Westone 4 vs Shure SE535 comparison - Will update as I go along

[Naim.F.C]

Quote:

 
I have to admit I definitely listen at a lower volume. I have my volume limit on my iPhone4 set to about 50-60% and then in EQu or Equalizer (use both) I have my volume 75%-100%. There are a few times I'd bump my volume limiter up a little bit, but I certainly don't like to have the volume cranked. When I listen at 30-60% overall volume output (considering full volume range without limit on the phone), I should be able to hear all the details of the music just the same as if it were cranked at 80% volume, just less painful
 
edit: after thought: What I would really like to know and need to do some more research and find a local store where I can try it out, is with an Amp, can I maintain my listening volume, bring out more soundstage and fuller sound overall (such as with the eq'ing), but without the eq'ing. Like I said though, all more research and trying for myself

 
 
I believe that is exactly what certain amps do based on reviews and impressions I have read. In-fact, one of the main sought after or commendable features of certain high end amps is widening the sound stage and improving clarity, bass impact etc. Having said that, I'm not sure if they would have such drastic results as EQ'ing, but you never know. I am still very new to the world of amps, but like I said, I plan to do a lot more testing with different amps over the coming weeks/months.
 
 

 

[Naim.F.C]

Update number God knows what (lol). I think this will be the last on the comparison itself.
 
Firstly, here's my final SE535 EQu settings for use straight from the iPhone 4. It's about as close as I can get to what I think they should sound like restricted of course by the earphones themselves and my personal taste. Sound stage is opened up just a touch compared to before, and vocals are slightly further back and more personal. 
 

 
---
 
Ok on to my final update.
 
What I'm finding is that the Westone 4's are the one's I'm going to the majority of the time now (post EQ). I really only jump to the SE535 if I want a bit more vibrance or dramatism. Where the SE535 provides a very controlled tight, and closed presentation, the W4's surprisingly open airy presentation is now really addictive. Where the W4 really excels is with (as mentioned numerous times now) instrumental separation and detail. The best thing about it is it offers a more neutral and realistic sound. It's really refined stuff. Not always as fun as the SE535, but certainly more accurate. I think the W4 is an earphone all about nuances. Post EQ, the balance is perfect for me now. Every element of the audio is superbly refined. I'm able to withdraw sonic information on every aspect of a song. Background details, vocals, bass, sub bass, highs et all. That's not to say I can't get these with the SE535, it's just that much easier and more coherent with the W4's. Before EQ'ing however, with the W4's I was focusing on instrumentals more than I wanted to, now I've got it just right, it's alluring. Like I said, the drama of the SE535 still isn't quite there, but instead of a band playing for me in my bedroom with equipment they've brought along and crammed in to my room, I feel like I'm getting them playing in an entire reasonably sized hall with instruments placed carefully around the stage.
 
That's why I've posted this update, to express my current change of heightened admiration for the Westone 4's and realisation that whilst the SE535's sonic signature can be very attractive, it's actually a good degree less "true" than the W4's, which is extremely accurate and un-influenced (except by my EQ'ing lol). If you want as close to what the music should sound like minus the excessive flair of what the average consumer likely wants or has become accustomed to these days, these are probably for you. They've got to (easily) be the most refined universal IEM's I have ever tried. Though I do still stand by there being a slightly annoying veil to the sound of the Westone 4's pre-EQ'ing. If I hadn't gotten rid of it, I may have ended up sticking with the SE535's.
 
 
So where does that leave the SE535's?
 
Well it got me thinking. See, one of the other areas of tech I'm extremely fussy over is with video, I consider myself as much a videophile as I am an audiophile. I'm currently sporting a Pioneer Kuro professionally calibrated and it's a thing of beauty. What relevance does this have on these earphones? A bit.
 
One thing I've noticed over the years with TV's is that the 'average' consumer, ins't always a big fan of the 'calibrated' TV look. That's why so many TV's ship with "dynamic" mode as the default. A mode that grossly exaggerates contrast, colours etc. Consumers see this and automatically think, wow, look how bright and potent the colours are, how deep the shadows are etc without realising they are grossly mis-representative of the real thing. But they don't care, that's what they want. In the same way, consumer Hi-Fi systems and car stereo systems come with bass that is stupendously strong and drowns out details, but again, many average consumers simply don't care, they're impressed by it. They want the 1000 watt RMS show off tag to gloat about. The car seat and jugular riveting bass.
 
Now I'm not suggesting the SE535 is an example of such a grossly exaggerated product. But it is a balance of something similar. I believe Shure has intentionally designed the SE535 to be slightly dramatic, with impactful bass, more sparkly highs and aggressive mids. It's still quite neutral overall, especially compared to the average earphone, but compared to the W4 you can see how it is quite coloured in areas, most probably to cater to some of that more common mass market. Despite the fact that the W4 may be more refined, articulate, with a wider soundstage, better instrumental separation and more 'accurate' presentation, to many, it will be too laid back, too neutral and possibly even timid. Like it was even to me to begin with. If I hadn't EQ'd the W4 I would have been one of those people. Pre-EQ, whilst it may have been more accurate than the SE535, it was too laid back for me. So I opted for the vibrancy and fun of the SE535. Post EQ however, now things are more balanced, the positives of the W4 really have more of a chance to shine
 
There is also the topic of design and build. The SE535's are better built and designed, aesthetically speaking. To me, the W4's feel cheap compared to the SE535. They're also less efficient, needing more power and volume to reach the same volumes as the SE535. Now I appreciate Westone probably cared more for the sound quality over design, but perhaps these are things they could rectify with the Westone 5's.
 
 
In any case, my personal pick of IEM is now the Westone 4's 

Though chances are, many people may prefer the SE535's over the W4's depending naturally of course, on musical tastes.
 
 
 
What a crazy journey that was! Lol.
 
 

 

[Lunatique]

If you want neutral, accurate, and smooth frequency response from the SE535, then your EQ curve has some problems. I'm not saying this as a subjective statement, but an objective one coming from the perspective of a composer/sound designer/audio professional, and I hope my explanations below will help you understand better how to achieve professional reference quality in your SE535's frequency response.
 
The SE535 is already too prominent in the mids, and the last thing you should do is to boost it even more. What you need to do is to do a steep narrow band notch around 7KHz or so, to eliminate the ear canal resonance peak that is very prominent in the SE535 (despite whatever tips your are using, but my EQ curve below was using the triple flange with the smaller flange and the stalk cut off, but it also applies to the black olives too). As soon as you make that cut, your ears will breath a sign of relief, and you'll immediately hear what accurate and smooth mids actually sound like.
 
The missing air in the treble is centered right at 13KHz, and you do a moderate width band when you boost it, which will restore the air in a very natural manner that's not exaggerated or artificial. Don't boost 16KHz and beyond because that is not the "meat" of the treble and you can't hear 16KHz and beyond that prominently enough anyway, unless you are still a child or a teenager. 
 
The SE535 actually has really good bass frequency response compared to most IEM's and even some full-sized cans. You do not want to cut the bass at all because you'll be destroying that very well balanced bass response that the SE535 is famous for. In fact, there's not much need to mess with the bass at all; however, if you want to give it a bit more visceral impact to remedy the fact that headphones cannot vibrate the air and impact our bodies like speakers can, you can do a gentle shelf boost of the sub-bass region as I've shown below with my custom EQ curve.
 

 
This EQ curve is not based on subjective taste, but careful measurements and comparisons with high-end pro audio reference monitors in a professional studio environment, as well as much more expensive headphones like the Stax SR-007 and LCD-2. I tried my best to take the best from each references to create the most accurate and neutral composite possible in the SE535. It may not be perfect since IEM's have inherent shortcomings of their own compared to other technologies, but if you use my EQ curve, you'll be able to hear a much more accurate and smoother sonic signature that is far closer to professional reference quality.

 

[Naim.F.C]

Thanks for the post Lunatique, however I must say, I'm scratching my head at the huge drop at 7k. Why is that necessary and doesn't it drastically change that element of the sonic balance overall? I'm no engineer or anything, but dropping 7k too much I find drums and other higher pitched beats sound too bloated, dry and lack snap. Also, not getting nearly as extreme "ear canal resonance peak". I actually adjusted both my EQ's for the SE535 and W4 to remedy this. But I listen at low volumes with Shure foam Olives. My guess is the tips too reduce things slightly, or you listen to your music at much higher volumes than me (for which you would need to drop it further than I have).

 

[Lunatique]

And for the W4, try these curves (also meticulously measured and compared with high-end audio gear for the best frequency response):
 
This is if you are using the triple-flange with the smallest flange and stalk cut off:
 

 
 
This is if you are using the triple-flange as is, without any modificatons:
 

 
 

 

[Naim.F.C]

Quote:

And for the W4, try these curves (also meticulously measured and compared with high-end audio gear for the best frequency response):
 
This is if you are using the triple-flange with the smallest flange and stalk cut off:
 

 
 
This is if you are using the triple-flange as is, without any modificatons:
 

 
 

 
The second is quite similar to mine. Though I pushed mids the tiniest bit higher since I think vocals aren't quite prominent enough by default on the W4 (using Black Olives).
 
 

 

 

[Lunatique]

The resonance peak is caused by the ear canal shape, and it's not the fault of the IEM's inherent frequency response. It's just like how speakers could be designed to sound totally flat and neutral when played in an anechoic chamber, but put it in an untreated typical room, it will have all kinds of nasty frequency response imbalances. So you have to acoustically treat the room so the speaker can sound neutral and accurate again. In the case of the IEM, you can try using a tip that doesn't cause as much resonance peak, or just EQ out the problem like I did.
 
Quote:

Thanks for the post Lunatique, however I must say, I'm scratching my head at the huge drop at 7k. Why is that necessary and doesn't it drastically change that element of the sonic balance overall? I'm no engineer or anything, but dropping 7k too much I find drums and other higher pitched beats sound too bloated, dry and lack snap. Also, not getting nearly as extreme "ear canal resonance peak". I actually adjusted both my EQ's for the SE535 and W4 to remedy this. But I listen at low volumes with Shure foam Olives. My guess is the tips too reduce things slightly, or you listen to your music at much higher volumes than me (for which you would need to drop it further than I have).
 

 


It could be because the shape of your ear canal is very different from mine. Mine causes a prominent peak at around 7KHz with most tips (but less so with the triple-flange unmodified), and as soon as I do a steep narrow cut, it's like "HELL YEAH! Now that's SMOOTH." It could also mean that you might have hearing damage at that frequency range (I hope not, because that would suck), so the peak actually remedies your damage. Have you ever tested your hearing? There are online tests you can do to check, and even a simple test such as this one can help you figure out if you do suffer from problems: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html
 
I don't listen loudly at all. Even at the loudest I would never go past 90 dB, and try to stay around 85 dB for the loudest peaks, and hover between 70 dB and 80 dB on average. 85 dB is the standard Hollywood sound productions uses for optimal listening levels for theaters.
 
If you listen quietly (say, around 65 dB to 75 dB, then you may want to EQ your IEM's so that you make up for the drop in frequency response flatness with the Fletcher-Munson curve as a guide. I have another set of EQ curves designed just to do that.
 
I tried the black olives with the curve I created and it works fine. I think the logic behind the tips are as follows:
 
1) Whether the tips fill your ear canal very shallow or very deep. So for example, the triple-flange would be deep, thus whatever resonance peak would be raised to much higher frequencies. The more shallow the tip is, the more space there is left in the ear canal, thus causing a lower frequency in the resonance peak.
 
2) The material could either reflect or absorb the sound waves. If it's a coarse, soft, and open material (such as foam that's not closed), it will act like acoustic treatment inside your ears, the way such treatments are used in recording studios. If it's smooth and and hard, then it'll reflect sound instead of absorbing.
 
I see that you also own the HD555, which is a headphone I have and used for years. The HD555's mids are pretty good, so I suggest you EQ your IEM's to match the HD555's mids. It's treble is a bit rolled off, so don't use its treble as a reference (though you can make sure your IEM's at least have just as much air as the HD555 and then a little bit more). Same with the bass--the HD555's bass is slightly anemic--especially in the sub-bass region, so make sure your IEM's at least are EQ'd to match and exceed the HD555's sub-bass prominence.

 

[Freefallr4545]

Quote:

Update number God knows what (lol). I think this will be the last on the comparison itself.
 
Firstly, here's my final SE535 EQu settings for use straight from the iPhone 4. It's about as close as I can get to what I think they should sound like restricted of course by the earphones themselves and my personal taste. Sound stage is opened up just a touch compared to before, and vocals are slightly further back and more personal. 
 

 
---
 
Ok on to my final update.
 
What I'm finding is that the Westone 4's are the one's I'm going to the majority of the time now (post EQ). I really only jump to the SE535 if I want a bit more vibrance or dramatism. Where the SE535 provides a very controlled tight, and closed presentation, the W4's surprisingly open airy presentation is now really addictive. Where the W4 really excels is with (as mentioned numerous times now) instrumental separation and detail. The best thing about it is it offers a more neutral and realistic sound. It's really refined stuff. Not always as fun as the SE535, but certainly more accurate. I think the W4 is an earphone all about nuances. Post EQ, the balance is perfect for me now. Every element of the audio is superbly refined. I'm able to withdraw sonic information on every aspect of a song. Background details, vocals, bass, sub bass, highs et all. That's not to say I can't get these with the SE535, it's just that much easier and more coherent with the W4's. Before EQ'ing however, with the W4's I was focusing on instrumentals more than I wanted to, now I've got it just right, it's alluring. Like I said, the drama of the SE535 still isn't quite there, but instead of a band playing for me in my bedroom with equipment they've brought along and crammed in to my room, I feel like I'm getting them playing in an entire reasonably sized hall with instruments placed carefully around the stage.
 
That's why I've posted this update, to express my current change of heightened admiration for the Westone 4's and realisation that whilst the SE535's sonic signature can be very attractive, it's actually a good degree less "true" than the W4's, which is extremely accurate and un-influenced (except by my EQ'ing lol). If you want as close to what the music should sound like minus the excessive flair of what the average consumer likely wants or has become accustomed to these days, these are probably for you. They've got to (easily) be the most refined universal IEM's I have ever tried. Though I do still stand by there being a slightly annoying veil to the sound of the Westone 4's pre-EQ'ing. If I hadn't gotten rid of it, I may have ended up sticking with the SE535's.
 
 
So where does that leave the SE535's?
 
Well it got me thinking. See, one of the other areas of tech I'm extremely fussy over is with video, I consider myself as much a videophile as I am an audiophile. I'm currently sporting a Pioneer Kuro professionally calibrated and it's a thing of beauty. What relevance does this have on these earphones? A bit.
 
One thing I've noticed over the years with TV's is that the 'average' consumer, ins't always a big fan of the 'calibrated' TV look. That's why so many TV's ship with "dynamic" mode as the default. A mode that grossly exaggerates contrast, colours etc. Consumers see this and automatically think, wow, look how bright and potent the colours are, how deep the shadows are etc without realising they are grossly mis-representative of the real thing. But they don't care, that's what they want. In the same way, consumer Hi-Fi systems and car stereo systems come with bass that is stupendously strong and drowns out details, but again, many average consumers simply don't care, they're impressed by it. They want the 1000 watt RMS show off tag to gloat about. The car seat and jugular riveting bass.
 
Now I'm not suggesting the SE535 is an example of such a grossly exaggerated product. But it is a balance of something similar. I believe Shure has intentionally designed the SE535 to be slightly dramatic, with impactful bass, more sparkly highs and aggressive mids. It's still quite neutral overall, especially compared to the average earphone, but compared to the W4 you can see how it is quite coloured in areas, most probably to cater to some of that more common mass market. Despite the fact that the W4 may be more refined, articulate, with a wider soundstage, better instrumental separation and more 'accurate' presentation, to many, it will be too laid back, too neutral and possibly even timid. Like it was even to me to begin with. If I hadn't EQ'd the W4 I would have been one of those people. Pre-EQ, whilst it may have been more accurate than the SE535, it was too laid back for me. So I opted for the vibrancy and fun of the SE535. Post EQ however, now things are more balanced, the positives of the W4 really have more of a chance to shine
 
There is also the topic of design and build. The SE535's are better built and designed, aesthetically speaking. To me, the W4's feel cheap compared to the SE535. They're also less efficient, needing more power and volume to reach the same volumes as the SE535. Now I appreciate Westone probably cared more for the sound quality over design, but perhaps these are things they could rectify with the Westone 5's.
 
 
In any case, my personal pick of IEM is now the Westone 4's 

Though chances are, many people may prefer the SE535's over the W4's depending naturally of course, on musical tastes.
 
 
 
What a crazy journey that was! Lol.
 
 

Thank you again for the updates. First do not let the design of the westones fool you. (I have the 3's and not 4's but I understand they are very close) Coming from the shures I thought, man these are very light, the cable seems flimsy, nozzle is shorter etc. The Cable is absolutely fantastic. The design while being light adds to the extreme comfort of these guys, and to me a better seal, as the cable being light, never tugs on the ear piece semi breaking a seal. Yeah the Shures are great Quality build and more flashy. I think their whole design of the 535's is a great improvement over the 530's
Now, Could you tell me how both of these EQ. For example Using my Sony Z I found the 535's EQ better than the W3's For example it;s easier to tweak. The Westones 3 (don;t need Eq) but when I try to EQ the W3's it messes with the whole soundstage and the balance (and Clarity) Are the more neutral 4's like the3's?. Or do they EQ as easy as the Shure's? Thanks again friend
 

 

[vinnievidi]

Several posts back it was mentioned that Earphone Solutions stated that the W4 would be the better choice for classical listening compared to the SE535.  I received a pair of the SE535 last week and compared the two with various classical sub-genres and conclude that it's not so cut and dry.  I'm not going to rehash the sound signatures of both IEMs—that has been done ad nauseam—but will say something about what I found to be true for me.  
 
The W4 seems to be a better representation of works performed by a chamber orchestra in a small, intimate recital hall.  It also seems to be better for works recorded using period instruments.  But when it comes to larger works with a modern orchestra and operas, the dynamics of the SE535 are clearly better suited.   This is not always the case though, as there are exceptions:  Janine Jansen's recording of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (recorded with a small ensemble) is flat and uninspired  through the W4 when compared to the SE535; and the Funeral March of the Marionettes by Charles Gounod (recorded by the Band of the Royal Swedish Air Force) sounds slightly more cohesive through the W4 than the SE353.  
 
I guess the take away for me was that Earphone Solution's statement (and most blanket statements on classical) about which one is better for the classical genre is not a simple X over Y.  If you're that critical, it will depend on what you listen to the most.  With that said though, if you only had to choose one IEM you can't go wrong with either the W4 or SE535—they are both a great choice for listening to all sub-genres of classical (far superior to the Etymotics, which a lot of people seem to love with classical).  

 

[music_4321]

^ Excellent post.

 

[Naim.F.C]

Quote:

Several posts back it was mentioned that Earphone Solutions stated that the W4 would be the better choice for classical listening compared to the SE535.  I received a pair of the SE535 last week and compared the two with various classical sub-genres and conclude that it's not so cut and dry.  I'm not going to rehash the sound signatures of both IEMs—that has been done ad nauseam—but will say something about what I found to be true for me.  
 
The W4 seems to be a better representation of works performed by a chamber orchestra in a small, intimate recital hall.  It also seems to be better for works recorded using period instruments.  But when it comes to larger works with a modern orchestra and operas, the dynamics of the SE535 are clearly better suited.   This is not always the case though, as there are exceptions:  Janine Jansen's recording of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (recorded with a small ensemble) is flat and uninspired  through the W4 when compared to the SE535; and the Funeral March of the Marionettes by Charles Gounod (recorded by the Band of the Royal Swedish Air Force) sounds slightly more cohesive through the W4 than the SE353.  
 
I guess the take away for me was that Earphone Solution's statement (and most blanket statements on classical) about which one is better for the classical genre is not a simple X over Y.  If you're that critical, it will depend on what you listen to the most.  With that said though, if you only had to choose one IEM you can't go wrong with either the W4 or SE535—they are both a great choice for listening to all sub-genres of classical (far superior to the Etymotics, which a lot of people seem to love with classical).  

Great post, completely agree. This is the problem with recommending earphones with vague blanket positives, since even among set genre's, music can vary substantially.
 

 

[Naim.F.C]

Just to let you guys know, I'm going to be testing these earphones with a range of different portable amps over the weeks, and will hopefully be comparing them with whichever custom I end up settling on! So watch this space.

 

[Naim.F.C]

Sorry for the delay in providing photo's, just been a bit busy, namely listening to music along with general work. Hope you guys like the shots.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
The album can be found here. If anyone wants high res (20+ megapixel) versions for whatever reason, just PM me a request.
 
http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/nchoudhury/Audio%20equipment/
 
______
 
EDIT: No idea why the pictures aren't showing up. They were working earlier, and my bandwidth is deifnitely still fine. I have a Pro account and have never run out of bandwidth on any image I've ever linked to. Very strange...Anyone have any ideas? In the mean time just click on the album link above to view the photo's.

 

[tnmike1]

Quote:

Several posts back it was mentioned that Earphone Solutions stated that the W4 would be the better choice for classical listening compared to the SE535.  I received a pair of the SE535 last week and compared the two with various classical sub-genres and conclude that it's not so cut and dry.  I'm not going to rehash the sound signatures of both IEMs—that has been done ad nauseam—but will say something about what I found to be true for me.  
 
The W4 seems to be a better representation of works performed by a chamber orchestra in a small, intimate recital hall.  It also seems to be better for works recorded using period instruments.  But when it comes to larger works with a modern orchestra and operas, the dynamics of the SE535 are clearly better suited.   This is not always the case though, as there are exceptions:  Janine Jansen's recording of Vivaldi's Four Seasons (recorded with a small ensemble) is flat and uninspired  through the W4 when compared to the SE535; and the Funeral March of the Marionettes by Charles Gounod (recorded by the Band of the Royal Swedish Air Force) sounds slightly more cohesive through the W4 than the SE353.  
 
I guess the take away for me was that Earphone Solution's statement (and most blanket statements on classical) about which one is better for the classical genre is not a simple X over Y.  If you're that critical, it will depend on what you listen to the most.  With that said though, if you only had to choose one IEM you can't go wrong with either the W4 or SE535—they are both a great choice for listening to all sub-genres of classical (far superior to the Etymotics, which a lot of people seem to love with classical).  

OBOY now I'm really confused.  I was the one who contacted Earphone Solutions and was given the suggestion on the Westies.  But I didn't specify sub-genres.  Listen to all those classifications, small ensemble as ell as large symphonic/operatic works.  Also listen thru Etymotic P and UM3X IEMs as well as Denon 5000.  So the best solution is to buy both Shure and Westies, sample both and either keep both or return one.  Or, less expensive yet, forget the whole thing and be happy with what I have.
 

 

[vinnievidi]

As long as you buy from somewhere with a generous return policy, I think that's the best way to choose.
 
Quote:

 So the best solution is to buy both Shure and Westies, sample both and either keep both or return one.  Or, less expensive yet, forget the whole thing and be happy with what I have.