WESTONE ES3 CUSTOM MADE IN-EAR MONITORS

[TerryKok]

Hi everyone!

I was the one who had the Westone UM2s and I still think they're great, had the chance to hear the UM1 single driver ones and I can tell you that they are very different beasts. I still listen to the UM2s regularly and they are actually very similar to the UEs, the cable design is almost identical.

The UE-10s you see in the picture actually have two bores one for the high frequency driver and the other for the low frequency drivers. The bores are slightly recessed in the unit in the photo as my ear canals are quite small so they're quite difficult to spot.


Best Regards,
Terry

 

[KPOT]

OK! Thank you guys for your answers. Tomorrow i will go to my audiologist to make ear impressions. I decided to buy westone es3 in translucent candy purple with silver glitter

It's my ear

 

[DJGeorgeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT OK! Thank you guys for your answers. Tomorrow i will go to my audiologist to make ear impressions. I decided to buy westone es3 in translucent candy purple with silver glitter It's my ear

Nice, please write a review after you have a chance to give it a good listen

 

[KPOT]

YES! Impressions are here, with me!

 

[cmascatello]

Those look to be well-done impressions. You should get a decent fit out of them. Keep us posted with updates and your thoughts when they are in your hands.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPOT YES! Impressions are here, with me!

Those green ear molds look akin to gangrenous organs or something! Eww! Seriously, the fact that they're green is kinda disconcerting, lol.

 

[DJGeorgeT]

Totally cool I say

 

[KPOT]

I've asked Dale Douglass from Wesone labs. about frequency response graph.
He replied me something like that:
"We do not have a frequency response curve for the ES3 at this time.
Regards,
Dale Douglass"

Very interesting...

 

[lindrone]

I think UE is the only company that publishes a frequency response chart... they claim that they've got an acceptible method of measuring frequency response outputs, and challenges all other companies to produce a chart.

Meanwhile everyone else basically says that there's no standard method of measurement, and that response curve changes from person to person depends on their ear canal shape, so they don't think there's a valid way to produce a frequency response chart.

Truth is somewhere out there...

 

[Big D]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone I think UE is the only company that publishes a frequency response chart... they claim that they've got an acceptible method of measuring frequency response outputs, and challenges all other companies to produce a chart. Meanwhile everyone else basically says that there's no standard method of measurement, and that response curve changes from person to person depends on their ear canal shape, so they don't think there's a valid way to produce a frequency response chart. Truth is somewhere out there...

Has anyone else noticed the difference between the frequency response curve of the UE-5c on it's page at Ultimate Ears and the FR curve at the bottom of the page when it is compared to the Shure e5s? The high frequencies seem to be better reproduced in the comparison chart.

 

[setmenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone About the drivers though... you may not have known this before. Essentially all canalphone manufacturers uses the same type of drivers from the same manufacturer. They could pick to use different sized drivers, and even if they are the same, they can still be tuned differently. For example, Sensaphonics ProPhonic 2X-S has much clearer treble than the Shure E5c... you would think they used different drivers. Actually 2X-S and E5c shares the same high-end driver, meanwhile they used different bass drivers. Yet 2X-S's high-end driver delivers more detail. There hasn't been any true technology advancement in balanced armature driver itself, unlike dynamic drivers (in which, many companies has their own R&D, and make really strange materials for their diaphram and magnets.. and such)... Canalphones has been more about tuning existing balanced armature drivers to what you want them to sound like. Either way, at the end of the day, you can read specs all you want, it doesn't mean anything towards the way it really sounds. Another advice, don't look at specs and imply superiority simply because of it... frequency response charts can be helpful, specs on paper can be easily manipulated due to different types of testing processes... at the end of the day neither one tells you anything at all about the way they sound.

Interesting, the transducers are sourced from a single company?
I would be interested in the name of that company.
Could be some scope for a DIY project there.......


Setmenu

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone Meanwhile everyone else basically says that there's no standard method of measurement, and that response curve changes from person to person depends on their ear canal shape, so they don't think there's a valid way to produce a frequency response chart. Truth is somewhere out there...

But does the argument against frequency response charts for canalphones hold for custom molded models? If I remember correctly, the big point against them was that with universal fit models (Shure, Etys, etc.) one can't predict how deep the tip would be inserted, the quality of the seal and so on and so forth.

With custom molded models, I suppose that for everybody the bores open more or less at the same distance from the eardrum (or however it is called), taking away a big chunk of the variables.

I'm saying this just for the sake of knowledge. I am skeptical about that 18 Khz response, but I wish to repeat and stress that I do believe KPOT will have every chance to be very satisfied with his new Westones.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gorman But does the argument against frequency response charts for canalphones hold for custom molded models?

Yeah, it certainly does. Even though you can more or less make the opening of the bores for custom molded earphones end up at the same location in terms of your ears (usually just enough to get to the "bend" of your ear canal), it doesn't speak for how much distance the sound has to travel before it reaches that point, nor does it speak for how much distance sound has to travel after that point.

The size of the ear and the shape, distance of each individual's ear canal are still different, even if you end up trying to get the most consistent point to "release" the sound, you still can't predict how that sound is going to be like "exactly". I believe you can get it to a pretty consistent, close point, but exact replicate of that sound for each ear is impossible.

I don't believe these type of minute differences is that bad when it comes down to day to day, practical usage. However, when you're benchmarking such a small difference, I believe there is a big problem with whatever method you choose to go along with. You can manipulate the results of these type of benchmarks by optimizing for certain type of test results... not unlike how graphic card vendors for computers tweaks their drivers to score high on certain popular benchmarks.

Note that this is a challenge not only with canalphones, but with any sound reproduction equipment in general. There's arguments about measuring performance of speakers, headphones... for just about as many variety of reasons as canalphones. Just that canalphones can be easily affected by even the smallest of change (exhibited by how sound signature changes just by switching tips).

That's why, generally, I don't give a crap about frequency response charts... there's too much to read into it that doesn't mean anything... It only gives you a hint of what technical performance the headphone might be able to perform, but tells you absolutely nothing about the way it really sounds.

 

[gorman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone You can manipulate the results of these type of benchmarks by optimizing for certain type of test results... not unlike how graphic card vendors for computers tweaks their drivers to score high on certain popular benchmarks.

Very familiar with it, as my job is Publishing Director of videogames magazines...

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindrone That's why, generally, I don't give a crap about frequency response charts... there's too much to read into it that doesn't mean anything... It only gives you a hint of what technical performance the headphone might be able to perform, but tells you absolutely nothing about the way it really sounds.

I agree on this, I was just mentioning it since Westones is actually making a selling point of their frequency response extending higher than most (all?) other canal/headphones.

 

[KPOT]

Can anyone help me? I have made ear impressions with opened jaw. But after it i put them into my ears, but the seal wasn't so good. think that silicon (ear impressions) can't provide optimal pressure to my ear-channel (the pressure is very small), so the isolation is not good as it should be. Is it normal for ear impressions?