[3X0]

Nope, HD.

 

[naldo]

I'd say er4p, I love mine

 

[lamb]

If you have plan for an amp, then ER4S; if no, then ER4P.

 

[vYu223]

Used to be the iM716 @ $69, then $63 on Amazon

But since it's now $105...

I'd say, for best price-to-performance...

ER-4P all the way!!!

 

[bellsprout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3X0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have both. They sound different but reminiscent of one another. The Altec Lansing is better for my music; it's warmer than the Etys but with at least 90% of the ER4's clarity and detail.

the er-6 has 90% of er-4's detail, but that doesn't put it anywhere close to er-4 overall. each to his own though.

also, super-fi 5 pro's are nowhere near er-4. it's warmth and muddiness galore and the mids and highs are some of the worst i've heard in a $100+ phone.

er-4 fits your criteria perfectly - they sound very neutral, bass is presented articulately, and probably the most detailed iem's money can buy. the downside is it's microphonics, so u may have to resort to wearing them behind your ear, fit, u have to find a tip that fits ur ears well before u get the full sound, and it's very unforgiving on bad source/recordings.

 

[leeivan86]

Get the crossroads mylar 3. Nothing beats it in the price range. Check the crossroads thread for more info. Kramer has also reviewed it and loves it. He posted his impressions in the recently concluded international meet:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...&postcount=511

Just a side note to his post, they are actually available worldwide through online orders

 

[jayzen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif also, super-fi 5 pro's are nowhere near er-4. it's warmth and muddiness galore and the mids and highs are some of the worst i've heard in a $100+ phone.

Really? Is the SF5P really muddy? Are the mid's really warm/muddy like the E5C? If so, I'll have to rethink my options. I didnt' like the E5C's at all...... no matter what I did with my EQ settings, they still sounded completely recessed from the mids to highs.

Awww..... and I was just deciding between the Super-Fi 5 Pros and the M5.

 

[Miester_V]

As a newly convert of the ER4P, I think their neutral and accurate sound may be appealing to you. It doesn't sound so analytical and harsh on my Rio Karma as it did when I did my initial impression of them on my Musiland MD-10 internal amp (though maybe some detail is lost because of an inferior source and/or lesser amplification).

I am glad to say that I will not be feeling any buyer's remorse from the ER4P.

 

[Joshatdot]

ER4P

 

[bellsprout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayzen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Really? Is the SF5P really muddy? Are the mid's really warm/muddy like the E5C? If so, I'll have to rethink my options. I didnt' like the E5C's at all...... no matter what I did with my EQ settings, they still sounded completely recessed from the mids to highs. Awww..... and I was just deciding between the Super-Fi 5 Pros and the M5.

yep. er-4s are the only iem's i've heard that doesn't have the recessed, veiled sound signature. your preferences sound similar to mine, i don't think u'll like sf5.

there's been a lot of recommendations for the mylar3's. if pepole say they have anything like er-4 sound signature, they might be "er-4 on a budget".

every headphone has their fans and new ones get a lot of hype, but er-4 has been around for a very long time (probably one of the oldest iem's still in production) and they have a very distinctive sound signature that's the benchmark of other iem's. and they're affordable. so check those out.

here's a relevant thread regarding er-4 vs sf5:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=236596

 

[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif the er-6 has 90% of er-4's detail, but that doesn't put it anywhere close to er-4 overall. each to his own though.

I'm not using a statistic, but trying to quantify my own experience. In reality, the ER4S is 92% accurate IIRC. The iM716 is 90% accurate. I personally subscribe to the group that believes that the iM716 uses ER4 armatures in a different housing, sacrificing some aspects of the sound in favor of others. Its warmer but gains no muddiness or blurriness while being so.

I concede that the ER4 is an absolutely fantastic choice, but taken in the most literal sense the iM716 even at $100 has it handily beat in bang for buck. The ER4 is definitely technically superior, but the iM716 holds its own and might actually be preferred to the ER4.

 

[electro house]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif also, super-fi 5 pro's are nowhere near er-4. it's warmth and muddiness galore and the mids and highs are some of the worst i've heard in a $100+ phone. er-4 fits your criteria perfectly - they sound very neutral, bass is presented articulately, and probably the most detailed iem's money can buy. the downside is it's microphonics, so u may have to resort to wearing them behind your ear, fit, u have to find a tip that fits ur ears well before u get the full sound, and it's very unforgiving on bad source/recordings.

The er-4 and othe er's sounded great to me. As long as I stood motionless.

As soon as I moved, these IEMs fell apart. The worst microphonics I've every experienced.

Yes, consider the er's if you like to stand like a statue and listen to your music. If you tend to move around when listening, skip the er. I'm pretty active. Microphonics were a deal-breaker for me.

 

[bellsprout]

^over the ear, gone

 

[scompton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^over the ear, gone

x2. I just bought a pair of im716 which have the same problem. Put the cords over the ear and there is no more cord microphonics than any other IEM. This works for canal phones as well, like the CX300 and JBL 220.

 

[Mr Iriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif the er-6 has 90% of er-4's detail, but that doesn't put it anywhere close to er-4 overall. each to his own though. also, super-fi 5 pro's are nowhere near er-4. it's warmth and muddiness galore and the mids and highs are some of the worst i've heard in a $100+ phone. er-4 fits your criteria perfectly - they sound very neutral, bass is presented articulately, and probably the most detailed iem's money can buy. the downside is it's microphonics, so u may have to resort to wearing them behind your ear, fit, u have to find a tip that fits ur ears well before u get the full sound, and it's very unforgiving on bad source/recordings.

Well the ER4 highs and mids are not that great either. Its as if the sound was manipulated to give the illusion of more detail, and more clarity. All it really has, however, is one of the worst decays in any IEMs at any price range, to give extra sharpness to the sound which makes people go like, omg its so clear. To me that is not even close to a 90% accuracy. Also the bass is rolled off, and there is almost no impact. The superfi pro, although not exactly the clearest of phones i have head, has a much more natural sound than the etymotics, but their technology is not enough yet to show both true accurate clarity, which is a sound that begins to be heard on the triple driver iems.

I dont think it is necessary, but just in case, as it is after all a forum where people express opinions and ideas...but just in case its all IMO.