I am in a very serious predicament. My brother, who owns an ipod, recently heard my clix2 with my shure e2c headphones, and to my surprise, was not impressed. He then let me hear his ipod with a pair of headphones he bought for $10. I was amazed... I never heard an ipod sound so good, i wouldn't say it was better than the clix + e2's in quality, but the bass was awesome... far better than the e2s. The headphones he used were from 'Skullcandy'. Then i tried those same phones with my clix and i was relieved to hear my clix destroy the ipod. However, I had no idea headphones were that capable. This lead me to ask myself this: Are the shure e3c's and up that much better than the e2c's? I thought I was on top of the world with my clix2 and e2's, thinking that the more expensive models from shure couldn't be that much better, but now i am thinking that they are. Now every time I listen to music and am impressed with the sound quality, I tell myself that it can be much better. I really need to know, cause i am obsessed with sound quality. Can anyone help me here?

These are the headphones my brother has:
Amazon.com: Skullcandy Smoking Buds Ink'd Earbuds - Black (SC-INK'D/BLK): Electronics

These are the shures i am considering:
Amazon.com: Shure E4c-n Sound Isolating Earphones (Black): Electronics

E2c and E3c is no longer consider to be up-to-standard. They were once very good IEM for their price (3 years ago), but now they are very much outdated by newer, better 'phone with cheaper price (but I am NOT talking about SkullCandy).

SkullCandy, as generally regarded, does not produce any Hi-Fi grade headphone. However, as you noticed, their cheaper earbud line is 'okay' (well, how much can you ask for a pair of $10 earbud, right?). SkullCandy (IMO) is basically a company that pump out bassy headphones for basshead and general consumer who often care less about sound quality than volume quantity (sadly).

E4c is a very well regarded IEM, even comparing to E2c, E3c, and E5c. You should be very happy with an E4c as it will be a big jump in SQ from your E2c. If you want to know more, search head-fi.org for its review. You might also want to look for Ultimate Ear Super.fi 5 series or Future Sonics Atrio M5 while you at it.

__________________

Thanks alot. That really cleared the picture. I guess I'll be gunning for those e4c's.

If I may say so, I'd opt for the Ultimate Ears Super.fi 5's
I've had the chance to own E4's and they sound utterly amazing, however my current IEM's are the Super.fi's.
Both have their pro's and cons but for pairing them with your Clix I'd go for the Super.fi's ( My current player however is an iRiver iFP-999 until my Clix2 arrives )
Hope I'm not 'too late', just figured you'd want to know just as long as you remember 'Sound is taste'

Don't worry, I'm not buying anything right away. I'll check some reviews and stuff first. I wish there was a way i could test them before buying them, cause it is a hell of a lot of money for headphones.

From some reviews i see that the Ultimate Ears Super.fi 5's offer better bass than the e4c's, but sacrifices its higher frequencies because of it. I love my bass, but i don't want to be losing out on the others. Can anyone say that it is a great difference in the bass with these two phones?

I also see a $50 difference in the price, the e4's being the more expensive. I really want to be spending my money wisely here. Even though they're both probably good choices, i want to make the better one.

Three 'phones, actually.

Super.fi 5 series has a 'pro' version and an 'EB' version. Pro version use two balance armature drives, and has good detail but a bit light on bass. EB version uses one balance armature drive and one dynamic drive, and has less detail but a lot more bass. EB version also requite a lot of burn in (150hrs+) before the muddiness (too warm with no detail) will go away.

E4c has what Shure called 'Tuned Port' to increase the bass, it is said to have good quality of bass, but probably still can't match up with that of SF5EB.

__________________

Quick note... many people believe the more you spend on a headphone the better it will sound. i do not believe this to be the case. it is important to know why shure & ultimate ears are so insanely expensive... they don't use traditional headphone speakers. they use hearing aid speakers. these are medical grade drivers that do two things... produce AMAZING clarity, and second, drive the price through the roof. the HUGE downside to this type of speaker is they are very narrow in the range of sound they can reproduce. the reason the lower price shure products (lower price means $100!!!) have zero bass response, is because they only have one speaker, narrowly ranged to cover mid-to high sound frequency. the midpriced ($149-$199!!!) buds have two speakers, so they have one for the highs, and one for the lows. since hearing aid speakers were never supposed to be bass boosters, you have to spend about $400 with Shure to get a model with one high, and two bass speakers. as you have heard, these things sound amazing, but do you really think they sound that much better than a bud with a traditional speaker??? not me. i happen to be a Skullcandy lover. they have a pair called Smokin' buds that i have used for years. GREAT range, and $39. they also come with a lifetime warrantee. Shure and Bose don't come close to that. the big difference between the $19 - $49 Skullcandy buds is primarily the quality of the cable, bud housings, cases, etc. listen to the difference between these and the Shures that cost ten times that amount with an open mind, and your wallet will stay full.

'hearing aid speakers'? Now that is the first time I have seen any one refer to Balanced Armature drive as 'hearing aid speakers'... Well, I know a few hearing aid are actually using dynamic drive as their speaker units, obviously calling balanced armature as hearing aid speaker is a bit too 'subjective' IMO.

I respect your support for company such as SkullCandy, but your argument isn't very convincing. First, balanced armature (BA) ARE capable of producing sound in all human hearing range (as a proof, there are tons of frequency response graph you can find on headroom.com). The limitation of BA is that it can't move a lot of air during sound production in the bass region (because BA is small in size) . The strong bass you feel from dynamic drive is because it moves a lot of air, and usually human can't tell much of any different between air movement (vibration) from actually sound wave below 100Hz (which again, BA is capable of producing). So the question boils down to bass quality vs. bass quantity. There are much more we can talk about on the history and making of IEM, but I will left it as it is. If you truly want to know, Head-fi.org and Headwise.com are where you should start your reading.

Of course, beside the question of how much bass you want from an IEM, there are other questions such as clarity, soundstage, bass extension, treble extension, detailness... if you combine all of these aspects that a good IEM should have, than I am sorry to say that SkullCandy just isn't making any good enough headphone for the audiophile market, or else, professional review magazine and audiophile forum would have had tons of SkullCandy lovers by now. After all, who want to spend extra money if a $10 pair of SkullCandy can do everything just right, right?

The preference of headphone is a very subjective manner (and I respect your choice), but to say SkullCandy SQ is just as good as all the Shure / Ultimate Ears is a bit 'too far'... However, you are right about an 'open mind'. Blindly supporting a company is not what I (or in fact, most head-fi'er) will do. Personally, I have actually done some critical listening on SkullCandy Smokin' bud and when I compared it to my Shure / Etymotic / MylarOne X3 (which is only $57), there is really no contest.

If you are in China now, you will know OVC, the company who OEM many of SkullCandy earbuds/canalpones, is actually selling the same model with better SQ and cheaper price. Head-direct.com has even imported their TC20 model ($19) to U.S. and received some very good review. Brand is not the question here, SQ is (and always will be).

__________________

I've got those same headphones, the skullcandy ink'ed earbuds. They do sound surprisingly VERY good. Worth a listen, considering they are 10 dollar headphones.

From all the things I've read on the Super.fi 5's and the e4c's, it looks like the decision is up to me, they both have their pros and cons. I suppose I'll stick with shure... I'm assuming the difference in the bass isn't huge.

CNet reviewed the clix2 recommending the shure se310's. I also realized that the se310's are newer than the e4c's. How do these compare to the Super.fi 5's and the e4c's?

Bought the se310's. After reading multiple reviews, they seemed perfect for me... basically the e4c's with more bass, and i bought them for 180 instead of 250. However, i cant say they sound that much better than the e2c's. At least not $100 better. Is it just me, or am i doing something wrong???

You are probably still in the transition from dynamic to balanced armature IEM. I'll say give it a few days and EQ a bit to find the sweetspot before any critical listening.

__________________

Ok. I hope i'm not trying to convince myself, but i think they're sounding better already. I'm going to stick with them for about a week and then try the e2c's again. Thanks.