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 5

post #61 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyle_t View Post
that sounds impressive! but sigh, my SE530 will have to go if these are as great as reviewed, no point to have 2 forward-mid type of IEMs.

surrealsky, i see you had TF10pro before, is the um3x's bass anything like it?
tf10p and um3x different quality bass to me ears. um3x sound more natural to my ears.
post #62 of 4253
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moody View Post
A early conclusion would be that these ones are (overall) better than the populair IE8 and W3? (ok, it always depends on what you want)

I were looking for some W3's or IE8's, but you say I can better buy the UM3X's?
Well, as you said it really depends on what you want. The IE8's are more rough sounding mostly because of their thick bass which is not nearly as clean as the bass on the UM3X's. I prefer the highs on the IE8 to the highs on the UM3X as they offer more sparkle to me but some people could find the highs on the IE8 fatiguing. The vocals on the UM3X's are more up front than the IE8's for sure but I still find them smooth, at least with Comply's.
post #63 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyle_t View Post
that sounds impressive! but sigh, my SE530 will have to go if these are as great as reviewed, no point to have 2 forward-mid type of IEMs.

surrealsky, i see you had TF10pro before, is the um3x's bass anything like it?
No, the um3x bass quantity is slightly more and goes lower. Then again it's based on my memory as i had sold the tf's for quite some time.
post #64 of 4253
I'm enjoying them very much with the modded tri-flanges, nothing less of splendid, something i have not experienced since upgrading from my apple ibuds to my er4p's.
post #65 of 4253
When I got my UM2s I remember doing a roundup of the different tips. The biflanges were definitely the best compromise between isolation, fit, clearer highs and less muddy base - in comparison to the comply foam tips.

It is stunning to see how much sound energy the tips can absorb.
Shure Foams are my fave now btw.

I must admit you guys are hitting it right on the mark - for a portable IEM the cables and comfort and hence *seal* are crucial. Without it, even the best IEMs sound dismal.
Better to have a 80% IEM that you can hear at 80% quality, rather than a 100% IEM which you can only get 50% out of because of poor fit or have to fiddle.

UM3X + UM56 seems to be the most prudent pick at this level and then some shure foamies.
If you remove the IEMS a lot the best is always going to be biflange or the soft-flex domes.

I'm glad these impressions have come out as I was trying to decide between IE8/W3/UM3X and although I listen to classical music mostly which the highs of the W3 might be useful for, the UM3X (like the UM2) seems to be more timbrally correct, i.e. closer to what I would hear in a concert hall. I used to term this as 'fun' rather than analytical a la ety.

But as you guys know for classical music the most important aspect is not just sparkling highs or clear lows and silky mids, but rather a balance of the three.

Think I'll be getting these before the summer hols come.

Anyone think these are a veritable step in clarity over the UM2s? Now I've converted to ALAC with ipod+xin reference/D2 boa from MP3 226 I'm finding the UM2s need some extra clarity.
post #66 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris_ah1 View Post
I must admit you guys are hitting it right on the mark - for a portable IEM the cables and comfort and hence *seal* are crucial. Without it, even the best IEMs sound dismal.
Better to have a 80% IEM that you can hear at 80% quality, rather than a 100% IEM which you can only get 50% out of because of poor fit or have to fiddle.

Anyone think these are a veritable step in clarity over the UM2s? Now I've converted to ALAC with ipod+xin reference/D2 boa from MP3 226 I'm finding the UM2s need some extra clarity.


Yes a correct seal is crucial and the um3x really helps with this as the fit itself is incredible and it's merely changing of tips to suit your needs. The same can't be said for the w3's. Yes um3x has more clarity and details across the spectrum compared to the um2 while sharing the same more forward mids.
post #67 of 4253
These sounds interesting. A few questions:

1. Do they suffer the same bad roll-off as SE530? Or are they more like W3, which has really sweet highs?
2. Does the bass get boomy when you boost it with EQ? What about the quantity and punch compared to W3 and SE530?
3. Are the mids really like the mids of SE530? I loved them and that's what I miss on the W3.
4. Would you call UM3X SE530 with better highs and bass (more punch and goes lower)?
post #68 of 4253
2 questions:

1- Is the cable exactly the same on the UM3X as on the W3? When the W3 came out some people first said cable was the same as UM2 when in fact it wasn't - similar yes, but not (exactly) the same.

2- Is it anywhere (IEM/box/manual/warranty) stated that the UM3X are made in the USA? Also, some people stated at first the W3's were made in the US when they came out, when in fact they weren't, whereas the UM2 is/was.
post #69 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsiCore View Post
These sounds interesting. A few questions:

1. Do they suffer the same bad roll-off as SE530? Or are they more like W3, which has really sweet highs?
2. Does the bass get boomy when you boost it with EQ? What about the quantity and punch compared to W3 and SE530?
3. Are the mids really like the mids of SE530? I loved them and that's what I miss on the W3.
4. Would you call UM3X SE530 with better highs and bass (more punch and goes lower)?
1. No roll-off highs like the 530's, the highs are slightly not as extended as the w3's to me. (Theory87 begs to differ tho)

2.I tried eq and it's able to sustain without any boominess till i add about +5 to the 200hz range. It has about the same quantity and tighter punch compared to the w3's.

3.Yes imo the mids are smooth and clear like the 530's.

4.They are an improved w3's to me and i could say the same for the 530's.
post #70 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_4321 View Post
2 questions:

1- Is the cable exactly the same on the UM3X as on the W3? When the W3 came out some people first said cable was the same as UM2 when in fact it wasn't - similar yes, but not (exactly) the same.

2- Is it anywhere (IEM/box/manual/warranty) stated that the UM3X are made in the USA? Also, some people stated at first the W3's were made in the US when they came out, when in fact they weren't, whereas the UM2 is/was.
1. It looks the same to me as compared to the w3 braided cables.

2.Nope, i just checked the box and the documents inside and i believed it didn't state where the um3x was manufactured from.
post #71 of 4253
Correct me if i am wrong , but the if you would rate universal tips for Um3x would it be this way:

1) Modified bi-flange( worked well with Um2 for me). loss of bass slightly ???
2) Shure gray sleeves -- Never used them so have no idea
3) Shure Olives and Westone complys .. Loss of highs slighty ???

Please note i am trying to start buying tips based on you suggestions and these rankings are not in any specific order.

PC
post #72 of 4253
Do you like your IE8 better or the westone?
post #73 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surrealsky View Post
I'm enjoying them very much with the modded tri-flanges, nothing less of splendid, something i have not experienced since upgrading from my apple ibuds to my er4p's.
Pretty bummed by the posts here relative to the W3 comparisons. With the modded tri-flanges, I do really like the W3s (more than the IE8s, for example) but the only issue is I must EQ the mids/highs a tad to get max enjoyment. Which is fine on my Sony, Touch or Clip. But my main DAP (size-wise) is the Zune, which has no EQ and the W3s just sound too dark/veiled on that machine with the tri-flanges. Really sucks, and I have tried all the tips I am gonna try with the Zune, every possible combo short of UM56s, and can't get them to sound as sweet as they do with the other DAPs and EQ.

So my point is the UM3Xs sound like they overcome that problem, with Complys or tri-flanges. Bummer. I could sell my W3s, but who will buy them now that these phones sound like the preferred universal Westone and cost $20 less at MSRP. I guess I could discount the W3s a lot and make up the difference, but I am not thrilled with Westone right now. The W3s have worked well for many owners, but in all honesty, the fit/sibilance issue has been a major downside. I can't use any tips but the tri-flanges without getting a very lousy treble/sibilance issue. Very frustrating situation for W3 owners who need to sell their W3 to pay for the UM3X.

But sounds like UM3X buyers are finally getting a phone that is living up to the W3 hype, without the fit/sibilance hassles, which really is the main drawback to the W3s. Otherwise, I really do love their sound (figuring my EQing is what they are supposed to sound like).
post #74 of 4253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surrealsky View Post
1. It looks the same to me as compared to the w3 braided cables.

2.Nope, i just checked the box and the documents inside and i believed it didn't state where the um3x was manufactured from.
Thank you.
post #75 of 4253
@ tstarn06 - When was the WM3X released? I've only heard of the new UM3X.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone UM3X Appreciation Thread