[Sugarfried]

Quote:

Originally Posted by enzoferrari650 Shure used to be a part of westone until they split into their own company. Westone has been around longer and used to design all of the shure canalphones.

You are completely incorrect.

Shure Incorporated was founded in 1925, and has never been owned by anyone other than Mr. Shure (who passed away in the 1990's) or his wife (Mrs. Shure, who is alive and well). We have never "been a part" of any company. We are a privately owned company, and always have been.

Westone co-developed the E1 (now discontinued) and the first version of the E5 with us. If you search Head-Fi for more history you will find it - I'm not going to get into all of that again.

Would you mind stating where you heard that Shure was a part of Westone? I'm intrigued.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Whoah, Shure was making equipment during World War II?

 

[machead]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bLue_oNioN I notice that you used the tri-flanges. I found the tri-flanges to be much too muddy for my tastes -- personally, I prefer the foamies in terms of SQ far and above any of the other tips.

I found that the sound, as well as the comfort, improved when I shortened the tri-flanges. I think this is due to the material from which they are made and the way they are mounted. The unmodified tri-flanges extend, unsupported, a long way into the ear canal and are very soft -- this allows them to bend to accommodate the shape of the canal. I suspect that the combination of a soft, absorbtive, material and the lack of a straight path into the ear could result in treble loss, hence muddiness. In my case, there was also a distinct difference in the treble quality in each ear with the unmodified tips; this is due, I believe, to the different shapes of my left and right ear canals and the resulting different amounts of curvature adopted by the triple flanges.

If you don't mind the reduction in isolation, you might find the increase in treble worthwhile with shortened tips. Some have suggested that the length of the tri-flanges is the issue; I believe that curvature (perhaps even some crimping) is the real culprit. It's worth noting that the Ety tri-flanges do not bend nearly as much, due to the stiff tube that extends most of the way inside them.

 

[Lion Zion]

I have actually inquired from Todd about getting some repalcement tri flanges and he indicated that while the Shure runs appx. 10.00- 12.00 per pair, the Etys are appx. 10.00-12.00 per 5 pair (unless I misunderstood). He said that the Etys would fit the E5c and that they are a shorter filter. I figured for 10.00 bucks, I could take a shot. I didn't want to mod the only pair I currently have until I get additional stock. I am not pleased to hear that they are a bit stiffer, but I will reserve judgement until I check them out. In another lifetime, I sold audio gear and we were Shure dealers. Their microphones and high end cartridges were always very highly regarded. In fact, I used a Shure V15 type 4 on my turntable for a really long time. A teriffic cartridge, considered a classic by some. This was in the mid to late 70's. Shure had been around for quite some time back then. I had never heard of Westone until several months ago on this site.

 

[drssyoon]

I have tried the following. Based on my admittedly "regular guy" hearing habits, I would rank as follows. From the best to the worst.

1. Shure E5
2. Ety 4P
3. Shure E2
4. Sony EX71, Shure E3 tied

I mainly use my phones when I travel. I used Ety 4Ps for a while and although they were very nice, I really missed the extra bass oomph that the Shure E5s gave. These two are really like night and day for bass. Not so apparent for the highs. The other reason for switching to E5s is that the Etys stick out so much that when I sleep on the plane they hurt everytime I move my head and they are VERY obvious when you have them on. Shures are much more discreet.

By the way my source is iRiver HP140.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drssyoon 4. Sony EX71, Shure E3 tied

oo commando is going to have an orgasm

EDIT: Actually, on second thought, maybe an an aneurysm... it's the first time I've seen anybody rank the E3s so low, but commando places the EX71s far above the E3s so...

 

[Lion Zion]

I received the Ety tri flange tips from Todd yesterday. They appear to be exactly the same as The Shure tri flange with the exception of not having a stalk at their base. They did not seem any stiffer as one poster suggested. However, I absolutley could not get a good seal with them and gave up frustrated. At this point it is either try to discover a mod, send them back for an exchange or flush em. As it they just won't work. I am still enjoying the e5's immensly and still wrestling with my only pair of Shure tri flanges.
Any ideas out there?

 

[Luke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lion Zion I received the Ety tri flange tips from Todd yesterday. They appear to be exactly the same as The Shure tri flange with the exception of not having a stalk at their base. They did not seem any stiffer as one poster suggested. However, I absolutley could not get a good seal with them and gave up frustrated. At this point it is either try to discover a mod, send them back for an exchange or flush em. As it they just won't work. I am still enjoying the e5's immensly and still wrestling with my only pair of Shure tri flanges. Any ideas out there?

I've had trouble with new tri flanges too. I also tend to have a little more trouble getting a seal right after cleaning them. I'd suggest being patient, I think they'll seal with time. You might try giving them a quarter turn on the earphone, since they sometimes get slightly oval shaped while in your ear.

I too have Shure tri flanges, then got Ety tri flanges later. The Shure tri flanges had a stem that was way too long, I couldn't get them in my ear very well at all. Bangraman suggested cutting off the excess stem so they look like the Ety tri flanges, because he said the Shure tri flanges' stem is way too long. I did and it was a big improvement. So, are you using the Shure tri flanges with the long stem? It seems to me that that must be difficult.

 

[Lion Zion]

I too have Shure tri flanges, then got Ety tri flanges later. The Shure tri flanges had a stem that was way too long, I couldn't get them in my ear very well at all. Bangraman suggested cutting off the excess stem so they look like the Ety tri flanges, because he said the Shure tri flanges' stem is way too long. I did and it was a big improvement. So, are you using the Shure tri flanges with the long stem? It seems to me that that must be difficult.[/QUOTE]

I have one pair of Shure tri flanges and a set of just arrived Ety tri flanges. Out of the gate, the Etys won't seal. I am bummed, because on paper, it sounded like a perfect solution. I can't get the one pair of faomies to seal either. When I really jam them in and hold them there, sound good and I can hear the bass as will as well defined high end. The large grey filter works easily, but is nowhere near as good sounding as the tri flange. Any suggestions on the Etys?

 

[Luke]

I guess you didn't read the first paragraph of my previous post. I'll try again:

I've had trouble with new tri flanges too. I also tend to have a little more trouble getting a seal right after cleaning them. I'd suggest being patient, I think they'll seal with time. You might try giving them a quarter turn on the earphone, since they sometimes get slightly oval shaped while in your ear.

 

[Lion Zion]

Luke: Your chastisement aside, thank you for your input. In fact, I did read your post. I was posting to advise that I had obtained Etymotic tri flanges and inquiring about others experiences using them with the e5c. Your comments regarding being patient with the Shure triflanges is well taken. I will hang in there with them.