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.

Build quality is very impressive for the price, with well-machined alloy shells and a supple, microphonic-free silver-plated cable. Swappable 2.5/3/5/4/5mm plugs are a neat idea, although the connection is unreliable (I had to heatshrink the 3.5mm plug to the cable, which defeats the purpose of interchangeable plugs).

No carrying case is included. Isolation is particularly noteworthy—these block out sounds effectively even without music playing. Very efficient and easy to drive; I didn’t notice significant differences with more power. The TRN ST5 tended to be unforgiving of lower-quality files and sounded best with a more neutral source–the CX Pro dongle was a very good match, while the more energetic, colored ibasso DC-05 gave the TRN ST5 more low end oomph but a bit of unwanted stridency at the high end.

In contrast to the surprisingly bassy, U-shaped signature of its predecessors, the TRN ST5 goes for what I’d term a “Japanese” tuning—bright, with more  subdued bass, energetic, forward mids and considerable high-end extension.  With the included foams, low end has considerable midbass quantity but not much subbass depth or impact and there is audible bleed into the mids.

Changing to the included narrow-bore silicons tightens  low end but sounds a little anemic, while wide-bored hybrid tips like the Symbio W had the best combination of bass control and quantity.

Mids, as stated, are prominent, full and very detailed, while crisp, highly-resolving treble shows a lot of little nuances and sparkle but (as is characteristic of TRN) sounds a bit hot/metallic in that 10-20kHz region.  The ST5 would likely benefit from further tiprolling and a bit of micropore tape modding in order to smooth the presentation.

In any formulation, the ST5 present a wide soundstage with modest depth but (other than a tendency to push vocals forward) good layering and accurate instrument placement.  Coherence isn’t as seamless as the BA5 or comparably-priced DD designs like the KBear Diamond or Moondrop Aria—your ears tend to drawn to the hopped-up mids—although the TRN ST5  shows more high-end information than either.

Ultimately, whether these are for you will depend upon your taste in tuning—in this weight class I prefer the bassier, less analytic BA5 as an all-rounder, while comparably-priced BQEYZ or Blon have less drive but a more natural tonality.

However, the ST5 is still a lot of earphone for the money—viscerally it looks and feels like it could cost $150-200, and it has as revealing a high-end as you’ll hear for $60, even if it lacks the ultimate refinement of pricier pieces. K-POP fans should take note.

Disclaimer: got ’em for free from Linsoul: https://www.linsoul.com/

Specifications TRN ST5

• Drivers: 1 x 10 mm beryllium-coated dual-magnetic dynamic driver, 2 x 50060 midrange balanced armature drivers, 2 x 30095 tweeter balanced armature drivers
• Impdedance: 22 Ω
• Sensitivity: 120 dB
• Frequency Response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
• Cable/Connectors: 8-core high-purity silver-plated oxygen-free copper cable/ 0.78 mm, 2 pin
• Plug: 2.5 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4.4 mm modular swappable plug terminations
• Product Page/Purchase Link: Linsoul

Also check our reviews of the following TRN models:

Contact us!

All Our 349 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

The post TRN ST5 Hybrid IEM Review – I Sing the Body Electric appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The article shows how to customize the sound of your iems by changing the frequency response – without equalization – and in a non-destructive way. That is, the modification is quickly reversible. The results of this earphone modding may vary but you will frequently enjoy an earphone more when modified than right out of the box.

Introduction: Why reversible Earphone modding?

Reversible earphone modding (“modifying”), mainly performed with micropore tape, aims to balance an earphone’s sound to better fit one’s personal tonal preferences. Those audioreviews.org authors who are also subscribing to the “Super Best Audio Friends” Forum, have always been keen on the technique.

In the following, I will summarize the basic principles and some simple tricks & tips in an easy cookbook style to assist you in getting the best out of your earphones. You then can dig deeper into some case studies provided.

Reversible meaning that, after modding, the iems can be easily brought back to their initial stage…no holes poked, nothig ripped off etc. That’s favourable if you want to sell them later…

Modding is required then some iems don’t sound right for some listeners out of the box. They may be too bright (“shouty”) or the may have too much/not enough bass. In some cases, a different cable of different eartips help, but our method is cheaper – and it can be applied on top of all others. It changes the frequency spectrum without equalization.

The idea of “reversible modding” was initiated and pioneered by SBAF/Head-Fier James444. We reproduced his wisdom with his permission on our blog, previously, whilst applying and refining it ourselves over time.

Typically, a sensitive listener wishes to reduce unwanted peaks in the upper midrange (2-4 kHz harshness and hardness area) and treble (e.g. 7-10 kHz sibilance area). And he/she also wants to attenuate an overly inflated bass, particularly slowly decaying mid-bass humps. In short, if the frequency response curve is a U or V with its lowest point in the lower midrange (let’s say at 1 kHz), this shape should open up towards a horizontal line in the eyes of an “audiophile”.

Dynamic-driver (DD) earphones, because of their comparatively simple design, are easier to modify than balanced armature (BA) multi-drivers or hybrids.

Our Success Stories

Our authors have tamed the upper midrange by micropore mod in the following iems – and included the process and results in their respective writeups (each of which gives you insights in the particular modding process) – but I recommend finishing this article first before dipping into the particulars:

• Blon A8 Prometheus
• Blon BL-05 MK1
• Brainwavz Delta
• ddHifi Janus2
• KBEAR Diamond
• KBEAR TRI3
• KBEAR KB04
• KZ EDX
• LETSHOUER S12
• Moondrop Kato
• Moondrop SSR
• Moondrop Starfield
• NF Audio NM2+
• NiceHCK M5
• NiceHKC NX7
• NiceHCK NX7 Pro
• Pioneer CH3
• Rose Technics QT-9 MK2S
• Shanling ME80
• Shozy Form 1.1
• Tin Hifi T2 Evo
• TRN BA8
• TRN VX
• Unique Melody 3DT
• Urbanfun YBF-ISS014

Materials needed

You will find most of these items in your household. The biggest hurdle may be finding 3M micropore tape. Have a look at your local drug mart or health supplies store (e.g try here if you live in Calgary).

1. 3M micropore tape (Johnson & Johnson micropore tape may be too thick; you can also try Transpore tape)
2. Electrical tape or Scotch tape (Tesa Film for Germans)
3. Alcohol swabs (only in rare cases; 2-ply because it is the thinnest)
4. Thin wire (create it from a twist tie)
5. Needle
6. Scissors

One IEM, two Vents: the physical Principles

Typically (but not always), an iem has two vents, one in the front and one in the back. Here the Tinaudio T2 as an example.

Head-Fier James444 explains the functionality of the vents (original Head-Fi post):

Front Vent: making it smaller increases bass. Explanation: the front-mod adds a tiny amount of front leakage which avoids over-pressurization in the ear canal and reduces bass quantity. Attenuation is a bit stronger in deep bass than in mid/upper bass, resulting in a bass-lighter, but slightly more mid-bassy signature. Because of the leakage, isolation is slightly reduced.

Back vent: adding air increases bass; decreasing back vent diameter makes bass roll off. Reducing the air flow through the rear vent by taping it reduces bass (cover up and poke). Explanation: the back-mod restricts airflow through the back vent, resulting mainly in mid/upper bass attenuation. Deep bass remains unchanged and strong. Due to partial blocking of the back vent, isolation is slightly increased.

Both vents: the combination of front and back-mod yields the largest amount of bass attenuation and results in a significantly more balanced signature than stock.

Reducing and increasing Upper Midrange/Treble

Attenuating Upper Midrange/Treble

Is your earphone shouty? This mod can affect the frequency range between 5 and 15 kHz, depending on earphone.

This is done by adding micropore tape onto the nozzle:

1. Cover 80-90% of the screen with a single strip of micropore tape or use two thinner strips and tape over in a cross-like manner. this should do the job in most of of cases.
2. If this does not work perfectly well, try this: cover the nozzle 100%, then take a needle and poke a hole in the middle and four by the edges.If this still does not do the job in rare cases…
3. You can also try covering ca. 80-90% with 2.5 mm square of 3M micropore tape. This resulted resulted in 2-3 dB decrease in the upper midrange of the TRN VX.

Downside: if nozzle is covered too much, micropore can slow down the bass and make it “boomy” and/or compromise dynamics and soundstage in some earphones.

Example on the right: 95% of screen taped over with 3M micropore tape removed an evil 6-7 kHz “sibilance” peak in a Knowledge Zenith ED3.

Increasing Upper Midrange/Treble

Since the human ear hears the whole frequency spectrum in context, you increase perceived upper midrange/treble by reducing bass. See below how this is done.

Reducing and increasing Bass

Attenuating Bass with Micropore Tape

This is a twofold process and involves a bit of juggling between the two. Measuring comes in handy for double checking the results.

1. Taping off the back vent. If bass is too weak now, poke a hole into the tape to dose bass quantity. As long the hole in the tape is smaller than the original vent opening, the bass will be removed.
2. Creating an air-vent (or aid duct) in the front between tip and nozzle: this easy process is described over there. If you prefer a quickie, follow these pictures…

The combination of back-mod and front mod yields the largest amount of bass attenuation and results in a significantly more balanced signature than stock. If there is no back vent, one can obviously only do the air ducting. And that’s how it goes:

Unfortunately, you will never be able to speed up the bass, that is making it less muddy…but, of course, the muddiness will appear less irritating with reduced bass quantity after modding.

Below an example of a successful mod.

Attenuating Bass with the “Gummiringerl” (=Elastics) Method

(German, Viennese slang: “Gummiringerl”…little rubber ring, elastic; name coined and method suggested by SBAF/Head-Fier James444). 

The air-vent mod can also be performed with rubber string/elastic/any other string: pull through between tip and nozzle, then cut the ends off. You can try string of varying thickness. The downside is lack of flexibility in fine tuning, but you don’t have to worry about channel balance and it probably lasts longer. And it is faster and easier.

Increasing Bass with Micropore Tape

Tape off front vent for maximum effect. If you would like to scale it down, poke a small hole. The bigger the hole, the lesser the bass. Measure channel balance after each step, or do it sonically using a sine wave (Online Tone Generator).

Example: The Tinaudio T2s’ bass can be maximized by taping the front vent over. The bass quantity can be scaled back by poking a hole into the tape.

How to add Bass Extension

That’s hit and miss and varies from earphone to earphone. The idea is to reduce the air flow in the back vent. It is a byproduct of reducing bass by reducing the size of the back vent by taping and poking as described above.

Modding Limitations – That awful 3 kHz Peak

3 kHz peaks may introduce unpleasant hardness and fatigue, but they effectively cannot be safely removed with a reversible mod. Some drivers may respond to micropore tape on the nozzle: it is therefore worth a try to either cover the nozzle grille with 80-90% of micropore tape or remove the screen with a needle, tape completely over with micropore tape and poke a hole near the edge…as described in the treble section.

Other published Mods

Successful mods of single dynamic-driver earphones performed and described by James444:

Alpex HSE-A2000 —  balancing reduction of bass and treble

JVC FD01 with DIY filters — dampening with swabs

JVC HA-FX850 — with great explanations of the physics

Pioneer CH3 — treble reduction only

Kopiokaya explains his mods of the following earphones in great detail:

TRN VX — shoutiness reduced

KBEAR Diamond — bass attenuated

Concluding Remarks

The methods I have summarized in this article may help you getting over your dissatisfaction with a recent purchase – by easy, inexpensive means. In the future, just read as many evaluations of an iem as possible to form the most complete picture.

And please, never – NEVER – fall for any YouTube hypsters/salesmen/influencers and order pricey iems on spec. They mostly want your money. We don’t.

Although this article is quite comprehensive, the relevant chapters can be easily selected and accessed from the “Table of Contents” above. All of these methods are easy and can be performed by people with two left hands. I am the best example of that.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

I thank James444 and Kopiokaya for their insights and cooperation. James444’s wisdom is reproduced here with his permission.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post The Principles Of Reversible Earphone Modding – Removing Shoutiness and Bass Boom… appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Instead of first impressions, we offer completely flavour-neutral optical treatments before following up with our exhaustive reviews of the products’ performances.

Current Photography

1. BQEYZ Autumn vs. BEQYZ Summer (Jürgen Kraus)
2. Hidizs MM2 (Jürgen Kraus)
3. IKKO OH2 vs. IKKO OH1S (Jürgen Kraus)

Vintage Photography (prior to March 2022)

1. AME Custom Argent Hybrid Electrostatic (Jürgen Kraus)
2. Anew X-One (Jürgen Kraus)
3. Blon BL-05 Beta (Jürgen Kraus)
4. Blon BL-05 Beta (Jürgen Kraus)
5. Blon BL-05 MKI & MKII (Jürgen Kraus)
6. BQEYZ Spring 1 (Jürgen Kraus)
7. BQEYZ Spring 2 (Durwood)
8. CCA CA16 (Durwood)
9. Drop + JVC HA-FXD1 (Jürgen Kraus)
10. Fidue A65/A66 (Jürgen Kraus)
11. FiiO FD1 (Jürgen Kraus)
12. FiiO FHs1 (Jürgen Kraus)
13. Hill Audio Altair • RA (Jürgen Kraus)
14. iBasso IT01 V2 (Jürgen Kraus)
15. Hilidac Atom Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
16. Ikko OH1 (Jürgen Kraus)
17. KBEAR Believe (Jürgen Kraus)
18. KBEAR Diamond (Jürgen Kraus)
19. KBEAR hi7 (Jürgen Kraus)
20. KBEAR KB04 (Jürgen Kraus)
21. KBEAR Lark (Jürgen Kraus)
22. Kinboofi MK4 (Jürgen Kraus)
23. KZ ASX (Jürgen Kraus)
24. KZ ZSN Pro (Slater)
25. Moondrop Crescent (Jürgen Kraus)
26. Moondrop Illumination (Jürgen Kraus)
27. Moondrop Kanas Pro Edition (Jürgen Kraus)
28. Moondrop SSP (Jürgen Kraus)
29. Moondrop SSR (Jürgen Kraus)
30. Moondrop Starfield (Jürgen Kraus)
31. NiceHCK Blocc 5N Litz UPOCC OCC Copper Earphone Cable
32. NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Earphone Cable (Jürgen Kraus)
33. NiceHCK NX7 (Jürgen Kraus)
34. NiceHCK NX7 Pro (Jürgen Kraus)
35. Queen of Audio Pink Lady (Jürgen Kraus)
36. Revonext QT5 (Slater)
37. SeeAudio Yume (Jürgen Kraus)
38. Senfer DT6 (Slater)
39. Sennheiser IE 300
40. Sennheiser IE 500 PRO
41. Shozy Form 1.1 and Shozy Form 1.4
42. Shozy Form 1.4 (Jürgen Kraus)
43. Shozy Rouge (Jürgen Kraus)
44. Simgot EM2 (Jürgen Kraus)
45. Simgot EN700 Pro (Slater)
46. Smabat ST-10 (Jürgen Kraus)
47. Tin Hifi T2 Plus (Jürgen Kraus)
48. Tin-Hifi T4 (Jürgen Kraus)
49. TRN-STM (Jürgen Kraus)
50. TRN V90 (Jürgen Kraus
51. TRN-VX (Jürgen Kraus)
52. Whizzer Kylin HE01 (Jürgen Kraus)

The post Photography appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Unique midcentric tuning (rare in budget CHIFI).
Good accessories.
Excellent isolation.
Good timbre for a pure BA set.
Laid back, non fatiguing tuning.
Fast and clean midbass.
Good technicalities.
Easy to drive.
Will make an affordable budget stage monitor.
2 pin connector, better lifespan than MMCX in general.

Cons

Subbass and higher treble roll off.
Insertion depth affects the sound and comfort a lot -> varying impressions as such.
2D soundstage (wide soundstage but sounstage depth/height below average).
Lack of edge definition/bite – may be pro or con depending on personal preference.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The KBEAR Neon is a unique midcentric set, featuring good timbre, isolation and technicalities. It does have a subbass and higher treble roll off as per most single BA sets, but otherwise is a recommendation for vocal and mid lovers. There’s not many single BA or midcentric sets at the budget CHIFI segment, so this is a refreshing tuning for vocal and acoustic genres.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: Knowles 29689 full frequency Balanced Armature driver
• Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20kHz
• Impedance: 14Ω
• Sensitivity: 105dB
• Cable: 2 pin
• Tested at $49.99 USD

ACCESSORIES

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

• Foam tips – 1 pair
• Silicone ear tips – 3 pairs (S/M/L)
• Carry case
• 4 core 4N copper silver plated cable – well braided, non tangly. Slight microphonics, but perfectly usable sonic wise.

Accessories wise, quite good for the price, I’ve seen worse in pricier IEMs, cough cough TRN VX. Everything is rather usable OOTB here, so no need to mess with getting aftermarket tips or cables, which can add to costs (looking at you BLON BL-03).

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 Neon is a bullet shaped IEM following the legacy of the Etymotics housing, and is meant to be worn cable down. The housing is light and each earpiece weighs in at an amazing 2.3 grams.

Do note that insertion depth of the KBEAR Neon makes a humongous difference in the perceived sound, and also for comfort. This may also account for the different impressions that various consumers/reviewers will find with this set. With a shallower insertion, the KBEAR Neon’s bass is rather anemic, vocals are in the background and the soundstage becomes wider. With a deeper insertion of the KBEAR neon, the bass and upper treble are boosted and the sound seems better for me, things don’t sound so hollow or distant. One might need to try smaller sized eartips (either stock or aftermarket) to get a deeper fit, so it is not a case of using the usual sized tips you are familiar with on other IEMs.

Of course this is a YMMV situation as we have different ear anatomies and comfort levels for deep insertion IEMs. Though even with a deeper insertion on the KBEAR Neon, I find the comfort is acceptable for me, it isn’t as “violating” or deep fitting as the Etymotics series IEMs. For comparisons, I couldn’t use the Etys for more than a few minutes due to ear discomfort and ear abrasions (though granted the Etys had one of the best passive isolation in a non custom IEM and they did sound good). I’ve managed to use the KBEAR Neon for a few hours with the deep insertion method, without much issues.

As per most cable down IEMs, there are some microphonics, but this can be mitigated to some extent by using a shirt clip. Another tip I learnt in this journey, is that some folks use cable down IEMs as over the ear IEMs to minimize microphonics, it does look weird but it gets the job done, though it might wear out the cable at the bent point over the ear, but detachable cables can be replaced anyways, so no biggie. 

I liked that the KBEAR Neon featured a 2 pin connector, I had my fair share of mishaps with MMCX type connectors after switching cables once too often.

The only issue about the 2 pin connector of the KBEAR Neon, is that one may inadvertently connect it in a reversed polarity, causing out of phase issues. The KBEAR Neon housing can be rotated, there’s a dot on the IEM to signify the orientation of the IEM housing, so just make sure both dots are facing up or both are facing down. As per convention, the red dot is meant for the right earpiece, left dot is meant for the left earpiece. I didn’t hear any difference when both dots were facing up versus both dots facing down, but according to KBEAR, the dots are officially meant to be both facing down:

Anyways, if the music is out of phase, it is pretty obvious, music seems to be coming from behind the head and sounds weird. Alternatively, just use some free online links to check if your IEM is in phase, eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUT6ZhFdLkA

If music is out of phase, just reverse one side’s housing and you should be back in phase.

ISOLATION

Isolation on the KBEAR Neon is excellent as per an unvented BA set. One of the better passive isolating IEMs I’ve tried so far.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the KBEAR Neon with a Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp, Sony NW A-55 DAP (DMP-A50 FEv2 Classic Mr Walkman Mod), smartphone, Shanling Q1 DAP, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, ESS ES9280C PRO DAC/AMP, and a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 Amp.

The KBEAR Neon is easy to drive, no amping or heavy powered gear required. The Neon runs off practically any weak source. Though as usual amping can increase soundstage, microdetails and dynamics a tinge.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The KBEAR Neon is a midcentric set. Tuning is towards laid back, especially when shallow insertion is used. As per most single BA (balanced armature) IEMs, there is a subbass and higher treble roll off, resulting in limitations in extension of the FR at both extreme ends. Thus, bassheads best look elsewhere for your subbass rumble, and trebleheads best look elsewhere for your sparkle and air. But the Neon’s midcentric tuning is very well done, there’s really no harshness or peaks in the tuning, it’s a very agreeable and smooth midcentric set.

Having said that, one must be aware that midcentric tunings are very niche, they shines in vocals and acoustics genres, but they are not the best for bass forward music genres, eg EDM. Nevertheless, there aren’t many single BA types or midcentric tuned sets in the budget CHIFI arena, so the KBEAR Neon is pretty unique in this aspect.

The KBEAR Neon’s midbass is neutral and the subbass rolls off very early, as per the single BA physics. What the Neon cedes in bass quantity, it aces in quality. The midbass is very fast and tight and textured. It is the literal definition of “Fast and Clean” bass, with no midbass bleed. Mids are the star here, being boosted, but not harsh or shouty. It is a very transparent mids that lets all the vocals and instruments shine through, midlovers and acoustic/vocal lovers will have a field day. There isn’t the harsh 2 – 4 kHz area that plagues a lot of budget CHIFI tuning, this is a non fatiguing set. Treble wise, there’s slight sibilance, but it is still considered a safe treble for me, yet retaining good microdetails, though it isn’t the most airy treble, as per the higher treble roll off in most single BA sets.

Note weight on the Neon is on the thinner side, but that allows the single BA to move quite fast without any dulled transients. Timbre is surprisingly good for a BA set, it won’t beat a well tuned single DD in the timbral accuracy department, but it is one of the better sets for timbral accuracy for a pure BA setup that I’ve tried. Timbral accuracy on the KBEAR neon definitely trumps the garden variety KZ in timbre for sure. Acoustic instruments and vocals sounded quite natural in timbre, with maybe only a slight “plastic” quality in stringed instruments.

On one side of the KBEAR Neon housing, one can see the Knowles 29689 BA serial number, so this set does use Knowles drivers. But of course driver brand and even driver count is secondary to tuning and implementation, as we can see that some TOTL sets (cough cough Campfire Solaris) use Bellsing BA drivers, and some purported Knowles sets don’t sound anything special. But the Knowles house signature does shine thru in the KBEAR Neon, featuring a well rounded note with good technicalities, without needing to boost the upper frequencies to cheat and get the details in. As per some Knowles BA sets, there is a slightly blunted edge definition/bite in notes, this may be a pro or con depending on your personnel preference.

On to technicalities. As this set is a deep insertion type IEM, as per some Etymotics, soundstage is kinda 2D. Soundstage width is good, but height and depth are below average. But what the Neon cedes in soundstage, it makes up for in good left/right imaging. I’d take a set with precise imaging and more intimate soundstage, over a set with big soundstage but fuzzy and nebulous imaging. Details and instrument separation are good for this price range, the KBEAR Neon doesn’t use the typical overly boosted upper mids/treble cheatcode that a lot of budget CHIFI use to boost clarity and give fake details. The Neon manages to get the details in without going to shouty territory, and yet being quite a chill laid back tuning that one can use for hours without fatigue. Think of a monitoring type sound signature with good details, in fact I think the KBEAR Neon can be a good entry level stage monitor due to its isolation, good fit and good technicalities.

COMPARISONS

Here are some comparisons with single BA types. As hybrids/multi BA and single DD IEMs have their own strengths and weaknesses compared to single BA types, they were left out of the comparisons. I apologize as I don’t have any Etymotics IEMs with me now to do A/B comparisons, I returned them some time ago as I couldn’t tolerate the deep “violating” fit, but suffice to say the KBEAR Neon is much more comfortable for me than the Etys series.

Westone UM1 (1BA) ($99 USD)

The Westone UM1 is a 1 BA set that is tuned warm neutralish (but with a treble roll off). The Westone UM1 comes in a conventional bean shaped design, that is worn over ears instead of cable down like the KBEAR Neon. The Westone UM1 has worse isolation.

The Westone UM1 has worse details, imaging, instrument separation and clarity and has a more compressed soundstage width. The Westone UM1 has worse timbral accuracy. Both sets have a subbass roll off as per most single BA types, but the Westone UM1’s bass has a slight midbass bleed and is not as tight/textured/speedy.

Acoustic Effect TRY-01 (1BA) ($130 USD)

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is a 1 BA bullet shaped Japanese set that is also worn cable down. It has a non detachable cable (this may be a dealbreaker for some) and also has poorer isolation. The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 has slightly better technicalities and soundstage depth/height, but is more than double the price. Subbass extension is slightly better on the Acoustic Effect TRY-01, though the KBEAR Neon comes with better accessories.

CONCLUSIONS

The KBEAR Neon is a unique midcentric set, featuring good timbre, isolation and technicalities. It does have a subbass and higher treble roll off as per most single BA sets, though there’s not many single BA or midcentric sets at the budget CHIFI segment, so this is a refreshing tuning for vocal and acoustic genres. The KBEAR Neon’s sound is also quite drastically affected by insertion depth, but even with deeper insertion, I don’t find it as ill fitting as the traditional Etymotics types.

I have an admission to make, I’m not a single BA fan. I’m a single DD (dynamic driver) guy for general music listening, as they tend to give better timbral accuracy and tonality/coherency at the budget/midfi CHIFI segment, when compared to BA sets. BA bass that isn’t vented (in general), tends to move less air and have less decay, thus resulting in a less natural bass sound than traditional DD bass. In addition to the higher treble and subbass roll off, single BA types may be weaker in technicalities, when compared to multi BA/hybrids, as expected of a single BA physics limitation. Even if I do use unvented pure BA type IEMs, I use them for stage monitoring exclusively, due to their better isolation (generally unvented) and better technicalities than DD types.

However, despite my biasedness against single BA sets, the KBEAR Neon is a set I think is a keeper, as it shines in vocals and acoustic genres and can also perhaps be a budget stage monitor for stage use. Anyways most of us in this hobby have a few pairs of IEMs lying about, to suit different sonic signatures and music genres, and I think for those who don’t have a midcentric set in your Pokemon collection, the KBEAR Neon is a worthwhile set to consider. Just be aware that midcentric tunings aren’t all rounder, but they will really shine at vocals and acoustic genres.

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 here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002637520309.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post KBEAR Neon Review (1) – Rarefied Neon Gas appeared first on Music For The Masses.

With this question I approached an ifi nano iDSD BL USB DAC-AMP, and this article is about how it went for me.

Input

nano iDSD BL is a USB DAC-AMP, and more precisely USB is its sole input. No SPDIF digital input option, nor analogue inputs or any kind by that matter (aka: the device can’t be used as a mere amp).

Like all USB DAC-AMPs it can be plugged onto just about any USB-capable source such as a PC a Laptop a phone or a tablet, and it will be “seen” as an audio card. Full Windows 10 support requires a driver, which is freely downloadable from ifi’s site.

Nano iDSD BL’s USB 2.0 digital input connector is quite uncommon: it’s actually a USB A male installed in a recess of the chassis’ back panel. Due to that, the cable to connect to the nano iDSD BL needs to have a Female (!) USB A termination on the device end, in lieu of the usual Male one.

A few USB OTG cables with different terminations are bundled within the package. (Ah by the way… if you don’t know what OTG technically means, read here. You might discover why that otherwise good cable of yours refuses to work with your phone…)

• USB-A Female to USB3.0-A Male, 1m long, usually good to connect to a PC
• USB-A Female to USB-C Male, 15cm long, good to connect to a PC or a phone or other transports
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female, 15cm long
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female adapter (same as above, but no short cable in the middle)

No Apple cable is supplied – Lightning or 30-pin – so that’ll have to be purchased separately if needed. Neither is a micro-USB adapter (or cable) supplied, useful to hook onto non last-gen phones and tablets.

Boring cabling apart, something of paramount importance is behind the USB input port: nano iDSD BL incorporates most of the features offered by ifi iPurifier3, the company’s standalone USB “cleanser” which takes care of reclocking, rebalancing and regenerating the USB signal on the fly.

Especially when connecting to noisy hosts like a PC or a Laptop the sound quality improvement is totally apparent and, at least in my experience, the sole reason not to employ an iPurifier3, a galvanic separator, and a cleaner power supply on the input gates of a good DAC is their relatively high cost – which indeed in the case of a budget DAC can easily exceed its price… even a few times over.

According to nano iDSD BL literature and some answers I got from their tech people, the device includes the same REBalancer as the original iPurifier, together with some additional USB buffering circuitry (market-named “Zero Jitter”) which pursues the same ends of the REClocking part inside iPurifier3. Considering an iPurifier3 is separately sold for € 130+, including many of its functionalities inside the nano iDSD BL (€ 230-ish) is a great value proposition.

Outputs

On the output side, nano iDSD BL has 3 ports: two 3.5mm females are on the front panel, one labelled “Direct” the other “iEMatch”, and the third one – on the back panel – is a 3.5mm Line Out.

The font panel “Direct” port unassumingly presents itself like just any single-ended analogue output port, and indeed it does work as such when you plug a 3.5mm single-ended terminated IEM or Headphone cable on it.

Direct output specs are quite interesting:

• Output impedance is nicely lower than 1 Ω
• Supported load impedances range from 15 Ω to a whopping 600 Ω – an uncommonly extended range on this price bracket, especially on the high end.
• Output power is not bad: 20mW (> 3.5V) @ 600 Ω load, 285mW (> 2.9V) @ 30 Ω load and 200mW (> 1.7V) @ 15 Ω Load.
• The declared system dynamic range is > 109dB (@3V) and THD+N is listed as <0.005% (-86dB).

While both latest values are not particularly impressive, they are definitely in-line with the product price bracket and it’s also worth noting that thanks to the above-mentioned built-in “purification” features nano iDSD BL will do its job on an “apriori less noisy” digital signal. This made me expect better results than what printed numbers say and as I’ll report later I was kinda right.

Two very important additional things are now to be noted about output.

First: the iEMatch port.

Inside nano iDSD BL ifi put a modified iEMatch circuit, offering non user-selectable -16dB attenuation and 4Ω output impedance. Is it as effective as the standalone version? Let’s see:

1. As for reducing noise floor (hiss) audibility on extra sensitive IEMs the benefit is entirely there: -16dB is quite bearable attenuation vs nano iDSD BL’s max power so yes it’s well calibrated, it works big time. Indeed, I just recently used it to tame hiss from possibly the “hissiest” IEM I ever auditioned: TRN BA8 – which I wrote about here.
2. As for maximising resolution connected with digital-domain volume control : no, you don’t get that from nano iDSD BL’s iEMatch port… for the simple reason that nano iDSD BL already has analogue volume control (a feature normally implemented on higher tier models). iEMatch can’t “fix” what is not broke in the first place
3. As, finally, for impedance matching… well, I have my doubts here. 4Ω output impedance is… if you ask me not low at all when it comes to managing extra-low (<16Ω) impedance IEMs, and anyhow it’s more than 4 times higher than the Direct port’s own impedance, declared at <1Ω. Penon Sphere (6 Ω) does in fact sound more open, un-veiled and simply “better” on the Direct port vs. on the iEMatch port.

Synthetically: nano iDSD BL’s “iEMatch output port” is nice to have, although just for reducing / removing hiss from too-sensitive IEMs.

Second: S-Balanced wiring.

Many non-entry-level budget-tier balanced-scheme source devices offer both headphone output options, via two separate ports: one for balance-ended cables, the other for single-ended cables.

Ifi adopted a smart in-between option called “S-Balanced” (short for “Single-ended compatible Balanced”). Refer to their own whitepaper for a nice technical description. It is included in ifi Pro iCAN, xCAN, xDSD and nano iDSD BL.

As a consequence, instead of the usual dual separated output ports on the chassis, a cabling scheme is put in place behind the 3.5mm phone port on nano iDSD BL :

• When plugging 3.5mm TRS plugs – aka the ordinary 3.5 male connectors found at the end of 99.9% budget fixed-cable IEMs, and modular single-ended cables alike – the port delivers “normal” single-ended output. All single ended drivers on the market will seemlessly work in there. In addition to that, thanks to how internal cabling is designed, they will also get 50% reduced crosstalk – for free.
• When plugging 3.5mm TRRS plugs, aka “Hifiman 3.5mm standard” (see here) – the port delivers full “balanced-ended” output to balanced-cabled drivers, resulting in quite apparently cleaner and more dynamic sound.
  3.5mm TRRS termination is very uncommon on today’s balanced IEMs and Headphones, so I needed to procure myself an adapter to exploit that (and you won’t be lucky enough to already have one in your drawer either, I’m afraid).

This is nice as it delivers full balanced-ended quality, and even improves single-ended quality a little bit, while keeping full backwards compatibility, all without requiring further faceplate space for an extra female connector.

Add that such dual-standard “trick” is applied both behind the Direct and the iEMatch port, too !

On the flip side, I find it odd that no 3.5 TRRS adapter is included inside nano iDSD BL’s box. Ok maybe I shouldn’t expect one to be bundled for free, but why none is available as an orderable SKU# from ifi ?

Other features

Nano iDSD BL supports a wide range of digital input formats and moreover resolutions: DSD up to 256, PCM up to 384KHz and – drumroll here – MQA up to 192KHz.

I’m not at all interested into MQA so I’m not going to assess that – and even if I did I would have zero comparative experience to rely on.

On the back panel a small switch also allows the user to choose between two filters labelled “Listen” and “Measure”. The Listen option enables a Minimum Phase bezier filter, while the Measure option switches to a Linear Phase Transient-Aligned filter.

The topic may become too technical but let me try to simplify: a Minimum Phase filter makes sound “behave” more closely to our human auditory system – which is incapable of perceiving vibrations before an impulse, and tends to like when those following it over time are smoother – and is therefore by many called “more musical”. A Linear Phase filter yields a little bit edgier notes, which is indeed preferred by a population of listeners, but most of all comes handy when submitting the device to sampling and measuring, hence its given label name (“Measure”).

One more very important note is deserved about available firmware versions and their differences.

When I acquired it, my nano iDSD BL unit carried the latest available fw, version 5.3c. I looked into possible firmware variations and I found something quite interesting, as follows:

As you can read on ifi’s PDF paper linked above, Gibb’s Transient Optimised (GTO) filter is supposed to be an upgrade to the previous Minimum Phase Filter. There’s much more to it, read the paper

Long story short again: by downgrading from 5.3c to 5.3, thus going back to the “original” Minimum and Linear Phase filters and their upsampling algorithms I perceive a distinct sound output improvement! May be a matter of tastes of course, or maybe related to the GTO upsampling being less refined (yet) than its predecessors. Be as it may, to me it sounds better, and I settled to 5.3.

Lastly, the form factor is not “ultrasmall” nor “ultrathin” but it stays very easily transportable, and pocketable – at least in terms of coat pockets. With a little intention it can be “paired” with another device, also exploiting the 2 rubber bands found in the box. Weight is also quite light (139g) and the 1200mAh battery offers up to 10h of theoretical life, which I could test down to 7-8hrs max which is good in its class.

How does it sound…

After all these structural descriptions it’s finally time to go back to the prologue and assess how this light (also quite money-wise) device performs in terms of sound output.

…as a DAC-AMP ?

Much like in virtually all other cases I encountered, true-balanced output is better than single ended on nano iDSD BL too. Once the 3.5 trrs adapter riddle gets sorted, using nano iDSD BL’s true-balanced features is a strong recommendation: soundstage, imaging and most of all dynamics get significantly better.

Even on its balanced Direct output nano iDSD BL’s general tonality is warm, and timbre is dark-ish. Bass is well bodied in positive, yet relatively slow in negative, this predominantly resulting in some bleeding into the mids. Trebles lack some sparkle, not a masterpiece but better than the bass. Range extension is by-laterally, deifinitely on par with devices on this price bracket at least as far as my experience goes. Soundstage and imaging are on the average mark for the price.

…as a DAC, with another AMP ?

Nano iDSD BL’s Line Out port offers surprising better quality.

Plugging the amazing little amp that I use as my “hyperportable transparency reference” (iBasso T3) in, nano iDSD BL’s sound presentation changes dramatically: “darkness” goes away and the general timbre becomes definitely neutral, tonality keeps a modest, possibly welcome warmth, treble suddenly becomes airy and unoffensively sparkly. Clarity goes up 2 notches, soundstage gets airier, separation gets much better too. By the way: T3 is single-ended only!

So putting it simply: nano iDSD BL internal amp does not seem to offer justice to the quality of its dac, which in facts seems capable to kick much above its weight.

…(unfairly) compared to the Mojo ?

I started the day asking myself if this device could hold a candle to Mojo sound-wise though. How about that? Simply put: as a standalone unit the answer is “not by a mile”, while as a DAC to be complemented by a decent (or even good, why not) external amp the score changes quite a bit.

Compared to nano iDSD BL’s Direct full-balanced output Mojo’s output wins hands down an all counts: bilateral extension, bass and treble control, clarity, soundstage, imaging. It simply partakes to a higher class, full stop.

Escaping from nano iDSD BL’s internal amp via the LO port, and adopting an even inexpensive amp as the above mentioned iBasso T3, the gap reduces big time. Mojo still wins by definition, extension and its outstanding (unique in its bracket, possibly) capacity to manage background voices with incredible clarity, but the timbres and tonalities become at least comparable, in the same ballpark so to say.

…or vs to other “more in-line” alternatives ?

Ok nano iDSD BL is not a Mojo. Where does it stand then ?

Let’s run another head to head comparison: Fiio BTR5 DAC/AMP.

The two devices are apriori not really equivalent in terms of intended use, and features: BTR5 is indeed marketed as a BT DAC-AMP for IEMs mainly, with some complimentary USB connectivity but that’s all, nano iDSD BL as an easily portable USB device supporting MQA, higher DSD and PCM resolutions, and high impedance cans. Still, BTR5 gained vast market appreciation in terms of high-sound-quality-for-its-price, and being its price roughly 40% less than nano iDSD BL’s I’m stimulated to compare the two, using BTR5 as a USB device in this case of course.

Compared to nano iDSD BL, BTR5 bass is less bodied (but also less bleeding), mids and highmids come up much less controlled, grainy, and raising volume makes them edge quite quickly. Stage on BTR5 is evidently narrower, imaging is more congested, instruments come accross less defined and separated. BTR5’s dynamics, while not bad per se, are also a notch below nano iDSD BL’s.

Such comparison refers to both devices’ balanced outputs by the way, using a pair of TIN T4 as IEMs.

Let me try another comparison I have at easy hand: my ol’ Fiio X3 mk-III.

I find it interesting as a comparison as I’ll be using X3 as a standalone device, not connected to my PC and therefore apriori unaffected by USB noise. As X3’s balanced output is – as an exception to what commonly happens – not really better then its single ended one, I’ll run this comparison on both devices’ single ended channels for a change. I’ll use a pair of final E1000 as supremely neutral drivers.

X3 comes out as a further bit warmer (nano iDSD BL’s SE already being such), and its trebles are even less extended – which on the up side makes it nigh-impossible to make X3 go edgy let alone screamy. X3’s soundstage is also a bit less extended, imaging is on par. Simply put: the two devices’ single ended phone out are definitely comparable in terms of overall quality.

Now let’s compare the two devices’ Line Outs – always with the help of my iBasso T3.

X3’s tonality stays almost unmodified, trebles become just a little bit edgier but it’s a nuance; soundstage, imaging and separation get better.

On the other hand, as previously noted, nano iDSD BL gets much better when its LO is exploited: bass is cleaner and faster, bleeding is very modest, treble still unextended but much airier, detailed and engaging, soundstage and separation get 2 notches up.

Winding down

Alas!… ifi nano iDSD BL does not sound on par with Mojo, costing 2.5X more. Is it really a problem? Of course not.

Its phone output quality, especially on the full-balanced side, is in line with its price bracket, and offers the significant extra advantage of the built-in iEMatch circuitry proving decisive to cope with extrasensitive IEMs hiss, paired with direct support – and enough muscle power – for 600 Ohm headphone on the opposite end.

Its DAC – taken alone – is more than good, I’d call it outstanding actually. Its reconstruction quality is not so easy to find at this price in a semi-pocketable device. Those – like me – who want to pull the max out of nano iDSD BL in terms of sound quality will pair it with a portable amp, and will get a very significant device for a quite affordable overall price.

At-a-glance card

A final, quick PS: the unit I am talking about is my own property, it has not been provided as a review unit.

Contact us!

The post iFi Audio nano iDSD BL – A nano Mojo? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Comfortable, light, good build. Well fitting.
Excellent tonality, smooth and non fatiguing.
IPX5 water proof rating.
Volume controller.
Supports wireless charging, charging case (with battery indicator).
Bluetooth 5.2, supports APT-X/AAC/SBC codecs.
Strong and easy BT connectivity and range.
Well implemented touch controls.

Cons:

Average isolation, let’s in wind noise.
Average battery life.
Bass not the most textured.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN T300 is quite the complete package for a TWS set, sporting a coherent well tuned U shaped signature, coupled with good BT connectivity/support, a good fit, and some nice aspects like IP45 waterproofing, volume controls, wireless charging and a charging case.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver type: 1DD + 2 BA (8 mm dual magnet DD, 2 custom 30019 BA)
• Bluetooth: 5.2 Bluetooth, QCC 3046 Chip /AAC
• Qualcomm cVc 8.0 Noise Cancellation for calls
• Volume control: yes
• IPX5 Water Proofing: Can resist a sustained, low-pressure water jet spray.
• Bluetooth codecs: APT-X/AAC/SBC
• Tested at $74.55 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the TWS IEM, it comes with:

1)Silicone ear tips (3 pairs in total)

2) USB C charging cable

3) Charging case

• The charging case is on the small side size wise, and can fit in a pocket or bag easily.
• It can charge the earpieces fully 5 times.
• There’s an inner magnet so the earphones won’t drop out when the charging case is held upside down, very innovative!
• The charging case supports USB type C charging and wireless charging.
• The charging case has a battery indicator, so very useful to have a rough gauge of the remaining battery life.

BUILD/COMFORT

The TRN T300 is on the larger size shell wise, so the set does protrude noticably from the ears. Though, it is very comfortable, light and ergonomic, no issues using it for hours, you can even forget sometimes it’s in use. I didn’t find any driver flex on my set.

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold has a IP45 waterproof rating (i.e. sweat, light rain and splash proof), so it can be used for gym/exercising too, but probably not for heavy rain or water sports.

Isolation is about average for a TWS, there’s no ANC, but the passive isolation should be good for most outdoor use. I’ve tried running around with it, there is a vent and unfortunately wind noise can get inside the TRN T300.

FUNCTION/CONNECTIVITY

The TRN T300 powers on when taking it out of the charging case. Putting them back into the charging case powers them off. I had no issues with pairing it with a few BT devices, they recognized the TRN T300 on the spot.

Function for the TRN T300 is as per this picture:

The controls work as advertised above, and the touch controls are well implemented and are not overly sensitive.

BT connectivity on the TRN T300 is very good, it can go about 10 – 15 meters with no obstacles, and maybe 5 – 7 meters with obstacles. I haven’t had any drop outs for the past month I’ve been testing it, though perhaps in very crowded areas there was some slight lag or signal breakup.

The TRN T300 boasts a TrueWireless Mirroring Technology, where both earpieces transfer and receive the bluetooth signal simultaneously, instead of the conventional route, where the primary earpiece gets the signal first before transferring it to the “slave” second earpiece. What TRN says this does, is in theory, both earpieces turn off automatically when there is no connection to the device, so this prolongs battery life in a way.

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

The TRN T300 supports APT-X, AAC and SBC bluetooth codecs.

Battery life wise, the TRN T300 is marketed as having the following specs:

I do get 3.5 – 4 hours of battery life with a single charge, so it is thereabouts for the advertised battery life and charging specs, but this would also depend on the volume levels one listens at. Also, battery life would be expected to go down with repeated charging, so in the big scheme of things, I would consider the battery life to be about average.

I didn’t detect much latency with videos and music, unlike some other TWS sets. I don’t usually do gaming, but I think the latency speed is excellent for this set for non gaming purposes.

SOUND

Soundwise, the TRN T300 is a very coherent U shaped set. It is quite atypically tuned from the usual wired TRNs which have harsh upper frequencies and sibilance in spades. If you have heard the BLON BL-05S (not the non S version), the TRN T300 is actually very similar in tonality to it. So tonally, I would describe the TRN T300 as having a smooth U shaped tuning, that is non fatiguing but still being able to bring forward vocals and instrumentation in the mix. There’s perhaps a higher treble and subbass roll off, but this is also common in some other wireless gear. Dynamics are surprisingly good.

The bass on the TRN T300 is north of netural, and is punchy but this is not a basshead set in terms of quantity. Subbass isn’t the most extended, and bass quality isn’t the most textured, but otherwise, the bass acts as a nice counterpoint to the upper frequencies. Bass has occasional midbass bleed but by and large it doesn’t encroach into the mids. Timbre of bass is quite natural.

The lower mids are a tinge recessed compared to upper mids. Some warmth is added from the midbass bleed, and thereafter, there’s a slight upper mids boost at the 2 kHz area, but this area isn’t shouty at all. The upper mids are very safe and non fatiguing, and I was rather surprised on hearing this, as TRN’s house tuning usually boosts this area to the moon.

Treble is quite well extended on the TRN T300 (other than a 6 kHz dip), with a good amount of details, but without sibilance/harshness. I’m treble sensitive and this treble actually falls on the safer side tuning wise, maybe trebleheads and those wanting a bit more sparkle in their music might find the treble too tame actually, but on the flip side, this is a very non fatiguing and smooth set, and is highly suited for long listening sessions as such.

To be honest, I’ve wasn’t too impressed with the wired TRN releases for 2020 (for tonality), especially the higher end models like the TRN VX and TRN BA8 (let’s ignore the $15000 golden ears TRN), but I really like the tuning of the TRN T300 here. There’s no harsh upper mids/treble/sibilance fest here, and if they used this tuning in one of their wired releases, I’m sure it will sell very well.

Technicalities wise, clarity, details, imaging and instrument separation are above average for TWS standards. Soundstage is above average in all 3 dimensions, though music can get congested in very complex pieces or with competing riffs. In general, wired gear will still beat most TWS at the same price bracket, so don’t be expecting a technical tour de force for this set (when compared to traditional wired hybrids), but it is still quite good overall for a TWS set.

Timbre is quite good for acoustic instruments, this set can be a good pairing for most music genres.

COMPARISONS

Tronsmart Apollo Bold ($99 USD)

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold is a more basshead, L shaped set, and the bass can really rattle the jaw, especially on ANC mode. In contrast, the TRN T300 doesn’t have ANC mode and is much less bassy. So in addition to the Tronsmart Apollo Bold having an ambient and ANC mode, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold has an app to do some EQ settings and it has a much longer battery life. The Tronsmart Apollo Bold doesn’t support wireless charging, and the charging case has no battery indicator.

Connectivity is poorer on the Tronsmart Apollo Bold, it suffers from occasional drop outs and pairing issues and has a lesser BT range than the TRN T300.

In terms of note weight, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is thinner, but it has better technicalities in the area of clarity, imaging, soundstage, instrument separation, details. A few folks in the TWS threads on audio forums didn’t like the too boomy bass of the Tronsmart Apollo Bold (though the app has EQ functions to give a less bassy profile), so in a way the TRN T300’s tuning is more versatile and should be more consumer friendly, with the U shaped tuning.

TFZ B.V2 ($49 USD)

The TRN T300 beats the TFZ B.V2 in most areas, including battery life, technicalities, fit, BT connectivity/range. The TFZ B.V2 also doesn’t support wireless charging and the charging case has no battery indicator.

CONCLUSIONS

The TRN T300 is quite the complete package for a TWS set. I do recommend this set to those who are looking for a well tuned TWS set, it sports a coherent U shaped signature that is very atypical from the usual harsh and overly bright TRN tuning.

In addition to the great tuning, the TRN T300 boasts good BT connectivity/support, a good fit, and some nice aspects like IP45 waterproofing, volume controls, wireless charging and a charging case and well implemented touch controls. Perhaps small nitpicks would be the average battery life and average isolation.

IMHO, TRN didn’t have the best 2020 with its more expensive wired releases, but I think TRN has started this year with a very good set (though it isn’t a wired set). If they do use this same tuning in some of their wired releases for this year, I think they will be on to a winner!

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. The TRN T300 can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001313332794.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN T300 Review (1) – Blue In The Tooth appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Overheated upper midrange, sterile timbre, poor cable and accessory package.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN BA8 is a well-resolving and otherwise technically very good earphone that fails on its overly aggressive sound and sterile presentation.

INTRODUCTION

TRN are a Chinese company that has entertained us with a few hits and misses in the past. The TRN V90 was immensely popular and one of the best visited in our blog’s history. The TRN STM made it on our “Gear of the Year 2020” list. This is approximately the 20th review of a TRN earphone on our blog (you find them all here). I found some of the TRN models very aggressive sounding, such as the TRN VX so that we repeatedly had to offer modding procedures such as this one. The TRN BA, unfortunately, falls into this category.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 8 BA (Customised 30095 high frequency x 3 + 29689 midrange x 2 + 50060 midrange x 2 + 22955 low frequency x 1)
• Frequency Response: 20 – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 20 ohms
• Sensitivity: 100 dB/mW
• Cable type: 2 pin
• Tested at $141 USD

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

The package contains the earpieces, a 4-core occ cable (not the one in the photo below), and a set of silicone tips (S/M/L). Baskingshark has this chapter covered very well in his own review. The earpieces are well machined, the cable is substandard – the QDC connectors were loose and the right channel failed after short use. I replaced the cable with the pure copper one on the photo below.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

My tonal preference and testing practice

My test tracks explained

Equipment used: iPhone SE (1st generation), stock cable, Yinyoo 8-core pure copper cable, Azla SednaEarfit and Spinfit CP145 silicone tips.

To make this short and swift: the TRN BA8 are only for people with metal eardrums or hearing loss in the upper registers. To me, they generated that instant Chi-Fi headache. They are the classic earphone that needs the famous micropore tape mod. The upper midrange is way overcooked which sharpens the vocals/midrange to the utmost. Most western ears find this offensive to painful. At this price, the high risk of buyer’s remorse is too big imo and means too big a potential loss.

Bass is really good, it is dry and tight. It does not smudge into the midrange and keeps it clear and transparent. However this also sucks any warmth out of the presentation and adds to a sterile and clinical timbre. The presentation is technically excellent however entirely unnatural. Like an overpixelated, oversharpened piece of photography. Yes, mids are intimate by piercing.

The other technicalities such as soundstage, separation, and layering are also very good.

The micropore mod (and replacing the small stock tips with Azla SednaEarfit) removed some of the aggression and harshness from the midrange, however the sound remained very digital – like out of an early-generation CD player. This had one advantage: event the oldest 1950s recorded sounded “remastered”.

And suddenly disaster stroke: the right earpiece lost some volume so that there was a strong channel imbalance. I grabbed the next cable lying around – it happened to be an 8-core pure copper cable: and both channels worked again equally well. But as a side effect, the sound characteristics had totally changed: it was was warm not not so digital anymore. And the low end sounded overly thick. I replaced the Azlas with the Spinfit CP145 to tighten the bass…and also ripped the micropore tape off.

The sound remained warm at the bottom but now the vocals picked up energy again. I realized that, apart from the earpieces, nothing was stock anymore. I decided to stop my review here as I felt I was doing R&D, something TRN should have done before throwing the BA8 on the market. Reporting the BA8 in my configuration does not help anyone, not the reader and not the manufacturer either. I therefore refer you to Baskingshark’s review.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In summary, the TRN BA8 is another promising iem thrown on the market prematurely. It is an unfinished symphony with an aggressive tuning many listeners find torturing, and with a cable that does not harmonize with the earpieces. TRN had ample warnings over and over again from the feedback to some previous models. If I had paid $150 for this, I would be extremely unhappy. Buyers should not be guinea pigs.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The TRN BA8 was sent to me unsolicited by the manufacturer and I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

RELATED…

The post TRN BA8 Review (2) – Cuts Like A Knife appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros

Well built metal shells.
Smooth and non fatiguing tuning.
Good timbre.
Above average isolation.
Good price to performance ratio.

Cons:

Iffy fit (slightly better than the fit of the infamous BLON BL-03).
Same crappy accessories (stock eartips/cable).
Not the best in technicalities.
Midbass bloat, might be too bassy and warm for some.
May not be getting full potential with low powered smartphones, amping is needed to scale the IEM.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The BLON BL-01 is a warm and mild V shaped, bassy set, it is smooth and non fatiguing, and it prioritizes timbre and tonality over technicalities. It is not an analytical or technical set for critical listening, but is a set very suited to just kicking back and chilling to enjoy the music. The BLON BL-01 does boast a good price to performance ratio for the price, but it needs amping to scale better, and sounds meh from a lower powered source.

Aerosmith might say “No More, No More!” to another BLON release, but the BLON BL-01 is definitely worth the cost of a small restaurant meal, and after hearing this set, BLON Cultists will surely say “More, More!! Take the Oppoty opportunity to Break the Levee to release mooooooar BLONs!”

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 10mm Biology Fiber Diaphragm Driver
• Impedance: 32 ohms
• Frequency range: 20 – 20000Hz
• Sensitivity: 102 dB/mW
• Cable type: 2 pin 0.78 mm
• Tested at $17 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Silicone tips of various sizes (one comes in a wider diameter, the other is narrower).

2) Stock cable.

3) Sackcloth pouch.

Essentially, the famous (or rather infamous) stock accessories of previous BLON iterations is here to greet us. This includes the barely serviceable cable and the usual BLON tips and lame sackcloth pouch. The meme generating BLON box advising BLON cultists to “LET MUSIC BURN”, together with BELIEF and NEVER GIVING UP and OPPOTY is however, not present!!!

Budget CHIFI companies need to cut costs somewhere, so as to pass down a cheaper price to the consumers, and accessories are understandably the first area they target. Some CHIFI (cough cough TRN BA8 and TRN VX) retailing at much more expensive prices may also have a similar dearth of accessories, so I won’t beat BLON with a stick for this and can close one eye, since this is a sub $20 USD set. Anyway, what’s more important is the IEM’s internals and how it sounds, and I think those of us in this CHIFI hobby might have some aftermarket tips and cables lying about, so no biggie swapping the BLON BL-01’s stock tips and cables out.

For the purposes of this review, I stuck with the stock tips and stock cable, so as to give a fair impression of what the average layman will encounter when opening the packaging (who may not know about tiprolling). Aftermarket tips (or cables if you are a cable believer) may skew the sound signature, and aftermarket eartips may not fit every individual ear anatomy, so it might be quite different in sound if reviewed with aftermarket accessories. Hence, I felt it would be a more fair apples to apples comparison to do the review with stock accessories, even though they ain’t optimal, at least we have a common baseline accessory set to discuss. But for sure I’d swap to aftermarket tips and cables for music appreciation for the BLON BL-01 once this review is over.

BUILD/COMFORT

The BLON BL-01 really looks like a mango or banana, in fact it is nicknamed the “BLONANA” on some audio forums. Looks aside, the BLON BL-01 is just slightly better in fit for me than the infamous fit of the older brother, the BLON BL-03 (ie that’s not saying much, they are both iffy in fit due to a too short nozzle). But as usual, when it comes to fit, it’s YMMV, as we have different ear anatomies. I managed to get a proper seal with the BLON BL-01 using the stock tips, but I would have preferred a longer nozzle eartip or spacer to use with the BLON BL-01 as it felt a tinge insecure for me with stock eartips.

The BLON BL-01 is made of a nice metal build, and comfort is very good. I have used it for hours with no issues. The shells are on the heavier side due to the metal, so some who are sensitive to weight may have issues with it.

I didn’t find any driver flex. I liked that the BLON BL-01 came with a 2 pin connector, as I had tons of issues with MMCX connectors and their general longevity in my CHIFI journey.

ISOLATION

With stock tips, the iolation on the BLON BL-01 is above average, better than the BLON BL-03 older brother. But like most dynamic driver types, it is vented and hence it doesn’t have as good isolation as some unvented multi BA types.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

I tried the BLON BL-01 with a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 amp, Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp, Shanling Q1 DAP, lower powered smartphones, Ziku HK-X9 DAP -> Fiio A3 amp, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO) and Tempotec Sonata HD Pro. The BLON BL-01 is rather hard to drive from low powered sources. One only gets the full potential when amping it (due to the lowish sensitivity of 102dB/mW). It is not an issue of volume only, but the BLON BL-01 scales better in soundstage, details, dynamics and bass tightness with amping. I preferred brighter or at least neutralish sources with it in general, as the midbass was a bit bloated in the BLON BL-01, so it doesn’t pair the best with overly warm or bassy sources.

One might then ask a quite relevant question, does it make sense to pair a more expensive amp with the $20ish BLON BL-01 to unleash the full potential? Fair enough, I think most folks entering into this budget price bracket, or newcomers to the hobby may not be interested in getting an amp, compared to those that are entering the midfi market. As such, I probably won’t be recommending the BLON BL-01 to new users if you don’t have a more powerful source than the average non LGV smartphone. You can perhaps consider an alternative IEM if so, there are many other gems at this price bracket that don’t need amping. But for those that have been around the CHIFI block and are long term recalcitrant addicts to CHIFI, do whip out your amp or balanced gear if you have one lying about, so as to unlock the full potential of the BLON BL-01.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

In a nutshell, the BLON BL-01 is a warm mild V shaped, bassy set, which is smooth and non fatiguing, it prioritizes timbre and tonality over technicalities. The BLON BL-01 is not an analytical or technical set for critical listening, but is a set very suited to just kicking back and chilling to enjoy the music. Those wanting microdetails and technicalities best look elsewhere, but I would argue that it is much easier to find a technically proficient set at the sub $50 market, rather than something with good timbre/tonality such as the BLON BL-01.

With a good fit and eartip seal, the BLON BL-01’s bass is north of neutral, and is a level shy of true basshead quantities. It is slightly more midbass focused than subbass focused, but the subbass extends very well and can give a good rumble when amped. The bass is definitely faster and tighter than the BLON BL-03 older brother, but the midbass is still quite bloated and bleeds into the lower mids. Some might like or dislike the additional warmth this gives to the music, it’s gonna be a love it or hate it thing, so those that want a very fast and clean bass best look elsewhere. The bass is rather thick and is unfortunately not the most textured (though as said still an improvement over the BLON BL-03).

The BLON BL-01’s lower mids are recessed compared to upper mids. There’s a slight upper mids boost but this is quite tamed compared to most of the budget CHIFI out there. Female vocals are still more forward than male vocals, but not shouty. Some might find the mids a tinge too recessed for vocals and guitars, so mid and vocal lovers best consider an alternatively tuned IEM.

Treble is not that extended on the BLON BL-01, it is polite and safe, without sibilance/harshness. Though the other side of the coin of such a safe treble is that some microdetails and resolution in the treble is lost. I’m treble sensitive and this treble actually is my cup of tea, but maybe trebleheads and those wanting a bit more pizzaz in their music might find the treble too tame actually.

Timbre is good for acoustic instruments as per its single DD roots. Note weight is on the thicker side.

In the area of technicalities, the BLON BL-01 loses quite a lot of points for me. For example, instrument separation and details are not the best in the BLON BL-01, compared to other budget single DD types. There’s a fair amount of microdetails lost in the music, for pieces I’m familiar with. In terms of soundstage, height is above average, but width and depth is bang average. Imaging is good for the price, but music can sound congested and be smeared in very complex movements. Honestly, against other multi BA/hybrids at the same price bracket, the BLON BL-01 gets eaten for breakfast, lunch, dinner and supper in the technicalities department. Amping does help improve the technicalities, but overall, the music sounds a bit low res even when amped. But then again, this is nitpicking for a sub $20 USD IEM, and as we discussed, this set focuses on timbre and tonality over pure technical performance.

COMPARISONS

I chose some common budget single DD sets to compare below. I left out multi BA/hybrids from the comparison as the different transducers have their own pros and cons, so it would be an apples to oranges comparison as such.

VS the BLON BL-03:

For myself at least, the BLON BL-01 fits a tinge better with stock accessories than the BLON BL-03. I actually didn’t need to swap any stock cables or tips out to secure a fit, so that’s a plus point already. Isolation is also better on the BLON BL-01.

I am not sure about QC and unit variance, but my BLON BL-03 has more recessed mids than the BLON BL-01. The BLON BL-01 is a tinge cleaner and brighter than the BLON BL-03 in terms of tonality. BLON BL-03 is warmer and more organic sounding. In terms of technicalities, the BLON BL-01 is slightly better, in the areas of instrument separation, imaging, details, bass tightness, maybe soundstage, but both BLON siblings are better in timbre and tonality than technicalities.

If you ask different audiophiles on the forums, there will be multiple impressions for the BLON BL-03 when it comes to the bass department, since most folks are using different aftermarket tips with the BLON BL-03 due to the atrocious fit (too short nozzle). The different aftermarket eartips all influence seal and isolation and hence subbass amounts, to varying extents. Different eartips also change the sound signature of the entire frequency spectrum (which changes the perceived midbass amounts), so it is gonna be tough to compare the bass amounts on the BLON BL-03 among different individuals against the BLON BL-01 (not to mention QC may cause unit variation in bass amounts). Nevertheless, I did A/B testing with the same source/eartips/cables and when volume matched, the BLON BL-01 may actually be a tinge bassier (in quantity) than the BLON BL-03. But in terms of quality of bass, the BLON BL-01 is better. The BLON BL-01 has better subbass extension than the BLON BL-03. I find the BLON BL-01 is less bloaty in the bass and faster and tighter than the BLON BL-03 in the bass frequencies, with a faster bass decay in the BLON BL-01. Some may find that the midbass of both BLON siblings does bleed and encroach a bit into the lower mids, the BLON BL-03 being a much worse offender in this area. I’m a basshead so I don’t mind, but perhaps amping and aftermarket eartips may tighten the bass for these sets.

Overall, I would say when adequately powered and fitted optimally, the BLON BL-01 is a marginal upgrade over the BLON BL-03. The BLON BL-01 is also slightly cheaper, but of course that is in stock form (assuming aftermarket cables and tips are not added to the equation to achieve a fit among the BLON siblings).

VS the BLON BL-05S

Not to be confused with the shouty BLON BL-05 (non S), this set we are describing here is the radioactive green shelled one, the BLON BL-05S. For myself, the BLON BL-05S fits much better and is lighter than the BLON BL-01. The BLON BL-05S is less V shaped, and has a thinner note weight, with less bass quantities than the BLON BL-01. In terms of bass quality, the BLON BL-05S is tighter and not as bloaty as the BLON BL-01.

Both sets have good timbre as per their single DD roots, but the BLON BL-05S trumps the BL-01 in technicalities (imaging, instrument separation, clarity, details, soundstage, transient speed), and is easier to drive.

When both are amped, I would consider the BLON BL-05S to be a true upgrade over the BLON BL-01, though the BL-05S comes in quite a hideous shell colour, and of course the BL-05S is more expensive. But if you can top up the additional outlay, the BLON BL-05S would be my recommendation, if you don’t mind the gaudy shell colours.

VS the Moondrop SSR

The Moondrop SSR is tuned somewhat diffuse-field neutral with an upper mids boost, with a colder tonality and thinner note weight and poorer isolation than the V shaped BLON BL-01. It has less bass and is much more sibilant than the BLON BL-01. Moondrop SSR is shoutier at the upper mids/lower treble than the BLON BL-01, especially when used at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson Curve). For technicalities, the Moondrop SSR is much ahead of the BLON BL-01 in the areas of better clarity, imaging, details and instrument separation.

I’ve said this before, but the Moondrop SSR actually sounds nice at low volumes, but by pumping up the volume a few dB, the 3 kHz area is shouty and is too much for me (Fletcher Munson Curve). The Moondrop SSR has very polarizing reviews, and I think this may be due to the different volumes all of us are using it at, and volume levels are typically not mentioned by reviewers or consumers. Not to mention the different sources, tips, hearing health we all have may affect our perception of upper mids/treble in the Moondrop SSR. After doing A/B testing using the same source, tips (and even cable), I’ll take the BLON BL-01 any day over the Moondrop SSR, as the 3 kHz peak and the sibilance on the SSR is a deal breaker for me.

Different strokes for different folks though, I know a lot of our friends like the Moondrop SSR, especially those that use it at lower volumes. The Moondrop SSR actually has better technical performance than the BLON BL-01, but unfortunately it isn’t my cup of tea in terms of tonality, and I’ll take tonality over technical performance as my first priority. I haven’t had a chance to try the newer Moondrop SSP, which is supposed to be bassier but I’ll update this review if I get the Oppoty opportunity to try it.

Oh ya, how could I forgot the most important point of comparison here?! The Moondrop SSR comes with a waifu anime box! This box packaging may actually be the most important criteria for some purchasers and may make some shout at the moon (no pun intended)!

VS the HZSound Heart Mirror

The HZSound Heart Mirror is tuned neutralish bright with less midbass quantity and is less “fun sounding” than the BLON BL-01, especially when bass foward music is involved. The HZSound Heart Mirror sounds more analytical and colder, with a thinner note weight. Timbre, vocals and technicalities are much better on the HZSound Heart Mirror. The HZSound Heart Mirror wins in transient response speed. Both sets do need amping to scale to their best.

I see the mildly V shaped BLON BL-01 and the neutralish bright HZSound Heart Mirror as complimentary sets with different tunings to suit different music genres/preferences. But tonality aside, even though the HZSound Heart Mirror is more expensive, I think it is a true upgrade over the BLON BL-01 in most areas (accessories, timbre, technicalities, build, fit).

CONCLUSIONS

The BLON BL-01 is a warm and mild V shaped, bassy set, it is smooth and non fatiguing, and it prioritizes timbre and tonality over technicalities. It is not an analytical or technical set for critical listening, but is a set very suited to just kicking back and chilling to enjoy the music. The BLON BL-01 does boast a good price to performance ratio for the price, but it needs amping to scale better, and sounds meh from a lower powered source. I can see a lot of folks liking this set, considering it is rather affordable and has nice timbre and is not shouty or fatiguing. It is much easier to find a technically proficient set at the sub $50 range than something that has good timbre and tonality like the BLON BL-01.

So, this latest BLON hypetrain is being hyped to the moon and back and is being heralded as the next best thing since sliced bread and a giant killer. Does it deserve the hype? Well, I do think it is a very good budget set, but my honest assessment is that in terms of overall performance, it is probably a marginal upgrade over the BLON BL-03. IMHO, what holds the BLON BL-01 back from truly legendary status is that it hasn’t the best technicalities and the bass has bloat, this is more apparent when faster or complex passages of music kick in and things get congested and muddied. The BLON BL-01 also needs amping to truly shine (which a lot of folks entering into this budget segment may not have) and one may also need to swap the usual poor stock tips/cables for aftermarket accessories to secure a better fit, which can add to costs. Overall, these are nitpicks, considering it is a sub $20 USD set, and I still think it is a very good set, for sure it punches above its weight and has excellent value proposition, and is indeed a great addition to the BLON family.

Aerosmith might say “No More, No More!” to another BLON release, but the BLON BL-01 is definitely worth the cost of a small restaurant meal, and after hearing this set, BLON Cultists will surely say “More, More!! Take the Oppoty opportunity to Break the Levee to release mooooooar BLONs!”

Thanks for reading and Let Music Burn!!!

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the Wooeasy Earphones Store for providing this review unit. You can Belief in it, and take the Oppoty opportunity to get the BLON BL-01 at https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001705164790.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post BLON BL-01 Review (1) – Another BLON!? Aerosmith Says No More No More!!! appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Sizes don’t fit everybody; not cheap.

Distinctive Features: Size definition different from other brands; long-stemmed (2 of the 4 varieties).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Azla SednaEarfit Original Series consist of four varieties of bulbous silicone eartips with wide bores, two of them long stemmed, two short stemmed. The long-stemmed/short stemmed varieties come in regular and light, referring to membrane thickness and therefore comfort. Because of their special features the Azla SednaEarfit Original Series is entirely complementary to other premium brands such as SpinFit.

INTRODUCTION

Azla is an innovative company out of Gangnam, Korea that designs and produces their designs domestically. I had introduce the company in this previous article. Azla SednaEarfit Original Series are wide bore silicone eartips that have been very popular with audiophiles for quite some time. Hard to get outside of Asia in the past, many European and North American users relied on Japanese sources for their supply. Azla kindly sent me a generous amount of SednaEarfit tips over a year ago – and I had ample time testing them. In the meantime, the company has released another kind, the Azla SednaEarfit Xelastec, which will be subject to a future review.

THE FOUR TYPES OF THE ORIGINAL SERIES

Here the four types of AZLA eartips, depicted in size L (14 mm diameter of canopy). They are all wide-bores with identical umbrellas that and come in long stemmed and short stemmed, and with thick membrane (black; “regular”) and thinner membrane (translucent white, “light”).

Here some images that makes these distinctions clear.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

All models have in common that the sizes are unusual. L is 14 mm and ML is 13.3 mm diameter, regular L of most other brands is at 13.5 mm. But: the short-stemmed SednaEarfits have a 4.5 mm inner stem diameters that fits most earphone nozzles – it is the most universal size. The long-stemmed Azlas have an inner diameter of 5.4 mm but fit the same; I wonder whether this is a typo. Also unusual is the shape: all models are equally bulbous. Here the Azla SednaEarfit size chart:

The regular SednaEarfit and SednaEarfit Light further are special in that they are wide-bores with long stems. The long stems work very well with short-nozzles such as in the Blon BL-03, Blon BL-05/Bl-05s, and essentially all Tanchjim iems. There is no other tip design that does that other than the “reversed KZ Starlines“. The short-stemmed varieties work best with – you guessed it – long nozzles, frequently found in Bluetooth earphones.

In contrast, the Spinfits are narrow-bores which takes them out of competition with the Azla: the eartips of both brands are complimentary; one does not replace the other.

The umbrellas shapes between the SednaEarfit Original Series varieties are identical. The principal difference between the Regular and Light models is the membrane thickness: the black Regular ones are thicker, they are probably the sturdiest eartips on the market. I jokingly compare them to plungers (see photo underneath). The thinner Light tips have less tension, they are more supple and excert less pressure on the ear canals, which some may find more comfortable.

TONALITY?

There is no doubt that eartips are one of the the cheapest and effective ways to alter sound towards personal preferences, more so than cables, and both are less finicky than our reversible modding suggestions. However the perceived sonic changes through eartips rely on individual ear-canal shape.

As a rule of thumb, the bulbous shape of all four Azla SednaEarfit Original Series varieties mainly affect and reinforce the low end (for my ears). They solidify, tighten, and firm up the bass and sub-bass which boost its perception tom some extent. Good for improving muddy, softer low ends. This principally also adds volume to deeper voices. The long stemmed types also correct for short nozzles to get basic seal.

The thicker membrane of the regular black varieties probably minimizes in-ear resonance and produces a marginally thicker, fuller bodied low end than the Light varieties that are marginally leaner…in some cases. These differences may be small and perceived differently by different users with their individual ear-canal geometries. Test it for yourself before I start fantasizing too much.

Co-blogger KopiOkaya wrote on the Azla SednaEarfit Original Series in his famous Simplified Guide To IEM Silicone Eartips – make sure your dog is on the leash before I tell you: our most watched blog article – from his personal perspective:

Azla Sedna EarFit (Regular)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: long
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 4
Midrange: 4.5
Treble: 4
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
For long nozzle good midrange
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Azla Sedna EarFit (Light)
Bore size: wide
Stem length: long
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 4
Treble: 3.5
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.25
A “lighter” version of the regular Sedna EarFit. More balanced-sounding overall.
Purchased from Amazon Japan

Azla SednaEarFit (Light) Short
Bore size: wide
Stem length: regular
Feel: sturdy and very firm
Bass: 3.75
Midrange: 4.25
Treble: 3.75
Soundstage: 3.75
Vocal presence: 4.5
A “short-stem” version of SednaEarFitLight. Both nozzles are brought closer to the eardrums thus enhancement in overall clarity and vocal presence, which means stereo image and presentation are slightly more forward.
Purchased from MTMT Audio, Hong Kong

PERSONAL USE

I certainly had a long testing period and these Azla tips have made it permanently on the nozzles of many of my earphones. Note that I don’t use the short varieties permanently, mainly because I don’t have any Bluetooth earphones. Before I go into the nitty gritty, I just list these earphones:

AZLA SEDNAREARFIT

• Blon BL-05
• Blon Bl-05S
• Cambridge Audio SE1
• Fidue A66
• NAD VISO HP20
• Tanchjim Blues
• Tanchjim Cora
• TinHifi T2 Plus
• TRN V90s
• TRN VX

AZLA SEDNAEARFIT SHORT

NA

AZLA SEDNAEARFIT LIGHT

• Blon BL-03
• B&W C5 Series 2
• Cozoy Hera C103
• LKER I8

AZLA SEDNAEARFIT LIGHT SHORT

NA

In summary, I mostly used the regular black original ones – and wonder whether the coincides with the general purchasing pattern.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Azla SednaEarfit Original Series silicone tips belong into every earphone enthusiast’s toolbox. Yes, they don’t come cheap, just start with small amounts…if they are not sold out right now. The main difference is not between the Regular and Light varieties but between the long-stemmed and short-stemmed ones. It appears that the long-stemmed SednaEarfit tips, Regular or Light, are more universally deployable, as they specifically target short earphone nozzles.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The SednaEarfit Original Series silicone eartips were kindly supplied – and int generous amounts – by Azla in Gangnam, Korea. I thank them very much, also for their patience.

Find more information on the Azla SednaEarfit Original Series on the Azla Product Page.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

PHOTOGRAPHY…

The post Azla SednaEarfit Original Series Eartips Review – Take The Plunge, Gangnam Style appeared first on Music For The Masses.

TWS Earphones

Acefast T8 (Mazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)

Anker Soundcore Liberty Pro 2 (Loomis Johnson)

AXS Audio Professional Wireless Earbuds (Loomis Johnson)

Beats Powerbeats Pro TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Cambridge Audio Melomania 1 (Loomis Johnson)

CCA CX4 Wireless TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Creative Aurvana Ace 2 (Durwood)

Donner Dobuds One (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)

Drop Grell TWS1X (1) (Darin Hawbaker)

Drop Grell TWS1X (2) Loomis Johnson

Earsonics AERØ (Jürgen Kraus)

Elevoc Clear TWS (Loomis Johnson)

FIIL CC2 (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)

FIIL T1XS TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Fiitii HiFi Air 2 (Durwood)

Fiitii HifiDots (Durwood)

Final ZE3000 (English) (Jürgen Kraus)

Final ZE3000 (Japanese) (Jürgen Kraus)

Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS (Alberto Pittaluga)

Klipsch T5 II TWS Sport (Loomis Johnson)

Knowledge Zenith VXS Pro TWS (Durwood)

Lypertek Tevi Z3 Powerplay (Loomis Johnson)

Mifo S TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Moondrop Alice (1) (Durwood)

Moondrop Alice (2) Loomis Johnson

Moodrop Space Travel (1) (Jürgen Kraus)

Moodrop Space Travel (2) (Loomis Johnson)

Naenka LITE Pro TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Oladance OWS Pro (Jürgen Kraus)

Oladance OWS Sports (Durwood)

OneOdio OpenRock Pro (Loomis Johnson)

Oladance Wearable Stereo (Loomis Johnson)

Samsung Galaxy Buds Live (Loomis Johnson)

Samsung Galaxy Buds Plus (Loomis Johnson)

Sennheiser CX 400BT (Loomis Johnson)

Sony WX-1000XM3 (Loomis Johnson)

Soundpeats H1 (Loomis Johnson)

Soundpeats H1 (Loomis Johnson)

Status Audio Between Pro (Loomis Johnson)

Tini Hifi Tin Buds 3 (Loomis Johnson)

TOZO Golden X1 (Loomis Johnson)

TRN T300 (3 reviews): Baskingshark | Loomis Johnson | Alberto Pittaluga

Tronsmart Apollo Bold (Baskingshark)

TWS Headphones

1More Sonoflow Wireless ANC Headphones (Loomis Johnson)

Apple Airpods Max (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)

Final UX3000 (English) (Jürgen Kraus)

Final UX3000 (Japanese) (Jürgen Kraus)

Hifiman Ananda BT (Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir)

Jabbra Elite 45H (Loomis Johnson)

Master & Dynamic MW50+ Wireless Headphones (Loomis Johnson)

Naenka Runner Caller Bone Conduction Headphone (Loomis Johnson)

Naenka Runner Pro Bone Conduction Headphones for Swimmers (Loomis Johnson)

Nank (Naenka) Runner Pro 2 Bone Conduction Headphones (Loomis Johnson)

Oneodio Pro C Wired + Wireless (Y80B) (Durwood)

Phiaton 900 Legacy (Loomis Johnson)

Sennheiser Momentum 4 TWS (Loomis Johnson)

Sony WH-1000XM4 [Wireless, Noise Cancelling] (Loomis Johnson)

Status Audio BT One (Loomis Johnson)

SuperEQ S1 and SuperEQ Q2 Pro (Loomis Johnson)

Bluetooth Amplifiers

Fosi Audio BT30D Pro (Durwood)

ifi Audio GO blu (Alberto Pittaluga)

iKKO Heimdalir ITB03 (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)

Qudelix-5K* (Jürgen Kraus)

Shanling UP4 (Durwood)

TempoTec March III M3 (Jürgen Kraus)

TempoTec Serenade X Digital Desktop Player (Jürgen Kraus)

Other Bluetooth Devices

Gravastar Mars Pro (Kazi Muhbab Mutakabbir)

iBasso CF01 Bluetooth Adapter (Baskingshark)

NiceHCK HB2 BT Earhooks (Baskingshark)

The post 67 Bluetooth & TWS Devices 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.

Good build.
Very good technicalities at this price range.
2 pin connector – better lifespan than MMCX general.
Good isolation.
Tight bass.

Cons:

Overpriced, many better sets for the same price or lower.
Harsh and fatiguing due to the overly boosted upper mids/lower treble, not the best option for treble sensitive folks.
Hollow lower mids, off tonality in the mids.
BA timbre.
Thin note weight.
Dearth of accessories.
Not the most comfortable fit for longer sessions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A picture paints a thousand words. The TRN BA8’s graph looks like a volcano that is gonna explode! (See graphs below!)

Okay, honestly the graph is scarier than it sounds. Though the TRN BA8 still sports a mild V shape tuning that is bright, with an overly boosted upper mids and lower treble. It has very good technical performance, but the upper mids/lower treble are harsh and fatiguing and the lower mids are a bit off in tonality. Fear inducing PTSD graph and dearth of accessories aside, at the $140ish price bracket this supposed flagship is releasing into, there’s honestly much better sound to be obtained for the coin.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 8 BA (Customised 30095 high frequency x 3 + 29689 midrange x 2 + 50060 midrange x 2 + 22955 low frequency x 1)
• Frequency Response: 20 – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 20 ohms
• Sensitivity: 100 dB/mW
• Cable type: 2 pin
• Tested at $141 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Hard round case (metal) – FYI, it costs $3 USD on aliexpress.

2) Silicone tips (S/M/L)

3) 4 Core OCC Cable – tangly and thin.

The packaging the TRN BA8 came in was huge, it is easily one of the bigger packages for the last 50 – 60 CHIFI IEMs I have opened. I opened the box like a kid opening a Christmas present, only to find to my astonishment, that the dearth of accessories was shocking. I mean, I wasn’t expecting a treasure trove of accessories as TRN is not known to be the most generous with accessories, but at least I expected it to be something befitting a $140 USD flagship set. (I know TRN released a way more expensive joke $15000 USD golden ears IEM Halloween prank recently, but I’ll just pretend that it never existed cause it is unlikely to be sold. Even if someone with fool’s gold buys the golden ears TRN IEM, there’s a big possibility of infamous TRN QC issues, so let’s just take the TRN BA8 as the current flagship of TRN).

Anyway, back to the accessories (or lack thereof) in the TRN BA8, I don’t really give much weightage to accessories usually, as after a few months in this hobby, most of us would have some aftermarket tips and cables lying about, but this is really astonishing for a purported flagship IEM of TRN. I’ve seriously seen $30 – 40ish USD IEMs with better accessories, eg HZSound Heart Mirror, KBEAR Lark etc! The TRN BA8’s cable and eartips are exactly the same as those seen in budget TRN gear, and perhaps they added the hard case to make it look more premium, but that hard case can be easily bought for $3 or cheaper on Aliexpress.

I know some CHIFI companies cut costs at the accessories area to save money, but this is really a case of penny wise, pound foolish. I hope the $15000 USD golden ears TRN IEM that TRN is selling doesn’t come with the same pitiful assortment of accessories, or at least if they do, I hope TRN makes them all from gold (golden eartips, golden cables, and gold 24 carat Bellsing drivers inside too, pretty please).

BUILD/COMFORT

Personally, I found the TRN BA8 has so so comfort, it can get can be a bit painful for longer listening sessions. We all have different ear anatomies though, so some may find it comfortable, so YMMV.

I’ve no complains about the build, it is very sturdy and well constructed.

I liked that it came in a 2 pin config, generally better lifespan than MMCX in general.

ISOLATION

Isolation is good as per most all BA sets that are generally not vented.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the TRN BA8 with a Khadas Tone Board DAC -> Topping L30, Shanling Q1 DAP, Ziku HD X9 DAP -> Fiio A3, android smart phone, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO) and a Tempotec Sonata HD Pro. The TRN BA8 is easily drivable from lower powered sources, no marked scaling of the sound was noted with higher powered sources.

Since the tuning of the TRN BA8 is on the bright side, I preferred pairing it with warmer sources to tame the lower treble/upper mids. Do note that the TRN BA8 sounds the best when played at a low to average volume. With boosting the volume, the upper mids/lower treble can get extremely hot due to the Fletcher Munson curve.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

A picture paints a thousand words as they say. The TRN BA8’s graph really reminded me of some exploding Hawaiian Bad Volcano, no pun intended, or at least Ayer’s Rock (between the 2 – 6 kHz regions). I was bracing myself for a screaming banshee on seeing it, and was getting ready to lose a few years of hearing (and ears of hearing also). This graph looked like it could really give PTSD and flashback nightmares for the next few months, but for the sake of audiophiledom and to do this review, I took a listen. I closed my eyes and said a prayer before turning on the amp. Slowly. Gingerly. Carefully. One volume pot marker at a time. Ah, I am still alive, my eardrums haven’t perforated yet! Honestly, the graph isn’t as painful as it looks, though it is still somewhat shouty, fatiguing and hot in the upper mids/lower treble, but the TRN BA8 actually ain’t as bad sounding as the graph looks. Could be worse. A eardrum could have burst there.

So scary PTSD inducing graph aside, the TRN BA8 does sports a mild V shaped tuning that is bright. Some good aspects about the TRN BA8 are that it is a technically proficient set. It has very good details, imaging, clarity and instrument separation at the $100ish price range. Soundstage is also above average in all 3 dimensions and music sounded rather spacious.

Timbre for acoustic instruments is so so, as per a set with pure BAs, definitely most pure DD sets have it beat in the timbre department, but it isn’t the worst BA timbre I’ve heard. Note weight is on the thinner side.

Bass:

Bass on the TRN BA8 is slightly north of neutral, midbass is more predominant than subbass. This is not a basshead set. The bass is tight, above average in texturing and on the faster side, as per most BA bass sets. The subbass extension is actually not bad for a pure BA bass, thought it won’t beat some DD bass in decay, movement of air and extension. There is only a slight midbass bleed, but this is somewhat source dependent. I have to say the bass is my favourite part of the tuning on this set.

Mids:

In a nutshell, the mids are the most controversial area of the TRN BA8. The upper mids of the TRN BA8 are much more forward than the rest of the mids, an almost 15ish dB difference, and this weird tonality in the mids does overemphasize vocals and guitars, making the mids sound unnatural. Female vocals are more forward than male vocals, but the lower mids are very hollow. This leads into a shrill and thin upper midrange that can get very hot, especially at higher volumes (Fletcher Munson Curve).

On the plus side, this boosted upper mids can give great clarity and details to the music, but the flipside is that the 2 kHz area is very fatiguing and harsh, though it isn’t as bad as the PTSD inducing graph looks. I found this 2 kHz area shouty especially with high vocals and horns/trumpets, and sometimes on badly recorded music.

Pure multi BA sets are commonly used for stage monitoring cause of their better technicalities and isolation (they are generally unvented) than equivalent single DD types. They also tend to have faster bass than DD bass. Fatiguing upper mids aside, I would still be hesitant to use the TRN BA8 for stage monitoring cause the tonality in the mids is rather off. Unless you have EQ on hand to somehow even out the vast chasm between the upper and lower mids.

Treble:

Lower treble carries on from the boosted upper mids, giving good details and clarity, but at the expense of harshness and fatigue.

Thankfully, the rest of the treble gradually dips thereafter, and it does extend quite well, but the upper treble isn’t that hot. The TRN BA8 sports an open and airier treble, with only mild instances of sibilance. Technicalities are good as expected in the treble, and trebleheads will like this set.

COMPARISONS

As per comparing oranges to apples, I’ve left out single DD sets from the comparisons.

TRN VX (6BA + 1 DD) ($69 USD)

The TRN VX is another banshee with a hot upper mids/lower treble and sibilance. I honestly couldn’t use the TRN VX for more than 5 minutes without EQ or a micropore mod. The TRN VX has thinner note weight, poorer timbre and technicalities and more sibilance. In stock form, the TRN VX has much harsher upper mids than the BA8. Accessories (or lack thereof) are similar between the 2, but there’s the added $3 USD metal hard case in the TRN BA8 to give some semblance of royalty to the purported TRN BA8 flagship.

The TRN BA8 is an upgrade over the TRN VX, but it is not doubly better as the price would suggest. Trebleheads and detail freaks may like these two sets, but I wouldn’t recommend both for treble sensitive folks, unless you want to play with EQ or some micropore mods.

TRI Starsea (2BA + 1DD) ($109 USD)

The TRI Starsea has better fit, better accessories, and tuning switches to give 4 different sound signatures. Hence it is more versatile than the TRN BA8. The TRI Starsea has a slightly more compressed soundstage and slightly poorer technicalities (instrument separation, clarity, details). Imaging is about on par between the two, but the TRI Starsea isn’t as harsh in the lower treble/upper mids than the TRN BA8, even on the brighter tunings.

The TRI Starsea is harder to drive and scales much more with amping, with regards to the bass heft. The TRI Starsea is also quite source picky, and benefits from a source with the lowest output impedance possible (ideally close to zero), in view of the very low 9ish impedance. On using it with higher output impedance gear, the FR may be skewed. The TRI Starsea is less dynamic and more “monitor” like. The TRN BA8 on the other hand is quite source agnostic.

TRI I3 (1DD + 1 Planar + 1BA) ($145 USD)

The TRI I3 sports a U shaped tuning, and is very coherent and balanced despite the weird mishmash of driver configuration. The TRI I3 is more power hungry and harder to drive due to the planars inside. The tonality in the mids and timbre are much more natural in the TRI I3 than the TRN BA8.

Imaging is about on par between the two sets when the TRI I3 is adequately powered, though the TRN BA8 edges it slightly in the areas of details and instrument separation. Clarity is more pronounced on the BA8 cause of boosted upper mids/lower treble, whereas the TRI I3’s treble is very safe and almost borders on dark, with less treble extension. The TRI I3 is much smoother and less fatiguing, especially in the higher frequencies as such, though on rare occasions, there is a 3 kHz spike that rears its ugly head on the TRI I3 with poorly recorded material or say in trumpets/saxaphones. When amped, the TRI I3 has a better soundstage than the TRN BA8.

Accessories are better in the TRI I3. Isolation is poorer on the TRI I3. Shell size is larger on the TRI I3, and the shell is heavier.

Audiosense DT200 (2BA) ($149 USD)

The Audiosense DT200 is a 2 BA set that is tuned warm neutralish. The Audiosense DT200 has better timbre and tonality than the TRN BA8, with less fatiguing highs. In fact, the Audiosense DT200’s treble is a bit dark. Technicalities like soundstage, imaging, instrument separation, clarity are better in the TRN BA8.

Accessories in the DT200 are one of the best at its price point, it comes with a myriad of foam tips and silicone tips, a very nice cable and brush, and a pelican like hard case (that is purportedly waterproof too). The TRN BA8 comes with a $3 hard case and some miserable tips and tangly budget cable.

Overall, even though the TRN BA8 beats the Audiosense DT200 in technicalities, I would argue it is easier to find a highly technical CHIFI than one with good timbre/tonality at this price point. The TRN BA8 is too fatiguing and harsh for me to use for longer sessions, compared to the smoother and more laid backed Audiosense DT200.

Hisenior B5+ (5 BA) ($78 USD)

The Hisenior B5+ is about half the price of the TRN BA8, and it is a midcentric (N shaped) set with more marked subbass roll off and higher treble roll off than the TRN BA8. Both are pure BA sets, but the Hisenior B5+ has knowles drivers.

Technicalities (clarity, imaging, instrument separation, details) and soundstage are better on the TRN BA8. The TRN BA8 is more harsh and fatiguing. Hisenior B5+ is more natural in the timbre and vocals department and the tuning is smoother. In view of the midcentric tuning, the Hisenior B5+ is great for vocals, but may not be that all rounded for certain genres eg bass forward genres like EDM.

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

CONCLUSIONS

Thanks for reading so far. The TRN BA8 isn’t that great, but it isn’t the worst tuned set. However, the big elephant in the room is why did it launch at the $130 – $150 USD price range? If TRN released their usual $30 – 50 USD fare, the expectations will be lower, but now that they try to muscle into the $100 USD pie, there’s tough competition against esteemed bigboys such as the TRI I3, ISN H40, Fiio FH3, TRI Starsea, ThieAudio gear, Shozy Form 1.4 etc. I honestly can’t recommend the TRN BA8 at its current price of $130 – 140 USD. Maybe at 50% and below of the TRN BA8’s current price, then possibly it can be a very very very soft recommendation.

The TRN BA8’s PTSD inducing graph is admittedly scarier than it looks, but the tuning is still rather fatiguing and hot in 2 – 6 kHz regions, as per the graph. The tonality is also a bit off in the mids, with a very hollow lower mids. Having said that, the TRN BA8’s technicalities are very good. If technicalities are of more importance to you over tonality, and if you are a treblehead, then perhaps this set may be up your alley, but most others may not enjoy the tonality or harshness for longer listening sessions. Different strokes for different folks as they say.

However, to add insult to injury, the accessories provided in the TRN BA8 are laughable for a $140ish flagship, and are almost no different from their budget IEMs (save for an additional $3 USD metal hard case to remind us that it is indeed a flagship).

I’m not really a BA bass fan, but have always appreciated that some of the pure multi BA sets I own (such as the Audiosense T800, some midfi Westones and the Hisenior B5+) can bring different benefits to the table, eg fast bass, good technicalities and good isolation (cause generally these pure BA types ain’t vented). In fact I use these pure multi BA sets mostly for stage monitoring due to the above reasons. But despite the good technicalities, the TRN BA8 wouldn’t be getting any air time as a stage monitor nor a general purpose IEM for me due to the harsh, fatiguing tuning and off tonality in the mids.

I thought that the cheaper TRN VX was pretty bad in stock form without EQ/mods, but TRN continues this similar tuning (or lack thereof) in the TRN BA8, with a higher price to boot. The TRN BA8 is also their most expensively priced IEM to date (let’s ignore the joke $15000 USD golden ears TRN Halloween prank iem), but unfortunately in this case, the sound does not justify the price. I borrowed the TRN BA8 from coblogger KopiOKaya for the purposes of this review. I couldn’t wait to return it to him pronto once the review was done.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

This set was borrowed from coblogger KopiOKaya for this review.

It can be gotten at $141 USD from the TRN Official Store: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001302669695.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN BA8 Review (1) – PTSD Inducing Graph, Screaming Banshee? appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros

Light and comfortable. Good fit.
Smooth and organic tonality.
Good technical performance for a budget single DD (though still won’t beat multi BA/hybrids in general).
Good timbre.
Fixes fit issues and midbass bloat of the BLON BL-03, fixes shouty upper mids of the BLON BL-05 (non S).
Quite all rounder for most music genres.
Above average isolation.
Good price to performance ratio.

Cons:

Gaudy coloured shells, takes guts to wear it outdoors!
Distorts with higher volume/overly robust EQ.
Same crappy accessories (stock eartips/cable).
May be overly safe in tuning, some may find it lacks pizzaz.
Bass is not the most textured.
Fares better with amping. May not be getting full potential with low powered smartphones.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It does take a brave BLON cultist to wear the BLON BL-05S down the street, due to the unconventional radioactive green shells. But don’t judge an Oppoty by its cover, this is one set with an excellent price to performance ratio, boasting an organic and coherent tonality, good technical performance and accurate timbre for a budget single DD set.

This third Oppoty’s the charm. You Better Belief It! After the false dawn of the BLON BL-05 (non S), which didn’t have the best reviews for overly shouty upper mids, the BLON BL-05S has tamed the upper mids of the BLON BL-05 (non S), and simultaneously fixed the midbass bloat and fit issues of the venerable BLON BL-03. I’m glad BLON “Never gave up” after the BLON BL-05 (non S) fiasco.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 3rd generation 10 mm carbon diaphragm (single dynamic driver)
• Impedance: 32 ohms
• Sensitivity: 108 dB/mW
• Cable type: 2 pin 0.78 mm
• Tested at $39 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Silicone tips.

2) Stock cable.

3) Sackcloth pouch.

Essentially the famous (or rather infamous) stock accessories of previous BLON iterations is here to greet us. This includes a barely serviceable cable and the usual BLON tips and lame sackcloth pouch. The familiar BLON box advising BLON cultists to “LET MUSIC BURN”, together with BELIEF and NEVER GIVING UP and OPPOTY greets us in a rainbow coloured hue.

Budget CHIFI companies need to cut costs somewhere, so as to pass down a cheaper price to the consumers, and accessories are usually the first area they target. Some CHIFI (cough cough TRN BA8 and TRN VX) retailing at more expensive prices may also have a similar dearth of accessories, so I won’t beat BLON with a stick for this and can close one eye. Anyway, what’s more important is the IEM’s internals and how it sounds, and I think those of us in this CHIFI hobby might have some aftermarket tips and cables lying about, so no biggie swapping the BLON BL-05S’s stock tips and cables out.

With regards to whether aftermarkets cables affect the sound on the BLON BL-05S, well that’s a big can of worms that is beyond the scope of this review. Suffice to say, I respect both camps. You save a lot of money in this hobby if you don’t believe in cables, while cable believers will have a new area in the audio chain to play with to achieve audio nirvana. Anyway, I think we’ll agree that most aftermarket cables will still be better asthetically and haptically than the stock one provided by BLON.

BUILD/COMFORT

The BLON BL-05S is very well fitting, similar to its BLON BL-05 (non S) older brother, it is very ergonomic and comfortable. It is much better fitting than the infamous BLON BL-03’s poor fit with stock tips/cables, due to the latter having a too short nozzle.

I didn’t find any driver flex. I liked that the BLON BL-05S came with a 2 pin connector, as I had tons of issues with MMCX connectors and their general longevity in the past.

The BLON BL-05S has a very garish radioactive green lick of paint. I tried wearing it outdoors and got a myriad of looks from passerbys, ranging from the disapproving to curious to disbelief (these heathen have no Belief in the BLON cult!). It was as though they were observing an alien device from another planet.

And this is the most dangerous thing about the green shells that I have to warn you folks about: your significant other will definitely notice that a new IEM has come in the mail, due to the obvious colour. And no, they will not be green with envy (no pun intended) seeing another IEM added to the collection. In fact, you might even be chased out of the house or have to sleep on the floor at night. There’s no excuse to disguise it as one of the other conventional black or silver coloured IEMs in your pokemon (gotta catch them all) collection of IEMs. Even my wife, who isn’t into audio, knew it was a new IEM from the colour. I took the Oppoty opportunity to try to disguise it as a preexisting Moondrop SSR (both had the radioactive green colour), but no dice, the Moondrop anime waifu box wasn’t present and it was just a lame mispelling of Oppoty and Belief on the box that let the cat out of the bag.

The radioactive green colour unfortunately doesn’t glow in the dark, so I don’t know what is the purpose of said colour, maybe to be radical and stand out from the cut throat competition at this price bracket? Perhaps for the local mainland Chinese who like jade, it might be an auspicious sign, but I got a feeling a lot of Westerners may not be willing to wear this colour outside. I hope BLON can consider producing the BLON BL-05S in conventional colours in the future, it shouldn’t be so difficult to do a new paint job isn’t it?

ISOLATION

At the risk of getting arrested by the police for wearing the garishly coloured shells out in the subway (for the sake of audio!), I found that the isolation of the BLON BL-05S is above average. As per most vented single DD sets, it won’t beat non vented multi BA types in this area.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

For the purposes of this review, I tried the BLON BL-05S with a Khadas Tone Board -> Fiio A3 amp, Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 amp, Shanling Q1 DAP and Tempotec Sonata HD Pro. The BLON BL-05S is drivable from low powered smartphones, but scales better in soundstage, details and dynamics with amping. I preferred warmer sources with it in general, to give a bit more heft in the bass.

Unfortunately the BLON BL-05S distorts with higher volumes or overly robust EQ, that’s one area of weakness in the driver. So for those that like to blast their music or fiddle with a lot of EQ, this might be one area that may be a potential dealbreaker.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The BLON BL-03 was lauded for excellent tonality and timbre, but had an achilles heel of a bloated midbass that couldn’t keep up with fast/complex bass movements. Not to mention the BLON BL-03 had fit issues due to the too short nozzles (which necessitated most folks to buy aftermarket tips +/- cables) and it had below average technicalities to boot. The next BLON, the BLON BL-05 (non S), tried to fix these problems by lowering the midbass quantity and fixed the fit issues of the BLON BL-03, but was decried for having shouty upper mids/lower treble and a somewhat off tonality in the mids (probably a seesaw effect due to the bass reduction).

I’m glad to report that this third OPPOTY is the legit charm. The BLON BL-05S combines the best characteristics of both the older BLONs and irons out their major deficits. The BLON BL-05S fixes the midbass bloat and lowers the midbass quantity of the BLON BL-03, and fixes the poor fit of the BLON BL-03. It also manages to tame the shouty upper mids/lower treble of the BL-05 (non S) with a better balanced tonality in the mids. The icing on the cake, is that the BLON BL-05S is technically superior to both the BLON BL-03 and BLON BL-05 (non S) too.

The BLON BL-05S sports a mild V shaped tuning, rather consumer friendly and coherently tuned, it is quite all rounder for most music genres as such.

BLON BL-05S’s bass is just slightly north of neutral, more subbass than midbass focused. It isn’t a basshead set for sure. For a DD set, the subbass doesn’t have the best extension, I would have preferred more subbass quantity and extension actually, but the BLON BL-05S’s bass is faster than the BLON BL-03’s bass, though it’s not that well textured or accurate compared to some DD peers at the same price range. There’s no midbass bleed and those that found the BLON BL-03 too bass heavy might like this set in the bass department.

The BLON BL-05S’s lower mids are a tinge recessed compared to upper mids, though the lower mids don’t seem as recessed as on the BLON BL-05 (non S). There’s a slight upper mids boost at the 2 kHz area, but it isn’t shouty at all (despite what the graphs would suggest). The BLON BL-05S can still on rare occasions get hot in the upper mids with boosted volumes (fletcher munson curve), but at moderate volumes, it is very tamed compared to most of the budget CHIFI out there. Female vocals are still more forward than male vocals, but not shouty. The upper mids/lower treble on the BLON BL-05S is much better than the BLON BL-05 (non S) in being not as harsh. The BLON BL-05S is more well balanced in tonality for the mids as such, and I liked that the mids were rather transparent. I would have preferred a bit thicker note weight in the mids, but this is just nitpicking.

Treble is quite well extended on the BLON BL-05S, with a good amount of details, but without sibilance/harshness. I’m treble sensitive and this treble actually falls on the safer side tuning wise, maybe trebleheads and those wanting a bit more pizzaz in their music might find the treble too tame actually. Perhaps for the cable believers, you can try using a silver plated cable with the BLON BL-05S and see if it does bring some clarity and details to the forefront.

Technicalities (in imaging, instrument separation and details) are better in the BLON BL-05 than the older BLON siblings. Against other multi BA/hybrids at the same price bracket, perhaps the BLON BL-05S can’t beat them in the technicalities department, as is expected of the limitation of a single driver. But for a sub $50 USD single DD set, I would consider it as having good technicalities for sure, with the driver being one of the faster single DDs I have heard at this price range. The BLON BL-05S’s soundstage depth is about average, but the width and height is above average. While the soundstage is not exactly classleading (my pick goes to the Final Audio E3000 at this price range), music never sounded congested on the BLON BL-05S for me.

Timbre is accurate for acoustic instruments as per its single DD roots. Note weight is moderate – it isn’t as thick as the BLON BL-03’s note weight, but isn’t as thin as that in the BLON BL-05.

COMPARISONS

I chose some common budget single DD sets to compare below. I left out multi BA/hybrids from the comparison as the different transducers have their own pros and cons, so it would be an apples to oranges comparison as such.

As per the above graphs, though the graphs of these 3 BLONs appear similar from afar, these sets actually sound very different (they do use different drivers too among the three and slight changes in bass/upper mids can cause a see saw effect in how the ears perceive the rest of the frequency spectrum). Suffice to say, the BLON BL-05S manages to fix the shouty upper mids of the BLON BL-05 (non S) and fix the midbass bloat of the BLON BL-03 very successfully.

VS the BLON BL-03:

The BLON BL-05S is different in tonality and tuning to the original BLON BL-03, so it is not a direct upgrade in a sense. Those wanting an upgraded version of the analoguish bassy warm tuning of the BLON BL-03 best look elsewhere. The BLON BL-05S has a tinge of warmth but is not as warm tuning wise compared to BLON BL-03. BLON BL-05S has a clearer treble but less subbass quantity, though subbass quantity on the BLON BL-03 is a bit tough to discuss among different individuals as most are using different aftermarket tips due to the poor fitting stock tips of the BLON BL-03. And different aftermarket tips give different isolation and bass amounts.

The BLON BL-05S has a more tamed midbass with minimal midbass bleed, with better technicalities (in imaging, clarity, instrument separation and soundstage and details). It fixes the slow and bleeding midbass of the BLON BL-03 with faster bass speed. I find it more balanced than the bassy BLON BL-03 actually.

The BLON BL-05S has better fit for sure, and better isolation, no need to mess with aftermarket tips.

Both have very legit timbre as per their DD roots, but BLON BL-03 has slightly better instrumental timbre in terms of timbral accuracy.

I feel they are complimentary sets, the BLON BL-03 having slightly better timbre and having a warm bassy analoguish tuning. The BLON BL-05S has better balancing in the mids and midbass, and it brings better fit and technicalities to the table. I think the BLON BL-05S has fixed the 2 main issues of the BLON BL-03 (ie crap fit and the midbass bloat), though it loses a bit of the warm analoguish bassy sound. One can consider the BLON BL-05S to be the BLON BL-03 MK2 that all BLON cultists are clamouring for, but the tuning is a bit different to really describe it as a direct spiritual successor, as bass forward music still has more midbass punch on the BLON BL-03.

VS the BLON BL-05 (non S):

I think most will agree the BLON BL-05 (non S) wasn’t that well received in view of the overly shouty upper mids, and its mids were off tonally wise, so the BLON BL-05S is a big improvement in this area. BLON BL-05S’s mids are more balanced, with the upper mids not being as hot (and the lower mids not being as recessed) as the BLON BL-05 (non S).

The BLON BL-05S doesn’t have as cold a tonality as the BLON BL-05 (non S), and timbre sounds more natural than the BLON BL-05 (non S).

Fit and isolation is similar between the two siblings. Technicalities are better than the BLON BL-05 (non S).

Overall I think the BLON BL-05S has made the BLON BL-05 (non S) superfluous. The BLON BL-05S is better in the 3 Ts: tonality, timbre and technicalities, no contest. So for those who are wondering between the 2, just skip the BLON BL-05 (non S). The BLON BL-05 (non S) will probably be a footnote now that the BLON BL-05S is in town.

VS the Tin HIFI T2 Plus

The Tin HIFI T2 Plus is a crowd favourite, sporting a U shaped tuning that is coherent and balanced, having good timbre and tonality. The Tin T2 Plus has a very inoffensive signature, but I find the Tin T2 Plus lacking a bit in dynamics and attack/bite compared to the BLON BL-05S.

The upper mids on the Tin T2 Plus are less boosted, with also less midbass punch/bass quantity than the BLON BL-05S. The Tin T2 Plus has slightly more extension/quantity in the treble and the bass is a bit more accurate than the BLON BL-05S.

The Tin T2 Plus also has poorer isolation, and has slightly poorer details and imaging than the BLON BL-05S when both are amped decently. Tin T2 Plus has better clarity and instrument separation. The Tin T2 Plus that I have unfortunately has a wonky MMCX connector on one side, and from forum reports it seems a few other users have been having MMCX issues from this model too and some of the older Tin HIFI MMCX ones (eg Tin T4, Tin T2 Pro). I think the penny has finally dropped for Tin HIFI and they are shifting towards 2 pin connectors in their newer releases (I prefer 2 pin connectors to MMCX ones for longevity any day). But if you are considering the Tin T2 Plus, it might behoof you to get it from somewhere with a good returns policy eg Amazon, in case an MMCX lemon comes in the mail.

Overall, just focusing on sound (and setting QC aside), I would consider the BLON BL-05S to be a sidegrade or at best marginal upgrade (if we were to split hairs here). Both are very good budget single DD sets, it may boil down to your sonic and music genre preferences. The BLON BL-05S has slightly better imaging and dynamics and edges it for me over the Tin T2 Plus most of the time. Maybe for classical genres, I’ll take the Tin T2 Plus for its more neutralish signature, though I personally find the Tin T2 Plus a bit boring and less dynamic for other genres, so it gets less air time for me, but YMMV.

VS the Moondrop SSR

The Moondrop SSR is tuned somewhat diffuse-field neutral with an upper mids boost, with a colder tonality and thinner note weight and poorer isolation. It has less bass and is much more sibilant than the BLON BL-05S. Moondrop SSR is shoutier at the upper mids/lower treble than the BLON BL-05S, especially when used at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson Curve). Moondrop SSR is the technical superior of the BLON BL-05S in the areas of better clarity, imaging, details and instrument separation.

I’ve said this before, but the Moondrop SSR actually sounds nice at low volumes, but by pumping up the volume a few dB, the 3 kHz area is shouty and is too much for me (Fletcher Munson Curve). The Moondrop SSR has very polarizing reviews, and I think this may be due to the different volumes all of us are using it at, and volume levels are typically not mentioned by reviewers or consumers. Not to mention the different sources, tips, hearing health we all have may affect our perception of upper mids/treble in the Moondrop SSR. After doing A/B testing using the same source, tips (and even cable), I’ll take the BLON BL-05S any day over the Moondrop SSR, as the 3 kHz peak and the sibilance on the SSR is a deal breaker for me.

Different strokes for different folks though, I know a lot of our friends like the Moondrop SSR, especially those that use it at lower volumes. The Moondrop SSR actually has better technical performance than the BLON BL-05S, but unfortunately it isn’t my cup of tea in terms of tonality, and I’ll take tonality over technical performance as my first priority.

VS the iBasso IT00

The iBasso IT00 is a U shaped set that comes with better accessories but unfortunately has driver flex. The iBasso IT00 has better extension at both ends (subbass/treble). The iBasso IT00 is more basshead, and is warmer sounding with a thicker lower mids. Upper mids are less boosted on the iBasso IT00. Technical performance is about thereabouts between the two sets.

The BLON BL-05S distorts with higher volume/overly robust EQ, and may lack a bit of dynamics compared to the iBasso IT00, but overall I would consider them sidegrades, with the iBasso IT00 perhaps better for bassheads/bass forward music and those that love a coloured and thick lower mids frequency.

VS the HZSound Heart Mirror

The HZSound Heart Mirror is tuned neutralish bright with less midbass quantity and is less “fun sounding” than the BLON BL-05S, especially when bass foward music is involved. The HZSound Heart Mirror sounds a bit more analytical and colder. Timbre and technicalities are better on the HZSound Heart Mirror. Both sets have fast drivers for a single DD but the HZSound Heart Mirror wins in transient response speed. The BLON BL-05S has lesser upper mids boost than the HZSound Heart Mirror and is generally less fatiguing for longer sessions than the HZSound Heart Mirror.

Isolation is better on the BLON BL-05S. The HZSound Heart Mirror is $10 – 15 USD more expensive, and this may be explained by the better accessories on the HZSound Heart Mirror. Both sets do better with amping, but the HZSound Heart Mirror scales much more with amping. Unfortunately, the BLON BL-05S driver distorts with higher volumes/EQ, so that’s an area of weakness when pumping up the volume compared to the HZSound Heart Mirror.

I see the V shaped BLON BL-05S and neutralish bright HZSound Heart Mirror as complimentary sets with different tunings to suit different music genres/preferences. The HZSound Heart Mirror is superior in vocals and instrumental timbre and technical performance (though this is with amping), but is a bit thinner in note weight and colder in tonality. For bass forward music or for something warmer and less analytical, I’ll still pick the BLON BL-05S. If one has no powerful source available (eg just a low powered smartphone), then go for the BLON BL-05S instead, as the HZSound Heart Mirror needs amping to sound good.

CONCLUSIONS

The BLON BL-05S succeeds in fixing the main issues of the BLON BL-03 (ie poor fit, poor technicalities and bloated midbass) and the BLON BL-05 (non S) (in the shouty upper mids), and also adds better technicalities to the mix. It has one of the better technicalities in a budget single DD set, with fast transients, though multi BA/hybrids at the same price bracket will generally trump the BLON BL-05S in this department.

Timbre on the BLON BL-05S is good, the tuning is rather coherent and smooth with no major peaks/troughs in the tuning. It has good price to performance ratio and should be a good all rounder for most music genres. Crap accessories aside, the BLON BL-05S does distort with higher volumes/overly robust EQ, so that’s one area to take note for those that like to blast their music or fiddle with EQ. The colour of the shells may be a potential deal breaker too, though I would take a weird/ugly looking yet good sounding earphone over a beautiful but lousy sounding set any day.

The BLON BL-05S isn’t a direct successor to the BLON BL-03 in my opinion, as it loses the analoguish midbass heavy sound signature of the BLON BL-03 to pursue better balance, speed and technical performance. Otherwise, the BLON BL-05S is a set that lives up to the name “price to performance ratio”. So this third Oppoty‘s the charm. You can Belief that and I’m glad BLON Never gave up after the BLON BL-05 (non S) fiasco. Let music burn!!!!

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Wooeasy for providing this review unit. The BLON BL-05S can be gotten from the Wooeasy Earphones Store! at $39 USD.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post BLON BL-05S Review (3) – Third Oppoty’s The Charm, You Better Belief It! appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Light, good fitting and comfortable.
Good price to performance ratio.
3 tuning filters to give different sound signatures (not gimmicks).
Good imaging, details and soundstage for the price.
Easily drivable.
2 pin cable connector – better lifespan than MMCX.

Cons:

Artificial BA timbre for treble frequencies, not best option for acoustic instrument/vocal predominant genres.
Upper mids and treble can get shouty/harsh on gold and blue filter.
Thin note weight.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN STM is a budget CHIFI brightish U-shaped hybrid that offers 3 tuning nozzles to finetune the sound signature. It has good price to performance ratio and good technicalities for the price. A nitpick would be the common artificial BA timbre for acoustic instruments and thinner note weight. Don’t be expecting a tour de force for the price, (and keep your expectations in check), but I think its very decent value for 20ish bucks.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver unit: 1DD+1BA hybrid unit
• Impedance: 24 ohms
• Earphone sensitivity: 106dB/mW
• Frequency range: 20 – 2000Hz
• Earphone interface: 2Pin
• Tested at $22 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

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

2) Stock cable – generally usable sonic wise, no chin cinch, slight microphonics.

3) 3 pairs of tuning nozzles to change the sound signature

BUILD/COMFORT

Though the TRN STM looks a bit cheap in appearance, it is very light, comfortable and well built. No issues with wearing it for long sessions.

I didn’t detect any driver flex.

I’m not a fan of MMCX connectors due to potential longevity issues, and am glad the TRN STM came with a 2 pin connector.

ISOLATION

The TRN STM has slightly above average isolation, not as good as some unvented BA types, but adequate enough for outdoors usage.

DRIVABILITY

The TRN STM is very drivable from lower powered gear like smartphones, so no amping requirements necessary.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The TRN STM on the default gold filter sports a bright U shaped tuning, with some boosted upper mids. The bass actually looks anemic on the graphs, but on actual listening (with a good eartip fit), they are slightly north of neutral and weightier than the graphs suggest (this is coming from a self-professed basshead), with quite good subbass extension.

Some BA (balanced armature) containing CHIFI such as some KZs and the TRN VX didn’t receive the best reviews from non trebleheads for the overly harsh upper mids/treble, probably cause of an undampened BA being nestled in the nozzle, which is a common bugbear for “westernized” ears. The TRN STM still has a BA hiding in the nozzle, but the tuning filters provide some dampening effect with the materials inside their nozzles, and this is a great move from TRN, to not only let one finetune the sound signature, but also to help to dampen the upper mids/treble glare for our treble sensitive breathen.

As per the graph below, there are 3 tuning filters which mostly affect the 2kHz – 5kHz regions (though some of the sound impressions may not correspond to the graphs, eg bass quantity and upper treble):

• Gold filters (stock) – make the sound “balanced and natural” according to the TRN store page. I dunno how TRN is marketing the gold filters as “balanced and natural” as it sounds like a bright U shape with boosted upper mids to me actually (the red filters sound more “balanced” for me). I find the upper mids more forward with this gold filter, with perceived depressed lower mids, and the upper mids can get hot sometimes, though it isn’t as bad as some other CHIFI offenders in terms of upper mid glare (cough cough some KZs, and the recent TRN-VX big brother). The subbass is actually quite well extended, more than the graphs would imply. Treble extension with gold filters is quite good. Perhaps for the local mainland tuners, this sound is “balanced and natural” to them, but I think treble sensitive westerners may need to try the red filter as this gold filter can get fatiguing with longer sessions at the upper mids area especially.

• Blue filters – makes it have a “resolving treble” according to the TRN store page. Of the 3 descriptions of the various filters above, this sounds (no pun intended) the most legit. The bass is perceived to be decreased with the upper treble being at the forefront, with more details in the treble heard. Not my cup of tea as the excessive details can get fatiguing with longer sessions, but detailheads and trebleheads may like it. The upper mids on this tuning filter is just slightly less than the gold filters.

• Red filters – “deep bass, fast transient” according to the TRN store page. The red filters does make the upper mids glare lesser and reduces treble a tinge compared to the stock gold filters. This is my preferred tuning filter, and actually sounds the most balanced of the 3 and it makes the TRN-STM to be more vocal centric. The subbass seems to be of about the same quantity and extension as with the gold filters, not sure why the store pages say it is “deep bass”.

So the tuning filters thankfully work to change the sound signature, and ain’t gimmicks (cough cough LOOKING AT YOU NiceHCK M6), though it may not exactly correspond to the store page’s description.

Bass as discussed above is quite dependent on the filter used, but the bass is generally on the punchier side, with midbass > subbass in quantity. Bass is quite fast and has slightly above average texturing. Mids are generally boosted at the upper mids across the different filters, and the treble is also on the brighter side, with good extension and details. Those that are sensitive to the usual CHIFI saw tooth upper mids and treble will likely appreciate the red filters the most.

Technicalities are good for the price, with great imaging, details and imaging at this price bracket. Soundstage is also good, with it being wider and deeper than tall, but nevertheless, music didn’t sound too congested on this set even with complex music. I liked that transients are rather fast on this set. Cymbals are occasionally splashy but ain’t as artificial as some other budget contenders.

For a budget hybrid, the TRN STM’s tuning is quite coherent actually, even with the various filters placed on, I didn’t really hear a significant crossover point on the TRN STM.

Unfortunately, timbre is poor for acoustic instruments, especially at the frequencies handled by the BA driver, so those that listen to predominantly acoustic instruments or who are vocal lovers might need to look elsewhere. Note weight is also on the thinner side, would have preferred more meat in the bones, so to speak, but these are small issues in the big scheme of things, considering the $22 USD asking price.

CONCLUSIONS

The TRN STM is a very decent budget CHIFI brightish U shaped hybrid that offers 3 tuning nozzles to finetune the sound signature. As such, it opens different permutations for sound signature in the music and can cater to both trebleheads and treble sensitive folks. It has good price to performance ratio, especially in the area of technicalities. However, a nitpick would be the usual BA timbre for acoustic instruments found in budget hybrids, with a leaner note weight.

The $20ish CHIFI market is ultra competitive, but I think TRN STM’s tuning filters will give it an extra feather in its cap when it comes to potential sales. In fact, one can even see it as getting 3 IEMs for one purchase when getting the TRN STM, due to the 3 different tuning nozzles (which are thankfully not gimmicks), giving different sound signatures.

At this price segment, I like this set more than the recent KBEAR KS2 and CCA C10 Pro (in terms of timbre/tonality), but it still loses to the KBEAR KB04 as an overall package, other than the tuning filters. So, don’t be expecting a tour de force for the price, (and keep your expectations in check), but I think the TRN STM is still extremely decent for 20ish bucks. I’ll probably be stocking up on a few sets to give as Christmas gifts this year.

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 the TRN STM review unit.

It can be gotten at $22 USD from https://www.aliexpress.com/item/4001282484099.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN STM Review (2) – Transformers, Different Tunings In Disguise appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Call us jaded, but requests to review <$30 Chinese earphones are generally met with a singular lack of enthusiasm around these parts, especially since upstarts like TRN are churning out barely-differentiated models faster than my wife generates traffic tickets. Certainly, nothing about the $23 TRN-STM’s appearance got me excited—generic cheap cable (albeit with a nice L-shaped connector) and dowdy-looking plastic and metal headshells which look a great deal like their KZ ZS and CCA competitors (In fairness, the teardrop design is very ergonomic and provides for excellent fit and isolation).  Behold my glee, then, when I found two sets of interchangeable tuning nozzles at the bottom of the box. Tuning nozzles are, of course, the audio geek’s equivalent of crystal meth.

Rather than following the current trend of jamming 18 cheap drivers into a shell, the TRN-STM goes old school with a single (30019) BA and a 10mm DD; as a result it’s a lot more coherent than many of its budget peers. Crossover from low end to mids is essentially inaudible. The TRN-STM is very easy to drive and didn’t benefit notable from amping.

With the default (gold) nozzles, the TRN-STM immediately register as a loud, energetic and very bright V-shape, with substantially enhanced subbass (at near-basshead levels) and crisp, highly extended treble.  Bass is deep (lower and more voluminous than the V80 or the V90, for example), and well controlled, with considerable texture and good speed. Mids are somewhat recessed, as if the performers are a few feet from front-stage, but full-sounding, while treble is very detailed, lean-bodied and sparkly; it’s not strident exactly, but not at all rounded or smoothed over, and treble-averse folks would find these too hot.

The red nozzles transform the sound significantly to a more balanced, mid-forward presentation—midbass is toned down a bit, though subbass is still full and present, while vocals (especially female) move to the front of the mix. They don’t rock as hard as the gold nozzles, but were better suited to tamer genres. The blue nozzles can be described as “vivid” or less politely as “reverse L-shaped treble cannon”—they similarly tone down low end and wildly accenuate the high end to emphasize upper frequencies and bring out even more micro-detail, but are over-pixilated and sharp to the point of exhaustion—there’s simply too much musical information.

In any permutation, the TRN-STM excels at a couple of things. First, it presents a surprisingly wide, deep soundstage, albeit with limited height— with excellent stereo separation and beyond-the-speakers imaging, it rivals the best KZs for sheer spread and instrument placement. Second, it does an absolutely uncanny job of reproducing drums—every snap, pound and cymbal is captured with precision, and attack transients are very fast.

So what’s the catch? Well, timbre is not the TRN-STM’s strong suit—like the recent KZ hybrids it’s ballsy and revealing, but excessively brilliant and somewhat over-etched; compared to something like the Blon BL-03 or BQEYZ KC-2, not to mention TRN’s $75 VX, the TRN-TM (like its predecessor, the V80) sounds a bit harsh and artificial, especially on brass instruments and with the red or blue filters. In this regard, the TRN-STM hews very close in character and quality to the ($30) KBear KB04, which is similarly bright, lively and hyper-detailed, though not paragons of naturalness. Yet while “technically” superior models like the Blon are truer to the source and ultimately less fatiguing, I’d likely find myself reaching for the STM (or for that matter, for the KB04) more often—it’s less fussy with source and more fun overall.

Finding absurdly cheap models like the TRN-STM are precisely what makes this obsession enjoyable—they’re colored as hell and purists may shudder, but give me that caffeine buzz are recommended nonetheless.

SPECIFICATIONS

Driver Configurations -10mm dual-magnet dynamic driver -30019 balanced armatures
Impedance 24 Ω
Sensitivity 106 dB/mW
Frequency range 20-20000 Hz
Cable Length 1.25m
Earphone interface 2Pin 0.75 mm interface
Tested at $23

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

These were provided free for review purposes by TRN and not by Linsoul.

Get the TRN-STM at Wooeasy Earphones Store.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN-STM Review (1) – The Devil Wears Lucite appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Tuning (glassy vocals/harshness from boosted upper midrange needed tape adjustment); design lifted from Meze; sub-standard cable; boosted upper midrange causes light note weight.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN-VX earphone is a 6 BA +1 DD hybrid that excels by its superb build and its (in this class) unparalleled technical abilities. But it does not work right out of the box and needs a different cable and some 3M micropore tape on the nozzle to work well.

INTRODUCTION

TRN is a relatively new company that had attracted many fans last year, mainly with the very popular 4 BA +1 DD TRN-V90 and the 5 BA TRN-BA5. You find several reviews of these two on our blog. In order to keep up with the Chi-Fi progress, TRN just released the 6 BA + 1DD, which is actually their best earphone yet in my opinion.

Two reviews of the TRN-VX exist on our blog already – as well as a video on our YouTube channel. I keep myself therefore short.

TRN-VX review I by Loomis Johnson

TRN-VX review II by Baskingshark

SPECIFICATIONS

Driver unit: 6 BA + 1 DD (10 mm)
Impedance: 22 Ω
Sensitivity: 107 dB/mW
Frequency range: 7 – 40000 Hz
Connectors: 2 pin
Tested at: $72
Product page:
Purchase Link: TRN Official Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

TRN appear to have put all their money into the earpieces and the sound. The box’s content is rather sparse: apart from the two shells, there is a cable, 3 pairs of silicone eartips (S/M/L), and the usual paperwork. The cable is basic and non-descript – and it does not live up to the beautifully CnC machined aluminum earpieces. Nicely enough, TRN also included their $14 TRN-T4 8-core occ copper cable – which caused the TRN-VX to sound overly sharp. It was therefore not used in the review.

OCC: Ohno Continous Cast! What is it?

The earpieces are rather small for hosting 7 drivers, and they are somewhat unique in comparison to your typical Chi-Fi fare. But before I gave kudos to TRN for their design, some similarities to the Rai Meze Penta became obvious. Not good. The earpieces just feel great between my fingers and the green colour is very appealing to my eyes. And they fit my ears very well – thank you Meze – and were comfortable over longer periods of time. Isolation is middle of the road. As sources I used my iphone and MacBook Air in combination with the ifi hip-dac and ifi nano bl. In terms of eartips, the largest stock tips worked well. For my listening, I used a cheap $8 8-core pure copper cable from Yinyoo as pure copper generally decreases harshness in my earphones [product link].

MICROPORE TAPE MOD

This mod was suggested and tested by KopiOkaya. It is based on Head-Fier’s/Super Best Audio Friend’s James444 modding techniques, which we summarize HERE.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

My tonal preference and testing practice

My test tracks explained

The TRN-VX is a very technical earphone with a bright, V-shaped signature (ootb). The tuners elected to bring the upper midrange forward, which causes some harshness (green graph). After micropore modding, the upper midrange is reduced by 2-3 dB (red graph) which removed some harshness and glassiness from the vocals and brought them forward in the mix. My description of the tonality is with the tape mod implemented.

The dynamic driver provides for a great bass. It is speedy, articulate, composed, and well extended. And it stays composed into the sub-bass without getting fuzzy. It is linear and therefore avoids a mid-bass hump that excavates my eardrums. Dosage is just right for the audiophile crowd but is not enough for bassheads. Well done. The bass adds a bit of warmth but the earphone stays analytical overall. Bassheads can increase the bass punch by adding Azla SednaEarfit tips (long-stemmed wide bores).

Vocals in the lower midrange as still a bit back, even with the 3M micropore tape and third-party pure copper cable. Upper midrange is still a bit on the forward side and still attenuates the lower midrange to some extent. Note weight could be a bit thicker/heavier. This yields a crisp and clear midrange and a bit of a cavernous listening sensation.

Treble is well extended, not fatiguing, adds sparkle to the whole, but has a tendency toward sibilance. I am sensitive towards treble but did not mind this one.

Timbre is also quite good, although it is not as organic as single DDs such as the Moondrop Starfield or the KBEAR Diamond. Detail resolution is very impressive. Soundstage is very wide, much wider than the competition I have tested (Tin Hifi T4, Starfield, and Diamond), with a reasonable depth. Generally, the TRN-VX beats their competition in terms of technicalities, including layering and instrument separation. I also find the modded TRN-VX less recessed than the organic TRN-V90, and much more balanced than the TRN-BA5 (all of the above have been reviewed by us HERE).

WHAT WOULD I DO DIFFERENTLY?

I would obviously flatten the curve to get a more robust vocals department and less shrillness. I would also add a decent cable that matches the physical qualities of the earpieces. After all, buyers expect a “complete” product at this price.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The TRN-VX are a technically, ergonomically, and hapticly very good earphone and possibly outstanding in their class in these respects. But what many users will dislike about it is that sub-par cable and the company’s refusal to tune the earphone according to the western flavour (but rather add artificial hardness that needs to be compensated for by taping the nozzle). But once these kinks have been ironed out, the TRN-VX is a reasonably enjoyable earphone that currently finds some use in my collection.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

The TRN-VX earphone – including a hefty DHL bill – was received unsolicited. But we do what we can…

Get the TRN-VX from the TRN Official Store

Yinyoo 8-core pure-copper cable used in the review

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

The post TRN-VX Review (3) – Technical Ecstasy appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Generic design; thin mids; not the greatest timbre.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The KBEAR KS2 is a warm-fun-lively V-shaped earphone that excels by its gigantic soundstage in all dimensions at the price of recessed mids.

INTRODUCTION

OK, let’s cut the crap right away. This earphone is not for the gallery, it is not sexy, it features a generic design. No staged photos, no camouflaged sales brochure, no other window dressing required to stimulate buying appetite. The KBEAR KS2 is all about functionality: sound and fit – and value. Apparently, 70% of the cost are in the drivers. It is KBEAR’s lowest priced budget model. As you know, KBEAR is a brand that has come a long way in the last half year with their popular Diamond and KB04 models both tuned with the help of KopiOkaya and myself – two big-hearted however poor pro-bono amateur tuners who made these products fly off the shelves like hotcakes. The KBEAR KS2 were apparently tuned by a professional team.

SPECIFICATIONS

Driver unit: 1 10 mm DD + 1 BA
Impedance: 16 Ω
Sensitivity: 105 ± 3 dB dB/mW
Frequency range: 20 – 20,000 Hz
Cable/Connector: 2-pin, 0.78 mm
Tested at: $23
Purchase Links: KBEAR Official Store and Wooeasy Earphones Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

The package contains the barebones: the 2 earpieces, 3 pairs of tips (S/M/L), cable, and the paperwork. Yawner! This content, including that shade of green, reminds me of some 2017 KZ hybrids…although, so I was told, this KS2 earphone has nothing to do with KZ. I am relieved.

The generic shells are made of good-quality resin, and they fit my ears well…although, they are not the smallest around and could be thinner. But they are really light. The cable is also nothing to write home about, we have seen such design frequently before, it works just fine. No microphonics at all, it is reasonably thin and pliable. Certainly better than the one that came with the Blon BL-03 or TRN-VX. But: it appears to be the latest gimmick in budget stock cables that the ear hooks are designed to strangle your concha. The loop looks tight as hell…but was working ok in the end.

The largest included tips do the job for me. And bingo, the KBEAR KS2 work out of the box. At a sensitivity of 106 dB at 16 Ω, the KBEAR KS2 play just fine with my iPhone SE – they are really easy to drive. You may not have known how much guts your phone’s amp has. Ergonomics is generic, and fit/comfort what you expect: average. Isolation could be better.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

My tonal preference and testing practice

My test tracks explained

What did a member of our Facebook group tell me: “Don’t tell us it’s got a long trunk, fat legs, and rough brown skin. Tell us instead it’s an elephant!” And this elephant is big. BIIIIIG…biggest soundstage in all dimensions I could imagine: deep, wide, and tall. Seriously, it is gigantic. You feel you are in a huge cave and the music was recorded binaurally. The signature can be described as warm-fun-lively V-shape with a tad of plastic added (not too bad, though). Here you have it. That’s what your elephant looks like.

Yes, the KBEAR KS2 are quite alive, they have this jump factor…this live sound. They have lots of energy without being annoying or fatiguing on either end – although the graph does not support this. BUT, don’t judge this book by its cover.

When I first put the KBEAR KS2 into my ears – listening to Canadian rock of the Guess Who – I could not get them out again, so appealing and irresistable was the sound.

OK, the graph looks awful: a pronounced V…doesn’t this remind us of the boomy bass and shouty midrange in pre-historic times, back in 2017? Well, drivers have come a long way since then – and today, the quality of the drivers appears to offset the odd, strange-looking graph. And since the human ear hears the whole frequency spectrum and not just select cherry-picked areas, the elevated upper midrange can balance the boosted bass. And it does in this case. So, no shoutiness or boom.

Bass is surprisingly speedy and controlled, and also, of course, prominent but not fatiguing. The punch/rumble appears to come from way below, not from the mid-bass, which is usually easier on the eardrum. But, although it is dry, it can be a bit blunt. The upper bass is actually rather thin and therefore does not bleed into the lower midrange/vocals. Vocals are breathy and attenuated with a splash of pressurized air added, but they are quite there and very 3-dimensional. They are not the richest or densest, but they are ok in the mix. The vocals obviously get that famous extra energy from the upper midrange, but not in a bad way. This results in excellent clarity without sharpness. (Sub-) bass and upper midrange keep each other well in check and balance each other nicely. I can’t hear any obvious shoutiness. Treble are present and add tizziness to cymbals. This whole mix results in great speech intelligibility.

The star of the KBEAR KS2 is undoubtedly the huge soundstage. It is very impressive in all dimensions and gives you the feeling you are at a live concert – when listening to a live recording, of course. Cavernous but not hollow! In this respect, it beats many more expensive competitors. Detail resolution is equally impressive: I felt I was diving through a symphony orchestra when listening to Gustavo Dudamel’s/LA Symphonic’s Star Wars interpretations. All of the above point to the KBEAR KS2’s good suitability for gaming.

But limitations in the technicalities exist: it is the timbre! Ok for string instruments but off for woodwinds and brass. The tonality has a bit of plastic added to it, which appears to be an artifact of this kind of shells – had this before in the KZs. This is however somewhat forgivable as it is partially offset by the openness of the sound.

WHAT WOULD I DO DIFFERENTLY?

Hmmm…we are bound by an extremely low price – so nothing really.

KBEAR KS2 COMPARED

The KBEAR KS2 are hard to compare as they are pretty unique: their build/design is generic and won’t win any door price, and their sound is well above the similar looking and priced Knowledge Zenith budget models of recent years. Maybe the <$20 NiceHCK DB3, which has a boomier bass and a more recessed midrange. The in-house <$30 KBEAR KB04 is punchier but also shoutier and a bit more tonally accurate, and it has heavier metal earpieces – it actually is the better value imo. The $199 Shozy Form 1.4 sound much richer and thicker, but the KS2 hold up quite well in their staging.

WHAT THE OTHERS SAY

We at audioreviews.org are a vibrant team of 8 bloggers [more], we have diverse opinions, and not everyone of us is writing a review. It is for your benefit to know more than just one opinion. Here we go.

KOPiOkaya:

Just received the KBEAR KS2. First impression… Better than Moondrop SSR… That’s a good start… Definitely better than TRN M10… That’s another good start.

Imaging and staging is exceptional (just as Jürgen had mentioned in his first impressions)… BUT I am not entirely impressed by it and here is why:

1. Bass is a tad too much for my taste… HOWEVER, it is clean, fast, punchy bass. Not muddy or wooly. Great for EDM stuff.

2. The upper-midrange sounds a bit etched. I don’t mean harsh or edgy. It sounded as if somebody had over-sharpened an image in Photoshop… If you get what I mean.

3. Timbre sound a bit unnatural to me. Sorry, maybe I am so used to DD timbre but hey, my TRI I4, which is a hybrid, has better timbre.

4. So, will it compete with KBEAR KB04? My comfortable answer is “no”. KB04 sounds more coherent and smoother overall. The bass of KB04 sounds more pleasing to my ears.

5. Switched to my iFi iDSD Nano Black Label DAP/Amp, MUCH BETTER!!! The KS2 definitely excels with a warm source. I am not going to nitpick on its build as most of you know by now, it is just meh. But fit and comfort-wise is very good. I can wear these for hours.

Okay, what I like about the KS2?

• Very good clarity and resolution,
• Very good soundstage,
• Pinpoint stereo imaging,
• 3D vocal
• Precise bass control (thanks to the new BLON DD),
• Deep, deep sub-bass,
• US$23 without mic is extremely good value.

Equipment used:

• Apple USB Type-C dongle with Xiaomi Max
• UAPP Player (Bit-perfect enabled)
• iFi iDSD Nano Black Label
• Yinyoo 8-core tin-plated copper cable
• SpinFit CP-145 eartips (medium)

Biodegraded:

This Super Best Audio Friend is the grumpiest of us (I come second) and therefore was rather critical of the idea that the world needed another ~$20 earphone. Biodegraded found a channel imbalance in the upper midrange and felt the need to remove bass by modding. He noticed that the stage is so big because the mids are so distant. He thinks people should buy less quantity and better quality.

WHY WOULD YOU WANT IT – OR NOT?

The desire to get the KBEAR KS2 really depends on your attitude towards consumerism. If you are a newbie and want to find out what signature you like, the KS2 is a good choice. If you just want to go for quantity of your collection or don’t have the cash to go higher, why not? But if you have drawers full of iems already, you may rather go a bit up the scale towards the TinHifi T2 Plus or the Shozy Form 1.1, or even the KBEAR KB04. I think the KS2 would work well for gamers because of their liveliness and soundstage.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

For me, the KBEAR KS2 are refreshingly unpretentious, pragmatic earphones: no amp needed, they play straight out of your phone. They are V-shape well done: gone are the days where the recessed mids were squeezed between a boomy low end and a screechy upper end. Here, all elements play well together and generate a pleasant and well-staged sonic experience – but with the limitations as described above.

The KBEAR KS2 are lively but nevertheless well-behaved earphones for the road, gym, or computer screen. They are not the audiophile steak & lobster fare, they are dripping burgers with greasy fries and lots of ketchup. Yummers! They are not served with champagne but with ice-cold thin American lager. Toss them in your backpack, throw them in your glove department. They are dynamic, they are fun, they are affordable…and they will be immensely popular soon…until the next model comes along. Believe me!

I think I need something to eat now.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

The KBEAR KS2 were provided unsolicited from Wooeasy Earphones Store. Thank you very much.

Get the KBEAR KS2 from KBEAR Official Store or Wooeasy Earphones Store.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

Like what you read? Did it help you save money? We don’t believe in Patreon accounts (a ripoff), affiliated links, or ads. But if you want to support our running cost, we gladly accept PayPal donations.

RELATED…

The post KBEAR KS2 Review (1) – Big And Wide And Tall appeared first on Music For The Masses.