[Podtweaker]

The reason I ask is because this appears to be a first rate product. I don't buy any music that I don't think has well above average sound engineering quality. I started this practice in my vinyl buying days & it still works pretty well for me. Given that most recordings are flawed(at least a lot of classical & jazz recordings are ruined in the production room) are we blaming the messenger rather than the message? Does anyone feel the UM2s are just fine the way they are & people are used to hearing "Hot" or "Tipped Up" upper register recordings? Give me some samples of what label the recording sounded rolled off. Thanks.

 

[gilency]

I like it just the way they are. I think is funny because I also enjoy my DT880's, which are supposed to have very bright highs.
One thing about the UM2s is the fact that you can equalize them nicely. I frequently use the acoustic and/or treble equalizer mode in my iPod with the UM2's. They sound just right. Some people complain about sibilance with these IEM's. I have sometimes experienced it with certain soprano singers but it is recording dependent.
Would I buy them again? without a doubt.

 

[mrdeadfolx]

The UM2's do not have rolled off highs at all in my opinion. In fact they are very forward without being shrill. Great IEMs.

 

[monolith]

They're not especially rolled off in the highs, no. I think they have a little hump in the midbass which might give this impression though. When switching from my ER-4Ps, the highs are certainly less prominent, but I believe the main difference between the two is bass presentation rather than treble presentation.

Often people seem to mistake accented frequencies at one extreme of the spectrum for rolled off frequencies at other ends. It's impossible to listen to a single pair of headphones and make this sort of comment about their frequency reponse unless you're listening to test tones.

 

[Podtweaker]

Thanks for your replies. I've been a little busy the last few days, so today is the first chance I've had to check for responses. I ordered a pair today from a local optical & audiology store. I debated having custom earmolds made , but I actually prefer the comply tips that I was using with my Shure e4c(?).

 

[oicdn]

I've owned them twice...and for some reason I keep selling them, and regretting it.

 

[monolith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Podtweaker /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for your replies. I've been a little busy the last few days, so today is the first chance I've had to check for responses. I ordered a pair today from a local optical & audiology store. I debated having custom earmolds made , but I actually prefer the comply tips that I was using with my Shure e4c(?).

Comply tips are nice, but I've found the UM2s sound better with Shure black "olive" foamies, and I've seen several people agree. Of course, YMMV.

 

[Spyro]

I had UM1's and did not care for them. They sounded bland and veiled to me. Do the UM2's give you more than just the added bass factor?

How would you compare the bass with either SE530 or TFP?

Lastly, do these dual drivers compete more with Super Fi Pro or with SE530/TFP? Or maybe in between?

 

[fredman22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyro /img/forum/go_quote.gif I had UM1's and did not care for them. They sounded bland and veiled to me. Do the UM2's give you more than just the added bass factor? How would you compare the bass with either SE530 or TFP? Lastly, do these dual drivers compete more with Super Fi Pro or with SE530/TFP? Or maybe in between?

Not having heard UM1s, I can't really say for sure, but if you found UM1s bland/veiled, I don't think anything the UM2s do will change that. I've noticed a trend that if the bloat/veiled sound does not improve for you after the first few days with UMs, it's probably not going to(!). The most consistent I've heard is that UM2s compare well with e5*/SE5* series. I've not heard SE530s or SE420s, but had a pair or e4c and found THEM quite bland and a little sterile compared to the UM2s - but sonically competent (just different preferences, IMO). Good luck.

 

[SiBurning]

Not fair comparing the shure e4 which sounds more like a senheisser k701 or etymotic--nothing like the shure 5 or um2. The shure 5 is a great comparison to the um2--they sound quite similar. They're both hard and lack sublety, so neither works well with foam tips which just mush the sound more. By the way, I only use the shure foamies these days. Got a pair at the 2006 national meet that are still holding up well. Yes, they're over 2 years old and just fine. I don't care for either iem, but think the shure has fewer flaws. In the Shure's favor, it does a better job with harmonics and has much better separation of frequencies. It's particularly good (relatively) with simple acoustic music, like solo piano. The one thing that makes the Westone stand out is a visceral quality no other iem can match. I can actually feel the bass pounding through my bones. (Maybe my bones are just the right length for resonance.) Probably due to the particular tuning of the heavy bass. This makes the Westone a relevant candidate for some people and certain types of music, while the Shure has little I can recommend today.

The original question about highs is hard to answer because the Westone is so in your face, and highs are a subtle thing. Like the pimped out bass that engulfs much of the midrange, it has presence that overwhelms the highs.