Drop x JVC HA-FDX1 DD IEM: The second coming of ...

Will there be dimensions on these later? In particular, the outer diameter of the tips and possibly the body? Didn't see anything on massdrop or in the other thread (although I may have missed some details in my jet-lagged stupor).

Asking as I have oddly shaped canals that relegate me to CIEM or long/thin IEMs. Campfire Atlas/Comet is already on the borderline of small enough and 90% of non-custom IEMs I've ever tried/used are pretty much unusable for me. Realized yesterday that I won't be re-making or reshelling my UE5 due to a lot of minor nitpicks with them (armatures don't do bass as well as I want, there are some odd spots in the sound signatures to me, etc.) but I want to keep my travel pair <$400ish (UE5 on sale is right at $400).

 

This alone might make it worthwhile grabbing them as ridged touch the rim of my concha. The end cap looks longer, which must be for a reason. Different resonance properties for tighter bass (wild ass speculation)?

 

JVC FDX1: Questions & Answers

Disclaimer: The modded JVC FD01, on which these new FDX1 are based, have been my favorite IEMs for more than a year now. No one should assume, that this is in any way, shape or form, an unbiased Q&A.


What’s your background with IEMs?

I’ve been an avid IEM collector for many years. In the heyday of my collector’s passion, I must have owned well over a hundred IEMs (I stopped counting at some point). I’ve since downsized my collection, but kept the ones I consider „essential“. That’s why I still have classics like the ER4S, EX1000 or UERM and can directly compare them with more recent IEMs.


I read you’re a fan of dynamic drivers?

Yup. While I have all sorts of technologically different IEMs in my collection, my preference has slowly, but steadily been shifting towards single DDs over the years . The reason for that isn’t easy to explain and I believe there’s quite a bit of „gut feeling“ involved.

Here’s one post, in which I tried to shed a little light on this topic:

Another aspect not mentioned here, I think we’re just used to the sound characteristics of moving coil transducers. And that could very well be the reason why many regard them as more „natural“ than other driver types. Think about it, most home speakers and headphones are based on moving coil. And most recorded music is mixed and mastered with moving coil monitoring equipment. So, if you want to hear things „like the artist intended“, what would be more natural than choosing moving coil (DD) IEMs over others for music reproduction?


And you’re obsessively modding these DD IEMs?

I hope not obsessively so. But when I hear something like the stock FD01s, which sound 90% close to my idea of perfect, then I can’t help but try to go the extra mile.

That’s how the FD01 filter mod originated, and after some trial and error, I settled on those alcohol swabs as DIY-filters. Some of my best audio friends took up the mod suggestion and liked it. Well, and the rest is (audio community) history, a story that @shotgunshane has already, very eloquently, told in his review.


Ok, so the modded FD01 (and the FDX1) are "perfect" now?

Not quite. As always, the „extra mile“ turned out longer than expected. And like all IEMs, the JVCs come with compromises of some sort. There‘s still a bit too much upper mids boost over what I‘d call perfect. And bass falls just a tad short of the EX1000, which still have the best bass of all DDs I’ve heard. But overall, the FDX1 come very close to my ideal sound signature and are my favorite DDs out of those I’ve heard. Personally, I prefer them over some much more expensive DDs, like the Vega, Xelento and IE800S.


Back to the filters, what’s the deal with that hole in the middle?

Well, it’s there for a reason. In my modding experiments, I noticed that if dampers occupy the entire nozzle, they cause a slight loss of bass clarity and dynamics. Therefore I tried these tube-shaped dampers, and found they do the job just as well, but without that negative side-effect in bass .


How would you describe the sound signatures of all three filters?

First of all, the three filters differ only in upper mids and treble. But since we perceive sound signatures as a whole, the FDX1 also seem to get a bit warmer and bassier as you move from the white to the green and the blue nozzles.

The white nozzles have no damper and hence sound leanest in bass and most forward in upper mids and treble. They create an impression of very high resolution, but that’s partly due to what I call „fake detail“ (an overemphasis on high frequencies). They can also sound quite fatiguing with music that has a lot of energy in the boosted range, like the brass section of a classical orchestra in full blast. However, for low volume listening at nighttime, they may still prove useful. And last not least, they can easily be modded with DIY-filters if desired.

The green nozzles have been tuned after my recommendation for FD01 „reference filters“. I would describe the sound signature as well-balanced, with a tasteful slight bass lift and a touch of warmth. The mids are mostly neutral with a moderate upper mids bump. And treble is smooth, free of sibilance and non-fatiguing, but with good presence and extension. There’s no „fake detail“ with these nozzles, just very good clarity and resolution throughout the full spectrum. These are the most versatile nozzles in my book, and they sound excellent with a wide range of music.

The blue nozzles are just a smidgen more pushed down in the highs and sound more relaxed than the green ones, while clarity and detail remain almost the same. They're the most warm-ish and laid-back sounding nozzles, and also my favorites for outdoors, where a slight tilt towards the low end comes in handy.


But Head-Fi’s measurements show the white (empty) nozzle actually closer to their target than your „reference“ filters?

Yes, I’ve seen that. What can I say... with regards to upper mids and lower treble, I’d call that target into question. Most people who’ve heard the stock FD01 (or empty nozzle FDX1) would agree that upper mids are clearly too much forward. And that we really don’t need even more low treble in the sibilance range, like the Harman IE Target would suggest.

But in the end, FDX1 buyers will get three different pairs of nozzles and will just use the ones they like best. So, regardless of whether they prefer the Harman IE Target or a more downsloping signature in the high range, the FDX1 will come with a matching nozzle for them.


How about bass? Is it really better on the FDX1?

That’s a tough one. I’ve spent hours A/B comparing the FDX1 to the modded FD01, but without reaching a solid conclusion. However, the majority of experienced listeners who heard both, confirm tighter bass on the FDX1. And there are burst and impulse measurements that seem to back their assessment. Therefore I tend to agree with the majority, even though I personally didn't really catch a significant difference.


So, what’s your advice to current FD01/FD02 owners? Are the FDX1 a worthy upgrade?

Another tough question. It’s actually easier for me to answer that for FD02 owners, since you'd get a better cable and the option to swap nozzles. Plus, the micropore tape mod on the FD02 is less robust than the filter mod on the FD01, so the JVC-made filters on the FDX1 would be a more substantial upgrade in robustness for FD02 owners.

For owners of properly modded FD01s, the upgrade would obviously be a less significant one. Needless to say, the professional JVC-filters have excellent channel matching and could improve imaging compared to DIY-filters... particularly, if you don't have a measurement rig to ensure consistency of your work. As for bass... I’d probably say that those, who‘re satisfied with bass quality on their FD01, don’t have much reason to upgrade to the FDX1. But for those, who feel that bass sounds a little too loose on their FD01, the FDX1 might well be worth a try.


I’ve been thinking about buying and modding the FD01. Should I go for the FDX1 instead?

Are you kidding me? Why would anyone buy and mod the FD01 any more, if they can have the professionally damped FDX1 for less money instead? Thanks to @shotgunshane, @CEE TEE and the team, the FD01 filter mod should be pretty much obsolete by 9/5/2019!

 

JVC HA-FDX1
A Review… sorta. More like a few opinions and observations.


Good: Excellent resolution, neutral-plus tonality, dynamic driver bass, A+ hardware, and of course- tunability.

Meh: Nozzles just a tad on the large side, a bit heavy.

Given: Hardware is functionally identical to the FD01- Same cable, same fit, same isolation, same tip size- even the same carrying case.

tl;dr: $250 would be a great price for the stock FD01. The FDX1 is better. With the Drop deal you essentially get both with a quick nozzle swap.



Me: I’m an old guy. I have to take off my glasses to see things up close. I can't hear much past 14KHz. My first decent IEM was the Ultimate Ears Triple-Fi. I also grew up with stuff like the Monster Turbine Pro, Sennheiser IE8, a few random Sony and Audio Technica models, and the JVC HA-FX700.

Since most sound descriptions mean little without a reference point, I'll leave most of that information down below in the comparisons. And because the FD01 has been out for a while, I won't get into the common aspects of that and the FDX1. I will say that having only heard the FD01 once before this, I was quite surprised at how good of an IEM it is in stock form. But the modded filters really do seal the deal for me. In stock (FD01) form, it does run bright. Keep in mind that I am a life-long, card-carrying member of the Treble Head Club: I listen to my HD800s un-modded. I prefer the HD600 over the HD650. I don't know what all the fuss is about with ESS Sabre DACs. And so on.

One question that I've heard thrown around: "Is this the IEM version of the HD6XX?" In terms of SQ, it's hard to compare because to me headphones inherently sound different than IEMs. I would say that the FDX1 sounds a bit more analytical and forward than the HD6XX- perhaps more in the direction of the HD600/800. But the HD6XX's true claim to fame is value: For a while it cut the price of its non-Massdrop sibling in half. The problem with comparing the HD6XX to the FDX1 is that the former is still an HD650 at heart. On the other hand, while the FDX1 can be the FD01 if you use the included stock filter, by using one of the other tuned filters (which to many will be seen as mandatory) you are getting something quite different.

So again, is this the IEM version of the HD6XX? No. That would only be the case if the HD6XX were already modded. What you are getting here is a rather heavily-discounted version of an already excellent IEM that includes additional tuning from the manufacturer, with all that entails (QC, warranty, etc.). It's more like if Drop came up with an HD6XX-MOD and sold it at a very deep discount.

"Well, that's great. But can't I just do this mod myself?" Sure you can. Go ahead. Call me when you're done. I've re-terminated IEM cables, re-cabled headphones, built an amp or two, and have modded a few headphones. But I have yet to do any HD650 mods, despite even having bought a second pair. Go figure. Also, the way that JVC has done this (re-)tuning is a bit different from what I've seen within the DIY community. So not only will this have better quality control and consistency than most of us can guarantee; but it simply may not be possible to duplicate at home. Granted for DIY there is the element of self-achievement and everybody needs a hobby- right?. But most people would rather spend their time doing something else. This is sort of an easy one for me. Did I mention, this is also cheaper?


Compared to…


NOTE: Not all of these are meant as direct comparisons. Most of it is to give context to what I am hearing from the FDX1. I settled on the blue filter nozzle:

• white = stock FD01/brightest/no dampening
• green = somewhere in the middle/some dampening
• blue = the least brightest/most dampening

Massdrop Noble 'X': I mention this IEM because not only are they from the same Drop 'house', tuned by the same folks, and around the same price; but it's one that many are familiar with. Tonally, there is no comparison between this and the JVC. The Noble was always just a bit too warm for me. The upper vocal registers (roughly between 2 - 4KHz) are a bit recessed, and it could also use a little more air. The JVC has good midrange presence and no shortage of air, even with the warmest (blue) filter. The Noble's bass, one of its strong suits, ends just a bit too quickly for me (has less decay) and doesn't have the sub-bass extension of the JVC. This is despite the Noble being a more bassy IEM overall.

Noble Savant: Tonally, this is somewhat close to the JVC. To many the Savant is a bit on the bright side. For me it is one of my references for tonality, with the understanding that it leans slightly forward and bright. But despite the tonal resemblance here, these IEMs sound very different. Treble clarity and air is far better on the JVC. Headstage on the Noble is a bit more of a wall of sound, while the JVC displays good depth and more distinct instrument placement. The Noble has more fundamental bass (~100 - 150Hz range), whereas the JVC is a bit more restrained in that area while extending further into the sub-bass region. Overall, the Savant is a bit more in-your-face and has a more simplified presentation; while the JVC is just a little bit better in almost every way- tonal linearity, headstage, and resolution.

Tin Audio T2p (Comply tip mandatory- they're way too vee without them!): This is my EDC. It has my ideal tonality, along with a nice amount of low-end grunt/fun-factor. Given that it's also a dynamic (dual-driver) it shares some characteristics with the JVC such as smooth tonal transitions, deep bass impact, and smooth treble. The overall presentation of the T2p is a bit warmer and smoothed over compared to the JVC. It is also more forgiving on bright recordings. (Remember… Comply tips!) The pay off with the JVC is literally in the details. Bass is quite similar between the two; but a bit more articulate and extended on the JVC. Instrument separation and sense of space is also better. Given the price delta between these two, this shouldn't be a surprise.

UPDATE 9/25/2019:
I recently lost and had to replace my Tin T2 Pro, and discovered that they made a few changes- most notably to the sound. The newer version, distinguishable by the different cable attachment location and finer nozzle screen, is noticeably brighter. There is more upper-midrange and treble- my ballpark guess is on the order of 4-5dB around 7kHz. Still, using the Comply tips (TSX-500 and TX-500), they sound good to my ears. But they are definitely brighter than what I was comparing the JVCs to before. Interestingly, I borrowed a friend's T3, and with the Comply tips they seem much closer to the older T2 Pro than my new T2 Pro. But I always thought that the T2 Pro and T3 sounded fairly similar.

BGVP DM6: I hear this as fairly neutral, with a slight upper-midrange recession. Bass is nicely articulated ala BA; but you're definitely not getting the extension or natural decay of the JVC. The DM6 also has a tiny bit of that grittiness inherent in many multi-driver balanced armature IEMs. This makes things sound a little bit warm (harmonically) and at times a bit crunchy. The JVC has that coherence often found in the better dynamic IEMs. This is a good example of the differences between multi-driver BA and single dynamic driver IEMs. The DM6 is fast but has a slight haze or harmonic warmth that some may find appealing. The JVC's bass extends further and it has more natural treble timbre. It also has more upper midrange as well as slightly better resolution. I like both IEMs; but I like the JVC a bit more for it's lack of coloration.

JVC HA-FX700 (modded tips): I thought I'd throw this in just because. Though very different sounding, there are still similarities in the naturally smooth treble, smooth tonal transitions, and deep-ish headstage (for an IEM). I would also say that they both prioritize vocals; albeit in slightly different ways. All of the JVC 'Woodies' that I have heard (FX500/700, FX750/850/1100, FW01) have a mid-bass bump that made them ideal candidates for modding since it's the single glaring flaw in what are otherwise excellent sounding IEMs. The FD01/FDX1 is a clear step away from those- almost going in the complete opposite direction with the (relative) brightness and more linear bass response. What has stayed the same or similar is the natural treble timbre (especially with the blue filter) and coherent sound that good dynamics are known for having. If you're looking for that warm, romantic sound that the 'Woodies' are known for, you won't really find that in the FD01/FDX1- for better or for worse.

 

This is $250 pre-sale, right?

 

This modded version looks very interesting but they are a few things that puzzle me. From the photos above the HA-FDx1 is similar to the FD02 instead of the FD01. If that is the case are the cable and case material of the FDx1 the same as FD01 (@james444 indicate some difference between FD02's and FD01 cable and driver case material)?

If the bass difference comes mostly from the new housing how the white (stock) nozzle generate the same FR as FD01?

 

I agree that the back of the housing looks more similar to the FD02 than FD01. However, stock frequency responses of FD02 and FD01 are very close, so I don't think the housing material has much of influence on FR:

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...ender-for-best-dd-iem.6500/page-2#post-215416

If bass is really tighter on the FDX1, I'd think they must have changed something that you can't see from the outside.

 

@james444 - Were you consulted at all for this drop?

 

Exactly that was my point in my second question but I may not express myself correct. If their is some internal change (not only the nozzle) that contribute the most in bass tightness, even the white (stock) FDX1 nozzle would have different FR from FD01. In contrast @purr1n described the FR of the FDX1 with stock nozzle same as FD01.

If the housing material and the cable of FDX1 are not the same as FD01 may justify some of the price drop (although the FR are similar ).

 

I understand what you mean, but not sure I'd share your opinion that a difference in bass tightness does necessarily require a difference in FR. However, I concur that identical FRs should be a reason to question a perceived subjective difference in bass tightness.

Yes, we talked about the idea around end of last year, and it soon became clear that it would be easier for @CEE TEE to work with @shotgunshane than me, because receiving international shipments can be tedious here in Austria. I've had some packets stuck in customs for up to 2 months in the past, which isn't a sound basis for timely international collaboration.

On top of that, my reasoning was that the FD01's problem area is mainly upper mids and treble, a frequency region that @shotgunshane is much pickier about than me. So I concluded that if those prototypes pass his evaluation, I'd be very likely fine with them too.

Anyway, for some reason we never talked about the project after that, and I had almost forgotten about it when I received Shane's email saying that the FDX1 is going into production. All the more, I'm curious and excited to hear the result!