Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM3 Appreciation Thread - Third Time is a Charm?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Earsonics SM3 Appreciation Thread - Third Time is a Charm? - Page 95

post #1411 of 1668
I'm sold. After 3 days with the SM3, I have come to realize that I am one of those people who would like them very much. I understand how some would hate them, i hear somewhat, unnatural reproduction, both in soundstage and in the mids. It can be a hit or miss, luckily for me it was a hit.
post #1412 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annafrancesca View Post

I'm sold. After 3 days with the SM3, I have come to realize that I am one of those people who would like them very much. I understand how some would hate them, i hear somewhat, unnatural reproduction, both in soundstage and in the mids. It can be a hit or miss, luckily for me it was a hit.

 

Yeah I to can see why some wouldn't like how the 3D presentation is because is is a bit unnatural at times but for music like EDM its fantastic.  I also think other types of music like rock and alternative sound great with the SM3, I just really like the mids and soundstage as well as the amazing separation the SM3 produces.  I glad to see that they've grown on you.

post #1413 of 1668

I traded an IEM for the Dunu I3C-S and they come with an impedance adapter and I think its like 200 ohm so I was wondering with and amp if that would change the sound of the SM3 to maybe a bit more balanced because I've heard that they can balance the mids some.  200 ohm seem a bit high I think 100 would be much better but I'm going to try it and see how they sound.

post #1414 of 1668

If your shells ever come open, you will see exactly how thin and flimsy the plastic they use really is. 2 other people I know here on head-fi (not just 2 posts I've read, but 2 users I've done business with or spoken to somewhat regularly) have had the shells come open for no reason at all. And just a few posts up you can read about TheMarkRemains having problems with the nozzle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Techno Kid View Post

 

The new SM64 is another 3 BA IEM with a new kind of crossover that optimizes the frequencies and make them sound cleaner.  They look exactly like the SM3 V2 but the back is clear so you can see the internals.  They cost like $50 Euros more than the SM3 V2 on the Earsonics site but I think they'll be around $400 to $450 when other vendors get them.

 

As for the build quality its not the greatest but I don't think the quality is horrible or anything.  All the seems are flush and sealed good and the nozzles also seem nice and strong so I don't fear them braking anytime soon and if they do for some reason its a good excuse to re-shell them.

post #1415 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilly87 View Post

If your shells ever come open, you will see exactly how thin and flimsy the plastic they use really is. 2 other people I know here on head-fi (not just 2 posts I've read, but 2 users I've done business with or spoken to somewhat regularly) have had the shells come open for no reason at all. And just a few posts up you can read about TheMarkRemains having problems with the nozzle.

 

Well I hope that doesn't happen but if it does I'll just end up re-shelling them.  I might re-shell them anyways because I don't see myself getting one I'll like more and I'm not willing to spend $600 or more on an IEM because I don't think the improvement in SQ will be worth it to me.  I know diminishing returns is in affect and even if the PFE 232 or some other more expensive a bit better I'm very happy with the sound of the SM3.


Edited by Techno Kid - 12/14/12 at 8:36pm
post #1416 of 1668

I thought about reshelling multiple times, and in retrospect, I wish I had done it. If I can get mine repaired, I probably will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Techno Kid View Post

 

Well I hope that doesn't happen but if it does I'll just end up re-shelling them.  I might re-shell them anyways because I don't see myself getting one I'll like more and I'm not willing to spend $600 or more on an IEM because I don't think the improvement in SQ will be worth it to me.  I know diminishing returns is in affect and even if the PFE 232 or some other more expensive a bit better I'm very happy with the sound of the SM3.


Edited by Gilly87 - 12/14/12 at 8:43pm
post #1417 of 1668

I think after Christmas I am going to re-shell them but now I have to figure out which company to use, I'm thinking InEarz because there in the states and they cost under $100 I just hope they do a good job.  Being without them for a month or more will be tuff but at least I'll have my Heaven IV back so that wont be bad.


Edited by Techno Kid - 12/14/12 at 9:09pm
post #1418 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techno Kid View Post

I think after Christmas I am going to re-shell them but now I have to figure out which company to use, I'm thinking InEarz because there in the states and they cost under $100 I just hope they do a good job.  Being without them for a month or more will be tuff but at least I'll have my Heaven IV back so that wont be bad.

 

I will tell you now, I've spoken to a couple customs companies about reshelling the SM3's back when I had them. They are one of the hardest IEM's to keep the original sound of in a custom, so caveat emptor.

post #1419 of 1668

Makes no difference to me, I preferred the unfiltered sound anyways; they are just seriously crisp and detailed, have a balanced tonality, and image really well. The precise presentation is not something I'm hugely attached to, as long as it's still reasonably good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mosshorn View Post

 

I will tell you now, I've spoken to a couple customs companies about reshelling the SM3's back when I had them. They are one of the hardest IEM's to keep the original sound of in a custom, so caveat emptor.

post #1420 of 1668

Well that does make me concerned because I love them the way they sound.  

 

Gilly with the filter out do they just get a bit bright but still keep the same over all sound signature?

post #1421 of 1668

With the filters out, they lose some of the thickness of the overall sound. Some might say it decreases the cohesiveness, but I find that it makes the sound more forward and less spaced-out sounding, yet simultaneously improves dynamics. The stage might lose a bit of width. The bass gains more of a punch, it doesn't have the same softness that it does with the filters. The highs and upper mids are definitely more prevalent, and the highs can be sibilant at times. The mids strike a half-way point between the creamy sound of the filtered SM3 and the raw feel of the original ASG-1s. The extra emphasis in the highs makes them sound much better for strings than the filtered version; I would say this, along with bass impact, are the most immediately improvements. The sound is overall more fatiguing, but also more precise, with better bass impact and less darkness.

 

For caution, I will say that they definitely lose their smoothness, it won't be the rich sound you are used to by now, and they will be noticeably more fatiguing. For me, it was worth it; might not  be for you. If you really like the way they sound, no sense tampering with it. For me, I wanted just that extra bit of bass impact, and it was a bit too dark for some of my psytrance and classical guitar stuff.

 

 

Originally Posted by Techno Kid View Post

Well that does make me concerned because I love them the way they sound.  

 

Gilly with the filter out do they just get a bit bright but still keep the same over all sound signature?

post #1422 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilly87 View Post

With the filters out, they lose some of the thickness of the overall sound. Some might say it decreases the cohesiveness, but I find that it makes the sound more forward and less spaced-out sounding, yet simultaneously improves dynamics. The stage might lose a bit of width. The bass gains more of a punch, it doesn't have the same softness that it does with the filters. The highs and upper mids are definitely more prevalent, and the highs can be sibilant at times. The mids strike a half-way point between the creamy sound of the filtered SM3 and the raw feel of the original ASG-1s. The extra emphasis in the highs makes them sound much better for strings than the filtered version; I would say this, along with bass impact, are the most immediately improvements. The sound is overall more fatiguing, but also more precise, with better bass impact and less darkness.

 

For caution, I will say that they definitely lose their smoothness, it won't be the rich sound you are used to by now, and they will be noticeably more fatiguing. For me, it was worth it; might not  be for you. If you really like the way they sound, no sense tampering with it. For me, I wanted just that extra bit of bass impact, and it was a bit too dark for some of my psytrance and classical guitar stuff.

 

 

 


This is 100% true, and I'm on the negative side. I tried filterless for a few days, and got fatigued too quickly. It sounded great, but I was looking for that molasses sig when i got the SM3 in the first place ;)

post #1423 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilly87 View Post

With the filters out, they lose some of the thickness of the overall sound. Some might say it decreases the cohesiveness, but I find that it makes the sound more forward and less spaced-out sounding, yet simultaneously improves dynamics. The stage might lose a bit of width. The bass gains more of a punch, it doesn't have the same softness that it does with the filters. The highs and upper mids are definitely more prevalent, and the highs can be sibilant at times. The mids strike a half-way point between the creamy sound of the filtered SM3 and the raw feel of the original ASG-1s. The extra emphasis in the highs makes them sound much better for strings than the filtered version; I would say this, along with bass impact, are the most immediately improvements. The sound is overall more fatiguing, but also more precise, with better bass impact and less darkness.

 

For caution, I will say that they definitely lose their smoothness, it won't be the rich sound you are used to by now, and they will be noticeably more fatiguing. For me, it was worth it; might not  be for you. If you really like the way they sound, no sense tampering with it. For me, I wanted just that extra bit of bass impact, and it was a bit too dark for some of my psytrance and classical guitar stuff.

 

 

 

 

Well if they don't have that same smooth sound that I love than I don't think I'll be re-shelling them anytime soon and thanks for letting me know how they sound with no filters Gilly.  I  love the smooth rich sound of them and if that is lost by taking the filters out or re-shelling them than I would be quite disappointed so I'm glad I know.

post #1424 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techno Kid View Post

I glad to see that they've grown on you.

I was worried I wouldn't like them at first and was even thinking of selling them right away. Good thing my brain was able to adjust.
post #1425 of 1668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annafrancesca View Post


I was worried I wouldn't like them at first and was even thinking of selling them right away. Good thing my brain was able to adjust.

 

I felt the same way because they do have their own unique sound signature that was a bit strange at first but after 2 or 3 days I really started to like them and now I can't stop listening to them.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM3 Appreciation Thread - Third Time is a Charm?