[luisdent]

I must be weird because i love the er4s cable. Sure a bit less noise would be nice? But otherwise, it's not that bad. I have the red/blue version. I add a small corcular cord lock at the upper half to slide the channels together ar the chest level. Otherwise it's very durable. I like the length most of the time too. But I'm not against other cables. Especially if they are easy to wrap up into a small case. That's my biggest beef. But that's not the cable as much as the resister, which is why i think the new model would benefit by losing that all together.. But i digress...

 

[moseboy]

 
 
I haven't seen one of those in person yet, but that certainly does look like a nicely designed connector.

 
Quote:

   
That's the issue we've found when researching various connectors.

 
When you guys were looking into different connector types, did you consider using an SSMCX and/or screw-type connector, or had you made your decision before you even knew such a connector was an option?

 

[AnyDave]

   
Dave,
 
Has Etymotic given consideration to offer different cable types, e.g. inline microphone for calls, on this high end model? 
 
Best,
Chris

 
Hey Chris,
 
Yep, we've certainly been considering many options.

 

[AnyDave]

   
When you guys were looking into different connector types, did you consider using an SSMCX and/or screw-type connector, or had you made your decision before you even knew such a connector was an option?

 
The SSMCX wasn't on our radar but we did look at screw types (including tooling up our own).  In the end, we never made it work to our liking for one reason or another.

 

[saxon48]

Speaking of cables: will the new models be sporting the same length as the previous ones?

 

[luisdent]

I just had an idea. You had mentioned wanting to keep the center piece on the cabe to identify it as an etymotic...

One area of contention for some people has been the cable length. Some love it, some hate it...

I would personally think it was pretty cool if that center cable piece was a female 3.5mm connector. And you could include a long and short cable extension.

I have a sony model like this, and it's cool to have any length you want. And it's also cool to be able to buy any 3.5mm cable to use with it. And that way you would still have the ety branding but it would be functional...

It may not be easy to tell, but in this model the earphones only hang down to about your chest. The second half is an extension. But i think it would be cooler to have the female connector as part of the upper half...

 

[AnyDave]

I just had an idea. You had mentioned wanting to keep the center piece on the cabe to identify it as an etymotic...

One area of contention for some people has been the cable length. Some love it, some hate it...

I would personally think it was pretty cool if that center cable piece was a female 3.5mm connector. And you could include a long and short cable extension.

I have a sony model like this, and it's cool to have any length you want. And it's also cool to be able to buy any 3.5mm cable to use with it. And that way you would still have the ety branding but it would be functional...

It may not be easy to tell, but in this model the earphones only hang down to about your chest. The second half is an extension. But i think it would be cooler to have the female connector as part of the upper half...

 
Yep, I've seen cables like that over the years.  It could certainly be done, although we'd have to change the look a little bit.
 
At this point in the development, the design is pretty much frozen and we're entering production.  It's a bit late to change the design of the cable, but we may offer other options in the future.

 

[moseboy]

   
The SSMCX wasn't on our radar but we did look at screw types (including tooling up our own).  In the end, we never made it work to our liking for one reason or another.

 
Is it possible at this point to disclose why? I understand if not.
 
Just to give some context as to where I'm coming from, I've been wanting to get the ER-4S for many years, but hearing about build quality issues with the housing (particularly the stem) always turned me away. I ended up getting the Shure SE535 at one point, which was my first earphone with a detachable cable that had an MMCX connector. While I did end up selling it shortly thereafter for mostly sound-related reasons, I was quite disappointed by the MMCX connector as it regularly caused mini-dropouts and static to interrupt a listening session.
 
Fast forwarding to now, I'm enthralled that the housing build quality has improved and that the ER-4SR gets even closer to your ideal target than the already-very-close ER-4S, but I'm hesitant about the connector (as I'm sure you can tell). I just need some peace of mind to know that another expensive earphone purchase that involves a detachable cable connector won't end up like my experience with the SE535.
 
Thanks again

 

[AnyDave]

   
Is it possible at this point to disclose why? I understand if not.
 
Just to give some context as to where I'm coming from, I've been wanting to get the ER-4S for many years, but hearing about build quality issues with the housing (particularly the stem) always turned me away. I ended up getting the Shure SE535 at one point, which was my first earphone with a detachable cable that had an MMCX connector. While I did end up selling it shortly thereafter for mostly sound-related reasons, I was quite disappointed by the MMCX connector as it regularly caused mini-dropouts and static to interrupt a listening session.
 
Fast forwarding to now, I'm enthralled that the housing build quality has improved and that the ER-4SR gets even closer to your ideal target than the already-very-close ER-4S, but I'm hesitant about the connector (as I'm sure you can tell). I just need some peace of mind to know that another expensive earphone purchase that involves a detachable cable connector won't end up like my experience with the SE535.
 
Thanks again

 
I could probably write a novel explaining various things that have been tried and why we decided to go another direction.  Needless to say, it would be quite long and likely very boring.
 
I'd rather focus on your (completely understandable) concerns about the MMCX and its use in our new design.  As I've hinted at earlier in the thread, I know where folks are coming from with some of the MMCX implementations out there.  I've certainly seen how they get loose over time and why some folks don't like them.  In every instance where I've seen this problem, it's been because the entire physical connection relied on the snap interaction between the snap ring of the MMCX plug and the MMCX socket.  These designs can freely rotate and the cable can often rock in place before it physically detaches.  With enough rocking back and forth, the connection starts to feel loose.
 
Because of this, we countersunk the socket.  It might help to explain a bit about how the cable assemblies are made.  Basically, there are two molded sections of the plug section of the cable:
 
1.)  Hard inner mold - This performs a few functions.  It's primary function is to hold the MMCX plug and trap the cable in the hard section of the cable which improves the pull force reliability at the earpiece.  There is also a section that mates with the earpiece.  It fits within the inside of the body of the earpiece which keeps it snug in place and has a key to prevent it from rotating.
 
2.)  Soft outer mold - This is actually molded on top of the hard inner mold.  This is the strain relief section of the cable that improves the flex life reliability of the cable at the earpiece.
 
So basically, the section of the cable assembly that is countersunk into the earphone body prevents the cable assembly from moving.  Because of this mechanical support, it shouldn't get loose like a connector that relies solely on the MMCX snap ring and socket. 
 
 

 

[Jupiterknight]

I find it interesting that the two new version's of the ER-4's have an impedance of 45 Ohm. I understand that it is two new types of single BA drivers, Knowles ED-xxxx or not, but upgraded and what else may surround the driver to approach your ideal freq target better.  
 
However, I remember a very long time ago (+6 years) I read that someone from the Etymotic department mentioned something/somewhere about that they felt that if they had/could released an Ety-4 with the impedance of around 50 Ohm it would hit the sweet spot between the ER-4S and ER-4P. Taking the warmth from the P version (bass enhanced as some perceive it) and and at the same time more or less retaining the upper midrange/treble detail from the S version. So at the same time  a release of an Etymotic ER4 with its best, tuned driver, easier to drive from the the many, various, DAP's and cell phone's that are available today without adding an external amplifier and still reach a near full potential of the ER-4 S/P performance. All subjective, of course..
 
So, I'm just curious if this aspect was part of creating the new Etymotic's R&D? Why did it take so long? )  I personally really like the "old" Ety-4 with an impedance around 45-60 Ohm, a bit more than either the P or S versions. 

 

[AnyDave]

  I find it interesting that the two new version's of the ER-4's have an impedance of 45 Ohm. I understand that it is two new types of single BA drivers, Knowles ED-xxxx or not, but upgraded and what else may surround the driver to approach your ideal freq target better.  
 
However, I remember a very long time ago (+6 years) I read that someone from the Etymotic department mentioned something/somewhere about that they felt that if they had/could released an Ety-4 with the impedance of around 50 Ohm it would hit the sweet spot between the ER-4S and ER-4P. Taking the warmth from the P version (bass enhanced as some perceive it) and and at the same time more or less retaining the upper midrange/treble detail from the S version. So at the same time  a release of an Etymotic ER4 with its best, tuned driver, easier to drive from the the many, various, DAP's and cell phone's that are available today without adding an external amplifier and still reach a near full potential of the ER-4 S/P performance. All subjective, of course..
 
So, I'm just curious if this aspect was part of creating the new Etymotic's R&D? Why did it take so long? )  I personally really like the "old" Ety-4 with an impedance around 45-60 Ohm, a bit more than either the P or S versions. 

 
That's very interesting.  I'd be curious who at ER mentioned that because it certainly wasn't me as I wasn't even considering that change 5-6 years ago.  The new driver was developed in lockstep with the new metal housing, which is fairly recent.
 
But it's not really surprising.  There are a bunch of smart folks at ER.  It's possible that somebody there looked at an impedance change years ago.  I couldn't tell you why it wasn't implemented.

 

[Jupiterknight]

   
That's very interesting.  I'd be curious who at ER mentioned that because it certainly wasn't me as I wasn't even considering that change 5-6 years ago.  The new driver was developed in lockstep with the new metal housing, which is fairly recent.
 
But it's not really surprising.  There are a bunch of smart folks at ER.  It's possible that somebody there looked at an impedance change years ago.  I couldn't tell you why it wasn't implemented.

 
I don't remember who it was, it was a very long time ago and it certainly wasn't you..
 
Yes, ER is one of the few audio gear companies that I actually truly respect, because you stay true to your original product, minor changes, you don't oversell your product as others tend to do in this time and age, but we can still ask questions and I believe the Ety/HF community appreciate this! So we will keep asking..  Thank you

 

[gortman]

I'm not sure how that's all going to shake out.  I'd love to see a loyalty upgrade program.  I'll be sure to put in my 2 cents about that but it's not really my decision.

That would be an amazingly nice gesture for sure. Crossing my fingers that it might come to pass.

 

[ClieOS]

   
Hey Chris,
 
Yep, we've certainly been considering many options.

 
BTW, just throwing this out there - have you guys considered making balanced cable for the new models? Not really something I am personally interested, but there are many portable audiophile players out there that have balanced output (i.e. A&K, Pono, Hifiman, etc) and I can see a demand for it. If not, I hope the stock cable will at least have separated ground wires for left / right channel to the 3.5mm plug so people can easily re-terminate it for balanced audio, since finding a aftermarket balanced cable that have the same MMCX connector design might not come quick enough.

 

[AnyDave]

   
BTW, just throwing this out there - have you guys considered making balanced cable for the new models? Not really something I am personally interested, but there are many portable audiophile players out there that have balanced output (i.e. A&K, Pono, Hifiman, etc) and I can see a demand for it. If not, I hope the stock cable will at least have separated ground wires for left / right channel to the 3.5mm plug so people can easily re-terminate it for balanced audio, since finding a aftermarket balanced cable that have the same MMCX connector design might not come quick enough.

 
We've definitely discussed it.  As soon as I have more info, I will absolutely post it here.
 
I am curious what the demand for it will be.  I'd love to hear from the balanced cable crowd.