Hi all,
Long time lurker, first time poster here!
.
Just wanted to put up my 2 cents on the SM3s, if that's ok. I suppose i should preface this saying that this is all based on my own ears and there practically no scientific data to back it up. i'm still new to headphilia so i will stay away from terms I've no proper understanding of.
To me the SM3s represent the sound signature I didn't realize I've been longing for all this while. I always felt something was missing with my other IEMs before the SM3 but could never quite put my finger on. And to me its the perfect IEM for the music I listen to. Tool, Opeth, Mudvayne, King Crimson, Dredg, Pink Floyd all never sounded better to me than on the SM3s. I've auditioned the SE535s, W3s, W4s and UM3Xs extensively at Jaben before i finally settled on the SM3. All the units had at least 50hrs on them so burn-in (crossover, cables) should have settled in, if you believe in that sort of thing. Also, i used only silicon tips and not Complys. I don't know why but i just DO NOT like Complys. Feels like they steal something from an IEM's signature.
Easily eliminated were the 535s and W3s. The Shures for some reason never sounded good to me and despite having forced myself to give all the above IEMs equal auditioning time, I still couldnt get 'into' the Shure sound. This even applies with their SRH840 cans. Go figure. The W3s while nice reminded me too much of my TF10s and while its fun, it just wasnt what I was looking for. The 3 which were battling for my hard earned cash were the UM3Xs, W4s and SM3s. Out of the plethora of tips Westone provides, i still preferred the stock double flanges that come with the SM3s. Am I weird? Anyways, i used this same tip for all 3 when auditioning.
To me, the SM3s were warm, yes but also detailed and balanced. The bass was tight and controlled and went deep enough for me. The mids were lush and 'creamy' as some have said but detailed at the same time. I never found it lacking.It does seem forward, but coming from recessed mids of the TF10, I couldnt tell if it really was forward vs the rest of the spectrum or just in comparison to what I'd been used to. And while the treble extends pretty high, it did sound a little 'veiled' in comparison to the UM3X and W4. But it was not lacking for details. I do admit I just needed to listen a wee bit harder for details than I did with the UM3X.
Soundstage-wise, the SM3 was excellent. Good depth and width, altho like someone said earlier, not as wide as the W4. I think I saw somewhere on head-fi someone had posted a illustration of where the SM3's soundstage places you in relation to the music / band. Cant remember if it was an SM3 thread or something else. Anyways, that illustration showed where other IEMs (IE8 was one of them) place you away from the band / music, in the audience, whereas the SM3 pretty much puts you on stage with them. i guess that sorta explains the smaller width and the forward mids? Doesn't matter, cuz thats how I like it apparently. I found i preferred this presentation as opposed to be being in various rows of the audience.
I'm not too sure what speed or dynamic range is but I found it handled the music i threw at it (especially some FLACs of a live TOOL show, taken straight of the soundboard) just as well if not better than the UM3X and W4. Again, i think its soundstage and presentation had a part to play in me liking it more. That's not to say the UM3X and W4 weren't great themselves. I could only afford to get one of them and the SM3 was the one which won me over ultimately. The UM3X, I 've had a little more time with as my colleague has one and I've auditioned it quite a number of times before doing so again at Jaben. In fact, i was pretty sure i'd be coming out with it but the Sm3 bowled me over, really. The UM3X's highs don't extend as high as the SM3 but they didn't seem veiled either. Maybe the Sm3's highs seemed that way cuz its balanced across the spectrum? I dunno. I'm spitballing here. As for the W4, they were really nice and while they're a totally different beast from the W3, they weren't too alien compared to the UM3X and SM3. In fact, IMO the W4 sounded like a refined, improved version of the UM3X. The W4 might be next on my list of acquisitions..not so much the UM3X. But by the time I can save up for the the W4, there might be something else new in the IEM world...X-jays, perhaps? Oh what have i gotten myself into?? LOL.
I'm just trying out modded Monster tri-flanges (w/olives or comply p-series cores) with the SM3 and already the veil seems to have lifted off the highs somewhat. Will need more time with it to determine if I prefer this over the stock double flanges. Oh, and how does the new stock double flanges (with the wider bore) sound? Can anyone advise? I would have tried Sensorcom bi-flanges but they dont ship here and I cant be arsed to jump thru hoops to get it somehow.
BTW, I have the SM3 v1s and I like its look better than the v2s. Just like how I think the UM3x looks better than the w4. Something bout its uilitarian, stripped down looks really gets me.
I know the v1's build quality isn't the best but it aint all that bad either (my CK10's are by far the best in that respect). And I baby my IEMs anyhow so I dont foresee any problems.
Wow, that was a really long first post / 2 cents. Sorry...hope i didnt bore anyone!