here's what you get with Pro2X-s:

1. This is 27 ohms canal phone can be driven by just about any audio unit. I tried on iriver iFP-190T and even a mini AM radio, had no problem. I doubt this one ever needs an amp.

2. It's ultra light! Dual drivers are embedded inside the custom earmold made of ultra soft silicon. It is so comfortably/firmly secured and anchored to your ears that you feel like wearing a ear glove. It takes a quick second to put these on so you won't
waste time trying to get a good seal. Don't go too deep like Ety. Incredibly ergonomic and extremely comfortable.

3. No microphonic! Excellent isolation at 26db. Perfect for noisy, turbulent environment as you won't hear a thing with your music on or won't bother anyone. You could have death metal at full blast, but people won't be noticed.

4. As for sound I will just compare this to dual driver Shure E5 since it wouldn't make too much sense comparing it to other low-end, inferior canal phones like e2, e1, er-6p & er-4p being exposed to most of them. Auditioned using the portable rig - Creative Zen with/without Supermini V6 although it didn't make much difference in sound quality so far. (will V6 ever do its thing?)

- Power (sound output):
This is something I can't quite comprehend because E5 at 110 Ohms (impedance) sounded much louder than Pro 2X-S at only 27 Ohms although Zen was more than enough to blast my ears off at about half volume. This wasn't a big deal but just noticed that E5's louder.

- Open-ness/analytical:
E5 seems to be more open and analytical but it seems to reproduce more uncontrolled sonic outputs whereas the sounds coming from Pro 2X-S are more laided back, musical and mellow.
I realized that too much open-ness by E5 can be more fatiguing to my ears in the long run. Pro 2X-S seems less revealing that it is bit more forgiving to low bitrate MP3s. Hissing noise with soft/quiet music files and artifects on deficient MP3s are less apparent with Pro 2X-S.

- Clarity/brightness:
E5 is very clear and rather bright compared to Pro 2X-S but I feel certain sense of coldness and brutality. Pro 2X-S isn't as crystal clear as E5 but all the details and warmth are retained. E5 is very direct and masculine if Pro 2X-S is described to be more soft and femine. High/Mid are well-balanced and EXTREMELY accurate. Such a clarity and precision is only possible due its dedicated mid/high frequency tranducers. Remeber, these are 2-way system in a one small single package.

- Bass:
E5 definitely delivers more power and stimulation to your ear drum so the bass, too, is bit more thumping and punchy but the bass from Pro 2X-S is not to be neglected. I really like the fact that
this is definitely not a synthetic but pure natural bass and it goes real deep, I mean real deep. E5 and Pro 2X-S surely have their strength on being able to deliver the superb bass response with a dedicated low frequency tranducer, but I somehow favor bass from Pro 2X-S because it seems to bland in better with overall tone (very mellow).

- Surrounding/3D-ness/Soundstage:
I don't believe the Canal phones will ever have wider soundstage as full-sized headphone but it has different way of enlightening your cerebrum with sonic spectrum. The long time canal phone
users may realize that you are not just hearing the music but you breath with it. Music lives on inside your head and you are being consumed by it. With the dual the drivers electro-pumping, I hear
and feel different sonic wave from many different corners of my head. This is called a 3D sonic trip in your private world on the go.


In conclusion, Pro 2X-S is surely non-fatiguing, mellow-out musical earpiece which has all the right ingredients of being top notch audiophile headphone, but what really makes this great is that it's an extremely portable mod with a comfort level beyond your imagination. So does it justify its high price tag? I am not sure if I can answer that but it's a great pleasure to feel that I am able to bring along full blown hi-fi system wherever I go without people noticing it.
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 12:01 PM Post #2 of 23
Mdog, glad you like the phones.

But you brought up some points I wanted to point out about these phones.

-They're laid back
-They're more forgiving of bad recordings
-They're less analytical, yet the highs and mids are extrememely accurate
confused.gif

-They're not as crystal clear as other phones out there
-They have a deep, mellow bass

I don't know, 3D sonics and fit aside, I could probably come up with other choices that might fit this description that aren't $750.

But again, as long as you enjoy them.
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 2:09 PM Post #3 of 23
Quote:

it wouldn't make too much sense comparing it to other low-end, inferior canal phones like e2, e1, er-6p & er-4p


I value your opinion, but would like to know, particularly on the comment on the er-4p that it isn't worth comparing. Is it because it doesn't have two drivers? Or is the sound quality to you no where near as good as the Prophonic 2x-s?
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 2:22 PM Post #4 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by enak
I value your opinion, but would like to know, particularly on the comment on the er-4p that it isn't worth comparing. Is it because it doesn't have two drivers? Or is the sound quality to you no where near as good as the Prophonic 2x-s?


I would say because their price.
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 3:13 PM Post #5 of 23
I would hardly call the ER4P an "inferior low-end canal phone". You may not like them as much as the 2X-S but they are far from inferior.

I just felt the need to stand up and defend my babies.

Cheers!

MJ
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 3:28 PM Post #6 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by MusicJunkie
I just felt the need to stand up and defend my babies.


i know the feeling.

arghhhh MadDog, posts like those gives more revisions for fanancial analysts.

hope others could hear what you hear before i ditch my ety's.
confused.gif
etysmile.gif
blink.gif
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 4:14 PM Post #7 of 23
MadDog: Very good read. Great details.

As I've stated before, my Pro 2X-s are the closest thing to reference quality that I have ever heard. They are also the most comfortable earphone I've ever worn.
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 7:16 PM Post #8 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by MusicJunkie
I would hardly call the ER4P an "inferior low-end canal phone". You may not like them as much as the 2X-S but they are far from inferior.

I just felt the need to stand up and defend my babies.

Cheers!

MJ


Sorry, didn't mean to offend anyone. That was just my opinion and you may certainly have different one but sonically I didn't think er-4p is at the same level as pro 2x-s. Just imagine, listening musics on 2 speakers versus one, will there be a difference?
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 9:03 PM Post #9 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by MadDog
Sorry, didn't mean to offend anyone. That was just my opinion and you may certainly have different one but sonically I didn't think er-4p is at the same level as pro 2x-s. Just imagine, listening musics on 2 speakers versus one, will there be a difference?


Still, there's no reason to think a 2 driver headphone is better than a single driver, for that reason alone. Didn't someone post a link to a "surround headphone" with 5 different drivers? Would you expect that one to be better?
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 9:43 PM Post #10 of 23
I would prefer having two separate speakers, tweeter (treble) and woofer (bass) for my earspeaker system, rather than having one that does both, but this isn't the reason I said er-4p may lack the dynamics. Who knows, you may have a different view after having been exposed to others and chance to actually compare..
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 10:09 PM Post #11 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by williamgoody
-They're less analytical, yet the highs and mids are extrememely accurate
confused.gif


This is what makes this earpiece so enchanting..yes, it isn't excessively clear to
make it somewhat harsh and piercingly sharp but well maintains the clarity in quite
pleasent manner.

Quote:

I don't know, 3D sonics and fit aside, I could probably come up with other choices that might fit this description that aren't $750.


As for me..
5+ years (of ultimate portable audiophile privilege)
5+ years (of ultimate comfort)
5+ years (of no more of headphone hunting)
pretty much evens out with $750...
biggrin.gif
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 10:55 PM Post #12 of 23
guys, when he mentioned the "inferior" earphones he didn't mention er-4s. most here agree that while the er-4p is an excellent earphone, the er-4s is more accurate. so he's not completely dissing your ety's
wink.gif
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 11:14 PM Post #13 of 23
Quote:

Originally posted by loveheadphones
guys, when he mentioned the "inferior" earphones he didn't mention er-4s. most here agree that while the er-4p is an excellent earphone, the er-4s is more accurate. so he's not completely dissing your ety's
wink.gif


Oh, Im pretty sure he just forgot to mention them. According to his logic the er-4s would clearly be inferior because it only has one driver compared to the 2 of the Pro 2x-s.
rolleyes.gif
Many people consider the ER-4S to be one of the best closed cans in the world, and many consider it to be better than the Shure E5. Therefore, how can it not be in competition with your Pro 2x-s?
 
Jul 9, 2003 at 11:35 PM Post #15 of 23
At $750??? NO WAY! I could get AKG K 1000s for $150 less than that. Or some HD600s and CD3000s. Or countless other headphones that are much better values.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top