WESTONE ES3 CUSTOM MADE IN-EAR MONITORS

[KPOT]

Hello, all!!!
So i decided to buy these monster phones! They are like a ticket to hi-end music. I think they will sound fine with headroom blockhead with stepped attenuators.

Next week i will go to my audiologist to get ear impressions.

"The size of your ear can also keep us from
making the ES3. In the event that your ear is too small to make the
ES3 we will e-mail you and let you know and suggest the ES2."
Dale Douglass (Westone labs)

And now i'm selecting color and custom art workshop image for them.

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

I think they will sound fine with headroom blockhead

Do the Westones come with balanced headphone plugs?

 

[penbat]

Are you not tempted by Ultimate Ears ?

 

[KPOT]

I choosed Westone labs because of their huge experience (from 1959 year) in in-ear technology. Also es3 phones have 20hZ-18khZ vs 20Hz-16khZ frequency response.

 

[lindrone]

I guess everyone has reasons for their choice.. just like how I chose ProPhonic 2X over the UE products..

 

[gorman]

They must be awesome. Really.

There was a couple of things that kept me from considering them.

First of all, they advertise up to 18 Khz of frequency response, but there's no chart in sight. I wonder if this piece "If others claim to have a triple driver design that is comparable or better than the UE-10 Pro just ask them to provide you the proof in their advertising by requesting their products frequency response chart to compare to the UE-10 Pro." taken from UE's website is directed to them. In short, I did not believe that. Plus, they are advertising the same frequency response for ES2, costing less than UE-10 and Sensaphonics 2X-S... so... if it's really important, can they achieve it on a headphone costing $250 less? They must be wizards of some sort.

Second, they do not use a double bore to channel the sound in your ears. From Lindrone detailed explanations in the past, I was led to believe that the double bore brought significant improvement to sound transmission to your ear.

Third, they are not currently offering any soft or full silicone option. I wanted to be comfortable with my canalphones... I'm lazy like that.

But I'm sure they will sound great just the same. With that kind of money invested, I guess you're pretty much sure of getting a very good listening experience.

 

[KPOT]

I don't think so about bores. More bores equals more resonating surface and more distortion. It's my opinion.

 

[KPOT]

Some facts about frequency response. It's like etys 6 and 4. All of them have 20-16 same frequncy responce, but different linearity. Also ue phones (all phones) have 20-16 frequncy responce. eu5 and eu10 have same, AND SAME LINEARITY (ues declares it).
I can ask westone labs to send me their frequency response graph.

 

[KPOT]

Also there were some doubt about wires used in these phones. It costs only 28 bucks!!! (ue and westone wires) And i asked westones about wire material. They haven't answered yet.

 

[lindrone]

What was mentioned in discussion prevy... is that Ultimate Ears had mentioned that the Shure E5c, because of its single bore design, has a problem in some of the mixture of the sound from its dual driver design, therefore it is deficient at producing certain sound frequencies. On the other hand, Shure said that they had intentionally made a single bore design, because they are for one, making an universal fit unit, and two, exerting control over how the sound mixture is going to happen. In a dual-bore design, the mixing of the sound from the two driver occurs in your ear canal, so you might get slightly varying sound signature (shouldn't vary that greatly, but not completely under control) due to the shape of your ear canal.

From what I understand though, both parties has their points. There's no reason to do dual-bore if you can predict exactly how the sound is going to mix beforehand. However, in a custom molded headphone, it's hard to do with a single bore design, since the distance in which the sound has to travel through (as well as the shape of the bore itself) is unpredictable. It makes no more to force mix the sounds into a single bore if it is already unpredictable. It would result in even more sound degradation to force-mix the sounds, and then feed it through a bore that's unpredictable in both length and shape. I think you would rather stick with a twin bore design and allow the sound to mix in the ear canal in that case.


Quote:

I don't think so about bores. More bores equals more resonating surface and more distortion. It's my opinion.

See the above statements... does it make sense to you? If it does, you should realize that more bores has its advantages in a custom molded canalphone. Meanwhile the opposite might be true for an universal fit canalphone.

On another note.. Gorman, does your UE-10 have two or three bores? I would imagine if it had only two bores, that would mean it combines the two bass drivers into one sound channel?

 

[KPOT]

I think men working in wesone labs. not so silly! There is no difference where sound mixes: in my ear channel, or in bore.

 

[plainsong]

Don't take it so personally KPOT. All Lindrone was pointing out was that the guys at UE weren't "silly" either. And Lindrone is more neutral in the arguement considering he went with Sensaphonic.

 

[KPOT]

What do you want to tell me? UE and WESTONE have approximately same characteristics...

 

[rabbitsfoot]

It is my understanding Westone was the origional manufacturer for the Shure E1's and E5's until Shure moved their manufacturing to Mexico. Also, Westone manufactured for Ultimate Ears. Hello to all, I am a newbie here! I have a background in pro-audio both on and off the stage, and have been involved with the love of all things music for many years. Am presently using the Ety,s and Shure E5's.

 

[KPOT]

STOP, STOP, STOP!!! One interesting idea came to me!
Look at this picture of ue10pro. How many bores do you see? Yes, only 1!!!!

And now look to the picture of gorman!

You will see on it 2 bores. I think that number of bores depends on size of your ear-canal.