[Anthrax]

i'm looking at getting either the e2 or e3(i can get these cheap through a friend) is the E3 worth the extra money ? whats the differnce in sound between these two ?

 

[LaBreaHead]

The E2C's will be bassier (but not necessarily with clarity ... he said, in what could be a massive understatement). I have -- and like -- the E3C's, but they're not overwhelmingly impressive (for example, the cost-performance ratio is just "pretty good"). I wish I had spent more money initially and just gotten the E4C's. The E3C's seem a little bass-shy, and the E2C's are reportedly bass-heavy.

Get the E3C's, if you can get a good price. However, I doubt that I would pay MSRP for them, and either low-end Shure model will just be a stepping stone in your path to Head-Fi upgrade-itis, anyway ...

Oh, and the E2C's will be bulbous and bulkier than the E3C's, if that's an issue for you.

 

[Spyro]

E3 has fantastic midrange, not a bad soundstage but both bass and highs are rolled off pretty badly. I tired of them pretty quickly. I strongly recommend jumping up to E4 even though the cost is higher..it's worth it. Otherwise, I personally think ER-6i is the best sub $100 IEM out there.

 

[ComfyCan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro E3 has fantastic midrange, not a bad soundstage but both bass and highs are rolled off pretty badly. I tired of them pretty quickly. I strongly recommend jumping up to E4 even though the cost is higher..it's worth it. Otherwise, I personally think ER-6i is the best sub $100 IEM out there.

I totally agree. The E3's are very disappointing if you want to hear the full sound spectrum (and who doesn't?). The E4 series is so much better that it's hard to believe they are made by the same company. E4c's can be found for much less than posted retail by contacting various headfi sponsors. If you can't make the jump to E4's, I would stay away from Shure IEM's altogether. Just my .02.

 

[DJShadow]

If you can, buy the e4c and that should just keep you satisfied for a long time, longer than the e3c for sure

 

[Dept_of_Alchemy]

I thought the E3C and the E4C share the same drivers...

I've owned both E3C and E2Cs and I find that the E3C sounds quite a bit better and is a better fit to my ears than the E2C (I'm 5'9"). The E2C was too bulky and it hurts my ears after an hour of use or so.

 

[vagarach]

Well, I used to have the e3's, and found them very, very, boring. The detail is good, but the fact that so much of the bottom end, and a bit of the top end is missing is a little too much to accept given their astronomical canadian price (at retail, that is). Also, I couldn't handle them being in my ear for more than 30 minutes, since I had major ear irritation from them. But, I recently got the e2's, for $100 cdn (yielding a $150 difference), still expensive, but not so bad.

I like them a lot! Since they have that bulbous design, they don't go very far into the ear, and the unit itself is supported by the outer ear, so the constant yanking on the already vacuum sealed ear canal that I got with the e3c is not a problem with the e2c, and I've been able to use them with no problems for 2 or so hours (haven't tried longer). The e2c's do not isolate as well as the e3c's though. The highs are still largely not there, but the bass is! Midrange is superb, quite amazing, actually. The e2c's render certain songs so well you never notice there is anything missing.

For sure, though, the cx300's come very, very close to matching the e2c's. With no noise about, and songs that cover the full spectrum, you could say they're even better, but add outside noise (taking a walk..) and you lose the extra definition they provide over lesser earbuds.

Conflicting views, I know, but I hope this helps.

 

[Shaan]

the cable issues that the e2c (cracking, loss of sound etc.) has alone would prevent me from buying a pair over the e3c, i've only had my e3c's a day now so i cant attest too much for the sound. the bass seems very similar to the e2c but then i cant do back to back tests so of course ymmv