[CareyPrice31]

Do I have to do a mod in order to use the Shure Olives?

If so, can someone post a detailed with pictures on how to do it?

 

[seanmo]

olives just fit right on, no mod needed

 

[mvw2]

Hmm...
 
I'm curious how the Westone 4 would compare to the CK100.
 
Why you might ask?
 
I own the UM3X and the CK100 and have used a majority of the other high end earphones (although no W3 nor the newer SE535).  For a Westone like sound, the CK100 has been the only other eaprhone that I've used that seem to use the same/similar drivers for a very similar presentation of sound.  I basically see the UM3X and CK100 as brother and sister.  The UM3X is huskier, more muscular while the CK100 is more delicate and chearful, but the core presentation is presented in a similar way, more so than any other earphone.  The CK100 sounds nothing like the CK10 or CK90Pro but moderately like the UM3X.
 
Now I see the UM3X as warm and bassy.  The upper midrange is recessed which creates a bass driven signature.  It's mostly a bass shelf, very flat, limitless in extension, and balanced but slightly heavy and always overshadowing.  Mids sound natural but overshadowed by the lows.  Treble rises and matches the bass level but this creates a peak after the drop in mids which can at times sound quite colored and oddly emphasized with certain information.  The top end sounds rolled off, not super extended (limitless) like the Triple.Fi 10, RE252, CK10.  EQed, the UM3X gets significantly better and more balanced, but the treble doesn't carry quite the same energy and presence as the low end, and the treble driver doesn't seem to be the best pick of the litter to cover the spectrum(likely less of a need due to the UM3X being geared as a tool rather than consumer music.  The level of detail, dynamics, and texture are quite high.  Sound has a sense of power and presence that is largely unmatched by most other earphones.  One thing the UM3X does really well is both show sound and the absence of sound, something most earphones can't pull off.  It is pretty stark in what it shows you.  If the source information is flawed, you will see it clearly.  If there is noise or hiss, it's noticeable.  Basically it is super revealing.  The sound stage is in your face pulling you right up on stage so to speak, very wide, great depth, but you feel very close.
 
The CK100 is significantly more balanced.  It sounds very even, more musical.  The low end is more subtle of course not being dominant, but bottom end carries presence, impact, and extension.  It's actually still different than an EQed UM3X, but it's more similar than different versus most other brands/models.  Something like the Triple.Fi 10 provides more punch and a fuller note but also less depth on the very bottom end which loses some of the visceral sense versus the CK100.  The midrange is flat which brings out the upper midrange making vocals natural and lively.  Female vocals really sing.  It's not midrange peaky like the SE530.  Treble is well balanced and extended, a gentle sloping hill around 10kHz but nothing like the sharp 9dB cliff of the CK10 or mountain of the Triple.Fi 10, mild enough where tip choice can get you where you want.  The treble has a "refined" sound to it, controlled, open but not super edgy or with too much bite, less raw energy than say the Triple.Fi 10 or RE252.  The big difference in overall presentation of sound versus the UM3X is that the CK100 is less textured.  It carries less articulation and isn't as stark as the UM3X.  The note is still hearty and largely presented, especially for a BA based product, but it doesn't flesh out the note as significantly as the UM3X.  The presentation becomes slightly more delicate from this.  The sound stage proportions are better with the CK100.  It's more rounded, natural.  Both have good pinpoint placement, but the CK100 sits you farther away in what sounds like a much more appropriate distance.  I always feel that sound stage requires good note texture.  We need those subtle variations to really flesh out the space, placement, distancing.  The UM3X is relatively aggressive and forward but sticks sounds in an exact spot, good enough where you could almost break out the tape measure and tell a person how many feet every sound is from each other.  The actual shape of the sound stage is skewed though, close and wide.  The CK100 has less texture but is very clean in details.  Placement is pinpoint, but space isn't fleshed out as completely.  The presentation is more balanced and does make the sound stage space more correct though.  The CK100 is sort of a partial step towards the SE530 in a way.  The SE530 had pinpoint placement due to a super clean note.  However the SE530's note lacked texture (very short decay, familiar "BA" sound, which made distancing and sense of space very poor.  The CK100 is a partial step towards this, but the notes are still hearty and well bodied rather than thin and analytical like the SE530.  The CK100 thankfully also doesn't sound unnaturally laid back (for what is an extremely dynamic earphone) from a high lack of note thickness like the SE530.  Instead, the CK100 sounds more delicate in signature but still natural and well-bodied.
 
From the way the Westone 4 has been described here, it seems to step a lot towards the CK100.  It is better balanced than the UM3X and Westone 3.  It is more laid back than the UM3X, hinting at a little less texturing or less dynamic range.  The midrange and treble are much improved pointing to better balance and extension, like the CK100 has over the UM3X.  The Westone 4 has lighter bass (more balanced with mids) but retains good punch (retains note heft) which the CK100 does also.  In the end, I am quite curious if the Westone 4 ends up being quite similar to the CK100.

 

[albau]

 
Quote:

 

did you guys find the treble from the westone 3 bright? maybe i never got a good fit, but i found the bass boomy and the treble drowned out

Same experience with W3 - highs are too subdued. As anything I had to boost highs a notch via EQ. And I got very good seal with moded tri-flanges or long Complys.

 

[LostAngeles]

Quote:

Do I have to do a mod in order to use the Shure Olives?

If so, can someone post a detailed with pictures on how to do it?

 
 
If your olives are new I would suggest opening up the diameter of the hole slightly before putting them on your 4’s otherwise twist off very carefully when removing. They are so tight without adjustment that it seems like they fuse to the nozzle.

 

[chrisssssssss2]

I've listened to the Westone 4s for about 3 days now, and overall I think they have a balanced, neutral sound. Like many others have said, they do almost nothing wrong and are crisp and detailed. I use them with modded sony hybrids, as they provide the best isolation and sound for me. I de-cored the short comply tips and used the core and superglued a medium-large sony hybrid tip to the de-cored comply sound tube. The reason the sony hybrids sound better than the grey silicone tips is because the sound tube is larger, allowing the treble to come out fully. The grey silicone tips have a narrow sound tube, causing a reduced treble. I also tried shure olives and found that it made them sound too dark, but had great isolation and still a nice overall sound, but it was just too dark for me. Overall, I am very impressed with the Westone 4s and I seem to have found the perfect tips that work for me. Kudos to Westone!

 

[SolidSnake3]

Quote:

Hmm...
 
I'm curious how the Westone 4 would compare to the CK100.
 
Why you might ask?
 
I own the UM3X and the CK100 and have used a majority of the other high end earphones (although no W3 nor the newer SE535).  For a Westone like sound, the CK100 has been the only other eaprhone that I've used that seem to use the same/similar drivers for a very similar presentation of sound.  I basically see the UM3X and CK100 as brother and sister.  The UM3X is huskier, more muscular while the CK100 is more delicate and chearful, but the core presentation is presented in a similar way, more so than any other earphone.  The CK100 sounds nothing like the CK10 or CK90Pro but moderately like the UM3X.
 
Now I see the UM3X as warm and bassy.  The upper midrange is recessed which creates a bass driven signature.  It's mostly a bass shelf, very flat, limitless in extension, and balanced but slightly heavy and always overshadowing.  Mids sound natural but overshadowed by the lows.  Treble rises and matches the bass level but this creates a peak after the drop in mids which can at times sound quite colored and oddly emphasized with certain information.  The top end sounds rolled off, not super extended (limitless) like the Triple.Fi 10, RE252, CK10.  EQed, the UM3X gets significantly better and more balanced, but the treble doesn't carry quite the same energy and presence as the low end, and the treble driver doesn't seem to be the best pick of the litter to cover the spectrum(likely less of a need due to the UM3X being geared as a tool rather than consumer music.  The level of detail, dynamics, and texture are quite high.  Sound has a sense of power and presence that is largely unmatched by most other earphones.  One thing the UM3X does really well is both show sound and the absence of sound, something most earphones can't pull off.  It is pretty stark in what it shows you.  If the source information is flawed, you will see it clearly.  If there is noise or hiss, it's noticeable.  Basically it is super revealing.  The sound stage is in your face pulling you right up on stage so to speak, very wide, great depth, but you feel very close.
 
The CK100 is significantly more balanced.  It sounds very even, more musical.  The low end is more subtle of course not being dominant, but bottom end carries presence, impact, and extension.  It's actually still different than an EQed UM3X, but it's more similar than different versus most other brands/models.  Something like the Triple.Fi 10 provides more punch and a fuller note but also less depth on the very bottom end which loses some of the visceral sense versus the CK100.  The midrange is flat which brings out the upper midrange making vocals natural and lively.  Female vocals really sing.  It's not midrange peaky like the SE530.  Treble is well balanced and extended, a gentle sloping hill around 10kHz but nothing like the sharp 9dB cliff of the CK10 or mountain of the Triple.Fi 10, mild enough where tip choice can get you where you want.  The treble has a "refined" sound to it, controlled, open but not super edgy or with too much bite, less raw energy than say the Triple.Fi 10 or RE252.  The big difference in overall presentation of sound versus the UM3X is that the CK100 is less textured.  It carries less articulation and isn't as stark as the UM3X.  The note is still hearty and largely presented, especially for a BA based product, but it doesn't flesh out the note as significantly as the UM3X.  The presentation becomes slightly more delicate from this.  The sound stage proportions are better with the CK100.  It's more rounded, natural.  Both have good pinpoint placement, but the CK100 sits you farther away in what sounds like a much more appropriate distance.  I always feel that sound stage requires good note texture.  We need those subtle variations to really flesh out the space, placement, distancing.  The UM3X is relatively aggressive and forward but sticks sounds in an exact spot, good enough where you could almost break out the tape measure and tell a person how many feet every sound is from each other.  The actual shape of the sound stage is skewed though, close and wide.  The CK100 has less texture but is very clean in details.  Placement is pinpoint, but space isn't fleshed out as completely.  The presentation is more balanced and does make the sound stage space more correct though.  The CK100 is sort of a partial step towards the SE530 in a way.  The SE530 had pinpoint placement due to a super clean note.  However the SE530's note lacked texture (very short decay, familiar "BA" sound, which made distancing and sense of space very poor.  The CK100 is a partial step towards this, but the notes are still hearty and well bodied rather than thin and analytical like the SE530.  The CK100 thankfully also doesn't sound unnaturally laid back (for what is an extremely dynamic earphone) from a high lack of note thickness like the SE530.  Instead, the CK100 sounds more delicate in signature but still natural and well-bodied.
 
From the way the Westone 4 has been described here, it seems to step a lot towards the CK100.  It is better balanced than the UM3X and Westone 3.  It is more laid back than the UM3X, hinting at a little less texturing or less dynamic range.  The midrange and treble are much improved pointing to better balance and extension, like the CK100 has over the UM3X.  The Westone 4 has lighter bass (more balanced with mids) but retains good punch (retains note heft) which the CK100 does also.  In the end, I am quite curious if the Westone 4 ends up being quite similar to the CK100.

Your take on the soundstage and lower end of the UM3X's is exactly what I determined when I was comparing them to my CK10's and actually part of the reason I really liked them. I found them to be such a different sound, a nice complement almost to the CK10's in that they were very powerful and pronounced in regions the CK10's were not. The bass and soundstage for example were so different between the two is was quite cool to hear the same sounds presented so differently. Also, your analysis of close and wide for the UM3X's is precisely what I heard from them as well. I felt like the instruments and parts of the song were spread almost completely horizontally from my ears out with maybe just a tiny bit forward. Basically you had the band on either side of you is what I was getting from them. Was amazing for acoustic and folk music in that you were sitting next to the artist but a bit too much for me in rock and punk stuff. Rock and punk sounded almost claustrophobic and it was just too much being "right in" with the band on some tracks.
 
Eric Clapton Unplugged for example was mind blowing but Rise Against was just too much being in the "center" of it.

 

[JoeyRusso]

Quote:

 
 
That is what I'm hearing. Maybe I need some Shure olives.
 

Give them a try.. If you still have your 535's, snag a pair from them.

 

[takoyaki7]

I was part of the pre-order and got the W4 with a shirt as well...
  I held off on posting any opinions because I've learned that first impressions can really change!!! For example I HATED my UM3x when I first got them, thinking they sound way too closed in and lifeless. After a couple weeks I started loving them, though I sold them for the W4.
  My first impression listening to the W4 was that I should have kept my UM3x!!!
  For one, the UM3x was the only universal IEM where I really felt I got a perfect fit whereas the fit with the W4 is and remains good but slightly problematic. Their slightly bulbous figure protrudes from my ear and no matter what tips I use, feels relatively stable but not perfect.
 
  The sound, on first impression was decent but disappointing. They sounded airy but somewhat anemic and cold. The UM3x had a warmth and bass presence that was perhaps a bit bloated, but an excellent compliment to my SE425s. The W4 too me sounded too laid back, balanced, but slightly treble-heavy and reminding me too much of my old UE700 (which were decent but definitely a notch down from the top IEMs IMHO). 
 
  HOWEVER, now after only about a week, I am really starting to appreciate their sound. They are extremely smooth and detailed with excellent extension at both ends. They bend towards the slightly cold and analytical side but within any of the treble harshness or bass weakness I have heard on some other BA phones.
 
To me they sound like a SUPER dual-BA, with a signature much like an enhanced UE700/DBA02/ or possibly a bit like the CK100s (though I haven't listened to them in quite awhile).
 
 Overall I am definitely liking them, but I encourage anyone looking at them to demo the W3 and UM3x if possible because they all have very different signatures.

 

[Mkubota1]

Quote:

...used the core and superglued a medium-large sony hybrid tip to the de-cored comply sound tube. The reason the sony hybrids sound better than the grey silicone tips is because the sound tube is larger, allowing the treble to come out fully.

OMG... thanks for that tip (no pun intended)!  Totally different IEM now.  Still gotta try the Shure olives, but this is definitely an option.

 

[Shecky504]

After spending some time with my new 4s I have decided to sell my Westone 3s.  While the 3s are definitely geared for a more fun listen, the 4s are just more balanced and the overall separation is better while still being very musical.  With my Cowon X7 I can EQ them just the way I like.  If anyone is interested, my 3s are about 6 months old and in like new condition with all original tips (I've been using Shure Olives), case, packaging, etc.  I am asking for $265 and will ship only in the USA via UPS Ground.

 

[Danz03]

Wow, didn't realize the Westone 3s & 4s are so expensive in the US! My Westone 4s cost less than the Westone 3s in the US, and I thought they are supposed to be made in the US. 

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Listening to the W4 for the first time.
 
First impressions are mixed. This seems to be a better version of the W3, and fixes one of the W3's weak areas: the bass. W4 bass is definitely tighter and better controlled than either the W3 or UM3x. But one other weak area of the W3 remains: the highs. They're definitely overemphasized and sometimes harsh. The UM3x underemphasizes its highs but I definitely prefer that since it brings out the mids and makes things a lot less fatiguing in the long term. The W4 takes the W3 route and seems to be tuned to impress - lots of sparkly highs to bring out detail, warm mids and punchy bass - but in the long term I wonder if the colorations will not start to grate.
 
Still, not bad. Definitely better than W3, but probably not better than UM3x. Since I already have the UM3x (and tons more stuff besides) I'll have to see if I'll keep it.

 
Quote:

I was part of the pre-order and got the W4 with a shirt as well...
  I held off on posting any opinions because I've learned that first impressions can really change!!! For example I HATED my UM3x when I first got them, thinking they sound way too closed in and lifeless. After a couple weeks I started loving them, though I sold them for the W4.
  My first impression listening to the W4 was that I should have kept my UM3x!!!
  For one, the UM3x was the only universal IEM where I really felt I got a perfect fit whereas the fit with the W4 is and remains good but slightly problematic. Their slightly bulbous figure protrudes from my ear and no matter what tips I use, feels relatively stable but not perfect.
 
  The sound, on first impression was decent but disappointing. They sounded airy but somewhat anemic and cold. The UM3x had a warmth and bass presence that was perhaps a bit bloated, but an excellent compliment to my SE425s. The W4 too me sounded too laid back, balanced, but slightly treble-heavy and reminding me too much of my old UE700 (which were decent but definitely a notch down from the top IEMs IMHO). 
 
  HOWEVER, now after only about a week, I am really starting to appreciate their sound. They are extremely smooth and detailed with excellent extension at both ends. They bend towards the slightly cold and analytical side but within any of the treble harshness or bass weakness I have heard on some other BA phones.
 
To me they sound like a SUPER dual-BA, with a signature much like an enhanced UE700/DBA02/ or possibly a bit like the CK100s (though I haven't listened to them in quite awhile).
 
 Overall I am definitely liking them, but I encourage anyone looking at them to demo the W3 and UM3x if possible because they all have very different signatures.

Thank you both for your impressions.
 
I'm a little confused regarding the actual size/ shape of the W4's housing. While I know the housing is not the same as the UM Series - the latter being smaller -, there seem to be conflicting reports, some saying it's identical to the W3's housing, others saying it's a little smaller. I know I found the W3 comfortable, but the UM3Xs even more. Don't know if Westone changed the original W3's housing (Nov 2008), which I owned, and made it smaller later. I know they changed the carrying case and the cable plug, possibly even the braiding on the cable, but the housing itself I've no idea.
 
As for the bass and treble, some people are saying the UM3X may have too much bass ("bloated") while others, like myself, find it pretty good and not as pronounced as the W3's bass. I also found both TF10 & IE8's bass to have more quantity, though not better quality, than the UM3X's bass. To these ears the UM3X & CK100's bass are very similar in both quantity & quality.
 
And the W4's treble...I still cannot get a real sense of it. I'm also concerned that it may be like the W3's, ie too much & fatiguing, though more people seem to suggest otherwise, that it's not as pronounced. I know I enjoyed the more pronounced TF10's treble over the UM3X's and never found it fatiguing like the W3s. I'm hoping the W4s don't sound like the SE535s, whose bass I found anemic and the treble a bit pronounced and grainy.
 
I know very well that it's not until I hear the W4 for myself that all my questions will be answered, and I do know that different people will appreciate or dislike different sound characteristics.
 
One refreshing thing, though, that I've noticed is that most of the recent W4 owners don't seem to be exaggerating the W4's qualities - that is rather unusual. The FOTM phase hasn't really kicked in, then, as is so often the case with most new (top-tier) IEMs. That's a very good thing.

 

[markh78]

I've been listening to my W4 extensively over the weekend.
There's no striking "feature" to describe how W4 sounds, like extended high with crystal clarity on ER4S, or deep booming base on IE8, or huge soundstage on EX1000, but as others have noted the sound of W4 is very well balanced and highs-mids-lows all come out at just the right amount.
Some may find this boring, and if you are looking for a mind blowing experience I can see that W4 can be a slight disappointment.
But for me, this kind of sound is exactly what I was looking for; an IEM that I can keep on listening for a long time without getting fatigued from too much high or too much low, and I can honestly say that this is probably gonna be my favourite IEM for a long time to come.

 

[Marcus_C]

Damn, these earphones sound good, i've been reading more and more impressions and my wallet has been retreating slowly into a dark corner at the same rate.