Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM3 vs UE TF 10 vs Westone 4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Earsonics SM3 vs UE TF 10 vs Westone 4 - Page 6

post #76 of 87

Just found them that way, I did not demo them when I bought them and I guess I like their dynamic driver on the 5 Pro EB much better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post


Wrong quote?
It definitely wouldn't be the w3 as the subject of comparison. (unless you consider that a medium of "flatness")
In general, the tf-10 out of my clip+ and hm602 is noticeably rich and full in the nether regions. There is a hump in the upper and mid ranges of the bass.
I don't know why you would think they're flat? Wrong or in-adequate fit?
post #77 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post


No.
An already V-shaped signature only makes things more un-balanced and fatiguing.
Plus, the tf-10 lacks in clarity and imaging next to the sm3 and w4. Doesn't matter what music genre.
Change the mindset now. For all of you people out there who think "more bass, bass-emphasis, or bass impactful" = best for hip hop/rap

 

Fair enough, I figured that if you're listening to hip-hop and rap you probably love a coloured signature, as that seems to be the general consensus.  I don't listen to those genres.  :3

Guess he could go for the Ety route too.

post #78 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post


Agree.
Dual armatures like the ck-10 and ck90 mk2 compare much more favorably than triple or quad drivers.
Why don't you see headphones using multi drivers? There's no need. The best "recognized" cans in the world use a thin film and a simple static current flow. One diaphragm is enough to cover all frequencies. Anything else is arguable and controversial.
You get to a point where the headphones or iem is technically proficient enough. It becomes a matter of preference from then on. I prefer my ck-10's presentation over the jh-13 demo. Does that mean I'm crazy? Not at all.


True that! The only reason why IEMs use 6-8 drivers is usually because of advertising. 

post #79 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


True that! The only reason why IEMs use 6-8 drivers is usually because of advertising. 

No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post


Agree.
Dual armatures like the ck-10 and ck90 mk2 compare much more favorably than triple or quad drivers.
Why don't you see headphones using multi drivers? There's no need. The best "recognized" cans in the world use a thin film and a simple static current flow. One diaphragm is enough to cover all frequencies. Anything else is arguable and controversial.
You get to a point where the headphones or iem is technically proficient enough. It becomes a matter of preference from then on. I prefer my ck-10's presentation over the jh-13 demo. Does that mean I'm crazy? Not at all.

Comparing IEM's and Headphones is like comparing apples and oranges.  Same class of item, yet different entities entirely.  

I'm not stating that your preference of the CK10 over the JH-13 is bad.  I never asserted that.  That's a perfectly fine opinion, but to come to the defense of the JH13, a demo will never sound as good as the true custom.  

 

And a last point, remember, the McGurk effect, sound is effected by our other senses such as visual perception.  Once you establish this mindset that you have so adamantly formed, you will never objectively view anything else.  <3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post


I think you're completely wrong at that point. A Final Audio FI-BA-SS has only a single balanced armature and it's able to cover the whole frequency range very well, I would say it sounds more accurate, neutral and detailed than a JH16. The ER-4 too, it has only a single driver, yet cover the frequency range pretty well. And do we need to dwell anymore into multiple ones? Customs like the UM Mage and Aero have only 3 and 4 drivers respectively, yet is able to cover the frequency range so well, in no way lacking compared to a JH16, 13 or Miracle. I can agree that more drivers can cover a wider frequency range? But seriously? 6-8 drivers for that? There are only the most discernible frequency we can hear which is highs, mids and lows, which means we only need 3 or 4 in the maximum. 

The word you used hear "if done properly" applies on what you have said. Having 6-8 drivers even if done properly can't sound as accurate or neutral as compared to a ER-4 or UERM. I think you're the one ignorant here, unless you heard those IEMs yourself and compared, I don't think you have the right to speak based on factual science, because sound is subjective. 

 

This is the reason that I hate trying to have a civil argument with persons on the internet.  I never made the point that a single balanced armature driver COULDN'T cover the frequency range well.    Did I say that it couldn't?  Furthermore, how can you compare the JH16 to the Final Audio FI-BA-SS when the JH16 is marketed as bass heavy headphone.  In addition, I highly doubt that you're an authority on which sounds better seeing as you haven't owned either yet you have tested it (anyone can test things, doesn't give them credence, and if you didn't realize there are a lot more polarized opinions with the Final Audio FI-BA-SS than other similar priced and lower priced IEM's such as the JH16, UM Miracle).

 

Etymotic also makes great single balanced armature driver in ear monitors yet I'm willing to bet that a majority of Head-Fiers will find it lacking certain aspects bar accuracy.  Your points are moot.  Seriously, did I say that a in ear monitor with less drivers cannot perform as well as current balanced armature IEM's with up to 8 drivers?  No.  Is your definition of sounding "better" subjective and lack any technical backing.  Yes.  We don't only need 3 or 4 in the maximum, more can be better as it offers more potential.  However, I do also believe in the concept of diminishing marginal returns and it would be hard to hear the distinctions offered by the extra drivers.  

 

6-8 drivers done properly "can't sound accurate or neutral as compared to a ER-4 or UERM."  Are you kidding me?  They are literally marketed as reference monitors designed for a flat and neutral sound.  You obviously haven't owned any other customs, nor have I, that are also designated to be a reference neutral sound because your opinion is severely lacking.   I'm sure if any serious research was done by a group of audiologist in conjunction with sound engineers and other related fields, my assertions would prove that multiple balanced armatures indeed gives the possibility of higher potential.  

 

One quick note, although I cannot state at which point this applies, I would like to clarify that I am not stating that 20 drivers is better than 8, and even if it was the difference would be indistinguishable, there is a point of diminishing marginal returns and at the point additional balanced armature drivers in all likelihood probably prove detrimental to the overall sound quality and fidelity.


Edited by Cassadian - 5/18/12 at 12:01am
post #80 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

No.

Comparing IEM's and Headphones is like comparing apples and oranges.  Same class of item, yet different entities entirely.  

I'm not stating that your preference of the CK10 over the JH-13 is bad.  I never asserted that.  That's a perfectly fine opinion, but to come to the defense of the JH13, a demo will never sound as good as the true custom.  

 

And a last point, remember, the McGurk effect, sound is effected by our other senses such as visual perception.  Once you establish this mindset that you have so adamantly formed, you will never objectively view anything else.  <3

 

This is the reason that I hate trying to have a civil argument with persons on the internet.  I never made the point that a single balanced armature driver COULDN'T cover the frequency range well.    Did I say that it couldn't?  Furthermore, how can you compare the JH16 to the Final Audio FI-BA-SS when the JH16 is marketed as bass heavy headphone.  In addition, I highly doubt that you're an authority on which sounds better seeing as you haven't owned either yet you have tested it (anyone can test things, doesn't give them credence, and if you didn't realize there are a lot more polarized opinions with the Final Audio FI-BA-SS than other similar priced and lower priced IEM's such as the JH16, UM Miracle).

 

Etymotic also makes great single balanced armature driver in ear monitors yet I'm willing to bet that a majority of Head-Fiers will find it lacking certain aspects bar accuracy.  Your points are moot.  Seriously, did I say that a in ear monitor with less drivers cannot perform as well as current balanced armature IEM's with up to 8 drivers?  No.  Is your definition of sounding "better" subjective and lack any technical backing.  Yes.  We don't only need 3 or 4 in the maximum, more can be better as it offers more potential.  However, I do also believe in the concept of diminishing marginal returns and it would be hard to hear the distinctions offered by the extra drivers.  

 

6-8 drivers done properly "can't sound accurate or neutral as compared to a ER-4 or UERM."  Are you kidding me?  They are literally marketed as reference monitors designed for a flat and neutral sound.  You obviously haven't owned any other customs, nor have I, that are also designated to be a reference neutral sound because your opinion is severely lacking.  Please stop replying because you make yourself seem a fool.  I'm sure if any serious research was done by a group of audiologist in conjunction with sound engineers and other related fields, my assertions would prove that multiple balanced armatures indeed gives the possibility of higher potential.  

 

One quick note, although I cannot state at which point this applies, I would like to clarify that I am not stating that 20 drivers is better than 8, and even if it was the difference would be indistinguishable, there is a point of diminishing marginal returns and at the point additional balanced armature drivers in all likelihood probably prove detrimental to the overall sound quality and fidelity.

Seriously, I don't think you're getting the point here. If I said the FI-BA-SS was preferred over to the JH16, it already shows that the 8 driver count isn't necessarily better than a single armature right? Less said about those with less driver count. And may I ask, do you own a JH13 or 16? Because if you do, I can perfectly see why you're trying to protect IEMs with a higher driver count so badly. I do agree with the fact it can handle better, but handling better probably has a limit, you don't need 6-8 drivers to cover so well?

post #81 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremypsp View Post

Seriously, I don't think you're getting the point here. If I said the FI-BA-SS was preferred over to the JH16, it already shows that the 8 driver count isn't necessarily better than a single armature right? Less said about those with less driver count. And may I ask, do you own a JH13 or 16? Because if you do, I can perfectly see why you're trying to protect IEMs with a higher driver count so badly. I do agree with the fact it can handle better, but handling better probably has a limit, you don't need 6-8 drivers to cover so well?

 

But what I'm stating is that you can't compare the two accurate because they designate two different demographics.  

 

I do not own a JH Audio IEM, and I'm not interested in it, I'd rather purchase a Unique Melody CIEM, which I actually am saving money to purchase at the moment.  I have no reason to protect them, I have no incentive.  Like I stated earlier, I can't state with authority that possibly 5 or 6 drivers is the point at which diminishing marginal returns become negative being more detrimental to the overall sonic qualities of the IEM, but the extra drivers allow for extra precision, that ability to utilize each driver to pinpoint different portions of the frequency range.  There's only so much you can do with one balanced armature driver, with 5,6,7 or 8, who knows?  I think the main thing though is the two concepts that I want to reiterate, the idea of diminishing marginal returns to the point of hindrance, and the concept of diminishing marginal utility.  As you continue to go up and up the ladder of IEM's, the distinction in sound quality is minimal and probably indistinguishable.  

 

Cheers.

post #82 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

 

But what I'm stating is that you can't compare the two accurate because they designate two different demographics.  

 

I do not own a JH Audio IEM, and I'm not interested in it, I'd rather purchase a Unique Melody CIEM, which I actually am saving money to purchase at the moment.  I have no reason to protect them, I have no incentive.  Like I stated earlier, I can't state with authority that possibly 5 or 6 drivers is the point at which diminishing marginal returns become negative being more detrimental to the overall sonic qualities of the IEM, but the extra drivers allow for extra precision, that ability to utilize each driver to pinpoint different portions of the frequency range.  There's only so much you can do with one balanced armature driver, with 5,6,7 or 8, who knows?  I think the main thing though is the two concepts that I want to reiterate, the idea of diminishing marginal returns to the point of hindrance, and the concept of diminishing marginal utility.  As you continue to go up and up the ladder of IEM's, the distinction in sound quality is minimal and probably indistinguishable.  

 

Cheers.


I know it's not a fair comparison, but I'm just stating that if I can prefer the FI-BA-SS over the JH16, that means more drivers does not = better sound.

At least your sentence sounds more fair now. So what UM are you aiming for? I preferred the Mage to the Miracle to say the least... 

post #83 of 87

Haha.  Well, I'm probably looking forward to purchasing either the UM Miracle, the Spiral Ear 5-Way Reference, or possibly if another company releases some ground breaking custom IEM I'll be on that like white on rice.

post #84 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

Haha.  Well, I'm probably looking forward to purchasing either the UM Miracle, the Spiral Ear 5-Way Reference, or possibly if another company releases some ground breaking custom IEM I'll be on that like white on rice.

 

 

I see, cool! The miracles are pretty good, although the bass is a little too much for me. Well, since I prefer less drivers, I would aim for the UERM, fitear 333 or MH334.

post #85 of 87
Fx700 have some of the best bass quality known to the human ear
post #86 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by basketball View Post

Fx700 have some of the best bass quality known to the human ear

 

At the sacrifice of control and speed.

post #87 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassadian View Post

 

At the sacrifice of control and speed.

Yes, But no headphone has the perfect of everything.Of course that is subjective because everyone likes a different sound signature. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Earsonics SM3 vs UE TF 10 vs Westone 4