[mervinteo]

Seems like no one had post any reviews on the UM3X and I am hoping someone would give their opinion on the New UM3X against the Weston 3.

So far, I have heard the UM3X and it sounds great. Very good clarity, good soundstage and sounds wide in most of the frequency. I like it better than the IE8. The IE8 after burning for 150 hours still sound very tight and does not sound that great to me.

Anyone care to give their opinion on the UM3X vs Weston 3 out there. It will be great for everyone to know more on the UM3X.

 

[toughnut]

Seriously, do u even search?? I read quite a few impressions between that two so far.

 

[gilency]

Yeah, in the UM3X appreciation thread.
Bottom line:
UM3X: less bloated but strong bass, good mids, clear highs without sibilance with mellower more neutral overall sound. Non fatiguing, smaller shell, more comfortable for most, and easier to fit.
W3: mid hump bass, strong bass, sparkling highs with sibilance if not properly fitted. More difficult to fit, slightly larger than UM3X.
I have had both and prefer the former, but like both.

 

[Turko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah, in the UM3X appreciation thread. Bottom line: UM3X: less bloated but strong bass, good mids, clear highs without sibilance with mellower more neutral overall sound. Non fatiguing, smaller shell, more comfortable for most, and easier to fit. W3: mid hump bass, strong bass, sparkling highs with sibilance if not properly fitted. More difficult to fit, slightly larger than UM3X. I have had both and prefer the former, but like both.

I remember that you said I have never experienced sibilance with w3 so far. Why did you write different comment..?

 

[Zalithian]

He didn't say that. He said he experienced sibilance until he found the proper fit, believe. I could be wrong, but either way people experience sibilance until they find the proper fit. It doesn't mean it was him.

 

[Turko]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zalithian /img/forum/go_quote.gif He didn't say that. He said he experienced sibilance until he found the proper fit, believe. I could be wrong, but either way people experience sibilance until they find the proper fit. It doesn't mean it was him.

@gilency said about w3 on um3x's first thread..


Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just returned my W3's. I really like them except for 2 things: they are comfortable, but not as comfortable as my (now sold) UM2's. I do hear sometimes a little bloated bass, but it is recording dependent; the overall sound is very rich and musical. I will be getting the UM3x's because of a little better comfort and perhaps a little more accurate sound. I did not experience sibilance with the W3. They are great phones. Hope I am not sorry for my decision!

 

[Kees]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turko /img/forum/go_quote.gif I remember that you said I have never experienced sibilance with w3 so far. Why did you write different comment..?

If I understood correctly, he was formulating what he thinks is the general consensus in the appreciation thread, not his own opinion.

 

[sennmann]

are there any users here that could tell me which of the both they liked more listening to rock and hardcore music?

 

[music_4321]

I think this thread is useless at such an early stage - the main UM3X can still answer the question above this post and the OP's question. I'd say give it at least a month and start/ continue this thread (or not), otherwise people will start getting mixed up about what was said where, when and by whom.

 

[chris_ah1]

Got to say there is already aggro in the thread. But I concur that the findings above from gilency are a mixture of his own opinions AND the general consensus.

For a portable IEM comfort and fit and microphonics ARE sometimes more important than raw SQ.

IMO - you have the UM3x so why not just enjoy them and listen to more music and don't worry?
You prefer them to IE8s which is good.
After all, out of the top IEMs very few of them actually do a bad job (except in terms of price).

The UM3x will not be the FOTM IEM because as flawed as the UM2 was in some areas, in general it excelled well above its lack of street cred as a serious IEM and got a strong following. In fact I haven't even bothered to move away from the UM2 yet. And it's not out of fanboyism, but because it is well-rounded. The UM3X (with or without UM56 and ES3X) is one to stay. Just like the shure 530, or ety er4, or UE11 etc.

W3 probably is just going to be a FOTM iem. as are the IE8s...because ultimately I'm sceptical about the whole IE6--->IE8 difference.

 

[LFC_SL]

Its important to note the UM3X uses the same body as the UM2 for anyone needing a reference point on how the UM3X would fit

Side-tracking now... I would not call the UM2 well rounded. Bass definitely has that thumpy, bloaty edge, and it is slightly sibilant. I think a more worthwhile thread title would have included the IE8. I can't be the only one looking at all 3 as a potential upgrade

I have also demo'd the IE6, IE7 and IE8. I for one am not going to say there is hardly a difference

 

[chris_ah1]

I meant well-rounded as a package, not in terms of raw SQ, given what I had said:
"For a portable IEM comfort and fit and microphonics ARE sometimes more important than raw SQ. "

so there really was a difference between IE6 ---> 8? I wish i could demo the range but it's INCREDIBLY hard to get a good demo here in the uk of any can or iem.

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah, in the UM3X appreciation thread. Bottom line: UM3X: less bloated but strong bass, good mids, clear highs without sibilance with mellower more neutral overall sound. Non fatiguing, smaller shell, more comfortable for most, and easier to fit. W3: mid hump bass, strong bass, sparkling highs with sibilance if not properly fitted. More difficult to fit, slightly larger than UM3X. I have had both and prefer the former, but like both.

X2...but I much prefer it over W3. Even with a great fit and minimal to no siblance I found W3 generally more fatiguing on the ears but I do tend to listen at relatively louder volumes. W3 is generally sharper sounding versus UM3X being smoother sounding.

Since I have switched to the larger complys and am experiencing a fuller bass impact, I don't see ANY type of music where W3 is better than UM3X.

 

[gilency]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turko /img/forum/go_quote.gif I remember that you said I have never experienced sibilance with w3 so far. Why did you write different comment..?

I had no problems with sibilance, but stated it was a problem if not properly fitted (as reported by many, not me)

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFC_SL /img/forum/go_quote.gif Its important to note the UM3X uses the same body as the UM2 for anyone needing a reference point on how the UM3X would fit Side-tracking now... I would not call the UM2 well rounded. Bass definitely has that thumpy, bloaty edge, and it is slightly sibilant. I think a more worthwhile thread title would have included the IE8. I can't be the only one looking at all 3 as a potential upgrade I have also demo'd the IE6, IE7 and IE8. I for one am not going to say there is hardly a difference

Technically, it's a tad different. Though it's extremely similar, if you pay attention, the bend in the UM3X nozzle is smoother, and less edged. Comfort reasons maybe...or even isolation...