[midnightwalker]

I can foreseen the future on Head-fi when someone asking for suggestion on headphones, people just need to share the graphs and discuss about it, even people have not listen to the headphone are also welcomed, they just need to pass the basic requirement: know how to read the graph. That will be fun and interesting.
 
No, it is not gonna happen. I am just kidding. Let's relax & TGIF.
 
@Inks: The graphs are useful to me to learn more about the SM64. However, as you might know, in audio industry it is both objective and subject. I do not think we can separate it and just mention about the cold facts. The fact is without reading the graphs me and many members in this thread were not recognized the issue which so called "The earsonics are pretty terrible, missing entire mid frequencies". You can see how the graph can mislead a member who has not heard the SM64 yet. As the current owners of the SM64, we are fine even the graph is horrible but please be fair to the other members who have not own the SM64, they need both cold facts and real impressions.
 
Additionally, as the original owner of the SM64 which was measured by Rin Choi already stated that his SM64 is faulty. I do not think we can use it as reference. I could not see any notice/disclaimer about that is an defective earphone on Rin Choi blog so everyone who does not had a chance to read Shotgunshane's post will be mislead as that is a normal SM64 pair.
 

 

[Mando323]

How much of an upgrade would the SM64's really be over the SM3's? Point me in the right direction if someone has a post or thread on this.

 

[Inks]

Quote:

I can foreseen the future on Head-fi when someone asking for suggestion on headphones, people just need to share the graphs and discuss about it, even people have not listen to the headphone are also welcomed, they just need to pass the basic requirement: know how to read the graph. That will be fun and interesting.
 
No, it is not gonna happen. I am just kidding. Let's relax & TGIF.
 
@Inks: The graphs are useful to me to learn more about the SM64. However, as you might know, in audio industry it is both objective and subject. I do not think we can separate it and just mention about the cold facts. The fact is without reading the graphs me and many members in this thread were not recognized the issue which so called "The earsonics are pretty terrible, missing entire mid frequencies". You can see how the graph can mislead a member who has not heard the SM64 yet. As the current owners of the SM64, we are fine even the graph is horrible but please be fair to the other members who have not own the SM64, they need both cold facts and real impressions.
 
Additionally, as the original owner of the SM64 which was measured by Rin Choi already stated that his SM64 is faulty. I do not think we can use it as reference. I could not see any notice/disclaimer about that is an defective earphone on Rin Choi blog so everyone who does not had a chance to read Shotgunshane's post will be mislead as that is a normal SM64 pair.
 

Well, they aren't missing the entire midrange frequency, they just miss a piece of it, 5k, it's misleading to say that? yes, but it's also misleading to not accept what's there, a 5k suckout. One side may be faulty [Rin mentions it], but both channels have the suckout, not only that a member here confirmed it, so very very likely a good unit will be like the left channel. Still this pair speaks of the quality control of these, cracked shells and now this. I welcome anyone to send another pair to Rin, heck we'll give them free knowles dampers to help tune these. 

 

[midnightwalker]

Quote:

How much of an upgrade would the SM64's really be over the SM3's? Point me in the right direction if someone has a post or thread on this.

 
Unfortunately, I do not own both Sm64 and Sm3 v2 at the same time. The last time I listen to the Sm3 v2 was more than 1 year. However, what i can pretty sure are that Sm64 offers better low range and brighter than Sm3 v2.

 

[Mando323]

Quote:

 
Unfortunately, I do not own both Sm64 and Sm3 v2 at the same time. The last time I listen to the Sm3 v2 was more than 1 year. However, what i can pretty sure are that Sm64 offers better low range and brighter than Sm3 v2.

My only gripe with the SM3's was the lows, so that is very encouraging to hear.

 

[midnightwalker]

By chance, I found out a source that has graph of another SM64. Let's check it out. Really sorry that the page is in French but I just want to focus on the graph itself. If you want to understand the text, google translate please.
 

 
 
http://www.eboons.com/ecouteur---earsonics-sm64---test-complet-earsonics-sm64_article11801.html

 

[Inks]

That graph uses a smoothing resolution, horrible. 2cc coupler measurement gone wrong. You can wait till GE or Tyll get one, but it will be the same as Rin's in raw. 

 

[Oof Oink]

It's informing the readers that there is a 5k suckout, if one still likes the product or decides to buy, by all means, the information was already given.

That's right. And given your (lack of) experience with said product, that's the FULL extent to which you should pass any judgement on these, as (and I'm forced to repeat myself time and time again) you still have zero personal experience with them. lol

Instead, you say with such conviction (as if you've actually spent time listening to them), and I quote:

Based on the pair Rin measured and heard, with all due respect I would re-evaluate what you think good sound is, because the thing is abomination, a company should take responsibility for this sort of thing.

This one really doesn't require much explanation. And there's no use in saying "with all due respect" when it's following by a statement as condescending as the above. lol

To DigitalFreak, as someone who actually owns the SM64, your hearing is not in judgement here, I promise you. But you already knew that, of course. lol

These have very nice bass to be fair, but the rest is horrid

You haven't heard them, to be fair...

So you accept it has serious flaws but then say it's top performing?

Wait, so even when someone points to the same "flaw" you've pointed out several times now, it's not enough? Despite what the measurement shows (which he CLEARLY acknowledged, mind you), SoundFreaq has every right to say that it's top performing. Why? Because he owns it, and has actually heard it! Who are you to claim otherwise?

But that's not the matter in hand, the matter is the performance of the product.

And you're relying EXCLUSIVELY on measurements, when you yourself have made it clear that measurements and subjective listening aren't mutually exclusive. They go hand in hand, and I believe you're one hand short.

Where are these assumption coming from? lol. I think the SS is pretty cool, does not measure well, but see the difference is that I won't lie to myself or others saying it's a top performing product, it's not, it's a boutique IEM, just strives to be different that's it

So, when an actual owner of the product shares his view, claiming that the product he has spent time listening to is a top performing product, he's suddenly lying to himself, or others? Give me a break!

The subjective experience, preference, attachment, etc. is a another matter one shouldn't displace another

No kidding.

Inks, here's the truth. I envy you. No, I REALLY envy you. I can't imagine a world where one hears in numbers and graphs. Honestly. That'd really be something. Oh, how I envy you.

 

[Inks]

Quote:

That's right. And given your (lack of) experience with said product, that's the FULL extent to which you should pass any judgement on these, as (and I'm forced to repeat myself time and time again) you still have zero personal experience with them. lol

Instead, you say with such conviction (as if you've actually spent time listening to them), and I quote:
This one really doesn't require much explanation. And there's no use in saying "with all due respect" when it's following by a statement as condescending as the above. lol

To DigitalFreak, as someone who actually owns the SM64, your hearing is not in judgement here, I promise you. But you already knew that, of course. lol
You haven't heard them, to be fair...
Wait, so even when someone points to the same "flaw" you've pointed out several times now, it's not enough? Despite what the measurement shows (which he CLEARLY acknowledged, mind you), SoundFreaq has every right to say that it's top performing. Why? Because he owns it, and has actually heard it! Who are you to claim otherwise?
And you're relying EXCLUSIVELY on measurements, when you yourself have made it clear that measurements and subjective listening aren't mutually exclusive. They go hand in hand, and I believe you're one hand short.
So, when an actual owner of the product shares his view, claiming that the product he has spent time listening to is a top performing product, he's suddenly lying to himself, or others? Give me a break!
No kidding.

Inks, here's the truth. I envy you. No, I REALLY envy you. I can't imagine a world where one hears in numbers. Honestly. That'd really be something. Oh, how I envy you.

And again, me not listening to them is not going to change what's there a 5k suckout, audible distortion, potential bad tweer, out of phase, etc. Missing the point?

 

[midnightwalker]

Quote:

That graph uses a smoothing resolution, horrible. 2cc coupler measurement gone wrong. You can wait till GE or Tyll get one, but it will be the same as Rin's in raw. 

 
I am not sure but it seems Rin is one of the founding members of GE so why should I have to wait for GE graphs. Do not get me wrong. I do not say I am not believing in Rin's graph. I am just waiting for another source or at least the response from Earsonics.    And while we are waiting for the result please do not conclude that such result will be the same as we can not see it yet.
 
By the way, as you mentioned that is a smoothing resolution. I tried to compare the ratio between these two graphs and these are different. Please explain if I am wrong as I am almost not looking to the graph when buying headphones. 
 

 

[Gilly87]

Whether its a defective unit or an issue with the product, count me unsurprised that we're seeing problems from Earsonics. The SM3 V2 is built like a dollar store toy and distorts worse at high volumes than cheap Skull candies. I love their sound signature, they are second to none that I have heard, including full size cans, when it comes to tonal balance, timbre, and precision (especially unfiltered), but the soundstage is downright weird and as a total package it is a very flawed product. I've owned 3 pairs and every time I sent them to France for repairs, waiting 4-6 weeks each time, they fell apart in the same fashion with very deliberate, delicate use.

Thumbs down for Earsonics. I can never buy or recommend their products again in good conscience until they totally revamp their design.

 

[midnightwalker]

Quote:

The SM3 V2 is built like a dollar store toy and distorts worse at high volumes than cheap Skull candies.

 
I owned the Sm3 v1, sm3 v2 and currently own a Sm64. Never had a problem with these earphones so may I conclude the quality is good? I know there are some ES users in here had the shell issue but is it a big deal? That's what warranty for. I also owned the Westone 4/4R and the 4R dead right out of the box so should I blame Westone on their QC? We all know that a company produces error-free products does not exist.
 
Besides, I do not know how loud you test on the Sm3 V2 but seems I do not have any issue when listening to loud music. May be our PoVs of loud sound are different and the way we are testing on sound quality also different. I tend to turn the volume low to normal to test headphones. By the way, protect your ears, do not listen too loud

 

[tinyman392]

Quote:

 
I am not sure but it seems Rin is one of the founding members of GE so why should I have to wait for GE graphs. Do not get me wrong. I do not say I am not believing in Rin's graph. I am just waiting for another source or at least the response from Earsonics.    And while we are waiting for the result please do not conclude that such result will be the same as we can not see it yet.
 
By the way, as you mentioned that is a smoothing resolution. I tried to compare the ratio between these two graphs and these are different. Please explain if I am wrong as I am almost not looking to the graph when buying headphones. 
 

 
The smoothing (averaging) got rid of the null dip at the 5kHz region. 

 

[Oof Oink]

Whether its a defective unit or an issue with the product, count me unsurprised that we're seeing problems from Earsonics. The SM3 V2 is built like a dollar store toy and distorts worse at high volumes than cheap Skull candies.

I can't make any comments regarding high volume distortion, since I've always been what I'd consider a moderately low level listener, but I do agree that their build is sub-par. Earsonics, if you're gonna knock Westone's style/design, at least build them equally as sturdy...

 

[tinyman392]

I don't have an SM64 on hand to show you the effects of smoothing on it specifically, but I do have the next best thing, the Heir Audio 4.Ai which is also known to have this dip.  Please ignore the resonance my setup has at 90 Hz and the early roll off in bass, but the graph below shows the effect of smoothing and how it can make a difference in the way the graph is represented.  Below is an unsmoothed, 1/24 smoothed, and 1/3 smoothed graph all based on the same unsmoothed data.  No compensation has been done to any of the graphs.  With the Heir Audio 4.Ai the smoothing brings the dip up about 5 dB.