So Mitch at Dream Earz modded my es5s...
ES5+ Review
Before: Westone es5s are a three way passive cross-over custom IEM that utilize a CI for bass, and 2 dual TWFKs (internally crossed over) for mids and highs. They have two sound tubes- one connected to the CI and another to the TWFKs.
- The top BA is the CI driver, below it are the TWFKs - Notice all the empty space on the right-hand side
After: The es5+ still uses the TWFKs for mids/highs, but replaces the es5's proprietary CI22955 with a CI2955 for bass and adds dual vented Sonion3800s for sub-bass. These are the same BAs used by Mitch in the Aud-5x, and he tuned them to give these their same bass signature. My es5+'s are IEMs with 7 drivers, 4-way passive crossover, and three sound tubes- one connected to the TWFKs, one to the 2955, and one to the 3800s.
- you can see the CI2955 in the upper right, Sonion3800s - you can make out the three sound tubes-
left of it, and barely see the TWFKs at a 45 degree angle they almost look like skeleton fingers
from the sound bores - you can also see an air bubble flaw
- you can see that there are now 3 sound bores near the tip
- what's written in red vertically is the first letter of my
first name and my full last name- ignore that
Special thanks to Average Joe, Kunlun, Shotgun Shane, and Evilcalypse. I've bounced many an idea off them, and this wouldn't have been made without their input.
1)
the Annoying stuff you should probably read:
My relationship to Dream Earz: I am in no way affiliated with them or Mitch, and have no interest in writing this, other than because he was absolutely great to work with. If you disagree with something I've written, or have had a negative experience with Dream Earz, this is the place to publicize it. Please air it out so others can make an informed decision.
My biases: You should take any review with a healthy amount of skepticism. Here are 3 good reasons for this one:
1. There's no way for me to A/B compare the es5s to the es5+'s. For 8 months, I listened to my es5s almost exclusively, and became very familiar with their sound signature. However, a little over a month passed from time I sent in my es5s for modding and the time I received my es5+s, and sonic memory is extremely faulty.
2. I went into this having read Average Joe's review of the Aud-5x. What particularly struck me was this: "The aud-5X has more sub-bass capability vs. any BA custom IEM I have heard priced below the JH16. Texture and tone are very good with a very natural decay while still being able to offer exceptional punch and good speed depending on the type of bass note being reproduced... The combination of speed and punch with the JH16 gives it a uniqueness to the bass that the 5X approaches but still doesn't reach. The JH16 also doesn't sound quite as natural with acoustic drums as the 5X has a more natural decay, so both have their strengths." This gave me a preconceived notion of how the es5+'s bass would be.
3. I
really wanted these to sound good. As far as I know, I'm the first to try modding top-tier IEMs, and this was a substantial risk. Desire for improvement can shape impressions of whether or not one actually occurred.
Source: iPhone 4. Why? Because most head-fi'ers can easily get to know its native sound signature. They either have one, can try a friend's, or can go to an Apple Store and bring their headphones to listen with. It performs decently, too- with both the es5s, and the es5+'s. While either IEM scales up nicely, even with an iPhone 4, I don't feel like I'm losing much.
File type: 320kbhps.
Why? Because I use my iPhone for other things, honestly, I don't have the space for apple lossless. Just like the source, the IEMs scale nicely with lossless files music, but I don't feel like I'm losing too much with lossy 320.
Burn-in: the e5s had hundreds of hours logged. My es5+s probably have now somewhere between 80-100. I didn't hear much of a change in sound with either.
Listening volume: I calibrate my critical listening volume by listening to talk radio and adjusting the volume until the person's voice sounds as if we'd be having a normal conversation about five feet from each other. Music goes on after.
2)
the Build Review
Shell quality: The es5+s have almost the same level of build quality as the es5s, which is very good. Cables fit flush to the monitors, and the connectors are not exposed at all. There are air bubbles on both tips, and the bores could look cleaner.
Durability: These things are solid. As you can see from the first picture, the shell is particularly thick. Much thicker than my original es5s, and Mitch wrote me that his shells are about twice as thick as the average IEM. They also have a half-silicon fill to further improve durability and isolation.
Isolation: I believe its slightly better than with the es5s. I can have the TV on at normal volume, and my iPhone's volume at the first notch, and I can't hear the TV.
Comfort: Surprisingly, just the same! I thought the vinyl tip of the es5's would be more comfortable than the es5+'s acrylic tip, but I can't tell the difference. I attribute this to getting really great original impressions, such that the es5's tips never really had to heat-conform to my ear canal shape.
3)
the Sound Review
Overall signature: I found the es5s not bass-light but bass-neutral, and now I find the es5+'s bass
slightly elevated- not enough to satisfy bass heads. Without looking at graphs, I would say that the es5+'s bass is slightly forward, mids are even more forward, and the highs are recessed. The coherency is just as good as before, and the instrument separation is slightly better because the bass has better definition. The overall signature of the es5+ is even more musical than the es5's, while retaining and even improving overall clarity.
Highs/mids: Mitch didn't touch the TWFKs, and they sound exactly the same. There are plenty of reviews on the es5 out there that do them justice. Here's my favorite because it also addressess their shortcomings: http://www.head-fi.org/t/602246/westone-es5-vs-heir-audio-8-a-the-5-driver-vs-8-driver-shootout
Bass: This was a revelation. After receiving my es5+s, I'm done buying BA-based IEMs (well, never-say-never), and so the bass I've got here is the most technically proficient bass I'll likely ever hear from balanced armatures. I found the es5's bass surprisingly slow hitting for being BA and that, along with it's signature not being bright, made it a poor choice for speed metal, punk, other faster rock genres. By contrast, the es5+'s bass is tight and punchy, and it performs well with anything I throw at it. I had never really thought that bass can be detailed, but these really bring it. Still it knows when to say when. It's there when its supposed to be, but you won't be hearing bass reverb from fingers plucking a guitar. Best of all, the mids are still the star of the show. With my es5s, I found that EQ'ing the bass up would cause the bass to hit deeper, but also wider. With these, there's no mid bass boost, no bleeding into the midrange. Despite the improved bass, mids remain so warm and liquid its like an ears jacuzzi!
Soundstage: Its even better. I believe that because there's more depth and texture in the bass, there's more depth to the overall soundstage. This is quite amazing, considering that soundstage was previously one of the es5's highlights. It retains the same width. If I had to describe it, it makes good recordings sound as if you're surrounded by the performance- occupying the same space as the singer who's in the center of the stage, the bassist and guitarist(s) are a few feet to the left and right, and the drummer's a few feet further back. They project an intimate and small venue presentation.
4)
Conclusion
While I don't have any other top-tier BA IEMs to compare to, I can't imagine another BA-based IEM giving significantly better bass than what mine offer. The best aspects of the es5 remain, while the one that I found to be a weakness is improved. It's not like an exponential improvement, because the es5's bass was never bad, but this modification has taken my es5s to another level that I didn't know existed. If the es5s were a 9/10 before, I would give them a 9.5 now.
Good work Mitch, what's next?
D!
