[Mrvile]

I was about to purchase the IM716's when I suddenly got a 100 dollar money gain. Now the E4's are within my budget, but I don't know if it's worth the extra money. I mean, isolation is about the same...comfort, well maybe the e4's are a bit more comfortable. Anyway, I've heard great things abotu the IM716's, especially if they're just ER4p's in an Altec shell. Comparatively, what are the sonic qualities and differences between the two? Is it worth the extra cash?

Music I listen to: Electronica, metal, rock. Sometimes hip-hoppy stuff.

Source: X5

Thanks.

 

[stmpjmp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile I was about to purchase the IM716's when I suddenly got a 100 dollar money gain. Now the E4's are within my budget, but I don't know if it's worth the extra money. I mean, isolation is about the same...comfort, well maybe the e4's are a bit more comfortable. Anyway, I've heard great things abotu the IM716's, especially if they're just ER4p's in an Altec shell. Comparatively, what are the sonic qualities and differences between the two? Is it worth the extra cash? Music I listen to: Electronica, metal, rock. Sometimes hip-hoppy stuff. Source: X5 Thanks.

It all comes down to your ears. If you need the better fidelity, the E4 is the way to go. If your source is going to be just a DAP on the go especially with lossy files, the iM716 will be more than enough for the task. Plus, you could buy an amp with 1/2 of that extra $100 (which brings the iM716s even closer to the e4s) and the other $50 on something completely different.

To me, gaining a good set of IEMs up to the task PLUS an amp PLUS $50 of whatever else I buy is far > than just the e4s.

But you know how you ll use them and how refined your ears are so youd know if you need the best sound over more gear.

 

[episiarch]

For me it all comes down to the ergonomics. I greatly prefer the sound of the iM716 to that of the E4, but I like the E4's non-microphonic behind-the-ears design for on-the-go listening, and I like its durability. I also find the iM716 a bit harder to seal consistently.

As for your ears: there are "E4 >> Ety" people and there are "Ety >> E4" people. I'm one of the latter, but there are plenty of the former on Head-Fi. Do your best to figure out which one you are before you buy. My best guess from your music preferences is that you'd be more of an E4 person, but that is only a guess and I could easily be wrong.

 

[jSatch]

The following graph was taken from the following thread and posted by nabwong. It is apparently superimposed graphs generated by HeadRoom:
As stated below, this irregular response by the Shure e4 may be disturbing. Read more below.


Post/thread:
http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showt...ighlight=im716

Graph:

Also from that thread:
Actually what you are seeing in the upper freqs on the graphs are break-up nodes. These occur in all speakers. THEY ARE NOT GOOD!!! The higher up the freq range, and out of your range of hearing the better. (I believe after 16k digital music is rapidly attenuated.) These nodes can result in ringing or sibilance in the treble.

It looks like the Shure may be damping out its first node at a little over 4k, due to the unnatural slope and slight peak within it. The node at 8k would tend to give back a little sizzle to the treble, so the freq response is not dull, but it is far from natural. Bit of a suck-out between 2k and 8k though. I'm surprised at this response considering how loved these phones are. In all fairness, I don't know how these measurements were taken. If they are correct, there are some significant problems that may appear to average out to a seemingly flat response.

The Ety actually follows a more natural roll off from about 2k, which for drivers I believe is ~12db/octave, before it hits its node very high the the freq spectrum. Although I suspect its first (or second) node may be at about 9k, I would guess that the Ety filter (not cross-over, the actual replaceable filter) may pad this down somewhat. Very clever. And I'll bet you just thought of it as an earwax magnet.

What causes this break-up? (Just in case you are interested- if not skip it)
Break-up nodes occur when the voice coil is pushing one way while the outer edge (for the 1st freq node) will still be traveling in the other direction. This ‘flex’ or node point occurs close to midway between the outer edge and the point where the voice coil meets the diaphragm. Theoretically keep halving this as you enter into the next node, etc, up the freq range. Each results in a sharp peak in the treble region. Soft tweeters, for example, exhibit this within the range of hearing and music, but the soft material and surround dampens the amplitude of the peak. Thus, the peaks are low and are not (very) offensive. Thin plastic, curved diaphragms of mid and bass units are often considered polite due to the same reasons. Metal diaphragms, such as on dome tweeters, maintain a very good response much higher into the freq range due to their very rigid structure. With all else being equal, this rigid diaphragm is far more accurate in its response. The peak can be padded down somewhat with a circuit, or in the case of the Ety / Altec IEMs, the filter unit (my presumption only!). Crappy amplification would tend to exacerbate this situation.

The diaphragm will loosen up at its frequency node points (flexure) over time and become less harsh, i.e., 'Burn-in', for you non-believers.

 

[Mrvile]

Thanks for the graph JSatch. Looks like the Ety/Altecs have better SQ in terms of highs, while the rest of it generally looks the same.

I would buy the Altecs in a second if it weren't for the volume switch thing...that's a huge turnoff. Also, I've read that the microphonics can be quite bad on these things. Hmm...

I have the money, but this is a tough decision. I've even looked at the original ER4P's, which are the Altecs with slightly better SQ, minimal microphonics, and no stupid volume thingy...gah! Personally though, I think at this point I would get the Etys over the E4's. So now it would be ER4P's vs iM716's! AHH!

Life sucks man.

 

[Okigire]

The microphonics can be quite bad on the iM716's though I haven't had a serious problem with it. How good are your ears... can they pick out the little stuff? If you have a good sense of hearing, then the E4s might be good... for something a little more "fun" the iM716 should be fine. That's another way of thinking of it too...

 

[afbug]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile So now it would be ER4P's vs iM716's! AHH! Life sucks man.

This is not really a good forum.

It depends on your preference. 4P still have microphonics but their design (Without the vol pot) is better i guess. The shirt clip is still a must. But Ety's accessories are widely avaliable.

Value for money gotta be the 716s. The $100 savings can buy you a starter amp. 716 in HD mode with amp will be a killer combo i guess? =ER4S?

 

[PiccoloNamek]

Regardless of the apperance of the chart, I have never been disappointed in the treble performance of my E4Gs.

 

[jSatch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile Thanks for the graph JSatch. Looks like the Ety/Altecs have better SQ in terms of highs, while the rest of it generally looks the same.

You are welcome, but keep in mind these are just graphs. You can only determine what weight these factors carry by listening. There are many experienced Head-Fi'ers that just love both these phones. Also, as I stated above- I do not know how these graphs are generated. Not sure of procedures and equipment on how to properly measure IEMs.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile I would buy the Altecs in a second if it weren't for the volume switch thing...that's a huge turnoff. Also, I've read that the microphonics can be quite bad on these things. Hmm... I have the money, but this is a tough decision. I've even looked at the original ER4P's, which are the Altecs with slightly better SQ, minimal microphonics, and no stupid volume thingy...gah! Personally though, I think at this point I would get the Etys over the E4's. So now it would be ER4P's vs iM716's! AHH!

Actually, the Altecs are purportedly derived from the ER4S. See Old Dave's thread regarding the iM716 = ER4 debate if you have a LOT of time to kill.

Anyway, all the characteristics of the ER4s are also inherent the iM716s, good SQ, bad microphonics, etc. Microphonics is a relative term though, and depends on how you will use your phones.

I think the ER4S driver is tweaked for better bass in the iM716s and may be a tad less analytical than the ER4s. They are still as fast (transient speed), just a minor shift in the freq response. But that’s just my opinion. For the price spread, audiophile wires alone could easily bridge that gap. Dunno what each uses though, just a comment.

That crappy vol pot. Yeah, I hated it too. Darndest thing though, it is a hell of a lot more convenient than the vol pot of the iPod (unless you have another DAP). These phones isolate so well while listening to music, if you need to quickly lower vol, the iPod just doesn't cut it for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile Life sucks man.

Well..................

It only really sucks now. Once you decide and finally listen to any one of these, OOOOOOOoooooooooohhhhhhhh...............

........life is Sweet!

 

[Mrvile]

Thanks for the responses guys.

I actually did read Old Dave's thread...and when I said the ER4's were slightly better than the Altec's, I was refering to the Altec's 90% SQ of the ER4 (that's what I derived from the thread, it was kinda confusing).

But jeez. Yeah.

The Altecs have their faults...like the volume control thing - volume control on the X5 is easy so I don't need that, and I'm pretty sure I would have the switch set to HD all the time (if I need more bass, that's what EQ is for). Jeez if they just had a normal cord with a normal clip, it would be so much better. Also, the extra sensitive microphonics + a subpar clip = no fun.

See the thing is, I don't want to buy a pair and end up not liking them - selling and trading is a hassle.

Oh just out of curiosity - are there any ways to lessen microphonics? Maybe like heatshrinking the cord...or something?

 

[jSatch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile Thanks for the responses guys. I actually did read Old Dave's thread...and when I said the ER4's were slightly better than the Altec's, I was refering to the Altec's 90% SQ of the ER4 (that's what I derived from the thread, it was kinda confusing). But jeez. Yeah. The Altecs have their faults...like the volume control thing - volume control on the X5 is easy so I don't need that, and I'm pretty sure I would have the switch set to HD all the time (if I need more bass, that's what EQ is for). Jeez if they just had a normal cord with a normal clip, it would be so much better. Also, the extra sensitive microphonics + a subpar clip = no fun. See the thing is, I don't want to buy a pair and end up not liking them - selling and trading is a hassle. Oh just out of curiosity - are there any ways to lessen microphonics? Maybe like heatshrinking the cord...or something?

Yeah, the 90%, etc thing is how Ety rates all of their phones relative to their hypothetically perfect in-ear response. Just more numbers. It seems the closer to the hypothetical, the more analytical the sound. The phones designed for home stereo are closer to the line, whereas the ones for portable use, further away to compensate for the deficiencies in DAPs.

Microphonics are inherent in all IEMs, but have really plagued Ety ER4s since inception. It’s a trade off for SQ. After nearly two decades of playing with different wires and ways to reduce this problem, there has been relatively little change. So if you’re gonna be doing active things where the wires will be moving around, you may want to look elsewhere. Maybe not even IEMs. Canal phones don’t go as deep in the ear and are generally less susceptible to this effect.

Yup, no one want to buy a pair they wouldn't like. What's nice about Head-Fi is getting many opinions about the 'flavors' the phones portray to see how they might fit your personal preferences. I think you would be very happy with any of the phones you are deciding between.

Good luck!

 

[TAsunder]

The 716 microphonics are there, but I would say they are actually not as bad as other ety's possibly, certainly not as bad as the ER6. The cord is thicker and microphonics only seem to be an issue from the bud to the volume switch. I can thwack the wire below the volume switch and it's barely audible when no music is playing. The closer to the ear, the more audible. But if you pull the wire behind your ears, it's really not too bad.

 

[Spyro]

Regardless of what the graph says, more people seem prefer the E4's on this forum.

 

[Jam_Master_J]

jastch,

Have you looked at FR response graphs for full-size headphones? Most of them exhibit similarly nasty looking graphs at high-frequency, I don't think it's exclusive to IEMS, let alone the Shure E4.
Also, look at the linearity of the e4 between the bass and up to the upper mids, it's very flat. Even mores o than the im317.

 

[Old Dave]

If you want to reduce microphonics, you can loop IM716s up around your ear like the E4s. I have listened to both and compared them,and actually find the sound signatures to be similar, so my question would be, why spend an extra $100? Don't you have anything else to buy, like music perhaps?

JSatch, I loved reading your graph and explanation; you should be an economist. "Let me tell you what the data means" and then we all go out and buy or sell stock.