[tstarn06]

W3 highs only darker/veiled with the tri-flanges, but with a small EQ tweak, they sound fantastic. I would not say the tri-flanges tame the treble a bit, I would say it causes severe damage to them (and I noticed MaloS and a couple of other W3 owners mentioned greatly diminished highs as well via tri-flanges).

My point is I would rather not have to use EQ to hear excellent Westone highs, especially when listening to my Zune, which I can't EQ. So the UM3X might be a good alternative to my situation. None of the other tip options at all do not cause sibilance for me with the W3s, and that's also a problem (having to use tri-flanges only).

 

[Spyro]

That makes sense.

MUSIC 4321 - Yes, glad you like the UM3X. It was a no-brainer to my ears in the first 20 seconds that this was something different (in a good way, obviously) from everything else.

So, to what percentage does the UM3X meet the great sound of the ES3X? I am curious. I am sure the dual bore of ES3X makes a nice difference but I am curious how close is UM3X?

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tstarn06 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow, great feedback for someone who has enjoyed both the W3s and the UM3X. So far, while there have been comparisons, yours is probably the closest to home for me. In fact, I really do enjoy the W3s (I use the modded tri-flanges), but still have some issues (veiled highs being the really only big one, but I EQ to fix it). Sounds like you are unequivocally endorsing the UM3X over the W3s, and that's got my radar up. Because I know you did really like the W3s too.

Thanks tstarn06 - Yes, I really liked the W3's. And yes, if I had to pick one, without a doubt the UM3X would be the one - 4.5 hrs and counting and NO fatigue! I never got that from the W3, never. The W3's had that wow factor, but after 2 hrs that was the limit, and as much as I really liked them, the UM3X's just take the cake.

Fit/ ergonomics is truly incredible in these - I knew they'd be comfortable but not THIS comfortable. The W3's were very comfortable (and the Se530's less so) but the UM3X are even better, straight away - no waiting here - you simply don't notice you have them on, they're lighter and less intrusive. Amazing really the sounds coming out of these 'small' shells.

As for the different tips, in my case not only did I find all other tips uncomfortable or painful, but luckily (for me) SQ wasn't right with them either - can't remember exact differences now, but I distinctly remember that apart from the discomfort, the sound was just plain wrong. Never did any modding as I quickly found the large soft grey tips (with W3) very comfy and great sounding. With the UM3X in less than a minute the medium soft grey ones did the trick.

 

[tstarn06]

All very good info. Thanks again.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif That makes sense. MUSIC 4321 - Yes, glad you like the UM3X. It was a no-brainer to my ears in the first 20 seconds that this was something different (in a good way, obviously) from everything else. So, to what percentage does the UM3X meet the great sound of the ES3X? I am curious. I am sure the dual bore of ES3X makes a nice difference but I am curious how close is UM3X?

Hopefully, I'll be able to do a head to head soon - I've sent my ES3X's for a 2nd re-fit, but with new ear impressions this time - and should have them here by next Friday, but all I can say now, from auditory memory, is that yes, the ES3X sound better but the UM3X is not that far - they certainly belong to the same family, and yes the UM3X are closer to the ES3X sound than the W3 were. From what I can remember - and please take this with a pinch of salt - I'd say instrument separation is better, more clearly defined, and the basses even more clear and with a greater impact; and highs, again, more accurate on the ES3X's. Mids don't strike me that different just yet, but I'll soon find out.

Suffice it to say that the UM3X are not THAT far behind the ES3X. Is the near $450-$500 (+ ear impressions) price difference worth it from what I can remember? For me, yes, but that CERTAINLY doesn't mean they are 50% of the ES3X's - NO WAY - perhaps 70? probably even more, can't really tell right now. All I can say is the UM3X sound really great out of the box and I will NOT be selling them any time soon.

 

[Bolardito]

Quote:

Originally Posted by music_4321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hopefully, I'll be able to do a head to head soon - I've sent my ES3X's for a 2nd re-fit, but with new ear impressions this time - and should have them here by next Friday, but all I can say now, from auditory memory, is that yes, the ES3X sound better but the UM3X is not that far - they certainly belong to the same family, and yes the UM3X are closer to the ES3X sound than the W3 were. From what I can remember - and please take this with a pinch of salt - I'd say instrument separation is better, more clearly defined, and the basses even more clear and with a greater impact; and highs, again, more accurate on the ES3X's. Mids don't strike me that different just yet, but I'll soon find out. Suffice it to say that the UM3X are not THAT far behind the ES3X. Is the near $450-$500 (+ ear impressions) price difference worth it from what I can remember? For me, yes, but that CERTAINLY doesn't mean they are 50% of the ES3X's - NO WAY - perhaps 70? probably even more, can't really tell right now. All I can say is the UM3X sound really great out of the box and I will NOT be selling them any time soon.

Thanks for your impressions. I agree with you, I can't se myself getting rid of them. They are by far (for me) better than all other universals. I'll be selling the IE8 over the next days, i only have to figure out a way to get paid different than Paypal.

 

[music_4321]

NOTE (also added on mini review above):

Just a reminder to anyone reading my comments above that I don't use an amp, and have a 160gb iPod Classic with no EQ. Same goes for all other IEM's and ES3X - I don't have my P-51 Mustang any more, and I only tried that with the W3 and ES3X and felt the Mustang + LOD did not provide better SQ than simply using the HP out.

 

[gameboy115]

Bought UM3X two days, now I will compare it based on my memory to my over 400hrs IE8 which it is gone now. I am using iphone 1 st gen to compare with and no amp or any eq

Starting from Low end
IE8: deep and quantity wise,prominent and strong point for IE8
UM3X: very dependent on which tips I am using. Currently, I have shure soft flex, sony hybird tips(with little mod, it fits perfectly) and Tri flange tips( not trimmed), sorry about no comply will be mentioned. With Soft flex and Sony hybird, light and quantity is behind IE8. With Tri Flange tips, it turns sound signature become warmer, the low end beome fuller and down deeper which is enough for several singers, but is still lagging behind IE8 which manage to reproduce masculine voice. Great example is Micheal Buble, IE8 trumps in reproducing his voice.

Mid end
IE8 : Recessed /Laid back, not consistent with prominent IE8 Low end, always feel slump down and little bit flooded by bass
UM3X: Again, it is about the tips I choose. With Soft flex or hybird tips, it is clear,transparent and up front presentation, totally different from IE8. The way it put the vocal ahead of other instrument is amazing, bass is not interfering at any of mid range. Thought presenting vocal any closer than that is going to choke me. Which arise my curiosity to know how it compares with "Mid King" SE 530 as its well known "in your face" presentation. The interesting thing for UM3X here is that it reprdoduces mid range in different way with Tri Fange tips, or I should say it is for all spectrum, now it is like moving vocal from row 2 to row 4 in a cinema which it sounds more like IE8(row 6). Overall, winner is UM3X in this part

High End
IE8, Sparkly, detailed, some times a little harsh, most of time I am pleased with it.
UM3X. With soft flex or hybird, natural but not as detailed as Tri Flange. I trully believe why W3 and UM3X is claimed as different product in its marketing tactics, as from what I heard W3 has more sparkly high end and UM3X concur on its characteristic of flat response, high is accurate and detailed which is good at monitioring but for sure less fun and wow factor. IE 8 slightly win over in this part, but again, sometimes it is harsh as I said that before.

Bass
IE8: My hand down, even at the min setting, its quantity is enough.
UM3X: Really don't feel it is lacking of bass. With soft flex or hybird tips, light ,tight, controlled and quality wise bass, while quantity is really not that much. With Tri flange tips, I don't know is that becasue of the fact that it can reach my ear canal deeper or it is supposed to be like that with these tips, I really feel more impact, quatity is elevated up to a level which is closer to IE8 now, lets say it is having almost 75% of IE 8 bass at the min setting( Don't even brother a flame war to me at this point, thanks

). Don't get me wrong, if you are not bass head, IE8 bass sometimes is overpowering and intrudes all spectrum .

Soundstage
IE8, spacious , wide and not much height.
UM3X: Pretty narrow/average with Soft flex or hybird. Open up a lot with tri flange tips, which now is very very decent to give enough space to reveal instrument placement. Width is still not comparable to IE8 though. I am not so sure why I feel UM3X has height to a certain extent. I have to listen more tracks to confirm that. Don't want to mislead you guys, you can ignore this comment for now. Winner is IE8, but UM3X is competing nicely in this area, not that it could match in term of sapcious feeling, it is the feeling I am being surrounded by music which IE8 gives me too makes me very happy

Instrument reporduction
UM3X rules this time.Timbre and airiness of guitar is like a bliss

Instrument seperation
Again, no room in comparsion. UM3X win out easily.

Overall detailness
Same as above. I can easily sort out slightest detail which I barely find out in IE8.

Isolation
UM3X. Better than IE8 a loooooot.

Fitting
Tied. Both are very comfortable.

Hiss
For me, I hear hiss in either of them

UM3X responses to different tips well which makes me feel if you like to use soft flex or hybird, UM3X is totally different from IE8. It is brigther than IE8 a lot, more transparent and up front. As a matter of fact, I am not suprised each attract different buyers which prefer different sound signature. However, with tri flange tips, UM3X to me become refined/ different version of IE 8, less dark, more airy, better mid range and better consistency to all spectrum. It also gives me the same feeling of being surrounded by music which is one of reason I am fond of IE8 at the first place. The down side for UM3X with tri flange on is that it gives away a little bit shrill of treble/ high and deep low end. That is why I said it is different version or refined version

For me, I can not decide which one is better. I am impressed what UM3X can offer, it is like I got two decent different earbud on hand with different tips on, each of them is not good for all singers though.

Now I have to change tips when I changes my tracks too.

P.S. IE8 responses differently with different tips too,the only difference is that it performing badly with wrong tips on

 

[music_4321]

Just added some photos also: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f103/w...ml#post5685373

 

[ilney]

My large shure olives arrive today. Wow, those are freaking huge, literally twice as large as my old medium ones. I wonder if there are two version of large olives lulz.

Anyway, they sound the best among my tips, very expansive, clear, impactful BUT the isolation sux.

 

[Quadrangulum]

I thought I'd share some of my initial impressions of the UM3X. Keep in mind that there has been only been a hour of use so far.

I've been a content owner and user of the Ultimate Ears TripleFi for over a year now, used unamped from an iPod. If the wire on the left driver didn't break, I don't think I'd bother getting another IEM. But since it did, here I am listening to the UM3X based on the seemingly unanimous rave reviews I uncovered during my brief research.

When I opened the box, I was shocked at how small it was. I've always thought the TripleFi was already minuscule but apparently, they are rather hefty in the world of IEMs. I really like how they disappear on my head. They are very comfortable. I'm also impressed by the build quality, in particular the thin twisted wires. It completely solves the engineering issue I had with the firm and thicker TripleFi wires.

To my great surprise, the sound signatures between the two are drastically different. Immediately, I was struck by the absence of the thundering bass that the TripleFi made me accustomed to. It was disappointing at first but after listening to several other tracks and comparing the experience to my speaker and headphone set up at home, I realize the UM3X gives a more honest representation of the source material. The bass could benefit from more quantity at this early stage (I'm hopeful that it will come as I use it more) but the control and speed is quite impressive. If the quantity does indeed increase with more burn in, I'd easily consider the UM3X to be superior. Until then though, the performance with my bass heavy songs, in particular, cello and organ heavy pieces and some of my J-Pop selections is unfortunately below par. The upshot to this is that I hear a lot more details in the higher frequencies as the sounds aren't being drowned out by excessive amounts of bass.

The other point on the UM3X's sound worth mentioning is that it is a noticeably superior performer in the midrange and treble frequencies. The vocal tracks on my iPod go significantly further with these new IEMs. I'm not sure how to describe this except that it sounds very smooth and liquid (but still just as detailed). There is also a nice corollary effect to this as I feel as if I can listen to these IEMs for more extended periods of time though this may have something to do with the fact that they are just physically more comfortable than the UEs.

In terms of everything else, I think both the UM3X and the TripleFi are tied. The soundstage is small on both though I'd attribute that to me not using an amp; I think the UM3X does a slightly better job of projecting a frontal image however. If not, it certainly does give a more out of the head experience. Both are poor performers with large scale orchestral pieces and piano. I think the UM3X may be more forgiving with lower quality mp3 files though I hesitate to assert this any further since I only have a few compressed tracks to test.

To sum it up, I am quite satisfied with my purchase. It's a well made unit that is terrific sounding. I think it's worth the price premium over the TripleFi and will probably be a better product in every way pending more burn in. Hopefully I'll be able to confirm my assumption in a few days.

 

[Spyro]

Gameboy 115 - I'm a little confused unless I missed something. I went back and viewed your posts since you received UM3X and I see no mention of sound with the comply tips?? These are the preferred tips as supplied by Westone to provide the most consistent sound....and you go on in your review to talk about the inconsistency of the sound with these other tips you are using ?? So...did you try the comply tips?

 

[LFC_SL]

I'm pleased they kept to the same body as the UM2. Anybody used them with Shure Olives? So I have a reference point

 

[gameboy115]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif Gameboy 115 - I'm a little confused unless I missed something. I went back and viewed your posts since you received UM3X and I see no mention of sound with the comply tips?? These are the preferred tips as supplied by Westone to provide the most consistent sound....and you go on in your review to talk about the inconsistency of the sound with these other tips you are using ?? So...did you try the comply tips?

You don't miss a thing, thanks for reading and you are so insightful. I tried comply like 1 hour when I was talking bus to school. Thought I wont brother changing comply so frequently, so I give the other tips a try. I can't give my comment to comply tip as I was not really getting into it, it is not fair to me if I said it is good or bad.

About shure soft flex and tri flange tips, I guessed it is quite similar to tips kit coming with W3 and there are other members here purchasing them as replacement tips for UM3X. So I thought it is worth for comparsion. I don't mean to mislead other members. I also saw inconsistency is good to UM3X, may be I am wrong, I have a hunch adding amp will change SS easly as WM3X is flat response, no much colored, seems it can be easily tailored made by amp to suit your taste. I saw IE8 was very dark, and laid back presantation. It was not much amp could do to it to bring it "very" up front, or "extremely" bright even I knew HPA mentioned D10 would help it to bring out mid, but I guess it still can not match UM3x, as I remebered HPA still prefer W3 over amped IE8. Not to mention some people said WM3X has more upfront presentation

Overall, I must remind other members reading, it just the personal experience from a guy seeing himself as male vocal lover and prefer warmer sound,big soundstage, decent bass, my music genre is mostly Pop, R&B, Jazz. I found WM3X is quite match to my taste.

it it the one? No, "The one" will be UE 11 pro/ ES3X

Is it a decent top high end IEM which worth extra bucks, YES. I have strange habit, I get used to listen at music a while before I fell asleep, if earphone is good enough to let me focus on it and make me fall asleep before I turn my player off. I will think of this as a keeper. IE8 and UM3X both can do that, while my all crappy past earbud can not do.

 

[music_4321]

Quadrangulum, Welcome to Head-fi.

That's a very well written post/ review, which I'm sure many will find quite valuable.

I'm always puzzled by how people hear things, differences in ear shapes, tips used and general sound preferences.

I'm currently listening to Beethoven's 6th string quartet by the Quatour Vegh recorded in 1973; I'm using the soft grey (shure) tips, and the sound of this oldish recording is breathtaking - the cellos are deep and powerful and clear - I've got only about 5 hrs' burn-in - and mids and highs are incredibly well balanced. The whole thing is such a joy to listen to, I didn't get this level of enjoyment with the W3's, certainly not at the current volume setting I'm using.

Earlier listened to Beethoven's piano sonata #29 with Alfred Brendel, another oldish recording, and I also get an exceptional response on all 3 frequencies - what remarkable balance! These not being my ES3X's do an extraordinary job, makes the music so enjoyable.

And Elgar's Cello Concerto with Rafael Fruhbeck de Burgos and the LSO (2005) sounds absolutely terrific with the UM3X's - deep, deep impactful basses, and the orchestra just enveloping the whole 'concert hall', ie great soundstage.

And btw, also earlier I listened to some random pieces from Bach's complete organ works, and I think we must be hearing things very differently - again, to these ears the sounds coming out of these little minitors is simply amazing. In these particular pieces the blending of all 3 frequencies is outstanding.

I've to say 90% of the classical music I listen to is chamber and piano, a lot of which are recordings from the 70's and 80's

I wish you (and others) could try those shure grey tips - at least for me, they're the only ones that really deliver, but I've heard far too often other people not really getting much from them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quadrangulum /img/forum/go_quote.gif I thought I'd share some of my initial impressions of the UM3X. Keep in mind that there has been only been a hour of use so far. I've been a content owner and user of the Ultimate Ears TripleFi for over a year now, used unamped from an iPod. If the wire on the left driver didn't break, I don't think I'd bother getting another IEM. But since it did, here I am listening to the UM3X based on the seemingly unanimous rave reviews I uncovered during my brief research. When I opened the box, I was shocked at how small it was. I've always thought the TripleFi was already minuscule but apparently, they are rather hefty in the world of IEMs. I really like how they disappear on my head. They are very comfortable. I'm also impressed by the build quality, in particular the thin twisted wires. It completely solves the engineering issue I had with the firm and thicker TripleFi wires. To my great surprise, the sound signatures between the two are drastically different. Immediately, I was struck by the absence of the thundering bass that the TripleFi made me accustomed to. It was disappointing at first but after listening to several other tracks and comparing the experience to my speaker and headphone set up at home, I realize the UM3X gives a more honest representation of the source material. The bass could benefit from more quantity at this early stage (I'm hopeful that it will come as I use it more) but the control and speed is quite impressive. If the quantity does indeed increase with more burn in, I'd easily consider the UM3X to be superior. Until then though, the performance with my bass heavy songs, in particular, cello and organ heavy pieces and some of my J-Pop selections is unfortunately below par. The upshot to this is that I hear a lot more details in the higher frequencies as the sounds aren't being drowned out by excessive amounts of bass. The other point on the UM3X's sound worth mentioning is that it is a noticeably superior performer in the midrange and treble frequencies. The vocal tracks on my iPod go significantly further with these new IEMs. I'm not sure how to describe this except that it sounds very smooth and liquid (but still just as detailed). There is also a nice corollary effect to this as I feel as if I can listen to these IEMs for more extended periods of time though this may have something to do with the fact that they are just physically more comfortable than the UEs. In terms of everything else, I think both the UM3X and the TripleFi are tied. The soundstage is small on both though I'd attribute that to me not using an amp; I think the UM3X does a slightly better job of projecting a frontal image however. If not, it certainly does give a more out of the head experience. Both are poor performers with large scale orchestral pieces and piano. I think the UM3X may be more forgiving with lower quality mp3 files though I hesitate to assert this any further since I only have a few compressed tracks to test. To sum it up, I am quite satisfied with my purchase. It's a well made unit that is terrific sounding. I think it's worth the price premium over the TripleFi and will probably be a better product in every way pending more burn in. Hopefully I'll be able to confirm my assumption in a few days.