[pdupiano]

after reading the first few pages and the last it seems like the um3x does the following against the w3's:

1)less bass but more accurate
2)better presentation of the mids
3) lowered the highs

and therefore......built the se530's

I could very well be wrong, but thats the conclusion i can draw from everyone's comments... but we'll see once i get a pair to try myself. I'm pretty curious now

 

[Zalithian]

Well, maybe not so much sparkle from the PFE's in how you're thinking - I guess it could be better stated as treble presentation when compared to the UM3X. I don't think the PFE's sound the same as the IE8's in that regard as the IE8's seem more up front to me when it comes to the highs. The IE8's highs were definitely the most "in your face" for sure. In regards to polar opposites I mostly meant in the bass end but the vocals on the IE8 and PFE are quite different also (at least with greys). In terms of high end presentation the UM3X's share more in common with the PFE's but are clearly different from both the IE8's and PFE's. I guess sparkle wasn't the right word for the PFE's highs - but more balanced and crisper sounding than some of my cheaper IEMS.

If I had to rank the forwardness of the treble it would be IE8 - PFE - UM3X but in terms of treble detail the UM3X is probably the best because it seems more energetic while being laid back in that regard. Weird, I know. Not sure how to explain it properly. Perhaps it's a bit sharper sounding to my ears. To me the PFE's with grey filters seem a bit dull compared to the UM3X's. I'm not sure what it is. The PFE's are harder to drive but it's not really like volume is the issue when A/Bing them.

With the IE8 I used mostly used either the SS Sony Hybrids or small/large foamies that came with them. I also use the small silicon tips for the PFE's if that makes a difference for you.

I'm also mostly using these on my D2 which is a bit brighter than my Sony by default - and I think you use a Sony right? That might be another reason for the difference in how we're perceiving the highs. If you're EQing that could do it to. I personally prefer BBE on my D2 or I think it sounds a bit boring. I use BBE 3 and maybe that's giving the PFE's what I would call sparkle opposed to my A818 which all I do is use Clear Bass 3 with the greys - and the highs don't have the same impact to me.

Hopefully someone else can explain it better than I can - but the highs on the UM3X are pretty unique based on what I have heard previously. If it is the same as the ES3X's - or close, hopefully someone can explain how that sounds because I'm failing at it

 

[toughnut]

I have totally different experience with IE8's high though. Even after 400+ hours burn in, the high doesnt sound forward at all. Not mentioning the lack of sparkle. I even rate it as recessed in my past comparison with TF10P and CK100. It actually blended well into background, something similar to CK100 after long burn in.

 

[Jensen]

Sounds like Westone fixed all the problems with the W3 and the reasons I preferred the SE530 over them.

Still, I learned my lesson with the W3. I bought into it early and was one of the first people to bring up the sibilance/fit issues that ultimately led to me getting rid of them. Think I'll keep saving up for the UE 11's!

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jensen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sounds like Westone fixed all the problems with the W3 and the reasons I preferred the SE530 over them. Still, I learned my lesson with the W3. I bought into it early and was one of the first people to bring up the sibilance/fit issues that ultimately led to me getting rid of them. Think I'll keep saving up for the UE 11's!

why not ES3X? you'll have them sooner and FWIR they are at least as good, for considerably less money. thats the direction i'm going. UE11 never really appealed to me. was only ACS T1, UE10 or ES3X and ES3X has won the day, although at this late stage the new customs by jerry harvey are interesting. all the same I think my decision to buy UM3X to use with my UM56 as a last precaution to going full custom with ES3X is sound. cant wait; reading this thread is killing me while I wait. i'll be able to compare directly SE530 with UM3X and fresh memory of W3

 

[musicmind]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano /img/forum/go_quote.gif after reading the first few pages and the last it seems like the um3x does the following against the w3's: 1)less bass but more accurate 2)better presentation of the mids 3) lowered the highs and therefore......built the se530's I could very well be wrong, but thats the conclusion i can draw from everyone's comments... but we'll see once i get a pair to try myself. I'm pretty curious now

According to Spyro's impressions it has a lot more treble detail than the SE530 while still having a smoother sound overall.

 

[qusp]

yeah, they sound like everything you wanted SE530 to be. which is great because I love my SE530 and still use them pretty regularly for the amazing mids, so if UM3X can get the mids as good, while improving on soundstage, highs and tightening up the bass, then I think i'll be in heaven. sounds kinda like W3, SE530 and IE8 had a got together while ER4S watched and this is the love child

 

[cn11]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toughnut /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have totally different experience with IE8's high though. Even after 400+ hours burn in, the high doesnt sound forward at all. Not mentioning the lack of sparkle. I even rate it as recessed in my past comparison with TF10P and CK100. It actually blended well into background, something similar to CK100 after long burn in.

I would say I hear the IE8 treble like you do. I wouldn't classify it as sparkly either, but still remaining very detailed. The earphones I had that I would consider 'sparkly' in the treble were the TF10 and Denon C700. Atrio V2 almost, but their treble is a tiny bit harsh at the same time. Neither the C700 or TF10 were harsh to me in the high end while having that nice shimmer to it. The PFE's were very extended in the treble, and I would say from what I remember had an aspect of sparkle to them too.

With the IE8's I guess I'd kind of describe it as a little more dark or recessed in the treble, or maybe it's that there's a little less 'energy' there. It's hard to describe since it's talking about the character of the treble presentation and when all phones have about the same level of detail that you hear, it's getting down to the subtlest nuances. It sounds to me like the UM3X is somewhere between the IE8 and PFE, and other treble kings, in its presentation.

 

[soozieq]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zalithian /img/forum/go_quote.gif The IE8's highs were definitely the most "in your face" for sure.

I didn't just use my Sony dap, I used my Touch 2G as well (both with no EQ applied), and still the treble was the least pronounced frequency to my ears. Lots of detail, but definitely no sparkle. Clearly we hear the IE8 highs very differently because the PFE treble was so much more sparkly to me. I guess this is another classic example of how we all hear things slightly differently from each other

 

[toughnut]

Julie, when is your UM3X ETA? Hope to hear from u soon and of course from others too.

cn11, not getting it? From your current collection, look like BA iem nonexistent

 

[soozieq]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toughnut /img/forum/go_quote.gif Julie, when is your UM3X ETA? Hope to hear from u soon and of course from others too.

I'm hoping they'll land in the UK by Wednesday or Thursday.

If not, I'm going to start strip-searching every member of Parcelforce

 

[sennmann]

hey guys i am not sure if i should buy the um3x. an argument speaking against to buy is that i already have the w3. but what i am still looking for is the In-Ear made for hearing rock music like older songs of rise against, strike anywhere, thursday, and kinda that stuff. so i miss a bit the forwarded mids at the w3, but i like the highs, maybe a bit less basspresence would be better! Also the W3 sounds a bit muffled and dumb. is the Um3x more brilliant? would you say that the um3x is suitable for me; what do you think? also the w3 is kind of tireing with the time maybe because of the strong bass and the extended highs?
iam curios to hear what you tell!
thanks for your answers

 

[qusp]

^^if the W3 is sounding muffled and dumb, there is something else wrong with your setup that new IEMs wont fix IMO

 

[cn11]

Quote:

Originally Posted by toughnut /img/forum/go_quote.gif cn11, not getting it? From your current collection, look like BA iem nonexistent

Yep. So far in my audio quest I've gravitated to dynamics more. The one BA that I liked the most so far was the TF10 (with the Image X10 being very close). I'll keep a watch on impressions/reviews of the UM3X to see if I want to give another armature a try....

 

[Flavio T]

Quote:

Originally Posted by soozieq /img/forum/go_quote.gif I guess this is another classic example of how we all hear things slightly differently from each other

x2

I already have my favorite and this will always be personal. Much more than the full-size headphones because of (mis)matching nozzle + earpiece shape and size with your outer and inner ear anatomy.

Oh yes, and the many different eartip choices...

For those UM2 previous or current owners it's a much easier description of the UM3X: same exact casing, same sound signature, more detail than UM2 with slightly more extended highs than the UM2 but less than the W3. It's a more pure product in comparison to the W3, which is more tweaked and optimized for playback but in the end, your ears will always have to be the judge. As soozieq stated, everyone will have their own unique "hearing curve" that will match this or that better. For UM2 lovers, UM3X is a no brainer in my opinion.

For those looking for more sparkle and brightness on the high end than the UM2 delivered, the W3. Fit and comfort wise, your ear, again, will need to answer that.