[lucozade]

Quote:

I do like them @ luco buddy, especially when paired with uDAC or one of my Fiio portable amps. Still, I like the Earsonics better (and I like the SM2 more than I like the SM3. Go figure?? lol).
 
I will say this @ luco: if you like or love the SE530, I think you will really lovvvvvve the SE535.

 

WOW ,@ericp buddy, so you like the sm2 better than the sm3 , as for you thinking i will really love the SE535 ,you are supposed to say i would hate them ,lol ,i have my cane in my hand ready to tan your hide 

 

 

[james444]

Thanks @Eric and Shane for clarifying, please let me clarify my statement: "on par" was only meant in terms of detail/refinement (at least that's what I had gathered from your posts), not regarding sound signature or other aspects. Of course it's open to debate whether sound signature is in turn part of what we call refinement, but in my understanding refinement and detail resolution are mainly technical capabilities due to driver/crossover quality, whereas sound signature is a result of acoustic design (crossover tuning, housing acoustics).
 
So in my book you can have IEMs that match your preferred sound signature but still have subpar detail resolution and refinement due to lower quality drivers and/or crossovers. The e-Q7 are a good example for what I mean, they match my preferred sound signature almost perfectly, but I have to admit that the SM3 are slightly better refined.
 
Sorry if I got you wrong,
James

 

[shane55]

 
Quote:

Thanks @Eric and Shane for clarifying, please let me clarify my statement: "on par" was only meant in terms of detail/refinement (at least that's what I had gathered from your posts), not regarding sound signature or other aspects. Of course it's open to debate whether sound signature is in turn part of what we call refinement, but in my understanding refinement and detail resolution are mainly technical capabilities due to driver/crossover quality, whereas sound signature is a result of acoustic design (crossover tuning, housing acoustics).
 
So in my book you can have IEMs that match your preferred sound signature but still have subpar detail resolution and refinement due to lower quality drivers and/or crossovers. The e-Q7 are a good example for what I mean, they match my preferred sound signature almost perfectly, but I have to admit that the SM3 are slightly better refined.
 
Sorry if I got you wrong,
James

Apology not at all necessary! Please retract...  

 

 
Might be true. I think I know what you are saying and think that the converse might also be true: That you can have resolution and refinement without also having the sound signature you desire. For me, that might be said of the SE535. It might have resolution and refinement, but not the signature that suites my tastes. If it had more sonority and bass (contributing to more 'warmth') it might be perfect for me.
 
shane

 

[MKang25]

There was something I noticed, with the SM3s I find my self tuning the volume up more than what I do on my 535s to get the little minute details, is that because of the recessed mids or just how they are powered?

 

[shane55]

Good question.
 
I find myself turning it up a bit to try to hear things more clearly. So yeah, for me the increased volume is to overcome the recess in the mids-highs. But then I find it (as someone said several pages back) 'too much'.
 
shane

 

[rawrster]

The SE535 has recessed mids? Isn't that pretty much the opposite of the SE530 based on my readings of them.

 

[ericp10]

Sorry buddy...lol
Quote:

WOW ,@ericp buddy, so you like the sm2 better than the sm3 , as for you thinking i will really love the SE535 ,you are supposed to say i would hate them ,lol ,i have my cane in my hand ready to tan your hide 

 

 

[ericp10]

Quote:

The SE535 has recessed mids? Isn't that pretty much the opposite of the SE530 based on my readings of them.

They're talking about the SM3, I believe, @ rawrster. And then again, they're referring to the mid-highs, not the whole mid spectrum. As a whole, neither IEM has recessed mids IMO.

 

[ericp10]

I agree with Shane (no apology needed @ James, and about some of his points regarding the SE535). It's clear however, that Shane prefers the 535 and I prefer the SM3, while we both respect each one of these IEMs.

 

[MKang25]

Quote:

The SE535 has recessed mids? Isn't that pretty much the opposite of the SE530 based on my readings of them.

Oops maybe I was a bit vague. I am referring to the SM3s.
 
Man I am having a hard time deciding. If the SM3s were built like a tank this would be so much easier.

 

[rawrster]

Yeah I misread that about the recessed mids referring to the SE535. So you're going to sell either the SE535 or SM3 and just keep one? What a nice problem to be having

 

[MKang25]

Yep I need to return one of these. I am just really worried about the Build Quality of the SM3s. When I head back to school they will be moving around a lot, which means higher chance of problems arising. Also the fact that EarSonics is France if I need warranty repairs I am assuming turnaround would be 2 - 3 weeks from when I ship them off.

 

[JoeyRusso]

Quote:

Yep I need to return one of these. I am just really worried about the Build Quality of the SM3s. When I head back to school they will be moving around a lot, which means higher chance of problems arising. Also the fact that EarSonics is France if I need warranty repairs I am assuming turnaround would be 2 - 3 weeks from when I ship them off.

No need to return them, I'm sure the line of people here that will buy either of them will be long and any sale will be lightning fast.
 

 

[lucozade]

Quote:

They're talking about the SM3, I believe, @ rawrster. And then again, they're referring to the mid-highs, not the whole mid spectrum. As a whole, neither IEM has recessed mids IMO.

i agree , no recessed mids or anything else on the SM3 

 

[TheJudge]

 
Quote:

 

Valid argument, but IMO it cannot fully explain the lack of refinement that I hear when comparing the SE530 with the SM3. Acoustic tuning can certainly make a difference, but mainly in sound signature, e.g. boost the highs a little bit to make them sound less veiled, open up the soundstage or something like that. I've never experienced an IEM to improve significantly in refinement or detail resolution merely as a result of playing with filters or tips or such.
 
I think I'm free from suspicion of being a SM3 fanboy, because I neither like their sound signature nor their spatial presentation, but after several rounds of A/Bing I had to admit that they are ever so slightly better than most of my other phones (not only the SE530) when it comes to refinement and detail resolution. Therefore I'm really surprised that Shane and Eric are rating the SE535 on par.
 
Oh, and please don't say there's only one way to find out for sure...

 
Aren't you basing your opinion on how the SE530 compares to the SM3, when the other posters here are referring to the SE535 versus the SM3's performance? What is the point of your argument when you're not discussing the same earphones?