Cons — Mid-bass texture on the KZ D-Fi is lacking
– Upper-midrange glare
– Fairly strong mid-treble peak can get fatiguing
– Upper-treble extension is lacking
– Staging is average

INTRODUCTION

It’s been a while since I have last reviewed a pair of KZ IEMs. Almost three years, to be exact. I missed out on quite a few KZ models in that period but from a tuning perspective, they were mostly more of the same.

However, around the end of 2022, KZ began to churn out some interesting models in terms of tuning. That departure comes full-circle with the KZ D-Fi, which is aptly named in the sense that the tuning “defies” the typical KZ house-sound (V-shaped, in other words).

Now, this is not a radical departure for KZ and some of their “signature” sound characteristics still seep through the cracks. However, the 4-way switch is a novelty in the budget segment, and the dynamic driver promises performance beyond the price point.

That’s a promise I hear often, but very few manage to keep it. Can the D-Fi be the one to follow through?

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. KZ provided the D-Fi for evaluation.

Sources used: Questyle CMA Twelve Master
Price, while reviewed: $33. Can be bought from KZ’s official store.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

KZ rarely focuses on the packaging and presentation and in the budget segment I applaud this move. I do wish that less plastic was used in the packaging for environmental reasons.

The stock accessories are good enough to get you going. The stock cable is an SPC affair that gets the job done. Stock tips are decent but tip-rolling may help in controlling the bass, for example.

BUILD QUALITY

Phenomenal, in one word. The metal shell is dense and I find the face-plate visually appealing. The review unit is the one with the tuning switches and I recommend getting this one because the price premium is absolutely worth it.

The switches are somewhat fiddly to operate with the fingernails, so KZ supplies a SIM-card tool to make the task easier. There is one vent on the face-plate and one on the inner-side of the IEMs. The 2-pin ports stick out of the shell – a choice I am not a fan of, but it is what it is.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

While the shells are shaped ergonomically, the added weight can be a bit of a bother for long listening sessions. Other than that, no qualms with the comfort. Isolation is above-average and becomes drastically better with foam tips.

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

The D-Fi are very easy to drive and on my desktop Questyle CMA Twelve Master, I “over-drove” them when using standard gain, so I had to use low gain while testing them.

DRIVER SETUP

KZ D-Fi have a 10mm single dynamic driver with the usual “dual-cavity”, “dual magnetic circuit” bonanzas. The driver performs well for the price, but the most interesting part for me is the Zobel network-based crossover-circuit. I do not recall seeing such tuning methods in any of the IEMs in the past… decade?

From what I can gather, the Zobel network is used to “attenuate” the frequencies by approx. 5 dB. When all the switches are down (default position), the entire FR remains same but things go “quieter”. Flicking each of the first three switches (in conjunction with the other one) adds 1dB of sub-bass boost from 50Hz downward.

When all four switches are engaged, the networks does not attenuate the frequencies anymore and you get a noticeable increase in loudness. A clever mechanism indeed. Keeping only switch four engaged, meanwhile, increases the loudness of the treble region by a couple dBs.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

KZ D-Fi have an upper-midrange forward tuning. The lower-mids still sound recessed but the focus on the upper-midrange is what you notice the most. The overall tuning is rather energetic.

Sub-bass rumble is strong and noticeable even around 25Hz. Mid-bass texture is lacking though, so snare hits do not quite have the timbral characteristics you’d expect.

The mids are affected by the upper-midrange glare. It does not seem too much at the graph at first, but the upper-mids can get intense in soaring female vocals or while playing certain guitar riffs. As a side-effect, male vocals can sound somewhat “hollow” in some tracks.

Upper treble lacks airiness. Treble is mostly there due to a noticeable 8kHz peak. Then the treble rolls off past 13kHz or so. Given the budget nature, I think this performance is acceptable despite the hit on perceived “resolution”.

Despite the treble roll-off, initially, there is some “wow factor” due to the hyper-energetic tuning. Things can get fatiguing though if you are sensitive to boosted upper-mids.

Stage is narrow. Imaging is good for the price though some of the peers do it better. Macrodynamic punch is strong, while mIcrodynamics are lacking.

SELECT COMPARISONS

It’s a bit difficult to make “Apples vs Apples” comparisons when it comes to the D-Fi because, let’s face it – there isn’t another option in this price range that has tuning switches.

Putting the novelty aside and only focusing on the sound quality, Final E1000 are better tuned across the board, even though they lack the bass rumble of the D-Fi, and the build is nowhere near as reassuring.

The BLON BL-05S, meanwhile, have a gaudy color scheme that hides the overall great sound, which is better than the D-Fi in terms of tonality and technicalities. They need changing the cable and tips, however, and the price tag can go well beyond USD$50 after that fact.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

KZ D-Fi are the odd ones out in the budget segment. The tuning is closer to the current “trends” of boosting the upper-midrange and dialing down the bass, while the tuning switches can be novel enough for many to warrant a purchase. I am not a fan of the shoutiness, nor the lack of mid-bass texture and warmth. Then again, the pricing is fairly competitive.

I do wish KZ further tones down the upper-mids in the next release, and perhaps focus on making the sound slightly warmer and more inviting. Once that happens, I may finally have found a pair of KZ IEMs that can stay in the collection for future comparisons.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from KZ Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post KZ D-Fi Review – Switcheroo appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Sub-bass has softened impact, might be an issue for those expecting robust bass
– Truthear Zero has thin, lifeless lower-midrange
– Scooped mid-bass region hurts impact of snare hits and thins out baritone vocals
– Dark, grainy treble
– Upper-mid shout may sound more pronounced due to lack of treble presence
– Middling technical performance

INTRODUCTION

Reviewer collaborations are all the rage now. At the beginning, it was more of a novelty than a marketing shtick. At present, it’s rarer to not see a “tuned by X influencer” tag instead.

Truthear is a relatively new brand, but they chose to collaborate with Crinacle for their very first mainstream offering. Crin has been tuning IEMs for a while, and some of them have been quite popular e.g. the Blessing2 Dusk. Truthear Zero is the latest in the line of Crinacle-tuned IEMs and has a rather unique dual-driver setup where one driver acts as a true “woofer”.

Does the novel driver setup and Crinacle’s signature tuning manage to elevate the Zero above the rest of the competition? Or is another flavor-of-the-week that will soon have the spotlight stolen? Let’s find out.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. ShenzhenAudio was kind enough to send me the Truthear X Crinacle Zero for evaluation.

Source used: Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $50.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The packaging of the Truthear Zero has the trendy “waifu” cover art. In fact, the unit I received also came with an acrylic replica of the pictured character, named “Virgo”.

Otaku-fanservice aside, we also get 6 pairs of silicone eartips (2 types), 1 pair of foam tips, and a nice carrying case. The stock cable is good for the price, though the memory hook is stiff. The carrying case looks and feels nice, but offers little protection.

BUILD QUALITY

The entire shell is made out of resin with a glittery faceplate. I quite like the hue of blue on the Truthear Zero.

There is one vent near the 2-pin connector, which are recessed thankfully. Crossover circuit can also be seen near the connectors. While the build is generally good, the shells are smudge prone and slippery. So keep a cleaning cloth handy.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

The Truthear Zero are very comfortable due to their pseudo-custom shape, and they offer good isolation.

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

The IEMs were tested with stock cable and eartips. Questyle CMA-400i was used as a source. The Truthear Zero is fairly easy to drive with any budget dongle.

DRIVER SETUP

Truthear Zero uses two dynamic drivers in an asymmetric orientation: one near the nozzle (tweeter) and the woofer is closer to the center of the shell.

The larger 10mm “woofer” uses an LCP diaphragm with a PU suspension. The smaller “tweeter” clocks in at 7.8mm, and while the diaphragm and suspension material remains same, the voice coil is changed to a lighter CCAW material.

The crossover circuit acts almost as a low-pass filter with the low-frequencies being solely handled by the woofer, and the tweeter having no response in sub-bass frequencies.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Truthear Zero has a near-Harman 2019-esque frequency response. This essentially means a “clean boost” of sub-bass from 200Hz downwards, and an aggressive rise to the upper-mids from the low-mid region.

Also, this leads to a strange hollowness in the mid-bass region, something “mid-bass bad” crowd will probably try to pass off as a positive, but it is not often the case.

Speaking of bass, the Truthear Zero has a detached sounding sub-bass akin to a 2.1 speaker setup. This is perhaps the intended tuning decision. Sub-bass has good density and dominates the scene in many electronic and live tracks. However, there is a softness to the sub-bass that makes it sound more polite than one would expect. Sub-bass rumble is not the strongest either.

Mid-bass is utterly devoid of body and slam. The bass is thus solely defined by the sub-bass emphasis near 50Hz. As a result of mid-bass hollowness and a near 12dB rise in the upper-mids, midrange is dominated by the upper-registers.

Snare hits lack body, baritone vocals sound thin, soaring male vocals get screechy and strained. Female vocals in bass-light tracks veer towards shoutiness.

Add to that the dark treble, which lacks sparkle and extension. As a result upper-mids gain further focus. Needless to say that this kind of tuning did not work well with my metal/rock focused library, and the occasional acoustic tracks and singer/songwriter pieces were marred by the shoutiness in the upper-mids.

Staging is average, imaging is mostly left and right. Not a technical tour-de-force in those regards. Layering is surprisingly good though, probably one of the strengths here. Overall resolution is middling.

Microdynamics are good, while macrodynamic punch is lacking due to the lack of mid-bass and dark mid and upper-treble.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Final E3000

Final E3000 has a more physical, impactful bass. They have superior male vocals in comparison but female vocals are noticeably more laid back than the Truthear Zero.

E3000 also has better treble definition and extension, wider staging and far superior imaging. The areas where the Truthear Zero trounce the E3000 are: build, vocal clarity, and far simpler amplification needs. E3000 need a good source to shine, which adds to the cost.

vs BLON BL-05S

Compared to the Truthear Zero, BL-05S lack bass impact and rumble. Bass is in fact the weakest aspect of the BL-05S.

Things get very different as we move upward the frequencies, with the BL-05S being far more resolving in treble and mids. Imaging and separation are superior on the BLON as well.

One caveat of the BL-05S is that they need cable and tip change, whereas Truthear Zero is good to go in stock form. If you need a more technically accomplished pair under $50, BL-05S will be a better pick.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Truthear Zero aces the frequency response graph game. If you primarily base your purchase decisions on a pair of IEMs hitting a specific target, the Truthear Zero will be right up your alley. Also, those preferring Harman-ish tuning should be happy with the tuning here.

Unfortunately for me, most rock, metal, and pop songs sound odd and lack the body and density I expect, especially if the vocalist is male. The Zero fare better in instrumentals and female vocal based tracks, but there are better options in this price range if those are your priorities.

In the end, the driver configuration is the most interesting aspect of the Truthear Zero, and there is nothing wrong with that. They just do not stand out enough in terms of technicalities, and the shouty vocals followed by dark treble doesn’t make things better.

I hope Truthear reigns down the upper-mids and focuses on refining the treble on the next release, and if a dose of mid-bass is added with that – color me interested.

MY VERDICT

3/5
Unique driver combination marred by a sheer lack of technicalities.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from Shenzhen Audio

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Truthear X Crinacle Zero Review – The Hype And The Aftermath appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Supplied Spring tips are not the best match for CHU as they attenuate treble
– Mids can sound shouty at times
– Technicalities expose the cheap price tag
– Shell paint is prone to chipping off

INTRODUCTION

Moondrop’s last budget offering, the Quarks, left me unimpressed. The only thing those had going for them: price-tag. The neutral-ish tuning was too dry-sounding and the cheap build did not inspire confidence for long-term use.

Enter Moondrop CHU, their latest budget offering. Priced slightly higher than the Quarks, the CHU have far better build and accessories. The tuning, at least on paper (i.e. graph), looks closer to Moondrop’s VDSF target.

All good news so far, but how do they perform in real life? Let’s delve deeper.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Hifigo was kind enough to send me the CHU for evaluation.

Sources used: Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $20. Can be bought from HiFiGo.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The CHU come in a rather fancy packaging with Moondrop’s signature anime-artwork on top. Fortunately the fanciness do not stop there, as these come with Moondrop’s Spring tips bundled. These tips cost more than half the price of the CHU if purchased separately, so the value proposition is high here.

There are a pair of ear-hooks which add extra strain relief to the cable while helping in over-ear fit. You also get a carrying pouch inside but it’s rather horrible. It offers no protection and is made of a paper-like material that I don’t think will last long. Something’s gotta give, I guess.

BUILD QUALITY

The metal shell of the CHU is exquisitely machined. The fit and finish here is as good as the more expensive Aria. In fact, the CHU have similarly “baked” paintjob on the shell, and similar golden design accents. The two vents on the inner-side of the IEMs also have similar position, with one being placed near the nozzle and another slightly higher up in the shell.

The biggest point of contention for many would be the fixed cable. The good news here is that the cable has ample strain reliefs near the jack and shell, and the sheathing is not too stiff. As a result, you won’t get many kinks and untangling the cable won’t be too difficult. If used carefully, I expect the CHU to last a while.

My only gripe would be the lack of strain relief near the Y-split. A cost-cutting measure perhaps that could be avoided. Another issue which is sort of Moondrop specific: the paint job. These tend to wear and chip-off over time.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

The CHU are very comfortable once worn. Isolation is fairly good, though you’ll need foam tips for best isolation. Do note that the supplied Spring tips are smaller than usual sizes, so you’ll have to choose “L” size if you usually use “M” size on other tips, e.g. Spinfits.

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

For this review, I mostly used the Questyle CMA-400i which is extremely overkill for such easy-to-drive (18 ohms, 104 dB/mW) IEMs.

As for eartips, this is where we run into some strangeness. As the supplied tips (and being fairly expensive), the Spring tips should be absolutely perfect for CHU. However, that’s not the case. The Spring tips attenuate the entire treble region noticeably, resulting in a smoother but less dynamic presentation.

As a result, for this review I chose the Spinfit CP-100+ tips. Even with the added cost of third-party tips I think the CHU are great value, so this small addition won’t change my final rating much.

MOONDROP CHU DRIVER SETUP

Moondrop has used a 10mm Nano-crystal coating composite Titanium-Coated Diaphragm in the CHU. In plain terms, there is a PET driver with perhaps a thin coating of Titanium. Overall, nothing spectacular and expected for the price-tag.

The acoustic chamber design is more interesting as the CHU use a similar system to Aria with two front-facing vents that equalize both the front and back-side air-pressure. As a result, driver control is easier to ascertain.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Moondrop CHU have a “sub-bass-boosted neutral” tuning. Moondrop calls it their VDSF target and higher-tier IEMs like the Blessing2 and Aria have similar target response.

Having the same graph does not mean that the CHU sounds the same as Blessing2 or the Aria. There are noticeable differences in the technicalities and presentation that set these three IEMs apart.

In terms of bass response, the CHU do reach as low as 30Hz, but the rumble is faint. Bass lacks physicality and doesn’t have the mid-bass punch or sub-bass slam you get from better drivers. Mid-bass notes are not the most textured, but CHU do a better job here than many of their peers. Bass speed is average, but again – not expecting miracles here.

The one thing that I like about the bass is that it doesn’t bleed into the mids. Even then, in tracks with a lot of bass undertones you will miss a lot of the notes. The driver is just not capable enough for that kind of workload.

Speaking of the mids, the lower-mids could do with a bit of body as I think baritone vocals lack some of their signature heft. This is somewhat compounded by the nearly 10dB of rise to the upper-mids. Fortunately, the rise is not too drastic and only in certain songs do you hear hint of shoutiness, e.g. Colbie Caillat’s Magic. Nonetheless, the lower-mids never get the heft and weight I would consider “ideal”, so there’s that. Easily fixed with slight EQ though.

The treble response will probably divide the audiences. Those who prefer a bit more presence-region “bite” will be disappointed as the Spring tips smooth those out. This hampers resonances and upper-harmonic, and most noticeably kills the dynamics. The fix is simple: use other tips like Final E-type or Spinfit CP-100+. The graph shows how the Spring tips reduce the frequencies between 4-8kHz by 3dB or so. Upper-treble is also hurt but those measurements aren’t reliable.

General resolution is middling in the grand scheme of things, but for $20 only very few IEMs can claim better performance, and those who actually resolve more have other tonal oddities. Soundstage has decent height but lacks the width and depth of higher-tier IEMs. Imaging is mostly left and right but I don’t want to nitpick here because, again, price.

Dynamics is another area where CHU can perform better even for the asking price. With the changed tips, I find them to have better macrodynamic punch than stock form but the microdynamics are mostly average. Overall, technically the CHU fail to impress as much as they do with their tuning.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Moondrop Quarks

The Quarks are inferior in every single aspect. I can’t find a single area where they excel over the CHU, sadly.

vs Final E1000

I consider the Final E1000 more of a CHU competitor than anything else under $50. They have a similarly neutral-ish tuning and come bundled with the excellent E-type tips.

The bass on the E1000 roll-off earlier than CHU but has better mid-bass texture. Midrange is where Final knocks it off the park with the E1000 having a neutral-yet-engaging tuning without a hint of dryness. Lower-mids have adequate weight and upper-mids are smooth, articulate, and devoid of shout or shrill.

Treble also has slightly more energy and cymbal hits are easier to identify on the E1000. They also have some stage depth and slightly better imaging. However, the E1000 have availability issues and the price is at times higher than the suggested $25.

Depending on availability and price, I would pick the E1000 over the CHU if they cost less than $30. Other than that, with an increased budget, I’ll probably go for the Final E3000 or BLON BL-05S, provided an adequate source is present. However both of those IEMs cost more than twice the price of CHU so there is that consideration.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The TL;DR version of this review would be: “I recommend the CHU if you only have $20 to spend and are willing to shell out for a pair of third-party tips, or like the sound with stock tips”.

The CHU have familiar failings of the budget realm, namely a lack of technical chops especially in perceived stage and imaging, and Moondrop’s VDSF target does not really fit well if the driver is not fast or resolving enough.

However, looking at the competition with their bass or treble-heavy offerings, CHU are pretty much uncontested in the under $20 price-bracket, and deserves the recommendation.

MY VERDICT

4/5

Good tuning meets average technicalities, and the end-product is more than decent.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from HiFiGo and official Moondrop Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Moondrop CHU Review (1) – A Budget Benchmark appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Shell size of the BL-MAX may be too large for some
– Prone to attracting scratches
– Mid-bass lacks texture
– Lower-mids are recessed
– Treble is muted and rolls off early
– Average imaging/staging
– Somewhat compressed dynamics

INTRODUCTION

BLON has been around for a while as an IEM/Headphone manufacturer (circa 2014 as per their logo). However, they reached stardom with the BLON BL-03 which have earned a place in our Wall of Excellence as the de-facto budget IEM. Since the breakout success of the BL-03, BLON has tried to re-capture the lightning in the bottle but never gained the same traction.

Enter BLON BL-MAX, their latest attempt at improving upon the BL-03, or perhaps providing something different enough to co-exist (just as the BL-05S were). Priced well under $50, the BL-MAX face stiff competition, even from within the family itself. Do the BL-MAX justify their existence, or are they doomed to fall into obscurity? Let’s find out.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Dunu was kind enough to send me the Luna as part of the Review Tour (thanks Tom!)

Sources used: Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $36. Can be bought from KeepHiFi.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

BLON is notorious for their below-par (often atrociously poor) accessories. This time around, though, they decided to at least provide a good quality cable. The stock cable of the BL-MAX is quite good IMO and I don’t see any reason to go for a third-party one unless you are too bothered by the (slight) stiffness. The stock tips, as always, are horrible and must be ditched if you care about fit. Finally, there is the fabric carrying pouch.

Overall, it’s an improvement for BLON but things can get better.
3/5

BUILD QUALITY

Build quality of the BL-MAX is solid. Each earpiece has a two-piece metal assembly (zinc alloy) with a visible-but-unobtrusive seam. There is a singular vent near the nozzle and at the bottom you have the protruded 2-pin connectors (not my favorite). The backplate has a chrome-finish that’s prone to picking up smudges and scratches and looks similar to the earcups of the Apple Airpods Max.

It is a fact that the BL-MAX shells are rather… maximized and looks quite menacing in the photos. However, the inner-side is mostly ergonomic and slowly tapers into a more “human-like” shape. Overall, the build quality is as good as one should expect at this price with the scratches being a concern.
4/5

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

Comfort seems to be a major point of discourse when it comes to the BL-MAX. For me it was not an issue once I swapped tips. For others, they found the housing to be too big to wear. I can only talk about my own experience but I also acknowledge that others may have issues given the unconventional shape.

As for isolation – it’s above-average once you get the right tips to fit.
3.5/5

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

BLON BL-MAX doesn’t need much amplification and ran fine on the Sony NW-A55 (which has fairly weak amplification). Eartips are another story, however. I highly recommend changing tips. Spinfit CP-145 worked great for me, your mileage may vary.

DRIVER SETUP

The BLON BL-MAX is their first dual-driver IEM with a 10mm CNT driver (likely 1st gen) for the lows and mids, and a 6mm micro-driver for the highs. The micro-driver uses a “lightweight” diaphragm as per the promo materials but the exact composition is missing. I assume it’s a PET/PEN diaphragm since a metal plating would surely be advertised.

An interesting thing is the orientation of the drivers which are stacked together vertically. This kind of driver assembly was first used on JVC’s FX-T90 and a “throwback” revival on the BL-MAX reminds me of the olden days.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

In a nutshell, the BL-MAX has a sub-bass boosted V-shaped signature with darker treble. Some also call this a W-shape these days.

Given the sub-bass prominence one would expect that the bass would be skull-shaking but in reality it’s not that dense of a bass response. You do hear the sub-bass rumble and some mid-bass punch but due to the driver limitation texture is lacking. The slow decay exacerbates the problem with the mid-bass sounding rather one-note. Fast-flowing bass sections are often reduced to a hum that fails to portray the rhythmic nature of these notes. I have seen some suggesting to EQ the bass to be even more prominent but I’d advise against that since this CNT driver is already at its limit.

Mids are quite alright though there is the obvious lower-mid recession that drowns out male vocals and low-notes in bass-heavy mixes. Fortunately, the upper-mid has adequate amount of gain and thus female vocals are well-articulated, so are string instruments and guitar riffs. Treble meanwhile is characterized by a noticeable peak around 5KHz that tends to make leading edge of cymbal hits somewhat exaggerated. However, the treble rolls-off quickly after that with perhaps a slight peak around 8KHz.

None of these treble are too noticeable in most songs since the sub-bass masks the peakiness. However, in songs with sparse instrumentation (acoustic tracks, singer/songwriter stuff) you may experience the unevenness in the treble region. The treble lacks extension and air and sounds darkened up top as cymbal and hi-hats decay abruptly, with no sense of airiness or sparkle.

Due to the recessed mids, soundstage feels “wide” but in reality it’s not very deep or tall. Imaging on the other hand was surprisingly decent and could even portray some “ordinal” directions well. Instrument separation was above average. General resolution is below average, and dynamics (both sudden changes in volume and gradual ones) are compressed. Compressed, as in: you don’t feel the immediacy of a sudden bass drop, or the minute changes in volume level of instruments/vocals. However, most budget IEMs fail in this category so no big deal there.

Bass: 3.5/5
Midrange: 4/5
Treble: 2.5/5
Staging: 3.5/5
Imaging and Separation: 4/5
Dynamics and Speed: 2.5/5

BLON BL-MAX FREQUENCY RESPONSE GRAPH

Channel-matching is very good for a budget IEM, so a job well done on that front.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs BLON BL-03

The OG superstar of the BLON family still remains unchallenged and seems to have been one of the rare “justified” hypes in recent years. The BL-03 is cheaper than the BL-MAX, has a worse fit, and requires both cable and tip changes.

However, once you have managed to get a fit, the BL-03 has a more analogue-ish tone with a warm tuning that offers a colored-yet-appealing midrange. The treble is also more present than the BL-MAX.

BL-MAX strikes back with better imaging, staging, instrument separation, and a deeper bass-reach. The sub-bass on the BL-MAX is better than on the BL-03. If you prefer to have a more mid-centric tuning the BL-03 is still an excellent IEM. For those who think the BL-03 needs more sub-bass or find the upper-midrange shouty – the BL-MAX can be a good alternative.

vs BLON BL-05S

The BLON BL-05S is my personal favorite BLON till date. It offers the best technicalities among all BLON offerings that I’ve tried and the tuning is pretty solid as well. The fit is a notable improvement over the BL-03 and even the BL-MAX but the cable and tips still require swapping out.

Once you change the cable and get appropriate tips, the BL-05S sounds better than the BL-MAX in nearly all categories except for sub-bass rumble (BL-05S is rolled-off in that region). Imaging and separation is class-leading on the BL-05S so the BL-MAX don’t sound that impressive anymore. However, the BL-05S has a controversial color and I know many who didn’t buy simply because of the jade-green paintjob. BL-MAX has their own idiosyncrasies though with the oversized shell, so it’s a toss-up between them on aesthetics.

For my personal taste and given the much improved technicalities, I will pick the BL-05S over the BL-MAX. If you think the BL-05S sound thin in the mids or too dry in the bass for your liking – BL-MAX might suit you better.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The BL-MAX did not stand out or impress in a hyper-competitive market and got overshadowed by its own brethren. It’s a complicated situation where BLON is somewhat bogged down by their own success.

BLON has been ramping up their release cycle lately with new IEM releases appearing almost every month. On one hand, it’s good to have more options in the market, and the potential for another “budget gem” is ever welcome. On the other hand we got this “scattershot” approach where brands try random stuff to see what sticks.

The BL-MAX does not look like a scattershot to me as the design and driver assembly hint towards a more planned approach. However, BLON did not get it right with their first dual-driver IEM, esp since dual-dynamic setups are hard to pull off. I hope BLON goes back to the drawing board, retunes the drivers/swaps them for something better, and while they are at it – redesigns the shell since it has caused fitment issues for some.

MY VERDICT

3.25/5

BLON BL-MAX fails to impress, but they are not too shabby either.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The Blon BL-Max was provided by KeepHifi and I thank them for that.

Get it from KeepHiFi

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post BLON BL-MAX Review – Size Matters appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Availability of Spinfit tips can be a bit spotty
– Some experimentation required

INTRODUCTION

Third-party eartips are one of those things that you end up with a large collection of as you fall deeper into audiophilia. The reason is quite simple: universal earphones (i.e. non-custom IEMs) require fiddling with the tips more often than not. Moreover, eartips are just about the cheapest (and often most reproducible) way of tuning an earphone. So we all end up with boxes of eartips of our own, sooner or later.

Spinfit have been making eartips for a while now, and their claim-to-fame is the name-sake “swivel” mechanism that rotates the top of the inner-stem. This in turn helps to achieve a deeper, more secure seal as the top of the tip (along with the sound-tube) literally bends to get closer to the inner-ear.

In this round-up, we shall explore how well this mechanism works across a variety of IEMs. Models to be evaluated: Spinfit CP-100, CP-100+, CP-145, CP-145 (medical-grade silicone), CP-240, CP-360, CP-500, and the CP-800. The only two in-production models that I don’t have with me are the CP-155 (I don’t have a large-nozzle IEM at the moment) and the Airpod-specific CP-1025 (I don’t have an Airpod). With that out of the way, let’s head right in.

Update [06-02-2023]: Guide updated with impressions about Spinfit W1.

Note: The Spinfit CP-100 and the CP-500 are units I purchased myself. Rest were sent in by Spinfits themselves for evaluation. A huge shout-out to them. You can check out there entire catalogue of eartips here.

GENERAL BUILD QUALITY

All of the Spinfit eartips share some similarities in terms of build. They have a colored stem and the outer material is medical/food grade silicone. Each tips also has a depression/joint around the top of the internal sound bore. This joint allows the top of the tip to swivel 360 degrees around inside the ear-canal and (ideally) move past the bends in the ear-canal.

In all cases the internal stem is made of a stiffer material than the eartips themselves, though the stiffness varies depending on model. Now, let’s get into the details of individual models. For a more thorough look into the various dimensions of the tips themselves, please check out co-blogger Jürgen’s take on the Spinfit eartips.

SINGLE-FLANGE SPINFIT EARTIPS

CP-100/CP-100+

The Spinfit CP-100 is probably the most popular Spinfit eartips around. They are also the most widely available one. The original CP-100 model had a fairly stiff, color-coded stem (with color changing upon size) and the outer material was also fairly stiff. This model suited a number of IEMs especially those with a shallow nozzle (e.g. Dunu Luna, pictured below). The CP-100 was pretty much a utilitarian eartip, as in it would suit most models without affecting the FR too much or causing discomfort. I personally found the surface of the tip to be somewhat itchy after long-term use, and the stiffer outer layer didn’t have the best grip with the inner-ear wall.

Thus, we enter the Spinfit CP-100+. The new variant (which shall be released on Amazon soon) addresses my key complaint with the original CP-100: the stiffness and feel of the silicone. The new material is more supple and grips better. Most of all: the itchiness after long sessions is gone completely. In terms of ergonomics, this renders the CP-100 irrelevant.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Moondrop Aria, Moondrop Starfield, Dunu Luna, Meze 12 Classics V2, Shozy Form 1.1, BLON BL-03/BL-05S

CP-145/CP-145 (refresh)

These are currently my favorite Spinfit tips. They are the most comfortable in Spinfit’s lineup along with the CP-100+ and pairs well with most IEMs with the given nozzle size (~4.5mm). Usually the bass seem to get tighter with these tips on and in some IEMs I’ve also experienced a perceived expansion of soundstage. The older CP-145 has a more supple, grippier texture on the outside whereas the new, medical-grade silicone version has a more coarse texture and has slightly worse seal. The choice between older and the newer CP-145 isn’t as straightforward as they both perform very similarly and are equally comfortable. Whichever you get, however, you shall find them stellar.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Moondrop Blessing2/Aria/Starfield, 64Audio U12t, Final A8000, Dunu Luna, Reecho Insects Awaken

CP-360

The Spinfit CP-360 are specialist eartips meant to be used with TWS earphones. If you’re having trouble getting a fit with the stock tips that came with your earbud, give these a shot. The flange material is soft silicone and it’s very comfortable to wear due to the nozzle material not being too stiff. Isolation is also top-notch. Generally a good tip to have in your collection if you are into TWS earphones.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Samsung Galaxy Buds/Buds Plus/Buds Pro, FIIL T1XS, Lypertek Tevi

CP-500

The most interesting offering in Spinfit’s entire lineup has to be the CP-500. It has a larger bore diameter (~5.5mm) and is meant for large nozzle IEMs that require a wide bore to work best. However, I have found them to work on slightly smaller bore IEMs too. I purchased the CP-500 initially to use with the Final E5000 (as stock E-type black tips have too much mid-bass). The CP-500 was the only tip available at that time for final’s E-series IEMs thus I pulled the trigger. Ironically, I ended up using the CP-500 on IEMs other than the Final E-type, most notably Dunu Zen and the IMR R1 Zenith. The CP-500 with Dunu Zen, specifically, have an incredible pairing that elevates the (already great) Zen to new heights. The difference between the Zen + CP-500 and other tips were far too noticeable.

That preamble aside, the CP-500 has a soft flange along with a similarly soft bore. The flange also has a somewhat oily texture to it, resulting in a fit that’s not the most secure and requires a bit of a deeper insertion. It’s a very comfortable eartip but isolation is worse than the CP-100/145/360. This is an eartip I’d recommend if you’re someone who’s into “tip-rolling” (as in, experimenting with various eartips). The CP-500 provides interesting results with many IEMs.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Final E4000/E5000/E1000, Dunu Zen (best pairing for me), JVC FX-700, JVC FW-10000

CP-800

The Spinfit CP-800 is a specialized eartip meant for using exclusively with narrow-bore IEMs like the Shure, Etymotic ones. In case of Etymotic ER2XR this provides an interesting alternative to the stock triple/double-flange tips. The CP-800 has about the same bass and midrange rendition so those who find the stock triple/dual flange tips on Etymotics intrusive might find the CP-800 far more comfortable. I would recommend going for a smaller size than what you usually use with these tips (so if you usually need M, go for S). A size smaller will help with deeper fit. Sadly on the ER2XR at least, the CP-800 makes the treble roll-off earlier than the dual/triple flange tips. If you need more treble sparkle, the CP-800 might let you down on those IEMs. Shure IEMs like SE-215 worked just as well as the Shure Olive tips, however, with slightly improved fit.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Etymotic ER2XR/ER4XR, Shure SE215/SE846.

W1

The Spinfit W1 is good for IEMs with large and heavy shells. The core of the stem has a ribbed pattern, which deforms less than the usual Spinfits. As such, even with deep fit, the nozzle retains a relatively straight sound path.

They also tend to isolate better due to grippier texture. I think this is how Azla Xelastecs should have been, but couldn’t be due to a lof of other issues.

The one nitpick I have with the W1 is that you must buy it in packs of three, with all three different sizes. At least that’s the case for the time being.

If you don’t own heavy IEMs then you can stick with CP-145. But if you have large, multi-driver IEMs then the W1 is a must try.

DOUBLE-FLANGE SPINFIT EARTIPS

CP-240

The Spinfit CP-240 is their only dual-flange offering. Usually dual-flange tips offer a deeper seal along with improved isolation. The CP-240, however, is a strange case. Due to the larger gap between the swiveling part on top and the second flange below, the seal breaks inside the ear canal and may lead to a loss of isolation. Moreover, the bass response lightens up a lot as a result. This might help if you want to tone the bass down on some IEMs but for me this particular tip didn’t really have a permanent place on any of the IEMs I’ve tried them on. The CP-240 also comes with adapters that you can slot inside the bore to reduce bore size and use narrow-bore IEMs like Etymotic/Westone/Shure.

Some suggested pairings for these tips: Westone, Shure, Etymotic IEMs with adapter, Meze 12 Classics V2 without adapter.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Writing about eartips can be confusing since it’s such a personal thing after all. This article is not meant to be taken as an absolute guide, rather a primer into what you might expect from the several Spinfit offerings. In the end, I can only speak from my personal experience along with the feedback I’ve gathered over time from other experienced users.

The Spinfit offerings are a must-have if you’re into collecting IEMs and love to experiment with several eartips. If I had to choose one SpinFit eartip among the 8 reviewed here, I would pick the CP-100+. It’s going to be widely available soon, it improves upon the original CP-100, and most of all it pairs well with most of the IEMs out there barring those with thin nozzles. Similarly, the CP-145 is a great choice and improves the comfort and sonic performance of many IEMs I’ve tried them on.

Among the rest, the CP-360 should be in your stable if you’re into TWS earphones, they are one of the few TWS-specific eartip after all. The CP-500 is a specialist eartip that can be unpredictable, and being the widest-bore tip in Spinfit’s lineup offers something unique. Finally, the CP-240 is something I couldn’t find a use for and the CP-800 didn’t perform as well as the tips it’s supposed to replace (for me). So these two don’t excite me as much.

Thus, I’ve covered most of Spinfit’s mainstream offerings. In the future I plan to make an entire post/thread where the eartips of all major manufacturers (along with a few obscure) ones will be covered. Let’s see how that one goes.

MY VERDICT

CP-100+/CP-145: Highly Recommended
CP-360/CP-500: Recommended

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

SpinFit Eartips can be found on Amazon.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Spinfit Eartips Roundup: A Comprehensive Comparison Between 8 Variants appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Stock cable forms kinks, gets tangled in pocket
– Somewhat soft transients
– Treble lacks sparkle, rolls-off early
– Soundstage depth/imaging is average
– Lower-mids can sound a bit recessed

INTRODUCTION

Moondrop needs no introduction nowadays after being one of the most consistent manufacturers out there in terms of releases and their adherence to hitting “target curves”, or a specific frequency-response in other words.

The Moondrop Aria 2 (2021) is their latest release that, on paper, succeeds their age-old model, the Aria (which had a shell similar to their now discontinued Crescent). Confusing naming schemes aside, the Aria refresh is nothing like the old model with a very different shell design along with a detachable cable (whereas the previous model had a fixed cable). Moreover, it seems to compete directly with their own Starfield and might even retire the old model given its lower price tag.

Let’s see if the new Aria 2 is a worthy refresh, and if it can carve itself a spot in the ultra-competitive budget segment.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Nappoler Hu from HiFiGo was kind enough to send me the Moondrop Aria 2 for evaluation.

Sources used: Questyle CMA-400i, Sony NW-A55 (MrWalkman modded), LG G7
Price, while reviewed: $80. Can be bought from HiFiGo.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The packaging, in usual Moondrop fashion, has an anime box-art. Other than that the accessories are mostly standard: a cloth-braided cable, 6 pairs of eartips, a small carry case, a pair of tweezers to replace the nozzle filters, and some spare nozzle filters. While the tips and case works fine, I’m a bit annoyed with the stock cable. Now, it’s an upgrade over Starfield’s noodle-like cable but the ergonomics are poor and it gets tangled very easily. The sheathing is also stiff and forms kinks very easily. I’d recommend an upgrade cable if budget permits.
4/5

BUILD QUALITY

The build quality is excellent with an aluminium alloy housing. The matte black paintjob has a soft-touch finish and the rose-gold pattern on top adds a bit of character to the shells. There are two vents on the inner-side to alleviate pressure. The 2-pin ports are recessed which is great for long-term durability. Finally, the nozzle doesn’t have any lips to secure the tips but it does grip the tips better this time around (unlike the Starfield nozzles where tips would slip out). The paintjob also seems more durable than the Starfield one (which chipped off easily) but time will tell. So far so good.
5/5

COMFORT AND ISOLATION

Due to its snug-fit and lightweight nature, the Aria has very good wearing comfort. Isolation is above-average too and with the right tips you can drown out quite a bit of outside noise.
4.5/5

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

For the purpose of this review, I primarily used the Questyle CMA-400i and LG G7 as sources. The Aria 2 runs well on most sources, though with better sources it does seem to scale. I’ve found it to pair the best with Questyle CMA-400i but then again it’s a desk setup and costs quite a bit. On a budget, the LG G7 worked just fine, with the Sony NW-A55 providing a very dynamic and engaging presentation.

The stock tips are fine but I opted for Spinfit CP-145 as it seemed to slightly widen the stage without sacrificing on the tonality/technicalities.

DRIVER SETUP

Aria 2 opts for a 10mm LCP (Liquid-Crystal Polymer) along with an N52 magnet system. The voice coil is just 35 micron thick and there’s also a brass cavity on the back to reduce resonance. Finally, the high frequency waveguide disperses high-frequency waves to reduce resonance peaks. LCP diaphragms have been used in legendary single-DDs like the Sony EX-1000, though in that case the diaphragm size was much larger (16mm) and the diaphragm stiffness also reportedly higher. However, given the price constraint at play here (1/6th of the EX-1000ST) it’s great to see LCP diaphragm here instead of the more mainstream CNT, Ti/Be-plated PET, or DLC diaphragms (though the latter costs more usually).

One interesting tidbit: Moondrop recommends 100hrs of burning to ensure that the drivers are in “optimal” condition. They even provide some burn-in instructions in the user-manual (comes in the box). I usually don’t bother with IEM user-guides but this one time I’m glad I read it. Whether or not you’re a believer in burn-in, it’s interesting to see that Moondrop is recommending this as they’re usually very focused on measurements and such (burn-in usually doesn’t show up in FR graphs). I decided to follow the guidelines and burned-in for ~60 hours or so before forming my impressions. It doesn’t hurt after all.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

The Aria 2 has a warm, upper-mid centric presentation that has some similarities with the Harman In-ear target curve. Fortunately, the upper-mids aren’t as pronounced as the Harman IE target and the mid-bass has more body, resulting in a more even and natural transition from sub-bass to upper-bass and lower-mids subsequently.

The standout feature on this one has to be the bass response which, IMO, is one of the best under $100. The bass reaches all the way down to 20Hz and provides excellent rumble. Best of all: it doesn’t slope right away as it moves into the mid-bass unlike some recent IEM releases that gives rise to what I call “2.1 subwoofer effect” (you feel that the sub-bass is detached from the rest of the frequency). As a result, the bass frequencies are all well-portrayed and the sub-bass focus sounds tastefully done. Snare hits are authoritative, double-pedals have a full-bodied nature to them, and most of all male vocals don’t sound thinned-out. Bass texture is great, and bass speed is above-average.

As we move into the lower-mids, it does some warmth from the mid-bass bump but this is where I encounter my first issue with the Aria 2. The male vocals sound somewhat distant, although they’re perfectly intelligible. The finer articulations (vocalists inhaling/exhaling, subtle shifts in the delivery) are not as well portrayed as a result. Female vocals are much better portrayed however though again the lower-ranges suffer from recession. On the plus side, these are excellent when it comes to rendering acoustic guitars. The leading edge of guitars sound crisp while having a certain heft to them. Distortion guitars are not as well portrayed however due to less energy around the 4KHz region, but this also helps in reducing listening fatigue so there’s that.

Finally, the treble, and there’s not much to say here. It’s inoffensive without being boring. The treble rolls off fast post 11KHz and doesn’t really offer a lot of sparkle or air. Cymbal hits sound somewhat muted and the resonance after the hit is absent. There’s a slight peak ~10KHz in the official graph which seems more like driver resonance and didn’t really bother me during listening sessions. I should also add a note about the timbre which is very natural here and doesn’t suffer from the artificiality of the typical BA drivers (and even some metal-coated PET diaphragms).

Dynamics are quite good, especially macrodynamics are class-leading. Micro-dynamic shifts (gradual changes in volumes) are portrayed fairly well though some of the competition does that better. Staging is good overall in terms of width/height, though stage depth is lacking vs the higher-tier IEMs. Imaging is not as precise as I find on competing IEMs so I’d say it’s about average for the price bracket. Separation is good, however, owing to faster transients of the LCP diaphragm, though I do find the leading edge of notes to be somewhat soft which robs some instruments off of their excitement/engagement factor. The better transients also aids in complex tracks though the treble does seem to get drowned out in that case.

Overall, I find the Aria 2 to have a very versatile sound profile that works well across a variety of genres. The presentation is dynamic with a very natural timbre and excellent rendition of acoustic guitars/percussion instruments. Due to the wide stage, instruments aren’t congested and separation is very good as well. However, the male vocals might sound recessed, the imaging isn’t as precise as I hoped it to be, and stage depth/treble extension is lacking. Given its budget nature though, I’m willing to forgive a lot of that.

Bass: 4.5/5
Mids: 4/5
Treble: 4/5
Imaging/Separation: 3.5/5
Staging: 4/5
Dynamics/Speed: 4/5
Timbre: 4.5/5

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Moondrop Starfield ($109): The Starfield received mostly rave reviews upon launch, though I myself found it very average on all fronts apart from the mid-range (vocals, to be specific). It was kind of a one-trick pony and I didn’t find the trick to be entertaining enough to warrant a super-positive review. I’d not discuss differences in build/accessories here as they are mostly similar (though Aria 2 cable is better).

The Aria 2 fixes most of my issues with the Starfield. The bass is much tighter with faster transients, acoustic guitars and percussion instruments don’t sound as “mushy” anymore, and the treble actually has some life in them. The stage is also wider and taller on the Aria 2, though stage-depth is similar on both (as in average). They measure similarly on FR but during listening the difference these technical upgrades are very noticeable. The one area where the Starfield trounces the Aria 2 is the vocal performance with Starfield having a more up-front/engaging vocal delivery. That’s about it though, and I’d pick the Aria 2 over the (more expensive) Starfield 11 out of 10 times.

vs Final E3000 ($50): The Final E3000 has long been one of my favorites under $100 and the Aria 2 has challenged it well for that throne. In terms of build quality, Aria 2 gets brownie points for having a detachable cable (though the supplied cable is far worse than E3000 stock cable). Both are very comfortable IEMs and offer good isolation.

The sound profile is quite different between them. The E3000 is a laid-back sounding IEM with warm, thick notes and an uncanny ability to separate the vocals from the rest of the instruments. In fact the biggest difference between the E3000 and the Aria 2 is how the former projects a wide, deep soundstage. Vocals are also more lush on the E3000, though they are even more recessed than the Aria 2. In terms of bass response, the Aria 2 is more sub-bass focused whereas the Final E3000 has mid-bass focus. Thus, the snare-hits/double-pedals sound even more substantial on the E3000 whereas Aria 2 can reproduce bass rumble better. Treble is about similar on both though the E3000 has slightly better sparkle and energy in the leading edge of cymbal hits. Imaging is also better on the E3000, though it falls behind the Aria 2 in complex tracks due to slower driver. Finally, microdynamics are superior on the E3000 with the Aria 2 having better macrodynamics.

One thing to note is the amping requirements which is higher on the E3000. Aria 2 is far easier to drive. All this makes the Aria 2 an easier pick for those who want more balance across the spectrum and don’t want to invest in a source. If you have a good source, however, the Final E3000 is still a very unique offering and will be right up your alley if you want a non-fatiguing, laid-back yet impressively wide presentation.

vs BLON BL-05S ($40): This is a comparison that many requested due to the BL-05S punching way above its price-tag in terms of technicalities. Let’s get into it, then.

In terms of build, the Aria 2 wins simply because of a more agreeable color, though I’m lately finding the BL-05S less of a turn-off. The stock accessories are also super-terrible on the BLONs so Moondrop gets an easy win here. Comfort/isolation is also better on the Aria 2.

Now, let’s get into the sound. The BL-05S has more focus on clarity with a more prominent upper-mids presence. The bass suffers on the BL-05S as a result with the Aria 2 having a superior bass response. In fact, the improvement in bass alone warrants an upgrade to the Aria 2 if you’re using BL-05S and need more “thump” in the lows. In the mids, I find the BL-05S to be better for female vocals and electric guitars. Treble also has more sparkle on the BL-05S though cymbals can sound a bit splashy at times on the BL-05S (which the Aria 2 avoids). Timbre is better on the Aria 2, so is soundstage width and height and the overall dynamics. Stage depth and imaging, however, is better on the BL-05S, so is the separation (surprisingly so).

It’s quite ironic that the BL-05S, despite being half as costly, is besting the Aria 2 in a few technical aspects (mainly imaging and separation). However, I find the Aria 2 an easier listen with far superior comfort/isolation and of course: bass. I can also see many getting both these IEMs to cover all bases (Aria 2 when you need a more smooth listen, BL-05S for the metal/rock sessions).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Moondrop Aria 2 is a wholesale upgrade over the Moondrop Starfield, despite the apparent similarity in the FR graph. I was very disappointed with the Starfield so the Aria comes as a form of redemption for the budget Moondrop offerings, among which I’ve only like the Crescent so far (and they don’t even make them anymore).

For me, the Aria 2 is now a default recommendation in the $100 range and renders many of its peers/predecessors irrelevant, if not unremarkable. It doesn’t excel in many technical aspects but as an all-round package it is very hard to beat. The stock accessories are good enough to get you going, the bass response is fantastic, the mids sound just right (albeit the lower-mids recession can sound a bit odd), and the treble is inoffensive for the most part aiding in long-term listening. Add to that good dynamics, separation, and stage width, and we’ve a new winner.

Well done, Moondrop, and I hope you guys keep it up.

MY VERDICT

4.25/5

A worthy upgrade to the Moondrop Starfield, and one of the best IEMs under $100.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from HiFiGo

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post Moondrop Aria (2021) Review (2) – The Big “Little” Upgrade appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Well fitting, light, comfortable. Beautiful looks.
Above average isolation.
Great organic timbre and tonality.
Good soundstage and technicalities. Fast transients.
Easy to drive.
Nice accessories.

Cons

Not the most textured bass.
Rare instances of hot upper mids.
Not all aftermarket 2 pin cables can fit this set, due to the round protruding housing design.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Whizzer HE01 features a warm mild V shaped tuning, and is an all rounder single DD set that scores good marks in tonality, timbre and technicalities. Transients are a particular standout on this set. Accessories and haptics are nice and I would say it is one of the standout sub $100 CHIFI single DDs of 2021.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: metal composite moving coil unit with high magnetic circuit
• Frequency response: 15 hz – 40 kHz
• Impedance: 18 Ohms
• Sensitivity: 112 dB SPL / MW
• Cable: 2 pin
• Tested at $79.99 USD
• Purchase link: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001731358565.html

ACCESSORIES

Other than the IEM, the Whizzer HE01 packaging comes with:

• 5N OFC oxygen free copper cable – well braided, very usable OOTB sonic wise. No microphonics. Only thing to note though is that the 2 pin connector here is round and protruding for the housing. So it may not fit all aftermarket cables.
• Silicone ear tips –  I find the narrow bore eartips tend to boost bass, the wider bore ones tend to boost the upper mids/treble, YMMV as we have different ear anatomies.
• Round metal hard case
• Cleaning tool

Accessories wise, this is rather generous for a budget single DD, I’ve definitely seen worse in some more expensive CHIFI “flagships” (cough cough TRN). Everything is rather usable OOTB, so no need to mess with getting aftermarket tips and cables (which can add to costs).

For the purposes of this review, the stock cable and tips were used, so as not to change the sound signature with aftermarket gear. In particular, the narrow bore eartips were used for this review.

BUILD/COMFORT

The Whizzer H01 shell is made of plastic and is very light and well fitting. Comfort is top notch, I’ve used this set for marathon listening sessions without an ounce of discomfort.

I didn’t find any driver flex for myself (but YMMV once more as this is somewhat dependent on ear anatomy and types of ear tips used).

I liked that the Whizzer HE01 uses 2 pin connectors, as I’m not a fan of MMCX connectors in general, as they tend to have shorter longevity especially if cables are swapped too much. Only thing to note though is that the 2 pin connector here is round and protruding for the housing. So it may not fit all aftermarket cables, so just a point to note.

The Whizzer HE01’s shell is also quite beautiful looking, my wife would usually glare at me or nag when a new IEM comes in the mail. But this time, she took a look and was quiet for a few seconds. Then she grudgingly said she “wouldn’t mind trying it” LOL. But of course for us in this hobby, most of us value the sound over the looks, so let’s dive into that below.

ISOLATION

The Whizzer HE01 has above average isolation. Not too bad considering it is vented, though some pure BA type IEMs without vents will beat it in the isolation department.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the Whizzer He01 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.

At a sensitivity of 112dB/mW, the Whizzer HE01 is easy to drive, but like most other single DD types, it scales with amping. Amping can increase dynamics, soundstage and perhaps microdetails, but no biggie if you do not have an amp on hand with the Whizzer HE01.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

In a nutshell, the Whizzer HE01 features a warm mild V shaped tuning, and is an all rounder single DD set that scores good marks in tonality, timbre and technicalities.

For the bass department, the Whizzer HE01 is not a basshead set in terms of quantity, but bass is definitely north of neutral with a great punch in the midbass. Midbass is more pronounced than the subbass, but this set can still extend quite well in subbass extension. Bass quality wise, while there isn’t marked midbass bleed, the bass isn’t the most textured and can be one noted at time, but that’s something I can close one eye considering the rest of the tonality is quite good.

Lower mids are midly recessed, not overly so. Upper mids are at the borderline of spiciness for me for some songs, but otherwise, it doesn’t really get into very banshee shouty territory (cough cough Moondrop SSR) unless one jacks up the volume a lot (Fletcher Munson curve), or on some poorly recorded materials. Mids are very clean and transparent.

Treble is well extended, though there’s mild instances of sibilance. Microdetails are well captured and cymbals ain’t splashy or unnatural.

Technicalities are very good for a budget single DD, soundstage is definitely above average to good in height, depth and width. Clarity, imaging, instrument separation and details are really quite good considering it is a single DD set. One thing that stands out immediately are the very fast transients. Music never sounded congested on the Whizzer HE01 even with complex pieces.

Timbral accuracy is good as per its single DD roots, no complains for this department, it would do well with acoustic instruments and vocals in terms of timbre.

COMPARISONS

Here are some comparisons with some well regarded single DD types below. As hybrids/multi BA have their own strengths and weaknesses compared to single DD types, they were left out of the comparisons.

BLON BL-03 ($25 USD)

The legendary BLON BL-03 is a harmanish set with a midbass bump, boasting superb tonality and timbre at the sub $30 USD region. Compared to the Whizzer HE01, the BLON BL-03 is more analoguish with a thicker note weight and a more nebulous and boomy midbass.

In terms of timbre, the BLON BL-03 shades it a bit, but the Whizzer HE01 beats the BLON BL-03 in accessories, fit, isolation, soundstage, transients, imaging, instrument separation, clarity and details. Basically the Whizzer HE01 is a few levels above the BLON BL-03.

I know they are at different price brackets, but the BLON BL-03 is sort of a milestone CHIFI single DD which many folks have, and I’m sure some would ask for A/B comparisons. But actually, the BLON BL-03 may be closer to $40 – 50 USD if aftermarket tips/cables are factored in to secure a better fit for the BLON BL-03’s atrocious fit with the stock accessories, whereas the Whizzer HE01 is ready to go OOTB, no need to mess around with aftermarket gear for it.

BLON BL-05S ($39 USD)

The BLON BL-05S is a U shaped set. Unfortunately, it comes in a gaudy green colour, which may be a dealbreaker for some (in fact, I got stared at when I tried using it on the subway, so it stays at home nowadays). I’ve had some audiophile friends who refused to buy it, cause of the colour, and also cause they were burnt by the not so stellar BLON BL-05 (non S), which was quite shouty in the upper mids.

Comparing the 2 sets, the BLON BL-05s has worse accessories. The BLON BL-05S is slightly shoutier in the upper mids than the Whizzer HE01. In terms of technical performance the Whizzer HE01 is slightly better, in terms of soundstage, clarity, details, imaging and instrument separation. Once again, they are at different price brackets, and the law of diminishing return kicks in, so the Whizzer HE01 is not 2 times better as the price would suggest, but it is still a slight upgrade over the BLON BL-05S.

iBasso IT00 ($60 USD)

Like the Whizzer HE01, the iBasso IT00 comes with nice accessories, and features a mild V shaped tuning. The iBasso IT00 has very bad driver flex though, so that’s one thing to note as it can be a dealbreaker for some. In terms of tonality, the iBasso IT00 has more subbass rumble/quantity but lesser higher treble extension.

In terms of technical performance, the Whizzer HE01 is better, featuring better clarity, detials, imaging and instrument separation. Transients are also faster on the Whizzer HE01.

HZSound Heart Mirror ($49 USD)

The HZSound Heart Mirror is a neutralish bright set, and has a more compressed soundstage than the Whizzer HE01. The HZSound Heart Mirror is also more difficult to drive and has a more neutral bass compared to the iBasso IT00. The HZSound Heart Mirror has a thinner note weight too. Accessories wise, they are both very good.

In terms of timbral accuracy, the HZSound Heart Mirror is a tinge better. In terms of technicalities, they are very close.

Though if one does not have an amp, I would suggest to look elsewhere from the HZSound Heart Mirror, as it sounds meh with a low powered source, with a compressed soundstage, thin note weight and lack of dynamics. The Whizzer HE01 on the other hand, sounds good even from lower powered gear.

I would see these 2 sets as sidegrades, both sets have good transients and technicalities. The HZSound Heart Mirror is more suited for those wanting a neutralish technical and analytical tuning, while the Whizzer HE01 is for those that want a more fun V shaped sound. The Whizzer HE01 by virtue of having more bass quantity, may be more suited for bass forward music genres too, but both are good sets to get, depending on your sonic preferences and usual music genres you listen to.

CONCLUSIONS

The Whizzer HE01 features a warm mild V shaped tuning, and is an all rounder single DD set that scores good marks in tonality, timbre and technicalities. Transients are a particular standout on this set. Accessories and haptics are nice and I would say it is one of the standout sub $100 CHIFI single DDs of 2021.

Definitely recommended for those who are wanting to dive deeper into the rabbithole from the sub $30 USD single DD segment!

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Whizzer for providing this review unit. It can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001731358565.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Whizzer HE01 Review (2) – Whizz Kid appeared first on Music For The Masses.

However, such background situation made my curiosity even more vivid when an opportunity developed for me to audition a pair of BL05s, a few weeks ago (my article here), and a pair of BL-01 now.

Also “pushed” by a couple of friends literally digging them I spent quite some time with my BL-01 sample in the past month or so, and I can easily say I’m impressed – both by the pros and the cons…

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove / Questyle QP1R / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman – Radius DeepMount eartips – Nicehck 16core High Purity Copper cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Considerations and conclusions

So as I mentioned in the beginning I found goods and bads with BL-01.

The two main negative aspects might be deal breakers (indeed the first one sadly is for me) : fit and source requirements.

About fit: I couldn’t possibly find a way to fit BL-01’s housings into my outer ear without resulting either in an unfirm grasp or in an uncomfortable one, or both. The housings are not shaped properly for me, and they are too “fat”. Add that their nozzles are infuriatingly short (sadly in good company there… Oxygen anyone?).

Long story short: if I “push the housings in” I do get a better seal a stability, but in less than 30 minutes I feel my outside cartilages aching; if I adopt longer eartips to compensate / avoid that, housings stay too much outside, don’t get properly “grasped” by my antitragus and antihelix, and normal head movements make them wobble, repeatedly loosing the seal.

I tried with all different tips I have (and I have quite a few), the sole ones that “reduce” the issue for me are Radius DeepMounts. The usual “YMMV” here is not enough: you really need better luck then me at compatibility with their shape.

About source requirements: from the electrical standpoint BL-01 fall in the “supereasy drive” class – 16 Ohm, 102 dB a piece of cake for any phone or whatever. However, major differences apply based on the source’s amp quality.

A lower end amp (stage) will make BL-01’s highmids glare out very soon, mid-bass transients longer & bloaty and the device will lose most of its layering / separation capability. The good amp for BL-01 needs to have great treble and bass control, and a clean power delivery.

Examples of counter-recommended amping sources: Fiio X3, BTR5; Hiby R3, R3Pro, R5; Meizu Hifi DAC Pro dongle; iFi ZEN CAN, Nano iDSD BL, and more. Examples of recommended amping sources, where the 3 issues go away : Sony NW-A55, Apogee Groove, Questyle QP1R, iFi Micro iDSD BL, Monolith Liquid Spark, Lotoo Paw GT.

On to the up side now.

When ideally paired – and if you are lucky enough for your ears to physically accept them for you – BL-01 are monumentally good all rounders.

Presentation and technicalities are on Ikko OH10‘s direction, surely less perfected but hey, at 1/5th of the price! And this by already factoring in the absolute need to swap BL-01’s bundled cable and tips with third party ones, otherwise it’s more like 1/10th!

Another very significant comparison is with their siblings BL-05s. Very simply put, it’s kinda like BL-05s is a BL-01 “shifted towards the trebles”. Both drivers show great technicalities, and a well calibrated presentation, with a very pleasant overall timbre and tonality.

BL05s fundamentally lack sub-bass, and deliver more attention on the high end; BL-01 the other way around. BL-05s do benefit like BL01 from higher quality amp pairing, but technicality delivery degradation when downscaling the amp is less dramatic on BL-05s, these are more indulgent so to say.

Finally, aesthetics apart (some do hate their color!), BL05s is indeed “almost easily” wearable for me, unlike their siblings, but… at twice the price.

Disclaimers

I got this pair of WGZBLON BL-01 as a review unit from my friends at KEEPHIFI (www.keephifi.com).

Our standard disclaimer

The post BLON BL-01 Review (2) – Give Me A Quality Source And I’ll Shine 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 — Bass could be more textured; optics not for everybody.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Whizzer Kylin HE01 is a well designed, well accessorized, warm and fluid sounding single DD earphone with a fast driver that provides hard beats, and excellent midrange and treble articulation and definition. I treasure the Whizzer Kylin HE01’s fluid, cohesive presentation. A personal favourite.

INTRODUCTION

As a reviewer, you are are often frustrated when a whole batch of iems supplied for review are uninspiring. Then, there are these models which “are good for their price”, which still may not give one much inspiration in the long run, considering you have better iems in your collection or memory. But there is the rare iem that is appealing and enjoyable independent of price. The Shozy Form 1.4 was one of these rare examples for me, and the Whizzer Kylin HE01 is another one. Yes, the Whizzer Kylin is that …good. I used them in all combinations, be it just with a phone up to the Earmen Tr-amp.

SPECIFICATIONS

Drivers: high magnetic circuit metal composite moving coil
Impedance: 18 Ω
Sensitivity: 112 dB/mW…easy to drive
Frequency Range: 15 – 40,000 Hz
Cable/Connector: 5N OFC oxygen-free copper
Tested at: $80
Company Page: http://www.whizzer-tec.com
Product Page/Purchase Link: Whizzer Official Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

The Whizzer Kylin HE01 is generously accessorized. The earpieces come in a padded metal box, two sets of silicone eartips (“reference” and “vocals”) are included as well as a cleaning tool and the “literature”. The 5N OFC oxygen-free copper cable is tightly braided, has metal connectors and a chin slider, and exhibits zero microphonic. High quality.

The earpieces are made of of metal and resin and appear sturdy. They are ergonomically very good with LONG nozzles that go deep enough into my teutonic ear canals. Fit and comfort are very good for me, isolation is ok, too, depending on eartips used.

The appearance is marketed as retro look…but I am not sure what era. My not-so-young wife (don’t tell her…) associates it with “little old ladies”. But, the shells are refreshingly different from the repetitive (and often oversized) standard designs – one has to fall in love with them for that reason alone – and I somewhat did (again, please don’t tell her…).

Yes, the Whizzer Kylin HE01 works fine out of the box. Bonus!

And it can be driven easily even by the weakest source.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Follow these links for some background information:

My tonal preference and testing practice

My test tracks explained

Equipment used: iPhone SE (1st generation) with and without Earmen Sparrow/Audioquest Dragonfly Black; MacBook Air with EarMen Sparrow or EarMen TR-amp; stock cable, both sets of stock eartips.

To give you the “helicopter view” up front: the Whizzer Kylin HE01 is a warm and (mostly) clean sounding single (and nimble) dynamic-driver iem with a natural timbre. Its strong points are the midrange, upper treble, and technicalities.

That slightly elevated bass is very well extended but could be more layered and articulate. It is not wooly or thumpy, and it provides a good kick, but it also may be perceived as borderline boomy. You have heard this type of bass over and over before. I am sure, tip rolling may modify the low end, however I was testing with the stock tips. Nevertheless, while the bass i technically not the greatest, its slight boost can be fun and it provides a solid base for the midrange.

But where things become interesting is from the lower midrange up: vocals are very articulate for a DD, they are only marginally recessed with medium note weight, and are well sculptured with a good note definition. This results in good midrange clarity and transparency – and really good detail resolution and separation. The bass does not affect the midrange. Also, that pinna gain of 12 dB at 3 kHz is reasonable and provides the right energy to voices. No shoutiness. The midrange is not neutral as in Moondrop or Tin Hifi iems but a tinge warm, which makes it particularly appealing to me.

The drop-off starts in the upper midrange and continues through the lower treble, which explains the lack of shoutiness but it also removes a bit of sheen from the midrange/vocals and subdues high sustainers such as cymbals and string instruments. Treble resolution is also very good. The highest notes are hit with accuracy and minimal smearing.

That midrange clarity plays into a very wide soundstage with average depth. But the music really plays outside your head. As said before, technicalities are very good, delivering just the right punch/dynamics. I appreciate the fluidity of the sonic presentation. Needless to say that speech intelligibility is excellent, too.

As to the included “reference” and “vocals” silicone tips. Although the main difference, according to the graphs, lies in the upper midrange, my listening perception focuses on the low end: the reference tips increase the bass. This is not surprising as the human ear hears the frequency spectrum in its full context….and it had been demonstrated well with the three filters of the JVC HA-FDX1.

WHIZZER KYLIN HE01 COMPARED

Let me be subjective for once. I much prefer the Whizzer Kylin HE01 over the Moondrop Starfield and TinHifi T4. Both Starfield and T4 are less cohesive and fluid. In the midrange they are much thinner, sharper, and hollower than the Whizzer Kylin HE01. These two are classic cases of “earphones good for the price…” as they lack compared to more expensive iems. The Whizzer Kylin HE01 sounded enjoyable even when compared to the very good Moondrop Illumination…albeit not as good. My ears can’t read price tags and they really like the Whizzer Kylin HE01 a lot.

But let’s continue the “slaughter”. The KBEAR Diamond, in comparison, sound much thicker in the bass and thinner in the midrange…I wonder who helped tuning them :).

The Tin Hifi T2 also don’t match the liveliness of the Whizzer Kylin HE01 and can’t keep up with midrange and treble resolution.

The best of this rest is still the Blon Bl-05s, which have a somewhat glaring upper midrange but similar midrange articulation….and substandard accessories.

In summary, the Whizzer Kylin HE01 is the most cohesive, articulate, and engaging iem of the lot to me. My pick. And I would not have expected this, quite frankly. A pleasant surprise indeed. And – for once everything works just fine ootb…but I am repeating myself.

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

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Whizzer Kylin HE01 is an enjoyable, fluid sounding single DD earphone that strikes the balance between fun (“bass”) and audiophile (“midrange and treble”). And it is comfortable, all of which qualifies it as a daily driver. The company has implemented a few technical, ergonomic, and optical ideas that make this earphone distinct from its competition.

The biggest appeal/non-appeal and potential selling point may be the rose-gold optics. For those who like the Whizzer Kylin HE01’s appearance a lot, there is no reason to stop you from getting it – as this iem has not real weak points and holds up very well against its peers.

I have to admit (secretly), that I quite enjoy this earphone, mainly for its nice punch/dynamics and its comfort/fit. The Whizzer Kylin HE01 is a great find for me.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The Whizzer Kylin HE01 was provided unsolicited from Whizzer and I thank them for that.

Get the Whizzer Kylin HE01 from Whizzer Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

RAW DATA…

The post Whizzer Kylin HE01 Review (1) – The Whizzard 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.

Gear of the Year: Just in time for Christmas we list our our personal favourites of 2020 – the portable audio we personally enjoyed most. Note, these are not necessarily the best, but the ones we…you got it. Therefore, these are highly personal, subjective listings. Please be aware we don’t offer reviews for everything we like/we list here (yet).

That Christmas tree on the right is a carryover from last year. It stood in the lobby of the Windsor hotel at the Copacabana in Rio de Janeiro…and it should be a symbolism for looking forward to travelling again. Viva Brazil!

Most of our reviews would have not been possible without our 2020 cooperating partners. We thank:

Acoustic Effect, ADV, Akoustyx, Apos Audio, Azla, Bill Barraugh/Audiotiers, Blon, Cozoy, CVJ, ddHifi, Dekoni, Dunu, EarMen, Earstudio, Hifigo, iBasso, ifi Audio, KBEAR, Keephifi, Moondrop, NiceHCK, Opa Audio Store, Sennheiser, Shenzhenaudio, Shozy, Smabat, Tempotec, Tronsmart, TRN, Vision Ears, V-Moda, Wooeasy Earphones Store, Yaxi, Don’tkillusifweforgotyoujustsendusanotandwefixit. 

For the companies: you can check for your products/yourself in the search field on the right-hand side.

Note: we do not make any money (or getting compensated by products) through the gear we review. No affiliate links, trackers etc. We keep the conflict-of-interest potential as low as possible by attempting to stay at arm’s length.

As to the popularity of our reviews with you, the reader: our top-viewed BLOG POSTS for 2020 were (click to go to the respective article):

1. Simplified Guide To Silicone Eartips (~13,000 views in early Dec 2020)
2. Tin Hifi T2 Plus Review
3. Blon Bl-03 Review
4. KZ ZSN Pro Review
5. Blon Bl-05 Beta Photography
6. Tempotec Sonata HD Pro Review
7. Moondrop SSR Review
8. Drop JVC HA-FDX1 Review
9. Apple Audio Adapter Review
10. Earphones Of The Year 2019
11. Sennheiser IE 500 PRO Review
12. Reversing Starlines Eartips
13. TRN V90 Review
14. Moondrop Starfield Review
15. Sony MH755 Review

Total Number of Blog Posts in 2020: 186

Facebook Group (est. 2020-01-01)| https://www.facebook.com/groups/audioreviews: >5200 members

YouTube subscriptions | https://www.youtube.com/c/audioreviews: 660

Our most-watched YouTube Video of 2020:

And yes, this blog grew and grew and grew in 2020. We are now 8 reviewers on 3 continents. Below are our personal favourites of 2020…

Baskingshark…Singapore

My 2020 favourites in the following categories are:

Earphones

$300 – 500 USD:
LZ A7. Provides a mind boggling 10 tuning configs (or more with aftermarket tuning nozzles). It has excellent technicalities, good fit, good isolation, and the best part that surprised me is that the LZ A7 has very natural timbre for a BA/piezo containing tribid (other than the higher treble frequencies handled by the piezo). Most folks would find an ideal sound signature with it, maybe except diehard bassheads. 

$200 – 300 USD:
Audiosense T800. It has good technicalities, is “fun sounding” and excellent isolation nearing 30 dB. Even though it contains a BA bass, it sounds like a DD bass due to a vented subwoofer. The T800 may be a bit on the bright side, so it isn’t the best option for treble sensitive folks, but you can use knowles filters, warm sources or eartips to tame the treble.

@ $100 – 200 USD:
TRI I3. Smooth, balanced, grand and coherent despite the weird 1 planar + 1 BA + 1 DD config. It needs amping though, the planars handling the mids are quite power hungry. It has one of the best soundstages at the $100ish region when amped, with sweet planar mids. Treble is safe, bordering on darkish, so maybe not for trebleheads.

KBEAR BElieve. “Bearly believable” for a full beryllium set at this price? The KBEAR BElieve sports a smooth and refined U shaped tuning, great technical chops in the mids and treble areas for a single DD. It has good timbre for acoustic instruments but is very hard to drive, as per the 98 dB sensitivity. It sounds muddy, congested and slow in the bass with a low powered source, but scales beautifully when optimally amped, so those that don’t intend to get an amp best look elsewhere. With power, the KBEAR BElieve does hit about 70% of the technical performance of the famed DUNU LUNA, at 10% of the price! 

@ Sub $100 USD:
HZSound Heart Mirror. Nice mirror like shells, as per its namesake, it is a neutralish bright set, excellent timbre for acoustic instruments. I like how it manages to get a forward upper mids without going into harsh or shouty territory, a very fine line to balance. The Heart Mirror has good transients and speed on the driver. Note weight is thin and soundstage is not the best though, and it needs amping to shine, sounds meh from a smartphone. Good set for vocal lovers and timbre lovers, but maybe not so all rounded due to the lack of bass, but it takes to EQ in the bass like a champ.

Favourite earbud for the year:
SMABAT ST105 Black Gold. Neutralish set with subbass and upper mids boost. If you have always looked down on earbuds for not having subbass, think again. The SMABAT ST10S Black Gold has the best subass quantity and extension I’ve ever heard in a bud. It has excellent technicalities, is MMCX
detachable and can be worn over ears or cable down. It needs amping though, as per the 150 ohm impedance. Not to be mixed up with the SMABAT ST10S Black Silver, which is tuned differently (and has lower impedance).

Best lucky bag/Fukubukuro/Mystery bag:
Urbanfun YBF-ISS014 – it is extremely exciting to see whether u get a beryllium vs “noble metal” driver. Or a working versus wonky mmcx. Even newer batches of the Urbanfun have been reported to have QC problems in the audio forums.The Urbanfun can be summed up in this statement by Forrest Gump: “My Mom Always Said Life Was Like A Box Of Urbanfuns. You Never Know What You’re Gonna Get.”

Best price to peformance joke IEM of the year:
TRN golden ears $14,750.00 USD IEM paired with $3400 USD xiaofan ortiz “king of the gods” cable. Mere mortals cannot hope to use these gear if not you’ll be struck down by lightning! I hope the Bellsing BAs inside are also made of gold!

Biodegraded…Vancouver, Canada

Sorry, from me you get stuff that mostly hasn’t been reviewed. In no particular order; and most aren’t new this year.

Digital transports:
Pi2Design Pi2AES (+ Raspberry Pi)
For streaming (via wifi or Ethernet cable) digital music from your computer, you could go cheap and crap like a Chromecast or Airport, brutally expensive like an all-in-one streamer from Naim or PS Audio, or this $US 149 HAT for a Raspberry Pi which will produce excellent quality AES or S/PDIF digital audio to feed into your audiophile DAC. DIY aesthetic & philosophy, audiophile quality, fantastic convenience once you figure out how to set it up (variety of OS solutions, some better than others).

Amps/Preamps:
Ifi Audio Zen Phono RIAA phono preamp
$US 149 for excellent resolution and transients and the ability to work with a wide range of cartridges. Might benefit from an improved power supply such as Ifi’s own iPower, but my jury remains out on that. Audioreviews summary here.

Amp accessories:
GE JAN 5670W vacuum tube
Cheap and widely available true new-old-stock military-surplus tube that works really well as a 6DJ8/6922 preamp tube substitute (great in the Schiit Vali 2).  Nice tight lows, smooth but detailed mids, sparkly highs. 6922 to 5670 adapter required to translate the I/O pin pattern so nothing blows up.

Headphone accessories:
Yaxi pads for Porta Pro / KSC75 / PX-100
Tastefully boost bass and treble while (on the Kosses) lowering the prominent 5kHz peak. And they’re comfortable! Audioreviews summary here.

IEMs:
Drop/JVC HA-FDX1
Champion single-dynamic earphone with great DD timbre and almost BA-fast transients. Slightly boosted in the uppermost mids, heavy in the ears, intermittent availability, but huge bang-for-buck. Audioreviews summaries here and here (note that Loomis isn’t their greatest fan).

Headphones:
Fostex T50RP Mk3 with cheap angled pads and other mods
Closed or semi-open (depending on how much you stuff the cups) planar magnetic phones that with a little effort (see eg here for ideas) can be made both neutral and extended while retaining deep bass and technicalities. Need amp power to perform.

Players:
USB Audio Player Pro
Gets better with every update. Neutron is more configurable, but unnecessarily so. Put this on your Android phone, plug in a USB DAC/amp, and enjoy great lossless sound quality on the go. Equalizer plugins available. Android only though.

Durwood…Chicago, USA

CCA this year might as well been a lump of coal, it’s only two letters shy of selling your soul. If you want to talk to your boring Uncle Bob, (no offense Bob’s of the world) get yourself an iBasso IT00 or Tin Hifi T2 Plus you knob. Your uncle Bob is the guy who has lots of interesting things to say, but leaves you wondering what did you just listen to today. My only favorites this year were TRN STM who is the punk that your family doesn’t like to talk about and the Shozy Rouge as your killer looking date that likes to party but not shout. Waiting to see if Shozy Form 1.4 is in good form, only thing I decided to buy during the holiday sales storm. BQEYZ Spring 2 was a nice lively upgrade to the BQEYZ Spring 1, but fix that bass man, maybe take some lessons from the Nicehck NX7 Daniel son. Some of my friends from last year are still good folks to have around, Sony MH755, BLON BL03 for sleeping, and TinHifi T4 (I just wish you would hang in my ear longer than a few minutes of sound). Simgot EN700 is a carry over as well. I like a mild V if you can see.

Jürgen Kraus…Calgary, Canada

Blon BL-05s: These are very articulate playing single DDs also appeal to me through their hideous colour. Probably my most used items of the year (together with the JVCs and Shozy Form 1.4 below). Following the footsteps of the popular Blon Bl-03 – the Blon Bl-05s disappeared fast in the big black hole of anti-hype. And for a good reason: they look like the Bl-05, smell like the Bl-05, measure like the Bl-05, but the Bl-05 had been thrown on the market prematurely, and they sucked. The more distinguished audience may have realized that Bl-05 and Bl-05s have different drivers and sound completely different.

Drop JVC HA-FDX01: Hailed as arguably the best single DD on the market until Dunu Luna and Final Audio A8000 took over, this labour of love was originally only available 665 times….which has extended to above 2000 by now while the price dropped to $200. Carryover from 2019. Still my best earphones because of their organic timbre and great resolution.

TRI I3: Planar magnetic. Something totally different. Big and bold sounding yet soothing. Nothing offensive, nothing dull.

Sennheiser IE 400 PRO ($349): The best of their PRO series. Classic Sennheiser quality midrange. Super ergonomics. Nobody will dislike this one.

Shozy Form 1.4 ($199): The Shozy team somehow got their tuning 100% right. The Form 1.4 simply sound appealing to my ears…warm and fuzzy.

Guilty Pleasure: I pull the $70 FiiO FD1 out for the road: nice’n’punchy.

Vision Ears Elysium in the Endgame category. At 2500 EUR hand made by elfs and some Rhine mermaids in Cologne, out of reach for longer than a week (borrowed). Produce vocals better than real life but also melts credit cards. Cymbals as crisp as Swedish bread…

Perversions and Subversions: the Moondrop Spaceship at $20 beats the Moondrop SSR and SSP…less accurate but the better “junk food” for my ears. Moondrop have a history of undercutting their own mid-tier earphones with their budget offerings…we remember the $30 Crescent and the $180 KPE.

Inasmile Cable Protector: Discovery of the year. 20 cents that protect my fraying Apple cables from total breakage.

I still use the Koss PortaPro headphones with Yaxi earpads for video conferencing and listening when I need comfort around my ears. Also great are the Koss KSC75. Grab all of them when you can, they are affordable standard staples. And my standard full-sized cans are still the Sennheiser HD 600.

Tempotec Sonata HD Pro dac/amp dongle ($40): comes at the price of an adapter – but with all possible adapters to connect this little rascal to anything, including iPhones. Good enough to drive any iem. The very best dongles are the $199 EarMen Sparrow run on their balanced output, and the $120 Earstudio HUD100. In terms of larger portable dacs/amps (with integrated battery), I like the $199 ifi Audio Nano BL, the $149 ifi Audio hip-dac, and the $249 EarMen TR-amp. And I don’t think I need a bigger desktop amp.

Question mark of the year: The KBEAR Believe with their Japan sourced Beryllium drivers were too cheap to be true…which was underlined by some competing cheater Be-less Beryllium earphones and doubt seeded by the Dunu competitor. Hey, but the Luna have that Chi-Fi peak…

Personal Disappointment of the year: the continuing Chi-Fi peak between 2 and 4 kHz that kills western eardrums…TRN are leading the charge…the TRN BA8 cuts steel like butter.

Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir…Munich, Germany

I’ve tried and reviewed more stuff this year than ever, and part of it (actually, most of it) is due to the awful home-arrest that we’ve all succumbed too. Hope things get normal soon, sigh.

IEMs: 

Final E500 ($20): This otherwise “cheap/beater” IEM does one thing better than *anything* under $100 – binaural tracks and gaming. At least it did so until its brethren VR3000 came out, but I’m yet to hear that and that’s got a 4x price tag attached to it. People call the Sony MH755 the best value IEMs, for me it’s the Final E500.

Dunu Studio SA6 ($550): This is a great all-rounder IEM. Great bass for an all-BA IEM, the lower-mids are full and organic whereas upper-mids tread the fine line between forwardness and shoutiness. The treble has good amount of sparkle and air. Great design and accessory pack. Really, hard to pick a fault.

Honorable mentions: Final E5000, Samsung Galaxy Buds, Moondrop Blessing 2, Sony IER-M9, Final FI-BA-SS, Dunu Luna

Headphones:

Koss PortaPro X + Yaxi Pads ($40): Just buy one. Don’t be stingy. Thank me later. 

Sennheiser HD650 ($300): The once and forever king. The HD6XX esp is a no-brainer. Scales better than any headphone I’ve tried.

Honorable Mentions: Hifiman Sundara, Focal Clear, Final D8000

DAPs:

Sony NW-A55 ($200): If your primary need is to run efficient IEMs, look no further. Great ergonomics, actually usable UI, good display, fantastic battery life, and then there’s the MrWalkman mod to turn it even more awesome. The only “budget” DAP I recommend. 

Questyle QP1R ($600): Questyle made the QP1R 6 years ago. It’s still one of the best DAPs out there when it comes to overall dynamics.

Honorable mentions: Cowon Plenue V, iBasso DX160, Sony ZX300

Desktop sources:

YULONG Canary II ($230): One of the best budget all-in-ones I’ve come across. Criminally underrated too which is a royal shame.

Questyle CMA-400i ($800): The all-in-one system I ended up with after countless trials and tribulations. Perfectly aligned to my tastes.

Honorable Mentions: iFi Zen Can, Headamp GSX-Mini

And that’s a wrap. Hopefully 2021 brings us better times.

KopiOkaya…Singapore

This year there are 8 of us, thus there are more choices for our readers to choose from.

This year also marked the year of COVID-19…. Meaning, people are staying home longer and more often, thus they can listen to their gears on desktop systems other than portable music players and phones. Fortunately, desktop gears are much better and more affordable now.

Desktop DACs:

Denafrips Ares II (US$700): I don’t own one but my friend do. If you like natural, organic sound with a huge, deep, tall soundstage and don’t mind its higher price tag, look no further… This is it! 

Topping E30 (US$130): A nice warm-neutral DAC. It doesn’t sound as natural, as organic or has a huge soundstage like the Ares II but it offers great audio at an affordable price.

Note: Extremely sensitive to the quality of power supply used. Make sure you power it with something decent like the iFi iPower X.

Desktop Amps:

Yulong Canary II (US$250): This is actually a DAC/Amp with a Class A amplification stage. It posseses a warm-neutral sound signature with lots of low-end drive thanks to the Class A topography. Very good value and performance consider this is both a DAC and an amp! 

Topping L30 (US$140): My current reference amp… If you have noticed, so far I don’t have any balanced amp in my list. When I tune earphones, I never tune them in balanced, simply because if it sounds good in single-ended, it should sound even better in balanced… Well, this is usually the case! The L30 is great (for me) because it has a gain REDUCTION switch for IEMs with high sensitivity… Not many headphone amps have such feature. This is a very neutral, clean and transparent amp that doesn’t colour the sound of the source. That’s all I ask for when tuning earphones.

Portable DAC-Amps:

FiiO BTR5 / Shanling UP4 / EarStudio ES100 MK2 / Qudelix 5K (US$120 or less): I don’t want to decide which is better. To me, each has its pros and cons but my point is… acceptable Bluetooth quality listening is finally here! Almost everybody owns a smartphone these days, so why not use it as a music player? Some of you despise this idea but c’mon… A TOTL DAP still runs slower than my $150 Android phone operating on Android 10.

Earphones:

Etymotic ER4XR (US$350): My reference for tuning hybrid earphones. If you are familiar with Etys you should know their earphones have a near-neutral Diffuse Field Target tuning. The “XR” version has slightly more bass. 

Etymotic ER2XR (US$100): Similar to the ER4XR except this uses a single dynamic instead of balanced armature, thus my reference when I tune dynamic earphones. The ER2XR has more natural timbre and punchier bass than ER4XR. You can forget about Moondrop SSR/SSP if you plan to buy one. This is better.

Note: Etymotic earphones are to be worn deep inside the ear canals touching the bone… #Etyheads call “deep insertion”. This can cause discomfort to first time Etymotic users but you will get used to it eventually… I used to hate it but I am OK with it now.

Headphones:

Singapore is too damn warm for headphones, unless using air-conditioning while listening to music… Sorry, I am too cheap for that. Electricity is expensive here.

Loomis Johnson…Chicago, USA

TRN STM–$20 wunderkind is not, as Durwood aptly states, a purist’s earphone, and it veers towards sounding over-pixilated and artificial. However, it has that certain toe-tapping rightness that keeps me reaching for it over much pricier “audiophile-tuned” pieces. Did I mention it’s $20?

KBEAR Diamond—you can spend a lot more and get a bigger stage or a richer timbre, but this smooth, highly-resolving single DD is awfully refined for the price, with class-leading coherence and premium aesthetics and build.

Cambridge Melomania TWS—they don’t have ANC, EQ customizability or the bells and whistles of their Apple/Samsung peers, and microphone is sub-standard. However, they sound damn good for wireless buds—and are surprisingly good value at <$99. 9 hour battery life a plus.

Honorable Mentions: Shozy Rouge, Shuoer Tape.

Slater…Cincinnati, USA

Slater is short for “See Ya Later”…and you will see him later…

And This Was The Previous Year:

The post Gear Of The Year – Our Personal 2020 Favourites 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.

In his comparison with the Shozy Form 1.4, Jürgen gave details of the specs etc. of this one, so this will not be the usual full Audioreviews exposition (Jürgen’s full review of the Shozy Form 1.4 is here). Because I haven’t heard the Shozy Form 1.4, this mini-review will focus on the sonic aspects of the Shozy Form 1.1 in isolation. One non-sonic factor to note is that the price has come down a little since the original review – they’re now $US 68 rather than $US 75.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

In my ears with the largest provided black silicone tips (a good fit for me although I usually take medium), the bass is overly emphasized and intrudes on the lower mids. Attacks in this area are not fast (which could be ok for you if you like bass that’s more ‘rounded’) and reverb detail is not preserved on decays. The muddy, boomy texture in the bass is not helped by the mids having a very smooth presentation, with subdued dynamics. The plus side of this is that they’re relaxing, but even for me (usually a liker of smooth mids) this is ‘too much of a good thing’.

Upper mids are not prominent, which will find favour with some (the tuning is not ‘Harman’ or ‘Etymotic’), but this is a handicap with these ‘phones because of their unrevealing lower mids: the entire midrange comes across as suppressed. There’s a bump up into the lower treble, but this is a bit scratchy, with hashy cymbals and sibilance. The masked (lower) and relaxed/suppressed (mid to upper) midrange character make imaging & staging imprecise, but on the plus side make for undemanding, non-fatiguing listening during long sessions.

Comparing with a similarly upper-mid-relaxed earphone, the UE900 (ok, maybe inappropriate because the UE900 is a 4BA and was rather more expensive – but it has a similar downward-sloping tonality), the lower mids on the UE are not overpowered by the upper bass and are much better resolved, cleaning up imaging and staging. Treble is similar in quantity but cleaner, not so sibilant or scratchy. Male vocals have much more nuance and female vocals more clarity.

Measurement Mysteries

Crinacle’s measurements of the two Forms show similar bass responses, and he reported hearing them as similar. Jürgen however heard the Shozy Form 1.4 as more bassy than the Shozy Form 1.1, but his measurements showed the opposite. I suspect this is because he used the KZ Starline tips to measure both, but the ‘large’ stock black silicone (not foam, as his review says) for listening. The large black tips are actually pretty small – on the small end of medium for me, and Jürgen usually fits a larger tip. Listening with these tips, I suspect the larger bodies of the 1.4s provided a component of seal in Jürgen’s ears to reinforce the bass he heard. 

My measurements with both stock tips and Starlines are similar to Jürgen’s (same coupler, so with the same tips no surprise). The ‘hiccup’ at about 100 Hz with the stock tips is because the tips are a fairly loose fit in the coupler tube and so wobble at the resonant frequency of the earpiece/tip mass, ‘soaking up’ some of the sonic energy (Tyll Hertsens of the late lamented InnerFidelity referred to the same effect with headphones as ‘pad bounce’).  The difference between the two tip types around 12 kHz probably just reflects different interaction with the resonant frequency of the coupler. I didn’t detect an obvious difference in this area, but I admit this is at the upper limit of my old ears.

The low-relief impedance profile shows the Shozy Form 1.1 are not responsive to/dependent on amplifier output impedance. However, the relaxed character of these earphones would probably be best complemented (or compensated for) by being driven with something dynamic and fast.

All of this illustrates that different tips (and earphone bodies) will fit different ears and sometimes different measurement couplers in different ways. The bass could be controlled with tip rolling but with the shallow fit of these things meaning some degree of seal is also provided by the earpiece bodies, so getting just the right degree of leakage might be tricky and will be very individual depending on ear size & shape. It is therefore difficult to make specific tip recommendations. 

Modding?

The Shozy Form 1.1 have only a single vent in each shell – at the rear, behind the drivers. Restricting airflow through a rear vent will typically reduce the mid-bass, opposite to the effect of restricting a front vent (which also tends to work more on the lower bass/sub-bass). To try to ameliorate the (for me) overdone bass, I covered the rear ports with 3M Micropore medical tape. While this did improve the tonal balance (my measurements suggest about 6 dB bass reduction; see graph below) and its bleed into the lower mids, it did no favours for the already not-great technicalities: transients remained sluggish and dynamics seemed to be suppressed even further. This indicates that the (overly, to me) slow and relaxed low end I heard without tape isn’t just a result of the Shozy Form 1.1’s downward-sloping tonal balance.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In summary, this could be a polarizing earphone. I suspect much of the differently perceived bass and its effects up into the midrange between myself and Jürgen is down to how the tips and bodies fit our different ears. While this could be managed to some degree with tips, it’d be tricky as getting the midrange right would require just the right amount of bass leakage – and therefore wouldn’t suit bassheads and would compromise isolation. Even if the bottom-heavy tonality were cured, the technicalities, particularly in the lower half of the frequency spectrum, remain sub-par and the treble is a bit scratchy too. 

On the plus side though, these Shozy Form 1.1 are a non-fatiguing listen – so if you like a smooth signature, are driving them with something dynamic, and are willing to experiment with tips (depending on your ears), these might be ok for you. Personally for the money I’d find something else. For a smooth listen with better tonal balance, the Moondrop Starfield is currently around $30 more; and for a more technicality-driven presentation and a slightly more prominent upper midrange, the Blon BL-05s is around $30 less. I’ve heard neither myself, but both have been favourably reviewed here (Starfield,BL-05s 1, 2, 3).

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The Shozy Form 1.1 were initially sent to Jürgen Kraus by the Shozy Team out of Hon Kong, who passed them on to Biodegraded for his sonic impressions.

Get the Shozy Form 1.1 from HifiGo

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

RELATED…

The post Shozy Form 1.1 Review – Brief Sonic Impressions appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Not the most organic tonality; recessed lower mids and boosted upper treble; needs aftermarket eartips.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRN V90S is a technically impressive earphone (for its category) loosely based on the popular TRN V90, characterized by a V-shaped sound with good dynamics and resolution and slightly unnatural timbre. Bass is very well dosed, midrange is rather recessed, and the upper treble is strongly elevated.

The original 4 BA + 1 DD TRN V90 earphone was released in the summer of 2019. It was a relatively organic sounding but very V-shaped earphone with an overly recessed lower midrange. Vocals sounded thin and distant and only JVC Spiral Dots eartips could fix the midrange somewhat. I nevertheless enjoyed some movies with the TRN V90 on a long flight from Calgary to Dublin and back. The interest in this earphone was immense, and it was the most watched review of this blog until KopiOkaya’s eartips compendium took over.

Following in quick succession was the TRN BA5, a technically better earphone at a few dollars more. But, as the name implies, if featured 5 BA drivers and sounded rather artificial to my ears. Critics liked it, I found it was a redundant model.

The TRN V90S features 5 BA + 1DD, and it does not look, feel, or sound like the original TRN V90. Upon first listening, I found it rather “meh” as it did not sound as natural as the TRN V90 or the Blon BL-05s, which is one of my few favourites of 2020. Initially, I thought the TRN V90S was another redundant multi-driver model in the $50 category. It reminds me sonically more of the TRN BA5 than of the TRN V90. But where the original TRN V90 and the TRN V90s come close is the recessed midrange, which is TOO much (or rather too little) for my taste. Nevertheless, this can be fixed with the JVC Spiral Dots eartips.

Co-blogger Kopiokaya already gave his first impressions, and Baskingshark his full review, so I tag on to these two. No need to repeat the housekeeping such as build, haptic, accessories, comfort, and fit. The earpieces sat nicely in my ears and there were no problems. The cable is as cheap as ever, and none of the eartips were large enough for my ear canals.

You find multiple reviews of all of the iems mentioned in this article here.

SPECIFICATIONS

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

Equipment used for listening: MacBook Air, Earstudio HUD100, JVC Spiral Dots, stock cable.

The TRN V90 have a V-shaped tuning resulting in a slightly warm sound that is technically focused and lacks a bit of organics. As said, I was initially not impressed by the BA timbre above the bass. At $50, the money should be in a well-tuned single driver imo. BUT…for some reason, my ears got into the TRN V90S and I started actually using and enjoying them. The TRN V90S are a technically very capable earphones and I somewhat got used to the timbre.

The other technicalities are impressive for a budget earphone: open, wide stage at average depth, nothing crammed in there. Height is good – generally one of the biggest progresses in recent budget Chi-Fi history. Musicians are sufficiently spaced and separated from each other.

The low end is slightly boosted above neutral but speedy and very well dosed. Layering and texture are good and so is the kick – but it is never overdone. A very pleasant, natural kick with just the right punch that is well liked by my sensitive eardrums – I absolutely dig it. Great that the low end is not overcooked. It provides warmth and body, opens up the stage, and does not reduce the good midrange clarity and transparency.

The lower midrange, as in so many cases, is recessed but not as much as the original V90. Voices are on the lean side but not glassy or aggressive. Perfectly acceptable when using the JVC Spiral Dots. Without these eartips, vocals are too thin for me. That 2 kHz peak adds energy to the vocals which can sometimes be a bit nasal, but there is never any outright sharpness or shoutiness, because that peak is relatively narrow and does not extend into the 4-5 kHz region, as so often with other Chi-Fi models. But we are not far away…

Treble is well extended, too well for some. Lower treble is quite natural but upper treble is very prominent, which adds air, sparkle, and fake resolution. However, younger people with naturally better hearing at above 15KHz may perceive some sharpness. These resonant frequencies will be fatiguing for them in the long term, and harmonic overtones will have an unnatural decay.

Here you have the glass half full, half empty situation again. Although the TRN V90S is technically probably very close to the $129 class of 2018, nobody who has tons of $50-100 earphones needs them. But if you get them on some crazy sale and would like to upgrade from the $20-30 segment, then the TRN V90S could be a candidate. Be aware that you must be upper-treble-proof, get some JVC Spiral Dots, and don’t care about the timbre that much. You get in turn a well-built and well resolving earphone with a killer bass quality.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The TRN V90s were sent to me unsolicited by Idon’tknowexactly. Thank you very much.

Get the TRN V90s from TRN Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

RELATED…

The post TRN V90s Review (2) – Little Red Corvette appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Good fit and comfortable. Light.
Excellent technicalities for a budget single DD such as good clarity, details and imaging.
Authentic timbre for acoustic instruments.

Cons:

Shouty at 3 kHz region, especially at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve).
Sibilance fest.
Fatiguing with longer listening sessions.
Thin note weight. Brittle female vocals.
Not all rounder due to the lack of bass. Basslite with a lack of subbass rumble.
Below average isolation.
Not that easy to drive.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Moondrop SSR is a budget single DD set that is tuned somewhat diffuse-field neutral with an upper mids boost. It has excellent technicalities and timbre (for acoustic instruments), but unfortunately the upper mids do get shouty especially at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve). Sibilance is also present in spades. It sounds good at low volumes, but those who like to blast their music may need to look elsewhere. In addition, it may not be an all rounder due to the lack of bass, and the tuning is quite niche to say the least. Having said that, the Moondrop SSR has one of the best technical performances for a sub $40 USD single DD set.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Unit: Beryllium Coated Dome + PU Suspension Ring
• Sensitivity: 115 dB
• Frequency response: 20Hz – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 16 ohms
• Cable: 2 pin detachable 0.78 mm
• Tested at $39.99 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1. Silicone eartips (S/M/L).
2. Silver-Plated 4N-Litz Oxygen-Free Copper (OFC) cable – For non cable believers, nothing to see here, please move on. If you are a cable believer, I prefer pure copper cables on the Moondrop SSR as they seem to me to tone down the treble/upper mids a tinge compared to the stock SPC cable.
3. Carrying pouch
4. Anime waifu box – Never ever underestimate the power of the anime designed box marketing. For some, it may actually be the most important item in this purchase, more important than the IEM itself!

For the purposes of this review, I stuck with the provided stock cable and tips, but I personally preferred Final E tips with the Moondrop SSR, as they helped to tame the sibilance and upper mids spike a tinge. I also preferred copper cables with the Moondrop SSR to add a bit of bass warmth, but YMMV as we have different ear anatomies and beliefs in cables.

BUILD/COMFORT

The Moondrop SSR is actually much smaller than it looks, and it is heart shaped and made of sturdy metal. It is very comfortable and light, I can wear it for hours with no issues. I didn’t detect any driver flex.

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

ISOLATION

Isolation on the Moondrop SSR is below average. Personally, I wouldn’t bring it for commuting due to the poor isolation letting it outside noise, for which one may try to boost the volume to overcome the external noise, and this is not good for hearing health in the long term.

Secondly, bass frequencies are the first to be lost in a noisy environment, and the Moondrop SSR is already bass lite to begin with. So from my subway trip with the Moondrop SSR, I lost a lot of bass frequencies in my music and as the ears take the frequency spectrum as a whole, the upper mids 3 kHz peak could get very hot, especially if one tries to pump up the volume to compensate for the bass loss.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

I tried running the Moondrop SSR 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 Moondrop SSR is actually not the easiest to drive, and scales better with amping.

Also, as the Moondrop SSR is on the brighter side, I find that pairing it with warmer sources manages to give the bass a bit more heft and evens out the 3 kHz area peak. Analytical sources may overemphasize the glare of the 3 kHz region and sibilance, so for my preferences, I wouldn’t recommend it.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The Moondrop SSR is tuned somewhat diffuse-field neutral with an upper mids boost. This said upper mids area is pretty controversial and has very polarizing opinions. The Moondrop SSR actually sounds very good at low volumes, but those who like to blast their music may need to look elsewhere. The upper mids 3 kHz area gets shouty especially when the volume is increased (Fletcher Munson curve), with sibilance in spades. Most users/reviewers do not mention the volume they play their music at, but the Fletcher Munson curve really affects this set a lot, so this may explain the polarizing reviews we see about it.

Having said that, other than volume, upper mids/treble sensitivity is a very personal thing, since we all have different hearing health (due to age/occupation exposure/leisure exposure), different ear anatomy that may affect the pinna gain, and we also use different sources, different tips and have different levels of treble sensitivity/trebleheadedness. I know some friends who really like the Moondrop SSR (but they are low volume listeners or those that like a brighter signature), so YMMV.

The Moondrop SSR thankfully has very good technicalities for the price, considering it is a sub $40 USD single DD set. Lately there have been a lot of beryllium (coated/plated) single DD releases, of which the Moondrop SSR is one of them, I’m still on the fence whether this is a marketing gimmick or not. But for sure, I can say the imaging in the Moondrop SSR is very good, with good clarity, instrument separation and details too. Transient speed in the Moondrop SSR is fast, possibly due to the said beryllium drivers. I dare say the Moondrop SSR probably beats most other single DDs in the sub $40 USD region in technical performance.

Soundstage width and height on the Moondrop SSR is above average, depth is about slightly more than average. Music didn’t sound too congested on the Moondrop SSR during complex movements.

Note weight on the Moondrop SSR is rather thin and the tonality is cold for me, with the tuning veering towards the analytical side. Timbre is accurate for acoustic instruments, but vocals sounded a bit brittle, especially for female vocals.

Bass:

The Moondrop SSR has a rather neutral midbass, with subbass roll off. The bass is quite well textured with minimal midbass bleed and good speed. The subbass lacks rumble, but then again, I’m a basshead, and though the Moondrop SSR’s bass is not my cup of tea in the area of quantity, the bass is of good quality.

This lack of bass quantity may render the Moondrop SSR not that versatile for certain genres where bass forward music is present, eg EDM. In addition, this lack of subbass actually compounds the boosted upper mids (which we will talk about in the next section), as the ears take the entire frequency spectrum as a whole, and this gives a somewhat shouty and harsh upper mids skewed tuning.

Mids:

The lower mids are pretty neutral on the Moondrop SSR, but then it spikes up around +10 dB in the upper mids, which as discussed above, is a big bone of contention. This is especially so when the volume is boosted (Fletcher Munson curve), as the ears perceive the sound to be more V shaped at higher volumes, whereas it is perceived to be more U shaped at softer volumes.

Female vocals are hence more forward than male vocals, and there are excellent microdetails and clarity especially along the upper mids. Trumpets and horns and higher vocals can get quite harsh at the 3 kHz regions, especially in poorly recorded material. Due to the huge dynamic differences from lower to upper mids, sometimes female vocals and violins “jump” out and adds a glare and an unnatural tonality. Personally, I’m rather sensitive to the 2 – 4 kHz areas, and the 3 kHz area is a dealbreaker for me for the Moondrop SSR, but as always, YMMV.

Treble:

Lower treble is about the same level as the aforementioned upper mids, but the higher treble has some roll off. Higher treble is actually quite safe for treble sensitive folks, and cymbals are emphasized but not splashy. Compared to the overcooked upper mids, thankfully the treble manages to gear down nicely. Microdetails and clarity are good in the treble. Unfortunately, the dreaded S word, sibilance is present, and in spades, especially when the volume is jacked up.

COMPARISONS

As per comparing apples to apples, I left out multi BA/hybrids/exotic drivers from the comparisons, as the different transducers have their inherent strengths and weaknesses. Also, since the Moondrop SSR is an upper mids boosted set, I decided to pick some budget single DD types that have a boosted upper mids for comparison:

HZSound Heart Mirror

The HZSound Heart Mirror is a neutralish bright single DD set. Both sets have good technical performance for a single DD set, maybe the Moondrop SSR edges it slightly in clarity, details and imaging. The Moondrop SSR has a better soundstage than the HZSound Heart Mirror. Timbre for acoustic instruments is very good in both sets. The Moondrop SSR has quite bad sibilance and a thinner note weight compared to the HZSound Heart Mirror. Isolation is better on the HZSound Heart Mirror.

After doing A/B testing using the same source, tips (and even cable), I’ll take the HZSound Heart Mirror any day over the Moondrop SSR, as the 3 kHz peak and the sibilance on the SSR is a deal breaker for me, whereas the HZSound Heart Mirror balances a very fine line of pushing forward vocals without going into shouty territory. The HZSound Heart Mirror is smoother and very rarely gets harsh or sibilant. The HZSound Heart Mirror also has a slightly deeper subbass extension, even though both are not basshead sets for sure.

To summarize, the Moondrop SSR actually has better technical performance than the HZSound Heart Mirror, but a worse tonality along the upper mids, so different strokes for different folks, it depends whether technicalities or tonality is a higher priority.

BLON BL-05S

The BLON BL-05S is a mild V shaped set, with a slightly boosted upper mids region and slightly boosted midbass. The BLON BL-05S has a warmer tonality and thicker note weight, with better isolation. The BLON BL-05S is the more bassy set and is less sibilant. 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. Moondrop SSR also has a slightly better acoustic instrumental timbre, and has better treble extension. They are rather different in tuning and would suit different sonic signatures/music preferences.

Tin T2 Plus

The Tin T2 Plus is U shaped, with more bass and less upper mids than the Moondrop SSR. Tin T2 Plus is more analoguish and warmer, though the Moondrop SSR has better technicalities and is more analytical. I find the Tin T2 Plus more balanced and very inoffensive in tuning, and it is pretty non fatiguing in contrast to the Moondrop SSR (especially at higher volumes). Note weight is thicker on the Tin T2 plus too, though I occasionally find it a bit lacking in dynamics. Due to the boosted bass, the Tin T2 Plus is more versatile in tuning, being more all rounded for more music genres than the Moondrop SSR.

The Tin T2 Plus is plague by MMCX QC issues though, there’s been quite a few reports in the forums (my set has a wonky MMCX too). I would strongly advise you to only buy the Tin T2 Plus from places with a robust returns policy (eg Amazon), in case a lemon comes in the mail.

CONCLUSIONS

The Moondrop SSR is a budget single DD set that is tuned somewhat diffuse-field neutral with an upper mids boost. It has excellent technicalities and timbre, but unfortunately the upper mids get shouty especially at louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve), with sibilance. It sounds good at low volumes, but those who like to blast their music may need to look elsewhere. Most users/reviewers do not mention the volume they play their music at, but the Fletcher Munson curve really affects this set a lot, so this may explain the polarizing reviews we see about it. Having said that, other than volume, upper mids/treble sensitivity is a very personal thing, since we all have different hearing health (due to age/occupation exposure/leisure exposure), different ear anatomy that may affect the pinna gain, and we also use different sources, different tips and have different levels of treble sensitivity/trebleheadedness. So YMMV.

In addition to only using the Moondrop SSR at low to moderate volumes, I will also not take this set outdoors due to the suboptimal isolation. The Moondrop SSR is not an all rounder due to the lack of bass, and bass forward music does sound pretty flat on it.

As such, I would say the Moondrop SSR’s tuning is quite niche, and is probably not a universally safe recommendation for everyone, especially those that listen to bass forward music, or are treble/upper mids sensitive, or those who like to blast their music. I know some friends who like it though (they are low volume and indoor users and/or trebleheads), so different strokes for different folks. Even though personally this tuning is not my cup of tea, I still applaud what sets the Moondrop SSR apart, and that is the excellent technicalities at the sub $40 USD asking price for a single DD set. It really beats most of the other sub $40 USD single DD sets in this department. Timbre for acoustic instruments is also quite authentic on the Moondrop SSR.

I very much look forward to the upcoming Moondrop SSP (Pulse), which is supposed to be a bassier variant of the Moondrop SSR. Hopefully the SSP’s bassier frequencies counteract the upper mids peak (since our ears take the entire frequency spectrum as a whole), or at least Moondrop softens the 3 kHz area peak a bit, but still preserves the excellent technical performance of the Moondrop SSR. They might have a true gamechanger then, if the Moondrop SSP’s price is similar, especially since a bassier sound may also be more compatible with more music genres.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

The Moondrop SSR was borrowed from coblogger KopiOKaya for the purposes of this review, and was returned after the review was done.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Moondrop SSR Review (2) – Shouting At The Moon appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros — Well built, comfortable shell
– Accessories are good enough to not look for replacements
– Gets loud quite easily (I’ve run out of good things to say at this point)

Cons — Generally awful sound
– Flabby bass with zero definition, texture, and extension
– Completely wrong timbre
– Nasal/honky midrange
– Lower-treble peak can get fatiguing depending on genre
– Low-resolution sound with atrociously poor treble

INTRODUCTION

I will cut to the chase with this one.

KZ ASF is an IEM I cannot recommend under any circumstances. KZ usually gets things somewhat right but this is a turd that you can’t polish, and anyone who tells me otherwise will only get a stern stare filled with disappointment and disbelief.

KZ ASF is one of the new/refreshed models from KZ and apparently it replaces the AS10… or something like that among the dizzying array of IEMs they’ve released over the past three years. It almost feels like eternity, but I digress. The ASF is supposed to have a soothing sound without the trademark peaky KZ treble. In a sense, it has succeeded in that, but the solution was more like lopping the head off than cure the headache.

Extremities, man.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. WooEasy Store was kind enough to send the KZ ASF as a review unit. Disclaimer.

Sources used: Sony A55

Price (while reviewed): $60

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

IN THE BOX…

The tips are decent (it’s a new variant, not the Starlines), the cable is decent, and as always KZ doesn’t find you worthy enough to throw in a carrying case or, *shudders*, pouch! But hey, we’re not getting this for silly ornaments, so we can look past that I guess.
3/5

APPEARANCE, HAPTIC, AND BUILD QUALITY

Yet-Another-Resin-Shell (YARS) makes an appearance again. The backplate of the KZ ASF is of aluminum (it seems) with some nice adornments on top. The nozzle is metal but be aware that it’s thinner (past the lip) than previous KZ offerings so some third-party tips may not fit snugly (Spinfit CP-100 for one).

The 2-pin ports are raised which sucks. Other than that, the KZ ASF shell quality and finish is adequate for the price-range. One thing that sticks out is the lack of any channel marking, even though KZ found the space for printing random text on the housing instead of something that’s more practical but hey… logic is at premium sometimes.
4/5

ERGONOMICS, COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

Despite the bulbous shape and larger-than-average housing the KZ ASF is fairly comfortable to wear. There is no driver flex as it’s an all-BA design and isolation is above-average. However, I can imagine someone with small ear-canals to have some potential fit issues but this likely won’t be widespread.
4/5

TECH INSIDE

The KZ ASF is a 5-balanced armature design with the newly released “S” models of the previous Bellsing/Knowles-clone BA drivers they were using. These drivers are apparently a new design and has improved things by a margin as per the claims. The bass driver (22955s) is apparently a vented design, though I didn’t see any bass-vent in the shell itself so I am doubtful about the proper implementation of the driver here. There is one mid-range driver (29689s), two upper-mid/lower-treble driver (31736s), and lastly one upper-treble driver (30095s). The drivers are arranged within a 3D-printed driver housing though there is no physical cross-over via tubing. KZ claims they put a lot of R&D effort behind this but the end results are hardly inspiring as we shall see.

The general sound signature of the KZ ASF is dark, with extremely rolled-off treble. The mids are overly scooped and upper-mids are too de-emphasized so there’s a severe lack of pinna gain. A dark v-shaped tuning is very hard to pull-off and KZ ASF fails spectacularly to pull off the trick.

The following impressions were made with the stock tips and cable.

Lows: Muddy, bloated, messy, flabby – pick your word. The low-end lacks sub-bass rumble and the extension is only a hum that has no definition or texture to it. The mid-bass boost also masks the subtle bass note shifts and there’s an utter lack of bass kick/slam. The bass is beyond disappointing, really, and I suspect that failure to vent a vented BA has resulted in this mess.

It’s just horrible. One listen and you’d know things are gonna go downhill.
1.5/5

Mids: The KZ ASF has a very strange midrange tuning. The lower-mids are scooped below 1KHz, but then there is a very sharp rise which peaks at 2KHz. This peak, however, isn’t enough here as there is a distinct lack of clarity. Female vocals are muffled, male vocals are nasal and honky. Nothing sounds right, midrange instruments are congested, their outlines blurred.

Resolved details in the mid frequencies are worse than some $10 IEMs nowadays. It’s incredible really how wrong things have gone here. If you thought the bass was poor, this whack mid-range tuning makes that look competent in comparison.
1/5

Treble: There is no treble extension at all. None. Nada. Zilch. Zip.

Cymbal strikes and hi-hats are barely registered. They are not just after-thoughts, they’re almost like aberrations that wasn’t even meant to be there but somehow spilled through the cracks. Even the most hardcore of metal tracks sound mushy, gushy, soggy as the sock after you accidentally step into a puddle.

There is a strange lower-treble peak around 5KHz that adds some presence but on some tracks this strange peak can induce fatigue and of course it’s just a straight downslope from there on. The treble doesn’t do much wrong because it doesn’t even exist, a bit like the second eye of cyclops.
0.5/5

Soundstage: Soundstage feels wide due to the de-emphasized upper-mids but there’s zero stage depth and height.
2/5

Imaging: Things are mostly placed left and right but there’s no sense of finer imaging. At this point, I have lost my hope anyway.
2/5

Bang-for-Buck: The KZ ASF will find itself short of the competition at $15.

It costs $60. Unless you want to use it as a modern art-piece (it’s not), a paper-weight (heavier things available for no cost), or something you gift to your enemies to piss them off – I can’t see the value in here.
0/5

Source and Amping: It gets very loud out of even regular phones and cheap dongles. Is that a good thing? Well, let’s assume for once it is.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs BLON BL-03 ($25): The BLON BL-03 is much better than the KZ ASF in every single aspect apart from accessories and comfort.

vs BLON BL-05S ($35): The BLON BL-05S is much better than the KZ ASF in every single aspect apart from accessories and comfort.

vs Final E3000 ($50): The Final E3000 is much better than the KZ ASF in every single aspect.

vs Final E1000 ($30): The Final E1000 is much better than the KZ ASF in every single aspect.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The KZ ASF brings back nostalgia. It’s almost as if I’m listening to a no-name multi-BA IEM from 2014 bought off of Taobao, but only it costs $60 this time around instead of $6 and I’m left regretting my life choices.

Dear KZ, you have the resources, you have the capital, please oh please make use of them on something that is actually great. Not another derivative, or as is the case with the KZ ASF – not another disasterpiece.

Your fans deserve better, and you sure as heck should do a lot better.

MY VERDICT

Overall Rating: 1/5

Our rating scheme explained

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

WooEasy Store was kind enough to send the KZ ASF as a review unit.

Can be purchased from WooEasy Store.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

PHOTOGRAPHY

The post KZ ASF 5-BA Earphone Full Review – Disaster appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Overall tonality of the Heart-Mirror is neutral-cool… Nothing offensive or harsh on the top-end. If you enjoy a clean and clear presentation, you are in for a treat.

Soundstage is average. Just slightly narrower than BLON BL-03. Imaging and instrument separation are distinct with good amounts of space around and in-between. Vocal is upfront but “not in-your-face”.

Bass is not the fastest I have heard in a dynamic earphone but it isn’t the slowest either (KBEAR Diamond is faster). I did notice bass tightens and speeds up a bit when amp’ed. However, amping doesn’t help with the sub-bass, and I feel it is lacking some low-end rumble.

A LOT OF FOLKS want to know if they really need an amp with Heart-Mirror… My answer is “YES!”… If you want the best sound from this earphone. Is it hard to drive? No! It sounds pretty decent with Apple dongle BUT the overall sound is even leaner than playing with an amp. ONE THING FOR SURE… You HAVE TO match it with a warm source (a tube amp or tube buffer for example) to sound really soothing to the ears. If not, certain tracks with saxophone or trumpet can sound quite uncomfortable.

After spending close to 10 hours with the HZSound Heart-Mirror, I could, more or less, nail down its sound characteristics. If you already own the BLON BL-05s, Heart-Mirror isn’t an upgrade (but an upgrade in fit and accessories). It is definitely an upgrade in tonality and technicality over the BLON BL-03. HOWEVER, you lose the musicality, listenability and fun-factor that the BL-03 is known for. To me, HZSound Heart-Mirror lacks richness, note weight and dynamics. These are the elements that I consider essential for an enjoyable listening.

If you already own the HZSound Heart-Mirror and would like to add some mass to its bulimic sound, here are some “weight gaining” diet you could try:

– Replace stock silver-plated cable to OFC pure copper
– Replace stock eartips to Acoustune AET08 or Final Audio Type E (black)
– Use a tube amp or add a tube buffer
– Use a warm sound source

I find myself enjoying HZSound Heart-Mirror when matched with iFi Audio Hip-Dac (XBass enabled).

Fellow Singaporean, colleague and co-blogger, Baskingshark wrote a very thorough review on the HZSound Heart-Mirror. He compared it against the Moondrop SSR, Tin Hifi T2 Plus, BLON BL-05 and BL-05s. Those who are interested in the Heart-Mirror may want to checkout his full evaluation:

Equipment used:

• Topping E30 + L30 stack
• Redmi Note 9 Pro + Apple USB Type-C dongle
• Redmi Note 9 Pro + iFi Audio iDSD Nano BL / iFi Audio Hip-DAC
• Stock cable + Stock “Sony lookalike” siliconeeartips Kios

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme explained

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get the HZSound Heart-Mirror at $49 USD at KeepHifi

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post HZSound Heart-Mirror Review (2) – Reflection Of My Heartfelt Truth appeared first on Music For The Masses.