I'm going to post a new thread since it was OT from the E5c comments.


I've yet to get the comparison thing out (a thousand apologies, only the test tracks write up re-formatting to go now), but I'll tell you the fundamental sonic differences between the E3c and the ER-4P.


The ER-4P feels fairly flat, with the exception of perhaps a slight boost across much of the low frequencies. Then there's perhaps an ever so slight dip in the midrange (so slight as to feel practically flat), and extended trebles. A clean, inoffensive signal.
The E3c feels much the same as the ER-4P until the midbass, where there's a boost. then there's also a boost in the upper midrange, then a slightly recessed treble in comparison to the ER-4P. A still clean, but a more aggressive signal.


What this means:
- Trebles do not 'stick out' as much on the E3c.
- E3c has closer soundstaging, sometimes to a very noticable degree.
- The midrange boost of the E3c lends a feeling of relative aggressiveness to the ER-4P's sound, at the expense of a somewhat metallic-feeling tinniness compared to the ER-4P. The grey/black tips, although much more comfortable than the ER-4P's silicon tips, seems to make this midrange even more prominent through some sonic glare.
- Deep bass is heard just as well on both phones. Get to the mid-bass and the E3c makes it fatter.


Now you might expect me to disparage the E3c based on that midrange issue. Surprisingly, no. On the whole I prefer the E3c's response for actual portable use. In higher-noise situations, I definitely prefer the E3c's overall response for rock and pop, for being able to deliver the sound to me better despite the background distractions that even the excellent isolation lets through.


However, if there's a lot going on in the midrange, the congestion can rob music of some nuances. In test tracks like Porcupine Tree's Blackest Eyes, The E3c managed to lose some of the texture of the acoustic guitar layer in comparison to the ER-4P. I'm not sure what is going on there but the difference in a quiet room was quite pronounced. This is however not really discernible in a typical portable situation.


The quality of sound differences were are a lot less than comparing many headphones I've had in similar price brackets. The changes are mainly in the flavour of the sound. ER-4P=flattish. E3c=forward. I think audio purists will still be drawn to the ER-4P/S. However I don't have any problems recommending the E3c just as highly, if not more for noise-attenuating portable listening of mainly rock and pop. The E3c's response seems to do a generally better job of this and the ergonomics are a LOT better.

Thank you so much, Headus Titanicus

Nice choice on the PT test track...that's probably my favorite PT song

This is going to take a great deal of deliberation. I'm horrible at making decisions ;D

Again, many thanks. I'll be sure to let you know of my decision

Bangraman,

Very interesting. Do you think that slight metallic mids you hear on the E3 could be due to the black tips? How about using the Ety tri-flanges on the E3, how does this affect its sound particularly on that metallic mids.

Which would you say attenuates more?

Quote:



The black/grey tips do seem to have a slight effect in adding almost an after-sibilance, a kind of sonic glare. Or put it this way, I notice this more when I put the black/grey tips on.


Both phones isolate about the same with the same tips (which are interchangeable... i.e Shure tips will fit on Ety and vice versa). The Etys may get a slightly better seal due to their construction (which also makes them less comfortable), but there's practically no difference.

Thanks for the clarification Bangraman.