[AnyDave]

  After a few days listening to the ER4SR at home and on the go, I think I definitely like these a lot.
 
Three words come to my mind: dry, fast, spacious. The SR sounds more even than the 4S and has a lot of texture, transient is crazy good and it manages to squeeze out much more detail than the ER-4S, at least to my ears. Very good layering and sounds pretty airy, less congested than the 4S. On some tracks I find myself wishing for a little more bass, but nothing bad overall. I'm not a true audiophile nor an audio professional, but they definitely impressed me on my favorite orchestral works, it just sounds much closer to being true than pretty much every other IEM I've tried. I also noted that vocals sounded less 'in your face' than with the original ER4 series. Lisa Gerrard's voice in Gladiator's OST doesn't sound as involving as with the ER-4S (which is probably my only disappointment). Other than that, I'm very impressed by the sheer resolution of the SR. I play the saxophone and on well recorded saxophone quartets/ensembles, there's absolutely no mix up, everything seems perfectly defined and clear.
 
 
Ps. to EtyDave, (as noted in luisdent's review) is it normal for the little ring between the earpiece and the connector to slightly wriggle along with the connector, as if it wasn't 100% securely attached?

 
I'll admit that I haven't had a chance to watch luisdent's whole review.  I'll comment on this after I've had a chance to view it.

 

[rebbi]

One more dorky question.
 
Even though I've owned my Ety ER-4P's for 7 years now (and just had them rebuilt), I've never really understood the difference between the 4P, 4S and 4PT. Can anyone summarize here? It'd help me understand the comparisons a bit better.
Thanks!

 

[Happytalk]

I believe the 4p and pt are the same. It has to do with resistance. When a 75 ohm adaptor is added to the er4p or pt it becomes the harder to drive er4s. To me the er4p is a wonderful sound, but the er4s is somehow more refined and organized, if I may. I can listen for hours to the er4s. The extra resistance seems to balance things out sonically and essentially makes the er4p grow up. There's your non scientific description.

 

[luisdent]

  After a few days listening to the ER4SR at home and on the go, I think I definitely like these a lot.
 
Three words come to my mind: dry, fast, spacious. The SR sounds more even than the 4S and has a lot of texture, transient is crazy good and it manages to squeeze out much more detail than the ER-4S, at least to my ears. Very good layering and sounds pretty airy, less congested than the 4S. On some tracks I find myself wishing for a little more bass, but nothing bad overall. I'm not a true audiophile nor an audio professional, but they definitely impressed me on my favorite orchestral works, it just sounds much closer to being true than pretty much every other IEM I've tried. I also noted that vocals sounded less 'in your face' than with the original ER4 series. Lisa Gerrard's voice in Gladiator's OST doesn't sound as involving as with the ER-4S (which is probably my only disappointment). Other than that, I'm very impressed by the sheer resolution of the SR. I play the saxophone and on well recorded saxophone quartets/ensembles, there's absolutely no mix up, everything seems perfectly defined and clear.
 
 
Ps. to EtyDave, (as noted in luisdent's review) is it normal for the little ring between the earpiece and the connector to slightly wriggle along with the connector, as if it wasn't 100% securely attached?

 
completely agree.  i find the er4s had that smooth slightly boosted mids, which sometimes added to the impression of vocals being in your face and thick. the er4sr in my opinion, i'm starting to feel, is more accurate. but sometimes vocals seem different then i'm used to, but in the end, i usually find that compared to studio monitors the er4sr seem more accurate in this regard even if that extra "color" seems pleasing sometimes...

 

[luisdent]

 

  After a few days listening to the ER4SR at home and on the go, I think I definitely like these a lot.
 
Three words come to my mind: dry, fast, spacious. The SR sounds more even than the 4S and has a lot of texture, transient is crazy good and it manages to squeeze out much more detail than the ER-4S, at least to my ears. Very good layering and sounds pretty airy, less congested than the 4S. On some tracks I find myself wishing for a little more bass, but nothing bad overall. I'm not a true audiophile nor an audio professional, but they definitely impressed me on my favorite orchestral works, it just sounds much closer to being true than pretty much every other IEM I've tried. I also noted that vocals sounded less 'in your face' than with the original ER4 series. Lisa Gerrard's voice in Gladiator's OST doesn't sound as involving as with the ER-4S (which is probably my only disappointment). Other than that, I'm very impressed by the sheer resolution of the SR. I play the saxophone and on well recorded saxophone quartets/ensembles, there's absolutely no mix up, everything seems perfectly defined and clear.
 
 
Ps. to EtyDave, (as noted in luisdent's review) is it normal for the little ring between the earpiece and the connector to slightly wriggle along with the connector, as if it wasn't 100% securely attached?

 
I'll admit that I haven't had a chance to watch luisdent's whole review.  I'll comment on this after I've had a chance to view it.

check it out if you like a lot of over talking

 

[Matte82]

  One more dorky question.
 
Even though I've owned my Ety ER-4P's for 7 years now (and just had them rebuilt), I've never really understood the difference between the 4P, 4S and 4PT. Can anyone summarize here? It'd help me understand the comparisons a bit better.
Thanks!

 
 

I believe the 4p and pt are the same. It has to do with resistance. When a 75 ohm adaptor is added to the er4p or pt it becomes the harder to drive er4s. To me the er4p is a wonderful sound, but the er4s is somehow more refined and organized, if I may. I can listen for hours to the er4s. The extra resistance seems to balance things out sonically and essentially makes the er4p grow up. There's your non scientific description.

 
That's basically it. I believe the extra "t" is for travel. I have the ER4PT's and they came with an airline adapter, and maybe a few other extras compared to the "p's".
 
As far as sound, the S's are harder to drive as mentioned. I honestly hadn't spent that much time comparing the audible differences, as I do have the P to S adapter and should have. Because after reading this I sat down and really compared. I agree with luisdent that some might call the P's "bassier", but imo it's not really the case. The P's seem to have reduced treble, which makes them seem "warmer". The S's add in some extra "sizzle and top end". But not in a harsh sort of way. Very clear and smooth. Kind of like taking a very thin veil off a speaker. After doing this I do much prefer the S sound. It's in no way major difference, but it's there, and I like it.
 
Also anyone have any idea why I noticed an increase in low end with ClieOS's cables? That's still the one thing I'm concerned about. I don't want to go back to the sound I had before them. Could I have really had a bad set of cables? I have both his P cables and his B cables. And both have very similar low end. So I don't think it was the new cables. I think my old ones were bad. But would hate to be wrong. Honestly if I knew for sure, I probably would have ordered the SR's by now. And am still very tempted to.

 

[Francisk]

   
 
 
That's basically it. I believe the extra "t" is for travel. I have the ER4PT's and they came with an airline adapter, and maybe a few other extras compared to the "p's".
 
As far as sound, the S's are harder to drive as mentioned. I honestly hadn't spent that much time comparing the audible differences, as I do have the P to S adapter and should have. Because after reading this I sat down and really compared. I agree with luisdent that some might call the P's "bassier", but imo it's not really the case. The P's seem to have reduced treble, which makes them seem "warmer". The S's add in some extra "sizzle and top end". But not in a harsh sort of way. Very clear and smooth. Kind of like taking a very thin veil off a speaker. After doing this I do much prefer the S sound. It's in no way major difference, but it's there, and I like it.
 
Also anyone have any idea why I noticed an increase in low end with ClieOS's cables? That's still the one thing I'm concerned about. I don't want to go back to the sound I had before them. Could I have really had a bad set of cables? I have both his P cables and his B cables. And both have very similar low end. So I don't think it was the new cables. I think my old ones were bad. But would hate to be wrong. Honestly if I knew for sure, I probably would have ordered the SR's by now. And am still very tempted to.

I have ClieOS' S and B cables and I love those cables. I don't hear any extra bass coming from them and both of them are still working perfectly since the day I receive them.

 

[Larethio]

What are your guys opinions on spinfit tips when used on er4 iems?

 

[Happytalk]

I have ClieOS' S and B cables and I love those cables. I don't hear any extra bass coming from them and both of them are still working perfectly since the day I receive them.

I notice the tiniest difference. Maybe the ever so slightest difference in bass presentation, not quantity. It's either better or the same, because I love it. Smoother? Plugged them into my integrated today and spun some vinyl. Incredible. I honestly don't know where else I could go with iems.

 

[luisdent]

Perhaps clieOs's cables have different impedance values than what yours had? If great enough, perhaps it could make a very slight difference in response like the ety adapter or absence of one?

As for the p/s, they are both great. And it could be argued that the p resolves some of the 2-3k boost on the s. But overall the s just edges out the p in reference treble overall. A small but nice improvement.

The sr takes it a step further

 

[moseboy]

I'm going to have to give the XR a really good listen, because what I've been hearing tonight... I dont think it could be beat.

You never did follow up on your conclusion

 

[luisdent]

For the record, I don't think I could part with either model. SR or XR... They're both amazing.

I'm not sure another company could sell me two earphones at once. Haha.

 

[Happytalk]

I noticed differences with aftermarket P to S adapters when compared to the OEM etymotic. The etymotic is best. I gather the cable is as well. The ClieOs cable is as good as far as I can tell. Probably not exactly the same. I don't know how two cables from to very different sources could be. I wondered about the impedence. It could also be the diff location of the resistors. Who knows. Not me!

 

[moseboy]

For the record, I don't think I could part with either model. SR or XR... They're both amazing.

I'm not sure another company could sell me two earphones at once. Haha.

Heh, yeah, that's really saying something. Especially coming from a sound engineer.

 

[tonehk]

Could someone please check if the new ER4SR or ER4XR is made in USA or china? Thanks!