Is the Etymotic Research ER3SE worth it?

[kdracu]

From what i gathered searching in this forum everyone is using ers4 is the 3 worth buying?

 

[Kouioui]

Not everyone. I think the ER4s are overpriced but there's some controversy over balanced armature vs dynamic drivers used in the 3SE and 2SE. I tried both and prefer the 3SEs as they have better imaging and transient response vs the richer bass of the 2SE. If you compare the FR graphs from crinacle the 4SR and 3SE are nearly identical.

They both benefit greatly by applying Harman target parametric EQ. If you're not going to use EQ the XR models are better. Deep ear insertion takes a few days to get used to but once you do they are quite comfortable.

For price and value consideration, the award goes to the ER3SE as I picked up mine for $81 on Amazon Warehouse. Paid $96 for the ER2SEs but returned them for a full refund. Both pairs looked brand new or had new tips installed.

 

[kdracu]

Thanks.

 

[sejarzo]

I picked up a pair of opened but unused ER3SEs last week via Ebay for $90 shipped and I am thoroughly pleased. Years ago, I had the original ER4P and while I appreciated the detail, I found the sound to be overly "hard" for lack of a better term. I think I gave away a pair of the ER6i, which I thought was a good value back then.

I probably would slightly prefer the ER3XR, but because I knew that I would EQ either, it's simply a matter of adding another 2-3 dB or so under roughly 150 Hz for the ER3SE. I find the Harman target bump centered at 2700 Hz to be overly aggressive with any IEM, so I always knock that back.

My PEQ for the ER3SE is pretty simple.

#1: Low shelf, Center frequency = 120 Hz, Gain = +4 dB, Q = 0.70
#2: Peak, Center frequency = 2700 Hz, Gain = - 5 dB, Q = 0.6

Regarding insertion, my canals have a relatively wide opening but then a turn not very far in. As such, any of the Ety tips are a total non-starter for me as they will not get far enough in to either seal or even stay in place, even when I had the ER6i which was probably the lightest IEM I ever owned.

I use either large Comply T100s or large Klipsch oval silicone tips with the ER3E.

 

[JohnYang1997]

I picked up a pair of opened but unused ER3SEs last week via Ebay for $90 shipped and I am thoroughly pleased. Years ago, I had the original ER4P and while I appreciated the detail, I found the sound to be overly "hard" for lack of a better term. I think I gave away a pair of the ER6i, which I thought was a good value back then.

I probably would slightly prefer the ER3XR, but because I knew that I would EQ either, it's simply a matter of adding another 2-3 dB or so under roughly 150 Hz for the ER3SE. I find the Harman target bump centered at 2700 Hz to be overly aggressive with any IEM, so I always knock that back.

My PEQ for the ER3SE is pretty simple.

#1: Low shelf, Center frequency = 120 Hz, Gain = +4 dB, Q = 0.70
#2: Peak, Center frequency = 2700 Hz, Gain = - 5 dB, Q = 0.6

View attachment 49076

Regarding insertion, my canals have a relatively wide opening but then a turn not very far in. As such, any of the Ety tips are a total non-starter for me as they will not get far enough in to either seal or even stay in place, even when I had the ER6i which was probably the lightest IEM I ever owned.

I use either large Comply T100s or large Klipsch oval silicone tips with the ER3E.

Oh well. What you did is completely removed the tuning of etymotics...

 

[JohnYang1997]

Thanks.

Well. I don't ever recommend the Harman target for etymotics.
Firstly I highly recommend the er2se with stock foam tips. They sound really good. If you don't want to mess with 3 flanges or the PtoS adapter I am talking later. This is the best choice

Then there's er3. Er3se is basically er4sr with less series resistance that you can add back on via PtoS adapter. The difference is er4 is brighter than stock er3.
Er3se vs er3xr, if you want the most accurate sound that even most studios don't have then go er3se+ PtoS. If you want a generic treated room with a pair of speakers then I recommend er3xr+ PtoS which gives a bit more bass thump.

 

[Kouioui]

Etymotic Diffuse Field vs Harman target is a matter of personal preference. As a musician, I wish to hear a reference studio monitor frequency response in a reference listening environment without disturbing others. I trust Dr. Olive's research to achieve this.

Acoustic engineer oratory1990 has published Harman IE settings for the ER4SR and those are what I use for the ER3SE. IEM specialist crinacle has taken measurements of the 3SE and 4SR and it's easy to see using his Graph Comparison Tool there's little difference in frequency response between them.

 

[JohnYang1997]

Etymotic Diffuse Field vs Harman target is a matter of personal preference. As a musician, I wish to hear a reference studio monitor frequency response in a reference listening environment without disturbing others. I trust Dr. Olive's research to achieve this.

Acoustic engineer oratory1990 has published Harman IE settings for the ER4SR and those are what I use for the ER3SE. IEM specialist crinacle has taken measurements of the 3SE and 4SR and it's easy to see using his Graph Comparison Tool there's little difference in frequency response between them.

I have read all the related paper and have discussed with the two online people you mentioned.
Don't want to write too long about this. In short, Etymotic target achieved the "reference monitor in well treated room" better than Harman Target. And there's absolutely no indication from either paper that that was the goal of the research. People made that up.

 

[Fregly]

For what it's worth I prefer the Er2se to the E3 and E4.

 

[Tks]

Not everyone. I think the ER4s are overpriced but there's some controversy over balanced armature vs dynamic drivers used in the 3SE and 2SE. I tried both and prefer the 3SEs as they have better imaging and transient response vs the richer bass of the 2SE.

Can you give me any material that would allow me to hear the difference between better and worse transient response for example? I have no idea what that could even mean >_>

 

[mkawa]

yah, usually about 140 on bh and amazon. huge deal.

only difference between er3se and er4se is: -the er3 series is not hand matched to 0.5db. the er3 is made in thailand. the er3 has a more microphonic thinner cable.

the er4sr sometimes goes down to 240 on amazon which is also a huge deal.

 

[sejarzo]

Oh well. What you did is completely removed the tuning of etymotics...

Correct, and for good reason. The tuning of Etymotics may be "correct" in theory, but it's wrong for the way that most music is recorded and mastered.

They excel in clarity, but certainly not in tonal balance. In order to hear music from acoustic instruments the way it sounds in live performance in the auditorium (of which I have extensive experience) or mastered on speakers, the low end must be boosted. There's a reason most IEMs are tuned with more low end than Etys.

Due to the shape of my ear/shallow canal, I need first and foremost a light IEM because the heavier ones simply drop out of my ear, and I absolutely hate most over-the-ear cabling. Ergo, the Etys with EQ are a very good solution versus the plethora of IEMs I have auditioned.

 

[sejarzo]

...IEM specialist crinacle has taken measurements of the 3SE and 4SR and it's easy to see using his Graph Comparison Tool there's little difference in frequency response between them.

I'd dare say the difference between them in that comparison is within the sample-to-sample variance for either individual model.

 

[sejarzo]

only difference between er3se and er4se is: -the er3 series is not hand matched to 0.5db. the er3 is made in thailand. the er3 has a more microphonic thinner cable.

Agreed. There's a reason they include that clip! That bothered me with old ER4 and ER6i and I assumed that they had resolved that better by now.

 

[sejarzo]

Can you give me any material that would allow me to hear the difference between better and worse transient response for example? I have no idea what that could even mean >_>

Well done recordings of a guitar string being plucked, or the impact of the mallets on the vibraphone, marimba, or other percussive sounds.

This is a good read on the terms many folks use to describe sound reproduction:

https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/tutorials/how-to-interpret-graphs/frequency-response/

 

[Fregly]

Correct, and for good reason. The tuning of Etymotics may be "correct" in theory, but it's wrong for the way that most music is recorded and mastered.

They excel in clarity, but certainly not in tonal balance. In order to hear music from acoustic instruments the way it sounds in live performance in the auditorium (of which I have extensive experience) or mastered on speakers, the low end must be boosted. There's a reason most IEMs are tuned with more low end than Etys.

Due to the shape of my ear/shallow canal, I need first and foremost a light IEM because the heavier ones simply drop out of my ear, and I absolutely hate most over-the-ear cabling. Ergo, the Etys are a very good solution versus the plethora of IEMs I have auditioned.

Well I find them the most true to instruments. Most boosted bass for supposed accuracy sound colored to me. Even audiophile offerings like Senn 650 have an obvious bloat, which overweight the lower instruments in an orchestra. I can hear the lowest notes on acoustic guitar pushed forward to create a kind of overhang, etc

 

[sejarzo]

Well I find them the most true to instruments. Most boosted bass for supposed accuracy sound colored to me. Even audiophile offerings like Senn 650 have an obvious bloat, which overweight the lower instruments in an orchestra. I can hear the lowest notes on acoustic guitar pushed forward to create a kind of overhang, etc

I agree about the HD650, though I have not heard the most recent iterations. I used the HD600 for many years because I thought it to be much more neutral in that regard, and I perceived the HD650 to be less detailed. On the other hand, I may have perceived the HD650 to be less detailed simply due to that low end bloat, which tends to mask perception of higher frequency detail (and not only for me.)

Curves for a number of high dollar multi-BA IEMs that are well-regarded on the headphone aficionado sites have 8-10 dB higher response in the sub-100 Hz region versus reference at 1 kHz. All of them sound like sh*t to me.

I'm using 4 dB boost on the low end, so that's only 1-2 dB more than the ER3XR provides versus the ER3SE.

Our son played classical alto sax in several top notch ensembles, so I often heard their performances of the same piece in a number of venues. Same players, same piece, different halls, different seats...much different tonal balance. Our daughter is an honor student in one of the country's top 5 speech, language, and hearing programs, and she's given me a lot of insight on the physical difference in ear canals after she spent a summer doing screenings.

To me, it is all about perception that results in an enjoyable experience, and in the case of IEMs, fit and comfort play a big role in that. I can't enjoy an IEM when one of the earpieces end up sitting on my shoulder every 10 minutes, can I?

I find your comment "most true to instruments" to be intriguing. What do you think about their reproduction of vocals?

 

[Kouioui]

To me, it is all about perception that results in an enjoyable experience

That sums up the entire thread very well. Find a sound signature you like and stick with it. It helps to start with transducers that are close to it and if you find an EQ profile that you enjoy, use it. Trying to find the average of what most people like is what the studies show. You could be on the extreme opposites of that average and it still is what you like to enjoy the music.

 

[sejarzo]

That sums up the entire thread very well. Find a sound signature you like and stick with it. ...

I would add "as much as possible." There are some good performances out there that really do need some individual adjustment.

 

[Kouioui]

There are some good performances out there that really do need some individual adjustment.

Mixing and mastering of the original recording is out of our control but nothing wrong with using EQ by the listener to try and adjust to their own preferences. I'm pleased that the 'circle of confusion' on their end is finally getting paid some attention.