Ultimate Ears intros Triple.Fi 10vi headphones with built-in mic
By Nilay Patel 
posted December 11th 2008 8:32PM
posted December 11th 2008 8:32PM
[Via iPodNN]
posted December 11th 2008 8:32PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Do you believe Apple fits iPods and iPhones with high-end DAT processors and amps? Running even lossless files through the sub-par components in these iPlayers, you're still getting some quality loss.
I use Apple lossless and I own an iPhone. I do also realize I don't need $400 earbuds to go with my mediocre player.
I understand what you're saying and I agree somewhat, but most people who would fork over the cash for a pair of these would use it with other audio sources as well. They will probably last through several generations of ipods. Using it just for an iphone is kind of a waste. Still though, I don't think that the Ipods are so bad that it's not worth getting some extremely good earbuds for. $400 for a good pair of earphones for just ipod use isn't that big of a deal and not overkill. Of course with 128kbps mp3s it most definitely is! With a good headphone amp and an ipod I still think spending $400 for some good earbuds is worth it and the sound quality improvement would definitely be noticed. You can easily tell the difference between say some $100 Shure headphones and the Triple-Fi's. From day one, i've never felt my combination of the ipod and the Triple-Fi 10's was a waste. Somedays if I don't care about sound quality I can easily get away without using a headphone amp. Of course not everyone needs $400 earphones. Even $50 these days can get something decent. Unlike with some BOSE stuff, for the $400 you really do get what you pay for.
Are UE Triple-Fi 10's even audiophile grade equipment? I always figured that was more like Sennheiser 650's and some of the more expensive Grado stuff. Now what would REALLY be stupid is using some $1000 Grado GS1000 headphones with an ipod mini. I bet some people do. I was tempted to buy a pair of those used, but passed at the last minute. I'm sure glad I did.
You think the iphone is bad? I upgraded to the IE40s (= triple.fi's) from Etymotic ER4s back when I was still using a Jabra bluetooth pendant. You know how BAD the quality of bluetooth stereo is? Apple refuses to implement it!!! Even with this awful sound source the difference was striking - and the ER4s are pretty high end. The improvement in performance was totally worth the money, even if the final result was still limited by bluetooth stereo. The triple.fis/IE40s really separated out the individual instruments and placed them in 3D space, even in really dense production, even with this awful bluetooth stereo source.
Cabled directly to the iphone they're amazing. The iphone has good DATs. You could get better, but it's a case of diminishing returns and sacrificing the convenience of a single device. I think you get more bang for your buck buying $400 headphones than you do getting an MP3 player with better DATs.
Wrong, do some research on the iMod - http://www.redwineaudio.com/iMod.html
Also ever heard of the Pico amp? http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f5/pico-usb-dac-amplifier-headamp-255507/
Pair these two together, like I have, and a pair of comparable headphones (I use sennheiser hd25-1's) and you will be in portable euphoria, just be sure your source isn't 192kbps or worse. Just one tip, this set up probably won't fit in your pocket.
The fact, is I hate UEs, all of them. I bought a pair of Super.fi 3s for $180 or so, and they just wouldn't fit in my ears. They hurt my ears after trying to fit them in for too long, and they were pain in the arse to carry around with my iPod. In the end I just got a pair of Yuin PK2s; they sound great and they're so much easier to carry around.
I had the same exact problem as you. My first earbuds were some hundred dollar Shures. Hated them due to problems with the fit. I couldn't even stand the foam inserts they provided.
I have the UE Triple-fi 10's and none of the inserts would fit comfortably in my small ears. Bought the Comply Foam inserts and the problem was solved. Zero pain or discomfort. They're now included with most UE models now I believe. Normally they're like $20 for a bag.
I think you can get the Comply Foam pieces for Shure earbuds as well.
The $350 Shure SE420s have a frequency range of 20Hz – 19kHz. I looked at Audacity's "spectrum analysis" readings from some of my music with lots of lows and there does appear to be some stuff down in that range... How noticeable would a 10Hz difference make? Would it be $50 worth of difference? The Shure model spans 2,000 more Hz in the highs - is the 10 extra Hertz of lows better (or more noticeable than 2,000 Hz of highs)??
How are frequency ranges measured? Is there a standard? If there's not, I can imagine the results would be very similar to the LCD contrast ratio dilemma.
I know, I know, too many questions...
or maybe the extra $50 covers the mic?
I don't think frequency response numbers are very helpful. The flatness of the response curve is probably more important to the quality of the sound. You really have to listen to them to judge.
Either order from someplace you can try them and return them (headphone.com) or go someplace you can try them out. Guitar Center has the M-Audio badged Ultimate Ears and will give you fresh foam ear thingys so you can try them. I don't know who has Shures you can try. I tried some at a Brookstone once that were out on the display - I was curious enough to stick them in my ears without worrying where they'd been. Ugh. The SE530s are incredible... and I didn't get an ear infection.
Actually, the lowest frequency that a human can recognize as pitched sound is about 20 Hz. Anything below that just sounds like clicks instead of pitch. Of course, there are frequencies from percussion and other unpitched instruments below 20 Hz, but you won't be noticing the difference.
Can I just ask why we need headphone that are capable of emitting frequencies that our ears cannot?
that's an interesting point, I just read a few websites that claim a typical human ear can only detect frequencies between 20Hz and 20kHz, which to me, makes the Shures sound like a better deal. (in the interest of full disclosure - I own a pair of Shure SE310s)
An elephant, however, can detect frequencies as low as 5Hz. Though finding one with $400 to spare might be slightly more of a challenge.
Any idiot who shells out for three way earbuds deserves all the crossover distortion that comes from such a superfluous design.
Well designed speakers of any size start as one way, and additional drivers are added only if necessary to cover the spectrum effectively.
Given the tiny size of the drivers and the minuscule mass that needs moved, there is simply no way these are an improvement anywhere but in the easily impressed snob's mind.
Put the most powerful magnets on earth in there. Wind the bobbins to previously unheard of levels of precision. Make the driver surfaces more rigid than anything ever before, yet completely non-resonant. These are the steps that will lead to superior earbuds.
Multiple drivers can minimize 'inverse square law' distortion, that is increasingly present at high levels. There is no such thing as "perfectly stiff" driver material, you'd be unable to get any sound from such a driver. Assembling a spider to a tiny diaphram? well, I suppose it's possible... but you clearly know nothing about speaker design, sorry.
Meh. As a long time professional musician. . . .to opine: Shure has multiple in ear monitors that dominate these in price ranges from significantly less to comparable. It is amusing the read the posts that a I-Pod, chock full of mp3s, justifies expensive botique-ee headphones at any rate. You clearly must not know what (even a high bit rate) MP3 compression does to a good digital recording of dynamic audio. And the cans we're discussing here are definiately going to make the glaring aural noise obvious enough for Hellen Keller to turn a deaf ear. The best ATRAAC or MP4 compression is ok, sigh ok, but you really need to keep your recordings lossless (FLAC anyone? :) ) if you're going to invest in quality headphones.
Fact is, even modestly priced shures improve the sound So Bleeping Much that you won't believe it, even with 128K mp3 the difference is astounding. Yeah, I know that $400 is a stupid amount of cash, unless you are prone to the pleasure of hearing really good sound. Fact is, most of the time I could care less, I'm listening to 'music in the background'. But I can tell you that apple uses DAcs that are pretty decent. It's the phones that come with the players that are mediocre. And if there are times when you want some serious portable music, there are non better than the iPod, that I've heard, even if the lows roll off a little much in some units. (not like you can't open em up and fix that problem with a little creative soldering!)
Anyway, if music is important to you, then $400 phones aren't out of line. Not at all. And they are not wasted on an iPod at all, with good source material. If you scoff at $400, then you can probably scrounge a set of Shures for $70 on ebay and get much happiness that way too. (fit problems not withstanding... don't give up without trying various ear plug materials and sizes)
DOes anybody make a mic attachment for normal headphones?
If it was just about the specs...
Audio-Technica ATH-CKM50
Frequency Response 5 - 24,000 Hz
MSRP* US$79.99
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/headphones/515b593287bd3c0f/index.html
Enjoy the sweeet sounds of a bargain!
Yes and a cup of mud has plenty of minerals in it too... enjoy the bargain!!!
It is a shame if you listen your ipoop using this earphone.
Ipoop sound quailty is just flat.
Dont get wrong I have iphone and my wife has ipoop touch, but I dont use my iphone for my mp3 player.