Latest Thread Images

Westone UM PRO Series Thread
Jun 6, 2014 at 7:43 PM Post #620 of 3,037
Picked up a Pro 50. First impressions are mixed.

Taken in isolation, these are pretty good, though not great. They do sound a bit like an HD650 in a rig that can't quite tame the bass. There's too much mid and upper bass and it interferes with the mids. Instrument tones are too warm, and the lower mids are obscured and a bit muddy. On the plus side, though, you have pretty much everything else. There's more detail than in any universal-fit IEM I've heard thus far, the highs are smooth, the dynamics are very good actually - even unamped - and drums and guitars sound great on these. Vocals can be a bit buried in the mix though, and cymbals sound like they're coming from next door. Though to be fair, that's how they sound on all Westones.

But when not taken in isolation, these make less sense. For a starter, I don't think they're a meaningful step up on the UM3x. Sure, they're more detailed and dynamic, but they also mess up the mids, and the UM3x doesn't. I was hoping for an updated UM3x with these, and what I got instead was a totally different canalphone with its own set of problems. And then, there is the price. If these were $400, I'd say hell yeah, go for it if you like bass. If they were $500, I'd say think about it, you will have some entry-level custom-molded options that are probably better. But $650? There's just no way they're worth that, at least sonically. $650 will get you an HD600 and a decent amp, which will sound better. $650 will also get you a Stax 2170 system which sounds better still. You do pay for the portability of course, but then why not go with a much less expensive canalphone that's almost as good, or a slightly more expensive custom that should be much better?

I'm not sure what I'll do with these. On one hand, they kinda mirror the HD650 in being absolutely great for jazz, rock, blues, that sort of thing, basically anything that benefits from a very warm transducer but still needs a lot of impact and dynamics. On the other hand, acoustic, classical, and electronic music sounds kinda muffled and a bit boring, and the UM3x definitely does better with that.

I will take these over the W4 though. W4 also has warm mids, but the midrange warmth is a result of an upper midrange dip which makes them sound dull and dead. The Pro 50 doesn't do that, and it has more detail besides. The bass is more controlled on the W4, but that's about all it's got going for it. I don't like any of Westone's consumer-oriented earphones - but I haven't heard the W50 and W60 yet.

The comfort is great. It's the same shape as the UM3x. The memory cables are only marginally less annoying than other memory cables, and I wish they'd ditch them. The stock tips aren't Comply foamies and are worse, so I'd put Comply tips on these asap.

I may sell these, or I may keep them, I don't know yet.

Also, I'm not exactly thrilled with Westone raising their prices. It was to be expected I suppose, they were undercutting the market values of similar products for years, but that seemed to be working for them, and all of us got terrific value products in return. Now, we have $1500 customs and $1k universals which may not be all that amazing, and it's unfortunate. The headphone market is going in the direction of the speaker market. Again, likely inevitable, but disappointing from the standpoint of someone that has been watching its growth for a very long time.
 
Jun 7, 2014 at 5:32 AM Post #621 of 3,037
You are right, maybe 'rubbish' was too strong a word but I find the Pro 50 sound signature very unlikable, just like my UE Pro18's, just all bass and nothing. I demoed them both time using my 7th generation iPod nano with the same few tracks I used for demoing IEMs. The staff at the first shop was trying to tell me my iPod wasn't powerful enough to unleash the full range of the Pro 50, which I found quite funny. Since the Pro 50 have an impedance of 45 ohms, which was even lower than my UM3x's 56 ohms, and the bass was so overpowering already. And it's not even punchy, low sub bass like the SE846's, it was kind of muddy and unpleasant sounding for me. I've also demoed the W50 briefly, I also found them a bit bass heavy, but not as muddy sounding as the Pro 50, I still prefer the sound signature of the UM3x. 
 
 
Quote:
michaelfong said:
  I am curious what kind of source or setup you are using when you tried the Pro 50. "Rubbish" is a very "strong" word
biggrin.gif
  I would say the pro 50s are not that bad at any aspect.
But I had an experience that was quite similar to what you said. I made a mistake when I was connecting from my player (fiio x5) to amp (fiio e12) using the "speaker out" instead of "line out".
That sounds really bad~~~and that is what you had described.
Actually, pro 50s sounds great even if you just directly connect it to a iphone 5.
But I am sure everyone has their own taste. For example, i do think "Astell & Kern" 180 (not sure if i remember their name correctly) player is not good at all. The sound is thin and not natural at all. However, I am sure some ppl like them. And, that is absolutely fine.
Click to expand...

 
Jun 7, 2014 at 5:43 AM Post #622 of 3,037
danz03 said:
 
Click to expand...

Nano is really not a good source. IMO, Nano is only better than the shuffle in the apple player family.
I think the reason for that "ugly"sound signature was caused by the source. It looks the nano was unable to drive it well.
You may try it another time with a iphone 4s or 5 or.... I bet the um pro 50 would be different for you.
 
Yes, I love the bass of shure 846 better than that of the pro 50.
 
Btw, do you enjoy the w60?
darthsmile.gif

 
Jun 7, 2014 at 6:08 AM Post #623 of 3,037
Maybe you are right, but if my SE846, Um3x and W60 sounded good on my iPod nano, the UM Pro 50 shouldn't sound so bad, if you know what I mean.
 
I love the W60, to me, they sound remarkably similar to my LCD-X; they are now the only IEM I'd use at home, apart from the UM Pro 30 which I use during commuting and working out.
 
The bass of the SE846 is even more punchy and deep than the LCD-2/3/X, but a little bit too over powering to me.
 
Quote:
michaelfong said:
  Nano is really not a good source. IMO, Nano is only better than the shuffle in the apple player family.
I think the reason for that "ugly"sound signature was caused by the source. It looks the nano was unable to drive it well.
You may try it another time with a iphone 4s or 5 or.... I bet the um pro 50 would be different for you.
 
Yes, I love the bass of shure 846 better than that of the pro 50.
 
Btw, do you enjoy the w60?
darthsmile.gif
Click to expand...

 
Jun 7, 2014 at 7:53 AM Post #624 of 3,037
Guys a question.. I'm wrong or the bass driver on UM pro 30 is a lot bigger than normal??? 
 
On the other iems that i've owned before it wasn't so big! That's why the bass are so strong on these?
 
Jun 7, 2014 at 9:06 AM Post #625 of 3,037
danz03 said:
 
Click to expand...

Hi, I think they are just different. 
I think you may need to look into their specification.
 
UM3RX:
Sensitivity: 124 dB @ 1mW
Frequency response: 20 Hz - 18 kHz 
Impedance: 56 ohms @ 1kHz
 
UMPro50
SENSITIVITY:​
 115 dB SPL​
@​
1mW​
FREQUENCY RESPONSE:​
 20 Hz - 20 kHz​
IMPEDANCE:​
 45 ohms @ 1 kHz​
 
It is not true to say "easy to drive" or "difficult to drive" with a single "impedance" spec.
The UM3RX gets higher sensitivity and higher impedance, therefore, it should be earlier to handle for a portable device. The UM3RX is far more easier (a lot higher sensitivity) to drive, and doesn't require a very powerful source.
That's why you can get better sound with a nano as source, through a UM3RX.
 
For the Shure pieces, IMHO, they are very capable of providing earphone that is not so difficult to drive through a portable device. At lease, at this aspect, they are better than the westone.
I didn't get the W60 spec, so, can't make any comments.
 
Or, you may just like the sound signature like W series.
 
And yes, the bass of shure 846 is punchy and deep :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Back
Top