[Modifiedz]

[/IMG]

Its just the part number they use in the factory.
They dont call them the Shure SE530 in the production line, they call them SER010.

 

[beamthegreat]

My shure se210 lasted for only 6 month T^T I think you should go buy a new earphones like sennheiser ie8 that is made out of kevlar materials.

 

[chengbin]

Shure cable problems, umm, I'm not gonna buy a Shure again.

It seems no matter how much care you put it will still fail on you. My Shure never lasted for more than a year. Most of the lasted 6 months. I don't abuse my earphones, but I don't care for them like the OP. I'm disappointed at this cable quality, so I bought myself a RE0. Hopefully these will last.

Good earphones are seriously expensive.

 

[DDW]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Modifiedz /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is this a JOKE or something??

No. Not a joke. Why do you think so????



Quote:

Originally Posted by Modifiedz /img/forum/go_quote.gif [/IMG] Its just the part number they use in the factory. They dont call them the Shure SE530 in the production line, they call them SER010.

How do you know "Its just the part number they use in the factory." ???

I can't find ANY information on Shure's website or via Google search to support this.

As I mentioned though, I did find SE530 printed on the male connector lead. So, I am reasonably confident they are the same.

I just don't understand why the package the earphones came in said SER010 and the invoice said SER010 replacement for SE530.

.

 

[ClieOS]

A very legit reason will be that Shure want to differentiate the retail SE530 from the replacement SE530. If anything, Shure always has problem with clone and grey market leakage. If SER010 leaks to the market, it will be easier for Shure to track them down since they are not for sale in the open market.

 

[priest]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Modifiedz /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is this a JOKE or something??

x2

 

[mesasone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDW /img/forum/go_quote.gif According to Shure, this was Shure being nice and offering replacements at a HIGHLY discounted price. But, I had to PAY for these replacements!!!!!!!! And I don't consider what I paid for the replacements to be an insignificant amount. Even if discounted, these were CLEARLY earphones the failed prematurely (even if out of warranty). They were EXTREMELY well taken care of and babied.

I have enjoyed the sound of my Shure earphones, but I will not buy another Shure product that does not have a user replaceable cable. It's bad enough that most IEMs don't have this feature, but with cables as prone to shorting as Shure's (despite being nice and thick!) it's an insult to their customers.

Of course they will "generously" sell you a new pair at a deeply "discounted" price... which I would guess is probably wholesale price.

 

[jyle_t]

Well, warranty period is warranty period. You're just unlucky.

 

[PolloLoco]

I'm also surprised at your anger over out of warranty service. Regardless, for about the same price you could have had them reshelled and recabled as customs by Fisher Hearing. It would have cost $80 for reshelling, $20 for a replaceable cable + the cost of impressions and shipping.

I'm not saying thats what you should have done - or would want, but I'm suggesting another option for the cable problems.

 

[DDW]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif A very legit reason will be that Shure want to differentiate the retail SE530 from the replacement SE530. If anything, Shure always has problem with clone and grey market leakage. If SER010 leaks to the market, it will be easier for Shure to track them down since they are not for sale in the open market.

This seems like fair and sound reasoning to me.

But, I still think they should make it clear what the SER010 number represents and why being used if used to replace SE530's. It is nice to know what is going on and why the numbers are different.

 

[DDW]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolloLoco /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm also surprised at your anger over out of warranty service.

Some others appear to be shocked as well. But, yeah, sorry, I am not happy about it.

And I guess I don't understand why so many don't understand my anger - given that:

- Shure has such a LONG and documented history of issues with cables = known quality control issues from Shure
- Shure SE530 cost as much as they do - which is a LOT for earphones IMO and inline with TOP of the line
- And considering how much effort I put into babying the SE530's I had.


I feel Shure should consider the situation at hand - "LOOK" at the earphones - acknowledge how well they were taken care of and that the problem CLEARLY had to be insufficient quality from Shure. Considering, the issue was CLEARLY insufficient quality from Shure, HECK YEAH, I feel they should have COVERED them and replaced them anyway.

To me, a two year warranty makes sense if people are abusing the equipment. Sort of gives Shure an out. But, outside of that, these earphones should last WAY longer than 2 years if properly maintained.

Are there that many people willing to pay $500 for earphones and "Accept" them only lasting 2 years at which point they fail beyond ability to use?
Had there not been such a LONG and documented history of issues with Shure cables, I might have an easier time writing it off as "Bad Luck".

But, the issue was CLEARLY faulty cables.

Further, I probably only used them about 3 hours per week on average. So, they probably only had about 300 - 500 hours use tops.

3 hours per week for about 27 months. Who here would really NOT be upset over something that cost what Shure SE530's costs, making EXTREME efforts to take care of and protect the earphones and then having the earphones fail anyway after such little use?


I do/did like the sound quality of the Shure SE530's.
But, at some point, the cost of ownership is TERRIBLE for Shure earphones.

If Shure earphones cost what they do and last for as little as they do, then until Shure raises their warranty to about 5 years, I have to recommend other makers for many reasons.

Considering the "Cost per Use" equations, Shure Costs WAY TOO MUCH.

I am not usually big on buying extended warranties on electronics. My average electronic purchases seem to last fine for 5-20 years or more. But, if buying "SHURE" earphones, I would HIGHLY recommend trying to acquire extended warranty options - Since Shure earphones seem to have an average life-span of 1-3 years!

I just wish I had an extended warranty option when I purchased.







Quote:

Originally Posted by PolloLoco /img/forum/go_quote.gif Regardless, for about the same price you could have had them reshelled and recabled as customs by Fisher Hearing. It would have cost $80 for reshelling, $20 for a replaceable cable + the cost of impressions and shipping. I'm not saying thats what you should have done - or would want, but I'm suggesting another option for the cable problems.

I looked into and considered having them reshelled/custom molded/recabled. I read posts here on it for hours. I estimated about $150 - $200.

But, considering the issues already apparent with Shure earphones regarding failures, I was afraid to pay $150 - $200 to have them custom reshelled/rewired and then have something else FAIL within the Shure earphones that would not be warranted.

.

 

[bjaardker]

To OP:

 

[Lil' Knight]

I don't THINK I like the WAY the OP posted.

 

[digivate]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil' Knight /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't THINK I like the WAY the OP posted.

Yeah, he's BEGINNING to come ACROSS as a bit of a RAVING lunatic!