[ZephyrSapphire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by elnero /img/forum/go_quote.gif Every piece of audio equipment made colors the sound in one way or another.

So the UE10 were made to be the "most accurate" monitors whereas the UE11 was made to be coloured professional monitors. That's the thing. Why is a more expensive model being sold to begin with as being called their best professional monitors if they are more coloured than the cheaper model? I don't see the point of the UE11 being made at all or even being bought if it doesn't surpasses the UE10 in terms of accuracy. Professional monitors should be tools which have the least colouration and that is what I'm complaining about. Professional monitors which colour more should not be called professional monitors. But of course. This is based on one man's opinion which said that the UE11 are coloured. Others might differ.

 

[mark_h]

Is it not true that the higher up the audio ladder you get the smaller the increments of improvement? I would pay the extra dollars to know that, as mentioned, the soundstage is better and the treble/top end is better in the UE, not much better apparently, but better all the same! Plus I get the custom fit that sit so well they never irritate and often seem to disappear from your ear, the very personal customer service and excellent warranty. Oh and did I mention the very best sound to come out of any IEM period straight out of an ipod! Attested to by so many audiophiles who have tried so many different monitors who all seem to conclude the same thing? If you don’t want to spend the money then don’t! Get the near perfect universal Westone 3 it really is that simple!

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif How else would you get "laid back" highs if they don't roll off? To what degree they roll off is what I'm wondering. Are symbols soft? Do violins soar like they do with etys? That's what I'm wondering... Here's a comment that has me wondering from another thread:

My Stax O2 have laid back highs without being "rolled off", my D2000 have laid back mids without being recessed, my Edition 9 have powerful bass without being over-powering, shall I go on? No oxymoron here

PS: These are in no way rolled off like the SE530 which weren't really rolled off as much as they were even more laid back. Non laid-back treble to me is the SR-325i and HFI-780, or even some Stax Lambdas, so I thought laid back was a good thing. Laid back does not mean no sparkle to me, it means no pain from piercing treble when you crank it up louder.

 

[gp_hebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif How else would you get "laid back" highs if they don't roll off? To what degree they roll off is what I'm wondering. Are symbols soft? Do violins soar like they do with etys? That's what I'm wondering...

The cymbals and other percussive instruments that play in the higher frequencies of the audible range definitely sound softer on the Westone 3 than on the Etys. The fast attack of the percussions is one feature that I really love on the Etys, but the counterpart is that the percussions are sometime "too there" while they should be a little more laid back. On the W3, I think it's slightly too laid back to be considered natural and I feel like there's slightly too much decay, I'd like a little more grip and faster attacks. I go to symphony concerts quite a bit so my opinion is mostly based on how I hear live percussions in the usual concert hall that I go (Place des Arts in Montreal), but YMMV because from what I read on this forum, the definition of what is natural varies a lot.

 

[hockeyb213]

natural is a loosely used term I have seen people use natural in place of balanced it is funny

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moseboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Recessed.

I guess it's a bit of mincing words then. I will say recessed highs, which to me are highs that are slightly rolled off

 

[ZzBOG]

Now this thread can be called a perfect illustration of what is called "hype".

 

[tstarn06]

No, it's more a perfect illustration of a situation whereby some people who bought a specific, much-anticipated product either really like it a lot, don't like it at all (or not very much), or didn't buy it at all yet have opinions anyway. Pretty simple, really. And someone decided to make a thread that was kind of off base, but there are some people who have both the UE11s and the W3s, and so some comparisons ensued.

If you read the threads (this one and others), there are some who don't agree and some who like the Westones just fine, or even more so than just fine. Is that hype? Dunno.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif My Stax O2 have laid back highs without being "rolled off", my D2000 have laid back mids without being recessed, my Edition 9 have powerful bass without being over-powering, shall I go on? No oxymoron here PS: These are in no way rolled off like the SE530 which weren't really rolled off as much as they were even more laid back. Non laid-back treble to me is the SR-325i and HFI-780, or even some Stax Lambdas, so I thought laid back was a good thing. Laid back does not mean no sparkle to me, it means no pain from piercing treble when you crank it up louder.

The O2s “recessed” highs are one of the reasons I couldn’t really get into them when I had the funds to purchase them. I love the resolve but the engagement just wasn’t there in comparison to the K-1000s which worked perfectly for me and are my favorite headphone of all. I would prefer a more refined Lambda to be hoest with you.

My HP-2s have “recessed” highs and that is why I don’t use them for classical music but mainly for rock. Like the E500s, they help hide the nasty highs. The same with the Senns (pretty much all of them except the stats).

So, If the highs are recessed then they aren’t going to work for me, and I might be better off replacing my Ety ER4s and having to switch to E500s for rock which is less than ideal, and the hope of having a single IEM to cover all music would be kaput (I'm not dropping $1K+ for an IEM to get that last little bit of high freq, ext, so don't mention UEs

) I was really hoping the W3s would get me there.

BTW, this is my taste and needs at the moment, nothing meant to degrade from how great the W3s are. I just wanted some more details on how the highs extended. I apprecaite the inputs.

 

[parrot5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZephyrSapphire /img/forum/go_quote.gif So the UE10 were made to be the "most accurate" monitors whereas the UE11 was made to be coloured professional monitors. That's the thing. Why is a more expensive model being sold to begin with as being called their best professional monitors if they are more coloured than the cheaper model? I don't see the point of the UE11 being made at all or even being bought if it doesn't surpasses the UE10 in terms of accuracy. Professional monitors should be tools which have the least colouration and that is what I'm complaining about. Professional monitors which colour more should not be called professional monitors. But of course. This is based on one man's opinion which said that the UE11 are coloured. Others might differ.

I understand the confusion... the UE-11 is officially stated to be "the most sophisticated" and "the best" that THEY'VE MADE, while the UE-10 is "for serious audiophiles" and is "the most accurate personal monitor AVAILABLE". It seems to me that the UE-11 is made to color the sound to please the majority of listeners, but that's just me. This has stuck in my mind ever since the UE-11 came out....

 

[oak3x]

There are children on this forum...but your opening Thread contain a curse word???

Wilfredo says please watch your language

 

[catscratch]

I don't know about the UE11, since I don't have one, but...

The ES2 pretty much stomps all over the W3. Whoever said that this was better than the ES2 must have defective ears, a defective ES2, or is just shilling to generate more interest in the W3.

The only area where the W3 betters the ES2 is in soundstage size. The soundstage on the W3, for an IEM, is indeed huge, while the ES2 has a pretty small soundstage, though bigger than the ER-4, E4c or whatever it's called now, and other single-driver balanced armature canalphones.

The ES2 has a much more neutral midrange tone, better detail, better bass control, and is way more forward. It's more refined and is more airy, whereas the W3 just sounds very creamy and rounded in an attempt to fake being refined.

However, the W3 is convincingly better than the UM2 and E500, IMO. It actually sounds very close in signature to the E500 - warm and laid-back, distinctly Sennheiser-like - but it is fuller, has a more natural and less plasticky tone, better bass control, and a less peaky treble. However, it also has slightly less detail, especially in the midrange.

Next to the UM2 - there is more detail, better bass control, and more refinement in the highs, but midrange tone is a lot less neutral. The UM2 has a very neutral midrange, while the W3 has an unnaturally warm one. It's also more laid-back than the UM2, which is very forward.

Honestly, this is a very good IEM. Customs are customs, and the ES2 is the sole IEM I've ever heard that sounds as good as high-end headphones. The W3 won't quite do that, but it's the best universal-fit IEM I've ever heard. Though not by so huge a margin.

 

[toughnut]

Thanks catscratch. I appreciate that.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know about the UE11, since I don't have one, but... The ES2 pretty much stomps all over the W3. Whoever said that this was better than the ES2 must have defective ears, a defective ES2, or is just shilling to generate more interest in the W3. The only area where the W3 betters the ES2 is in soundstage size. The soundstage on the W3, for an IEM, is indeed huge, while the ES2 has a pretty small soundstage, though bigger than the ER-4, E4c or whatever it's called now, and other single-driver balanced armature canalphones. The ES2 has a much more neutral midrange tone, better detail, better bass control, and is way more forward. It's more refined and is more airy, whereas the W3 just sounds very creamy and rounded in an attempt to fake being refined. However, the W3 is convincingly better than the UM2 and E500, IMO. It actually sounds very close in signature to the E500 - warm and laid-back, distinctly Sennheiser-like - but it is fuller, has a more natural and less plasticky tone, better bass control, and a less peaky treble. However, it also has slightly less detail, especially in the midrange. Next to the UM2 - there is more detail, better bass control, and more refinement in the highs, but midrange tone is a lot less neutral. The UM2 has a very neutral midrange, while the W3 has an unnaturally warm one. It's also more laid-back than the UM2, which is very forward. Honestly, this is a very good IEM. Customs are customs, and the ES2 is the sole IEM I've ever heard that sounds as good as high-end headphones. The W3 won't quite do that, but it's the best universal-fit IEM I've ever heard. Though not by so huge a margin.

I had previously posted that Blutarsky came to my house to listen to the W3 on the 26th, and he liked them a lot and told me they had better bass than his ES2 and that he wanted some - he didn't say the W3 were better at anything else - we didn't have time to discuss much other than he was impressed. I didn't get the impressions that his ES2 are going anywhere, just as I will keep my customs as well. However, I will likely use my W3 with custom molded tips more than my three pairs of customs.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had previously posted that Blutarsky came to my house to listen to the W3 on the 26th, and he liked them a lot and told me they had better bass than his ES2 and that he wanted some - he didn't say the W3 were better at anything else - we didn't have time to discuss much other than he was impressed. I didn't get the impressions that his ES2 are going anywhere, just as I will keep my customs as well. However, I will likely use my W3 with custom molded tips more than my three pairs of customs.

I think the ES2 has better bass, but honestly the bass is just fine on either headphone. The W3 has more upper bass emphasis, and its bass tends to sound fuller on more mellow material. The ES2's bass has more depth and slam, but is also tighter and more recording-dependent.

I wasn't attacking Blutarsky. My intentions were to dispel the W3 > ES2 rumor before it had a chance to get a foothold, though it may be too late. The W3 is good but not that good.