The cheapest IEM to date....

[Zephyron 0]

THESE THINGS ARE LOUD!!! XP

 

First impressions, not yet burned in:

-These things are very low-mid-end bass quantisized, but the bass doesn't extend very deep. Its sensitivity maybe lower than that of the CK7, but it seems louder to me because of the low-mid bass and low-mids quantity. The volume levels were tested whilst walking around Causeway Point. The bass definitely does not drown out as easily as the CK7.

-There's a huge dip in the mid-mids to high mids region and supposedly quite a bit of concentration of low to low-mid highs, it can be a teeny bit sibilant at the start (they remind me a bit of the UM2 in this department). It feels somewhat hollow to me, the mid-mids to high-mids region feel very unresolving. Male vocals seem closer to me but female vocals seem somewhat distant. Overall, the mids feel as if they lack body.

-Surprisingly, its quite detailed, and can handle complex heavy rock passages better than my EX71, CK5 and LMX-E630 did.

-Its highs feel a liiiiiiiitttle bit rolled off.

-Soundstaging feels similar to the slightly larger than the EX71 and CK5, akin to LMX-E630's level but comes nowhere close to CK7.

-Very comfortable to wear, attentuates outside noise better than the EX71, CK5, LMX-E630 and CK7 to my ears. The ear sleeves used are similar to that of the CK5 and CK7, but seems somewhat thicker to me.

-Overall 1st impression isn't very good, but will burn-in for a few stages and then test the results after that using the CK7 as a benchmark for placebo hearing. I still prefer the sound from the LMX-E630 over the CK32 as of now.

 

Somehow, the CK32 strikes me as a phone that was deisgned for use in extremely noisy environments, where its pre-burned in graph should handle things more effectively.

 

EDIT: Pic add

ATH-CK32

 

Close-up shot

 

ATH-CK lineup

Edited April 26, 2006 by Zephyron

[aaron-xp 0]

Judging by your review, it seems like quite a good IEM, given its extremely low price (for a new IEM). This might very well spark a new trend for IEMs in Singapore. IEMs seem to be gaining popularity slowly, but their steep prices usually put people off.

[siriuz 0]

most creative freq response graph ever!

[Zephyron 0]

^

That graph's just my what my ears tell me. To others, it maybe different

[ahdui 0]

great review

[DiGdUb 0]

do they produce a lot of micrphonics?

[RB26DETT 0]

it may be just me, but i dun really understand the graph..

 

can someone like explain the graph to me?

 

EDIT: No. 100!! hehehe..

Edited April 26, 2006 by RB26DETT

[Zephyron 0]

Listened to the CK32 more carefully for a 2nd time this morning (yesterday was a brief impression before letting them burn in), the burn-in time has passed an estimated rough of about 10 hours or so.

 

Burnt in using white noise and sine wave sweep at 440Hz.

 

Had to take back some things I said yesterday. it'd seem that the bass of the CK32 seems much softer this time round, much so that I believe that there's a slight bowl scooped from the depths of the low to mid-bass region. It does recover when it reaches the high bass region though. The bass was much more tamed than I remember, or maybe I got the wrong impressions right from the start. Through EQ from the laptop (Foobar 2K), the main frequencies I have to push up were from the 55Hz to 311Hz region from a descending order of +6dB peak at 77Hz, and lowered at it sides in order.

 

Further bass tests in audacity (using the tone generator), the CK32 completely fails to reproduce anything below 22Hz, and the bass seems to start to rolloff at around 50Hz or so.

 

Still, the bass reproduction is much better than that of the ATH-CK5 still.

 

The mids seem to have more body this time round, female vocals (Utada Hikaru, Christina Aguilera and some others were used for test), don't feel as distant as I remembered yesterday, improvement was quite big.

 

The highs don't seem to have changed much, but there's a slight sparkle which I never thought was there. Sibilance seem to have also been tamed, tested to some tracks which have strong S sounds to test.

 

Must get to school now, I'll do some more further listening at the 20th hour I guess

 

 

EDIT: ADD

Digdub: They do carry microphonics, but its nowhere as bad as the CK5 IMO, not so bad this time round. Can also wear CK7 style

Edited April 26, 2006 by Zephyron

[[J]-ohn 0]

I guess all this means it good...

[Zephyron 0]

^

Don't consider that its good too soon yet. Honestly, I'm not very impressed as of yet, even given its cheap price point. Hmm, can let you audition first before you decide to get.

 

What AT can are you using now?

[DiGdUb 0]

got it today. only the white one is available for now. black and blue will come in next month.

 

initial impressions. the sound is weird. sounds a bit nasal, bass extension not there, highs like a bit rolled off, sound hollow and congested. only good thing about this earphones is the design is nice. you'd be better off paying a bit more for the cresyn 630 or the creative ep630. i'm guess this means you get what you pay for'.

 

rating: 2/5.

Edited April 27, 2006 by DiGdUb

[Zephyron 0]

^

Agreed with what Digdub said with regards to the bass extension, its definitely not there, and highs are rolled off.

However, I don't really feel that its too congested however, might be fit issues.

 

Also agree that money would be better spent on the Cresyn LMX-E630 and Creative EP630.

[Zephyron 0]

Burnt in more than 24 hours already, the more recent graph I tried to draw apparently still stands more accurately that the first.

 

Now can confirm that the ATH-CK32 is a canalphone that rolls off in bass and highs and only mainly has mids. A good scenario of 'you get what you pay for', its not a good earphone in my books. The best way to describe the ATH-CK32 is that it sounds rather nasal. Its clarity however, still beats the MDR-EX51 I currently have.

 

Below it a final comparison graph of how I think it sounds (1+ hour usage or so) after comparing it with the ATH-CK7 (a days usage) and SportaPro (graph not included):

 

I take back what I commented in my 2nd impression with regard to its treble sparkle, the CK7 completely blows it away in that department.

 

The CK7 gave me a more accurate feel of how the ATH-CK32 sounded like after A-B-ing the tracks I'm familiar to, ranging from Jazz, Alternative Rock, Classical and Video Game OSTs. Somehow, after using the CK32 for an hour and then switching back to the CK7 makes the CK7 actually sound warm and whole.

 

This should be my final impression for the CK32, I don't think there'll be anymore change in terms of sound, especially when I've seen burning it in utilizing lineout load at slightly higher than listening volume to kind of accelerate the burn in process, and then use the ATH-CK7, then switch to the ATH-CK32 for about 1 hour and then write this out.

 

Overall summary: Avoid the CK32, fork-out the extra cash for either the Cresyn LMX-E630 or the Creative EP630, they do your wallet better justice.

[Watanabe 0]

i'm wondering about the sound. Is it good?

[xllms 0]

i'm wondering about the sound. Is it good?

if u want good sound at the price range, pls ignore this and go straight to the cresyn

 

for me anything

below S$70 -> Cresyn E-630

S$71-S$150 -> Audio Technica CK7

S$151-S$250 -> Westone UM-1

S$251-S$350 -> ??? (anyone wanna chip in?)

S$351-S$500 -> Westone UM2 or Shure E4c

S$500-S$1000 -> Shure E500

>S$1000 -> UE10

 

*wonder how much does etymotic ER4P costs now? anyone knows? n where can get one in sg? (these were reference earphones for sound engineers)

 

my criteria for tis selectation is based on a balance between price and sonic reproduction of music (me no bass-head, btw)

 

xllms

Edited April 30, 2006 by xllms