[_Toki_]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John E Woven /img/forum/go_quote.gif ha ha ha ha ha

Please don't smoke these weeds anymore man

 

[digivate]

Okay _Toki_

Here's where I agree with you to an extent ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Toki_ /img/forum/go_quote.gif they're tiny - no arguments there excellent comfort - though not as comfortabe as UM2 or SE530 by general consenscous no hiss on most players - totally agree - absolutely no hiss - that was the one and only thing that did really impress me about them

... and where I tend to disagree ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Toki_ /img/forum/go_quote.gif flat freq. response - I thought they were overly focused on the high end very well-made - maybe, as long as you don't get a pair with dodgy filters sound is rich and warm - as I've said, I found them a bit synthetic - my main gripe aboout them before they became distorted was the lack of warmth any genre sounds equially good - I thought they were okay with pop, funk, rock ... but no good for classical and finally - they sound like I want them to be. and they sound like what I hear in live music - once again, I thought they sounded synthetic - my live recordings just didn't sound true

There's a few other points you make where I don't really have an opinion one way or the other.

We've both got our favourite IEMs ... but I think they'll be a few other people who take exception to your descriptions of their preferred earphones (I've got a feeling they'll be some digruntled ER4-P owners out there in particular).

Each to there own though

 

[pdupiano]

I'm not exactly shure why you'd say the shures don't produce accurate sounds, when I think the frequency response sounds very realistic. If you think that the q-jays are realistic because they have a flat response... well then I know for a fact that you are wrong to call them more natural than the shures. Read up on some articles regarding human hearing and frequency response, some of these were released in the 80's and Stereophile recently released an article about psychoacuoustics and designing headphones (its about full sized headphones not IEMS, but its along the same lines).

To claim that the Ety4s are old and outdated is just... wow... I really don't even know how to respond to that. I'd grab the Etys any day if I were to do analytical listening over the Q-jays.

Once again you have strong opinions that's fine and refreshing -but factual mistakes are something that we cannot tolerate even in a heavily opinionated piece.

To be perfectly honest, I never thought I'd come across a fanboy in these forums but I guess it was bound to happen.

 

[knights]

i have no experience with jays... but you include its aesthetic part as one of the best... how about putting it next to philips she-9850? lol.... enjoy your gears

 

[jonathanjong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Toki_ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please note (again) that all my knocking of other brands is comparative and not absolute, and it is all my own opinion. I hear it this way. If you are not agree with it - then you've got it wrong.

This is where confusion kicks in again... What's the "it" in the last sentence? Your impressions/opinions? We're wrong if we disagree with your evaluation of 1-jays? Or is it your claim that your review is purely subjective, and that we'd be wrong to interpret it otherwise?

Don't get me wrong, I do symphatize for English-as-a-second (or third, etc.)-language speakers, being proudly Asian-Fi myself. However, potentially controversial claims should be worded as precisely and carefully as possible. And if it's not possible to say something precisely and carefully, perhaps it should not be said. Perhaps.

 

[monolith]

I'm glad to see you liked your Q-Jays.

I own Q-Jays, UM2s and ER-4Ps. The UM2s get the most ear-time by a *large* margin.

Maybe if I was sitting in one place (a quiet place) and not moving, the Q-Jays would get more use, but for practically walking around, the design of the UM2s is substantially better I find.

Sonically, the Q-Jays are great, but the terrible silicone tips, terrible cable design and terrible microphonics keep me from using them, and I'm strongly considering selling them. I originally got them because of everyone's claims that they sounded like more bass heavy ER-4Ps, and considering the sonic glory that the ER-4Ps represent, I thought it would be a quick shoe-in for my new favourite IEM. It's all lost in the design flaws though. That and the non-standard tip sizes.

Now that it's winter, I can put my iPod in the inside pocket of my jacket, allowing me to use the Q-Jays without either of the extensions. I'll try to use them that way, but if I can't get them to isolate (which they don't do at all, for me, regardless of what tip I use), they're no use to me. In the summer, the huge length of the extension cables makes them wholly impractical for use while moving around. Compared to the much more flexible, perfectly lengthed, microphonic-free cable of the UM2, the choice is clear.

 

[ljcii]

RE-1s muddy? How so?

 

[_Toki_]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I start thinking that my topic is not welcome here.

When I was choosing which earphones to buy, I've read numerous posts here. And that's what I thought the best universal fit iems are -
TF10, Shure 530, Westone UM2 (these 3 models should put me straight to nirvana I thought), then goes Klipsch Image, RE1 amped, SA6, q-Jays etc. So, for example, if I had a 1500usd for buying earphones, I wouldn't have even tried q-jays. And that would be very wrong for me. So I decided to express my thoughts about those models I was lucky to hear to make some people who are going to make a choise that they should never rely only on the opinions of the majority here. And also that expensive earphones are not automatically better that twice cheaper ones (it wasn't obvious for me some time ago)


Quote:

Originally Posted by digivate /img/forum/go_quote.gif Okay _Toki_ ... and where I tend to disagree ...

Hmm... I believe that most of the disagreements could be linked to the problem with your particular unit. Harshness on highs can also be caused by smaller silicone tips. Right now I am listening to Apocalyptica - and start thinking that they have plenty of good punchy bass, and I am not lacking anything in it in classical recordings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not exactly shure why you'd say the shures don't produce accurate sounds, when I think the frequency response sounds very realistic.

Because that is what I hear. I cannot hear by your ears, you cannot know how my ears hear.
I tried to listen to some classical music piece with very high level of dynamic range, for example. When the music was calm, it was ok, but when the loud part kicked it - it was almost painful for my ears. The sound become suddenly too sharp and piercing on highs. It didn't happen when I heared jays or SA6... neither did it when I have heared a live performance of this piece in philarmony some months ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you think that the q-jays are realistic because they have a flat response... well then I know for a fact that you are wrong to call them more natural than the shures.

No, I do not link these things directly. As I say, it is an observation, not a conclusion from analysis of their characteristics or schematics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif Read up on some articles regarding human hearing and frequency response, some of these were released in the 80's and Stereophile recently released an article about psychoacuoustics and designing headphones (its about full sized headphones not IEMS, but its along the same lines).

Why do you assume that I have not read these articles? Do these articles mention jays vs shure comparison somewhere? And if yes, should I trust my ears no longer, and switch to reading instead of listening?
And - most importantly - have you made this listening test - shure vs jays - for yourself?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif Once again you have strong opinions that's fine and refreshing -but factual mistakes are something that we cannot tolerate even in a heavily opinionated piece.

Please explain what factual mistakes I did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif To be perfectly honest, I never thought I'd come across a fanboy in these forums but I guess it was bound to happen.

To be perfectly honest, I was hoping noone will call me "fanboy". Do you wish to be called "fanboy of shures" yourself?

Quote:

Originally Posted by knights /img/forum/go_quote.gif i have no experience with jays... but you include its aesthetic part as one of the best... how about putting it next to philips she-9850? lol.... enjoy your gears

i have no experience with that model you mention. If it was a joke or sarcasm I didnt get it, sorry. if you completely leave out aesthetic part in my comparison main conclusions will remain the same

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathanjong /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is where confusion kicks in again... What's the "it" in the last sentence? Your impressions/opinions? We're wrong if we disagree with your evaluation of 1-jays? Or is it your claim that your review is purely subjective, and that we'd be wrong to interpret it otherwise?

I was hoping it was clear from context, and my following messages. I say several times that the comparison and all impressions are only my opinion, other people's opinions could be (and perhaps should be) different to a various extent. And that all I say is very subjective, and should be taken as this. Of course I didn't mean that everyone should start loving q-jays better that other models as much as I do.


Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathanjong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't get me wrong, I do symphatize for English-as-a-second (or third, etc.)-language speakers, being proudly Asian-Fi myself. However, potentially controversial claims should be worded as precisely and carefully as possible. And if it's not possible to say something precisely and carefully, perhaps it should not be said. Perhaps.

Perhaps you are right. Perhaps.
I still hope that it is better to clarify ambiguous points via discussion than suggest someone who doesn't speak foreign language to cut their talk...

Quote:

Originally Posted by monolith /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sonically, the Q-Jays are great, but the terrible silicone tips, terrible cable design and terrible microphonics keep me from using them, and I'm strongly considering selling them.

Please explain why you find silicone tips to be terrible.They are just fine for me. Have you tried all the sizes? I'm sure when you find the right tips (maybe foam, comply's, etc) the problems with isolation and microphonics will be much less severe.

 

[_Toki_]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljcii /img/forum/go_quote.gif RE-1s muddy? How so?

Sorry if I again used wrong word... They were not clear enough for me. I have heared a bit less details in them, and couldn't reconstruct the picture of soundstage in my head when I listened to them. When listened to jays, I could tell where different instruments are placed, and with RE1 it was confusing. They are not much worse than q-jays by instrument separation and width of soundstage, but their music presentation is a bit... well... maybe artificial for me. With jays it was more plain and clear.

 

[ClieOS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Toki_ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I start thinking that my topic is not welcome here.

Let just say your preference maybe a bit out of the convention, than again, we Head-fi'er seldom agree about each others' opinion completely, so don't take it too hard

I like my q-JAYS. Though I won't call it the best I heard/owned, it certainly holds its own ground. The main point is you find the headphone that fits you best and that's all that matter. So congrats and enjoy... till upgraditus hits again, that is.

 

[pdupiano]

Reasons why you sound like a fanboy:

1. "I have pointed out quite a few weaknesses simply because they are really few. "

2. "yeah, they have few weak points, but all other their sides are especially strong - even compared to the "leaders"! " -- dismissing the weaknesses and still stating they're on top

3. "any volume sounds equially good (low volume sounds great in silent environment)," --You're just reaching at this point.

4. "Extension cord is a bit too long and degrades sound quality a bit (although it smoothes and adds warmth, so some people may found it more pleasing with extension than without it)." -- an imperfection turned into a plus


5. "FutureSonic Atrio. They cost the same as q-jays, and have really
nice sound, but they give nothing in terms of details and soundstage. I
do believe that over-150$ IEMS should be quite analytical. Again - 100$
would be fair price for them. If we leave the price aside, I cannot say
that jays are much better... they are just different. But for me it's
not a question which ones to keep. Fit and look are much better in jays." --a comparable set of headphones, yet you undervalue them rather than simply state that they are clear rivals.

-You have countless headfiers complaining about the fit of the Triple.Fi's some even going so far as stating that they wish they could get the Triple.Fi sound from a UM2 housing -but I don't think I've ever heard anyone state, "well because of the fit of the Triple.Fi's they should be 50 bucks less than the UM2's."


========================
Originally Posted by pdupiano View Post
'If you think that the q-jays are realistic because they have a flat response... well then I know for a fact that you are wrong to call them more natural than the shures.'

"No, I do not link these things directly. As I say, it is an observation, not a conclusion from analysis of their characteristics or schematics.'

"and finally - they sound like I want them to be. and they sound like what I hear in live music."

-I think I can conclude from the previous quote that you do believe them to be more natural because of their frequency response -the flat response (and if you have read those articles, you should know that's not natural).

"Why do you assume that I have not read these articles? Do these articles mention jays vs shure comparison somewhere? And if yes, should I trust my ears no longer, and switch to reading instead of listening?
And - most importantly - have you made this listening test - shure vs jays - for yourself?"

-Trust you're ears.... OFCOURSE, I would never ask you to blindly trust the word of heavily researched subject by scientists. But don't make proclamations that are statements of fact. It doesnt matter, not one bit, that you state all of your claims are matters of opinion if you treat them as matters of fact. For example, since you seem to associate me with a shure fanboy, if I state 'in my opinion shures are the bestest most realistic sounding headphones in the world.' Then I state later on, that "the Triple.Fi's are not realistic because they do not sound like the Shures." Then I would have just used my opinion as a matter of fact. you did that several times in each post, that's where factual errors get a little blurry.

If you are posting true and honest opinions (which I think you believe in very firmly) then you cannot draw statements stating that "this is better than that." you are limited to stating, the q-jays have a bigger soundstage than the UM2's etcc... In your first post, you are very quick to state that rival IEM's have bad qualities such as bass etcc.. because they do not sound like the q-jays. At this point you are no longer stating your opinions you are now making "factual" statements. You said it your self, your ears your sound -so I don't get how, in any way shape or form -- in even the minutest possible sense, in even a very very small possible way you have the ability to sit and state on one hand "These are my opinions and what I hear is what I hear" yet on the other you state "These are the negatives of other IEMS and if you use them you will notice these negatives aswell." At this point its not a matter of changing your title, its you're approach to your posts and the way you use your opinions as facts.

I still think you have a fanboy mentality about the q-jays, you can take it to be a negative comment if you'd like, but I take that to simply mean that its impossible to argue with you. And others here including myself should just stop. well I guess I'll stop

 

[TacticalPenguin]

There's something up if you're not noticing the ER 4's for their crystally highs, they're not harsh just analytical and precise. If you are looking for straightup detail, the 4P's likely have the Q-jays whipped, and the 4S's with an amp have them whipped without a doubt.

 

[_Toki_]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let just say your preference maybe a bit out of the convention, than again, we Head-fi'er seldom agree about each others' opinion completely, so don't take it too hard

Yes, you are right - my preference is a bit unconventional, and I thought THIS is what makes my thread possibly interesting for community. Unfortunately some people seem to have thought that I am telling them to start listen to q-jays and throw out all other earphones that they love

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like my q-JAYS. Though I won't call it the best I heard/owned, it certainly holds its own ground. The main point is you find the headphone that fits you best and that's all that matter. So congrats and enjoy... till upgraditus hits again, that is.

Thank you for kind words! Indeed I am very happy to find my best earphones, and I hope that upgraditus desire will delay its visit to me

 

[Rednamalas1]

Interesting stuff. But I absolutely disagree with ER 4S/P though. Dead and lifeless they may be, they are amazingly neutral. I'm not sure what type of music you were testing those with, but they do accurate presentation for classical where neutrality and speed is key. And their treble is not peaky last time I've tried. They were unfortunately pretty boring to my ears, but that's a different subject

last time I tried those Q-jays, they were pretty decent, but nothing spectacular.

I highly recommend you try UE TF10s. If you can achieve a good fit (big IF btw, I had a perfect fit though) They're fine balance of being accurate while being exciting. Great bass response, combined with spectacular highs.

However, none of IEMs I've tried seemed to satisfy me 100% so far, so I've moved back to AT lineup - ESW10JPN. since isolation was not a priority for me, I don't regret getting rid of those wonderful TF10s.

 

[synaesthetic]

After a very long and expensive journey of IEMs, from the ER-4P to the Klipsch Image x10 to the Shure SE420 to the Super.fi 5 LS to the Triple.fi 10...

(never did try customs...)

... I'm downgrading back to the ER-6i with Shure black foams. It's good enough, and for portable listening that's all that I care about.

Additionally if I lose them or destroy them, it's not so difficult to buy a replacement pair.