Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi Custom Flagship IEM Review 23/8/11 UERM Added
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Multi Custom Flagship IEM Review 23/8/11 UERM Added - Page 6

Poll Results: Which Custom IEM should I review next? I'll purchase them in the order of popularity :)

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 14% (32)
    Ultimate Ears Referene Monitor
  • 14% (32)
    1964 Ears Quads
  • 30% (67)
    UM Mircale
  • 14% (33)
    UM Merlin
  • 3% (7)
    UE 11Pro
  • 6% (15)
    Westone ES3X
  • 19% (44)
    JH16Pro + JH3A
223 Total Votes  
post #76 of 111

I don't know if this has ever been mentioned, but AVguide.com did a review of the UE RM, and the review mentions several times that the UE RM has rolled off treble.

 

http://www.avguide.com/review/ultimate-ears-ear-reference-monitors-playback-40

 

I don't have the UE RM and haven't heard the universal version so I can't say he's right or wrong, but this review is the ONLY review I've read describing the UE RM's treble as rolled off. Everywhere else I've read describes its treble as airy, detailed, and extended. Can any UE RM owners comment?

post #77 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by moseboy View Post

I don't know if this has ever been mentioned, but AVguide.com did a review of the UE RM, and the review mentions several times that the UE RM has rolled off treble.

 

http://www.avguide.com/review/ultimate-ears-ear-reference-monitors-playback-40

 

I don't have the UE RM and haven't heard the universal version so I can't say he's right or wrong, but this review is the ONLY review I've read describing the UE RM's treble as rolled off. Everywhere else I've read describes its treble as airy, detailed, and extended. Can any UE RM owners comment?

We mostly always confuse extended and present treble with the harmonic frequencies ( 14khz+ ). Really, there is very little information of music in those frequencies. Treble that is significant to the music really occurs below 12khz. Most if not all balanced armature speakers significantly roll off past 16khz and we're talking about 8-10db drops.
 

 

post #78 of 111

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tronz View Post

We mostly always confuse extended and present treble with the harmonic frequencies ( 14khz+ ). Really, there is very little information of music in those frequencies. Treble that is significant to the music really occurs below 12khz. Most if not all balanced armature speakers significantly roll off past 16khz and we're talking about 8-10db drops.

 

But those harmonic frequencies are what he's saying is missing. Here's a quote from his review:

 

"The IERM’s treble response is clear and extremely smooth, though I thought there was a touch of roll-off at the very top of the audio spectrum. While the IERM never sounds “dull” or unduly subdued, it does not convey high-frequency harmonics, “air,” or textural and transient details quite as effectively as, say, the Westone ES5 does."

 

Which boggles my mind that he'd say the ES5 has more air, because not only is that the exact opposite of what I've been seeing people post about the IERM vs. the ES5, but I have the ES5 and I personally think that its "airiness" is one of its weaknesses.

post #79 of 111

It's a bit tricky.  To be clear the RM is a bit 'brighter' than the ES5.  However, one needs to consider extension versus peaks too.  It gets pretty hard to know what's really going on past 12-14khz w/o a graph.  Even then, how each ear hears it is another story.

 

Here's the thing, the RM is thinner than the ES5, that we can all agree on.  This allows the RM to sound more balanced and appear more 'clear' and detailed.  The question is whether the RM is actually more resolving than the ES5.  From careful listening I'd say not necessarily.  The signature of the RM allows you to hear things more obviously and easily.  Does that mean the information is not there in the ES5?  No.  If you listen close you can hear the same detail and oft times even more on the ES5.  Sometimes if can actually seem like you are getting overloaded w/ sound so it seems like their is less air.  

 

In a way it's a matter of perspective.  Imagine tasting a Vanilla milkshake.  You can pick out the hints and complexities of the vanilla bean flavor and really dissect it.  Now add crushed Oreo cookies to the same shake.  It becomes much harder to analyze the intricacies of that Vanilla flavor w/o the cookies getting in the way.  Now ask yourself which has more flavor (resolution in the case of phones).  The Oreo shake does.  But which do you prefer?  That's a matter of taste.  More often than not I use the RM as a specific tool for ABing gear and tracks.  It's just easier and quicker to do than w/ the ES5.  I also enjoy it musically and it does a pleasurable job.  However, the RM never conveys the realism of the instruments or vocals on a track like the ES5 does.  When I hear a horn, a horn literally pops out of blackness into being.  When I hear a horn on the RM I hear an excellent rendition of a horn on the track I'm playing.  How else can the ES5 render a near visual image of an actual instrument playing in front of my face if it isn't retrieving more information and assemblying it more coherently?  That being said ears and gears vary and so do some of the impressions here.  

 

As to actual 'air' and its relation to treble and SS I'm going to stay away from that can of worms...for now.  I can say the RM seems to have more air and separation by nature of being thinner, but the ES5 has better definition to me.  IME SS is the least objective and consistent of the sonic qualities to compare from listener to listener so I avoid discussing it unless need be.  Some get a nice coherent stage w/ decent depth, some extreme left and right, some behind and below.  Who can really surmise anything from that?   


Edited by Anaxilus - 8/28/11 at 8:56pm
post #80 of 111

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post 

[...]

In a way it's a matter of perspective.  Imagine tasting a Vanilla milkshake.  You can pick out the hints and complexities of the vanilla bean flavor and really dissect it.  Now add crushed Oreo cookies to the same shake.  It becomes much harder to analyze the intricacies of that Vanilla flavor w/o the cookies getting in the way.  Now ask yourself which has more flavor (resolution in the case of phones).  The Oreo shake does.  But which do you prefer?  That's a matter of taste.  [...]


Can I equalize my tongue, so the cookies are removed from the milkshake? Or is that too difficult tongue_smile.gif

 

post #81 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

It's a bit tricky.  To be clear the RM is a bit 'brighter' than the ES5.  However, one needs to consider extension versus peaks too.  It gets pretty hard to know what's really going on past 12-14khz w/o a graph.  Even then, how each ear hears it is another story.

 

Here's the thing, the RM is thinner than the ES5, that we can all agree on.  This allows the RM to sound more balanced and appear more 'clear' and detailed.  The question is whether the RM is actually more resolving than the ES5.  From careful listening I'd say not necessarily.  The signature of the RM allows you to hear things more obviously and easily.  Does that mean the information is not there in the ES5?  No.  If you listen close you can hear the same detail and oft times even more on the ES5.  Sometimes if can actually seem like you are getting overloaded w/ sound so it seems like their is less air.  

 

In a way it's a matter of perspective.  Imagine tasting a Vanilla milkshake.  You can pick out the hints and complexities of the vanilla bean flavor and really dissect it.  Now add crushed Oreo cookies to the same shake.  It becomes much harder to analyze the intricacies of that Vanilla flavor w/o the cookies getting in the way.  Now ask yourself which has more flavor (resolution in the case of phones).  The Oreo shake does.  But which do you prefer?  That's a matter of taste.  More often than not I use the RM as a specific tool for ABing gear and tracks.  It's just easier and quicker to do than w/ the ES5.  I also enjoy it musically and it does a pleasurable job.  However, the RM never conveys the realism of the instruments or vocals on a track like the ES5 does.  When I hear a horn, a horn literally pops out of blackness into being.  When I hear a horn on the RM I hear an excellent rendition of a horn on the track I'm playing.  How else can the ES5 render a near visual image of an actual instrument playing in front of my face if it isn't retrieving more information and assemblying it more coherently?  That being said ears and gears vary and so do some of the impressions here.  

 

As to actual 'air' and its relation to treble and SS I'm going to stay away from that can of worms...for now.  I can say the RM seems to have more air and separation by nature of being thinner, but the ES5 has better definition to me.  IME SS is the least objective and consistent of the sonic qualities to compare from listener to listener so I avoid discussing it unless need be.  Some get a nice coherent stage w/ decent depth, some extreme left and right, some behind and below.  Who can really surmise anything from that?   


Great post. Frequency response is a seriously huge factor in how we perceive the overall sound of a speaker.

 

post #82 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 


Can I equalize my tongue, so the cookies are removed from the milkshake? Or is that too difficult tongue_smile.gif

 



Equalisation will cause distortion and therefore affecting your ability to taste the details within your food. 

post #83 of 111

btw which one is better with the UERM, the full acrylic shell with -26 dB of isolation or the hybrid/soft shell (acrylic faceplate with softer material on the inner side, silicone if im not mistaken) with -32 dB of isolation? im planning to go for the hybrid ones, since silicone is known to be more comfortable. my only concern is durability.. which option is more durable? 


Edited by NobleSix - 8/30/11 at 4:15pm
post #84 of 111

It seems I have a big preference for Balanced Armatures over Dynamic IEMs. My preference of UE18 Pro over the ES5, and my most liked universals being the ER4P and the CK100, all seem to point to the fact that I like the refined sound of Balanced Armature over coarse dynamics despite their better "musicality".

post #85 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleli View Post

It seems I have a big preference for Balanced Armatures over Dynamic IEMs. My preference of UE18 Pro over the ES5, and my most liked universals being the ER4P and the CK100, all seem to point to the fact that I like the refined sound of Balanced Armature over coarse dynamics despite their better "musicality".


The ES5 uses balanced armature speakers too.

post #86 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tronz View Post


The ES5 uses balanced armature speakers too.


I was going to say that but I got lazy. rolleyes.gif

 

post #87 of 111

cue the knock against the ES5 for not having a "refined" sound despite having balanced armatures...

 

I think mine sounds pretty refined anyway


Edited by moseboy - 8/30/11 at 9:30pm
post #88 of 111
How about EM3Pro from Earsonics? Heard that they are better than JH13. How can you not include these, since they have a reputation for producing the king of universal iems- SM3. I would also like to see more of Spiral Ear SE 5 way, cos at 999 Euros, they are the most expensive custom iems ever. Just curious if their pricing is justified...

If only someone can do a comparison between ES5, EM3pro and Spiral Ear SE 5 way.
(After that I can say goodbye to Head Fi biggrin.gif )
post #89 of 111

     Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjerry View Post

[...]If only someone can do a comparison between ES5, EM3pro and Spiral Ear SE 5 way.


Check this thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/541494/multi-custom-iem-review-resource-mfg-list-discussion-thread-info-on-page-1 ;)

post #90 of 111

tongue.gif, seen that... still awaiting for average joe's 5-way..

Reserved average_joe: http://www.head-fi.org/products/spiral-ear-se-5-way-reference

 

popcorn.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Multi Custom Flagship IEM Review 23/8/11 UERM Added