Earsonics SM3 Appreciation Thread - Third Time is a Charm?

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

 
This
 
[size=7.5pt]Using foobar2k eq:[/size]
[size=7.5pt](increment value is 1 dB)[/size]
[size=7.5pt]-4 55 Hz
-4 77 Hz
-4 110 Hz
-4 156 Hz
-4 220 Hz
-4 311 Hz
-3 440 Hz
-2 622 Hz
-1 880 Hz
0 1.2 kHz
0 1.8 kHz
0 2.5 kHz
0 3.5 kHz
0 5 kHz
-3 7 kHz (sibilance reduction)
-3 10 kHz (sibiliance reduction)
0 14 kHz
0 20 kHz[/size]
 
I liked it at first but I found myself using it less as I got used to the sound signature more.

 
Would I also "get used" to its sound and learn to love it? Sure, that's a real possibility. Will I ever prefer that over a more accurate presentation?... I don't think so. You guys' taste in music is not the same as mine. For me, midrange is everything. It can't be colored with any additional warmth (>90% of headphones out there) that wasn't in the original recording; and it can't be, in the slightest bit, pushed aside by additional bass (>95% of headphones) that, again, wasn't in the original recording. It's actually an effect that your brain can never get used to, and I read it somewhere on wikipedia, or some article about psychoachoustics. Basically, when multiple sounds are heard the louder ones grab more of your brains' attention, and as hard as you may try to focus your attention on the less loud ones in order to hear them more fully, you cannot. Therefore, no amount of brain burn-in is going to help you more fully hear the midrange while there is a throbbing mass of background bass sounds trying to get in that bit of the spot light that rightfully belongs more to the midrange.
 
Most head-fiers will say that a frequency response where bass is higher in decibel than mids, and where lower-mids is higher, yields more musicality to their ears. To my ears, I can't even stand listening to such so-called musical coloration for very long without longing for more clear and accurate vocal presentation. To me accuracy is so critical, because vocalists vary the loudness of each note sung based on the emotion or feeling they are trying to convey. When you color these notes, you color their emotional impact. Suddenly, a passage that is supposed to feel a certain way now feels differently. I would much prefer headphones that stay more faithful to the vocalists' portrayal.
 
Btw, my current eq setting is slightly different. Keep in mind that your source and amps are different than mine, and you should play around with eq, yourself, to obtain the sound you like best.
 
@confispect That applies to you, also. Since you asked, here it is, through foobar2k's equalizer:
 
[size=7.5pt]-4 55 Hz
-4 77 Hz
-4 110 Hz
-4 156 Hz
-4 220 Hz
-3 311 Hz
-2 440 Hz
-1 622 Hz
-0 880 Hz
-0 1.2 kHz
-0 1.8 kHz
-0 2.5 kHz
-0 3.5 kHz
-0 5 kHz
-0 7 kHz
-3 10 kHz (sibiliance reduction)
-0 14 kHz
-0 20 kHz[/size]
 
As you can see, I prefer to attenuate than accentuate, because the sm3 is already very sensitive; such that I would have to otherwise turn the volume knob even lower on the uDAC. As it is, it gets plenty loud at around 10 o'clock. I notice that the sibilance reduction is just as good as before, so the -3 on the 7kHz band was not necessary. Also, even with the sibilance attenuation, the re0 handled sibilance better than my sm3eq. I don't want to reduce the 10kHz much more than 3 dB as I find the sibilance bearable and am worried about compromising the treble. That might change, as I am still playing around with this.

 

[Inks]

Sound like you should give something like the DBA02/ER4S a try rather than trying to transform the SM3 to something it's not. 
 
I also have to add that the build must of gotten a lot better, no sign of the shell splitting and everything stays intact and solid. 

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Sound like you should give something like the DBA02/ER4S a try rather than trying to transform the SM3 to something it's not. 
 
I also have to add that the build must of gotten a lot better, no sign of the shell splitting and everything stays intact and solid. 

 
Sure. Please PM me if you're willing to donate some spare change?

 
I was able to combine the best of two worlds (sm3 and re0) by eqing the sm3. That means I get the sm3's excellent instrument separation and imaging, resolution, and speed; and at the same time refined the sm3 to my taste. So, why not try to transform it? Btw, I didn't just try, I actually did - my sm3eq vs the sm3 is like Anderson Silva vs Brock Lesnar: one is well-rounded and agile, the other is bulky and forceful.

 

[Inks]

Well buying either the DBA02 and ER4S would've still been cheaper than getting the SM3s. Too bad it's too late this is why I recommend baby steps rather than just aiming for the top. 
 
EQing has it's negatives, I don't know but I dislike the dynamic range trade-off and to me it's fighting coloration with coloration (even though you're aiming at neutral) and just prefer it's natural sound as it was meant to sound and does best. Also recordings change drastically at least for my case, EQing effects can bring in negatives when faced with this and I wouldn't bother constantly tweaking it myself. I personally think it's still agile regardless of the EQing.  

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Well buying either the DBA02 and ER4S would've still been cheaper than getting the SM3s. Too bad it's too late this is why I recommend baby steps rather than just aiming for the top. 
 
EQing has it's negatives, I don't know but I dislike the dynamic range trade-off and to me it's fighting coloration with coloration (even though you're aiming at neutral) and just prefer it's natural sound as it was meant to sound and does best. Also recordings change drastically at least for my case, EQing effects can bring in negatives when faced with this and I wouldn't bother constantly tweaking it myself. I personally think it's still agile regardless of the EQing.  

Not sure if that would be cheaper, as upgrading step by step builds up cost. Besides, how does one do baby steps towards something like the JH3A system? lol
 
I had no dynamic range issues with any of my myriad of eq settings. The problem arises mostly from listening too loud, and/or making very dramatic eq tweaks. It also depends on the dynamic range of your headphones at certain bands. Remember, by default, headphones are already EQed; a driver's FR has less to do with its technical capability, and more to do with the engineer's deliberate tuning. What does that mean? Let's say, at 12 o'clock on a certain amp, the volume of sounds in the 200Hz region is at X dB. If the engineer decided that the headphone should sound warmer, he can tune that region up. Now, if he goes too far, the driver's specs will not allow it - it will clip. So, a pair of headphones' FR is more result of someone's tuning, and their potential at any frequency band is not determined by that tuning of how-loud, but determined by the specs on the implemented driver. EQing is just another way of further tuning. In other words, just don't make too sharply an adjustment at any frequency bands and you should be fine. How sharply is determined by your ears. As soon as you hear distortion, that's where you know where the borderline is.

 

[Inks]

Well the range of the steps matter and the upgrading cost may be a bit more (granted you sell off the unwanted stuff) but ultimately more rewarding due to the granted experience. You may also find yourself saving money if more budget stuff satisfies you more than the SM3. 
 
Well yeah don't do any tweaks to the point of distortion myself, to each their own but I feel no need to EQ these if I want a less colored sound in the mids I just use something else (CK10/EQ5).
 
. 

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Well the range of the steps matter and the upgrading cost may be a bit more (granted you sell off the unwanted stuff) but ultimately more rewarding due to the granted experience. You may also find yourself saving money if more budget stuff satisfies you more than the SM3. 
 
Well yeah don't do any tweaks to the point of distortion myself, to each their own but I feel no need to EQ these if I want a less colored sound in the mids I just use something else (CK10/EQ5).
 
. 

If I wanted less colored anything I'd just switch to the re0 (given that I hadn't broken it); but I would lose the sm3's other highly valued qualities. So, yeah, seems like a lot people underestimate the power of EQ.
 

 

[Inks]

DBA02 gives those aspects you're looking for with that neutrality, will keep an eye on that it could somehow be possible for you. 

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

DBA02 gives those aspects you're looking for with that neutrality, will keep an eye on that it could somehow be possible for you. 

I appreciate the suggestion. If I ever do decide to go down that route I'll have you to thank for it. Right now, though, I'm primarily focused on the w4, which might have technical capabilities above that of the sm3. It probably also sounds closer to my sm3eq than the sm3. That could mean I might not feel the desire to use my dap's eq function, which is too basic. I'm also interested in the 1964 Quad, which is about $200 more than the W4 at most. Until I have either one, I'm enjoying music through the sm3eq just plenty, plenty fine. =D

 

[Inks]

Hmm the Quads may be too risky sq wise, the bass is said to be pretty big for a ba and the mids are laid back (though not recessed), if anything the 1964 Triples sound more like your taste. W4 will also be an interesting choice, seems to be the most neutral Westone flagship yet. 

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Hmm the Quads may be too risky sq wise, the bass is said to be pretty big for a ba and the mids are laid back (though not recessed), if anything the 1964 Triples sound more like your taste. W4 will also be an interesting choice, seems to be the most neutral Westone flagship yet. 

I have a suspicion the um3x is actually the most neutral of all the westone IEMs. People are just so used to the extra bass and warmth that when its not there, it gets interpreted as midrange being pushed forward and aggressive. I don't want to derail the thread too much, so that's all I will say regarding Westone's stuff.

 

[matto]

Okay after reading this thread and the reviews from average joe dfkt and the other one on TMA over and over, I've decided I'm going to give the SM3's a go, though couple questions before I finally commit, and to Inks that means I'm no longer interested in your MD's but thanks.
 
Can anyone give me some brief comparisons of the TF10 to the SM3's in terms of it's mids and lows.
 
i.e. the bass's "impact" I'm scared that the impact will be so little that I'd hate them, I currently turn off EQ for R&B/hip -hop /rap when listening out of my iPhone 4 with my TF10s though when listening to more intense genres like heavy metal/screamo bands like Parkway Drive, August burns red I put it on Bass Reducer and on my Sony X series I've pretty much boosted the mids all the way up for all genres. The bass is enough on bass reducer for those genres, though is the sm3's impact much less than the TF10s? Thanks guys.

 

[Inks]

From memory it's a bit less than the TF10s, definitely less punchy. The TF10s had a more midbass focused sound compared to the SM3s more linear bass. 

 

[james444]

Quote:

@confispect That applies to you, also. Since you asked, here it is, through foobar2k's equalizer:
 
[size=7.5pt]-4 55 Hz
-4 77 Hz
-4 110 Hz
-4 156 Hz
-4 220 Hz
-3 311 Hz
-2 440 Hz
-1 622 Hz
-0 880 Hz
-0 1.2 kHz
-0 1.8 kHz
-0 2.5 kHz
-0 3.5 kHz
-0 5 kHz
-0 7 kHz
-3 10 kHz (sibiliance reduction)
-0 14 kHz
-0 20 kHz[/size]
 
As you can see, I prefer to attenuate than accentuate, because the sm3 is already very sensitive; such that I would have to otherwise turn the volume knob even lower on the uDAC. As it is, it gets plenty loud at around 10 o'clock. I notice that the sibilance reduction is just as good as before, so the -3 on the 7kHz band was not necessary. Also, even with the sibilance attenuation, the re0 handled sibilance better than my sm3eq. I don't want to reduce the 10kHz much more than 3 dB as I find the sibilance bearable and am worried about compromising the treble. That might change, as I am still playing around with this.

No offense, just throwing in my 2c...
 
First of all, if you have more sibilance with the SM3 than with the RE0, I'd seriously question your tips. I wasn't all that fond of the SM3's sound signature when I had them, but they were among the least sibilant phones I've ever heard.
 
Second, I'm quite supportive of EQing and it works great with the IE8 that are warmish from too much bass. But I don't think the same thing applies to the SM3. These have a distinctive richness/thickness to their lower mids that's IMO caused by attack/decay transients and not by excessive bass. To my ears the frequency response in bass and mids is pretty balanced (not so sure about treble though). Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that they sound less bassy with your settings, but there's only so much you can do with an EQ and you can't do anything about attack/decay transients that make notes sound thicker or thinner.

 

[ahmadmfz]

Everyone has their own preferences. I like my sm3s with a bit of mid bass down, and abit of the treble up
 
Just enjoy your music everyone. When i just want to relax and enjoy music, i sit down with the sm3s and let it's luscious mids seduce me.
When i want to do critical listening, i take out my er4s. every iem has it's strengths.