[gnarlsagan]

I'm open to different opinions but a good standard might be having >92% accuracy response. It may also measure better than the ER4S in some areas.

 

[Sinocelt]

Quote:

Just found that I have scratch on my 334, but from inside. Wut?

 
They're worthless now. Just throw them away ... in a package with my address written on it. Then dispose of the whole filthy thing at the nearest post office. 

 

[tomscy2000]

Quote:

I'm open to different opinions but a good standard might be having >92% accuracy response. It may also measure better than the ER4S in some areas.

 
If that's what you decide is the right metric for you, then the short answer is no.

 

[cooperpwc]

Quote:

I'm open to different opinions but a good standard might be having >92% accuracy response.

 
Here we go again...   

 
 
What is it about Etymotic fans that they cannot stand that other people think that their headphones sound boring? 
I don't care if you have hate my Piano Forte IX - and it probably has 12% accuracy.  

 

[gnarlsagan]

I like the GR07 a lot which I'm sure has poor accuracy response. I'm curious if users of the 334 consider it to be better than the ER4S. I chose the 4S because I read that they shared a lot in common. Also from seeing a graph of the two it seemed that the 334 was trying to beat etymotic at its own game. If that is the case I'd like to know if they succeeded. I'm just asking to learn and because I didn't see that anyone directly addressed this question in this thread. I haven't heard an ER4S.

 

[PhoenixClaw]

From reading around I thought the FitEar F111 was supposed to be the one to "beat" the ER4S, not the TG334

 

[cooperpwc]

Quote:

I like the GR07 a lot which I'm sure has poor accuracy response. I'm curious if users of the 334 consider it to be better than the ER4S. I chose the 4S because I read that they shared a lot in common. Also from seeing a graph of the two it seemed that the 334 was trying to beat etymotic at its own game. If that is the case I'd like to know if they succeeded. I'm just asking to learn and because I didn't see that anyone directly addressed this question in this thread. I haven't heard an ER4S.

 
Ah! I think that you are confusing the TG334 with the Fitear F111. This thread here:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/619034/fitear-f111-impressions-reviews-discussion-previously-to-go-111

 

[gnarlsagan]

From reading around I thought the FitEar F111 was supposed to be the one to "beat" the ER4S, not the TG334

Ah that's probably right. I'd like to find that FR graph again.

 

[cooperpwc]

gnarlsagan, not fair automatically to lump you in with certain others. By way of background, the "frequency response defines headphone sound" argument always comes from Etymotic fans.  It is absurd; nobody else thinks this way. FR is an interesting piece of the puzzle.

 

[gnarlsagan]

gnarlsagan, not fair automatically to lump you in with certain others. By way of background, the "frequency response defines headphone sound" argument always comes from Etymotic fans.  It is absurd; nobody else thinks this way. FR is an interesting piece of the puzzle.

I agree. I'm still learning a lot about it. I'll take my questions over to the correct thread. Thanks for your help guys.

 

[tomscy2000]

Quote:

  I like the GR07 a lot which I'm sure has poor accuracy response. I'm curious if users of the 334 consider it to be better than the ER4S. I chose the 4S because I read that they shared a lot in common. Also from seeing a graph of the two it seemed that the 334 was trying to beat etymotic at its own game. If that is the case I'd like to know if they succeeded. I'm just asking to learn and because I didn't see that anyone directly addressed this question in this thread. I haven't heard an ER4S.

 
I don't think you saw a graph comparison between the ER4S and the TO GO! 334. FitEar did publish a graph comparison between the ER4S and the F111 (formerly named the TO GO! 111), and those two models are very similar in response. In that case, yes, the FitEar F111 seems to have achieved a very slightly (I emphasize slightly) more accurate response while at the same time making it easier to drive via portable sources. However, whether this added accuracy is appreciable by ear, I don't know. Most IEMs usually add an extra 5-6 dB of bass boost over the bass shelf response of the ER4S/B because of the psychoacoustic drawbacks of insert earphones (canalphones, IEMs) causing the mind to detect less bass because of the lack of tactile feedback of the outer ear. However, the bass boost will slightly lessen transparency. At the same time, however, there is the potential (potential, not definite) for multi-driver earphones to broadcast more details.
 
If you want to ask me, subjectively, whether the 334 outstrips the ER4S sonically, I would definitely say yes, but only in certain subjective dimensions, but not by any of the metrics that you required. In terms of response accuracy, the only earphone that has been tested to be more accurate (extremely slight improvement, and not independently verified) than the ER4S is the FitEar F111. I've heard the F111, and while it's excellent, I can't really say it's better than your ER4S, except in terms of driveability.

 

[Inks]

Actually, the ER4B is more accurate than the ER4S but proves to be a bit too much for modern treble boosted recordings. ER4B with orange Knowles filter is the most flat IEM I have seen personally on a FR graph. And yes, the 111's graph hasn't been verified, that graph looked iffy to Rin as the ER4S didn't look like that to him in raw form. 

 

[Bokyung]

Quote:

 
They're worthless now. Just throw them away ... in a package with my address written on it. Then dispose of the whole filthy thing at the nearest post office. 

I see what you did there! Your trickery will never work on me!
 
 
 
Offtopic: Just got F111, it's different beast. Liking it so far. Never heard ER4S so idk how it compares.

 

[tomscy2000]

Quote:

Actually, the ER4B is more accurate than the ER4S but proves to be a bit too much for modern treble boosted recordings. ER4B with orange Knowles filter is the most flat IEM I have seen personally on a FR graph. And yes, the 111's graph hasn't been verified, that graph looked iffy to Rin as the ER4S didn't look like that to him in raw form. 

 
All of FitEar's graphs have a weird thingy at 700 Hz or so... not sure what it is, just like how Purrin's graphs all have a thingy at 2 kHz or so. I say that the 111 is probably more accurate just by looking at the differences between the two earphones and looking at how an ER4S can improve compared to Knowles' own target graph. However, it obviously hasn't been verified by others, and the difference is most likely negligible. Personally, of the three, sonically, I do like the 4B best, especially for binaural (for obvious reasons), but the F111 fit is by far superior for my ears. With Sennheiser double flange tips, it comes extremely close to a custom fit, with a second bend depth.

 

[cn11]

Quote:

 
All of FitEar's graphs have a weird thingy at 700 Hz or so... not sure what it is, just like how Purrin's graphs all have a thingy at 2 kHz or so. I say that the 111 is probably more accurate just by looking at the differences between the two earphones and looking at how an ER4S can improve compared to Knowles' own target graph. However, it obviously hasn't been verified by others, and the difference is most likely negligible. Personally, of the three, sonically, I do like the 4B best, especially for binaural (for obvious reasons), but the F111 fit is by far superior for my ears. With Sennheiser double flange tips, it comes extremely close to a custom fit, with a second bend depth.

 
I have found the Senn bi-flange tips to be pretty darn decent on the TG!334's too. But I find Sony Hybrids help bump SQ a tad even over those... I guess there's my choices for #1 & #2 tips on the 334's.