Very dissapointed with Shure E3C
Jan 8, 2006 at 11:58 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 43

iScream

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Posts
109
Likes
12
Location
Atlanta
I picked up a set of E3C's locally and I'm so dissapointed it almost makes me mad. There is very little bass and no high treble. Compared to my AKG K271S cans they just seem lifeless to me and the AKG's are not exactly dynamic. How can anyone think these things sound good and are worth what they cost?

By the way, I'm pretty sure I'm inserting them far enough and that I'm getting a good seal. I hope the place where I got them will let me return them.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:05 AM Post #2 of 43
When you listen to good sounding cans, you start to expect to much out of everything you buy!

If the E3c's were the first good set you ever heard, you would probably like them better!
icon10.gif
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:05 AM Post #3 of 43
Believe it or not, the bass is as good as it gets with a single-driver phone. In direct comparison with full-sized headphones, most single-driver IEM's come off not that well. The only reason that many people like the Etys is of the overboosted treble and underemphasised bass leading to an illusion of detail. The E3c's don't have the treble boost to set off the rest of the response (although IMO it is a more honest account of what the driver is capable of), so it does come off worse to some.


IEM's are a tradeoff between portability, isolation and performance, with a heavy emphasis on the former two. I don't think that you can deny for example that the level of isolation is significantly enhanced (with foam tips) over the K271S.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:08 AM Post #4 of 43
IEM's have difficulty competing with ANY over the ear headphone (with the exception of maybe the customs), sometimes even regardless of price. When people say that IEM's sound good (imo) they are comparing them with other IEMS.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:23 AM Post #5 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by cheechoz
When you listen to good sounding cans, you start to expect to much out of everything you buy!

If the E3c's were the first good set you ever heard, you would probably like them better!
icon10.gif



I'm sure it doesn't help that I was at the DFW meet yesterday and listened to some very nice sounding setups. I just can't believe how extreme the sound difference is though. Even compared to my somewhat modest 271's.

-Chris
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:26 AM Post #6 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman
IEM's are a tradeoff between portability, isolation and performance, with a heavy emphasis on the former two. I don't think that you can deny for example that the level of isolation is significantly enhanced (with foam tips) over the K271S.


Yes, there is a huge difference in isolation between the IEM and the sealed K271S, whether I'm using the foam tips or the soft gray tips. I don't need the portability so I'm not willing to give up this much sound quality for the isolation...

-Chris
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:27 AM Post #7 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by markot86
IEM's have difficulty competing with ANY over the ear headphone (with the exception of maybe the customs), sometimes even regardless of price. When people say that IEM's sound good (imo) they are comparing them with other IEMS.


The statement above should be posted at the top of this forum...
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 2:06 AM Post #8 of 43
I agree, the E3's were the first over $100 headphone I bought, and I certainly didn't expect the spectral performance to be so weak considering that the previous EX71's had no problem with (excessive) bass and treble. It is especially misleading because Shure claims "extended frequency response" for the E3C's.

I did find relative happiness in the Etymotic ER6i which isn't as weak in the treble (but still a bit veiled) and has about the same amount of bass (give or take a dB depending on the seal)
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 10:27 AM Post #9 of 43
In terms of perception the probably minor measurable difference in bass was noticeable, and the definition of the E3c also struck me as superior in the frequencies that it did represent.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 11:22 AM Post #10 of 43
E3c were my firsts IEMs and I can't say nothing but good things about them.

Try a different seal. For me, it worked with yellow foams.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 11:58 AM Post #11 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by markot86
IEM's have difficulty competing with ANY over the ear headphone (with the exception of maybe the customs), sometimes even regardless of price. When people say that IEM's sound good (imo) they are comparing them with other IEMS.


That's not true, it's even bullcrap imo..
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 12:01 PM Post #12 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by bangraman
The only reason that many people like the Etys is of the overboosted treble and underemphasised bass leading to an illusion of detail.


Your opinion is based on ...? Your own opinion? Did you even take a look at the frequency responses of the ER4?

@iScream: never heard the E3C, but owned the E2C, and it's hard to imagine that an upgraded model lacks bass.. but it IS imaginable that it lacks in resolution, clarity, and so on..
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 1:48 PM Post #13 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by iScream
I picked up a set of E3C's locally and I'm so dissapointed it almost makes me mad. There is very little bass and no high treble. Compared to my AKG K271S cans they just seem lifeless to me and the AKG's are not exactly dynamic. How can anyone think these things sound good and are worth what they cost?

By the way, I'm pretty sure I'm inserting them far enough and that I'm getting a good seal. I hope the place where I got them will let me return them.



I'm own E3C for 2 month, and don't like it, not happy with it
I sold it because it's sound not good
it's sound compress, less bass, less high treble
and it's sound always in my brain, not open
not reccommend for other head-fier
very_evil_smiley.gif
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 2:37 PM Post #14 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by sidewinder
Your opinion is based on ...? Your own opinion? Did you even take a look at the frequency responses of the ER4?

@iScream: never heard the E3C, but owned the E2C, and it's hard to imagine that an upgraded model lacks bass.. but it IS imaginable that it lacks in resolution, clarity, and so on..




Of course it's my opinion. And it is always my opinion. Not conjecture, assumption, etc. I've compared the E5c, E3c, E2c, ER-6i and ER-4P/S against each other over an extended period and of course against full-size phones. I don't have to look at frequency responses to figure out the relative capabilities of headphones.
 
Jan 9, 2006 at 2:54 PM Post #15 of 43
Quote:

Originally Posted by munkong
I'm own E3C for 2 month, and don't like it, not happy with it
I sold it because it's sound not good
it's sound compress, less bass, less high treble
and it's sound always in my brain, not open
not reccommend for other head-fier
very_evil_smiley.gif



Shure made it because they knew that you didn't want to travel around with your hornet and HF1.
icon10.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top