E5 vs E3c: Part 2

[Shurenuff]

First off, I apolagize if this thread is too closely related to DLeeWebb's thread. I considered posting in his thread, but I really wanted the responses that a new thread would hopefully get me. With that out of the way, I seem to have stumbled upon a little problem. I really enjoy my E3c's, but I feel they lack in producing sufficient bass. This is a problem since I mainly listen to hip-hop and rock. The E3c produces very articulate and tight bass, but it lacks the impact needed for these particulate genres IMO. For those that have experienced both of these phones, would you consider the E5 as a good solution to this problem? Is there a significant difference in bass response between the E3c and the E5 (unamped out of iPod and later amped out of a XP7)? I've come to enjoy the basic sound signature of the E3c's (similar to the E5?), but their rather thin bass response has me searching for more. I've got a couple of weeks to make my decision (30 day money back guarantee) so replies and advise would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

 

[wildeone]

First of all, you can't have had it *that* long so I'd advise burning them in since you have the time. I got to listen to very well burned in phones and found the bass quite sweet. Then again, I'm coming from the Etys and you're coming from the Sonys. Both phones do have the same basic sound signature so not worry. I found the E5s to have a broader range, both highs and lows and smoother in-between. There was more bass in the E5 with the dual driver, but *how* much I can't say as I never got the seal quite right (i.e., is it worth the upgrade if you're satisfied with everything else....).

Gentlemen (bigger ears)???

 

[baies]

From what I have read hear I kind of got the impression that the Ec3's will not get more bass from burn in.

I hope that is wrong because I think could use just a bit more.

 

[Shurenuff]

Quote:

Originally posted by wildeone First of all, you can't have had it *that* long so I'd advise burning them in since you have the time. I got to listen to very well burned in phones and found the bass quite sweet. Then again, I'm coming from the Etys and you're coming from the Sonys. Both phones do have the same basic sound signature so not worry. I found the E5s to have a broader range, both highs and lows and smoother in-between. There was more bass in the E5 with the dual driver, but *how* much I can't say as I never got the seal quite right (i.e., is it worth the upgrade if you're satisfied with everything else....). Gentlemen (bigger ears)???

Well, I have used my E3c's for well over 150 hours, so I'm sure they're burned in. You're right about me being satisfied with everything else. There are times when I'm very happy with them, but with some types of music (especially hip-hop) I find myself slightly disappointed.

 

[EyEPoD]

Have you tried using bass bosster on the ipod?

This isnt a solution for critical listening, but for on the go use, or relatively low quality recordings, it could help.

Also, while i feel the E5 handles bass exceptionally well, you wont approach subwoofer type bass with any headphone (this may not be 100% true, im sure there is some crap phone with a mini sub attached selling for 19.99 somewhere, but thats beside the pont...).

If you want deep, accurate bass then I would say the E5 cannot be beat for an earphone. However, for punchy bass you will want to look elsewhere (not sure if there is anywhere else to look in terms of canal phones unfortunately).

You may want to consider upgrading full sized headphones. The Beyer 250-80s have a very strong low end and can be driven out of the ipod. They arent nearly as suited for on the go use however.

Its a tough call, I dont know if there is anything that will meet all your criteria, you may have to make sacrafices either in terms of portability or sound...

 

[Shurenuff]

Quote:

Originally posted by EyEPoD Have you tried using bass bosster on the ipod? This isnt a solution for critical listening, but for on the go use, or relatively low quality recordings, it could help. Also, while i feel the E5 handles bass exceptionally well, you wont approach subwoofer type bass with any headphone (this may not be 100% true, im sure there is some crap phone with a mini sub attached selling for 19.99 somewhere, but thats beside the pont...). If you want deep, accurate bass then I would say the E5 cannot be beat for an earphone. However, for punchy bass you will want to look elsewhere (not sure if there is anywhere else to look in terms of canal phones unfortunately). You may want to consider upgrading full sized headphones. The Beyer 250-80s have a very strong low end and can be driven out of the ipod. They arent nearly as suited for on the go use however. Its a tough call, I dont know if there is anything that will meet all your criteria, you may have to make sacrafices either in terms of portability or sound...

Thanks for the reply! Well, I refuse to use the bass booster setting on my iPod as it distorts like crazy. I plan to use these phones (E5 or E3c) as my main portable solution. I'll also purchase a XP-7 in the near future for both home and portable use, so take that into consideration. For home use I plan to get the DT-770 pro to satisfy my basshead needs

and a more balanced, open can down the line . The reality of the matter is that I'm not looking or expecting to rattle my brain with a set of canalphones, I just want more impact than what the E3c's supply. If it's not worth the $200 upgrade, I'll most likely end up sticking with my E3c's.

 

[lindrone]

There's a significant increase in bass region from the E3 to the E5. E5 can reproduce the very low-end bass that E3 can't, and it doesn't "roll" off the bass in comparison to the E3.

E3 is really only good 'til about the midbass region, where the E5 will reach way deeper than that.

E5 is really about as good as you'll ever get with bass in a canalphone. The only other contender is some other canalphone that has 2 low-end drivers (is that Ultimate Ears?.. Can't remember), but that one is only available with a custom molded fitting, and isn't returnable if it turns out not to be all that great after all.

Not to mention, even more expensive than the E5.

 

[Shurenuff]

Quote:

Originally posted by lindrone There's a significant increase in bass region from the E3 to the E5. E5 can reproduce the very low-end bass that E3 can't, and it doesn't "roll" off the bass in comparison to the E3. E3 is really only good 'til about the midbass region, where the E5 will reach way deeper than that. E5 is really about as good as you'll ever get with bass in a canalphone. The only other contender is some other canalphone that has 2 low-end drivers (is that Ultimate Ears?.. Can't remember), but that one is only available with a custom molded fitting, and isn't returnable if it turns out not to be all that great after all. Not to mention, even more expensive than the E5.

Thanks lindrone! I knew it was only a matter of time before you showed up

. I completely agree with your comments regarding the E3c. I've read your review of the E5 where you tested with Outkast's Speakerboxxx/ The Love Below album. From your review, it seems like the E5 was more than up to the task of producing that "exaggerated" bass that I don't think the E3c is capable of. Is that a fair assumption?


ps. Waiting for bangraman's input before I take this crazy plunge.

 

[lindrone]

E5 is much more capable of reproducing that bass on OutKast's album than any other canalphone that I've tried.

At the time, I think the test set-up I used was a NAD 541i, and a Gilmore V2. Gilmore V2 is one of the more pure amp that you can get, and is known for the exciting and slammy bass.

In contrast with the CD3000, E5's bass is almost as good, but it does come to a point where CD3000 will produce bass still with rich texture and tone, and the E5 just flats out and produces a single tone bass that basically says, "This is as deep as I can go."

It is still remarkable how close they do get though...

Of course, I wouldn't say anything like that with the E3c's.

Also keep in mind, most "audiophile" quality headphones will not produce the type of bass that exists in your normal consumer, and sometimes even cheaper headphones. Accuracy and realism counts for a lot here. CD3000, one of the most exciting and forward headphone, probably still produce less exaggerated bass than other cheaper consumer headphones.

However, cheap consumer headphones will not produce a bass that has tone, texture and control.

 

[Shurenuff]

That's exactly the type of answer I needed to put me over the edge. Now I don't know if I should thank you or curse at you.

 

[Shurenuff]

Well, the deed is done. I went ahead and returned my E3c's and placed an order for the E5's ($389 at microphonesolutions.com). They also have a 30 day money back guarantee, so if I'm unsatisfied, I'll just return them and reorder the E3c's again. I've got a good feeling about this though.








ps. Sorry about my wallet!

 

[lindrone]

Hopefully you get the tri-flange and the soft flex sleeves with them as well... if not, you should order them.

 

[Shurenuff]

Quote:

Originally posted by lindrone Hopefully you get the tri-flange and the soft flex sleeves with them as well... if not, you should order them.

I didn't order the tri-flanges. Could you give me a mini review of these in regards to sound characteristics and comfort in relation to the clear and grey sleeves? FYI, I enjoyed the clear sleeves over the grey ones with my E3c's in regards to sound characteristics. If they sound like it's worth it, I'll order them as well. Thanks!

 

[lindrone]

Well, the E5's are supposed to come with the tri-flange and the soft flex sleeve now. However, you might not be getting them, because the E5 that you're getting might still be older stocks with the old packaging.

Generally speaking, the tri-flange gives you the "warmest" sound out of all the fittings. The bass is warmer and pronounced. The trade-off is that the high-end is more recessed. The tri-flange also reaches deeper than any other Shure fittings. So it might feel weird the first few times you try them on. They're also not the easiest thing to put on/pull off... you do have to clean them much more, because they reach in deeper and pull more earwax out.

The soft flex sleeve, I feel, were the best of everything combined into one. It has bass response that's slightly lower than the tri-flange, and not as warm. However, the bass texture and clarity is a bit better as well. The high-end is more pronounced and accurate, but to some people they might feel this is too harsh. Truthfully speaking, that's really a personal preference, some people can't stand hearing treble the way they're supposed to, they would rather have a rolled-off high. The soft flex sleeve really has the most balanced presentation of all sounds, imo.

Both the soft flex sleeve and the tri-flange offers less isolation, because the material itself allows more sound to pass through. This material, however, is also why the sound is better passing through them.

I'm surprised that you like the regular flex sleeve, because most people complain about their fitting. They're too rigid and hard for most. They do offer good isolation, but acoustically I think they're the worst sounding out of all the fittings. They basically offer good isolation with repeatible usage (as opposed to foamies).

Foamies offer the best isolation, because of the seal they provide is more flexible, and the material itself absorbs some sound to begin with. Hence the material also absorb some of the high-ends, makes the bass a little more warm and muddy. I think it damages the bass clarity.

 

[scottder]

Quote:

Originally posted by Shurenuff That's exactly the type of answer I needed to put me over the edge. Now I don't know if I should thank you or curse at you.

Join me in a class action suit against Lindrone for making us spend this kind of money on 'earbuds'