[Mecc]

Could you list some tracks or cds where you should be able to pinpoint the high roll offs? That would be very helpful. I have a lot of music, about 2 TB worth of lossless, but no live experience with real performances. I actually have lots of classical music but some of the stuff sounds quite different from one another... probably due to the recording equipment used during different times. I have no idea what music "should" sound like. I admit to being an audio noob.

I'm interested in understanding more since I'll be able to judge headphones and equipment more properly. I got a pair of K1000s, that should be enough to discern the differences. When I listen to music with the Westone 3, I actually just pay attention to vocals. High roll off seems like an issue you'd have a problem with if you're listening critically or with certain types of genres. I only use the Westone 3 on the go and I just follow along with the lyrics.

Etymotic er4p is probably your best choice of IEM for classical. But yeah, this info is very important for people interested in buying the Westone 3, especially for critical listening.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif If they fit, then they essentially all sound very similar--I do not believe the different tips will significantly change the sound signature of the IEM--that would be a terrible design flaw if that were true.

Tips significantly change the sound, and yes, it is a terrible design flaw.

What you want to mess around with vis-a-vis the fit is driver/ear distance. When the headphones are inserted as far in as they will go, you will get the sound that you describe - bloated, overbearing bass, rolled-off highs that are also quite steely and sibilant to boot, and a midrange that's recessed, half swallowed by the bass, and is tonally very wrong.

Try to maximize driver/ear distance while maintaining a good seal. I do this by using oversize tips (large clear plastic ones sound the best for me but are terribly uncomfortable) and seating the canalphones just outside the ear canal rather than ramming them in. That brings the bass back into balance, evens out the mids, and takes the steel out of the highs, though nothing will give the highs the extension they should have had to begin with.

The W3 is hardly a world-class headphone sonically but it's closer to being a good headphone than any universal-fit IEM has done thus far. Though to be honest, it still has a long, long way to go.

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch /img/forum/go_quote.gif Tips significantly change the sound, and yes, it is a terrible design flaw. What you want to mess around with vis-a-vis the fit is driver/ear distance. When the headphones are inserted as far in as they will go, you will get the sound that you describe - bloated, overbearing bass, rolled-off highs that are also quite steely and sibilant to boot, and a midrange that's recessed, half swallowed by the bass, and is tonally very wrong. Try to maximize driver/ear distance while maintaining a good seal. I do this by using oversize tips (large clear plastic ones sound the best for me but are terribly uncomfortable) and seating the canalphones just outside the ear canal rather than ramming them in. That brings the bass back into balance, evens out the mids, and takes the steel out of the highs, though nothing will give the highs the extension they should have had to begin with. The W3 is hardly a world-class headphone sonically but it's closer to being a good headphone than any universal-fit IEM has done thus far. Though to be honest, it still has a long, long way to go.

The sound I described is not quite that bad--there is no sibilance or harshness at all--simply recessed detail in the upper frequencies. The bass in the 100Hz region is boosted about 3~4db, and the treble in the 12Khz~14Khz range is about 3~4db recessed. If you do an EQ tweak like I showed in the picture attachment, you'll get something that's far closer to what "neutral" sounds like, although the highest frequencies will always be a bit rolled off because the W3 has a slight limitation in the upper frequency by design (by about 2Khz or so).

I have been using IEM for a couple of years now and have done enough experimenting with the tips to have a pretty good idea of maximum isolation vs good sound reproduction vs comfort. I have tried all the tips, and I pay attention to whether they are sealed well, pushed too far in, and how they sound as I move them in and out of the ear...etc. The frequency spike/recess is the same with all the tips that seal well and are comfortable--I can reproduce the EQ setting test with all tips and get the same result. The idea of the different tips is really to get one that fit in the sweet spot of your ear canals while providing proper seal and maximum comfort--I don't think they were ever designed to act as some kind of physical EQ for your ears.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecc /img/forum/go_quote.gif Could you list some tracks or cds where you should be able to pinpoint the high roll offs? That would be very helpful. I have a lot of music, about 2 TB worth of lossless, but no live experience with real performances. I actually have lots of classical music but some of the stuff sounds quite different from one another... probably due to the recording equipment used during different times. I have no idea what music "should" sound like. I admit to being an audio noob. I'm interested in understanding more since I'll be able to judge headphones and equipment more properly. I got a pair of K1000s, that should be enough to discern the differences. When I listen to music with the Westone 3, I actually just pay attention to vocals. High roll off seems like an issue you'd have a problem with if you're listening critically or with certain types of genres. I only use the Westone 3 on the go and I just follow along with the lyrics. Etymotic er4p is probably your best choice of IEM for classical. But yeah, this info is very important for people interested in buying the Westone 3, especially for critical listening.

I don't know if this Chinese retailer allows returns--typically in China they are bad about returns in general. We'll see. If I do get to return them, I will have to research very carefully about what IEM to replace the W3's with.

As far as the listening materials, I have a huge range of stuff that I've used for many years as monitor testing tracks. If you want to test for specifically the recessed highs in the 12Khz~14Khz region, the most prominent examples would be tracks that have orchestral strings playing in normal to high registers (namely violins and violas, or cellos playing in the higher octaves). That treble recess isn't as starkly obvious if you listened to just rock or electronica. Since classical recordings of the same pieces are so numerous, it's probably best if I name something easier to find. Here are a few tracks I thought the recessed treble was very obvious (I won't name anything obscure like my Japanese game/film scores collection):

(Try the EQ setting I showed, then listen to these examples. Listen without the EQ and get used to the track first, then turn the EQ on at the points I've marked and you'll hear all the shimmer and high frequency detail that was missing.)

Starship Troopers (film score) - Klendathu Drop. All the high frequency buzz of the military styled snare drums are gone. Also the brass section's high frequencies are gone.

Lisa Ekdahl's album "Sings Salvadore Poe" (bossa nova/jazz vocals) - Rivers of love. There's some pretty prominent hi-hat playing in the rhythm section, and Lisa's voice is one where the higher frequencies are crucial--both are muffled by the W3. Also, without the EQ tweak, the bassline will become too muffled and dominating. In jazz music the bass boost of the W3 is particularly problematic since jazz double bass tends to resonate more than typical electric bass or synth bass in a mix.

Fast and the Furious (film score) - track 9 Hot Fuji. There are upper frequency percussions like the shaker and cymbals sprinkled among the other skin-based percussions, and the recessed frequencies of the W3 makes it hard to hear those instruments clearly. Once you turn on the EQ setting I showed, they become a lot more detailed.

Total Recall (film score) - Clever Girl. Around 2:25 and on, there's some pretty interesting orchestration with the brass and strings, and the recessed high frequencies muffles the buzzing of the brass blasts or the energetic string parts.

The Sheltering Sky (film score) - track 2, the Sheltering Sky theme, where the strings pick up the drama at about 3:50

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch /img/forum/go_quote.gif Tips significantly change the sound, and yes, it is a terrible design flaw. Try to maximize driver/ear distance while maintaining a good seal. I do this by using oversize tips (large clear plastic ones sound the best for me but are terribly uncomfortable) and seating the canalphones just outside the ear canal rather than ramming them in. That brings the bass back into balance, evens out the mids, and takes the steel out of the highs, though nothing will give the highs the extension they should have had to begin with.

I agree but doesn't the regular size comply achieve just that? Perfect seal and great comfort yet still a good amount of distance between end of nozzle to end of tip. It's the only one that really sounds right to me but I think it sounds fabulous!

 

[mvw2]

The impression I got with trying different tips is that they do influence frequency response some. However, with each tip, I can re-EQ and end up with the same end result. As well, the tips don't create major enough of changes to fix any major response problems. If you've got a -10db dip by 16kHz, no tip will fix that. You might be up to -7dB with one particular tip, but you'll still need to use a good bit of EQ to bring it up either way. There can be a slight difference in the stage presence from the physical location of the IEM vs. canal/drum, but it's not a tremendous change. My RE0 came with 6 different tips. I've used all of them and pretty much end up at the same end result. Only one tip was significantly different, and that was the biggest bi-flange because it barely gets into my ear at all. I lost a lot of bass response. All the others worked about equivalent to each other with some minor changes in response that could be EQed slightly to correct again. It was just that none did anything significant enough to cause significant changes.

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let me preface this by saying that my taste for sound reproduction devices is very simple--accuracy, neutrality, defined, clear, no hype or dip in any frequency range, as deep a soundstage and expansive stereo imaging to accommodate all recording's original intent, fast transient response, smooth (no graininess), and I believe when a pair of speakers/headphones achieve that, there's no longer any need for words like "musical" or "fun" or "dynamic," nor is there need for descriptions like "great for (insert genre of music) but not as good on other genres)." In short, if a sound reproduction device itself does not color the sound, then the only thing left is the intent of the original recording/mixing/mastering engineers. Sound reproduction devices should not sound "warm" or "clinical" or whatever other adjectives used to describe these products--they should simply be invisible and let the original recordings express the artistic ideas intended. A piece of music should only sound warm if that's what the original mastering engineer wanted, not because a pair of speakers/headphones colored them that way. If a recording is supposed to sound very clean and clinical, the that's how the speakers/headphones should reproduce them. If we expect our TV screens to not have a noticeable color cast (too much blue or red or green), then why do we tolerate sound reproduction devices that leave their fingerprints all over the music they reproduce? Unfortunately, it appears to be easier to reproduce a neutral TV screen than it is a neutral pair of speakes/headphones (I could be wrong about this though). So, with that out of the way, let me share my impression of the Westone 3. I got them in the mail today and have been testing them for a whole day. I purchased them from a reputable dealing online here in China (¶ú»ú£*°²ÈóÉ̳ǣºÆ·ÖÖ×îÆëÈ«µÄ¸ßµµ¶ú»úÉ̳Ç) for roughly $291 USD. I compared the Westone 3 to the following: Klein + Hummel O 300D (3-way professional reference monitors in a fully acoustically treated studio using broadband absorbers--see my website for photos of the studio) Sennheiser HD555 (open back headhpones) I purchased the Westone 3 to replace my destroyed Shure E4C (I was never totally happy with the E4C due to the anemic bass and slightly hyped high's around 12Khz-ish). I essentially had to listen with EQ compensation and that drains the battery faster and I really wanted a pair of IEM's that required no EQ'ing to be totally accurate and flat across the frequencies (as much as possible). The most accurate sound production tool I have in the studio are my Klein + Hummel O 300D's, and I trust them completely, especially after doing shootouts between various professional monitors over the years. I know it's unfair to compare headphones to monitors, or full sized headphones to IEM's, but I have no other quality IEM on hand to test against (the only other IEM in the household is my wife's JVC Marshmellows, and they are definitely not high-end). So, I tested the Westone 3 against the Sennheiser HD555 (which I purchased after doing extensive testing against the HD600 and felt the HD555 was just a tiny bit warmer--meaning the high's are slightly rolled off, and that tiny bit of difference didn't not justify the much more expensive price of the HD600 for me) and the K+H O 300D's. I tested with a wide range of styles--from jazz, classical, electronica, industrial, rock, pop, trip-hop, soundtracks, and so on. I also tried all the different tips available. First of all, the tips either fit or they don't--there's not in-between. If they don't fit you do not get a proper seal (or they fall out easily) and that's the end of the story. If they fit, then they essentially all sound very similar--I do not believe the different tips will significantly change the sound signature of the IEM--that would be a terrible design flaw if that were true. If it fits (meaning getting proper seal), then that's it--nothing more to say. After hours of testing and comparing, this is what I found: 1) The Westone 3 is not neutral or accurate. The high's are significantly rolled off--to the point of sounding like a veil is placed in front of the tweeters. The bass is hyped, to the point of sounding muddy. I was not happy about this because with all the research I've done, the Westone 3's are supposed to be one of the more neutral/accurate sounding IEM's on the market currently. As things stand, I cannot use them without customized EQ settings, and this is enough for me to exchange them for something else (I don't know if the online retailer even allow it). 2) In comparison, my Sennheiser HD555 sounds far more similar to my K+H O 300D's than the Westone 3's. This leads me to believe that the higher end Sennheisers are indeed quite accurate in general (the HD555 is only their mid-level product). 3) I started to troubleshoot Westone 3's frequency curve and I tried to match a custom EQ setting on the Westone 3 to sound like the Sennheiser HD555 and the K+H O 300D's. This is what I ended up with: (I also double checked by reversing this EQ setting on the HD555 and K+H so they sound like the Westone 3's.) As you can see, the high's in the 12Khz~14Khz area had to be bumped up quite a bit, while the low's in the 170Hz range had to be pushed down quite a bit as well to get rid of the muddiness. With this setting, the Westone 3's sound close enough to the HD555 and K+H's that if they sounded that way naturally, I'd be happy with them. So, as things stand, I'm pretty disappointed. After all the hype and reading dozens and dozens of pages of forum discussions and reviews, I still ended up with an unsatisfactory product. Before I go ahead and try to exchange the Westone 3, I'd like to hear from those of you who have both the Westone 3 and a Sennheiser HD500 to 600 series full size headphones. Can you please replicate my EQ settings and see if you also get a very close match between your Westone 3 and your Sennheiser HD 500/600 series (please don't try this if you have some other number series of Sennheiser headphones because they do not sound like the 500/600 series. For example the HD280 Pro sounds nothing like the 500/600 series). I'm asking for this because there's a small part of me that wonders if I had gotten a fake one (it's China afterall). I kind of doubt it since the retailer is fairly reputable and the packaging looks perfectly legit to me. IF there's way to spot fakes, please let me know--just in case. So, with all that I've said, if I were to exchange the Westone 3's, what is a far more accurate IEM? The goal is to get a pair of IEM that require no custom EQ settings to sound neutral and accurate.

Not only were my highs recessed -- the same veil in the way problem, but the bass on mine is so anemic as to be almost absent!

I compared them to my old UE2s, and discovered that the older monitors delivered much better quality sound.

However, all Westone monitors are "warmed" up, especially in the midrange. It's their characteristic sound sig which is very pleasant if you use an ipod with less compressed or uncompressed files. I called Westone and they have asked me to return the monitors to them for repair as they are not delivering sound that is as good, let alone better than the UE2s. They say that my experience is an extreme rarity, but I'm beginning to suspect that it's a lot more widespread. The monitors were delayed because of production problems, and I now suspect those problems may still be around.

Unfortunately, you live in China where the monitors are manufactured but not close to Westone HQ in USA. It would be foolish to ship them to the USA for repair or replacement, so I suggest that you return them to the buyer and try to get them replaced or exchanged (under warranty) from your dealer. Try emailing Westone with your finding and see if they won't authorize the exchange.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Lunatique,

Based on your requirements, I think a Phonak Audeo with grey filters would be a great choice for your listening needs. No bass or mid-bass humps but deep bass extension, with crystal clear mids and highs and great extension there as well. It's a $150 IEM that sounds like a $250-300 IEM, effectively competing with Image X10/SE530 (bass hump and rolled off) and even the Triple.fi which to me are slightly colored sounding compared to the Phonak.

 

[catscratch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree but doesn't the regular size comply achieve just that? Perfect seal and great comfort yet still a good amount of distance between end of nozzle to end of tip. It's the only one that really sounds right to me but I think it sounds fabulous!

Too small. I can get a decent seal in the left ear without having to push it too far in, but in the right ear in order to get a seal it has to be too close to the eardrum to maintain good sound. The large-sized tips on the other hand are too big and are quite uncomfortable after a time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif The sound I described is not quite that bad--there is no sibilance or harshness at all--simply recessed detail in the upper frequencies. The bass in the 100Hz region is boosted about 3~4db, and the treble in the 12Khz~14Khz range is about 3~4db recessed. If you do an EQ tweak like I showed in the picture attachment, you'll get something that's far closer to what "neutral" sounds like, although the highest frequencies will always be a bit rolled off because the W3 has a slight limitation in the upper frequency by design (by about 2Khz or so).

Balanced armatures don't have any meaningful output past 16khz anyway, so if treble extension is a priority, I'd look into a dynamic driver. The ER-4S does have decent treble extension but that comes at the price of very severe lower treble emphasis. Other than that, I don't know of any universal-fit balanced armature canalphone that will do extension even remotely well. There are customs that will work, of course, but that's a completely different price category.

 

[Lunatique]

I asked Westone for a frequency response chart so I can be sure of my EQ settings (turns out I cannot return the W3--I'm not surprised since that's how China is in general). This is their reply:

Quote:

I'm sorry to say that at this time Westone does not release frequency response charts. I will, however, keep your e-mail on file in the case that we do change that policy and I will let you know. I apologize for not being able to further assist you with these inquires. Thank you and have a great day.

I hope they do release the frequency response chart, or some audiophile/headphone website will do their own independent test and show the results (like headphone.com).

 

[mvw2]

I'm curious how many years it will be until head-fi catches up to home-fi in the sense of manufacturer provided specs.

The most you can do now is EQ it yourself and see how far it is off your ideal. The downside is it will be your particular ear flat and not true flat. Along with the response, the presentation needs to be there too, and no amount of EQing will change a headphone's various sound characteristics. In home audio, you can't exactly make a Morel sound like a Scanspeak, just can't happen. You work on frequency response, but that's about it. If you want a different sound signature, you need a different piece of hardware.

What you have to ask yourself now is it a frequency response issue that can be fixed or a sound characteristic issue that can not? Can you live with EQing or do you really need to step to a different piece of hardware?

I'll note the W3 really isn't a burden on you. It will quite readily sell in the for sale section even if Westone won't take it back. Just think critically about the device and decide if you can or can not live with it. Everyone has their own preferences and one should not expect Bob's favorite IEM to also be Tom's favorite IEM. Not everyone likes the same thing. Many folks do really like the W3 for their own personal reasons. You may or may not.

 

[eio]

hi rob, i'm perfectly agree with your way of judging sound quality, and i'm also a new user of Westone 3 (using Etymotic ER4P previously)

the first impression i've got on my Westone 3 is quite similar to yours: extremely boomy 100~200hz, thin and distorted mid-range, noisy highs.

totally unacceptable, even for half the price of it really costs. the only thing that Westone 3 satisfied me is its comfortability.

but wait. then i found out this pair of IEMs changes drastically in the burn-in process! and the time it takes to fully burn-in is ridiculously long

i'm burning it with white/pink noise in large volumn(2x normal listening volumn), 24*7, for 10 days now (roughly 200+ hrs), and it's still changing!
in the early hours the boomy lows were back to relatively normal, then the sound field was open, then the lows continued to going thinner and deeper, as well as the mid are floating up now...i've no idea what it will finally become but it's definitely not what it was in the begining.

i'm totally confused now, i've never seen a instrument takes so much time to burn-in and changes so much in the process as the Westone 3. but it really does so.

 

[kite7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eio /img/forum/go_quote.gif hi rob, i'm perfectly agree with your way of judging sound quality, and i'm also a new user of Westone 3 (using Etymotic ER4P previously) the first impression i've got on my Westone 3 is quite similar to yours: extremely boomy 100~200hz, thin and distorted mid-range, noisy highs. totally unacceptable, even for half the price of it really costs. the only thing that Westone 3 satisfied me is its comfortability. but wait. then i found out this pair of IEMs changes drastically in the burn-in process! and the time it takes to fully burn-in is ridiculously long i'm burning it with white/pink noise in large volumn(2x normal listening volumn), 24*7, for 10 days now (roughly 200+ hrs), and it's still changing! in the early hours the boomy lows were back to relatively normal, then the sound field was open, then the lows continued to going thinner and deeper, as well as the mid are floating up now...i've no idea what it will finally become but it's definitely not what it was in the begining. i'm totally confused now, i've never seen a instrument takes so much time to burn-in and changes so much in the process as the Westone 3. but it really does so.

Hello and welcome to Head-Fi,
I'm not sure if burn-in exists, many people including me will conclude that armatures don't need burn-in and that any changes is pretty much mental burn-in. Although I haven't done the same procedure as you burning in with pink noise for 10 days straight, I do have about 200 hours usage on them and I really can't say there was any big change, it was all about the tip and fit for me that really changed the sound.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kite7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hello and welcome to Head-Fi, I'm not sure if burn-in exists, many people including me will conclude that armatures don't need burn-in and that any changes is pretty much mental burn-in. Although I haven't done the same procedure as you burning in with pink noise for 10 days straight, I do have about 200 hours usage on them and I really can't say there was any big change, it was all about the tip and fit for me that really changed the sound.

Yup, pretty much.

 

[Spyro]

After 2 months of steady use I found no change in the sound. Still too boomy bass, weak midrange and too fatiguing treble. This is after exhausting every tip combo known to mankind (except custom).

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're right, and that is the unfortunate truth. But if we can get the most neutral sounding equipment, at least we won't be veering off in some direction that makes the original "coloring" of the recording even more unbalanced. The more neutral our sound reproduction system is, the more likely we won't further color something that's already colored in a negative way. It's exactly like if we stand at the middle of a circular platform, and if the original recordings push us this way or that way, we'll still be on the platform--just further away from the middle. If we were standing closer to the edge of the platform, we can get pushed off completely if a certain recording pushes us in that direction.

i see a problem with needing 'nuetrality' in music to make it good. most music is not mixed for headphones. thus, headphones' deficiency which is lack of visceral impact is not taken into account. whether or not w3 or ie8 or other headphones are too bassy should not be a matter. the most neutral phones i have heard are the er4s according to graphs but i have never heard live or studio music ever sound so bass anemic. headphones cannot be neutral - it will ruin the music as if they were, they would play only into their own weaknesses and none be fun at all to listen to.

it is nice that makers are thinking of these things to help out the listener. most users of the w3 seem very very happy with their purchase 'neutral' or not.