Does ER P-S converter alter E5 and UM2 in the same way?
post-1434323
Thread Starter
Post #1 of 6

GhostWing

Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
52
Reaction score
12
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Posts
52
Likes
12
I once heard E5s with their volume attenuater in order to get rid of hiss, noticed that SQ degraded by means of lossing detail. Then how about UM2's action under similar condition?

BTW, IMO, the P-S converter does not show substaintial difference with volume attenuater, doesn't it?

Please help me about this one last issue! thanks a lot!


'Cause I would be very happy if I could make a choice in this weekend.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1434519
Post #2 of 6

catscratch

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
3,810
Reaction score
281
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Posts
3,810
Likes
281
I've tried the UM2 with the Ety P/S converter, and while it does have some beneficial effects, it also introduces a coloration into the sound. Specifically: with the P/S converter and amped out of a Porta Corda Mk II, the UM2 has tighter bass, slightly better resolution, and a more neutral tonal balance... or it would be a more neutral tonal balance if not for a massive peak in the lower treble/upper midrange that the P/S converter introduces. At the same time, the upper treble remains fairly recessed. So, you have a bright(er) sounding canalphone with a forward lower treble but a recessed upper treble - a bad combination. Whatever other virtues the P/S converter gives the UM2's, they are offset by this problem.

Use them stock. Or maybe try a different strength resistor.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1434552
Post #3 of 6

GhostWing

Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
52
Reaction score
12
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Posts
52
Likes
12
Thank you Catscratch!

From what you have talk about It's seemed that a resistor may do different influences on different type of canalphone? (let me think about the ER4P+P-S converter=ER4s)

"massive peak in the lower treble/upper midrange that the P/S converter introduces" does this mean it is more prone to sibilance?
 
     Share This Post       
post-1434558
Post #4 of 6

Dick Danger

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
132
Reaction score
0
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Posts
132
Likes
0
I don't know what any of that means but I've used that ety cable with my ES2s and it's at least moderately okey dokey if not better.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1434567
Post #5 of 6

catscratch

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
3,810
Reaction score
281
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Posts
3,810
Likes
281
I don't listen to music where sibilance is a problem, but... I would say yes.

The 75 Ohm resistor specifically seems to shift the emphasis to higher frequencies, making the sound colder. It also seems to bring out detail - slightly. I have a hunch that it simply shifts the peaks in the headphone's response curve to the right (i.e. to a higher frequency) while preserving the overall shape of the response curve. So if you had a hump in the midbass, it would now be in the midrange or lower treble - and so on. However, this is just a hunch.

I haven't experimented with resistors of other values. This could be a pretty interesting experiment, though.
 
     Share This Post       
post-1434676
Post #6 of 6

mkeroppi

New Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Messages
43
Reaction score
10
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
43
Likes
10
No. It does not make any sense whatsoever to use the cable for any other phones. In fact, in general, adding resistance is *bad*, because you lose signal (and you turn up volume and add noise/distortion, among other things). If you want coloration, use an EQ. P-S cable works because it's the other way around, the P was made from S by "removing resistance" (sort of). For a detailed explanation, check my old posts here: http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=117981
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top