Moondrop CHU Review (2) – Unneeded

I’ll keep this article about a very inexpensive (€ 21.99) Moondrop CHU sample received from co-blogger Kazi relatively succint, at least for my standards.

That’s mainly because I found myself a lot in line with what Kazi already reported on his own article. I’ll focus on underlying some details, and noting aspects where I have a different opinion.

Another reason for being short is that although I found Chu obviously “good for the price” I also find that they don’t offer anything significatively better compared to existing options. No change on our relevant Wall of Excellence section for now.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Apogee Groove / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Cowon Plenue 2 – Spinfit CP100+ eartips – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC and DSD64/128 tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

Moondrop CHU deliver a definite bright neutral (Moondrop “VDSF target”) tonality, with some above average (good) accent on trebles. Bassheads and treble sensitives : stay away.

Sub-Bass

Not rolled off but a bit too slow to be organic. I found them less bad than other reviewers did though.

Mid Bass

Less slow than sub-bass but quite untextured and often dull. The driver is clearly fatiguing on crowded passages, often yielding some sort of undistinguished bass notes “blob”. Not bleeding in the mids though.

Mids

Moondrop CHU’s mids are flat and not particularly articulated. Highmids tend to overdo in many occasions. Organic note body is most often missing, which predominantly gets revealed on guitars and male vocals.

Highs

Sparkling and quite energetic, and also somewhat airy. That’s the area where stock Spring eartips most evidently fail. In addition to what Kazi noted regaring the 3-8Khz region, experimenting with an EQ and the Spring tips one can find an annoying situation at approx 12KHz that, once notched down, improves treble definition, and also instrument separation and layering. Most of this is “fixed” adopting Spinfit CP100+ tips.

Technicalities

Soundstage

Moondrop CHU offers a limited soundstage width, and virtually zero depth

Imaging

Lacking, mainly due to bad layering.

Details

Lacking and quite messy on the bass, Moondrop CHU offers a good detail retrieval on highmids and trebles.

Instrument separation

Very underwhelming with stock tips, separation and layering get better by swapping onto Spinft CP100+. Even then, layering and microdynamics (weakness thereof) still stay the single aspect where low price gets revealed on Moondrop CHU.

Driveability

CHU are oversensitive (120db/V, corresponding to 135dB/mW at their 28 ohm impedance), so they hiss like cobras on pretty much all high power sources you can plug them onto (there is where always carrying an IEMatch over makes the difference). On the other hand, this means they can be powered by “whatever” (even an old phone).

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

Final E1000 ($29.90)

I do agree on most Kazi’s notes here, too.

On their down side, Final E1000 feature a rolled-off sub-bass that calls for some simple eq correction. On pretty much every single other aspect E1000 is superior to CHU: better bass definition and texturing, better more organic mids, better refined unshouty highmids, and most of all much superior layering and microdynamics.

Soundstage is comparable, with E1000 a bit better in terms of depth but that’s because I’m picky. Trebles are a give/take: E1000 are less aggressive overall yet nicely detailed and sparkly nonetheless, although someone might elect to tame them down on 5K; Moondrop CHU (with Spinfit) are furtherly airy and “clear” off the box (wether this is a pro is personal taste) and call for attention at 12K.

E1000’s price tags is unsignificantly higher, but gets equally unsignificantly lower when we account for Spinfit CP100+ tips required on Moondrop CHU, while E1000 perfectly pair with their bundled Type-E’s.

Long story short, I find no single reason why an E1000 owner should get a pair of CHU, nor solid reasons why someone would have to get CHU before E1000. Needless to add: YMMV.

KZ ZEX / CRN (€ 30,00)

As quite extensively reported on my article KZ CRN is a fundamentally flaw-tuned model requiring substantial EQ-ing to turn into something pleasantly audible. So for whoever is not keen on adding EQ to its gear, KZ CRN is simply rubbish.

Comparing an EQ’d CRN with CHU, the latter still easily wins in terms of timbre coherence of course. On low notes, KZ CRN is even worse than CHU. General timbre and tonality are quite similar, so is the fundamental lack of note weight mainly in the mids. Treble detail retrieval is superior on CRN. Soundstage and imaging are a bit better on CHU.

Considerations & conclusions

At this point in my piece there are two questions ready to be answered.

One: Are Moondrop CHU “good” ? Heck, yes: for 20$ they are more than good, really. And they stay so even at approx 35$ which is the total you need to pay for CHU + a pair of more appropriate eartips.

Two: Are they “entry level killers” as their bombastic payoff states? No, they are not and by far so. Final E1000 are still better, and not by a small margin at least for my tastes.

My few readers know I am the opposite of a compulsive sidegrader. To me a new product not proving significantly better compared to existing directly-comparable staples takes a negative mark as a product, and another negative mark to the company marketing a product which has no competitive reason to exist. And this definitely applies to Moondrop CHU.

So if you are a die-hard gear roller, yeah, do get a pair of Moondrop CHU and of SpinFit CP100+ – you’ll like the pair, I mean it ! All others, just stick to their E1000 and be happy 😉

Our generic standard disclaimer.