Originally Posted by sadburai
according to the post in hifi-forum.de: i am german and i think you got it wrong!
Fit: very comfortable like W3 (i own the TF10 and they are uncomfortable ;-) )
Building: Drivers are the same like W3, but a different configuration
Sound: Sligtly more bass than the W3 (has been confirmed by an english speaking staff from westone), so heighs do not provide strong "ssss" sounds like the W3 does - that sucked on the W3.
Compared to the TF10 the i like the end of cymbals (dont know how to translate it) and the High Hats better/ in my opinion they are more detailed.
There was nothing negative, no warm mids like the UM2 has.
Today i would buy the UM3 (not the TF10) (better overall sound, better High-Hats, cymbals, etc, better fit, neutral sound <--not like the UM2 i think [he didnt listen to them], it's a slightly better TF10)."
Hope you understand it better now!
well actually, the language makes more sense, but the review doesnt. as elnaro says, sibilance has absolutely no correlation with the amount of bass, more bass is more bass, sibilance will not go away because of more bass. there will just be more bass with your sibilance.
they are not using the same drivers
this is a musicians monitor; the bass may be more extended, but there should not be MORE bass quantity than W3 or there is something wrong
if there is better transient response and decay (in reference to the cymbals), i'm very happy with that, but we'll see. I think that is what he is saying.
it would want to be a lot better/different than TF10 or you'll find mine on the FS forums in no time. the lack of talk about mids worries me too.