Eaah! Just got a pair of Shure SE530s. What gives?
Sep 29, 2007 at 1:45 AM Post #76 of 100
I agree with your impression and others' comments. I like them and use them, but they are dark and bass-heavy, and mid-treble on up is missing.

I also use the Acoustic EQ on iPod. None of the others work. The Treble Boost EQ is overdone, killing the bass and midrange.

I used to run them flat when I listened loud, and Acoustic when soft, or Loudness. But I've come to notice the treble rolloff too much over time. I've actually become disappointed with them over time.

I now like my SR-125 Grado headphones better, something that wasn't true initially (of course, I've just modified the Grados a bit).

Notice below the two curves (I use the HD650 because I find it neutral):

graphCompare.php


The bass of the Shure is definitely higher. The mid-upper midrange rolls off. And the treble peaks (emphasizing sibiliance) and then plunges. This is in fact how they sound to me.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 2:09 AM Post #77 of 100
Quote:

Originally Posted by Stoney /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I agree with your impression and others' comments. I like them and use them, but they are dark and bass-heavy, and mid-treble on up is missing.

I also use the Acoustic EQ on iPod. None of the others work. The Treble Boost EQ is overdone, killing the bass and midrange.

I used to run them flat when I listened loud, and Acoustic when soft, or Loudness. But I've come to notice the treble rolloff too much over time. I've actually become disappointed with them over time.

I now like my SR-125 Grado headphones better, something that wasn't true initially (of course, I've just modified the Grados a bit).

Notice below the two curves (I use the HD650 because I find it neutral):

The bass of the Shure is definitely higher. The mid-upper midrange rolls off. And the treble peaks (emphasizing sibiliance) and then plunges. This is in fact how they sound to me.


Kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Many of the people who bought high end IEMs like E500 did so because they need ultra portable headphones for travel, excersize, etc.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 2:12 AM Post #78 of 100
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sugarfried /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We do not publish a frequency response on any of our earphones.


Why not? I got into an argument with some Westone rep about this once. He kept dodging the issue and eventually became defensive. I know that you publish response charts for your microphones, why not for your IEMs as well?

Quote:

The link you provided is to a measurement that Headroom took, and by no means reflects our response. The curve is only intended to be a reference and does not have any input or approval from Shure.

This is not to discredit the validity of the curves at Headroom, merely to state that we (Shure) did not take those measurements, as we do not publish our measurements.

Tyll and I have talked about this at great length and even gave a talk about it together at Headfest in San Jose. The curves that Headroom shows are only useful when compared to other "reference" headphones that the user is familiar with - they are not meant to be used as absolute. And believe me, our measurements vary a great deal from theirs.

Thanks.


Headroom's measurements have excellent repeatability; all of the Shure IEMs have extremely similar response characteristics. If anything, this shows that their measurement method is reliable. I would imagine that if a company with a truly high-end dummy head (like Etymotic, for example) took measurements of Shure IEMs, they'd probably turn out very similar to HeadRoom's.

At any rate, the graphs are definitely in agreement with my personal experience with Shure IEMs.

In other words, I think Shure's position is absolute bollocks.
wink.gif
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 3:44 AM Post #79 of 100
How do we know you didn't blow out your inner ears with loud music and now can't hear the highs that the rest of us can hear just fine?

I and many others have NO problems with the frequency response of the Shure earphones being too rolled off in the mids and highs, such as the E500/SE530. My 45 year old ears still hear 20-20K so far...
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 6:21 AM Post #80 of 100
Who are you talking to?
(Me, my hearing, my equipment, and my credentials are all above that kind of comment. Evidence supplied upon request... audio consultancy, job offer by Stereophile, published articles, ability to hear subtleties again and again....)

I played with the EQ settings of iTunes, the "manual" settings, to see if I could flatten the E500. Well, I could only do so much. At least in my ear canals, there is still a sibilance problem with these canal phones. But I can flatten the general response with this:

e500eq3.jpg


On the other hand, I can get flat response with Grados (well, as flat as Grados get) and HD650s (again, given their particular sound) by simply turning EQ of entirely.

If I only listened to E500s, I'd adjust my entire library like the above. In fact, maybe I will... because, setting EQ to "off" will defeat the preset, allowing me to use other phones. Good idea!
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 6:59 AM Post #81 of 100
OK, tried the Manual EQ in iTunes as above, saved it as a Preset, and named it Shure E500.

I set my "Manual" EQ as described above.

Then, I went to my iPod Music library when docked and in iTunes. I selected all songs in the library. I selected Get Info. I then chose the EQ setting "Shure E500". Upon closing the Get Info dialog, it applied this change to all my songs, as indicated in a progress bar dialog.

However, playing back from the iPod, once disconnected, yielded no difference in EQ. Sounded just like it did before, whether I set EQ to "flat" or to "off." My recollection was that "flat" would still honor the EQ my iTunes applied, while "Off" would defeat all EQ. Or perhaps I had it backwards. But, I am getting no effect at all.

Does anyone know how to get custom EQ into iPod songs?

--

Wait, I found the answer in http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61567:

1. iPod does not use custom equalizer settings made in iTunes.
2. You can't create custom equalizer settings on iPod, or transfer custom settings to iPod.

Damn. I guess "treble booster" is as close as I can get. "Acoustic" is just a bit too colored for my tastes.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 9:33 AM Post #82 of 100
You could try the "RockBox" firmware upgrade. It has a built-in parametric equalizer.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 5:28 PM Post #84 of 100
^Well actually, I think it's your question that is off topic on this thread. It probably belongs in the E500 cable poll; try posting it there for more responses.

I will tell you I've never heard of a way to reverse the hardened cables. You're suspicion is correct though: they're hard because the older cables can interact with some people's body chemistry, in your case, the previous owner. Sweat/oil from the skin cause one of the plastic's compounds to migrate out of the exposed part of the cable, resulting in the stiffening and, sometimes, cracking.

Like I said, I don't know of a way to loosen them up, but maybe someone else does... try the E500 poll thread. I can tell you that you don't have to worry about being hung out to dry if they do crack. Shure has your back on this issue... they will replace them at no cost, supposedly even if you're past warranty or have no receipt... their level of customer service is practically unheard of.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 7:54 PM Post #85 of 100
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dexter Morgan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
^Well actually, I think it's your question that is off topic on this thread. It probably belongs in the E500 cable poll; try posting it there for more responses.

I will tell you I've never heard of a way to reverse the hardened cables. You're suspicion is correct though: they're hard because the older cables can interact with some people's body chemistry, in your case, the previous owner. Sweat/oil from the skin cause one of the plastic's compounds to migrate out of the exposed part of the cable, resulting in the stiffening and, sometimes, cracking.

Like I said, I don't know of a way to loosen them up, but maybe someone else does... try the E500 poll thread. I can tell you that you don't have to worry about being hung out to dry if they do crack. Shure has your back on this issue... they will replace them at no cost, supposedly even if you're past warranty or have no receipt... their level of customer service is practically unheard of.


There was no previous owner. They were brand new, they'd just been sitting in the box for 8-12 months before I opened them. Thanks for the warranty re-assurance, I will consider posting in the appropriate poll.

RE the sound of the E500s, after experimenting I feel I get the most desireable (for me) sound from the Comply tips. Unfortunate that they cost like $3 a set.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 11:00 PM Post #86 of 100
Quote:

You could try the "RockBox" firmware upgrade. It has a built-in parametric equalizer.


Thanks. I'm checking out Rockbox.org right now....
http://download.rockbox.org/manual/r...l#x9-1040006.8

Yes, the EQ is truly parametric. So I can set a low frequency shelf down a dB or two, then a moderate Q to fill in the upper mids, then a higher Q to notch down the peak where I hear sibilance a bit, then an upward slope above about 8kHz.

I'll let you know how it works.... if I find I'm willing to reformat my hard drive.

PS: I'm finding that I can live with the E500s if I use the foam sleeves (new black ones with funnel-shaped tip), buried deeply, and Treble Boost EQ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top