So...the Westone 2 are better than I was expecting...
Apr 2, 2011 at 10:25 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 14

fallingreason

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Posts
776
Likes
22
I had a good run with the Westone 3 last summer/fall but in the end went back to the IE8 because I just couldn't deal with what I felt were distant mids, and slightly sibilant highs.  The fit, isolation, balance, soundstage, and just about everything on the Westone 3's were great, and I felt they had developed a house sound that I could really love with a couple of small tweaks.
 
Now, I have had the chance to spend some time with the Westone2, and it seems like the presentation just about perfect!  The highs are not as piercing and the focus lies more in the mids, which I feel are extremely detailed and very well done.  The bass is not lacking AT ALL with the help of Cowon's JetEffects EQ.  The sound is also less fatiguing than the Westone3.

The only thing I am missing with the 2's is that "magic" that top tiers like the 3's and IE8's have.  Theres a little more life breathed into the music and sometimes you can forget you are listening to IEM's because the soundstage is noticeably better.  
 
I guess I'm wondering if the Westone4 might be what I'm after...or perhaps the UM3X.  Or maybe nothing is quite like the 2's and I can get over what I feel makes them inferior.  
 
Can anyone who has heard the Westone2 provide any input?
 
Apr 2, 2011 at 11:26 PM Post #2 of 14

kite7

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Posts
2,036
Likes
87
UM3X is not really like the Westone 2. Its mids are thick and upfront and the bass presence is abundant on the UM3X. The soundstage is a little strange; it is narrow and I mostly hear instruments like they were coming from the top left or right of my head. The width on the Westone 2 is noticeably wider than UM3X. I went from Westone 3 to UM3X to Westone 2 and I've kept Westone 2 the longest out of them all; its balance is almost perfect I just wish the highs were more plenty and more forward instead of hiding in the background.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 4:46 AM Post #3 of 14

fallingreason

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Posts
776
Likes
22
I totally agree about the highs of the W2.  I think even the IE8 highs are more forward, but softer.
 
To me, it seems to me the UM3X and other IEM's made specifically for professional monitoring have a very focused sound which compromises soundstage and sometimes musicality.
 
Perhaps the W2 is the really the best BA I will be able to find for now, though I would like to hear the Westone 4 sounds like.  
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 9:17 AM Post #4 of 14

Marcus_C

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Posts
1,057
Likes
32
There are a few people who have/had the w2 and w4, JoeyRusso and Headphoneaddict spring to mind, there's probably a comparison somewhere in the 100 pages of Westone 4 appreciation thread, good luck and remember to take the ball of string so you can get back out!!! In the meantime enjoy the w2's, I like mine and agree. That 'forgetting you're listening to iem's' is the only thing I really miss about the sm3.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 1:05 PM Post #5 of 14

Spyro

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Posts
6,574
Likes
245
While W4 is more refined sounding that W2 with a little more forward midrange, I prefer the W2.  W2 has better treble and is a generally more detailed IEM where W4 is sort of on the dark side with a rolled off treble....somewhat veiled by comparison.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 1:10 PM Post #6 of 14

tuahogary

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
395
Likes
16
 
Quote:
While W4 is more refined sounding that W2 with a little more forward midrange, I prefer the W2.  W2 has better treble and is a generally more detailed IEM where W4 is sort of on the dark side with a rolled off treble....somewhat veiled by comparison.


That is very interesting.... W2 more detailed than W4??
 
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 2:39 PM Post #7 of 14

Spyro

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Posts
6,574
Likes
245
I'm telling you.  I have had W4 for about 5 days now.  Am trying and trying and trying to like it but I honestly find it very average and bland sounding  I have seen some reviews claiming "better detail" or "better treble" "gives the last bit of detail lacking in W3" (or something to that effect) and I think it is hogwash.  I find W3 quite a bit more detailed, crisp and "alive" sounding.  Same goes for W2 (from memory).  I'm not buying the "its the way the detail is presented" angles on the W4.
 
Not trying to stir any controversy but it is my opinion and while I may not be a true audiophile, many here have found success with choosing IEM's based on my inputs over the years.  Just trying to be honest and not get caught up into the hype.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM Post #8 of 14

tuahogary

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
395
Likes
16
I only listened to the W4 for a few minutes, not able to tell exactly how detailed they are but I did like the signature. I had both the W3 and W2 and my A/B comparison showed that W3 were more detailed. For a $450 IEMs that are less detailed than the W2 would be crazy, I guess I'll find out if I manage to get a loaner unit soon.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 3:13 PM Post #9 of 14

shotgunshane

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Posts
6,059
Likes
1,781
I only listened to the W4 for a few minutes, not able to tell exactly how detailed they are but I did like the signature. I had both the W3 and W2 and my A/B comparison showed that W3 were more detailed. For a $450 IEMs that are less detailed than the W2 would be crazy, I guess I'll find out if I manage to get a loaner unit soon.


I know you are a DD guy and I am starting to lean that way myself but the W4 is without a doubt the best universal BA I've heard. See my review in my sig. I know you like the HJE900 for drums but the W4 is my favorite for them. It's really weird b/c I did not like them at first due to the non wow factor but they are many steps up from the W3, which I found somewhat hazy in the lower mids. I can see why someone might prefer the fun factor of the W3 but the W4 is supremely detailed and balanced.

 
Apr 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM Post #10 of 14

NimbleRabit

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Posts
139
Likes
11
I'm also loving my W2, and have been listening to them for hours and hours every day (the only thing that lets me get through the day at work).  I don't use EQ because I'm too lazy, but I have to agree that the sound on these things is amazing and I don't find the bass lacking.  I'll definitely be keeping an eye on this thread to see what I might look into when I want to upgrade, although right now I couldn't be happier.
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 10:04 PM Post #11 of 14

Spyro

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Posts
6,574
Likes
245


Quote:
I'm also loving my W2, and have been listening to them for hours and hours every day (the only thing that lets me get through the day at work).  I don't use EQ because I'm too lazy, but I have to agree that the sound on these things is amazing and I don't find the bass lacking.  I'll definitely be keeping an eye on this thread to see what I might look into when I want to upgrade, although right now I couldn't be happier.


W3 is a very logical upgrade to W2.  Enough to almost blow you away.  It's fabulous!
 
 
 
Apr 3, 2011 at 10:25 PM Post #12 of 14

Spyro

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Posts
6,574
Likes
245

"It's really weird b/c I did not like them at first due to the non wow factor but they are many steps up from the W3, which I found somewhat hazy in the lower mids. I can see why someone might prefer the fun factor of the W3 but the W4 is supremely detailed and balanced."
 
 
 
 
Not picking on the poster but this makes me go "WHAT???$#^&%$.
 
The W4 is the IEM with the veil/hazy sound.  It is very Sennheisr'ish sounding. I am starting to wonder if the new W4 owners need to qualify there assesments based on what they are comparing to?  As far as detail retrieval and treble, W4 ranks very low on my list of IEM's.  Sort of reminds me of the old Shure E4 but more refined sounding. 
 


 
 
Apr 4, 2011 at 5:07 AM Post #13 of 14

shotgunshane

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Posts
6,059
Likes
1,781
"It's really weird b/c I did not like them at first due to the non wow factor but they are many steps up from the W3, which I found somewhat hazy in the lower mids. I can see why someone might prefer the fun factor of the W3 but the W4 is supremely detailed and balanced."
 
 
 
 
Not picking on the poster but this makes me go "WHAT???$#^&%$.
 
The W4 is the IEM with the veil/hazy sound.  It is very Sennheisr'ish sounding. I am starting to wonder if the new W4 owners need to qualify there assesments based on what they are comparing to?  As far as detail retrieval and treble, W4 ranks very low on my list of IEM's.  Sort of reminds me of the old Shure E4 but more refined sounding. 
 


 


You're a funny guy!
 
Apr 4, 2011 at 7:18 AM Post #14 of 14

Pasiasty

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Posts
137
Likes
11
Do You know SM3's signature? Some people say they lack in details but I think it's an effect of laid- back treble. When treble is not very forward You may not notice all the details but in fact they are just there. I found some people need more forward treble to hear all the details and some prefer more laid- back and veiled sound to listen deeply for details.
 
I don't know W2 but IMO W3 has not a very balanced signature.
Quote:
While W4 is more refined sounding that W2 with a little more forward midrange, I prefer the W2.  W2 has better treble and is a generally more detailed IEM where W4 is sort of on the dark side with a rolled off treble....somewhat veiled by comparison.



 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top