Since there’s limited info out there on the Etymotic ER3XR, here’s my take compared to the ER4XR. I’ll add that I am a Product Designer who has designed headphones in a prior job for a major HP company & will comment from that perspective:
From a hardware perspective, they are largely the same:
Earphones – Same dimensions, the 3XR’s are matte black anodized with lasered graphics, the 4XR’s are polished 80% grey anodized with pad printed graphics. The 4XR’s are made in the USA.
Cable – Same cable strain reliefs, the 3XR has smooth cables throughout, a shorter laser engraved Y splitter with injected slider & is 4ft in length. The 4XR is 5ft, with braided upper cables, a larger Y splitter & a thin slider, the lower cable is much thicker. The 90 degree 3.5mm jack seems identical with a narrow neck to fit phone cases.
Accessories – the 4XR has multiple earplugs of the same size whereas the 3XR only has one of each & one mini carrycase. The 4XR includes the mini & an additional large carry case & has nicer packaging presentation overall with the signed channel matching card.
As for the sound quality, I’d have to agree with the FR graph posted earlier by CSGLINUX.
ER3XR: Specifically seems to have a hair more bass overall, esp with a slightly more punchy mid-bass region vs the 4XR. The 3XR feels more suited to Hip-Hop+Electronic+Pop music etc. Achieving a stronger seal also pulls out the bass even more, at the expense of comfort due to the added pressure. They are also about 10% easier to drive out of my smartphone than the 4XRs. Seems Ety wanted to make the 3’s slightly more palatable for mainstream tastes yet keep the ER4’s accuracy intact.
ER4XR: Seems to bring out the treble more giving it a slightly airy’er, lightweight feeling vs the 3XR. The 4XR have no problem bringing out delicate, barely perceivable sounds whereas with the 3XR they are still there but perhaps not as effortlessly presented. On a technical level the 4XR wins & works especially well with string instruments & female vocals IMHO. Soundstage on both are about the same – average. Both seem to be able to handle a touch of EQ’ing with the bass if desired.
One thing I did struggled with: the cable on the 4XR is long with a braided upper portion making them less practical for portable use - I noticed the heavy cable splitter tugging & the braided cable rubbing on the collar of my jacket while walking around, giving a fair amount of microphonic noise which can get annoying since the isolation/noise floor is so good. Wearing them over the ear is also weird since the strain relief points outwardly. This might be the nature of the beast with deep-insertion earphones but the 3XR fairs better here with their fully smooth & slightly shorter cable with slightly smaller, more reasonably sized cable splitter (I’m not aware of any resistors in there, so can’t really understand Ety’s decision making). I also preferred it’s injected cable slider vs the 4XR’s odd thin one with little cable grip. The lack of a L/R ‘dot’ or color coding is also a minor miss… Small things I know, but living with these things everyday these details can become significant. For desk use the 4XR’s 1ft longer cable is much better.
In summary, these two models are much more similar than I expected. The differences I noted in the SQ are very slight, within a ~5% range I’d say, so take that for what its worth. They both sound great & very Etymotic’y, but with a more fulfilling/Harmon response curve type sound vs the traditional Ety signature. Unfortunately I can’t speak to how either of these compare to the SR versions, but I’ve always struggled with the coldness of Ety's older models, preferring a warmer, more natural tuning which is why I’ve given them another shot with their ‘XR’ lines.
For mobile/daily use I prefer the ER3XR’s simply due to their practical benefits, easier going sound signature for long listening & bang-for-the-buck… If I was an audio professional sitting stationary (& I didn’t need an extra $170), the 4XR’s would take it… but only by a hair.
I agree. I've been listening to the four sets off an on for a few days straight. Here is my overall impression of the differences:
4xr: The 4xr is my favorite. It has just the right balance of bass and treble overall to give me the impression of a real studio monitor sound. It absolutely nails the treble accuracy of the four. While the treble of the 4sr is essentially identical, the lack of bass weight in comparison makes it sound a bit more fatiguing.
4sr: The treble is phenomenal and the lower mids are a bit more open sounding than the 4xr, but the lack of lower bass removes the realistic "weight" of the sound just a bit making them more fatiguing in comparison but also a bit more revealing of high end timbre.
3xr: These are essentially the 4xr with a downward tilted treble at 2khz and up. This makes for a very relaxing tonality, but for me personally it is "just" a hair too far into the overall sound being too bassy. During a long listening session of just the 3xr, I find myself wishing the upper half of the sound spectrum weren't as "low" in the mix. It is warm, bassy, and relaxing while retaining all of the er4 glory, but for me it's just not the right balance of low and high overall.
3sr: THIS thing is a dang beast. I said before that it is sort of in between the 4xr and 4sr, and I still hold to that. The signature is essentially a 4sr with downward tilted treble. But you could look at it the other way around and say it is like the bass is being upward tilted to a degree instead. Basically like the 4xr. But the difference is that the 4xr only tilts the bass up below "roughly" 400-500hz. The 3sr turning point is 2khz. so you're getting a warmer tone to the tilt, which is why to my ears it is between the 4sr and 4xr.
For the record my favorites are the 3sr and 4xr with a very close rating. Next would be probably a tie between the 4sr and 3xr, because i like both for different reasons and they both lack the same amount of accuracy compared to what I prefer as "neutral". The 3xr is a bit too bassy but has the benefit of being the least fatiguing of all of the sets and the more relaxing. However, the 4sr has the least bass, but it has the benefit of being the best linear treble. So they are sort of equal but different.
All of the sets sound incredibly good though, and if I didn't have my er4xr I'd be hard pressed not to buy just an er3sr. I would say in terms of pure "value", there isn't a single better earphone on the planet in my opinion. But the er4xr to me is slightly more accurate, and I'm willing to pay the double price for that personally. But I realize not everyone would. In fact, the difference in accuracy is probably small, whereas the price difference is not small. So I highly recommend them all, but for someone who is very limited in budget, but wants something as accurate as possible, the er3sr is absolutely amazing.
Lastly, I do believe you can hear a slight difference in the response in the treble of the er3 series vs the er4. While they are almost identical but downward tilted, they are not identical. Look closely and around 9khz and higher the treble isn't lowered as much compared to the er4. I've been hearing this before seeing the graphs. The effect that has to my ears is that the er3 has a darker overall treble, but sometimes seems to pull at as much "upper" treble. So the sound is sort of crisp and tight and you hear a lot of snap in the treble, even though it is darker in tone overall.
This is a very interesting sound, and in some small way it sometimes sounds like there is more space in the treble and distinction between instruments. But when compared closely to the er4 the treble lacks the ultimate balance that reveals "all" instruments clearly.
So you lose a bit of accuracy perhaps, but gain a touch of definition in the upper treble since it is now elevated from the main treble a bit.
Hopefully that makes sense. And before I ever saw the graph I knew the treble tilt started at exactly 2-3khz just by ear. Etydave can verify that.
