How old is the ER-4?
Jan 25, 2007 at 12:29 PM Post #16 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The ER4s can't get much more technically accurate than they already are. The only way I can see to improve them is to tame the area from 12 to 16khz a little bit. If you look at the graphs for the ER4, you'll see that the "Listener's perceived response" is just a tad too high in this area.

Other than that, there is really nothing that needs to be changed.


I agree with Piccolo (that's twice this week).

Quote:

Originally Posted by buihia /img/forum/go_quote.gif
is there any chance of Ety releasing a new version of ER4 anytime in the near future? be it the goodies inside the earphone, or just plain cosmetics wise.. espcially at this time where it seems very competitive with shure and westone coming up new phones..

i too would like to dive in and get a pair of ER4, but afriad of having it for 1 month and there comes a newer version..


If you learned to bake a perfect apple pie, would you want to muck with the recipe?
 
Jan 28, 2007 at 2:46 AM Post #17 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you learned to bake a perfect apple pie, would you want to muck with the recipe?


I'm sorry but i don't think er4 is perfect yet. Maybe only for you and some hardcore fans..

if u go around asking people what thier "dream er4" would be, some will say improvements in microphonics problem, some will say bass.. customs by ety themselves perhaps? (please don't say "thats what the shirt clip was provided for" or "the bass is there!")

as long as there is single item on the wishlist of the "dream er4" of current er4 users, i think there is a reason for improvement and innovation..

Also, any company should never think "If you learned to bake a perfect apple pie, would you want to muck with the recipe?" because with ever moving technology, no gadget is perfect.

btw, their new BT earphone is meant for a different league of people, so dont bring that in..
 
Jan 28, 2007 at 2:55 AM Post #19 of 30
The ER-4s are about as close to perfection as an IEM can get. They are quite
basshead.gif
with EQ. The clarity and detail the highs bring make the UM2s sound like toys.
 
Jan 28, 2007 at 3:31 AM Post #20 of 30
paired with a sr71 amp, and NO equalization, i couldn't ask for a more involving experience than the er4s. that said it is the blackbird amp that completes the picture, without a doubt.
 
Jan 28, 2007 at 4:15 AM Post #21 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Emon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The ER-4s are about as close to perfection as an IEM can get. They are quite
basshead.gif
with EQ. The clarity and detail the highs bring make the UM2s sound like toys.


ER4 will never come close to what UM2's capable of in midrange. At least not for I listen to.
 
Jan 29, 2007 at 2:45 AM Post #23 of 30
A lot of arguments for the ER-4 seems to be somewhere along the lines of: It's flat, I believe it's flat, so anything I hear is the truth and anything I don't hear isn't in the recording to begin with.

I have heard that nobody, not even Etymotic, knows what true flat really is.

What can you do to explain to someone who says that UM2s has bass with more decay and sounds more "real" than Ety bass? That UM2s are just recreating bass that's not there in the recording?

Don't get me wrong - I'm an ER-4S owner and I love them. I just don't see how the ER-4's are close to "perfection" at all. They may be the more perfect overall compared to other IEM's (bar UE10Pro), but there are other IEM's that trumps the ER-4 in at least one area.
 
Jan 29, 2007 at 2:53 AM Post #24 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by redshifter /img/forum/go_quote.gif
this question gets asked a lot.

advances like multi-driver iem's? etymotic made the er4 a one driver canalphone, and made that driver as ear-canal neutral as anyone could ask for. also, no crossovers.

the short answer is it ain't broke.


Agreed, though a better form factor would be nice, something that does not stick out as much. I should custom mold my pair and discover what the Etys are really capable of.
 
Jan 29, 2007 at 2:59 AM Post #25 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif
A lot of arguments for the ER-4 seems to be somewhere along the lines of: It's flat, I believe it's flat, so anything I hear is the truth and anything I don't hear isn't in the recording to begin with.


Yes.

Quote:

I have heard that nobody, not even Etymotic, knows what true flat really is.


Nonsense. "Flat" can be scientifically measured. The problem is that with in-ear monitors, "flat" can vary between person to person. The response of the ER4 is a compromise choice that unfortunately some people find harsh and non-flat.

Quote:

What can you do to explain to someone who says that UM2s has bass with more decay and sounds more "real" than Ety bass? That UM2s are just recreating bass that's not there in the recording?


If you want to be very technical, anything with a non-flat bass response is "adding" more bass than the recording itself has. However, some recordings are purposefully mixed bass-light, and sound better on bass-heavy equipment.

Quote:

Don't get me wrong - I'm an ER-4S owner and I love them. I just don't see how the ER-4's are close to "perfection" at all. They may be the more perfect overall compared to other IEM's (bar UE10Pro), but there are other IEM's that trumps the ER-4 in at least one area.


Close to technical perfection, perhaps, but for many, they are not subjectively perfect, or even good. Even I, the biggest EtyFan ever, can see their flaws now.
 
Jan 29, 2007 at 3:17 AM Post #26 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you want to be very technical, anything with a non-flat bass response is "adding" more bass than the recording itself has. However, some recordings are purposefully mixed bass-light, and sound better on bass-heavy equipment.


If you amplify the bass, it's just louder bass. Eg, Sony Fontopia in-ears - they make the bass louder, even on songs that don't have it, so it sounds muddy and bloated. However, some earphones have longer bass decay time, which sounds pleasing to my ears. That's gotta be real, because I can't see how you'd add decay to a note which doesn't decay in the recording.
 
Jan 29, 2007 at 4:39 AM Post #28 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you amplify the bass, it's just louder bass. Eg, Sony Fontopia in-ears - they make the bass louder, even on songs that don't have it, so it sounds muddy and bloated.


They have a higher bass response, yes, but that's not why they sound bloated. They sound bloated because they're budget headphones. Something like the SF 5 Pro EB does the same thing and according to bassheads, is far from bloated.

By the way, when I was talking about the ER-4s earlier, I was talking about their sound, not ergonomics. That area can obviously use some improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top