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!
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!
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).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).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.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.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.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.
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.
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.
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).
Specifications and stuff:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).Specifications and stuff: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.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.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.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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?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.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.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.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.
