Sennheiser RIP

Prof. Dr. Fritz Sennheiser, the founder of Sennheiser, has passed away.

Put simply, without him, I would never have had the pleasure to own and listen to a IE 8, the greatest IEM Sennheiser has ever made - or indeed the countless of other Sennheiser headphones I've worn so many times in over ten years since I discovered the joy of headphones and portable music.

Thanks Sennheiser!

x-JAYS announced - quad armature IEM

Swedish headphone designer/manufacturer Jays has today announced a range of new IEM models to be released this year, of which the most interesting to me is the high end quad armature x-JAYS (due out second quarter of 2010). Not a lot has been said about it yet, but based on the press release I am going to guess that the x-JAYS will feature a four-way crossover, where each armature speaker operates on each own frequency. Still what do I know? In any case I'll try to procure one for review... so watch this space!

Due out sooner are the a-JAYS and t-JAYS (pictured). Even less are known about these, though it is probably safe to assume that the t-JAYS at least would feature a micro balanced armature-based architecture, if the preview image of it is anything to go by.

Excited? I know I am.

Westone UM3X IEM review

The UM3X is Westone's flagship universal fit IEM designed for musicians and replaces the much liked UM2, as well as a cheaper alternative to the custom high-end ES3X. It isn't aimed to replace the much hyped Westone 3, which was designed for consumers and audiophiles. This is the first universal fit ear canal headphones that contains contains three balanced armatures with a passive three-way crossover - the same technology used on their flagship custom ES3X (which incidentally costs more than double the price of a UM3X).

Specifications and stuff:

Frequency response: 20 Hz – 18 kHz
Sensitivity: 124 dB SPL/mW
Nominal impedance: 56 ohms
Transducer: Three balanced armature transducers with passive three-way crossover

I have been listening to it for the past week, on and off in between sessions with my Sennheiser IE 8 and Denon AH-C710. These three comes at a completely different price point with the C710 costing the least, IE 8 around £180 and UM3X about £300 in the UK. I'll share my thoughts about the C710 in another review, but right now let's get to business regarding the UM3X. The UM3X sounds good, but the sound signature is an acquired taste. The sound quality here isn't disputed - it is great if you can afford the entry price - but as usual, try to borrow one or seek a test unit to hear it before buying.

As before, my tip of choice are the Klipsch gels that can be found on their Custom and Image series. They fit the UM3X perfectly, has the same bore diameter and are very very comfortable (at least for me). Beware that the sound signature will be dependent on your choice of tips. They come with Comply tips, which isn't something I would normally prefer to use. Another tip that can fit the UM3X is the Shure foamies (black olives).

Both Comply and Shure black olives offer superior sound isolation, and in theory should offer improved bass response. I do not like using them because I find them 'muffled' and hate the icky ear wax that tends to hang on to the surface. They also cost more in the long term, though people with no issues spending £300 on a ear-canal monitor will have no issues with spending £13 every couple of months on new Comply tips.

The built quality is excellent. I can't judge its long term durability, but they do seem tough enough. I have my doubts on the cables though. The braided cable has its uses - it remains supple and kinky-free throughout - though I did manage to get it tangled once. Even better the cable is microphonic-free (the echos you hear when walking and cable rubbing is due to microphonic cables - an example would be the popular CX 300 and EX71.

Unfortunately despite the cost, the cables are not modular - meaning you will have to send it back to Westone should the cable gets damaged. Also the length between the earpiece and the Y-splitter seems a little too short (in comparison the C710 is too long, and the IE 8 about perfect). I didn't find a braided cable brushing my neck to be extremely comfortable.

The UM3X is smaller than I thought. Considering that they have managed to cram in three balanced armature transducers inside each ear piece, the UM3X is an example of the technical achievement of the engineers at Westone. They fits well in my ears and I never had a problem with seal. Isolation is better than the IE 8 (with standard single-flange silicon tips), though this could be both positive and negative. The lack of isolation with the IE 8 is one of the reason of its airiness and vast soundstaging.

They seem to be as comfortable as the Klipsch Customs (easily the most comfortable IEMs I have ever had the pleasure of sticking inside my ear canals). Also, the UM3X sits flushed inside my ears, so I guess most will not have any issues sleeping with them. I wouldn't recommend sleeping with it though, considering the cost and the lack of replaceable cable.

Because of the higher than usual impedance (most consumer IEMs has 16 or 32 ohms), the UM3X suppressed most hiss that comes from lower-cost DAPs. I find that the UM3x is a bit more forward than the IE 8, particularly in the mids and vocals. They sound great with vocal-based performances and genre, though at the expense of bass and treble. It also sounds warmer than I initially expected it would be and I experienced no fatigue despite long sessions with it (two hours or longer). There are no issues with sound quality and music output was clean and clear throughout.

They are definitely bass-light and has very little impact, not surprising considering the use of balanced armature transducers, but should be sufficient for most people. If bass quantity is something you seek, get something with a moving-coil dynamic driver like the IE 8 or Denon C710. Regardless the bass is deep and controlled and does not interfere with the music. Treble quality is brilliant, and I detected no sibilance. They have some sparkle, but lack the dynamic of the IE 8. Soundstaging is pretty decent, but is tighter than the IE 8. In any words, the UM3X offers a more head-staging experience, particularly the vocals. I feel at times if the singer was right next to me, where as with the IE 8 I tend to feel like an audience a couple of seats from the front stage.

Westone's flagship universal is definitely one of the more boring IEMs I have heard, with its flat presentation. I love the dynamism and in-your-face all-around performance of the IE 8, which seems to be designed for people keen on listening to music. The UM3X is a high-end stage monitor designed for musicians, where as the IE 8 and other alternatives (like Westone's own W3) are geared towards us consumers and listeners.

Do not get me wrong, these are brilliant IEMs, but as I said earlier, they also cost significantly more than the IE 8 (in the UK - in the US and some other countries the pricing gap is smaller). The issue of sound preference is definitely a subjective one. I know of people who would love the UM3X where as some will dislike it outright.

If you are a budding musician who is keen on getting a quality in-ear stage monitor without the budget for moulded custom IEMs, then perhaps the UM3X will be great for you. I don't know since I don't know squat about making music. For consumers who tend to listen through a portable digital audio player, try out the Westone 3, Sennheiser IE 8 and Shure SE530 first. Those may be better suited for you.

Westone UM3X first impressions

This is it, the Westone UM3X. In my hands (or should I say... my ears!). Thanks to @mark2410 for loaning me his. I've only managed to listen to it a couple of hours, but I am deeply impressed by it. I will eventually compare it with my IE 8 (of which has close to a thousand hours on it). Both offers completely different sound signature. It is just a matter of pinpointing your preference. The UM3X is likely to appeal more towards owners of other balanced armature IEMs like the Shure SE530, but I only have the IE 8 here to compare with.

My tip of choice are the Klipsch gels that can be found on their Custom and Image series. They fit the UM3X perfectly, has the same bore diameter and are very very comfortable (at least for me). Beware that the sound signature will be dependent on your choice of tips. Impressions and the following review (next week?) will be my own, so please do not flame me for stating my opinions. I also would not comment about multi-flange ear tips, as I do not find them as comfortable. This is due to my shallow ear canals (one reason why the IE 8 with default single flange silicon tips are perfect for me).

The UM3X fits well in my ears and I never had a problem with seal. Isolation is better than the IE 8 (with standard single-flange silicon tips), though this could be both positive and negative. The lack of isolation with the IE 8 is one of the reason of its airiness and vast soundstaging. They seem to be as comfortable as the Klipsch Customs (easily the most comfortable IEMs I have ever had the pleasure of sticking inside my ear canals). Also, the UM3X sits flush inside the ears, so you will not have any issues sleeping with them. I wouldn't recommend sleeping with it though.

As I only have had a couple of hours with them, I won't comment much about the sound quality. But they do sound good, and even more importantly, do they sound £120 (price difference in the UK) better than the IE 8? I can't say for sure yet. They are a bit more forward than the IE 8, particularly in the mids. The bass is just a bit behind the IE 8, and has some impact, though not quite there. Just a note here that I am no bass head and I never found the bass on the IE 8 (mininum dial) to be overwhelming. Because the UM3X are fitted with balanced armatures, bass impact will definitely depends on seal and tip type.

Westone's flagship is definitely the more neutral (and thus 'boring') phone of the two, but right now I am leaning more towards the IE 8 in terms of sound preference because I just find it to be more musical. Having said that I can't yet reach a conclusion (especially with so few hours with it). All I can is for sure is that the UM3X are very good IEMs (there are no such thing as poor performing high-end IEMs - they all depends on your preference), but they also cost significantly more than the IE 8 (in the UK - in the US and some other countries the pricing gap is smaller).

Look out for my review sometime in the next week or two once I have a bit more time with it, and then another one for Denon's flagship AH-C710.

CrossRoads MylarOne Quattro in-ear headphone review

You may have never heard of CrossRoads, but their MylarOne line-up of ear canal headphones has been well received at headphone forums as capable of offering good audio quality at a reasonable price level. As far as I know, their products are not sold in Europe, at least not in traditional outlets. However you can get them from Jaben.net (thanks to Uncle Wilson who has kindly supplied this review unit).

With the new MylarOne Quattro, Crossroads is aiming to bring a pair of reasonably priced customisable headphone to the masses. The Quattro features interchangeable “tuning plate” screw-on bass ports, that allows the listener to customise the desired sound to their liking. At US$88 inc. shipping, the Quattro is one of the cheapest in-ear headphones that allows the listener to option to do so, and significantly undercuts its competitors by a wide margin (price wise).

Specifications and stuff:

Frequency response: 20 Hz – 22 kHz
Sensitivity: 95 dB at 1 kHz
Nominal impedance: 16 ohms
Transducer: 7mm moving coil dynamic
Cable length: 1.25 meters

The Quattro arrives in a small and simple card box packaging that isn't a pain to open. Bundled inside includes four pairs of single flange silicon ear sleeves, a pair of dual flange silicon ear sleeves, an airplane stereo adapter, a shirt clip and a small pouch. You also get three pairs of the screw on bass ports labelled with '1', '2' and '3'.

The build quality of the Quattro is actually pretty good. The Quattro itself seems to be made of anodized aluminium and is very tiny. It is actually the tiniest IEM I ever held. The housing features a clinder design and holds a small 7mm moving coil dynamic transducer. The silicon sleeves are soft and supple, and reminds me a lot of the Klipsch ear gels (easily the most comfortable ear sleeves I have worn). Like the Radiopaq, there is no mesh or filters on the nozzles to prevent dirt and ear wax from entering. I am guessing that it features a similar design to the Radiopaq which features a built-in protection at the driver level. Overall, I have no complains about the build quality of the Quattro earpiece itself.

Unfortunately the cable appears to suffer from slight microphonics. CrossRoads cleverly supplied a shirt clip (already clipped to the cable), which can help with reducing the amount of microphonics. Wearing the Quattro over the ear will also help a lot. A Y-slider is included which you can also use to help reduce the microphonics. On the upside the cable is soft and do not kink as easily as the Radiopaqs or tangle much. It terminates at a 3.5mm headphone jack that is angled slightly (comparable to the Klipsch Image X10).

Because of the size and lightweight-ness, the Quattro is very comfortable on my ears. They feature a deep insertion design that allows for greater isolation in comparison to other headphones like the Sennheiser IE 8. Unfortunately my ear canals are quite shallow so the Quattro sticks out quite a bit more than say, IEMs that features a flushed design. This makes sleeping with it almost impossible. Still people with deep ear canals may find the Quattro to be ideal for sleeping, but mileage my vary.

Now, on to the important bit: the sound quality! Based on other owners experience I subjected the Quattro to 100 hours of intense burn-in. The three pairs of bass ports does affect the frequency response by quite a bit. Port 1 offers the heaviest bass response, with port 2 in between and port 3 offering the lightest.

Unfortunately before doing my final testing, one of my part 3 port suffered a mishap when the adhesive that held a cover that closes the port's vent loosened and fell out, trapped inside the Quattro itself. I was able to remove it, damaging the cover in the process. This does mean I am unable to accurately judge the performance of port 3 at this stage of burn-in. However based on previous tests (before the cover fell out), I found that that port 3 offered a very bass light sound, with greater treble detail at the expense of soundstaging.

Personally I found that the bass response with port 1 to be too much. The treble quality doesn't seem to be affected much, but they are slightly more recessed than port 2. Soundstaging wise, they are the widest and has an airy sound. Instrumental separation could be better, but they don't sound congested. They have a nice warm sound, but so does port 2 and 3. Port 1 also happens to isolate the less due to the vent, though not by much.

Port 2 is my favourite port to use with the Quattro. They offer a bit less bass than port 1, whilst not changing the overall warm sound signature much. The soundstage narrows a bit, but is still wide to enjoy classical music. The clarity is actually pretty amazing with port 2, with good amount of transparency. Mids are detailed and lush, with good but slightly recessed vocals. The treble isn't too bad either and I detected no apparent sibilance. Bass impact is punchy, but without the overwhelming quantity of the first port, and certainly no where near the speed, tightness and impact of the IE 8.

The Quattro is any interesting product. The price range puts it up against plenty of established brands and products, including Klipsch (with their new Image S4), Sennheiser CX 95, Denon AH-C551 and the Radiopaqs. The warm and fun sound will almost certainly please many people, but the sound quality isn't nearly as good as the CX 95, Radiopaq Jazz or the discounted Klipsch Custom 2. However if you want a customisable in-ear headphone without the large price tag, the Quattro comes highly recommended.

The CrossRoad MylarOne Quattro is available for US$88 with free worldwide shipping from Jaben.net

JVC and rip-off Britain

JVC's HA-FX1000 has been gaining some attention lately as being a Sennheiser IE 8 killer, what with its use of wooden diaphragms and stuff. But suspicion has emerged that it is merely a renamed version of the old cheaper FX500 model. Unfortunately there hasn't been any proof and all evidence so far were circumstantial, until now.

Today a fellow Head-Fi'er Soozieq decided to call JVC UK and spoke with someone called Richard who confirmed that the FX1000 is indeed a rebranded FX500 and has been renamed specifically for the UK release. Now here's where it gets all nasty. The FX500 only costs £70 at Amazon.co.jp whereas it is sold here (under the FX1000 moniker) for... wait for it... £250! That is 3.5 times the price in Japan! Nothing wrong with that as at the end of the day it is the prerogative of the company to price their product whatever they want, but the deliberate attempt to mask the version by doubling the product numbering to make it appear as a new version or an upgrade really takes the piss. Odd my arse.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it is mighty tempting to import the FX500 from Japan as they appear to be good value for money. But on the other I am pretty darn pissed off with JVC and/or Apple for deliberately attempting to mislead and price gouge its potential customers. I know us in the UK are no strangers to being ripped off, but this is a whole new level. If JVC thinks that they can get away with this then they can duly fuck off. My money will instead go towards other (less evil) companies.

Radiopaq Custom Tuned Earphones review

Radiopaq has made big claims over their new range of headphones, which they dub as Custom Tuned Earphones. Costing £59.99 each, the four IEMs are customised to different types of music: Classical, Jazz, Pop and Rock, but will also sound great regardless of whatever genre you throw at each individual headphone. So is the Custom Tuned Earphones a shrewd concept cooked up by marketing of a way getting customers to hand over their money four times, or is Radiopaq really onto something?

Specifications and stuff:

Frequency response: 18 Hz – 20 kHz
Sensitivity: 120 dB
Nominal impedance: 16 ohms
Transducer: 10mm moving coil dynamic
Attenuation: up to 26 dB
Cable length: 1.2 meters
Warranty: 2 years

One thing Radiopaq is right on the money is that different people has different sound preference. What they did is tune the four individual models, through customising the transducer drivers, chamber shapes and bass ports in order to produce the frequency response that their engineers believe would distinguish each versions from each other. This allows for differentiation that offers people with a degree of sound choices, all without the confusing audiophile terminologies.

Unfortunately it also presents the would-be customer with some tough choices. For many £60 is a lot of money to spend on headphones, so getting it right would be important. And what if, like me, a person listens to a wide range of musical genres? No problem says Radiopaq, you will still be able to enjoy other genres with them, even going on to likening their headphones to different sort of cars.

Sadly, until you are able to listen to all four models, there is no way to know which models really suit you. With the Rock version, you get big warm and powerful sound, with plenty of bass and good mid-range. The Pop IEMs offers forward vocals with good clarity and a bit less bass than the Rock version. On the other hand the Jazz model gives you a more balanced sound, with adequate amount of bass impact and sweet vocals. Finally if you prefer Bach to Burt, the Classical version delivers more on the mids and highs with a greater soundstaging, but by sacrificing any sort of bass impact.

It all boils down to personal preference. I personally found the Rock version to be too bassy and the Classical version too flat and dull, but some may just prefer the sound. My classical piano-trained partner offered her opinion on the Classical version as sounding flat and neutral, capable of capturing every nuance of a good classical recording. The Jazz version is sweet sounding, which I find perfect for listening to tons of indie pop and twee, where as I use the Pop version for good amount of trance and electronica, as they provide just about the right amount of bass and very fun. Instrumental separation could have been better with all versions, but they are not too bad.

They also lack the vast soundstaging (burn-in will improve this), clarity and fuller in your face sound of my Sennheiser IE 8, but then again the IE 8 costs three times as much as an individual Radiopaq. If I have to pick one of the four, I would go for the Jazz as it allows me to relax in between sessions with my IE 8. It is less bold, softer, slightly colder and ideal for chill-out sessions (like before sleep). Unfortunately the design meant that it sticks out of my ear a bit and thus is physically uncomfortable to sleep-in. The Pop version is better in this regard as they are as tiny as the CX 95, and has an overall better fit.

It is actually nice to find that the enclosure is indeed made of metal. Even the nozzles are metal. They feel very tough and yet light. The same however can't be said about the cable. The cord seems tough, but they kink a lot, and are also microphonics. The microphonics isn't as bad as the Sennheiser CX 300, but they are still noticeable. They can be worn over the ear, which can somewhat alleviate the microphonics issue. As for fit, the Pop version first my ear the best due to its small size. Coming up on the rear is the Jazz version due to its rather large housing. The silicon taps are also proned to pick up dirt easily, though John of Radiopaq did inform me that they are looking into alternatives including foam tips. Isolation is on par with my Sennheiser CX 95 and s-Jays, but no where near the Klipsch Customs.

At £59.99, the Radiopaqs do offer plenty of value, but getting them all would mean spending just under £240. For that you can get a Sleek Audio SA6 (US$199), or the Sennheiser IE 8, which while only allows you to customise the bass, has overall better clarity. Another would be the CrossRoads MylarOne Quattro, which at US$88 may be a serious contender to the Radiopaq, whilst also offering interchangeable bass ports.

All in all, the Radiopaqs surpassed my expectations. They don't come with plenty of frills - in fact just the headphone and three pairs of single-flanged silicon tips are included within the retail plastic case. But what you do get is a pair of headphone with good sound quality/price ratio and a two year warranty to match. I find them better than the equally priced Denon AH-C551, and just about equal to the Sennheiser CX 95. The Jazz version in particular is a keeper and I have no qualms about saying that this version is one of the better sub-£100 in-ear headphone I have heard.

The Radiopaq Classical, Jazz, Pop and Rock are all available on Amazon UK. Radiopaq has plans to launch the IEMs in the US in the future, but you can always get them from their own online store now.

+ Great sound quality/price ratio
+ Good build quality
+ Two years warranty as standard
+ Very light
- Kinky and microphonic cord
- Packaging

JAYS s-JAYS in-ear headphone review

You may never have heard of JAYS. They are a Swedish headphone manufacturer who have lofty ambitions to conquer the headphone market through churning out models with good technology and design for the fashion conscious. Check out the q-JAYS, which is one of the tiniest and most desirable looking dual balanced armature in-ear monitors in the world. But with most consumers not willing to spend more than £100 on headphones (or indeed at all) recession or not, the s-JAYS at half the price is a much more tempting proposition.

At £60 retail (£43 on Amazon UK), JAYS have the mid-range market well covered with the new s-JAYS. These, according to JAYS, is their first in-ear headphone to use the SIREN armature technology - whatever that means. Featuring a new tubeless round design, they are said to be capable of delivering plentiful of bass and open soundstage, something balanced armature technology isn't exactly known for. A normal armature transducer is typically shaped as a longish rectangular box, where as the SIREN armature here is shaped more like a dynamic transducer. This explains the apparent large body size of the headphones.



Specs:

Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
Sensitivity: 113 dB SPL/mW (1mW)
Nominal impedance: 69 ohms) @ 1 kHz
Transducer: SIREN armature
Headphone weight: 10 grams

Included in the sales package are plentiful of accessories, something JAYS should be commended here. Six pairs of ear tips of varying sizes are included (five pairs of silicon sleeves, one pair of foam sleeves). You also get a small zipped faux leather carrying case, extension cable, four pairs of earwax filter, stereo splitter and an airplane headphone adapter. The filters are required to prevent dirts, ear waxes and spiders from entering the s-JAYS nozzles. To be honest I do believe that they should bundle an ear wax cleaning tool instead or provide a permanent protective mesh as these filters are expensive to replace! Having said that I do not suffer from excess earwax issues and reckon a single pair to be able to last me more than a couple of months.



For an in-ear headphone with a single armature in each earpiece, the s-JAYS are pretty huge, no doubt due to the dynamic driver-like design of the SIREN armature drivers. The caterpillar or bee-like design is an acquired taste, but I generally like them even if they are a bit too large. They look nicer in person than in promo pictures. Despite the size I didn't had any issues getting a fit. They slot into my shallow ear canals rather nicely. The fit is overall better than Denon's C551. They do not sit in as deeply as the Klipsch Custom 2 or my Sennheiser CX 95 though.

Both the symmetrical main cord and extension cord terminates at a straight gold plated 3.5mm plug. Having experienced Sennheiser's extraordinary new cord, I find the cord here to be nothing special. JAYS doesn't think so and they do make pains to highlight the quality of the cord (including a sticker on it). They do seem tough and capable of withstanding abuse, plus they do not get tangled easily. However they are rather stiff. On the upside microphonics is minimal. The Y-splitter also look rather fragile in comparison, but it is no better than the one on the Denon C551. Like the Denon and Klipsch headphones, there is a Y-adjuster which is useful for tightening and preventing microphonics.



The s-JAYS driver housings are made entirely of plastic and are very light to hold. The lightness does make it feel cheaper in comparison to the aluminium housed Denon C551 and CX 95. Still they are comfortable to wear for hours at a time. The biggest design flaw of the headphones is the decision to print the 'L' and 'R' labels in the same colour as the body! The letters may be raised, but they are still troublesome to locate. When will manufacturers learn we want colour coded headphones?!? I found that the default single flange silicon tips to fit perfectly in my ears. They do not leak sound - not surprising considering the lack of air vents. The isolation is also on par with my CX 95. The silicon tips themselves are soft and a bit thicker than the default one provided by Sennheiser, Sony et. al.

Enough chattering. Question remains, how good does this SIREN armature powered s-JAYS sound? Well I had a chance to listen to it during the whole long weekend away at the Lake District and here are my thoughts. JAYS has made it clear that the SIREN armature transducer here produces more bass than equivalent single balanced armature drivers. They do sound plenty, at least more than the last single balanced armature IEM I had which was the Klipsch Custom 1. They do not extend as low as the Sennheiser IE 8, but the mid-bass hump is definitely there. The bass impact is certainly one of the better ones I have heard outside that of the IE 8 or CX 95.



Unfortunately the mids do get overwhelmed by the bass. It isn't like the IE 8 where even with strongest bass setting, the mids remained forward, clear and precise. Here the mids are recessed, shoved to the back so to speak. The highs on the other hand are only slightly recessed and fortunately they do not suffer from sibilance, or at least my ears did not detect any. Sadly I have to agree with many others that complex music do not work well with the s-JAYS. The sound quality easily gets muddy and veiled. My month old relationship with the IE 8 does not help either, but please please remember that the IE 8 is triple or quadruple of the cost of the s-JAYS. Compared to the CX 95, the s-JAYS are a bit more detailed, but lack the warmth and fun of the similarly priced Sennheiser.

The soundstage is sufficient. They still provide a more headstage kind of sound, in that the music revolves inside your head, rather than around. However as far as imaging goes, the s-JAYS performs well here in comparison to other armature based in-ear headphones. If you require something with a larger soundstage, then get an IE 7, IE 8 or full size cans. Ultimately the general rule is armature technology has so far been unable to provide a more encompassing soundstage compared to dynamic technology, so keep that in mind the next time you go headphone shopping.



All in all I quite enjoyed the s-JAYS. It won't replaced my IE 8, but it makes for a reasonable backup headphone. For those who can't see the point of spending more than £100 on headphones, these are also good enough to be used as your everyday pair. At £60, I do think the s-JAYS are a bit overpriced, but they can be had for £43 from Amazon UK or even cheaper elsewhere (I've heard that Costco had them for £35 once - you may want to check there). At that price I would recommend them - but do check out their competitors as well.

+ crisp sound
+ good amount of bass for armature
+ bundled accessories aplenty
+ good sound quality for price
- nice looking packaging hampered by the requirement to package products in blister plastic packs
- recessed mids
- filters, I hate them

JAYS s-JAYS unboxed

Firstly, thanks to Peter at JAYS for giving me the opportunity to try out the new s-JAYS in-ear headphone.

As I have had it for less than a day, I won't be commenting about the sound quality just yet. I'll be going heading off to Cumbria later today and this will be the headphone of my choice for the long weekend trip. The trip will give me an excellent time to test out the isolation, comfort and sound quality of the s-JAYS in between sessions of trekking, lunching and whatever it is people in the country do. You can also follow my ramblings on Twitter, the platform of which I shall delegate my mobile blogging on.

Anyway here are some pictures.

The box is rather eye catching:



You will need a pair of scissors to cut through the plastic defenders here:



Plenty of frills are included here: stereo splitter, airplane stereo adapter, extension cord, replaceable ear wax filter, small case, assortment of silicon and foam tips:



Noticed how large the s-JAYS are in comparison to the IE 8 and CX 95. There is a reason for that...:



Trance and electronica music in general do seem to pair well with the s-JAYS:

Denon AH-C551 in-ear monitor headphone review

Denon is one of the most prestigious hi-fi brand. Their range of full-size headphones has often received plenty of accolades from audiophiles. The Denon AH-C551 is one of their first forays into the world of in-ear monitor portable headphones. At around £50 per pair, the C551 is designed to compete with the headphones like the Sennheiser's CX 95 (now discontinued and replaced by the CX 550) and Klipsch Custom 2.

Frequency response: 15–25,000 Hz
Sensitivity: 104 dB SPL/mW (1mW)
Nominal impedance: 16 ohms
Attenuation: up to 26 dB (95%)
Transducer: Dynamic driver

The C551 is similar to their high-end IEM, the AH-C751. While not as big, the C551 retains a similar bullet shape profile. Despite its look I was surprised by how light the headphones are. Like the CX 95, the Denon comes with an extension cable that terminates at a gold plated 3.5mm L-plug. The cords are well made and isn't as sensitive to microphonics as the one found on the CX 95, and is also less prone to getting itself tangled. Despite the good impression I found the Y-split and stress relief to be disappointingly fragile looking.



The C551's housing is made of machined aluminium, a nice change and premium compared to the sea of plastics favoured by Shure, Ultimate Ears and Sony. They are wonderfully engineered and looks prettier than the CX 95. In each of the earpiece lies a 11mm neodymium dynamic transducer. The large driver size meant that the canal body is a bit larger than the CX 95. This results in less isolation as I was unable to push the drive unit into my small ear canals. Despite that I had no problem getting a good fit and seal with the supplied silicone tips (which are interchangeable with Sony and Sennheiser headphones).

At the back of each earpiece are these holes that Denon calls Acoustic Optimizer, more commonly known by simple people as bass ports or air vents. These ports are said to provide the sound characteristic of the headphone by "adjusting the sound pressure balance in the front of and behind the diaphragm", whatever that means. Ergonomically they can be worn with the cords hanging down or over the ear style (for less microphonics). The Denons are not the most comfortable in-ear headphones I have worn, but they are also not the worse. Unfortunately they also leak plenty of sound, no thanks to the large Acoustic Optimizer vents.



Enough chatter, what about sound quality? Well they have a nice warm sound signature. Compared to my CX 95, I have to admit I much prefer the CX 95 (to be fair the CX 95 does have hundred of hours of burn-in/listening time to it compared to about 60 hours on the C551). The bass on the C551 for example hasn't got the same impact, though I did find the bass performance to be tighter. Regardless the bass performance is more than adequate for bass heads and fans of electronic genre.

The soundstage isn't as airy or wide as the CX 95, though that isn't saying much as all IEMs suffer from the same problem when it comes to imaging (except perhaps the IE 8). The sound quality overall is good but is a little harsh on the treble and the mids are a bit grainy. Details and definitions are also comparatively weaker to the CX 95. Overall the sound signature is dark with good mids but recessed highs.

Despite the C551 being only second IEM, Denon appears to have delivered a quality product. The problem here is that while the C551 is a perfectly fine quality product, there are better products out there (at least in my opinion) within the same price range. Sennheiser's CX 95 does seem to better them at almost every level, at least when it comes to sound quality and bass impact and mid-range. The Klipsch Custom 2 on the other hand offers delightfully lush mids with good highs and adequate bass response for a reasonable price.

The C551 is available for around £50 from Amazon UK.

Klipsch Image S4

Nothing is known about them yet, but judging by the more traditional design I am going to guess that this will be an entry level version of their popular Image line-up.

Via Head-Fi

Update (10 March 09): Amy has kindly informed me via Twitter that the Image S4 will have the following specs:

Frequency Response: 10Hz – 19KHz
Transducer: moving-coil dynamic
Sensitivity (1mW): 110db SPL/mW
Impedance (1kHZ): 18-ohm
Price: $79.99

It is available for pre-order from Amazon.com for US$79.99

Sennheiser IE 8 in-ear headphone review

The IE 8 is Sennheiser's flagship high-end in-ear headphones. With a suggested retail price of £263/US$450 (the street and online price is significantly cheaper) the IE 8 forms part of the upper end of universal fit in-ear headphones and is designed to compete with established products like the Shure SE530, Ultimate Ears Triple.Fi 10 Pro, Westone 3 and Klipsch Custom 3. Thie Sennheiser model is unique as it is one of the very few high end IEMs that uses dynamic transducers instead of balanced armatures. Also, among the IE series, the IE 8 is the only model to be fitted with a modular cable allowing the user to replace the cable with different lengths and stuff as well as a tune-able bass system.

Specifications and stuff:

Frequency response: 10 Hz – 20 kHz
Sensitivity: 125 dB SPL/mW (1mW)
Nominal impedance: 16 ohms
Attenuation: up to 26 dB (95%)
Transducer: Dynamic
Headphone weight: 5 grams



For your money Sennheiser ships the IE 8 in a nice tin metal case. Whether or not these are useful is debatable, but maybe Sennheiser thought a nice tin metal case would appeal to users who likes to feel 'premium' and pampered. Inside the box contains a a massive amount of accessories, some useful, some not so much. Various tips (single flange silicons, double flange silicons, Shure black olives-like foamies and bizarre ridge silicon thingies) are included, a tool with ear wax cleaner and screw driver (for the bass knob), shirt cable clip and memory wire holder (similar in function to the one on the Klipsch Customs but removable).

Also included is an over engineered protective case that is lined with 'dry salt pads'. These pads are said to 'control the humidity' of the case whilst also absorbing any sweats. May be useful for people who excercise with $300 headphones. The case itself, while nice and pretty, is overtly complicated for everyday use. I wonder how much time and R&D is wasted on this? They even designed a compartment so that the user can keep a silicon gel bag! Dear Sennheiser, a zipped semi-hardcase, like the one Klipsch bundles, is more than sufficient.



Now on to the IE 8 itself. My first impression is I thought it was a fake because of how light the overall package was. The IE 8 is like the Kate Moss of the IEM world especially when compared to the CX 95 and Klipsch Custom 3 which felt awfully heavy afterwards. Built quality seems to be good and the industrial design is a nice change from the streamlined design favoured by other manufacturers. The IE 8 uses a modular cable meaning that if you ever lose your cable or fancy a different length cable you can always order one from Sennheiser and just plug in the new one. It also means you do not have to purchase a whole new IEM just because the cable breaks. Not that you should feel worried as the bundled cable is thick, flexible and seems well constructed.

The IE 8 are pretty comfortable on my ears. I've read that due to the IE 8's design many has been experiencing problems getting a good fit/seal. The problem stems from the short nozzle/large driver body design which prevents users from pushing the tip all the way in. Klipsch cleverly avoided the same problem despite sharing a similar design by extending the nozzle where as with the CX 95, the problem is none-existent due to the slim driver body. On a personal note I am happy to report I've not experienced such a problem despite only using the medium single flange tips. IE 8 has always held securely onto my ears and does not dislodge despite doing silly faces and whatnots. However they do don't isolate as well as the Klipsch Customs with the silicon tips, though they are far less microphonics (in fact almost none-existent).



Like Sleek Audio's SA6, the IE 8 allows the user to customise the sound somewhat. But rather than using modular treble tips and bass ports which are easily misplaced, Sennheiser's boffins decided to engineer in a small knob that allows the user to control the bass response to something that is more to their liking. A small sound adjuster screwdriver-like tool is included for this. Personally I find the bass response to be more than adequate with the minimal setting but bass heads will no doubt love this feature and will take advantage of the knob the moment they can. I do turn it up a notch or two when listening to electronica music and find the bass beats are phenomenal. It feels like there are tiny subwoofers in your head.

The IE 8 has to be one of the most average sounding high-end IEM I've listened to out of the box. Like many IE 8 owners I found the initial bass response to be bloated and harsh. This is because unlike the Klipsch Custom series I reviewed in December, the IE 8 uses a single dynamic moving-coil driver which tends to require burn-in period before they shine. Leaving aside the fact that I personally think that Sennheiser should be the one doing the burn-in dirty work at the factory, I left the IE 8 to burn while listening to it at intervals. The upside of using dynamics is the wide frequency response and better bass response.



After just a couple of hours burn-in, the bass tames a little and the clarity improves. With further burn-ins, the IE 8 turned from an average sounding headphone to something that was well capable of delivering great midrange definition. The once recessed highs were blooming and the initial dark sound is all but gone, though they were still a little bit muddy. At this point I notice how vocals is one of the strength of the IE 8. They were clear and smooth. There were no issues with sibilance during my period with the IE 8, except perhaps with badly recorded music.

50 hours of listening later (I've stopped burning-in by then) IE 8's soundstage is simply astonishing - with depths unheard of in any IEMs I've ever owned/listened to. It makes for a pleasant change from the sound signature of more "inside-head" IEMs, like the Klipsch Custom 3, as this increases instrumental seperation. The clarity is amazing and while the resolution isn't nearly as detailed as the Custom 3, it is still pretty good. Even the highs improved, though still not nearly as forward as the Custom 3 or as extended as a Etymotic headphone. Mind you, both are very different IEMs. While the Klipsch has a very clinical sound, the IE 8 seems to be have a softer grainier texture with a wider dynamic range at its disposal.



If you do not require the bass knob or modular cable, then you should also consider the IE 7, the IE 8's slightly more svelte and cheaper Darth Vader-like cousin. Apparently they sound just as good as the IE 8 with the bass knob set to low. Even if the cable isn't replaceable, they ought to last long. Still the IE 8 is, at least for the moment, the pinnacle of dynamic transducer based in-ear headphones. They sound wonderfully like open headphones with amazing sound quality to match.

Perhaps the worse thing about the IE 8 is how they expose some badly ripped and low bitrate tracks, thus forcing me to re-rip some of my music collection - something that I should have done a long time ago if I weren't being such a lazy arse. With very strong and tight bass impact and extension, amazingly wide soundstage, strong lush mids and treble extension; combined in a thoughtfully light package, the IE 8 is without a doubt one of the best portable headphones you can buy today. Happy listening.

The good stuff
Open headphone-like soundstage
Good thumping bass
Lush mids
Very light
Modular cable
Good selection of tips
Standard two years warranty

The bad stuff
Fit may be an issue, this is one IEM you should try before you buy
Noise attenuation is less compared to other brands
Expensive
Lousy case

The Sennheiser IE8 is available at Amazon UK or Advanced MP3 Player (use the voucher code head10 to obtain 10% off). US residents can also order them Amazon.com.

Sennheiser IE 8 first impressions

The IE 8 is Sennheiser's flagship high-end in-ear monitor headphones. Costing around £200, the IE 8 is designed to compete with established high-end universal fit IEMs like the Shure SE530, Ultimate Ears Triple.Fi 10 Pro and Westone 3. The IE 8 is unique as it is one of the very few high end IEMs that uses a dynamic transducer instead of the more popular approach of using multiple balanced armature drivers. It is also Sennheiser's first IEM that allows the user to fine-tune the bass response and also the only in-ear headphone by the company that is fitted with a modular cable.

I've only had it for less than two days, so please bear with me. After all this is merely an impression. I've read that many had problems getting the correct fit with the IE8 (and to a certain extent, the IE 7). Maybe I am lucky but I have not experience such a problem. They do not go as deep as my Klipsch Custom 3 or CX 95, but they do seal well. On the other hand the isolation isn't as good as the Klipsch Custom 3 with the stock single flange tips, but proved adequate for Tube journeys. Sennheiser has also provided a vast selection of tips, including bi-flange silicon tips as well as foamies that resembles Shure's black olives. I've not tried them yet.



The initial sound (out of box, new) was harsh. The bass was muddy and the soundstage practically none-existent. I do not believe in the requirement of burn-in period (manufacturers should do it in the factory level), but I did burn it in for an hour before my second listen to avoid some form of mental burn in. Upon listening the IE 8's initial muddy bass is gone, but the treble were still recessed. The initial sharp sound that gave me fatigue when listening to female vocals were also gone. Today after roughly 20 hours of burn in, the bass response has improved dramatically and while the highs were still recessed, I found that the soundstage to finally open up.

I will continue listening to them, but if the burn-in are of any indication I believe this would be one of the best in-ear headphones I've ever have the pleasure of listening to. The clarity is already as good as my Klipsch Custom 3 but with more bass impact. Look out for a review sometime next week.

The Sennheiser IE 8 is available at Amazon UK for £199.99 or Advanced MP3 Player for £220.02 inc. worldwide delivery (use the voucher code head10 to obtain 10% off). US residents can also order them from Amazon.com.

Klipsch UK's Image X10 offer

Klipsch's Image X10 is easily the sexiest and smallest high-end IEM I've ever laid my eyes on. Unfortunately they are pretty expensive. Klipsch UK, in conjunction with What Hi-Fi? Sound & Vision, is offering the Image X10 for a slightly better price of £129.99 down from £179.99, the same price as the mid-range X5. The offer ends on 6 January.

Unfortunately for me and my wallet, I am all spent out. :( You can read my opinion of Klipsch's Custom-3 here.

Klipsch Custom-3 IEM headphones review

Here it is, the final review in my journey through Klipsch's Custom series, and the last review of 2008. Perhaps next year I'll do another one (maybe Sennheiser's IE range? I'll go broke!). So anyway, the Custom-3 is Klipsch's top-end IEM in terms of SQ performance and the second most expensive after the Image X10. With a recommended retail price of US$199/£199 (the street price is a lot cheaper than that), the Custom-3's direct competitors includes Shure SE420, Sennheiser IE8, Denon C751, Sleek Audio SA6, Etymotic ER4P and Westone UM2 - all of which are well regarded and have received raved reviews.

Some boring technical specs:

Frequency response: 8Hz – 19kHz
Sensitivity: 115 dB SPL/mW (1mW)
Nominal impedance: 32 ohms
Crossover frequency: 1500 Hz
Tweeter: KG723
Woofer: KG731
Headphone weight: 13 grams
Bundled accessories: Large carrying case, 1/8" to 1/4" adaptor, airplane jack adaptor, two pairs of bi-flanged ear gels, three pairs of single-flanged ear gels, ear wax tip cleaning tool

Perhaps rather disappointingly, the Custom-3 shares the exact same physical and attractive triangular enclosure as its lower-end cousins. There is no removable cable system or additional use of premium material that reflects the premium cost. The only distinct difference is the colour scheme - that is of the traditional bronze Klipsch logo. It is personally my favourite colour scheme of the three Customs, as the bronze accent doesn't make it stand out as much as the other two, and also because the classic Klipsch logo is, well, classy. Regardless the built quality was excellent.



Again like the other two Customs, the enclosures are connected to 50" fabric cable which terminates to a gold plated right-angled 3.5mm plug. The fabric cable is both a joy and curse. It is sturdy, but is microphonic like hell. This can be fixed by running the cables through the back and tightening it with the adjuster, or getting a shirt clip. It also tangles easily, though untangling isn't a hellish experience as you would get on a low-end Sennheisers or Sonys. On the upside the Y-split is reinforced and seems to be able to withstand some abuse.

While the outside might look almost the same, the Custom-3 is an altogether different beast on the inside. Like the Custom-2, each speaker is powered by dual balanced armature drivers. However unlike the Custom-2, the Custom-3's armature drivers is a two-way design, meaning a dedicated woofer and a tweeter through a crossover system. This may seem insignificant in comparison to the Westone 3 with its three-way system - but then again it does not cost nearly as much. Still, all these are just bullshit if it doesn't perform. More doesn't always mean better just like the best shaving experience still comes from a good traditional cut throat.



With a low impedance of 32 ohms, the Custom-3 is relatively easy to drive using my Walkman S639. I can listen to it at a comfortable level and portable amp is needed to run this. It is a less sensitive headphone compared to the Custom-2 which exhibited a slight hiss during silent passages, where as on the Custom-3 it was very difficult to detect any - if at all. Compared to the fuller sounding Custom-2, the Custom-3 is noticeably more refined, analytical and tight. Personally I think it is less fun in comparison to the Custom-2.

One thing I noticed about the Custom-3 was how alike the sound is to the Custom-1 - with better defined and forwarded mids and overall brighter less aggressive with a slighter warmer sound signature. The top-end could have been better, but the clarity is still amazing and isn't fatiguing and does not suffer from sibilant. Sound stage wise it is similar to the two Customs - in that they deliver a more 'in-head' sound than you would get with a traditional headphone, though it is evidently more spacious than the other two. Another area where the Custom-3 really does improve upon was its performance in regards to instrumental separation.



The bass is defined and sharp, though the dedicated woofer does very little to increase the bass quantity. This is good as I am beginning to appreciate a more neutral less-bassy sound, though Jennifer did scoffed at it before throwing it back and immediately switching to her trusty Sennheiser CX 95. Regardless, bass response is tight and the quantity an improvement over the muddy low-end escaping the Custom-1. Listening to Master of Puppets on the Custom-3 revealed wonderfully textured bass lines by the late Cliff Burton. Overall I have to say that the Custom-3 is a well balanced IEM that performs well with many genres.

Like the Custom-1 and Custom-2, I found the Custom-3 to be extremely comfortable. Despite wearing glasses, the memory cable is unobtrusive. It is fatiguing and I can wear it for a couple of hours at a time. I can even sleep on the side with it, though I would not recommend doing so with such an expensive pair of headphones. It doesn't isolate as well and you can definitely hear people talking when the music is switched off, though once music is player you will be happy to read that ambient noise isn't that noticeable at a moderate volume level. Very little sound escapes the headphones, which is ideal when listening to music in a semi hostile environment like the London Underground.



As much as I love the Custom-3, I seriously can't recommend the headphones at the suggested retail price. Do not get me wrong the Custom-3 is a great IEM, the best I've ever owned, but for US$299/£199 I would expect a bit more frills - for example having the cables replaceable like the those on the cheaper Sleek Audio SA6. Microphonics is still an issue with the Custom series, though it does disappear if you run it through the back. And not everyone will appreciate the mandatory over the ear fit either. At least with an IEM like Sennheiser's IE8 you get a choice between over ear or traditional earbud (cord hanging down) fit.

Remember that the Custom-3 is an IEM geared towards audiophiles and musicians. It isn't as 'fun' or 'emotional' (though I have to street it isn't 'boring' either) like other consumer-orientated headphones like Klipsch's own Image X10 or Ultimate Ears Super.Fi series. The best thing to do would be to try to audition as many as possible. I really do love mine, and would heartily recommend it if you can find it was readily available within the US$200/£150 mark or it gets marked down like during that recent Klipsch sale.

+ wonderful SQ with great all around performance and tight bass response
+ unique stylish design
+ very comfortable with the right tip
+ fabric cable
- expensive RRP (street and online price is far cheaper)
- excess packaging (this issue is being addressed by Klipsch)
- cumbersome to put on and remove

9/10

You can buy now from Amazon.com