Dan Clark E3 Headphone Review

[lowmagnet]

Trying to wear mine today with a hair wrap on to protect my ears from the pads.

 

[DantonIzzo]

I got mine in two days ago. The first impression wasn't the greatest. It seemed overly bright to me, and somewhat lacking in mid-bass and sub-bass punch. So last night, I tried positioning the cup down and toward the front of my head. It's a bit better, but the bass is still somewhat lacking. I'm running it off of my Topping D50/A50III stack and also Valhalla 3, so there's plenty of power. For reference, my daily driver for the past couple of years have been the Focal Clear og, Audeze MM500, IE600, IER M9, and Mega5Est. Anyone else has this experience?

 

[jdjung]

Sadly due to my prescription that isn’t an option for me but you are correct that I heard a large difference with and without glasses. It’s a shame but I appreciate your reply. It would be great if a disclaimer of this sort was there on the E3 product page as it would’ve saved me money (return shipping and potential restocking fees). Especially when most people in the USA can’t audition before buying.

The difference is pretty huge below a certain frequency when I wear my glasses or don't. I need about a 5 to 6 db increase in the bass for it to sound about the same. When I wear my glasses I use open cans at it seems that seal isn't as important so either my Atriums or my LCD2. If I don't have my glasses I use the E3.

 

[Robbo99999]

I got mine in two days ago. The first impression wasn't the greatest. It seemed overly bright to me, and somewhat lacking in mid-bass and sub-bass punch. So last night, I tried positioning the cup down and toward the front of my head. It's a bit better, but the bass is still somewhat lacking. I'm running it off of my Topping D50/A50III stack and also Valhalla 3, so there's plenty of power. For reference, my daily driver for the past couple of years have been the Focal Clear og, Audeze MM500, IE600, IER M9, and Mega5Est. Anyone else has this experience?

It's been said quite often, that it's important that it seals properly so that's something to check, or the other option is that maybe you just like lots of bass.

 

[BAK]

I got mine in two days ago. The first impression wasn't the greatest. It seemed overly bright to me, and somewhat lacking in mid-bass and sub-bass punch. So last night, I tried positioning the cup down and toward the front of my head. It's a bit better, but the bass is still somewhat lacking. I'm running it off of my Topping D50/A50III stack and also Valhalla 3, so there's plenty of power. For reference, my daily driver for the past couple of years have been the Focal Clear og, Audeze MM500, IE600, IER M9, and Mega5Est. Anyone else has this experience?

I had exactly the same impressions with my E3. I bought them a couple of months ago. It was a disappointment at first listen (without any EQ) — the upper mids (2–5 kHz) are too bright, and there’s a lack of density in the lower part of the spectrum (weak bass and lower mids). Older recordings are almost impossible to listen to — the upper mids are painfully sharp — but some modern tracks, not all of them, sound more acceptable and more spectrally balanced.

I’m using a Topping DX5II DAC and a Qudelix T71 DAC. There’s plenty of power.
I tried equalizing, and it feels better now, but since I don’t have any headphone (or head/ear) measurement equipment, I haven’t yet found the perfect EQ settings — though I keep experimenting.

I’ve been professionally mixing music and feature films for over 30 years. Recently, for various reasons, I’ve had to work mostly on headphones. My main reference headphones are the HD600 (with slight correction). I understand their sound very well — my mixes translate perfectly to speakers — but I wanted to treat myself to a pair of modern headphones with a full spectrum (especially solid lows) and minimal distortion. So far, my impression of the E3 is mixed.

I’m considering the DCA Stealth — perhaps they don’t have that piercing upper midrange — but it’s hard to tell from frequency graphs, and there’s no opportunity to audition them in the country where I currently live.

Here are my impressions of a few tracks listened to on the E3 (without EQ, or with minimal Oratory EQ):

• Dire Straits – “So Far Away” — very sharp snare, harsh upper mids
• Phil Collins – “Do You Remember” — piercing upper mids in guitars, vocals, and snare
• Yes — since their tracks are stylistically midrange-focused, the E3 makes them nearly unlistenable; the upper mids are painfully aggressive
• Anthony Russo – “u & k” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs
• Daft Punk – “Get Lucky” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs

 

[Chagall]

I had exactly the same impressions with my E3. I bought them a couple of months ago. It was a disappointment at first listen (without any EQ) — the upper mids (2–5 kHz) are too bright, and there’s a lack of density in the lower part of the spectrum (weak bass and lower mids). Older recordings are almost impossible to listen to — the upper mids are painfully sharp — but some modern tracks, not all of them, sound more acceptable and more spectrally balanced.

I’m using a Topping DX5II DAC and a Qudelix T71 DAC. There’s plenty of power.
I tried equalizing, and it feels better now, but since I don’t have any headphone (or head/ear) measurement equipment, I haven’t yet found the perfect EQ settings — though I keep experimenting.

I’ve been professionally mixing music and feature films for over 30 years. Recently, for various reasons, I’ve had to work mostly on headphones. My main reference headphones are the HD600 (with slight correction). I understand their sound very well — my mixes translate perfectly to speakers — but I wanted to treat myself to a pair of modern headphones with a full spectrum (especially solid lows) and minimal distortion. So far, my impression of the E3 is mixed.

I’m considering the DCA Stealth — perhaps they don’t have that piercing upper midrange — but it’s hard to tell from frequency graphs, and there’s no opportunity to audition them in the country where I currently live.

Here are my impressions of a few tracks listened to on the E3 (without EQ, or with minimal Oratory EQ):

• Dire Straits – “So Far Away” — very sharp snare, harsh upper mids
• Phil Collins – “Do You Remember” — piercing upper mids in guitars, vocals, and snare
• Yes — since their tracks are stylistically midrange-focused, the E3 makes them nearly unlistenable; the upper mids are painfully aggressive
• Anthony Russo – “u & k” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs
• Daft Punk – “Get Lucky” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs

Placement is very important with E3. Try frequency sweeps to see if there are any major dips. For me there is a complete null around 6kHz when ears are in the horizontally and vertically in the middle. Playing around with the placement, I can get a smoother FR and then they sound very good - no harshness, full bass. The problem is that even small movements have an effect..I guess that is the price for going close back with no EQ needed.

Don't think Stealth is going to do any better in that regard.

 

[BAK]

Placement is very important with E3. Try frequency sweeps to see if there are any major dips. For me there is a complete null around 6kHz when ears are in the horizontally and vertically in the middle. Playing around with the placement, I can get a smoother FR and then they sound very good - no harshness, full bass. The problem is that even small movements have an effect..I guess that is the price for going close back with no EQ needed.

Don't think Stealth is going to do any better in that regard.

Yes, I’ve seen Dan Clark’s recommendations and tried different ways of positioning the headphones on my head, but the changes are so minor that they don’t really affect the overall issue — the protruding upper mids and the lack of solid low end and lower mids.
The problem is that when I start equalizing them to suit older tracks, newer ones end up with too much low end and lower mids, and not enough upper mids. So far, I haven’t found the golden balance.

 

[DantonIzzo]

I had exactly the same impressions with my E3. I bought them a couple of months ago. It was a disappointment at first listen (without any EQ) — the upper mids (2–5 kHz) are too bright, and there’s a lack of density in the lower part of the spectrum (weak bass and lower mids). Older recordings are almost impossible to listen to — the upper mids are painfully sharp — but some modern tracks, not all of them, sound more acceptable and more spectrally balanced.

I’m using a Topping DX5II DAC and a Qudelix T71 DAC. There’s plenty of power.
I tried equalizing, and it feels better now, but since I don’t have any headphone (or head/ear) measurement equipment, I haven’t yet found the perfect EQ settings — though I keep experimenting.

I’ve been professionally mixing music and feature films for over 30 years. Recently, for various reasons, I’ve had to work mostly on headphones. My main reference headphones are the HD600 (with slight correction). I understand their sound very well — my mixes translate perfectly to speakers — but I wanted to treat myself to a pair of modern headphones with a full spectrum (especially solid lows) and minimal distortion. So far, my impression of the E3 is mixed.

I’m considering the DCA Stealth — perhaps they don’t have that piercing upper midrange — but it’s hard to tell from frequency graphs, and there’s no opportunity to audition them in the country where I currently live.

Here are my impressions of a few tracks listened to on the E3 (without EQ, or with minimal Oratory EQ):

• Dire Straits – “So Far Away” — very sharp snare, harsh upper mids
• Phil Collins – “Do You Remember” — piercing upper mids in guitars, vocals, and snare
• Yes — since their tracks are stylistically midrange-focused, the E3 makes them nearly unlistenable; the upper mids are painfully aggressive
• Anthony Russo – “u & k” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs
• Daft Punk – “Get Lucky” — sounds full, deep lows, pleasant mids and highs

Yes, I’ve seen Dan Clark’s recommendations and tried different ways of positioning the headphones on my head, but the changes are so minor that they don’t really affect the overall issue — the protruding upper mids and the lack of solid low end and lower mids.
The problem is that when I start equalizing them to suit older tracks, newer ones end up with too much low end and lower mids, and not enough upper mids. So far, I haven’t found the golden balance.

Yeah, I also find that the positioning does make a difference, but somewhat subtle. It definitely helps with the shout and some glare at lower treble, but the mid-bass is still isn't there. But I do find that using on my Schiit Valhalla 3 does add some haze that tames the eargain region and lower treble a bit more too. It's a shame because it's too expensive to not be great out of the box. lol. But I do find that I like it more so than the MM500, which I unloaded because it was just too heavy and uncomfortable, as well as a weird resonance in one of the cups. My favorite for long listening session is my Focal Clear og (with ZMF perforated sheepskin pads).

In any event, I've been using the Chord Mojo 2 in my chain, and got decent result with the following DSP on (it's not parametric, but according to instruction booklet, it's a gradual low shelf for the first two and gradual high shelf for the second two):

20Hz: +1
125Hz: +3
3kHz: -2
20kHz: +1

 

[BAK]

After a long search for the right EQ settings for my E3, I decided to rely on my own ears for the measurements. I used binaural microphones and pink noise. I inserted the microphones into my ears, put on my HD600 (with the correction I normally use for mixing), and played pink noise while recording the frequency response in FabFilter Q3 using the Match EQ mode as a reference.

Then I carefully took off the HD600, put on the E3, and while playing the same pink noise, I adjusted the EQ in FabFilter Q3 to match the reference curve as closely as possible — the plugin clearly shows the difference in response. I repeated this entire process three times from the beginning to avoid errors, since even a small shift of the microphones when removing or putting the headphones back on can change the response.

I positioned the E3 slightly lower, so that the tops of my ears touched the ear pads — this removes a small narrow peak around 4200 Hz.

The result satisfied me. Now the E3 sounds balanced, very similar to the HD600 but with a fuller low end. Here’s what I came up with (perhaps it might be useful to someone):

Preamp: -3.5 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 40 Hz Gain 2.6 dB Q 2.563
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 190 Hz Gain 3.5 dB Q 0.903
Filter 3: ON HS Fc 12000 Hz Gain 3.1 dB Q 0.900
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2500 Hz Gain -2.1 dB Q 1.000
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1200 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 2.273
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4000 Hz Gain -3.3 dB Q 4.440
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 5850 Hz Gain -5.0 dB Q 5.551
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 7722 Hz Gain 2.5 dB Q 2.563
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8330 Hz Gain -8.0 dB Q 6.072
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 10000 Hz Gain -6.2 dB Q 4.986

Of course, all this EQ tweaking and “jumping through hoops” is exactly what I was trying to avoid when buying the E3 (I had no chance to audition them beforehand in the country where I live). I’m disappointed that headphones this expensive don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs — even if the HD600 frequency response was measured on the same rigs… Or do I just have a defective pair?

 

[CedarX]

I’m disappointed that headphones this expensive don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs — even if the HD600 frequency response was measured on the same rigs…

Why be disappointed? Headphones don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs… when placed onto your ears. Irrespective of the price.
Well-tuned HPs like the E3 are more likely to work for most, but if you understand the use of in-ear binaural mics and how to fine-tune EQ to perfect the sound for you, it’s unlikely that any HP will deliver exactly what you want… again, irrespective of the price.

 

[jdjung]

Why be disappointed? Headphones don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs… when placed onto your ears. Irrespective of the price.
Well-tuned HPs like the E3 are more likely to work for most, but if you understand the use of in-ear binaural mics and how to fine-tune EQ to perfect the sound for you, it’s unlikely that any HP will deliver exactly what you want… again, irrespective of the price.

I agree! Plus, ear leakage or people with glasses find these earphones to be less dynamic. You really need a good seal on these. I find that without a good seal the bass just insn't there. I need to listen to these with my glasses off to appreciate them.

 

[solderdude]

Leakage is an issue on the vast majority of closed headphones.
E3 is simply also one of those.

 

[BAK]

Why be disappointed? Headphones don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs… when placed onto your ears. Irrespective of the price.
Well-tuned HPs like the E3 are more likely to work for most, but if you understand the use of in-ear binaural mics and how to fine-tune EQ to perfect the sound for you, it’s unlikely that any HP will deliver exactly what you want… again, irrespective of the price.

I’m disappointed because the HD600, when measured on test rigs, shows a frequency response that actually matches how they sound in practice. But the E3 — whose frequency response graphs are highly praised and look very similar to the HD600’s (except for the low end) — sound completely different, drastically so. They have much less bass, even though the graph clearly suggests there should be significantly more. That’s what’s frustrating and makes me wonder whether my pair might be defective.

 

[BAK]

I agree! Plus, ear leakage or people with glasses find these earphones to be less dynamic. You really need a good seal on these. I find that without a good seal the bass just insn't there. I need to listen to these with my glasses off to appreciate them.

I listen to them without glasses and even tried pressing the ear cups slightly — it doesn’t help. There’s still too little in the lower part of the spectrum, and the upper range is harsh to the ear. You can clearly see this in my EQ curve.

 

[jdjung]

I listen to them without glasses and even tried pressing the ear cups slightly — it doesn’t help. There’s still too little in the lower part of the spectrum, and the upper range is harsh to the ear. You can clearly see this in my EQ curve.

Might be a preference you like then. I do like my LCD-2 Fazer more in general since it has more bass presence then the Harmon curve but that's me. I've been leaning towards a more v curve shape now a days with bass emphasis as I find I have more of an emotional response to it. Though I will admit I get ear fatigue much faster with a v curve then Harmon and can listen to the E3 for hours without much ear fatigue.

For me there is a noticeable bass difference and my glasses were the factor for the E3 which are closed back and has a bass port on the side. It's very picky with seal. Your head shape, ear canal, ear position may just not work very well with the E3.

 

[Robbo99999]

After a long search for the right EQ settings for my E3, I decided to rely on my own ears for the measurements. I used binaural microphones and pink noise. I inserted the microphones into my ears, put on my HD600 (with the correction I normally use for mixing), and played pink noise while recording the frequency response in FabFilter Q3 using the Match EQ mode as a reference.

Then I carefully took off the HD600, put on the E3, and while playing the same pink noise, I adjusted the EQ in FabFilter Q3 to match the reference curve as closely as possible — the plugin clearly shows the difference in response. I repeated this entire process three times from the beginning to avoid errors, since even a small shift of the microphones when removing or putting the headphones back on can change the response.

I positioned the E3 slightly lower, so that the tops of my ears touched the ear pads — this removes a small narrow peak around 4200 Hz.

The result satisfied me. Now the E3 sounds balanced, very similar to the HD600 but with a fuller low end. Here’s what I came up with (perhaps it might be useful to someone):

Preamp: -3.5 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 40 Hz Gain 2.6 dB Q 2.563
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 190 Hz Gain 3.5 dB Q 0.903
Filter 3: ON HS Fc 12000 Hz Gain 3.1 dB Q 0.900
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2500 Hz Gain -2.1 dB Q 1.000
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1200 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 2.273
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 4000 Hz Gain -3.3 dB Q 4.440
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 5850 Hz Gain -5.0 dB Q 5.551
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 7722 Hz Gain 2.5 dB Q 2.563
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8330 Hz Gain -8.0 dB Q 6.072
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 10000 Hz Gain -6.2 dB Q 4.986

Of course, all this EQ tweaking and “jumping through hoops” is exactly what I was trying to avoid when buying the E3 (I had no chance to audition them beforehand in the country where I live). I’m disappointed that headphones this expensive don’t sound the way they appear to measure on test rigs — even if the HD600 frequency response was measured on the same rigs… Or do I just have a defective pair?

Who's to say your subjective pink noise assessment curve is accurate. Yes you've set it up subjectively with your in-ear microphones & HD600 but that might not have been accurate in the first place. You're then measuring the E3 on your own head vs that standard so the accuracy is only as good as your initial subjective assessment with your HD600. Yes, you're probably getting your E3 to sound more close to what you think is preferred with your HD600 setup but that by no means it's indication of proper neutrality. I don't think your assessment & measurements go towards saying the E3 doesn't have good neutrality.

 

[MayaTlab]

I’m disappointed because the HD600, when measured on test rigs, shows a frequency response that actually matches how they sound in practice. But the E3 — whose frequency response graphs are highly praised and look very similar to the HD600’s (except for the low end) — sound completely different, drastically so. They have much less bass, even though the graph clearly suggests there should be significantly more. That’s what’s frustrating and makes me wonder whether my pair might be defective.

Your pair isn't necessarily defective. As others have said, some headphones, and that includes most passive closed backs, tend to have rather wild variations at low frequencies in in situ FR between individuals. The rest of the response may also vary depending on the design, and all over-ears will have rather wild variations as well past 3-4kHz (but in this range it's rather difficult to sort out what belongs to desirable variations and undesirable ones).

Open front volume large open over ears such as your HD600 tend to be more stable between individuals, are easier to recommend as a result, and for some of them are at minima ideal as EQ platforms as the measurements obtained on ear simulators are more likely to be what you're going to experience.

This is the Aeon 2 Noire, but most passive closed backs will be like this : https://www.rtings.com/headphones/g...o-aeon-2-noire-vs-sennheiser-hd-600/41467/325

 

[BAK]

Who's to say your subjective pink noise assessment curve is accurate. Yes you've set it up subjectively with your in-ear microphones & HD600 but that might not have been accurate in the first place. You're then measuring the E3 on your own head vs that standard so the accuracy is only as good as your initial subjective assessment with your HD600. Yes, you're probably getting your E3 to sound more close to what you think is preferred with your HD600 setup but that by no means it's indication of proper neutrality. I don't think your assessment & measurements go towards saying the E3 doesn't have good neutrality.

You’re certainly right in your own way, but the fact is that my professional experience as a sound engineer working with the HD600 has proven in practice that they are accurate enough to be used as a reference and serve as my personal benchmark for natural sound. The mixes of hundreds of songs and dozens of feature films have confirmed this. I was hoping that the E3 could replace my HD600, but I didn’t expect them to sound so unnaturally on my head and ears, and to deviate so drastically from the published frequency response graphs available online.

 

[BAK]

Your pair isn't necessarily defective. As others have said, some headphones, and that includes most passive closed backs, tend to have rather wild variations at low frequencies in in situ FR between individuals. The rest of the response may also vary depending on the design, and all over-ears will have rather wild variations as well past 3-4kHz (but in this range it's rather difficult to sort out what belongs to desirable variations and undesirable ones).

Open front volume large open over ears such as your HD600 tend to be more stable between individuals, are easier to recommend as a result, and for some of them are at minima ideal as EQ platforms as the measurements obtained on ear simulators are more likely to be what you're going to experience.

This is the Aeon 2 Noire, but most passive closed backs will be like this : https://www.rtings.com/headphones/g...o-aeon-2-noire-vs-sennheiser-hd-600/41467/325

Thank you for the information. Yes, I understand that. I just didn’t expect that, in my case, the E3 would sound so dramatically different from the published frequency response graphs in practice.

 

[sonitus mirus]

You’re certainly right in your own way, but the fact is that my professional experience as a sound engineer working with the HD600 has proven in practice that they are accurate enough to be used as a reference and serve as my personal benchmark for natural sound. The mixes of hundreds of songs and dozens of feature films have confirmed this. I was hoping that the E3 could replace my HD600, but I didn’t expect them to sound so unnaturally on my head and ears, and to deviate so drastically from the published frequency response graphs available online.

The recent DCA closed models measure very close to neutral in independent tests, so the tuning itself probably is not the issue. The HD600 just fits very differently. The HD600 pads are softer and do not rely on a strong seal, while the DCA pads are deeper and need a more exact fit. Small changes in seal and angle can shift the upper mids and make things sound a bit strange or unnatural. So if the HD600 sounds right to you and the DCA does not, it is most likely the way the DCA interacts with your head and ears, as you suggested, rather than the tuning being off.

I love my Stealth, and they replaced my long-favored Denon AH-D5000 that were modified by Mark Lawton of Lawton Audio. I enjoyed my modded D5000 over the D7000, and I did end up adding a touch of bass to my Stealth with EQ to get the sound I prefer, just a small 2 to 3 dB adjustment in a narrow range. Gotta have my bass!