Clarification: CD3000, UE-10 and ProPhonic 2X-S comparisons

[lindrone]

I noticed in a couple of unrelated threads, there seems to be some idea of that some comparison of CD3000 and UE-10 has been made. I haven't seen other members making this comparison, so I thought this might have risen from some of the comparison that I've made.

I've only compared CD3000 and ProPhonic 2X-S directly, and determined I liked the 2X-S more for various reasons, but I have never mentioned anything about UE-10 up to this point. Seems that some people has interpreted that since I thought UE-10 is up to par, albeit with different sound signature, with the 2X-S, that it was automatically equal/better than the CD3000 as well. I don't think that's necessarily true, so I think I should clarify this for all those who are interested.

Comparison of ProPhonic 2X-S and CD3000

ProPhonic 2X-S:

1. Overall, a warmer sound signature than the CD3000
2. Better and more natural decay
3. A lot more reproduction of fine, micro-details, allowing everything to sound more life-like. Additional microdynamics creates an richer presentation
4. Depper bass, with a more body and fullness
5. Not as bright, better sibilance control. Trebles are definitely not as harsh.

CD3000:

1. Larger soundstage

Comparison of UE-10 and CD3000

UE-10 Pro:

1. About same amount of details in the rising note.
2. Very similar in terms of articulation, the way the trebles are extended and sharper
3. Similar sibilance control, there are areas where UE-10 gets even a little harsher, due to its more revealing nature. There are sharp trebles that even CD3000 will smooth over, and UE-10 will not.
4. Slightly more detail in the decay, but not enough to really beat the CD3000
5. Clean, lean bass with deeper reach. At low volume levels, the body is definitely not as full as CD3000. Crank it up much higher, it gets close, but still has that very lean, clean feel
6. Compressed soundstage in the midrange due to forwardness of vocals & other midrange instruments

CD3000:

1. Larger soundstage
2. Flatter sound playback, in terms of no specific element sounds more forward than other elements. Overall balance is better
3. Much more musical than UE-10

So.. what does this all mean...?

Basically, there are a lot of characteristics of 2X-S that CD3000 simply doesn't have. The way 2X-S produces very fine and rich details in its decay adds a lot more life-likeness to the sound. Its full and warm bass is also very appreciative over the CD3000 for me. So there's multiple reasons why 2X-S is preferrable for me over the CD3000. Where CD3000's only got one chief advantage over the 2X-S.

Compared against UE-10 though, CD3000 and UE-10 is rather more alike. In the way that UE-10 has a relatively cold presentation, and it doesn't produce as much detail in its decay either. The bass is deeper with less body. UE-10 is more analytical, and CD3000 is a lot more musical. Yet CD3000 still has a bigger soundstage, and a more balanced one at that.

Where I felt 2X-S has a lot of advantages over the CD3000, UE-10 just doesn't have quite as much. UE-10 feels more or less like a very cleaned up and dry version of CD3000, without the musicality, fun and excitement. If you made a "monitor" version of CD3000, UE-10 would be it. Not only that, UE-10's forward vocal, at least for me, has always been its detriment, it just destroys the placement of the sound and overall feeling of the soundstage.

In conclusion, even though I consider 2X-S and UE-10 Pro in the same league, I will only take 2X-S over CD3000.

 

[gorman]

http://www5.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=77508
Here utdeep that used the CD3000 and HD600 says "The overall sound is definately the best that I have ever heard, and the UE10 has become my headphone of choice for all music!"

 

[lindrone]

Ah, I see, so that's where that came from.

I feel that UE-10 is an adequate replacement for CD3000, but definitely not "superior" in any form. It's too much of a trade-off between different characteristics.

 

[gorman]

Well, considering you don't particularly like their sound signature, I guess "adequate replacement" is quite an endorsement!

 

[KPOT]

lindrone, you are mr professor.

I don't like people lie, that you. It was not too bad if it was one time. But you are talking nonsense on each UE10PRO thread! Look at frequency response, for example, and you'll see UE10PRO the flatest phones of these 3 models. Other technical characteristics are in the same manner.

 

[gorman]

Please, let's not turn this into a flame. Lindrone has got his opinion. Several other UE-10 owners have already expressed their satisfaction with the UE-10. Let's keep it at that.

Btw, I'm listening to the UE-10 with my newly acquired HA 1 MkII and it appears to definitely add a little bit of "fullness" to the music and more, dare I say it, musicality?

 

[KPOT]

gorman, opinion and truth are different things. There are technical characteristics that concerns actual state of affairs.

 

[ampgalore]

How much is prophonic 2x?

What's the web address.

Construction quality wise, which one is better, Ultimate Ears or Prophonic?

ER4S is well constructed, but I am always afraid it may break down.

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT gorman, opinion and truth are different things. There are technical characteristics that concerns actual state of affairs.

Kpot, you are probably referring to the frequency response chart that HRA posted a while ago. I include it here for completeness sake. I had to turn up contrast and reduce resolution, otherwise I could not have attached it, as the picture was too big. Red is Sensas, orange/whitish is UE-10.

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT gorman, opinion and truth are different things. There are technical characteristics that concerns actual state of affairs.

According to these same technical characteristics, and just to mention one example, from the ones I have heard, HD600 goes from 12Hz to 39KHz, and the CD3000 form 20Hz to 20KHz, I have owned both, and IME the HD600 will not go that high nor that low, not even in its sweatest dreams, so IMO technical specifications means nothing to me sometimes....unless both taken by the same person and gear associated.....

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ampgalore Construction quality wise, which one is better, Ultimate Ears or Prophonic? ER4S is well constructed, but I am always afraid it may break down.

If what you want is solidity, I'd say go for hard acrylic UE-10.

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovkiller According to these same technical characteristics, and just to mention one example, from the ones I have heard, HD600 goes from 12Hz to 39KHz, and the CD3000 form 20Hz to 20KHz, I have owned both, and IME the HD600 will not go that high nor that low, not even in its sweatest dreams, so IMO technical specifications means nothing to me sometimes....unless both taken by the same person and gear associated.....

Kpot was not referring to on-paper specs. He was referring to a test whose results were published by HRA (check the image I attached in my previous post). Now, the test happened at UE laboratory, but HRA was ready to swear on Jerry Harvey's honesty in reporting results. And from what I could gather from our e-mail conversations... yes, I doubt he would lie about something like this.

 

[md01]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT gorman, opinion and truth are different things. There are technical characteristics that concerns actual state of affairs.

Specs are only a point of reference. Lindrome's opinion is that of his experience listening to all three headphones. Have you heard all three? It's one thing to disagree, but another to call him a lier. If you don't like what he has to say, move on to another thread.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorman Well, considering you don't particularly like their sound signature, I guess "adequate replacement" is quite an endorsement!

Only problem is, "adequate replacement" should not cost 2.5 times as much compared to a new CD3000, and about 3 times as much as an used one. Not that UE-10 Pro doesn't have its merits, it's just that it doesn't have enough to differentiate its sound away from the CD3000 enough, and it doesn't make up for what it lacks compared to CD3000.


Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT I don't like people lie, that you.

What right do you have to say whether I'm lying or not? Technical specs, graphs and everything, doesn't speak anything for what the headphone really sound like. You can hold on to those technical specs all you want, and create for yourself the illusion of superiority. That's exactly what UE's marketing department wants anyway. BTW, have you seen HD650's crazy specs? It produces frequencies that your dog can't even hear (actually, dogs probably can.. hehehe)


Quote:

Originally Posted by gorman Now, the test happened at UE laboratory, but HRA was ready to swear on Jerry Harvey's honesty in reporting results. And from what I could gather from our e-mail conversations... yes, I doubt he would lie about something like this.

I'm sure the test results are accurate, but it doesn't speak for that's how a headphone should sound like anyway. CD3000 doesn't have a "flat curve", neither does HD600, HD650, and many other audiophile headphones out there. Seems like IEM's are the only one subjected to the stupid "flat curve" test because of the claims made by UE that "flatter is better". No other headphone manufacturers has ever laid claim to that.

I think most engineers that makes audio equipments wouldn't consider a flat curve the holy grail of sound at all.


Quote:

Originally Posted by ampgalore How much is prophonic 2x? What's the web address. Construction quality wise, which one is better, Ultimate Ears or Prophonic?

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

http://www.sensaphonics.com

Overall construction quality wise, ProPhonic is much more refined than the Ultimate Ears. The silicone mold is much better than either the full soft or the hard acrylic option of the Ultimate Ears.

 

[ampgalore]

Would you recommend the Prophonic soft or regular version?

What are the benefits of each option?