[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif well the sf5's use dynamic driver for the bass and armature for the rest. that's why to me it sounds so...incoherent. but a lot of people like it, so i guess it's not too bad a decision. wouldn't say they are flawed. it's sound - how can it be flawed? theres bound to be at least one person who prefers it. surprised about your comment on the ibuds tho - how can u NOT tell the difference?

Uh... Is that really why they sound so... incoherent to you? The Super.fi 5 Pros use dual balanced armature drivers. The Super.fi EBs use 1 balanced armature and one small dynamic driver for the bass.

 

[bellsprout]

oh ok then. my mistake

 

[JimBob1971]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif 1.) Vocals sound like they're behind a wall 2.) Highs muted 3.) Boomy bass w/ pretty much no control 4.) Mids very recessed; no "bite" in anything

I actually can't agree with any of that, but I guess that goes to show how different people hear different things.

As well as my SF 5 pros i own a pair of Shure E4cs. Whilst the Shures have at times a jawdropping soundstage it is the SFs that I prefer to listen to. They are the ones that make me want to dance, not analyse the music.

 

[The Monkey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimBob1971 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I actually can't agree with any of that, but I guess that goes to show how different people hear different things. As well as my SF 5 pros i own a pair of Shure E4cs. Whilst the Shures have at times a jawdropping soundstage it is the SFs that I prefer to listen to. They are the ones that make me want to dance, not analyse the music.

Agree.

 

[bonethugz]

i made a mistake not getting the superfi because of those guys. what worse is i heard sf pro many time and i alway like them. i always ignore the ety fan boy(because i actually like etty) but lots of people here saying sf this or that so i got myself a pair of um2. man i was wrong. i'll be getting this next month.

 

[rhymesgalore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bonethugz /img/forum/go_quote.gif i made a mistake not getting the superfi because of those guys. what worse is i heard sf pro many time and i alway like them. i always ignore the ety fan boy(because i actually like etty) but lots of people here saying sf this or that so i got myself a pair of um2. man i was wrong. i'll be getting this next month.

That sounds exactly like my story

Got the UM2, and man, did i not like them.........

The Etys are nice for listening critical at home or in quiet environments, but in noisy environments, their slim bass (Yes, they have bass! no kidding there

) makes them just a bit boring and uninvolving.

I use IEM only for listening during my daily commute, and there i need something more fun than the etys, so it's superfi 5pro for me as well, because the Triplefi or e500 are just too expensive for my taste.

 

[sorrick]

I really liked the super.fi 5pros when I had them. They were my upgrade from the er4p's. I loved the ety's but they were too analytical for me...they were tiring and I couldn't listen to them for more than three hours at a time. The UE's by comparison had (I thought) nearly all of the detail but a much more musical, enjoyable sound signature.

In fact when I upgraded to the e500's I was initially disappointed with the new shures. The rolled off highs of the shures drove me crazy and I thought that while they had better detail in the mids, the sf5pros had better highs (cymbals etc). I eventually grew to like the e500 sound, but since I upgraded again to the triple.fi the e500's have been shelved for the most part.

The triple.fi's take the super.fi's to the next level, matching (in my opinion) the detail you get with the er4's but while maintaining musical without the overly analytical nature of the er4's. When I listen to music I don't want to have to try and pay attention to hear the bass (the er4's definitely have bass, but it seemed to me that you almost had to 'look' for it).

 

[konish]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh, thanks for pointing that out, mrdeadfolx. Didn't notice troll49 posting. The 5 Pros are not popular for a reason. They were basically an experimental step into the dual-driver IEM world, and they failed overall. 1.) Vocals sound like they're behind a wall 2.) Highs muted 3.) Boomy bass w/ pretty much no control 4.) Mids very recessed; no "bite" in anything They had the appealing gimmick of having a removable cord, but it was unnecessary in the end when you look at it. Does this mean the whole UE line is screwed up? No, the UE-10 Pro pretty much set the bar for the (custom) IEM world; nobody I ever read about/met regretted getting the UE-10 Pro. But still...coming straight from the iBuds to the 5 Pro and honestly thinking they was not much of a difference...to me that means something is seriously flawed with the product.

I think it funny that you can unilaterally call the SF5Ps a failure. I love mine. True my ear isn't very critical, but I know what I like. Truth be told, I'm not sure that removeable cords were any more gimicky than anything else the other manufacturers are offering. I thought they were a HUGE step up from the i-buds,....moreso than most of the crap that gets touted here on head-fi as a life altering expereince. It seems a very common tactic around here to dismiss opinions becasue they don't align with individual experience. Therefore, people who own and love SF5P's either need to be convinced they are dead wrong for liking them or patronized about playing with "kid stuff".

Not a comment you made in the above quote, but carry this further with the double standard of stating that the Etys have no bass. Instantly you get the Ety fan boys insisting that it's all there...just very controlled and extended. It's like some collective crusade to convince people that brand "X" is superior in sound to brand "Y" just because one or two "head-fi analytical ears" have stated as such. Whatever.

I had a chance to listen to some ER-4P's and I thought they sounded okay but really thin and no bass. That's my opinion. Now I'm not saying the SF5P's are *the best*, but I am saying they sound very good to me and apparently a bunch of other people as well. Would I recommend them...you bet. Would I blindly recommend the Ety's? No, because I simply have not had enough time to form an opinion.

R/
D

 

[ozz]

he must have gotten a defective sf5p to list all that.

 

[mrdeadfolx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozz /img/forum/go_quote.gif he must have gotten a defective sf5p to list all that.

Very possible, mine do not suffer from any of those symptoms, or at least when presented to my ears in particular. I know they might not be the most "accurate" phones on the market, but they are for fun listening, not analytical, and to me they hit the nail right on the head. Definitely leaps and bounds better than iBuds. That is not even opinion, it is fact....well not EXACTLY, but as close to fact as an opinion will ever be.

 

[productred]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh, thanks for pointing that out, mrdeadfolx. Didn't notice troll49 posting. The 5 Pros are not popular for a reason. They were basically an experimental step into the dual-driver IEM world, and they failed overall. 1.) Vocals sound like they're behind a wall 2.) Highs muted 3.) Boomy bass w/ pretty much no control 4.) Mids very recessed; no "bite" in anything They had the appealing gimmick of having a removable cord, but it was unnecessary in the end when you look at it. Does this mean the whole UE line is screwed up? No, the UE-10 Pro pretty much set the bar for the (custom) IEM world; nobody I ever read about/met regretted getting the UE-10 Pro. But still...coming straight from the iBuds to the 5 Pro and honestly thinking they was not much of a difference...to me that means something is seriously flawed with the product.

while i'm inclined to agree wholeheartedly with most of these comments, i think i have my own version of the conclusion to this pro-and-anti super.fi5pro campaign.

i think the super.fi 5pros are definitely a failure to strike a chord in the hi-fi earphone world. you may say er4s are hi-fi, you may say shures are hi-fi, or westones are hi-fi, but the 5pros? no. from our hearts i believe everyone has their own definition of FIDELITY, but all those varying definitions should not deviate THAT much. sounds coming out from the 5pros are simply not believable. even 5pro lovers tend not to comment it as accurate - cos it is not.

However, the 5pros are a success as a GENERAL MARKET PRODUCT, a successful ipod/mp3 peripheral. it has its distinct purpose, and it serves well in that purpose. and that is to complement the ipod/mp3 players which are ever-so-popular nowadays and provide the bass one needs to drown out the hum of the rail or the clitter-clatters of fellow commutors. in that sense, the 5pros make sense, and i benefit from this (i'm using my 5pros when commuting) while it still remains absolutely clear on my mind that this is not the sound i want for sheer musical enjoyment. i have my er4s ready for that, and sometimes i even reach for my AKG K14P for some consolation from my disappointment with the sound coming out of my 5pros. but still the 5pros serve well most of the time...........and although i think its reproduction of classical music is simply plain AWFUL, its the only solution out there if i'm to be crazy enough to listen to classical on the go. i won't hear a thing when using my K14P on the train, and i need an amp plus a good sitting position to be able to really enjoy my er4s. but even the softest piccolo passage blasts out loud and, eh, "clear" with my 5pros. that's what i want them to do, and they did it.

that's my own opinion developed over a prolonged period owning the two (er4s for years, 5pros for 1 year).

 

[Spyro]

After having ER-4's twice in 2 years I have come to the following conclusions.

There is a huge "wow factor" with the detail aspect but this actually becomes fatiguing and artificially sounding after extended listening periods. Then you get used to the detail and moreso notice the shortcomings in the bass and how one-dimensional they sound. An amp with EQ definitely helps this to a point but they are too analytical for my tastes and have perhaps the narrowest soundstage of any >$100 IEM. Yes, I fully realize that recordings aren't made with soundstage....and that the mikes are all 6 inches or whatever away from the respective instruments (so their can't be a soundstage) but no matter how you slice it, a certain amount of (artificial?) soundstage is very desireable to the ear. That's why some of us strive for IEM's that sound more like full size headphones or floor speaker soundroom type set-ups.

Kind of like 20-20 vision is the flat (Ety) response but 30-20 (seeing farther with better accuity) is not necessarily the standard or correct but still pretty darn cool in many regards.

 

[Aevum]

im actually considering the ER6´s, the ER4´s the Super.fi 5 EB and pros right now, what worries me most is that most people who say that the super.fi´s sound good are ipod users, last time i checked, ipods in the SQ department arent exactly referacne devices,
plus, i have a Cowon D2, which has good sound quality but has a small whisper behind the sound due to the excessive strengh of the included amp (36mW per channel), so im worried that a 119db pair of headphones will provide me with good detail, good sound quality but with that constant buzz behind the music,

 

[bellsprout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif After having ER-4's twice in 2 years I have come to the following conclusions. There is a huge "wow factor" with the detail aspect but this actually becomes fatiguing and artificially sounding after extended listening periods. Then you get used to the detail and moreso notice the shortcomings in the bass and how one-dimensional they sound. An amp with EQ definitely helps this to a point but they are too analytical for my tastes and have perhaps the narrowest soundstage of any >$100 IEM. Yes, I fully realize that recordings aren't made with soundstage....and that the mikes are all 6 inches or whatever away from the respective instruments (so their can't be a soundstage) but no matter how you slice it, a certain amount of (artificial?) soundstage is very desireable to the ear. That's why some of us strive for IEM's that sound more like full size headphones or floor speaker soundroom type set-ups. Kind of like 20-20 vision is the flat (Ety) response but 30-20 (seeing farther with better accuity) is not necessarily the standard or correct but still pretty darn cool in many regards.

i know what u speak of. when u first listen to er-4, u know by the sharp attack they are capable of resolving detail, but that doesn't make them sound good. but the detail causes u to listen more analytically and u even try to like what ur hearing, but u can't - jus cuz it has fast attack, ur still listening to garbage.

but er-4's not at fault for that - it's just a simple set of transducers - it doesn't know what instruments are supposed to sound like. it's the signal ur feeding into it which determines whether it sounds totally real or garbage.

nothing wrong with analytical listening though. i can listen analytically for hours and as long as i'm hearing good stuff i'll listen for a few hours more. there's always the occasional recording which sounds like crap no matter what hardware u run it thru however.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aevum /img/forum/go_quote.gif im actually considering the ER6´s, the ER4´s the Super.fi 5 EB and pros right now, what worries me most is that most people who say that the super.fi´s sound good are ipod users, last time i checked, ipods in the SQ department arent exactly referacne devices, plus, i have a Cowon D2, which has good sound quality but has a small whisper behind the sound due to the excessive strengh of the included amp (36mW per channel), so im worried that a 119db pair of headphones will provide me with good detail, good sound quality but with that constant buzz behind the music,

that's cuz of the non revealing nature of sf5's non changing sound signature.

on a crappy source, it sounds

on a better source, it sounds

compare with er-4

on crappy source it sounds

on a better source it sounds

 

[Aevum]

so you would go for the ER4 or ER6 for the D2 ?
becuase the D2 is a better sound then the Ipod, so what you say is
Super.fi
Ipod -> sounds Ok
D2 -> sounds good

ER-4
Ipod -> sounds bad
D2 -> sounds kick ass ?