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.
Interesting to know about the transition! I do know people who own multiple Etymotic products, but transitioning from an XR to an SR model seems rarer than that. So I think you do find a major difference between ER4SR and ER4XR, since you hopped from one to another?
For anyone seeking a more traditional IEM fit, give the Final Audio nozzle adapters a try. Works with Final Audio tips (of course), Spinfit & Sony tips. Should work with others, but these three are my preferred brands. I had some fit issues with the regular tips (& regular insertion). You may find that the shallower fit affects the soundstage & also depending on how far in the tips are pushed onto the adapters. (I don’t know why the pictures were rotated after I uploaded them).
This is iDSD Diablo driving Evo at 11:30 of Normal mode SE (could be 10:30-11:00 depending on the record) as you can see (could be Eco mode in balanced mode). They DO need power to PERFORM! And Evo performs!
So just forget about smartphones and budget DAPs...
This is iDSD Diablo driving Evo at 11:30 of Normal mode as you can see (could be Eco mode in balanced mode). They DO need power to PERFORM!
So just forget about smartphones and budget DAPs...
They're a scalable pair for sure. I jokingly told my friends and family "I could power this thing from a potato and it would still sound good." Not like they'll be bad on a phone, but the added power from that Diablo certainly helps!
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.
What you say is true; EtyDave knows it pretty well from one of his replies to me, close to: "XR sold more by a considerable margin". In which 'considerable margin' is of course such a lot that the R&D on the EVO would be steered towards the XR-curve, next to Dave and other's liking for such a bass-boosted model.
However, I meant switching/swapping people; supposedly liking the accuracy more and going ER4XR-to-ER4SR = "XR->SR", from actually owning the ER4XR. I guesstimate that the number switching/swapping is rather low, as even some sound engineers apparently default to the ER4XR and the SR having a bit of a bass-light reputation in the mainstream media. @EtyDave I guess that these specific complaints/service-enquiries are less well documented = "not known/-able"? I could be wrong though.
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 would absolutely be interested; while the EVO looks like a great IEM, it doesn't appear to be quite what I was hoping for as someone who vastly prefers the ER2SE to the ER2XR and has been considering trading out the ER4XR for an ER4SR.
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.
These things--clarity, separation, dynamics, etc--are difficult to articulate and do not appear to be captured in the standard frequency response graphs in a manner which we know how to extract, but they do exist. Of all the IEMs that I have heard and owned over the years, the Sony IER-M9 stand out as having tremendous clarity and separation between distinct sounds, with perfect cohesion between the drivers across the frequency spectrum, and I only got rid of them because the tuning was not for me. While what Etymotic achieves with the ER4 series' single BA is god damn black magic it simply cannot overcome physics and the single BA exhibits issues with separating and positioning different sounds, as well as sometimes having a noticeable graininess or 'smearing' effect in faster/more complex recordings. Only the IER-M9 has come close among IEMs to matching the clarity of my Clears.
A well-implemented set of BA crossovers can simply achieve greater quality and clarity of sound than a single BA irrespective of the tuning, and while I don't expect a company the size of Etymotic to develop a product quite like the IER-M9 the bones of a glorious reference IEM with peerless clarity are already there in the EVO.
While what Etymotic achieves with the ER4 series' single BA is god damn black magic it simply cannot overcome physics and the single BA exhibits issues with separating
Cannot overcome physics? I'm afraid, it's just a self-proclaimed statement which gained popularity here pretty quickly.
As for separating, in general many folks prefer when this thing is accentuated and perceiving that as better clarity while losing fluidity of music composition as a whole piece.
Although, I'm not familiar with IER-M9, but IER-M7 however, knowing Sony latest products for the past decade I have my doubts M9 is that much better
No impressions yet, just opened it, but I will say that I have a hard time fitting the Evo into my right ear. The body on the IEM prevents me from my usual Ety ear canal maneuvers.
Cannot overcome physics? I'm afraid, it's just a self-proclaimed statement which gained popularity here pretty quickly.
As for separating, in general many folks prefer when this thing is accentuated and perceiving that as better clarity while losing fluidity of music composition as a whole piece.
Although, I'm not familiar with IER-M9, but IER-M7 however, knowing Sony latest products for the past decade I have my doubts M9 is that much better
Interesting to know about the transition! I do know people who own multiple Etymotic products, but transitioning from an XR to an SR model seems rarer than that. So I think you do find a major difference between ER4SR and ER4XR, since you hopped from one to another?
My version of differentiation is almost exclusively on drums and other percussion, where I compare recording replay to live settings e.g. conservatory. A bit unfair as recording and mixing at wonder-/truthful quality is an [engineering] art. Bleeding of bass into mids is minimal, although in with acoustic guitar it is noticeable.
- The XR becomes a bit boomy with heavy-mixed tracks (e.g. late-Slayer).
+ The SR-simulation sounds sooo accurate, especially toms and snare drums (e.g. Tool).
I have come to appreciate accuracy should be the starting (and end?) point, any enhancement/boost/preference may come after. While sounds engineers using the XR hsows the minimal difference; my mouth fell open quite a few times because of the representation of the drums following the SR-curve.
To tie it in as not-off topic: this is the main reason why will I leave the EVO for what it is for now (OK, and not cash-to-burn or swap-possibilities from Etymotic).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
