[gnarlsagan]

The 232's have way more bass and treble emphasis compared to the 112's. If you like a flatter (DF reference) sound then don't do it!

 

[pacman46]

The 232's have way more bass and treble emphasis compared to the 112's. If you like a flatter (DF reference) sound then don't do it!

perfect..thank you..ya at 600 bucks I'm not going for them..I don't like that v sound really at all..I'm going to try the 112s..thank you

 

[pacman46]

The 232's have way more bass and treble emphasis compared to the 112's. If you like a flatter (DF reference) sound then don't do it!

perfect..thank you..ya at 600 bucks I'm not going for them..I don't like that v sound really at all..I'm going to try the 112s..thank you

 

[pacman46]

Stupid phone..sorry for the double post grrrr lol

 

[robm321]

I agree, the 112s are great. I wouldn't bother with the colored 232s. They basically caused the company to drop out of the IEM business. The 112s come very close to the Etys with Olive tips. Unfortunately, I got the first batch which practically disintegrated on me. They have since fixed the quality issue. 

 

[luisdent]

Quote:

lol in regards to the previous comments
 
ER4S isn't that accurate, it lacks bass and has too much 1-3k [which narrows it's soundstage], the Olive-Welti curve shows this. [it also caps at 17k]. Still far better than a lot of IEMs out there, but that needs to be made clear. Hmm matter of fact the flattest itteration may be the ER4P+33ohms+red/orange knowles dampers
 
A graph will show if the FETG111 kept some of the great attributes of the ER4 and improved in some, obviously if it doesn't hold a candle to it, the graph will show. 
 
GE's graph are a big joke..the most bogus compensation I've seen that has no scientific backing, only their raw graphs are helpful and even then, they're not specific about their methodology. 

 
I agree it lacks some bass, but overall I hear no noticeable peaks otherwise, and the 11-3k issue and soundstage issue are gone completely with the right tip/depth combination.  With certain tips, yes, but others no.  Oddly for me, the deeper the tips go, the wider and more "real" the soundstage is for me.  So I use the foam tips or comply tips inserted deeply and I have no issues with those two things at all.
 
As for GE graphs, "the most bogus you've ever seen"?  Wow.  I've yet to see one that visually matches what I hear.  As a matter of fact, proof that they are accurate is in the accudio app.  It literally applies an eq compensation to the graphed response of each earphone to bring the line as close to flat as possible.  Thereby bringing the sound close to reference.  I've replicated the sound the accudio results in using a parametric eq, and it does indeed only eq the earphone in a negative compensation to achieve flat.  Every single earphone I've used it with sounds flat and consistently the same with accudio.  In other words, if the earphone is capable of at least reproducing all the frequencies (no matter what response they have) and I didn't know what earphones were in my ears, with accudio applied I'd have a hard time telling the difference between them.
 
This shows that at a minimum all of their graphs are almost perfectly consistent.  Add to that the fact that they actually logically make visual sense, and I've yet to see a better graphing method.  I don't care what method you use, all of the graphs I see have bogus "looking" lines that are impossible to interpret unless you understand all the math and science behind the graph.
 
The GE graphs are perfectly logical.  Start with a flat earphone and add treble, their graphs show a hump in the treble.  Take away bass, their graphs show less bass.  Other graphs show weird ranges and curves that don't follow the sound.  I've seen graphs like headphone.com that show a decreasing bass response on an earphone that is clearly boosted bass.  I'm sure it is simply the type of curve and the units of measurement, etc. but that just doesn't make visual sense to how it sounds.
 
The GE graphs to me look like someone took a flat reference plane and they're showing you what you would do to an equalizer to achieve the earphone's actual sound.
 
Lastly, I'm not sure what you're looking for, but their info is pretty straightforward with how they graph:
 
http://en.goldenears.net/388

 

[luisdent]

Quote:

I've been thinking about getting the pfe232 ..I've read alot about the 112 ..and from what I've read alot of people who like the etys likes the 112 too..what is the difference in sound between the 112 and the 232 ?? Besides alot of money lol those things ain't cheap holy crap lol..I do love my etys..and I find that when I use the complys or the soft ones that come with the etys..not too sure what they are called...that I get a great seal without any of the pain..plus I'm getting lots of bass with them..more then with the tri tips.. Are the 112s more flat and more accurate then the 232s.. Thank you for your input.

 
I'd stay away from the pfe232 at all costs if you want reference.  They are a very high quality earphone in most respects and have incredible bass, but they are far from flat in reality.  I would describe them as a very good sounding V shape earphone with which some people have sibilance issues and some do not.  But flat they are not.  The pfe112 is very similar to the etymotic but with certain differences.
 
The etymotics are more flat in the treble and reveal a little more depth and smoothness to the sound.  The pfe112 are a bit more peaky, however this can be reduced with deep insertion and using foam tips as well.  I actually like the silicon tips for the treble when I have them in deep and sealed well, but the foam smooths everything out nicely.
 
The biggest difference I find is that the pfe112 has the bass the er4s "should" have.  It's not dramatically louder, but it is noticeable and the pfe112 is what I consider more reference bass level.  You can more clearly hear that it is extending all the way down to human hearing limits and there is a tad more meat to the bass, but with a similar "type" of bass as the etymotic.  Imagine the ety with a slightly bassier sub bass but slightly more treble and less smoothness in the mids.  Not that they aren't smooth, but the etys are really nice in that respect.
 
That's my thoughts anyway.  pfe112 is a billion times more comfortable though.  haha

 

[tigon_ridge]

I wouldn't mind at all a twin of the ER4S that has a bit more decay in the mid-range, and a bit less of the 1-3kHz peak. From what I saw, the F111 may have the exact same peak in the exact same size. I know it's an attempt to make monitors sound speaker-like, but I feel monitors shouldn't try to be what they're not. That peak is a bit too jarring to my ears most of the time. Trying to be like speakers is the same reason why there's a plethora of IEMs out there with exaggerated bass, including the most popular ones: UM3X, W4, W3, GR07, on and on and on... All of these make vocals sound somewhat distorted, and in every single case, bass sounds are competing for the spotlight against vocals. I don't understand why accurate sound has to be such a niche. Only ones I've read about so far that are supposedly similar to the ER4S are the F111, 112 and RE-272... but the RE-272 is too amp-picky, and the F111 costs a kidney. *sigh*
 
I actually like that there is a peak in the 1kHz-3kHz range, just not so much. Through equalization I was able to shorten its height by about a third, and that seems to be the sweet spot for me.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

I wouldn't mind at all a twin of the ER4S that has a bit more decay in the mid-range, and a bit less of the 1-3kHz peak. From what I saw, the F111 may have the exact same peak in the exact same size. I know it's an attempt to make monitors sound speaker-like, but I feel monitors shouldn't try to be what they're not. That peak is a bit too jarring to my ears most of the time. Trying to be like speakers is the same reason why there's a plethora of IEMs out there with exaggerated bass, including the most popular ones: UM3X, W4, W3, GR07, on and on and on... All of these make vocals sound somewhat distorted, and in every single case, bass sounds are competing for the spotlight against vocals. I don't understand why accurate sound has to be such a niche. Only ones I've read about so far that are supposedly similar to the ER4S are the F111, 112 and RE-272... but the RE-272 is too amp-picky, and the F111 costs a kidney. *sigh*
 
I actually like that there is a peak in the 1kHz-3kHz range, just not so much. Through equalization I was able to shorten its height by about a third, and that seems to be the sweet spot for me.

 
There's also the excellent and fairly underrated Sony MDR-7550 (in Asia known as MDR-EX800ST) which doesn't cost an arm and a leg, BTW.
 
 
--------------
 
 
Although this thread is titled "If you still love Etymotic ER4, this is the thread for you", and seeing what been discussed in the last couple of pages, and FWIW, I'll copy and paste two comments I made recently in two separate threads:
 
"I'd been questioning the accuracy of several FR graphs of IEMs (not of full-sized headphones) for quite some time. This questioning became even stronger after I got the HD600 in November last year and, later, the HD800s in January, the latter of which I've been using almost exclusively for 2.5 months on a daily basis.

A few posts back I wrote that "[the FI-BA-SS] may not have the most 'correct' FR, or not as 'correct' as that of the F111…" ---- Although I find the F111 to be an excellent IEM, I found myself reaching much more often for the FADs for the simple reason that my ears kept telling me the latter rendered music (most, if not all, genres) more realistically / faithfully. I find the exact same thing with the HD800 & HD600. Of all the IEMs I've ever heard, only the AKG K3003 (with the reference filter) & the FI-BA-SS have managed this, though the former is closer sonically to the HD800's sonics than the FADs. The F111s, by contrast, I found worked very well almost exclusively with very well recorded and/or mastered music. However, to me, a very good ear/headphone—an excellent one, at that, like the HD800—has to be able to handle all genres AND different recording / mastering types competently while obviously shining on better source material. That's not what I found with the F111 (or the EX1000s, another earphone I regard very highly), and I did get a perfect fit. However, I understand this view may not necessarily be shared by all those who would be able to compare both F111 & FI-BA-SS side by side in a quiet environment (like I did)."


"There is a reason why not everyone likes the ER-4S/P as much as other phones—even when some may own a pair, still enjoy it and perhaps even have a reasonable amount of respect for Etymotic—and it is not only because people don't manage to get a good fit or seal or because today's people's music tastes are all about "da bass"."

 

[pacman46]

I'd stay away from the pfe232 at all costs if you want reference.  They are a very high quality earphone in most respects and have incredible bass, but they are far from flat in reality.  I would describe them as a very good sounding V shape earphone with which some people have sibilance issues and some do not.  But flat they are not.  The pfe112 is very similar to the etymotic but with certain differences.

The etymotics are more flat in the treble and reveal a little more depth and smoothness to the sound.  The pfe112 are a bit more peaky, however this can be reduced with deep insertion and using foam tips as well.  I actually like the silicon tips for the treble when I have them in deep and sealed well, but the foam smooths everything out nicely.

The biggest difference I find is that the pfe112 has the bass the er4s "should" have.  It's not dramatically louder, but it is noticeable and the pfe112 is what I consider more reference bass level.  You can more clearly hear that it is extending all the way down to human hearing limits and there is a tad more meat to the bass, but with a similar "type" of bass as the etymotic.  Imagine the ety with a slightly bassier sub bass but slightly more treble and less smoothness in the mids.  Not that they aren't smooth, but the etys are really nice in that respect.

That's my thoughts anyway.  pfe112 is a billion times more comfortable though.  haha

thanks..appreciate that..when you talk about the.. Foam tips..are you taking about the ones that come with the etys or are you talking about the complys?? I really don't like the way the complys make them sound..I find they loose that sparkle in the high end..but with the foam ones that come with them I find they sound really good...??thank you.

 

[luisdent]

Quote:

I wouldn't mind at all a twin of the ER4S that has a bit more decay in the mid-range, and a bit less of the 1-3kHz peak. From what I saw, the F111 may have the exact same peak in the exact same size. I know it's an attempt to make monitors sound speaker-like, but I feel monitors shouldn't try to be what they're not. That peak is a bit too jarring to my ears most of the time. Trying to be like speakers is the same reason why there's a plethora of IEMs out there with exaggerated bass, including the most popular ones: UM3X, W4, W3, GR07, on and on and on... All of these make vocals sound somewhat distorted, and in every single case, bass sounds are competing for the spotlight against vocals. I don't understand why accurate sound has to be such a niche. Only ones I've read about so far that are supposedly similar to the ER4S are the F111, 112 and RE-272... but the RE-272 is too amp-picky, and the F111 costs a kidney. *sigh*
 
I actually like that there is a peak in the 1kHz-3kHz range, just not so much. Through equalization I was able to shorten its height by about a third, and that seems to be the sweet spot for me.

 
I'm really curious to hear the 272 myself.  I think there is another re-XXX model too that was supposed to be pretty flat.

 

[Pianist]

I highly recommend that you guys try out RE400. I am so excited about them right now. They are not 100% neutral, but sound really natural. Bass is almost as tight as that of ER4, but extends lower and has a more realistic impact. The mids are much smoother than those on ER4 while retaining most, if not all of the resolution. The highs are not quite as good as on the ER4 - they are somewhat more peaky on the RE400 - but their resolution is actually really good and, again, close to that on ER4 IMO. Where RE400 really shines is timbre and soundstaging - real instruments and vocals sound very realistic through RE400, sometimes even beating out my HE500 in realism. This is a big improvement over RE262 and 272 IMO, which sound plasticy compared to RE400. I actually found RE0 to have the most accurate timbre in Hifiman IEMs until RE400 came out. Now, RE400 takes RE0's place as an even more natural sounding IEM with much better dynamics, resolution, bass and soundstage than what RE0 was capable of IMO. Another thing that RE400 excels at is soundstaging and imaging. The sound is far more 3D, taller and deeper than with the previous generation Hifiman IEMs and really puts the ER4 to shame in this regard. ER4 is still clearer, faster and perhaps more resolving, but RE400 is close - really close.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

I highly recommend that you guys try out RE400. I am so excited about them right now. They are not 100% neutral, but sound really natural. Bass is almost as tight as that of ER4, but extends lower and has a more realistic impact. The mids are much smoother than those on ER4 while retaining most, if not all of the resolution. The highs are not quite as good as on the ER4 - they are somewhat more peaky on the RE400 - but their resolution is actually really good and, again, close to that on ER4 IMO. Where RE400 really shines is timbre and soundstaging - real instruments and vocals sound very realistic through RE400, sometimes even beating out my HE500 in realism. This is a big improvement over RE262 and 272 IMO, which sound plasticy compared to RE400. I actually found RE0 to have the most accurate timbre in Hifiman IEMs until RE400 came out. Now, RE400 takes RE0's place as an even more natural sounding IEM with much better dynamics, resolution, bass and soundstage than what RE0 was capable of IMO. Another thing that RE400 excels at is soundstaging and imaging. The sound is far more 3D, taller and deeper than with the previous generation Hifiman IEMs and really puts the ER4 to shame in this regard. ER4 is still clearer, faster and perhaps more resolving, but RE400 is close - really close.

I was reading the RE400 and RE600 thread just as you were writing up this post. Indeed, the RE400 seems very interesting! I loved my (now broken) RE0, which I found to be very similar sounding to the ER4S.

 

[Pianist]

Quote:

I was reading the RE400 and RE600 thread just as you were writing up this post. Indeed, the RE400 seems very interesting! I loved my (now broken) RE0, which I found to be very similar sounding to the ER4S.

 
Well, I am not sure if you know, but I used to be a big fan of RE0. I felt that they were the most balanced and correct sounding Hifiman IEMs before the RE400 came out. I easily preferred them to RE252 in nearly every way and found that they had a more realistic timbre than RE262 and 272, which is likely due to superior acoustic properties of RE0's metal shell, compared to the RE200 series plastic shells. Now, with the RE400, I suspect that Fang went back to using the RE0 driver, but with titanium coating for improved diaphragm control and transients, as well as the new, elongated shell for superior acoustic properties and the result is an IEM with a similar, superbly balanced tone of RE0, but much better dynamics, low end performance, resolution and overall transparency. Fang really hit the nail on the head with this one IMO and I think that if you liked RE0 and found it close to ER4S in performance, then you will find RE400 to be equal to or better than ER4S - RE400 is a very noticeable improvement over RE0 on nearly all fronts. Also, the ergonomics are much improved on the RE400 - RE0 was fairly easy to fit, but these things just slide into my ears with no effort at all and are so small that they completely disappear in the ear, allowing me to easily lie on my side in bed, for example, which is not possible with most other IEMs. I think the finish and durability on the RE400 are also much better than those of RE0 and other Hifiman IEMs and it doesn't have the cable defect of RE0 - at least for now.

 

[kkcc]

Quote:

 
Well, I am not sure if you know, but I used to be a big fan of RE0. I felt that they were the most balanced and correct sounding Hifiman IEMs before the RE400 came out. I easily preferred them to RE252 in nearly every way and found that they had a more realistic timbre than RE262 and 272, which is likely due to superior acoustic properties of RE0's metal shell, compared to the RE200 series plastic shells. Now, with the RE400, I suspect that Fang went back to using the RE0 driver, but with titanium coating for improved diaphragm control and transients, as well as the new, elongated shell for superior acoustic properties and the result is an IEM with a similar, superbly balanced tone of RE0, but much better dynamics, low end performance, resolution and overall transparency. Fang really hit the nail on the head with this one IMO and I think that if you liked RE0 and found it close to ER4S in performance, then you will find RE400 to be equal to or better than ER4S - RE400 is a very noticeable improvement over RE0 on nearly all fronts. Also, the ergonomics are much improved on the RE400 - RE0 was fairly easy to fit, but these things just slide into my ears with no effort at all and are so small that they completely disappear in the ear, allowing me to easily lie on my side in bed, for example, which is not possible with most other IEMs. I think the finish and durability on the RE400 are also much better than those of RE0 and other Hifiman IEMs and it doesn't have the cable defect of RE0 - at least for now.

 
I have both ER4S and RE400 but still don't think RE400 is "better" or can replace my ER4S.  Fit and comfort wise RE400 is superb and the I can't fault its sound (especially at this price point but not because of it).  But ER4S scale much better with your amp/dac than RE400.  Using my AK120 now I'm loving my ER4S even more.  I still haven't been able to find a "better ER4S".  Must confess I went away from it since I don't lug around a stack and went with dedicated players but the ER4S and FT334 are my two go-to IEMs these days.  I mainly use RE400 in bed or when I went go out with just my Note2.  
 
I still LOVE my ER4S (so much so I'm on my 3rd pair now)!