Spyro
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Posts
- 6,576
- Likes
- 247
Direct A/B comparisons with Triple Fi Pro. Keep in mind I am a big fan of the Triple Fi Pro.
Bass Pretty darn identical. Not detecting much difference. Quite adequate in amount, detailed, fast but smooth.
Treble: Again quite similar but where TFP has that drier airy presence, UM3X is not necessarily wetter but more natural sounding. I slightly prefer it to TFP treble but this is partially due to TFP midrange problem intefering with the treble.
Midrange: This is where UM3X pulls way ahead. Not forward. Just very present and well -represented. Again, fast, detailed but smoooth!
Soundstage: This one is kind of odd. TFP presentation is set back a bit which helps create the "space" for the soundstage. Instrument separation is very good. Very pleasent and easy on the ears. UM3X is a little more up front, intimate and in your face, kind of like UM2 BUT, the instrument separation is absolutely superb which immerses you into the music. It's not a concert wall of sound like SE530...there are instruments playing all around you. So I guess it's how you define soundstage. The space with UM3X is within each instrument in relation to each other whereas the space with TFP is more one of overall distance and more headphone'ish. Kind of hard to explain. I think of that incredible instrument separation of ER4 but a somewhat closed in headstage. UM3X is similar but your head is more like a beachball in size.
If I wanted to impress any Joe Shmo music lover, I would give him a pair of W3's. If I wanted to impress an audiophile I'd give him the UM3X's. There are great reasons to want either one over the other. I am certain if UM3X came out first, I still couldn't resist purchasing W3 upon it's release.
Bass Pretty darn identical. Not detecting much difference. Quite adequate in amount, detailed, fast but smooth.
Treble: Again quite similar but where TFP has that drier airy presence, UM3X is not necessarily wetter but more natural sounding. I slightly prefer it to TFP treble but this is partially due to TFP midrange problem intefering with the treble.
Midrange: This is where UM3X pulls way ahead. Not forward. Just very present and well -represented. Again, fast, detailed but smoooth!
Soundstage: This one is kind of odd. TFP presentation is set back a bit which helps create the "space" for the soundstage. Instrument separation is very good. Very pleasent and easy on the ears. UM3X is a little more up front, intimate and in your face, kind of like UM2 BUT, the instrument separation is absolutely superb which immerses you into the music. It's not a concert wall of sound like SE530...there are instruments playing all around you. So I guess it's how you define soundstage. The space with UM3X is within each instrument in relation to each other whereas the space with TFP is more one of overall distance and more headphone'ish. Kind of hard to explain. I think of that incredible instrument separation of ER4 but a somewhat closed in headstage. UM3X is similar but your head is more like a beachball in size.
If I wanted to impress any Joe Shmo music lover, I would give him a pair of W3's. If I wanted to impress an audiophile I'd give him the UM3X's. There are great reasons to want either one over the other. I am certain if UM3X came out first, I still couldn't resist purchasing W3 upon it's release.