[digitaldave]

I'm thinking about getting some of these, but from what I've read on here, opinion on them seems to be... Meh :-/. I have no experience with the Ety sound, so wouldn't be disappointed with their sound from that perspective. So what exactly is is about them that is so underwhelming?

Thanks,

Dave.

 

[alexm23]

They do not have a very full bass. The bass drops off towards the lower frequencies and is sort of weak overall. However, it's not as bad as a lot of people say it is, and I think it's a fair price to pay for the lack of annoying midbass hump.
 
Otherwise, I really like Ety mids and highs. They're very balanced and don't have much unevenness or harshness. 
 
The mc series are supposedly much less detailed than the hf series, which I own. However, the frequency response and "sound" is very similar.

 

[supersleuth]

For classical music, they are actually very good- their sound is clean, smooth, and gratifyingly free of annoying colorations. They could use a bit more bass to sound subjectively flat. I can see how they might seem underwhelming with other kinds of music. They remind me of what used to be thought of in loudspeakers as the "New England sound" of KLH, AR and so forth (now I'm dating myself!).

 

[digitaldave]

Thanks for the feedback. I wimped out of buying the MC5/MC3. Just ordered the HF3 instead!

 

[supersleuth]

I have to admit that if and when I need to replace my MC5, I probably won't be able to restrain my curiosity to try the HF5. But in the meantime, I'm more than satisfied.

 

[ClieOS]

...I wimped out of buying the MC5/MC3. Just ordered the HF3 instead!

Good decision.

 

[Trinity]

I have given SWMBO an Ety HF set AND an MC set for use with her iPhone 4. (She tends to be VERY tough on all things electronic and optical...) She likes the slightly larger size and perceived durability of the MCs; however, she has noted that the sound of the HF set is FAR better. (FWIW, she uses both with the small, silicone triflanges.)  YMMV