![:headphone: :headphone:](./images/smilies/msp_headphones.gif)
Vu ce que j'ai lu ici et là, j'ai l'idée que c'est exceptionnel, mais... j'aimerai bien avoir ton opinion
![(Y) (Y)](./images/smilies/msp_thumbup.gif)
Ok merciMrLocoLuciano a écrit :Je crois que je ne me suis jamais dis de quelque chose que c'était exceptionnel. À part peut-être les Craft Six vu le tarif, et je pense qu'ils te plairaient.
Les Odin sont de très bon intras, signature proche des Trinity SS avec un peu plus de mediums et un peu moins de haut médium.
Les basses sont exceptionnelles je trouve.
Le soundstage est excellent, notamment la profondeur.
De très belles qualités techniques.
Du très bon boulot.
C'est très complémentaire des MAD24
MrLocoLuciano a écrit :3 jours d'écoutes maintenant, et je dois dire que le résultat est vraiment dans mes goûts sur ces S8Z,
La réponse est plus équilibrée que celle des S8P, moins en V et pas du tout agressif sur le R8. D'ailleurs, pas en V du tout pour moi et juste ouvert comme il faut dans le haut médium sans aucune sibilance.
Les bas-médiums ne sont pas trop épais ni trop fin, et permettent de laisser passer la moindre inflection d'émotion.
Les aigus sont agréables et précis.
Les basses BA, rapides et sèches sans emphase. Peut-être un peu léger pour mes goûts mais l'EQ paramétrique de Neutron est mon ami.
La scène est large et assez profonde avec un bon étage ment des plans.
Le résultat est très dynamique mais sans l'agressivité des S8P. Une vraie amélioration pour moi.
Voilà vraiment des intras agréables et vivant pour un tarif "raisonnable".
MrLocoLuciano a écrit :Bon alors ça fait un petit moment que j'ai ce R8.
J'ai revendu le DX220 Max car il était vraiment trop encombrant, mais niveau son il était au dessus, je le confirme.
La maîtrise des basses et le filé des aigus sont moins bons à mes oreilles sur le R8. Et surtout le fond noir est nettement meilleur sur le DX220 Max ce qui permet de passer la moindre inflexion. La scène me semblait aussi un poil plus large et profonde mais de peu.
Par contre l'ergonomie du R8 est à mille lieus de celle du DX220 MAX, et le médium un peu plus organique. Sa réactivité est bluffante, tout comme son autonomie.
Finalement je m'y suis fait, avec tout de même une réserve sur le bruit de fond qui m'agaçait vraiment.
Et en discutant avec Nayparm, il m'a dit qu'Hiby préconise la sortie 4,4 pour les casques et la 3,5 pour les intras.
J'ai donc fait le test, et le résultat est très positif. Pas au niveau du MAX, mais on est pas mal. Par ailleurs, aucune perte sur la scène ou les registres.
Du coup je suis enfin très satisfait du résultat.
Avec Neutron paramétré aux petits oignons c'est un régal.
MrLocoLuciano a écrit :J'ai pu tester le DX300 de Fabduf69 avec ses Nio.
Je ne connaissais ni l'un ni l'autre.
J'ai été très très déçu par le résultat niveau sonore.
Sombre, faible niveau de détail, résolution très moyenne...
Vraiment quelque chose qui ne fonctionne pas pour mes goûts.
Par contre niveau ergonomie et réactivité, équivalent du Hiby R8, une rolls.
Comme je n'avais pas mon matos, pas possible de vous en dire plus.
J'espère avoir l'occasion prochainement de le retester, car la, c'était pas top.
Deezel177 a écrit :To answer your previous question about note size, the way I define it is how much space these notes take up in the in-ear's stage; how much of the in-ear's soundscape is note vs. how much of it is clean air, or empty space, or the black background. And, that can be done in a number of ways as well:
A note can seem larger because it emanates more warmth, which comes from a raised mid-bass. It's also what I mean when I say an in-ear has warm air mucking up its image, or when I say the warmth present between instruments slightly congeals them together. It also relates to my comparison between the Noir and the ODIN, where I mention that the Noir's raised mid-bass causes its instruments to slightly intermingle. Whereas, when it comes to body and warmth, the ODIN's instruments largely keep to themselves. This is signified by the clean or "empty" air present between the ODIN's instruments.
A note can also seem larger because of a raised lower-midrange, and that's signified by a chestier, meatier tonality to the instrument as well. This is the kind of "largeness" or fat that you can observe on the Phantom, for example.
And, lastly, in the ODIN's case, its notes are larger because of the 2-3kHz peak. The presence region is raised, so singers and leads seem closer to you; more in-your-face in their delivery. And, what happens when an object comes closer to you? They'll seem bigger. That closeness gives the ODIN's upper-mids more resolution and texture, because those nuances are brought forth to you.
However, there can be a scenario where that rise is overdone, and you're so close to the instrument that you're almost suffocated by it. That's what I mean when I say an upper-midrange is intense or (over)saturated: Adding saturation to a photo can help you distinguish the different shades of colours (or the different nuances) in the image, but adding too much can also blow out details and stress your eyes.
Bringing instruments closer can also cause them to somewhat overlap spatially, reducing the precision in their imaging. For example, you have a guitar at 10 o'clock, a singer at centre-stage and a trumpet at 2 o'clock. If those notes come closer - and, thus, become larger - to you, that guitar now spans between 9 and 11 o'clock, and the singer sits between 1 and 2 o'clock, and the trumpet's between 1 and 3 o'clock. But, compared to the other two methods outlined above, this is a less common cause of poor separation, because having a present upper-midrange also contributes detail. Whereas, an excess of lows or low-mids will also mask detail, which makes separation even more difficult.
I really hope this is coming across clearly. I can probably include illustrations in a reply if you'd like me to explain it a bit better.
In any case, as I mentioned in the Midrange section of my ODIN review, neither are really issues on this IEM, because all of its nuances still come through, and there's always a sliver of air between instruments in that area.
Now, when it comes to tightening and/or compacting instruments, it's achieved by doing the opposite of everything I've listed above. Cutting the mid-bass takes away some of the warm air between instruments, so there's clearer separation between one and another. A lack of warmth between instruments also means that you're more able to see the image's background (or, say, in Photoshop, the base layer) between them. This also contributes a sense of tidiness or cleanliness. That's how itsfit Lab's Fusion does its separation, for example; more so relying on its sub-bass for kick.
And, the same applies to the low-mids in terms of body as well. Of course, the trade-off there is in fullness and tonality. The tighter and more compact instruments are (and the less warmth they emanate), the drier, thinner and more artificial they'll begin to sound. In the ODIN's case, specifically, the more you drop those low-mids, the less dynamic, present and rich male vocals and baritone saxophones become. This was basically the criticism I lobbed at the ODIN's lower-register presentation on the review.
Lastly, having the high-mids relaxed distances instruments from you a tad, so you're able to better tell where one ends and another begins. Also, as notes move further back, the space between them increases. Like, if people held hands in a circle and you told them to start walking backwards, they'd eventually have to let go of each other, because the space between them is now too large. The same applies to notes in an image. But, of course, it's only true if the IEM's also constructed a properly circular or spherical stage, which is what the ODIN does. All this is why the ODIN's midrange separation can't ever be as tight or precise as some of the more referenced-tuned IEMs out there, i.e. ones with more neutral high-mids. But, again, as I said in my review, it's the closest a musical midrange can get to that, which is to EE and the ODIN's credit.