[boodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFRfan there are certain similarities to my ears.

not only your ears really , in my short exp I found as canalps really approximate ( and can get really close with some flaws , punch and speed of attac of notes on all ) the sound of the best dynamic cans around

 

[zatara]

Thanks,
I was not trying to compare just a contrast of behavior. I have the DT-770/80's and really love the bass so I was just looking for some common ground with which
to evaluate from.
Quote:

Originally Posted by PFRfan Mt 770's are for sale (sold actually, it looks like), so that might tell you something. I'm suprised by how much the SF5P sound like the DT770-80s - bassy, crisp on top, but the SF5P seem to have more presence in the middle of the midrange. The Beyers extend the bass farther down. I fully expect the Beyers to respond to better amplification, though. Most guys will bug out over comparing regular headphones to IEMs. I'm not trying to do that, but there are certain similarities to my ears.

 

[BillC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kessomatt I went to guitar center and bought the last pair they had. Tried them in my car with my ipod and the left phone was dead. What a bummer... Now I have to drive to another GC tomorrow. I will say that only hearing the right side I was impressed with the bass compared to the e4c. I have a feeling I will be sending my e4c's back, seems that the superfi's are more ipod friendly, but I wont make my final decision till I hear out of BOTH phones(heh)

Make sure you try to reseat the cable on the "dead" side before you declare it dead. I lost one side of my SF5Ps and that's all it was. The replaceable cables are a great idea but it does mean that a connector can slip a bit on you. Once I reseated it I haven't had a problem since.

 

[KenB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boodi e4c look probably the most interesting midbudget canalphones.. waiting for more feedback and comparison before i try them

Wow! More comparisons and reviews...? No doubt you'll get them if you continue to wait, but there's an abundance of material already written and I think a concensus (although not unanimity) has materialized re: E4C's:

- E4C's represent a sonic enhancement over E2's and E3's (might be unanimous).
- E4C's are not as bass rich as E5's, but present more and cleaner treble and cost at least $150 less.
- Many/most owners report the E4C's bass to be adequate, tight, and balanced.
- Super.Fi Pros produce more bass than E4's, but less treble (rolled off).

After all the reviews I digested, I ruled out the Super.Fi's even though there was a lot of interest in them when they were first mentioned here. My decision came down to Shure E4C vs. E5C. I'll admit to being heavily influenced by Jude's post in which he provided a convincing rationale for preferring the E4C.

I did experience some early difficulties with the E4C's. Before becoming properly acclimated to them, I wore them too long/deep with the wrong fitting sleeve and ended up getting a very distorted perception. Thanks to advice from Head-Fiers, I cleared up those early misperceptions and am now truly enjoying the sound. I find the bass sufficiently deep/extended to be realistic, if not basshead quality, and the overall sonic spectrum is wonderfully detailed and nicely balanced. Since these are true canaphones (tight seal), unlike my previous EX71's, I am still getting used to the feel of them, the minor cable microphonics, and other noise caused by body movements. Those factors appear to be intrinsic to canaphones in general, regardless of manufacturer.

At one point, I thought I might sell the E4's in order to upgrade to the E5's, but I have since done a reversal on that notion. I have decided to keep these E4C's which, although not perfect, may very well be the best value available in canaphones from $175-250. After all, I don't think I want to pay more for earphones than I did for IPOD itself!

KenB

 

[kessomatt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillC Make sure you try to reseat the cable on the "dead" side before you declare it dead. I lost one side of my SF5Ps and that's all it was. The replaceable cables are a great idea but it does mean that a connector can slip a bit on you. Once I reseated it I haven't had a problem since.

I returned them right after, I did not realize the cables detached until I got home.

 

[ILikeMusic]

After all, I don't think I want to pay more for earphones than I did for IPOD itself!

Nothing wrong with that, though. Speakers are almost always the best place to put your money and often cost more than any of the other components in a hi fi system. No reason it should be any different with portables.

 

[BRBJackson]

Nicely done review, PFRfan

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFRfan Efficiency: SF5P are much easier to drive requiring about 20% less volume setting to get the same volume. Also, they sound great at all volume levels. E4C push my Karma more, and start to "blare" when I go too loud.

I'm actually finding that the 'blare' such as you describe may be more due to the high frequency response of the Shures than to their respective efficiencies. Granted, I'm comparing the SF5P's to my E3's, not E4's, but I find that really turning up my Shures can lead to a fatiguing sense of harshness. With the SF5P's, I can absolutely crank it up if I want to (not to dangerous levels, mind you...), and the sound still seems to be presented in a 'liquid' fashion. Perhaps since canalphones have such an up-close-and-personal physiological relationship with the ears, there is a lower tolerence for treble frequencies than there would be with Grados/bowls for example? Of course, this wouldn't explain how something like the UE-10 Pro's can have so much high-end energy without sounding harsh (as I've experienced)... More listening and investigation is in order for me.

 

[thebrain]

Does the well represented treble make the e4c fatiguing to listen to after a little while?
thanks

 

[some1x]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thebrain Does the well represented treble make the e4c fatiguing to listen to after a little while? thanks

Not fatiguing at all. The E4 isn't bright or tipped up. The E4 might be the most tonally balanced phones I've owned so far, excluding the HP2. But this is just one parameter of the sound..

 

[thebrain]

Great news, because I am very eager to get tehse
so you could listen to them for say an entire feature length film and not be fatigued, as with my e3c's?

 

[some1x]

I don't watch movies, so wouldn't know about that. I've listened to music for 5 hour stretches (mostly classical, some pop).

 

[Spacko]

Great review. nice presentation which ultimately made it easier to compare and see the pros and cons of both 'phones. So good that i have finnaly made my mind up over which ones...shure E4c

 

[thebrain]

A 5 hour stretch? Thats impressive. That'll do just fine for me. Thanks for the info

 

[PFRfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRBJackson I'm actually finding that the 'blare' such as you describe may be more due to the high frequency response of the Shures than to their respective efficiencies.

Yeah - I didn't really clarify what I meant, and the placement of my statement about "blare" made it look like it had something to do with efficiency, when it really doesn't. I was just in that section when I thought of it

.

Also, thanks to everyone for all of the kind words. I didn't expect it to be used as a decision making reference. It's just one guys impressions. I'd still much prefer to hear the promised comparisons of more recognisable members. I sure hope that I don't steer anyone away from the SF5P, because I think they're great. I didn't say this in the review, but to me they sound like a better E3C. The overall tone is similar, just better in every point. I like them a lot, just not as much as my E4C...

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRBJackson Nicely done review, PFRfan I'm actually finding that the 'blare' such as you describe may be more due to the high frequency response of the Shures than to their respective efficiencies. Granted, I'm comparing the SF5P's to my E3's, not E4's, but I find that really turning up my Shures can lead to a fatiguing sense of harshness. With the SF5P's, I can absolutely crank it up if I want to (not to dangerous levels, mind you...), and the sound still seems to be presented in a 'liquid' fashion. Perhaps since canalphones have such an up-close-and-personal physiological relationship with the ears, there is a lower tolerence for treble frequencies than there would be with Grados/bowls for example? Of course, this wouldn't explain how something like the UE-10 Pro's can have so much high-end energy without sounding harsh (as I've experienced)... More listening and investigation is in order for me.

I think the harshness actually comes from the upper midrange - lower treble.