[roy_jones]

Quote:

Quit lying? That's exactly what I see in the frequency chart posted by 1964 ears so how the hell am I lying? I can understand that you have an undying love for the 1964-Q so your opinion is understandable but to call me a liar off of what I see from a chart posted from their own company is a bit much.  I think it's great that you love your product but there's no need to get defensive and resort to calling me names.  Also just so you know, I was very interested in the 1964-Q's but after seeing the frequency chart and hearing impressions on the smooth highs I'm moving onto something else. 
 
Actually I'll just go out and say that I'm not satisfied with the highs on my ie8's which are supposedly less recessed than the 1964-Q's based off the frequency charts on headroom.  Is the next post gonna be from someone so emotionally attached to his sennheiser ie8's that he's gonna call me a liar too?  Like I said, I understand your love for your iem's but seriously man you need to calm down with that stuff.  Keep in mind I do realize frequency charts aren't everything so I made sure to confirm opinions with people who own it and that have heard similar headphones and share the same musical taste.
 
Anyways besides ericp's unnecessary name calling I hope this thread can get back on track.  I'm definitely looking forward to reading everyone's honest impressions.

 
 
I don't know if you were around when that Voltage/Sonic guy was still posting, but you've got to understand that there are posters here that are really proud of their purchases and derive a lot of their self-esteem from consumer products.  You've simply got to accept that, for some members, their favorite IEM is kind of like a favorite sports team and a projection of their own ego.  There's nothing wrong with that, and guys like ericp shouldn't be criticized for being so sensitive once you realize how important this is for them...
 
 

 

[ericp10]

The charts I've seen show that the highs are extended, but I don't go by charts, I go by what I hear. And I do enjoy the Quads (love them actually), but that doesn't mean I can't be objective about them (as objective as someone can be who enjoys a sound signature). There is no point of saying something is one way and it isn't just because I like it. What would be the point of it? More people than not have said the opposite than you- of the ones I have read who actaully own the Quads too. I haven't really seen to the contrary, and you haven't seen me push for anyone to buy Quads, so again your point about me loving is baseless. I know average-joe wrote there were roll-off in the bass and treble of the quads, and I corrected him because it wasn't true. He later came back and apologized and corrected himself (he mixed the Triple with the Quad he said). Anyway, we are off topic. Why even mention the Quad here unless you're comparing them because you have heard them? We are all here because we're interested in the Merlin, but I just wasn't going to let something that's untrue stand. I have no issue with you not being interested in the Quad, that's fine as far a I'm concerned. I just took issue with making a statement about it that's untrue, especially if you haven't heard it (and again, it's not what the majority of Quad owners say about it). Okay, wanted to respond. My apologies for getting off-topic again. Project86 has really piqued my interest in the Merlin...
 
Quote:

Quit lying? That's exactly what I see in the frequency chart posted by 1964 ears so how the hell am I lying? I can understand that you have an undying love for the 1964-Q so your opinion is understandable but to call me a liar off of what I see from a chart posted from their own company is a bit much.  I think it's great that you love your product but there's no need to get defensive and resort to calling me names.  Also just so you know, I was very interested in the 1964-Q's but after seeing the frequency chart and hearing impressions on the smooth highs I'm moving onto something else. 
 
Actually I'll just go out and say that I'm not satisfied with the highs on my ie8's which are supposedly less recessed than the 1964-Q's based off the frequency charts on headroom.  Is the next post gonna be from someone so emotionally attached to his sennheiser ie8's that he's gonna call me a liar too?  Like I said, I understand your love for your iem's but seriously man you need to calm down with that stuff.  Keep in mind I do realize frequency charts aren't everything so I made sure to confirm opinions with people who own it and that have heard similar headphones and share the same musical taste.
 
Anyways besides ericp's unnecessary name calling I hope this thread can get back on track.  I'm definitely looking forward to reading everyone's honest impressions.

 

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

 
 
I don't know if you were around when that Voltage/Sonic guy was still posting, but you've got to understand that there are posters here that are really proud of their purchases and derive a lot of their self-esteem from consumer products.  You've simply got to accept that, for some members, their favorite IEM is kind of like a favorite sports team and a projection of their own ego.  There's nothing wrong with that, and guys like ericp shouldn't be criticized for being so sensitive once you realize how important this is for them...
 
 

Now that is funny @ roy_jones...lol. Thanks for the comedy...

Back on topic please...
 

 

[Poetik]

Alright, for the sake of staying on topic I will change my opinion on the highs of the1964-Q's to "smoothed out" to quell the wrath of ericp10.  Just like Roy_jones said, I know people tend to get a little too emotionally attached to the headphones they own which can unfortunately lead to irrational name calling on a internet headphone forum.  I am a victim of said irrational name calling on a internet headphone forum but luckily I have tough e-skin so I can take it. 
 
I guess the lesson learned here is that we all should be wary to mention the 1964-Q in any other thread besides the 1964 appreciation thread unless it involves the 1964-Q blowing that other IEM out of the water.  Also be sure to never speak your opinion based off of a frequency chart regarding a -6db drop starting at 3.5khz as "recessed highs" because you will be called a liar.  You will also be told your opinion is wrong because you don't own it even though you're just making an observation based off a frequency chart that was published by the company. 
 
I also do remember sonic as he was the first and only person I've ever blocked on any internet forum.
 
With that said and all joking aside, now can finally get back on topic. 

 

[ericp10]

Poetik my apologies since the word "lying" offended you. And I can concede that was perhaps too strong of a word. I still believe, however, that you're mistaken in describing the highs' signature in said IEM. Now I apologized, so can we please move back on topic? Thank you sir. 

 

[Saintkeat]

wow i missed out on an interesting fight lol..
 
Quads didn't really have recessed highs, they sounded alright but definitely NO "sparkle" in lieu of a better word.
 
but overall quads are undeniably not my cup of tea. =/ I had high hopes, but how do you make benny benassi boring? and almost every other track to be honest.

 

[Inks]

Right on, nothing wrong with going by the frequency chart of the Quads considering they're customs and simply testing them out to heard it for yourself is not a option. I think your reasoning is quite sound and I wouldn't let anyone change that. Even customs are going to have their flaws and picking out exactly what you want is essential to take a plunge for such an expensive/binding item. As roy_Jones states/implies, don't let it get to you, customs buyers have a more emotional attachment (though I honestly still wouldn't use that as a justification). This seems OT but it's not, same logic applies to the Merlin though the company is actually taking action to get their product out there for users to dismiss or embrace. These are going to have lot's of impressions if things go well for UM. 

_

Alright, for the sake of staying on topic I will change my opinion on the highs of the1964-Q's to "smoothed out" to quell the wrath of ericp10.  Just like Roy_jones said, I know people tend to get a little too emotionally attached to the headphones they own which can unfortunately lead to irrational name calling on a internet headphone forum.  I am a victim of said irrational name calling on a internet headphone forum but luckily I have tough e-skin so I can take it. 
 
I guess the lesson learned here is that we all should be wary to mention the 1964-Q in any other thread besides the 1964 appreciation thread unless it involves the 1964-Q blowing that other IEM out of the water.  Also be sure to never speak your opinion based off of a frequency chart regarding a -6db drop starting at 3.5khz as "recessed highs" because you will be called a liar.  You will also be told your opinion is wrong because you don't own it even though you're just making an observation based off a frequency chart that was published by the company. 
 
I also do remember sonic as he was the first and only person I've ever blocked on any internet forum.
 
With that said and all joking aside, now can finally get back on topic. 

 

 

[roy_jones]

Quote:

wow i missed out on an interesting fight lol..
 
Quads didn't really have recessed highs, they sounded alright but definitely NO "sparkle" in lieu of a better word.
 
but overall quads are undeniably not my cup of tea. =/ I had high hopes, but how do you make benny benassi boring? and almost every other track to be honest.

A lot of people enjoy significantly rolled-off treble; there's nothing wrong with having a preferred sound signature. 
 
Some very expensive Wadia players have a deliberate dip in the treble range.  Even the HiFiMan players that are so praised here have a 1964 quad-like recessed treble presentation...tons of people still love them.     
 
 

 

[ericp10]

I apologized and some of you still choose to be instigators. SMH.  There was no fight, just a difference of opinion. Anyway, what is the latest on the Merlin? Still no one has heard the final product?

 

[kingice10]

Yesterday I was talking to a dealer here in SG and they were going to have demos next week by the latest...I just cannot wait to compare them with the UM Miracle Demo they have.

 

[Yikuso]

Well, guess no one is going to get their Merlins this week since the first week of May is a Chinese golden week. UM Lab is having a week off too, imo.

 

[Saintkeat]

roy, I was merely stating what I heard. and as i've stated before, my problem with the quads is the presentation and perhaps this is their house sound. nothing melodious about them, just straight out mechanical. benny benassi isn't a song i test for highs by the way. its the song i use to test for bass.
 
whatever, clearly a lot of sore spots when people talk about their 500 dollar customs rofl.
 
hey kingice stereo going to carry the merlins next week? sound great!!!!! got a date?

 

[qusp]

should I go back to my off topic frequency response/impedance explanations? 

 
 

 

[roy_jones]

Quote:

roy, I was merely stating what I heard. and as i've stated before, my problem with the quads is the presentation and perhaps this is their house sound. nothing melodious about them, just straight out mechanical. benny benassi isn't a song i test for highs by the way. its the song i use to test for bass.
 
whatever, clearly a lot of sore spots when people talk about their 500 dollar customs rofl.
 
hey kingice stereo going to carry the merlins next week? sound great!!!!! got a date?

 
No worries, but how would you feel if you were to find out that your comments had actually reduced a head-fier to tears?  I'm not going to say who, but I have it on good authority that some of these negative comments have caused this head-fier serious emotional distress to the point of tears.  As a result, I feel there should be new rules against any type of product-bullying.  
 
 
 

 

[roy_jones]

Quote:

should I go back to my off topic frequency response/impedance explanations? 

 
 

 
It's a very worthy topic, and directly relevant to the discussion about the Merlin.  I think it might be the most under-appreciated performance issue in the entire discussion of multi-BA driver IEM's on head-fi. 
 
I might try to dig up some posts on anythingbutipod that talk directly about the importance of impedance matching...