[xtr3me]

If you're going for bass, then I'd say IE8/TF10. IE8 if you don't mind the lesser isolation capacity and want bigger soundstage, TF10 if you prefer better sealing (but beware it might not fit you so well).

If you prefer a little more detail, then I'd say se530 (or maybe UM3? ... haven't heard them so I can't comment). Not so detailed as Ety's ER4P/S but still really good and, in my opinion, with all the bass one needs.

Give the shures a little more time to grow-up

 

[iponderous]

^ I don't find the SE530 to have any more detail than the TF10, IE8 or UM3X. As another Head-Fier posted earlier in this thread, the treble roll-off combined with the accentuated mid-range tends to make the SE530 sound a little less detailed to my ears in some respects. I notice more extended and detailed highs with both the TF10 and the IE8. The TF10 has superior instrument separation and soundstage over the SE530 to my ears. I also happen to prefer its bass presentation, which extends further and just sounds more realistic to me.

 

[DeusEx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iponderous /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ I don't find the SE530 to have any more detail than the TF10, IE8 or UM3X. As another Head-Fier posted earlier in this thread, the treble roll-off combined with the accentuated mid-range tends to make the SE530 sound a little less detailed to my ears in some respects. I notice more extended and detailed highs with both the TF10 and the IE8. The TF10 has superior instrument separation and soundstage over the SE530 to my ears. I also happen to prefer its bass presentation, which extends further and just sounds more realistic to me.

+1.

 

[hairygorillaz]

I like the 420's. The mid range is awesome, and the bass is just nice.

The only gripe i have with them are the cables and the fact that an extension is needed. Other than that, its great.

 

[goodvibes]

530's still sound more natural to me and not at all mid prominent. How can they have a midbass emphasis, a lower treble emphasis and be mid prominent. Can't do all 3 at the same time and the first 2 would make the mids appear laid back. LOL I suspect this is a case of horses for courses and they're neutral enough that results vary a bit by source. Try monitoring or a first generation 24/96 recording on a Nagra VI and you'll know these are closer to right than some others. Haven't heard the A/Ts, Ortofon or customs. Don't get me wrong, I can hear that they're a hair warm and have a some minor presence but no more problems than anything else I've listened to in an iem and they just seem less artificial or peaky on good sources.

 

[lwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I find the 530s laid back and forgiving, especially in the highs. They have a great midrange, but I never thought the bass was all that excessive compared to other phones/IEMs

I don't know if I would consider 'forgiving' a good quality when talking about sound reproduction. The highs of my SE530 sometimes leave me aching for more. Most of my complaints go away when I drive these with at least a Cmoy, but some many people state they do not/should not need to be driven.

 

[goodvibes]

Lose the tos and things should snap up.

 

[iponderous]

It's almost a given at Head-Fi at least, that the SE530's highs roll-off earlier than its other top-tier universal IEM competitors and that its midrange is also the most forward/prominent. This is the IEM that's recommended to people who love their mids. I certainly notice these traits in the SE530's sound signature when I listen to it and it's even more apparent when I compare it with the TF10 and the IE8. It's the reason why I moved on to those two phones. As for the mid-bass hump, I don't understand why it's incompatible for the SE530's to have rolled-off highs, prominent mids and a mid-bass hump. That's pretty much how it sounds to me.

 

[the search never ends]

Having owned the se420, and still owning the se 530, I can tell you that I thought the 420, though more laid back, is a little grainy and not so smooth. This is only my opinion, nut the se420 for my ears offers much less than the 530, The Se310 may be more suitable, less bass, and somewhat smoother than the se 420, I found the se420 to be horrible, but that is my ears. I think the um2 would be a much better choice, in any case, give the 530's some time, many owners don't fall in love overnight, I sure didn't and they are one of my favorites.

 

[goodvibes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iponderous /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's almost a given at Head-Fi at least, that the SE530's highs roll-off earlier than its other top-tier universal IEM competitors and that its midrange is also the most forward/prominent. This is the IEM that's recommended to people who love their mids. I certainly notice these traits in the SE530's sound signature when I listen to it and it's even more apparent when I compare it with the TF10 and the IE8. It's the reason why I moved on to those two phones. As for the mid-bass hump, I don't understand why it's incompatible for the SE530's to have rolled-off highs, prominent mids and a mid-bass hump. That's pretty much how it sounds to me.

To each his own but don't see how anyone with IE8s can point to a midbass bump in a 530.

Check headline's measured response and tell me which curve looks better to 16k. Also throw a an ER-4p along with them as see how far out the king of highs really goes. Then check your hearing and the spectrum of what you listen to. If you look at the curves, the 530 will actually be less prominent in the 3k to 6k range, there's no midbass bump but there is an 8k bump though not higher than the IE8. 4P has it's peak at 15k which gives it sparkle but is the flattest in the upper ranges otherwise, lacks some bottom. Learning Center - Build a Headphone Graph | HeadRoom Audio

 

[iponderous]

^ The IE8's have a mid-bass hump as do the SE530's to my ears. The IE8's also have more treble extension, which I feel the SE530 lacks and a presentation that I happen to prefer overall. I'm sorry, but I don't pay any attention to frequency graphs. I just enjoy listening to music through phones. Is that a bad thing? "To each his own", as you would say.

 

[cardozo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by james444 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sounds to me like the SE530 is too much in-your-face for your taste. You want a more relaxed and laid back presentation. Among the Shures I think the SE420 would have been the better choice for you.

X2

 

[cardozo]

from another thread... (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/hel...85/index2.html)

My 2 cents...

I own the both headphones. Both are wonderful, each with its own characteristics.
Both headphones have the Shure sonic signature, delivering a detailed and airy sound, good soundstage and good instruments separation. The treble of both devices are not very extended.

Connected directly into the headphone-out of my Cowon iAudio X5, the main difference is an incredible dynamic and lively sound of the SE530, including therein a greater extent and detail of all frequencies. The highs are extended and detailed without being harsh, the mids have the characteristic of being very life-like and the bass is quite powerful, extended and detailed. This is the "wow!" headphones.

Moreover, the SE420, if at first may sound off and dull when compared directly with the SE530, has a great quality to be very neutral and balanced. Each frequency is exactly in its place, producing the impression of cohesion and organization, benefiting greatly the instruments separation, soundstage and aeration, characteristics that I appreciate a lot. It is a delight to hear him and allows many hours of fun without any fatigue. This is the "what the next song?" headphone.

If the SE530 definitely do not need an headphone amplifier, the SE420 is greatly beneficiated, increasing the sense of soundstage, instruments separation, aeration and depth. The highs and lows are more extended and detailed. Everything improves with the use of an amplifier, while still maintaining the characteristic of neutrality, cohesion and organization of the sound. With this setup, the Shure SE420 is something from another world, as if angels were singing in his ears ...

In short, put follows the main differences:

SE530

- It is more dynamic and lively, directly in the headphone-out of my player. It is as if it had a built-in amplifier;
- It's a phone for fun and some listeners may feel tired;
- The bass is detailed and extended, however, may overlap with other frequencies;
- The mids are wonderful and very real;
- Need a little equalization to play well;
- It's not as comfortable as the SE420 and the act of removing and placing it in the ears is a little more complicated;
- An headphone amplifier can bring more disadvantages than advantages.

SE420

- Loses in dynamics and liveliness directly in the output of headphones player;
- Has a more "professional" sound. Less tired for long periods of hearing;
- The bass is quite powerful. They are not as extended and detailed, however, are faster. The bass complement the music, never rising above the other frequencies;
- The mids are more recessed;
- Need a good equalization to play well;
- Very comfortable and easy to take and put in the ears;
- An headphone amplifier bring this phone to another level of sound.

Sorry about my poor english... :O)

Thanks,

Peter

 

[krismusic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardozo /img/forum/go_quote.gif from another thread... (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/hel...85/index2.html) Sorry about my poor english... :O) Thanks, Peter

I wish my second language was that good!