[bball3212]

In addition to good sound (obviously) I like good isolation and durability.

 

[mythless]

ER4p will give you better isolation

 

[ljokerl]

I think isolation and durability put the ER4P over the RE0. Can't beat replaceable cables...

 

[Gossling]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think isolation and durability put the ER4P over the RE0. Can't beat replaceable cables...

Not to mention the two-year warranty.

 

[ChroniCali]

ER4P have some of the best isolation and definitely have better durability than the RE0.

 

[MrGreen]

Echoing what others have said. I also prefer the er4 sound.

 

[Xan7hos]

Actually interested in this as well. I'm actually surprised of all the people in favor of the ER4P given RE0's perhaps FOTM-ness and low low price

 

[ljokerl]

The issue here is that the OP's stressing isolation and durability, and also pitting the RE0 against something that is very well-regarded in those two areas. SQ is really a matter of preference between the RE0 and ER-4P, as each does something better than the other, but in durability and isolation the Etys clearly win. FOTM or not, cold, hard facts are hard to ignore

.

 

[bball3212]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif The issue here is that the OP's stressing isolation and durability, and also pitting the RE0 against something that is very well-regarded in those two areas. SQ is really a matter of preference between the RE0 and ER-4P, as each does something better than the other, but in durability and isolation the Etys clearly win. FOTM or not, cold, hard facts are hard to ignore .

Is the isolation 60 bucks better? And what advantages does the RE0 have over the Er-4P?

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bball3212 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is the isolation 60 bucks better? And what advantages does the RE0 have over the Er-4P?

Depends on how much you value isolation. If it is a top concern then yes, it is $60 better. The isolation really is immense - by far the most I have experienced from an IEM. If you intend to use them outside they can be downright dangerous.

The RE0 has the advantages of being much easier to insert, having a wider soundstage and better tracking, and sounding slightly smoother at the high end. The dynamic driver is just more natural-sounding and balanced to me. Note that my comparison was done versus an Er-4S, not a 4P.

 

[R3SET]

Maybe it's interesting as well to know how the HF5 compares to the re0?

 

[bball3212]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljokerl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Depends on how much you value isolation. If it is a top concern then yes, it is $60 better. The isolation really is immense - by far the most I have experienced from an IEM. If you intend to use them outside they can be downright dangerous. The RE0 has the advantages of being much easier to insert, having a wider soundstage and better tracking, and sounding slightly smoother at the high end. The dynamic driver is just more natural-sounding and balanced to me. Note that my comparison was done versus an Er-4S, not a 4P.

What is the difference between the 4s and 4p?

 

[Gossling]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bball3212 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is the isolation 60 bucks better? And what advantages does the RE0 have over the Er-4P?

How does one translate isolation into money, especially without knowledge of your listening environment? Shure Olives are popular with both phones, and if you go that route, you'll end up with very similar isolation between the two. They definitely block out more noise than the RE0's stock bi-flanges. The ER4P with Olives are indeed noticeably superior in isolation, especially low-mid frequencies, but high frequency attenuation (mouse clicks, for example) is much closer. Keep in mind, this difference will be less noticeable with music actually playing.

The RE0 has greater high frequency extension, less harmonic distortion, and most agree a slightly wider soundstage. But ER4p's imaging is crisp and more realistic, even if the sheer size of the soundstage is slightly smaller. My perception of the ER4P's frequency response is highly dependent on tip used. The grey tri-flanges give a more balanced response than the RE0, but I perceive treble spikes of various amplitudes with other tips (at about 8khz, 15khz). It's a shame I can't get a good seal with the grey tri-flanges consistently. Anyways, the RE0 do give a superbly balanced response for the price (barring one lower spike and two upper treble spikes). I apply some EQ to the lower bass and lower mid regions and I neutralize the lower treble spike, but they're fine without EQ.

For me, it is easier to insert the ER4P w/ Olives than it is to insert the RE0 w/ Olives, due to the thin, long shape of the body (you can stick it in like you would a pencil). This also allows for a deeper insertion (probably the reason I achieved better isolation from the ER4P in the first place). I cannot achieve the same depth with the Olives on the RE0. That said, the RE0's generally do not have to be inserted as deeply to get optimal sound as do the ER4P. I say "generally," because I've heard of one person who actually gets optimal sound out of the ER4p without the deepest of insertions. Anyways, I find myself forgetting things are in my ears much more easily with the RE0 than with the ER4P.

I have a feeling my writing is losing its coherence, feel free to ask any more questions while I still have the two IEMs.

 

[bball3212]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gossling /img/forum/go_quote.gif How does one translate isolation into money, especially without knowledge of your listening environment? Shure Olives are popular with both phones, and if you go that route, you'll end up with very similar isolation between the two. They definitely block out more noise than the RE0's stock bi-flanges. The ER4P with Olives are indeed noticeably superior in isolation, especially low-mid frequencies, but high frequency attenuation (mouse clicks, for example) is much closer. Keep in mind, this difference will be less noticeable with music actually playing. The RE0 has greater high frequency extension, less harmonic distortion, and most agree a slightly wider soundstage. But ER4p's imaging is crisp and more realistic, even if the sheer size of the soundstage is slightly smaller. My perception of the ER4P's frequency response is highly dependent on tip used. The grey tri-flanges give a more balanced response than the RE0, but I perceive treble spikes of various amplitudes with other tips (at about 8khz, 15khz). It's a shame I can't get a good seal with the grey tri-flanges consistently. Anyways, the RE0 do give a superbly balanced response for the price (barring two upper treble spikes). I apply some EQ to the lower bass and lower mid regions, but that's based off personal preference. For me, it is easier to insert the ER4P w/ Olives than it is to insert the RE0 w/ Olives, due to the thin, long shape of the body (you can stick it in like you would a pencil). This also allows for a deeper insertion (probably the reason I achieved better isolation from the ER4P in the first place). I cannot achieve the same depth with the Olives on the RE0. That said, the RE0's generally do not have to be inserted as deeply to get optimal sound as do the ER4P. I say "generally," because I've heard of one person who actually gets optimal sound out of the ER4p without the deepest of insertions. Anyways, I find myself forgetting things are in my ears much more easily with the RE0 than with the ER4P. I have a feeling my writing is losing its coherence, feel free to ask any more questions while I still have the two IEMs.

Are the 'shure olives' the black tips or the clear plastic tips? I assume they are the black.

 

[cujobob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bball3212 /img/forum/go_quote.gif What is the difference between the 4s and 4p?

I believe 12 db of sensitivity. 4P is easier to drive...p = portable.