Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure se425: Spotty Sound Quality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shure se425: Spotty Sound Quality

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

I received my se425s after sending my 6 year old E4Cs into Shure... Awesome CS, BTW. The sound on the SCL4 seems to be better overall. The se425s completely fall apart on cymbals and snares - most of the time you can barely hear cymbals. When you can they sound like fingers-on-a-chalkboard. I'm listening to CDs and high-quality AAC. Another thing is that the sound isn't as clear, it is muffled on many songs. It almost sounds like a busted speaker but I don't think I actually have one.

I have to turn these up fairly loud to hear all the sound then things start to pop but it snaps so tight and screechy that it is difficult to listen too. All the sounds don't seem to blend together smoothly its like they are all disconnected parts and distant. They sound like a Tin-Can where the SCL4s sounded full and natural. I'm not sure if that is what they are supposed to sound like or not. Songs that sounded perfect on the SCL4s sound completely different on the se425s. Electronic music seems to fair better than studio recorded instruments.

 

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

post #2 of 17

Cymbals always sounded like that on my SE420 when i had them ,by far the worst earphone i have ever heard and ,very forward aggressive mids ,bass was far ,far away ,by your description  sounds like the new model is not much improved .

post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucozade View Post

Cymbals always sounded like that on my SE420 when i had them ,by far the worst earphone i have ever heard and ,very forward aggressive mids ,bass was far ,far away ,by your description  sounds like the new model is not much improved .



I'm thinking about returning them and asking for the SCL4s. After reading every review I could find I figured these would be a step up from that but not sure what to think now.

 

Like you said it seems like the mids are up front and right in the middle with everything else being completely drowned-out. There are parts of songs I can hear that I couldn't hear with the E4Cs but that is mostly stuff like static from the recording and lots of minute stuff - all the good stuff, the actual instruments, are almost unheard in some parts.


Edited by RS232 - 9/11/11 at 10:17am
post #4 of 17
Thread Starter 

I really need some opinions from anyone who has or who knows anything about these earphones because I am seriously thinking about sending them back.

post #5 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RS232 View Post

I really need some opinions from anyone who has or who knows anything about these earphones because I am seriously thinking about sending them back.



Um...unless ur set is broken it shouldn't sound bad. The highs are known to be less bright than what most prefer, however. But I find it just right.

 

Maybe it comes down to preference, and also, it may take time to appreciate the sound signature.


Edited by jz9chen - 9/11/11 at 6:53pm
post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz9chen View Post





Um...unless ur set is broken it shouldn't sound bad. The highs are known to be less bright than what most prefer, however. But I find it just right.

 

Maybe it comes down to preference, and also, it may take time to appreciate the sound signature.


It doesn't sound like music, it just sounds like a bunch of disconnected sounds but somehow blurred together on a very small and narrow sound-stage. To me that sounds bad. I can't actually hear anything in the music unless I really try.

post #7 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RS232 View Post




It doesn't sound like music, it just sounds like a bunch of disconnected sounds but somehow blurred together on a very small and narrow sound-stage. To me that sounds bad. I can't actually hear anything in the music unless I really try.


Would suggest your set either broken, or fake.  I had the 425's for quite a while - and they were very pleasant, quite balanced IEMs - just lacking a little in the high end (rolled off treble).  Better than the 420, but still lacking a little sparkle.  Mids were forward (typical Shure sound sig) - but really nice, especially on vocals.  Bass was back a little, but still present.  Overall quite a balanced signature.

 

Suggest you contact Shure - and get them checked.


Edited by Brooko - 9/11/11 at 8:15pm
post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post




Would suggest your set either broken, or fake.  I had the 425's for quite a while - and they were very pleasant, quite balanced IEMs - just lacking a little in the high end (rolled off treble).  Better than the 420, but still lacking a little sparkle.  Mids were forward (typical Shure sound sig) - but really nice, especially on vocals.  Bass was back a little, but still present.  Overall quite a balanced signature.

 

Suggest you contact Shure - and get them checked.

I got them directly from Shure when I sent my E4Cs in.... had those for 5-6 years.
 

 

post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RS232 View Post



I got them directly from Shure when I sent my E4Cs in.... had those for 5-6 years.
 

 


Doesn't mean that there may not be something wrong with them.  If what you are describing is happening, I can't see any other explanation than a malfunction somewhere.  I was really sorry to let mine go - but in the end, the lack of upper extension was really the only reason for returning them.  Incidentally - they guy I sold mine to got in touch with me this week) he's now had them almost a month).  He just wanted to let me know he was loving them - and he echoed my comments on their balance.

 

If you're not sure, contact Shure and advise what you are hearing - knowing their customer service, they'll at the very least check them out for you.

post #10 of 17

Maybe give them 4 years of burn-in, or rather give your ears 4 years of burn-in, and then see what you think.

post #11 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yggdrassilious View Post

Maybe give them 4 years of burn-in, or rather give your ears 4 years of burn-in, and then see what you think.



That is too long... the E4Cs sounded awesome right from the start.

post #12 of 17
Thread Starter 

I think I've realized what the problem is... whatever frequency things like guitars usually are on are overwhelmed by the ting, slap, smack, pop of cymbals, snares, and hi hat. So, I keep turning up the volume to hear guitar and such and those other frequencies become too much to bear. So, they might need some EQ adjustment. The SE425 is biased towards vocals and cymbals, snares and such.

I've also noticed I can push these to full volume and they are not that loud. The E4Cs would be so loud you HAD to turn them down at full volume. I have to have these at at least 3/4 volume to get much sound out whereas the E4cs could be heard fine at about 1/2 volume - using an ipod for reference.

post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RS232 View Post

I think I've realized what the problem is... whatever frequency things like guitars usually are on are overwhelmed by the ting, slap, smack, pop of cymbals, snares, and hi hat. So, I keep turning up the volume to hear guitar and such and those other frequencies become too much to bear. So, they might need some EQ adjustment. The SE425 is biased towards vocals and cymbals, snares and such.

I've also noticed I can push these to full volume and they are not that loud. The E4Cs would be so loud you HAD to turn them down at full volume. I have to have these at at least 3/4 volume to get much sound out whereas the E4cs could be heard fine at about 1/2 volume - using an ipod for reference.


I'd still get them checked.

 

[1] Even on an ipod (Touch G4), I couldn't go much over a third volume before it became unbearably loud.

[2] The 425s are very balanced, but just a tad rolled off on the high end.  Although there is some overlap in the frequency of cymbals and guitar, most of the harmonics of the guitar is lower freq than the main harmonics of the cymbal.  So one shouldn't drown the other - unless it was recorded to sound that way.

[3] Are you sure you are listening to these flat on your ipod (no EQ?) - that could account for the messy sound.

 

The SE425 has a prominent mid range yes - but normal vocals tend to be mids / lower mids, whereas cymbals reach into upper mids and highs.

 

What you're describing is not normal for the SE425.

 

post #14 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post




I'd still get them checked.

 

[1] Even on an ipod (Touch G4), I couldn't go much over a third volume before it became unbearably loud.

[2] The 425s are very balanced, but just a tad rolled off on the high end.  Although there is some overlap in the frequency of cymbals and guitar, most of the harmonics of the guitar is lower freq than the main harmonics of the cymbal.  So one shouldn't drown the other - unless it was recorded to sound that way.

[3] Are you sure you are listening to these flat on your ipod (no EQ?) - that could account for the messy sound.

 

The SE425 has a prominent mid range yes - but normal vocals tend to be mids / lower mids, whereas cymbals reach into upper mids and highs.

 

What you're describing is not normal for the SE425.

 

Everything is flat - I changed the iTunes EQ to "Rock" for some songs and it evened things out a bit. I just don't want to make a fuss to Shure and then look like an idiot when they say: "These are fine." Maybe I'm just used to the E4Cs.
 

 

post #15 of 17

I had very similar experiences with the 530s... sounded like complete crap to me and similar to what OP said, bunch of sound just scrambled together. but I lend them to some friends and they all seem to love it. guess its just personal preference...


Edited by rangerid - 9/13/11 at 5:24am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Shure se425: Spotty Sound Quality