[Benaiir]

I'm quite intrigued by all the reviews of the E5 saying it's not that great in improving sound quality. Could it be that the E3's better?


Some point's I'd be delighted to have cleared up are:

***Is it really worth paying almost triple the cost, even though it's a matter of dollars?

***How does each work on high-impedance cans?

***Which genre does each specifically excel in?

***How comfortable are each while in use? (Pocket pains, accidental unplugs, drops)


All help is appreciated. Thanks.

 

[Xan7hos]

I remember the first time hearing an E3 i had more had a "wow!" sorta feeling than I had with the E5. Unfortunately I gave away the E3 before I could do some comparisons.

I didn't notice the hiss issue with the E3, though I did notice that both the E3 and E5 seem to have a very low reverb/echo noise going on

I'd say its closer to double than triple btw. And the extra 10 dollars pays for a rechargable battery and bass boost

 

[ClieOS]

For me, E5 SQ is much better than E3; but for many others, I'll just tell them E5 SQ is about the same as E3. Here are the reason:

1) Many of them doesn't have a difficult-to-drive headphone to benefit from the extra power of E5, thus they don't feel any improvement.

2) E3 has warmer bass boost than E5, and people who love warmer bass interpret that as better. I prefer E5 bass boost because it doesn't mud up the overall sound like E3.

3) E3 with its permanent EQ has synergy problem with many headphone (turning warm sound to muddy sound), but E5 gives me the choice to pair it differently with different 'phone. However, people who don't own many pair of 'phone might not notice the synergy issue since them have nothing to compare with.

4) Back clip is a big plus to me. I don't have to put E5 in my pocket like E3. Not to mention volume control and rechargeable battery.

 

[swanlee]

The E3 was nice for what it was and the price was good but the E5 is much better.

The e3 has a lot more hiss a much lower S/N ratio which combined means you will be missing clarity and details compared with the E5.

Some may enjoy the muddier sound and more hiss out of the E3 but there is no question the E5 is technically the better performing portable amp.

 

[RedSky0]

Remember that though the E3 costs less, unless you already rechargable AAA batteries and a charger, that is going to cost you extra.

 

[Benaiir]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xan7hos /img/forum/go_quote.gif I remember the first time hearing an E3 i had more had a "wow!" sorta feeling than I had with the E5. Unfortunately I gave away the E3 before I could do some comparisons. I didn't notice the hiss issue with the E3, though I did notice that both the E3 and E5 seem to have a very low reverb/echo noise going on I'd say its closer to double than triple btw. And the extra 10 dollars pays for a rechargable battery and bass boost

$13, and people say the parts/accesoriess feel a little "cheap

 

[Xan7hos]

Yeah, I bought it on DealExtreme preorder when it was closer to
21-22 (not much of a difference)

In terms of parts, the E5's aluminum shell definitely has a sturdier feel over the E3's plastic. There is more of a solid heft feel to it which I like.

As stated above, the clip is definitely a plus. I'm able to clip my Sansa Clip onto my pocket, and the E5 on my belt strap, and it definitely gives me easier access and greater comfort overall.

Accessories are quite standard - USB charging cable, mini to mini interconnect. Obviously for the price you can't expect a starquad terminated in neutrik/switchcraft. The E5 package comes with 2 sets of mini to mini interconnects: one right angled and straight, the other both mini are straight and a bit longer. The E3 only comes with two straight mini to mini interconnects. Nothing really wrong with both IMO. Also the E3 does not come with a battery.

IMO, you can't go wrong with either. Sound quality wise, I definitely do not see the E5 as an downgrade from the E3, and the cost is absolutely justified.

 

[Xan7hos]

double post

 

[RASeymour]

Batteries were a real deal killer with the E3. While I liked the sound, having to replace the batteries every five hours or so was a problem for me. I was using good lithium and alkalines. I didn't even try rechargeables because I didn't think they would last a day.

I'm keeping the E3 for a backup at the Y.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif For me, E5 SQ is much better than E3; but for many others, I'll just tell them E5 SQ is about the same as E3. Here are the reason: 1) Many of them doesn't have a difficult-to-drive headphone to benefit from the extra power of E5, thus they don't feel any improvement. 2) E3 has warmer bass boost than E5, and people who love warmer bass interpret that as better. I prefer E5 bass boost because it doesn't mud up the overall sound like E3. 3) E3 with its permanent EQ has synergy problem with many headphone (turning warm sound to muddy sound), but E5 gives me the choice to pair it differently with different 'phone. However, people who don't own many pair of 'phone might not notice the synergy issue since them have nothing to compare with. 4) Back clip is a big plus to me. I don't have to put E5 in my pocket like E3. Not to mention volume control and rechargeable battery.

I definitely agree with all of this.

The E5 has better quality bass than the E3, which I feel is bloat and the E5 retains the highs while boosting the bass.
I'd keep the amp volume on maximum though and control the volume via the player for a better signal to the earphones (tell me if you think I'm wrong).

 

[BIGHMW]

For me, the E5 has a better synergy with my sets of cans than does the E3, especially when using my 40-ohm (with NC on) Sony MDR-NC60 (JE Version) noise canceling headphones, it also provides more of a volume boost for them, as well as a fatter sound as opposed to unamped, and the ever-so-convenient clip which goes right next to my RM-MC40ELK inline remote control on my shirt collar that I use with either my NW-HD5 HDD or my MZ-RH1 Hi-MD Walkman is the most convenient function that anyone can use on occasion.

An excellent job of R & D by the fine folks at FiiO, indeed they should be very proud of themselves that they have put out such a great amp and for such a low price at that. Also the gold-plated IC's included with the E5 blow the cheaper ones included with the E3 completely out of the water (although they will never beat aftermarket IC's). I myself use the shorter (4-inch-long cord with straight and L-plugs) cord because it works great with my aforementioned remote and phones setup, in which is plugged in from the remote's phones jack into the E5's input and from there any Japan-market import short-corded set of IEM's/buds/cans.

This is me plugged into my E5 with my remote-friendly DAP:

any questions?

 

[Juaquin]

The E5 is better built and has a more recent, maybe more "advanced" circuit. I find that the bass boost is the perfect level (if you need it) and not overblown. Overall the E5 is a great value; even if it is 2.5x the cost of the E3, it's still only $25 - that's less than most people pay for an interconnect.

 

[clownzee]

I'm just glad that the horrible hiss from the E3 is gone in the E5... that's a big plus to me.

 

[boomy3555]

I bought two E-3's 8.50 US free shipping form hong kong

I bought 1 E-5 24.99 free shipping from hong kong.( w/some PL30's for 20 bucks more)

IMHO the E-5 is simply the logical upgrade from it's little brother. Other than the Bass Boost on the E-5 allowing you to take or leave the bass that the E-3 gives you whether you like it or not. I don't find a great deal of difference in the SQ.
My selling point for the E-5 was
1.On/Off
2 Volume control
3 Rechargeable battery
4 Clip on
5 Thinner and matches up better with my shuffle.

All of those things makes it definitely worth the price difference.

 

[Moontan13]

I like the E3 a lot, but I think I a $25 CMOY would be a better value than an E5 FiiO in terms of SQ.