Raising a skirt - needs a ride - Page 4

That was well put. BUT...

If we are comparing PFE with gray filters vs. ER4S there is a big difference. the PFE lacks body and can seem harsh. It's total lack of low end may be the cause, it simply does not have the punch of the ER4S, and I'm not one to complain about lack of bass, but the overall presentation seems shrill.

Insert the black filter and the mids are too recessed/ veiled for my liking. The singer takes a back seat to mid/low end. An example of this would be found on live recordings .i.e. D. Matthews & T. Reynolds Live at Radio City where the crowd sounds like they are inside a plexi-glass box, more of a v-shape freq response.

As for the highs, they may seem "crystal clear" to you, but i find them rolled off and a byproduct of the recessed mids. The bass picks up, but again too me it's not "natural". It's more along the lines of the Se530 which I didn't care for.

You are right about sound stage though, but this may have more to do with fit/placement than anything else.

"To simply call the ER4S better is ignorant." And no I am not ignorant.

Why are people recommending um3x in this thread? I'm glad you like your phones, but they are pretty much on the opposite side of the spectrum of what the op is looking for.

Anyway, to the op I'd suggest the ck100 very strongly. I am a former er-4 owner, and I was looking for something with similar but with more punch. I ended up with the ck100. The ck100 has all the advantages of the er-4 (good treble extension, lots of detail, bass that isn't overwhelming) with better (more forward) mids and bass. It still has an airy, light sound but the treble doesn't overwhelm the rest of the spectrum. Imaging is great, the instrument separation is as good as the er-4 but the soundstage is twice as big. Also the build on them is awesome, it's very solid (titanium and rubber) and they're tiny-smaller than the er-4, despite the fact that they're triple drivers. They're also the most comfortable iems I've owned, due to their small size and that they're over-the-ear style.

The only other universal I could see fitting what you're looking for are the triple fi, but many have fit issues with them, and they could be too bassy.

+1 for considering the PFE. I encourage you to at least take advantage of their free trial.

I agree that the PFE does not share the thickness of note of the ER4S. If you wanted to break this down to attack and decay duration, the ER4S is a lot longer. The PFE is very short and to the point. You're making an assumption that the ER4S is correct in its presentation. Frankly, the ER4S is a comparatively muddy earphone. It does lack control and will retain extra energy and duration that isn't actually in the source. It does sound more real because of this as we like the texture. Headphone.com has testing of the ER4S, and the square wave tests clearly show the issue.

I agree with you in terms of punch. The ER4S does have a more pronounced midbass range, a little thicker. However, the low end doesn't compare to the PFE. The ER4S just rolls off early. I'm not sure how you say the low end is lacking with the PFE. It is bumped up a few dB from the ER4S and is also more extended down an extra octave from the ER4S. The PFE also has more dynamic range and energy of note then the ER4S. Bass is stronger in all regards short thickness of note. Bass doesn't sound natural because it lacks the thickness that you come to expect.

I won't comment on the black filters. You change the frequency response, you change the presentation. The gray filter matches the ER4S closely, so that's sort of the only comparison. The black filter is entirely different.

Both the ER4S and PFE roll off at about the same point on top. The PFE is more peaky while the ER4S is a little smoother and even. My concept of clarity is not a discussion on frequency response. It's a matter of articulation of note. The PFE is dead on accurate in note. It hides nothing and plays every little detail. It is lightyears beyond the ER4S in this regard. In fact, I have not heard another IEM match it, not every a couple of the top level IEMs I've used like the TF10 or UM3X.

Here is the frequency response of the ER4 series compared to the PFE. Notice the odd peak at 10kHz and the bass emphasis versus the ER4S. Notice how close they are up top. The difference is only 1kHz or two. Both extend out to the limits of a common person unless the person is still young and can still hear up to very high. You can see how the black filter modifies the response too.

Dang! Could be a first ever on Head-Fi ER4S being referred to muddy sounding with too long of a decay on treble notes and a thick sound.

Nothing worse than a cheat. Say the word and I'll beat some gentleman into his punkass.

That sounds like a fine choice. What's the rush for an amp? Don't you already have an ipod? Why don't you just plug your new Grado into that first up and see how you go? Er, does the SR225i terminate in a 1/4" or 1/8" plug? I can't remember but if it's a 1/4" plug then you'll need an adapter.

^ Yes, I've gained the impression that you're a girl in a hurry.

MVW2- with all due respect your analasys is so completely askew. It completely baffles me. But to each his own. I find most of your posts very helpful and respect your opinion, but regarding this thred, and irrespective of the graphs, I couldn't disaggree more.