tstarn06
Banned
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Posts
- 7,929
- Likes
- 10
Wonderful stuff. As my other post noted, I didn't get into this depth, and don't have the experience to put it in words, but I know what you are saying. I also have that Patricia Barber track, so I will have to take a listen.
But great to hear the W3 compared to one of the IEM heavyweights, and coming out on top. You didn't compare comfort with the two phones but can only figure the W3s are more comfortable.
Quote:
But great to hear the W3 compared to one of the IEM heavyweights, and coming out on top. You didn't compare comfort with the two phones but can only figure the W3s are more comfortable.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by vorlon1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif After going several rounds back and forth with the TF10s and the W3s, I’d have to say both are great phones. They have a certain similarity of sound signature also, but the W3s are slightly cleaner sounding, kind of like if you took the TF 10s and with some kind of magic sound cleanser stripped away a very fine layer of sonic film from the entire presentation. This is not dramatic, but you can certainly hear it. In addition, the bass on the TF10, while quite good, is not as deep, clean, detailed, or impactful as the W3. One of the songs I have been using for this comparison is Patricia Barber’s version of “Norwegian Wood” by the Beatles. Besides excellent recording quality and female vocals, there is a lot of stand-up bass, piano, drums and some bells in the background. While the TF10 renders the bass fiddle well, the W3 is just cleaner and more impactful, including the sound of the fingers plucking the strings, which you do get some of with the TF 10, just more resolution and impact comes with the W3. The vocals are competent with the TF10, although the placement is ever so slightly recessed compared to the main body of the music. The W3 places the vocals slightly forward of the instruments on this cut, which is, in my opinion, where it belongs. It is not way out front just a bit and pleasantly so. The W3 has a very smooth musicality to its presentation, you hear no grain in the voice, it flows very well. With the TF 10 there is a very slight hint of grain and a sense that something is resisting the flow of the music very slightly. Again, this is a subtle effect, but depending on one’s sensitivity to such things, noticeable. The biggest difference I found between the W3 and TF 10 was in listening to classical music. I used the Cleveland Symphony’s recording of the Dvorak 8th Symphony, conducted by Christophe von Dohnanyi for this test. Listening to large string elements with complex textures of woodwinds in the mix, the W3 is phenomenal at rendering the weight of the orchestra with clarity and definition. I do not think I have heard anything like this done so well. You get the low rumble that a real orchestra creates in the hall, but the string definition is all there, not smudged or approximated, and the woodwinds and flutes are all there very clearly heard, but integrated into the sound as they should be. The 4th movement of this work starts with a big trumpet introduction and this is clear and biting while retaining a certain sweetness in the sound, like it sounds live. This section of the music can sound more biting and acerbic on lesser phones. I am extremely impressed with the W3s performance with classical music. The same holds true for piano music. The W3s ability to pick up bass energy just gives a reality to the piano that the TF 10 does not duplicate. In fact, as I have been listening to the W 3 off and on all day, I have gotten used to hearing this lower bass weight underpinning the music and now I hear the lack of it with other phones quite glaringly, when I wouldn’t have recognized it before to the same degree. To test the higher registers I listened to a Judy Collins tune called, “All the Pretty Horses” which has bells and triangles and such. Here the TF 10 showed a lot of strength, with clarity and definition in the higher realms. The W3 was also quite good, but the higher sounds of the bells and triangles didn’t sound quite as defined, but more “in the mix” of the music. Whether they should stand out like the TF 10 allows or be slightly less emphasized like the W3 presents, I do not know. The highs on the W3 are very clear and very smooth, with a kind of golden color to them (if that can describe a sound) while some of these sounds with the TF 10 may be ever so slightly more extended and defined. Others may perceive this differently, I do not see it as a major difference. Also, I dod no mention soundstage. Generally the TF10 has a slightly larger and deeper soundstage, I’d say about 5% larger all around, not so much, but perceivable. BTW, if there are any lovers of classical violin out there, the W3s sound fantastic on violin music because of their smoothness and lack of grain and easy flowing sound they allow. So, those are my attempts to compare the TF10 and the W3. Coming later the Shure E 500s and Sleek SA 6s. |
