One important note I should also offer is that I found I needed to use a really first rate portable amplifier with the PFE 232 in order to fully appreciate what the earphones could do (for our tests we used the ALO Rx Mk2 amplifier and the Ray Samuels SR-71B Blackbird amps, both of which are excellent). If you listen straight from an iPod, you could potentially miss some of the sonic subtleties the PFE 232 brings to the party.
Are the sonic differences between the PFE 122 and the PFE 232 worth the more than $400 jump in price that’s involved? Only you can answer that question, and let’s concede up front that it is a really tough question to answer. On one hand, the PFE 122 is very, very good, and in my view offers exceptional value for money. On the other hand, the PFE 232 is one of the most focused, revealing, and finely resolved universal-fit earphones I’ve ever heard—one that in some respects rivals even today’s best custom-fit in-ear monitors, which is saying a mouthful. True excellence is never cheap, but if you want to dig down deep to get to the innermost elements of the music, then the PFE 232 could be a good choice for you,
Whether you do or don’t enjoy the music of Jack Johnson, there’s no denying that the man (with help from an obviously expert recording/production team) knows how to put together a beautifully made recording. To appreciate (deeply appreciate) what I mean, try listening to any or all of the tracks on Jack Johnson’s On and On (Universal) while playing close attention to the textures and timbres of the individual instruments you’ll hear. On this desk the PFE 232’s serve up a treasure trove on sonic riches and will, in pretty short order, have you asking deep philosophical questions along the lines of, “How high is up?” On the track “The Horizon Has Been Defeated”, for example, listen to the song’s loping, syncopated reggae-influenced bass line and note that—in keeping with the best reggae traditions—the bass sound deep, rich, and warm, but with a slightly softly focused character. At the same time and on the same track, note that the sounds of cymbals in general and of the high hats in particular, sound almost shockingly clear and pure, with high-frequency overtones that shimmer and linger on the air long after most competing earphones would have faded back to silence. If your amp is up to the task, the PFE 232s offers resolution and detail that just won’t quit, allowing you to pick up on subtle elements of the record that might go missing with other ‘phones.

Drawing a different example from the same album, check out the track “Taylor” and note the fact that Johnson’s voice is mic’d just a bit differently than on some of the other songs, conferring an especially up close, immediate, and even intimate quality that gives the lyrics extra impact. My point is that the PFE 232 invites you to listen back through the chain of playback (and recording) equipment to understand more clearly how the record was made, and why—almost as if you were looking over the shoulders of the mastering engineer or record producer to take notes on the decisions being made. With many earphones, even some pretty good ones, you may find you eventually run into a “glass ceiling” of sorts in terms of performance potential, where the transducer eventually come to a point where it sounds as good as it is ever going to, and that’s that. But with the PFE 232 in play, my sense was always that recordings themselves were the limiting factor, so that as put on better and better recordings the Phonaks just kept on revealing more and more potential. This “ceilings unlimited” quality is one the reasons to chose the PFE 232s, though you will—as mentioned above—need a very fine amplifier to hear what these ‘phones can do.
Yet another well-made recording that showcases the PFE 232’s strengths is the jazz group Floratone’s eponymous album (Blue Note), featuring Bill Frisell and Matt Chamberlain. Several things are noteworthy about the overall presentation. First, the eclectic Floratone ensemble uses unexpected and unorthodox combinations of acoustic instruments, electric instruments, with selectively applied touches of electronic processing adding extra sonic flavors. What the PFE 232s make crystal clear is which instruments are captured in an unprocessed way, which have had electronic embellishments applied, and which ones were captured in natural acoustic environments (or not). What’s really impressed is the manner in which the PFE 232s disentangle and make plain the multiple, dense layers of instrumentation, so that you are free to follow individual musical threads or to drink in the musical whole, just as you please. The listening experience through the Phonak 'phones is not cold or artificially “analytical” by any means, but they place so much musical information before you that—if you happen to be in an analytical or deeply contemplative mood—they’ll keep you engrossed for hours on end.
Comments
Actually nothing. Where are the comparisons to top flight earbuds, UE's, Shure 535s, Monster Coppers, or the best headphones, Audez'e?
Personally I cannot relate this review to anything.
Perhaps some day soon we'll be enlightened?
Greetings agb, and thanks for your comment. Your point is fairly taken. Here's my take on things.
I would place the PFE 232 in the very top-tier of universal fit earphones, and in that same general category I would also place the Shure SE535, the Westone TrueFit 4, and (provisionally) the Monster Coppers. All things considered, I regard the PFE 232 a personal favorite within that group, though your mileage might vary. The reason why I'm drawn to the PFE 232 involves that "ceilings unlimited" quality I mentioned in the review. With many earphones you'll hear sonic improvements as you step up through various grades of amplifiers until you reach a certain point where it appears that you have essentially "maxxed out" the sonic potential of the earphone. Above that point, amplifier/source improvements don't seem to buy you much as the earphones, themselves, have become the limiting factors. But that's not what happens with the PFE 232; as you improve ancillary components it just keeps sounding better and better and better, which I find very impressive and quite rewarding.
Note, however, that the perceived sonic excellence of the PFE 232's is very much dependent on ancillary gear. If you only ever drove the PFE 232 directly from an iPod, you might feel it offered only small, incremental benefits vis-a-vis the PFE 122's or other mid-priced earphones. From that frame of reference you might reasonably conclude that the PFE 232 doesn't offer very good return on investment (i.e., it costs a lot more than mid-priced models, but seemingly sounds only a small bit better). But once you start that upward progression through better amps (and sources), the true potential of the PFE 232 is revealed, as you discover it has quite a lot more performance headroom or "upside" than its supposed peers.
For me, one eye opener came when I switched back and forth between favorite custom fit in-ear monitors and the PFE 232. Normally, it has been my experience that even the best universal fit earphones pale in comparison to good custom fit monitors, but with the PFE 232's I found that wasn't the case. On the contrary, the PFE 232's fared quite well in comparison with custom fit designs, though I did and do think the custom fit models enjoy an undeniable edge in terms of overall noise isolation.
__________
I won't try to compare the PFE 232 to full-size headphones, since I find that earphones and headphones typically offer very different listening experiences. For example, compared to the PFE 232's both the Audeze LCD-2 and HiFiMAN HE-6 sound terrific (arguably even better than the PFE 232), but are very much harder to drive, provide far less noise isolation, and are not really what I would consider to be viable portable listening devices (because they're just plain big). So, from where I sit the two classes of products are really designed for entirely different listening applications.
Best, Chris Martens
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
First of all - fantastic review, really enjoyed your thoughts on the PFE 232s.
I owned a pair of PFE 012s and I've just got my hands of these 232s. I've listened to them for about 4-5 days now and I'm just blown away by how good they are. Even straight out of my iPod classic they sound fantastic. When amped up, they continue to get better; which leads me onto your point about this IEMs 'ceiling.' You make a quite brilliant point here - herein lies the difference between this pair of IEMs and others in the so-called 'top tier.' I look forward to more of your reviews!
So is your review based on using those two amps? Personally i do not find carrying amps for portable listening very appealing. How do they perform straight out of a mp3 player? I see that one would be missing some of its sonic potentials but do they still sound one of the best among the universals? Would you say they are an upgrade from some of the high-ends universals like W4 or SE535?
Hi easrs,
I listened to the PFE 232 pretty extensively both with and without portable amps. While the 232 sounds very good directly from an iPod, I would say that an awful lot of its potential is masked by limitations inherent to the iPod itself--limitations that of course are lifted (to a large extent) when you listen through a good LOD cable connected to a high quality outboard amp.
I would say the W4, SE535 and PFE 232 would make a good "Top 3" to evaluate, though which to choose would be up to you. How you feel about the PFE 232 will have much to do with whether you find one of its three voicing filters to be a good match for your perception of what natural or accurate sound should be. One thing I think you will find very impressive though, is the PFE 232's ability to resolve very low-level details and sonic information--an area where I consider it to be one of the best in-ears I've yet heard.
Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision
That was quick! Thanks for the reply. I will try them out.
Appreciate the comps.