Band: opinion spread · Dot: weighted average
Sources split, and mostly along the calendar. Everyone describes the same tuning — flat through the bass and lower mids with a deliberate presence lift at about 2.7 kHz — and the larger, mostly launch-era camp hears that as a genuine reference that shows other in-ears up. The other camp, led by the measurement-first reviewers of 2018-2026, hears it as analytical, bass-light or plain boring against modern tunings. The middle position — accurate, but not engaging — is common too.
Measured
Crinacle grades it A- for tone and files it as 'Neutral'; Precogvision scores tonality 5.7/10. Across eight squig rigs (normalised at 500 Hz, against the Harman IE 2019 target) the ER4XR runs about 6 dB under the target at 50 Hz and 2 dB under at 100 Hz, matches it within about a decibel at the 2.6-2.8 kHz ear-gain peak on most rigs, and sits 3-6 dB under it from 5 to 6 kHz.
vs. listeners — Both camps are reading one graph correctly. Against Etymotic's own diffuse-field-derived target the XR is accurate with a lift; against a Harman-style target, or almost any in-ear released since, the low end is lean and the upper treble restrained. The verdict moved with the reference point.
“A more mainstream tuning of the ER4S/SR with slightly boosted bass.”
Crinacle, In-Ear Fidelity ranking list
“This is an expensive IEM at $300 with an out of box performance that doesn't satisfy in this day and age.”
amirm, Audio Science Review
