Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone 2 True-Fit IEM Appreciation & Impressions Thread...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Westone 2 True-Fit IEM Appreciation & Impressions Thread... - Page 7

post #91 of 432
Is that all you need? Anyone own the W2s, W1s, E2C and SF 5 Pro?
post #92 of 432
I don't own the W2s, W1s, and SF5 Pros. However, I still have my E2Cs (well, it's actually the SCL2) with me.

Hmmm..to keep the story short, only the mids are prominent with the E2Cs/SCL2s. Forget it if you're looking for great soundstaging, dynamics, and detail. It'll give you performance commensurate at its price point. I think it's somewhat respectable...but if I were to purely base my judgment on the previous comments made in this post by the OP and other head-fi'ers, there's an ocean-wide and -deep difference between the W2s and the E2Cs/SCL2s.

Just my $.02.
post #93 of 432
Hey Tstarn, thanks for the reminder about triflanges cut down to biflange.
I tried those last night and immeditelay go a better seal. The bass locked into place,
and I am not disspointed in the bass at all. I think for many people, tips that allow deeper insertion (biflange or long complys) are the ticket with the W2. People with smaller than average canals might be a different story.

I could use the silicones or olives on the UM3X, but the housing on the 2 is different enough for me to need to rethink my tip choice.

Compared to the bass of the UM3X, the quantity of bass is dialed down just a touch.
However, the bass on the 2 seems to be in perfect balace with the rest of the spectrum and is quite detailed and tight. I would not be surpised if there is a bit more upper bass than the 3X that makes them a little more engaging, even if a deviation from neutrality.

Looking forward to your (and others) full impressions when you get a chance to do it.
post #94 of 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by ben4345 View Post
How would you compare the sound stage, dynamics, violins, and detail compared to the W1's, E2C, or the UE SF5pro?
E2 is far inferior as it is entry-level. Super Fi Pro is getting closer. Like W2 it has a large soundstage but W2 is more balanced and more refined sounding. SFP was always a little harsh sounding to my ears. W2 fit is much better profile. Have not heard W1.
post #95 of 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by jowens View Post
Hey Tstarn, thanks for the reminder about triflanges cut down to biflange.
I tried those last night and immeditelay go a better seal. The bass locked into place,
and I am not disspointed in the bass at all. I think for many people, tips that allow deeper insertion (biflange or long complys) are the ticket with the W2. People with smaller than average canals might be a different story.

I could use the silicones or olives on the UM3X, but the housing on the 2 is different enough for me to need to rethink my tip choice.

Compared to the bass of the UM3X, the quantity of bass is dialed down just a touch.
However, the bass on the 2 seems to be in perfect balace with the rest of the spectrum and is quite detailed and tight. I would not be surpised if there is a bit more upper bass than the 3X that makes them a little more engaging, even if a deviation from neutrality.

Looking forward to your (and others) full impressions when you get a chance to do it.
After a short audition with the tri-flanges (stalks trimmed, left over from the W3s), I found I liked those even more than the bi-flanges.

But then went back to my UM56s (custom sleeves) and the W2s are really sounding better. I had some fit hassles, but with a little futzing, got it down. Anyway, I think the long sleeves sound better on the W2s, so something to consider, though I know for some that may cause pressure problems. It's just a personal ear thing for me, I can't abide by the shorter sleeves with the Westone phones for some reason.

I also prefer a little Sony X EQ on the W2s, +1 on Clear Bass and +1 on the 6.3 and 16hz sliders. Again, not saying the highs are bad, I just like a little more sparkle even.
post #96 of 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstarn06 View Post
I also prefer a little Sony X EQ on the W2s, +1 on Clear Bass and +1 on the 6.3 and 16hz sliders. Again, not saying the highs are bad, I just like a little more sparkle even.
My only DAP is an 8gb Clip v2 ($49 Walmart special) so no EQ here.
Still pretty happy with the sound - the better seal with the biflanges was key.
Tried the longer complys, and the sound was pretty good too- plenty of bass but the bass lost a bit of edge or attack.
I just like the easy insertion and durabilty of somthing else.
post #97 of 432
Understand on the Complys, hassle to use them too. Glad at least the bi-flanges worked. The Clip does have an EQ, but not very good. Might want to mess with it a little for kicks.
post #98 of 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaibautista View Post
I don't own the W2s, W1s, and SF5 Pros. However, I still have my E2Cs (well, it's actually the SCL2) with me.

Hmmm..to keep the story short, only the mids are prominent with the E2Cs/SCL2s. Forget it if you're looking for great soundstaging, dynamics, and detail. It'll give you performance commensurate at its price point. I think it's somewhat respectable...but if I were to purely base my judgment on the previous comments made in this post by the OP and other head-fi'ers, there's an ocean-wide and -deep difference between the W2s and the E2Cs/SCL2s.

Just my $.02.
The reason I asked that the the E2c is purely minimum SQ performance requirement. I recently got the W1 and was very disappointed (sent them to Westone to see if they're just defective, they said they might be) The SF5P are just a tad too colored for me and the overall comfort of the phones are bad.
If the W2 is just like what Head-fi'ers say, "they;re just like the SF5P but more refined sound and better mids." then that would be perfect.

I mention the few things "sound stage, dynamics, violins, and overall detail"
Is because those are some of the things I would earphone perform reasonably with. Bigger the Sound stage the better (doesn't need to be huge, but not sound like 90% of the performance in my head)
Dynamics, go from producing good subtle sounds to big sounding climaxes with eaze.
Violins, be able to produce with good transparency, one thing that just insults me is if the violins or similar string instruments that sound like they're in another room.
Overall detail, this means good balance to me. I got to have some reasonably amount of detail in the bass too, and in the highs with out sibilance or muddy bass.
Now if I can have all this and the super duper comfort of the W1''s than I am a happy camper!
I can barely afford the W2's but I willing to sacrifice a week of eating top ramen for a 2-4 years of bliss.


It seems the W2 have less bass than the higher end UM3x's but about the same detail in bass?

BTW I have the e2c for 2-3 years and the ue SF5P's for about year and a half.
post #99 of 432
After 2 hours of A/Bing of W2 and UM3X. it is a tie. the high on W2 is slightly more cleanrer and clearer. It is still anemic compare to PFE which is really loud and clean. the mid of W2 is a little more transparent and and brighter which can be good or bad depend on songs. some songs sound better with sweet and warmer vocal other need transparency to shine. the mid is really a tie. The bass/low of UM3X is slightly stronger. the focus is different. both are clear with good detail on this part however they have different focus. or I should said W2 is weaker on lower and or sub bass which result is better detail with bass guitar as drum become less prominent. on the other hand UM3X is strong in all lower end which result in more prominent drum sound when bass guitar and drum play together. as a result sonic wise W2 is very similar to UM3x just slight upshift which make it sound slightly more transparent. I have t said the detail in both is equally good just UM3X has better dynamic range in frequency response. in most case W2 will save people some bucks

Now we are talking about the built and package of W2 vs. UM3X it is extremely small and light which is amazing and show how good is Westone with designing universal IEM. however the bright mirror like finish of the ear-piece make scratch easy to see if anyone scratch it compare to mett finish of UM3X. smooth surface also mean it is a finger print magnet therefore constant cleaning is needed. based on my experience with plastic (scale model lover) the plastic is thinner and may be brittler of W2 "compare" to UM3X. remember it is by comparison. I am pretty confident W2 won't be that easy to break in real life but the "FEEL" is less sturdy. just the feel. On the good side, the accessories that W2 give you is unmatched (fit pack and travel kit with a nice carrying case) make it worth a lot more than UM3x which cost a lot more and give a lot less.

last thing to talk about it is fit. fit is a personal thing so it is based completely on my ear. the small size of W2 make it disappear into the ear. this particularly good if anyone want to sleep with it. W2 will not rub against the pillow so much like UM3x which is much bigger. I decided to let W2 go for one reason which is the fitting. yes it is really small but for my ear. I cannot get good fit with olive. it never seal my left ear which make imbalance in sound and lack of isolation which is absolutely a must for my case. using silicon tip solve the sealing problem but silicon does not have the isolation I need.
not only that no seal using olive. the stem of W2 is slightly thicker than UM3X which make fitting a olive onto it require or result in the enlargement of the hole so it will no longer fit on UM3X.

please let me know if you are interested in W2 I can let it go for 210 shipped USA. it sound perfect as IEM just the fit is not for me
post #100 of 432
Interesting about the sound tube on the UM3X vs. W2. The thicker W2 must be the reason why my UM56 sleeves are sticking on and not plopping off. Also, if you had the UM56s, you might appreciate the W2s a little more. Great iso and SQ, and needed for the smallish W2s, as we both found out (short tips don't work for us).
post #101 of 432
not completely, just not the olive and comply will cost too much (degraded too quick) yet harder to get if not in USA, shure soft flex work great just not isolating enough. so I am selling W2 and buy some short flex in case I need a little bit less isolation. no point of keeping W2 just for less isolation and UM3x for maximum quiet. both sound great though.
post #102 of 432
Not sure I understand. You say you can't get a good seal/fit with olives, which are short. And the tri-flanges don't isolate enough? To me, they are very good isolation-wise, and the best stock tips for the W2. No matter, saying the W2 and UM3X are a tie is a pretty good endorsement.
post #103 of 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by tstarn06 View Post
Not sure I understand. You say you can't get a good seal/fit with olives, which are short. And the tri-flanges don't isolate enough? To me, they are very good isolation-wise, and the best stock tips for the W2. No matter, saying the W2 and UM3X are a tie is a pretty good endorsement.
I had tried those flanges tip long ago. It has to do with my ear. they are dry, so dry that tri-flange don't goes in well and bi-flange don't seal well (when my ear is wet such as after shower they works great but that is about it). the only deep insert that work is comply with mean I have to change it constantly. hence shallow insert is the only option and shallow mean least isolation without using foam. I used to have UM56 but it doesn't work for me either not to mention they do not isolate better than foam and like most silicon tip the impact of my footstep transfer to the IEM making them move and the movement turn into loud sound that is extremely disturbing. insert them is also difficult like inserting tri-flange and IEM will stick out so much. for all these reason, I have to stick with olive. silicon tip, any minor imperfection in fitting will cause a lot of trouble for me. luckily the initial impression of soft gray silicon is good except isolation. so I am getting it for when less isolation is needed but otherwise I will alway use olive.
post #104 of 432
Just saw CNET's review Westone 2 True-Fit Earphone Headphone reviews - CNET Reviews

Not too in depth, but they seemed to like them.I am surprised she found the housing bulky. Personally I would not want it any smaller.
post #105 of 432
It is CNET, they don't really know much about high end IEM. nor they know what's inside those case. it is just like "trying to fit 2 or 3 engine into a car and ask why it has to be big ?"
They should love them not just like them, the sound is really great. they either basshead or hearing impair if they don't like it
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone 2 True-Fit IEM Appreciation & Impressions Thread...