Page 3 – DM200H

Kicking off with the most expensive model, the BED hybrid DM200H. This was the original model that got me interested in the company and the one that really shows some innovation in its design. The patent was actually filed in 2014 so it has been two years for them to actually be happy with the finished product and release it!

16DM-26 16DM-27

Since one of the big benefits they are touting for their bulls eye arrangement is better space management I am surprised at just how big this IEM is. It has the shape of a big dynamic driver with the angle out nozzle like I have come across many times before but has a lot more depth than I am used to. While I am saying it is big don’t get it in your mind that I mean in the vicinity of the likes of JH Audio’s Siren Series, it is just bit bulky in this style and for only 2 drivers that almost act as 1.

16DM-34 16DM-2

While big it is made solidly, completely out of metal in fact. The only plastic is surrounding the cap to work as a strain relief. One of my biggest annoyances all through Dynamic Motion’s models is actually how they ignore the concept of removable cables completely. The cable in action is the same as the DM100 and also very similar to what we saw on Torques T096z. It is on the thinner side but strong and tangle free nonetheless! On top of that who doesn’t want a right angled jack!

16DM-35

Their big size and heavier metal construction don’t feel too bad on initial insertion but after an hour or so I felt my outer ear getting worn and uncomfortable, demanding a break. On top of that you can’t deny they have a more lack lustre isolation due to shallow insertion and venting.

16DM-33

Does Sound Hit the Bulls Eye?

Listening through the range of models they all seem to have a slightly different sound, which one would hope for considering the different selling points through the unique technologies on offer. With this holding the most drivers I can happily say it has the best end to end extension, especially in the bass. I can also tip my hat to the coherency of the drivers, they certainly pulled that off, which one would hope of a product that put phase alignment at the forefront of its design.

Now the sound signature I am hearing is a warmer, softer sound with an emphasis in sub-bass and then gaining a some energy once again from the upper mids through to the treble, maybe in a slight U shape. My honest initial opinion is that the sound just doesn’t justify the price range, when I am coming off the likes of Dunu’s Titan 3, Trinity Audio’s Atlas and even the LZ A3, I am just expecting so much more from this price range than previously and earphones like this will be left behind, even on the dawn of their release! Ouch that was brutal but when I am dealing with my readers money and where it may be going, this is the only way I can be. That being said, unlike the ZhiYin QT5 I just received, this isn’t awful or flawed, it just a safe and slightly bland tuning with a little too much decay through out.

16DM-32

The bass has a gradual swell starting from the mid-bass and accentuating with extension. It is a softer range, a bit unusual for a low end that isn’t actually that massive. Considering this has an impressive extension, not the greatest but capability well under 100Hz, its just a shame we aren’t getting some air movement or agile punches. The bass brings back the word bland, its just going through the motions, not super slow, not super warm, not really anything, just bass with a slight emphasis the deeper we get.

The midrange seems really tilted, with a withdrawn lower midrange and then an upper mids that is bordering on quite the opposite. While smooth through out, I find the entire midrange still quite strained, held back in some way, even if by the time female vocals come around they are not recessed in the traditional sense. It does however have a good sense of clarity and Josh who liked the midrange more than me, likened this area to some of the better Dunu’s!

Coming from a thicker midrange/bass which is produced by the dynamic driver, the armature treble does feel a little thinner, but still blends well enough and doesn’t stick out. While I still get the sense of a U shaped sound, it’s more through the nature of the midrange, than an emphasised treble, although it does sparkle above the midrange.

Beyond the sound signature, which is not tragic in any sense (quite pleasant on the ears at time even), its just the technical side of things that holds this back. Speed is poor, with an obvious decay in all frequency ranges the dynamic driver produces. Soundstage is no more than average and imaging within shows no real accuracy. Finally it just sounds a little misty, with no revealing nature, no real shine of details and nothing to pull me in and engage me in the music.

16DM

Measured

Here is quick look at the measurements.

16DM200

It’s a Hard Market

With IEM companies popping up on a weekly basis and each and everyone wanting to somehow make a name for themselves, the most common method seems to be doing something exceptional at low cost. This just makes it so much harder for the old timers, because they are getting shown up hard in terms of value. I remember a day when the DM200H would have been perfectly acceptable for its given price, but now I just don’t see where it fits in, for whatever sound signature you crave, I have a better option, thats the sad truth for Dynamic Motion.

16DM-3

 

On to the DM008P!

Sonny Trigg
Page 3 of 612345...Last »