Originally Posted by Edward Ng /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Let me preface this comparison by saying that the UM-56 tips are the best tips I've ever used on the Westone IEMs, bar none. By far the best for comfort and sound quality. Isolation is just as good as the best universal tips I've used (though not necessarily better). Additionally, I'd like to preface this comparison by stating that I have not read anyone else's comparisons between these two so as to avoid my impressions being affected by other reviewers' results.
Okay, first off, I'll state the setup specifications for this first test/comparison event (there will be more tests with other equipment I own later on).
Source: My PC, playing back max bitrate VBR MP3s and lossless FLAC/ALAC files, via foobar2000's WASAPI output mode to my Nuforce Icon Mobile DAC/amp. I chose this as my initial testing setup because of the Nuforce Icon Mobile's dual headphone outs.
My pair of Westone 3 have something like 500 hours of listening on them. My Westone UM3X have maybe 25 hours on them at most (probably less). Balanced armature IEMs should not need break in, so make what you will of this discrepancy. I apologize that I don't have comparably new Westone 3s on hand, but I was a pre-order customer for both IEMs from Earphone Solutions.
We'll start with the products themselves. The cable for both IEMs is identical in every way imaginable, so there's nothing to compare (not even length). However, I would like to note that the Westone 3 comes very nicely wound up in the retail container, whilst the Westone UM3X was tightly bound and as a result came from the factory with a crease/kink in the cable where the threads are splitting just slightly--not an issue for my pair of Westone 3s.
As far as build quality of the monitors themselves, I have to definitely give the nod here to the Westone 3s. The casing design and quality of moulding has a clean, high-quality, high-precision commercial look and feel to it, smooth and refined. I feel that this is far less the case for the UM3Xs, which appear much less refined and like a lower-volume, almost hand-made product (paying particular attention to the forming of the base of the nozzle, where it leads away from the body of the monitor). I rather think that professionals care less about this sort of thing so long as they are durable and perform well, whereas at a consumer level, the Westone 3s need to show excellent polish to compete with the Sennheisers and Shures of the world, so in a way this makes plenty of sense. Aesthetically speaking (this is obviously a subjective opinion here), I prefer the clean and simple, smooth look of the 3s over the UM3X, particularly when paired with universal tips. I must admit that there is a harmony to the clear outside shell of the UM3Xs when pairs with translucent custom tips though, like my UM-56s.
For fitment, I give the win to UM3Xs over the 3s; the smaller bodies and the angles of the nozzles allow the UM3Xs to nestle more flush in the ears. Because there's a flare out at the base of the nozzles on the UM3Xs compared to the flat base of the 3s' nozzles, I find that different tips will have better fit on one or the other. For the UM-56 tips, they happen to work just as well on either one because my UM-56 tips came with a rather wide bore at the nozzle end; they wouldn't even really attach to the Westone IEMs until I came up with the solution of using de-flanged triflange tip cores to gap the space. As such, when I mount the UM-56 tips to my UM3Xs, I can nestle the flare at the nozzle base into the wide bore opening on the back side of the tips. For the 3s, they sit flat against the body, flush. Comfort is pretty much the same when using the UM-56 tips between the two, as they tend to push both IEMs out farther than flush compared to universal tips (though not as far out as the ACS tips do to my IE8s). With universal tips, I definitely give the nod to the UM3Xs as far as comfort is concerned, though.
Okay, the meat of this experiment, the comparison of sound. First thing I must note is that while the differences between the two are noticible, they are fairly subtle and the fact of the matter is that it's very easy for the sound of one to be preferable to one person and the other one to be preferable for the next person--basically speaking, I really don't think I can specifically say that one sounds better than the other all the time, it depends on the taste of the listener and the genre of music.
That being said, I so far have come to the conclusion that for my ears, which are particularly sensitive to high frequencies, both of these IEMs are on the very slightly bright side. It's not bad enough to cause listening fatigue for me, but it is definitely anything but dark sound coming from either of these IEMs. Now, as far as the highs themselves, I feel that the UM3Xs have better air and extension than the 3s; however, they (the UM3Xs) also seem brighter than the 3s for that reason. From a detail standpoint, the UM3Xs produce the more convincing cymbals. When it comes to sharp consonants in vocals, the UM3X is sharper and more airy. I feel that it is in the high frequency range where the biggest difference is perceivable between the two.
In the mids, the UM3X presents a more up-front presentation, particularly in vocals. It's not in-your-face, just more forward than 3.
On the bass end of the spectrum, the Westone 3 presents a slightly warmer sound as a whole, a somewhat bolder bass presence with a bit more oomph. Extension downward seems pretty even between the two, both being fairly substantial at the bottom end, with the 3s being only slightly more so than the UM3X.
This concludes my observations for now...I'll follow up next time with specific listening comparisons on several of my personal reference tracks, and then after that I'll chime back in with tests done using my P-51 Mustang and after that probably some final comparisons being fed by my Benchmark DAC1.
-Ed
|
