antonyfirst
Headphoneus Supremus
[size=large]Westone 3[/size]
Hello guys, like I anticipated in a random post and to some friends privately, I got very curious as to the sound of "Westies", to the point that I bought a pair to review them. Some might have seen my FS ad in the classifieds, since I never meant to keep these things unless they were perfect (in the IEM realm).
As of now, I have about 15 hours of listening time with the West. After the first hours of listening, the tonal balance was evident to me, and the further time I spent listening to them confirmed my early impressions, though making the overall picture more complete.
Build quality, fit
In short, the Westones have the most convenient cable ever seen in a IEM. It's no secret that Westone IEMs (or Westone ES cables used for aftermarket recabling of UE iems) have no microphonics, and almost disappear thank sto their flexibility. This is something for I have always looked at Westone 3 hoping they were the perfect IEM, since comfort would also be top notch.
As stated by Westone rep, Powderhound, the nozzle of the W3 is shorter than that of UM2 and UM1.
Comfort-wise, this translates in a series of problems for certain people: many short tips won't seal well enough, so that you lose bass and isolation. I tried a few tips: the provided short silicon tips, which didn't seal for me; medium Shure olives, which I had on my own, which added sibilance and made vocals pretty sick, also feeling huge in my ears.
I tried the classic Etymotic black/dark gray foam tips: due to the angled orientation of Westone 3's nozzle, they were comfortable (more so than using them with ER4), but they had the awful sibilance problem.
Finally, I found myself comfortable with the provided triflanges, which sealed both my ears very well, and sounded the best to me, with very well resolved treble, and no sibilance. These triflanges have the same shape of others, like Etymotic ones. But the silicon stem that fits on the IEM nozzle is longer than Etys triflanges, thus distancing the drivers more from the ear canal.
I also tried Etymotic "baby blue" triflanges, which a friend gave me yesterday. I have my right ear canal larger than the left one, so the small blue triflange didn't seal at the right side. If I held it with a hand, obtaining a seal, the sound was good as with the stock triflanges, so the "Baby blue" tips might be good for people who have small ear canals.
Other people discovered that the nozzle of Westone 3 doesn't have to stay too close to the ear canal, compared to other IEMs like Etys or Klipsch Image X10. I can confirm it, and the triflanges, while going deeply inside the ear, let the driver stay far from the earcanal. Otherwise, you have high chances to incur in sibilance problems.
I am wondering if the earphone nozzle has been shortened due to the "sickened upper midrange" and sibilance issues, but it's not something I can give for granted, so please don't quote me on this.
[Note: this has been discussed later in the tread, and the shortening of the nozzle might be just related to durability issues in the first prototypes]
The long comply tips, included with Westone 3, would provide the same physical effect of triflanges.
My review (and 90% of my listening with the 3) has been done using the triflanges.
The Sound
There is a W3 review I really liked, and it's made by vorlon1. You can read it here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/5067467-post548.html
It describes the clarity of Westone 3 perfectly, especially as to their ability to pick up reverb, when it's present on the recording.
Anyway, I feel the need to analize the tonal balance more deeply.
An impression that stroke me immediately, is that Westone 3 sound like a grown up Klipsch Image X10, adding a lot of clarity, treble resolution and some treble quantity (still on the delicate side), a bigger soundstage, but also screwing somewhat the lower frequency balance compared to the Klipsch, by bloating the mid-upper bass.
The Westone 3 have pretty nice deep bass. I don't find it amazing, nor superior to that of Klipsch X10 or Apuresound ER4P. It also does't touch the bass depth and rumble of my all time favourite (and stupidly sold) headphone, Stax SR-X MkIII Pro.
To use a comparison that orthodynamicists will like, Westone 3 have a similar midbass and upper bass to that of undamped bass-heavy orthos, with an oceanic resonance and mid-upper bass boost that is too full and bloated. The interesting thing is that while the bass stays like a cover on everything (and some might consider the sound "well integrated" for this... I consider it "pasted"), the bass doesn't sound muddy at all, and lets every kind of detail flow naturally and with a relaxed tonality. Westone 3 make big bass (bloated) and great clarity coexist like no other IEM did. I think this is where the three-driver/two cross-over technology makes itself noticed.
I don't like the upper bass bloat. With many tracks, especially if fattened recordings, the bass is too full, and adds too much of its presence. This is the main shortcoming of this IEM. As I said, it manages to screw the bass-midrange tonality, otherwise similar to that of Klipsch Image X10, even if the W3 are better at pretty much everything else.
It doesn't make any sense to me. Lowering the bass around 100-200Hz with Equalizer makes things more neutral and pleasing... I feel the need to eq my dap down of 6dB in that region, and even more would be ok, depending on the capability of your player to equalize things without distorting. Sometimes I decide that the bloat is not annoying, only to remember that I EQ-ed my dap. Even with that, the overall tone is still mid-upper bass heavy, but more naturally so.
Vorlon1 talked about reverb. It's beautiful. I am using a very good mp3 player, but still a standard one, without the clarity of the iMod, for example (the difference is noticeable only with high end IEMs/headphones). I owned Stax systems, used with better source than my iRiver E10 dap. I used this very E10 with the Audiocats-modded Babystax. None managed to pick the reverb with the clarity of Westone 3. I am not saying that Westone 3 are as fast as Stax, but there is something in their clarity that is amazing, especially with so much bass going on. My idea is that the decay is tuned differently for every driver, and especially short in that dedicated to midrange (that might also reach some midbass-upper bass frequencies). It's just a guess (I don't have the technical knowledge to talk about it), though, I don't see anything in the frequency response that would give the W3 such an ability to capture reverb so well.
Another possibility I have thought of is that the stereo separation of Westone 3 is extremely high, thus permitting reverb sounds to be distinguished clearlier.
It's beautiful to hear echoes of certains sounds on another part of the recording room, or I should say, the head. I haven't heard it in any other IEM, not even Etymotic ER4P (being them in stock form -hyperdetailed- or the Apuresound recabled version -where peaks are tamed and the frequency response becomes more natural, and a bit blurred). Yesterday (Sunday 21 December) I met with a friend, who bought a pair of Apuresound ER4P on the FS forum under my advice (my pair is coming back from [AK]Zip), and I could swap between the two IEMs. Going from the W3 to the Apurety, I couldn't feel an improvement in detail, still certain treble sounds were more in my face. The Etys lacked the same reverb qualities. I thought "they are almost less detailed than Westones". Going back to Westone 3, I felt like they were muddy, but it's due to the cloud of midbass. Details were always present and well defined. Etys have a more "naked" and skinned sound presentation, which becomes addicting for lots of people (including me). The bass was equally deep, but a lot tighter with Etymotics.
I already commented on the highly emotional and pretty aggressive vocals on Apuresound ER4. Etys upper mids are forward.
The Westone 3 have laid back vocals, especially due to their own lower mids and upper bass balance. The lower mids are not over-exaggerated like the midbass and upper bass, but still pronounced. Vocals sound very "sweet" and human thanks to that, but at the same time, a certain upper midrange recession makes certain vocalists sound a bit distant.
Vocals are clear, but tend to be relaxed and don't always convey the same excitement other headphones can. They are pretty similar to those of Klipsch Image X10. As said, they would have very similar tone if it wasn't for the fatter bottom end of Westones (please take into account that the Images have already powerful, visceral and vibrating bass, but the Westone 3 extend that to higher bassy frequencies, unnaturally so).
The lower midrange tone makes acoustic guitars sound very pleasant, satisfying, full bodied and defined. It's a pleasure to listen to John Fahey's guitar on "Fare Forward Voyagers" album.
The same lower midrange can make few albus sound too saturated, like Popol Vuh - Hosianna Mantra, whose recording already has resonance at lower mids (until about 1kHz).
Going up with frequencies, treble has more quantity and definition compared to Klipsch. Not as much quantity as the Triple.fi or Ety, but I don't feel something is lacking when I listen to Westone's treble, while I feel this way when I listen to the Klipsch. Cymbals sound hearable but not defined with Klipsch Image X10. They have good definition with Westone 3. Triple.fi and Etys convey more cymbal energy over Westone 3.
The Triple.fi were sibilant with certain music of mine, as well as stock Etys. Apuresound Etys don't have the same issue, yet they provide lots of air and extention (up to 16kHz without heavy recessions). Westone 3 have well defined treble, but unfortunately it rolls off slightly past 12kHz, so they can't pick up all the harmonics of certain instruments. They have no sibilance once one understands what's going on with the tips.
Talking of other gimmicks, soundstage is pretty big for a IEM, not huge, not amazing, not short to any of the best IEMs. It doesn't leave anything to be desired for a IEM. I don't have Yuin Pk1 (open earbuds) anymore, but I recall them to have bigger soundstage of any IEM I tried.
Instrument placement is VERY precise and defined, and makes great use of all the head space.
Speed is top notch, on par with the best IEMs, like Etys and Head-Direct RE0... due to this three way design, though, it's hard to talk about "overall" speed, as things get more complex and I am pretty sure decay is tuned differently for every driver.
Burn-in?
Quickly, here: unlike Spyro, I didn't feel there was any burn in taking place with this IEM, from the very start until now. I'll keep trying to notice if there will be any improvements, but I really don't expect any.
Bottom line
So, do I like these toys? Yes, overall. I think they have great qualities, many to be unique in the IEM world. I also think certain qualities of these are sort of ground-breaking for future IEM designs. The use of the multiple drivers is clever when it comes to portraying reverbs. It's less clever when you realize that the tone could be better. I think the bass tonality is wrong. It's not that people won't like them, but this single issue makes me favour my Apuresound Etys for overall enjoyment. For both these IEMs, I can't suggest them for particular music genres. Different people would like them differently, even with the same music. I think Ety lovers won't find in the Westone 3 the perfect IEM. People liking bass, clarity, warmth and a laid back sound might well do, though. I feel W3 are a great upgrade over Klipsch Image X10, for example, IF you are not looking only for tone.
Ety lovers would be better served by trying a recable, or auditioning the Triple.fi. Personally, I prefer both Apuresound Etys and Westone 3 over the Triple.fi, but certain people might find the Triple.fi to be a better trade off between bass oriented phones and (lower) treble oriented phones, as they are U shaped, pretty much.
Tony
Hello guys, like I anticipated in a random post and to some friends privately, I got very curious as to the sound of "Westies", to the point that I bought a pair to review them. Some might have seen my FS ad in the classifieds, since I never meant to keep these things unless they were perfect (in the IEM realm).
As of now, I have about 15 hours of listening time with the West. After the first hours of listening, the tonal balance was evident to me, and the further time I spent listening to them confirmed my early impressions, though making the overall picture more complete.
Build quality, fit
In short, the Westones have the most convenient cable ever seen in a IEM. It's no secret that Westone IEMs (or Westone ES cables used for aftermarket recabling of UE iems) have no microphonics, and almost disappear thank sto their flexibility. This is something for I have always looked at Westone 3 hoping they were the perfect IEM, since comfort would also be top notch.
As stated by Westone rep, Powderhound, the nozzle of the W3 is shorter than that of UM2 and UM1.
Comfort-wise, this translates in a series of problems for certain people: many short tips won't seal well enough, so that you lose bass and isolation. I tried a few tips: the provided short silicon tips, which didn't seal for me; medium Shure olives, which I had on my own, which added sibilance and made vocals pretty sick, also feeling huge in my ears.
I tried the classic Etymotic black/dark gray foam tips: due to the angled orientation of Westone 3's nozzle, they were comfortable (more so than using them with ER4), but they had the awful sibilance problem.
Finally, I found myself comfortable with the provided triflanges, which sealed both my ears very well, and sounded the best to me, with very well resolved treble, and no sibilance. These triflanges have the same shape of others, like Etymotic ones. But the silicon stem that fits on the IEM nozzle is longer than Etys triflanges, thus distancing the drivers more from the ear canal.
I also tried Etymotic "baby blue" triflanges, which a friend gave me yesterday. I have my right ear canal larger than the left one, so the small blue triflange didn't seal at the right side. If I held it with a hand, obtaining a seal, the sound was good as with the stock triflanges, so the "Baby blue" tips might be good for people who have small ear canals.
Other people discovered that the nozzle of Westone 3 doesn't have to stay too close to the ear canal, compared to other IEMs like Etys or Klipsch Image X10. I can confirm it, and the triflanges, while going deeply inside the ear, let the driver stay far from the earcanal. Otherwise, you have high chances to incur in sibilance problems.
I am wondering if the earphone nozzle has been shortened due to the "sickened upper midrange" and sibilance issues, but it's not something I can give for granted, so please don't quote me on this.
[Note: this has been discussed later in the tread, and the shortening of the nozzle might be just related to durability issues in the first prototypes]
The long comply tips, included with Westone 3, would provide the same physical effect of triflanges.
My review (and 90% of my listening with the 3) has been done using the triflanges.
The Sound
There is a W3 review I really liked, and it's made by vorlon1. You can read it here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/5067467-post548.html
It describes the clarity of Westone 3 perfectly, especially as to their ability to pick up reverb, when it's present on the recording.
Anyway, I feel the need to analize the tonal balance more deeply.
An impression that stroke me immediately, is that Westone 3 sound like a grown up Klipsch Image X10, adding a lot of clarity, treble resolution and some treble quantity (still on the delicate side), a bigger soundstage, but also screwing somewhat the lower frequency balance compared to the Klipsch, by bloating the mid-upper bass.
The Westone 3 have pretty nice deep bass. I don't find it amazing, nor superior to that of Klipsch X10 or Apuresound ER4P. It also does't touch the bass depth and rumble of my all time favourite (and stupidly sold) headphone, Stax SR-X MkIII Pro.
To use a comparison that orthodynamicists will like, Westone 3 have a similar midbass and upper bass to that of undamped bass-heavy orthos, with an oceanic resonance and mid-upper bass boost that is too full and bloated. The interesting thing is that while the bass stays like a cover on everything (and some might consider the sound "well integrated" for this... I consider it "pasted"), the bass doesn't sound muddy at all, and lets every kind of detail flow naturally and with a relaxed tonality. Westone 3 make big bass (bloated) and great clarity coexist like no other IEM did. I think this is where the three-driver/two cross-over technology makes itself noticed.
I don't like the upper bass bloat. With many tracks, especially if fattened recordings, the bass is too full, and adds too much of its presence. This is the main shortcoming of this IEM. As I said, it manages to screw the bass-midrange tonality, otherwise similar to that of Klipsch Image X10, even if the W3 are better at pretty much everything else.
It doesn't make any sense to me. Lowering the bass around 100-200Hz with Equalizer makes things more neutral and pleasing... I feel the need to eq my dap down of 6dB in that region, and even more would be ok, depending on the capability of your player to equalize things without distorting. Sometimes I decide that the bloat is not annoying, only to remember that I EQ-ed my dap. Even with that, the overall tone is still mid-upper bass heavy, but more naturally so.
Vorlon1 talked about reverb. It's beautiful. I am using a very good mp3 player, but still a standard one, without the clarity of the iMod, for example (the difference is noticeable only with high end IEMs/headphones). I owned Stax systems, used with better source than my iRiver E10 dap. I used this very E10 with the Audiocats-modded Babystax. None managed to pick the reverb with the clarity of Westone 3. I am not saying that Westone 3 are as fast as Stax, but there is something in their clarity that is amazing, especially with so much bass going on. My idea is that the decay is tuned differently for every driver, and especially short in that dedicated to midrange (that might also reach some midbass-upper bass frequencies). It's just a guess (I don't have the technical knowledge to talk about it), though, I don't see anything in the frequency response that would give the W3 such an ability to capture reverb so well.
Another possibility I have thought of is that the stereo separation of Westone 3 is extremely high, thus permitting reverb sounds to be distinguished clearlier.
It's beautiful to hear echoes of certains sounds on another part of the recording room, or I should say, the head. I haven't heard it in any other IEM, not even Etymotic ER4P (being them in stock form -hyperdetailed- or the Apuresound recabled version -where peaks are tamed and the frequency response becomes more natural, and a bit blurred). Yesterday (Sunday 21 December) I met with a friend, who bought a pair of Apuresound ER4P on the FS forum under my advice (my pair is coming back from [AK]Zip), and I could swap between the two IEMs. Going from the W3 to the Apurety, I couldn't feel an improvement in detail, still certain treble sounds were more in my face. The Etys lacked the same reverb qualities. I thought "they are almost less detailed than Westones". Going back to Westone 3, I felt like they were muddy, but it's due to the cloud of midbass. Details were always present and well defined. Etys have a more "naked" and skinned sound presentation, which becomes addicting for lots of people (including me). The bass was equally deep, but a lot tighter with Etymotics.
I already commented on the highly emotional and pretty aggressive vocals on Apuresound ER4. Etys upper mids are forward.
The Westone 3 have laid back vocals, especially due to their own lower mids and upper bass balance. The lower mids are not over-exaggerated like the midbass and upper bass, but still pronounced. Vocals sound very "sweet" and human thanks to that, but at the same time, a certain upper midrange recession makes certain vocalists sound a bit distant.
Vocals are clear, but tend to be relaxed and don't always convey the same excitement other headphones can. They are pretty similar to those of Klipsch Image X10. As said, they would have very similar tone if it wasn't for the fatter bottom end of Westones (please take into account that the Images have already powerful, visceral and vibrating bass, but the Westone 3 extend that to higher bassy frequencies, unnaturally so).
The lower midrange tone makes acoustic guitars sound very pleasant, satisfying, full bodied and defined. It's a pleasure to listen to John Fahey's guitar on "Fare Forward Voyagers" album.
The same lower midrange can make few albus sound too saturated, like Popol Vuh - Hosianna Mantra, whose recording already has resonance at lower mids (until about 1kHz).
Going up with frequencies, treble has more quantity and definition compared to Klipsch. Not as much quantity as the Triple.fi or Ety, but I don't feel something is lacking when I listen to Westone's treble, while I feel this way when I listen to the Klipsch. Cymbals sound hearable but not defined with Klipsch Image X10. They have good definition with Westone 3. Triple.fi and Etys convey more cymbal energy over Westone 3.
The Triple.fi were sibilant with certain music of mine, as well as stock Etys. Apuresound Etys don't have the same issue, yet they provide lots of air and extention (up to 16kHz without heavy recessions). Westone 3 have well defined treble, but unfortunately it rolls off slightly past 12kHz, so they can't pick up all the harmonics of certain instruments. They have no sibilance once one understands what's going on with the tips.
Talking of other gimmicks, soundstage is pretty big for a IEM, not huge, not amazing, not short to any of the best IEMs. It doesn't leave anything to be desired for a IEM. I don't have Yuin Pk1 (open earbuds) anymore, but I recall them to have bigger soundstage of any IEM I tried.
Instrument placement is VERY precise and defined, and makes great use of all the head space.
Speed is top notch, on par with the best IEMs, like Etys and Head-Direct RE0... due to this three way design, though, it's hard to talk about "overall" speed, as things get more complex and I am pretty sure decay is tuned differently for every driver.
Burn-in?
Quickly, here: unlike Spyro, I didn't feel there was any burn in taking place with this IEM, from the very start until now. I'll keep trying to notice if there will be any improvements, but I really don't expect any.
Bottom line
So, do I like these toys? Yes, overall. I think they have great qualities, many to be unique in the IEM world. I also think certain qualities of these are sort of ground-breaking for future IEM designs. The use of the multiple drivers is clever when it comes to portraying reverbs. It's less clever when you realize that the tone could be better. I think the bass tonality is wrong. It's not that people won't like them, but this single issue makes me favour my Apuresound Etys for overall enjoyment. For both these IEMs, I can't suggest them for particular music genres. Different people would like them differently, even with the same music. I think Ety lovers won't find in the Westone 3 the perfect IEM. People liking bass, clarity, warmth and a laid back sound might well do, though. I feel W3 are a great upgrade over Klipsch Image X10, for example, IF you are not looking only for tone.
Ety lovers would be better served by trying a recable, or auditioning the Triple.fi. Personally, I prefer both Apuresound Etys and Westone 3 over the Triple.fi, but certain people might find the Triple.fi to be a better trade off between bass oriented phones and (lower) treble oriented phones, as they are U shaped, pretty much.
Tony
