[kyrie]

Quote:

Anyway, in conclusion, custom fit IEM's are made that way for a very specific reason, and without it, it will in fact be much, much harder to achieve a controlled sound reproduction and satisfactory result for everyone. There is a definite reason why all the highest end IEM's had to be custom molded.

Perhaps? Or perhaps not. Your argument says that IEMs that were designed to be custom molded would sound best when custom molded. This is obvious.
But the fact remains: no company, to my knowledge, has tried to create a $1000 pair of universal-fit IEMs. Considering this, I don't think there is any conclusive way to prove, without actually trying it, that custom molded IEMs *inherently* has a great advantage over universal-fit IEMs in terms of SQ. True, perhaps it's easier to achieve a controlled sound reproduction using custom-fit IEMs. But by that logic, would that also not make IEMs in general more controlled than full-size headphones, since we need not worry about the shape or angle of the outside ear? And yet, we do not regard full-size headphones as being inferior to IEMs. Your argument is theoretical, but we all know that when it comes to perception of music, theory only says so much.
I mean, consider a certain person's very theoretical argument that electrostatic cans are inherently capable of more detail than dynamic ones...

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrie But by that logic, would that also not make IEMs in general more controlled than full-size headphones, since we need not worry about the shape or angle of the outside ear? And yet, we do not regard full-size headphones as being inferior to IEMs.

Here again, you have part of the idea correct, but part of it wrong. Yes, indeed, custom IEM's should be much more consistent from person to person than any headphones.

With full-size headphones, your outer ears are always involved in shaping the sound, so the perceived sound is probably always somewhat different from person to person. Some headphone that people perceive to be way too sibilant is just right for another person. Just like how universal fit IEM's are, the general sound signature is still there, but the minor variance in it does in fact, vary from person to person.

How many times have you heard people say "everyone hears differently?" We try our best to establish some sort of a barometer on relative hearing to judge which headphone is good and bad, but everyone will still have slight variance in one way or another.

However, just because custom IEM's are more consistent, does it mean they're just "better"? Err.. no... it just means they're more consistent. In a way, if they can be consistent crappy, they'd still be consistent, right? Obviously there will always be some limitation in the type of sound IEM can produce, try as you might, full-size headphones still have better potential to produce soundstage than IEM's have, due to the outer ear involvement.

Then again, FYI, I do consider the overall sound quality of the Sensaphonic ProPhonic 2X-S superior or equal to every full-size headphone that I've heard under $1000 mark. There's a few headphones out there under that mark that I've yet to try, but for everything that I have tried, 2X-S is competitive in everything. Except for maybe soundstage, which some headphone does extremely well, which 2X-S can't emulate... but overall sound quality wise, I'll take 2X-S over any of them.

I'm sure someone's going to ask.. so.. I'll list some of the headphones I've tried under that $1000 mark (no reason to list all of them):

Audio Technica A900, A1000, W2002
Sony CD3000
Grado SR-125/225, RS-1, RS-2, HP-1
Sennheiser HD25-1/HD580/600/650
Ultrasone HFI-700
AKG501
Beyer DT880

And yes, I consider 2X-S superior than almost all of those...

 

[raptor18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toaster22 i don't really know what's going on here, but the e5's have astonishing bass. they have emphasized mids and very undetailed highs, to put it simply.

Sorry, i forgot to tell you that i don't have any problems with the bass at all. For me, the Shure E5 has got the bass that i've always wanted, tight, punchy and balanced.


I want to take back the word i wrote about beeing very disappointed with the E5. I'm not very disappointed, i'm only a bit disappointed.

I managed to find a technique that gives me a bit more highs now.

I'm mostly disappointed with the peaked mid that makes everything so muddy.
I still can't get over that.

I keep enjoy them more and more now for everyday that goes.

Regards
Raptor

 

[iamdone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrie Perhaps? Or perhaps not. Your argument says that IEMs that were designed to be custom molded would sound best when custom molded. This is obvious. But the fact remains: no company, to my knowledge, has tried to create a $1000 pair of universal-fit IEMs. Considering this, I don't think there is any conclusive way to prove, without actually trying it, that custom molded IEMs *inherently* has a great advantage over universal-fit IEMs in terms of SQ. True, perhaps it's easier to achieve a controlled sound reproduction using custom-fit IEMs. But by that logic, would that also not make IEMs in general more controlled than full-size headphones, since we need not worry about the shape or angle of the outside ear? And yet, we do not regard full-size headphones as being inferior to IEMs. Your argument is theoretical, but we all know that when it comes to perception of music, theory only says so much. I mean, consider a certain person's very theoretical argument that electrostatic cans are inherently capable of more detail than dynamic ones...

Well I actually tried the universal sensaphonics at the audiologist before I received my real ones. I believe there are only a few produced for their road shows. They looked like bloated etys with the tri-flange tips. I thought they sounded pretty close to the real ones. I think you get a little deeper bass with the custom molded but otherwise it wasn't a big difference. These are a big improvement over the etys and shure, so a great sounding universal iem is possible. Whether or not this could be made at the $500 mark is another story.

I think I might have prefered the universal fit model if it was available because you wouldn't have to deal with an audiologist, refits, or any other problems. You'd also be able to sell them if you didn't like the sound or sell them later if something better came along. I also thought my etys were very comfortable and easier to insert and remove.

The main advantage of the custom fit for me is I can lay on my side with them and even fall asleep. I haven't flown with them yet but the custom fit would also allow you to lean you head again the side of the seat and not worry about it jamming inside your ears like the etys did.

The company might also save money with the universal model because it seems the audiophiles are more picky and probably have a higher return rate for seal and fit problems than musicians. Everytime you return it, they have to remake the whole thing (at least with sensaphonics).

 

[toaster]

with custom molded iems, you can in fact lie on your side and listen to music.

but it is also far easier to achieve and maintain a good position in your ears with the phones and they are also far more comfortable.

custom molding is not just a gimmick, is has a lot of practical applications, especially for someone who is going to move their mouth when they listen to music.

i used to smile a lot with the e5's cause they sounded great, but every time i did i broke the seal.

 

[gorman]

Bah... for me going the UE-10s route was more about comfort and the guarantee of getting a perfect seal than anything else. The incredible jump in sound quality from my previous E3s was obviously more than welcome. But I wouldn't have bought the UE-10 if they had not been custom made.

 

[penbat]

No, what Wmcmanus is talking about, is that HRA, when he was still around, spread "insider news" of how UE has something amazing coming down the pipeline, cheaper & better than what they've got now for the consumer market or something akin to that. That's about 4 months ago now?.. Maybe 5 months? Can't remember the exact timeline. We haven't seen anything new yet. This is something that's completely separate from the UE5c.

HRA actually said that new UE models were apparently available as of 3 months ago. He said that what was delaying their release was that UE were applying for copyright and HRA had little idea of how long that would take but he guessed about 3 months.

Whether HRA is talking bulls**t or not I don't know but i can't see any motivation in him lying. It was no surprise to me that UE have repeatedly denied this story - if it is true it is obviously commercially sensitive.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Where did HRA go?