[Anaxilus]

Quote:

ha, glad i'm not boring everyone with recording and mixing talk.
 
so, as i mentioned, i had a recording session all sunday. it was a location recording in a pretty nice hall, properly designed and acoustically treated to a basic level,... so not exactly a concert hall, but i've recorded in worse spaces.
 
i was recording a koto class. koto is a japanese zither instrument, if a guitar have nasty sex with a harp in japan then their offspring would be a koto,... kinda.
 
i used a small condenser omni, and for those not in the know, true omni's are pressure transducers and their response is as flat as you can get in a mic which is one of the reasons they're used on classical recordings.
 
anyway, i moved the mic around alot which i normally do and i've gotta say, reverbwise, or soundstage wise, these are pretty much spot on. i stood just in front of my mics about 3-4 feet away from the kotos, listened to the room,... then went back to the sm3's and they pretty much sounded the same. not much room, which was what i wanted and the reason i put the mics there.
 
move the mics back to get more room sound, and the sm3's will gave me a more reverberant sound similar to what i heard at the new spot.
 
so i'm quite happy with the way the sm3's do reverb,... i think some of you might notice how certain recordings are all of a sudden alot wetter than what you were used to, i know i have. when multitracking and mixing down a whole bunch of tracks into a stereo track we use reverb to put everything into one space,... this is how an instrumental can be written and recorded in say london, but an artist in LA will do the vocals, and the two will blend to make it sound like it all happened in the same room.
 
the trick is to make it barely noticeable, you dont want to be swimming in reverb making a pop track sound like a church recording. the sm3's dont push out the reverb like i thought they did, but if someone used just a tad too much to be unnatural, then you'll hear it. for live recordings, if the mics were placed just a tad too far capturing more room, you'll hear more of the room. watch some tv shows, something like futurama,... all artificial reverb of course and on the sm3's you hear it alot more.
 
so what does all that waffle mean? lol effed if i know,...
 
are they flat and neutral? no, they're ever so slightly warm, a bit more than tepid, just enough so that i still enjoy work . 
 
they are pretty honest though, for better or worse. 
 
not quite the end of the ride though,... i've got  a bit of mixing to do and i'm gonna see how they translate as well in a few days time. 

Would love to hear more of your findings as they come in.  If the SM3 really is that accurate w/ imaging the true mic placement in a recording then I would certainly consider that an asset rather than a weakness.

 

[bada bing]

 
Quote:

By the way,since you are one of the very few that has sm3 and jh13,how do they compare?

That brings up one of the ideas I see repeated that isn't always true; that going to
high end custom means the end of lusting after universals. It doesn't necessarily work that
way. It didn't for me. I would bet for a significant number of people expressing the idea, it won't either.
 
The JH13 is a remarkable piece of engineering and worth every bit of it's price. How it
manages to use 6 BA drivers and the associated crossovers and sound so seamless and smooth is nearly
unbelievable. The presentation is seamless, like a single driver IEM, fast like any BA and extended
on both top and bottom in line with the best universals.  
 
but
 
It is only one version of sonic presentation. It is easily possible to have a high end custom and still
choose to spend listening time with "lesser" IEMs. I've had the JH13 for a year now. Over the last few months
at least half my listening time is with other IEMs. For the most recent few months it's been the e-Q7. Now it's
the SM3. The SM3 may very well end up beating my favorite universal, the e-Q7 sound wise, although the build never will.
 
The SM3 seems to match up pretty well with the JH13 as far as frequency extension, both top and bottom.
The mids on the SM3 are more forward and a little "hotter" than the JH13. The JH13 is quite a bit smoother
across the spectrum than the SM3, which isn't to say I hear the SM3 as peaky. The SM3 makes a very good
transition through the frequencies, but it isn't seamless. The SM3 has very nearly equal clarity to the JH13,
and not far behind the CK10, which has the most clarity of any IEM I've heard. 
 
So far, the unique feature I hear in the SM3 is it's soundstage and image. It's very impressive, but at the same time
sometimes not "real". The soundstage reminds me of the HD800, which is my favorite fullsize can. The HD800 throws an amazing,
huge 3d soundstage, even when it's not called for. The SM3 does somewhat the same thing, although not to the extent
the HD800 does. I like the effect on a lot of material, but not on everything. In comparison the JH13 has about
as "honest" an image and soundstage as I've heard in IEMs. Everything is in the correct location and of the correct size.
The soundstage on the JH13 disappears because nothing much surprises or disappoints.
 
That's my 2[size=12pt]¢ so far on the JH13 vs SM3 comparison. [/size]

 

[GuyDebord]

This is because you havent tried the EM3-pro's  
 

Over the last few months
at least half my listening time is with other IEMs. For the most recent few months it's been the e-Q7. Now it's
the SM3. The SM3 may very well end up beating my favorite universal, the e-Q7 sound wise, although the build never will.

 

[kdawgg83]

I second this. At low to medium volume these do not release their full potential as when you crank them up to medium-high or high volume.
 
Quote:

I'll echo the comment that you have to play these things at fairly high volume to get the most out of them.  They respond well to power.
 

 

 

[GGman05]

Quote:

I second this. At low to medium volume these do not release their full potential as when you crank them up to medium-high or high volume.
 

 

I dont own the sm3
but most upperclass IEMs reveal their full potential at medium-high volume.
(maybe 3/5 volume of my fuze is optimal for my IEMs )

 

[Anaxilus]

I keep hearing these are the some of the best w/o and amp, don't need an amp to they need power and sound best volume cranked up a bit.  I'm lost.  

  Anyway, I think I'm more interested on EM3Pro impressions at this point.

 

[Hero Kid]

 
Quote:

<snip>  Anyway, I think I'm more interested on EM3Pro impressions at this point.

People keep mentioning these but when I had a quick look at their web site I got the impression that they are customs. Am I correct in thinking this?

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
People keep mentioning these but when I had a quick look at their web site I got the impression that they are customs. Am I correct in thinking this?

You are 100% correct.  The cool thing is w/ Earsonics you can purchase the EM1-iF1 and upgrade to EM2-iF1 and then EM3Pro at no added cost at anytime.

 

[Hero Kid]

Hang on what the heck is the EF1 and EF2? I don't see anything that goes EF on their product list...
I must say, without knowing what they are or what they cost that sounds like a very cool thing to happen for the consumer. Free upgrades?

 

[rawrster]

That's cuz it's EM1 and EM2. It's a pretty interesting concept. You can buy those customs and then upgrade to the pro line at a future date for the difference in cost I believe.

 

[Anaxilus]

Woops edited.

 

[dfkt]

Quote:

I second this. At low to medium volume these do not release their full potential as when you crank them up to medium-high or high volume.
 

 

It is probably more of an issue of how the human auditory system works at different volume levels, the ear's equal loudness contour. When you listen at quiet volume levels, you tend to need boosted bass and treble regions to perceive the sound as "natural" - the louder you listen, the less bass/treble elevation you need, as your ears become flatter in their response. Since the SM3 are rather flat sounding, it makes sense that they sound better at loud volume levels, due to the nature of human hearing. This of course goes for any other "flat" phones too.
 

 

[koonhua90]

^ does that work the other way round, where earphones with more of a V shaped frequency response would sound 'flatter' at a lower volume?

 

[midoo1990]

BadaBing,thanks for the comparison,much appreciated.

And I agree with you my jh13 doesn't stomp over universals Or totally outclasses it.

As perfect the jh13 is which to be honest I can't find a fault with it,full size headphones are IMO the way to go when in home. Soundstage,airness,the fullness of the sound are just much better than any universal or custom.



With IEMs you feel intimate with the singer or the band but a problem I found is that I don't feel the the body of the singer,I only feel the voice which maybe attributed to the fact that open CANs have much bigger soundstage height.



And yes ck10 has the most clear sound I have ever heard in an iem or full size headphones,it's just amazing and more ruthless to the source than the revealing jh13.
I wish someone can lend me the sm3,I am very curious of how they sound.shelling $400 for a universal is just.....toooooo much.

 

[dfkt]

Koonhua90, indeed, I love phones that have a more V-shaped frequency response for sleeping, where I listen at very quiet volume levels (such as the IE8, FX700, etc). Flat phones like the Phonak PFE or the SM3 sure seem to lose some of their "natural" sound qualities at those low volume levels.