[elnero]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlingo Yes, but UM56 with UM2 changes UM2 into a completely different beast. Clearer, Bass Tighter, Cleaner, High more pronounced and less harsh.

Don't you think UM56's would have a similar effect on E500's.

 

[Tuarreg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vorlon1 I own both of these and completely disagree with what is stated. I find the shure's warmer and more musical than the UM 2's, with better bass, much larger soundstage and clarity of detail without any sense of etching or unnatural emphasis. I am someone whose everyday portable was mostly UM2's (with intermittent ETy 4's) both of which I really like, but since the shure arrived I think it is just far more enjoyable on every level. My 2cents.

I second that emotion.

Especially with Hornet amp and AudioLineOut cotton docks.

Tuarreg

 

[nakedtoes]

I can understand why some of them are hooked to the UM2.. cause of the delicious MIdranges.. i was hooked too..however i find that it need a higher volume to attain the magic and the same time the level of details. Shure are more balanced and refined phone

 

[GIGANTOID]

Not sure what one would expect in the difference in triple vs. double driver IEMS with one carrying a $200 premium over the other. personally I wouldnt want to deal with the weird cable with the E500s.

 

[solvexyz]

I had to comment on Shure E500 vs Westone UM2.

All these universal IEM do changes its sound signature dramatically when using different tips.

Shure E500 sounds the most boring if using the grey silicon tips. It does everything in a balanced way, and therefore, just like some people said it got detail, but it can not get my foottapping.

With the clear silicon tips, the treble and bass got a bit emphasised, but again this does not get my foottapping.

With tri-flange, amazing thing happens, the mid range got a huge bump, and bass tighten and has attacking power, and the treble sibilence that I have experienced with other tips are gone, and even with treble boost, there is no treble sibilence.

All these above happened to Westone UM2, but Shure E500 just does everything better in my opinion.

In the end after some tuning with my Shure E500, I can have the same forward sound of Westone UM2 and close to UE10 Pro detail out of my iPod. In the end, I had to give up on UM2 because the bass bothers me a lot. Its bass is too loose for my taste.


Please do note that because the different shape of earcanal, different people might experience slightly different sound signature than me when they changed the tips.

 

[wakeride74]

I'd have to disagree ^^ the UM2 and E500 are like Senn and Grado... totally different regardless of tuning. I owned both and listened to both with the triflange and the UM2 can not compete with the clarity and detail of the E500. The E500 can not compete with the bass, forward vocal/mids and fun factor of the UM2. Unless you are doing crazy things with the EQ I can't see how these could sound similar.

 

[solvexyz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakeride74 I'd have to disagree ^^ the UM2 and E500 are like Senn and Grado... totally different regardless of tuning. I owned both and listened to both with the triflange and the UM2 can not compete with the clarity and detail of the E500. The E500 can not compete with the bass, forward vocal/mids and fun factor of the UM2. Unless you are doing crazy things with the EQ I can't see how these could sound similar.

Not quite sure if you are refer to my post. I am saying I can tune the Shure E500 to have the forward vocal / mids of Westone UM2 while obtaining details very close to UE10 Pro. I am not saying I can tune Shure E500 to sound exactly like Westone UM2, but with only the aspect of UM2 that I liked (forward vocal and mids), I can do it.

 

[Pete7]

The E500 does everything better? Not in my opinion. I found the E500 to be less musical, the vocals veiled, and to have less impact than the UM2's. I also would love to know how forwardness and detail can added to a headphone's sound signature using an equalizer.

 

[wakeride74]

Quote:

Originally Posted by solvexyz Not quite sure if you are refer to my post. I am saying I can tune the Shure E500 to have the forward vocal / mids of Westone UM2 while obtaining details very close to UE10 Pro. I am not saying I can tune Shure E500 to sound exactly like Westone UM2, but with only the aspect of UM2 that I liked (forward vocal and mids), I can do it.

I was and I'm not trying to rip on you or anything but the UM2's vocals are "in the chair next to you" while the E500's are about "5 rows from the stage". I don't see how you could alter the sonic characteristics of either to make them sound similar in this respect. They are both pretty different here. Again I don't know if you are doing any crazy EQ stuff but I agree with Pete and would love to know how you are making such a drastic change.

 

[4metta]

Okay...I just recieved my e500s from Earphone Solutions and was listening to them with the short Comply ear tips stright out of my iPod with songs ripped both 320 aac and Apple Lossless. Off the bat...detail is exceptional. Reminds me of the Etys I had for a while except I returned those because they had no bass to my ears and these definitely do. The only problem so far is I am coming from Superfi5 pros and those suckers were very very warm. The e500s don't have an inch of warmth to my ears. They are detailed and balanced. R&B and jazz sound real nice with them. The thing is... I really miss the warmth listening to hard rock. I don't like how they sound with rock. The detail without warmth kinda makes my ears fatigue. I have only used them for about 30 minutes, though and am about to spend the rest of the day with them so I'll post again later. The funny thing is when I first bought my Superfis I thought they were way too warm and then the sound grew on me. Perhaps I just have to adjust to these as well. Is the general consensus that nothing sounds warmer than foam? I haven't bothered with the other eartips assuming this.

 

[4metta]

Perhaps it would help if those who are posting in this thread list what genres of music they tend to listen to the most? For example...I would definitely not recommend Superfis to a classical music listener right off the bat.

 

[wakeride74]

I find the triflange to sound the best. They have a warm/full sound compared to the foam which just sounds thinner IMO.

As far as music I listen to everything but rap and hip-hop.

 

[lostbobby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrJon Thanks for the further thoughts! Interesting. Two related questions on UM2 vs. E500 (or any other IEM's for that matter): -Is either one any better at sound isolation than the other? I'm getting old and cranky and want to block out much of the outside world. -If I'm just going to use an iPod and no amp, is either then better or worse?

Good thread guys, I'm looking at getting E-500 now they are out of late-beta stage. I'm not too worried about not liking them, since any used E500 will sell faster than hotcakes. ER-4p too. I think UM2 / E5c take longer to sell but they will sell.:

BTW ipod no amp: ER-4p substantially cleaner/ more enjoyable AND better isolation than UM-2 with triflange.

 

[javahut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4metta The only problem so far is I am coming from Superfi5 pros and those suckers were very very warm. The e500s don't have an inch of warmth to my ears. They are detailed and balanced. R&B and jazz sound real nice with them. The thing is... I really miss the warmth listening to hard rock. I don't like how they sound with rock. The detail without warmth kinda makes my ears fatigue. I haven't bothered with the other eartips assuming this.

I came from E5C to E500s. E5C are also really warm and at first, with the regular soft rubber tips, I pretty much thought the same as you about the E500s. But E500 with the tri-flanges did it for me (which is what I used on the E5s, too). Everything pretty much fell into place. The warmth showed up, with not as much of the fat bass hump of the E5, but with more depth and really good tight, control and detail of the low end. Everything just sounded right with the E500s after I switched to the tri-flanges. I still love that big fat low end of the E5s, but I love the E500s version of low end, too, with the added benefit of much more detail in the mids and hi end. The E5s definitely sound a little veiled in the upper mids and hi end in comparison to E500.

 

[4metta]

Thanks for the suggestions guys! You know...I read them and a little light bulb lit up above my head: the Comply eartips actually don't let you push the nozzles in that deep in your ear canal and these can go in a lot. I remember with the Etys how much bass was improved with plugs that allowed deeper insertion. I forgot that coming from Superfis that sit well outside and actually sound warmer with foam.

FYI...Spent the whole day with the Complys and am already listening to metal no problem once my ears adjusted to the new sound signature. But I would still like a bit more warmth so I will try the triple flanges tomorrow. I'll have to cut the tips off though, since I have short ear canals. As sleek as the e500s are, they still are not flush against my ear. If I put my head on a pillow the plastic inside the short Comply tips push against my ear canal..that's how small my ears are. Needless to say I am enjoying the sleeker design lookwise compared to the Superfis.

edit: Just tried the stock yellow foamies that came with the e500s and I gotta say that they fit and sound better to me than the more expensive Comply tips. Nice! I get to save some money in replacements.

The thing is that the yellow foamies don't have that little ridge inside the plastic tube that the Complys do so you can push em all the way into your canal. The sound is definitely warmer so I'm happy. Bit less detail of course but not bad. Still more detail than my Superfi 5's with the treble boosted in my iPod.