[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TacticalPenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not trying to bash you or anybody else, I am just arguing against the idea that MSRP determines what you can compare. If you go by that logic, we should compare the HF5 and the ER 6i because they both have a $150 MSRP, even though the HF5 is newer and clearly better than the ER 6i.

That's Etymotics marketing department's problem, they still list them on the website as a current model. You can even buy it from their website. They are clearly overpricing 4 year old tech and trying to make it look like the HF5 and the er-6i are comparable at the same price. If some one didn't bother to check anywhere else they would think the er-6i and the hf5 are comparable. Etymotics is making them comparable by pricing them the same. If they had dropped the price on the er-6i no one would be confused.

Quote:

I just don't see how you can call the ER 6i an unfair comparison when it is one of the most popular $75 IEMs among Head-fiers and in the exact same price bracket as the apple IEMs.

No it isn't an unfair comparison. I conceed that point.

Quote:

Since the ER 4P MSRPs for 300, isn't it an even more unfair comparison? How dare you compare the Apple IEM to it!

Would you compare a Er4 and the HF5 since they both have about the same street price?


Quote:

All I'm saying is that you can't compare things based on MSRP, it is street price. The ER 4Ps now got for $160ish, so they are compared to qjays, SA6, SF5, etc, which also go for around that price. As for the car, obviously I would get the lexus if it was likenew for the same price, I dont care about MSRP, I care about what can I get for $X?

Fair enough.

 

[Spad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll post a thread with a much more detailed review. I need to spend more time with the Apple and NE-7m. I cancelled my order of the er-6i after listening to the NE-7Ms. If they are indeed like the er-6i I'd rather not add one more variable to the mix.

Wow! After reading this I promptly cancelled my NE-7M order. Since we are in such close agreement on the Apple IEM I doubt we'd differ much on the NE-7M.

Regarding your comments concerning the NE-7M and ER-6i, here's what HeadphoneAddict, one of the more respected IEM aficionados and a guy who has firsthand experience with them all had to say yesterday concerning how he ranks various models. He hasn't encountered the Apple IEM yet, but note that he places the NE-7M 8th and the ER-6i 13th on a list of 14.

1. Westone 3 with UM-56
2. Livewires
3. SE530 in Livewires custom molded acrylic shell
4. Image X10
5. Stock SE530
6. Triple.fi
7. SA6
8. q-JAYS or Nuforce NE-7M
9. de-podded IM716 (because they must be amped)
10. Denon C700
11. SE310
12. E4c
13. ER6i
14. Super.fi 5 Pro

Looks like you made a smart move in canceling the ER-6i I'd say. BTW, I'm listening to Mozart's Oboe Concerto (Hogwood/Academey of Ancient Music) and it sounds scrumptious over these things. I can't believe I'm so smitten by an $80 'phone!

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spad /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow! After reading this I promptly cancelled my NE-7M order. Since we are in such close agreement on the Apple IEM I doubt we'd differ much on the NE-7M. Regarding your comments concerning the NE-7M and ER-6i, here's what HeadphoneAddict, one of the more respected IEM aficionados and a guy who has firsthand experience with them all had to say yesterday concerning how he ranks various models. He hasn't encountered the Apple IEM yet, but note that he places the NE-7M 8th and the ER-6i 13th on a list of 14. 1. Westone 3 with UM-56 2. Livewires 3. SE530 in Livewires custom molded acrylic shell 4. Image X10 5. Stock SE530 6. Triple.fi 7. SA6 8. q-JAYS or Nuforce NE-7M 9. de-podded IM716 (because they must be amped) 10. Denon C700 11. SE310 12. E4c 13. ER6i 14. Super.fi 5 Pro Looks like you made a smart move in canceling the ER-6i I'd say. BTW, I'm listening to Mozart's Oboe Concerto (Hogwood/Academey of Ancient Music) and it sounds scrumptious over these things. I can't believe I'm so smitten by an $80 'phone!

The NE-7M is definitely a great value. At first blush my wife thought the NE-7M sounded better than the Apples. Then she listened to both of them again and said the Apple has a more sophisticated sound and better imaging and the NE-7M's sound stage sounds "squished".

She is an audiophile too.. doesn't care much for the terms but knows what she hears. She has auditioned everything I have and has a great ear.

Now I am thinking "What if what I am hearing in the Apple is just better clarity that dual drivers provide?". If that is the case then the Apple IEMs are a great value but suffer what I would consider limitations of the $80 MSRP production budget. I would like the sophistication of the Apple with a little more forward presentation.

 

[Spad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now I am thinking "What if what I am hearing in the Apple is just better clarity that dual drivers provide?". If that is the case then the Apple IEMs are a great value but suffer what I would consider limitations of the $80 MSRP production budget. I would like the sophistication of the Apple with a little more forward presentation.

I agree. If they can do this at the $80 level wouldn't it be great to see them try a triple at $250 or so?

Now I'm hoping (and expecting) the W3 to sound somewhere between the Apple IEM and the SA5K, and hopefully closer to the latter. If it's in that ballpark I'll be happy as the proverbial pig. I really wonder if there is any point in trying any other IEMs between the Apple and the W3. Some, like the IE8, Image X10 and UE Triple look interesting, but I can see me frittering away lots of green with that step-at-time approach.

If I keep Hemorrhaging money in the market at the rate I've been doing for the last several months I'm going to want something really nice to listen to while waiting in the soup line.

 

[TacticalPenguin]

"Would you compare a Er4 and the HF5 since they both have about the same street price?"
Yes, and people do. Basically every HF5 thread I've seen has mentioned the ER 4's or people have asked for a comparison. Many reviews on amazon compare it to the ER 4 as well.

 

[jonathanjong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NajoBB /img/forum/go_quote.gif Logically, you should compare two similar priced IEMs to see which is best, but it's not a fair comparison if they still have so different MRSP. They are in different categories.

I don't know about "logically", but yes, it's reasonable to compare similarly priced IEMs. I disagree that "it's not a fair comparison if they still have so different MRSP." This seems to be the argument:
1. MRSP-range determines "category."
2. IEMs should be compared within-category.
3. From 1. and 2., IEMs should be compared within MRSP-range.

The argument is valid, as 3 follows from 1 and 2, as far as I can tell. And 2 is uncontroversial, I think. But I submit that 1 is false. I just don't see why MRSP-range should determine category if by category, you mean something about quality. MRSP is a common heuristic for quality, but I don't think it's a good one. If it's used at all, it should be used with caution. It's an empirical question, of course, how good MRSP is at tracking quality. If 2 is false, as I submit but admittedly have no data to firmly conclude, then the argument is unsound and the conclusion should be rejected.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif manufacturers price should be anything but a guidepost for quality of sound or construction.

This is where shigzeo, TacticalPenguin and I (et al.) agree, and differ from NajoBB and oarnura (et al.), I think. A bit on the strong side, this comment, but I think the gist of it is basically right. For the reasons TacticalPenguin and I have given (i.e., pragmatic considerations about what consumers care about), categorizing IEMs by street price and comparing those within these categories makes more sense than using MRSP.

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathanjong /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know about "logically", but yes, it's reasonable to compare similarly priced IEMs. I disagree that "it's not a fair comparison if they still have so different MRSP." This seems to be the argument: 1. MRSP-range determines "category." 2. IEMs should be compared within-category. 3. From 1. and 2., IEMs should be compared within MRSP-range. The argument is valid, as 3 follows from 1 and 2, as far as I can tell. And 2 is uncontroversial, I think. But I submit that 1 is false. I just don't see why MRSP-range should determine category if by category, you mean something about quality. MRSP is a common heuristic for quality, but I don't think it's a good one. If it's used at all, it should be used with caution. It's an empirical question, of course, how good MRSP is at tracking quality. If 2 is false, as I submit but admittedly have no data to firmly conclude, then the argument is unsound and the conclusion should be rejected.

Your argument is flawed. If I can procure a er-6i for $10 and a JVC marshmallow for $10. Comparing the two is a pointless exercise. The er-6i would be clearly better because at one time it was a mid-range IEM and the JVC has always been an low end one.


Quote:

This is where shigzeo, TacticalPenguin and I (et al.) agree, and differ from NajoBB and oarnura (et al.), I think. A bit on the strong side, this comment, but I think the gist of it is basically right. For the reasons TacticalPenguin and I have given (i.e., pragmatic considerations about what consumers care about), categorizing IEMs by street price and comparing those within these categories makes more sense than using MRSP.

In the above example the er-6i would be a steal because of pedigree determined by its once higher MSRP. For a purchaser that is the right call but objectively however comparing the two is a waste of time.

 

[chinesekiwi]

However, for people buying it, what would they look at more?
The street price.
What do they care about more?
The street price.
For comparisons, you always compare at the street price as that's what consumers buy it at. What are reviews for?
To help consumers make informed buying decisions.
All the MRSP is the Minimum Recommended Selling Price
Note the 'recommended' part of that acronym.
That implies that it's optional.

 

[jonathanjong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your argument is flawed. If I can procure a er-6i for $10 and a JVC marshmallow for $10. Comparing the two is a pointless exercise. The er-6i would be clearly better because at one time it was a mid-range IEM and the JVC has always been an low end one.

Which argument is flawed? How is it flawed? It is unsound? Is it invalid? Why is comparing 6i and JVC "pointless"? What's the "point" of comparison? I tried to reconstruct your argument in a systematic way,but couldn't. Would you do the honours?

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathanjong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which argument is flawed? How is it flawed? It is unsound? Is it invalid? Why is comparing 6i and JVC "pointless"? What's the "point" of comparison? I tried to reconstruct your argument in a systematic way,but couldn't. Would you do the honours?

The argument you put forth wasn't an argument. You said:
Quote:

"The argument is valid, as 3 follows from 1 and 2, as far as I can tell. And 2 is uncontroversial, I think. But I submit that 1 is false. I just don't see why MRSP-range should determine category if by category, you mean something about quality. MRSP is a common heuristic for quality, but I don't think it's a good one. If it's used at all, it should be used with caution. It's an empirical question, of course, how good MRSP is at tracking quality. If 2 is false, as I submit but admittedly have no data to firmly conclude, then the argument is unsound and the conclusion should be rejected."

You don't explain why MSRP determines category is false. You just stated it because it is your opinion. MSRP is a heuristic for quality because it is determined by tangible things like cost of material + R&D cost + profit margin.

According to you street price determines category not MSRP. Street prices change over time. Does that mean the quality and categoryof the product also changes over time?

Let's take the category of IEM changes with time because the street price changes as a argument.

The Image X10 and Triple.fi 10 started off as top tier IEMs with a street prices of around $350 some time in the past. Now the Image x10 can be had for $190. Did the X10 suddenly become a mid range IEM with the same quality of the Super.fi 5 pro?

All that has happened is a once top tier IEM has become more afforadable to some one in a mid tier budget. Only by virtue of that can you say they are comparable. What you are trying to say is affordability is the only comparison criteria, it has nothing to do with category or quality.

 

[Taikero]

MSRP is only valid as a categorical constrainer if the MSRPs for the given manufacturers being compared against each other are updated for all products being compared as of the date of that company's last product release.

e.g. Etymotic releases the HF2/HF5. It follows that in order for a person to rightly compare these new products, as well as the company's old products, against other companies' products, then the prices of old products within the same company must be updated.

This is important because the HF5 is clearly a superior IEM to the ER6i, but they have the same MSRP.

By Etymotic not updating their MSRPs to reflect inflation, market valuation changes, and competition, they have made it impossible to use MSRP to compare products and their value even within their own company.



MSRPs are exactly that, a "suggestion". There is nothing regulating MSRPs, and a manufacturer may manipulate an MSRP in whatever way it wants to in order to get any result they want to, including but not limited to setting a higher MSRP than the item would ever rightfully be able to sell for, selling the item at a low wholesale price to distributors, then having the distributors sell the item at a street price which reflects the MSRP the manufacturer originally wanted but was smart enough not to list.



Honestly, even street price isn't an ideal categorizer, but it is much, much better than MSRP. Street price at least reflects what the market is able to bear for a particular item, how much interest there is in that item, etc. The main reason street price is used so often is because most people have budgets they must follow when feeding their headphone addiction.



To be frank, the best way to categorize IEMs would be to have a hybrid categorization based on current street price and overall value for the price (with perhaps a swing value for margin of error in cases of disagreement of value).

e.g. If the street value for the UE Super.fi 5 Pro is $180, but I give it 3/5 stars for how much it costs, its "real dollar value" is $108. If the street value for the ER6i is $75 (on average), and I give it 7/5 stars for overall value for price, its "real dollar value" is $105. This would then presumably equate the 5 Pro to the 6i, and therefore make them reasonably comparable in the $100-$125 "real world value" price range (or whatever range you like). This way you can rank and group IEMs not so much on price alone, but by an "idealized value", which would equate like-valued IEMs to each other.

Granted, this is just an example, and not an entirely accurate one at that, but if we're really talking valid comparison methodologies, neither MSRP or street price properly reflect the true value of a headphone to those who frequent Head-Fi.

Also, when it comes to actual purchases, it's going to come down to street price and value for that price. If 5 products are $100, and all but one are worth 60 cents on the dollar, and the one product is worth 80 cents on the dollar, it is likely the best value will be bought.

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taikero /img/forum/go_quote.gif MSRP is only valid as a categorical constrainer if the MSRPs for the given manufacturers being compared against each other are updated for all products being compared as of the date of that company's last product release. e.g. Etymotic releases the HF2/HF5. It follows that in order for a person to rightly compare these new products, as well as the company's old products, against other companies' products, then the prices of old products within the same company must be updated. This is important because the HF5 is clearly a superior IEM to the ER6i, but they have the same MSRP.[ By Etymotic not updating their MSRPs to reflect inflation, market valuation changes, and competition, they have made it impossible to use MSRP to compare products and their value even within their own company.

That is the problem with Etymotic. But I don't see that as a systemic problem across all manufacturers. That is also the reason why I didn't want to waste my time with Etymotic.




Quote:

Honestly, even street price isn't an ideal categorizer, but it is much, much better than MSRP. Street price at least reflects what the market is able to bear for a particular item, how much interest there is in that item, etc. The main reason street price is used so often is because most people have budgets they must follow when feeding their headphone addiction.

That's what I said ... Affordability is the only criteria which is true for anything in this world not just IEMs. That is where street price comes in.



Quote:

To be frank, the best way to categorize IEMs would be to have a hybrid categorization based on current street price and overall value for the price (with perhaps a swing value for margin of error in cases of disagreement of value). e.g. If the street value for the UE Super.fi 5 Pro is $180, but I give it 3/5 stars for how much it costs, its "real dollar value" is $108. If the street value for the ER6i is $75 (on average), and I give it 7/5 stars for overall value for price, its "real dollar value" is $105. This would then presumably equate the 5 Pro to the 6i, and therefore make them reasonably comparable in the $100-$125 "real world value" price range (or whatever range you like). After that it simply becomes a matter of narrowing down which IEM's sound signature you like, and you buy whichever is the best value for you (Presumably the 6i in this fake comparison).

This is a system based on a subjective observer. We can't draw any objective data from a persons value judgement.

Quote:

Granted, this is just an example, and not an entirely accurate one at that, but if we're really talking valid comparison methodologies, neither MSRP or street price properly reflect the true value of a headphone to those who frequent Head-Fi. Also, when it comes to actual purchases, it's going to come down to street price and value for that price. If 5 products are $100, and all but one are worth 60 cents on the dollar, and the one product is worth 80 cents on the dollar, it is likely the best value will be bought.

That still doesn't allow for setting a standard for comparison. What determines the cents on the dollar value is subjective to the observer limited by the observers budget of course.

If I were to come to you and say price is no object suggest the best value for an IEM out there what would you recommend?

 

[Taikero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is a system based on a subjective observer. We can't draw any objective data from a persons value judgement.

This would be why such a system would have to be a collaborative effort. The goal is to suggest prices for a given IEM, and ask, "What do you think is a fair price for this?" or "At each of these prices, what is the overall value out of 5 stars?" However, the caveat is that only people who have actually bought and used a given IEM will give valid responses that have any weight. In addition, you have to ask across a range of prices to determine what the highest price is where a person would still give it a 5/5 star rating. Then just average all the valid results and there's your "real valuation".

Not that it'll ever be put into action, just an idea I've always had for rating products, not just headphones. If Amazon were to do something like that, they'd definitely be on to something. They already allow reviews with starred ratings and blah-blah, but they don't allow my idea of suggesting a better target price (that actually makes sense).

Quote:

Originally Posted by oarnura /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I were to come to you and say price is no object suggest the best value for an IEM out there what would you recommend?

Best value for the dollar (no matter the cost, based on current street price of course) or best sound?

If I had to say where the best value for dollar is, I'd say it's currently in the $150-$200 street price range, where the Image X10, Sleek Audio SA6, Atrio M5, Etymotic HF5 (was $99 a few days ago, and a huge steal at that price), UE Super.fi 5 EB/Pro, Head-Direct RE0, Klipsch Custom 3, Etymotic ER4P, Shure SE310, and perhaps a few others I can't remember right now reside.

If I had to say best sound, period? I think it's pretty unanimous that the UE-10/11 has the crown (at a price!). As far as value for the dollar, you're getting a much lower return on each dollar with the UE-10/11 than any of the universal IEMs, and any universal IEM over $200 has increasingly diminishing returns on sound per extra dollar you throw at it. There are plenty of people who prefer some of the $100-$200 IEMs (common are Atrio M5, Sleek Audio SA6, Image X10, and the Etymotic ER4P) to the higher-end $300+ IEMs.

Either way, I think it's best to take each comparison on a case-by-case basis overall. Different people need different comparisons. Some people like heavy bass, and there are good options across all price ranges. Others like clarity, and there are plenty of options there. Others like neutral or somewhat warm or somewhat cold phones, and there are tons of those too. Basing a comparison on anything other than what the end user needs is only going to confuse everyone involved.

 

[oarnura]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taikero /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I had to say where the best value for dollar is, I'd say it's currently in the $150-$200 street price range, where the Image X10, Sleek Audio SA6, Atrio M5, Etymotic HF5 (was $99 a few days ago, and a huge steal at that price), UE Super.fi 5 EB/Pro, Head-Direct RE0, Klipsch Custom 3, Etymotic ER4P, Shure SE310, and perhaps a few others I can't remember right now reside. If I had to say best sound, period? I think it's pretty unanimous that the UE-10/11 has the crown (at a price!). As far as value for the dollar, you're getting a much lower return on each dollar with the UE-10/11 than any of the universal IEMs, and any universal IEM over $200 has increasingly diminishing returns on sound per extra dollar you throw at it. There are plenty of people who prefer some of the $100-$200 IEMs (common are Atrio M5, Sleek Audio SA6, Image X10, and the Etymotic ER4P) to the higher-end $300+ IEMs. Either way, I think it's best to take each comparison on a case-by-case basis overall. Different people need different comparisons. Some people like heavy bass, and there are good options across all price ranges. Others like clarity, and there are plenty of options there. Others like neutral or somewhat warm or somewhat cold phones, and there are tons of those too. Basing a comparison on anything other than what the end user needs is only going to confuse everyone involved.

I am seriously considering getting something in the $150-$200 range. I have decided that the nuforces NE-7M are going back. They have a fun sound but they aren't my thing. The soundstage is too exaggerated width wise and flat dimensionally for me. I find it fatiguing.

The Apple IEMs I like a lot more but that has got me thinking of trying dual armature drivers in a higher price bracket.

I am not a bass head but want accurate sound reproduction with decent but not over powering bass. The soundstage imaging to be more layered and precise.

What do you think of the Custom 3s? I did look around and don't get a real feel for it. People seem to prefer the X10 because it is more fun. I prefer more accurate. My main home speakers are from a monitoring company.

 

[Taikero]

Lots of people like the sound from the Custom 3s, but many also dislike the fit on them, enough even to return them when they really like the sound. I personally think they'd probably sound great at their $175-$200 street price. However, I only own the X10 and am a little biased toward it, so I'm not really one to comment on the Custom 3. The only "analytical" IEM I own is the HF5, and I don't think I want another since the HF5 strikes a balance I personally enjoy.

If it were me right now though (Well, I am me and did do this not 10 minutes ago), I'd order some of the $80 Shure SCL4's (Only white is that price). They're single driver but they're an absolute steal at that price (MSRP for $300, BTW).

Buy Shure SCL4 Sound Isolating Earphones with Bass Port | In-Ear Professional Headphones | Musician's Friend
Shure SCL4 Sound Isolating Earphones with Bass Port and more In-Ear Professional Headphones at GuitarCenter.com.

Guitar Center will probably have tax, but they'll be available sooner (By end of year instead of almost mid-January). Just select "white" from the drop down box on either site. At Guitar Center at least, your CC won't be charged until they ship.