Quote:
UE600 (or the SuperFi 5 when I had them) are disappointing to me at its price point. Quit trying to compare them to the SE530/SE535 because they sound nothing alike and the SQ of the SE530/SE535 is on another level. FR graphs are very misleading.
What annoyed me most about this iem was it's pretty crappy detail for its price.
Can you expand on this? What exactly do you mean when you say UE600 has crappy detail? Compared to which IEMs in its price range? What details can't you hear with UE600 that you could with the others? I find detail to be very good on the UE600, especially in the midrange. I find them equally or more detailed than my RE262, RE272, DT880. Treble detail is behind the DT880 perhaps, but definitely comparable to the Hifiman IEMs to me. I do find them very similar to Shure SE530/535 overall. I didn't hear more detail from the Shures, nor did I hear anything else from the Shures that I could lable as a significant improvement over the UE600. If you think that perhaps my ears are not good enough to hear that level of detail, let's say that I also own the $699 Hifiman HE-500 Orthodynamics and I do hear details with them that I can't with any other headphone I tried, so I do detect extra detail when its there. SE530/535 is hardly any more detailed than the UE600 to me, period.
Also, did you read my original post carefully? I wrote clearly that I am impressed with the UE600 measurements, not FR graph. The measurements include, impulse response, isolation, square wave graphs among other things. What impresses me most is the 300 Hz square wave reproduction of this IEM, not the FR graph.
Quote:
Inks said it. However, you did agree with Inks and make that statement. However, your proof isn't a general case (in relation to the 600s only), it's a specific case. I want a universal cause... Meaning, a certain frequency shape = punchyness and no other shape can produce punchyness. Without this specific proof, the statement that frequency graphs say a lot about the headphones properties are nil.
Do I have to back up everything I hear with graphs? It just happened that UE600 graphs well and sounds great also to my ears. If we have to back up everything we hear with objective scientific evidence then most of what's written on head-fi is pretty much useless. What I was trying to do in case of UE600 was share my appreciation for its sound with the community here. Graphs were just used to show that the UE600 does measure quite well objectively too, not just sounds good subjectively.
But anyway, this is an appreciation thread for UE600. If you don't like the sound, why post in the appreciation thread in the first place? I don't understand this. If you want to argue about its sound, then you need to create a separate "UE600 criticism" thread or something. This thread is to share appreciation for the sound of the IEM, not to bash it.