Shure SE420 cables compared to SE530 cables

[archigius]

Hi, i'm an happy Shure SE420 owner.
However, i'm thinking to upgrade in the next months to the SE530, if they can be an improvement.

My question is about cables:
After 4 months my 420 cables are completely perfect; how do they compare to the 530 cables?
It's the same material/thickness?
I use a lot of care with my 420, i put them in their carrying case after every use, so object care should not be a problem for me about the 530 cables.

About the sound, i think the 420 are very balanced, but they do suffer a lot bad recordings because of their very balanced bass: i think the bass is perfect in good recordings (for example Hotel California by The Eagles), but looses impact in poor registrations.

Maybe the 530 little colorated bass could improve the listening experience on bad recorded albums. For example, to me Californication by Red Hot Chili Peppers sounds terrible: a lot harsh mids and hights, very poor bass.

May the 530 help a bit about poor registrations and what about the 420/530 cables?

 

[Dash]

Although I only own SE420, I have not experienced any cable trouble in the year I have owned them. I mow the yard, hit golf balls, run and sleep with my Shures. They have seen their fair share of use but I have not noticed any cable wear issues. I will say that one thing I do not do is wrap them up and place them in the Shure case. I think that the repeated rolling/winding action of placing them in the Shure case is a contributing factor to the cable wear.

 

[fredman22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archigius /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi, i'm an happy Shure SE420 owner. However, i'm thinking to upgrade in the next months to the SE530, if they can be an improvement. My question is about cables: After 4 months my 420 cables are completely perfect; how do they compare to the 530 cables? It's the same material/thickness? I use a lot of care with my 420, i put them in their carrying case after every use, so object care should not be a problem for me about the 530 cables. About the sound, i think the 420 are very balanced, but they do suffer a lot bad recordings because of their very balanced bass: i think the bass is perfect in good recordings (for example Hotel California by The Eagles), but looses impact in poor registrations. Maybe the 530 little colorated bass could improve the listening experience on bad recorded albums. For example, to me Californication by Red Hot Chili Peppers sounds terrible: a lot harsh mids and hights, very poor bass. May the 530 help a bit about poor registrations and what about the 420/530 cables?

Unfortunately:
1. 420, 530, and others are so well resolving that mastering/recording imperfections become obvious (even with low compression, lossless, or WAV).
2. Compromises in DAP sound engines exacerbate this.
3. In this range of IEM, you are likely to spend a lot for very little gain, or simply a lateral gain that may not be worth the expense.

Now I have heard both about the 420/530: the 530 is much more bloated than the 420; and that the 530 adds the bass reinforcement the 420 lacks If you're satisfied with the sound of the 420 and your DAP, I'd say save the money (32Gb flash DAPs are around the corner!) as your curiosity is going to be very expensive to scratch! Good luck.

P.S.
BTW 'Californication' is acknowledged as one of the worst- if not the worst 'hot' mastered album in a contemporary sea of very poorly mastered albums.

 

[archigius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredman22 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Unfortunately: 1. 420, 530, and others are so well resolving that mastering/recording imperfections become obvious (even with low compression, lossless, or WAV). 2. Compromises in DAP sound engines exacerbate this. 3. In this range of IEM, you are likely to spend a lot for very little gain, or simply a lateral gain that may not be worth the expense. Now I have heard both about the 420/530: the 530 is much more bloated than the 420; and that the 530 adds the bass reinforcement the 420 lacks If you're satisfied with the sound of the 420 and your DAP, I'd say save the money (32Gb flash DAPs are around the corner!) as your curiosity is going to be very expensive to scratch! Good luck. P.S. BTW 'Californication' is acknowledged as one of the worst- if not the worst 'hot' mastered album in a contemporary sea of very poorly mastered albums.

Very interesting points in your answer!
So yes i like the overall 420 sound, it's really very good on good recorded albums:
the already mentioned Hotel California by Eagles, some BB King albums (Riding with the King), a lot of Dire Straits albums, the entire Ben Harper discography, and good old prog rock albums like those from King Crimson, Camel, Pink Floyd, Genesis ecc
The 420 really shine on this point.

But i'm thinking if the 530 slightly reinforced bass could help on some recordings with very weak bass, like some Bon Jovi albums (Cossroads, These Days sounds poor with 420).

I've found a Internet store who sells the 530 at a very good price here in Euroope, so in the next months i can think about getting a pair.

About the DAP, my Vision:M is 60 gigs, still far from flash daps.

What about the cables? It's the same meterial/thickness?

 

[jinx20001]

bad recordings will show up on any high end phones, thats why they are high end.

its true tho the se530 have more bass and may smooth away the softer basslines.

im not going to say they beat the se420 hands down,in my opinion the se530 is a little more...''wow'' than the 420 but the 420 offer a flatter sound for sure!

 

[archigius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx20001 /img/forum/go_quote.gif bad recordings will show up on any high end phones, thats why they are high end. its true tho the se530 have more bass and may smooth away the softer basslines. im not going to say they beat the se420 hands down,in my opinion the se530 is a little more...''wow'' than the 420 but the 420 offer a flatter sound for sure!

Can you tell me something more about cables differences between the two models?
Unfortunately these kind of hi-end IEMS can't be tried before to buy, so i can't be sure if the upgrade to the 530 could the a justified improvement.
Furthermore, i'm worried about 530 cables; the 420 cables seems good to me, not sure about those of 530.

 

[archigius]

Bump

 

[Spyro]

I believe the cables are identical. I've owned both and I think the SE530 trounces the SE420 in every regard. I found the SE420 very flat and nasally sounding. Perhaps the biggest let down of any IEM I have ever tried.

 

[archigius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif I believe the cables are identical. I've owned both and I think the SE530 trounces the SE420 in every regard. I found the SE420 very flat and nasally sounding. Perhaps the biggest let down of any IEM I have ever tried.

Do you own the 530 now?
Can you tell me what differences you actually note between the two IEMs?

I don't think SE420 it's so bad, but i've some problems on my Zen Vision:M with some songs or albums with weak bass;
in fact, it seems the Vision M is a very cold player and coupled with the 420 (very neutral) is not the best for poor bass recordings;
very good, instead, on well recorded albums.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif I believe the cables are identical.

I was asking for this because i read about some cables problems with the 530 (but now they seem fixed), but no cable problems about the 420.
My 420 are still perfect.

 

[Spyro]

My SE530's are date coded in April so I'm sure they are the newer "fixed" cable. I have never had any problems with any Shure cables (E2, E3, E4 twice, SE530 twice) and I always work out and sweat with them. In fact, the Shure cables are my favorite in the industry. Virtually tangle free and I just love the heavy robust feel to them.

I only had SE420 two days and returned it. Maybe I even had a bad pair. I found it very non-exciting, flat and neutral. Not musical and kind of nassally like I said above. Not sure how else to describe. Just blah....whereas SE530 is full and heavy, yet still very detailed with a much larger soundstage. Some have compared SE420 with E4 but I actually loved E4's before I went to SE530.

But I know there are some here that loved the SE420.

 

[dantztiludrop]

I have also thought some about upgrading to the 530 & have wondered the same thing about the possible differences in cables between the 2 phones. I've read about the SE530 cable issue, but have had e4c for 2 years with no sign of any problems....& I use mine to the fullest: hiking, beach, sleeping, etc..

Can I make one suggestion...if you do not have a portable amp with an LOD (I didn't see anything in your profile), that may be one of the better upgrades you could do. The great thing to take advantage of with a ZVM is its line-out. I was blown away (after having used my ZVM's headphone-out with the e4c for over a year) by the amount of transformation that took place with increased clarity & detail, increased extension @ both ends of range, and increased punch & life. I hadn't realized my ZVM was capable of producing such good sound & the e4c's respond very well to it.

 

[archigius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif My SE530's are date coded in April so I'm sure they are the newer "fixed" cable. I have never had any problems with any Shure cables (E2, E3, E4 twice, SE530 twice) and I always work out and sweat with them. In fact, the Shure cables are my favorite in the industry. Virtually tangle free and I just love the heavy robust feel to them. I only had SE420 two days and returned it. Maybe I even had a bad pair. I found it very non-exciting, flat and neutral. Not musical and kind of nassally like I said above. Not sure how else to describe. Just blah....whereas SE530 is full and heavy, yet still very detailed with a much larger soundstage. Some have compared SE420 with E4 but I actually loved E4's before I went to SE530. But I know there are some here that loved the SE420.

My 420 cable code is 1327/SE420, so it might be about may 2007, seems very good to me, the material has some kind of roughness at my fingers' touch.
The majority of 530 broken pictures shows a very shiny, smooth cable, not opaque, rough like actually my cable seems.
Maybe it's really the new cable formulation.

Not that i enormously love the 420, but they just seem good enough to me, indeed more than my old SCL2.
I think it's a good pair of IEM, sometimes too neutral: the bass is very balanced, but in noisy environment (like the trains) the ultra-low bass it is slightly overwhelmed by vibrations and very loud ambient noise.

They lose something on weak bass albums, but overall they perform well, very well with some well recorded CD's.
For sure, the 530 must be better and sooner or later i'll buy a pair, hoping they'll have strong cables.

 

[archigius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dantztiludrop /img/forum/go_quote.gif Can I make one suggestion...if you do not have a portable amp with an LOD (I didn't see anything in your profile), that may be one of the better upgrades you could do. The great thing to take advantage of with a ZVM is its line-out. I was blown away (after having used my ZVM's headphone-out with the e4c for over a year) by the amount of transformation that took place with increased clarity & detail, increased extension @ both ends of range, and increased punch & life. I hadn't realized my ZVM was capable of producing such good sound & the e4c's respond very well to it.

What is LOD?

One thing i don't like about the Zen Vision:M lineout, is that when i put a jack in the lineout, the player becomes no more directly controllable until i remove the jack.

So i want to change songs i have to remove the jack from lineout...not so great.

 

[dantztiludrop]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archigius /img/forum/go_quote.gif What is LOD? One thing i don't like about the Zen Vision:M lineout, is that when i put a jack in the lineout, the player becomes no more directly controllable until i remove the jack. So i want to change songs i have to remove the jack from lineout...not so great.

LOD = line-out dock, like this one here. This is the one I have, but bought it for 1/3 of the price here on FS forum.

There is a setting on the ZVM to be able to see the screen & have control of the player when something is plugged into the line-out, but don't remember what it is exactly....will need to check the player when I get from work this evening. I think it is where the NTSC/ PAL video setting is(?). Then I use my portable amp between the LOD & earphones to control the volume. Works like a charm!

 

[archigius]

Then my 530 have just arrived.
About the cables:
they look absolutely different from the 420 cables.
The 530 cables are more rigid (production code may 2007), while the 530 cables seems softer, more elastic.
The code on the 530 box is 2007/4/09, while on the Y connector the code is
0177.
May i have the newer cables or the older ones?

I read on head-fi that the newer cables are softer, but their production code seems older than my 420 code.

Any suggestion?