[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GosuEric /img/forum/go_quote.gif Kinda surprised to see a lack of mentions of the X10s. For whatever reason though, I don't see them as a top-tier IEM, but that might be because I own them, or because they were so deliciously cheap (for the quality) when I got them.

Yeah, I'm kind of surprised as well. Once retail prices dip below $200 it seems the IEM isn't really "high end" anymore as cost is inexplicably associated with the class and perceptions of a given IEM (reference the classic wine test, where a sample of consumers find more pleasure in wine if they are simply told that it costs more, even when it doesn't). Months ago the X10 was mentioned in the same breath as other top-tiers of the time.. now suddenly it's not in the same league. Curiously, it's not even a "giant killer."

 

[ilney]

Months ago? How many months?

.........and they only have 1 armature.

 

[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilney /img/forum/go_quote.gif Months ago? How many months? .........and they only have 1 armature.

Before the price cuts, incidentally. I was going to purchase them before I sprung on the IE8, and as I searched and researched them, I noticed a distinct shift in how people perceived them when the price plummeted.

I don't know what armatures have to do with anything. But on that note, now they seem to be regarded on the same echelon as the venerable Etymotic ER4 series, though the two are exact opposites in sound signature.

 

[shrisha]

You know guys, I'm really not getting it. Why there is no objective opinion of headphones? Headphones, IEMs, earbuds are just consumer products, and what we need is just quality. What I'm really looking for is just to hear what artists, musicians, and sound engineers want me to hear. Cello is cello, violin is violin. And if it's Stradivari violin I want to hear it, not this signature sound, or that signature sound, of this IEMs, that earbuds. Manufacturers produce products which are suppose to deliver original unaltered sound to our ears and according to our wallet we choose the level of that delivery/quality. Of course everybody tries to get the best value, and main point is sometimes these products are not good or even suck. And that's why we here, trying to find out and get the best for our budget. Especially for me, it’s just not possible to try all IEMs or headphones before I buy one.

Objectivity is real thing. It's like if you look for real quality in something you’ll be seeking an opinion of an expert in this particular field, right? Like, for example, I definitely will ask opinion of my friend who’s a musician rather than my wife which is pretty satisfied with stock iPod buds. And if 8 out of 10 experts said this product is great so then I can say it's objectively best product, or 80 out of 100 none experts at list.

Headphone is a device which was created for personal listening, and manufacturers suppose to make them to "deliver" what is recorded on CD. For example, if SE530s is lacking in treble and TF10 in mids and lows then they are both not really good products, and we just have to decide which one bothers us less than the other or we can even like/prefer this particular ‘fault’ (we can call it a "signature") and are willing to live with it. On the other hand, those cans which can ‘deliver’ in every aspect we can call good ones. In other word - the closer to original sound the better headphones are.

 

[Zalithian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shrisha /img/forum/go_quote.gif You know guys, I'm really not getting it. Why there is no objective opinion of headphones? Headphones, IEMs, earbuds are just consumer products, and what we need is just quality. What I'm really looking for is just to hear what artists, musicians, and sound engineers want me to hear. Cello is cello, violin is violin. And if it's Stradivari violin I want to hear it, not this signature sound, or that signature sound, of this IEMs, that earbuds. Manufacturers produce products which are suppose to deliver original unaltered sound to our ears and according to our wallet we choose the level of that delivery/quality. Of course everybody tries to get the best value, and main point is sometimes these products are not good or even suck. And that's why we here, trying to find out and get the best for our budget. Especially for me, it’s just not possible to try all IEMs or headphones before I buy one. Objectivity is real thing. It's like if you look for real quality in something you’ll be seeking an opinion of an expert in this particular field, right? Like, for example, I definitely will ask opinion of my friend who’s a musician rather than my wife which is pretty satisfied with stock iPod buds. And if 8 out of 10 experts said this product is great so then I can say it's objectively best product, or 80 out of 100 none experts at list. Headphone is a device which was created for personal listening, and manufacturers suppose to make them to "deliver" what is recorded on CD. For example, if SE530s is lacking in treble and TF10 in mids and lows then they are both not really good products, and we just have to decide which one bothers us less than the other or we can even like/prefer this particular ‘fault’ (we can call it a "signature") and are willing to live with it. On the other hand, those cans which can ‘deliver’ in every aspect we can call good ones. In other word - the closer to original sound the better headphones are.

That is purely your opinion. If you want objectivity, go find some frequency response graphs and find the one that is the most natural or neutral once you take into account the location of the drivers and such. It's your opinion that headphone manufacturers should be making devices which reproduce things perfectly, or as close to it as possible. My opinion is that if people want accuracy they shouldn't be buying consumer products. To me audio and music is about enjoyment. You said yourself headphones are made for personal listening, which leads me to the conclusion headphones for personal listening should be subjective and well, personal.

Each person in audio has different goals. Some people find colored sound suits them better. Some people strive for perfect reproduction. For me, I find coloring can add some extra excitement to the music. There are so many things in the chain which can alter or color the sound that I find in general it is a bit silly for people to claim only perfect reproduction will do. If you listen to mp3's or any lossy file, any headphones with any sort of imbalance or coloring, a DAP which isn't perfectly flat, etc. There are so many factors which make it difficult to hear something "as the artist intended" or whatever.

I'm not trying to bash people looking for perfect reproduction of sound as I find it admirable, but please don't be so stuck up as to assert perfect reproduction is the best for everyone. There are plenty of people who think something very colored may be the best, and in their opinion (which is all that matters) it is. Objectively is a different matter, but just because a graph tells me headphones sound good doesn't mean my ears do.

 

[mark2410]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shrisha /img/forum/go_quote.gif You know guys, I'm really not getting it. Why there is no objective opinion of headphones? Headphones, IEMs, earbuds are just consumer products, and what we need is just quality. What I'm really looking for is just to hear what artists, musicians, and sound engineers want me to hear. Cello is cello, violin is violin. And if it's Stradivari violin I want to hear it, not this signature sound, or that signature sound, of this IEMs, that earbuds. Manufacturers produce products which are suppose to deliver original unaltered sound to our ears and according to our wallet we choose the level of that delivery/quality. Of course everybody tries to get the best value, and main point is sometimes these products are not good or even suck. And that's why we here, trying to find out and get the best for our budget. Especially for me, it’s just not possible to try all IEMs or headphones before I buy one. Objectivity is real thing. It's like if you look for real quality in something you’ll be seeking an opinion of an expert in this particular field, right? Like, for example, I definitely will ask opinion of my friend who’s a musician rather than my wife which is pretty satisfied with stock iPod buds. And if 8 out of 10 experts said this product is great so then I can say it's objectively best product, or 80 out of 100 none experts at list. Headphone is a device which was created for personal listening, and manufacturers suppose to make them to "deliver" what is recorded on CD. For example, if SE530s is lacking in treble and TF10 in mids and lows then they are both not really good products, and we just have to decide which one bothers us less than the other or we can even like/prefer this particular ‘fault’ (we can call it a "signature") and are willing to live with it. On the other hand, those cans which can ‘deliver’ in every aspect we can call good ones. In other word - the closer to original sound the better headphones are.

if we all just wanted that then we would all have ety er4 brain implants. yes it would be super accurate but it wouldnt feel quite so alive as it can with other things.

and frankly as someon who is quite treble sensitive with the ammount of treble that gets dumped into music it would mean id be unable to listen to things all day without feeling like id ran a marthon.

most modern music is designed to be played back on crap speakers and i buds so they boost sounds to compensate

 

[emann]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KLS /img/forum/go_quote.gif To emann: Would you mind elaborate more on UE700? I think this is a pity fellow unable to gain much attention from Head-Fiers

Yes you've made me want to elaborate more really well.

 

[decay]

The problem is that, there's no objective "opinion" of headphones.
The average of professional opinions provided by your 10 musician friends (for reference)
gave you a statistically opinionated summary, and the only thing you
can be sure of is that they can make that product sound good to them.

EVERYONE hear differently and posses different ear and canal shapes.
The only thing that can be measured is the technical abilities of an transducer,
which by no means indicate what consumers actually hear in their ears, not to
mention the psychological aspects of hearing, past experience, past diseases/injuries
around the ear, etc. contributes to the final sound "perceived".

Customs and high end IEM/earphones are set to address this, and for many they have succeed
in providing a fairly accurate rendering of what's on a record with minor variations for
personal preferences and to compensate for parts of frequency spectrum they may be insensitive/overly sensitive to.

 

[roy_jones]

I understand the poster's frustration at the level of equivocation that goes on often in these discussions. The comments about individual listener preferences are also valid.

It seems to me that the UM3X would probably rated, across a broad spectrum of users, as the top current universal. If the poster is looking to distill the average user opinion and make a selection based on such a ranking, then I think it would be the UM3X.

That being said, many people who have auditioned all the top contenders maintain that it more like choosing a particular flavor than anything based on technical merits.

One point I'd make is to consider ergonomics. I'm sure the triple.fi is a really good IEM, but for me, it's automatically disqualified on the basis of ergonomics. On the other hand, the UM3X is probably the most ergonomic universal that performs at a high level.

You'd be surprised how highly you'll rate simple factors like fit once you actually have the IEM and are using it daily. The secondary point is that some of the parsing of sound nuances can seem more profound and important in these discussions than they really are, relative to practical factors.

 

[clasam]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shrisha /img/forum/go_quote.gif -snip- Manufacturers produce products which are suppose to deliver original unaltered sound to our ears...

That is currently impossible, my friend. They may be able to produce relatively close to neutral sounding equipment, but the search goes on for now...

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ok someone here definitely doesn't know what the Sennheiser IE8 is...the IE8 "IS" and IN EAR monitor. i am being a smart ass, but being correct at the same time.

LOL; correct are you?? by who's measure?? who made you judge of what the IE8 is??. its been contentious around here since release whether the IE8 qualifies as an IEM. and how is it that my opinion is wrong pray tell. smart ass isnt really appropriate.

 

[qusp]

OH and OP, no problem, I dont mind. man its gonna be hard work though. especialy with people popping in to 'correct' you because they own one of the products and disagree with your opinion on them (clearly stated repeatedly as an opinion mind you). LOL some people just dont know how to read around here. they see something about their beloved headphones in a passage of text that they disagree with; their blood boils and they forget about reading the rest of it that comes after, or perhaps a post that came before, hell even reading that bit properly; instead jumping straight to the reply button and blurting something out. too funny; but oh so predictable

 

[shigzeo]

I hang in the group who would consider the Senn IE8 an 'iem' but only on its virtue of entering the ear canal - which it does - painfully. It does not isolate much at all, but it does go in.

So, I understand MaoDi's opinion that it is an IEM and Qusp's that it may not be one based on other virtues. If IEM meant isolating ear monitor, then, no it is not an IEM at all, but if IEM means inner ear monitor, then it is as much as Ultimate Ears, the Westone 3, Pfe and a few others that don't go ety on your canals.

 

[qusp]

well the tip goes in, but thats about as far as I got even into the surround to the canal. maybe for some people with larger ears it might go IN EAR, but certainly not mine and that weird shape OMG. its not even shaped to go in, you need to extend the tip somehow to get it to even go that far with me. UM3X, W3 and SE530 all actually sit fairly well in the entrance to the canal themselves because they are shaped to be cradled in that curve and then the tip goes in deeply (not ety style) and easily. that for me is a totally different experience to IE8. they have tips just like any other of these, the reason they dont isolate very well (without modding) is because they dont go in very far. which makes it a canalphone/earbud by my definition. but thats just my definition. not a fact as stated by a god. at least by my reckoning IEM refers to the actual body of the IEM sitting in the entrance to the canal/ear and the tip goes in further; curving around the bend, baby stax have a protrusion that kind of goes into the ear as well; are they IEMs??

 

[decay]

@shigzeo:
I see you still haven't found your sweet spot nor tip yet, wish you luck to be able to "enjoy" them.

Isolation is very tip dependent, so whether you qualify it as a isolating ear monitor or not the bases of your opinion are likely to be different tips.

@qusp:
Willing to edit this line "which IMO these arent, they're earbuds" to "which IMO these with stock tips aren't, they're earbuds in that combination"? This should clear up what
you meant even though it's redundant.