[random person]

Thanks toaster22 for clarifying my intentions -- you are right that I didn't mean to imply that I had the best speakers and I'm glad you understood that I brought up the price only to make my point. These online forums are tough as we all type faster than our brains can process and as a result it is easy for misunderstandings to develop.

And HRA -- no offense taken! And thank you very much for making me feel good about the UE5c -- I needed that. You are right though about the nagging feeling that there is something even better out there -- kinda like an itch you can't scratch, you know what I'm saying? (Maybe I'll upgrade in a couple of years -- gives me some place to go, eh?)

Interesting about the frequency response issue -- I hadn't studied the charts closely but UE did indicate that the UE5c had more bass -- that puzzled me as I thought the extra driver would make the UE10 more bass-heavy. If there is a tradeoff between accuracy and a little more bass well then I'd pick more bass every time! (You can tell I'm not a professional, can't you?)

I guess I'll stick with my UE5c order -- yikes a week to ten days is a LONG time to wait! I'll let you all know what I think when I get em!

 

[bhd812]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyson I ordered a pair of Sensaphonics after reading Lindrone's review, and also reading Welly Wu's UE 10 review. Both gave me confidence that canalphones could indeed match up to full sized headphones in almost every category. Who else here has ordered recently, what did you get, and what was the reasoning for your decision?

these are not regular etys or shures these are hardcore...lol


i want a set,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,of each

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by random person Interesting about the frequency response issue -- I hadn't studied the charts closely but UE did indicate that the UE5c had more bass -- that puzzled me as I thought the extra driver would make the UE10 more bass-heavy. If there is a tradeoff between accuracy and a little more bass well then I'd pick more bass every time! (You can tell I'm not a professional, can't you?)

I would mention that E5c is more "bassy" than 2X-S in a general sense as well. Although 2X-S's bass is more accurate, with deeper extension and better texture, tonality... E5c's bass is still more on the side of pure fun. The biggest difference is that 2X-S reproduces visceral, vibrating bass when the bass extension gets deeper.. where E5c will produce visceral vibration without going as deep, it will reproduce some visceral bass even at a low mid-bass.

So yes, it does make sense that even though one canalphone might have one more driver to ensure bass accuracy, that it would actually not produce as "much" bass in quantity (in that fun-inducing sense) as a canalphone with one less driver. It's not really a trade-off for accuracy either, it's just the way that one canalphone is tuned for a certain purpose, versus another tuned for a different purpose.

All these balanced armature drivers in these canalphones are the same anyway... most (if not all) of them come from the same manufacturer.

 

[toaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone It's not really a trade-off for accuracy either, it's just the way that one canalphone is tuned for a certain purpose, versus another tuned for a different purpose.

Some people would debate the triple driver design being more accurate. I myself would guess it has to be, otherwise what's the real reason for it?

We already know it does not produce more bass volume. I would think it has to be more accurate, in a similar fashion that the 2-X's bass is more accurate than the E5's. It's probably just an even smaller difference. Not to say the bass isn't great on the sensas or even the e5's for that matter, but I'd bet the triple driver design adds, albeit a small one, a bit more control and refinement to the lowend.

 

[superjohnny]

We know the UE-5c's cost $550, UE-5 Pro's cost $750, & UE-10's cost $900, but what do the Sensaphonic 2X-S's cost?

 

[lindrone]

UE-10 Pro w/ full-soft option => $950 + $50 audiologist fee = $1000 (correct?)

ProPhonic 2X-S => $750 + $50 audiologist fee = $800

 

[cmascatello]

Don't forget, the UE-7....

UE-7 Pro = $850 + $50 Audiologist Fee = $900

 

[lindrone]

Does that include the "soft" option? The soft option on the UE's are not included in the base price.

 

[cmascatello]

EDIT: All of the UE models with the exception of the UE-5C are available with the Full-Soft option. This adds $50 to the cost of the IEM. Thanks, Toaster.

 

[bhd812]

OK for most of these two companies clients I can understand why they would buy and use these. but a audiophile or something close (i guess us) wouldnt need such a defined phone, I mean I could see if your preforming infront of 50,000 people then it would be inportant to have a custom fit, non-attracting phone but for pure audio listening I find these to be a very exspensive journy...$900? thats more the a rs-1, or a hd650 with a amp


I am not debating the use, but I would love to know why you all would purchase such a product for pleasure listening.

and by the way when a artist uses somthing like this, isnt their certain sounds going thru them? not the whole band but just certain instruments?

 

[cmascatello]

I made the move upwards from the ER-6 to the ER-4P to the e5c to the 2X-S b/c I was in search of the "perfect" canalphone. I found each of the other IEMs to be lacking in one way or another. The price of the 2X-S and UE-7/10 is quite high, but I find it easily worth it when taking the amount of time I use them per day into consideration. I spend 2-3 hours a day with my canalphones when I am at home (1/2 of the month) and 5-10 hours a day with them when I am travelling for work. I felt that the 100+ hours a month certainly justified whatever expenditure was needed to bring me the comfort, isolation, and, most importantly, sound quality that I was looking for. If, at some point down the line, I decide that the 2X-S is not making me 100% happy I will not hesitate to take another look at the UE-10.

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhd812 ...$900? thats more the a rs-1, or a hd650 with a amp

Problem is, for portable use, an HD650 with an amp is a little bit... inconvenient?

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhd812 OK for most of these two companies clients I can understand why they would buy and use these. but a audiophile or something close (i guess us) wouldnt need such a defined phone, I mean I could see if your preforming infront of 50,000 people then it would be inportant to have a custom fit, non-attracting phone but for pure audio listening I find these to be a very exspensive journy...$900? thats more the a rs-1, or a hd650 with a amp

Yes indeed... There's a cost associated with miniaturization, to get that type of great sound into a little package cost a bundle... which is the justification for most of the extra money being spent.

We purchase these basically because of our usage habits... I spent most of my time listening to music at work or on the commute from home to work. I can't carry my CD3000 around with me. So ultimately I wanted an uncompromised portable sound experience as well as home.


Quote:

I am not debating the use, but I would love to know why you all would purchase such a product for pleasure listening.

It seems that you've gotten a misconception that these canalphones are not good for pleasure listening?

In fact, they are very, very good for pleasure listening. I like my ProPhonic 2X-S more than HD650, RS-1, and even my CD3000 (which is my favorite full-size headphone out of them all). There's a lot of microdynamics that 2X-S can produce that no full-size headphone can represent as easily or as clearly; *AND* it retains all of the visceral impact and emotional involvement as well.

I've done a CD3000 to 2X-S comparison, as well as a general 2X-S review.. you can read up on them if you want further information.


Quote:

and by the way when a artist uses somthing like this, isnt their certain sounds going thru them? not the whole band but just certain instruments?

When artists uses these on-stage, they use it in combination with a wireless receiver, wireless transmitter, and mixers. The audio technician mixes different channels of sound according to the artists's requests.. so they can mix in, say guitar, drums, and reduced crowd noise (so they can still monitor crowd reaction) and send the wireless signal out to their receiver (belt-packs).

There isn't anything special about IEM's capability to produce sound for a certain instrument. IEM's are just headphones, they'll produce whatever sound is being put into it. It's the mixer and rest of the monitoring set-up that helps artists to perform on stage.

 

[Welly Wu]

Bah...N/T!

 

[toaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmascatello I do not believe that the UE-7 PRO is available in the "full-soft" option. I think that the UE-10 is the only one to offer the non-acrylic material.

my post on page 2 of this thread addressed this issue.

The UE 7 and 10 are both available with the "full soft option," while UE 5 is not.