[InvisibleInk]

Please, keep it simple. High performance single dynamic driver would be a bliss.

Or, how about a "triple dynamic driver," like the Unique Melody 3DT has? Aim high!

 

[zerogorgor]

It's a very good question. It is certainly a possibility, but nothing is etched into stone yet. It could be an SR EVO or a different model entirely. If that is something that you (or anybody else here) wants, I would encourage you to comment and make your voice heard. The SR models don't sell in the quantities that the XR models do, but I know that many folks love them and I personally would like see new models offer that option.

This sounds very promising. I am more than interested. ER4S and ER4SR are my go-to IEMs. I am lucky enough to be part of the EVO tour, and I enjoyed listening to EVO, but I didn't have the urge to get one right away. To me, EVO is more a like a cousin than a sibiling to ER4S/ER4SR, but an SR EVO sounds very appealing.

 

[Zachik]

an SR EVO sounds very appealing.

I already voiced the desire by some to have an SR version of EVO to my Etymotic contact.
Obviously that does not guarantee anything, but the voices of the folks here ARE being heard.

 

[zerogorgor]

I already voiced the desire by some to have an SR version of EVO to my Etymotic contact.
Obviously that does not guarantee anything, but the voices of the folks here ARE being heard.

You're giving me so much hope man

 

[rggz]

Well, I'm a simple man I just hope in the future Etymotic can come up with a 1DD version of EVO using a similar price strategy as the ER2 lineup. Usually, I have a preference for 1DD timbre over BA 'resolution' and timbre so it'd be amazing for fans of the ER2 lineup like me.

 

[gikigill]

Between cost, complexity, and Etymotic losing their "house sound" - I would say let's keep our shared dream for a hybrid. DD and BA only.

The DD from the ER2XR and a couple/triple of BAs from the EVO.

Call it a Super EVO.

 

[donthuang]

The DD from the ER2XR and a couple/triple of BAs from the EVO.

That would make things more complicate, beside need total redesign crossover.
DD and BA have rather different distortion model and group delay.

I'm not say complicate things is bad, but complicate things usually more expensive.

 

[CK Moustache]

It's a very good question. It is certainly a possibility, but nothing is etched into stone yet. It could be an SR EVO or a different model entirely. If that is something that you (or anybody else here) wants, I would encourage you to comment and make your voice heard. The SR models don't sell in the quantities that the XR models do, but I know that many folks love them and I personally would like see new models offer that option.

Well, then: I'd be interested in how Etymotic's take on an all-BA multi-BA IEM model with three acoustic ways with an ER4SR tuning would sound like (preferably with sealed and not vented BA woofer(s) for that speed and tightness). I'd basically wish for something somewhere around my Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors'/InEar ProPhile 8s' levels of "performance" (speed, resolution, control, tightness, separation, transparency), but with that signature ER-4S/ER4SR tuning. So basically Etymotic's multi-BA take on the ER4SR.

 

[Max Choiral]

Well, then: I'd be interested in how Etymotic's take on an all-BA multi-BA IEM model with three acoustic ways with an ER4SR tuning would sound like (preferably with sealed and not vented BA woofer(s) for that speed and tightness). I'd basically wish for something somewhere around my Ultimate Ears Reference Monitors'/InEar ProPhile 8s' levels of "performance" (speed, resolution, control, tightness, separation, transparency), but with that signature ER-4S/ER4SR tuning. So basically Etymotic's multi-BA take on the ER4SR.

Just another multi-BA implementation, with non-linear impedance & high sensitivity which are literally pain in the a$$... Aren't you tired of those things?
I don't know whether you have any exp with full-size headphones but if you don't, I encourage you to dive into it. You can have all ultimate resolution and transparency (not measurable, by the way) you want in BA iems - and it will still sound kind of "thinnish", because it's not about just tuning, but also type of the driver and its size.

In addition, I remember @EtyDave have said once:

Moving coils have, on average, lower distortion than balanced armatures. That's actually why we used them on our 10x probe that we make for hearing research: https://www.er10x.com/.

 

[CK Moustache]

Just another multi-BA implementation, with non-linear impedance & high sensitivity which are literally pain in the a$$... Aren't you tired of those things?
I don't know whether you have any exp with full-size headphones but if you don't, I encourage you to dive into it. You can have all ultimate resolution and transparency (not measurable, by the way) you want in BA iems - and it will still sound kind of "thinnish", because it's not about just tuning, but also type of the driver and its size.

In addition, I remember @EtyDave have said once:

I never really cared about the impedance response or high sensitivity since I've always made sure that my DAPs/DAC-Amps have got a very low output impedance and very good hiss performance even with very sensitive in-ears alongside a volume attenuation range that I consider as acceptable for my needs (ability to listen at very quiet volume levels). So... this has never been a problem for me, especially as I'm not one of those people who constantly feel the urge to buy the newest gear releases.

Yes, I do have experience with full-sized headphones and own a few as well. Still I prefer IEMs most of the time, though.

I'm just simply interested in a set of IEMs with the exact tuning of the ER4SR but in a multi-BA three-way execution - basically Etymotic's take on technically upgraded ER4SR for the rare situations when the ER4SR are "not enough"/"close-ish to their limits". Just as I remarked earlier, simply IEMs with the same frequency response as the ER4SR but somewhere in the performance range of the UERM and ProPhile 8.

After all, while the frequency response is clearly the most important factor, it's not the sole metric for perceived performance. There are more than enough examples for IEMs/headphones/active studio monitoring speakers with the same/nearly the same tuning but a (more or less) noticeable difference in perceived technical performance when very fast, complex and demanding music material is played back.

 

[Max Choiral]

I never really cared about the impedance response or high sensitivity since I've always made sure that my DAPs/DAC-Amps have got a very low output impedance and very good hiss performance even with very sensitive in-ears alongside a volume attenuation range that I consider as acceptable for my needs (ability to listen at very quiet volume levels).

I wouldn't call such in-ears versatile if you need to go that far for basic needs. There is also pro audio industry where people wouldn't meddle with such things as DAP/DAC. Plug and play, ability to pair well with different gear without major issues, is more important. It will have good impact on sales as well.

 

[SilverEars]

I never really cared about the impedance response or high sensitivity since I've always made sure that my DAPs/DAC-Amps have got a very low output impedance and very good hiss performance even with very sensitive in-ears alongside a volume attenuation range that I consider as acceptable for my needs (ability to listen at very quiet volume levels). So... this has never been a problem for me, especially as I'm not one of those people who constantly feel the urge to buy the newest gear releases.

Yes, I do have experience with full-sized headphones and own a few as well. Still I prefer IEMs most of the time, though.

I'm just simply interested in a set of IEMs with the exact tuning of the ER4SR but in a multi-BA three-way execution - basically Etymotic's take on technically upgraded ER4SR for the rare situations when the ER4SR are "not enough"/"close-ish to their limits". Just as I remarked earlier, simply IEMs with the same frequency response as the ER4SR but somewhere in the performance range of the UERM and ProPhile 8.

After all, while the frequency response is clearly the most important factor, it's not the sole metric for perceived performance. There are more than enough examples for IEMs/headphones/active studio monitoring speakers with the same/nearly the same tuning but a (more or less) noticeable difference in perceived technical performance when very fast, complex and demanding music material is played back.

Based on what you are saying, you should give EVO a try. EVO is a triple driver implementation. You didn't hop on the EU tour?

I used to own the custom UERM, and can't say if it was really better than the EVO. One thing for sure, I think the bass is better on the EVO than what I recall of UERM. For the time UERM was considered a good tuning as we just mainly have random flavors of the months with no attention to FRs, but I really don't know how it stands now. I don't have a direct comparison, but looking back, the universal demo version seemed to be better than the customs I've own. I question if the multiple bore nozzles are really necessary as Ety has implemented a single narrow one. I find it interesting that Ety implemented it as single narrow nozzle. The bore design made sense for deeper insertion like the traditional Etys, which is a way to get the response of the highs. Ety fits are specific, so you'd have to tolerate the deeper fit, and the fit must work to get proper sound.

As for Profile 8, I didn't like the tonality. Too rough with the highs. I couldn't enjoy listening to music with it, probably works better as a monitor. EVO is contrary to that. It's smooth in the highs, so different tuning.

Profile 8 measurements clearly reflect what I didn't like about the tonality

 

[SXero]

It's a very good question. It is certainly a possibility, but nothing is etched into stone yet. It could be an SR EVO or a different model entirely. If that is something that you (or anybody else here) wants, I would encourage you to comment and make your voice heard. The SR models don't sell in the quantities that the XR models do, but I know that many folks love them and I personally would like see new models offer that option.

I am making a move to the ER4SR from the ER4XR version, because of my apparent/unexpected love for the simulated SR-curve. I thought you should know, as I suppose the number of XR->SR are low or not known/-able.

 

[CK Moustache]

You didn't hop on the EU tour?

No, I didn't.

Based on what you are saying, you should give EVO a try. EVO is a triple driver implementation. You didn't hop on the EU tour?

I used to own the custom UERM, and can't say if it was really better than the EVO. One thing for sure, I think the bass is better on the EVO than what I recall of UERM. For the time UERM was considered a good tuning as we just mainly have random flavors of the months with no attention to FRs, but I really don't know how it stands now. I don't have a direct comparison, but looking back, the universal demo version seemed to be better than the customs I've own. I question if the multiple bore nozzles are really necessary as Ety has implemented a single narrow one. I find it interesting that Ety implemented it as single narrow nozzle. The bore design made sense for deeper insertion like the traditional Etys, which is a way to get the response of the highs. Ety fits are specific, so you'd have to tolerate the deeper fit, and the fit must work to get proper sound.

As for Profile 8, I didn't like the tonality. Too rough with the highs. I couldn't enjoy listening to music with it, probably works better as a monitor. EVO is contrary to that. It's smooth in the highs, so different tuning.

Profile 8 measurements clearly reflect what I didn't like about the tonality

To my ears the ER4SR, ER2SE and my ER-4S are more linear, more realistic, smoother and tonally more correct than my UERM and ProPhile 8 (the PP8 sound linear and smooth to me in the highs when performing sine sweeps (I'm getting a nice, deep fit), but are too mild in the presence range and upper highs to sound "flat Etymotic studio neutral" to me, hence I'd rather characterise them as "natural neutral") as well. And it's definitely true that the "typical" deep Etymotic fit definitely contributes to this as well, as it minimises the risk of unexpected ear canal resonances that may occur otherwise.
After all, the ER-4S and ER4SR are my all-time favourite IEMs when it comes to what a realistic/neutral sound reproduction sounds like to my ears. And they're more than sufficient for my stationary listening needs when it comes to technicalities, and it's rather rare that I really "need" my UERMs' and PP8s' superior separation, speed and transparency, although these aspects can come in handy in scenarios such as very busy, fast and dense orchestral works where the Etys just sound a bit too "strained" (the ER4SR and ER-4S still handle these situations well enough for my tastes/needs, but the ER2SE, while generally very good IEMs and with that differently perceived bass body reproduction, are ultimately just too "foggy"/"smeared" in more "critical" music situations).

As for the EVO - I don't know. While their announcement was the major contributor for why I came back to Head-Fi, I don't think that I would really "need" them in my collection - it was initially clear that they wouldn't serve me for critical listening where I prefer a flatter bass reproduction, there are alternatives with a bass boost implementation that is "better"/more to my tastes in the same price range - I think that for a moderately strong bass boost, the ER2XR are a neat alternative, and for a milder, deeper-placed, more sub-bass exclusive boost of the lows, the Oriveti O400 are pretty much perfection.
Nonetheless it'd be very interesting to see/hear how they compare side-by-side to the O400, my Shure SE846, Massdrop Plus, Earsonics ES3 and the ER2XR.

Both multi-bore designs as well as single-bore designs have their right to exist and individual advantages and disadvantages. In the end, it's up to the manufacturer how well they execute the implementation, and a multi-bore design definitely makes it easier for the manufacturer to dial in the exact frequency response they want, but may introduce other complications (such as acoustic phase cancellations and more reflections) that have to be dealt with.

 

[CK Moustache]

I am making a move to the ER4SR from the ER4XR version, because of my apparent/unexpected love for the simulated SR-curve. I thought you should know, as I suppose the number of XR->SR are low or not known/-able.

Well, but through the number of direct sales and orders from distributors and retailers, I think that Etymotic know very well how many SR and XR versions are sold. And honestly, it doesn't really surprise me that the XR version sells in higher quantity.