[soozieq]

average_joe, when you had the e-Q7's you heard an imbalance that neither myself nor Mark heard. Before they were replaced under warranty, I think you said you'd tested them with something to prove it wasn't an ear thing, and the test showed the balance was uneven. Can you remember what it was you used? Maybe BB can test the SM3's using the same method.

 

[Anaxilus]

Just focus on the phones guys.  Enough has already been said.  Twice.

 

[ericp10]

 
I hope all are discovering new ways to listen to the SM3 (mods, right tips, etc.). I'm glad it's Friday. Listening to Lenny Kravitz' "Fly  Away" song again. It's just wonderful through the SM3 I tell you. Happy listening people!!

 

[Bennyboy71]

Right, I've got my SM3s back from Mark now, and have tested the balance with a couple of tracks he's sent me so we're both singing from the same hymn sheet.
 
I tested using the SM3s with both Sensorcom tips and the Jays single flange tips.
 
In the case of the Jays, vocals that Mark had heard as right-biased were centred perfectly. With the Sensorcoms, however, there was indeed a slight offset to the right.
 
I believe this down to fit issues.  Unfortunately, while the Sensorcoms give me the bext sound quality of all tips, I do think they can be a bit of a bugger to get perfect fits with, and are not consistent in this respect - unlike the Jays, for example, which are plug and play each time and seal perfectly in my ears.
 
So, I do think Mark may have had a fit problem, rather than the earphones themselves being technically faulty. The fact that I sent them off for repair and he had the same issue with the returned pair might back that diagnosis up, I dunno, its hard to prove either way.
 
But here's the thing - at the same time as I have been testing the SM3s, I've also had chance to AB them against my Ety HF5s, And I much prefer the latter, it has to be said. The clarity of the HFs just crushes that of the SM3s. There's a weight and solidity to vocals, a crystal sense of them within the music that the Earsonics don't produce, whatever EQ I apply to my J3.
 
And that for me - more than soundstage or bass or anything else - is the deal breaker.
 
It feels really weird and a little guilty of me to be praising a £70 iem over a £300 one, especially as I was a former primo advocate of the more expensive set, but thats the way it slices for me folks. I have to be honest and report what i hear.
 

 

[kameltow83]

Long time lurker, first time poster.
music4231 - it is clear that you are a fan of the um3x more than the sm3 or shure or other top-tier universals. you should share that in the um3x appreciation thread. You go to the appreciation threads of phones that you obviously dont like and feel the need to tell the people who are there to share their appreciation for their particular favorite phone they are wrong. This is not the definitive unbaised review thread for people to point out the faults of the phones and play consumer advocate for some imaginary buyer who will blindly follow this thread and buy an expensive toy but where owners and those interested in the phone can learn why people love the phone as much as they do. 

 

[ericp10]

I hear what you are saying  @ Bennyboy, and I think it comes down to personal preference. I use to own the HF5, and from a analytical standpoint it is a brilliant earphone (I rated higher than my SE530, so price doesn't matter). At the same time, while I could tolerate it for awhile, the non-bass impact eventually really got on my nerves.So I guess I choose some coloration over strictly cold and analytical.
 
I actually like some phones that give a balance of both. I'm finding that in the recent dual-armature drivers of the Custom 3 and dynamic driver of the HJE900 in-ear monitors I recently purchased.
 
And of course, I've been saying and still contend that the FX700 is a better sounding iem overall than the SM3. But the SM3 has really opened up for me and I love it more than I have ever prior. It's not the best, but it's still high up there with of the top tier in-ear monitors I have heard. But just because someone says it doesn't ring true to his or her ears based on their A/Bing doesn't mean it discounts what others have said about its greatness. It's an individual thing.
 
I know there have been songs that cn11, search, luco and I have listened through the same type of iem, but we each heard a slightly different way. You have to hear for yourselves no matter how many times anyone tried to convince you either way. And I also hold to my main premise that I've had since joining head-fi.org >>>> THERE IS NO KING (but a good few members of the royal family).
 
But never heard anything out of the HF5 (like Bennyboy has) that makes me feel like it's better than the SM3. So it is an individual hearing thing indeed.Just like I love bass, and the SE535 is a bit anemic to me in the bass region, yet I love the overall sound so much that I don't mind eq-ing the bass up some,

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

Long time lurker, first time poster.
music4231 - it is clear that you are a fan of the um3x more than the sm3 or shure or other top-tier universals. you should share that in the um3x appreciation thread. You go to the appreciation threads of phones that you obviously dont like and feel the need to tell the people who are there to share their appreciation for their particular favorite phone they are wrong. This is not the definitive unbaised review thread for people to point out the faults of the phones and play consumer advocate for some imaginary buyer who will blindly follow this thread and buy an expensive toy but where owners and those interested in the phone can learn why people love the phone as much as they do. 

 
Great first post @ kameltow83, and welcome into the hi-fi sunshine.

 

 

[Kunlun]

Quote:

Long time lurker, first time poster.
music4231 - it is clear that you are a fan of the um3x more than the sm3 or shure or other top-tier universals. you should share that in the um3x appreciation thread. You go to the appreciation threads of phones that you obviously dont like and feel the need to tell the people who are there to share their appreciation for their particular favorite phone they are wrong. This is not the definitive unbaised review thread for people to point out the faults of the phones and play consumer advocate for some imaginary buyer who will blindly follow this thread and buy an expensive toy but where owners and those interested in the phone can learn why people love the phone as much as they do. 

Disagree strongly. While it's lame when someone who obviously couldn't get a good fit or somesuch waddles in to have a go at currently-popular iem, a reasoned comparison between iems can be very informative. The idea that we can only cheerlead for expensive purchases is more than a little ridiculous.
 
The SM3 was described in overblown, exaggeratedly positive terms when it first came out, having people report that the treble is veiled in comparison to the mids, it breaks if you look at it the wrong way, the need for tip/fit/filter/eq is at a point way beyond other iems and legitimately points to flaws in the iem itself--all of this is very useful.

 

[kameltow83]

Quote:

Disagree strongly. While it's lame when someone who obviously couldn't get a good fit or somesuch waddles in to have a go at currently-popular iem, a reasoned comparison between iems can be very informative. The idea that we can only cheerlead for expensive purchases is more than a little ridiculous.
 
The SM3 was described in overblown, exaggeratedly positive terms when it first came out, having people report that the treble is veiled in comparison to the mids, it breaks if you look at it the wrong way, the need for tip/fit/filter/eq is at a point way beyond other iems and legitimately points to flaws in the iem itself--all of this is very useful.

 
I absolutely agree with you that a reasoned comparison is very informative and valuable. 
 
I may have been out of line with my comment and not have correctly understood the point of the appreciation threads. I thought they were like mini-communities w/in headfi where enthusiasts of particular phones can come to talk about their ownership experience with the phone. This certainly also includes the negative aspects of ownership as well but i figure that once those negative aspects have been voiced it seems pointless and redundant to constantly show up to a appreciation thread to keep driving home that point. 

 

[ericp10]

Plenty of lovers/likers of the SM3 have pointed out the negative aspects and flaws of the iem. I am one of them. So please don't be under the illusion that only those who don't like SM3 will say anything negative about it. That's just not true. I am not one to defend threads either way in general, but the name of this thread is>>>>> Earsonics SM3 Appreciation Thread...
 
It just seems to me that lovers of the SM3 just want some peace and tranquility, which seems as if it can't be had in an SM3 thread. Oh well, what will be will be.

 

[Rip N' Burn]

Just noticed that this thread has already been pruned. I still have the SM3 and I'm still enjoying them but I don't think they are better than a few of my iems.

 

[average_joe]

Quote:

average_joe, when you had the e-Q7's you heard an imbalance that neither myself nor Mark heard. Before they were replaced under warranty, I think you said you'd tested them with something to prove it wasn't an ear thing, and the test showed the balance was uneven. Can you remember what it was you used? Maybe BB can test the SM3's using the same method.

I used a sine wave frequency sweep to test the balance.  Most IEMs I have tested are off somewhere in the frequency spectrum, usually at some treble frequencies, usually where there is a peak.  One peak is higher than the other, for example.  These imbalances are usually minor and not detectable most of the time with music, but with the frequency sweep are.  The e-Q7 was different as the bass on one channel was louder than the other, and the treble went back and forth between the two sides.  I eliminated it as a fit issue because when I swapped ears, the channel imbalance would also switch.  The SM3 is harder to swap channels to verify, however.

 

[shane55]

Quote:

Disagree strongly. While it's lame when someone who obviously couldn't get a good fit or somesuch waddles in to have a go at currently-popular iem, a reasoned comparison between iems can be very informative. The idea that we can only cheerlead for expensive purchases is more than a little ridiculous.
 
The SM3 was described in overblown, exaggeratedly positive terms when it first came out, having people report that the treble is veiled in comparison to the mids, it breaks if you look at it the wrong way, the need for tip/fit/filter/eq is at a point way beyond other iems and legitimately points to flaws in the iem itself--all of this is very useful.

Right.
Yes, it is an 'appreciation' thread, but people in the market for new IEM's will venture here seeking discussions and comparisons and honest critiques. If all that is to be written here is fanboy praise then maybe the thread should be titled accordingly. Otherwise, I think it is useful for the prospective buyer to know that there is perhaps another side to all the glory. Few if any 'sound-producing' device will be perfect for all people and the various opinions (and that's all they are, folks... opinions, observations, etc.) will be useful to those seeking some idea of the IEM. Nothing substitutes for trying them first hand, but if one reads enough opinions one can get a general sense of the sound... if the observations are honest, clearly stated and relatively free of hyperbole and hype (yes, it's possible).
 
Many observations are overstated: It's bright, muted, bassy, mid-centric, shrill, dull, etc. (And I am as guilty of this as the next person). So the reader needs to beware, but can still get the general drift of the writer. 
 
The SM3 is a good IEM. They do some things very well, and now that there has been a mod to open up the upper-mids and highs, they might be stellar (I haven't heard them with the mod). But stock, they were not for me. I found them too bassy and muted. I prefer a more 'neutral' sonic character, and if coloured... to be on the bright side. But that's my taste, clearly stated and my observation, and I think they have a right to appear in this thread, as they did in the original threads when I still owned them.
 
Cheers
 
shane
 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I prefer a more 'neutral' sonic character, and if coloured... to be on the bright side. 

Yeah right Mr. M50 and D7000.  Time to come out of the closet Shane.  

 

[shane55]

Quote:

Yeah right Mr. M50 and D7000.  Time to come out of the closet Shane.  

Well Mr. Anaxilus, nice trap... but it won't work this time!  Bwahahaha... 

 
So, here's how I 'hea'r it... The M50, D7000, DT880, DBA-02, etc., are all relatively 'bright' to my ears, but with varying amounts of lower-mids and bass. I really think that the clarity of the upper-mids and highs are the one characteristic that all my favorite cans have in common. I know you think the M50's have good sparkle, and that's what I'm saying... the SM3's did not have that, and so... they're gone. They gotta have the 'crisp'... Added sonority (M50, D7000) just increases the enjoyment. 

 
shane