The TRN BAX PRO were provided my review by the manufacturer. I thank them for that and also apologize for the long delay of the publication of this article owing to some lengthy orofacial problems. You can get them from TRN Audio.

Introduction

TRN, or more precisely, Dongguan Zuodu Acoustics Technology Co., Ltd. are a ChiFi player of the first hour, from a time when a budget Chifi model reached easily 40,000 views on Head-Fi in a few weeks. Examples are the TRN V80 and V90.

TRN, like many other relatively inexperienced ChiFi companies (compared to, let’s say, the more established Sennheiser or Audio Technica), overestimated their abilities and prematurely released earphones in the premium segment that may have had the ingredients but the final meal was subpar. For example, the TRN BA8 was a screamer and unable to deliver musical enjoyment to the aided ear. And the original BAX was apparently not much better (I was told).

Time cures wounds and companies mature. TRN reassembled and tried again in order to close the reputation gap to, let’s say, Dunu or Moondrop.

Specifications TRN BAX PRO

Physical Things and Usability

The BAX PRO features quality ingredients and an interesting architecture: 1 DD + 2 BA + 2 EST: a Beryllium diaphragm for the bass, 1 Knowles 29689 BA for the mid frequencies, and another Knowles BA 33518 as well as two Sonion electrostatic drivers for crisp treble. It also comes with a modular cable with 3.5 mm single ended and 2.5 mm & 4.4 mm balanced plugs.

In the box are the earpieces, 2 sets of eartips with three tuning switches, the modular cable with three plugs, a strange plaque, a small tool for moving the switches, the usual TRN metal storage box and the paperwork.

The CnC machined, sturdy earpieces are rather large and have a bit of an unusual nozzle angle. Some people complained about not getting them deep enough into their ear canals, I have had no issues. But I don’t get the world’s greatest isolation with them either.

The eight-strand single crystal copper cable is rather pliable and, appeal wise, average. The eartips (2 silicone sets and 1 foam set)) are also nothing to write home about. In summary, the BAX PRO’s haptic is ok.

The BAX PRO are easy to drive.

Tonality and Technicalities

It is very difficult to give you an accurate account of the sound considering the options you have with switch positions and (stock) eartips. The BAX PRO are also sensitive to insertion depth so that different reviewers may report different results. Let me start with the black stock eartips and all switches in the “off” position [“Equalization mode”].

If you expect another TRN shoutfest, you may be surprised to hear that this is not the case. The BAX PRO offer a slightly warm however transparent sound with vocals in the foreground and zero shoutiness. I was quite delighted when I tried them out the first time and left them in my ears for a couple of hours going through a selection of jazz, rock, and classical.

What sticks out to me is the lower midrange: both female and male vocals are sparkly, very well sculptured in three dimensions, and rather intimate with a very good body. Bass is digging deep but is a bit subdued, thick, and could be a tad crisper while having enough kick…a bit similar to the Sennheiser HD 600 headphones…but you can tweak this with the switches, insertion depth and eartips. The midrange has good transparency and resolution without a hint of shoutiness. Very realistic.

TRN spent lots of attention on the treble – which are very well carved out with excellent resolution. My treble testing passed, for example, Anne Sophie Mutter’s rendering of the very high violin notes of her pieces from Star Wars. Cymbals are very clean…though rather subtle.

The technical merit of the BAX PRO is also very good. Stage may be average in two dimensions, but the spatial reprodcution and imaging are excellent. You really can spot the singer on stage. Dynamics is also good.

Timbre is also rather natural. I much preferred it over the glassy BA sound of the Blessing 2, allegedly the first $1000 soundalikes at $300. I listened to a lot of Beethoven piano music and orchestral pieces with great pleasure.

The piano touch was quite realistic and revealed a good driver speed. Timbre and dynamics paired result in orchestral sounding natural and developing a healthy richness and volume. Surprising how good the BAX PRO work with acoustic instruments of any quantity.

I confirmed my positive listening impressions when connecting the BAX PRO to the EarMen stack after listening to the Sennheiser HD 600. They did hold up to my big surprise.

Let’s have a look at the switch settings.

Equalization

The standard mode which sounds best to my ears. I use this mode as comparison to the other switch settings.

Electronic Mode

Enhances the upper midrange and introduces shoutiness. Not for me.

Transparency Mode

Bass imbalance 2-3 dB. Reduces bass and adds upper midrange. Introduces even more shoutiness than Electronic mode. Transparency is good enough without this mode.

Atmospheric Enhancement

Is the same as Electronic Mode in my measurements…I did two independent measurement runs to confirm.

High-Frequency Mode

Adds to upper midrange and to treble. Only for the hardest of us who get up with cheap Bourbon whiskey in the morning. Too bright for the rest of us.

Low Frequency Mode

Essentially the same as Equalization, with the upper midrange minimally tuned down. Good.

Compared to the LETSHUOER EJ07M

The EJ07M have been one of my daily drivers for the last couple of years. They also sport electrostatic tweeters and are, at $649, ca. 50% more expensive than the BAX PRO. They feature smaller earpieces with a different nozzle angle, which probably provide a better fit for many. Their imaging is flatter than that of the BAX PRO (in the Equalization setting), they are generally a tad brighter sounding and more coherent overall.

The BAX PRO have the upper midrange dialled down (in the Equalization setting), which makes the vocals thicker but also duller and less dynamic. In terms of treble resolution, both are pretty even, with he BAX PRO possibly a tad ahead. I’d like the EJ07M’s form factor with the BAX PRO’s sound.

Overall, the price difference appears arbitrary.

Concluding Remarks

The TRN BAX PRO come as a very pleasant surprise to me. They sound enjoyable to my ears with all musical genres I threw at them. The money is essentially in the excellent holographic staging and imaging. But I am also confused: the switches are not very useful as most of the settings only add shrillness nobody needs. Sometimes, less is more!

My other criticism is the very generic accessories (cable, eartips). And some may have problems with the fit owing to the unusual nozzle angle. Sometimes, more is better!

In the end, I recommend trying them out if possible. I may have to send them on a western Canadian tour to gather some feedback from Biodegraded and Co. We may have a diamond in the rough that is overlooked owing to lack of concerted promotion and organized hype.

TRN are finally on their way to join the likes of Moondrop and Dunu in the mid tier segment (if they leave useless gimmicks such as switches off). They now have to substantiate this with other models. Durwood is currently taking on their Dragon Azure, and I am anxious to see what he will come up with.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TRN BAX Pro Review – Electroexstatic appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Introduction

Vision Ears are a boutique company out of Cologne, Germany that offer a plethora of interesting premium earphones. Audioreviews.org authors had the chance of analyzing their products in the past and the Vision Ears Elysium made it onto our Wall of Excellence. The EXT is one of Vision Ears’ many premium models.

As always with premium products, they are short-term loaners that don’t come in retail packaging. I therefore focus on the sonic performance

Specifications Vision Ears EXT

Tonality and Technicalities

Please note that I had the EXT (and PHöNIX) only for 7 days as part of a Head-Fi tour. I feel that was too short for a definitive evaluation of these iems. Hence take my comments with caution – and look at other opinions, too.

The EXT is sonically built on the Elysium, the best iem I have ever heard. The Elysium has a midrange of godly quality and its BA bass was the only criticism. In general, Vision Ears do midrange particularly well.

I recently reviewed the Vision Ears PHöNIX, characterized by its mellow and soothing presentation. The EXT is quite different in that is features a sharper and leaner sound, particularly in the midrange, and a thumpier, punchier, but also tighter bass at the better extended low end. And it is requires a more powerful source than the PHöNIX.

I’d describe the EXT’s signature as close to neutral with a tad of warmth, and an extra serving of bass.

Yes, there is bass, and lots of it. Quite a rumble down there (“es brummt da unten”). Lots of oomph with a realistic decay, but it could still be more composed and tighter. It is not thick but thump. Mid bass is pounding mercilessly against my eardrums. Some love it, others can’t handle it.

The bass smudges into the lower mids, causes some congestion, and masks them to some extent, sadly. To me, the bass is like too much ketchup on the burger, which overwhelms and drowns the taste. A very intense low end.

The midrange is the star of the show. Vocals in the lower midrange are organic, a bit recessed but show good note definition, medium note weight and subtle rounding but also a healthy edge. They are overall more towards the lean side, but in a good way. Very well done, going towards perfection…weren’t they affected by the bass.

Midrange resolution and clarity are very good when little of no bass is present in the music. Even the highest piano notes are lively, well resolving and 100% natural. Just bad that the midrange is competing against the bass – and frequently losing.

Lower treble is rather humble. I find the presentation of cymbals somewhat metallic, tizzy, and dry. Decay could be slower. From memory, the Elysium was close to perfect in the upper registers but the EXT cannot deliver that.

Imaging is good: 3D space is nicely re-created. Layering is also good: the musicians are placed well on stage. Soundstage is not very wide owing to the that rumble in the (low-end) jungle. Dynamics is good.

Concluding Remarks

The VE EXT didn’t blow me out of my sandals like the Elysium that belong to my all time favourites.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Vision Ears EXT Review – The Short Answer appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The CCA Duo is a dual dynamic-driver $40 iem characterized by excellent sub-bass extension, subdued mid bass but middling technicalities, and a good wearing comfort.

The CCA Duo were provided unsolicited by the company for my review. And I thank them for that. You can get them here.

Introduction

CCA is a sub-brand of Knowledge Zenith (“KZ”). The latter have been known to western customers since 2014, and have generated an incredible number of models since (I stopped counting at 50…which was a while ago). My co-bloggers have analyzed a few CCAs, the Duo is my first encounter with the brand.

Since KZ and their affiliate brands have been in the headlines all “storm in a teapot” lately for allegedly offering $1000 for a review, I was not one of the lucky ones, and have done this review for free – as all my previous ones, too. And because I don’t like having money, we also do not do affiliate links or even sell earphones – we remain entirely independent. The company claims that their low price stems from not handing out commissions to influencers. Here you go!

The CCA Duo is yet another dynamic driver in the budget realm with a dual magnetic cavity technology claiming to be superior over single DDs in terms of detail resolution. In the company’s own words the CCA Duo offers “unstoppable performance advantages” whereas I am unstoppable in analyzing the iem’s performance.

Specifications CCA Duo

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a cable, 3 pairs of silicone eartips (S/M/L), one set of foam eartips, and the userguide.

Tonality and Technicalities

You’d expect a dual dynamic driver to be bass heavy, but the CCA Duo is more on the brightish side. Call it bright-neutral or bright-slightly warm. And that’s although the pinna gain between 1 and 2 kHz has been tamed to 10 dB (earlier KZs offered 13 dB). Add the very moderate mid bass and the only slightly elevated sub bass, hear the whole mix in context, and you arrive at this perception.

The Duo’s main distinguishing feature is its subdued mid bass. Rolling tips, I got the beefiest low end with the SpinFit CP145. Paradoxically, the Duo’s sub-bass extension is excellent (with TempoTec V6 only), it is one of the deepest reaching iems I have ever tested. This low end combination could be tighter as sub-bass is naturally fuzzier than mid bass it dominates. And it could have more kick and definition. Bass lines are generally somewhat rubbery and sloppy.

But the low end brings out vocals: they are rather natural and intimate, with decent richness. Note definition and resolution are middling in the midrange, but there is decent clarity. I’d like to hear better sculptured vocals.

The rolloff in the uppermost midrange and lower treble keeps the presentation away from shoutiness. The warm fuzzy bass and the more neutral midrange result in a lack of cohesion, accentuation, and fluidity to my ears. I find the recently analyzed $25 Moondrop Space Travel TWS much better in this department.

There is lots of upper treble energy. Cymbals are surprisingly present, crisp, and nuanced, but can also be tizzy. The upper treble energy adds quite a bit of liveliness and sparkle to the sound image.

Stage is wide with average depth (owing to the lack of mid bass). Spatial cues is quite good, imaging is not bad either. Separation is also good, layering is a bit on the shallow side. Attack and overall dynamics are also pretty decent.

In comparison, the highly hyped Truthear Zero x Crinacle: RED is on the bassier side with a more subdued, less forward midrange. It has more depth and cohesion than the Duo but also less sparkle. Two different types catering to different preferences.

Concluding Remarks

The CCA Duo is a dual-dynamic driver earphone with a decent sound that has no obvious flaws, but it also does not stick out of the large body of competitors. It biggest advantage, in my opinion, is its small and light earpieces that make for a comfortable wear. The manufacturer’s claim that the CCA Duo offers unstoppable performance advantages turn out to be a marketing gimmick.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post CCA Duo Review (1) – Brighter Now appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $89 LETSHUOER DZ4 is a safely tuned triple-dynamic driver earphone with bass-enhancing passive radiator that offers a relaxed listening experience but paradoxically falls short on midbass impact, dynamics, and sparkle.

Introduction

LETSHUOER are a very ambitious established in 2016 by a group of experienced “geeks” around a former Panasonic engineer. They have been very transparent to us since one of their reps lives in Vancouver, Canada. In fact, our own Biodegraded has met him personally to exchange gear.

I once wrote a rather non-descript review of the non-descript $625 EJ07M iem. The EJ07M was simply not wowing me. But, it always did well in comparison with the competitors…and is one of my go-tos to this day.

The DZ4 shares many features with the EJ07, but the question is whether it performs similarly well.

Specifications LETSHUOER DZ4

The LETSHUOER DZ4 was provided by the company for my review – and I thank them for that. You can get them from LETSHUOER.

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, 2 sets of silicone eartips, cable with 0.78 mm connectors and 3.5 mm plug, metal storage box and paperwork. The 3-D printed earpieces of CNC-milled anodized aluminum share the shape with their big EJ07M brother, which is one of my standard go-to iems. They fit my ears well and are very comfortable.

The wider white “balanced” eartips work best for me (same as with the EJ07M), but the don’t isolate well. The big difference between the black and white tips is their form factor. The black “vocal” ones simply don’t fit my ear canals well.

The DZ4 feature a few technical gimmicks such as a 6 mm passive radiator aiming to increase bass response. “Passive” refers to that this part is purely mechanical and not connected to a current. It is essentially a woofer and very similar to a bass reflex design.

The robust cable is of high quality build.

Tonality and Technicalities

The LETSHUOER DZ4 offers another Harman Target style tuning with a slightly attenuated lower midrange and a recessed lower treble relative to the 2019 original. It comes across as lacking bass response. Safe but somewhat unexciting.

Yep, midbass kick and impact are somewhat missing which benefits the midrange transparency. I always have the feeling to insert the earpieces deeper into my ear canals to get more punch. Unsuccessfully.

The bass shelf is reduced compared to many peers, it lacks bite and heft, although it digs deep. A rather polite attack for my liking. While the bass quantity is missing, the quality is not the best either: it lacks tightness and definition and dribbles along in the background

Emphasis is on the sub-bass lowest octaves, which makes the vocals stick out. Although they are not the most forward and robust either, they are “free standing” in that it they are not overrun by the bass. Voices are reasonably well presented and quite natural. They are relaxed with rounded corners and could be a bit edgier and better defined, and they can sound hollow. Midrange continues the low end’s polite tradition. Upper midrange is well behaved, there is no shoutiness.

Low end and midrange collectively produce a goo that could be much better defined.

Treble kind of follows suit. It is tame and lacks energy and air…but it is safe. Cymbals are somewhat hidden.

Soundstage is of reasonable width, depth is missing, imaging is not great, neither are separation and layering. Dynamics are lacking. Timbre is as organic as you expect from a single dynamic driver and probably its biggest tonal asset. The DZ4’s technicalities are dead middling.

In comparison, the Whizzer HE 10 is way more dynamic because of its punchy bass which is overly dominant. The Truthear x Crinacle Zero: RED has much better note definition and an interesting take on the low end, and the Moondrop Aria still trumps all of the above based on its superior note definition and resolution.

Concluding Remarks

The LETSHUOER DZ4 is undoubtedly a technically very interesting and sophisticated earphone design. Sonically, it is yet another average single-dynamic driver iem in the sub-$100 category. Harman-tuned minus some bass and treble with middling technicalities. Safe and sound. It is somewhere between heaven and earth and cannot throw the Moondrop Aria off our Wall of Excellence.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post LETSHUOER DZ4 Review – Energize Me appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $70 Whizzer Kylin HE10 is a safely tuned and well-built single-dynamic driver iem with a good punch that impresses most by its excellent built and small form factor.

The Whizzer Kylin HE10 was provided by the company for my review. And I thank them for that. You can get it from the Whizzer Store.

Introduction

I like original earphone designs and small shells for optimal comfort. Whizzer, established in 2015, are regularly delivering on this front. This does not come as a surprise as they engage J.IDEA for design and tuning.

For the HE10, the company has developed a 10.2 mm CNT (carbon nanotube) driver for maximum clarity and minimal distortion. You find more details on the company’s website.

Specifications Whizzer Kylin HE10

The Whizzer Kylin HE10 was provided by the company for my review. You can get it from the Whizzer Store.

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the two earpieces, cable with 3.5 mm plug, three sets of earpieces [ET100 (“straight”), VC20 (“vocals”), SS20 (“soundstage”)], a cleaning brush, a metal storage container, and the paperwork. Everything works well out of the package.

The metal earpieces are of superb build, of great, seamless fit and comfort for my ears. Isolation depends on eartips, I have the best success with the widebores (SS20). The 5N Silver-plated Oxygen Free Copper cable with 0.78 mm 2-pin connectors and 3.5 mm is equally well made. The accessories are top notch for the $70 class.

The HE10 has a rather low sensitivity and benefits from additional amplification. I calculated a sensitivity of 105 dB/mW @ 1 kHz from the sound pressure level given in the specifications.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Whizzer HE10 comes with three stock tips that yield tonal differences between 2.5 and 5 kHz. Any of these signatures is a variation of the Harman target curve with some added bass, making for pronounced V-shapes. Although the differences in these frequency responses appear to be minor, they are actually not. The VC20 narrow bores produce the spiciest (upper) midrange, the SS20 widebores the richest midrange, and the oddly shaped ET100 are somewhere in between.

I am sensitive to upper midrange glare so that the SS20 served me best and they will be used in my sound characterization.

The HE10’s tonality can be described as a safe V-shape dominated by a thumpy bass that adds warmth to the mix. The low-end dominates the sound and sets the HE10 (marginally) apart from so many similar sounding iems in its class.

Bass reaches very deep down into the lowest frequencies (one of the deepest reach of any of the earphones tested), but the low end lacks definition and finesse. It is fuzzy. Pure quantity over quality. As the focus is at about 50 Hz, the bass shelf is never intrusive and also does not overly affect the lower midrange (it affects the whole frequency spectrum). It is pleasant but not accurate. Basslines are somewhat thick and sloppy.

On the positive side, the low end has lots of robustness and punch.

Vocals, male and female, are classic V-shape, as experienced umpteen times before: a bit recessed, a bit lean, slightly warm, with decent note definition. Safe, but always dragging behind the rumbling sub-bass. With the ET100 and VC20 eartipes, energy is added to the midrange with thins notes out, pushes them forwards, and becomes unnaturally bright for my ears.

Note definition in the midrange could be better, they are somewhat washed out in comparison to, for example, the Moondrop Aria. Vocals are too lean in context with the thick bass for my taste.

Treble is far behind bass held and mids, almost buried, and lacks energy, but is has surprisingly good definition in the uppermost registers.

Overall resolution, layering, and separation are muddled by the fuzzy low end and don’t stand out compared to other iems in this class. Decent imaging is also lacking by the omnipresent sub-bass. Timbre is as natural as expected with the SS20 widebores used. Soundstage is relatively narrow but has good depth.

Dynamic response is good.

Overall, the HE10 joins the recent army of Harman-tuned models. In comparison, our $80 Wall of Excellence contender, the Moondrop Aria offers much better note definition and imaging, but also has more upper midrange glare and is more analytical than the HE10. The Truthear x Crinacle Zero RED may lack technical finesse but plays more internally cohesively and it has this fun sub-bass that sets it apart.

Concluding Remarks

The Whizzer HE10 is a safely tuned, well accessorized single-dynamic driver iem that is sonically average. It excels in its original and small shell design, great cable, and its build quality, but it introduces nothing new to the army of similar earphones, sound wise.

It is a good option for the novice to this hobby but will not thrill the advanced hobbyist.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Whizzer Kylin HE10 Review – Punch And Judy appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $55 Truthear x Crinacle Zero Red (upgrade of the original 2022 Zero) is a good sounding, very well-accessoried dual-dynamic driver but overmarketed/overhyped earphone that is rather an evolution than the revolution claimed by some.

The Truthear x Crinacle Red Zero was provided by SHENZENAUDIO for review by my request – and I thank them for that. You can purchase it exclusively from SHENZHENAUDIO.COM.

Introduction

First was the written word. Then came YouTube. Then YouTube took over as there is more money to be made. YouTubers reach more viewers for bigger product sales and for ad revenue. Next, YouTubers and manufacturers/sellers increasingly entered symbioses, known as collaborations. Prominent YouTubers (“influencers”) lend their names (and some work) to companies to maximize sales to the (joint) fan base through hype generation.

This happens in all categories, not only in audio.

The problem is that this creates conflicts of interest and distorts the market. Better products with less exposure may not get the respect they deserve. On the other hand, the consumer wants that “hot product” quickly in their hands….until he/she moves on the the next big thing…rather fast.

Whereas each YouTube video has only a short a shelf life till the next one crops up, written reviews last, especially when filed well. The user can go back quickly and have yet another look – and he/she can compare easily between the different write-ups. Written material is for discerned readers who want to get in-depth information. A smaller market segment, but the one with the deepest pockets. That’s who we cater to.

The Truthear x Crinacle Zero Red project has been in the making for quite some time. Corin Ako alias Crinacle had already a sneak peek setup at CanJam NYC 2022, and he also appeared at High End Munich 2023, where he talked to co-blogger Kazi.

It was not clear to the public what Project Red was about until the day of release. Rumours of a $200 iem were circulating. In the end, Project Red is “just” an update of the original Truthear x Crinacle Zero from 2022. Consumers could have the flaws of the original fixed – by buying it for the second time. Not that this is something new…

In order to hide the general disappointment, (somewhat) glowing reviews of the Red appeared on the day of its release. Coincidence? We at audioreviews.org were added to the second tier of reviewers, the ones that can’t do any damage as the main sales have been done when this is published.

To make this clear: the hype everybody is talking about was not generated by the early adopters but entirely by the marketing machine. It is completely artificial and may have made you feel you need to have this…before a serious independent analyst could get their hands on a pair. So you may have been sucked in again, just like a few reviewers who could not detach themselves from the peer pressure.

Specifications Truthear x Crinacle Zero Red

Physical Things and Usability

The Red comes with excellent accessories: a generous set of eartips, extra filters, a really imaginative storage wallet, even a 10 Ω adapter for increasing bass/sub-bass, cable and the paperwork. The earpieces – same shape as the original Zero – are rather large with very thick nozzles that may accept may third-party tips, which is actually not necessary as the stock tips work very well…for me.

Fit, comfort, and isolation are good (isolation is actually exceptionally good). The Red can be driven with a phone but benefits from amplification.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Truthear x Crinacle Zero Red delivers a bottom heavy, warm-neutural tonality with a focus on sub-bass at the expense of midbass and lower midrange whilst being safe towards the upper end of the frequency spectrum.

The low-end is the Red’s most distinct and probably most discussed tonality feature. It delivers a relaxed, silky subwoofer-type listening experience that can be really nice and fluffy on the ear. A subtle, pleasant, thick, dampened rumble with a warm tilt underlying the melodies. This works very well for classical music.

But the very low end is boosted at the expense of the mid bass and lower midrange. This means, in some music, the bass lacks punch, kick, and tightness as the emphasized sub-bass is rather fuzzy and it lacks definition. Adding the 10 Ω adapter shifts the tail end of the graph some dBs up: mid-bass and sub-bass responses are raised…however this makes the shelf too thick and syrupy for my liking. Not so great for powerful music.

Continuing without the adapter, the lower midrange is therefore somewhat lean, vocals are recessed and the sub-bass may paint over it in some instances and muffle the lower mids (“Sennheiser veil”). Both female and male vocals are recessed, lean, but articulate and much more neutral than the low end. Midrange notes are well defined and articulate. This works well when listening at moderate volumes…contributes to the spatial cues.

The upper midrange is being balanced by the sub-bass so that there is no shoutiness. An early rolloff provides a safe treble experience but you have to dig somewhat for cymbals.

Soundstage is wide and tall but not overly deep. Separation, layering, imaging, and resolution are average for this class.

Timbre is expectedly reasonably natural but midrange decay is relatively fast (in contrast to the bass and sub-bass): string instruments can sound a bit scratchy.

In summary, the Red has no real weaknesses considering its price. I quite like using it as a “beater” on the go. The good isolation works in favour of this. It is more of a “fun” iem than an audiophile revelation.

Comparisons

The question is whether the Red is that revelation at the $50 price point as claimed. A comparison with our own $50 favourite, the final E3000 [Crinacle rating: C+] will give answers. It was introduced in 2017 and has been holding strong since. The E3000 has much more prominent mid-bass, lesser upper midrange and more treble. It sounds therefore bassier and punchier than the Red but relies on stronger amplification.

E3000 scales with source and has superior imaging (also compared to some $200 models) and a more organic timbre. The Red works better with a phone or small dap, it has a detachable cable and is much better accessorized. The E3000’s piston-shaped shells are much simpler looking and much smaller and are therefore more comfortable. In summary, the Red does not beat this 6-year old model.

Comparing the Red with the $150 Sennheiser IE 200 at three times the price is unfair but interesting (as the IE 200 are my personal discovery of the last year). For my ears, the IE 200’s vocals are more in the foreground and the low end is subtle where’s its higher treble energy makes for a more vivid performance. The IE 200 have a fluidity and organic timbre that is hardly found in their category.

Concluding Remarks

The Truthear x Crinacle Zero Red, an upgrade of the original 2022 Zero, is certainly a decent iem that is worth its asking price. But, other than that it has been carefully curated/marketed/hyped and is well accessorized, it is by no means as special as the internet’s echo chamber makes it – and it is outright underwhelming considering the expectations created by Crinacle’s marketing machine over a long time. Alone the sub-bass emphasis is unique in this class. Nevertheless, the Red will please most mainstream consumers.

Applying his own audiophile scale, influencer Crinacle has released yet another average iem, one of the kind he used to rip apart with vigour in his previous reviewing career. How times change.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TRUTHEAR x Crinacle ZERO: RED Review (1) – Perfect C appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $139 TempoTec IM05 is a 4+1 iem with fabulous imaging qualities that may have a tad too much bass for some.

The TempoTec IM05 was kindly supplied by the manufacturer for my review – and I thank them for that. You can purchase it from TempoTec Official Store .

Introduction

TempoTec’s claim to small fame came with their budget dongle DACs that were unbeatable at their price. For example, their $40 Sonata HD Pro came with all accessories to even work with iPhone.

Recently, the company has expanded gear wise and simultaneously moved out of the budget realm. They now feature the excellent V6 dap, the great Serenade X desktop streamer, and the March III M3 desktop DAC/amp. One device per category, all mid-fi, and all surprisingly good.

With the IM05 (IM stands for “Impromptu”, 05 for the number of drivers), TempoTec enters yet another category: earphones. And TL;DR, they do another good job. No rookie mistakes, the IM05 is a mature product. It was actually designed to harmonize with the V6 DAP.

Specifications TempoTec IM05

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces with plenty of silicone tips, a fancy cable, a very roomy storage case, and the paperwork. The earpieces are large but light, they are comfortable, fit me well, and they isolate well, too. The cable is gorgoeous both haptically and functionally (“pliable”).

Tonality and Technicalities

The TempoTec IM05 is warmish sounding with a good depth and headroom and a decent timbre (considering it has 4 BAs), but with a “broad” lower mid bass that smears into the lower midrange. It sounds nothing like the graph implies, paradoxically.

Yep, the bass is the polarizing feature, with its strong cat buckle (in the graph) that culminates at the transition mid-bass/sub-bass. This makes for a thick and somewhat punchy midbass, but with a rather subtle impact and intensity that does not torture my eardrums. The Azul Performer 5 does the opposite.

TempoTec offer this kind of bass lift also in their V6 DAP and March III M3 DAC/amp. It appears to be part of their house sound. In fact, the $4000 Fir Audio iems offer a similar bass impact.

Bass lines are generally on the rich side. Extension into the sub-bass is average but, paradoxically, the lowest frequencies are leaner than the mid bass. There is always a subtle but never annoying rumble down there.

The bass smears into the midrange which has the positive effect that it re-inforces male and female voices alike, but it also cuts into the midrange transparency. Strangely enough, vocals are not recessed but rather intimate, despite the mickey mouse ears in the upper midrange’s graph segment.

There is also no shoutiness. I can only explain this by the balance between elevated bass and upper midrange in combination with the recessed treble.

Somebody tuned these iems by ear and not by graph, obviously. And it works. Vocals are very well rendered and nicely layered, they have a 3D effect and are almost holographic. They are neither thick or thin but are nicely intimate and rather articulate.

Treble is subtle overall, the extension is..well..not well extended. The high notes are somewhat swept under the carpet. Older listeners like me won’t probably care that much.

That combination of modest treble and extension and bass lift make for a deep but not too wide (but wide enough) stage. Midrange resolution is excellent as long as there is no strong bass superimposed. Separation and layering are also very good, not to forget the outstanding imaging. When listening to concerts with interaction of musicians and audience, I always feel I am in the building or stadium.

In comparison, the $150 single DD Sennheiser IE 150 are more fluid with a more emphasized midrange, but they have flatter staging and less resolution. The LETSHUOER S12 is less holographic with lesser imaging but somewhat smoother (after micropore tape mod).

The IKKO OH10 on our Wall of Fame plays vocals leaner, sharper, and more recessed, at similar imaging qualities. The Dunu Talos has a wider stage but lacks depth in comparison, and the notes are leaner. The first model in my collection to beat the I M05 is the $650 LETSHUOER EJ07 in that its sonic presentation is somewhat smoother with better rounded notes, but the IM05 is still better imaging.

The discontinued $699 Dunu Zen is better resolving but has an upper midrange glare. I prefer the IM05 over the lesser imaging and resolving Moondrop KATO. In summary, the IM05 are also head and shoulders above most $150-200 ChiFi fare I have tested, at least in terms of imaging.

Concluding Remarks

The TempoTec IM05 is an enjoyable 4+1 iem with an agreeable sonic signature. I have auditioned way more than 500 iems, but never had exactly this listening experience, so it is somewhat mainstream with new features, particularly the bass (though it may be considered being too boosted by some).

Since it is the company’s first iem, many analysts may “laud a good initial effort” while tacitly recommending the reader to wait for the “Pro” version. This is not necessary for the IM05, TempoTec got it right on the first try, as is the case with their V6 dap, Serenade X streamer, and March III M3 DAC/amp.

It was a pleasure testing the IEM05, an outright inspiration following my bundle of 10 Chifi iems that landed on my desk just before Christmas. TempoTec keep surprising.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TempoTec IM05 Review – Uniquely Mainstream appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $15 KZ Ling Long is a well-tuned, agreeable, warm sounding single dynamic driver iem that offers average technicalities but lots of fun.

Introduction

KZ entered the western market back in 2014, with some simple, bullet-shaped iems like the EDR1 and EDR2, that sold at around $5 (including shipping). They sounded surprisingly good with a V-shaped mainstream tonality and a somewhat loose bass.

KZ changed their flavour with the introduction of their hybrids to “shouty” and “harsh”, characterized by enormous pinna gains, a raise of around 13 dB between 1 and 2 kHz, and another peak at around 4 to 5kHz. The resulting sound was fatiguing to the western ear. Many Chinese companies followed suit….and we got into trouble for publishing an analysis of sonic preferences…

The KZ Ling Long follows the tradition of these very early KZs shape wise, which got me interested in KZ again. After all, some budget bulled-shaped iems are quite good, for example the final E500 and E 1000.

Specifications KZ Ling Long

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are…a box..and quite a good one: a waterproof case. Bingo! The rubbery standard cable is fixed to the earpieces, 3 pairs of silicone eartips (S/M/L) and the instructions complete the content.

The earpieces and the pearly-white cable are haptically very good, comfort and fit belong to the top of the field (as bullet-shaped iems don’t touch much of the inner ear).

Tonality and Technicalities

The Ling Long follows the tradition of the earliest KZ models released to the western hemisphere. It features what was called a “fun tuning” at the time…in contrast to an analytical tuning. In modern lingo, it is an agreeable, inoffensive tuning that will please most ears with a warm sound that is far from analytical. There are no unpleasant surprises or flaws throughout the frequency spectrum.

The bass is the classic somewhat “bouncy”, that is it could a bit tighter/faster, it peaks rather far down so that there is a good rumble and not overwhelming punch in the mid bass frequencies. Bass lines can be a bit sloppy and smear into the lower mids. Extension to the very bottom is good. I never feel that there is too much bass.

Vocals are quite well rounded with a surprising richness, although you have to turn your volume up. Resolution is middling and attack could be a bit more forceful.

The Ling Long follows the latest KZ (and TinHifi) trend of a reduced pinna gain (that rise between 1 and 2.5 kHz) below 10 dB — and no peak in the upper midrange and lower treble at all. In fact, the treble rolls off very early and lacks extension. High notes are swept under the carpet to some extent and there is no shoutiness at all.

Imaging is surprisingly good, and staging is average. Nothing is leaving your head sideways, although spatial cues is decent. Resolution is merely ok, separation and layering are also not exceeding the ultra budget realm. Timbre is spot on.

While the Ling Long is enjoyable, the lack of overall heft, body, and resolution (compared to more expensive models) does not elevate it beyond its class.

In comparison, the 2014 EDR2 model sounds very similar but somewhat edgier with more recessed vocals. Notes are more mature and better rounded in the Ling Long.

The current KZ ZVX is technically much superior with infinitely better resolution but lags in timbre and other overall pleasantries.

Concluding Remarks

The KZ Ling Long is what I had expected: a warm, musical middle of the road iem at a good price that fits perfectly in your shirt pocket. Not quite steak, but a good burger fare. Nothing wrong with that.

KZ are finally back to their roots.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post KZ Ling Long Review – Happiness Is A Warm Gun appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $150 Sennheiser IE 200 is a well tuned, great sounding single DD with a perfect timbre that beats even some of its more expensive siblings. Now on our Wall of Excellence.

The Sennheiser IE 200 was provided by their US distributor upon my request. And I thank them for that.

Introduction

Sennheiser have been known to us mainly for their headphones. Their HD 25 have been in production since 1988, and their HD 600 (my go-tos) since 1997. The company, established in 1945, obviously knows what they are doing. And although they are from Germany, Asia is their biggest market. Sennheiser is some kind of a status symbol there, like Mercedes or BMW.

But when it comes to earphones, they may have been a bit slow. Sennheiser may have invented the earbuds, which may have prevented them from catching on to the earphone market fast. Their early models had a thick and fuzzy bass tied to a classic V-shape, like the CX 300B MKII or the Momentum In Ear.

This changed somewhat in 2019 with the release of the Pro series, designed for musicians: the $99 IE 40 Pro, $349 IE 400 Pro, and $599 IE 500 Pro. Strangely enough, the IE 400 Pro sounded the best of the lot. The $300 IE 300 followed a year later, which featured a new shell design with new silicon eartips. The difference between all these models is discussed here.

Sennheiser maintained the IE 300’s shell shape for their recent super premium models IE 600 and IE 900, but also for the $150 IE 200.

TL;DR: the Sennheiser IE 200 are the company’s best sounding iems below the IE 600 and IE 900 – they run circles around their more expensive Pro series. The company finally got some affordable in-ears 100% right.

Specifications Sennheiser IE 200

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a cable with 3.5 mm plug, 2 sets of eartips (S/M/L), a storage pouch and the paperwork. The IE 200’s earpieces have the same dimensions and other physical properties as the IE 300’s: they are inconspicuous, haptic wise, although Sennheiser certainly know their polycarbonates. The shells are small and light, you can even wear them in bed, and they are very comfortable.

What also contributes to comfort and fit are the shapeable earhooks…they don’t feature that kind of memory wire that cuts the circulation in your ears off. There are only two iems outside the Sennheiser family I have auditioned (out of >500) that are similarly small and comfortable: the discontinued Brainwavz B200 and Beyerdynamic Soul Byrd.

The cable is fairly basic: let’s say, it works. It tangles up easily and once it has, you are in for some fun. From my conversations with the company, Sennheiser appear to have never cared about fancy looking cables, they are all about pragmatism. Fitting a third-party cable is difficult as the MMCX sockets are recessed. I could not find a single “upgrade” cable in my stash that fits, not even that from the IE 500 Pro would do.

Just like in the IE 300, Sennheiser changed their standard silicone eartips to a kind that doesn’t provide seal for many users, including myself. I therefore once again deployed the SpinFit CP100 tips, which work extremely well with the IE 200 (and my ears).

Tonality and Technicalities

Reviewers typically subdivide the sonic characteristics of a device into “lows, mids, and highs”, then elaborate on the soundstage, in order to lose the reader in comparisons with other recent models. A useful synthesis is too frequently missing and the reader is scratching their head, wondering how the product actually sounds overall, whether it justifies its price, and what’s missing to a true stellar premium product.

Some never care about usability at all. What good is great sound when these little rascals are uncomfortable in our ears?

The Sennheiser IE 200 make the case for a holistic approach…before going into details: they are perfectly tuned iems with a perfect timbre that only fall short of super premium iems by their lack of super headroom, super staging, and they have possibly a somewhat too dry of a sound. The sonic quality difference is probably mostly in the shells’ cavity and not the driver.

Nevertheless, this model is so good that I have used almost no other iem in the last weeks. I could stop here. But, what makes the perfect tuning? After all, even an experienced company such as Sennheiser had failed to produce a decent sounding set of affordable in-ears for the longest time.

Well…comes a young acoustician by the name of Anders Hed and changes it all. And the IE 200 are only his first effort.

What makes the tuning of the IE 200 special? Alone from the graph you can guess the fluidity and smoothness of the sound, considering timbre has never been an issue for Sennheiser. They don’t use balanced armature drivers because of potential crossover issues.

Bass is rather subtle with a natural decay, mids are in the foreground with good note definition and decent (but not optimal) note weight. At the high end, that tizziness in the uppermost registers of the IE 300 is gone, the treble is sweet.

Where the IE 200 falls off the super-premium wagon is a comparatively shallow staging (wide, not deep) and a lack of sheen. But all of this is more than compensated for by the aforementioned fluidity, which makes for an irresistible listening experience. A great rare example of a very enjoyable product independent of price.

IE 200 and IE 300 share the same driver (as far as I know), but the tuning obviously makes the difference.

The IE 200 does not have the lower midrange congestion and treble spike of the IE 300 or the veil of earlier models such as the IE 500 Pro. It is a transparent sounding, well resolving iem with a great timbre.

Remains the question which of my iems are better? Only two, the discontinued $700 Dunu Zen, and the $650 LETSHUOER EJ07M. The Zen have more depth and more sparkle (but also an upper midrange glare), and better microdynamics and micro detail, and the EJ07M is a better resolving jack of all trades. But the IE 200 are smaller and lighter, and therefore more comfortable.

Concluding Remarks

The Sennheiser IE 200 may be the company’s answer to mid-price ChiFi, considering Asia is their biggest market. And boy did they get it right this time. There is no competition for the IE 200 in their class, sonically and comfort wise. Period! They are earphones for real music lovers and one of the most impressive iems I have auditioned in a long time.

Sennheiser shows that tuning by trained professionals pays off. They know what they are doing (I am repeating myself). No need to replace the IE 200 with an update next year…which also builds and/or retains customer confidence.

Gut gemacht! Sehr gut sogar! Wall of Excellence! Done!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Sennheiser IE 200 Review – Back On Top appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $21 KZ ZVX is a well-built single-dynamic driver earphone with great resolution but off timbre.

The KZ ZVX was provided unsolicited by the manufacturer and I thank them for that. You get it from KZ Audio.

Introduction

I had given up on KZ after their 50th model or so. The company focused on releasing new models (“quantity”) but not on getting their tuning and therefore their sound right (“quality”). In particular did they never tone down their icepick peaks in the 2-4 kHz area, which is the most sensitive area of human hearing. I think the last KZ earphone I reviewed was the EDX in 2020.

Paradoxically, KZ’s first batch of iems, all single-dynamic drivers, back in 2014, were quite good sounding. Oldies of this hobby may remember the classic bullet-shaped EDR1 and EDR2, both in the $5 category (including shipping). They offered an “agreeable” mainstream sound – their only issue was a somewhat boomy/loose bass.

KZ introduced their aggressive tuning at around 2017 with the general advent of affordable hybrids.

But this may have finally changed, which appears to be a common trend of many Chinese companies across the board. I recently got wind of the Ling Long, a $15 single dynamic driver in the classic bullet shape, and wanted to give them a chance.

Coincidentally (or not), the KZ ZVX showed up in that package, too. A good opportunity to test this new generation of dynamic drivers.

Specifications KZ ZVX

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the ZVX earpieces, a cable, 3 pairs of foams (S/M/L), and the paperwork. The cable is the standard slightly springy fare from the past — but I am missing some silicone eartips.

The metal earpieces have a matte finish and are slightly bulky and heavy and feel substantial – way above a $20 product. Fit and comfort somewhat standard according to their standard shape. Isolation is good because of the foams.

Tonality and Technicalities

The KZ ZVX is a well tuned, incredibly well resolving single DD, that falls short of being sensational by its weird timbre and its overly fast note decay. The sonic performance is reminiscent of an overpixelated photo. Yep, it could have been that holy grail bargain hunters have been hoping for in Chifi in the last 5 years – but it isn’t quite. Though it is a very interesting iem at this price.

When saying “fast note decay”, you may expect a crisp, tight, lean bass with good speed that does not bleed into the midrange. And sure, it is, although sub-bass extension is just average: the rumble is subtle, but it is there. The low end has a good punch. So far so good.

Vocals are rather forward, but they are edgy, analytical, even robotic, and sometimes tinny and nasal. Notes are lean and with sharp corners. Smoothness is entirely missing. Midrange resolution and clarity are outstanding. Note definition is great, note weight is lean. Voices could be rounder and smoother, they sound a bit roughed up.

There is no shoutiness as KZ have finally dialled back that pinna gain from 13 dB in some previous models to 8 dB.

Treble continues to be well resolving, lean, and…fast. Cymbals are tizzy and robotic, they are grainy and too fast.

Stage is rather deep, of average width (voices don’t leave your head), imaging is very good, there is lots of headroom. In live recordings with band and applause, the concert hall is mapped out well. Dynamics is very good and the overall presentation is rather lively.

Timbre is somewhat off, it is overly metallic, and, paired with an overly fast note decay (string instruments sound scratchy), makes the overall sound somewhat odd and edgy. This does not matter that much with pop and rock, but it does with acoustic sets, jazz, and classical music.

Concluding Remarks

The KZ ZVX is a mixed bag full of contrasts. On the one hand, it is tuned well and offers excellent technical capabilities that rival much more expensive iems, but timbre and speed are not natural on the other. My most positive take home is that KZ have finally recognized and fixed their shoutiness issues.

Despite all its shortcomings, the $21 KZ ZVX is a very interesting budget iem worth a try by the learner drivers, but the “pros” won’t bother.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post KZ ZVX Review – Fast Eddie appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Lacks esprit; presentation too polite for some; not the greatest clarity.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Vision Ears are a boutique company out of Cologne, Germany that offer a plethora of interesting premium earphones. Audioreviews.org authors had the chance of analyzing their products in the past and the Vision Ears Elysium made it onto our Wall of Excellence.

As always with premium products, they are short-term loaners that don’t come in retail packaging. I therefore focus on the sonic performance

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

The earpieces are big, they are nevertheless comfortable, and the isolation is average.

Tonality and Technicalities

Please note that I had the PHöNIX (and the EXT) only for 7 days as part of a Head-Fi tour. I feel that was too short for a definitive evaluation of these iems. Hence take my comments with caution – and look at other opinions, too.

I’d call its signature gently V-shaped, coloured, balanced, and mellow. Soothing with good cohesion. Relaxed and laid back. An earphone for chilling.

It has a very high sensitivity, which makes it very easy to drive with weak sources. It is also much easier to drive than the Vision Ears EXT. There was some hiss when used with the EarStudio HUD100.

Bass is soft, thick, and fuzzy. It is rumbly at the very low end but the dominating mid bass is somewhat blunt and lacks attack, bite, and definition. Downward extension varies with source but is ok. The low end lacks bite for me.

The midrange is on the warm side and lacks clarity in my setups. Vocals are rich, silky smooth, reasonably intimate, but narrow, somewhat veiled, soft, and occasionally nasal. Notes are overly rounded and lack an edge. Like the bass, they could have more definition and crispness to please. Upper midrange has more energy, in comparison. Midrange clarity could be better.

The PHöNIX has good treble extension, energy, and clean resolution while preserving some of the midranges smoothness. But very high cymbal notes show a fast decay and can be somewhat robotic.

Mellow attack, reasonably holographic Overall, the presentation lacks pizazz, and a combination with a neutral, spicy amp would yield optimal results.

Stage is very well defined in 3D space but narrow to average in width – and it can be crowded. Spatial reconstruction is reasonably holographic and players are placed correctly on the stage. Resolution of a group of musicians is not the greatest, but soloists’s instruments are well resolving.

Overall dynamics is not great, the attack is too mushy, I wished the presentation was more vivid.

Concluding Remarks

The PHöNIX is musical, almost lyrical, but it lacks engagement and excitement to my ears and is therefore uninspiring for me. This is, of course, subjective, and I’m sure its signature will appeal more to other listeners, some with a harder life than mine.

Moving from analytical to recreational listening, the PHöNIX will not be outright unappealing to anybody wasn’t it for the melting credit card when purchasing it.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Vision Ears PHöNIX Review – Silk Cut appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The KBEAR Rosefinch is your classic $20 V-shaped single dynamic driver iem but without the traditional flaws such as shoutiness.

The $16.99 KBEAR Rosefinch was kindly provided by KBEAR and I thank them for that. You can get it from the KBEAR Official Store.

Introduction

My history with KBEAR goes back almost to their origins – to the “golden times” of this blog, when iem releases were not as frequent as sand on a beach. I even participated in tuning a KBEAR iem (with KopiOkaya, our eartips man), the infamous KBEAR Diamond. It was the grandfather of all “collabs” and got us both censored on Head-Fi…they wanted to extort money from us, their fair share of our profits. The problem was: we did not receive any compensation.

I later fell temporarily out of favour by not pleasing tuner and manufacturer with my account of the KBEAR Believe, that sported a unique Be diaphragm.

Specifications KBEAR Rosefinch

Physical Things

In the box are the earpieces, a cable, a set of eartips, and the paperwork. KBEAR appears to release variations of the same design over and over again. The metal faceplates are quite nice for this budget price but they are essentially a repetition of the KBEAR Lark. The resin shell are also standard.

The cable and the eartips are as basic as it gets.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Rosefinch sounds like a 2018 V-shaped single-dynamic driver in its price category could or should have sounded: slightly warm and without shoutiness or any other unpleasant peaks. It has a surprisingly good midrange imaging and resolution, a reasonably focused bass, and subdued lower treble with some tizzyness in the uppermost registers.

Sub-bass extension is quite good and bass lines are reasonably well defined. We have had this many times before in this class. The low end is a bit on the strong side – but not as prominent as the graph implies – which may sometimes congest the lower midrange a bit and narrow the stage. But it is by no means hard on my sensitive eardrums.

Vocals are surprisingly well rendered – but don’t expect magic – though they could be a bit more robust. Midrange clarity is best in bass-poor passages. There is no shoutiness, rather the opposite, which has a slightly muffling effect occasionally.

Cymbals are also a bit behind and they get some splash from the upper harmonics. Overall, the treble is quite tame. Timbre is what you are used to from this kind of driver in resin shells – ok, but nothing out of the ordinary. Staging, separation, and layering also take over where the other $20 iems have left off. They are alright, but not exciting.

One thing to note is that the Rosefinch has a low sensitivity and benefits from amping, which is odd for a $17 iem, but not unheard of (see all these VE earbuds).

Concluding Remarks

The KBEAR Rosefinch is another feelgood iem for the budget aficionado and newbie, but it does not offer anything new for the experienced hobbyist. KBEAR did a reasonable job learning from their previous mistakes. There is nothing wrong with this iem – and listeners on a limited budget may be quite pleased even. The price is certainly right.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post KBEAR Rosefinch Review – Average Guy? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $120 NiceHCK F1 is a well-resolving planar magnetic earphone that follows the current trend. It essentially sounds like my “modded” LETSHUOER S12.

The $120 NiceHCK F1 planar magnetic earphone was kindly provided by the NiceHCK Audio Store for my analysis – and I thank them for that. You can purchase it at the NiceHCK Audio Store.

Introduction

NiceHCK are an aliexpress company that made their name with $3 earbuds (before the current inflation) and annual Fukubukuro offerings: a surprise bag (“Wundertüte”) containing a mystery new-release earphone at a discount price. They are also quite renowned for their accessories, first and foremost their earphone cables. Good quality at reasonable prices.

While their iems are always interesting, they have been hit and miss throughout history. We have reviewed quite a few of their products.

Loomis and I, in our sonic youth, had a soft spot for their $12 NiceHCK Bro single DD. And I found their $140 NiceHCK M6 offered a sniff into the world of premium iems – at the time. The company’s most prominent effort was/is the NX7 series that recently culminated in the MK4. M6 and NX7 MK4 suffered from a slow bass, a flaw the F1 avoids.

As NiceHCK’s contribution to the current planar magnetics trend, the F1 is actually a good sounding earphone.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a cable, 2 generous sets of silicon eartips, a lavish pleather storage box, a velcro tie, and the paperwork. The OCC silver-plated cable is absolutely gorgeous with a perfect flexibility and probably costs $30-40 by itself.

The rugged earpieces are made of CnC machined aluminum alloy in the tradition of the 2018 NiceHCK M6 for example. Their cylindrical shape is very similar to my beloved Dunu Zen, just a bit smaller.

The generous sets of eartips are generic – they came with all previous MK4 models, too. NiceHCK should make some effort selecting eartips that optimizes the sound of a particular model (ok, ok, Sennheiser does the same).

The colour combination and faceplate have a retro appeal to me (retro being 2018). The nozzles are a bit short but once I have inserted them deep into my ear canals, they stay i there, and give me a good seal. The shells are comfortable for me over longer listening sessions. Isolation is average.

Just like with many other planars, the F1 are not very sensitive and work best with decent amplification

Tonality and Technicalities

The NiceHCK F1 comes with three different screw-on tuning filters, silver, black, and gold. Each filter creates a different sonic flavour. The silver filter delivers the most balanced and most realistic musical reproduction and is used for this sound analysis.

The gold filter adds an upper midrange spike that introduces a brightness that is fatiguing to the western ear. And the black filter enriches the lower midrange but leaves a particularly thick bass perception.

The F1 rides on the bandwagon of the the current planar magnetic hype, and it does so actually quite well. In the “olden days” there were two end members of sound signature, “neutral” and “fun”. The first meant the item was analytical and sterile as it lacked bass, and the second referred to a bassy V-shaped signature with recessed vocals.

Updating this terminology to today’s standards means “technical” vs. “agreeable (or musical)”. The NiceHCK F1 straddles the thin line between the two.

The F1’s bass is on the satisfying, robust side with a slightly blurry midbass hump, which is not pounding fatiguingly but rather subtly against my eardrums. A reasonably pleasant but slightly unfocused punch (it could be a bit tighter), which bleeds into the lower midrange. This adds robustness to the sound an contrast to the less bassy Dunu Talos.

The midrange is on the clean, more technical side, but not as lean or analytical as in the LETSHUOER S12 for example. It is richer but also not as sharply etched out and articulate as in the S12 or 7Hz Timeless. With the silver and black filters, the upper midrange is not shouty.

Treble rolls off rather early and is a bit robotic, typical for planar magnetics.

Bringing this all together – the human ear processes the whole frequency spectrum in context – this amounts to a slightly bassy sound with a reasonably well resolving midrange, which allows the listener to turn up the volume without regrets.

In terms of technicalities, the “agreeable/musical” part sacrifices some technical capabilities. The marginally blurry, bleeding bass and the lack of treble extension narrow the stage. Midrange resolution and clarity are very good as long as it is not affected by the bass. Separation and layering are also best in the midrange and treble, but lag behind at the bottom end of the frequency spectrum..

Timbre is a bit on the “planar magnetic” side, which means it is a bit metallic…but still good enough for enjoying acoustic sets.

Apart from the bass, the F1 are very good iems. The LETSHUOER S12, in comparison, has a tighter bass, but leaner mids, and is less “musical”. But with its current “micropore mod” (which removed spice from the S12’s upper midrange and thickened the bass) both sound almost identical (and they have almost the same frequency response). I would not be surprised if S12 and F1 had the same driver, just use different filtering.

The Dunu Talos is less bassy than the F1 and S12, has a much wider stage, and comes across as a bit sharper and spicier in the upper midrange (but there’s always micropore tape). I’d not put a newspaper between the three. In any case does the F1 not need any modding, but possibly some better eartips.

Concluding Remarks

After my criticism of their recent models, NiceHCK have pulled out a good and useful planar-magnetic earphone in the F1. While my analysis may be nitpicking, they are quite enjoyable for recreational listening.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Gallery

The post NiceHCK F1 Review – Bandwagonesque appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $49 TINHIFI C3 is yet another TINHIFI Harman-tuned single DD iem with agreeable mainstream sound, good for universal use.

The TINHIFI C3 Plus was provided unsolicited by the manufacturer – and I thank them for that. You can get it from TINHIFI.com.

Introduction

TINHIFI tried to avoid their sonic sins of the past and recently launched a series of Harman tuned iems coverin- the complete budget spectrum: the $39 C2, the $49 T2 TLC, and the $119 T4 Plus. As we know, the company became famous back in 2018 with their (in)famous T2, which you still get on drop.com.

Strangely enough, all the above mentioned models produce almost identical frequency responses – and the $49 C3 joins in with them. But they sport different drivers and cavities in their shells, which does not make them sound exactly identical. Durwood already took a stab at the C3, which you can find here.

Specifications TINHIFI C3

Physical Things and Usability

The package contains the shells, a set of silicon eartips in 6 sizes, a gorgeous cable, and the paperwork. The shells deviate from TINHIFI’s silvery brushed metal, they are resin with one of these average shapes we have seen frequently before.

The shells fit me well, they are rather comfortable, but they are nothing to write home about. They are a generic standard design.

Tonality and Technicalities

TINHIFI C3 is yet another safely tuned offering by TINHIFI, who obviously learnt their lesson from the sharp sounding T2 DLC. It is reminiscent of the Moondrop Crescent which also follows the Harman curve. The sound is “agreeable” with a bass boost and respectable technicalities.

The low end is the most prominent sonic feature of the C3. It has some emphasis somewhere between sub-bass and mid-bass reminiscent of the XBass in some ifi Audio amps. Bass is visceral, tactile, thumpy, and agile, but could be a bit more composed. It can be quite enjoyable but you sadly cannot switch it off when (not) in the mood. Let’s say the bass is tastefully overdone.

Despite its emphasis, sub-bass extension is actually just average. On the other hand, the punch is below the point that could annoy my eardrums.

Vocals are richer than, for example, in the TINHIFI C2, but they could be richer in absolute terms. Notes are well defined and a bit on the edgy side, they could be a bit more rounded. They are nevertheless never harsh but constitute a contrast to the bass. The advantage of this is a good note definition in the midrange. There is no shoutiness.

Treble is somewhat subdued with limited resolution. Lower treble can be a bit splashy. Rolloff starts quite early.

Stage is average width and depth, and of good height. The other technicalities such as separation and layering are class average, spatial cues quite decent. The TINHIFI is like a good 2nd league football club: no outstanding player but a good team. Timbre is good but with a hint of plastic.

In comparison, the T4 Plus sounds more cohesive, more mature, and rounder sounding. One step up, the $150 Sennheiser IE 200 achieves the timbre we are looking for. The C3 sounds less smooth in comparison.

To my confusion, the TINHIFI T2 TLC also costs $49 and, considering both share the frequency response graph, you tell me which one you prefer. Of the other Harman-tuned recent TINHIFI models, the T4 Plus sound more refined than the C3, and the C2 sounds a tad leaner. Of all these, the C3 may be the most comfortable, and probably the one with the strongest perceived bass perception.

Concluding Remarks

By and large, I find the TINHIFI C3 relatively enjoyable (inasmuch a $60 rem can be enjoyable). Its bass drive helps eliminating ambient noise, which makes the C3 a suited companion on the road, be is on the bus, train, or on foot.

Yes, it is not the last word in audiophile excellence, but after too much caviar, we also crave a tasty burger. And that’s what the C3 can be compared to. In everyday use, I prefer the C3 over the C2 and the T2 TLC, whereas the T4 Plus remains technically out of reach.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TINHIFI C3 Review (2) – Tastefully Overdone appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $59 Celest Pandamon is a composed sounding planar-magnetic earphone with surprising technical capabilities.

Introduction

Celest is a new sub-brand of Kinera focusing on iems priced below $100. The mother of these companies, YuTai Electronics Acoustics, was established in 2011, focusing on drivers and hearing aids. Kinera followed in 2013. The first Celest iem, the Gumiho, was introduced in 2022.

The Celest Pandamon follows the bandwagon of popular planar-magnetic iems at ever lower prices. It was designed by the company without the collaboration of any YouTuber. And it is a good one (nevertheless or rather despite…).

Specifications Celest Pandamon

Driver: Kinera 10mm SPD 2.0 ( Square Planar Driver ) Impedance: 9 ohm Sensitivity: 108 dB Frequency Response: 20Hz-20,000 Hz Cable/Connector/Plug: Oxygen Free Copper Cable/ 2pin/3.5mm Termination Plug Tested at: $59 Product Page/Purchase Link: kineraaudio.com

Physical Things and Usability

In the package are the shells, a cable, a storage bag, 2 sets of silicone eartips (S/M/L), the paperwork – and a strange fat panda and on a chain. Turns out the latter is a bookmark. Handy idea, provided you can read (if not, there’s Youtube).

The earpieces are drop shaped – and therefore different from the usual fare – with interesting faceplates. The nozzles are a bit on the short side, I have to really push them very deeply into my ear canals, and it takes some effort to get a seal. Once in, they are reasonably comfortable.

The eartips work even for my large ear canals, isolation is soso for me, and cable is average.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Celest Pandamon offer a cohesive, well dosed, dry & lean, vivid, airy, neutralish presentation with an elevated bass adding some temperature from below. The tonality is based on an agile, thumpy, dominant but never overwhelming bass with good extension making for a pleasant sub-bass rumble.

Bass lines are reasonably fast but can be a bit rich and could be a tad more refined/more composed/tighter, although they are never out of control. And they may smudge a bit into the more neutral midrange.

The lower midrange is lean (but not thin) and dry, vocals have a sparse, pragmatic presentation with good note definition. Very disciplined, but not too weighty and never sharp.

Voices are articulate, they sound organic and speech intelligibility is quite good. There is no shoutiness, a new trend across the board. The mids are not as dynamic as the bass. Despite this apparent contrast, low end and midrange harmonize well.

Treble rolls off…and therefore does not have the biggest upward extension. Stage is average in width but somehow very intimate, resolution is ok in the low end and better in the midrange. The same accounts for separation and layering.

In comparison, the latest batch of TINHIFI iems, all with essentially the same Harman tuning (and therefore the same frequency response graph) are thicker in the low end and warmer in the mids. They sound more “conventional/middle of the road” than the slimmer, drier, more disciplined Pandamon.

The Celest’s stage is average in width but somehow very intimate as if the listener was in the first row. Imaging is excellent: placement of players on stage is accurate. Note definition, resolution, and layering/separation are probably hard to beat for its class. Timbre is a bit on the planar-magnetic side.

Concluding Remarks

After expecting from its looks, the Celest Pandamon was a toy, it turned out to be quite a good sounding and enjoyable, very disciplined and composed sounding iem. It is probably a good alternative to the hyped budget collabs – but cheaper without the royalties.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Celest Pandamon Review – Disciplined appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The TINHIFI T4 Plus is the umpteenth repeat/variation of their famous 2018 T2, with identical frequency responses to their current C2, C3, and T2 DLC models…but the best sound quality of the lot. Since it also features essentially the same shells as the $49 T2 DLC, I wonder wonder why TINHIFI keeps beating the same dead horse.

The TINHIFI T4 Plus was provided unsolicited by the manufacturer – and I thank them for that. You can get it from TINHIFI.com.

Introduction

TINHIFI have become famous in 2018 with the (Tinaudio) T2, a $50 neutrally tuned iem – which was unique at the time. The company has pursued the T2’s visual concept in all variations in many follow-up models, most recently in their T2 DLC.

What has changed lately is TINHIFI’s tuning: they have been playing safe by applying the same Harman tonality to all their recent models (see below). This avoids unpleasant surprises such as shoutiness and therefore lack of cohesion, but it also means that, if you know one of them, you know them all.

The T2 Plus is the priciest and best accessorized of the latest “Harman” models. It is indeed safe on all fronts, from the ergonomics to the sound.

Specifications TINHIFI T4 Plus

Physical Things and Usability

The package includes the earpieces, a cable, three sets of eartips in a soft-plastic box, a snazzy storage container and the paperwork. The shells are a modification of the T2’s, which have been re-cycled in different models. They work well ergonomically, and are comfortable. None of the stock eartips were big enough for my ear canals so that I relied on the SpinFit CP145s.

Tonality and Technicalities

The TINHIFI T4 Plus has the same tuning as the C2, C3, and T2 DLC, so you essentially can just read up from these how the T4 Plus should sound. Considering that, on top of that, the T4 Plus has essentially the same shells, and that this earpiece concept has also been used in various other TINHIFI models since their famous 2018 T2 model, the company may be beating a dead horse.

In short, the T2 Plus delivers a safe V-shaped mainstream sound with a warm, thumpy bass, a lean, recessed midrange, and some…treble. As we have heard it so often before, not only in the aforementioned TINHIFI models.

There is an average bass extension, and average bass rumble, making for a warm average bass with bass lines that could be a bit tighter and less thick. The vocals are lean and recessed, slightly bright, clean, and reasonably articulate and natural. They could be richer and more forward.

Treble sounds a bit artificial. Cymbals come across as splashy and tizzy. And I thought my hearing is losing upper frequencies. Obviously not.

Staging is of average width and not very deep. Spatial cues is ok. Timbre is a bit on the metallic side. Separation and layering are average for a $60 iem. Stop, this one is $119. And I have no idea why it is $70 more than their even safer sounding T2 DLC (the T4 Plus’ better accessories alone don’t justify it).

Neither the T2 DLC or the T4 Plus are particularly inspiring for the trained ear. The difference between the two is that the T2 DLC is outright boring sounding and the T4 Plus is ok but unexciting and overpriced.

What’s the difference between the two? I A/B-ed with a splitter. The easier-to-drive T2 DLC sounds a bit splashier, the T4 Plus is a tad more refined and composed. That’s it.

Concluding Remarks

The T4 Plus is principally an appealing and pleasing sounding iem – and the best of the loooong series with the “T2 shells”. Nobody will find it offensive or bad, everybody will somewhat enjoy using it. But for the more experienced listener/hobbyist, the T4 Plus may be repetitive in both design and well-known sonic signature. If the T2 (and their follow-ups) had never existed, I’d be less harsh on the T4 Plus.

TINHIFI should stop copying themselves and stop milking their clientele as their recent $49 T2 DLC offers the same frequency response and almost the same shells as the T4 Plus…and the shells are also shared with the T2, T2 EVO, T4…and and and…did I forget a model?

In summary, the T4 Plus could be considered a good $60 mainstream iem (with some accessories added), unfortunately at twice the price. And if you own any of the iems mentioned in this article, you don’t need the T4 Plus.

Stop resting on your laurels and move on, TINHIFI! You have all the tools…

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TINHIFI T4 Plus Review – Groundhog Day appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The AFUL PERFORMER 5 is a technically innovative earphone that does not quite hold up to the the company-generated hype.

The AFUL Performer 5 was provided by HifiGo for my analysis – and I thank them for that. You can get it from HifiGo.

Introduction

It was only three months before this writeup that AFUL – coming seemingly out of nowhere – launched a gigantic promotional campaign and hype, presenting themselves as a a leading player in the earphone market. From 0 to 100 in a few seconds. To achieve this would be nothing short of sensational (Sennheiser have been at it since 1945).

We at audioreviews.org love dissecting claims and hype – and put the Performer 5 happily on our work bench. OK, ok, the name alone…we have heave heard the jokes about it already…it is apparently pronounced “A-foo”. L is silent. It means “prosperity and fortune” in Mandarin. Nothing wrong with that.

From AFUL’s self presentation:

Aful Acoustics has always targeted a strong and experienced acoustic R&D Team. They have adhered to the simple concept of “Only Real Progress in Technology can bring Tangible benefits to the Consumer”.

Four Years Ago, AFUL Acoustics was founded to bring a change to the HiFi Audio industry with class-leading IEMs and Headphones at pocket-friendly prices. After painstaking research by the team for over two years, Aful Acoustics matured the basic technology in 2020. Ever since then they have got several different technologies such as EnvisionTEC Medical-Grade 3D Printed Acoustic Tube Structure, 3D Air-Pressure Balanced Relief Technology, etc.

Aful Acoustics has always targeted innovative Acoustic Technologies to produce crisp, high-resolution sound quality with IEMs that outperform the competition by a huge margin. We have always aimed to design quality products that deliver high-end performance while coming at a mid-range price tag.

Source: HifiGo

To be fair, the Performer 5 does incorporate some good innovative technical ideas. KopiOkaya told me that the pressure-relief vent has similar principles to 64Audios ADEL, just that it is built into the shell design. They also seem to be serious about the coherence. Not often you see separate sub and mid-bass tubes, especially the coiled ones that tend to extend sub-bass rumble. Moondrop Blessing2 does it around $300, but not many others. 

Specifications AFUL Performer 5

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, cable, eartips, metal storage case, and paperwork. The shells are bulky but light and comfortable, and the isolation is good – with SpinFit CP145 eartips, the stock tips are too small for my teutonic ear canals.

The cable is pliable with sturdy metal connectors. Very good. Overall haptic and build are commensurate with the price tag.

Tonality and Technicalities

The AFUL Performer 5 was hyped as somewhat different sounding from the rest – and this is actually true. It offers a relaxed, laid back presentation with a mild BA timbre. Tuning is quite good but the technicalities are more in the category of a $100 earphone. The Seeaudio Yume comes to mind.

I always pick out the bass first in my listening sessions, which, unfortunately is the Performer 5’s weakest point: midbass is mushy and muffled to a point that my eardrums start ringing after a short while. And that, although it does not have a lot of kick. This lack of bottom-end focus may be compared to hitting a drum with a somewhat loose skin.

If the bass had more pizazz, this mush would be unbearable. Needless to say that the bass resolution is not satisfying, basslines are sloppy and lack composure. Extension into the sub-bass is average and there is not much rumble down there at all.

The soft midbass partially covers the vocals which are actually well presented. Note definition is good, note density is ok but not the fullest, vocals come across with a reasonably natural speed. Nothing shrill and there is also zero shoutiness (a new trend across the board). But I find the midrange somewhat splashy and fluffy. It lacks discipline.

Treble extension is also good with middling resolution. I find the cymbals a bit on the lean side and high violin notes somewhat muffled.

Timbre is as you expect from a “multi”, resolution is best in the midrange and poorest in the bass. In less bassy pieces, the midrange has lots of air, once bass sets in, it is getting muffled to various extents. Soundstage is average but can be narrowed by the bass smear.

Separation, layering, and headroom do hold up to its class.

Overall, the Performer 5 lacks cohesion and composure to justify its price. It could be more refined in its presentation.

There is no comparison to top notch $200-250 iems such as the JVC HA-FDX 1, which have much better tonal balance, tonal accuracy, and cohesion…to name but a few criteria…which add up to much more enjoyable listening experience.

Concluding Remarks

The AFUL Performer 5 is another example of an unjustified hype of a prematurely released product. You can evaluate this statement yourself: where is the Performer 5 three months later? While the R&D may justify its price, the result does not.

We are now waiting for the “Pro” model addressing the initial toothing issues. And, I am sure, it will be a good one. The early adopters as guinea pigs? That’s not how it should work – but unfortunately that’s how the game goes. Again and again.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post AFUL PERFORMER 5 Review – Lost In Translation appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $60 KBEAR Qinglong is a haptically and optically appealing single DD iem…that lacks sonic inspiration.

The KBEAR Qinglong was kindly provided by the manufacturer for my analysis – and I thank them for that. You can get it from the KBEAR Official Store.

Introduction

KBEAR are currently deeply invested in Chinese mythology. Qinglong, the Azure Dragon, is one of the Dragon Gods, one of the highest deities. It is also one of the four symbols, which the inclined reader knows from the Led Zeppelin IV album.

The other three symbols are the Black Tortoise, the Vermillion Bird, and the White Tiger. These symbols have multiple meanings in Chinese mythology – and describing them would go too far here.

Specifications KBEAR Qinglong

Physical Things and Usability

The package features the earpieces, eartips, cable, storage case…and additional cleaning brush and microfibre cloth. Nice! The earpieces are of highest quality, made of polished aluminum, and very similar to the the Moondrop KATO’s (at almost three times the price). The cable is pliable with rugged metal connectors – and optically good average. Works well.

Comfort and fit are good, isolation could be better – for my ears.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Qinglong’s sound is not bad, looking at it superficially: decent single DD timbre, V-shape…but but but… After a few minutes, the Qinglong shows its true face: it lacks PRAT and its tuning is from yesteryear (that isolated midrange mountain between 2.5 and 4.5 kHz).

Bass is on the weaker side with relatively little kick, but there is an ok sub-bass rumble. Kick is soft and bass lacks focus and composure, which leads to a somewhat fuzzy mid bass. The bass may congest the lower midrange.

Vocals are much recessed, lean, and they can be sharp (that midrange mountain in the frequency response…again) and borderline nasal. Higher guitar notes are on the verge of being shouty – but not quite. And then there is this weird drop off from 4.5 kHz on moving cymbals and high violin notes into the background.

So we get a little agile bass covering somewhat bright, lean vocals. Voices are way too thin for my taste. Upper midrange is only borderline shouty. We get a sharp rolloff in the lower treble that puts cymbals behind the bass. Somehow, the whole image lacks fine tuning and cohesion.

I am rather critical, as I have tested tens of such half-baked iems. The newbie reviewer may be more satisfied with the Qinglong.

As to the technicalities: the fuzzy mid bass narrows and congests the stage, which is average in less bassy tracks. Timbre is good, separation and layering are actually ok, too. Overall, tonality and technicalities combined are not more than just acceptable, but nothing special.

My criticism is that there is no cohesion, no PRAT, which makes my listening experience somewhere between boring and painful.

Higher guitar notes are on the verge of being shouty – but not quite. And then there is this weird drop off from 4.5 kHz on moving cymbals and high violin notes into the background.

Concluding Remarks

The KBEAR Quinlong are not per se bad but simply uninspiring to the trained ear. They are just another <$100 iem with great build and good looks – and mediocre sound. Tuning is simply lagging – and the competition is not sleeping either. There’s more to product design than just looks.

And that’s it for me with reviewing cheap gear. I’ll leave it to the juniors!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post KBEAR Qinglong Review – Into The Mystic appeared first on Music For The Masses.