[music_4321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif I got my ES3X's back today. The fit feels perfect and the seal is complete. Vivaldi never sounded better!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sounds interesting. I am kind of stuck in the Romantic period. Modern classical has not been my cup of tea with a few exceptions. Kind of jumped straight into Jazz although I do love a lot of 19-20th century American composers. I know, I know, I need to expand my horizons..... My wife and youngest son went to Russia, Finland and Sweden in June. Lucky them, they went to Tchaikovsky's and Sibelius homes.

Hey Gilency, great to hear you've got your ES3X back!

Now is the perfect time for you to start listening to some Bartok

 

[Sinocelt]

Both JHA and UE use stereolitography; Westone only uses it for its medical earpieces, not for its custom IEMs (a dichotomy I still cannot fathom). It would be simple to point this difference as the reason why Westone experiences more refits... if it really did. I've been an avid reader of both the ES3X and the JH13 appreciation threads, and both have their fair share of refitting stories. It's just that they don't seem to get discussed as much on the JH13 thread.

 

[GreenLeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by music_4321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're right - 100% right! And I'm supposed to be good at maths I stand corrected

You just got a slip, pal and we head-fiers are just backing you up.

 

[p0wderh0und23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh no, that's foam i see! it's best not to use foam as they tend to stick to the impressions and damage them. Also, in general the impressions are great, but the impressions would be more detailed if there was more material filled into the canal. I see some dents in the impressions. However, great impressions in general =) Good luck on your customs!

Ummm.. that is not true. Foam is best since it provides a better seal in the canal and can have a vented tube put it in to help with air pressure.

 

[Bolardito]

Quote:

Originally Posted by p0wderh0und23 /img/forum/go_quote.gif @tigon_ridge so what I'm hearing from you is that a company that has been around for 50 years and is considered the WORLD leader in custom fit products for the ear, STARTED the market for the balanced armature earphone/monitors back in 1994, was approached by Etymotic, Shure and Jerry Harvey (Ultimate Ears) in the mid 1990's to help start them in design, manufacturing and production(which we gladly did), is in serious mud and falling behind because one or two little start ups that have been around for what, less than 2 years (or 6 months) are making some noise? Just because the fact that we have 8 dedicated product labs with highly trained people (hmmmmm...did I just say dedicated?) and we do not do ONLY earphones that we are lacking? One single comment is all I have to say... please remove head from sand. Thank you.

This is why many big and leading companies fall from the top. Because they see the new entrants with strong propositions to the consumer as "one or two little start ups making some noise". Common please take a visit to the JH13 thread and honestly tell it is some noise. Just because you are the leader it does not mean you are better and you will always be on the top, you have to show respect for your competitors and start looking and taking into consideration what they are doing, you may even learn something.

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by p0wderh0und23 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ummm.. that is not true. Foam is best since it provides a better seal in the canal and can have a vented tube put it in to help with air pressure.

For ear impressions? everytime i get impressions with foam, the canal part is damaged. Even other manufacturers have said this, so wouldn't cotton be a better choice?

 

[tigon_ridge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif For ear impressions? everytime i get impressions with foam, the canal part is damaged. Even other manufacturers have said this, so wouldn't cotton be a better choice?

Hmm, damaged as in the inner tube develops jagged edges or grooves? That might be undesirable because it could bounce a small percentage of sound waves in funky directions, creating a little distortion?

 

[p0wderh0und23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif For ear impressions? everytime i get impressions with foam, the canal part is damaged. Even other manufacturers have said this, so wouldn't cotton be a better choice?

yes for ear impressions. Any lines or dents from the tubing is filled with a clay before the the impressions are waxed and cast.

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by p0wderh0und23 /img/forum/go_quote.gif yes for ear impressions. Any lines or dents from the tubing is filled with a clay before the the impressions are waxed and cast.

ah i see, i guess it just depends on what kind of foam you are using? i myself prefer cotton, it's most comfortable when taking the impression and i haven't had any problems with it damaging the end of the canal.

 

[iponderous]

Sorry for taking this thread slightly off-topic but for those of you who own both the ES3X and the UM3X, what are the significant differences between the sound qualities of these IEMs? Does the ES3X overcome the somewhat "closed-in" soundstage of the UM3X that has been reported?

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iponderous /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry for taking this thread slightly off-topic but for those of you who own both the ES3X and the UM3X, what are the significant differences between the sound qualities of these IEMs? Does the ES3X overcome the somewhat "closed-in" soundstage of the UM3X that has been reported?

to my ears, yes it does. Even listening to the UM3X for a short amount of time, i find the ES3X to have a larger soundstage.

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif to my ears, yes it does. Even listening to the UM3X for a short amount of time, i find the ES3X to have a larger soundstage.

Thanks. Could you comment upon how they compare in terms of instrument separation, detail retrieval and the presentation of highs, mids and lows? Are there also significant differences in these areas as well? Does the ES3X present music with more clarity than the UM3X? I'm trying to get a sense of how much of an improvement the ES3X is over the UM3X from people who have both. Is it a slight or considerable improvement?

 

[FYJX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iponderous /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks. Could you comment upon how they compare in terms of instrument separation, detail retrieval and the presentation of highs, mids and lows? Are there also significant differences in these areas as well? Does the ES3X present music with more clarity than the UM3X? I'm trying to get a sense of how much of an improvement the ES3X is over the UM3X from people who have both. Is it a slight or considerable improvement?

I can't really as i can't do a AB, but i'm sure Music up above can.

 

[gilency]

To me the improvement was considerable. Although the sound signature is similar, the degree of clarity and the ability to separate each instrument are clearly better. I enjoy listening to a piece listening to each instrument or voice one at a time and the ES3X makes it easy to do. Currently listening to Bach's Missa Brevis BWV 234: I can follow the sopranos, contralto, tenor and bass, as well as the organ, flute strings and bass quite easily. Extremely enjoyable. While the UM3X allows it also, I did not find it as clear. Not sure if that helped, but is the best explanation I could come up at this time. The UM3x is also an excellent choice, though not quite at the same level. Music however did not find the difference as significant as I did.

 

[iponderous]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif To me the improvement was considerable. Although the sound signature is similar, the degree of clarity and the ability to separate each instrument are clearly better. I enjoy listening to a piece listening to each instrument or voice one at a time and the ES3X makes it easy to do. Currently listening to Bach's Missa Brevis BWV 234: I can follow the sopranos, contralto, tenor and bass, as well as the organ, flute strings and bass quite easily. Extremely enjoyable. While the UM3X allows it also, I did not find it as clear. Not sure if that helped, but is the best explanation I could come up at this time. The UM3x is also an excellent choice, though not quite at the same level. Music however did not find the difference as significant as I did.

Much appreciated gilency.