KZ, or Knowledge Zenith, or Dongguan Yuanze Acoustic Technology Company Ltd., have been flooding the western markets with earphones since 2014 (and the domestic market probably much earlier).

We may remember the early ED1 and ED2 that came in plain blue boxes and cost $5, including shipping from China. These were actually quite decent iems. KZ briefly built on their early success with some more sophisticated dynamic-driver models like the popular ED9.

When balanced armature drivers became affordable at around 2017, KZ were one of the first players to catch on and cash in on a grand scale. I quickly purchased and/or reviewed 22 of their models but stopped when they started to overflow and jam the lowest drawer of my office desk. KZ exacerbated this effect by producing bigger and bigger models such as the ZS10 or the BA10.

Their first multi driver models had a V-shaped sound characterized by vocals buried behind the soundstage, like the ED16. But they were cheap, most of them sold for below $25. Their next generation was characterized by an exaggerated upper midrange that produced a sharp and shouty sound. Examples are the EDX and ZSN Pro X.

But KZ did not give up and, in collaboration with the Comical Research Interference Network (C.R.I.N.), they fabricated at least one model with mostly decorative drivers (which they may have taken over from Campfire Audio): only some in each model actually “fired”…which did not play a role as some professional YouTubers did not notice it, possibly owing to too much decorative makeup around their ears. Decorative drivers helped keeping the price down, and YouTubers are mainly decoration, too, albeit annoying ones (for adults).

KZ play the game and they play it well: cashing in on obsessive-compulsive buyers who need their weekly fix…or mail call, as they call it on Facebook. These are eternal sidegraders. Such buyers spend cumulatively way more money on their countless budget models than on a decent earphone such as the Sennheiser IE 600, which would stand the test of time.

KZ must have a sign in their conference room: Many a little makes a mickle!

Finally, the KZ AS24 is a good earphone. It is model 1199. Yes, there are slightly more KZ models than Bruce Lee karate movies, and way more than words spoken by Sylvester Stallone in his Rocky francise. Number 1200 will be released soon. Congratulations!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post KZ To Release Their 1200th Earphone Model appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Unlike the stubby, cable-less SD2, the bespoke aluminum-and-glass S9 Pro Plus utilizes the same traditional cabled design as its S9 forbearers, but adds volume buttons which allow for much finer adjustments than most source’s volume control and which double as selectors for six different digital filters (fast roll-off, linear phase slow roll-off etc.).

Both sampling rate and filter effects are indicated by colored lighting, which is a nice aesthetic bonus. As with most such gimmicks, the filters on the S9 Pro Plus have a very small (but audible) effect on the presentation, with the “slow” settings showing less ringing and more rounded treble. Ultra hirez PCM and DSD support is provided, though curiously no MQA, which seems to be a dying breed.

Prior reviews of the S9 Pro Plus have stressed its considerable driving power and inclusion of a balanced (4.4m) out, and it certainly is a lusty beast—even through the single-ended out IEMs of average sensitivity sounded loud at 33% of my Pixel 6’s volume, while (other than losing a little subbass depth and  tightness) the 300 ohm/97dB Senn HD 600 didn’t break a sweat when played through the balanced out.

For all that, careful pairing is advised—unlike the S3, the S9 Pro Plus did not match well with very sensitive IEMs like the BGVP DM8 or the KZ ZS10 Pro, which sounded edgy/strident at the high end, especially at higher volumes. In general, the S9 Pro Plus seemed to play better with higher impedance (>50 ohm) phones. Note, too, that if battery life is a priority, the Plus is very power-hungry and will get warm with use. 

The Plus uses an ESS DAC chip which imparts a very different signature to the Plus—in contrast to the brightness, forwardness and lean note texture of the its progeny, the S9 is less adrenalized (though not exactly laid-back), with a neutral-to-slightly warm timbre and a thick, but still-crisp note texture. Bass has considerable depth and emphasis, mainly in the subbass region, but remains tight.

Where the SD2, which image very well and present a lot of space between performers, imparted a “bigness” to the music, the S9 Pro Plus sounds simply massive—upright bass has a resonance and body you won’t hear with lesser pieces, while snare drums have a booming-but-realistic snap. Unlike, say, the Moondrop Dawn, overall coloration isn’t wholly absent, but is considerably less on the Plus and there’s little of the digital sheen you’ll hear on the S9 or SD2.

Resolution and transparency are very, very good—little nuances like the quiet guitar echoes and cymbal taps on INXS’s “Need You Tonight” are revealed in a way I’ve never heard before, while the unadorned piano on Keith Jarrett’s “Koln Concert” sounds eerily lifelike. Other than some hiss on very sensitive phones, background noise is wholly absent.

Yet unlike the similarly revealing SD2, the S9 Pro Plus avoids sounding clinical or excessively detailed, and coherence is almost flawless, and you can pick out different performers without losing focus on the musical whole. Which is not to say they’re particularly smooth or mellow—they still retain a hint of Hidizs’s characteristic sharpness/metallic edge at the highest frequencies, and treble-averse listeners might find it slightly hot, but for most of us it’s an appealing, very detailed presentation.

Nominally $139, the S9 Pro Plus is selling for $89 on the Hidizs website, which is only a few sou more than Hidizs’ less powerful models and actually cheaper than the (non-Plus) S9. Especially considering its build quality, flashing lights and fancy tech specs, this seems like good value. Again, it doesn’t achieve the purist’s audiophile-neutral ideal, and you’ll need to be careful with impedance matching, but the S9 Pro Plus plays at a significantly higher level than its cheaper peers and gets my gushing praise.

Disclaimer—yet another freebie from Hidizs—get one here: https://www.hidizs.net/

Specifications Hidizs S9 Pro Plus Martha

Contact us!

The post Hidizs S9 Pro Plus Martha Balanced & Single-ended Dac/Amp Review – Metal Machine Music, Vol 2 appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $217 Shanling M1s was proved by Aohsida Audio for my review – and I thank them for that. You can get it from Aoshida Audio.

Shanling’s new $217 M1s packs a lot of functionality and tech into its smallish (70mm x 70mm) package, including MQA/DSD decoding, Bluetooth receiving and transmission, gapless playback, Wifi connectivity, standalone DAC capability and 14h battery life. Beautifully machined metal casing is a bit heftier than anticipated, but conveys a sense of solidity, and the 2.8” screen has good visibility (I would pop the extra $10 for the optional leather case). 

UI (which combines a physical volume wheel and responsive touch controls) is logical and well-conceived. Onboard EQ and digital filter options are catnip for technogeeks. The user manual is extremely minimalist and doesn’t provide guidance beyond basic operation of the controls—I was able to muddle through Bluetooth connection, file downloading etc., but Luddites beware.

Note further that the DAP utilizes Shanling’s simplistic OS, which has a built-in Tidal app but (at least for now) doesn’t allow other Android apps. In practical terms, this means if I want to listen to a Steve Bannon podcast on Spotify, I need to remain tethered to my mobile, which undermines the utility of having a separate DAP.  

Shanling maintains that other apps aren’t viable because of the MS1’s screen size (and some maintain Android-based systems are sonically inferior), but a more inclusive OS would have been ideal.

I first tested the M1s as DAC/amp, playing Coltrane and Radiohead in lossless, Tidal MQA and 320kb OGG through my Kindle Fire and a Dell laptop (note that a driver is required for Windows). Because the MS1 uses the same ESS ES9038Q2M chips as Shanling’s UA5 and UA2 dongles (albeit with a more powerful amp), I expected the M1s to sound more-or-less the same—warmish, smooth and balanced across the different frequencies.

Instead, the M1s has quite a different signature—tonally a bit bright, with lean, crisp notes and a conspicuously forward midrange which highlights horns/male voices. Bass is tight and controlled but not especially deep or visceral; high end is very well-extended and presents a lot of microdetail.

Perhaps because of the midrange emphasis, I hear the soundstage as fairly narrow and low-ceilinged, although performers remain well-separated and imaging is accurate if somewhat two-dimensional.

The M1s immediately scores in two respects. First, it has a ton of driving power, especially through the 4.4mm output–it can drive the 300 ohm Senn HD600 effortlessly and really gets a grip on the wobbly bass of my 60 ohm Koss KSC74. It can, however, be a bit much for very sensitive IEMs, even in low gain setting—something like the KZ ZS10P or TRN-VX show more high-end glare and metallic timbre than with lower-powered sources.

OTOH, synergy with the more power-hungry Blon BL-03 was great, with the Blon sounding fuller-bodied and bassier than typical. The M1s are not without coloration—horns in particular sound amped-up and slightly billowy—but this an extremely revealing, live-sounding piece. 

Second, and most pronouncedly, the M1s is as unforgiving and revealing of source as you’ll hear—poorly-recorded or low-rez files sound crappy, while well-recorded, hi-rez files are richly detailed and impeccably clear. Nothing is smoothed over; the sonic difference between say, a Tidal master-quality track and the same track on Spotify is massive.

Especially since I inevitably listen to a lot of sub-par recordings, this is a mixed-bag—the M1s can sound over-analytical without careful matching of file and headphone. Optimally paired, however—say a 24bit/192Hz take of “A Love Supreme” through the aforesaid HD-600—the M1s sounds very transparent and lifelike, with considerable energy and top-to-bottom coherence. 

I did test the M1s as a Bluetooth streamer to my Sony WH-1000XM4  and it was fine—easy connectivity, good range—while the LDAC codec very clearly presents more sonic information than generic AAC. However, other than playing louder I can’t honestly state that even after tweaking the EQ on the MS1 to augment low end tracks on the M1s sounded much better or different than the same tracks played through my Pixel mobile.

Plainly, the highest and best use for the M1s is as a portable player through wired phones, where its power and transparency are on full display. I loaded a ton of FLAC and WMA (as well a couple of DSD tracks) onto a microSD card (not included; there is also no onboard storage, which is a curious omission). Again, my big takeaway was just how much better than Bluetooth this wired setup sounded—gutsier, punchier, with much more high-end definition.  

Not having other DAPs on hand, I borrowed a ($200ish) Sony NW-A55 from a gym mate to compare. The Sony is a nice-sounding piece with more intuitive ergonomics and better battery, but trails the M1s sonically in most respects. Most notably, the Sony has much lower output power and isn’t suitable for higher impedance loads.

This is manifest mostly at the low end, which sounds softer and less impactful than the Shanling’s. The Sony has a warmer, smoother tonality which does work well for low-quality files but is significantly less resolving and extended at both ends. I also found the Sony’s various DSP tunings artificial-sounding.

The M1s isn’t perfectly neutral, and treble-averse folks might find it a bit spicy on top. As noted above, it is also brutally revealing of poor recordings. It is, however, unquestionably a lot of machine for the money and will make your higher-impedance wired headphones sound brawnier and better. Thumbs way up.

Disclaimer: sent to me gratis by Aoshida Audio   https://aoshida-audio.com/ . Unless Jürgen has some covert arrangement with them [he has not], we get nothing (other than more gear) for touting their wares.

Specifications Shanling M1s

Contact us!

The post Shanling M1s Portable Hifi Player Review – She Blinded Me With Science appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Unamped, and with the included silicon tips, the  Lyra sounded like, well, a $20 cheapo—bass-shy and anemic , with a dark unnatural-sounding tone. Amping these with a Shanling UA-3 dongle, switching to foams and (esp.) inserting the nozzles deeply massively transformed these to warm, rich-textured and (generally) balanced, with tons of thumping-but-controlled subbass, a bit of a dip in the 100-200Hz midbass region and full-bodied mids.  

Treble is smooth and fairly laid-back—it misses a bit of snap on drums and percussion, but wholly avoids the tizziness and sharpness of cheap hybrids. Soundstage isn’t massive, but remains uncongested, and imaging (a typical KZ strength) is very good by any standard.

The Lyra lack the high-end extension and sound less expansive than KZ’s better hybrids (ZSX, ZS10 Pro) but have the more organic, less strident timbre; the Lyra is also less revealing than the $40 budget champ  Blon BL-03, but has superior fit and isolation. In the same price bracket, the amazin’ TRN-STM is bigger-sounding and presents more microdetail and sizzle, but is also hotter at the treble end and more exhausting than the easygoing Lyra.

Durwood praises these as daily-driver material and the current uber-budget go-to. He may be right.

Disclaimer: borrowed from Durwood.

SPECIFICATIONS CCA Lyra

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from CCA Store on Aliexpress

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post CCA Lyra Review (2) – Profiles in Polyurethane appeared first on Music For The Masses.

INTRO

In this hobby, if you have not heard of Knowledge Zenith these past few years then time to get educated on the KZ ESX. Recycling the shell from classics such as the KZ ZSN, Z10pro , and countless other models from TRN, CCA and others, KZ gives the faceplates a cosmetic refresh. Given inflation these budget models have trickled up in price from $12-15 and now come priced at around $19. The KZ EDX is a bassy rolled off treble listen that is inoffensive and lackluster.

DISCLAIMER: It’s hard to get excited over new budget models, but I graciously received these direct from KZ to give everyone an Audioreviews take. There are limits to budgets, and we cannot forget those folks.

GOOD TRAITS

• Common universal shell with good nozzle length and a lip to keep the eartip on
• 2 Pin cable
• Inoffensive treble, no sibiliance
• Easily driven from smartphone

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

• Darker/mellow sounding treble (yes I put treble in both pros and cons)
• Technically abilities
• Better bass articulation

FITMENT / DESIGN

The rear of the KZ ESX driver is vented quite a bit, but I don’t notice it impacting isolation so much. The translucent blue is a nice color accenting the silver metal faceplate. The nozzles are long and made of plastic with a lip, they are on the larger side but not XL. Cable is the standard silver plated straight cable with a right angle plug and plastic molded earhooks.

The dynamic driver is a 12mm liquid crystal 5 micro thick diaphragm, claiming more powerful energy, faster response, and stronger vocal resolution. This reminds me of a persona that typically says things that are untrue to detract from what may be really happening.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

• Earphones
• 0.75mm 2 Pin detachble 1.2m silver plated cable
• S/M/L White starline eartips

SOUND

Tested using LG G8 and SMSL DO100/HO100 DAC/AMP

First thing you notice on the KZ ESX is the throbbing bass, I would say the boost feels centered near 40-60Hz, sub bass is covered no problem. While not articulated in precise terms, it has a boomy linger that tends to color the lower mids and sits in front of the mix.

Midrange is recessed with no harshness, but no excitement either. I sense some crowding of instruments all in the center. There appears to be a medium/normal pinna gain, guitars and horns are present, but lack any bite or edginess to them to sound realistic or exciting to listen to.

Treble roles off quickly and early after 10khz making the KZ ESX sound “polite” or even too dark at times. No real sparkle on cymbals, string instruments are present but like wallflowers. If feels as if I was around loud noises all day and my hearing has compensated for the barrage of noise.

TECHNICAL STUFF

There is not a lot to say about the technical merits of the KZ ESX. Width feels narrow, perhaps the recessed midrange gives it the essence of depth. Overall they feel claustrophobic, lacking in resolution, and congested with busy music. At least there is no sibilance or shoutiness.

FINAL REMARKS

10 years of KZ slowly defining the era of budget entries, the KZ ESX feels as if panders to collectors. This is one I don’t find particularly worthy of purchasing. It has a very 70’s/80’s vibe of big driver bass, coupled with low resolution midrange without decent tweeter output to mask the shortcomings.

This is probably not the review KZ was hoping for, but not everything is a homerun, and sometimes they strike out. Maybe it is not far to call it a strikeout, perhaps a bunt is a better classification as I am sure some people might prefer the politeness of the treble. The CCA CRA+ is a better buy at $9 more, although I do like the styling of the KZ ESX better.

SPECIFICATIONS

GRAPHS

• Left vs Right

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from KZ direct at their Aliexpress Store or other distributors and retailers.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post KZ ESX Review – 10 Years of Another One appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Elaborately packaged, with extensive marketing materials espousing  particularly baffling gobblygook about “DMT4 architecture” and “FEA finite element analysis;” I do find their slogan “Faithfully Recreating the Original Sound” to be better than most of its ilk.

The aluminum and plastic shells look pedestrian but are extremely lightweight and comfortable, with a flat, compact shape and raked nozzles  that fit snugly within the concha and provide for excellent seal and good isolation. (These would  work well for sleeping).  

I like the silver-plated microphonic-free Litz cable, which has useful memory. Not quite as sensitive as the (126dB) spec would indicate, although they were capably driven with just my LG and I didn’t hear any advantage when paired with a dongle.

Specifications:
Brand | TANCHJIM OLA
Sensitivity | 126dB/Vrms
Impedance | 16± 10%
Frequency range | 7-45kHz
THD | < 0.3%
Driver | 10mm dynamic driver
Cable | 1.25M 3.5- 0.78PIN
Technology | DMT 4
Cable Material | Litz crystal copper silver-plating
Diaphragm material | polymer grapheneModel | OLA
Tested at | $39.99
Purchase Link| SHENZHENAUDIO

While prior Tanchjim releases have generally been touted as warm and Harman-tuned, in the sense of having elevated midbass and upper mids, the OLA were surprisingly bright and bass-shy. To my ears, they aspire to that “Japanese tuning;”  like the Kumitate and Ocharaku I’ve heard they have considerable treble extension and some added energy in the midrange, which notably emphasizes female voices.

Even with the “bass-enhanced” eartips, subbass is conspicuously lacking in impact; such lowend as exists is presented mostly as soft and very lean midbass. Soundstage is fairly rounded and within your head; performers tend to be bunched towards the middle of the stage. They do show considerable microdetail; drumheads and cymbals have good snap. Using foams adds bass texture but not really depth.

The OLA does avoid the coarseness or shrillness of cheap BAs; they are more coherent and truer-to-source than bawdier, bigger-sounding peers like the KZ ZS10P and they have a more natural timbre than the overpraised Tin T2.

These might have considerable appeal to fans of this more “reference” tuning. However, I cannot get past the OLA’s lack of the lower octave—they simply sound incomplete, like well-resolving surround speakers in need of a sub. For the same money, the Blon BL03 or KBEAR KB04 sound weightier and more engaging, if not necessarily more revealing.

Bottom line: not my cup of Sake, though well-designed and not without their sonic virtues.

Disclaimer: Got these unsolicited from SHENZHENAUDIO.

Contact us!

Headphone Reviews

The post Tanchjim OLA Review – Carnivores Beware appeared first on Music For The Masses.

INTRO

KZ Acoustics is one of the more well known budget kings where they take and constantly tweak models, the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro is no exception. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a third iteration. KZ has taken liberties with marketing slang to advertise it as an electrostatic but then clearly indicate later it uses an electret microphone. Not the same thing, but seems a little misleading.

So the the original KZ Zex was sort of interesting from a driver standpoint, but sported the usual KZ style of tuning. It received mixed reviews with the CCA NRA being a slightly better take on it from what I have seen but not experienced.

The Zex Pro attempts to rectify some of the short comings by adding a balanced armature to pick up the treble. The tuning appears to be a complete departure from the KZ ZEX based on reviews I have seen of the original ZEX. Instead I believe the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro is actually inspired by the popular JVC HA-FD01 or Drop JVC HA-FDX1. So if you were curious what a JVC HA-FDX1 sounds like with a sprinkle of bass lift and a resonant treble peak around 8khz, this gets interesting.

Disclaimer: No animals were harmed in the receipt of these free earphones from KZ. I would like to thank the post office for delivering them to my mailbox without incident.

Tested at $35 with the LG G8 and Sony NW-A55, Liquid Spark DAC + JDS Labs Atom

GOOD TRAITS

• Not another KZ tuning, something different and balanced
• Fitment fits snugly
• Isolation

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

• Resonance around 8Khz, not just measured. Impacts Timbre.
• Higher volume improves staging, but at the expense of the resonance.
• Misleading “Electrostat” verbage if buying based on technology is how you make decisions.

PHYSICAL COMMENTARY

After removing them from the simple KZ white box, I surprised to find the KZ X Crinacle CRN ZEX Pro does not use the ZSN/ZS10 Pro/ZEX shell. Instead it appears to use what I think is the DQ6 shell that is more contoured and offers excellent isolation for a universal shell.

I received them shortly before my workplace decided to do some concrete ceiling work with a jackhammer. Perfect time to really put these to an isolation test. While I cannot say they are OSHA approved, I did find them to be excellent isolation when seated further away in a separate room, better than the more generic shells.

The KZ ZEX Pro 2 pin silver plated flat cable is a departure from the tangling prone twisted cable, and while it looks and feels meh, it does tangle less easily.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

• Detachable 0.75mm 2 pin 1.2m long cable with or without mic depending on order
• IEM pair
• 1 Pair each of S/M/L starline eartips

SOUND

So the KZ X Crinacle CRN ZEX Pro is not a minor incremental improvement of the original flavor Zex, but what is it? I had heard this signature before initially thinking maybe the ZSN series. After a quick measurement, I realized it looks eerily similar to the Drop JVC HA-FDX1 and well sounds a bit like it to.

The difference comes from a lower centered bass boost enough to add fullness to vocals and drums and upright bass that the JVC lacks. It departs from neutral but classifies as balanced for my definition. Vocals dance along the forward line, it’s a less vivid sounding than my preferred signature, but works great for jazz and classical.

For popular music the signature presents a studio effect. It doesn’t have the suckout though that more mellow KZ iterations such as the ZSN, or ES4 had with shoutier 2-4KHz treble plateau.

Listening to drums and cymbals I am picking up some extra twang from that resonance peak, this impacts the timbre as well. The KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro treble experience is a nice departure despite that zest.

I feel like there is a hand off issue between the electret and the BA driver that reminds me of an audio tape slightly boogered up. I don’t always hear it, so it depends on if the music has information in that particular band.

TECHNICALLY SPEAKING

Excellent width combined with above average depth is a good fit for the KZ X Crinacle CRN Pro. While it seems unfair to keep comparing to the Drop JVC HA-FDX1, instrument spacing and overall blackness doesn’t reach top ratings for the Zex Pro, I would classify as above average.

There is not a 10x difference here though so ignorance can be bliss. As volume is increased it starts to sound a little crowded, so best to keep it mid level or a tick north of that for more liveliness.

COMPARISON

BLON BL-03 ($25) vs the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro ($35)

So I should probably compare the KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro to something in the same price bracket right? The Blon BL-03 was widely dispersed so this should give an idea. Obviously fitment is better on the Zex Pro. Less punch on drums, more blended in the bass for the Zex Pro, the BLON has more natural timbre whereas the Zex Pro gives a more spacious feeling and ambient room portrayal.

There is a minuscule hint of forwardness in the BLON BL-03 only compared to the Zex Pro. Together these two characteristics make the BLON BL-03 feel closed in compared the Zex Pro. Since the treble rise occurs later and that pesky peak around 8khz, cymbals and flutes get more prominence in the the spotlight.

HAPPY ENDINGS

While the misleading use of electrostat leaves a bad taste in my mouth, the rather different tuning makes this KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro a foray into experiencing what some people might view as a more natural tuning with extra low end and narrow treble boost that distinguishes it as a vivid budget HA-FDX1-esque.

Consider it a less technical version where your college roomate has turned the bass boost and treble knobs on that 1970’s vintage stereo system to make it exciting. It’s sculpted custom universal adds more secure fitment with good isolation, so if you played with their earlier KZ ZSR or DQ6 models, you will know what I mean.

I rank these as nice to have budgets way different from other KZ offerings and no issues recommending to friends, but not replacing my daily mid-tier favorites in the $150-$200 category.

I had no idea these were Crinacle branded until later when I was told by KZ to use the new ridiculously long name. I can understand that “X Crinacle” is the moniker used for models with his hand in the tuning.

I respect Crinacle’s work, it’s just too long of a name. I would have actually ditched the Zex Pro portion and give credit where credit is due, and if people didn’t like it so what. Chi-fi is a fast moving target where 6 months from now there will be other things in the market catching our attention.

SPECIFICATIONS

GRAPHS

• Left vs Right
• Zex Pro vs JVC HA-FDX1
• Zex Pro vs Blon BL-03
• Impedance

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from any available reseller.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post KZ X Crinacle CRN Zex Pro Review (2) – Inspired By Drop JVC HA-FDX1? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

To the extent I ever think about cables, I’m a moderate—generally, I neither believe that all well-made cables sound the same nor that you can radically change an IEM’s  tuning with a cable. I’ve also previously rejected as fantastical the notion that silver cables are brighter than copper or that heavier gauges are somehow better. However, the Leyding did have enough of a sonic impact that I’m starting to rethink some of my preconceptions.

The plastic-sheathed 8-core braided Kinera Leyding doesn’t look or feel especially luxe, except for its modular output design, which provides for detachable 2.5mm balanced, 3.5mm single-ended and 4.5mm balanced plugs. Build seems solid, with metal connectors and gold-plated plugs, but the 3.5mm plug is too stubby to fit in the protective case on my mobile (I had to use a M to F extender, which admittedly is not a great sacrifice). The cable does feel soft and supple around your ears, and (in contrast to the stock Bravery cable) is free from microphonics and awkward memory.

Contrary to my preconceptions, the Kinera Leyding very significantly changed the presentation of the SeeAudio Bravery. First and foremost, it boosted the volume considerably—while I leave measurements to my more technogeek colleagues, I hypothesize that the Leyding has lower impedance than the stock Bravery cable (less impedance=greater volume).

However, it also made the already-bright Bravery brighter and made the low end, which had somewhat slow decay with the stock cable, audibly tighter. Not all of these changes were favorable—guitar strings and female vox with the Leyding sounded a little more shrill/digital, albeit more detailed. Overall, however, the Kinera Leyding was an improvement.

Results with the ($49) KZ ZS10 Pro were less successful. Again, the phones sounded louder with the Leyding than with the stock copper cable (which is $9 on KZ’s website) and notes seemed weightier. However, the Kinera Leyding tended to bloat the bass to a painful level, which was better-controlled with the cheaper original.

With the Moondrop Kanas Pro, whose stock cable is thinner but also silver plated copper, the differences were much more subtle—I may have heard a bit more weight in the notes with the Leyding, but I can’t swear that there wasn’t some expectancy bias in play. 

I’m happy to own the Kinera Leyding—the detachable plugs are useful gimmick, it’s very comfortable to wear and a definite enhancement to some phones. You could probably find an equivalent performer for less  (though given its lavish presentation the Leyding seems fairly priced). Above all, it made me actually care about cables for the first time, which is worth something. 

Disclaimer: gifted by and available from HifiGo. Thanks, guys and gals. 

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

The post Kinera Leyding .78mm 2 pin Cable Review – Better Living Through Science appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Nice build and good comfort.
Above average isolation.
Good timbre for a BA containing hybrid.
Non fatiguing tuning, good for treble sensitive folk.
2 pin connector, better lifespan than MMCX in general.
Adequate accessories at this price bracket.
Easy to drive.

Cons

Midbass bleed.
Limited upper treble extension with lack of air
Not the best in technicalities.
Recessed vocals.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The KBEAR Robin is a smooth and non fatiguing set. It doesn’t have the best technicalities, and it is not tuned to be an analytical set, but it is very suited for chilling back and enjoying the music for what it is. Treble sensitive folk will be quite at home with the tuning.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: 10mm dual-magnetic circuit DD + 4 customised balanced armature (BA) drivers
• Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20kHz
• Impedance: 18 Ω
• Sensitivity: 110 dB/mW
• Cable: 2 Pin (0.78mm), 4N oxygen-free copper cable.
• Tested at $54 USD

ACCESSORIES

Other than the IEM, the KBEAR Robin packaging comes with:

• Silicone tips – One set of eartips are wide bore, the other set are narrower bore.
• Cable – The cable provided is quite well braided and is a 4N oxygen free copper cable. It has minimal microphonics and is very usable. 
• Semi rigid case

The accessories provided and the packaging are very similar to the older KBEAR Lark. I find it very adequate at this price range, no complaints on my part, as I’ve definitely seen similar priced competitors with worse accessories.

YMMV, as we have different ear anatomies, but regarding the eartips, the narrow bore ones boost the bass, whereas the wider bore ones boost the higher frequencies. It is a nice touch that KBEAR provided 2 different sets of eartips so that one can tiproll to see what suits your sonic preferences.

I liked that the KBEAR Robin’s cable featured a 2 pin connector, I had my fair share of mishaps with MMCX type connectors after switching cables once too often, they ended up like spinning windvanes.

For the purposes of this review, the stock tips and stock cables were used, so as not to change the sound signature with aftermarket gear.

BUILD/COMFORT

The KBEAR Robin’s shell appears externally similar in shape to the KBEAR Lark, but the Robin is heavier and sturdier. Comfort is good, I have used the Robin for hours at a time with no discomfort. I received the blue coloured version and it has a quite unique hue that stands out from the usual silvery/blackish shelled CHIFI IEMs.

I didn’t have driver flex with the KBEAR Robin, but this is a YMMV situation, as driver flex is partially related to the eartips we use and our ear anatomy.

ISOLATION

Isolation is above average, and is quite acceptable considering it is a vented set, it can be used outdoors for sure.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the KBEAR Robin with a Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp, Sony NW A-55 DAP (Midnight v2 Plus v2 Mr Walkman Mod), smartphone, Shanling Q1 DAP, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, E1DA 9038D, and a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 Amp.

At a sensitivity of 110 dB/mW, the KBEAR Robin is easily drivable from a lower powered source, amping is not really compulsory.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The KBEAR Robin is a warm and bassy V shaped set. Tuning is towards laid back and non fatiguing. It kinda reminds me of the CCZ Plume and BGVP DMG in terms of tuning, if you have heard them before. The KBEAR Robin keep the same midbass focused tonality as these 2 sets, but have weaker technicalities than them.

Bass on the KBEAR Robin is midbass focused. The subbass extends quite well for a DD bass, with good rumble, but the midbass is still the predominant frequency. The midbass quantity is quite north of neutral, but it isn’t a true basshead set per se. The midbass speed is on the slower side, texturing is below average, and the midbass does bleed a bit, and encroaches into the lower mids.

For non bassheads or those who want a fast and tight bass, the bass amounts can be tamed to some extent with wider bore ear tips or tightened slightly with amping, but even so, the midbass is still on the boomy side even when amped.

The KBEAR Robin’s lower mids are thickened and warmed by the aforementioned midbass bleed. This may cause some loss of transparency and clarity in the lower mids, and give a bit of a veil. It adds to some lushness in the lower mids, but I understand it is a love it or hate it kind of issue as such.

Upper mids on this set are tamed, nothing shouty like a classic V shaped CHIFI set, so it isn’t fatiguing. Though as a consequence, vocals may not cut thru sometimes, and may sound recessed. Mid lovers will need to look elsewhere for their vocal fix.

The lower treble on the KBEAR Robin continues on from the safe upper mids, it is very relaxed and smooth. Treble borders on dark, sibiliance is minimal and upper treble doesn’t extend that well, and hence there is some loss of sparkle and microdetails. Honestly trebleheads will not be pleased with the resolution of this set, but this is a set that will make treble sensitive folk feel at home.

Technicalities are below average at the $50ish USD price range. Instrument separation, imaging, microdetails and clarity are hazy as mentioned, contributed in part by the midbass bleed encroaching into the mids. Soundstage is also not the best at this price bracket and music could sound congested in complex tracks.

Timbre is actually quite good for a hybrid containing BA drivers, there’s a very slight hint of BA timbre for acoustic instruments for the higher frequencies, but nothing deal breaking in my book. In fact, timbral accuracy is better than quite a lot of similar priced hybrids.

COMPARISONS

I have compared the KBEAR Robin with a few other hybrids. Single DD types were left out of the comparisons as they have different pros and cons among the different transducer types.

KZ ZS10 Pro

The venerable KZ ZS10 Pro has a deeper V shaped tuning, and has a thinner note weight, with slightly better technicalities than the KBEAR Robin. The ZS10 pro is much more aggressive and in your face, compared to the laid back and smoother KBEAR Robin.

The ZS10 Pro can be more fatiguing in the upper mids and lower treble and also has a more artificial timbre for acoustic instruments.

KBEAR Lark

Accessories, build, comfort and even looks are similar between the 2 sets. Even though both sets are named after birds, I wouldn’t call the KBEAR Robin a successor to the older KBEAR Lark, as they are tuned to be very different beasts.

The KBEAR Lark is a neutralish bright set with better technicalities and resolution. Clarity and micro details are better in the Lark, though the Lark has a thinner note weight and can be fatiguing for treble sensitive folk in view of the more pronounced treble quantities. The Lark also has more sibilance than the laid back KBEAR Robin.

The KBEAR Robin on the other hand is a bassier and warmer V shaped set with a smoother and less fatiguing upper mids/treble, with less air and a thicker note weight than the KBEAR Lark.

BGVP DMG

The BGVP DMG has a similar tuning (midbass focused V shaped) as the KBEAR Robin, but it has better technicalities and soundstage than the Robin. I had a poorer fit and less isolation with the BGVP DMG.

The BGVP DMG has some tuning nozzles to change the sound signature , but they are bordering on gimmicky, as the changes are very subtle. Think of the KBEAR Robin as being a baby BGVP DMG.

CONCLUSIONS

The KBEAR Robin is a smooth and non fatiguing set. Build and comfort are good, and the timbral accuracy on this set is quite authentic for a BA containing hybrid. The Robin doesn’t have the best technicalities, and it is not tuned to be an analytical set. It is very suited for chilling back and enjoying the music for what it is.

Trebleheads and midlovers might need to consider alternative options, but treble sensitive folk will like this set. I would have preferred less midbass amounts (so as to give less bleed and a tighter bass), but the KBEAR Robin is a decent set with a unique tuning at this price bracket, in the sea of CHIFI with hyper boosted upper frequencies. In fact, the Robin is sort of a baby BGVP DMG, without the tuning filters.

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank KBEAR for providing this review unit. It can be gotten at https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002995847825.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post KBEAR Robin Review – Round Robin appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Viscerally, nothing about the ASX suggest it’s a $100 piece—it seems shoddily built, with cheap plastics and visibly uneven seams, while the top metal plate looks garish and the printed slogan “20 BA Work Together” is unlikely to win a Clio. The thin, tangly silver cable is likewise cheap-looking but is noise-free. Oversized headshells are very lightweight (which not incidentally reinforces the sensation of cheapness) and protrude out considerably, although comfort isn’t bad and isolation is good.

In contrast to the more mature, balanced tunings of their (very likeable) KZ ZS7 or ZSX, KZ goes old school here with a loud, energetic V-shaped presentation which evokes their early hybrids like the ZSN or ZS5. This is a bright phone with no pretense to neutrality. Soundstage is narrower than expected—this lacks the expansiveness of the ZS5 or CCA-10– but imaging (usually a KZ strength) is credible and there’s enough space between instruments. Note texture, however, is unnaturally lean which lends them a clinical, spiky quality which I found exhausting to listen to.

The ASX surprises with the quantity of its bass—it’s as bass-focused an all-BA as I’ve heard, which in context is not a good thing. The low end is deep and impactful but wobbly and boomy and there’s way too much of it—like a cheap subwoofer turned up to 11, it dominates the spectrum and draws your ears away from the higher frequencies; overall effect is one of incoherence and poor tuning. Mids, especially lower mids, are lacking in presence; male voices in particular sound shrill and unnatural. Despite the ridiculous driver count, treble is pushed forward but sounds surprisingly rolled off, as if the highest frequencies are filtered out. It’s not as hot/strident as prior models like the ZST or ZSN, but it’s also not particularly revealing, and details like cymbal hits or woodwind trills are pixelated and blurry; drumbeats sound especially canned and unnatural. The ASX is also less coherent than the aforesaid, which is not high praise considering the ASX costs 7X as much. 

Especially compared to former, cheaper releases like the ZS7 or ZS10P, the ASX is a great big step backwards—it just sounds wrong. I gather there are still KZ completists and fanboys who will buy whatever they crank out, but this just doesn’t look, feel or play like a $100 earphone and it’s strange they let this one escape the lab.

Not recommended.

Got it from Jurgen, whose latest email stated, verbatim, “Throw the KZ in the trash.”

SPECIFICATIONS

Drivers: 10 (1*BA22955s, 1*29689s, 4*30017, 4*31736)
Impedance: 20 Ω
Sensitivity: 106 dB/mW
Frequency Range: 20 – 40,000 Hz
Cable/Connector: QDC 2 pin 0.75 mm
Tested at: $100
Product Page:
Purchase Link: Wooeasy Earphones Store

DISCLAIMER

The KZ ASX review unit was provided unsolicited by Wooeasy Earphones Store. Thank you very much. Following my review, the unit was shipped to the next reviewer.

Get the KZ ASX (or rather something else) from Wooeasy Earphones Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Contact us!

The post KZ ASX Review (2) – Seriously? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Beautiful shells, light and well fitting.
Good isolation.
Safe non fatiguing tuning, coherent V shape set.
Easy to drive.
2 pin connector – generally better lifespan than MMCX.

Cons:

Notes may have a lack of bite/edge definition (may be pro or con depending on personal taste).
Technicalities not class leading.
Roll off at higher treble may not appeal to trebleheads, but this is not that fatiguing as such.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Kinera BD005 Pro is a beautiful jack of all trades, sporting a rather coherent warmish V shaped tuning that is safe for the upper frequencies (compared to the usual CHIFI tuning). Other than looks, it scores above average points in most areas, but doesn’t have a particular department that it truly excels at to stand out in the ultra cut throat budget CHIFI market segment.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: 1 DD (9.2 mm) + 1 BA
• Frequency response: 20Hz – 20kHz
• Impedance: 16 Ohms
• Sensitivity: 108 ± 2 dB
• Cable: 2 pin 0.78 mm
• Purchase link: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001870377067.html
• Tested at $49 USD

ACCESSORIES

Other than the IEM, the Kinera BD005 packaging comes with:

• 4 core 4 N High purity oxygen free copper cable (in built mic) – seems there isn’t a choice for a non mic cable. I generally don’t really like mics in the cable as they may be a potential source of failure down the line, not to mention sometimes they may add resistance, but I appreciate that some may like the mic for calls and meetings. The cable doesn’t have a chin cinch though, but is quite usable sonically, and is leagues better than the usual TRN or KZ stock cables.
• Eartips (S/M/L) – the stock silicone eartips come in a short nozzle config, so you might wanna tip roll to aftermarket tips depending on fit.
• Semi rigid carrying case.

For the purposes of this review, the stock cable and tips were used.

BUILD/COMFORT

Kinera gear are generally well known for having beautiful shells/designs and nice packaging, and the Kinera BD005 Pro is no exception. The resin shells are indeed very beautiful. In terms of ergonomics, they are very light, comfortable and well fitting. They actually look and feel like semi customs. The shells are on the larger side in terms of size, but I have used them for hours with no discomfort.

I didn’t find any driver flex for myself (but YMMV as this is somewhat dependent on ear anatomy and types of ear tips used). I liked that the Kinera BD005 Pro came with a 2 pin connector as they generally have better life span than MMCX types, for those who do frequent cable rolling.

ISOLATION

The Kinera BD005 Pro has good isolation, I quite like it as a transit IEM as such, though it won’t beat pure BA unvented types in this department.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the Kinera BD005 Pro with a Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp (thankfully the L30 didn’t blow up for this review LOL), smartphone, Shanling Q1 DAP, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, ESS ES9280C PRO DAC/AMP, and a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 Amp. The Kinera BD 005 Pro is relatively easy to drive, and amping is not generally required. Though amping can increase dynamics, soundstage and perhaps microdetails a tinge.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The Kinera BD005 Pro sports a rather balanced warmish V shaped tuning that is safe for the upper frequencies (compared to the usual CHIFI tuning). I’ve owned a few Kinera gear in the past and the general consensus in audio forums is that for the Kinera house sound, they are on the brighter (and more fatiguing) side, so this Kinera BD005 Pro’s tuning is rather atypical for a Kinera.

Technically, the Kinera BD005 Pro has above average details and imaging. Clarity and instrument separation are about average. Note weight is on the thicker side, and the notes do have a lack of edge definition/bite, so this might be a pro or con depending on personal preference. It results in a smoother and less fatiguing presentation, but those that want some crunch/bite in vocals and guitars might need to look elsewhere. Soundstage is above average in width/height, but not too deep, music can at times get congested with complex riffs or competing instrumentation. So to summarize, the technical performance of the Kinera BD005 Pro is above average at this price range, but not classleading in this aspect.

Timbre of acoustic instruments does have a slight BA timbre, so it won’t beat a well tuned pure DD setup in the timbre department for acoustic instrument realism. But I would say the Kinera BD005 Pro still has better instrumental timbre than most garden variety TRN and KZ hybrids, and it should be an all rounder for most genres of music.

Bass:

Midbass of the Kinera BD005 Pro is of more quantity than subbass, with midbass north of neutral, but not at basshead levels. Bass is a tinge on the slower side, with a mild midbass bleed and average texturing/details. The note weight is a bit thick and nebulous. Some folks may not like the midbass quality as such, but I liked that it added some warmth to the lower mids. The bass may smear in some fast bass movements and hence bass quality isn’t the tightest compared to comparatively priced competitors in the same price bracket. The subbass rumble is quite good like in well tuned DD sets, though subbass extension is not the absolute deepest, but will definitely not be absent from subbass focused tracks.

Mids:

Lower mids are mildly recessed, but are thick and coloured. As per the mid bass, some may not like the fuller lower mids, so YMMV. Mids details and texture are average but not class leading. Upper mids are boosted but are not as harsh as some CHIFI counterparts, so this is quite an atypical Kinera tuning per se. As per the Fletcher Munson curve, the upper mids can get hot if the volume is pumped up a lot, or on poorly recorded material, but by and large, it is a very safe upper mids. Notes have a lack of bite/edge definition in the mids, so this can be a love it or hate it kind of thing especially when it comes to guitar crunch and vocal bites.

Treble:

Lower treble is boosted as per the upper mids. There’s a dip around the 6 kHz area, and thereafter the upper treble extends once again (though upper treble extension is not the greatest). For me, this is a rather safe upper treble, but trebleheads will probably want a bit more air and sparkle. Sibilance is mild. Cymbals are not as splashy as some budget CHIFI. As per the mids, notes have a lack of bite/edge definition, and whether one likes this is down to your personal preference.

COMPARISONS

As per comparing oranges to oranges, I left out single DD types as they have different pros and cons among the transducer types:

KBEAR Lark (1BA + 1 DD; $29 USD)

The KBEAR Lark we will discuss here is the newer retuned version (not the 4 kHz boosted older version). The KBEAR Lark has a neutralish bright tuning and is not as warm as the Kinera BD005 Pro in terms of tuning. The upper treble on the KBEAR Lark extends more and is brighter and airier but can be more fatiguing and sibliant. Note weight is noticeably thinner on the KBEAR Lark and acoustic instrumental timbre is a tinge poorer on the KBEAR Lark.

Bass is tighter on the KBEAR Lark, and the KBEAR Lark has a bigger soundstage and better clarity.

The KBEAR Lark has poorer isolation.

I would consider these 2 sets to be complimentary sidegrades, it depends if you want a thicker and warmer sound (Kinera BD005 Pro), versus a more neutralish bright and thinner sound (KBEAR Lark). Both sets are very well accessorized and look beautiful externally, hence they will make good gifts for beginners to this hobby.

KZ ZS10 Pro (4 BA + 1 DD; $35 USD)

The venerable KZ ZS10 Pro is more V shaped, with hotter upper mids and more midbass thump (quantity). The KZ ZS10 Pro has poorer isolation, poorer accessories and poorer instrumental timbre.

In terms of technicalities, the KZ ZS10 Pro is slightly better in soundstage, details, instrument separation, clarity and details, but this hotter upper mids/lower treble area can make it more fatiguing for treble sensitive folks, compared to the smoother Kinera BD005 Pro.

TRN V90S (5 BA + 1 DD; $43 USD)

The TRN V90S is also V shaped, and has a tighter bass than the Kinera BD005 Pro. The upper mids on the TRN V90S are also smooth when compared to the Kinera BD005 Pro, however, the TRN V90S has greater treble extension and can be more sibilant and fatiguing in the higher treble. Note weight is thinner and tonality is more analytical on the TRN V90S.

The TRN V90S has poorer isolation, poorer accessories and poorer instrumental timbre. Technicalities are slightly better on the TRN V90S.

CONCLUSIONS

The Kinera BD005 Pro is a beautiful jack of all trades, sporting a rather balanced warmish V shaped tuning that is safe for the upper frequencies (compared to the usual CHIFI tuning). For a budget hybrid, other than looks, it scores above average points in most areas (eg timbre, technicalities, tonality), but doesn’t have a particular area that it truly excels at. And at this cut throat budget price bracket, that makes it quite hard to stand out from the extremely stiff competition (eg there are some sets that excel at timbre, though at the expense of technicalities, and vice versa).

Nevertheless, the Kinera BD005 Pro would be an all rounder for most genres, and the note weight is thick and tonality is generally quite good and non fatiguing. Coupled with the beautiful shells and packaging, it would make a good introductory set to those who are new to this hobby (though recalcitrant CHIFI addicts will probably have something better in their inventory).

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the Yaotiger HIFI Audio Store for providing this review set at a discount. The Kinera BD005 Pro can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001870377067.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Kinera BD005 Pro Review – Sleepy Beauty appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Good build, well fitting and comfortable.
Good technicalities at this price bracket.
Well textured bass with good subbass rumble/extension.
Easy to drive.
Smoother and not as hot/fatiguing in the upper mids as the usual CHIFI KZ/TRN fare.
Okay timbre for a hybrid, but won’t beat single DD types in absolute timbre.

Cons:

Overly recessed mids (not for mid lovers).
Average isolation.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN V90S is a V shaped hybrid that does most things well. It has good technicalities at this price range, with a well textured bass. In fact, it is smoother and tuned not as hot in the upper mids as the garden variety KZs/TRNs. I think it can be an allrounder for most folks, other than for mid lovers, due to the recessed mids in the tuning.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Unit: 5 BA + 1 DD
• Sensitivity: 108 db/mW
• Frequency response: 20Hz – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 22 ohms
• Cable: 2 pin detachable
• Tested at $50 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1. Silicone eartips (S/M/L).
2. 4 core 6N OCC pure copper cable.

Well, it’s the usual (dearth) of accessories we see for a TRN IEM, these same accessories are seen in budget sets like the TRN STM all the way to their higher end gear like the TRN VX and TRN BA8 (maybe the TRN BA8 has a $3 USD hard metal round case to add some semblance of importance).

The stock cable of the TRN V90S is a bit too thin for my tastes, but sounds fine sonically. Do upgrade the cable if you want something thicker or haptically better, I’ll leave the unending cable skeptic vs cable believer debate for another time, while we concentrate on the review of the IEM. For the rest of this review, I used the stock tips and stock cables for assessment.

BUILD/COMFORT

The TRN V90S came in a very nice Ferrari red hue, quite unique for a CHIFI. The build is very good, no build QC issues detected on my end. They are comfortable and well fitting too, I managed to use the TRN V90S for a continuous few hours without issues. I didn’t find any driver flex on my set, though YMMV, as driver flex is partially related to ear anatomy and eartips used.

I liked that it came with a 2 pin connector, as I’m not a fan of MMCX connectors due to potential longevity issues, especially with frequent cable swapping.

ISOLATION

Isolation on the TRN V90S is average with the stock tips used. It has 2 vents on each earpiece, and this does let in some noise. I tried the TRN V90S on the subway, and personally I am quite OCD about hearing health and I wouldn’t use it for commuting due to this set letting it outside noise. One may try to boost the volume to overcome the external noise, and this is not good for hearing health in the long term. But as usual YMMV, as we have different tolerances in the area of isolation.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

I tried running the TRN V90S with a Khadas Tone Board -> Toppping L30, Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 amp, Shanling Q1 DAP, Ziku HD X9 DAP -> Fiio A3 amp, a low powered smartphone and the Tempotec Sonata HD Pro.

The TRN V90S is easy to drive, it does scale just a slight tinge with amping, but amping is not mandatory.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The TRN V90S is a V shaped set, but this is one of the smoother and less fatiguing TRNs I have heard in the past few years. The bass is dosed very well, and the upper mids are more depressed than the garden variety TRN/KZ multi driver types. What this translates to, is that the TRN V90S manages to get in details and clarity without the CHIFI “cheat code” of boosting the upper mids to create a fake sense of perceived clarity, and hence the TRN V90S avoids fatigue/shoutiness in those upper mid frequencies.

For a budget hybrid, the TRN V90S has very good imaging, details, instrument separation and clarity. Soundstage width and height on the TRN V90S is above average, depth is about average. Music didn’t sound too congested on the TRN V90S during complex movements.

Note weight on the TRN V90S is a tinge thinner than average. Considering it is BA drivers handling the mids and upper frequencies on the TRN V90S, the timbre is not bad for acoustic instruments, I was pleasantly surprised by well rendered stringed instruments, though vocal timbre sounded a bit nasal. Timbre on this set is much better than most garden variety KZs for acoustic instruments, but still won’t beat a well tuned single DD set in the isolated area of timbre.

Bass:

The TRN V90S has a midbass just slightly north of neutral. Subbass is of slightly more quantity than midbass. Subbass extension is actually very good, the subbass can give a visceral rumble that should please most bassheads. The TRN V90S also has quite a quality bass in being rather well textured and quite accurate with minimal midbass bleed.

Mids:

The TRN V90S mids are quite depressed and this actually contributes to the wider perceived soundstage as such. Upper mids are boosted relative to the lower mids, but the upper mids in the big scheme of things are tuned on the smooth and safer side relative to the general TRN lineup (looking at you TRN BA8 and TRN VX).

The TRN V90S is hence not a set for mid lovers. Guitars may sound subdued, and on some recordings I was familiar with, there were some nuances and elements in the mids missing. Having said that, this is an intentionally tuned V shaped set, so do know what you getting into if you intend to get this set, mid lovers best consider an alternative option.

Treble:

The lower treble of the TRN V90S continues on from the safe upper mids tuning, and is non fatiguing. At the higher treble region, the TRN V90S does have a peak around the 10 – 12ish kHz region which adds some air and extension to the music, though some who are very treble sensitive to the higher treble regions may find occasional peaks in the music here. Details are captured rather well in the treble and cymbals didn’t sound too splashy for me. Sibilance is mild and manageable.

COMPARISONS

As per comparing apples to apples, I left out single DD types from the comparisons here as the different driver types have their respective strengths and weaknesses.

TRN BA8 (8BA, $140ish USD at launch, now hovering around $130ish USD)

The TRN BA8 is a bright V shaped set, and of the time of writing, is their current flagship (let’s ignore the $15000 USD golden ears joke TRN for now). The TRN BA8 was famous (or rather infamous) for having a scary looking graph, but on actual listening, it didn’t sound as scary as what it looked like. Nevertheless, the TRN BA8 is still hotter and more fatiguing in the upper mids/lower treble than the TRN V90S. The TRN V90S has more subbass extension than the TRN BA8.

A big area of controversy on the TRN BA8 is the almost 15 dB difference between the upper mids to the rest of the lower mids spectrum, this caused the lower mids area to be perceived to be “hollow” and gave an off tonality for the mids. The TRN V90S is much more balanced in the tuning, even though the mids are relatively more recessed than the TRN BA8.

The TRN BA8 has better technical performance and a thinner note weight. The TRN BA8 was a bit more uncomfortable in fit and tuning for me for longer listening sessions, though fit is quite dependant on ear anatomy and the individual, so YMMV.

Scary graph aside, the TRN BA8 is not that bad sounding in the big scheme of things, I’ve heard worse CHIFI before. But the big elephant in the room is that it was released into the $140ish USD region at launch. There’s tough competition against some bigboys there like the TRI I3, ISN H40, Fiio FH3, TRI Starsea, ThieAudio gear, Shozy Form 1.4 etc. People expect a much more refined experience and better tuning at that price bracket. Hence, even though the TRN BA8 has better technicalities, I would take the TRN V90S any day of the week, cause of the better value in terms of price to performance ratio and the better tuning in the TRN V90S. To add insult to injury, the TRN BA8 also came with almost similar accessories as the TRN V90S and other budget TRN models, barring the addition of a $3 USD hard metal case to remind us that it is indeed a flagship. That dearth of accessories is not acceptable for a $50 – 100 USD set, let alone a $130 – 140ish USD flagship.

TRN VX (6 BA + 1 DD, $90ish USD at launch, now hovering at $70ish USD)

The TRN VX is another bright V shaped set in the TRN stable, it has better technical performance than the TRN V90S, but is too hot for me in the upper mids/treble regions, with sibilance in spades. I honestly couldn’t use the TRN VX for more than a few minutes without resorting to EQ or a micropore mod.

As it is also priced more expensive than the TRN V90S, I do feel the TRN V90S has better price to performance ratio, with a better tuning to boot (though TRN VX has better technicalities).

KZ ZS10 Pro (4BA + 1DD, $27 – 30ish USD)

The KZ ZS10 Pro is a popular V shaped KZ. The KZ ZS10 Pro has a muddier and more bloated bass, with the TRN V90S being more textured and accurate in bass lines. Instrument separation, details and imaging are better on the TRN V90S.

The TRN V90S has a better timbre for acoustic instruments than the KZ ZS10 Pro, and is also less fatiguing/hot in the upper mids compared to the KZ ZS10 Pro.

CONCLUSIONS

The TRN V90S is a V shaped hybrid that does most things well. It has good technicalities at this price range, with a well textured bass. To top it off, it is smoother and tuned not as hot in the upper mids as the garden variety KZs/TRNs. I think it can be an allrounder for most folks, other than for mid lovers, due to the recessed mids in the tuning.

The TRN STM and this TRN V90S are actually my favourite TRNs for this year (sorry TRN BA8 and TRN VX, I would take tonality and price to performance ratio over technical performance any day). Anyways, I saw that the TRN V90S is going at a mind boggling $19.90 USD for the upcoming Aliexpress Black Friday sales, that is real a steal at this price, compared to the $50 USD normal pricing! Just 2 – 3 years back, a western brand multi driver set of this sound quality would be retailing for at least 10 times of the $19.90 USD, so we are very lucky to be living in this era where sound quality can come for comparatively little outlay. Well, I’ll just pretend the TRN golden ears that is going at a very “affordable” $145000 USD during the Black Friday sale doesn’t exist, but you know what I mean, that CHIFI sound has really come leaps and bounds the past few years, they give us a small taste of audiophile heaven without needing to sell a kidney (or two).

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the TRN Official Store for providing this review unit. It is normally at $50 USD, but will be going at a mind blowing $19.90 for Black Friday sales! https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001518935278.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post TRN V90S Review (1) – Rosso Corsa appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros

Light and comfortable. Good build.
Above average technical performance for the price.
Above average isolation.
Easily drivable.
2 pin connector – better lifespan than MMCX in general.

Cons:

Not for treble sensitive folks, can be fatiguing and harsh in the treble.
Sibilance fest.
Average soundstage.
Very forgettable in the pantheon of KZ/CCA sidegrades/beta releases.
Poor instrumental timbre.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

KZ (and by extension sister company, CCA) are back to their circa 2018 – early 2019 habits of churning out almost weekly sidegrades/marginal upgrades. The CCA C10 Pro is one of these said sidegrades, and in the big scheme of things, the CCA C10 Pro is pretty forgettable in the pantheon of pokemon KZ/CCAs.

The CCA C10 Pro features a V shaped sound signature, with an overly boosted upper mids/treble. It has above average technicalities, but this is offset by a harsh and fatiguing treble, sibilance and an artificial timbre. I find it doesn’t give much value add compared to some existing KZ/CCA iterations (eg the KZ ZS10 Pro), so this is one pokemon that you should think twice about catching.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver type: 4 BA + 1DD (10 mm)
• Impedance: 24Ω
• Earphone sensitivity: 109dB/mW
• Frequency range: 20 – 40000Hz
• Cable type: 2 pin 0.75 mm
• Tested at $40 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, the package comes with:

1) Silicone tips (S/M/L).

2) Stock cable – silver plated. It is servicable, for cable skeptics, please go on to the next section! For cable believers, I feel a pure copper one would have synergized better with the CCA C10 Pro as it is already bright and harsh in the treble, and would have benefitted from a copper cable to tame the highs and give a bit of warmth.

BUILD/COMFORT

The CCA C10 Pro has a beautiful metal faceplate, with a unique design emblazzoning it. Kinda like some illuminati code LOL. The CCA C10 Pro is very comfortable and light and I had no issues with using it for longer sessions in terms of fit (sound wise however, I couldn’t use it too long due to the harsh treble, but that will be discussed below).

I did not detect any driver flex.

I liked that the CCA C10 Pro came in a 2 pin connector, that has generally better lifespan than MMCX connectors in my experience.

ISOLATION

The CCA C10 Pro’s isolation is just above average, but won’t beat some unvented multi BA types in this area.

DRIVABILITY

The CCA C10 Pro is pretty drivable from lower powered sources, with not much scaling in sound noted when amped. It does hiss with PCs and phones but this can be mitigated by using a DAC/AMP, inline volume controller or impedance mismatch device.

As the CCA C10 Pro is on the brighter and leaner side tuning wise, I preferred pairing it with warmer sources to offset the treble/upper mids glare.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The CCA C10 Pro sports a bright V shaped tuning, with boosted upper mids and treble. This is a treblehead set, no doubt about it, with above average technicalities at this price point.

Timbre is unfortunately, artificial for acoustic instruments, much like some circa 2018 KZ fare. The CCA C10 Pro is definitely not one for folks that listen to genres that comprise primarily acoustic instruments. I think the CCA C10 Pro will do pretty well with genres that have more synthetic instrumentation eg electronic. Note weight is leaner and tonality is overall on the colder side.

Soundstage on the CCA C10 Pro is pretty average in all 3 dimensions, it is slightly wider than deep, nothing to write home about. Imaging, instrument separation and details are above average but not class leading for a multi BA/hybrid budget set.

Bass:

Bass on the CCA C10 Pro is midbass focused over subbass, and the subbass extension is not the deepest. Generally the subbass manages to hit notes when called for and is not anemic. The bass quantity is north of neutral but not as basshead levels. Bass speed is on the faster side for a DD with above average texturing.

Mids:

Upper mids are boosted on the CCA C10 Pro compared to the lower mids, and the upper mids can on occasions be shouty, especially at higher volumes (Fletcher Munson Curve). Female vocals are hence more forward than male vocals.

Treble:

This is a bright set with the dreaded S word: sibilance. The CCA C10 Pro has detail and clarity to suit trebleheads, but may be fatiguing for longer sessions at the lower treble region, especially with female vocals/horns/trumpets. Cymbals and high hats occasionally sound splashy. I would grade the treble of the CCA C10 Pro as the weakest part of the frequency spectrum.

COMPARISONS

I had a bigger collection of KZ pokemons in the past, but have sold all my KZs away except the KZ ZS10 Pro, so apologies if I can’t do A/B comparisons with the other KZs.

KZ ZS10 Pro (4BA + 1DD)

The KZ ZS10 Pro is also V shaped in tuning, but the KZ ZS10 Pro has less treble than the CCA C10 Pro. CCA C10 Pro is hence brighter, and due to the ears taking the entire frequency spectrum as a whole, it also feels as though the CCA C10 Pro is lighter in bass quantity. The CCA C10 Pro has more sibilance, and is much more fatiguing for longer sessions than the KZ ZS10 Pro.

In terms of timbre, I thought the KZ ZS10 Pro wasn’t the best, but the CCA C10 Pro is even worse in timbre. KZ ZS10 has better soundstage and imaging. CCA C10 Pro has a tighter bass with less midbass bleed. KZ ZS10 Pro is more “fun” sounding and more versatile in terms of tuning, with the CCA C10 Pro sounding more cold in tonality.

Even though the KZ ZS10 Pro came out more than a year ago, I think there is no value add for the CCA C10 Pro for existing owners of the KZ ZS10 Pro.

TRN V90S (5BA + 1DD)

The TRN V90S is also another V shaped set, but it has less boosted upper mids/lower treble than the CCA C10 Pro, with the latter being more fatiguing and harsh and sibilant. The TRN V90S has better soundstage and imaging/instrument separation/details than the CCA C10 Pro, though the CCA C10 Pro has better clarity due to the boosted higher frequencies. TRN V90S has a more textured bass too, though it has a bit more recessed mids than the CCA C10 Pro.

Both sets have poor instrumental timbre, and ain’t the best option for music genres that incorporate a lot of acoustic instruments.

Overall, both are going at about $50 USD, and I think TRN V90S is the better set in terms of tonality and technicalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The CCA C10 Pro features a V shaped sound signature, with an overly boosted upper mids/treble. It has above average technicalities, but this is offset by a harsh and fatiguing treble, sibilance and an artificial timbre. I find it doesn’t give much value add compared to some existing KZ/CCA iterations (eg the KZ ZS10 Pro), so this is one KZ/CCA pokemon that you should think twice about catching.

In all likelihood, a pro version of this CCA C10 Pro will probably be coming our way in a few weeks’ time, since it appears KZ (and by extension sister company CCA) are back to their circa 2018 – early 2019 habits of churning out almost weekly sidegrades/marginal upgrades. Perhaps trebleheads will like this set, but even so, it doesn’t have the best technicalities also, and there’s better options to be gotten out there at the same price range.

The CCA C10 Pro is really pretty forgettable in the $50ish USD cut throat CHIFI market, and unfortunately being average in that price segment is not good enough nowadays. Perhaps two to three years back, when CHIFI were still relatively uncommon in the wild, the CCA C10 Pro would have been lapped up, but this does not apply for the past year and a half or so, when CHIFI sound quality has really scaled up tremendously.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the Wooeasy Earphones Store for providing this review unit.

It can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001302167271.html at $40 USD.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post CCA C10 Pro Review (2) – KZ/CCA Pokemon, Better Not Catch Them All! appeared first on Music For The Masses.

CCA has decided to follow others in releasing a “pro” model of one previous IEM, the well received C10 model. The $35 CCA C10 Pro is a familiar recipe, a safe and popular tuning packed into the same shell as their C12. Characterized as a mild v rough Harman outline, the CCA C10 Pro adds some additional sparkle up top and leaner bass then it’s kissing cousin KZ ZS10 pro. If this is interesting or if the color scheme of your favorite sports team is black and gold, keep on reading.

GOOD TRAITS

Familiar design and tuning that made the KZ ZS10 Pro and CCA C10 popular.

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

Bass articulation; Smooth out the peaks and sibilance.

SOUND

While I never purchased the CCA C10, I do own the cousin model the KZ ZS10 Pro which was well done for this price segment way back in 2019. The CCA C10 Pro seems to be either a C12 minus one driver or a C10 in the C12 shell with design changes. This is all conjecture at this point since I own neither the C12 or the O.G. C10, I can only rely on past discussions on how similar they were.

Tuning is unoffensive and while peaky in some areas, it is a cross between a typical shouty Chi-fi tuning and a Harman curve. The upper midrange is knocked down a few decibels from the ZS10 Pro and the bass is not as thumping. The bass instead is sort of a lazy affair, present in the room but not screaming look at me spectacular. You might bring it home to mom and dad, but you are not going to brag to your friends about it. The KZ ZS10 Pro measures roughly the same quantity, but I feel the quality is better on the KZ. I find the bass sometimes gets drowned out on the CCA C10 Pro, I wish it had better articulation. Occasionally there is some growl coming from the lower registers which helps to fill out the bottom required for some genres. It’s good to have a little oh yeah down there.

Midrange does not sound too forward since CCA decided to keep the peak halfway between 2kHz (Chi-fi standard) and 3kHz (Harman Standard). Vocals sometimes come off a little raspy, not real breathy and there is some sibilance that peeks through (pun intended). On the lower end they sound full and thick with a some bass warming it up. Treble is exciting and not dull, CCA C10 Pro adds some extra sparkle at the tippy top and this probably where they feel the CCA C10 Pro has now earned the “pro” achievement for the additional crispness. Guitars and brass really come alive with this style of treble tuning, and cymbals are very present. We are not talking Nicehck NX7 or KZ ZS6 levels of tearing your face off, just additional sparkle and sizzle.

Soundstaging is wider than deep, timbre is a little sterile and metallic sounding but cohesion is good and the multiple driver configuration allows it to be fairly resolving.

COMFORT / ISOLATION / DESIGN

Fitment is comfortable and stays in place, a pretty standard universal shell making the isolation a tick above average. I do like the color scheme, but this is merely a personal preference. The familiar KZ ZSN , ZS10 pro faceplate has been sharpened with accents. Cable is silver and surprised they didn’t opt for a copper or gold colored cable to match. Don’t take fashion tips from me though, wires are on their way out.

FINAL WORDS

For $35 or so, it’s a good pick but if you already own the ZS10 Pro or the CCA C10 and are completely happy with them, you could skip this refresh. On the other hand if you wanted to add a different color scheme to your collection I say go for it. It’s definitely a crowd pleasing medium V with warm vocals and crispy bacon-like treble. However a word of advice to the manufacturer, if you are going to put “Pro” in the name some of the basics need to be right- looking at you sibilance. Nothing ground breaking but a solid offering.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

Earphones; silver 0.75mm 2 Pin cable; S/M/L eartips

SPECIFICATIONS

Drive unit: 1 Dual magnetic dynamic bass + 4BA (50060 mid, custom mid-high, 30095 tweeter)
Impedance: 24Ω
Sensitivity: 109dB/mW
Frequency range: 20-40000Hz
Cable Length: 1.2m±3cm
Cable conductor: 1.25 4N oxygen free copper plating silver Mic/no Mic options
Earphone interface: CPIN 0.75MM interface

GRAPHS

Left vs Right
CCA C10 Pro vs KZ ZS10 Pro
Impedance Plot

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Volunteered to review this set to see what was new. Get the CCA C10 Pro from Wooeasy over at Aliexpress.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post CCA C10 Pro Review (1) – Not for Noobs? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

CCA CX4—A purist at heart, I confess to being underwhelmed by most of the wireless IEMs I’ve experienced, and I had meager expectations for the $29 CX4 from CCA, whose offerings have definitely been hit-or-miss. My prejudices were unjustified—the CX4 is actually a very credible bit of kit.

SPECIFICATIONS

Drivers: 7 mm dual magnetic + 30019 Balanced Armature
Impedance: 24 Ω
Sensitivity: 93 dB/mW
Frequency Range: 20 – 40,000 Hz
Connection: Bluetooth 5.0 (20 m range)
Other: active noise cancelling
Tested at: $26
Purchase Link: Wooeasy Earphones Store

Teardrop shaped resin earpieces are solidly built, lightweight and quite comfortable; long nozzles provide for deep insertion and good isolation and fit is very stable. The compact charging/carrying case is well designed. Functionality, however, is counter-intuitive (the tiny, barely legible operating instructions are essentially useless) and touch controls are over-sensitive, though bluetooth connectivity is simple. Call and microphone quality is very good, and ability to connect either earpiece separately is a nice touch. The claimed 22h battery life may be optimistic, but they are resilient nonetheless.

Sonically, the CCA CX4 hews very close to CCA’s house sound, which is to say a warm, rich- textured tonality presented across a wide, holographic stage. Instrument placement is very accurate. The CCA CX4 have a balanced signature, which is not to say bass-shy—low end is throbbing and voluminous (though like the CCA C10 rather loose, with considerable bloom and bleed into the lower mids). Mids are forward and meaty; male vocals are very forcefully presented, if a bit chesty. Treble isn’t hyper-extended or detailed (it has a smoothish quality and some snap and nuance is missing from cymbals and drumheads) and tend to be slightly overshadowed by the prominent subbass, though overall clarity is pretty good and these do a very good job with lower-quality files. I hear these as quite coherent overall, without conspicuous peaks or dips in the spectrum, and they are free from the shrillness or splashy high end of many budget hybrids. Unless you listen solely to bass-heavy genres (where the wooly low end becomes an issue) they are not tiring during extended listening sessions.

Where the CCA CX4 trail wired brethren like the C10 or KZ ZS10 (as well as comparably-priced Blon) is in their timbral quality—they have a slightly dark, colored sound which isn’t exactly artificial, but more like listening to cassette tape as opposed to vinyl; it’s not clear whether this is intrinsic in the Bluetooth or a function of the drivers. That said, these are surprisingly musical phones which hold up well to their price peers; their clever technology and ergonomics are a bonus. At this price, an absolute no-brainer.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The CCA CX4 were provided by Echo at Wooeasy for review purposes.

Get the CCA CX4 from Wooeasy Earphones Store!

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post CCA CX4 Wireless TWS Hybrid In-Ear Monitors Review – I Dream of Wires appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Light and comfortable. Good build and fit.
Atypical neutralish bright tuning in the vast sea of V shaped/harmanish budget CHIFI.
Good technicalities for the price.
Easily drivable.
Good price to performance ratio.
Good timbre for a budget hybrid.
2 pin connector – better lifespan than MMCX generally.

Cons:

Bass lite, may be a pro or con, but definitely not for our basshead breathen.
Occasionally sibilant/harsh at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve), not the best option for treble sensitive folks.
Splashy cymbals/high hats.
Occasional nasal vocals.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The CVJ CS8 is a budget hybrid with good technical performance at its asking price of sub $30 USD. Its tonality lies on the analytical side and it brings a breath of fresh air in sporting a neutralish bright tuning in the vast sea of V shaped/harmanish budget CHIFI.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 3BA + 1DD (10 mm)
• Frequency Response: 7 Hz – 40 kHz
• Impedance: 22 ohms
• Sensitivity: 105 dB/mW
• Cable type: 2 pin
• Tested at $30 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Wooden plywood box

2) Velvet pouch

3) Silicone tips (S/M/L)

4) OFC cable (2 pin)

The cable is pretty well braided and has minimal microphonics, though it lacked a chin cinch. I liked the fact that the CVJ CS8 uses 2 pin connectors, as I had my fair share of problems with MMCX connectors. Ear tips are also good to go out of the box, no need to mess around with aftermarket tips. The plywood wooden box is quite cool actually, it is definitely different from the usual white filmsy box other budget CHIFI generally come in.

BUILD/COMFORT

The CVJ CS8 is very light, well fitting and ergonomic, with a small profile. I had no issues with comfort even with longer listening sessions. I did not detect any driver flex.

ISOLATION

Isolation is above average, but won’t beat some non vented BA type IEMs in the isolation department.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the CVJ CS8 with a Shanling Q1 DAP, Ziku HD X9 DAP, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO), Samsung Note 5 smartphone, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro and a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 amp. The CVJ CS8 is easily drivable from lower powered sources, but the bass quantity and some technicalities improved slightly with amping.

Since the tonality of the CVJ CS8 lies on the more analytical neutralish bright side, I preferred pairing it with a warmer sources rather than something more analytical. Do note that the CVJ CS8 sounds the best when played at a low to average volume. With boosting the volume, the upper mids/treble can get hot due to the Fletcher Munson curve. So for those that love to blast their music at high volumes, this is something to be aware of, and you might need to look elsewhere.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The CVJ CS8 sports a neutralish bright tuning, which is a breath of fresh air from the usual dime a dozen V shaped/harmanish type budget CHIFI we regularly see at the sub $30 USD price range. I have to confess the CVJ CS8’s tuning is not my cup of tea due to my basshead tendencies, but I still think the tuning is relatively well done for the asking price and will definitely try to review this set objectively in stating its pros and cons.

The CVJ CS8 has good details, imaging, clarity and instrument separation for the $30 asking price. Soundstage is also above average in width, depth and height.

Timbre for acoustic instruments is good for a cheap budget hybrid, I was actually quite surprised on this aspect, there isn’t the usual artificial BA timbre sometimes seen at this price range for hybrids/multi BA sets, though a well tuned single DD set will still have better timbre than the CVJ CS8 in general.

Bass:

Midbass on the CVJ CS8 is of more quantity than subbass. Bass on this set actually goes down to around 25 Hz before rolling off, but the bass quantity is neutral at best, and may be anemic for some songs, especially in songs with subbass predominance, where there is a notable lack of visceral rumble/decay.

The DD bass of the CVJ CS8 is on the slightly faster side, and due to the lack of bass quantity, there is no midbass bleed. Bass is acutally above average in texturing and amping does bring slightly better bass quantity and technical performance rather than just using the CVJ CS8 from a lower powered source.

I think those that prefer a neutral bass will like this set, but my fellow basshead breathen or those who listen to bass forward music eg EDM may need to look elsewhere for their bass kick (no pun intended).

Mids:

Mids are transparent and detailed, and upper mids are boosted on this set all the way to the treble. Guitars sound crunchy and well rendered on the CVJ CS8, but the upper mids can get occasionally hot with higher volumes as detailed above (Fletcher Munson curve).

Female vocals are more forward than male ones as such, and vocals sometimes sounded nasal and thin, though they were detailed with fine nuances like breath sounds, lip smacking etc being heard in well mastered tracks. Instrumental timbre like piano reverb and vibrato on strings could be heard very well on the CVJ CS8, though perhaps the timbre of brass/woodwind instruments was slightly more authentic than acoustic stringed instruments. This is just nitpicking though, the instrumental timbre on the CVJ CS8 is definitely better than the run of the mill KZs/TRNs out there and coupled with the analytical nature, good technicalities, and neutralish bright tuning, it is quite a capable budget set for classical music.

Treble:

The CVJ CS8 is a bright set with some sibilance (unfortunately). The lower treble is boosted in comparison to the upper treble. The CVJ CS8 has quite a lot of detail and clarity to suit trebleheads, but may be fatiguing for longer sessions at the lower treble region, especially with female vocals/horns/trumpets.

One thing I didn’t like was that cymbals and high hats sounded splashy, and even though this is quite a common offence in budget CHIFI hybrids/multi BA sets, it appeared to be more splashy than the usual fare. In certain songs with predominant cymbals/high hats, that frequency took centrestage and literally became a sharp mess of clanging metal.

COMPARISONS

Comparing some budget CHIFI hybrids at the sub $30 price segment:

CVJ CS8 has better timbre and is less fatiguing than the bright and sibilant Jade Audio EA3. Though EA3 has better treble and subbass extension and wider soundstage. Other areas of technical performance may be slightly better on the CVJ CS8.

CVJ CS8 has better technical performance and timbre than the recently released KBEAR KS2, though KBEAR KS2 has better bass quantities (though not bass quality) and a wider soundstage. Tonally, the KBEAR KS2 was off, with overly recessed lower mids and a boomy bass and hot upper mids. Timbre was also poor on the KBEAR KS2. Perhaps the KBEAR KS2 does fare better with songs with synthetic instruments or bass forward music but for most other genres, I would take the CVJ CS8 over the KBEAR KS2 any day.

CVJ CS8 has better instrumental timbre than the V shaped KZ ZS10 Pro, technicalities are about on par. CVJ CS8 is slightly harsher in the upper mids/treble than the KZ ZS10 Pro, probably cause there isn’t the larger bass quantities of the ZS10 Pro to balance out the frequency spectrum. ZS10 Pro has some midbass bleed though and bass isn’t as tight as the CVJ CS8. I think these 2 sets have complimentary signatures though, the V shaped KZ ZS10 Pro and neutralish bright CVJ CS8 bring different options to the table.

The KBEAR KB04 and CVJ CS8 are quite close in the technicalities department, maybe CVJ CS8 edges it slightly in soundstage and imaging. CVJ CS8 also has better instrumental timbre. KBEAR KB04 though has the better bass in terms of quality and quantity, and is probably more all rounded due to the mild V shaped tuning compared to the bass anemic CVJ CS8. CVJ CS8 is also more fatiguing and harsher in the treble regions than the KBEAR KB04.

You find reviews of most of the iems mentioned above here.

CONCLUSIONS

The CVJ CS8 is indeed a breath of fresh air, bringing an atypical neutralish bright tuning to the table, in contrast to the vast sea of V shaped/harmanish CHIFI budget sets at the sub $30 USD region.

The CVJ CS8 lies on the analytical side and has good technical performance for the asking price. Bassheads and treble sensitive folks will have to look elsewhere, as the bass is light, and the upper mids and treble can get occasionally hot at higher volumes, with sibilance and splashy cymbals/high hats. Admittedly, this neutralish bright tuning is not my cup of tea personally, but I still think CVJ did well with this set (for the price) and neutralheads/trebleheads and those looking for a cheap set for critical listening will find this a budget friendly option.

From reading previous reviews of CVJ products, CVJ seems to have their own house sound and tuning philosophy that embraces a neutralish sound rather than generic V shaped/harmanish tuning. This is actually a trait that may let CVJ stand out and thrive in the highly competitive budget CHIFI market, and I applaud their effort in trying something different. I sure look foward to CVJ’s next release!

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Janet Hu from CVJ for providing this sample, my views are my own. The CVJ CS8 can be bought on multiple shops on Aliexpress at around $30 USD.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post CVJ CS8 Review – Breath Of Fresh Air appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros:

Good price to performance ratio.
Comfortable, well fitting.
Above average isolation.
Good details, imaging and especially soundstage at this price bracket.
Deep subbass extension.

Cons:

Plasticky build.
Timbre artificial for certain acoustic instruments/vocals.
Tonality issues – Overly V shaped, with upper mids/lower treble occassionally getting hot when bass frequencies are not playing, with overly recessed lower mids. Bass may be too boomy for non bassheads.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The KBEAR KS2 is a budget bassy V shaped set with good technicalities for the price. It isn’t the best in timbre/tonality and has an overly recessed lower mids with occasionally hot upper mids. Adjust your expectations and don’t be expecting a tour de force for the price, but it excels at soundstage and does more things right than wrong. It would be an affordable daily beater set, or even a gaming and movie IEM in view of the great soundstage/imaging.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver: Hybrid 10mm composite diaphragm Dynamic Driver + Balanced Armature
• Interface: 2 Pin 0.78mm
• Frequency range: 20 Hz – 20kHZ
• Sensitivity: 106±3dB
• Impedance: 16Ω
• Tested at $23 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Stock cable – thin with no chin cinch. Recommended to swap if possible.

2) Silicone tips of various sizes.

BUILD/COMFORT

The KBEAR KS2 looks to have a similar shell to some KZs (like the ZST), and looks plasticky and cheap, but don’t judge a book by its cover, build wise, it is quite comfortable, light, well fitting, with above average isolation. I did not detect any driver flex.

DRIVABILITY

I tried the KBEAR KS2 with a humble Android smartphone, Shanling Q1 DAP, a ESS ES9280C PRO DAC, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 amp, and a TRN BT20 bluetooth device. The KS2 is quite sensitive, and hissing may be noted with some desktops/smartphones but the hiss generally disappears when music plays. Otherwise, one can mitigate the hiss with using an impedance matching device, amp/dac or an inline volume controller.

The KS2 is pretty drivable from lower powered sources like smartphones, but scales slightly better with amping.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The KBEAR KS2 is a bassy deep V shaped set with some brightness in the upper mids as above.

Technicalities are good for the $20ish USD price, with a big soundstage, good imaging, instrument separation and details. In fact, it has one of the best soundstages at the $20ish price tag (the other competitor in big soundstage at this pricetag would be the Senfer DT6, though the Senfer DT6 has worse isolation due to the semi open backed design). The KS2 would make quite a good gaming and movie IEM in view of the good soundstage and imaging, though the bass is quite boosted, so footsteps and gunshots might be a tad overemphasized for gaming, but I quite like the KS2 for movie watching due to the great subbass extension.

String timbre is okay considering it is a hybrid, but woodwinds and brass instruments sound very artificial, so not the best option if you listen to classical or jazz. Vocal timbre is a bit chalky but intelligible and clear, so also not the best option if you are a vocals connoisseur. The tonality of the KS2 is skewed towards the upper mids and bass frequencies, and non bassheads might find the bass quantities boomy, with the lower mids overly recessed, with some occasional hot upper mids.

Bass:

Subbass extends well for a DD bass, with good rumble and decay. Subbass seems to be a tad more emphasized than the midbass in terms of quantity, with the visceral grunt of the subbass rattling the jaw in some music tracks with amping. Indeed, bass quantities are one level shy of basshead levels. I’m a basshead and like the bass amounts but I think those that want a neutral bass might need to look elsewhere or do some bass mods, as it might be too boomy for them.

The KBEAR KS2 sounds quite good for bass forward music, eg EDM.
I didn’t find overt amounts of midbass bleed considering the KS2 has rather copious bass, unlike some other basshead sets eg TFZ No. 3.

Mids:

The KS2’s lower mids are quite recessed, certain songs sound thin/distant in lower mids. Guitars in particular aren’t that well rendered in the lower mids and some chunks of music are missing in the lower mids for pieces I’m familiar with. In fact, the big soundstage of the KS2 might be partially explained by the distant lower mids.

Even though the graphs appear quite boosted in the upper mids/lower treble for this set, I find the big bass quantities balances out the upper mids and the KS2 isn’t shouty when there are bass frequencies playing. The upper mids and lower treble do get harsh and fatiguing when there is female vocal predominant music or when the music is bass lite (i.e. no bass to balance the upper frequencies) or when saxophones, trumpets and flutes come out to play.

A warm source, or tape mods, or copper cables (if you aren’t a cable skeptic) or even EQ may help with the upper mids issue if you are sensitive to these areas, but I usually listen to bass heavy music (which as above balances the upper mids), so I enjoy the KBEAR KS2 with the stock configuration without any mods.

Treble:

Lower treble is discussed in the above point with the upper mids. The upper treble extends moderately well, and isn’t that fatiguing for me. Sibilance is mild, cymbals aren’t that splashy compared to budget KZs. I like the upper treble amounts, which balances details and clarity without being overly harsh.

COMPARISONS

Here are some comparisons of the KBEAR KS2 with other CHIFI gear in the similar price bracket ($20 – 30 USD):

KBEAR KB04 ($26 USD):

Ironically, the KBEAR KB04 from the same company is the KS2’s main competitor in having a similar driver config (1DD + 1 BA) and price in a V shaped tuning (see graph below).

KB04 is less V shaped as per the graphs below, with lesser bass and upper mids/lower treble. Note weight on the KB04 is slightly thinner, but the KB04 is more balanced tonally. The KB04 also has slightly better instrument timbre.

I find the KB04 to be faster in transients for complex portions of music, with a more accurate bass, but the KS2 trumps the KB04 in soundstage and imaging.

Both sets are tuned differently and bring separate benefits to the table. The KB04 has better build, timbre and tonality, but the KS2 is slightly cheaper, has better soundstage/imaging and better bass quantity (I’m a basshead and appreciate this aspect). Overall, for my music preferences, I’ll take timbre/tonality over technical performance for casual music listening, so the KB04 edges the KS2 for me.

BLON BL-03 ($24 USD):

In general, I try not to compare single DD sets to hybrids as they have their own inherent strengths and weaknesses between the different transducer types, so it is really comparing oranges to apples, but since a lot of folks own the BL-03 and use it as a yardstick, here goes:

The single DD BLON BL-03 has better tonality, and more accurate timbre for acoustic instruments, with a thicker note weight.
Upper mids are not as hot on the BLON BL-03.
The BLON BL-03’s bass is slower with more midbass bleed and it sometimes can’t keep up with complex bass riffs.
Fit and isolation are poorer in the BLON BL-03. In fact the infamous BLON BL-03 fit may require one to splurge a bit on aftermarket eartips or even cables, so the BL-03 outlay may be closer to $40 USD actually.
Technicalities are also poorer on BL-03, with a smaller soundstage on BL-03.

Hence, the BLON BL-03 is better for timbre/tonality and would better suit those that listen to music genres incorporating a lot of acoustic instruments, whereas the KS2 is better for technicalities and fits well OOTB; the KS2 would be better for more complex music or synthetic music.

Senfer DT6 ($18 USD):

The DT6 (1DD + 1BA + 1 Piezo) has worse timbre especially for acoustic instruments, but is more balanced and less V shaped than the KS2.

The DT6 needs amping for the treble regions to not sound dull (the piezos handling the treble need some juice), whereas amping is not really mandatory for the KS2.

KBEAR KS2 has better technicalities (imaging, clarity, details, instrument separation), and both have big soundstages, but the DT6 has penalties in isolation due to the semi open backed design.

KZ ZS10 Pro ($30 USD):

The ZS10 Pro (1DD + 4 BA) is likewise a V shaped set, and the ZS10 Pro also suffers from an occasionally harsh upper mids/lower treble, but I felt the lower mids aren’t as recessed in the ZS10 Pro.

The ZS10 Pro has better technicalities (except soundstage and imaging), but I found the timbre on both sets to be artificial for non-stringed acoustic instruments, with the KS2 being a worse offender in the timbre department.

The ZS10 Pro has more predominant midbass than subbass, unlike the KS2 which has subbass quantity > midbass. ZS10 Pro’s midbass is not as tight with some flabbiness and midbass bleed.

CONCLUSIONS:

The KBEAR KS2 is an entry level budget CHIFI set with good technical performance for the price. Unfortunately, it lacks a bit in the timbre/tonality department. I think the KS2 can suit most genres due to the consumer friendly V shaped tuning, except maybe genres that need good instrument timbre e.g. classical, jazz. The upper mids/lower treble can get hot occasionally when the bass isn’t playing, but pairing the KS2 with a warm source helps if you are sensitive to this area. Bass averse folks and lower mid lovers might also wanna give this set a miss.

So this brings us to the million dollar question: does one need another $25ish USD budget set like the KBEAR KS2 in the flood of budget CHIFI releases? Well, that’s pretty subjective and only one that you can answer yourself. Those stuck in the neverending CHIFI IEM rabbithole who own higher end gear will definitely have heard something more refined in sound quality. Do you have a drawer full of cheap CHIFI collecting cobwebs somewhere and does your spouse/significant other give you a deathstare when they see another budget CHIFI coming in the mail? Are you looking to climb up the CHIFI ladder in terms of price/quality, rather than staying in a vicious cycle buying budget sidegrades, which do add up to the costs of a midfi set eventually? Then probably not. But the KBEAR KS2 will suit avid pokemonesque “gotta catch them all” CHIFI collectors or someone new to the hobby and starting to sample budget gear to discover their ideal sound signature. It would also be an affordable daily beater set for the price for beginners, or even a gaming and movie IEM in view of the great soundstage, imaging and visceral subbass amounts.

Overall, I’m rating the KBEAR KS2 to be a pass, with context being the KS2’s selling price of a restaurant meal. It brings a big soundstage and good imaging to the budget CHIFI table. For experienced audiophiles, please temper your expectations and don’t be expecting a tour de force considering the asking price of $25ish USD (well, the BLON BL-03 is an amazing anomaly at the same price tag, but probably costs more after purchasing aftermarket tips/cables for the fit, whereas the Senfer DT6 is hyped to the moon but has an Achilles heel of poor timbre). The KBEAR KS2 excels at soundstage/imaging and does more things right than wrong.

Thanks for reading and enjoy the music!

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

Here’s another review of the KBEAR KS2 earphone.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank KBEAR for providing this review sample. It can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001134070208.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post KBEAR KS2 Review (2) – Bear Necessities vs Barely Necessary? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Lots of choices these days for single dynamic drive IEM’s how is one to choose? The HIDIZS MS1 Rainbow enters the ring and wants a chance and I think it should be given one. At $69 retail it is above the “budget” threshold of the magical $50 dividing line so it needs to prove it can compete with the likes of similar recent popular contenders such as the KBear Diamond and TinHifi T4 also found near this price range. The Hidizs MS1 Rainbow doesn’t have a fancy DLC or CNT driver, but boasts a bio-cellulose driver instead. Reminds me of fancy carbon fiber kelvar rein-enforced drivers vs. a tried and true paper cone driver in the speaker world. I think Hidizs has done a good job with the MS1 Rainbow and let me tell you why.

Standout Features-

• Bass is elevated without bleed and has a nice mild V treble to match.
• No sibilance detected
• Cable is above average and pliable with my favorite style of earguides
• Good fitment (varies by user)
• Driven easily by smartphone, good sensitivity

Needs Improvement-

• Inline mic barrel design makes it hard to locate buttons
• 5khz energy might be too much for some people leads to a little vocal scratchiness
• Slightly above average resolution

4 C’s, Case, Cable, Contents, Comfort

Let’s get the obvious out of the way, they throw in a pouch to hold the earphones made of a rubberized vinyl material. It’s ok, a bit small to hold the earphone tips and the earphones themselves. I would probably use it to hold the extra tips but find a new case that would properly protect the earphones…OR you could just opt for the higher end packaging of the MS1 Mermaid. I am making an assumption that the Mermaid is the same tuning as the Rainbow, but with better packaging and in a metal shell.

Cable is twisted (not braided) but it is thicker than other stock cables – maybe twice as thick as the standard KZ/TRN affair we all know. It is pliable and does a good job of minimizing microphonics – I dig it. Could it be better -of course, but I am perfectly happy with this as the included cable especially since it has a inline remote.  I know this is not the “audiophile” way however I personally prefer cables with inline controls. I like to advance my music without taking my LGV30 out of my pocket. The thin buttons on a round barrel design make it troubling however to actually operate in a timely manner. I wish they would have used a different design, rounded rectangle with bigger buttons. The earguides are not overbearing not too springy either.

Contents of the package are above average with both a narrow set and wide bore set of tips which I find acceptable. They are sticky and medium fits me well due to the long nozzle with a lip. They are short stemmed which is fine for these since the nozzle is long enough to stay in place. The narrow bore tips caused a bit of peakiness in the treble and the bass fullness suffered a bit so I used the wide bores for the purpose of this review.

Comfort-I would say the shell is on the medium yet bulbous size. It fits to my ear contours nicely for a universal fit that is devoid of sharp edges, and made of plastic resin. It is lightweight yet of similar quality of other budget friendly brands KZ, TRN, CCA. The nozzle stem points forward in a straight angle, as opposed to a downward (KZ ZS10pro/TRN V90) or upward tilt (BQEYZ Spring1).

Sound

I would label this as a balanced or mild V shaped tuning. Moderately elevated bass stopping short of true basshead levels with plenty of haptic rumble will satisfy those that like their bass without midbass bleed and leaning towards the sub-bass region. I believe the bass is excellent for my tastes but could use a little more articulation. Continuing into the midrange we find that it is balanced well with the amount of treble and bass to avoid a major recession. Male vocals tend to have a minor amount of scratchiness to them, but it is absent with female vocals. This is probably my only minor complaint. No offending major spikes into the upper midrange even though the graph shows one at 5khz, sibilance is only there if the recording has it. Treble extends perfectly to give it just the right amount of air to avoid sounding too sparkly, but not lacking in warmer sounding sets like the Nicehck M6. Cymbals sound great with a nice smooth shimmer. Very polite sounding, so if your preference is hard and aggressive these might not satisfy.

Technicalities

Sound-staging is above average prioritizing width over depth, and has good instrument placement and separation. Cohesion is there as expected for a single DD. Layering is nicely done and I find the timbre to be natural sounding.  I have thrown many genres at the Hidizs MS1 and it exhibits them all superbly with electronic sounding well… a bit electronic. That tells me it renders everything as it should without imparting it’s own signature too much. There could be more resolution, but at this price level it is satisfying. The Simgot EN700 pro for example has a similar tuning but with a tad more resolution. It also costs 2-3x as much. The airiness present in the treble aides in adding spaciousness or atmosphere, to me other earphones lacking this will comes off as flat sounding. It handles complex music just fine without too much congestion, but something like the TRN V90 with its five drivers does appear to offer slightly better clarity. Sensitivity is also great and easily driven by a smartphone, while a nice headphone amplifier might give it more oomph it doesn’t improve anything that much.

Closing

Instrument separation could use a bit more refinement, but still good. While it doesn’t seem to be boasting anything spectacular and looks like just another single DD earphone in a crowded market, it is the sum of all parts that came together to produce a great sounding earphone with some atmospheric qualities. I enjoy this earphone completely as is and while there is a bit of grain in the vocals and lacks some points on resolution, I could be very happy with this as my daily earphone. It checks off all my boxes without asking me to crack open my wallet too much. I prefer it over the KBear Diamond that is more aggressive in the lower treble. I was unable to compare to my Tinhifi T4 at this time since I loaned them to LoomisJohnson just before Covid lockdown, but these do have better fitment YMMV.

Specifications

• 10.2mm Dynamic Driver Unit with Double Magnetic Circuit and Dual Cavity Design.
• Skin-Friendly Resin Housings with Aluminum Alloy Sound Tubes.
• Impedance: 20 Ohms.
• Frequency Response Range: 20Hz-40kHz.
• Sensitivity: 112dB.
• 0.78mm Two-Pin Connector Type.
• Calling and In-Line Music Control on Cable.
• 4 Core High-Purity Silver Coated High Purity OFC Cable.
• Plug Type: 3.5mm.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Disclaimer

I received these unsolicited from Hifigo. Tested at $69. Get them here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post HIDIZS MS1 Rainbow Review (1) – Charming Luck appeared first on Music For The Masses.