To my ears, the Etys' mids don't overshadow their lows - the tuning compensation for the lack of the natural open ear gain in IEMs on the ER-4S/SR/XR, ER3SE/XR and ER2SE/XR seems to match my personal HRTF very well, as I do not experience any of this when comparing my ER-4S or the ER4SR with real environmental noise/sound, speech etc, which is also the case when carefully using a sine generator or listening to white noise. In fact, to my ears, and also backed by various research studies (Killion, others, and as far as I know the most recent one by Hammershøi & Møller), this type of HRTF compensation sounds the most accurate to me, and in my earlier years when the IEM market was less crowded than it has become in the past decade or so, before finally "discovering" my ER-4SR, pretty much all other IEMs I had (including my UERM) lacked the last bit of realism in the mids (especially upper mids), with a somewhat too relaxed presence range compared to real life, which was also what I heard when listening to pure white noise.
To my ears, the Etys' mids don't overshadow their lows - the tuning compensation for the lack of the natural open ear gain in IEMs on the ER-4S/SR/XR, ER3SE/XR and ER2SE/XR seems to match my personal HRTF very well, as I do not experience any of this when comparing my ER-4S or the ER4SR with real environmental noise/sound, speech etc, which is also the case when carefully using a sine generator or listening to white noise. In fact, to my ears, and also backed by various research studies (Killion, others, and as far as I know the most recent one by Hammershøi & Møller), this type of HRTF compensation sounds the most accurate to me, and in my earlier years when the IEM market was less crowded than it has become in the past decade or so, before finally "discovering" my ER-4SR, pretty much all other IEMs I had (including my UERM) lacked the last bit of realism in the mids (especially upper mids), with a somewhat too relaxed presence range compared to real life, which was also what I heard when listening to pure white noise.
I'm not saying the ER2s are a bad IEM (far from it, actually) - it's just that if your emphasis is sub-bass, look elsewhere or EQ it. The ER2XE has it, it's just hidden relative to the mids.
If you want deep sounding earphones, you tend to try and go for dark-sounding ones or U-shaped IEMs.
I'm not saying the ER2s are a bad IEM (far from it, actually) - it's just that if your emphasis is sub-bass, look elsewhere or EQ it. The ER2XE has it, it's just hidden relative to the mids.
If you want deep sounding earphones, you tend to try and go for dark-sounding ones or U-shaped IEMs.
I'm definitely not trying to defend/be fanboying at the ER2XR, but even if one doesn't agree with a diffuse-field-oriented midrange being "accurate" but finds it too boosted, the absolute difference between the Etys' midrange and the others is not that big (2 to 5 dB at 1 kHz respectively 3 kHz based on measurements of the U12t and WF-10000XM3 that you have). Perhaps your HRTF also differs somewhat more from the average HRTF, which is nothing that's too unnormal since individual ear shaped are, well, obviously individual and quite different at times (ear shape, canal length and canal width), or perhaps the insertion depth is not up to where it is supposed to be at, since this would also cause the ear canal resonances to shift to other frequencies than they should be (in fact when I got my ER-4S several years ago, I was initially not getting a proper seal or insertion depth either and put them away because I also perceived the (upper) mids as definitely too prominent, which however fortunately settled some time later when I took them out again and experimented some more with them and finally got them to the correct insertion depth to which I just had to get used to because it didn't feel comfortable or natural to me at first (I always avoided any sorts of multi-flange tips and still do unless really necessarysince single-flange tips are just easier to insert and take out), but once I had them at the correct depth, the mids' FR was the most accurate I have experienced from any IEMs so far, with the exception of a very slightly (1 dB to my ears) too prominent presence range, which was however with the ER4SR).
Anyway, clearly it seems like people have quite contrasting perceptions of what a perceptively neutral midrange tuning is, perhaps even with the IEMs at correct insertion depth.
Shure SE846 and the Westone B50, the latter of the two I currently own, have incredible bass response both in quantity/quality and extension. Adding EQ into the mix, the Etymotic ER4XR is unreal for a single BA driver. Actually, even without EQ, the subbass extension is incredible but just a little shy in quantity for me.
Empire Ears Legend X, dual DD hybrid with the most physical bass I have heard to date. Nothing quite like it. At least, not that I have heard. (Would love to hear more like it though. )
Campfire Atlas is in my opinion the best nonsense single DD IEM that does it all, and at this moment it's reasonably priced compared to the flood of new chi-fi DD IEMs.
Shure SE846 and the Westone B50, the latter of the two I currently own, have incredible bass response both in quantity/quality and extension. Adding EQ into the mix, the Etymotic ER4XR is unreal for a single BA driver. Actually, even without EQ, the subbass extension is incredible but just a little shy in quantity for me.
Audiosense AQ7 have perfect bass, it is not only sub bass focused and powerful but extremely tight and controlled with great texture, destroying Blessing 2 easily in the bass department
Old thread, but I thought I would throw in my 2 cents anyhow.
If we're talking about quality, then the iBasso IT07, and (yes, I'm going there) TinHifi P1. I know what your thinking. But, where the P1 lack in quantity, they REALLY shine in quality. That tight controlled planar bass is just lovely, as long as you don't need any sort of boosted bass. The IT07 are not super boosted, but it is just such good quality. It is tight and controlled but goes very deep (lovely).....
If we're talking about quantity, I could pick any of the older Skullcandy IEMs (because they had BIG bass, it was just sloppy), but to mix quality as well as quantity, I have not heard bass the likes of the Xioami Piston 2 or HERE. These were considered audiophile grade sound for like $20. They were ChiFi before it was a thing (even though they were referred to as budget-fi back then).
Old thread, but I thought I would throw in my 2 cents anyhow.
If we're talking about quality, then the iBasso IT07, and (yes, I'm going there) TinHifi P1. I know what your thinking. But, where the P1 lack in quantity, they REALLY shine in quality. That tight controlled planar bass is just lovely, as long as you don't need any sort of boosted bass. The IT07 are not super boosted, but it is just such good quality. It is tight and controlled but goes very deep (lovely).....
If we're talking about quantity, I could pick any of the older Skullcandy IEMs (because they had BIG bass, it was just sloppy), but to mix quality as well as quantity, I have not heard bass the likes of the Xioami Piston 2 or HERE. These were considered audiophile grade sound for like $20. They were ChiFi before it was a thing (even though they were referred to as budget-fi back then).
@Softears Cerberus. Overall a very elegant neutral sound signature with slightly forward mids but when there’s a need to deliver sub-bass, it doesn’t hold back. Boy oh boy can they dig deep when needed and it’s, like their overall signature, a very elegantly implemented, well controlled sub-bass that doesn’t muddy the other frequencies. Until now, the EE Odin held the honors for best sub bass in my IEM collection but I think my newly-acquired Cerberus might have clinched it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
)
