Shure E500 v. Ultimate Ears UE-10
Jul 17, 2006 at 2:54 PM Post #557 of 607
I've been enjoying the E500 a lot lately. There's great bass and mids there. The highs are good as well. I know the graph shows that they might be a bit recessed and I guess they are a little, but they seem well-balanced with the mids and bass. As a classically trained musician we were always taught in large ensembles to blend like a triangle: Bass on bottom, its the foundation and we need the most of it, mids obviously split the difference between the bass and the highs and the least volume on the highs since they come through better.

Overall I'm very pleased with them, and that's unamped....as soon as I finish my new PIMETA, I think I'll be even happier
smily_headphones1.gif


I wish I could compare them to the UE-10, but alas...I cannot. Maybe someday.
 
Jul 17, 2006 at 3:34 PM Post #558 of 607
The TTVJ price of 395$ for the shure e500, does it include the Push to hear device?

I guess im gonna have to reorder the earphones now, considering i paid the 495$.
mad.gif
 
Jul 17, 2006 at 3:49 PM Post #559 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spacko
The TTVJ price of 395$ for the shure e500, does it include the Push to hear device?

I guess im gonna have to reorder the earphones now, considering i paid the 495$.
mad.gif




Yes it should. As far as I know the Push to Hear device is only being offered with the E500 right now. It will be available seperately in the Fall. I don't think you can get the E500 without the PTH device, at least not right now.
 
Jul 19, 2006 at 5:14 PM Post #561 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany
I thought I post Hirsch take on the E500. Again because it basically supports my stance with the E500s. They are a great headphone but not on the level with UE-10s. Being that TTVJ is still offering the E500s for $395, I order a pair for my wife and will be selling her e5s. That way the cost isn't so much to swallow. Once I get them, I will be sure to post my thoughts.





graphCompare.php


Here's an interesting one:

graphCompare.php


And this:
graphCompare.php
[/



Like I said before, E500 has a bass bump; sheesh no one listens to you when you're not "headphonus supremus"
 
Jul 19, 2006 at 5:18 PM Post #562 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by rx7_fan
Like I said before, E500 has a bass bump; sheesh no one listens to you when you're not "headphonus supremus"


I don't listen to graphs.
 
Jul 19, 2006 at 5:20 PM Post #563 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey
I don't listen to graphs.



the graph just proves what I said, but I said it way before the E500 came out to the market and before headroom posted their graphs. Listen for yourself and see.
 
Jul 19, 2006 at 5:45 PM Post #565 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete7
Yeah right...Graphs also "prove" that Shure E2 and E3 are more revealing than E4.


I have been telling people that all along and they just wouldn't listen to me.

No the graph only back up, Hirsch remarks. Which I thought was the most important part of the posting. Hirsch is quite experienced in headphones and amps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hirsch
I had a chance to compare the Shure with my UE-10 today. Source was unamped iHP-140, Rockbox playing FLAC.

The Shure had a blunted attack and smeared detail relative to the UE-10. Mind you, the Shure is an excellent IEM. However, the UE-10 was able to produce greater depth and height in the "headstage". Instruments in the background stayed in the background with the Shure. Using the UE-10, I was able to pick out the individual instruments in the background, and hear 'air' around each of them. The UE-10 did a much better job of producing texture on everything I threw at them (admittedly not a lot).

In terms of background hiss, both the E500 and UE-10 picked up about the same amount from the iHP-140 internal amp. The UE-10 may have been a bit quieter, but I couldn't be certain.

I would be very interested in hearing an E500 with a custom mold. Whether the mold or the design is responsible, the UE-10 acquited itself well today. And it should have, at twice the price. I have no trouble recommending the E500 as an excellent IEM at its price point. But it isn't a UE-10 killer by a long shot.


 
Jul 19, 2006 at 6:01 PM Post #566 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by rx7_fan
Like I said before, E500 has a bass bump; sheesh no one listens to you when you're not "headphonus supremus"


I don't see a hump on those graphs...to me it looks like both the k701 and the sf5pro have more of a hump. The e500 simply appears to have a uniformly boosted low end: looks like it'll sound great to me
smily_headphones1.gif


not that we can place too much stock in graphs
 
Jul 19, 2006 at 6:08 PM Post #567 of 607
The one thing graphs prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that you should never make a headphone choice based on them.
 
Jul 20, 2006 at 12:26 AM Post #568 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete7
The one thing graphs prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that you should never make a headphone choice based on them.


word!
 
Jul 20, 2006 at 1:01 AM Post #569 of 607
The one thing graphs prove is that you need to know how to interpret them correctly.

Like rx7, hirsch etc. said, there indeed seems to be a bass bump, but that is from the perspective of the devices used to measure it. It seems to me that an IEM which is putting out x db of bass is not going to perceptually be as bassy as a circumaural headphone putting out x db of bass and thus a certain amount of extra bass would be appropriate for an IEM, in order to appear to be natural sounding.

If you compare the E500 to the E4c the graphs look similar except the E500 has 5db more bass. The E4c is perceived by many to be bass-shy so this looks about right. Whereas IIRC it's hard to measure the treble so it might not be wise to make any assumptions based off that.

Of course muddiness and so on are more or less subjective in nature and not to be determined by the FR.

RX7: I don't think the headphoneus supremus title has an meaning, it has more to do with 1) being well-known and 2) telling people what they want to hear (i.e. E500 pwns!!!!!) Naysayers of course may also attract much attention but that depends on the situation and apparently it didn't happen in this case.
 
Jul 20, 2006 at 1:35 AM Post #570 of 607
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete7
The one thing graphs prove beyond a shadow of a doubt is that you should never make a headphone choice based on them.



I have to say that I just don't understand why people get so bent out of shape about measurement graphs for audio equipment. It seems to me that people think if they like a piece of gear with a "bad" measurement or graph that makes them a bad audiophile, or perhaps their hearing isn't as good.

We use all sorts of scientific procedures and equipment to measure all sorts of things and yet people feel that measuring audio gear is some sort of sacriledge.....why?

A graph, or measurement is just that....a visual representation of a measurement, for better or worse. It's not intended to be the sole determinator in judgement, it just offers another piece of the puzzle.

A tool is only as good as the materials/methods used to make it and the person using it. But is is just one tool, amoung many available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top