What do you think of this.....SE530 / UE10
Sep 27, 2007 at 6:19 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 19

DavidMahler

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Posts
4,124
Likes
344
I spoke to an audiophile whom I respect and he told me something which makes sense.....but I want to verify it with you guys. He said that for long extended listening sessions at a loud volume the SE530s are preferable to the UE10 Pro because the rolled off highs will more than likely protect my high frequency hearing better than the UE10s. He commented that the Rolled off treble was developed by Shure with that specific purpose because the orignal consumers of their IEMs were touring musicians. He stated further that when musicians do a 2 hour show they need the treble slightly reduced so that they don't get listener fatigue. Daily fatigue could cause severe hearing loss in the upper register and Shure was conscious of this when implementing the rolled off highs.

What do you think of this notion. If it is absolutely true I may prefer my Shure SE530s even though the sound isn't as desirable.
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 6:57 PM Post #2 of 19

rlanger

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Posts
1,731
Likes
201
Location
Japan
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I spoke to an audiophile whom I respect and he told me something which makes sense.....but I want to verify it with you guys. He said that for long extended listening sessions at a loud volume the SE530s are preferable to the UE10 Pro because the rolled off highs will more than likely protect my high frequency hearing better than the UE10s. He commented that the Rolled off treble was developed by Shure with that specific purpose because the orignal consumers of their IEMs were touring musicians. He stated further that when musicians do a 2 hour show they need the treble slightly reduced so that they don't get listener fatigue. Daily fatigue could cause severe hearing loss in the upper register and Shure was conscious of this when implementing the rolled off highs.

What do you think of this notion. If it is absolutely true I may prefer my Shure SE530s even though the sound isn't as desirable.



Certainly sounds reasonable enough. I personally have trouble listening to some Grados or Ultrasones because of the fatigue they cause from their upfront treble presentation.

Whether or not that could cause hearing damage over the long term, I'm not quite sure. Fortunately, I'm already a Senn/Shure guy!
icon10.gif
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 7:26 PM Post #3 of 19

DavidMahler

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Posts
4,124
Likes
344
Quote:

Originally Posted by rlanger /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Certainly sounds reasonable enough. I personally have trouble listening to some Grados or Ultrasones because of the fatigue they cause from their upfront treble presentation.

Whether or not that could cause hearing damage over the long term, I'm not quite sure. Fortunately, I'm already a Senn/Shure guy!
icon10.gif



do you feel being a sennheiser fan would easily make you a shure fan?
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 11:04 PM Post #5 of 19

jinx20001

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Posts
2,639
Likes
20
i always knew from the start that shure held back the highs for a reason, lots of people claim its a 'problem' the shures have, but it is not a problem, they are designed that way.

i believe the reason behind this is absolutely true what has been said. humans are a lot more sensitive to higher frequencies than lower frequencies as lower frequencies are more felt than heard.
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 11:15 PM Post #6 of 19

Friskyseal

Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Posts
73
Likes
17
Location
-
i don't know if that's accurate. while i understand that high frequencies can sound "sharper" to the ear and are more fatiguing...i'm not sure that ear fatigue necessarily equals hearing loss. doesn't hearing loss have purely to do with volume/decibel pressure and nothing else? therefore, while loud bass might be more tolerable, it can just as easily damage your hearing at the right volume level. couldn't that make the shures worse for your hearing, because they allow you to listen louder for longer periods of time?
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 11:22 PM Post #7 of 19

jinx20001

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Posts
2,639
Likes
20
Quote:

Originally Posted by Friskyseal /img/forum/go_quote.gif
i don't know if that's accurate. while i understand that high frequencies can sound "sharper" to the ear and are more fatiguing...i'm not sure that ear fatigue necessarily equals hearing loss. doesn't hearing loss have purely to do with volume/decibel pressure and nothing else? therefore, while loud bass might be more tolerable, it can just as easily damage your hearing at the right volume level.


you have the right idea but lets put it this way, you can listen to a 1000 watt sub without it hurting your ears really, if you have 1000watt mids or highs at that volume you could be in trouble, which is why the sub is usually the most powerful part of a sound system.

also i dont know about anybody else, but i could listen to earphones quetly but after a while i get ear ache so maybe it is more the time used mixed with volume
 
Sep 27, 2007 at 11:49 PM Post #8 of 19

rlanger

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Posts
1,731
Likes
201
Location
Japan
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
do you feel being a sennheiser fan would easily make you a shure fan?


Actually, it's the other way around. I was a fan of the E500s first, before I had even tried the Senns.
 
Sep 28, 2007 at 2:57 AM Post #9 of 19

Logman

Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Posts
68
Likes
0
Somewhere in this forum there is a post with another theory for the rolled off highs on the E500's. The thought was that Shure did this to better match with the sound out of the ipod headphone jack. Having tried my E500's and a few other headphones directly out of the ipod's headphone jack, I think there may be some merit to this. The highs are just a little too bright for my taste when I listen through a decent set of cans.
 
Sep 28, 2007 at 5:05 AM Post #11 of 19

Agent Kang

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Posts
739
Likes
12
Quote:

Originally Posted by edwardsean /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The hole I see in this logic is just that UE also designs their IEM sound signature with touring musicians in mind.


The fact that UE also targets the touring musicians as a viable market does not make the OP's argument any less logical. UE could simply be designing their IEM with an alternate set of criteria for product differentiation (e.g., neutrality).
 
Sep 28, 2007 at 7:04 AM Post #12 of 19

HeadphoneAddict

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Posts
17,429
Likes
797
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
do you feel being a sennheiser fan would easily make you a shure fan?


I think my Shure SE500's sound signature reminds me of my Sennheiser HD600 (stock cable)

Smilarly, my Denon AH0C700's remind me of my Ultrasone HFI700's.
 
Sep 28, 2007 at 4:14 PM Post #13 of 19

Dexter Morgan

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Posts
719
Likes
115
Very interesting topic, thanks to the OP. I've wondered the same thing - I'm constantly worrying about preserving my hearing. Whenever something is too loud, it's always the treble that is responsible for my discomfort. But that doesn't necessarily mean anything. I guess the big question is whether or not daily fatigue equals hearing loss, speaking from a purely scientific/evidence-based perspective. I think the OP was more interested in this question, not so much theories from fanboys on how Shure must have planned this in their mighty wisdom and infallible (Don't get me wrong, Shure rocks..... belligerent fanboys do not). Of course, if someone knows for a fact that Shure did this on purpose for this reason (i.e. Sugarfried), then that's a compelling piece of information.

So are there any hearing loss experts out there? If it's true that less treble = less fatigue = less hearing loss, there's still a potential problem. As someone pointed out, I might turn up the volume more to hear the treble, which might cause me to listen at a louder volume overall than I would have with more balanced treble. Also, can someone explain what decibel levels are composed of? What creates a loud sound? Someone mentioned pressure being a factor...
 
Sep 28, 2007 at 5:17 PM Post #14 of 19

jinx20001

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Posts
2,639
Likes
20
Its not a case of wether fanboys think this that and the other or wether it can be proven, the point is the highs are held back, shure knows this because they are not stupid, we are simply debating the reasoning behind this.

And that is because too many people claim rolled highs is immediately bad when in fact it could be more good than we all expect.

On the decibel levels i believe (yes me, this is not fact) that most sounds that are considered loud are mid and higher frequency sounds, wether it be jet engines or rock concerts...the simple fact is humans hear mids and mid highs better (that is fact) so in theory it would be the loud mids and highs that cause more damage as loud bass is felt rather than heard.
 
Sep 29, 2007 at 1:53 AM Post #15 of 19

Dexter Morgan

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Posts
719
Likes
115
Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx20001 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Its not a case of wether fanboys think this that and the other or wether it can be proven, the point is the highs are held back, shure knows this because they are not stupid, we are simply debating the reasoning behind this.


The point is you are perpetually starting with a conclusion, then searching for evidence to back that up, when it should be the other way around. It's like trying to have a nuanced discussion on political affairs with a knee-jerk conservative or liberal. As long as you realize you're not going to convince many people to take you seriously by acting that way.

If you wish to remain in your state of belligerence, though, that's cool. It's probably fun. You might make a better impression by focusing on punctuation. I have noticed your writing skills improve since you first started posting on head-fi months ago. In fact, it's quite impressive. I think you may be ready to start using periods in your punctuation. Maybe just start with one per post
wink.gif


I realize this might read as really smug or insulting. It kind of is, I guess, but I honestly mean no insult. I just couldn't resist making the joke. You honestly seem like a real sweet kid, and I'm only teasing in fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx20001 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
On the decibel levels i believe (yes me, this is not fact) that most sounds that are considered loud are mid and higher frequency sounds, wether it be jet engines or rock concerts...the simple fact is humans hear mids and mid highs better (that is fact) so in theory it would be the loud mids and highs that cause more damage as loud bass is felt rather than heard.


Yeah, this makes sense, but I was hoping for more reliable information than your intuition/reasoning. And yeah, I didn't intend for it to sound like I was saying we can't debate theories. That's part of the Head-Fi! But I'm also saying let's try to find some real information here, because it's worth it to find out for sure. This is significant, because this is hearing loss. No headphone in the world sounds good when you're deaf. So I'd like to know for sure if I'm at less risk of hearing loss when I use my 530s.

I can PM Sugarfried myself and ask him about it, but I'd prefer if someone else did it. He's been so helpful to me lately, I don't want to outwear my welcome!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top