iLounge

1

These look similar to the Sony ones, except for the price.  The sony in-ear headphones are about 35-40 bucks only!  And they work great and sound great.  Blocks out virtually all sounds! 

Why are these so much more expensive?

Posted by Cabbit on January 10, 2004 at 10:53 AM (PST)

2

Having tried the new $39 Apple In-Ear Headphones, I chose them over the Sony models because they were more comfortable for me and the sound quality was the same (if not slightly better).

No matter, I can’t see spending $156 on something that is at best only marginally better than the Sony or Apple headphones - and in my opinion are less comfortable than either.

Posted by Atomic Bomb in Mid-Atlantic on January 10, 2004 at 11:06 AM (PST)

3

[url=http://www.head-fi.org]http://www.head-fi.org[/url]

These aren’t particularly expensive, except when compared with cheap ones (obviously).

They are significantly better, if you care. Don’t bother, if you don’t.

A.B. - have you actually tried/worn these? Since they’ve only been available for a week or so, I very much doubt it.

Posted by m.s on January 10, 2004 at 11:59 AM (PST)

4

m.s - Yes, I have.

Posted by Atomic Bomb in Mid-Atlantic on January 10, 2004 at 12:32 PM (PST)

5

Ao, A.B., you’ve worn two pairs of buds that were JUST released and compared them?

Interesting.

Posted by stark23x on January 10, 2004 at 3:45 PM (PST)

6

Wow great price! I just ordered mine from shure for $196 shipped and i’m pretty sure the $156 advertised here is including shipping

I would return mine to shure and buy the cheaper one but it actually is cost prohibitive. Jump on this if you want some amazing buds for a crazy price (Etys can’t touch this deal)

- Justin

Posted by noname in Ottawa on January 10, 2004 at 4:01 PM (PST)

7

Ahh just check out the site closly. It seems this is the price for the E3 not the E3c. The only difference between the two is the packaging AFIK.

Posted by noname in Ottawa on January 10, 2004 at 4:05 PM (PST)

8

The E3 is a medium gray. The E3c is white. Packaging is most likely different, too.

Posted by m.s on January 10, 2004 at 4:28 PM (PST)

9

stark23x: Correct.

Posted by Atomic Bomb in Mid-Atlantic on January 10, 2004 at 4:58 PM (PST)

10

How are the new apple in ear plugs. I have the sony ones(forgot the part number but it is the 70’s not the short 71). There too long and always get tangled when I am working out..so I am looking for a new pair.

Posted by Troy on January 10, 2004 at 5:21 PM (PST)

11

m.s: Thanks for posting the correction, I found that out a little after you while browzing head-fi forums.

- Justin

Posted by noname in Ottawa on January 10, 2004 at 5:26 PM (PST)

12

The new Apple In-Ear Headphones have the same cord length as the stock iPod headphones. That works out well for me - any shorter would be too short. I use the middle sized caps and they fit snugly. I don’t loop them over my ear, and they really have a different feel than the Sony 71s. I prefer the fit of the Apple buds to that of the Sonys. The Apple buds also seem to do a slightly better job of minimizing outside noise, but as they say - results may vary. You should definitely try them before buying.

Posted by Atomic Bomb in Mid-Atlantic on January 10, 2004 at 5:53 PM (PST)

13

My Futuresonics Ears came in last week and they are so ugly and sound so great. 89.00 and I found them here on iPL. Its kind of hard to believe when you get the box but they sound better than anything incl. my full sized Bose NC Triport2. So much for that.

Posted by Jockomo on January 10, 2004 at 8:12 PM (PST)

14

Yes, the sony ones are definately too long.  Without the extention they are too short. 

Posted by Cabbit on January 10, 2004 at 9:21 PM (PST)

15

Sennheiser Px 200’s > all, for portable earphones.

I’m not too excited about sticking something in my EAR CANAL.

get those sennhesier’s,  best investment since the updated case.

Posted by iPod on January 10, 2004 at 9:42 PM (PST)

16

The new Apple earphones deliver better sound and bass response than the standard earbuds… but not dramtically so. They *do* block out sounds very well, however, and they have very minimal sound leakage, which is great if you use your ipod in a quiet environment, like a library. They’re also quite comfortable (once you get used to having rubber shoved in your ears).

I’m glad I bought them.

Posted by Chimpee on January 10, 2004 at 10:46 PM (PST)

17

Comparing Shure (professionell audio) with Sony (mostly consumer audio) is like comparing Burger King with a french restaurant.
I’m using Shure gear for about 10 years now in my business as event-technician - it’s not the best, for sure, but Sony can’t even touch it in most cases.
As for the earbuds: Ever compared E2s with Sony-earbuds? You will definetly hear the difference - and this differnce is worth every dollar for me. Just try it! I will go for this E3c.

Posted by Blueface in Germany on January 11, 2004 at 1:38 AM (PST)

18

Can someone please detail the exact differences between the Shure E3 & E3c??

Ok the colour is different; but is that just the colour of the buds, do both have black wiring? How different, if at all, is the casing - I’ve seen pics of the E3c with a zip case and about 17 different faom fittings, do the E3s come with the same ‘accesories’?

Thanks
m

Posted by Matti on January 11, 2004 at 2:31 AM (PST)

19

Blueface is correct.  I have the E2s & the E3cs.  The E3cs are definately a step up from the E2s, and the E2s are vastly superior to the Sony’s.  So do the math!

The E3cs are worth every penny.

Posted by YYWWVV on January 11, 2004 at 6:07 AM (PST)

20

anyone in the Uk know where I can purchase a pair of the latest Apple in-ear headphones from?

thanks

ChOci

Posted by choci on January 11, 2004 at 6:16 AM (PST)