[tstarn06]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cn11 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Quite right. I'm done beating this one. These kinds of discussions take the fun out of the hobby.... I'm going to listen.

Sorry to spoil your fun.

 

[moseboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't compare the two directly because those are the SE530 EQ settings from back before I converted them into custom molded hard shell earphones (one shot custom, they don't want to do more, sorry).

Oooh yeah, I completely forgot about that. Oh well....

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif So they still don't match the Westone 3 in some regards, like having the full bodied weight and presence of instruments that the W3 portray to me. However, the SE530 have a very good sense of ambience and space and soundstage, that once moved into custom dual sound-tube shells is even more like the W3 soundstage.

The soundstage of the Westone 3 I've actually heard mixed things about, which is interesting. I'm sure it's very tip-dependent is all.

 

[vespadaddy]

Hmm. I ho[pe the W3's sound better than the stock earbuds which came with my 4 GB Sansa Clip. I paid good $$ ($35) for that player, so I assume the included earbuds are quality units. I assume the W3 will be an improvement?


Also, how many posts are required to post in the WTB section? Any tips on how someone new to the iem/DAP scene can contribute and gain enough posts?

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vespadaddy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, how many posts are required to post in the WTB section? Any tips on how someone new to the iem/DAP scene can contribute and gain enough posts?

Read the sticky, mm hm: 50 posts, and a one-month member.

 

[catscratch]

I don't agree with this review AT ALL. I also own both of these IEMs (well, E500 instead of SE530 but it's exactly the same thing), and a great many others besides.

To my ears, the W3 has a fuller, more punchy bass with upper bass emphasis. The E500 has a more detailed bass but it's less full, with more midbass emphasis and paradoxically less bass control. It's a bit like bad electrostatic bass - detailed and textured but still fuzzy, and not quite kicking hard enough.

The mids are a problem for both headphones. The W3 has recessed mids with a warm but artificial tone and a lack of clarity and texture. The mids are easily this IEMs Achilles' heel. The E500 is better but still not quite there - the mids have more clarity, but are very plasticky and textureless. They're lush but in an artificial way.

The highs are a bit spiky on both headphones, though the E500 is more detailed. Both headphones are lacking treble extension.

The W3 I'd say is more muscular and dynamic, while the E500 is more detailed and has better clarity. Both are laid-back sounding, and both have very wide soundstages (for IEMs).

I'd say the E500 is better for jazz, vocal, and slower rock genres, while the W3 is better for electronica, dance music, faster rock, and anything that stresses dynamics over detail. Neither headphone is very good for classical music since their tones are off and their highs aren't very extended.

Which one is better? It's a close call but the W3 may nudge out a narrow win here.

 

[toughnut]

No so-called Killer Mid on W3?

 

[tstarn06]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catscratch /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't agree with this review AT ALL. I also own both of these IEMs (well, E500 instead of SE530 but it's exactly the same thing), and a great many others besides. To my ears, the W3 has a fuller, more punchy bass with upper bass emphasis. The E500 has a more detailed bass but it's less full, with more midbass emphasis and paradoxically less bass control. It's a bit like bad electrostatic bass - detailed and textured but still fuzzy, and not quite kicking hard enough. The mids are a problem for both headphones. The W3 has recessed mids with a warm but artificial tone and a lack of clarity and texture. The mids are easily this IEMs Achilles' heel. The E500 is better but still not quite there - the mids have more clarity, but are very plasticky and textureless. They're lush but in an artificial way. The highs are a bit spiky on both headphones, though the E500 is more detailed. Both headphones are lacking treble extension. The W3 I'd say is more muscular and dynamic, while the E500 is more detailed and has better clarity. Both are laid-back sounding, and both have very wide soundstages (for IEMs). I'd say the E500 is better for jazz, vocal, and slower rock genres, while the W3 is better for electronica, dance music, faster rock, and anything that stresses dynamics over detail. Neither headphone is very good for classical music since their tones are off and their highs aren't very extended. Which one is better? It's a close call but the W3 may nudge out a narrow win here.

Very informative, helpful comparison/analysis. Anyone choosing between these two phones should read this to get some perspective.

 

[SierraHotel01]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here is the EQ settings for my Freq Show 3-driver customs: Here is the EQ settings I would use with my SE530: Here are the EQ settings for my Westone 3 and Livewires Customs: I can't find anything wrong with the Westone 3, sorry.

Larry,

Recommend an experiment: for your Freq Show & SE530 EQ settings, try lowering all EQ settings, while maintaining same relative positioning, so that no band exceeds 0db. (You will have to compensate with a litle bit more gain/volume on your amp during playback).

I tried it on my SE530's, and WOW - a much cleaner signal, with the same EQ-flavor! (blatantly noticeable on my 3G Nano-->Tomahawk-->SE530)

Would be interested to hear your results - whether you too notice an improvement.

There's something to be said for using SUBTRACTIVE EQ on iPods.

 

[SierraHotel01]

How to customize iPod EQ using iTunes:

In iTunes menu bar, select Window - then - Equalizer
Customize EQ settings to your liking.

(As soon as you change any EQ passband, the name of whatever preset you started out with, will change to "Manual" in the pulldown menu at the top of the EQ popup screen)

Strongly recommend that you use subtractive EQ ONLY!
Increasing any passband above 0db setting (on any iPod I've ever owned) degrades the sound quality way more than subtractive EQ.

The only thing that matters in EQ is the "shape" of your EQ settings (i.e. bandpass gain settings RELATIVE to each other), not their absolute amplitude.

Now, the important part:

- In the iTunes / Equalizer pulldown menu, that now says Manual, select "MAKE PRESET".

- Type in an EXISTING preset name: e.g. Rock
You'll get a prompt saying: "An EQ preset already exists with the name "Rock". Do you want to overwrite it? -Click YES!

- In iTunes, be sure you have Equalizer selected in View Options, for the Playlist to which you will be applying your custom EQ.

- select the Preset Name (e.g. Rock) that you used for your "Custom EQ" for the each track you want to listen to, with your new custom EQ.

- Select the same EQ Preset Name on your iPod (in the Settings / EQ menu).

Voila - you now have a custom EQ on your iPod (you have customized a preset EQ)

You can now iterate: make incremental changes in your custom EQ setting in iTunes (as described above),
sync your iPod,
listen,
and then modify your Custom EQ appropriately,
until you zero in on the ideal EQ for you ears & your system.

I couldn't live without it.

But never, ever, exceed 0db on an iPod EQ setting.

PS: I create & save an EQ setting named for each headphone (e.g. W3, SE530), then just overwrite "Rock" with the EQ setting saved for whatever headphone I'm listening to.

 

[shigzeo]

i have tried that too and i am not quite impressed that it works. it may be that the ipod resets it... i have not tried this in over a year or so... so maybe i am wrong.

 

[small.solar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SierraHotel01 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Larry, Recommend an experiment: for your Freq Show & SE530 EQ settings, try lowering all EQ settings, while maintaining same relative positioning, so that no band exceeds 0db. (You will have to compensate with a litle bit more gain/volume on your amp during playback). I tried it on my SE530's, and WOW - a much cleaner signal, with the same EQ-flavor! (blatantly noticeable on my 3G Nano-->Tomahawk-->SE530) Would be interested to hear your results - whether you too notice an improvement. There's something to be said for using SUBTRACTIVE EQ on iPods.

IMO your suggestion only applies to DAPs. for computers' soundcard (not those crappy ones), the EQ won't bring distrotion as DAPs do.

 

[NajoBB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by small.solar /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMO your suggestion only applies to DAPs. for computers' soundcard (not those crappy ones), the EQ won't bring distrotion as DAPs do.

Actually it will bring some distortion even on quality soundcards. It's better to lower the frequencies.

 

[hockeyb213]

eq will always bring a bit of distortion to music but what matters if it is noticeable or not personally I don't believe in eq

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SierraHotel01 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Larry, Recommend an experiment: for your Freq Show & SE530 EQ settings, try lowering all EQ settings, while maintaining same relative positioning, so that no band exceeds 0db. (You will have to compensate with a litle bit more gain/volume on your amp during playback). I tried it on my SE530's, and WOW - a much cleaner signal, with the same EQ-flavor! (blatantly noticeable on my 3G Nano-->Tomahawk-->SE530) Would be interested to hear your results - whether you too notice an improvement. There's something to be said for using SUBTRACTIVE EQ on iPods.

The Freq Show EQ is pretty much already there, except for the 3db bass boost which is optional (I have 6 different EQ settings for Freq Show and one is the same as this one but without the boost). Can't try it on the SE530 because they are in a custom acrylic shell now and I either listen to them flat or with 3 db bass boost only.

 

[hockeyb213]

well after doing some listening I already like my w3's more then my shure's don't know about my tf10's will have to do more extensive listening to determine that