Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone UM3X Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Westone UM3X Appreciation Thread - Page 13

post #181 of 4244
Direct A/B comparisons with Triple Fi Pro. Keep in mind I am a big fan of the Triple Fi Pro.

Bass Pretty darn identical. Not detecting much difference. Quite adequate in amount, detailed, fast but smooth.
Treble: Again quite similar but where TFP has that drier airy presence, UM3X is not necessarily wetter but more natural sounding. I slightly prefer it to TFP treble but this is partially due to TFP midrange problem intefering with the treble.
Midrange: This is where UM3X pulls way ahead. Not forward. Just very present and well -represented. Again, fast, detailed but smoooth!
Soundstage: This one is kind of odd. TFP presentation is set back a bit which helps create the "space" for the soundstage. Instrument separation is very good. Very pleasent and easy on the ears. UM3X is a little more up front, intimate and in your face, kind of like UM2 BUT, the instrument separation is absolutely superb which immerses you into the music. It's not a concert wall of sound like SE530...there are instruments playing all around you. So I guess it's how you define soundstage. The space with UM3X is within each instrument in relation to each other whereas the space with TFP is more one of overall distance and more headphone'ish. Kind of hard to explain. I think of that incredible instrument separation of ER4 but a somewhat closed in headstage. UM3X is similar but your head is more like a beachball in size.

If I wanted to impress any Joe Shmo music lover, I would give him a pair of W3's. If I wanted to impress an audiophile I'd give him the UM3X's. There are great reasons to want either one over the other. I am certain if UM3X came out first, I still couldn't resist purchasing W3 upon it's release.
post #182 of 4244
Hai..this my first impression...little review on UM3X..

The Packaging is absolutely better than westone3....
first about the hiss...
From my IPOD TOUCH 1g the hiss is very noticeable, even though when the volume is very low..but the hiss disappear I use the LOD via my Fiio5..I have not really compare the sound using Fiio5 or not..but definitely help with the hiss

From my ipod TOUCH 2g....There is also no hiss, like the 1g-LOD-Fiio5...but have not really compared the sound....

I will be comparing the sound with W3 which I used to have..From my IPOD TOUCH 1g (headphone jack) as that is what I used to listen from with my W3..

UM3X high is clearer,no sibilance..but I prefer the westone3 (without sibilance),which i think have more power (more impact, more emotion from the singer)...
The mid is better in clarity as there is midbass hump in W3...
The bass/low; i think it depend with the IEM...the W3 low suits the W3's high and mid (it need more bass as the high is more extended)...and UM3X has less bass( as the high is not as extended as W3 and the mid already very full)..In other word, just to keep everything balance..

Now, I'm Looking for amp for UM3X..anyone has suggestion?or selling one?
post #183 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyro View Post
To clarify my points about Westone marketing, they don't dick around and release a slew of garbage filler IEM's every other year in between their flagsjip models so I don't see where you are coming from saying they are taking customers and putting them upside down, vacuuming their cash and hitting them with "sticks". To my knowledge, Westone has been very idle in the IEM market as far as new products. UM1 and UM2 have been out about 8 years if I am not mistaken. NO NEW UNIVERSALS IN 8 YEARS! They fancy themselves as a "monitor" company which is evidenced by why they make the majority of their IEM money on custom monitors. So they release W3 last November, a fun big sounding not so accurate IEM. Now, 5 months later they FINALLY release a top of the line 3-driver incredibly accurate MONITOR which will actually vacuum cash AWAY from their much more expensive custom IEM's.

Sounds like a very consumer conscious manufacturer to me.
...

Once again read above... I guess sarcasm just doesnt show well on forums
post #184 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by roy_jones View Post
The release of the UM3X has complicated the picture for me. All of the comparisons to the UM2 actually has a negative effect on my perception of what this latest westone sounds like.

There were many positives to the UM2, but it also had bloated, uncontrolled bass, and very little treble extension. I know that this is said to have been remedied, but even the fact that they're compared to each other as sharing the same basic signature is off-putting. I guess it's because of the forward mids.

If the UM2 is even 80% as good as the UM3X, I don't want it.
I also disagree with those who are assuming that the UM3X automatically displaces the W3 as being the superior earphone. Once the FOTM effect starts to wear off, I expect that they'll be seen as variations on the same basic level of sound quality...
Valid observation. I would say UM2 is more like 65-70% tops of what UM3X is. It is definitely the same family sound sig but VERY improved as we have noted. UM3X won't displace W3. I honestly think Westone will sell more W3's to the consumer market. It's certainly the flashier sounding IEM. I Haven't heard IE8 so I can't guide you there.
post #185 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverknit3 View Post
I was a fan of the UM2. I really liked the bass and clarity I got from them. I listen to R&B and electronic a lot and I'm in a crossroad between the W3 and UM3x. Anyone have ideas as to which may better suite my needs?
ditto on this question. Im also stuck between W3 and UM3x now that it's finally released. Hip hop, RnB, powerpop, punk, rock, metal, classical, these are what i listen to...

I'll also be moving from SA6 which I'm only so so with it.
post #186 of 4244
@Spyro
Thanks for the impression. Based on that comparison, seem like UM3X quite similar to CK100 except the low end spectrum. The way u describe UM3X soundstage very similar to my CK100 experience.
post #187 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdupiano View Post
...

Once again read above... I guess sarcasm just doesnt show well on forums
No, it's difficult since you can't see people's faces or body language.
post #188 of 4244
I actually find UM3X pretty quite. Slightly LESS hiss than SE530 and W3.
post #189 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by kurosuto View Post
ditto on this question. Im also stuck between W3 and UM3x now that it's finally released. Hip hop, RnB, powerpop, punk, rock, metal, classical, these are what i listen to...

I'll also be moving from SA6 which I'm only so so with it.
Anything where big bass is required , I'd favor W3. Anything with vocals, I'd favor UM3X. Most other criteria I personally would favor UM3X for the smoother, easier on the ears presentation. I think a crunching guitar solo will sound better with UM3X due to the better midrange. Forgot to mention...decay and timbre of instruments on UM3X is breathtaking...and I suppose a triple driver musicians monitor should be that way.
post #190 of 4244
not sure if this is a valid question but which one can be considered as "epic" or jus WOW. or are they both able to do this. also, my ears are quite small for a guy, so wondering if W3 will have fitting issues.
post #191 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by gilency View Post
I agree with your comments about the UM2 about the bass, but I still find then a fun IEM, non fatiguing and ideal for long listening periods. I cant tell you how much better the UM3X's are when compared with the UM2. They are better, with controlled bass. They equalize nicely to suite different music and different tastes.
I agree with you that they don't displace the W3's. they are different. May be some day I will get the IE8's. I am sure I will like them too.
I think what's confusing me with the UM2 comparison is that I haven't heard an IEM that is 'better' than the UM2. If I'd heard the se530 or the triple fi's, etc...than I would have a better feel for what actual improvements have been made within the IEM world since the UM2 was considered the top universal.

So the issue of sound signature ends up getting me confused a bit, because I end up equating sound signature with overall sound quality because of my lack of another high-end IEM reference point.

The character of the bass still remains a little enigmatic for me. I feel like the reviews have done a good job of capturing the mids/highs, but the bass is hard to get a tangible impression for. It sounds from the reviews as though the bass quantity is actually 'less' than the W3, even allowing for the mid bass hump of the W3, etc...

I don't have a problem with that, but some of the descriptions I'm hearing seem to make the UM3X sound like they would be considered the IEM with the least amount of bass between the W3, IE8, se530, triple fi.

The bass is described as sounding appropriate for a proper stage monitor. I'm trying to figure if this will mesh well with the genres of music I prefer, as it seems that these are considered good phones for classical, etc...

I'm not necessarily a bass-head, but I also don't want something that would be described as less 'full' than the W3 or IE8.

Also, the soundstage on these is somewhat enigmatic, based on some of the early reviews.

@spyro:

Thanks for the feedback. Your comments about the soundstage of the UM3X are appreciated. I was reading a discussion a couple of days ago talking about what IEM most closely matched the Grado house sound.

Interestingly, the triple fi's were being described by someone as the IEM that closely matches that signature, with the reasoning being that their highs/bass were a little peaky.

Someone responded by saying that the triple fi's are un-Grado-like, because the mids on the triple fi are somewhat sucked out relative to the treble/bass. This seems to support what you're describing with your comparison between the UM3X and the triple fi's.

Grado's have a great mid-range. It sounds like the UM3X is a better candidate for a grado comparison, especially if it's similar in presentation to the UM2.

From your description, it sounds as though the UM3X is more resolving than the triple fi's, thus creating better imaging and separation, but I'm kinda guessing based off of the description. It's possible they're not more resolving, but are rather simply placing instruments differently based on the mids being more forward...I don't know.

Someone said the UM3X have better soundstage than the IE8, which certainly serves to confuse me a bit.

It sounds like the IE8's and the W3, the two IEM's competing with the UM3X's, are tipped up a bit in the treble region as well as the mid-bass, which is what is giving them their status as more consumer-based phones.

It's tough for me, because I love the RS-1, and one could argue that those too have a bit of a mid-bass hump as well as treble, so I'm not sure I'm actually looking for flatness or neutrality.

Unfortunately, this is all just hypothetical for me, as my budget is probably going to restrict me to having to go with the IE8. The idea that they may not isolate very well is really bothersome to me, though.

The IE8's soundstage is very intriguing to me, as it seems the dynamic driver gives it the ability to out-class it's BA competitors on soundstage. I am kinda skeptical about burn-in being responsible for massive changes in sound quality over time, though, and I'm alarmed at how many folks seem to be very unimpressed with them initially. I'm more inclined to believe that they're accomodating the different sound signature over time- so if the first impression is bad, that doesn't encourage me like it might if I were more of a believer in significant burn-in effects.
post #192 of 4244
Thread Starter 
I think I'm the only person who's said the UM3X have a bigger soundstage than the IE8's - but I also said it was either very slightly bigger or about the same. I think I'm pretty much alone in thinking it's THAT big but keep in mind that is based off memory as my IE8's are currently at Sennheiser right now. Memory isn't the best indicator, so in an A/B comparison it might very well be the UM3X's are smaller in soundstage - but even if they do they have fantastic separation, air, and spacing in my opinion.

I don't think ANYTHING will sound more full or even equal to the IE8's. The IE8's have exaggerated bass which gives them a thicker sound. I can't speak for the W3's but I know the UM3X's do not have it. They sound much cleaner but certainly not paper thin like some may describe Ety or Grey filter PFE's unamped.

Trust me on the burn in - it's real. I have had several dynamic driver IEMS and they have all gotten significantly better after time and never had the same issue with Balanced Armature phones.
post #193 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zalithian View Post
I think I'm the only person who's said the UM3X have a bigger soundstage than the IE8's - but I also said it was either very slightly bigger or about the same. I think I'm pretty much alone in thinking it's THAT big but keep in mind that is based off memory as my IE8's are currently at Sennheiser right now. Memory isn't the best indicator, so in an A/B comparison it might very well be the UM3X's are smaller in soundstage - but even if they do they have fantastic separation, air, and spacing in my opinion.

I don't think ANYTHING will sound more full or even equal to the IE8's. The IE8's have exaggerated bass which gives them a thicker sound. I can't speak for the W3's but I know the UM3X's do not have it. They sound much cleaner but certainly not paper thin like some may describe Ety or Grey filter PFE's unamped.

Trust me on the burn in - it's real. I have had several dynamic driver IEMS and they have all gotten significantly better after time and never had the same issue with Balanced Armature phones.
Thanks for the response- it helps to clarify a few of the significant questions I'd had.

The only time I have had any experience with burn-in was with a pair of HF-1's. Ironically, I thought that I observed significant burn-in effects with those phones, so I guess my skepticism isn't as well founded as I'd thought.

I don't think of myself as a bass-head, but my first experience with high end audio was a pair of Shure E4c's. I ended up disliking them because of their lack of low end presence, and that experience has always stuck with me.

I also had a pair of W5000's that were a little light on bass. In fact, I think I'm having a moment of personal revelation, as I really loved the L3000's I briefly had, and those are bass monsters.

Anyways, it sounds like the IE8 bass is potentially over-done. Is the UM3X a clear winner compared to your IE8's?

I tend to listen to rock like Radiohead, Tool, Mars Volta, Arcade Fire, etc... where having good bass is important, but also having a solid mid range is critical, hence the Grado RS-1 comparison as an ideal sound signature for my musical tastes.

I'll say this, the UM3X sound pretty impressive. Almost like a universal ES3X, sorta like the triple fi's were a universal UE10. I know they share some of the same driver technology, etc...
post #194 of 4244
Compared to the se530 (for awesome mids), w3 and the ie8 (great sound stage, but i hate the ammounts of bass of this one ) is the um3x that much better ?

I own all 3 of them and i am not sure if i want to buy a pair of um3x as well.
post #195 of 4244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyl View Post
Compared to the se530 (for awesome mids), w3 and the ie8 (great sound stage, but i hate the ammounts of bass of this one ) is the um3x that much better ?

I own all 3 of them and i am not sure if i want to buy a pair of um3x as well.



The um3x are a good balance of the 3 of them, having smooth detailed mids, bass quality of w3's and slightly smaller soundstage of ie8's while having excellent fit and easy to get seal.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone UM3X Appreciation Thread