[elfary]

After a few days trying the UM3x amped and unamped i can't help to notice how remarkably well this iem scales with an outboard amp. I've been amping it with an iBasso T3 through an iPod Classic line out and the improvement it brings not only to the frequency response but mostly to the soundstage is far more noticiably than the improvements that i ever got amping my other iems (SE420 and SE530).
 
I'd say that the UM3x amped could almost be deemed as a different IEM than unamped. It scales wonderfully. Properly amped the no soundstage claims are simply wrong. At least in my humble opinion.
 
It's not that the UM3x needs an amp since it sounds very good unamped but it does "appreciate" more an outboard amp than other iems out there.

 

[roy_jones]

How does the amp bring an improvement to the frequency response?
 
I've noticed that most of the time people seem to use amps as a kind of equalizer. 
 
I'd also be interested to learn how you've controlled for volume matching in your comparisons. 

 

[syn_fx]

I own the UM3X too, but haven't noticed any significant improvement when it's amped.
 
What are you referencing to? Ipod Classic's HO? In that case, the improvement you see is likely to come from the lackluster internal amp on the Classic. 
 
I compared on a Sony S639 via HO and via LOD.
 
 

 

[elfary]

The hardware used has been a 2009 gen iPod Classic, fiio lod and an iBasso T3.
Dunno how well implemented is the Sony line-out and dunno if the Sony dac crosstalk performance is good enough. With the iPod the space between every sound increases more than a bit.

and nope i have not measured volumes but to tell that the treble provided by the T3 is far more clean and detailed than the unamped one you do not need to get into a lab

And for the record i'd say the iPhone behaves the same way.

When i do the same with the SE530 the improvement is minimal and with the SE420 the improvent is greater.

 

[pedxing]

I believe if the source is already good and the output jack is high quality, amping won't help much with the UM3X as they are already sensitive.  I think the biggest difference in my opinion was moving from the headphone jack of my iphone to the LOD - things sounded much smoother and natural.  I never tried the T3 specifically, but I get the feeling a lot of supposed improvements of amping people have experienced is adding coloration to the signal.  I bought the pico slim which has been described as too transparent and neutral - rather boring which IMO is ideal.  All it did for me was reduce the volume output of my LOD which was a big win for me.
 
I assume most output impedance of amps is 0, so I doubt coloration would be introduced by changes in the output impedance affecting the crossover circuits of the UM3X.  I find the UM3X is very susceptible to coloration with volume adapters, exhibiting muddy bass boosting, which makes buying a portable amp much more attractive option.

 

[syn_fx]

My point is that you are seeing the difference because your Classic's HO is a poor source compared to LOD (which bypasses the inferior internal amp), and not because UM3X benefit from amping. In my experience, UM3X does not really change with amping if the source is good. Others who have good sources (Sony X, Cowon J3) are unlikely to see any difference.
 
Of course, not everyone hears the same, YMMV.

 

[T78Power]

This is because of the poor headphone out on the ipods. Even the great sounding 6th gen nanos (by comparison). To test this plug your headphone out then LOD to your home theater setup / car etc.... you'll get the same results (ipod will sound very lacking if out of the headphone out) NO YMMV here just simple facts.

 

[syn_fx]

YMMV in the sense that some people like to use amps to colour their sound - if that 'improves' the sound for them, I can't argue with that. But most likely the OP hears the difference as a result of the poor source, not colouration. 

 

[mvw2]

I've found the scaling to be dependent on the source player.  If wattage is sufficiently low, bass gets muddy and discoherent but snugs right up when stepping to an adequate wattage source.  Wattage need is volume dependent.  As well, the UM3X get more visceral and realistic as you up the volume some, so wattage need goes up.  Depending on listening levels and available source devices, amping may become rather important.  Mind you, the UM3X doesn't need a lot of wattage to operate.  Something as simply as a FiiO E5 will do the trick.  However, amp choice as well as source or DAC choice may be a touchy topic considering the level of clarity the UM3X offers.  It's an earphone good enough to show you differences between source devices and even amps, so one may find worth in stepping up their game a little.

 

[elfary]

I've found the scaling to be dependent on the source player.  If wattage is sufficiently low, bass gets muddy and discoherent but snugs right up when stepping to an adequate wattage source.  Wattage need is volume dependent.  As well, the UM3X get more visceral and realistic as you up the volume some, so wattage need goes up.  Depending on listening levels and available source devices, amping may become rather important.  Mind you, the UM3X doesn't need a lot of wattage to operate.  Something as simply as a FiiO E5 will do the trick.  However, amp choice as well as source or DAC choice may be a touchy topic considering the level of clarity the UM3X offers.  It's an earphone good enough to show you differences between source devices and even amps, so one may find worth in stepping up their game a little.

By the way man your multi-iem reviews are awesome even i find your latest take on the UM3x Frequency response a bit exaggerated on it's v shape. What player do you use for the tests ? And out of curiosity what iem do you like more the SE530 or the UM3x ?

Thanks a lot for all the time and money invested on your reviews.Greatly appreciated.

 

[roy_jones]

Gotta volume match to be able to draw conclusions.  I'm not trying to be a douche, and everyone should be free to discuss their perceptions regardless, but I'm continually surprised at how few head-fiers seem to understand how important this is to being able to make substantive claims. 
 
 

 

[elfary]

I know a thing or two about digital audio and i'm aware of the volume matching importance but all i'm saying that the difference between T3 and no T3 is huge with the UM3x and tiny with the SE530. it's not a scientifical claim but it's just too blatant.
Anyway i do respect hour view on the matter.

 

[syn_fx]

Hvae you tested the amp though? Because from what you are saying, it's not the 'difference between the T3 and no T3' - its more the difference between LOD and no LOD. 

 

[elfary]

Name it whatever you want to. With the SE530 lod or no lod makes for a tiny difference. The same chain yields different results depending on the iem: UM3x,SE 420 or SE530.

To me it's clear that the UM3x scales better than the SE420 and much better than the SE530 which it's all i'm trying to point out i this thread. Which it's not about the iPod or the iPhone or the T3 used on the test. The chain is the samr aside from the iem.

 

[syn_fx]

The fact that you find little difference between LOD and HO on SE530s on an ipod classic, yet a lot of difference with UM3X is a little strange. The classic's internal amp is poor, you should see a difference if you are using decent quality IEMs (like the SE530's) and a decent amp (which you are using). To then go on and say that the UM3X exhibits a lot of difference is again strange, given how most people have heard no difference when amping the UM3X (I in fact DBT'd). 
 
I've tried the UM3X through high end sources, and adding an amp to the chain has made no difference, an experience that a lot of other members will relate to. But you might well hear differently - I would be very cautious in recommending an amp as an upgrade for UM3X unless your source is poor.