[ZackT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJGeorgeT okay, after reading this long thread, I can conclude that everyone still compares any in ear cans to Ety ER4's...you know why? Even if the bass is lacking, there is no universal-fit can out there that will give you the definition and clarity that the Ety's provide. If you don't like the piercing highs of the ER4S, get the ER4P which has more of a balanced high presentation with a bit more bass. I am going to get me a 6i now Super.fi Pro out the window, E4C in the crapper. Shure should quit releasing loosers.

Strong words. I have Er6's and E3's - I alternate. They both do their jobs well. Different Strokes. I think it's a bit silly to say Ety are the be all and end all. But if you're happy...

ZT

 

[Jmmmmm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJGeorgeT okay, after reading this long thread, I can conclude that everyone still compares any in ear cans to Ety ER4's...you know why? Even if the bass is lacking, there is no universal-fit can out there that will give you the definition and clarity that the Ety's provide. If you don't like the piercing highs of the ER4S, get the ER4P which has more of a balanced high presentation with a bit more bass. I am going to get me a 6i now Super.fi Pro out the window, E4C in the crapper. Shure should quit releasing loosers.

The e4c's have the detail of the er6i's, but have a fuller, more enjoyable sound, imo.

The er4's, though, seem to still be the most detailed universal monitors out there.

I haven't tried the er4's, but the e4c's are definitely my favorite canalphone. I hope you enjoy your ety's; that's all that really matters, anyway.

By the way...what are 'loosers'?

 

[Mr Iriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJGeorgeT okay, after reading this long thread, I can conclude that everyone still compares any in ear cans to Ety ER4's...you know why? Even if the bass is lacking, there is no universal-fit can out there that will give you the definition and clarity that the Ety's provide. If you don't like the piercing highs of the ER4S, get the ER4P which has more of a balanced high presentation with a bit more bass. I am going to get me a 6i now Super.fi Pro out the window, E4C in the crapper. Shure should quit releasing loosers.

I do not agree. The etys have an artificial sound with exagerated highs. As far as piercing highs I find the ER4P more annoying/piercing than the ER4s. The ER4S does emphasize the highs even more than the ER4p, but the highs are much smoother than those of the ER4p. Even then, however I would not say UE and shure are releasing losers (I also do not know what a looser is). I even prefer my shure E3 to the ER4. The shures (E3) make the more expensive etys sound thin, boring, lifeless, and sibilant by comparison, especially in the mids and bass. I bet the Shure E4, and E5 are even better. From what I have read even the UEs while rolled off give a much more musical sound. So the etys are not the only good choice for universal canalphones. They etys are the best at detail, but in my OPINION they suck when it comes to musicality, which is where the shures can beat the hell out of them while maintaining resolution and detail.

 

[trose49]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Iriver I do not agree. The etys have an artificial sound with exagerated highs. As far as piercing highs I find the ER4P more annoying/piercing than the ER4s. The ER4S does emphasize the highs even more than the ER4p, but the highs are much smoother than those of the ER4p. Even then, however I would not say UE and shure are releasing losers (I also do not know what a looser is). I even prefer my shure E3 to the ER4. The shures (E3) make the more expensive etys sound thin, boring, lifeless, and sibilant by comparison, especially in the mids and bass. I bet the Shure E4, and E5 are even better. From what I have read even the UEs while rolled off give a much more musical sound. So the etys are not the only good choice for universal canalphones. They etys are the best at detail, but in my opinion they suck when it comes to musicality, which is where the shures can beat the hell out of them while maintaining resolution and detail.

[size=xx-large]Halafreakinloooooya!!!!!!!![/size]
If I wanted that much piercing treble I would hire a 10 year old to slam cymbals on the sides of my head! (Details huh!)

 

[iGory]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rx7_fan Because you stated that the super.fi was your first 'high-end' canal phones. I heardly consider the super.fi 'high end' and compare to full size headphones at similar price, the super.fi can't compete. Thus, your listening experience is limited do to your gear. I mean if you were coming from Senn HD 650, Grado RS-1, or STAX, and you said, the super.fi is perfect; I would had given you some credibility. But this is the first dual canal phone you own, you're just enthusiastic. No credibility P.S. Damn the super.fi Pro! Give me some detailed highs, please! anyone know how to fix this (don't say buy new earphones )? The highs on the super.fi leave a lot to be desire!

Are you the poster who asserted "Trose49 aka Mike Dias from UE!" on ipodlounge?

 

[Edwood]

I also found the ER-4P to be too bright/harsh. The ER-4S is a better match for higher end sources, it is not a good match for lower end sources like portables, which is kind of ironic, since it would seem like a good earphone for travel.

The Super.Fi 5 Pro lacks the clarity the Ety ER-4's have (although the Ety's do have a bit too much of sibilance I don't hear with my top two headphones), but have a LOT more bottom end. Too much in fact for home listening in higher end setups.
However, an EQ setting provided by Jerry Harvey helped the Super.Fi's tremendously. There is too much midrange in the Super.Fi's that they sound very "nasally resonant" and congested. But without EQ, it is almost a perfect match for my PSP unamped.

The Super.Fi's sound like they were definitely voiced for portables.

-Ed

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rx7_fan Uuuh no, Jerry Harvey told us that he still re-make UE-Pro 10 for people who had them for more than 3 years.

Are you telling me that once I pay for a pair of UE-10 Pros, I am covered for life?

 

[Foran]

Quote:

Originally Posted by trose49 [size=xx-large]Halafreakinloooooya!!!!!!!![/size] If I wanted that much piercing treble I would hire a 10 year old to slam cymbals on the sides of my head! (Details huh!)

And what's left of this guy's credibility is out the window now...

Come on, trose49. When you start stating that the Super.fis are NOT MUDDY in childish colored huge font as a FACT, you really need to give yourself a reality check...

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJGeorgeT okay, after reading this long thread, I can conclude that everyone still compares any in ear cans to Ety ER4's...you know why? Even if the bass is lacking, there is no universal-fit can out there that will give you the definition and clarity that the Ety's provide. If you don't like the piercing highs of the ER4S, get the ER4P which has more of a balanced high presentation with a bit more bass. I am going to get me a 6i now Super.fi Pro out the window, E4C in the crapper. Shure should quit releasing loosers.

Funny, I wouldn't even consider an Etymotic product for my own use. They are seriously lacking IMHO. I'm particularly bothered by their lack of proper decay and soundstage. I also found their timbre way off; things just don't sound real. The bass issue for me is secondary, but why put up with it when the Ety's can't get the other things right.

 

[Jasper994]

If you are using a computer as a source with foobar as your player, try these settings:

http://photo.head-fi.org/showphoto.p...sort=1&cat=500

I set this according to an e-mail conversation with Jerry Harvey from UE. As mentioned by Edwood, it cleans them up a lot.

 

[redshifter]

no way am i shelling out +$200 for a canalphone that needs eq'ing. c'mon. at least the er4s sounds great without eq.

 

[rx7_fan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bLue_oNioN Are you telling me that once I pay for a pair of UE-10 Pros, I am covered for life?

Not for life, what if you lose them? UE will not send you a new one if you left it somewhere and can't find it. But Jerry Harvey did state that it still re-make them for customers who had them for more than 3 years. If you're that serious about buying the UE-Pro 10, just e-mail UE with your concerns, they will answer your questions promptly.

 

[BRBJackson]

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the Pro's need EQing, and in fact have been moving between no EQ and the Pod's Jazz preset pretty regularly during this evaluation phase. IMO, the straight sound can be catagorized as a bit colored, with strong, natural bass and low midrange (thus Jerry Harvey's EQ recommendations, I suspect), but the overall effect is quite pleasing and non-fatiguing. The high-end seems not so much attenuated/rolled-off as 'in the mix' with everthing else.

At any rate, if I wanted to analyze the minutia and details of my recordings, I'd likely go for ER4's (or UE10's), but I'm a music lover first and an audio nut second. The 5 Pro's are proving to be very engaging music makers. I've rarely been able/anxious to spend 3-5 consecutive hours absorbed in sound, and never before with canalphones. I think that says a lot about these little guys.

 

[DJGeorgeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper994 If you are using a computer as a source with foobar as your player, try these settings: http://photo.head-fi.org/showphoto.p...sort=1&cat=500 I set this according to an e-mail conversation with Jerry Harvey from UE. As mentioned by Edwood, it cleans them up a lot.

wow I think Herry Harvey forgot to include an external equalizer with each super.fi order...that's some massif EQing going on. He should recall all of the super.fi's What was he thinking

 

[Mr Iriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper994 Funny, I wouldn't even consider an Etymotic product for my own use. They are seriously lacking IMHO. I'm particularly bothered by their lack of proper decay and soundstage. I also found their timbre way off; things just don't sound real. The bass issue for me is secondary, but why put up with it when the Ety's can't get the other things right.

Agreed. The etys seem to made to sound artificially cleaner by getting rid off decay to levels that are just unnatural sounding. Soundstage wize both etys and shures aren't that great though. The shures seem to have a wider soundstage unamped though. The detail in the etys seems to be created (partly) by harmonic distortion as shown in this graphs from this thread http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showp...7&postcount=59.
Even if the detail is fake, I gotta admit it is very impressive. It does make you go WOW much more than the other canalphoens I have used.
However, The E3s by comparison sound much more realistic, musical, though less detailed, and allow ME to enjoy the music much more.
I don't know if the graphs are accurate however as canalphones seem to differ from user to user much, much, much more than regualar headphones.