Westone 3 impressions?

[catscratch]

Thanks for sharing your impressions catscratch, they concur with what I'm hearing. What do you think of the vocals presentation? That's the main reason why I finally decided to sell the W3, I think the reproduction of human voice is not natural at all and there's not enough emphasis put on the mids in general for my tastes. I'd even say the mids are pretty recessed compared to what I'm used to and it really hurts my enjoyment of these phones.

Right now I hear three things going on with vocals: 1) not enough treble extension which kills detail and texture 2) very rounded off leading/trailing edges which makes detail/texture less audible, and 3) too much emphasis on lower mids and upper bass, which makes the tone too warm. Net effect: vocals are too warm, too chesty or too husky, and also pretty veiled - fuzzy, with not enough texture. There is a definite subconscious urge to boost the mids to bring more detail out, though if there was more clarity I probably wouldn't feel that the mids are recessed.

Still, compared to what goes on in other canalphones, this isn't bad.

There is one big positive effect from all this: mp3 compression artifacts are a lot less audible! These are very forgiving headphones. There is this whole creamy, euphonic deal going on, sort of like an underdriven HD650 but a lot more open.

[deepak]

Right now I hear three things going on with vocals: 1) not enough treble extension which kills detail and texture 2) very rounded off leading/trailing edges which makes detail/texture less audible, and 3) too much emphasis on lower mids and upper bass, which makes the tone too warm. Net effect: vocals are too warm, too chesty or too husky, and also pretty veiled - fuzzy, with not enough texture. There is a definite subconscious urge to boost the mids to bring more detail out, though if there was more clarity I probably wouldn't feel that the mids are recessed.

Sounds like a HD650 \

[GPH]

Right now I hear three things going on with vocals: 1) not enough treble extension which kills detail and texture 2) very rounded off leading/trailing edges which makes detail/texture less audible, and 3) too much emphasis on lower mids and upper bass, which makes the tone too warm. Net effect: vocals are too warm, too chesty or too husky, and also pretty veiled - fuzzy, with not enough texture. There is a definite subconscious urge to boost the mids to bring more detail out, though if there was more clarity I probably wouldn't feel that the mids are recessed.

Still, compared to what goes on in other canalphones, this isn't bad.

There is one big positive effect from all this: mp3 compression artifacts are a lot less audible! These are very forgiving headphones. There is this whole creamy, euphonic deal going on, sort of like an underdriven HD650 but a lot more open.

Damnit, you put the words in my mouth. I wish I'd have that kind of skills in English to talk about sound.

I think you're right, it's not so much that the mids are recessed (well, they're a bit recessed), but more the fact that they severely lack clarity and the transition between upper bass and lower mids is poorly done.

[catscratch]

Sounds like a HD650 \

A poorly driven HD650. A well-driven one doesn't sound like that.

Still, the W3 doesn't sound lifeless or dull or excessively slow, or anything else that's usually associated with poorly-driven HD650s.

[MaloS]

Ya, I was wondering if that was my equipment or what...its like you don't hear explicit texture of things, but then all the different layers are there...I guess 'rounded' describes it correctly. I am always a bit slow on pin-pointing the exact characteristic that is wrong, especially when its not an obvious frequency response issue.

[deepak]

A poorly driven HD650. A well-driven one doesn't sound like that.

Still, the W3 doesn't sound lifeless or dull or excessively slow, or anything else that's usually associated with poorly-driven HD650s.

Nothing to do with the amp. Even with the best balanced dynamic amps running tubes at high voltage the HD650 doesn't rise beyond mediocrity.

[Voltron]

Nothing to do with the amp. Even with the best balanced dynamic amps running tubes at high voltage the HD650 doesn't rise beyond mediocrity.

<------ Deepak

[Fungi]

[GPH]

Nothing to do with the amp. Even with the best balanced dynamic amps running tubes at high voltage the HD650 doesn't rise beyond mediocrity.

Who's this Deepak guy, a troll?

[Voltron]

Who's this Deepak guy, a troll?

He's obviously a tin-eared galoot with limited experience with quality gear.

[deepak]

Or I'm more picky what I consider good sound

[GPH]

On another subject, I'm trying to sell my Westone 3 and I just remembered how much I hate selling IEMs on Head-fi. People make offers, seem very serious, and then just disappear and stop replying to PMs. It's a very different attitude than people buying high-end cans and speakers who are usually more serious and professional in their behaviour. I've had 3 guys tonight who were very interested in appearance, one of them even asked for my PP address, and then, total silence.

[elnero]

In general I've found it to be a real chore selling gear on HF for at least the past year or more.

[HeadphoneAddict]

After a day of having them and with the new toy factor wearing out, I have to say I'm not very impressed with these IEMs. I've tried all the tips provided, plus the Shure olives, and I notice differences between all of them, but the characteristics of the W3 that I don't like stay there. Here's what I dislike:

- Way too much bass. Also, the bass is not so tight and it overpowers the lower mids.

- There's a very noticeable veil on the vocals that gives an artifical tone to the voices. Overall, I'd say the mids are more on the recessed side of things, inserting unnatural smoothness in the sound signature.

- The highs are rolled off and remind me of why I didn't like the Shure E500. It's better with some tips than others (Shure black olives and clear silicon tips), but the Etys simply slaughters the W3 in this region.

- While the W3 provides a smooth and musical presentation, it's pretty bad for resolving low-level details. On fast musical passages, it blurries the notes and I don't get as much definition as I want.

The good things with the W3 is that they sound very musical and the bass is good for listening to classical music and jazz or any record that sounds thin. The sound is a lot less fatiguing than most of the IEMs I've tried. It's also very comfortable and low profile compared to the Etys.

With a price tag 5x higher than what I paid for my Etys, I'm going to sell them before the FOTM stops. I'm very disappointed, I was expecting a sound signature in the vein of the ER4S, but with a good bottom, and what we got is very far from that. The W3 smooths out things too much in order to provide a big and non-fatiguing sound and offer a sound that is far from what I consider "natural".

I'm going to post this message on H-F once the W3 will be sold.

Hi. I've been sitting on my hands for a couple of days, cooling off and thinking about how to reply to this post and the other post about FOTM starters. I can only reply honestly. We hear things differently. But what I hear I write about - I can't write about what you hear.

Some of it may be due to my using UM-56 custom tips 90% of the time, some could be from different sources and program material, but much of it could be our physiology and how our ears are shaped differently and our brains interpret differently. It seems 80% of the people posting about the W3 (or other things I post about) hear things like I do. The other 20% must have some validity to their impressions too, but unless we sit down and listen to the same thing together and agree on some baseline as sounding the same while using terminology that is objective and not subjective, we have no experimental control or basis for comparison.

As for your specific points above:

- to my ears there is not too much bass and it doesn't encroach on the mids like the Image X10 did for me, unless I use the Complys foam tips.

- I detect no veil or unnatural smoothness to the mids, the timbre and tone seems accurate, and to my ears the vocals are transparent and true, unless I use unmodified triple flange tips and then things sound plasticky. I don't hear recessed mids, and while they are not as forward as my AD2000 or O2 Mk2 the mids were more forward than SE530.

- side by side with SE530 the W3 highs show no sign of roll off to me, although my hearing gives up the ghost at 16Khz (and I stated that in my review). Vs my de-podded IM716 the highs are slightly less prominent with the W3, but not lacking to my ears.

- I find no lack of focus or congestion or lack of low level detail like I get with my Denon C700 or got with the Super.fi 5 Pro that I sold a while back, and find these W3 to be almost as detailed as my SR-001 (stock or audiocats modded). This is an issue I can easily and quickly hear when comparing an ATH-A900 (congested) to a re-cabled Denon D2000 (detailed).

I don't have ER4 to compare to, with the closest being my de-podded IM716 which I will admit are quite good if properly amplified. p0wderh0und23 listened to my IM716 out of my iMod and Vcaps with Pico and was quite impressed with them - said he didn't expect them to sound as good as they do. Still, when amped or unamped I think these W3 are better than the other IEM that I have tried, and still a little better than my Livewires or de-podded IM716 with Shure black olive foam tips (wannabe ER4 but not quite but I still have after a year because they are still good). I like the way the W3 hit like an Edition 9 or big speaker, yet portray all the detail I could demand (I have great stat rigs, I know what detail sounds like).

To me the de-podded IM716 only seem to compete with the big dogs when played with a proper amp, and I have read many times that the ER4 also need an amp. For portable my goal was to have something I could run right from an iPhone 3G or 3G Nano without an amp. I have been thinning the herd of portable amps to just have my USB amps for macbook, and my iMod/Vcap/Amp for travel. Based on what I hear with these comparisons, I can see where an ER4S or ER4P with an amp might be a seriously good IEM. I had been planning to get an APureSound ER4 until I got the Westone 3 and decided they were the best un-amped IEM I have owned. Maybe someday I will be able to do that comparison, and maybe a UE11Pro will come along my way too.

I do not try to blow up the sound to astronomical proportions, or start a new FOTM, but I tell it like I hear it; and if I am enthusiastic about something I am more likely to review it and share my enthusiasm. What bugs me most about this place is that enthusiasm seems to be squashed like a bug before it can get out of hand. We should try to find a middle ground.

[HeadphoneAddict]

CMasten posted a mini-review on head-fi, in a thread that I did not create, and not as a response to any of my posts. What he said below mirrors my findings, so I don't feel so bad now. Hah!

For the last week I have compared my E530s to my new 3's, unamped out of my Iphone 3g and then amped out of my predator via ALO silver from a Nano using my best samples on my train commute into my office.

I have used my Shures now every day for almost 2 years as I bought them when they first came out. i have considered them to be the best of the best for sound, fit and finish. I tried the Triple Fis and neither the fit or signature ever did it for me.

There is nothing I have heard to date the sounds better across the spectrum in universal fit IEMS than the 3

[Torpedo]

Come on guys, depending on the comparison terms, up to certain extent I can agree with Deepak. I find the HD600 properly amped more balanced and interesting than the 650, which for their enhanced bass always sound to me kind of "average", perhaps not mediocre, but not much more than that. Definitely not "world class" to my ears.

[spritzer]

Or I'm more picky what I consider good sound

Amen brother!!!

[elnero]

I've had the Westone 3's now for a couple of days and I guess my opinion runs about middle of the road. My ears are quite sensitive to silicone tips these days but my preference is to use a tip that has some durability. With this in mind when I first got the 3's I went straight to the Shure black olives. Unfortunately for me the 3's with these tips exhibit excessive sibilance which I'm very sensitive to. This made me hesitant to open the included pack of tips because the only ones I didn't have in one form or another were the Comply's and I would have preferred to avoid those because of the shorter durability and expense of them. I tried a few of the other tips I have around even tri-flanges and bi-flanges for as long as my ears could tolerate them. Some worked better than others which gave me a bit of hope so I finally broke down, cracked open the package of tips, put on the Comply's and I've been fairly happy since.

In this configuration to my ears the 3's have a nice full bass that seem to integrate nicely with the mids which also have a full, somewhat forward sound. It's not too forward though, vocals seem to have natural amount of body. Based on how my other IEM's are configured the treble is a bit more than I'm used to but that's not necessarily a bad thing, sibilance is still more than I'm accustomed to at this point as well but it does not seem excessive unless it's recorded that way and even then I haven't found it to be too bad.

I see what others have said about the decay, I think this adds to the full-bodied, silky smooth feel and even though the stage isn't huge you get a good sense of the recorded space but I think this also causes them to feel a bit reserved or reined in. They have a decent amount of punch but lack that last bit PRaT that would give them that extra bit of "fun factor". As it stands now when I listen to the 3's I know they sound good but it's not until I put in one of my other IEM's that I realize just how good they are. IMO, based on what I have here and the comparisons to the other high-end universal IEM's I've had in the past I think the 3's represent a step above the rest of the class. Are they perfect? Nope, but they certainly represent a step in the right direction.

[GPH]

Larry - that's a fair reply, thanks for taking the time.

Some of it may be due to my using UM-56 custom tips 90% of the time, some could be from different sources and program material, but much of it could be our physiology and how our ears are shaped differently and our brains interpret differently. It seems 80% of the people posting about the W3 (or other things I post about) hear things like I do. The other 20% must have some validity to their impressions too, but unless we sit down and listen to the same thing together and agree on some baseline as sounding the same while using terminology that is objective and not subjective, we have no experimental control or basis for comparison.

It's possible that it might be due to the fit or ear physiology, but I highly doubt it. I'd say 95% of the time, when I audition new headphones, I hear similar things than most experienced reviewers do. And that's exactly my problem with the hype surrounding the W3 right now on Head-fi; there are very few reviewers who have decent experience with high-end cans that can serve as a point of reference to properly review the Westone. For some reason, you have a lot of experience, but my perspective on the Westone 3 is very different from yours. We all hear differently, that's true, but I believe there's a good part of objectivity in sound reviewing, otherwize Head-fi would be a total chaos and no one would agree on anything. In my experience, the small complaints that are made when a new headphone is released usually take more importance with time, so we'll see how it goes when more people will have reviewed them. For now, my thoughts concur with what catscratch and ZephyrSapphire are hearing.

I do not try to blow up the sound to astronomical proportions, or start a new FOTM, but I tell it like I hear it; and if I am enthusiastic about something I am more likely to review it and share my enthusiasm. What bugs me most about this place is that enthusiasm seems to be squashed like a bug before it can get out of hand. We should try to find a middle ground.

What I like about this place is that people try to be more objective. I'm happy for you if you are very enthusiatstic about a new pair of headphones, but there's a thin line between enthusiasm and fanboyism/FOTM. What I see on Head-fi is that you are very active in 2-3 different threads and it seems to me that you are almost trying to "push" the product. Naming a thread "Westone 3 vs the losers" speaks for itself.

[HeadphoneAddict]

Larry - that's a fair reply, thanks for taking the time.

[snip]

What I like about this place is that people try to be more objective. I'm happy for you if you are very enthusiatstic about a new pair of headphones, but there's a thin line between enthusiasm and fanboyism/FOTM. What I see on Head-fi is that you are very active in 2-3 different threads and it seems to me that you are almost trying to "push" the product. Naming a thread "Westone 3 vs the losers" speaks for itself.

Actually, that was the conclusion of an inside joke with ZephyrSapphire from the "Westone 3 to be released 11/28" thread that I pushed to get renamed as the "Appreciation Thread". I thought it was funny, and didn't think the title would backfire on me - it went like this:

WHY CAN'T WE JUST ASK THE OP TO RENAME THIS THREAD - "WESTONE 3 IMPRESSIONS AND APPRECIATION THREAD". Then we don't have to have a 3rd big Westone thread...

Don't forget, I am trying to add links to all the impressions I find that are more than a few lines long, that have some substance to them, good or bad (at the bottom of my review's first post). I'm not trying to hide anything bad about them. Link to the actual review is removed to prevent breaking any rules about linking to another forum from here, and I can't link any impressions from this forum to my review or the review will be deleted.

[elnero]

I'd say 95% of the time, when I audition new headphones, I hear similar things than most experienced reviewers do.

You make it sound like 95% of the experienced reviewers share your opinion and preferences, somehow I doubt that's the case or we wouldn't have Grado vs. Sennheiser, O2 vs R10, etc. Just because the W3's didn't meet your expectations or your personal preference doesn't mean they're are not top-tier universals deserving of the praise others have for them. It seems to me to be fairly obvious that if you were expecting the W3's to be a more balanced ER4 that you would be disappointed, in many ways the W3's are the antithesis of the ER4's and trust me, there's many people with good ears and plenty of experience that think that's a good thing.

[Torpedo]

You make it sound like 95% of the experienced reviewers share your opinion and preferences, somehow I doubt that's the case or we wouldn't have Grado vs. Sennheiser, O2 vs R10, etc. Just because the W3's didn't meet your expectations or your personal preference doesn't mean they're are not top-tier universals deserving of the praise others have for them. It seems to me to be fairly obvious that if you were expecting the W3's to be a more balanced ER4 that you would be disappointed, in many ways the W3's are the antithesis of the ER4's and trust me, there's many people with good ears and plenty of experience that think that's a good thing.

I don't think GPH meant to say that 95% of experienced reviewers share his preferences, just that when you try to write about some headphones performance keeping observations objective, then impresions get much closer. One thing is what you hear assessing "sounds" which allow you to be quite objective, and another very different one is what you think about those sounds placed together reproducing music, and how you feel about them.

[GPH]

You make it sound like 95% of the experienced reviewers share your opinion and preferences, somehow I doubt that's the case or we wouldn't have Grado vs. Sennheiser, O2 vs R10, etc.

Tell me where I said that. What I said was that different headphones have different particularities and most of the time people come to agreements about how certain headphones sound. Someone who loves Grado SR-225 wouldn't argue that the sound is more laid back than a pair of Sennheiser HD650. It's not a question of preferences and I wouldn't dare say that my opinion is universal, I just usually hear the same characteristics that other people do about particular models.

[elnero]

Ahhh ok, I misinterpreted what you said, sorry.

[GPH]

Ahhh ok, I misinterpreted what you said, sorry.

No offense taken, sometimes I think about things that make sense in French, but the meaning is lost when I type it in English.

Also, I realize my opinion may come as overly negative in this whole Westone 3 debate, but I'm not trying to go against the grain, I'm just stating what I hear.

For example, I think that the percussions, particularly snare drum and cymbals sound very muted on the W3 compared to most of the headphones I've heard and owned. What do you guys who own the Westone 3 think about that?