Etymotic ER6 -- Did Ety make the wrong design choices?

[MacDEF]

Now that I have your attention

As we all know, the ER4S and ER4P (and the ER4B) are the "reference" Etys, while the ER6 is the "more affordable" model. The 4 series are around $250-$300, while the ER6 are $120-$150.

Yet when you look at how difficult they are to drive, the hierarchy is this:

ER4S
ER6
ER4P

That is, the ER4P can be driven by anything, the ER4S requires a dedicated amp, while the ER6 may or may not need an amp depending on the source.

To me, this makes no sense whatsoever. Before I get jumped on, let me explain

Most people who buy the ER6 instead of the ER4 series are going to buy it because it's cheaper than the ER4. Sure, there will be a few who buy it only because its cable is a bit less microphonic, but if you look at every thread on Head-Fi where people discuss whether or not to get the 4 or the 6, it basically comes down to price -- how much of a performance hit do you take for half the price?

Given this, it follows that the people who buy the ER6 are most likely not going to be buying an amp -- i.e., money is a big factor, or else they would just buy the ER4 models.

Sooo... I think the decision to make the ER6 harder to drive than the ER4P was a horrible one. Since it's the cheapest Ety headphone, it should be driveable without an amp -- the way it stands now, it's OK with some sources, but not with others. So people end up debating whether to get the ER4P, or the ER6 with an amp... both choices amounting to about the same price range. So the "intended" market for the ER6 -- people who want to buy Etys but can't afford the ER4s -- isn't really being served as well as it could be (and Etymotic probably isn't selling as many as they could be).

Now I know that there are a lot of people who have ER6 with weak sources and love the sound, so posts like "I have the ER6 with player xyz and it sounds great" aren't really addressing the point of my post. I'm sure it does, and I'm in fact considering getting a pair myself just for the less microphonic cable

-- the point of this thread is that IMO, Etymotic should have clearly made the ER6 a "less expensive Ety," which includes making them as easy to drive as the ER4P. Since Head-Fi is probably one of the biggest sources of Ety ER4 and ER6 sales, our feedback probably has a good deal of weight.

Don, I don't know if you'll eventually see this or not, but I know this wasn't your decision. You mentioned in a thread before the ER6 came out that you fought for a lower impedance, like the ER4P, and lost out to higher-ups. Maybe this post, and the responses, will help you convince the others at Etymotic that you were right

 

[J.Y.]

I totally agree with you MacDEF...
It sound most reasonable if Etymotic releases the new easier to drive version of ER6.

I am saving up for some ER4p though...

 

[morphsci]

I totally agree. That was the only reason I did not order a set for portable use before the holidays.

 

[joelongwood]

You're right on target, MacDEF. I agree wholeheartedly! To quote one of the jurors in the classic 1950s film, "Twelve Angry Men"......"Damned stupid thing to do!"

 

[utdeep]

Like everyone else, I disagree wholeheartedly.

The KSC 35 is my favorite headphone of all time, and I never use it with an amp. Its also an open headphone which means that I've got to turn it up when I'm in noisy environments. I may be wrong on this, but I believe that its harder to drive than the ER6!!

Now, the ER4P is really easy to drive, more than any headphone I've used (even Grados and Sony CD3000). Just because the ER6 doesn't have its efficiency, its not a bad design decision. I'm guessing that it took a ton of research to produce the ER4P, and I'm certain that they went through the same process for the ER6 to find the optimal sound.

To summarize, I don't think anyone should use the ER-4Ps extreme efficiency to criticize the ER6, because both should be well driven by most sources without an amp. I could be wrong though.

 

[utdeep]

Besides, they're not using the same drivers for the ER4, Er6 are they? I doubt that they were thinking randomly on the impedence numbers for the headphones... I'm guessing the big issue was a compromise between sound quality and efficiency (like the ER4P and S) and sound quality won out!

 

[RickG]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF Now I know that there are a lot of people who have ER6 with weak sources and love the sound, so posts like "I have the ER6 with player xyz and it sounds great" aren't really addressing the point of my post.

Can you list some specific portable sources that fail to drive the ER6 properly? Just curious.....

 

[Gluegun]

I heard that they are fine with 5 mw portable players from, like, everyone we have recommended them for with 5 mw portable players!!

 

[slindeman]

My guess is that it is physics and cost. The ER-6 probably has larger drivers, which most likely require more power and yet will probably yield less SPL because of the increased distance. I'm just assuming they don't insert as deep in the ear canal, you guys would know for sure. The decreased isolation may come into play here too. They could probably somehow drop the impedance down lower but it might make the sound quality worse, and if the sensitivity is still less than the ER-4P then it wouldn't be easier to drive anyway. All engineers know there are many tradeoffs when building anything, and cost certainly could be a factor too. Maybe it just costs more to manufacture a good sounding canalphone with the kind of sensitivity that the ER-4P has. Remember it is not just the impedance! Sensitivity is just as important, if not more so with headphones under 50 ohm impedance.

My one question is this -- is there a portable with a really weak headphone jack that sounds good with ER-4P and horrible with ER-6. I'm kind of skeptical really about there being such a thing unless the ER-6 is a heckuva lot less sensitive than either the 4P or the 4S. It's impedance (48 ohms) is less than the KSC35/50 and its sensitivity is probably nearly the same I would guess. Unless it is not, how could anything have trouble driving these? Are people listening at insane volume levels or something?

 

[Tim D]

I'm gonna try out a new ER4 cable with similar impedance to ER6 soon.

My feeling based on current performance of ER4S, is that the ER6 type impedance should be absolutely fine from the portables I tend to look at. It won't work for some Mp3 players with ultra weak outputs, or 3mw MD players. It should be powered quite well from a 9mw Panasonic, and extremely well from 15mw old Sony's or other older portables IMO.

I think people that like to have great options in portables regardless of their headphone jack might be dissapointed. However I'm in the group of people that bases their portable buying based much on headphone jack quality as well as lineout.

Also the 4P probably a hiss hound with lower impedance. I also think ER6 impedance would be around the KSC-35.

 

[slindeman]

Remember Tim, its not just the impedance. The ER-4P will probably still be more sensitive when the impedance is raised to match that of the ER-6. It will lose a little sensitivity of course.

OK at the etymotic website it looks like they have an error for the ER-6 specs, saying it needs 4.0 volts to get to 108 db SPL!.

Hehe, if you look at the other specs it would appear that it should probably be 0.4 volts, based on its other specs that say a volltage of 2.5V will yield 120dB SPL. If you do the calculations it leads to either 103 dB SPL at 1 mW (based on .4v = 108dB) or 99 dB SPL at 1mW (based on 2.5v = 120dB). In either case you are very close to KSC-35/50 territory, which has 101dB SPL at 1 mW. So unless everyone is having trouble driving their KSC-35/50 from portables they are not going to have any trouble driving the ER-6, which has lower impedance and is probably more sensitive.

 

[Neruda]

I remember how don wilson wanted them to be 12db more efficient than the ER4S (like the ER4P), but got voted down and instead they made it something like 4db more efficient. My bet is that to make them more efficient, they would have had to sacrafice sound quality.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by utdeep The KSC 35 is my favorite headphone of all time, and I never use it with an amp. Its also an open headphone which means that I've got to turn it up when I'm in noisy environments. I may be wrong on this, but I believe that its harder to drive than the ER6!!

I was under the impression from Don's posts that the ER6 is a bit harder to drive than cans like the KSC-35 -- not in terms of SPL, but in terms of getting them to their potential.

RickG, I've read a few reviews/comments of people with 5mW portables that didn't feel they were getting enough juice. And some of the newer ultra-long-battery-life portables have only 3.5mW.

Neruda, that's the post (by Don) to which I was referring

 

[NWAudiophile]

I found this older thread which relates to the question I just asked about the ER-6's sensitivity.

It appears my estimates of the ER-6 sensitivity are correct. I also think Etymotic made a poor choice here. With the 5mw or 3.5mw wimpy amps in many portables these days, the ER-6 will be hard pressed to play loud enough on peaks for most tastes. This will mean compressed dynamics, more distortion/clipping, and just plain weak sound.

It doesn't make sense to have your "economy" headphone require an outboard amplifier or high-end portable gear to perform to a reasonable level. The ER-6 is considerably less sensitive than most inexpensive headphones. Every 3db loss in sensitivity means you need twice the power. So where a 5mw amp would be OK with the ER-4P, you would need more than 20mw to drive the ER-6 to the same level because they're 7db less efficient.

I'm not willing to go to the hassle and expense of carrying a headphone amp just to properly drive the ER-6s. The trend toward portable gear is smaller and lighter with the newer MD and MP3 players. The latter can often be smaller than even the smallest headphone amps plus you I don't want to deal with the extra cables, batteries and cases to keep it all organized. The trend is also towards lower powered headphone outputs as the batteries get smaller and smaller. Etymotic seems to be ignoring these important trends.

Sadly, I think Ety just lost me as a customer as I don't think I'm willing to spend nearly $300 on a pair of headphones that are likely to have a rough life on the road. For example: During one late night flight I left my isle seat to use the restroom. When I returned, I noticed my headphones (which I'd left sitting on my seat) appeared to be gone. Closer inspection in the dark cabin revealed they were tightly wedged into the crotch of the armrest and the cord was dangling out into the isle. The left earpiece didn't work anymore and the other one was physically broken. The elderly woman sitting next to me decided to go to the bathroom while I was gone (her seat was still empty) and she must have snagged the cord on her way out.

I realize there are plenty of folks who are happy with their ER-6s for portable use, but I suspect they either don't listen to music with a wide dynamic range, like to keep the levels down, or they have portable equipment with higher than average output levels (such as the iPod or some of the better CD players). As indicated in this thread, there have been reports of others being unhappy with low powered portable gear and the ER-6.

I hope another manufacture or Ety eventually gets it right (how about an ER-6P Ety?). It sounds like even Don Wilson agrees the ER-6 should have been much more sensitive. In the meantime, I'll live with something less expensive that gives me good sound but less isolation. If anyone has any other suggestions, please let me know.