[Oomingmak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qusp /img/forum/go_quote.gif definitely UM3X. sometimes I miss the W3 for use with electro and other various dance music genres, but the whole package with UM3X is far superior IMO. texture and amount of detail across all frequencies is just sublime. with a great source they are head and shoulders above every universal IEM I have heard/owned to date (SE530, W3, TF10) they are IMo like SE530 on steroids. basically everything I would have liked SE530 to be. perhaps the SE530 still has an edge in the mids, but only VERY slightly. I think natural is the one word I find suits them the best. sure in so far as soundstage they fall short a touch, but the rest of their attributes is for me more than enough to make up for it. besides with iroiver->D10->amp of choice. i'm in heaven and JH13 have got some shoes to fill. though from all reprts that shouldnt be much trouble. JH13 are oirdered, so they'll be dethroned, but for universals they will definitely be my go-to IEM. and i've stopped reading other threads they are that good.

JH13 is more nuetral than the UM3X but you're using an amp so you probably won't notice it. For example the UM3X may make the bass sound punchy on a song that the JH13 would instead make sound more subdued but deeper and more textured. This is because the UM3X has a mid bass hump and the sound signature just isn't as nuetral as the JH13. With the JH13 you just hear whatever you play, there's no coloring. Of course an amp might change that.

 

[DLeeWebb]

I own both the W3 and the UM3X and I prefer the W3. I'm not particular good at describing subtle sound differences. I like them both. I think that the W3 sounds better amped and the UM3X sounds better unamped. That's the way that I have settled in to using them.

 

[Dodeca]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oomingmak /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is because the UM3X has a mid bass hump and the sound signature just isn't as nuetral as the JH13. With the JH13 you just hear whatever you play, there's no coloring. Of course an amp might change that.

JH13 have a hump in the low bass at around 40 - 50, tho, no?

...

Re: W3/UM3X, I picked them both up. Immediately found the bass on the W3 overdone... not unpleasant, just that the W3 were trying a bit too hard to be punchy. Coming from a music production background, I far more enjoy the more even sound of the UM3X. Regardless, I do like both and will keep them both for different purposes.

 

[Alec E]

I am rather shocked that the W3 is sometimes said to have soundstage--any. It had the most brutally in-your-eardrums sound of any IEM I've yet tried. I wish that hadn't been the case, because I found the details, the treble, and the bass fantastic.

 

[barleyguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alec E /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am rather shocked that the W3 is sometimes said to have soundstage--any. It had the most brutally in-your-eardrums sound of any IEM I've yet tried. I wish that hadn't been the case, because I found the details, the treble, and the bass fantastic.

I had exactly the opposite experience with the soundstage of the W3. When I listened to it, it had a large soundstage with lots of depth and width. That is one of my favorite things about it actually.

What source or amp did you listen to them with? I tried them with several Ray Samuels amps, a CTH, and a Samson Q5. They sounded great with all of them. I was using custom tips.

I voted for the W3, BTW.

 

[Spyro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodeca /img/forum/go_quote.gif Immediately found the bass on the W3 overdone... not unpleasant, just that the W3 were trying a bit too hard to be punchy. Coming from a music production background, I far more enjoy the more even sound of the UM3X. Regardless, I do like both and will keep them both for different purposes.

Yea, I would agree it's a bit overdone so I have evolved to "treble booster" setting on Ipod and it seems much more in check to my ears...and the detail...WOW!

 

[playingwithfire]

Maybe I have different hearing but the W3's high sounds muted to me personally. Um3x is much sparklier, sometimes too much. I was trying to listen to Feist(the album with the cover of line going through her throat...) and some of the vocals are REALLY harsh

 

[mvw2]

I've only used the UM3X, so I can't really vote. I did specifically go with the UM3X after reading lots of comments/reviews simply because it was geared to be better balanced, although both have been described as very similar to each other in a lot of ways.

I agree that the UM3X is incredibly in your face. It puts you right up on stage instead of out in the audience. This can certainly be off-putting for some who don't want that. Depth of stage is limitless though in terms of perceivable distance of sounds. I can see why some people say the sound stage is small though, but that's unavoidable with its type of presentation. It certainly isn't outside of your head like some earphones, but I tend to ignore that and focus on depth instead which is excellent.

As to the midbass hump, you might want to ditch the stock, short Comply tip if you don't want it. That tip, unfortunately, adds a rather noticeable midbass hump and a slightly unusual thump to the bass. It does the same if put on other earphones too. It also sucks out some of the high end and even upper mids making the upper end sound somewhat recessed. I really wasn't a fan of the short Comply tip. The long tip worked differently but was an odd setup being so long and jutting the earphone out away from the ear. I ended up running Shure Olive tips with the earphone, no midbass hump and a more open top end. I've always considered the stock Comply tip to be a horrible pairing with the UM3X. There might be benefits with the W3 as well when swapping to a different tip.

I also found amping quite important. The bass with the UM3X can become extremely muddy and incoherent if underpowered. I assume the W3 could get that way too. These are also good enough where the source quality plays a sizable roll, so having a great source or an amp with a DAC gets important. The overall listening experience can very much get destroyed listening to poor source information.

I am quite curious how the UM3X and W3 would compare to each other if both were EQed to the same end response.

 

[dj nellie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alec E /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am rather shocked that the W3 is sometimes said to have soundstage--any. It had the most brutally in-your-eardrums sound of any IEM I've yet tried. I wish that hadn't been the case, because I found the details, the treble, and the bass fantastic.

While I agree that the W3 can sound a bit congested with custom tips, the soundstage is only limited in relation to an IEM like the IE8. I find the W3's soundstage to be much wider than the SE530's and UM3X's, and it's on par with the TF10's. Moreover, the W3's excellent imaging prevents it from feeling too closed-in for me; the accurate spatial placement of sounds provides a great headstage. It just doesn't feel as open as most full-sized cans (obviously) or IEMs that were designed to have a more airy feel.

In part, I think this is a function of the deep insertion that the W3 requires to sound its best. I'm not sure it's possible to have an "out-of-head" experience without a bit more air leakage like you get with the IE8.

 

[Alec E]

Quote:

Originally Posted by barleyguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif What source or amp did you listen to them with? I tried them with several Ray Samuels amps, a CTH, and a Samson Q5. They sounded great with all of them. I was using custom tips.

I used a current generation iPod Classic. I've never used an amp with a portable player. I used the more firm of the included single flange tips.

I owned it for only about a week, but I was never able to listen to it for even an hour at a time. I found it the most fatiguing IEM I've ever heard, and I don't think treble, the usual culprit in instances of fatigue, was very relevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj nellie /img/forum/go_quote.gif While I agree that the W3 can sound a bit congested with custom tips, the soundstage is only limited in relation to an IEM like the IE8. I find the W3's soundstage to be much wider than the SE530's and UM3X's, and it's on par with the TF10's. Moreover, the W3's excellent imaging prevents it from feeling too closed-in for me; the accurate spatial placement of sounds provides a great headstage. It just doesn't feel as open as most full-sized cans (obviously) or IEMs that were designed to have a more airy feel. In part, I think this is a function of the deep insertion that the W3 requires to sound its best. I'm not sure it's possible to have an "out-of-head" experience without a bit more air leakage like you get with the IE8.

It was chiefly a TF10, the IEM I've owned for the longest time, to which I was comparing the W3. I felt it hadn't nearly as much soundstage as the TF10, though I didn't find the TF10's soundstage all that remarkable when I owned it.

I was listening to some rather aggressive music with the W3, such as the recent EP's by the band Wire. I found the W3's presentation of guitar noise-oriented rock to be simply more than I could handle, to my surprise, and I also felt there was an issue of not being able to see the forest for the trees--the music wasn't coming together for me somehow.

I did find that the W3 inserted more deeply than I had expected, or than I would have guessed it did from looking at it. They shaped it just right for that, I suppose.

As for the UM3X, I've not heard it.

 

[Young Spade]

I'm not voting because I haven't heard both; but I ordered the UM3X after extensively reading about the differences between that and the W3. I already have the Triple.Fi10s so I have all the detail and bass I can ever want.
I wanted a neutral, accurate sound to use with classical, vocal oriented, and acoustic songs that don't get much usage.