Link to my review and measurement index thread where one can also find a full review overview, more information about myself as well as my general-ish audio and review manifesto:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/956208/
I only give full stars. My ranking/scoring system does not necessarily follow the norm and is about as follows:
5 stars: The product is
very good and received the "
highly recommended" award from me.
4 stars: The product is
very good and received the "
recommended" award from me.
3 stars: The product is
good/very good, but not outstanding/special enough to get any of my two awards. ["Thumbs Up"]
2 stars: The product is
only about average or even somewhat below that and
somewhat flawed/flawed in some areas. [neither "Thumbs Up" nor "Thumbs Down"]
1 star: The product is
bad/severely flawed to
outright bad. ["Thumbs Down"]
Etymotic ER-4S
Source:
Personal unit.
Miscellaneous:
Excellent unboxing experience with all of the accessories nicely arranged in a large, protective plastic hard case that can be also used for storage/transport in addition to the small soft case. I really like this.
The shells are made of black plastic and have got the individual side’s serial number on them.
While the in-ears feel sturdy and durable, they could perhaps appear just a bit more premium from a consumer point of view.
Removable cable with the same connectors as the Sennheiser HD 600s’ cable.
Angled 3.5 mm connector.
Properly executed strain relief.
Twisted conductors above the cable divider.
The bulky y-splitter contains all of the electrical filter network/resistors, wherefore simply by changing the cable, one could theoretically turn the ER-4S into the ER-4P or ER-4B.
I like how it reads “ER-4S” on the y-splitter.
Unfortunately no chin-slider and therefore even higher microphonics than the ER-4S already have due to their deep insertion.
I really like the red dot that acts as side indicator on the right hand side’s connector.
One Balanced Armature driver per side.
Sound:
Largest included triple-flange silicone tips, modified so that they create a seal in my large ear canals while still maintaining the original ear tip length (achieved by cutting off the smallest flange and putting it onto the nozzle first, followed by the remaining double-flange rest of the tip).
Tonality:
Diffuse-field oriented flat, lifeless studio neutrality.
The ER-4S, to my ears when performing sine sweeps, listening to noise signals, music and spoken word, just sound as they are advertised – studio reference neutral flat and highly accurate.
They just don’t really have any colouration at all to my ears and come the closest to my personal perception of uncompromised neutrality, and are therefore (along with their successors, the ER4SR,) the flattest and most lifeless, most uncoloured, most accurate and realistically tuned in-ears that I have ever heard, wherefore they are also by far my favourite choice for serious music listening from my CD rig; their tuning just seems to match my ears’ HRTF extremely well wherefore I choose them over my Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors, the Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered to-go and my InEar ProPhile 8, three sets of in-ears that are among the most neutral on the market but in comparison still tuned more for a “natural neutral” instead of “uncompromised studio neutral” tonality, purely based on my personal tonal preferences.
Generally, there is not much that I could really think of about writing here, since the mostly audibly flat and lifeless, neutral tuning could be more or less summarised in just one sentence, which is also the reason why most of this text is just a slightly modified pasted version of my ER4SR review.
The bass is just flat without any sort of lift and extends flat down into the real sub-bass without any real roll-off. No warmth, no body, but definitely not lacking – just uncompromised flat.
The midrange is just generally flat and direct, without any of the relaxation dips in the upper mids that is found on almost any other set of in-ears, wherefore the ER-4S are quite merciless here and purely raw, without trying to create any sort of recession to create an even slightly laid-back fatigue-free long-term listening effect.
If I were overly critical, I would say that to my ears, the presence range is just a wee bit too strong for absolute flatness, wherefore the ER4SR are even a tad more “correct” sounding here than my ER-4S.
The treble is simply among the most realistic and evenly tuned regardless of price, wherefore the ER-4S manage to create an incredibly realistic, accurate response here as well.
The only area, when performing sine sweeps, that is just a little below neutral in quantity to my ears, is the one around 7 kHz, but this is nothing that’s really audible when listening to music.
Extension past 10 kHz is good and not lacking to my ears.
Frequency Response:
ProPhile 8-Compensation
Resolution:
Very high. Probably the best single-BA implementation that I know of, and superior to some multi-BA models.
Typically for a single-driver design, coherency is perfect.
Even distribution of the resolution across the whole frequency range.
Nimble, fast, tight and controlled bass. High quality. Outperforms some of the other single-BA in-ears in terms of speed and tightness, although ultimately not as tight and controlled as some multi-BA implementations when pushed to the limits by the recording; comparable speed but a little softer in comparison. There are, however, some multi-BA implementations that are noticeably softer and slower – so absolutely nothing to criticise here and about the most technical single-BA implementations I know of in the lows.
The ER-4S sound even a little tighter in the lows to my ears than the ER4SR.
Very high midrange resolution and speech intelligibility without “cheating” by presence range elevations found implemented into some w-shaped in-ears’ tuning. Very authentic.
Excellent transient response and precise note separation in the high frequencies. Highly natural as well thanks to the very even treble response.
It is generally remarkable what the ER-4S manage to put out in terms of tonal range/extension, bass quality, resolution and authenticity – just like their predecessors, they show that a well-implemented and -tuned quality single Balanced Armature driver doesn’t lack behind its similarly priced multi-driver competitors.
In some categories, there are multi-driver in-ears (such as my UERM and ProPhile 8) that can somewhat beat the Ety in terms of partial resolution or bass speed, transparency and control when the recording is extremely demanding, however there are very few in-ears at this price point that deliver such an excellent overall package where nothing lacks behind – there is really hardly any flaw in terms of resolution.
Soundstage:
Neither the largest nor the smallest. “Averagely large”, as it usually the case with a flat neutral tuning without any strategically placed elevations or recessions.
Authentic and three-dimensional with just as much depth as spatial width to my ears.
Precise imaging without any blur/fog. No bleeding of single instruments/tonal elements into each other. The ER-4S even manage to render some of the perceived “empty space” around and between them really well.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Comparisons:
Etymotic ER4SR:
Only very small differences when it comes to tuning: the ER4SR are slightly less forward in the presence range and will therefore appear slightly less fatiguing over time; to me they are even a little more realistically tuned here than my ER-4S. Slightly less level around 10 kHz as well.
Pretty much equal when it comes to resolution. In comparison, though, the ER4SR appear to be just a slight bit softer in the lows, but as a result also just a little more visceral.
To my ears, the ER4SRs’ soundstage appears to be just a touch wider than the ER-4S’, with a slightly cleaner imaging (instrument separation), which is mostly audible with faster and more complex recordings.
Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors:
In terms of flatness and accuracy, I hear the ER-4S as superior to my UERM that have about 3 dB stronger bass quantity, are more relaxed in the presence range in comparison, and brighter past 10 kHz due to the peak that they have there, and which also makes their treble response come across as ultimately less even and realistic compared to the Etymotic (and UERR to-go), although that’s criticism on a rather high level.
As a result, the ER-4S are even more critical to the recording and even less forgiving, and more sterile sounding (which is something that I consider a very positive aspect while others may not).
While I prefer the ER-4S’ even flatter, less forgiving, more sterile tuning, when it comes to bass speed, control, micro details and note separation, I definitely perceive the UERM as audibly superior, as they have more detail headroom for the recording to pushing them to their limits.
The same as for the resolution can be said about the soundstage that appears to be a good bit larger than the ER-4S’ and “gives in” less early in comparison when very dense and fast arrangements are played back.
InEar ProPhile 8:
To my ears, the ER-4S represent more of a “sterile studio reference neutral” tuning whereas the ProPhile 8 fall more into the range of being “naturally neutral” tuned.
That said, the ProPhile 8 have around 3 dB more bass than the ER-4S and sound warmer in the fundamental range and lower mids, but are a slight bit less “warm” than the ER4XR and have also got slightly less bass.
The ER-4SR are slightly more forward/intimate sounding in the mids whereas the ProPhile 8 present the middle frequencies in a comparatively more relaxed way due to the more recessed presence range, but with still accurate timbre and no audible colouration.
Both are very even, realistic and accurate in their treble reproduction, which is something not too many in-ears achieve.
In terms of resolution, precision, bass speed and tightness, the ProPhile 8 are ultimately ahead, which is the most audible during very fast and complex, dense music, but not as strikingly obvious otherwise most of the time. So to say, the ProPhile 8 don’t yet “cave in” when the ER-4S already start to do.
Regarding perceived soundstage, that of the ProPhile 8 isn’t even all that much larger to my ears but only somewhat, but as with the resolution, the In-Ear in-ears are ahead when it comes to imaging precision and remain cleaner, better separated when the track is densely arranged and/or very fast.
Pai Audio MR3:
The MR3 are more v-shaped/loudness-compensated tuned in comparison, with a moderate bass lift of around 5 dB and somewhat elevated upper highs. Therefore, they are definitely more coloured than my ER-4S, but less so when compared to my Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors.
When it comes to the open ear gain compensation in the upper mids, that of the MR3 is weaker and more comparable to the UERM.
The highs are more even and smoother on the Etymotic.
When it comes to soundstage, that of the MR3 is larger.
InEar StageDiver SD-2:
They are close in terms of treble evenness and flatness in the highs but ultimately a bit darker than the ER-4S and minimally less even.
The SD-2 are warmer and thicker in the lows by around 5 dB.
In terms of midrange, that of my InEar are warmer and darker.
The SD-2s’ stage is larger than the ER-4S’ to my ears.
Phonak Audéo PFE 132:
The Phonak, while still very neutral and among the most neutral in-ears, have ultimately got a peak in the upper highs and a bit of a dip in the middle treble, as well as a bit more warmth in the lows.
Compared to the ER-4S, their bass is softer as well and they are also somewhat below the Etymotic when it comes to resolution.
To my ears, my Phonaks’ soundstage never sounded completely realistic or coherent, therefore my ER-4S sound spatially more convincing as well as more precise.
Logitech/Ultimate Ears UE900:
Their biggest weakness is definitely the midrange tuning with the moderate bass warmth “radiating” way up into the central midrange, with a sudden drop towards the upper mids/presence range, wherefore there is no real differentiation between the actual midrange and lower mids/fundamental range, which is also the reason why I find my UE900 to sound somewhat weird (i.e. plasticky) with voices and use them mostly for electronic music.
Their 5 kHz range shows a dip with a mild follow-up elevation in the upper highs.
While ultimately decently tuned except for the somewhat weird/plasticky midrange, they are clearly not as realistic or even sounding as the ER-4S.
The UEs’ soundstage is quite flat to my ears without much depth, wherefore the ER-4S sound spatially more realistic and convincing to me.
Etymotic ER2SE:
Highly comparable to almost similar tuning, with the ER2SE having minimally more bass quantity, minimally less presence range quantity, and slightly less level at 10 kHz. The ER2SE, unlike the ER-4S, are closer to neutral around 7 kHz, though, when performing sine sweeps.
In terms of technical perception, the dynamic driver Etys are just a smidgen behind the BA Etys to my ears when it comes to ultimate note separation, but this only shows rarely when the in-ears are stressed by very busy, dense and bast sound material. Most of the time, they are remarkably close to the point of being near-indistinguishable.
Slightly “softer” bass presentation compared to the BA Etys but on its own very tight and controlled. Attacks and impact better/easier perceived when compared to the single-BA Etys.
In direct comparison, the single-BA Etys appear to have a bit of “grain” in the midrange compared to the dynamic driver Etys that do not.
Larger perceived soundstage than the single-BA Etys and highly precise as well, but starts to become “foggy”/gives in earlier with spatially very crowded, densely arranged tracks with many tonal elements at the same time, wherefore the ER-4S are my choice with spatially more crowded, more demanding recordings/arrangements.
Conclusion:
Highly Recommended.
Uncompromised flat, neutral, lifeless “studio-neutral” tuning with really high technical performance especially for single-BA in-ears (ultimately below my UERMs’ and ProPhile 8s’ resolution, but the ER-4S, as a whole package, are still somewhat ahead of other good multi-BA in-ears in the 500$ range in some areas or are at least similarly precise when it comes to technicalities, and moreover have that uncompromised flat neutral tuning in addition).
As a result, together with the ER4SR, they are also my personal favourites for serious CD listening.
The lack of a chin-slider above the cable’s y-divider (that was finally added to the ER4SRs’ cable) is my only real complaint about my ER-4S.
Photos:
Is there a balanced cable for Etymotics ??
Barry