[penbat]

I noticed on Sensonic's website http://www.sensaphonics.com/faq.html

it says:

"Currently, the ProPhonic IV is available in a universal fit with 2 options for ear tips-- a triple flanged silicone adapter and a foam adapter. We will be adding a universal fit to the 2X product line soon."

For me living in the Uk it would be a nusense having to ship impressions to the US and also i am concerned that custom moulds would give me too much insulation as i often listen to my phones walking around the streets, crossing roads etc. However i also listen to them in bed and it would have been nice to have the flush fitting of the custom moulds but it isn't that essential.

Anyone know how the ProPhonic IV compares with the 2X and Shures E5s ? Is the ProPhonic IV not as good as 2Xs ? Maybe the 2X with tri-flanges is the way for me to go when they are available.

 

[penbat]

From what i can gather, the ProPhonic IV is closely based on Ety ER4 technology and probably no better but much more expensive. I think the 2X are similar to Shure E5 technology. If the 2X with tri-flanges is better than the Shure E5 with tri-flanges then i would buy one.

 

[joelk]

I own the soft 2x. The comfort level of the custom fittings is absolutely superb. Sending impressions to Sensaphonics is a necessity. Go to the trouble!






Quote:

Originally Posted by penbat I noticed on Sensonic's website http://www.sensaphonics.com/faq.html it says: "Currently, the ProPhonic IV is available in a universal fit with 2 options for ear tips-- a triple flanged silicone adapter and a foam adapter. We will be adding a universal fit to the 2X product line soon." For me living in the Uk it would be a nusense having to ship impressions to the US and also i am concerned that custom moulds would give me too much insulation as i often listen to my phones walking around the streets, crossing roads etc. However i also listen to them in bed and it would have been nice to have the flush fitting of the custom moulds but it isn't that essential. Anyone know how the ProPhonic IV compares with the 2X and Shures E5s ? Is the ProPhonic IV not as good as 2Xs ? Maybe the 2X with tri-flanges is the way for me to go when they are available.

 

[penbat]

Custom mouldings would have too much insulation for me for using them walking around and crossing roads etc. If the 2X with triflange is better than E5 with triflange then i will get one. It sounds to me like the 2X is fairly similar to the E5 but with a little less bass and more detail which is an Ety characteristic.

 

[joelk]

I don't think so. My Etys with the tri-flange insulate more than my Sensa Soft 2-Xs with their custom fitting. Again, if you're going to spend this much money, my opinion is that you want the full Monty. After all, you're paying for the technology.





Quote:

Originally Posted by penbat Custom mouldings would have too much insulation for me for using them walking around and crossing roads etc. If the 2X with triflange is better than E5 with triflange then i will get one. It sounds to me like the 2X is fairly similar to the E5 but with a little less bass and more detail which is an Ety characteristic.

 

[penbat]

Yeah I agree that Ety Tri-flanges insulate a lot (in fact I found it dodgy crossing roads etc), but i found the Shure E5 tri-flanges insulated quite a lot less than the Etys. So i don't really know how 2X tri-flanges would work out unless i ask Sensaphonics for attenuation data.

 

[lindrone]

I haven't seen any of the universal fit 2X's... but the 2X-S is more than just "like the E5c's with a little less bass and more detail."... It is superior than the E5c in almost every way... the only way in which it isn't, is the "guilty pleasure" factor of E5c's very active and exciting midbass.

It is a step far and above beyond the E5c's.. I would expect if there were a tri-flange version, it would do so as well.

 

[penbat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone I haven't seen any of the universal fit 2X's... but the 2X-S is more than just "like the E5c's with a little less bass and more detail."... It is superior than the E5c in almost every way... the only way in which it isn't, is the "guilty pleasure" factor of E5c's very active and exciting midbass. It is a step far and above beyond the E5c's.. I would expect if there were a tri-flange version, it would do so as well.

It doesn't sound like 2X with tri-flanges are available yet.

I recall you posting a while back that tri-flange fittings produced the best results for you for your E5s, better than E5 custom moulds. Obviously we can only guess what is best for 2Xs but possibly you might have come up with the same conclusions with 2X fittings.

The certain advantages of tri-flanges over custom moulds for 2X are it works out significantly cheaper. I would be able to resell my 2Xs if i wanted to. Buying them would be quicker and less hassle avoiding having to get and ship moulds to the US etc. Tri-flanges may work out better for use walking around streets although this isn't certain.

 

[penbat]

It sounds from other 2X-S owners on Head-Fi that there is around 30% chance that the mould isn't good enough the first time and it would have to be redone. This would be a pain for me in the UK. So a universal fitting would be an attractive idea for me.

 

[cmascatello]

I'm not sure that 30% is an accurate number. However, it is absolutely true that the quality of the audiologist and their experience with/care in taking the custom moldings makes all the difference in the world. I know that lindrone and I both had solid experiences with our office visits -- hell, mine didn't even charge me for the molds and visit. Making the molds is not so difficult a task that people should worry about failures. I have had them done three different times now for various reasons (once for IEMs) and a trained audiologist who understands the need for a good impression can tell you before they even go in to Sensa/UE/etc. if it is a good mold. I have had one bad mold taken (due to faulty activator in the mold compound) and the difference between the bad one and a good one is striking. One thing that I might recommend if you are worried about mold quality is to have 2-3 sets taken by the audiologist. They should be willing to do this for you, b/c after all, you are paying for the office visit.

 

[lindrone]

I don't know how you can come up with a 30% number from just people on this forum. First of all, there's only a handful of people that has custom molded IEM's... Let's suppose, if I got the ProPhonic 2X-S and absolutely hated them; by your methodology at arriving at this numbers, everyone in the world hates ProPhonic 2X-S. It's ridiculous to make general consensus based on a few ownership experiences. If there's 100 people here that has the 2X-S, and 30% had to get them refitted... then it's a little more valid.

Secondly, yes, E5 sounds better with the tri-flange, that's only because E5 were not designed to have custom mold in mind to begin with. E5's single bore design already combines the two driver into one sound channel, the extra length of the sound tube incurred by attaching a custom mold (and there's a *lot* of extra length) allows to degradation of the sound over the long distance of the sound tube.

Custom molded IEM's are designed to have a certain length of sound tube mostly under a controlled situation, it isn't a retro-fit where it detrimentally affects the sound of the IEM's themselves. This is very different than an E5+attachment situation.

I would say the opposite is actually more likely, where an universal fit version of the ProPhonic 2X will probably sound a bit worse, even if ever so slightly, than the custom molded version.