Which IEM should I buy?
Nov 25, 2009 at 10:23 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 8

Oranav

New Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Posts
8
Likes
10
Hey.
I'm looking for buying an IEM in Black Friday
smily_headphones1.gif

I live in Israel, so the prices may seem expensive for you, but it's kinda normal here. The IEMs that fit my budget are:
- Audio Technica ATH-CK300M (~20$, normal price - 40$)
- AKG K321 (~25$, normal price - 50$)
- JBL Reference 220 (~35$, normal price - 60$)

Which one should I get?

BTW, if it matters, I listen mostly to rock / metal.

Thanks!
 
Nov 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM Post #3 of 8
I have the JBL 220 and it's actually quite decent. I'd say it's worth it for $35 seeing as how that's what I paid for mine 2 years ago. I've since moved to the Shure SE530's so the 220's aren't in use anymore and I also had some problems getting mine to seal properly. But your experience may vary. The 220 isn't a bad iem at all.
 
Nov 26, 2009 at 5:02 PM Post #4 of 8
Quote:

Originally Posted by wantmyf1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I have the JBL 220 and it's actually quite decent. I'd say it's worth it for $35 seeing as how that's what I paid for mine 2 years ago. I've since moved to the Shure SE530's so the 220's aren't in use anymore and I also had some problems getting mine to seal properly. But your experience may vary. The 220 isn't a bad iem at all.


Thanks. How is the JBL 220 comparing to Sennheiser CX300-II?
My brother has a CX300-II and I liked it. Unfortunately the CX300-II isn't being sold in a discount, so it's around 45$ here.
 
Nov 26, 2009 at 8:31 PM Post #5 of 8
You're in luck as I also had the CX300II. I just sent them off gratis to a fellow head-fi'er who had his die. I wasn't using mine so I sent them off.

First (very) noticeable difference is that the 300 has much more bass than the 220. the 220 isn't bass light with the right seal, but the 300 is a bass monster so if that's what you liked about the 300 then at least try before you buy if that's possible. The 220 seems to be a bit of a chameleon though with some reporting them as bass heavy and some as bass light.

The 220 is much better balanced and natural sounding than the 300. With the 300 all I pretty much heard was bass & treble with no mid to speak of. With the 220 bass, mid & treble are about equally represented. Not of the best quality, but one doesn't really overwhelm the other.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top