Review: Shure E3c, E5c, and Ety ER-4 comparisons

[twilightrevenant]

is the er-4 here the S or P or X?
also, how much diffrence does an amp makes on the e3c?

 

[lindrone]

I can't say anything about the Gilmore Lite, never used it. I've found myself more and more unhappy with the Gilmore V2 though. It's a very punchy, very exciting amp, and they do have great synergy with Grados. However, at times I feel that the power balance leaned a little too much towards the top end, and didn't round off the low-end enough. It also has this unrefined quality to them, you get really punchy sound, but the midrange feels compressed and muffled. Did I say they were punchy?.. Yeah, they were really, really punchy.

However, I didn't have any sort of complaints about the Gilmore until after I heard other amps that are much better. MPX3, Emmeline HR-2, even the Gilmore V2 SE was much better. One other amp in the Gilmore price range that I was impressed with, and on retrospect would've probably gotten that one instead, is the PPA. I was able to test a JMT PPA, and the sound was just smooth and engaging.

Not to mention there's that "buzz" I get with the Gilmore V2, which you may or may not experience with Gilmore Lite. This buzz was also not present on Gilmore V2 SE.

For this test, I simply borrowed my friend's ER-4P as a refresher to what they sound like. My previous E5c versus Ety ER-4 review used a ER-4P and a P=>S adaptor, and I noted the differences in using either.

The truth being, by the end of the test, I concluded ER-4S is better, but not enough to make a world of difference. Its basic sound signature doesn't change much, it's just the balance leaning one way or another. Certainly not enough to warrant charging $50 for the P=>S cable... maybe $5, maybe $10, but $50 is just a rip-off. I got the official P=>S cable as a gift for Dunbar, because he sent me the ER-4P half-way across America for me; personally I would've never gotten the official cable myself, if the ER-4P was mine.

Edit: Clarification (just in case anyone got confused), I mean the ER-4S was better than the ER-4P. Not better than anything else.

 

[greenhorn]

The Ultra-Soft Flex sleeves sell by bags of 10 (5 pair)... I doubt anybody would need 5 pair of those. If somebody will get a bag of 5 medium sleeves and would like to sell me a pair (or two?), please PM me.

 

[penbat]

Mr Lindrone, did you use small, medium or large flex sleeves ?

 

[kugino]

do those ultra-soft flex sleeves fit on the er-4p? if so, i'd buy a pair (or two) from someone, too.

who knows, these might be a great mod on the 4p.

 

[lindrone]

I used the medium sized tips... Unlike the other sleeves though, there doesn't seem to be as much of an issue with seal with any of the sizes (since they flex so much)... there's a little difference between how they sound. They seem to achieve a very good seal regardless... it's mostly a matter of comfort between them.

Bangraman has mentioned in his thread that the stem of the ER-4 is the main issue. It's too long and protrudes too much, so I think while the tip might fit, it probably doesn't improve the comfort that much (still need to jam it deep into the ears?).

 

[twilightrevenant]

does anyone know if the e3 not e3c, will be out when the e3c is? I want the grey one more than the white one, it blends in more...

 

[scottder]

Quote:

Originally posted by twilightrevenant does anyone know if the e3 not e3c, will be out when the e3c is? I want the grey one more than the white one, it blends in more...

Shure told me he E3 will be out mid-to-late January at places like Guitar Center.

Scott

 

[SENOR4Q]

This should be in the reviews section, great job!

 

[chadbang]

Thanks, Lindrone. That was one of the best reviews I've read at Head-fi. That kind of reporting is the reason why Head-fi makes all these other "review" sites like IGN and CNET look sick. Great job. I'm gonna pick up a pair of the E3s. If I get even a 20% boost in performance over the E2s, I'll be very happy.

 

[gpalmer]

Just did a quick read, but I was curious as to whether or not you tried the Gilmore V2 with any of the sources at the bay area meet? Just curious as to whether or not the midrange sounding muffled on the Gilmore V2 was source related since I don't hear that big a difference between the midranges of the V2 and V2 SE, it's more a matter of improved dynamics, increased blackness and better refined trebles to me. Also, my V2 is dead silent with my Etys, was it with the Etys you were hearing the buzz? Lastly, could you comment on the volume you listen at? I personally listen at relatively low volumes and I think this has an effect on the results. For me if I can't easily converse with someone ten foot away with one canalphone in, it's too loud!

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Quote:

The ER-4 has always felt a little sterile and hollow to me. It seems that the ER-4 has a tendency to introduce detail by enhancing the "notes" in the music. For example, if a guitar string or a piano key is struck, you hear a very clear and distinct note being played, but you don't get the falling note nor the transition notes. In a way, the "sound between the sound" seems to have been hollowed out. This produces a very clean, almost clinical sound.

Of all the phones you're comparing here, I've only heard the ER-4, but I find that the etys help me to pick out a lot more tonality in notes that otherwise seem atonal and in general just helps me make more sense of the music compared to my other reference, the HD580. Is that the kind of thing you're talking about here?

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Also, my V2 is dead silent with my Etys, was it with the Etys you were hearing the buzz? Lastly, could you comment on the volume you listen at? I personally listen at relatively low volumes and I think this has an effect on the results. For me if I can't easily converse with someone ten foot away with one canalphone in, it's too loud!

I didn't get around to try the Gilmore V2 with any other source at the meet. I did to go Chinchy's place later and tried it with his 333es, and the Gilmore V2 was previously owned by Habib and attached a NAD 541i before. It's hard to explain, there's something about the midrange clarity that seems to be lacking to me. I'm not sure if the Gilmore V2 SE does any better in this regard, however I distinctively remember the other aspects that you mentioned about the Gilmore V2 SE. Darker, and more refined. Perhaps those other two aspects gives me a sense that the midrange resolution improved.

I listen to the Shure's with relatively low volume as well. Ety's and Shure's usually has about the same volume levels coming from sources. Actually most of the time, I think the Shure are turned down even lower, because they get louder much easier than the Ety's.

The "buzz" is non-volume related, so it's definitely a noise introduced into the system. Just like how people get hisses with certain amps + headphones (of course, Shure *hisses* with some of them as well).

Quote:

Of all the phones you're comparing here, I've only heard the ER-4, but I find that the etys help me to pick out a lot more tonality in notes that otherwise seem atonal and in general just helps me make more sense of the music compared to my other reference, the HD580. Is that the kind of thing you're talking about here?

Precisely, I think the Ety's exaggerate certain characteristics about the music to help people pick up details better. In reality, that's not what the music was supposed to sound like, it's a filtered version of the original. It feels like an artificially enhanced sound. On the other hand, E5 and E3's will extract details that you previously have never heard before.

With a crappy recording, that might not be what you want anyway, but you'll realize just how crappy those recordings were to begin with. Surprisingly enough, with certain music it sounds a lot better, because the production quality was higher. For example, I would never listen to boy bands and Britney Spears, but their albums usually has higher production value than your typical old jazz album.

Not that I'd enjoy the boy bands any more, but it certainly make you wonder about those jazz productions

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally posted by lindrone Precisely, I think the Ety's exaggerate certain characteristics about the music to help people pick up details better. In reality, that's not what the music was supposed to sound like, it's a filtered version of the original. It feels like an artificially enhanced sound. On the other hand, E5 and E3's will extract details that you previously have never heard before.

The Shure E3c have certain frequencies boosted or cut to achieve their sound. The E3c is just as good as the Etys at extracting detail in the most part. However it is not in my view better.


Both phones surprise, impress and delight with SACD's. For SACD reviews, I was using the Volodos/Levine performance of a Rachmaninoff piano concerto and have today added Charlie Mingus' Ah Um to the listening notes list.


Although we are fundamentally arriving at the same conclusion, that the new E3c are indeed good, I have to question how objectively lindrone listened to the Etys because there's now a lot of things in his reviews regarding the Etys that I can't reconcile.


Was that bitchy? I'm very sorry if it is... Jeez, I look like the evil one... But I'm trying as hard as I can to give both phones a hard time.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Was that bitchy? I'm very sorry if it is... Jeez, I look like the evil one... But I'm trying as hard as I can to give both phones a hard time.

LOL... yes, and it's okay to be bitchy

We definitely value Ety in different ways. In my opinion, there's absolutely no reason to get an Ety whatsoever at this point. It's hard to judge "objectivity" in this regard, because I've heard the Ety extensively, and I couldn't really pick out anything that I liked about it at all. I do not believe that Ety's sound signature is one that interests me in any way.

Think of it as people who refer to HD580/600 as being too boring. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the way that HD580/600 presents their sound, it's what the manufacturer had intended. However to some, that sound is too boring for them, and there's no way they'd recommend that headphone to anyone else.

My opinion regarding the Ety's are like those people who hate Sennheiser (btw, I don't hate Sennheiser), I found them boring, uninteresting, uninspiring. Out of all the headphone I've heard (CD3000, W2002, E5c, E3c, HD590, HD580/600/650, DT880, A900, SR225, SR100, HP1000, heck, even KSC-35), they are the boringest of them all.

It's hard to draw the line between objectivity and bias, but a review always has some bit of subjectivity involved. That's why review readers should take every review with a grain of salt. That's true not only with this review, but every review on this site. One may suggest a certain amp is vastly superior than another, while another person may be completely opposed to that idea. Which is the reason why having multiple reviews is the key to really judging a product. Also understanding the reviewer's chosen "flavor" with his music and his preference is important as well.

In my original review of Ety versus E5c, the only credit I gave the Ety were the fact they're much cheaper and attainable. Even then I would've never spent the money on Ety's myself if I heard these two headphones side by side. I would take the $250 on the Ety's and went out and got another headphone... and still spent $500 on the E5c instead.

Now that the E3c is easily attainable, even cheaper than Ety's... there's just no merit I can give to the Ety's anymore. I'll take that $250 and invest it towards a good source.