badrisuper
Active Member
I just realized why HM-601 was so loud yesterday
It's a big screw-up, really sorry for that. But in every failure, there's something to learn. In this I learned that I am allergic to loudness - at least with 601's high gain mode with IEMs.
Let's try everything today......this time in my ranking order using Opeth - "When" from MYAH:
- EX-1000: Good. Slight elevation in bass quantity, bass note becomes a bit thick which makes me feel a bit muddy at times. Sound stage width is one big sacrifice that EX-1000 had to make, though depth is not bad at all. EX-1000 usually sounds sweeter in the mids, but it assumes a slightly warmish tonality here. Treble energy of EX-1000 is lost with HM-601 as is to be expected. When listening stand-alone, the difference in note thickness is not as much felt until I switch to UHA-6S. Due to a constricted width, separation between the center, left and right is not as wide in 601. Some excellent separation and spatial positioning in UHA-6S is clearly lost in 601 due to this. Vocals occupy a far more prominent role in 601, whereas they are distant and slightly recessed to the guitars in UHA-6S. It's a 50:50 as far as loss-gain is concerned. The only thing that matters - Does it sound good? Yes!
- SM3: Bad. Two things stand out for SM3 - it's "in your face" mids and the excellent separation. What do you get when you mix cream with more cream? Of course, fat is what it gets with mid range. Guitars sound too thick, vocals are anyway the main focus of both. In complex passages, there's mild crowding in the center image next to the UHA-6S. Bass of SM3 does not feel as elevated as in the case of EX-1000. Treble of course gets drowned out. A few may like it still, but count me out.
- FX700: Decent. Ah! That's what I missed - the recessed vocals. The separation in FX700 being more rounded than that of EX-1000's largely Left to Right half circle lends better hand with HM-601. Despite that, the effect of drum traveling from back right towards front is far better pronounced with the well separated UHA-6S. But, switch to UHA-6S, even the recessed vocals seem to get a bit more clarity. That's because of the thicker, a bit more pronounced bass in HM-601 that towers a bit over the mids than anything else. Bass punch is a little harder on the HM-601 as well. In this case, I am a little split. Does FX700 sound nice with HM-601? Somewhat for sure. But, from FX700's point of view, not all it's strengths show through HM-601.
- CK10: Decent. Long been my only analytical IEM in the fave four, that's because it does two things exceedingly well - one is giving a limitless space with great, precise imaging and the very splashy, 10Khz spikey treble. The separation and sense of space while relatively present well within the HM-601 needs that expanse to show off better. One would think that due to the treble roll-off, it would take CK10's treble away. However, while the edge gets somewhat blunt, it is still similarly forward in HM-601. Mids feel a bit recessed (vs UHA-6S) in HM-601. In all, while much less demanding on the ears, CK10 does feel a little constrained with 601. CK10 is simply more enjoyable with UHA-6S as it brings out both the edginess and the mid range smoothness out better.
- RE272: Good. At least in unbalanced mode, RE272 has poor bass quantity, more lower mids, flatter upper mids and treble. It is never biting on the ears in any case. Since you are going to hear almost all mids + a little bit at either end, RE272 probably sounds a bit like a poor cousin of RE262 with 601. But, mid range still remains detailed without craving for too much attention, imaging does not suffer too much and that slightly thick bass of HM-601 helps fill out a very little bit at the lower end. RE272 is probably the only one here that does not suffer shocking signature and presentation shifts.
- Etymotic HF2: Good. Ety is notorious for a few things - chief among them is requiring insertion to where no ear tip has gone before. Second would be lack of sound stage. Of course, if it did not have as clear mids and treble, I would not have bothered. It's one of the few IEMs I've bought this year that I quite enjoy. Much like RE272, the transition is less shocking with HF2 as well (light but well textured bass, good on mids, flat treble, not much sound stage) => (slightly thick bass, good on mids, non-sparkling treble, not much sound stage). Of course, being a fan of treble, I'd choose any other player easily with HF2.
More later. This is just a quick A:B and I looked out only for a few differences - relative frequency response / balance, sound stage, imaging. Due to time constraints, could not be further in depth. One thing more irritating with 601 is the gap between tracks for gap-less albums like "MAYH", whereas QA350 has far less gap that it's almost gap-less (though gap won't escape your attention, you are already in the next song before you think about it).
Is switching gain affects our listening? I like to know what is A:B comparison? May be silly question but I dont know much about audio.
