[drewjp]

I just received the Jan 2010 issue today, and much to my delight, they reviewed and compared high-end IEMs. Here's the bunch: IE8, Turbine Pro, SE420, Image X10, Triplefi10, ER-4P, Sleek SA6, and Audio-Technica ATH-CK10.

The reviewer compared each one to his own UE11 Pro as the benchmark.

He preferred the Triplefi10(not surprisingly), but gave the IE8 and Turbine Pro as his next choices.

I suggest you grab it at the newstand. It was a very nice read!

 

[unclejr]

No Westone, eh?

 

[semisight]

Obviously he liked the triple fi the best, it probably sounded closest to his ue11s. Sounds like he likes bass, considering his top choices. I'm guessing the Etys didn't rank nearly as high.

 

[loopsider]

That's a bit awkward. Why not the truly higher end SE530? No Westone ES3x/3/Um3x? No Phonak PFE (which I preferred over my TF10)?!?

 

[the search never ends]

A very odd mix of iem's to compare. Like loopsider said, the westone 3 and se 530 should be in there, not the se420. Apples amd Oranges comparison if you ask me.

 

[drewjp]

I agree. I'm not sure why the Westone 3 wasn't in there; maybe because the brand isn't as 'mainstream' as the others?? Same thing with the Phonak, I'm sure.

I also don't know why the SE530 wasn't there. If they contacted Shure about reviewing 'high-end' offerings, why wouldn't Shure send them the SE530??

I'm also going to write an email to the reviewer asking if he burned-in the dynamics (Turbine Pro and IE8) before his review. He didn't mention it in the article at all. Also, one of his complaints about the IE8 was the lack of deep bass (??!!) unless he turned the dial to 'full'.

 

[billybob_jcv]

Most of the time, the reviewers only review what the mfr will send them. If no one sent him a westone or SE530, they won't be included.

 

[unclejr]

^ This is probably true, though it's kind of a funny problem. The article loses some legitimacy this way, so it would be beneficial for the article to include all the major top tiers. And what reasons would an IEM mfg have for not supplying review samples, assuming they were asked for them? I mean, isn't any press good press, and don't they believe in their product?

 

[drewjp]

^ I agree. A national publication would bring your best product into the spotlight. I'm sure if the reviewer stated that "Sennheiser sent an IE8; what's comparable that you make, Shure??" that Shure no doubt would've sent their best.

Unless...Shure thinks they have enough press with the SE530 and wanted to give its little sister a chance at the spotlight??

 

[noisecancelationheadphone]

why the heck aint the SE530 compared in the list?

 

[chicaman]

reviews are bias~ different people has different preference, hence take the review as a guide. not because the author said tri fi is best then it will be the best. things doesnt work out this way. the best is still audition them urself

 

[intoflatlines]

It's also possible that Shure didn't want to risk damaging the reputation of it's top SE530 in the event that it came out below the competitor's IEMs.. That way if their SE420 came out below the others, they could at least say, "Oh well, that's not even our best IEM."

 

[Modifiedz]

I dont agree with the choosing of the SE420 over the SE530. His top three would have been Triple.Fi 10, and then either IE-8 and SE530 as 2nd and 3rd place.
Maybe this is to help marketing for the Turbine Pros, as they are now rated in the top 3 phones.

 

[shigzeo]

Shure also had the SE530 out a looong time ago and have made their spotlight moment. Either they are working on new products, or they don't have review samples to send about. I had a very hard time getting my hands on a loan sample which I was happily able to finger for 3 weeks. I sold my old one a couple of years ago.

 

[what]

REVIEWS DONT AGREE WITH WHAT I THINK

BIAS BIAS EVIL