m-13 said:

  Curious.... Dan why are the white filters included in the stock version? I would love to get your take on the sound differences and what was behind the decision to include them in the first place.

Click to expand...

The bass is definitely  tighter with the stock pads..............also possibly softens siblilance/stridence and better for overall balance

Anyone try removing the stock white pad and adding one tuning kit black pad?

I'm going to go out on the CRAZY limb an ask if Dan ever did a Tour for these? I know there's two Hifiman Edition X tours going around an I'm kinda curious how an open back Hifiman would compare to Dans newest Flagship 

allanmarcus said:

Anyone try removing the stock white pad and adding one tuning kit black pad?

Click to expand...

that's a great Idea and i'll try it by next Tuesday, if not sooner

Got my Ether-C’s last week and finally got around to putting about 5 hours of critical listening on them over the weekend, through my iPhone 6S and Centrance HiFi-M8 (via 4-pin XLR, though the M8 isn’t actually a fully-balanced amp). Listened to a wide variety of music, including the entire Chesky’s Ultimate Demonstration Disc and a number of jazz, pop and EDM tracks (generally all in 16-44.1/48 ALAC)
 
Impressions:

1. Neutral: although I was biased by having read many reviews / impressions of the Ether C’s in advance, I can see why people refer to these headphones as neutral, and how they’re more of the “do everything well” rather than “excel in one area” type headphones. The way I would describe it is that it sounds like everything is elevated (bass, mid-range / vocals, treble) even though in reality it's fairly flat. Bass, Mids and Highs all sounded more detailed and “enhanced”, and wonderful
2. Vocals: I love how vocals sound with this headphone. Overall these headphones sound fast, with a quick decay. I hear this applied to the vocals such that you can hear distinctly the “decay” of every word (sort of like an echo, but not in a bad way, in a high-resolution way if that makes sense). Like the headphone is resolving so fast that I can hear more gradations when a vocal note is decaying so it’s ultra smooth (like the audio equivalent of a 240hz tv showing fast motion smoother than a 60hz tv).
3. Detail reproduction: wonderful. I hear everything, including the softer instruments that I often don't pay attention to. The pluck of guitar / bass strings in acoustic-focused music, the reverberation that that sound echoes through the body of the instrument. I felt I could hear those things extremely well. As it applies to vocals, when there are multiple voices (in a harmony for example), I felt like I could hear both distinct voices (rather than a more blurred mesh of voices) – could really visualize two different people singing the different notes
4. Bass: tight and crisp. I do agree with some others that it is just a touch light for what I expected in terms of impact. After an hour or so, I set my HiFi-M8 one notch higher on bass boost, which satisfied my bass desires, which goes to show you the headphones weren’t missing much to begin with (the HiFi-M8’s tonal adjustments are quite subtle, with a +3dB narrow boost centered around 80Hz). Everyone’s opinion on bass differs of course
5. Soundstage: impressive for songs that have this information recorded. A number of the songs from Chesky’s Ultimate Demo Disc, as well as some jazz recordings (i.e. Miles Davis – So What), had great width and depth. Could really locate placement of different instruments well. I haven't listened to other high-end closed headphones before, but these really seemed to be on par with the original Ether (which I've had a lot of listening time with)
6. Comfort: as mentioned many times previously, these were incredibly comfortable and light, and I felt no fatigue at all after 5hrs of straight listening. I had no problems with clamping force, and I feel like MrSpeakers has found the perfect balance between stiffness of the headband (and weight) and clamping force. Provided a great seal and pushing the cups in closer to my ears didn’t change the sound at all, which to me means that the clamp is at the right level
7. Isolation / leakage: isolation was great, I really couldn’t hear much ambient noise in my environment, and even outside voices sound significantly dampened (with no music playing). In terms of leakage though, there definitely was some – again I don’t have much experience with high-end closed cans, but I (and my wife!) was hoping leakage would be minimal, especially after reading other reviews. I like to think I don’t play my music THAT loud, but in a reasonably quiet room, my wife was definitely able to to hear what I was listening to. I had my wife listen to a few songs, and also tried the thigh-test, and I was easily able to tell what song was playing and “sing along” with it. It depends on the environment of course, but I personally wouldn’t bring these to work (quiet office environment), although an airplane would likely be fine.

 
Pairing with Centrance HiFi-M8: I was quite pleased with how the M8 was able to drive these. I was on the middle gain setting, and generally had my volume knob between 12-1 o’clock. I look forward to hearing if the sound improves over the coming weeks, and once I get a good feel for the sound, trying out the various felt tuning pads (and potentially removing the 2 white pads which are there as default).

Tried it without any tuning pads today and it was very fine detail. I can see if one is into this higher frequency of listening, it would be great. However, the higher frequency is pretty piercing at higher levels and as i feared has lead to listening fatigue with a couple of tracks. I've put the stock pads back on and burning it in more.

Thanks for the report Tylerchris. Who did you purchase from?

inthere said:

 
The bass is definitely  tighter with the stock pads..............also possibly softens siblilance/stridence and better for overall balance

Click to expand...

That's it in a nutshell.   It's not that you are increasing detail, it's that the headphone is becoming brighter and it's also not correctly damped, both of which may sound like more detail up top and more bass, but it's really turning up the highs coupled with a bit of smearing in the time domain (that may account for more perceived bass, but it's not accurate bass.  High THD sounds like more bass too because your ear is more sensitive to harmonics than deep bass fundamental tones).  
 
I doubt removing the material is going to please long term.   
 
Of course as a modder, the first thing I know is that ANY headphone can be modified, and while to different ears maybe these changes are good, I'd suggest substitution of alternate materials vs actual removal if you are inclined to tweak.  If you do be careful not to contaminate the driver with debris if you do.  Also, you'll probably loosen up the pads in the process, which may cause them to spin out of position easily.  A bit of double sided tape under the elastic mounting flange may help keep the pad from spinning out of position.  

rcoleman1 said:

  Haven't received my Cs yet but I'm considering the iDSD for the versatility. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Well, if you want extreme versatility, it is true you won't find anything on the market today anywhere CLOSE to its price-range as versatile as the Micro iDSD.  It will drive the most sensitive of IEM's with no hiss at all on one combo of settings, while on another combo of settings it will drive just about ANY headphones other than electrostats with extreme authority.  I also found that it has a very "organic" quality to the sound compared to a more "artificial" sound that I get from some other equipment I've heard.  And, it definitely pairs well with Mr. Speakers headphones from the tests I did.  I found it also pairs very very well with Audioquest Nighthawks, for what it's worth   In fact, iDSD with XBass-boost engaged+Nighthawks is possibly the best heavily-bassy sound I have ever heard from anything in my entire lifetime.

FYI, I am definitely planning to get the iDSD myself, it will probably be my bottom-line all-around DAC and amp until someday in the future when I have many thousands of dollars to spare.

inthere said:

   
 As I sit in the studio now listening to them, it definitely has "body", of course a lot of Head Fiers won't like that, so it's a personal preference thing. The mod is super easy and reversible; you just take off the ear pads and remove the white things.

Click to expand...

What EXACTLY do you mean by "body" in this particular case, buddy?  Do you mean something along the lines of what I often like to describe as bass being "not just audible, but visceral?"  And I know you will have to bass this on memory but, how would you say the quality of bass comapares to the Alpha Dogs?  Because I am GREATLY enjoying the bass from the Alphas you lent me   Also, how does the bass, with the mod, compare to something like the Nighthawks?  Not in terms of quantity, of course haha, but just in terms of quality and tonality. . . . .
 
 

allanmarcus said:

Anyone try removing the stock white pad and adding one tuning kit black pad?

Click to expand...

Yes, cool idea, I hope @inthere does try it soon like he said and gets back to us on the results!
 

mrspeakers said:

 
That's it in a nutshell.   It's not that you are increasing detail, it's that the headphone is becoming brighter and it's also not correctly damped, both of which may sound like more detail up top and more bass, but it's really turning up the highs coupled with a bit of smearing in the time domain (that may account for more perceived bass, but it's not accurate bass.  High THD sounds like more bass too because your ear is more sensitive to harmonics than deep bass fundamental tones).  
 
I doubt removing the material is going to please long term.   
 
Of course as a modder, the first thing I know is that ANY headphone can be modified, and while to different ears maybe these changes are good, I'd suggest substitution of alternate materials vs actual removal if you are inclined to tweak.  If you do be careful not to contaminate the driver with debris if you do.  Also, you'll probably loosen up the pads in the process, which may cause them to spin out of position easily.  A bit of double sided tape under the elastic mounting flange may help keep the pad from spinning out of position.  

Click to expand...

Hmmmmmmmm so what would you suggest for those folks who want a bit more true bass-quantity from the Ether C's (as in, people like me whose hearing is such that something like the tuning of the Alpha Dogs sounds a lot more "neutral" than that of the C's, such that I like the bass of the Dogs quite a bit more) but don't want to have to mess with EQ at all????

Also, when I got a chance to compare the C's and the original Ether side-by-side, why was it that I found I was acutally hearing MORE bass-quanity from the original open-backed Ether?  I wasn't the only one who thought so, either. . .Dave (@JerseyD) from Inner Sanctum Audio, who was the one who let me demo the headphones in a nice quiet library (along with a pair of the Audioquest Nighthawks, all from the iFi Micro iDSD, he's a nice guy and offered to let me demo stuff while he was passing through my town ) told me he was hearing the exact same thing!  We even heard more sub-bass from the open Ether, which really shouldn't make any sense whatsoever!!!!  On some stuff, the bass from the Ether C seems to become near-inaudible.  The clarity, detail, and soundstage are all amazing, for sure, but I simply cannot stand the low quantity of bass, and that's why I'm hesitant as to whether the Ether C really will be my endgame-head-fi purchase someday.

Thanks for the info @goodyfresh about the iDSD. Gonna order me one for my Cs.

@goodyfresh I think the Ether C you listened to needed a bit of burn in *ducks* (yeah I know) -brain burn in because you're coming from those Sony's which have a lot more bass, so that may explain the "near-inaudible" quality of the bass.

inthere said:

  @goodyfresh I think the Ether C you listened to needed a bit of burn in *ducks* (yeah I know) -brain burn in because you're coming from those Sony's which have a lot more bass, so that may explain the "near-inaudible" quality of the bass.

Click to expand...

*Throws stuff at you anyway* LOL just kidding man.
 
Idk about that man because I listened to the old open-backed Ether RIGHT THERE SIDE-BY-SIDE with the Ether C and the open-backed Ether had more audible bass throughout the entire range!

goodyfresh said:

 
*Throws stuff at you anyway* LOL just kidding man.
 
Idk about that man because I listened to the old open-backed Ether RIGHT THERE SIDE-BY-SIDE with the Ether C and the open-backed Ether had more audible bass throughout the entire range!

Click to expand...

 
I can somewhat agree with this assessment, at least when both the ETHER and ETHER C were both paired with the QP1R and I listened back to back.  That said, some paired sources I would presume may flip the bass observations somewhat for both headphones.

goodyfresh said:

Hmmmmmmmm so what would you suggest for those folks who want a bit more true bass-quantity from the Ether C's (as in, people like me whose hearing is such that something like the tuning of the Alpha Dogs sounds a lot more "neutral" than that of the C's, such that I like the bass of the Dogs quite a bit more) but don't want to have to mess with EQ at all????

Also, when I got a chance to compare the C's and the original Ether side-by-side, why was it that I found I was acutally hearing MORE bass-quanity from the original open-backed Ether?  I wasn't the only one who thought so, either. . .Dave (@JerseyD) from Inner Sanctum Audio, who was the one who let me demo the headphones in a nice quiet library (along with a pair of the Audioquest Nighthawks, all from the iFi Micro iDSD, he's a nice guy and offered to let me demo stuff while he was passing through my town

) told me he was hearing the exact same thing!  We even heard more sub-bass from the open Ether, which really shouldn't make any sense whatsoever!!!!  On some stuff, the bass from the Ether C seems to become near-inaudible.  The clarity, detail, and soundstage are all amazing, for sure, but I simply cannot stand the low quantity of bass, and that's why I'm hesitant as to whether the Ether C really will be my endgame-head-fi purchase someday.

Click to expand...

 
First, Dave gave that feedback right after receiving the phones and I can't see how they were not burned in yet.  As many times as I state this most people don't burn the phones in and judge the bass right away, it takes 100+ hours, and it does change.  It's not an epic increase in bass but it's real and you'll hear it, out of the box it's slightly over-damped and the decay is too quick and amplitude is slightly increased as it settles (the point being you'll probably want to try it again after burn in, and while your mind may not change you'll at least know you're hearing what you should be).  
 
That said, the topic is hugely complex, and to answer it I have to write a tome.  These factors inter-relate so YMWV.  
 
1) ETHER has a stronger upper bass to lower mid region, they're about the same in the bass fundamental region, and ETHER C has more sub bass.  From about 140-300Hz, ETHER has up to 2-3 dB more output than ETHER C, and below 50Hz ETHER C has about 3-5dB more output than ETHER.  I find ETHER's upper bass is slightly warm of neutral, where C's will comparatively sound leaner in this region.  BUT how you experience this depends on your listening level and the choice of music...
 
2) Level: true sub bass is less audible until you increase volume to about 80dB, and as that is a safe level for long listening and it's also where you start to hear sub bass clearly (read about volume and bass perception here) so I optimize for 80-85dB.  Perfect point to both hear the bass and be able to listen for a long time.  I assume most customers for a headphone like ETHER value their hearing (seriously) and intend to have it healthy and don't listen at 95dB for four hours.  
 
As volume affects perception of lows and highs, a designer *must* pick a point to optimize voicing. I voice the headphones for 80-85dB because that's where the ear is most linear yet the SPL are safe for a long session.  If you listen below 80dB ETHER has more perceived bass because your ear just won't pick up the sub bass (EQ can easily solve this) and not only will it play the harmonics louder, and at frequencies you'll clearly hear them as louder.  As you hit 80dB ETHER C gets the more power on the bottom, but even then the harmonics are leaner, so you'll feel more power but depending on how you listen you may HEAR louder because you're queuing off overtones.  This latter is my theory after discussing this with many people at meets and seeing how they react.  This also heavily influenced my releasing the tuning kit, because it making the loudness dependency more flexible.
 
3) Content: Is there actually any sub bass in your music?  Most pop music has little or no sub bass, true sub bass is really only for EDM.  If you put on pop or rock and compare, ETHER has more bass at a comparable volume, for the reasons outlined in #2.  However, if you put on EDM and turn it up, ETHER C per #1 above ETHER C will have more of a foundation.  In real terms, the typical E string of a 4 string bass is tuned to ~41Hz, low enough so at low volumes you would usually hear more harmonic than fundamental but you will hear the lowest notes having a more solid bass on C, even while possible sounding not as loud due to the harmonics.  Confused yet?  
 
4) A lot of what people hear in bass is overtones and THD (THD can be thought of as emphasized overtones).  ETHER C's sub bass has very low THD and that, combined with the leaner upper bass presentation than ETHER means that if you AB ETHER vs ETHER C  you will almost always say ETHER has more bass if you are weighting the overtones that are more audible more than you are the fundamental, but if you listen for the real pressure waves, the fundamentals, ETHER C whomps ETHER, and if you listen to acoustic bass at say 85-90dB I think many people will hear that C has more presence and resolution.  
 
5) If you aren't getting a good seal on the C you won't get the sub bass, that's just the physics of it.  The deeper bass needs a good seal.  Thick hair that doesn't press flat or glasses will kill sub bass.
 
I've watched experienced listeners and reviewers get tangled up on this, it definitely is source and volume dependent, and it also factors WHAT you listen for, the harmonics or the fundamentals?  Many people hear the harmonics first, I think.
 
 It's a remarkably complex subject and there are no easy answers.  Many times it comes down to simply how loud you listen and what you listen to.  If your meat and potatoes is classical or jazz you may well prefer ETHER's bass, but for EDM or as an all around (because I love EDM) I go with C because I love the feel of the pressure wave, even though you can barely hear it you can feel it, and it's there at the levels I like to listen, and with a lot of what I listen to.  I tend to listen at 80-85 dB.
 
So to get the most bass out of ETHER C:
 
1) Use 2 black pads or 1 white.  This truly makes a noticeable difference by allowing the upper bass to have higher relative prominence, 1 white pad on each side gives me that "Funktion 1" sound I like.
 
2) Don't be afraid of EQ, digital EQ can be excellent in a good player and both ETHER's have very low THD and excellent transient response, so they take EQ really seamlessly.  Using Parametric EQ just add 2dB from 140-250 or 300Hz and you will probably immediately say ETHER C has more bass at any level.  To Parametric EQ ETHER add 3-4 dB below 15-50Hz.
 
3) Listen at 80dB plus on ETHER C.  80-85dB is safe for extended listening, but louder you need to pay attention to your levels and how long you listen for safety.  
 
4) Remember ETHER C will have a more powerful feel to the deepest bass, but that you will hear the overtones on ETHER more, so how you listen and experience will have a big impact.  
 
So summing up, I voiced the headphones so most people would like both but everyone would have a preference, this is part of that.  I don't think there's a right answer, but for the record, I used to play bass, and I love the instrument dearly.  For me, it's C for most music, except jazz where I often prefer ETHER.
 
Regarding your preference for the Alphas, look, maybe that's just your preference, there's nothing wrong with that.  I've had people prefer the Mad Dog to the Alpha Prime, though that has only happened twice.  So if you prefer the Alpha save some money, or decide to upgrade and use EQ because ETHERs love EQ and you can pretty easily hit that curve, but now with much greater resolution.  EQ can't fix a bad headphone, but it can do wonders to dial a solid headphone to precisely fit your tastes, and EQ is improving quickly in quality on a lot of the good players.
 
Just remember, you asked.  
 
 
Now that I've answered this I expect about 80 questions, so fire away.  I have more C's to build tonight, so it may be a while...  Hope this wasn't too confusing, I did not have time to truly copy edit.  If anyone spots errors let me know...

Great post Dan, and echoes a lot of what I've been discovering recently as I've been refining my understanding of how many qualities like soundstage and imaging are very closely linked to frequency response. Interestingly a lot of my listening so far has been with the Ether C volume-matched to around 80dB, and I clearly hear the sub-bass more prominently than the Ether (I listened to some frequency sweeps for that also). For the stock tuning I generally find the Ether bass better for me as I listen to little EDM relative to other genres, however with how the appreciation of the overall tonal balance of the C shifts with the tuning pads I'm pretty satisfied with the bass using the white pads (I actually EQ the treble ~8Kh up slightly to give me back the sparkle where cymbals live with the white pads, and the sound for my preferences and hearing is fairly spot on).