[rawrster]

I may not have the UM3X but I do have multiple ES cables. One of them I have removed the plastic tube and the memory wire. The plastic tube is quite easy and just take a small scissor or any object you can use to cut it. the memory wire I cut off as much as I could. Just be sure not to cut the cable when cutting off the tube. It probably takes 5-10 minutes and is much more comfortable after esp if you wear glasses like I do and don't like memory wire.

 

[shane55]

Quote:

I may not have the UM3X but I do have multiple ES cables. One of them I have removed the plastic tube and the memory wire. The plastic tube is quite easy and just take a small scissor or any object you can use to cut it. the memory wire I cut off as much as I could. Just be sure not to cut the cable when cutting off the tube. It probably takes 5-10 minutes and is much more comfortable after esp if you wear glasses like I do and don't like memory wire.

Thanks... good to know. If I do get these, and assuming I like and will keep them, this technique would be a must. To say I don't like memory wire, or the plastic that usually covers them, is a huge understatement. I too am a glasses wearer and it's uncomfortable and noisy.
 
shane
 

 

[rawrster]

When I get my other ES cable back I'm going to do the same. A friend has the other one for the time being. It definitely greatly increased the comfort to similar levels of the universal ES cable. The only bad thing about cutting off the plastic tube is that you can't remove the wire completely so I cut it to be even with the place where the pins are. I was tempted to buy a cable off ebay with no memory wire but decided just to do this instead and worse case scenario I'm out ~30 which is cheaper than the cables on ebay.

 

[ovrclkd]

Quote:

 
This plastic cover on the cable really annoys my ears, any of you ever tried to remove it? 

 
Before you chance damaging a very fragile cable .... Keep the plastic tube on and bend it away from your ear. It is meant to guide the cable up and over not hang on your ear, and I believe it may help protect jacks and plugs for those of us with removables. Check an artist using monitors with guides during a performance, you'll see the tubing away from the body. IMO they would be longer if the design intention was ear hooks. Just my 2 cents ........  and I wear glasses.

 

[shane55]

Quote:

Before you chance damaging a very fragile cable .... Keep the plastic tube on and bend it away from your ear. It is meant to guide the cable up and over not hang on your ear, and I believe it may help protect jacks and plugs for those of us with removables. Check an artist using monitors with guides during a performance, you'll see the tubing away from the body. IMO they would be longer if the design intention was ear hooks. Just my 2 cents ........  and I wear glasses.

Yeah... no can do. If the cable doesn't go behind the ear, I don't wear it. I work out and do other activities that would preclude me from wearing the cable out, away from my head. The plastic casing and wire come off, or obviously these are not for me.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Before you chance damaging a very fragile cable .... Keep the plastic tube on and bend it away from your ear. It is meant to guide the cable up and over not hang on your ear, and I believe it may help protect jacks and plugs for those of us with removables. Check an artist using monitors with guides during a performance, you'll see the tubing away from the body. IMO they would be longer if the design intention was ear hooks. Just my 2 cents ........  and I wear glasses.

 
Quote:

Yeah... no can do. If the cable doesn't go behind the ear, I don't wear it. I work out and do other activities that would preclude me from wearing the cable out, away from my head. The plastic casing and wire come off, or obviously these are not for me.

I also wear glasses. Last year, when I got me ES3X, which have the same cable as the new UM3X, I found the memory wire a little awkward at first but it very soon became a non-issue and I've had absolutely no problems or discomfort ever since. In fact, when I recently had the IE8, SM3 & CK100, one thing that I did miss was precisely the memory wire I'm so used to with my ES3X, which helps keep the (universal IEM) earpieces & cables in place, specially when moving one's head a lot or vigorously. The IE8's ear-guides are removable but when I tried them, they didn't quite do the job they were meant to as well as the Westone (ES) cables, so I decided not to use them.

 

[flexium]

Quote:

Edited 9-23:  I am an idiot and did not read Flexium's post very well.  I thought he wanted to use an amp with a portable source and his UM3X. 
 
Just disregard everything below,  I'll leave it for those who might see the humor in it.
 

What are you using for a source and what file types? 
 
I certainly would not waste my money on a dac for the UM3X.  They are very revealing phones yet sound just fine with a good source.  Nano 4G and Touch 2G are very good.  A $100 to $200 dac IMO will not get you that much more if any increase in SQ, just different. 
 
But it is your $ and I have gone down that road myself once.  Good luck.

No worries. UM3x is not my only phone. I also have HD580 and have plans to try out dt880 in the future. I certainly don't want my source to be limiting factor sound. 

 
Quote:

I would be safe to assume that if flexium's looking at the uDAC that his source is a computer. I've found that even a PCM2702E equipped DAC improves the sound over the headphone out of my Macbook Pro or iMac, even with 320K MP3 and 256K AAC files.  The uDAC he asked about is more detailed and spacious, with better micro-detail and soundstage with my UM3X than any of my three PCM2702E equipped pieces of gear that I still like and kept (EF2, 3MOVE, XM5).  It's a great bang for the buck.
 
The uDAC to my ears beats many iPods in sound as well.  I found the iPod Touch 2G to sound a little grainy and harsh, and the 4G Nano to sound slightly bright or make sibilance worse in some earphones; although I do like the headphone out jack of the iPhone 3G, 3GS, and 4, and the 3G Nano.  Your suggestion to get an iPod instead of listening through the computer with a nicer DAC may not be the right move for him, if what he really wants is better sounding computer audio.
 
Now, he did ask, "Would a higher end Dac improve the sound much?"  In response I'd have to say that jumping to a $200, $300, or even $400 DAC/amp will only result in minute/small improvements over the gains obtained from the cheaper uDAC (or uDAC-2 which is even better).  In that case, doubling the cost only results in a few percentage points improvement in sound.  That may be worth it to some people, and not to others.  So I understand your reluctance to urge him on to spend more.  I just wouldn't encourage him to live with the stock audio card that the computer came with if there is decent priced gear that will improve his enjoyment.
 
Today I was listening to several Westone IEM with some friends on their Emotiva CD/Apache amp desktop rig, plus my iPad and iPhone 4 with TWag LOD and Pico Slim, and the iPhone 4 headphone out.  It was surprising that the iOS device with Pico Slim was warmer and punchier sounding than the very costly desktop rig, yet keeping up in areas of ambience and detail.  Proof that you don't have to spend a lot of money to get good synergy with certain IEM.  On the other hand, that same Pico Slim isn't going to drive a pair of HD600 or HD800 as well as the Apache.  
 
The iPhone 4 headphone out also had slightly less bass extension, presence, wamth, detail and soundstage vs the iPhone 4 or iPad with the Pico Slim.  But the headphone out was not bad at all, and I could see where someone would say an amp is not worth it.  But in the end the amped iPhone/iPad was more immersive, transparent and realistic sounding than right out of their headphone jack.  All three of us were convinced that the differences were not huge, but they were still unmistakable and rewarding.

Sorry I have been reading at other places last couple of days. and have not seen these replies. But thank you for a detailed response. Your assumption is correct. I am playing music from computer and the reason I need a dac at all is the statics noise coming from my computer(probably). 
 
I have decided on asking MisterX to build me a Gamma-2. I think that pretty much outclass uDac but I also question if I will be able to hear the difference of a higher quality dac since my music file are not all lossless(let's save the lossless discussion for another day). Hopefully, when I receive the dac, I can come back and say that it was worth it. If it is not, I am pretty confident that I can sell it without too much loss and switch to a much cheaper option like uDac. Gamma 2 is pretty popular in the FS forum from what I have seen.
 
 
 
Coming back to the topic of UM3x, it looks like westone is having some quality problem with the new um3x with removable cable. I hope the issues are resolved soon for those of you that are dealing with westone. Also regarding the cable, westone's cable are actually consider top notched despite of how fragile they look. 
 

 

[Rip N' Burn]

After listing to my UM3X for a few weeks I've concluded that it is a very different beast from my other iems. It doesn't have a midbass hump but it has a deep impact and excellent low end extension. Mids are forward but vocals are even more forward. It feels like singers are singing right in the middle of my head and the rest of the music is enveloped in a 3D headstage. The 3D imaging is phenomenal. The highs are almost identical the IE8's. Soft with excellent extension so it's not prone to sibilance and won't create listener fatigue. The major complaint about the UM3X is that it sounds too constricted and I agree with statement when using tips with narrow openings. Even my UM56 tips didn't alleviate the problem. It sounds more open using the sensorcom tips and that is when I realized how good they really are. If I got them with just the foam tips like when they originally started to ship, I would have sold them off quickly.  The separation and details are the best I've heard from any of my universal iems except for possibly the Etymotic ER4B but I sold them a while ago. To me, it's one of those iems that people would either love or hate. That UM3X vs. SM3 thread is a joke. I own both and the SM3 is not vastly superior to the UM3X likes it's made out to be in that thread. They excel in different areas but one doesn't blow away the other.

 

[Yuceka]

It was kind of refreshing to read this because when I saw that thread, I thought I might have made a huge mistake by buying UM3X, instead of SM3 
 
Quote:

That UM3X vs. SM3 thread is a joke. I own both and the SM3 is not vastly superior to the UM3X likes it's made out to be in that thread. They excel in different areas but one doesn't blow away the other.

 

[Rip N' Burn]

It was done at a time when the SM3 was the FOTM. The small handful of people that owned them at the time did an excellent job at hyping them to unrealistic proportions. What I mean by unrealistic is that it had no flaws in terms of sound. There were some build issues in the beginning. As a result some people who actually haven't heard them started to mention that they were the best universal iem. After some time, more people listened to them and then the flaws started to appear. Go figure. The common complaints now are that it is veiled similar to the IE8 and it has recessed highs. The one thing that surprises me with the SM3 is that it produces bass similar to dynamic driver iems.
Quote:

It was kind of refreshing to read this because when I saw that thread, I thought I might have made a huge mistake by buying UM3X, instead of SM3 
 

 

[mvw2]

 

Quote:Originally Posted by Rip N' Burn 

If I got them with just the foam tips like when they originally started to ship, I would have sold them off quickly.  The separation and details are the best I've heard from any of my universal iems except for possibly the Etymotic ER4B but I sold them a while ago. To me, it's one of those iems that people would either love or hate.

 

 
Yep, I was not a fan of the stock tips that came with the UM3X.  I quickly went over the to Shure Olive tips, and the UM3X much improved.  The stock Comply tips just sucked out too much of the high and some of the midrange plus it seemed to add this weird midbass hump (has on more than one IEM brand/model).  Now the long Comply is interesting and does provide a different sound, but it's just weird to wear an IEM that's designed to tuck in the ear way out of the ear like that.
 
The very close up presentation is hard for some people to take.  It does create an outstanding sound stage but pretty much puts the singer right in front of your nose, very claustrophobic to some people.

 

[Photofan1986]

 
Quote:

The common complaints now are that it is veiled similar to the IE8 and it has recessed highs.

No way their "veil" can be compared with the one on the IE8. And their highs are not recessed, it's the upper mids that are recessed

 

[DaeO]

I have followed both of the SM3 threads (the first one was closed) from the start (which is over 4000 replies) and this one for a while, as I wanted to evaluate these 2 contenders as my next purchase.
 
I can honestly say that your evaluation bears no resembalance to how those threads have panned out IMO. 
 
Quote:

It was done at a time when the SM3 was the FOTM. The small handful of people that owned them at the time did an excellent job at hyping them to unrealistic proportions. What I mean by unrealistic is that it had no flaws in terms of sound. There were some build issues in the beginning. As a result some people who actually haven't heard them started to mention that they were the best universal iem. After some time, more people listened to them and then the flaws started to appear. Go figure. The common complaints now are that it is veiled similar to the IE8 and it has recessed highs. The one thing that surprises me with the SM3 is that it produces bass similar to dynamic driver iems.

 

[Rip N' Burn]

I mentioned the 'veil' because the IE8 got the same treatment as the SM3. In the beginning it was the best and then came the veil. Maybe a different type of veil but that's purely subjective.  I forgot about the recessed upper mids as well but from the thread, I clearly remember a bunch of people mentioning the recessed highs. I don't hear about that too much anymore. The 'veil' still dominates as the major flaw for the SM3.
 
Quote:

 
No way their "veil" can be compared with the one on the IE8. And their highs are not recessed, it's the upper mids that are recessed

 

[Photofan1986]

I certainly agree with you regarding the FOTM.