dgs
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Posts
- 314
- Likes
- 10
Here it is. Finally. After a month of listening to all three phones, I offer a comparison review of the 3 etymotic headphones: er6, 4p, and 4s. This post is reproduced on both headwize and head-fi. Bullets are at the end for people who hate to read this kind of thing.
DISCLAIMER: As usual, please preface all statements with IMO, since these observations represent my experience solely. No music was harmed during this review. And please keep in mind that the differences I note here are not overwhelming. Although the differences definitely are there to my ears, they are not so prominent that one headphone should not be considered. Really, what it comes down to is application (as I discuss at the end of the review). I tried to describe differences in a way that will help people visualize the differences between the phones, but this is never meant to suggest that any one of these phones is lacking in any significant way.
Organization of the review:
1. A comparison of the 4p vs. the er6. Since these are essentially portable application headphones, I have chosen to compare these two headphones under “ultraportable” conditions. What that means is that all music is played on a sony mzr700 MD player with no amplification.
2. A comparison of the 4s vs the er6. Since the 4s really shines with amplification, I have chosen to do this comparison by amplifying both of these headphones. Music is played, again, through the Sony MD player. I should note that the “4s” I’m using is the 4p with the Daniel Pumphrey adapter cable. Although there are those who might argue that this isn’t really using a 4s, I find that there is a distinct advantage to having identical drivers in the 4p and 4s for this review.
For those interested in a direct comparison of the 4p vs 4s, please see my earlier comparison of these phones in the Full Featured Headphone Review Section.
I have left out a description of the build of each of these phones. You can see that on either the etymotic website or the headroom website.
Some “pre-sound” considerations:
Occlusion Effect vs. Microphonic Effect (with definitions a la Reader’s Digest):
Microphonic Effect: a sense of amplified sound coming from the cord of the headphone moving against something, ie. scratching against your clothes. In this sense, there is a definite hierarchy—the 4s has most, 4p is next, and the er6 has remarkably less microphonic effect.
Occlusion Effect: a sense of amplified other sounds (chewing, talking, breathing, walking) caused by the fact that you have eliminated a high percentage of the noise coming from outside your body. In this regard, they are all pretty close. The er6 might have a little less from the fact that the seal is not quite as tight, but it is still pretty significant.
Music: I have tried to use music that represents a fair range of both musical and dynamic styles. Furthermore, I have tried to pick music that I used for my earlier comparison of the 4p and 4s headphones (see the Full Featured Headphone Review Section). The actual tunes are listed below:
Dave Matthews: Stay, Everyday, Pig
Tool: Lateralis, The Grudge, Ticks & Leeches
Soggy Bottom Boys: Man of Constant Sorrow
Tom Waits: Come on Up the House, Georgia Lee, House Where Nobody Lives
Keith Jarrett/Gary Peacock/Jack DeJohnette: Round Midnight
Louis Armstrong/Duke Elington: Duke’s Place
Ella Fitzgerald/Duke Ellington: Imagine My Frustration
Pavarotti: vesti la gubba from I Pagliacci, E lucevan le stele from Tosca
Evgeny Kissin: Chopin Funeral March
Let me start by saying that all three of these headphones are great. No matter which one you chose of these, you are going to get a really nice headphone that ranks right up there with the other top-of-the-line dynamic headphones. So, if you just want to “taste” the “ety sound,” it doesn’t matter that much which of these headphones you get. You can chose your phone based on your budget and your application and get a great headphone no matter what (see below). If, however, you are one of those nit-pickers (like most ety users), you might find this review useful for giving you a sense of the differences that somewhere around $150 USD will give you. And there definitely are some sound differences.
Er6 vs 4p:
Overall differences: the 4p is a bit easier to drive than the er6, although my MD drives both without amplification quite nicely. The er6 sound great, but they are really no comparison to the 4p. Just in terms of transparency and balance, when I listen to the er6 alone, they sound quite good, but then when I switch to the 4p, it is like the music explodes. Everything is so much more wide-open sounding. Instruments regain much of the subtlety of texture that just isn’t captured by the er6. And vocals soften and become more filled with emotion. The separation between instruments (like, for example, between each of the background singers on “Stay”) is so much more prominent on the 4p than er6. At the same time, the difference pitch ranges (ie. Treble, midrange, bass) is more separated (to a fault, I think) on the er6. One gets the sense that there is a treble, a midrange, and a bass, all sitting alongside each other with the er6, whereas with the 4p, these artificial divisions never appear: the ranges blend into each other without a hint of artificial separation.
Treble: This, to me, is one of the biggest differences between the er6 and 4p.
Er6: The treble on the er6 can be a tad edgy. It’s never outright harsh, but there are moments when I think it’s just a tiny bit too sharp. It’s not that this edginess is constant because it isn’t. But at moments where there is a great deal of high end in the music, the er6 can be slightly overpronounced in the upper-mid (UMT) to low-high treble (LHT). This can lend an air of harshness to music in this range at times. And this edginess is the most significant thing to differentiate the er6 from either of the 4 series. This edginess permeates the entire er6 sound spectrum, and it makes for a more fatiguing and less musical experience. On the other hand, it is this same edge that makes the er6 better by some measure for ultraportable commuting applications. The bite of the headphone (increased sense of attack, if you will), makes the er6 easier to differentiate from the din of background noise in a lot of portable commuting applications (subways, walking on the street, trains). There is a fair amount of sibilance on some recordings, especially old jazz vocals (ie. “Duke’s Place”). The experience with the er6 is, overall, a bit more visceral than the 4p. One very oversimplified way to think of the er6 is to think of them as the ety for people who like the Grado sound, but without Grado’s signature liquid vocals. Drums often have a strongly reassuring “crack” in rock music with the er6 that tends to place the music a bit more “in-your-face” than the 4p, but at the cost of musicality. With the 4p, on the other hand, the drums sound accurate, not overemphasized, not in the background.
4p: This is one of the true sweet spots of the 4p compared to the er6. Cymbals become more lifelike, more subtle, and less overpowering than with the er6. There is virtually no fatigue with these phones, and, for that matter, no harshness to the highs with the 4p. But this is not at the sacrifice of attack. The 4p are by no means a “laid-back” headphone. Rather, it is that they are extremely well-balanced. Although the er6 is more pronounced on the treble than the 4p, I think that this is to their disadvantage. The 4p is clearly more detailed and can be quite breathtaking with cymbal work and vocals.
Midrange: The difference here is also quite pronounced. The richness and sweetness of vocals are FAR superior on the 4p.
Er6: vocals on the er6 are nice. There is a very slight tendency for vocals in the lower to middle tenor to feel a bit recessed, and this is especially true on music that has a lot of high treble information. I find the treble of the er6 to be sometimes too overpowering, leading me to not be able to turn the volume up sufficiently to capture the vocal midrange well without being irritated by too much treble. Drums in the midrange have a great punch, but not a tremendous amount of tone. They are pretty real-sounding, but the extra attack seems to rob them of a bit of their resonance. For example, about 3:40 minutes into “The Grudge” by Tool, there are a series of drum fills between breaks. Although I can hear the drums very accurately in this section, they sound a bit like the toms have been stuffed with newspaper or something.
4p: Man, oh man. The 4p has a beautiful midrange. Vocals are breathy, subtle, and well-reproduced. No matter what type of music, the vocals are rich and well-balanced with the rest of the instrumentation. Drums sound more realistic, and the tone of the drums is more satisfying and present. On the er6, it is sometimes difficult to tell which drum is being hit, the high tom, mid tom, or low tom. No such difficulty is present on the 4p. The tonal characteristics of each of the drums stand out nicely.
Bass: this is perhaps the most interesting difference between the two, although certainly not the most pronounced. The er6 has stronger sense of deep bass (at least, at first), somewhere between the 4p and 4s; however, the 4p’s bass is more articulate, faster, and more well-balanced to the rest of the sound spectrum. And the low bass that is present on the 4p is MUCH more musical than the er6.
Er6: very good low bass on the er6. Remarkable, in fact, at least at times. The “edge” that I mentioned before does come into play here: sometimes the electric bass sounds a bit like everyone in the music industry has suddenly switched to a Rickenbacker (if you don’t know what that means, listen to a few old Rush albums. Geddy Lee uses a Rickenbacker, and it lends a strong sense of attack to the notes he plays, almost making the bass into a bit of a percussion instrument.).
4p: As is well known, the 4p has a small mid to upper bass hump that can make them sound slightly light in the low bass range. However, this hump, at least in this comparison, seems welcome. This hump adds articulation to the bass without making everything sound “over-attacked.” I really think that the er6 adds a bit of artifact to the bass with its attack that, unless you are on the move, hurts the overall experience of them. Now, that said, the 4p does seem slightly easier to wash out with background noise. I don’t want to suggest that the er6 has better isolation (because it doesn’t), but the 4p’s bass, being a bit more subtle, seems to get lost a little bit easier on subways and loud streets than that of the er6.
So, when comparing these two phones, it basically comes down to application in many ways. If you are looking for phones that you don’t mind carrying around in your jacket pocket (read as “subjecting to abuse”) and sound great on the go, the er6 fits the bill very nicely within a budget. If, however, you don’t tend to move around as much and you want something that sounds absolutely fantastic without an amplifier that you can take with you anywhere, the 4p is clearly superior. In this comparison, you are paying the extra money purely for the sound; there is no increased ease of use or portability between the two. More on this issue in the summary at the end.
Er6 vs. 4s:
Just to keep things fair, in this comparison I used an amplifier with both the er6 and 4s (a JMT built CHA47). Still, the same MD player and same music selections.
First of all, adding an amp does help the er6. It removes a lot of that artificial separation that is somewhat prominent in the er6 without an amplifier. Second, it adds a level of musicality to the er6 that is superior to the er6 without an amp. Third, by helping push some of these recessed frequencies back into the mix, it presents an overall more balanced sound. However, they remain quite “edgy,” definitely not as refined as the 4p without an amp, and clearly nothing near the 4s with an amp.
Treble: Huge differences between headphones that are obvious and unmistakable.
ER6: The treble on the amped er6 is more balanced, a little smoother, and more detailed, but still nothing close to the 4p/s. Still, there is a slight push in the mid treble that can be a bit irritating with hard rock. For example, on “Ticks & Leeches” by Tool, when the guitars come in for the chorus, the sound is a bit harsh…not quite grainy, but harsh. This can be relatively fatiguing, although not intolerably so. Please note that the JMT CHA47 is a fairly bright amp, so this quality might be different on a darker amp (like the TA). Interestingly, sibilance, prominent on certain tunes with the unamped er6 (ie. Vocals on “Duke’s Place”), are lessened, although still present with the addition of amplification. Furthermore, the brassy trumpet of Armstrong is less harsh with the amp.
4s: Holy cow. The upper registers just open up with the 4s. Details leap through the headphones, both in comparison with the er6 and in general. Cymbals regain their spread, and the upper harmonics of guitars return. Hihats become clean and more real sounding. Accents are more easily discerned. For example, in the opening verse of “Pig” by Dave Matthews, the drummer plays a fairly intricate pattern of syncopated accentuations on the hihats. With the er6, these subtle dynamics get washed out in the mid treble push, but they come through brilliantly with the 4s. The upper elements of drums have more presence without a sense of over-attack. For example, the muffled rim shots in “Lover, You Should Have Come Over” by Jeff Buckley have a much more realistic resonance than with the er6, where they sound somewhat staccato. The upper registers of female vocals become more human, and they lose the sibilance and harshness present in the er6.
Midrange: definite and profound differences here.
Er6: The midrange on the er6 benefits most significantly from the addition of an amplifier. The recessed tenor range is put more squarely into the presentation, and male vocals sound quite nice. They are not quite as rich in timbre as the 4p still, but better. Acoustic guitars (ie. Soggy Bottom Boys) sound pretty realistic, and overall, the sound is fuller in this range. Female vocals, like Ella’s on “Imagine My Frustration” can sound somewhat forced and brash. Pavarotti, in my opinion, one of the most emotionally powerful singers, comes across a bit flat with the er6. His tone is just not as round with these phones. He sounds a little tinny, although not significantly so. It’s really more that the er6 just doesn’t capture the detail of his intonation like the 4s.
4s: Pavarotti almost makes me cry immediately with the 4s. His emotion and tone are just so alive and gratifying with the 4s. The missing harmonics with the er6 are ever-present with the 4s, as well as the overall power of his vibrato. It’s truly an ear blowing, mind blowing, and heart wrenching experience. Guitar details are so excellent that I sometimes could ask who remixed this album so much better before I put these headphones on. Female vocals soften and, as noted above, are more human sounding. Music through the 4s gains so much more texture, not only in the midrange, but across the whole sound spectrum.
Bass: definite differences, but more application based consideration needed here.
Er6: There is not a huge difference in bass from adding an amp to the er6. The over-present attack of the er6 without an amp is lessened, but it is still present to a degree. But the bass is more musical, with bass notes sounding fuller with more resonance. This is true of the bass drum as well. I refer the reader to “Come on up to the House” by Tom Waits. The bass drum, recorded acoustically with fairly little muffling, sounds with the 4s more like it’s in a room being recorded rather than in a box. On Louie and Duke’s “Duke’s Place,” the acoustic bass is tighter and the differences in pitch between the notes are more evident, as is the case with “Imagine My Frustration.”
4s: The bass on the 4s is clearly the most musical of the three phones. Full but not overpowering, with precision, speed, and accuracy. When the bass comes in on the “Everyday” by Dave Matthews, it blends very well with the overall sound, coming through clearly and with not a hint of muddiness, but not overly stated. The detail is so evident that fingering can be discerned in many cases. Of the three phones, the bass is the most subtle on these phones. The pronounced attack of the er6 is reduced, the mid to upper bass push of the 4p is reduced, and only a balanced and musical bass reproduction remains. However, this subtlety also means that the bass on the 4s is most easily lost when frequencies intervene from outside. In other words, on the train, the bass on the 4s can easily get lost in the rumble of the train. This is not because the sound from outside gets through the phones’ isolation. Rather, it is because the rumble of the train transmits a low frequency sound wave to one’s middle ear that masks the less visceral tone produced by the headphones. It’s similar to the idea of putting on a white noise machine to remove certain frequencies from being heard by someone outside a room.
Overall Sound Evaluation:
The er6 are a really nice headphone for ultraportable applications. They easily blow away all other earbuds/canalphones at their price point. Their overall sound is very much like the 4p/s in that they are relatively flat, neutral phones (except for the slight push in the mid treble); they clearly have the signature ety sound. If you like that sound and are looking for something for more portable/commuting applications, you’ll probably like the er6. On the other hand, the er6 is nowhere as detailed, rich, musical, or satisfying as either the 4p or 4s. If I could apply an analogy for descriptive purposes, I might suggest that the 4p/s vs er6 is much like CD vs well-encoded mp3. When listening to well-encoded mp3, the music retains essentially the same frequency distribution, the same overall tonal characteristics, and the mp3 might sound fine if you are on the move or listening only to mp3s. However, there is a sense of lifelessness to the mp3 recording—just a tad too much is pulled out in some way, details of the sound are sacrificed, emotions just don’t come across as well. This is true of the er6. On the go, listening to MDs, they are great little phones. But the detail of some elements of the sound are just not present. When I put on the 4p or 4s, there is clearly so much more music that isn’t being captured with the er6. By the same token, if you have a lot of trouble telling the difference between a CD and a well-encoded mp3, you might not find the sound differences between the 4p/s and er6 to be easy to discern either. But if this distinction is easy for you or irritating to you, then the 4p/s is going to sound much better to you than the er6.
That said, I use the er6 everyday. It is my commuter headphone. My 4p has been relegated to long trips where I will be essentially sitting still (trains and so forth), and my 4s is used mainly at home or when I really have time to sit and appreciate the music. They all have their uses, and the 4s does suffer significantly when on the move. The 4p, although much less so, also suffers a bit on the go. In my impression, the er6 tends to not be hurt by movement, and in some ways benefits from being on the go: the er6’s extra sense of attack helps music come through with a little more articulation amongst the sounds of the subway and street.
So, all three headphones have their uses. To sum up:
Er6: Great headphone for on the go. Ultraportable. Do not need an amp. A bit fatiguing depending on the music. A little less isolation than 4p/s, which is useful for being on the street/subway. Better articulation in the face of lots of intermittent background noise than the 4p/s. Definitely have the “ety sound.” Easier to insert, remove, and reinsert than the 4p/s. Not as satisfying aurally as the 4p or 4s under any other circumstance besides being on the go. A bit brash in the mid treble, with a small amount of perceived over-separation between the main frequency ranges. These phones are also great as an introduction to the ety product. You can learn insertion of the phones, get a sense of the ety sound, and get a lot of wonderful use from these phones, without blowing close to 300 USD. They definitely make truly excellent portable sound available to people on a tighter budget. Great starter phone.
4p: Great for on the go. Clearly more articulate, refined, and not at all fatiguing. The improvement in sound is worth the extra money, but only depending upon the application. If you are going to use etys ONLY for commuting, then it is less likely that you will be able to appreciate the differences between the er6 and the 4p. If, however, you do any serious listening with etys, the sound differences between the er6 and 4p are a prominent and impressive step up.
4s: Great for serious listening sessions. Need an amp to really shine. These are, as headroom so eloquently has put it, total eargasm. These phones are so absorbing, so detailed, so musical, that they literally disappear, leaving only the music there. If you intend to buy the phones for at home listening, listening in your hotel room, while on a plane, etc, and you’ve got the cash, these are the ultimate. Definitely worth the extra money.
Final Bullet/Take Home Message:
If you are trying to decide between any other earbud/canalphone vs the er6, and isolation is not a negative feature for your application, it is essentially a no brainer (ie., in my opinion, they blow away the ex70). Deciding between the 4p/s and er6 is harder. It has to be application based. The beauty of the 4p/s sound gets lost to a very large degree when on the move, so if that’s their sole application for you, you are unlikely to hear a difference between the two. If you want more versatile phones that can be used for very serious listening session, you owe it to yourself to check out the 4p/s. If you are new to headphone listening, the er6 is a great introduction, and it will likely take you quite a while to outgrow them. But for me, the 4p and 4s are a superior sounding headphone that just is not seriously rivaled by the er6.
DISCLAIMER: As usual, please preface all statements with IMO, since these observations represent my experience solely. No music was harmed during this review. And please keep in mind that the differences I note here are not overwhelming. Although the differences definitely are there to my ears, they are not so prominent that one headphone should not be considered. Really, what it comes down to is application (as I discuss at the end of the review). I tried to describe differences in a way that will help people visualize the differences between the phones, but this is never meant to suggest that any one of these phones is lacking in any significant way.
Organization of the review:
1. A comparison of the 4p vs. the er6. Since these are essentially portable application headphones, I have chosen to compare these two headphones under “ultraportable” conditions. What that means is that all music is played on a sony mzr700 MD player with no amplification.
2. A comparison of the 4s vs the er6. Since the 4s really shines with amplification, I have chosen to do this comparison by amplifying both of these headphones. Music is played, again, through the Sony MD player. I should note that the “4s” I’m using is the 4p with the Daniel Pumphrey adapter cable. Although there are those who might argue that this isn’t really using a 4s, I find that there is a distinct advantage to having identical drivers in the 4p and 4s for this review.
For those interested in a direct comparison of the 4p vs 4s, please see my earlier comparison of these phones in the Full Featured Headphone Review Section.
I have left out a description of the build of each of these phones. You can see that on either the etymotic website or the headroom website.
Some “pre-sound” considerations:
Occlusion Effect vs. Microphonic Effect (with definitions a la Reader’s Digest):
Microphonic Effect: a sense of amplified sound coming from the cord of the headphone moving against something, ie. scratching against your clothes. In this sense, there is a definite hierarchy—the 4s has most, 4p is next, and the er6 has remarkably less microphonic effect.
Occlusion Effect: a sense of amplified other sounds (chewing, talking, breathing, walking) caused by the fact that you have eliminated a high percentage of the noise coming from outside your body. In this regard, they are all pretty close. The er6 might have a little less from the fact that the seal is not quite as tight, but it is still pretty significant.
Music: I have tried to use music that represents a fair range of both musical and dynamic styles. Furthermore, I have tried to pick music that I used for my earlier comparison of the 4p and 4s headphones (see the Full Featured Headphone Review Section). The actual tunes are listed below:
Dave Matthews: Stay, Everyday, Pig
Tool: Lateralis, The Grudge, Ticks & Leeches
Soggy Bottom Boys: Man of Constant Sorrow
Tom Waits: Come on Up the House, Georgia Lee, House Where Nobody Lives
Keith Jarrett/Gary Peacock/Jack DeJohnette: Round Midnight
Louis Armstrong/Duke Elington: Duke’s Place
Ella Fitzgerald/Duke Ellington: Imagine My Frustration
Pavarotti: vesti la gubba from I Pagliacci, E lucevan le stele from Tosca
Evgeny Kissin: Chopin Funeral March
Let me start by saying that all three of these headphones are great. No matter which one you chose of these, you are going to get a really nice headphone that ranks right up there with the other top-of-the-line dynamic headphones. So, if you just want to “taste” the “ety sound,” it doesn’t matter that much which of these headphones you get. You can chose your phone based on your budget and your application and get a great headphone no matter what (see below). If, however, you are one of those nit-pickers (like most ety users), you might find this review useful for giving you a sense of the differences that somewhere around $150 USD will give you. And there definitely are some sound differences.
Er6 vs 4p:
Overall differences: the 4p is a bit easier to drive than the er6, although my MD drives both without amplification quite nicely. The er6 sound great, but they are really no comparison to the 4p. Just in terms of transparency and balance, when I listen to the er6 alone, they sound quite good, but then when I switch to the 4p, it is like the music explodes. Everything is so much more wide-open sounding. Instruments regain much of the subtlety of texture that just isn’t captured by the er6. And vocals soften and become more filled with emotion. The separation between instruments (like, for example, between each of the background singers on “Stay”) is so much more prominent on the 4p than er6. At the same time, the difference pitch ranges (ie. Treble, midrange, bass) is more separated (to a fault, I think) on the er6. One gets the sense that there is a treble, a midrange, and a bass, all sitting alongside each other with the er6, whereas with the 4p, these artificial divisions never appear: the ranges blend into each other without a hint of artificial separation.
Treble: This, to me, is one of the biggest differences between the er6 and 4p.
Er6: The treble on the er6 can be a tad edgy. It’s never outright harsh, but there are moments when I think it’s just a tiny bit too sharp. It’s not that this edginess is constant because it isn’t. But at moments where there is a great deal of high end in the music, the er6 can be slightly overpronounced in the upper-mid (UMT) to low-high treble (LHT). This can lend an air of harshness to music in this range at times. And this edginess is the most significant thing to differentiate the er6 from either of the 4 series. This edginess permeates the entire er6 sound spectrum, and it makes for a more fatiguing and less musical experience. On the other hand, it is this same edge that makes the er6 better by some measure for ultraportable commuting applications. The bite of the headphone (increased sense of attack, if you will), makes the er6 easier to differentiate from the din of background noise in a lot of portable commuting applications (subways, walking on the street, trains). There is a fair amount of sibilance on some recordings, especially old jazz vocals (ie. “Duke’s Place”). The experience with the er6 is, overall, a bit more visceral than the 4p. One very oversimplified way to think of the er6 is to think of them as the ety for people who like the Grado sound, but without Grado’s signature liquid vocals. Drums often have a strongly reassuring “crack” in rock music with the er6 that tends to place the music a bit more “in-your-face” than the 4p, but at the cost of musicality. With the 4p, on the other hand, the drums sound accurate, not overemphasized, not in the background.
4p: This is one of the true sweet spots of the 4p compared to the er6. Cymbals become more lifelike, more subtle, and less overpowering than with the er6. There is virtually no fatigue with these phones, and, for that matter, no harshness to the highs with the 4p. But this is not at the sacrifice of attack. The 4p are by no means a “laid-back” headphone. Rather, it is that they are extremely well-balanced. Although the er6 is more pronounced on the treble than the 4p, I think that this is to their disadvantage. The 4p is clearly more detailed and can be quite breathtaking with cymbal work and vocals.
Midrange: The difference here is also quite pronounced. The richness and sweetness of vocals are FAR superior on the 4p.
Er6: vocals on the er6 are nice. There is a very slight tendency for vocals in the lower to middle tenor to feel a bit recessed, and this is especially true on music that has a lot of high treble information. I find the treble of the er6 to be sometimes too overpowering, leading me to not be able to turn the volume up sufficiently to capture the vocal midrange well without being irritated by too much treble. Drums in the midrange have a great punch, but not a tremendous amount of tone. They are pretty real-sounding, but the extra attack seems to rob them of a bit of their resonance. For example, about 3:40 minutes into “The Grudge” by Tool, there are a series of drum fills between breaks. Although I can hear the drums very accurately in this section, they sound a bit like the toms have been stuffed with newspaper or something.
4p: Man, oh man. The 4p has a beautiful midrange. Vocals are breathy, subtle, and well-reproduced. No matter what type of music, the vocals are rich and well-balanced with the rest of the instrumentation. Drums sound more realistic, and the tone of the drums is more satisfying and present. On the er6, it is sometimes difficult to tell which drum is being hit, the high tom, mid tom, or low tom. No such difficulty is present on the 4p. The tonal characteristics of each of the drums stand out nicely.
Bass: this is perhaps the most interesting difference between the two, although certainly not the most pronounced. The er6 has stronger sense of deep bass (at least, at first), somewhere between the 4p and 4s; however, the 4p’s bass is more articulate, faster, and more well-balanced to the rest of the sound spectrum. And the low bass that is present on the 4p is MUCH more musical than the er6.
Er6: very good low bass on the er6. Remarkable, in fact, at least at times. The “edge” that I mentioned before does come into play here: sometimes the electric bass sounds a bit like everyone in the music industry has suddenly switched to a Rickenbacker (if you don’t know what that means, listen to a few old Rush albums. Geddy Lee uses a Rickenbacker, and it lends a strong sense of attack to the notes he plays, almost making the bass into a bit of a percussion instrument.).
4p: As is well known, the 4p has a small mid to upper bass hump that can make them sound slightly light in the low bass range. However, this hump, at least in this comparison, seems welcome. This hump adds articulation to the bass without making everything sound “over-attacked.” I really think that the er6 adds a bit of artifact to the bass with its attack that, unless you are on the move, hurts the overall experience of them. Now, that said, the 4p does seem slightly easier to wash out with background noise. I don’t want to suggest that the er6 has better isolation (because it doesn’t), but the 4p’s bass, being a bit more subtle, seems to get lost a little bit easier on subways and loud streets than that of the er6.
So, when comparing these two phones, it basically comes down to application in many ways. If you are looking for phones that you don’t mind carrying around in your jacket pocket (read as “subjecting to abuse”) and sound great on the go, the er6 fits the bill very nicely within a budget. If, however, you don’t tend to move around as much and you want something that sounds absolutely fantastic without an amplifier that you can take with you anywhere, the 4p is clearly superior. In this comparison, you are paying the extra money purely for the sound; there is no increased ease of use or portability between the two. More on this issue in the summary at the end.
Er6 vs. 4s:
Just to keep things fair, in this comparison I used an amplifier with both the er6 and 4s (a JMT built CHA47). Still, the same MD player and same music selections.
First of all, adding an amp does help the er6. It removes a lot of that artificial separation that is somewhat prominent in the er6 without an amplifier. Second, it adds a level of musicality to the er6 that is superior to the er6 without an amp. Third, by helping push some of these recessed frequencies back into the mix, it presents an overall more balanced sound. However, they remain quite “edgy,” definitely not as refined as the 4p without an amp, and clearly nothing near the 4s with an amp.
Treble: Huge differences between headphones that are obvious and unmistakable.
ER6: The treble on the amped er6 is more balanced, a little smoother, and more detailed, but still nothing close to the 4p/s. Still, there is a slight push in the mid treble that can be a bit irritating with hard rock. For example, on “Ticks & Leeches” by Tool, when the guitars come in for the chorus, the sound is a bit harsh…not quite grainy, but harsh. This can be relatively fatiguing, although not intolerably so. Please note that the JMT CHA47 is a fairly bright amp, so this quality might be different on a darker amp (like the TA). Interestingly, sibilance, prominent on certain tunes with the unamped er6 (ie. Vocals on “Duke’s Place”), are lessened, although still present with the addition of amplification. Furthermore, the brassy trumpet of Armstrong is less harsh with the amp.
4s: Holy cow. The upper registers just open up with the 4s. Details leap through the headphones, both in comparison with the er6 and in general. Cymbals regain their spread, and the upper harmonics of guitars return. Hihats become clean and more real sounding. Accents are more easily discerned. For example, in the opening verse of “Pig” by Dave Matthews, the drummer plays a fairly intricate pattern of syncopated accentuations on the hihats. With the er6, these subtle dynamics get washed out in the mid treble push, but they come through brilliantly with the 4s. The upper elements of drums have more presence without a sense of over-attack. For example, the muffled rim shots in “Lover, You Should Have Come Over” by Jeff Buckley have a much more realistic resonance than with the er6, where they sound somewhat staccato. The upper registers of female vocals become more human, and they lose the sibilance and harshness present in the er6.
Midrange: definite and profound differences here.
Er6: The midrange on the er6 benefits most significantly from the addition of an amplifier. The recessed tenor range is put more squarely into the presentation, and male vocals sound quite nice. They are not quite as rich in timbre as the 4p still, but better. Acoustic guitars (ie. Soggy Bottom Boys) sound pretty realistic, and overall, the sound is fuller in this range. Female vocals, like Ella’s on “Imagine My Frustration” can sound somewhat forced and brash. Pavarotti, in my opinion, one of the most emotionally powerful singers, comes across a bit flat with the er6. His tone is just not as round with these phones. He sounds a little tinny, although not significantly so. It’s really more that the er6 just doesn’t capture the detail of his intonation like the 4s.
4s: Pavarotti almost makes me cry immediately with the 4s. His emotion and tone are just so alive and gratifying with the 4s. The missing harmonics with the er6 are ever-present with the 4s, as well as the overall power of his vibrato. It’s truly an ear blowing, mind blowing, and heart wrenching experience. Guitar details are so excellent that I sometimes could ask who remixed this album so much better before I put these headphones on. Female vocals soften and, as noted above, are more human sounding. Music through the 4s gains so much more texture, not only in the midrange, but across the whole sound spectrum.
Bass: definite differences, but more application based consideration needed here.
Er6: There is not a huge difference in bass from adding an amp to the er6. The over-present attack of the er6 without an amp is lessened, but it is still present to a degree. But the bass is more musical, with bass notes sounding fuller with more resonance. This is true of the bass drum as well. I refer the reader to “Come on up to the House” by Tom Waits. The bass drum, recorded acoustically with fairly little muffling, sounds with the 4s more like it’s in a room being recorded rather than in a box. On Louie and Duke’s “Duke’s Place,” the acoustic bass is tighter and the differences in pitch between the notes are more evident, as is the case with “Imagine My Frustration.”
4s: The bass on the 4s is clearly the most musical of the three phones. Full but not overpowering, with precision, speed, and accuracy. When the bass comes in on the “Everyday” by Dave Matthews, it blends very well with the overall sound, coming through clearly and with not a hint of muddiness, but not overly stated. The detail is so evident that fingering can be discerned in many cases. Of the three phones, the bass is the most subtle on these phones. The pronounced attack of the er6 is reduced, the mid to upper bass push of the 4p is reduced, and only a balanced and musical bass reproduction remains. However, this subtlety also means that the bass on the 4s is most easily lost when frequencies intervene from outside. In other words, on the train, the bass on the 4s can easily get lost in the rumble of the train. This is not because the sound from outside gets through the phones’ isolation. Rather, it is because the rumble of the train transmits a low frequency sound wave to one’s middle ear that masks the less visceral tone produced by the headphones. It’s similar to the idea of putting on a white noise machine to remove certain frequencies from being heard by someone outside a room.
Overall Sound Evaluation:
The er6 are a really nice headphone for ultraportable applications. They easily blow away all other earbuds/canalphones at their price point. Their overall sound is very much like the 4p/s in that they are relatively flat, neutral phones (except for the slight push in the mid treble); they clearly have the signature ety sound. If you like that sound and are looking for something for more portable/commuting applications, you’ll probably like the er6. On the other hand, the er6 is nowhere as detailed, rich, musical, or satisfying as either the 4p or 4s. If I could apply an analogy for descriptive purposes, I might suggest that the 4p/s vs er6 is much like CD vs well-encoded mp3. When listening to well-encoded mp3, the music retains essentially the same frequency distribution, the same overall tonal characteristics, and the mp3 might sound fine if you are on the move or listening only to mp3s. However, there is a sense of lifelessness to the mp3 recording—just a tad too much is pulled out in some way, details of the sound are sacrificed, emotions just don’t come across as well. This is true of the er6. On the go, listening to MDs, they are great little phones. But the detail of some elements of the sound are just not present. When I put on the 4p or 4s, there is clearly so much more music that isn’t being captured with the er6. By the same token, if you have a lot of trouble telling the difference between a CD and a well-encoded mp3, you might not find the sound differences between the 4p/s and er6 to be easy to discern either. But if this distinction is easy for you or irritating to you, then the 4p/s is going to sound much better to you than the er6.
That said, I use the er6 everyday. It is my commuter headphone. My 4p has been relegated to long trips where I will be essentially sitting still (trains and so forth), and my 4s is used mainly at home or when I really have time to sit and appreciate the music. They all have their uses, and the 4s does suffer significantly when on the move. The 4p, although much less so, also suffers a bit on the go. In my impression, the er6 tends to not be hurt by movement, and in some ways benefits from being on the go: the er6’s extra sense of attack helps music come through with a little more articulation amongst the sounds of the subway and street.
So, all three headphones have their uses. To sum up:
Er6: Great headphone for on the go. Ultraportable. Do not need an amp. A bit fatiguing depending on the music. A little less isolation than 4p/s, which is useful for being on the street/subway. Better articulation in the face of lots of intermittent background noise than the 4p/s. Definitely have the “ety sound.” Easier to insert, remove, and reinsert than the 4p/s. Not as satisfying aurally as the 4p or 4s under any other circumstance besides being on the go. A bit brash in the mid treble, with a small amount of perceived over-separation between the main frequency ranges. These phones are also great as an introduction to the ety product. You can learn insertion of the phones, get a sense of the ety sound, and get a lot of wonderful use from these phones, without blowing close to 300 USD. They definitely make truly excellent portable sound available to people on a tighter budget. Great starter phone.
4p: Great for on the go. Clearly more articulate, refined, and not at all fatiguing. The improvement in sound is worth the extra money, but only depending upon the application. If you are going to use etys ONLY for commuting, then it is less likely that you will be able to appreciate the differences between the er6 and the 4p. If, however, you do any serious listening with etys, the sound differences between the er6 and 4p are a prominent and impressive step up.
4s: Great for serious listening sessions. Need an amp to really shine. These are, as headroom so eloquently has put it, total eargasm. These phones are so absorbing, so detailed, so musical, that they literally disappear, leaving only the music there. If you intend to buy the phones for at home listening, listening in your hotel room, while on a plane, etc, and you’ve got the cash, these are the ultimate. Definitely worth the extra money.
Final Bullet/Take Home Message:
If you are trying to decide between any other earbud/canalphone vs the er6, and isolation is not a negative feature for your application, it is essentially a no brainer (ie., in my opinion, they blow away the ex70). Deciding between the 4p/s and er6 is harder. It has to be application based. The beauty of the 4p/s sound gets lost to a very large degree when on the move, so if that’s their sole application for you, you are unlikely to hear a difference between the two. If you want more versatile phones that can be used for very serious listening session, you owe it to yourself to check out the 4p/s. If you are new to headphone listening, the er6 is a great introduction, and it will likely take you quite a while to outgrow them. But for me, the 4p and 4s are a superior sounding headphone that just is not seriously rivaled by the er6.
