Hey, I’m curious about the EX800ST. According to graphs, it looks exactly like what I would prefer, as it has a nice dip at 4kHz where the JVC has a spike that makes it sound brighter than I would like. How is the bass impact and warmth on the EX800ST compared to the FDX1? I find that the bass impact is excellent on the JVC once you get rid of that 4kHz peak with EQ.
The seal is the biggest factor with the EX800ST, I started using the Xelastec tips and it has good punch, they are warm and full bodied too, but the driver has good proficiency so it never seems muddy to me. It EQs well if you dont like it too. Compared to the JVC its like fire and ice. The JVC is so precise and detailed, but it is cold sounding. Ive not had an issue with bass impact on the EX, where with the JVC there was not any weight to the notes the way I like so to improve it I have a 2db bump from sub to mid bass and its pretty nice that way. 
I hope this helps, sorry if its on the ramble-y side.
They’re back at Drop. And at $175, they’re fantastic value.
how do these compare to the wood variant? also, are these so good that their performance maintains the value proposition when compared against the competition at the same price point? good audio is always good…but if they underperform at their price point, they may not be worthy of your hard earned coin.
One of my favorite IEMs, more than certainly competitive with anything $200-250. Fantastic timbre and balance, treble can be too spicy but picking the most muted filter can help if you are sensitive, fit is also something to be wary of compared to UIEM shape, I personally had to work hard to get a secure fit.
Usually never cheaper than $140 used, so $175 is a solid new price.
2 Likes
Yup. The clarity, resolution and coherence is way above the price point. Only caveats are, they are heavy, so seal can be broken when walking and isolation is poor. You will hear the environment, which partly negates the great technicalities when used outside.
2 Likes
I don’t think this set gets enough attention despite it’s unnatural timbre which is a potential dealbreaker.
The FDX1’s tuning is well balanced (With blue or green filters.) and very resolving, especially for a single DD set.
Lean neutral gang should look no further than this if they think the Blessing 2 won’t fit them well.
Not my favorite set, but it’s pretty impressive what JVC accomplished with the FD01 which was fixed with some modding.
3 Likes
FDX1 vs Olina
OK, a little background. So, I’m a happy FDX1 owner for more than a year. It’s my favourite IEM, with a wonderful tonal and technical balance. Last year I was mostly expanding my headphone collection, so this year I reserved the funds for a little IEM exploration. For a long time I’ve heard nice things about Tanchjim Oxygen, so when I’ve heard about $99 Oxygen “clone” (Tripowin Olina), I’ve decided to take a chance. What was my expectations? Potential side grade. Less detail, more soundstage, more dynamic, better treble extension, slightly energetic upper midrange.
So let’s compare:
Tips and tuning
- Green filter and XS stock tips.
- Narrow bore S stock tips
Build and look
- FDX1 is small but heavy, with distinctive industrial look. Very nice.
- Olina is medium size and light, very beautiful with marble plate and shine, blue aluminum shell.
1 < 2
Olina wins it for me. Good build and really like the look.
Comfort
- Heavy. When walking prone to falling out and breaking the seal. Stock tips have bad grip.
- Good. Comfortable. Has some movement which needs readjustment.
1 < 2
Olina. With IEMs is the same as with headphones, the lighter, the better. Less fiddling with position.
Isolation
- Bad. Vented design. You hear the environment.
- Very bad. 2 vents per shell. Almost open back.
1 > 2
FDX1 wins it. Unfortunately, FDX1 isolation is bad, but Olina is new benchmark for bad isolation. As I’ve hear Oxygen is similar or worse, so at least I understand the design choice. However, this makes it almost unusable outside or in a noisy environment.
Tonality
Bass
- Perfectly tuned. Detailed and controlled. Not much dynamics, though. Sub bass feels rolled off and unimpactful.
- Similarly tuned. Less detail and control. Kind of echoy, reveby sound. Somewhat subdued in the big picture. Very good punch and slam.
1 > 2
It’s a trade off between precision and tactility. Olina bass is much more fun and tactile. Sub bass is much better on Olina. FDX1 bass is better controlled and more clear and detailed. I’m torn on this, but to my surprise, I give the preference to FDX1.
Test tracks:
Chameleon - Trentemoller
Sadness - Enigma
They Just Haven’t Seen It - San Holo
Mids
- Perfect. Perfect lower midrange. Slightly recessed lower midrange. Clear and detailed midrange with no shoutines.
- Small recess at lower midrange, high energy at the upper. Clear and sparkly midrange, with a touch of shoutines.
1 > 2
What Olina gains in sparklines, loses in detail and fatigue, especially on higher volumes. Also energetic upper mids kind of negate Olina’s lower frequencies. FDX1 mids are more detailed and smooth. Olina’s more aggressive and rough.
Test tracks:
Crazy - Daniela Andrade
My Work - JFDR
Treble
- Very good. Small peak and recessed air.
- Excellent. Bigger peak and lower air peak.
1 < 2
Definitely better treble extension on Olina, with the price of a little rougher response.
Test tracks:
Red Light Zone - Colonia
Overall
1 > 2
FDX1 has excellent tuning. Only nitpicks are non impactful sub bass and rolled off treble.
Olina has very good tuning. Energetic upper midrange limits you to medium volumes (not bad per se). Bass is dynamic and tactful but relatively uncontrolled and echoy, which influence the overall clarity. Also focus on the midrange kind of impedes bass perception. So there is kind of negative feedback, bass degrades mids, mids impedes bass. Treble is excellent.
Overall FDX1 is more smooth and enjoyable listen.
Technicalities
Detail
- Excellent. Hard, fast transients. Fantastic clarity.
- Very good.
1 > 2
FDX1 is on another level. Olina is very good, but tier or two below FDX1.
Imaging
- Average soundstage. Precise imaging.
- Good. Sound stage is widest I’ve heard in IEM. However, still an IEM.
1 >= 2
Olina has biggest soundstage I’ve heard in IEM. This is Olina’s forte. Imaging seems better on the FDX1. Maybe product of it’s clarity. Despite of it, I remain somewhat unimpressed with Olina’s soundstage as it stays squarely in IEM territory. However, I am impressed with FDX1 imaging, so my slight preference goes to it.
Dynamics
- Flat. Average.
- Very good. Bass punch is excellent.
1 < 2
Olina is more dynamic IEM. FDX1 is somewhat dynamically constrained.
Overall
1 > 2
Despite Olina’s nice soundstage and dynamic sound, I think that clarity, resolution and imaging are on the FDX1 side. It is a technically better IEM.
Value
- worth the blind (at $200) (seems unavailable this moment)
- redefines the price bracket
1 > 2
At 1/2 of FDX1 price (1/3 in my case, with transport and import duties), Olina is very competitive and maybe the best IEM at $100 bracket. However, FDX1 (if available at $200) is probably the best single DD under $700.
Overall
FDX1
Pros: resolution, tuning (with green nozzle), design
Cons: heavy, isolation, sub bass, treble extension
Olina
Pros: really big soundstage, great punch n’ slam, comfortable build, great looks
Cons: abysmal isolation, which makes it unusable in the noisy environments, hot upper mids. Hot upper mids would be manageable on medium volume, but with low isolation this makes them unusable outside
Olina is very nice for the price, maybe even the best in the price bracket. Detail is with the best is the price bracket, probably behind ER2XR.
So did it meet expectations?
Less detail? Yes.
More soundstage? Yes.
More dynamic? Yes.
Better treble extension? Yes.
Slightly energetic upper midrange? Yes.
Side grade? Eh? Well, now we enter deeply in the field of personal preferences. FDX1 is problematic outside, Olina is borderline unusable. But, disregarding that, are the technical trades off worth it? Well, for me… no. What I did conclude, is that I prefer detail retrieval and imaging to IEM soundstage and even dynamics. Bounded with great tuning, it makes FDX1 easy preference. However, for those who find FDX1 clinical, lacking sparkle, sub bass or dynamics, Olina might be a good choice, especially for the price. Take in the account that it is not usable in noisy environments.
All in all, Olina is an interesting IEM and this experience made me appreciate more FDX1 and made me more aware why I love them and also see some minor nitpicks I didn’t noticed before.
3 Likes
FDX1 is definitely more resolving than the Olina, but doesn’t have the fun factor of the Olina nor the soundstage width (This is open for debate tho.) You can’t go wrong with either IMO.
That being said, I do use my own FDX1 on a weekly basis when swapping out IEMs, I do appreciate it’s super clean sound, stock cable is a heavy MF tho, always wear mine over head like a traditional IEM, not the most comfortable fit but it’s serviceable.
Just got a B2:Dusk from another head.fi member, will be testing both out when I get that in the mail, I think both are similar on sheer detail retrieval.
2 Likes