[FidelityCastro]

Thanks I know what you mean. When I got my 8.A, I sent my Velvet back to get reshelled into crystal. When I listened to them for the first time after two weeks of the 8.A, the Velvet sounded bright, borderline sibilant, without any mids! Now I readjusted and really like them again. But when you switch between opposites you hear the bad in extreme.

Thanks for the effort Im kinda doubting now whether the 8.A and S-EM6 are too similar in overall signature.

I don't have the Shure 846 - have tried them and thinking about getting them - but I have the 535. I think the EM6 might be like a slightly better 535 and maybe approaching the 846. I.e. Warm, smooth, punchy and fun.

 

[flinkenick]

Oh I dont have the 846 either, I meant the Heir 8.A custom are you referring to that?

Do you think the Velvet and EM6 are different enough to have both or are they still very similar?

 

[FidelityCastro]

Oh I dont have the 846 either, I meant the Heir 8.A custom are you referring to that?

Do you think the Velvet and EM6 are different enough to have both or are they still very similar?

Velvet and EM6 are definitely different. Velvet is more hi-fi / trebly. EM6 is more middly and punchy.

 

[superachromat]

I don't have the Shure 846 - have tried them and thinking about getting them - but I have the 535. I think the EM6 might be like a slightly better 535 and maybe approaching the 846. I.e. Warm, smooth, punchy and fun.

 
I have listened to 846 and SEM6 before. From my memory, SEM6 was superior in almost all sonic catergories. The 846 was tuned with too much "sweet" for my taste.

 

[flinkenick]

I was interested in the 846 but I've been put off by all the people saying they prefer the Velvet in the Velvet thread. But then again, maybe there are people posting they prefer the 846 in the 846 thread
 
I'm just kinda worried that the highs are pushed too far back in the S-EM6. Not that that's a problem, but then it might be too similar to my 8.A

 

[sect44]

Having owned S-EM6 I can confirm extremely recessed highs to the point I always found myself looking for treble in eq no matter the source...no I don't like bright IEMs...On the other hand these have the best mids I ever heard until now to the point I really miss them.... Go figure...

 

[TokenGesture]

Just got mine back... With a twist... Those lovely chaps at Earsonics customised them for me ( as they had to be reshelled)

 

[vince741]

Does the S-EM6 have reverse polarity compare to westone cable?
I read on the SM3v2 thread that the polarity was inverse for the SM3 but I am unsure if it is the case for all the Earsonics line up.

 

[FidelityCastro]

Having owned S-EM6 I can confirm extremely recessed highs to the point I always found myself looking for treble in eq no matter the source...no I don't like bright IEMs...On the other hand these have the best mids I ever heard until now to the point I really miss them.... Go figure...

Agree with this 100%. One way around it is to pair them with a more trebly, or bright-sounding, cable upgrade. I've just paired my S-EM6s with a Wagnus balanced cable and it has definitely brightened them up at the top end. In fact the Velvets, which I was using with that cable before, now sound a not too bright with that cable, so I've paired them with one that is a bit less bright. Synergies eh.

 

[KritiKal]

I thought this thread was dead when I bought my S-EM6's, but I decided to check in and I'm glad to see it's not!
Well, I think it depends on the treble you are looking for. These do have plenty of treble, but it's mostly located in the 6-9k region (stretching to 10k with silicone tips). Personally, I'm not a huge fan of it, so I do equalize these for a (relatively) flat response (frequency response of flat loudspeakers) but with a few extra dB in sub-bass and a touch extra in the upper treble. The mids are extremely close to flat in frequency response, from about 350Hz to 4kHz and it's obviously their strong point, so I'm happy to leave them as is. The biggest adjustment I make is a 6.7dB reduction at 8k, starting from 4.5k and finishing at 10k.
I think a screen shot will be much better, actually.


This is flat with foam tips and I have to say, it transforms these IEM's from great, to stellar. These IEM's do have the ability to extend low and retrieve tonnes of true detail (not faux-detail from brightness), but a lot of it is drowned out as they come.

Now, I know that EQ isn't for everybody, and a lot of this is simply my opinion, but it is worth giving it a try if you're up for some experimentation. I don't EQ for music, just for my headphones, as I want the best possible performance I can achieve. I don't see the point in going through a vast amount of equipment, just because it's a touch too dark/bright/warm/dry/thin/"insert adjective here" and leaving it all to luck/guessing, because even pairing dark headphones with a bright amp won't always match up the way you want it to. But, I appreciate that this can achieve good results with a lot of experimentation. Anyway, I digress. To bring it all home, I do adore these IEM's, just with the right configuration!

 

[TokenGesture]

I had mine customised and it has altered the sound - seems more balanced with more treble than before.

 

[maxsimus]

Hello, I broke my body headphones! tell me please what to do?

 

[KritiKal]

Hello, I broke my body headphones! tell me please what to do?

Contact Earsonics, you'll have to send them in for a reshell!

 

[maxsimus]

Thanks

 

[KritiKal]

Thanks

No problem! As TokenGesture mentioned last week, you could have them reshelled by Earsonics with a custom fit (or a universal fit again).