shane55
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2010
- Posts
- 3,443
- Likes
- 355
Quote:
I always appreciate everyone's help on here, and I do apologize if I've derailed the thread
No derailment here, my friend.
I always appreciate everyone's help on here, and I do apologize if I've derailed the thread
I was considering the UE 7 because like the TF10 has the 3 drivers, only I assume (anyone correct me if I'm wrong) are higher quality due to the price difference and the fact they're customs, and the price is bearable, great quality without a complete wallet bust.
Hey Matt,
You'll want to do a little more research if you consider the UE 7 because it can have three drivers and be tuned like the TF10 or the IERM which is also 3 drivers...depends on how they tune it and which drivers they use.
So the UE 7 sound signature will probably be different from TF10 unless you find comparisons or UE on their website stating that they have a similar description to the TF10.
The price difference can come from better drivers but mostly for all the labor that comes with dealing with your impressions and creating/polishing/assembling the shells and tuning the drivers to meet a pre-determined frequency graph for the particular model (within a certain tolerance). That was explained to me when UE were at our local meet.
No derailment here, my friend.
Initial reaction: This is the sound I've been looking for. The presentation is pure and effortless, and the soundstage is the widest of all my customs. This came as a surprise, because I had assumed that a "neutral" IEM would sound compressed or slightly rolled off. The UERM sounds incredibly detailed and yet quite natural and musical, to the point where it feels like I'm hearing my favorite songs for the first time--which says a lot to me, because my other customs are by no means unrevealing.
The biggest differences I'm noticing between the UERM, JH16 and ES5:
1. UERM's treble is exquisitely well-defined and crisp. The presentation is overall slightly brighter than my ES5, as it seems the UERM doesn't have the light veneer of warmth that the ES5 does. The JH16's treble seems ever-so-slightly muffled in comparison, and the ES5's a little more so. Again, this came as a surprise to me; if the UERM are indeed "neutral", that doesn't necessarily mean that it will sound dull or rolled-off.
For you UERM guys.... do you find them to be unforgiving of poor recordings/source material?
For you UERM guys.... do you find them to be unforgiving of poor recordings/source material?
I want to be able to hear what's there, warts and all. If not, I can grab something other than my UERM. I haven't been using anything other than .wav files for a long while though.
I want to be able to hear what's there, warts and all. If not, I can grab something other than my UERM. I haven't been using anything other than .wav files for a long while though.
Any particular reason why you're using .WAV, such as editing? I would really re-encode those into FLAC or ALAC, something less clunky, because WAV files are large. And you can tag FLAC/ALAC files to your heart's content.
Any particular reason why you're using .WAV, such as editing? I would really re-encode those into FLAC or ALAC, something less clunky, because WAV files are large. And you can tag FLAC/ALAC files to your heart's content.
Detail? You're looking for fully-blemished detail? I can't make any comments about the UERM, but I do know of a couple things that might fit the bill.... but that would really be way OT.