EarSonics SM3 Appreciation, Discussion, & Review Thread - Technically Best Universal? (see first post for reviews and info)

[dfkt]

It is a good treble, it just needs to be persuaded to come out and play.

 

[MayaTlab]

Quote:

It is a good treble, it just needs to be persuaded to come out and play.

Have you tried other tips than the stock ones ? Which one currently has your preference un - EQued ?

 

[dfkt]

I ditched the stock tips after the first few minutes (don't like foamies in any case). Been using Atrio double flanges for some time, and am now using grey Shure single flange silicons, which provide the best treble of the three to my ears. I might try Sony Hybrids or the painful Shure triple-flanges as well, when I have a quiet minute.

 

[cn11]

Thanks dfkt... Sorry for the peppering of questions, but while I have you here (and since we seem to have similar sound preferences) would you say that one who thoroughly enjoys the bass of the FX700 would be happy with the SM3's low end? If it's reasonably close, then I may actually be able to get into these. 
 
As for tips, whenever I had a BA IEM with the narrow nozzle, I would usually find the Shure grey single flange silicones the most effective as well. I still have some in my big ol' bag o' tips if I should decide to try these out. 

 

[KLS]

Quote:

Indeed, the SM3 have some of the most recessed treble I've heard so far in IEMs. Probably equal to or even more recessed than the Atrio (can't say for sure, sold my Atrio a long time ago), definitely more recessed than the SE530. The paradox part however is, the SM3 do not lack any details and precision up there, it's just a very weird frequency response - they are more resolving than the aforementioned SE530. EQing the treble up 4-6dB makes them sound flat to my ears, and almost "sparkly" (which I like in IEMs like the PFE and e-Q7). EQed SM3 treble sounds better than similarly EQed IE8 treble to my ears. But both are not really my first choice un-EQed, personally.

 
     Quote:

It is a good treble, it just needs to be persuaded to come out and play.

 
 
 
Agree with you @dfkt, even we are not using the same tips. Using stock tips (the best tips I have for them now), without any EQing, treble is more laid back compared to IE8. However with some EQ the treble opens up very much. Tips choices also alter the sound very much in my opinion. Would like to know how you compare SM3 to FX700 as well.

 

[HONEYBOY]

Quote:

Indeed, the SM3 have some of the most recessed treble I've heard so far in IEMs. Probably equal to or even more recessed than the Atrio (can't say for sure, sold my Atrio a long time ago), definitely more recessed than the SE530. The paradox part however is, the SM3 do not lack any details and precision up there, it's just a very weird frequency response - they are more resolving than the aforementioned SE530. EQing the treble up 4-6dB makes them sound flat to my ears, and almost "sparkly" (which I like in IEMs like the PFE and e-Q7). EQed SM3 treble sounds better than similarly EQed IE8 treble to my ears. But both are not really my first choice un-EQed, personally.

I think KLS made similar observations when he indicated that the IE8 sparkles more than the SM3. However, at that time it was quite ambiguous as to whether or not this rather "reticent" treble was a tip/placement in ear issue or just an inherent characteristic of the SM3. Your post above seems to suggest that it's the latter.
One question though, would you use the word "natural" to define the overall presentation of the SM3? Natural in the sense that details aren't forced but comes to you, well... naturally haha.Mind you I love treble sparkle but I feel that there are some phones with a hyped up treble reproducing fake or artificial details rather than "real" details.Two such phones are the W3 and ER-4P from my experience. If you or any other owners of the SM3 can comment on the way the details within the music are presented per my qualifications above It'll be very welcomed.

 

[Big Kev]

I love the Westone 3's, when coupled with some P series Comply's, finding the all round sound to be very good indeed.
 
I mostly listen to Metal/Rock, with some pop thrown in for good measure, out of my Sony X1060, so would I see a noticeable benefit from going to the SM3's? 
 
I wouldn't be interested in going the amp route either, so the Sony would have to do the business.
 
Isolation is important to me, some decent mids and treble would be a must as well, so I'm waiting for the thumbs up, before parting with all that money.
 

 

[midoo1990]

 
Quote:

It is a good treble, it just needs to be persuaded to come out and play.

then my suspicions were right,they are similar to um3x. um3x has probably the most recessed treble i have ever heard since my headfi journey. it is neutral but terribly warm.i used every tip with it but no cure for the muted treble. i read that sm3 is better than um3x but if they share the same terrible treble,i would stay away from it because it is very unmusical SQ.

 

[KLS]

 
Quote:

I think KLS made similar observations when he indicated that the IE8 sparkles more than the SM3. However, at that time it was quite ambiguous as to whether or not this rather "reticent" treble was a tip/placement in ear issue or just an inherent characteristic of the SM3. Your post above seems to suggest that it's the latter.
One question though, would you use the word "natural" to define the overall presentation of the SM3? Natural in the sense that details aren't forced but comes to you, well... naturally haha.Mind you I love treble sparkle but I feel that there are some phones with a hyped up treble reproducing fake or artificial details rather than "real" details.Two such phones are the W3 and ER-4P from my experience. If you or any other owners of the SM3 can comment on the way the details within the music are presented per my qualifications above It'll be very welcomed.

I am not @dfkt I have commented that with Shure yellow foamies, I get more treble quantity, more sparkle, and more clarity compared to the stock comply tips. But, don't expect anything near CK10's treble.
 
If you look a few pages earlier you can see some of us discussing 'accuracy' of SM3. Using stock tips, without any EQ, to my ears, details aren't forced to my ears, they flow in naturally. However, unlike CK10, I sometime have to concentrate hard to pick up details in the treble. The details are those that I am familiar and can be easily heard through CK10. And by concentrate I really mean this:

 
In the mids and bass though, details flow into your ears pleasantly and naturally.
 
EDIT: Regarding the treble 'inherent characteristic' of SM3, I think we could know more precisely if we try custom sleeves from EarSonics for SM3. According to MayaTlab, EarSonics seems to design SM3 with acrylic custom sleeves in mind.

 

[dfkt]

Quote:

Thanks dfkt... Sorry for the peppering of questions, but while I have you here (and since we seem to have similar sound preferences) would you say that one who thoroughly enjoys the bass of the FX700 would be happy with the SM3's low end? If it's reasonably close, then I may actually be able to get into these. 
 
As for tips, whenever I had a BA IEM with the narrow nozzle, I would usually find the Shure grey single flange silicones the most effective as well. I still have some in my big ol' bag o' tips if I should decide to try these out. 

Bass quantity of the SM3 is quite a bit less than the FX700, but quality is on par. SM3 extends to the lowest octave without breaking a sweat, bass has fast attack and is textured. It has no midbass hump (the SM3 is somewhat veiled with certain material, but that's something in the midrange, not in the bass or midbass). It's not quite as punchy as the FX700 at lower listening levels, the SM3 needs a certain SPL to get really dynamic. For me that's a bit of a disadvantage, I prefer listening at quieter levels. There's this "timbre" or "resonance" of the FX700's bass - I'm not quite sure yet what it exactly is, but I like it - that the SM3 (or any other IEM I know) doesn't have.
 
Quote:

I think KLS made similar observations when he indicated that the IE8 sparkles more than the SM3. However, at that time it was quite ambiguous as to whether or not this rather "reticent" treble was a tip/placement in ear issue or just an inherent characteristic of the SM3. Your post above seems to suggest that it's the latter.
One question though, would you use the word "natural" to define the overall presentation of the SM3? Natural in the sense that details aren't forced but comes to you, well... naturally haha.Mind you I love treble sparkle but I feel that there are some phones with a hyped up treble reproducing fake or artificial details rather than "real" details.Two such phones are the W3 and ER-4P from my experience. If you or any other owners of the SM3 can comment on the way the details within the music are presented per my qualifications above It'll be very welcomed.

Various tips certainly seem to have a small yet noticeable influence on the sound character, but it's not really been a "total transformation" for me yet. Maybe I will find some tips that give my ear anatomy some more revelations. But a silicon/foam tip is not an EQ, it can't do magic...
 
I would not use the word "natural" with the SM3 so far. Of course, such terminology always implies some subjective feelings that are hard to interpret for anyone outside. For me they are "neutral, warm, dry, fast, detailed, precise, veiled, forgiving, analytical, laid back, punchy, crisp" - which of course is rather paradox. They are very hard to wrap one's head around. They don't really make me think I'm listening to live music, as I can feel with the FX700, UE11, IE8 (EQed), and some other quality IEMs. For the moment, the SM3 (EQed) rather make me appreciate the details and the punch of music at volume levels I'm not usually listening at. That's the novelty factor, and I sure need a few more days/weeks until the initial excitement (positive and negative) has settled down, so I could give a more concise statement.

 

[HONEYBOY]

dfkt and KLS your posts have been informative. For some reason if I say the letters of your user names in quick succession I get close to the words "defecate" and "careless" respectively. JK (me and my insipid jokes).

 

[dfkt]

Ouch, I rather stay with "defect", but I guess I won't get your... de-acronymization out of my head anymore.

 

[shigzeo]

I also tend to EQ the SM3, but I reckon it and the UM3x aren't 'recessed', just not built for the ear's attenuation. Technically, the UM3x goes higher at the same SPL than the W3 and the SM3 I think is similar. At the same time, it remains flat with no accents for so long that the 'sparkle' you get with loudness curves IEMs isn't there.

 

[SolidVictory]

Just received my SM3's today. Outstanding performance, effortless. I will post impressions later. All I can say is: IE8s are off these ears.

 

[average_joe]

Quote:

I ditched the stock tips after the first few minutes (don't like foamies in any case). Been using Atrio double flanges for some time, and am now using grey Shure single flange silicons, which provide the best treble of the three to my ears. I might try Sony Hybrids or the painful Shure triple-flanges as well, when I have a quiet minute.

All my experimenting with tips is making me realize tips with small openings (Shure triple-flange, etc.) constrict the treble.  And as I recall (it has been a while), the Atrio double flange and Shure tips all have thinner tubes.  Of course, the Sony tips will need a spacer, but I am wondering if you will hear more treble from those tips.
 
Quote:

     Quote:

 
What happened to your quote?  Something about tips and the FX700 vs the SM3.
 
Quote:

Bass quantity of the SM3 is quite a bit less than the FX700, but quality is on par. SM3 extends to the lowest octave without breaking a sweat, bass has fast attack and is textured. It has no midbass hump (the SM3 is somewhat veiled with certain material, but that's something in the midrange, not in the bass or midbass). It's not quite as punchy as the FX700 at lower listening levels, the SM3 needs a certain SPL to get really dynamic. For me that's a bit of a disadvantage, I prefer listening at quieter levels. There's this "timbre" or "resonance" of the FX700's bass - I'm not quite sure yet what it exactly is, but I like it - that the SM3 (or any other IEM I know) doesn't have.

Various tips certainly seem to have a small yet noticeable influence on the sound character, but it's not really been a "total transformation" for me yet. Maybe I will find some tips that give my ear anatomy some more revelations. But a silicon/foam tip is not an EQ, it can't do magic...
 
I would not use the word "natural" with the SM3 so far. Of course, such terminology always implies some subjective feelings that are hard to interpret for anyone outside. For me they are "neutral, warm, dry, fast, detailed, precise, veiled, forgiving, analytical, laid back, punchy, crisp" - which of course is rather paradox. They are very hard to wrap one's head around. They don't really make me think I'm listening to live music, as I can feel with the FX700, UE11, IE8 (EQed), and some other quality IEMs. For the moment, the SM3 (EQed) rather make me appreciate the details and the punch of music at volume levels I'm not usually listening at. That's the novelty factor, and I sure need a few more days/weeks until the initial excitement (positive and negative) has settled down, so I could give a more concise statement.

Interesting as to how different we both hear these.  To me, the reverberations of the FX700, while tighter than the Copper's reverberations, sound like they lack control compared to the SM3.  And the soundstage of the FX700 (well, every other IEM I have heard) sounds compressed front to back in comparison and doesn't have the width, save the IE8.  But I already compared the two (2nd post in this thread).  Must be differences between our tips/ear canals/brains.
 
But I completely agree that at first they are hard to wrap one's head around because they are different than the other top-tier IEMs.
 
Quote:

I also tend to EQ the SM3, but I reckon it and the UM3x aren't 'recessed', just not built for the ear's attenuation. Technically, the UM3x goes higher at the same SPL than the W3 and the SM3 I think is similar. At the same time, it remains flat with no accents for so long that the 'sparkle' you get with loudness curves IEMs isn't there.

I A/Bed the Copper and SM3 to see if I heard the treble as 'recessed.'  What I heard was location dependent.  When the treble was further away, it was quieter by a bit on the SM3, but other times it was at a similar volume level, or a few times even slightly louder.  Could just be different peaks, but if the frequency response is flat, than what is it?  This was using the Ety black foam.  I have switched tips to the Sensorcom curved profile tips and today they are working for me...wider opening for me = more treble.  A deeper insertion may also play into that as well.
 
Quote:

Just received my SM3's today. Outstanding performance, effortless. I will post impressions later. All I can say is: IE8s are off these ears.

Glad to hear words from another owner, if only brief for the moment!