I lost my e3c's and I need a replacement. Which are considered the better headphones?

Clarity wise, er6-i's, bass and overall soundwise, I hear the e3c's are better.

I don't know what your silly acronyms mean sooo...

I just bought these: http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82E16826106347

They're pretty good.

[Edit: Oh, out of stock. >.>]

depends on your needs... going from e3c to er6 would be a big change given the different sound signatures... e3c (going from memory of a 10 minute listening session with some) has some treble roll off and leans slightly towards bass heavy... er6 is basically the opposite... bass isn't nearly as strong (some have even claimed that it's weak but i disagree)

though if you go with etymotic and don't have an amp definately get the er6i... if you have an amp the er6i is still going to have stronger bass but the er6 is an option

keep this in mind though... with etys you will need to replace the filters after a certain amount of time (depends on the person and how often they are used) and filter cost ~$15 for a pair (one replacement set is included with the phones)

I think you can get filters and replacement tips for cheaper than that from places like the Earplug Super Store.

The ER-6i have unprecedented clarity for their price range, but the bass isn't as strong as the E3c. If your portable player has a decent bass boost or EQ, that's usually enough to compensate.

If you want to save up, get the E4s or ER-4s. The ER-4s are basically the 6s but much more even and less "cheap" sounding (compared to the 6 that is, the 6 don't sound cheap on their own). Their bass is decent, but not nearly as good as the E4s. The E4s have better mids and treble than any other Shure phone. The ER-4s can be had for like $120 or $150 these days, see if you can find one of those. Oh, you want the P version, not the S.

As far as I know, an amp won't help the dynamic armature in an IEM sound better. It may allow for finer volume tuning, but it will not help with the overall sound quality.

The reason why people were recommending the use of an amp was because of the iPod's crappy headphone out. The amp helped to rectify some of its deficiencies.

er-6i's only cost like 70-80 bucks on pricegrabber, also.

That and they're stupid audiophiles that don't know what they're talking about.

Yes, that too.

lol I didn't like the metallic sound of the resistors in my $500 stepped volume control so I switched to carbon film to complement the warmth and airiness of my tubes :downs:

I bought some ER6i's and a Gameboy Micro from J&R. I hope I like them as much as me e3c's.

You actually spent money on a gameboy micro? Aren't those things like a hundred bucks?

Christ, what a waste of cash.

I was going to give the money to your mom for an abortion but my time machine is broken.

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURNSAUCE!!!!

Headphones > earbuds.

At least I have a soul

No you don't... you're here.

So are you, yet gingers have no souls.

Thus disproving the whole massassi takes your soul theory.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]Headphones > earbuds. :v:[/QUOTE]
They aren't earbuds, and chances are both of his choices are far superior to the headphones you have.

The fact that they're (I will continue to call them earbuds) earbuds means they lose any superiority they may have in sound quality and totally fail to headphones. They HURT my ears, they get very dirty, they're easier to break/lose, and they got maintenance costs.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]The fact that they're (I will continue to call them earbuds) earbuds means they lose any superiority they may have in sound quality and totally fail to headphones. They HURT my ears, they get very dirty, they're easier to break/lose, and they got maintenance costs.[/QUOTE]
You've never used IEMs, have you? They're nothing like earbuds. Take your ignorance elsewhere.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]The fact that they're (I will continue to call them earbuds) earbuds means they lose any superiority they may have in sound quality and totally fail to headphones. They HURT my ears, they get very dirty, they're easier to break/lose, and they got maintenance costs.[/QUOTE]
I'm not a huge fan of HeadRoom, but please, educate yourself.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]You've never used IEMs, have you? They're nothing like earbuds. Take your ignorance elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

Yep, those are the ones, and I think I'd rather gouge my ear out with a rusty sawblade. Take your "I AM FACT" elsewhere.

I can understand comfort issues. IEMs don't fit everyone that well. Most people that complain, however, have not given their ears time to adjust or have not tried the whole variety of fit options. Or they are inserting them incorrectly.

But your statements about sound quality are completely :downs:

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]Yep, those are the ones, and I think I'd rather gouge my ear out with a rusty sawblade. Take your "I AM FACT" elsewhere.[/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about the comfort issues--those I can understand. But saying Headphones > IEMs sound quality wise is, as Emon said, very :downs:. Are IEMs for you? Probably not. Does that mean they're not for anyone? No.

Take your I AM FACT elsewhere.

I never said they had poor sound quality. I said, paraphrased, "Despite any sound improvements they may have over headphones, is totally negated by *list of reasons why they suck*" Learn to read, kthanks.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]I never said they had poor sound quality. I said, paraphrased, "Despite any sound improvements they may have over headphones, is totally negated by *list of reasons why they suck*" Learn to read, kthanks.[/QUOTE]
They hurt your ears, okay, that's you, they do NOT get very dirty if you keep them clean (which isn't hard, or costly, unless you insist on having the filters).

Your reasons were superficial and mostly personal.

Also, easier to lose means they're smaller...meaning more portable. If by smaller you mean "easier to lose", then sure, but if you're going to be so careless as to misplace an 80-180 dollar investment towards your portable sound quality, then you kind of deserve to lose them.

And IEMs are not easier to break, that's just something you thought up as some lame-*** and wholly untrue argument. I've had my E2c's almost a year now, and they still work just fine. Every pair of headphones I've ever had, including a nice pair of Sennheiser HD-280s, has been somewhat mottled by now, not to mention the sound quality on the e2c's is, in my opinion, far far superior.

Get off your high horse, stop being such a hypocrite Mr. "I Am Fact" and realize that, even though IEMs may not be fore you, doesn't mean they're not for anyone. In a thread that's dedicated to the discussion of them, your inane and totally useless banter is (probably) not welcome by the original poster, and definitely not welcome by anyone else.

I am fairly certain your ranting is less welcome than my short spiel on what I think about the things. kthx.

By short you mean 5 posts worth of suck?

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]
And IEMs are not easier to break, that's just something you thought up as some lame-*** and wholly untrue argument. [/quote]

even the fragile looking er6 is not all that easy to break

closed at the request of TOFU