Introduction:
This is perhaps my slowest review in terms of turn-around time since I got PR401 two months ago.
First, a Full Disclosure:
I bought it from lendmeurears (also was on eBay) by February. In the interest of full disclosure, at that time, he was running a discount sale at SGD 80 for Singapore buyers. I asked for the same discount and got it, but I had to pay an additional 7 SGD for International shipping. The total came to 87 SGD, which is approx $71, a clear $4 less than the usual $75. I was also asked to write a review for it, which I agreed to.
So, why was I not jumping out to review or post my impressions? For one, I bought many IEMs in between. Secondly, I wanted to see how PR401 compares to a few other IEMs, so I had to wait for them to come in - which means the usual delays with item being in stock (especially the hard to find Fischers), ordering, shipping, customs etc., Not to mention my losing of enthusiasm from time to time.
Photos:
Specifications:
Driver
|10mm Closed Dynamic
Frequency Response |10Hz ~ 20kHz
Impedance |32 ohm at 1kHz
Max Input |40mW
Sensitivity |103dB/mW at 1kHz
Cable |1.4m flat cable
Plug |Gold plated 3.5mm straight plug
Build Quality, Accessories, Isolation and Microphonics:
PR401 comes in a small black cardboard box with exactly the contents as shown in the first picture. The hard carry case is actually very good, a little larger in size than the ones I bought from eBay recently. There are the usual three sizes of single flanges and a shirt clip are included. In addition, delonicdevil bundled 3 sizes of Sony hybrid 'compatible' tips along with the package.
The housings are made of aluminum and pretty tiny in size. Unlike the longer M31 I reviewed recently, these truly disappear into the ear. A bit of twist once they are inside your ears helps the seal. I don't usually sleep with IEMs stuck inside the ear. But last Sunday, I had a nap listening to PR401 with absolutely no issues.
Which brings me to my main gripe with these IEMs - the flat cable. This is my only IEM with the flat cable, so I don't know if it's the case with all flat cables. The cable is thin and does not have a cord cinch or chin slider. Though they don't retain memory, they do tangle easily. They also happen to be bloody microphonic when worn straight down. The only other cable that I have a similar dislike for (within the same price range) would be Brainwavz M series due to it's memory character (try using them in a quick A/B :no
. Luckily, I could route PR401's cable over the ear using the Phonak Silicon ear guides. If you want a chin slider, you can do a 'rawster mod', which is basically using a electrical tape round the cord as a 'slider'. Shirt clip can cut down some microphonics as well.
Isolation is average to slightly below average depending on the seal you get.
Sound Signature:
The $60-100 range is the busiest range in the IEM world today. It's like the meaty midrange of music. There are lot of bargains to be had and they are typically great stepping stones to higher end IEMs. In such a crowded market, the key for survival is differentiation. Let's see if PR401 has what it takes to be an apt choice in the range.
PR-401 was given 80 hours of burn-in. At first, I was not impressed at all. But the problem with writing a review is that I had to be a little fair to the IEM without being either over the top or degrading it (even though it will still be my subjective and biased opinion). So, I gave it time to sink in to give as fair an analysis my subjective opinion could allow.
Frequency Response:
The impressions were written using the stock Medium size flanges, which gave me a comfortable fit and seal.
The first thing that strikes me when I think of PR401 is "polite". But, isn't it a V-shaped IEM? Read on...
The bass of PR401 falls around the region of Brainwavz M2 in quantity, but not as smooth and soft in nature. It has decent extension and punch, a bit more sub-bass than M3, though not as much to compete with Hippo VB. This puts it squarely off the map for bass-heads. It is much more oriented towards those who don't want lack of bass in their music and at the same time, do not want too much either.
The mids are slightly recessed in the scheme of things. But, unlike most V-shaped IEMs, PR401 has a delicate balance and hence mids do not get overshadowed by bass and treble. Mids are close to neutral tone with a slightly tinge of warmth, not as warm or lush like the Brainwavz M3 or Xears TDIII. The midrange remains fairly smooth and soft. Above all, despite the recessed nature, midrange is very clear, so there should not be any difficulty in picking up details.
The treble is in nice balance with bass and mids with a good amount of sparkle. Cymbals are crisp and have a bit of a body to them, neither ultra-thin nor thick. Personally, I prefer an extended, forthcoming treble, despite my hearing rolling off around 16Khz. That way, PR401 is not for the treble-head, but for someone who like a bit of sparkle, but not overly so.
Presentation:
What it does not convey to me is the 'bite' of guitars when I need them or the emotions in the vocals. In other words, once EQ-ed up, midrange seems pretty flat and soft in character. On the other hand, the smoothness leads to complete lack of sibilance and a bit of fatigue free listening. It's a trade-off, but I for one would have preferred it the other way.
The sound stage is wide with a bit of depth, but it is not the widest or the deepest sound stage I've heard. Separation is excellent. PR401 never feels congested like some IEMs do. They are faster as well.
The imaging is what sets PR401 apart from many others. It sounds sort of 'open'. Usually, the IEM sound stage has a clearly defined left and a right extremes. An 'open' sounding IEM gives an illusion of un-walled stage. That said, PR401's use of space is not very optimal. I have a couple of other IEMs that sound open. One is of course, the FX700 and the other one is the now discontinued Playaz N1. Both use front-to-back and left-to-right placement better than PR401. FX700 spans far more space than PR401, creates more distance between instruments and is also far better with imaging. N1 with it's distant sounding mids, while not in the league of FX700 is among the handful of IEMs which are spacious sounding with good separation.
Most of the open feel comes from the excellent separation and the airiness PR401 displays. But, it is a bit hazy when it comes to placement. I am used to finger pointing the artists in a track. But with PR401, I always seem to be playing "Catch the (Wo)man!". I know it's playing there somewhere, yet cannot locate it exactly. It seems to be up in the air without an exact positional cue to it - kind of feels like people trying to punch a ghost in movies. What happens with this kind of 'hazy imaging' is that most of the music seems to originate from the back of your head and up in the air. I am clearly unclear about describing it, but that's how it feels. Most will like it, some would rather prefer the traditional left-to-right, front-to-back positioning. I belong to the latter camp. It is a different and an interesting experience at first, but it muffles up certain things too.
Comparisons:
Why do I like A/B? Because most of the things I am about to say would not have been realized without A/B-ing the IEMs. My audio memory is as disastrous as the guy in Memento. Besides, our memories are not only made of the 'signature', but also a bit of our emotional response. So, your favorite IEM's signature would most probably be stored along with the happiness you experienced while listening to it. Combining that with my not so great audio memory, I feel better if I can A/B rather than talk from memory. If you listen to an IEM long enough in isolation, all it's faults will start to 'disappear' once there is enough brain adaptation. But with A/B, when you are quickly changing IEMs, brain does not get as much time to adapt or emote. While A/B won't be the most accurate, at least it's not as biased as comparing from memory.
Coming to comparisons, they say 'do not compare apple to an orange'. But, here I am going to compare the apple to orange, mango and even stones, if I need to. The purpose is not to determine how PR401 stacks up against other balanced or V-shaped IEMs in the $60-100 range, but to offer a small insight from my perspective about the choices available in this range. All the sound descriptions in this section must be considered relative and not absolute. Please also note that no IEM in this comparison is 10-20% better than the other. I rank them all within the same tier (except RE-ZERO) and hence the SQ difference is only within 5-10% depending on each one's preference. Also, most people describe the IEM from the perspective of their favored IEM. For instance, someone liking RE-ZERO over RE0 will say "RE0 has thin notes, recessed midrange and harsh treble", whereas for those liking RE0 over RE-ZERO, it would be "Too forward midrange, dry, not so great treble". I will try to present both sides a bit, though I won't be totally impartial.
Vs Brainwavz M3 ($80) with the Hifiman Bi-flange tip:
M3 is a perfect yang for the yin of PR401. In a reversal of sorts, M3 thrusts most focus on the midrange, making it forward and lush. Bass and treble play a support role, while not lacking. The sound stage is equally wide, while PR401 has a bit more depth. With bass, PR401 has more quantity and a bit more extension, helping bass guitar and double bass sound better than on M3. Despite it's recessed midrange, PR401 still manages to remain clear. But where the midrange of M3 scores is in conveying the emotion compared to the dry midrange of the PR401. It's not completely unfathomable considering the forwardness, warmth and the relatively better body M3 lends to the mids. The treble of PR401 is more airy, sparkling and crisp compared to the slightly thicker M3 as well, then again it's still short of how I like my treble. PR401 is also faster than M3.
Thanks to BF1983 for the extreme patience shown for this loaned IEM. Long live his love for RE1, without which he'd have called for his M3 long back
My preferred IEM: Neither. Though neither are close to my preferred signature, I prefer PR401 ever so slightly.
Vs Klipsch Image S4 ($80) with the LostEarBuds Klipsch tips:
If I complain about PR401's politeness again, shove S4 in my ears...please! The sound stage of S4 is a little wider than PR401. The bass of S4, while greater in quantity, also is thick, hard-hitting and a bit muddy which makes it lose on the quality front. But, there's no doubt that if someone prefers impact and quantity, S4 with it's good sub-bass extension would be preferred. The midrange of S4 sounds thinner without texture even when compared to the not so thick PR401. Not to mention, whenever the recording has sibilance, S4 will magnify it. S4's treble is thick, but lacks the detail and clarity that PR401 brings out. S4 also sounds a bit congested in complex passages, a fate that PR401 does not suffer. While PR401 does not want to cross the lines, S4 crosses a few lines that should not be crossed. Stand alone, S4 may not be as bad though!
Thanks to strategy. Do you even remember you sent this on tour?
My preferred IEM: PR401
Vs Xears TD100-II (varies. Roughly $60-80) with UE compatible medium single flange:
Of course, the Xears don't do that well in the build quality department with their cable and driver flex. PR401 has a wider and deeper sound stage than Xears. With a deeper insertion, TD100-II has thunderous bass that overwhelms the spectrum. A little shallow insertion would do the trick. The bass - both in mid and sub-bass area - are larger in quantity than PR401. While TD100-II has the thinnest note of the TD series, it appears thick and very slow when pitted against the PR401. The midrange of TD100-II is a tad more forward than PR401 even with the bass trying to overshadow it. PR401 is not only clearer, but also more forthcoming with details than the TD100-II. On the other hand, TD100-II with it's slightly more warmth and thickness brings forth some decent timbre for a midrange phone. With treble, PR401 is a it faster and crisper, but TD100-II again is not too far behind. The slight clincher in favor of TD100-II despite it's not so great technical prowess is the traditional imaging. Considering they both are on par, I'd give the edge to TD100-II.
My preferred IEM: Xears TD100-II
Vs Xears TDIII Blackwood (varies. Roughly $60-80) with White medium single flange from LostEarBuds:
TDIII is quite similar to TD100-II, not a surprise considering that it's a different tuning of the same driver. Compared to TD100-II, TDIII adds some lushness and slight bit more forwardness to the midrange, but makes the treble a little thick losing the some of the sparkle in the process. So, what PR401 loses in the midrange, it gains in the treble over TDIII.
My preferred IEM: PR401
Vs Fischer Audio Eterna V1 ($68) with UE single flange (approx burn-in time: 47 hours at the time of this comparison):
Eterna is a strange beast indeed! While it's sound stage is as spacious, perhaps a bit more than PR401, that's where the comparisons stop being favorable to it. The mid-bass quantity is huge compared to PR401 with a good punch as well. But next to the light weight PR401's bass, Eterna's bass feels a bit muddy. Coming to the midrange, Eterna feels a bit more thick and full bodied, but also feels dry, cold compared to PR401. The treble on the Eterna is recessed and needs a bit of an effort to see that it's actually a bit airy and sparkling. Above all, PR401 scores very well in clarity across the spectrum. Yet, in spite of all these things, I did not feel Eterna to be inferior to PR401, just laid-back. I'd start to A/B Eterna, but would forget to switch back to PR401 and vice versa. If one was perceived to be 'bad' or 'inferior', less chances of that happening. Eterna may not be technically proficient, but the overall sound has a charming B- movie quality to it, you know, like the films that later become cult classics.
My preferred IEM: PR401. Don't blame me if I prefer Eterna later on.
Vs Fischer Audio Silver Bullet V2 ($68) with UE single flange (approx burn-in time: 53 hours at the time of this comparison):
The sound stage of SB has more lateral width and sounds far more spacious than PR401. The way it portrays distances is excellent. The bass of PR401 has more quantity and a tad more extension than SB. But, SB's bass is more than adequate for my tastes. The mids of SB are the best in this comparison. It's lush, sweet, slightly recessed, may be a tad bit more forward than PR401. It feels like sculpted to perfection for my tastes. I cannot describe it as thick or thin, just about right. Treble, while not forward, extended or as detailed as PR401, is very airy and displays some amount of sparkle. As a treble head, I do search for it at times (reminds me of a certain RE1, only several notches better overall). Separation is excellent in both. SB sounds every bit as airy and spacious as PR401, only better without sounding too distant or too close.
My preferred IEM: Silver Bullet V2
Vs Hippo VB ($79) Foam mod, 2 dot bass plate with original Sony hybrid Medium size:
A fair comparison between two V-shaped IEMs? Let's see. Hippo VB's sound stage is wider than PR401. The mid-bass quantity of PR401 is higher than VB, but it's also thick. VB's bass is much cleaner and leaner all the way till sub-bass. In the midrange, PR401 scores very well in clarity, smoothness and is a tad bit more forward when compared to VB. With treble, I prefer neither since both seem to be OK, though I'd give a very slight edge to PR401. Since this seems like a close competition, what happens when I apply EQ to bring the mids forward to equal levels? Turns out that despite not having the best midrange, I prefer VB since PR401 is well...flat!
My preferred IEM: Hippo VB (EQ). If I had not EQ-ed, I'd have picked PR401.
Vs RE-ZERO ($99) with Stock Medium single flange:
RE-ZERO is a bit strange in that it requires a tiny bit of 'adjustment time' until it stops sucking and becomes a better IEM to my ears! It should not be a shock that PR401's sound stage actually is wider than RE-ZERO or that it's bass is much better than RE-ZERO's "Me too" bass. ZERO's mids are warm and forward. Clarity is good in PR401, but even better with RE-ZERO. And whenever you bring in treble, PR401 does not hold a chance against the ZERO. With the IEMs compensating at the extremes - PR401 in bass and ZERO in treble, it comes down to details, in which ZERO easily wins.
For many people, the law of diminishing returns in terms of SQ begins at $50 or $80. While I don't go by the price, I feel that there is a BIG step-up in my rankings from Tier-III (other IEMs in the comparison) and below to Tier-II (PFE, RE-ZERO, RE0, HJE900).
My preferred IEM: RE-ZERO
My (subjective) Rankings of the IEMs compared, ordered by rank:
Value for Money:
ECCI PR401 is yet another good choice in the $60-100 bracket. Comparing to my reference at $80, RE0, I would be willing to pay somewhere around $60-70 for the sound. $75 is not far off that price. So, I'd say it's a decent value for money IEM, but ONLY if the signature suits your taste.
My Ranking:
PR401 currently ranks 17 / 45 in my rankings. Since I have not completely evaluated a few other IEMs in the same tier (Eterna, SB and TDIII), it may move up or down the list. For a complete list of my IEM ranking, check out the link in my signature.
Is it for ME?:
Choose PR401 if you answer Yes to all questions
Conclusion:
On the whole, I'd describe PR401 as balanced with a slightly less preference for mids than stronger emphasis on bass and treble. One thing that does stand out in PR401 is it's very good clarity across the range. In spite of the slight V-shaped frequency response, it does not overstep any limit to hurt the ears. In a way, it has a bit of everything, but without any excesses, a bit "polite" as I mentioned at the beginning. While it's not the only choice under $100, it is among the better choices for those who want a balanced IEM with good clarity.
This is perhaps my slowest review in terms of turn-around time since I got PR401 two months ago.
First, a Full Disclosure:
I bought it from lendmeurears (also was on eBay) by February. In the interest of full disclosure, at that time, he was running a discount sale at SGD 80 for Singapore buyers. I asked for the same discount and got it, but I had to pay an additional 7 SGD for International shipping. The total came to 87 SGD, which is approx $71, a clear $4 less than the usual $75. I was also asked to write a review for it, which I agreed to.
So, why was I not jumping out to review or post my impressions? For one, I bought many IEMs in between. Secondly, I wanted to see how PR401 compares to a few other IEMs, so I had to wait for them to come in - which means the usual delays with item being in stock (especially the hard to find Fischers), ordering, shipping, customs etc., Not to mention my losing of enthusiasm from time to time.
Photos:
Specifications:
Frequency Response |10Hz ~ 20kHz
Impedance |32 ohm at 1kHz
Max Input |40mW
Sensitivity |103dB/mW at 1kHz
Cable |1.4m flat cable
Plug |Gold plated 3.5mm straight plug
Build Quality, Accessories, Isolation and Microphonics:
PR401 comes in a small black cardboard box with exactly the contents as shown in the first picture. The hard carry case is actually very good, a little larger in size than the ones I bought from eBay recently. There are the usual three sizes of single flanges and a shirt clip are included. In addition, delonicdevil bundled 3 sizes of Sony hybrid 'compatible' tips along with the package.
The housings are made of aluminum and pretty tiny in size. Unlike the longer M31 I reviewed recently, these truly disappear into the ear. A bit of twist once they are inside your ears helps the seal. I don't usually sleep with IEMs stuck inside the ear. But last Sunday, I had a nap listening to PR401 with absolutely no issues.
Which brings me to my main gripe with these IEMs - the flat cable. This is my only IEM with the flat cable, so I don't know if it's the case with all flat cables. The cable is thin and does not have a cord cinch or chin slider. Though they don't retain memory, they do tangle easily. They also happen to be bloody microphonic when worn straight down. The only other cable that I have a similar dislike for (within the same price range) would be Brainwavz M series due to it's memory character (try using them in a quick A/B :no
. Luckily, I could route PR401's cable over the ear using the Phonak Silicon ear guides. If you want a chin slider, you can do a 'rawster mod', which is basically using a electrical tape round the cord as a 'slider'. Shirt clip can cut down some microphonics as well.Isolation is average to slightly below average depending on the seal you get.
Sound Signature:
The $60-100 range is the busiest range in the IEM world today. It's like the meaty midrange of music. There are lot of bargains to be had and they are typically great stepping stones to higher end IEMs. In such a crowded market, the key for survival is differentiation. Let's see if PR401 has what it takes to be an apt choice in the range.
PR-401 was given 80 hours of burn-in. At first, I was not impressed at all. But the problem with writing a review is that I had to be a little fair to the IEM without being either over the top or degrading it (even though it will still be my subjective and biased opinion). So, I gave it time to sink in to give as fair an analysis my subjective opinion could allow.
Frequency Response:
The impressions were written using the stock Medium size flanges, which gave me a comfortable fit and seal.
The first thing that strikes me when I think of PR401 is "polite". But, isn't it a V-shaped IEM? Read on...
The bass of PR401 falls around the region of Brainwavz M2 in quantity, but not as smooth and soft in nature. It has decent extension and punch, a bit more sub-bass than M3, though not as much to compete with Hippo VB. This puts it squarely off the map for bass-heads. It is much more oriented towards those who don't want lack of bass in their music and at the same time, do not want too much either.
The mids are slightly recessed in the scheme of things. But, unlike most V-shaped IEMs, PR401 has a delicate balance and hence mids do not get overshadowed by bass and treble. Mids are close to neutral tone with a slightly tinge of warmth, not as warm or lush like the Brainwavz M3 or Xears TDIII. The midrange remains fairly smooth and soft. Above all, despite the recessed nature, midrange is very clear, so there should not be any difficulty in picking up details.
The treble is in nice balance with bass and mids with a good amount of sparkle. Cymbals are crisp and have a bit of a body to them, neither ultra-thin nor thick. Personally, I prefer an extended, forthcoming treble, despite my hearing rolling off around 16Khz. That way, PR401 is not for the treble-head, but for someone who like a bit of sparkle, but not overly so.
Presentation:
What it does not convey to me is the 'bite' of guitars when I need them or the emotions in the vocals. In other words, once EQ-ed up, midrange seems pretty flat and soft in character. On the other hand, the smoothness leads to complete lack of sibilance and a bit of fatigue free listening. It's a trade-off, but I for one would have preferred it the other way.
The sound stage is wide with a bit of depth, but it is not the widest or the deepest sound stage I've heard. Separation is excellent. PR401 never feels congested like some IEMs do. They are faster as well.
The imaging is what sets PR401 apart from many others. It sounds sort of 'open'. Usually, the IEM sound stage has a clearly defined left and a right extremes. An 'open' sounding IEM gives an illusion of un-walled stage. That said, PR401's use of space is not very optimal. I have a couple of other IEMs that sound open. One is of course, the FX700 and the other one is the now discontinued Playaz N1. Both use front-to-back and left-to-right placement better than PR401. FX700 spans far more space than PR401, creates more distance between instruments and is also far better with imaging. N1 with it's distant sounding mids, while not in the league of FX700 is among the handful of IEMs which are spacious sounding with good separation.
Most of the open feel comes from the excellent separation and the airiness PR401 displays. But, it is a bit hazy when it comes to placement. I am used to finger pointing the artists in a track. But with PR401, I always seem to be playing "Catch the (Wo)man!". I know it's playing there somewhere, yet cannot locate it exactly. It seems to be up in the air without an exact positional cue to it - kind of feels like people trying to punch a ghost in movies. What happens with this kind of 'hazy imaging' is that most of the music seems to originate from the back of your head and up in the air. I am clearly unclear about describing it, but that's how it feels. Most will like it, some would rather prefer the traditional left-to-right, front-to-back positioning. I belong to the latter camp. It is a different and an interesting experience at first, but it muffles up certain things too.
Comparisons:
Why do I like A/B? Because most of the things I am about to say would not have been realized without A/B-ing the IEMs. My audio memory is as disastrous as the guy in Memento. Besides, our memories are not only made of the 'signature', but also a bit of our emotional response. So, your favorite IEM's signature would most probably be stored along with the happiness you experienced while listening to it. Combining that with my not so great audio memory, I feel better if I can A/B rather than talk from memory. If you listen to an IEM long enough in isolation, all it's faults will start to 'disappear' once there is enough brain adaptation. But with A/B, when you are quickly changing IEMs, brain does not get as much time to adapt or emote. While A/B won't be the most accurate, at least it's not as biased as comparing from memory.
Coming to comparisons, they say 'do not compare apple to an orange'. But, here I am going to compare the apple to orange, mango and even stones, if I need to. The purpose is not to determine how PR401 stacks up against other balanced or V-shaped IEMs in the $60-100 range, but to offer a small insight from my perspective about the choices available in this range. All the sound descriptions in this section must be considered relative and not absolute. Please also note that no IEM in this comparison is 10-20% better than the other. I rank them all within the same tier (except RE-ZERO) and hence the SQ difference is only within 5-10% depending on each one's preference. Also, most people describe the IEM from the perspective of their favored IEM. For instance, someone liking RE-ZERO over RE0 will say "RE0 has thin notes, recessed midrange and harsh treble", whereas for those liking RE0 over RE-ZERO, it would be "Too forward midrange, dry, not so great treble". I will try to present both sides a bit, though I won't be totally impartial.
Vs Brainwavz M3 ($80) with the Hifiman Bi-flange tip:
M3 is a perfect yang for the yin of PR401. In a reversal of sorts, M3 thrusts most focus on the midrange, making it forward and lush. Bass and treble play a support role, while not lacking. The sound stage is equally wide, while PR401 has a bit more depth. With bass, PR401 has more quantity and a bit more extension, helping bass guitar and double bass sound better than on M3. Despite it's recessed midrange, PR401 still manages to remain clear. But where the midrange of M3 scores is in conveying the emotion compared to the dry midrange of the PR401. It's not completely unfathomable considering the forwardness, warmth and the relatively better body M3 lends to the mids. The treble of PR401 is more airy, sparkling and crisp compared to the slightly thicker M3 as well, then again it's still short of how I like my treble. PR401 is also faster than M3.
Thanks to BF1983 for the extreme patience shown for this loaned IEM. Long live his love for RE1, without which he'd have called for his M3 long back
My preferred IEM: Neither. Though neither are close to my preferred signature, I prefer PR401 ever so slightly.
Vs Klipsch Image S4 ($80) with the LostEarBuds Klipsch tips:
If I complain about PR401's politeness again, shove S4 in my ears...please! The sound stage of S4 is a little wider than PR401. The bass of S4, while greater in quantity, also is thick, hard-hitting and a bit muddy which makes it lose on the quality front. But, there's no doubt that if someone prefers impact and quantity, S4 with it's good sub-bass extension would be preferred. The midrange of S4 sounds thinner without texture even when compared to the not so thick PR401. Not to mention, whenever the recording has sibilance, S4 will magnify it. S4's treble is thick, but lacks the detail and clarity that PR401 brings out. S4 also sounds a bit congested in complex passages, a fate that PR401 does not suffer. While PR401 does not want to cross the lines, S4 crosses a few lines that should not be crossed. Stand alone, S4 may not be as bad though!
Thanks to strategy. Do you even remember you sent this on tour?
My preferred IEM: PR401
Vs Xears TD100-II (varies. Roughly $60-80) with UE compatible medium single flange:
Of course, the Xears don't do that well in the build quality department with their cable and driver flex. PR401 has a wider and deeper sound stage than Xears. With a deeper insertion, TD100-II has thunderous bass that overwhelms the spectrum. A little shallow insertion would do the trick. The bass - both in mid and sub-bass area - are larger in quantity than PR401. While TD100-II has the thinnest note of the TD series, it appears thick and very slow when pitted against the PR401. The midrange of TD100-II is a tad more forward than PR401 even with the bass trying to overshadow it. PR401 is not only clearer, but also more forthcoming with details than the TD100-II. On the other hand, TD100-II with it's slightly more warmth and thickness brings forth some decent timbre for a midrange phone. With treble, PR401 is a it faster and crisper, but TD100-II again is not too far behind. The slight clincher in favor of TD100-II despite it's not so great technical prowess is the traditional imaging. Considering they both are on par, I'd give the edge to TD100-II.
My preferred IEM: Xears TD100-II
Vs Xears TDIII Blackwood (varies. Roughly $60-80) with White medium single flange from LostEarBuds:
TDIII is quite similar to TD100-II, not a surprise considering that it's a different tuning of the same driver. Compared to TD100-II, TDIII adds some lushness and slight bit more forwardness to the midrange, but makes the treble a little thick losing the some of the sparkle in the process. So, what PR401 loses in the midrange, it gains in the treble over TDIII.
My preferred IEM: PR401
Vs Fischer Audio Eterna V1 ($68) with UE single flange (approx burn-in time: 47 hours at the time of this comparison):
Eterna is a strange beast indeed! While it's sound stage is as spacious, perhaps a bit more than PR401, that's where the comparisons stop being favorable to it. The mid-bass quantity is huge compared to PR401 with a good punch as well. But next to the light weight PR401's bass, Eterna's bass feels a bit muddy. Coming to the midrange, Eterna feels a bit more thick and full bodied, but also feels dry, cold compared to PR401. The treble on the Eterna is recessed and needs a bit of an effort to see that it's actually a bit airy and sparkling. Above all, PR401 scores very well in clarity across the spectrum. Yet, in spite of all these things, I did not feel Eterna to be inferior to PR401, just laid-back. I'd start to A/B Eterna, but would forget to switch back to PR401 and vice versa. If one was perceived to be 'bad' or 'inferior', less chances of that happening. Eterna may not be technically proficient, but the overall sound has a charming B- movie quality to it, you know, like the films that later become cult classics.
My preferred IEM: PR401. Don't blame me if I prefer Eterna later on.
Vs Fischer Audio Silver Bullet V2 ($68) with UE single flange (approx burn-in time: 53 hours at the time of this comparison):
The sound stage of SB has more lateral width and sounds far more spacious than PR401. The way it portrays distances is excellent. The bass of PR401 has more quantity and a tad more extension than SB. But, SB's bass is more than adequate for my tastes. The mids of SB are the best in this comparison. It's lush, sweet, slightly recessed, may be a tad bit more forward than PR401. It feels like sculpted to perfection for my tastes. I cannot describe it as thick or thin, just about right. Treble, while not forward, extended or as detailed as PR401, is very airy and displays some amount of sparkle. As a treble head, I do search for it at times (reminds me of a certain RE1, only several notches better overall). Separation is excellent in both. SB sounds every bit as airy and spacious as PR401, only better without sounding too distant or too close.
My preferred IEM: Silver Bullet V2
Vs Hippo VB ($79) Foam mod, 2 dot bass plate with original Sony hybrid Medium size:
A fair comparison between two V-shaped IEMs? Let's see. Hippo VB's sound stage is wider than PR401. The mid-bass quantity of PR401 is higher than VB, but it's also thick. VB's bass is much cleaner and leaner all the way till sub-bass. In the midrange, PR401 scores very well in clarity, smoothness and is a tad bit more forward when compared to VB. With treble, I prefer neither since both seem to be OK, though I'd give a very slight edge to PR401. Since this seems like a close competition, what happens when I apply EQ to bring the mids forward to equal levels? Turns out that despite not having the best midrange, I prefer VB since PR401 is well...flat!
My preferred IEM: Hippo VB (EQ). If I had not EQ-ed, I'd have picked PR401.
Vs RE-ZERO ($99) with Stock Medium single flange:
RE-ZERO is a bit strange in that it requires a tiny bit of 'adjustment time' until it stops sucking and becomes a better IEM to my ears! It should not be a shock that PR401's sound stage actually is wider than RE-ZERO or that it's bass is much better than RE-ZERO's "Me too" bass. ZERO's mids are warm and forward. Clarity is good in PR401, but even better with RE-ZERO. And whenever you bring in treble, PR401 does not hold a chance against the ZERO. With the IEMs compensating at the extremes - PR401 in bass and ZERO in treble, it comes down to details, in which ZERO easily wins.
For many people, the law of diminishing returns in terms of SQ begins at $50 or $80. While I don't go by the price, I feel that there is a BIG step-up in my rankings from Tier-III (other IEMs in the comparison) and below to Tier-II (PFE, RE-ZERO, RE0, HJE900).
My preferred IEM: RE-ZERO
My (subjective) Rankings of the IEMs compared, ordered by rank:
- #12 - RE-ZERO
- #15 - Silver Bullet V2 (under evaluation)
- #16 - Xears TD100-II
- #17 - ECCI PR401
- #18 - Hippo VB
- #19 - Eterna V1 (under evaluation)
- #20 - Xears TDIII (under evaluation)
- #21 - Brainwavz M3
- #29 - Klipsch S4
Value for Money:
ECCI PR401 is yet another good choice in the $60-100 bracket. Comparing to my reference at $80, RE0, I would be willing to pay somewhere around $60-70 for the sound. $75 is not far off that price. So, I'd say it's a decent value for money IEM, but ONLY if the signature suits your taste.
My Ranking:
PR401 currently ranks 17 / 45 in my rankings. Since I have not completely evaluated a few other IEMs in the same tier (Eterna, SB and TDIII), it may move up or down the list. For a complete list of my IEM ranking, check out the link in my signature.
Is it for ME?:
Choose PR401 if you answer Yes to all questions
- I can live with the Flat cable and less than ideal isolation.
- I like balanced IEMs.
- I like a little spacious sound stage.
- I do not like too much bass - neither like deficient bass like RE0 or bass-head bass.
- I like a bit of treble sparkle, but not like RE0.
- I do not require a liquid, forward midrange.
- I am perfectly ok with V-shaped IEMs with a bit of recessed midrange.
- I am not an analytical listener and won't demand details.
Conclusion:
On the whole, I'd describe PR401 as balanced with a slightly less preference for mids than stronger emphasis on bass and treble. One thing that does stand out in PR401 is it's very good clarity across the range. In spite of the slight V-shaped frequency response, it does not overstep any limit to hurt the ears. In a way, it has a bit of everything, but without any excesses, a bit "polite" as I mentioned at the beginning. While it's not the only choice under $100, it is among the better choices for those who want a balanced IEM with good clarity.
