The final question to e3c vs e6i poll

[rsaavedra]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Iriver E3: Clarity is amazing, but so is the Er6i's. There is no bass.

Gee no bass in the E3c? That is quite an unusual impression on them. One of their strengths is a very healthy bass. I would suggest try replacing the size (or type) of the tips you are using to get a good seal.

I don't vote in this poll however, because I haven't tried the ER6's.

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Iriver There is no bass.

There is something wrong here -- what tips have you tried? Do you have a good seal?

 

[lee0539]

awesome iriver... your now my other go to guy for this decision... thats if i dont end up buying a used er4s with convertor

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hackeron May very well be true, but when I got my E3c, there was *no* bass! -- I was very disappointed. I was trying them with different tips for around 5 hours before deciding to send them back in the morning, but leaving them over night playing THX bass samples just for the sakes of it. In the morning the bass was more than enough! -- I dont see how such a dramatic difference coud be coincidental, but it was easier getting them in my ears, so maybe I just suddenly "got it" on how to insert them, but fact remains I experienced what he has.

Hmm that is certainly a very interesting finding!

The generally accepted view is that such night and day differences should not appear with balanced armature drivers.

Perhaps a re-evaluation is in order?

 

[lee0539]

are u guys who vote for e3c as being better using an amp? cuz i think thats why u guys like e3c better cuz it sounds better with amp.. if its ampless and using a portable player like ipod, ihp, or creative. Then i have nothing to say. Mr. Iriver what is ur source?

 

[Mr Iriver]

The source I have been using for this comparison is my Iriver IFP395T flash player ampless. I think they are both very efficient without an amp.
So which is better the Er6i or the E3c.
I previously had said that the Er6i seemed to be the better canalphone. Now look at the title of my thread reply. Now I think the E3c is much better.

I left both the E3c and ER6i playing music to see if they burn in. E3's sound to me seemed now slightly more detailed than before, but what brought me to like them is their bass .

Maybe E3's do burn in: Their bass was now while soft, deep,slightly punchy, and gave the music presence that the ety's lacked. The midrange still has the hump, but yet maintains it's full, and enjoyable sound (I also tried the Iriver's equalizer which improved the sound. A good equalization is to lower the midbass, to mids). The highs, they seem not to be as detailed as the Ety's but the truth is that they are not as loud+the midrange is loud enough to take over most of the sound (I increased the highs with the equalizer, and they now seem to make the soundstage wider, however I prefer upfront sounstage).

Er6i: While no noticeable improvements, Er6i has a nice advantage. They sound awesome in the first listen. For example if I tell a friend to listen to my E3's, This is what they'll say.
- They sound great. so how much were they?
- They cost $180.
- You got robbed badly.
The Er6i unequalized already has a nice bass. the midrange is great. The highs are amazingly detailed, but sometimes annoying. The problem that leads me to think the overall the E3's are much better, is that compared to the ER6i, makes the 6i's sounds dead. You'll find all the notes while very clear, thin. Also the bass is pretty good, but doesn't have the effect that gives the music a pleasant, present, alive sound. The highs, yes are more detailed, but in truth it seems to me they are just louder.
E3's are not for everyone. I have seen people on headfi hating them, while others love them.
Mini comparason using the equalizer.
To me E3c, unequalized are overall a better canalphone, then the Er6i. I think that it desreves to be compared with the Er4 rather than with the Er6i. The E3c may just need the patience of the customer specially since they don't come with the triflange which fits almost everyone. Instead you have to go through all of the sleeves to find which seals best.
When equalized the E3c does really show it is better than the Er6i, especially after you get rid of the Midrange hump. E3c equalized well, beats Er6i equalized or not equalized.
E3 is better then Er6i, especially is equalized. While I think it is more fair to compair it to the Er4 I am sure the ER4 beat the hell out of E3 when it comes to high end.

 

[hackeron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Iriver The source I have been using for this comparison is my Iriver IFP395T flash player ampless. I think they are both very efficient without an amp. So which is better the Er6i or the E3c. I previously had said that the Er6i seemed to be the better canalphone. Now look at the title of my thread reply. Now I think the E3c is much better. I left both the E3c and ER6i playing music to see if they burn in. E3's sound to me seemed now slightly more detailed than before, but what brought me to like them is their bass . Maybe E3's do burn in: Their bass was now while soft, deep,slightly punchy, and gave the music presence that the ety's lacked. The midrange still has the hump, but yet maintains it's full, and enjoyable sound (I also tried the Iriver's equalizer which improved the sound. A good equalization is to lower the midbass, to mids). The highs, they seem not to be as detailed as the Ety's but the truth is that they are not as loud+the midrange is loud enough to take over most of the sound (I increased the highs with the equalizer, and they now seem to make the soundstage wider, however I prefer upfront sounstage). Er6i: While no noticeable improvements, Er6i has a nice advantage. They sound awesome in the first listen. For example if I tell a friend to listen to my E3's, This is what they'll say. - They sound great. so how much were they? - They cost $180. - You got robbed badly. The Er6i unequalized already has a nice bass. the midrange is great. The highs are amazingly detailed, but sometimes annoying. The problem that leads me to think the overall the E3's are much better, is that compared to the ER6i it sounds dead. You'll find all the notes while very clear, thin. Also the bass is pretty good, but doesn't have the effect that gives the music a pleasant, present, alive sound. The highs, yes are more detailed, but in truth it seems to me they are just louder. E3's are not for everyone. I have seen people on headfi hating them, while others love them. Mini comparason using the equalizer. To me E3c, unequalized are overall a better canalphone, then the Er6i. I think that it desreves to be compared with the Er4 rather than with the Er6i. The E3c may just need the patience of the customer specially since they don't come with the triflange which fits almost everyone. Instead you have to go through all of the sleeves to find which seals best. When equalized the E3c does really show it is better than the Er6i, especially after you get rid of the Midrange hump. E3c equalized well, beats Er6i equalized or not equalized. E3 is better then Er6i, especially is equalized. While I think it is more fair to compair it to the Er4 I am sure the ER4 beat the hell out of E3 when it comes to high end.

Exactly!

The ER-6i cost as much as the E3c but sound is far worse. A summary of why the E3c kill the ER-6i:
* 2 year vs 1 year warranty
* $55 replacement after warranty vs pay full price (E1 owners get E3c! -- free upgrade)
* Far more durable (thicker wire, better connection to driver, hense warranty is far better)
* Clearer bass
* Clearer mid (although over emphasized)
* Compareable highs (better if equalized)

I really hated the E3c initially being used to over powering muddy bass (vs crystal clear, balanced bass), less mids (vs overemphasized mids) and over emphasized treble (vs recessed treble).. So sure, if you compare to other earbuds, they sound very different, upfront and claustrophobic. When comparing sound detail however, not much compares and if your *personal preference* is less mids -- reduce them and increase highs, it adds no distortion whatsoever.

If you look at *ANY* headphone pair (except for 1 or 2), they all have a pretty messy frequency graph, and it makes a fair compromise for sound clarity in those frequencies. Its your job to tune the volumes of each frequency range you like best -- its the headphones' job to bring you clarity in those frequencies, and the shures excel at that!

 

[lee0539]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hackeron Exactly! The ER-6i cost as much as the E3c but sound is far worse. A summary of why the E3c kill the ER-6i: * 2 year vs 1 year warranty * $55 replacement after warranty vs pay full price (E1 owners get E3c! -- free upgrade) * Far more durable (thicker wire, better connection to driver, hense warranty is far better) * Clearer bass * Clearer mid (although over emphasized) * Compareable highs (better if equalized) I really hated the E3c initially being used to over powering muddy bass (vs crystal clear, balanced bass), less mids (vs overemphasized mids) and over emphasized treble (vs recessed treble).. So sure, if you compare to other earbuds, they sound very different, upfront and claustrophobic. When comparing sound detail however, not much compares and if your *personal preference* is less mids -- reduce them and increase highs, it adds no distortion whatsoever. If you look at *ANY* headphone pair (except for 1 or 2), they all have a pretty messy frequency graph, and it makes a fair compromise for sound clarity in those frequencies. Its your job to tune the volumes of each frequency range you like best -- its the headphones' job to bring you clarity in those frequencies, and the shures excel at that!

what EQ do you do? on the basis of 50% being normal. 100% is max and 0% is no bass/treble

i was close to buying an e5c cuz i was frustrated with all this.. but i'm lucky i didn't. i found out those have high impedance so i dont think i can run that wihtout an amp. and its kinda funny to have headphones more costly then the player itself. if anything i should get a better player first.

which i understand for people who have really good setups and amps to buy expensive phones.. but i just need something for portable use without amp

 

[bLue_oNioN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee0539 i was close to buying an e5c cuz i was frustrated with all this.. but i'm lucky i didn't. i found out those have high impedance so i dont think i can run that wihtout an amp. and its kinda funny to have headphones more costly then the player itself. if anything i should get a better player first. which i understand for people who have really good setups and amps to buy expensive phones.. but i just need something for portable use without amp

Actually, in reality, it is just the opposite -- the Shure E5s are highly sensative and will quickly ramp up to incredibly forceful volumes with only a few clicks.

 

[lee0539]

thats weird. well i dont think i should pay that much for headphones when my source isn't good enough to make good use of it

and if i spoil myself again i might end up buying everything costly.. even my speakers.. its for my wallet's sake

ignorance is bliss

 

[lee0539]

seems like everyone who has both the etys and shures like the shures better after constant use. except for commando. but i dunno about commando cuz i have the ex71s and its just boomy bass to me and he loves them, so i guess i just dont have the same tastes. i also read about how the e3cs are better for rock. I think i need the bass even if its a small difference. with the warranty and comfort benefits of the e3c. i decided to jump on the super deal they having at amazon. 114 dollars for e3c with free shipping and no tax for me. better deal then ety 6i. couldn't pass up.

i also couldn't wait any longer for new headphones.. headroom says 4 to 8 weeks for the new e6i. such a pain to be waiting for those. the warranty did make a difference cuz i haven't had many good experiences with small portable earbuds. i think i went thru 3 or so and destroyed them all. including the sturdy ksc35 which isn't even an earbud.

 

[hackeron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee0539 what EQ do you do? on the basis of 50% being normal. 100% is max and 0% is no bass/treble i was close to buying an e5c cuz i was frustrated with all this.. but i'm lucky i didn't. i found out those have high impedance so i dont think i can run that wihtout an amp. and its kinda funny to have headphones more costly then the player itself. if anything i should get a better player first. which i understand for people who have really good setups and amps to buy expensive phones.. but i just need something for portable use without amp

Err, equalizer shows +/-db. So my current settings are:
50hz = +6db (what can I say, I like bass, lol)
200hz = -1db (mid bass I dont like)
1khz = -3db (here is where the punchy mids disappear)
3khz = +3db (hmm, sounds good that way

)
14khz = +8db (I dont like that much treble -- technically this should be set to +20db)

Technically, if the frequency chart is accurate (which I doubt it -- there's a huge isolation drop in the highs vs no isolation drop on the etys, so look out for that!). Anyway, assuming its accurate, the equalizer settings should be:
4k = +5db
6k = +10db
7k = +5db
>9k = +20db

My equalizer isnt powerful enough for this kind of customization, but I tried this in a software equalizer in xmms and there's far too much treble which makes me question the accuracy of the frequency chart further.

Anyway, others reported success just setting 1khz to -6db without touching any other settings. It sure removes the punchy middle

 

[Mr Iriver]

The main difference between the Er6i and E3c is the alive sound of the Shure's makes the Er6i sound thin and boring. Both are great canalphones, but E3 wins in every way except that the thick durable cord makes them hard to insert at first. E3's sound is better, and by far if equalized, warranty is also much better, and compfort is slightly better. Er6i have much better isolation though. I have never heard Er4 but bet they win in highs and clarity, but yet lose to E3c in Bass, and maybe in midrange.

 

[lee0539]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hackeron Err, equalizer shows +/-db. So my current settings are: 50hz = +6db (what can I say, I like bass, lol) 200hz = -1db (mid bass I dont like) 1khz = -3db (here is where the punchy mids disappear) 3khz = +3db (hmm, sounds good that way ) 14khz = +8db (I dont like that much treble -- technically this should be set to +20db) Technically, if the frequency chart is accurate (which I doubt it -- there's a huge isolation drop in the highs vs no isolation drop on the etys, so look out for that!). Anyway, assuming its accurate, the equalizer settings should be: 4k = +5db 6k = +10db 7k = +5db >9k = +20db My equalizer isnt powerful enough for this kind of customization, but I tried this in a software equalizer in xmms and there's far too much treble which makes me question the accuracy of the frequency chart further. Anyway, others reported success just setting 1khz to -6db without touching any other settings. It sure removes the punchy middle

hmm problem is my player doesn't have all those different settings. i only have bass and treble.

 

[hackeron]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lee0539 hmm problem is my player doesn't have all those different settings. i only have bass and treble.

Sounds like a pretty awful player. Anyone knows any good pocket sized equalizers?

On a receiver I set treble to around 65 and bass to around 50 to remove the claustrophobic feeling of the sound (if I dont have an equalizer handy that is), but thats not equalizing.