Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone UM3X RC vs. EarSonics SM3 v2 vs. SE535 Showdown (updated 10/5/11)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Westone UM3X RC vs. EarSonics SM3 v2 vs. SE535 Showdown (updated 10/5/11) - Page 3

post #31 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by miow View Post

At the moment. the UM3X RC, due to better mids, especially noticed on vocals. They give me a more enjoyable listening experience.



I thought so too.

post #32 of 70

.


Edited by miow - 12/9/11 at 4:18pm
post #33 of 70
Thread Starter 

There are some similarities in their sound signatures, with the exception of the mid-range being more forward/pronounced with the UM3X.  I do believe that the instrument separation with the UM3X is far superior to the SM3.  In fact, I might go as far as saying that it is better than any IEM (with the Ety ER4 being the only close competitor).

post #34 of 70

I have noticed that too.

 


Edited by miow - 12/9/11 at 4:59pm
post #35 of 70
Thread Starter 

Update: My SE535s arrived a week ago.  After about 30 hours of testing and many-many tips I'm very happy with these!  I think the Olives are the 2nd best option for the sound signature I'm looking for, but oddly enough the factory EarSonics bi-flanges that come with the SM3 v2s sound best with the SE535.  The bass and mids are unchanged compared to the Olives, but the Treble has slightly better extension. It may also be placebo, but I think there is a more open sound to the flanges.  They sound great.

 

The build quality is absolutely amazing.  There is also better instrument separation than the SM3s (although not as good as the UM3X), but the mids are not as pronounced and unrealistic as the UM3X.  Bass is VERY detailed and extended, but not as strong as the UM3X or the SM3 (OK, the only negative point).  Less rolled off in the treble than both the UM3X or SM3.  They're great!  I'm a happy Head-Fi'er.


Edited by SoulSyde - 10/5/11 at 6:31pm
post #36 of 70

I haven't owned the SE535 but have owned the SE530.  I suggest giving it time.  Spend time comparing back and forth between the earphones.  From my experience the SE530 and very likely the SE535 has a lot of wow factor.  It's very dynamic, squeaky clean, and well balanced.  It has a number of strengths.  However, it also has a number of shortcomings too.  Now I've only used the SE530, and a couple of the shortcomings with that earphone was improved with the SE535.  Still, it will come down to a mix of things in the end, and you will have to weigh each product against what you see as ideal or best.  In the end, one will win.  The wow factor of the SE535 makes it really great at first.  Give it time and keep comparing.  You will see how the SE535 fairs after the newness of the sound wears off.  Once you build a solid understanding of each product and can view them from a holistic standpoint, you can then make a seriously conclusion.

post #37 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoulSyde View Post

Update: My SE535s arrived a week ago.  After about 30 hours of testing and many-many tips I'm very happy with these!  I think the Olives are the 2nd best option for the sound signature I'm looking for, but oddly enough the factory EarSonics bi-flanges that come with the SM3 v2s sound best with the SE535.  The bass and mids are unchanged compared to the Olives, but the Treble has slightly better extension. It may also be placebo, but I think there is a more open sound to the flanges.  They sound great.

 

The build quality is absolutely amazing.  There is also better instrument separation than the SM3s (although not as good as the UM3X), but the mids are not as pronounced and unrealistic as the UM3X.  Bass is VERY detailed and extended, but not as strong as the UM3X or the SM3 (OK, the only negative point).  Less rolled off in the treble than both the UM3X or SM3.  They're great!  I'm a happy Head-Fi'er.

 

So which one is the best according to your taste?
 

 

post #38 of 70

Well, after listening to TENs of songs, TENs of bands, different genres since Progressive Metal, to Pop/Rock, Jazz, Electronic and more, I come to the conclusion that UM3X is better in all aspects except vocals, which are a bit more upfront/warmer on the SM3 due to mid-centric sound sig (but still amazing on the UM3X). Instrument separation is better, more clarity, more details and better treble (quantity and its more sparkly). Treble on the SM3 is indeed recessed. If you A/B both, you almost can't hear the SM3's treble. Bass quantity and quality is same thing. UM3X is brighter, SM3 is dark. This is after an extensive A/B. No doubts, UM3X wins hands down. Going to buy a silver dragon cable for it and it will be heaven, with even more details, better soundstage and deeper bass.


Edited by miow - 12/9/11 at 3:08pm
post #39 of 70

The more I listen to the UM3X and the SM3, the more weaknesses I find on the SM3 (congestion - no excelent instrument separation as the UM3X, less treble extension, darkness, less clarity, less details, less dynamics, etc). I'm gonna send them back.


Edited by miow - 12/10/11 at 2:45am
post #40 of 70

It's for those reasons I too parted from the SM3, as it sounded mesmerizing at first, until I began to compare it to a few other favorites, after which it sounded much too dark for my liking.

post #41 of 70

Too dark and excessively mid-centric. Thats why some people need a month to get accostumed to their "odd" sound sig (lol).


Edited by miow - 12/10/11 at 2:43am
post #42 of 70

I really suggest those finding the SM3 dark sounding or congested trying to remove the filters and replace them with a little foam. I guarantee you that you won't recognize them. I'm quite certain that the in house signature of Earsonics is due to the filter. Simply removing them is not enough, as you will get a real harsh sound. But replacing the agressive filter with a bit of foam will get you a much clearer, but still smooth sound.

I did not like my SM3 much at first, but I guarantee they are still my favourite iem now (after the mod).

post #43 of 70

How can I remove that? The nozzle is so thin I can't see a thing inside.

post #44 of 70

DSCF9156.jpgDSCF9157.jpg

I made a small tool from a screw that I glued to a UE cleaning tool. All you have to do is to find a screw that just fits into the nozzle. On the second pic, you see the original metal housing of the filter with some foam inside. Originally, there was a green filter visible in the metal housing.

To remove the filter, just screw the screw in the nozzle and gently pull. You can always put it back in place after trial.

post #45 of 70

I don't understand where that metal housing comes from. If I look inside the nozzle I can't see that.

 

BTW, would that work on the V2? I won't do that in this one, but on the V2.


Edited by miow - 12/10/11 at 12:58pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Westone UM3X RC vs. EarSonics SM3 v2 vs. SE535 Showdown (updated 10/5/11)