I've been comparing S and B for a while now, and after the new toy syndrome wore off, I've come up with some more sober impressions of the sound, and would like to see what other people think.
FR differences aside, the ER4B is a LOT more dynamic than the ER4S. Just looking at bass, it takes like 5dB of bass boost on the ER4S to achieve anywhere near the level of bass impact that the ER4B has, and it's still not quite there. And this applies to the entire frequency range; the ER4B is just able to produce much more natural depth and imaging than the ER4S, which sounds flat and shallow by comparison. Playing back the extremely high dynamic range cannon blasts from 1812 overture (cincinnati pops/erich kunzel) with the orchestra turned up to about the same volume on each, with ER4S i didn't even flinch at the blast, while with ER4B I nearly jumped out of my seat. There's also a fantastic recording of Sarasate's Navarra on Youtube (Paul Huang) where the ER4B really excels on the dynamic shifts and separation between the two violins.
However, after also EQing one into the other and comparing to the real thing, I am getting the feeling that the ER4S is overall more detailed and cleaner in the mids and highs. It's like the ER4B is starting to push the BA to its limits, and it shows. ER4S reveals more texture on cymbals, and on fast metal it is less harsh and more coherent, even when I apply EQ to change it to approximately ER4B response. But it really noticeably lacks in dynamics, with everything sounding flat and boring, without all that much distinction between a fairly compressed metal track and a well recorded jazz album.
But I'm not certain that er4b=less detailed impression im getting isn't just some weird psychoacoustic thing so I figured I'd ask around, specifically for impressions about the detail resolution of S vs B as well as the overall presentation and dynamics (not frequency response/tonality)