[mark2410]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyle_t /img/forum/go_quote.gif seriously why do ppl always say SE530 have good bass, when i can barely hear it at all? its even weaker than SA6 to me. TF10pro's bass is so much more, they're not even close.

530 has a ton of bass, yours are either broken or really not getting a proper seal

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaloS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wrong. Your fit is wrong. Very wrong. I know it is what alot of people were getting so far, but as with other IEMs it has been spoken that if you play with things you can get it to work much better - and it is especially the case here. W3 does not have a V-Shape response, W3 is not sibilant, W3 does not have recessed mids (actually it has forward midrange response, with similar bass strength to follow and softened treble).

Okay, then the fit is wrong because I know what I am hearing. Again, I owned them for two months and tried many fit variations. This would be the first IEM I have ever experienced where I was not able to get a proper fit and that is not a good thing. After listening to UM2 and then sticking W3 in my ears I have a hard time agreeing that W3 has a forward midrange.

So for 100% of all IEM's up to this point the key criteria to a great fit/seal is a strong presense of bass. But with W3 this doesn't apply?

 

[fredman22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif Okay, then the fit is wrong because I know what I am hearing. Again, I owned them for two months and tried many fit variations. This would be the first IEM I have ever experienced where I was not able to get a proper fit and that is not a good thing.

Coming from UM2s for a lengthy time, I had a similar struggle and agree with you that these take far too much effort to find the 'right fit'. It shouldn't ever have to be this hard. That said, I must admit that a lot of the initial sig disappointment had to do with accepting the UM2 sig over time and having preconcieved perceptions of what a W3 ought to sound like after that. Wrong. Accepting the W3 for its strengths (and yes, toning down bass somewhat) revealed a much better IEM than I thought was initially there... but I did feel the need for 'isolating' my experience & excluding use of any other IEMs for the initial couple of months, to get on with the acclimation. Cheers.

 

[MaloS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif Okay, then the fit is wrong because I know what I am hearing. Again, I owned them for two months and tried many fit variations. This would be the first IEM I have ever experienced where I was not able to get a proper fit and that is not a good thing. After listening to UM2 and then sticking W3 in my ears I have a hard time agreeing that W3 has a forward midrange. So for 100% of all IEM's up to this point the key criteria to a great fit/seal is a strong presense of bass. But with W3 this doesn't apply?

I don't disagree with you that getting things correctly is frigging hard with Westone 3 - I disagree with you on what they sound like if you get things down correctly. With all IEMs the matter is not of just getting a seal, but also of getting the driver in the correct position. Degree of variability differs, depending on many many variable.

My point is: if you figure it out (from what I understand some people have besides me, although alot of them are UM56 owners), you get forward mids, softened extended treble, and impactful deep bass (which is what Westone promised to deliver with these essentially), but unfortunately we are left to our own resources figuring out the fit.

Lastly: Spyro: have you tried using biflanges? My experience with all other fittings mirrors the general opinion, but I didn't see anyone messing with these.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredman22 having preconcieved perceptions of what a W3 ought to sound like after that.

Similarly, I had preconceived notions of what Westone 3 is supposed to sound like (well I also heard one of the prototypes which sounded in a peculiar manner which was great apart from an issue with a midrange bloom that apparently they worked on fixing all this time). I was extremely disappointed ... so it may be a matter of guess work that I was able to actually reproduce the sound that I was expecting (no EQ involved, and I used MS1 as a consistent sound reference).

 

[Spyro]

Actually I think I started with bi-flanges. When I got them to sound pretty neutral it was by only inserting them to where your ear just grabbed them but in doing this they kind of stick out and the fit isn't real secure. Putting them all the way in they seemed siblant probably because the driver was too close to the eardrum. The majority of the time I used full size complys. Perhaps if I tried backing those off a bit?

 

[MaloS]

You started with biflanges? Hrm...tri's are the stock, you need to modify those.

Moving the driver away from the eardrum at first sight seems to help deal with sibilance and lower midrange / upper midbass bloat, but you get variety of other issues. My main good experience is using biflanges (I cut off the tip from triflanges) and jamming them as far as possible along with rotating them such that body is somewhat below the tip.

 

[Young Spade]

Westone 3: Overall, better mix of mids and highs
Triple Fi: Better highs
Shure: Better mids
THey all have great bass.

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaloS /img/forum/go_quote.gif You started with biflanges? Hrm...tri's are the stock, you need to modify those. Moving the driver away from the eardrum at first sight seems to help deal with sibilance and lower midrange / upper midbass bloat, but you get variety of other issues. My main good experience is using biflanges (I cut off the tip from triflanges) and jamming them as far as possible along with rotating them such that body is somewhat below the tip.

Yes, I have many sets of triflanges and modified biflanges from all of the Shure and Ety products I have owned over the years. I'm also well aware of the angle orientation. I found actually to be most important with ER4's. Always insert at a 30 degree upward angle.

 

[MaloS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, I have many sets of triflanges and modified biflanges from all of the Shure and Ety products I have owned over the years. I'm also well aware of the angle orientation. I found actually to be most important with ER4's. Always insert at a 30 degree upward angle.

With W3 so far it is not the upward angle, but rather having the tube follow the earcanal. You make a strange curvature aiming towards the back of your head. The rotation is necessary in order to facilitate this given the fairly large body of W3.

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Qusp, as an MOT, you aren't allowed to give subjective opinions on anything in the forums. Just thought I'd let you know.

well I may as well stop posting altogether then; since 99% of any posts made on here are subjective view on a product. I have read the rules and I took it to mean that I cant make a subjective review or comment pertaining to my own or my competitors products. I make LODs, IC,'s mod ipods etc. I have asked for a custom tag under my avatar to show what my company is; the fact my sig is full of DIY cables isnt enough it seems. I will have to clear this up with jude; I actually did talk with him about that very rule you speak of, I will have to check my communications with him as i'm sure I had asked about that, because it stuck out to me. the MOT rules as posted, were copied from another template, from another forum and some of them dont apply very well to this forum; all the same I will follow up. If I cant comment on anything, regardless of the fact that it has nothing at all to do with what I do, then that creates a large problem. I'm in the same boat as you guys, trying to find my own audio nirvana, if it means that I cant participate, then that is a rule that should be reviewed IMO; as without the ability to discuss the pros and cons of the gear I have and want to buy, then that puts me at a distict disadvantage


Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro Qusp...you are a "member of the trade"? For Westone by chance? There is absolutley NO WAY W3 is more balanced than TFPro. I would bet huge money that W3 is the most V-shaped freq response of any IEM ever made, period. As far as the midrange, I still prefer the smoothness of TFPro. It is slightly blurry but present whereas W3 it is a little siblant and clearly recessed. It is neither one's strong point but at worst I would call it a wash (even). This is personal preference but I MUCH prefer fit and comfort of TFPro. Much easier and faster to take in and out and only tip portion is touching your ear canal versus entire fairly large housing of W3 being mashed up against your entire ear canal.

I have no affiliation with any of these companies that are being discussed here; thats why i havent posted in the cables forum since I became an MOT. I am just a consumer when it comes to headphones etc. in fact if anything, if I recommended TF10 you would have been closer to the mark, as its the only one I can make a cable for. your experience with W3 is the oposite to mine and you are the FIRST person I have heard to prefer the fit/comfort of the TF10 over W3; I find that utterly confusing, but each to their own I guess. I felt like frankenstine with them on; even with the flip flop mod, impossible to lie down, wear a beanie or many hats and they are HUGE/ugly. the stock cable is a POC; stiff, thick and mine failed after having them for only 2 weeks, so I had to send them back for RMA exchange for SE530, which I preferred in every aspect. the sound with UM56 on W3 is very good IMO and not at all V-shaped; there is still a tendency towards the midbass, but nothing like the horrid grating highs I found the TF10 to have and the mids on TF10 were as you say; blurry and that is unacceptable to me, since the mids are where its at IMO and the reason why I still prefer the SE530 with some music. I also didnt have much luck EQing the TF10, the W3 on the other hand responds very well

rep for westone OMG I wish; then I could have a set of ES3X that i'm saving for/lusting after, for free.

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by geremy /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's hilarious that spyro accuses qusp as being a westone MoT when he lives in Australia and recommended the shure se530 over the westone.

ya; I thought that was a little funny myself

perhaps he just jumped straight away when someone was dissing TF10 and totally failed to notice I had recommended the SE530 to the OP

 

[cancam]

So most of you suggest that I should get a W3 for vocal instead of 10pro (Can't purchase a shure in my area)

Should female vocal be regarded as mid-range?

 

[MaloS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cancam /img/forum/go_quote.gif So most of you suggest that I should get a W3 for vocal instead of 10pro (Can't purchase a shure in my area) Should female vocal be regarded as mid-range?

Ya, just be prepared to do alot of work with getting the fit (or spend some money on um56 ).

 

[jyle_t]

yes, vocal wise, westone 3 will be better.
you can try playing vocal songs on foobar2000 (with that frequency spectrum bar chart on), that way you can see the range of frequency peaks for female vocals you listen to.

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cancam /img/forum/go_quote.gif So most of you suggest that I should get a W3 for vocal instead of 10pro (Can't purchase a shure in my area) Should female vocal be regarded as mid-range?

yep almost all instruments including the human voice are mostly in the midrange. and I would definitely recommend the W3 over the TF10. TF10 is good for classical if you can get passed the highs (I found them sibilant/fatiguing while W3 are not to my ears) the bass and highs are slightly more extended on TF10, but mids are not very nice and EQ didnt improve them for me. more of a bad thing is not an improvement.