[mochill]

bass on the vc02 for trance is great in my opinion, it does have a slight sub bass boost for them electronic genre so they are great at it and from my guess the ckn70 just might be asgood as the vc02.

 

[kahaluu]

Quote:

Yeah I might do mate.

I've been trying to sell some iems for a while now but not much has happened so far.

I'm also really interested in the new ATH CKN70, people seem to be proper loving them right now.

Just got my CKN70's today. IMO, the 70's are in another league in SQ compared to the VCO2's. Much more detailed throughout the spectrum. However, I still love the VC02 for casual listening, it's got the perfect level of bass, mids and highs for me.  

 

[Lifted Andreas]

Just got my CKN70's today. IMO, the 70's are in another league in SQ compared to the VCO2's. Much more detailed throughout the spectrum. However, I still love the VC02 for casual listening, it's got the perfect level of bass, mids and highs for me.  

Wow thanks for this!

I definitely will be getting the CKN70.

Everyone says that they sound special.

 

[DonRadlauer]

I'm looking at these as my next IEM and possibly my entry into the world of HiFi in ears. Coming from the monoprice 8320 what can I expect from these? And correct me if I'm wrong but these almost seem like they'd sound like a Sony mdr-v6? I've found the Sonys to be pretty close to my ideal frequency response, so I'm hoping they come along well

 

I've got 8320's and VC02's. Here are some thoughts about the differences:

1) The physical experience is quite different. The 8320's are shallow-insertion, large-bodied units, as you know. The VC02's are more or less the exact opposite: thin-bodied 'phones that go deep into your ear canal. Getting a good seal is a lot easier with the VC02's; but OTOH only you can decide if you like having something that deep in your ears.

2) Even with tape over the inner-side port, the 8320's aren't all that big on bass - adequate, but nothing special. The VC02's are slightly more bass-heavy, particularly if you're getting a less-than-perfect seal with your 8320's. That said, the VC02's are not even close to being "bass monsters": they're basically flat-response 'phones.

3) Particularly with the inner ports taped, the 8320's have a major response peak at around 5000 Hz. For some music, this is fine - I listen to a lot of acoustic jazz, and I kind of like what the 8320's do to saxophones and pianos. (OTOH they make Amy Winehouse sound entirely too "raw".) The VC02 lacks this peak, so they have a smoother sound than the 8320's; jazz sax still sounds fine, but with less of an edge than with the 8320's.

4) My impression is that the VC02 has less of a fall-off in the high treble; high-hat cymbals have noticeably more "zing" than they do with the 8320's. (Again, I notice this particularly with acoustic jazz, which has brushed high-hats going on most of the time.)

5) You'll get a lot more isolation with the VC02's - which, as always, is something of a double-edged sword. They're definitely my go-to 'phones for the bus or when flying; but the isolation is rather a problem when I'm sitting at my desk, as my phone can ring and I'm completely oblivious. (As opposed to with the 8320's, where I'm just mostly oblivious!)

6) The cable is much nicer on the VC02's - the cable on the 8320's, of course, is well-known to be horrible. OTOH, the VC02 has two physical flaws: First, the cable can come off the housing far too easily (I've almost lost one of the drivers twice so far!); and second, it can be very hard to tell the right side from the left side. (There's a little bump on the right-hand driver; but I've got very little feeling in my right-hand first finger, so the bump doesn't do much for me.)

My solution to the VC02 problems mentioned in (5) is (A) little pieces of duct-tape to hold the driver and the cable together; and (B) different-colored tips on the two sides. My right-side driver has a bright-red silicone tip, making it impossible to get things backwards.



Hope all that helped!

 

[thoughtcriminal]

I've got 8320's and VC02's. Here are some thoughts about the differences:

1) The physical experience is quite different. The 8320's are shallow-insertion, large-bodied units, as you know. The VC02's are more or less the exact opposite: thin-bodied 'phones that go deep into your ear canal. Getting a good seal is a lot easier with the VC02's; but OTOH only you can decide if you like having something that deep in your ears.

2) Even with tape over the inner-side port, the 8320's aren't all that big on bass - adequate, but nothing special. The VC02's are slightly more bass-heavy, particularly if you're getting a less-than-perfect seal with your 8320's. That said, the VC02's are not even close to being "bass monsters": they're basically flat-response 'phones.

3) Particularly with the inner ports taped, the 8320's have a major response peak at around 5000 Hz. For some music, this is fine - I listen to a lot of acoustic jazz, and I kind of like what the 8320's do to saxophones and pianos. (OTOH they make Amy Winehouse sound entirely too "raw".) The VC02 lacks this peak, so they have a smoother sound than the 8320's; jazz sax still sounds fine, but with less of an edge than with the 8320's.

4) My impression is that the VC02 has less of a fall-off in the high treble; high-hat cymbals have noticeably more "zing" than they do with the 8320's. (Again, I notice this particularly with acoustic jazz, which has brushed high-hats going on most of the time.)

5) You'll get a lot more isolation with the VC02's - which, as always, is something of a double-edged sword. They're definitely my go-to 'phones for the bus or when flying; but the isolation is rather a problem when I'm sitting at my desk, as my phone can ring and I'm completely oblivious. (As opposed to with the 8320's, where I'm just mostly oblivious!)

6) The cable is much nicer on the VC02's - the cable on the 8320's, of course, is well-known to be horrible. OTOH, the VC02 has two physical flaws: First, the cable can come off the housing far too easily (I've almost lost one of the drivers twice so far!); and second, it can be very hard to tell the right side from the left side. (There's a little bump on the right-hand driver; but I've got very little feeling in my right-hand first finger, so the bump doesn't do much for me.)

My solution to the VC02 problems mentioned in (5) is (A) little pieces of duct-tape to hold the driver and the cable together; and (B) different-colored tips on the two sides. My right-side driver has a bright-red silicone tip, making it impossible to get things backwards.


Hope all that helped!

Thanks!

 

[papijoe08]

Sorry wallet hello ckn70

 

[papijoe08]

Quote:

 

I've got 8320's and VC02's. Here are some thoughts about the differences:

1) The physical experience is quite different. The 8320's are shallow-insertion, large-bodied units, as you know. The VC02's are more or less the exact opposite: thin-bodied 'phones that go deep into your ear canal. Getting a good seal is a lot easier with the VC02's; but OTOH only you can decide if you like having something that deep in your ears.

2) Even with tape over the inner-side port, the 8320's aren't all that big on bass - adequate, but nothing special. The VC02's are slightly more bass-heavy, particularly if you're getting a less-than-perfect seal with your 8320's. That said, the VC02's are not even close to being "bass monsters": they're basically flat-response 'phones.

3) Particularly with the inner ports taped, the 8320's have a major response peak at around 5000 Hz. For some music, this is fine - I listen to a lot of acoustic jazz, and I kind of like what the 8320's do to saxophones and pianos. (OTOH they make Amy Winehouse sound entirely too "raw".) The VC02 lacks this peak, so they have a smoother sound than the 8320's; jazz sax still sounds fine, but with less of an edge than with the 8320's.

4) My impression is that the VC02 has less of a fall-off in the high treble; high-hat cymbals have noticeably more "zing" than they do with the 8320's. (Again, I notice this particularly with acoustic jazz, which has brushed high-hats going on most of the time.)

5) You'll get a lot more isolation with the VC02's - which, as always, is something of a double-edged sword. They're definitely my go-to 'phones for the bus or when flying; but the isolation is rather a problem when I'm sitting at my desk, as my phone can ring and I'm completely oblivious. (As opposed to with the 8320's, where I'm just mostly oblivious!)

6) The cable is much nicer on the VC02's - the cable on the 8320's, of course, is well-known to be horrible. OTOH, the VC02 has two physical flaws: First, the cable can come off the housing far too easily (I've almost lost one of the drivers twice so far!); and second, it can be very hard to tell the right side from the left side. (There's a little bump on the right-hand driver; but I've got very little feeling in my right-hand first finger, so the bump doesn't do much for me.)

My solution to the VC02 problems mentioned in (5) is (A) little pieces of duct-tape to hold the driver and the cable together; and (B) different-colored tips on the two sides. My right-side driver has a bright-red silicone tip, making it impossible to get things backwards.

 

Hope all that helped!

No need for duct tapes on my vc02's it has a lock by twitching the driver to the cable a little sideways.

 

[kahaluu]

Quote:

Sorry wallet hello ckn70

Nice, you'll love them.

 

[PMAP]

I feel really stupid but I gotta ask. What's the right way to connect VC02 earphones to the cable? The connector is up/down symmetrical and I realized that when I turn the earphone(s) upside down, the sound changes - it seems the phase is reversed.
 
I like the sound when the VC02 sign faces backwards (when in my ears), or forwards when upside down.
 
If it's reversed (sign faces forwards, or backwards upside down), the sound is really really weird.
 
So is the phase reversed when the earphone is turned around?

 

[papijoe08]

Quote:

I feel really stupid but I gotta ask. What's the right way to connect VC02 earphones to the cable? The connector is up/down symmetrical and I realized that when I turn the earphone(s) upside down, the sound changes - it seems the phase is reversed.
 
I like the sound when the VC02 sign faces backwards (when in my ears), or forwards when upside down.
 
If it's reversed (sign faces forwards, or backwards upside down), the sound is really really weird.
 
So is the phase reversed when the earphone is turned around?

There are two ways one turn the logo of vc02 upside down, the other one is do the opposite. To the ears of most people here when the logo is turned upside down it sounded smoother and better than the normal way.

 

[pro1137]

Anyone know if Shure Soft Flex, Shure Orangw Foam tips, and/or Shure single/bi-flange tips will fit the VC-02?

 

[kova4a]

Quote:

Anyone know if Shure Soft Flex, Shure Orangw Foam tips, and/or Shure single/bi-flange tips will fit the VC-02?

Yeah, shure tips should fit. I tried the shure olives - didn't like the sound with them but they fit fine.

 

[PMAP]

Quote:

There are two ways one turn the logo of vc02 upside down, the other one is do the opposite. To the ears of most people here when the logo is turned upside down it sounded smoother and better than the normal way.

 

In fact there are 4 ways to put the earphones on the cable, since both earphones (sides) are technically identical but the logo goes always form left to right, so basically you can can switch the shells around (while the L/R sides remain correct on the cable) and have:
 
a)
- logo facing forward
- logo facing backward, upside down
b) earphones switched around, L/R remains
- logo facing backward
- logo facing forward, upside down
 
So, when you're referring to logo upside down, do you mean facing forward or backwards? Is this discussion here in this thread or somewhere else? Thanks a lot - I can't really read 34 pages of forum right now...

 

[pro1137]

Hey guys. I just posted my review of the VC02. You can read it Here.

I'll probably be doing some revisions to it in the future, but I like how it turned out.

 

[Ivabign]

I bought these back in December and when I demo'd them, one of the channels was intermittent and it took a great deal of time before I got a replacement pair - in the meantime I bought a number of different IEM's so I really didn't add the VC02's to my round-robin carousel of headphones. I burned them in for 20 hours or so, but never listened to them - I bought some Monoprice 8320's in black and some others - It wasn't until a couple of days ago- after I read Joker's review, that I remembered I owned them and so I gave them some time....
 
WOW - they are really, really good. I was expecting bass on the level (perhaps less) than the monoprice - but no - I am able to get a great deep-insertion seal with these and when I play some of my nicer recorded lossless files, I was blown away - the level of detail and the solid punch of the bass notes caught me off guard. These are just wonderful IEM's. I have always liked the fun, V shaped sound that I get with phones like my IE8's or TF10's - but most of the "neutral" phones I have listened to have left me wanting something more - not so with these. 
 
I really, really am happy with these and will definitely make sure they get the recommended 100 hours burn now. The bass response is great. I used to do mobile audio - and when I did high end systems for customers, they would always drift to the larger woofers - with ported enclosures. Myself, I would set up my systems with sealed boxes and multiple smaller, 8 or 10" drivers. They were always faster and punchier. They also required more power. These remind me of that sound - tight, not sloppy.
 
Very nice - I'm glad I have these. Now I'm going to have to find the same sort of sound in a higher end IEM - now that I know that this sound exists - it has to be available at another level.
 
Cheers.