This new OH1S model is presented as an evolution of its previous siblings in terms of technology, and carrying a quite different intended tuning compared to OH10. Formally positioned at $199,00 list price, same as OH10, it benefits of an introductory price of $139,00 (more on this later) which makes it very appealing for a quick grab. And you can bet it’s currently being hyped around. Which is more then enough to move my critical curiosity and spend quite some time with it to see if I agree with the hype (which, you know, is quite seldom the case ) .

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove + Burson FUN + IEMatch / Apogee Groove + iBasso T3 / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman – JVC SpiralDot and Ikko i-Planet foam tips – Linsoul LSC08 cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Some important notes and caveats

Burn in

For my personal experience, burn-in is way more rarely required than what I read around on a daily basis. That said, this is one of those times when it is compulsory. When I first put OH1S into my ears I appreciated them nowhere near how I appreciated them after a) a couple of days of free burn-in and b) optimising the fit aspect (see below).

So if you do get them, let them play a bit on their own.

Fit

Fit is probably “the” critical point with OH1S.

Not in the sense of difficulty. Wearing them is not problematic nor uncomfortable at all per se – the other way around, actually! – but it just takes a brief audition to realise sound, with particular regards to highmids and presence trebles, do change depending on how you position the housings into your external ear.

Given a bit of acquired experience with other equivalently capricious IEMs it took me relatively short to realise I better adopted a pair of shortstemmed, wide nozzle tips (e.g. JVC Spiraldots) and manage to push the drivers as much as possible into my canal: with that done, trebles get “combed”, less hot, the presentation gets less aggressive, definitely more elegant indeed. Thanks to OH1S design the housings are small enough that gently pushing them towards the inside of the concha does not result in an uncomfortable fit. At least for my ears!…

A solid alternative to obtain a very pleasant sound result, however, is using Ikko’s i-Planet foam tips, those bundled inside the box.

I am not a foam lover at all, and that’s possibly the reason why I was so surprised on how well these foams apply to these drivers: trebles are “combed” like it happens with short-stem silicons and deep push, bass gets a bit less edgy, but both extremes do not lose detail in the process. Furthermore, i-Planet foams significantly improve in passive isolation !

Cable

OH1S comes bundle with a very nice-quality “high-purity single crystal copper silver plated magnetic core” cable. Yeah almost a tongue twister I know, still, a good cable product, really. Build quality and sound transmission are very good, and way above what in the average you can find bundled with IEMs on this price range.

…Too bad that it does not pair ideally with OH1S.

The stock cable is what I would call a “bright” cable, i.e. a cable facilitating high mids and treble crystalline notes – which is the opposite I would personally choose as a good pair for the OH1S.

As a matter of fact, pairing OH1S with a (equivalently high quality) full-copper cable helps adding a bit of note weight and furtherly helps “combing” treble thinner peaks a little bit. I’m using a Linsoul LSC08 (2*44core 6N OCC single-crystal copper), which is by the way the same I’ve adopted on the OH10 – of course a different sample, with 2p connectors in that case. A less expensive but still very good alternative is the NiceHCK 16 core High Purity Copper cable.

One key comparison : Final A3000

Final A3000 ($130) is the single IEM that we deemed deserving to be stuck onto our Wall of Excellence in the $80-$200 bracket, and – to my experience – the champ of bright-neutral tonality drivers up until switching over to Oxygen, for twice its price tag. So I find it quite natural to bench the OH1S vs the A3000 and see hear how they fare.

Sub-bass is much more present on A3000, not tamed let alone rolled off. Mid-bass is also definitely more elevated on A3000, while keeping equivalent speed and definition compared to OH1S.

Mid tones and especially highmids are significantly more recessed on A3000, which brings them to appear “behind” the midbass – exactly the opposite of what happens on OH1S. Mid frequencies with particular regards to vocals have a leaner note weight on A3000 but the overall timbre is less dry on A3000 nonetheless, and the tonality is warmer in comparison to OH1S.

Trebles are a tad airier on OH1S but note definition is more organic on A3000, whereby OH1S sometimes comes accoss a bit thin on some details.

On soundstage and imaging there’s no game: A3000 is holographic and extremely precise. Layering and separation are I would say on par though.

A3000 are way more capricious to bias due to their much lower sensitivity, and higher altogether amping quality demand. On the other hand A3000 are way less tip / fit dependent – they deliver their best result with much lesser effort on that front.

Conclusions

At the bottomline I would say that OH1S – at its current introductory smart price – is 100% a fair contender onto the $100-$150 market bracket. I would surely recommend OH1S for vocal tracks, for example. And in general to get a different flavour of a very well tuned, coherent, affordable driver for jazz and other acoustic / unplugged musical genres.

On the flip side I do humbly suggest Ikko to convert its current discounted price into the regular list price. Raising it to $199 or thereabouts would in fact bring OH1S into direct or close to direct competition with higher tier alternatives, and that I’m afraid would be a pity.

This sample of Ikko OH1S has been provided by the manufacturer free of charge for this review.

You can buy them if you like from their own website, at this link. Importantly enough: if you decide to buy these “soon”, you might still benefit from the introductory special discount by making use of the “IKKOOH1S” discount code.

Disclaimer

I am not, nor Audioreviews is, commercially affiliated with Ikko, and I/we are not getting commission for any sales happening from the link above, or exploiting the mentioned discount code.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Ikko Gems OH1S Review (1) – A Contender appeared first on Audio Reviews.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove + Liquid Spark / Questyle QP1R / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman – Stock T-APB wide bore tips – Stock cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Nozzles and eartips

Tanchjim Darling come with two very interesting features, which are well worth a separate note. For one, the housings’s nozzles are shaped in such as way as to allow for 2 different eartip fitting levels. Secondly, inside the packed Tanchjim ships their new T-APB silicon eartips.

Let’s start with the nozzles:

Those two relieved rings on the nozzles facilite fitting eartips “more on the tip”, or “deeper down”, upon free user choice, with two notable consequences: fitting the tip deeper onto the nozzle shortens the total nozzle length (which of course includes the eartip’s cylindrical body once fitted), and oppositely, fitting the tip less makes it easier to obtain a deeper overall insertion into the ear canal, or better said, makes it easier to fit the housings + their tips into the ear canal pushing them closer to the timpanus.

Both such actions do impact on the sound. In particular, deeper canal insertion will somewhat tame highmids and enhance Presence.

The other notable element is T-ABP eartips.

These are newly developed silicon eartips by Tanchjim, which come in two flavours labelled “B” and “T”, short for “Bass enhancing” and “Treble enhancing”. “B” tips feature a smaller opening, “T” tips a wider one.

Their silicon umbrella fabric is superbly well calibrated, not too soft not too hard, extremely comfortable also for long sessions. Silicon umbrella comfort is particularly welcome in bullet shaped housings like Tanchjim Darling whereby the user may want to opt for a deeper fit.

I must say I’m really impressed by them: they are in facts fantastically comfortable, and they do precisely deliver on their marketing claims in terms of sound shaping: narrow bore tips (“B”) do enhance mid bass and midrange, while wide bore (“T”) tips enhance high mids, vocals, trebles and – thanks to the extra treble air – soundstage.

Apart for the 2 set (1 S/M/L B-type, and 1 S/M/L T-type) they can of course be purchased separately from Tanchjim, for the not cheap price of € 14,99 for just 2 pairs! (1 per type, same size-letter). Which, considering the size-letter inconsistency (see picture above), if like me you want 1 pair of 12 mm Bass tips and 1 pair of 12 mm Treble tips you are forced to buy 2 packages (and waste 1 pair from each). Ah, well…

Notable comparisons

Unique Melody 3DT

3 Dynamic Drivers, 25.4Ω impedance, 113dB sensitivity, $299 street price.

UM 3DT offer a 10-15% heavier bass note weight (although still in punchy unbleeding territory). On the other hand mids and highmids are less athmospheric, dryer actually – which makes UM 3DT come out more bodied from approximately 500Hz down, but not really warmer overall, possibly the opposite actually. As a main jazz listener, I find Tanchjim Darling’s timbre more “natural” than 3DT’s.

3DT are a bit less fantastic than Tanchjim Darling on the highmids, where I get them less detailed and more prone to glaring. On the other hand I could not spot any defaillance on crowded treble passages, where 3DT’s highend-dedicated DD behaves much better than many BAs I heard in whole truth.

Vocals are rendered quite similarly by the two: females better than males. Soundstange, imaging and separation I would say also on par.

Fiio FH7

1 Beryllium-plated DD + 4 Knowles BA, 16Ω impedance, 111dB sensitivity, $499

Bass is equally extended but definitely slower on Fiio FH7. At times I find midbass too bloomy, rarely even bleeding. This imposes a much warmer color to FH7’s tonality compared to Tanchjim Darling.

Mids are evidently more bodied on FH7, especially the central part. Male vocals – while still not at “specialistic” level – are better structured and articulated compared to Tanchjim Darling. On the opposite end, females are unbodied and often very close to sibilance

Highmids and treble are tuned just oppositely on FH7 compared to Tanchjim Darling: FH7’s highmids are kept “calmer” , and Presence is enhanced. This is probably the origin of some too thin overtones coming out quite often which contribute to give an occasional but noticeable metallic aftertaste to FH7 highs, which is totally absent on Tanchjim Darling.

Even with a lesser prominence imposed to their highmids, FH7 and Darling do compete well in terms of detail retrieval with Tanchjim Darling leading by a modest edge. FH7’s stage lacks depth big time, while (possibly as a consequence?) instruments appear even better scattered, but on the X axis only.

Tanchjim Oxygen

1 Carbon Nanotube Diaphragm DD, 32Ω impedance, 110dB sensitivity, $249

Under some points of view Tanchjim Darling can be considered Oxygen’s direct upgrade. Simply put: the low end and lowmids are very similar, with most differences coming up from the high midrange up – which is totally logical considering Oxygen exploit a single DD for the entire spectrum, and Darling pair a DD with 2 Sonion BAs dedicated to the higher frequencies.

Oxygen’s midbass are just a tad more “flowery” than Tanchjim Darling’s and this, paired with a more “polished” (read: less sparkly) highmids and treble rendering gives them a definite smoother timbre, and more neutral-balanced tonality compared to Tanchjim Darling’s bright-neutral one.

Tanchjim Darling delivers 20%+ more sparkles, brilliance and sheer details from 2KHz up and that’s totally apparent – all without losing Oxygen’s competence on avoding sibilance or fatigue, which is a notable result, if well paid by the asking price of course.

The extra treble air grants Tanchjim Darling a somewhat airier stage too: on close listening the sheer stage size is actually similar but instruments feel better separated on Darling – there’s more “clean air” between each other, in facts.

Oxygen is much easier to drive, and costs 40% less, there’s that too of course.

Conclusions

Simply put, Tanchjim Darling’s are Oxygen’s direct upgrade and rightfully take their seat as Tanchjim’s new flagship model. If you are shopping for mid-tier IEMs to enjoy acoustic music such as cool jazz, bebop & similar they are a solid recommendation. Just make sure you check your source is not a low-end one or some of Tanchjim Darling’s capabilities will not shine as they otherwise could.

The sample has been provided courtesy of SHENZHENAUDIO, and you can buy Tanchjim Darling on their website, here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

This article is also going to appear on my personal blog, here.

Contact us!

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

The post Tanchjim Darling – A Rightful Upgrade appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Intrigued by the question I recently conceded myself a go at a couple of other Made-in-Japan models, one of which is what I’m talking about today: Intime Sora 2.

Intime Acoustic, a.k.a. Ozeid Co., a.k.a O2aid.com…

Intime Acoustic is a brand owned by Ozeid Co., Ltd., a quite young (2016-founded) Takasaki City (JPN) based company. Its main business is actually not manufacturing, but consulting.

The owner and key developer mr Yoshiyuki Watanabe has 35+ years of experience on devices and applications that use piezoelectric materials.

Rotate his company name “ozeid” (or even better its web domain name “o2aid”) by 180°. What do you read ?

That said, mr Watanabe also decided to deliver some of his competence in form of earphones, targeting young users – young like his children – aiming to convey (in his own words) “the good sound of Japan“.

Well I’m more the age of mr Watanabe than of his children, but this all is anyhow more and more intriguing, isn’t it ?

Key technologies

The model I got is called “Sora 2”, quite evidently the second generation of the model previously released under the name of “Sora”.

Similarly to other models in Intime lineup, Sora 2 is based on a dual-driver system including a 10mm dynamic driver, and a somewhat special ceramic tweeter taking care of the upper treble / top octave end.

A number of very interesting details are available regarding the technology inside Sora 2, let me summarise what the main claims are.

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

Adopted on Intime’s TOTL Ti3 model – VST is made of some sort of special laminated ceramics, instead of the most commonly adopted titanium oxide.

Fundamentally, laminated ceramics is supposed to offer more controllable vibrations.

Conventional “super tweeters” are so-called as they reproduce sounds outside the audible range, but this Intime’s variation, thanks to the uncommon material selection in addition to their calibrations, has a different behaviour and reproduces overtones, effectively contributing to the highest-end part of the audible spectrum.

2 – Graphene coating

A graphene coating has been applied to the Dynamic Driver unit, which – always according to Intime – improves mid-high range frequencies reproduction power and definition.

3 – Stainless steel housings

Stainless steel has been adopted for the housings. Besides obvious robustness, the choice reportedly offers a significant impact on sound.

In general, the more solid & heavy a material is used, the better is unwanted extra vibrations suppression obtained on the housings, but at the expense of equally unwanted extra weight.

On Intime Sora 2 the adoption of stainless steel, the application of a heat treatment and a careful internal cavity shaping – according to Intime – turned into higher material rigidity, excellent vibration control, better sound transmission speed and – why not – scratch resistance too, all within a limited weight.

Well, weight is not feather-level in my books to be honest. I don’t have a subjective comfort problem with that, YMMV.

4 – HDSS

Another unique (patented, actually) technology adopted inside Sora 2, as much as inside Ti3 too, is called “HDSS” as in High Definition Sound Standard.

Its purpose is to suppress sound reflections inside the housing, resulting in cleaner output.

Some sound waves are commonly uncontrolledly reflected inside the housing, impacting onto the dynamic driver diaphragm, causing dissonance from the intended purpose. With HDSS technology, the sound inside the housings is more controlled and does not invest the diaphragm, allowing the dynamic driver to move only as a consequence to the signal source.

This – according to Intime – increases sound realism and decreases fatigue. It has a down side though: it tends to purge too much of the high frequencies off the dynamic driver vibration.

This is where a careful calibration between the resolution of the ceramic VST mentioned above and the mid-high range tuning of the graphene coated DD becomes vital, resulting in a bass with a solid outline, harmonious mid-high range and wide spatial expression – as in facts Insime Sora 2 does deliver, big time !

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sony NW-A55 / Apogee Groove / Questyle QP1R – final E ML-size tips – Lossless 16/44.1 – 24/96 – 24/192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Technicalities

Physicals

Specifications (declared)

Comments and conclusions

Intime Sora 2 represent a very good piece of japanese audio engineering and craftmanship.

Although not partaking to the ultra-budget price segment, I find them inexpensive enough to make for a no-brainer recommendation for whoever is in search of a clean, natural-timbred, energetic and musical IEM which I find particularly well paired to jazz and acoustic genres alike.

Very simplistically put, I might position them as a less expensive alternative to final A3000, or as a similar-priced, similar-quality, clearer-presentation complement to final E3000, which is the quite obvious driver-to-beat on that price level for pop, rock, songwriters etc.

Disclaimers

My Intime Sora 2 unit is not a loaner for review purposes, but was indeed a direct purchase. You can find them here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

This article also appeared on my personal audio blog, here.

Contact us!

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

The post Intime Sora 2 – Clean Energetic Musicality appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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 Audio Reviews.

Good build, comfortable, well fitting.
Very good technicalities for a single DD set (may not beat multi driver types at this price point though).
Refined, organic and smooth tonality.
Good timbre.
Good accessories.
Good price to performance ratio compared to other purported full beryllium DDs.
Takes massive EQ like a champ.
2 pin connector -> better lifespan than MMCX in general.

Cons:

High powered source needed as per the low sensitivity – sounds muddy, congested and smears in bass when not powered adequately. (***PLEASE CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE IEMS IF YOU ARE NOT INTENDING TO GET AN ADEQUATELY POWERED SOURCE WITH THE KBEAR BELIEVE***)
Average isolation.
Average soundstage width.
Bass not the fastest in decay/transients when underpowered (this improves with amping).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BEAR WITH ME, ISN’T IT BARELY BELIEVABLE THAT THE BELIEVE IS BRIMMING WITH BERYLLIUM?

The KBEAR BElieve is a purported full beryllium single DD set, priced so that one doesn’t need to sell our kidneys! It sports an organic, refined and smooth warm U shaped tuning, with very good technicalities (for a single DD). Timbre is good as per its single DD roots, but it has high power requirements due to the low sensitivity. When paired with lower powered sources, the bass is muddy, smears and is congested, so those that do not have optimal sources best look elsewhere. But once adequately amped, the magic starts and I daresay it can hit about 70% of the technical performance of the fabled DUNU LUNA, which is truly lunatical, no pun intended!

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Unit: pure beryllium diaphragm dynamic driver (imported from Japan)
• Sensitivity: 98 dB/mW
• Frequency response: 20Hz – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 17 ohms
• Cable: 2 Pin 0.78mm
• Tested at $159 USD

BEAR WITH ME, ISN’T IT BARELY BELIEVABLE THAT THE BELIEVE IS BRIMMING WITH BERYLLIUM?

Please skip on to the next section if you don’t want to read about beryllium and its controversies.

Alliterations about bears aside, 2020 is truly the year of the beryllium driver. Beryllium for drivers may or may not be a marketing gimmick, but these beryllium sets supposedly take EQ very well and you can read more about beryllium in IEMs in this very informative article by coblogger KopiOKaya (https://www.audioreviews.org/beryllium-drivers-ko/). Indeed, a lot of CHIFI brands are riding on a beryllium made hypetrain, and there’s been lots of single DD beryllium coated/plated gear released this year like the Moondrop SSR/SSP, Fiio FD1/Jade Audio EA1 and Urbanfun YBF-ISS014 (assuming it is not the “noble metal” driver version and that the QC is not a fail), amongst other hybrid containing beryllium coated/plated sets too.

Marketing aside, my personal take, is that what is more important than driver type/driver materials/driver count, is the actual implementation of the material/driver and the actual tuning. Also, I think beryllium may be toxic to process, so we have to be eternally grateful to the workers who risk their lives to get these pieces of audio nirvana to us!

That also leads us to talk about the issue of price. The beryllium coated/plated sets discussed above are generally cheaper than a purported full beryllium driver. So let’s address the biggest elephant in the room: does the KBEAR BElieve truly have a full beryllium single DD at this relatively cheap price point of $159 USD? Before the KBEAR BElieve, probably the cheapest advertised full beryllium DD set would have been the Periodic Audio BE ($299 USD) which has equivocal reviews, and deeper down the beryllium rabbithole, you have more expensive luminaries like the SummitFI single DD beryllium DUNU LUNA ($1700 USD) and Final Audio A8000 ($2000 USD).

Skeptics will surely ask, “How can the same tech be possible for $159 USD?” “That’s bearly barely believable for the price!” Well I’m on the fence about this, but just 3 years back, I would have laughed at you if you told me a multi driver IEM could be gotten at $16 USD (Senfer DT6 with piezos), as a triple driver set from a western/japanese brand then would have minimally cost north of $150 – 200 USD. I’m not privy to the inner workings of CHIFI land, but with economies of scale and cheaper labour/assembly in CHIFI land (and perhaps less robust patents/licensing), I would say, “never say never”, I wouldn’t discount the possibility?

I know there’s been a big shakeup in the audio world recently when an esteemed member of Audioreviews Facebook (Delta Fyre) dissected a certain brand’s IEM shell and realized the driver wasn’t beryllium as advertised, so biggest respect to him for exposing this (literally), and it prompted a withdrawal of that product by the company. Delta Fyre for sure deserves a noble metal prize for services to CHIFI (no Urbanfun beryllium pun intended). So now in addition to graphs for IEMs, this year we also move on to dissecting drivers and doing x-rays of gear to see what’s inside (yes there are folks doing x-rays in the audio forums!)

A famous and well followed Youtube reviewer also likewise dissected the KBEAR BElieve’s shell, showing the driver looks at least metallic, but I don’t have the necessary tools/expertise to proof otherwise for my set. There’ll be skeptics and “believers” (no pun intended) of the KBEAR BElieve regarding this beryllium question. Some will say even if KBEAR sends the driver to a lab for testing, the report may be rigged, or even if they send it to our Facebook laymen brethren to dissect, it may be a planted set. Anyways, one can open the driver and show the world it looks like beryllium, but do non professionals have the necessary equipment (eg spectrometer) to show the type of metal and even the purity and coating amounts? So this will be a beryllium made can of worms that will be argued till the cows come home, so I guess we need to move on to how it actually sounds. However, let me state for the record that false advertising of a purported driver material/type is a big no go for me, even if the IEM sounds great.

FWIW, take it from me that the driver in the KBEAR BElieve takes to EQ like a champ (with minimal distortion), even with massive EQ, which is kind of a hallmark of other beryllium sets I’ve used, though as discussed, I can’t prove anything, cause maybe plated beryllium sets also can also take EQ very well. And as stated above, I do feel that what is more important than driver type/driver materials/driver count, is the actual implementation of the material/driver and the actual tuning. And I daresay when adequately amped, the KBEAR BElieve can hit about 70% of technical performance of the DUNU LUNA (which is lunatical [no pun intended], considering the LUNA costs 10 times more). So question about driver type aside, the price to performance ratio for the KBEAR BElieve is very good. I will do further comparisons with the DUNU LUNA and other similarly priced single DD types in the comparisons segment below, but let us continue with the review proper.

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) PVC leather pouch

2) 4 strands of 6N single crystal copper Litz – the stock cable is very well braided and thick, with no microphonics. It’s very good haptically and asthetically. Cable skeptics and believers (no pun intended) can have your own arguments whether aftermarket type cables will improve the sound, which is beyond the scope of this review.

3) Two types of stock silicone tips in various sizes – one is of softer consistency (black) than the other (grey). The KBEAR BElieve is extremely tip sensitive, using wide bore silicone tips on it drops the bass and using narrow bore ones boosts the bass quite markedly. Of course YMMV as we all have different ear anatomies, but do explore with eartips to do slight modifications in the sound to suit your preferences.

4) Foam tips (2 sizes)

Accessories are very nice, and are quite similar to the predecessor, the KBEAR Diamond. The cable however is different from the KBEAR Diamond, the one included here in the KBEAR BElieve seems to be a 4 strands 6N single crystal copper Litz cable rather than the SPC cable of the Diamond.

For the purposes of this review, I stuck to the stock greytips and the stock cable.

BUILD/COMFORT

The KBEAR BElieve’s shell is very well made, comfortable and well fitting. It is on the heavier side as it is made of metal, but I had no issues using it for long listening sessions. I didn’t find any driver flex, but YMMV as this may be partially related to the eartips we use and different ear anatomies.

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

ISOLATION

Isolation on the KBEAR BElieve is average with the stock tips used, as per most vented single DD types.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

I tried running the KBEAR BElieve 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, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO) and the Tempotec Sonata HD Pro.

So other than whether the KBEAR BElieve contains a full beryllium driver, let’s address the second biggest elephant in the room: the KBEAR BElieve is one power hungry IEM, I already suspected it from the store specs of a sensitivity of 98dB/mW (impedance: 17ohm). But on actual listening, this drove the point in that amping is mandatory. It sounds muddy and gooey on smartphones and lower powered dongles, with the bass smearing when underpowered. Sure you can drive it from a non LG smartphone or lower powered source at higher volumes. It’s not a matter of absolute volume, but amping tightens the bass, increases dynamics, microdetails and perhaps soundstage.

Personally, I think most 3.5 mm dongles can’t drive the BElieve optimally, maybe some extreme dongles like the 9038S may be able though. On high gain with the Topping L30, them the real potential is shown, with the sound opening up. The Final Audio E5000 was similarly another power hungry IEM in terms of raw amping needs, also sounded meh and muddy without amping, though the BElieve is not as power hungry as the Final E5000. The KBEAR BElieve is actually a tinge more power hungry than the TRI I3 (which has a planar)!

For the rest of this review, I used the Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30 (high gain). I suspect a lot of folks who will be getting the KBEAR BElieve, may be using it from lower powered sources and are not gonna get the intended sound, and may walk away thinking it is a muddy set, similar to the Final Audio E5000 being muddy when underpowered. So be warned, it needs amping to scale to its real potential.

Since the KBEAR BElieve is on the warmer side, it doesn’t pair the best with warm amps/DAPs, as the bass may be a bit more woolly and muddy, so do consider neutral or brighter sources with the KBEAR BElieve.

Some folks will then ask, what is the point of pairing a more expensive source such as an amp/DAP with the KBEAR BElieve, doesn’t that add to the additional costs of the IEM? Well, for one, the KBEAR BElieve is a midfi IEM, and I guess folks that buy midfi stuff may probably own a higher end source or two and they will probably read up about the source requirements. And getting an amp/good DAP is probably a one time investment as we progress further down this rabbithole hobby. Sources may end up being the limiting factor in the audio chain sooner or later, and is a worthwhile investment I feel, more worthwhile then spending tons on cables for sure. Getting a good amp/DAP will also be future proofing as we can unlock other gear that have high requirements. I mean if it were a sub $20 set like the recent BLON BL-01 (which is aiming for a different market segment) and someone told me I need an amp to unlock the BL-01’s potential, I would ask them to fly a kite. But a lot of other IEMs such as the Final E series (Final E3000, Final E5000) and even the more expensive full beryllium Final A8000 are not the easiest to drive, and need amping to scale to their optimal sound.

One can also argue that IEMs are for their portability (compared to headphones), and that getting a desktop amp (or a powerful DAP) doesn’t make economic sense for a midfi IEM. Well that’s a valid point, and at the end of the day, if one doesn’t intend to invest in a powerful source, then I would advise to look elsewhere from the KBEAR BElieve, there’s lots of other options around the same price that don’t need amping. Horses for courses as they say, I apologize if I’m boring everyone here with this long discussion about source pairing, but I want to reinforce to everyone that the source will be the limiting factor and probably the biggest variable in getting optimal sound when it comes to the KBEAR BElieve. Do know make an informed decision: I don’t want to see people getting the KBEAR BElieve only to realize later that you don’t have a proper source pairing for it.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The KBEAR BElieve is a warm U shaped set, it sports an, organic, refined and smooth U shaped tuning, with very good technicalities. The upper mids do look emphasized on the graph, but on actual listening, with adequate amping, they are very smooth and non fatiguing, managing to balance a fine line between having forward upper mids without shoutiness. With boosting the volume a lot (Fletcher Munson curve) or on poorly recorded material, then there might be rare instances of shoutiness at the upper mids. This isn’t a set that has the typical CHIFI sawtooth upper mids, but goes for a more mature and refined tuning.

For a midfi single DD set, the KBEAR BElieve has very good details, instrument separation and clarity. Imaging is generally above average but may not beat some multi BA/hybrids at this midfi price bracket. Nevertheless, the KBEAR BElieve manges to keep up with very complex musical arrangements. Soundstage is not the widest but it is quite deep and tall in soundstage, especially when amped. Those that want very large soundstages (you may argue even on the verge of artificially large soundstages) better look elsewhere.

Note weight on the KBEAR BElieve is a tinge thinner than average. The timbre for acoustic instruments is very good, as per its single DD roots, but there might be some rare instances of a metallic tinge for violins (which I have heard in some other beryllium sets).

Bass:

The KBEAR BElieve has a midbass that is north of neutral but not at basshead levels. Subbass is of less quantity than midbass. With lower powered sources, some may find the midbass quantity overly thick and the midbass decay slow, but this improves with amping as discussed. Subbass extension is okay for a single DD, the subbass can give a visceral rumble when called for, but this is not a subbass focused IEM, nor a basshead IEM.

In terms of bass transients, it is not the fastest (especially when compared to other beryllium type DD bass), texturing is good but not class leading. Even when amped, the slower bass decay does damp the transients and resolution a bit. This adds a bit of warmth to the music, I like it, but I know some who are adverse to it. Dynamics and timbre in the bass are very good. When amped, there is almost no midbass bleed, which is quite surprising for the slower bass decay, so no worries about the bass impinging into the other frequencies.

If you want to boost the bass to basshead levels or tame the bass to something more neutralish, then please feel free to EQ to your heart’s content. As discussed, the KBEAR BElieve takes to EQ like a champ (with minimal distortion), even with massive EQ, which is kind of a hallmark of plated and full beryllium sets, so EQ lovers will have a field day with this set.

Mids:

Mids-wise, they are slightly recessed at the lower mids, but are quite natural and transparent nevertheless. Upper mids are boosted, but as discussed, the upper mids are very smooth and not shouty (when amped). Female vocals are slightly more forward than male vocals, vocals for both genders are very intelligible. I liked that the upper mids manages to balance a fine line between having forward upper mids without shoutiness. As per the Fletcher Munson Curve, it can on rare occasions be hot in the upper mids at high volumes or with poorly recorded material. This isn’t a set that has the typical CHIFI sawtooth upper mids, but goes for a more refined tuning.

Treble:

The lower treble of the KBEAR BElieve continues on from the safe upper mids tuning, and is non fatiguing. The higher treble does extend quite well and is not harsh for my treble sensitive tastes. I didn’t find any sibilance (unless it is already present in the recording). Details, clarity and resolution are captured very well in the treble regions and cymbals sound very natural (cymbals can sound splashy on other CHIFI types).

COMPARISONS

As per comparing apples to apples, I left out multi BA/hybrids and rarer driver types from the comparisons as they have their own strengths and weaknesses among the different transducer types. I apologize that I’m not able to audition or get hold of a loaner unit for the hypetrain NF Audio NM2+, I think a lot of folks are interested to see how it performs against the KBEAR BElieve (as both are single DDs around the same price). If i do get it one day, I’ll definitely update this review, but I’ll make do for now to compare some TOTL single DD types all the way to $100ish USD single DD types.

DUNU LUNA ($1700 USD)

Just to put it out there, the DUNU LUNA is my most favourite single DD set in terms of how it melds technicalities, timbre, tonality and musicality. The DUNU LUNA is usually discussed in the same breath with the other full beryllium single DD summitFI set, the Final Audio A8000, and I do think the Final Audio A8000 has better technical performance, though I found the Final Audio A8000 too bright/fatiguing for me due to the wealth of resolution and details and there’s a peak somewhere at the 5 – 6 kHz region, so it isn’t my cup of tea.

I know it is kind of lunatical (no pun intended) to compare the KBEAR BElieve ($159 USD) to the $1700 USD DUNU LUNA, but since they are both advertised to have full beryllium DDs, here we go:

The DUNU LUNA has better timbre and thicker note weight. The DUNU LUNA is more refined, has faster transients and has better technicalities/dynamics, but it costs 10 times more, so that’s kinda expected. If I were to give a ballpark figure, I think the KBEAR BElieve can hit around 70% of the DUNU LUNA’s technical performance (when amped). Despite the high price, the DUNU LUNA is also not perfect, it has a subbass/higher treble rolloff. The DUNU LUNA is easier to drive, but has worse isolation.

So between the 2, it depends if you wanna chase the last 30% sound for huge diminishing returns, or are happy with hitting 70% performance for 10% of the cost, but the only problem is I can’t unhear what I have heard (the 30% improvement) in the DUNU LUNA hahaha.

Final Audio A8000 ($2000 USD)

The Final Audio A8000 as discussed above is another summitFI set that has excellent technicalities and also is advertised to have a full beryllium single DD. I would say the Final Audio A8000 has the best resolution, transparency, transients and technicalities I’ve ever heard in a single DD set, though it needs amping as it is also not that easy to drive.

For sure the Final Audio A8000 has better technicalities than the KBEAR BElieve (in clarity, transients, resolution, details, imaging, soundstage), but I found the Final Audio A8000 too bright/fatiguing for me due to the wealth of resolution/details and there’s a peak somewhere at the 5 – 6 kHz region, though I’m treble sensitive. Ballpark, I would say the KBEAR BElieve can hit about 60ish% of the technical performance of the Final Audio A8000 but the latter costs 12 – 13 times more, so big diminishing returns once more as you go up the ladder. Likewise it is an unfair comparison at the different price point for these 2 sets, but I brought it out since they are both advertised to have full beryllium single DDs. Between the two, the tonality is rather different too, the Final Audio A8000 goes for a brighter and crisper tonality compared to the warmer and more analoguish KBEAR BElieve.

KBEAR Diamond ($79 USD)

The KBEAR Diamond is the predecessor of the KBEAR BElieve, they both look similar externally, but are of a different colours and driver types (DLC versus purported beryllium). The nozzle is also slightly shorter in the KBEAR BElieve compared to the KBEAR Diamond, I actually find the fit more secure in the KBEAR BElieve cause the longer nozzle seems to “push” the KBEAR Diamond out of my ears.

The KBEAR Diamond does scale with amping too, but is easier to drive than the KBEAR BElieve. The KBEAR Diamond has poorer technicalities, is more V shaped, and can get a bit hotter in the upper mids, with a more depressed lower mids region (which some found polarizing). KBEAR Diamond is more bassy (when same tips are used). I do believe, no pun intended, that the KBEAR BElieve is a true upgrade over its predecessor, and is worth the extra outlay assuming you have an optimal source.

TFZ No. 3 ($109 USD)

The TFZ No. 3 is a more V shaped single DD basshead set. The TFZ No.3 has more copious midbass and subbass quantities, but the bass quality is worse, in being not the most textured, with boominess and midbass bleed in spades. The TFZ No. 3 also has a more shouty upper mids at higher volumes (Fletcher Munson curve), and it also has worse timbre and technicalities than the KBEAR BElieve, with a quite compressed soundstage too.

The TFZ No. 3 would suit bassheads and would be very good for bass forward music genres, but is kind of a one trick pony. I think the KBEAR BElieve is the more refined pair between the two, and is smoother and has better technicalities, although the TFZ No. 3 is much easier to drive (in fact it has a higher sensitivity and can hiss like a snake with certain sources).

Toneking Ninetails ($125 USD)

The Toneking Ninetails is more versatile as it has 9 tuning options (from basshead to V shaped to neutralish), so it has more sonic signatures than the KBEAR BElieve. The Toneking Ninetails IEM was a cult classic with good reviews among owners, but a lot were hesitant to purchase it due to the unconventional looking design. The Ninetails is actually quite well fitting and comfortable once you know how to wear it, but the KBEAR BElieve is still more comfortable due to the more ergonomic and conventional profile.

The Toneking Ninetails is easier to drive but has weaker technicalities than the KBEAR BElieve. Timbre between the two is similarly good. The Toneking Ninetails is also semi open backed and hence has a better soundstage, though this double edge sword makes it poorer in isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

The KBEAR BElieve is a purported bearly barely believable full beryllium single DD set, priced so that one doesn’t need to sell our kidneys! It sports an organic, refined and smooth warm U shaped tuning, with very good technicalities (for a single DD). Timbre is good as per its single DD roots, but it has high power requirements due to the low sensitivity. It can be played from a lower powered source, but the bass is muddy, smears and is congested, so those that do not have optimal sources best look elsewhere.

The big question about whether you “believe” or do not believe that the KBEAR BElieve does contain full beryllium drivers can’t be answered conclusively here, but I’d say it has good value proposition compared to some other full beryllium luminaries like the DUNU LUNA, just that the requirement for a higher powered source may limit the potential pool of buyers or some folks may be underpowering the KBEAR BElieve with weaker sources and may walk away thinking this is a muddy set.

The KBEAR BElieve hits close to my preferred tuning target actually. I do recommend this set for those that want a warm and smooth organic tuning, to chill back and just enjoy the music (without much loss of technical performance). Diehard bassheads or those that want a very crisp and analytical signature may need to look elsewhere. Technical chops, as we discusssed, are very good for a midfi single DD, although some similarly priced multi BA/hybrid types may trump it in this department.

The KBEAR BElieve has quite a smooth and well balanced tonality, and it will be accompanying me on many late night chill jazz sessions after a long day of work!

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the KBEAR Official Store for providing this review unit. https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001722682651.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post KBEAR BElieve Review (2) – Bearly Believable? appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Cons:

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

SPECIFICATIONS

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

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

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

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

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

BUILD/COMFORT

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

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

ISOLATION

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

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

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

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

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

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

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

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

Bass:

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

Mids:

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

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

Treble:

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

COMPARISONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN V90S Review (1) – Rosso Corsa appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Good build, comfortable.
Excellent timbre for vocals and acoustic instruments for a pure BA setup.
Organic neutral tonality.
Good soundstage depth. Good instrument separation, imaging and details.
Smooth, no sibilance/fatigue.
Average isolation, considering bullet shape design.

Cons:

Non detachable cable, slightly microphonic.
Lack of subbass, not all rounder for bass forward music as such.
Needs amping to scale better.
No left and right marking – just a dot for left side on the cable insert.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is the quintessential niche Japan-FI IEM. Minimalistic with one driver only, but still well tuned, smooth and relaxing, with no sibilance present. Timbre, technicalities and tonality are good for a single BA set, though this set is subbass lite, so it may not be allrounded for bass forward music genres or bassheads. The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 also retains the legacy of some budget/midfi Japan-FI IEMs in having non detachable cables, but for neutralheads and midlovers, this set is gonna be a zen like listen.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Type: 1 BA
• Frequency Response: 20 – 20000Hz
• Impedance: 31 ohms
• Sensitivity: 116 dB SPL 1mV input
• Tested at $130 USD

ACCESSORIES

My set was a review sample, so it came with the following (in addition to the IEM):

1) Spare nozzle filters with ring and filter changing tool

2) Silicone tips (S/M/L)

3) Rubber band – seems to be those used to stack DAPs and DACs/Amps

4) Acoustic Effect sticker

The actual retail packaging comes with a hard case (with screws to close the box) as per this product page photo of their actual provided accessories:

BUILD/COMFORT

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 comes in a classic bullet shaped design, it is well built, light and comfortable. I have used it for hours with no issues.

Unfortunately, this set has no detachable cables, which may be a dealbreaker for some at this price point. TBH, I’m in the camp that got played out in the past by a few non detachable IEMs dying at the cable, but I have spoken to a Japanese audiophile previously, and interestingly, he says a lot of budget/midfi Japan-FI IEMs come with non detachable cables, even recent releases. And he says most of the Japanese audiophiles don’t mind this quirk!

Nevertheless, the cables on the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 are pretty well braided, and they came with strain reliefs at the housing insertion (unlike the Final Audio E3000). The cable also has slight microphonics, but this can be reduced by using a shirt clip or wearing the IEM over the ears instead of cable down.

Interestingly, there is no left and right marking on the IEM, in keeping with its minimalistic roots. There’s just a small dot on the cable housing insert to delineate that it is the left side. It became second nature to me after a few moments, to know which side went to which ear.

ISOLATION

Isolation is about average, though it is actually one of the better ones for a bullet shaped design as it isn’t vented.

DRIVABILITY

I tested the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 with a Khadas Tone Board DAC -> Topping L30, Shanling Q1 DAP, Ziku HD X9 DAP -> Fiio A3, android smart phone, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO) and a Tempotec Sonata HD Pro. The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 scales slightly with higher powered sources but is drivable from lower powered gear in terms of bass quantity, dynamics, microdetails and soundstage.

As the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is a bit bass lite, I preferred pairing it with warmer sources to give some bass heft.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is rather neutralish, with a subbass roll off as per most single BA types.

It has a very organic and natural tonality with no harshness or sibilance noted. Sound is rich and nuanced. Timbre is actually excellent for a pure BA set and may beat some budget single DD sets in the timbre department, although it won’t beat a well tuned single DD type in the timbre department. Note weight is moderate.

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 has good imaging, instrument separation, clarity and details, but it may not beat some multi driver types at this price point in technical ability, which is an expected limitation of a single driver setup. Soundstage is deep rather than wide (width is about average), but for a 1 BA set, I was quite surprised that the driver capably kept up with complex instrumentation and fast passages of music, without feeling congested.

In view of the lack of subbass, the Acoustic Effect TYR-01 is not that all rounded, it won’t do well with bass forward music or for bassheads, but for some music genres such as jazz, classical, vocals, acoustics, it does very well due to the smooth organic tonality and natural timbre. So one can consider this a niche IEM that will suit vocal lovers, midlovers, neutralheads and the above mentioned genres, and for these areas, the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 really shines brightly.

Bass:

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is more midbass than subbass focused. In fact, the subbass rolls off at around 30ish Hz and I found the subbass missing in some of my basshead songs. The midbass is neutral in quantity, and bassheads or those listening to bass heavy music will definitely not be happy with the subbass amounts. The subbass does increase in quantity with amping, and perhaps one can also try tiprolling away from the stock tips to see if you can get a better seal and hence subbass amounts.

Like a typical BA bass, the bass on the Acoustic Effect TYR-01 is fast and I found it very textured. Neutral bass lovers will love the bass quantity that has no midbass bleed, this set goes for a quality bass over quantity.

Mids:

Mids on the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 continues on from the neutral midbass and there is a very good balance between the lower and upper mids. There is minimal harshness at the upper mids regions that is commonly seen in CHIFI tuning. The mids are quite natural and transparent with a fair bit of microdetailing noted. It may not beat some multi BA/hybrids in this aspect, but does a respectable job for a 1 BA setup, and I liked that the Acoustic Effect TYR-01 manages to get the detail and clarity in without “cheating” by boosting the upper frequencies, an aforementioned common habit seen in budget CHIFI. Another good point is that the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 manages to balance a fine line between slightly forward vocals without being shouty.

Treble:

Treble on the Acoustic Effect TYR-01 is moderately extended and airy, but without harshness or sibilance. Cymbals and highhats sound quite natural and not splashy. I’m treble sensitive and really appreciated the neutral treble here, I could use this set for hours with no fatigue. While some multi driver types may get better microdetailing in, the treble of the Acoustic Effect TYR-01 is natural and not overbaked.

COMPARISONS

Westone UM1 (1BA) ($99 USD)

The Westone UM1 is a 1 BA set that is tuned warm neutralish (but with a treble roll off). The Westone UM1 comes in a conventional bean shaped design, that is worn over ears instead of cable down like the Acoustic Effect TRY-01. The Westone UM1 has better isolation.

The Westone UM1 has much worse details, imaging, instrument separation and clarity and has a more compressed soundstage. The Westone UM1 has worse timbre. It also has a more marked treble roll off than the Acoustic Effect TYR-01. Both sets have a subbass roll off as per most 1BA types, but the Westone UM1’s bass has a slight midbass bleed and is not as tight/textured/speedy.

Audiosense DT200 (2BA) ($149 USD)

The Audiosense DT200 is a 2 BA set that is tuned warm neutralish. The Audiosense DT200 is also quite non fatiguing and smooth In fact, the Audiosense DT200’s treble is a bit dark, and not as extended as on the Acoustic Effect TRY-01. Technicalities like soundstage, imaging, instrument separation, clarity are about on par. However, the Audiosense DT200 has some lack of bite/edge definition in notes, and for vocals, it sounds a bit subdued and undynamic.

Accessories in the DT200 are one of the best at its price point, it comes with a myriad of foam tips and silicone tips, a very nice cable and brush, and a pelican like hard case (that is purportedly waterproof too). The isolation is also better on the Audiosense DT200 due to the hard and well made resin shell, it feels and looks like semi customs.

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

CONCLUSIONS

The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is the quintessential niche Japan-FI IEM. Minimalistic with one driver only, but still well tuned, smooth and relaxing, with no sibilance present. Timbre, technicalities and tonality are good for a single BA set and music never sounded congested.

Some negatives are that the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 retains the legacy of some budget/midfi Japan-FI IEMs in having non detachable cables, which may be a deal breaker for some at this price point. This set is also subbass lite, so it may not be allrounded for bass forward music genres, and bassheads best give this set a miss.

Nevertheless, for neutralheads, this set is gonna be a zen like listen. It shines for music genres such as jazz, classical, vocals and acoustics, due to the organic tonality and timbre. So one can consider this a niche IEM that will suit vocal lovers, midlovers, neutralheads and the above mentioned genres, and for these areas, the Acoustic Effect TRY-01 really shines brightly.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Atsushi Narita from Acoustic Effect for providing this review unit.

Their website can be found here: https://www.ac-ef.jp/

Acoustic Effect is a boutique Japanese earphone company, located in Tokyo. Their gear is entirely made in Japan, unlike some other companies that do assemble their gear in China. The Acoustic Effect TRY-01 is their entry level IEM, and I am already quite impressed with what they can do with just a single BA in this set. I really hope to try their higher end gear if I get to visit Japan (once this covid climate is settled).

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Acoustic Effect TRY-01 – The Zen Of Minimalism appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Many have posited that the Shuoer Tape was named as an homage to the recordings of the infamous “Golden Shower” incident alleged in the Steele Dossier. However, we at audioreviews.org have been unable to verify this rumor, and as responsible journalists must report that the American premier, Donald Trump Jr., has vociferously denied these lurid allegations, as well as any and all other accusations of groping, raping, fraud, and nepotism. Yet  we must also express our outrage that Mr. Trump Jr. was unfairly deprived of reelection merely because a majority of the ill-informed, mongrelized American public voted for his opponent, the demented pedophile Joseph Biden, Jr. We appeal to our leaders to revamp our electoral system to prevent such injustice from ever recurring.

The $129 Shuoer Tape arrives in a round bright orange box, which looks better suited to a jack-in-the-box; accessories include generic silicon tips, and, atypically, a 2.5mm MMCX cable with 3.5mm and phone jack adapters. The round metal carrying case is aesthetically pleasing but undersized and nearly impossible to unscrew (better suited to weed?). Blocky metal headshells look much better in person than in pictures and are very solidly built. Despite its odd, ovoid shape, the Shuoer Tape fit me well and and provides for good seal and fairly good isolation, despite intrusion of some wind noise. Long-term comfort is only fair, however, as their considerable heft becomes noticeable. The Shuoer Tape were easily driven with just my mobile, and I actually preferred them unamped

The Shuoer Tape distinguishes itself from the morass of price peers with its novel electret/dynamic array, which  is ostensibly intended to recreate the quick transients and extended HF of true “electrostatics” [magnetostatics in reality]]. From my experience with big electrostatic speakers like Martin Logan and Acoustat, the Shuoer Tape does quite a credible job in eliminating the inherent phasing and audible discontinuity problems of conventional designs.

The Shuoer Tape presents a neutral-to very slightly bright tonality and a surprisingly conventional V-shaped signature (I’d expected to these to be more balanced).  Soundstage is wide, but low-ceilinged and instrument placement is accurate and there’s adequate air between the performers. Low end is presented mainly as tight, sculpted subbass, and some midbass impact is missing—these will not appeal to EDM or rap fans, though I found its quantity to be sufficient. 

Mids are very clear but quite recessed, with a conspicuous dip in the lower mids and boost in the 3-4k region, which gives male vocalists a sense of being a bit behind the mike.  High end stars here, deftly pulling off the trick of being well-extended without sounding analytical. The Tape lacks the hyper-detail of hybrids like the NiceHCK NX7, but are also wholly free of the latter’s artificial sharpness and/or tizziness and are wholly non-fatiguing.  Note texture is leaner than comparably-priced single dynamics like the BQEYZ Spring and Moondrop Kanas Pro, though the Tape is more coherent and has better overall clarity than either, perhaps due to its tighter, more attenuated bass. 

The Shuoer Tape is very uncolored and refined sounding overall—horns, synths and electric keyboards in particular are recreated very accurately. They are also quite laid-back, without the artificially-juiced tonality of, say, KZ hybrids. However, they do lack a bit of sizzle at the high end, which makes them better-suited for acoustic jazz or small-scale classical than for denser, more uptempo genres.

Overall, I rate the Shuoer Tape a notch under some recent faves like the Shozy Rouge, which are a more exciting listen and better balanced through the spectrum, though the Tape nails the technicalities and is certainly worthy foray into new driver technology. Recommended, if not worshipped.

Non-disclaimer—I bought these on Drop.

SPECIFICATIONS

Drivers: Low-voltage electrostatic dynamic driver
Impedance: 18 Ω
Sensitivity: 104 dB/mW
Frequency Range: 20 – 30,000 Hz
Cable/Connector: MMCX
Tested at: $129

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme explained

Contact us!

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

The post Shuoer Tape Review – A Magnetostatic For These Troubled Times appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Shozy Rouge not to be confused for Rogue as my simple brain wants to correct, these things are jewelry masquerading as earphones. The 1 dynamic driver + 2 balanced armature Knowles hybrid earphone is not the only one in their lineup, but the name seems to suggest it is geared towards musician audiophiles interested in glamour. Fairy tales and unicorns aside, the Shozy Rouge will do more than having your significant other wondering what you are sticking in your earholes.

COMFORT / ISOLATION

Fitment of the Shozy Rouge is uneventful and slips right in without much fanfare. Isolation is good because it fits tightly forming a good seal not just with ear tips but the shell as well. This tight fitment does make it noticeable during long sessions. Cable is unobtrusive and retains shape a bit.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

Some stuff like a large sized carrying case, basic tips and non-fancy looking 2 pin cable. Note: I tested them with Alza Sedna light eartips and their stock tips.

SOUND

As I listen the first thing that pops out is the upper treble emphasis on cymbals and guitars. Sparkles and rainbows ensue. It has an effortless weightless quality to the treble not found in many other budget offerings that struggle to present this area without sounding too harsh or piercing. There is some tuning in the upper midrange that stops short of sibliance making an appearance. 

Vocals are a bit recessed, less on male voices with more grunt down lower whereas females tend to fall into the background a bit more. Voices sound dryer as if just having a conversation with me instead of really singing. Bass is snappy and light, not impactful enough to warrant a noise ordinance call – in other words not for bassheads. The bass is the kind you find in nice high quality bookshelves or towers that need some subwoofer backup to really get things shaking. Thinking about 5-6” woofer bass over 10-12” bass.  It definitely does not steal the show – that belongs to the bright-ish treble. I find myself really having to concentrate on what is happening with bass guitars it just sort of blends which is great for those who might be offended or get tired of thumping and pulsating bass drones. Electric guitars really shine however.

TECHNICALITIES

Staging is great I sense good width and depth with more air over ambiance even with the bright treble lean. Instrument separation is great in the mids through treble. Reproduction space sounds studio like or intimate club feel. Good at microdynamics, easy to pick out those random sounds that get lost or masked in other sets, the Shozy Rouge is definitely an analytical sounding IEM with it’s precision of reproduction. THe Shoozy Rouge is a very sensitive earphone even at 32ohm, yet with with more amplification the bass is more powerful and adds more rumble. If we look at the impedance plot this makes complete sense since the bass driver actually has an ~150ohm impedance. My fellow buddy Loomis did tell me they come alive with MOAR POWA! Okay he did not say it like that, but he was right on the money. If you haven’t already read his review you probably should.

MIC DROP

If whimsical looking and sounding earphones are up your alley the Shozy Rouge are a clear winner. Quick and fast flat bass teamed with bright analytical sparkles, these are excellent sounding earphones from Shozy. Jurgen should have a comparison of the Form 1.4 against these in the near future for those willing to skip a few pints or coffees at the local watering hole and a more neutral color scheme. The Shozy Rouge are definitely a noticeable step up from the usual budget affairs.

SPECIFICATIONS

Tested at $179

Each pair of the Shozy Rouge in ear monitors are different due to the hand painting nature, resin arts varies but you will get a similar and stunning result, don’t forget every pair will be unique and one-off!
Drivers Configurations

Proprietary Dynamic Driver + Dual Knowles Balanced Armatures
Sensitivity: 113db/ mW
Impedance: 32Ohm
Frequency Response: 20Hz-20kHz
Cable: 0.78mm 2Pin

GRAPHS

• Left vs Right
• Silicone vs foam
• Impedance Plot

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Loomis enticed me to listen to these after consuming a few adult beverages on his porch. He did correct me they are Rooouge not Rogue…duh.

Get the Shozy Rouge from HIFIGO

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

The post Shozy Rouge Review (2) – Touched for the Very Second Time appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Pros

• 4 tuning switches that ain’t gimmicks, so one can change the sound signature to suit different moods and music genres (ranging from mild U shaped to V shaped).
• Very good technicalities.
• Good isolation.
• The TRI Starsea is quite “monitor” like, and in view of the above good technicalities, it can be a good set for audio work or stage monitoring.
• Very light and well fitting. No driver flex. Beautiful resin shells.
• Quality bass which is on the faster and tighter side.
• Generous accessories.
• 2 pin connector – better longevity than MMCX connectors in general.

Cons:

• Very source picky: sounds good on sources with as lowest output impedance as possible, but fares badly without amping or on gear that has high output impedance (FR is skewed).
• Overall, when not amped, note weight and bass is on the thin side with some lack in dynamics. Not as “fun sounding” or “musical” as some peers, and can be sterile and subdued, especially when not amped.
• BA timbre in higher frequencies for acoustic instruments.
• Can get hot in upper mids with vocal and pure tone configs.
• Switches are very small, need a pin (provided) to flip the switches. Those with vision or coordination issues may have some difficulties.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The TRI Starsea Stasi is not part of the East German Secret Police Apparatus.

The TRI Starsea is actually a hybrid with 4 tuning switches to give a potential mild V shaped to U shaped sound. It is rather versatile as such, and has very good technicalities. It focuses on a quality bass and the TRI Starsea may even make a good stage or studio monitor. Its shells are beautiful and well made. The TRI Starsea is rather source picky though, and is a bit thin in note weight when not amped. It does lack a bit in dynamics and “fun factor” and has BA timbre, but otherwise one can see it as getting 4 IEMs with 1 purchase due to the tuning switches.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver type: High-frequency balanced armature: Customized TRI-HI-A, Three-frequencies balanced armature: Knowles ED-29689, Low frequency dynamic driver: 8 mm composite silicon crystal biological diaphragm
• Frequency range: 20 Hz – 20kHz
• Impedance: 9.5 Ω
• Sensitivity: 106 ± 2dB
• Cable Connector: 2Pin 0.78mm, 8 strands silver-plated Cable
• Tested at $129 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with a very generous assortment of accessories:

1) 2 types of foam tips.

2) 3 types of silicone tips (each comes in S/M/L sizes). One type comes in black with a wider bore and is filmsier. The other 2 types (red and green) are firmer with a narrower bore and between them, they have slightly varying ear tip diameters. Do tip roll to see what suits you best in comfort and sound signature, but I generally found the wider bore black ones to boost treble, whereas the narrower bore ones boosted the bass. I preferred the firm green narrower bore ones overall, as I found they gave the thickest note weight. YMMV as we have different ear anatomies.

3) Nice PVC carrying case.

5) Pin to flips tuning switches -> don’t lose this! Good thing is the carrying case has a pouch to potentially store this pin.

6) Thick and well braided 8 core SPC -> it is of good quality but a wee bit microphonic. For cable skeptics, please move on to the next section. For cable believers, I find a pure copper cable generally synergizes better with the TRI Starsea as this IEM is a bit lacking in note weight (especially when not amped or with inappropriate source pairing), so copper cables seem to increase the warmth in the lower mids a tinge rather than the stock silver plated one.

7) Microfibre cloth

For the purposes of this review, I used the default green stem silicone stock tips and stock cable.

BUILD/COMFORT

The TRI Starsea is comfortable and well fitting for me, despite its larger size. It is honestly much lighter than it looks. The shell is made of resin and has a concha protrusion, a bit like the BLON Cardinal and BGVP DM6 shell in terms of good ergonomics and looking like semi customs. I know some friends who love the concha protrusion, whereas others hate it as it may cause discomfort with longer sessions, so YMMV, as we have different ear anatomies.

The shell is very beautiful and comes in a purple hue with speckles of other colours. Well, some IEMs (cough cough Kinera) do look beautiful but sometimes the sound doesn’t measure up to the looks, so I’ll take a good sounding set over a good looking shell any day. It is a bonus if the sound and looks are both good, but I’ll still go for good sound over a crap looking shell.

I didn’t detect any driver flex on the TRI Starsea.

I liked that it came in a 2 pin config for cable housing, I had many bad experiences with MMCX connectors in general, for longevity.

Do note that the tuning switches are very small, one will need the provided pin or at least a toothpick to flip the switches (it can’t be flipped with a finger). People with poorer vision or poor motor control may have issues with flipping them. In addition, it might be difficult to flip the switches when outside on the go (eg say in a bus when it is moving).

Personally though, I prefer tuning nozzles than tuning switches, a friend of mine after doing repeated toggling of the dip switches of another IEM, he had the switch snap. Another said that after not using the dip switches for a few months, it sort of rusted in place and can’t be toggled anymore. I guess YMMV though. But I have a feeling most folks when using IEMs that have tuning nozzles/switches, they will probably just leave it in their most favoured config most days of the week. And there’s also the suspicion that tuners may have their attention divided when tuning gear with multiple tuning configs; some tuning configs may have been given more care and attention compared to other configs which may have been shoehorned in or just put as an afterthought?

ISOLATION

Isolation on the TRI Starsea is good but not classleading, this is expected since it is vented, so it won’t beat unvented pure BA setups in this respect. The vent does let in wind noise too in windy environments.

It does a rather good job for isolation during commuting, but when not amped or with inappropriate source pairing, the TRI Starsea is not a basshead IEM (even on the bassiest tuning config), and as bass frequencies are the first to be lost in a noisy environment, I would still prefer to use the TRI Starsea at home. One might be tempted to push up the volumes while commuting to make up for the bass losses and this may cause the upper mids area to be hot in certain configs (eg Pure Tone and Vocals config).

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

I tried the TRI Starsea on a Khadas Tone Board -> Topping L30, Sabre HIFI DAC (ESS ES9280C PRO), Shanling Q1 DAP, Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, Ziku HK-X9 DAP -> Fiio A3 and a humble android smartphone.

The TRI Starsea is very picky when it comes to sources. It fairs the best with sources with very low output impedance, ideally close to zero if possible. The Starsea’s advertised impedance is 9.5 ohms (not sure which tuning switch this is measured on), and that is low for an IEM. Higher output impedance gear may affect the frequency curve of the Starsea, I find it skews towards the upper frequencies and makes the sound brittle and thin and basslite. I had a similar issue with the Audiosense T800, that had an impedance of 9.2 ohms, it was also a fussy IEM that sounded good on low impedance output gear, but may sound bad on other stuff like smartphones.

So the TRI Starsea has a thin note weight and has a bit of a lack in dynamics, and sounds subdued and “meh”, when just powered from a lower powered source or in a source that doesn’t synergize well. It sounds fuller when amped, especially for the bass heft and extension. The TRI Starsea is not as power hungry as the planar containing TRI I3, but dynamics, details and soundstage do scale slightly better with powerful sources, in addition to the aforementioned bass.

Even among sources with a low output impedance, the TRI Starsea benefits from synergizing with a warmer rather than colder source, in view of the above thinner note weight. Using a warmer source adds some lower mid heft and thickness, and adds more meat to the bones, so to speak.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

The TRI Starsea has 4 tuning switches, they do change the sound and ain’t gimmicks (cough cough looking at you NiceHCK M6). I’ll try to explain the various sound signatures below:

With both switches down – “exquisite pure tone” – this is the default tuning the TRI Starsea comes in. The tonality sounds like a mild V shape with an upper mids and treble boost, with a slight bass boost. The bass is slightly north of neutral, subbass > midbass in quantity. It is quite comfortable in the higher frequencies and balances a fine line between shoutiness and a forward upper mids/lower treble. With louder volumes (Fletcher Munson curve), or in poorly recorded materials, then some shoutiness may show. Lower mids are depressed but not overly so like some other deep V shaped CHIFI sets. The treble is moderately extended here.

With switch 1 down, switch 2 up – “beautiful vocals” – overall, upper mids are boosted, but the bass is decreased. Hence the ears perceive it to be somewhat bright U shaped. There’s sibilance, and the upper mids and treble can get hot (due to the corresponding bass drop). Vocals are clearer, especially female vocals, though this tuning can get fatiguing with longer sessions due to the wealth of details and clarity. It has slightly less bass than the first “exquisite pure tone” config and approaches neutral in the midbass. Subbass quantity is still more than midbass, but subbass extension isn’t very deep and sounds like a BA bass in terms of speed and extension/decay.

Both switches up – “balanced tuning” – sounds like a mild U shaped. Indeed it is the most balanced of the configs as claimed. I think it is the most inoffensive of the tunings. It is probably the tuning that is quite similar to the big brother TRI I3, though the TRI I3 has a 3 kHz peak, but the peak in this configuration in the TRI Starsea has been shifted a bit earlier to the 2ish kHz region. This tuning has the thickest lower mids of the 4 tuning configs. Bass is north of neutral but not at true basshead quantities, especially when not amped/inappropriate source pairing. Treble is not the most extended here, trebleheads may find it overly safe.

With switch 1 up and switch 2 down – “amazing bass” – sounds mild V shaped approaching L shaped, lower mids are recessed with a subbass boost. Upper mids and lower treble are boosted, but less than the bass, so the ear takes the frequency response as a whole and it is the most bassy of the 4 configurations. Subbass extension is the deepest of the 4 tunings here. But subbass is not the deepest in extension compared to other DD containing basshead IEMs. Bass is north of neutral, subbass is more than midbass in quantity but this is not at basshead levels even though it is claimed to be “amazing bass”. When not amped, or with wrong source pairing, I find it lacking a bit in midbass punch and thickness (in note weight), but then again, I’m a basshead so YMMV. The midbass thickness and quantity does improve with amping, using low output impedance sources (as detailed above), using narrower bore tips or perhaps copper cables (if you ain’t a cable skeptic). Instead of pursuing a basshead quantity, TRI has gone for a good quality bass. There’s no midbass bleed and quite good texturing present. The bass is on the speedier and tighter side. On this tuning, the higher frequencies are rather tamed, smooth and non fatiguing.

Among the tuning configs, I found the pure tone and vocal configs weren’t my cup of tea, as they were hot in the upper mids/treble (especially at louder volumes), with some sibilance present, but perhaps trebleheads will like those configs. FWIW, I did most of my listening with the balanced and amazing bass tunings. I think other than bassheads, most others will find a suitable sound signature with the 4 tuning configs on the Starsea.

Technicalities are a highlight in the TRI Starsea, the imaging is very good for the price, with a dark background allowing one to pinpoint instruments easily. When amped, soundstage is above average in height and width, but average in depth and there are sets with better soundstages at the same price bracket (eg TRI I3). Soundstage is not as expansive when unamped, but I didn’t find music to be congested during complex pieces. Clarity is dependent on which tuning switch is activated, as boosted treble/upper mids usually give more clarity on the pure tone and vocal configs. Details are above average, and instrument separation is generally very good. In fact, due to the good technicalities and good isolation, the TRI Starsea will make a good stage monitor or tool for audio work. There ain’t that many $100ish and below CHIFI sets that are suited for monitoring work, so this area can be a niche market for IEMs like the TRI Starsea, what more so with the different tuning switches on offer.

Unfortunately BA timbre resides in the treble and mid frequencies, and has a bit of a “metallic” sheen sometimes for acoustic instruments. The frequencies settled by the DD bass has very good timbre for drums and percussion instruments. I’ve definitely heard worse timbre in other multi BA/hybrids (cough cough KZs and TRNs), but generally single DD type IEMs will achieve better accuracy of timbre compared to the TRI Starsea, though the TRI Starsea will probably beat them in technicalities, so different strokes for different folks.

Note weight on the TRI Starsea is on the leaner and thinner side, and the sound can be quite undynamic at times, especially when used on weaker sources or with inappropriate source pairing. So it isn’t a “fun” sounding or “in your face” set, but the TRI Starsea just portrays the music with accuracy, control and restrain, sometimes veering to the sterile side on the less bassy configs.

COMPARISONS

TRI I3 (1 BA + 1 planar + 1 DD) ($147 USD)

The TRI I3 is a very coherent and balanced sounding U shaped tribid, despite the weird mismash of driver configs. It is smooth and generally not harsh, except for an occasional 3 kHz spike that can rear its head during poorly recorded material (with say trumpets) or at boosted volumes. One negative area on the TRI I3 is that is has a bit of lack of sparkle in the treble for trebleheads, and was deemed overly safe in the treble.

The TRI Starsea is very different in tonality from the TRI I3, with the latter being more warm and analoguish and thicker in note weight, even on the balanced tuning where the FR is similar. The TRI Starsea as detailed above, is more “monitor” like and drier and leaner, especially when not amped or with inappropriate source pairing.

Isolation is poorer on the TRI I3, and the planars on the TRI I3 need amping to scale. The TRI Starsea as discussed also benefits from amping, but is less power hungry. Timbre is better on the TRI I3 for the treble frequencies, though the TRI Starsea seems to have better timbre in the lower end frequencies handled by the DD, such as in drums and percussions.

The TRI I3 has one of the best soundstages at the $100ish price bracket (in width/height/depth) when amped, and it beats the TRI Starsea in this area. The TRI I3 is more “grand” sounding when amped and more musical and more dynamic, with more spaciousness. Technicalities are close for instrument separation, details, imaging for the 2 TRI brothers, but with adequate power, I think the TRI Starsea is slightly better in this area, other than in soundstage.

I view the TRI I3 as the rotund extroverted big brother who is warm and outgoing, whereas the TRI Starsea is the skinny, introverted and shy younger brother, who quietly aces all the exams and is very intelligent and knowledgeable. The TRI Starsea is the more technical IEM, with more versatility due to the 4 tuning switches, whereas the TRI I3 is the one with the bigger and grander sound, especially in the area of soundstage (when amped). Different strokes for different folks, there’ll be fans who will be drawn to both tunings, so the TRI Starsea is a welcome addition to the TRI family, and it brings different things to the table.

Westone W30 (3 BA) ($400 USD)

The Westone W30 is a warm neutralish set, and also sounds very “monitor” like. Timbre is worse on the Westone W30 and notes lack an edge definition/bite on the Westone W30. The TRI Starsea beats the Westone W30 in technicalities at 1/4 the price, in the areas of imaging, instrument separation and details. Isolation is slightly better in the TRI Starsea, but the Westone W30 is slightly more comfortable due to the smaller bean shaped profile.

The TRI Starsea is a complete upgrade in almost all areas for a fraction of the price, and it is more versatile too due to the 4 tuning configs.

Audiosense DT200 (2BA) ($149 USD)

The Audiosense DT200 is another warm neutralish set, sporting 2 BA. It is non fatiguing and has a treble bordering on darkish. The DT200 is very smooth with no sibilance, and hence it is suited for long listening sessions. But on the converse side, vocals in the Audiosense DT200, especially female ones, have a bit of a lack of bite/edge definition, and ain’t as clear as the TRI Starsea.

The Audiosense DT200 is weaker than the TRI Starsea in soundstage and technical performance, probably a limitation of the 2 drivers. Subbass extension is also less than the TRI Starsea with a lack of rumble and decay. TRI Starsea is also more versatile due to the 4 tuning switches.

Toneking Ninetails (1 DD) ($125 USD)

I know it is strange to compare the Toneking Ninetails (a single DD set) to a hybrid in the TRI Starsea, as the single DDs and hybrids have their different strengths and weaknesses. But I decided to go ahead and compare them since the Toneking Ninetails is selling around the same price, and is another set that has tuning nozzles to change the sound signature.

Just a bit of a background, the Ninetails is a Far Eastern “fox spirit” in Japanese, Korean and Chinese cultures, which can shapeshift to take the form of a human. So it is quite a good naming convention, as the Toneking Ninetails IEM had a rear and front tuning filter to give 9 different sound signatures, from neutralish to V shaped to basshead. The tuning filters are not gimmicks and they actually worked, and it tied in nicely with the Ninetails namesake and folklore.

The Toneking Ninetails IEM was a cult classic with good reviews among owners, but a lot of people were hesitant to purchase it due to the unconventional looking design. Spoiler: the Ninetails is actually quite well fitting and comfortable once you know how to wear it, but the TRI Starsea is more comfortable with its resin shells feeling like semi customs.

The TRI Starsea has better isolation and accessories. The Toneking Ninetails has actually more tuning configs (nine) than the 4 in the TRI Starsea, and the Toneking Ninetails can become basshead on certain configs with a jawrattling nausea inducing headache, something the TRI Starsea cannot do, even on the most bassy config.

The single DD Toneking Ninetails, has weaker technicalities than the multi driver TRI Starsea, though the Toneking Ninetails has a better timbre for acoustic instruments, as per its single DD roots. The TRI Starsea trumps the Toneking Ninetails in details, instrument separation, clarity and imaging, though in view of the semi open backed design, the Toneking Ninetails has better soundstage (though at the expense of isolation).

One can see these 2 sets as sidegrades, and they bring different things to the table. The TRI Starsea has better technical performance, fit and isolation, whereas the Toneking Ninetails has better timbre and has a few more tuning options, though at the expense of isolation and technicalities.

LZ A7 (1 DD + 4 BA + 2 Piezoelectric Ceramic Drivers (7-layer piezoelectric parallel)) ($338 USD)

The LZ A7 has been having rave reviews, and the hype is deservedly so. It has great tonality, tuning, technical performance and a multitude of tuning options (via a switch and various tuning nozzles).

Other than the LZ A7 having more possible tuning sound signatures than the TRI Starsea, the LZ A7 has better timbre, a thicker note weight and a more refined tonality. The LZ A7 also has a bigger soundstage and better instrument separation, details and imaging.

It may be an unfair comparison due to the almost 3 times price difference between the 2 sets, but I view the TRI Starsea as sort of a poor man’s LZ A7, with the TRI Starsea having lesser refinement overall. Though, I brought up this comparison as the LZ A7 is probably the next tier upgrade from the TRI Starsea for a CHIFI that has tuning configurations (I haven’t heard the ThieAudio Legacy 3 yet, but I did read some concerning QC reports about the non CIEM version). Anyways, as per this hobby, diminishing returns are very real, and even though the LZ A7 is the better set in the 3 Ts of tonality, timbre and technicalities, it is not three times better than the TRI Starsea (as the price would suggest).

CONCLUSIONS

The TRI Starsea is a unique hybrid with 4 tuning switches to give a potential mild V shape to a bright U shape. It is rather versatile as such, for different sonic preferences or music genres, and one can view the TRI Starsea as sort of getting 4 IEMs with 1 purchase. It is beautiful looking and has good accessories and has very good technicalities at that price point. I think it can even be used as a stage monitor or for audio work due to the good technicalities and good isolation. The TRI Starsea, however, is one fussy IEM when it comes to source pairing, it fairs better with amping and with sources with the lowest output impedance possible (ideally close to zero). Even though the bass is not the most extended and is a bit leaner (especially when unamped or with inappropriate source pairing), it focuses on a quality bass over quantity.

However, the TRI Starsea does lack a bit in dynamics and may verge towards a sterile tuning especially on the pure tone and vocals tuning switches. It also unfortunately suffers from a BA timbre for the higher frequencies. Most consumers will potentially find some preferred options with the tuning, though the most bassy config is still possibly not for bassheads, especially when the TRI Starsea is run from a weaker source/inappropriate source pairing. Those wanting more dynamics and something “fun sounding” or “musical” will also need to look elsewhere, but I see the TRI Starsea as a mini LZ A7, for 1/3 the price of the famed LZ A7.

Nevertheless, the TRI Starsea is a good addition to the TRI family, providing a contrasting sound signature to the crowd favourite TRI I3, by bringing a different 4 course course meal to the table.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Wendy Li from KBEAR for providing the TRI Starsea review unit.

It can be gotten here at $129 US here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001524289463.html

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRI Starsea Review (2) – When You Wish Upon a Star appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Pros

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

Cons:

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

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

SPECIFICATIONS

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

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Silicone tips.

2) Stock cable.

3) Sackcloth pouch.

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

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

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

BUILD/COMFORT

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

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

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

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

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

ISOLATION

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

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

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

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

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMPARISONS

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

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

VS the BLON BL-03:

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

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

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

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

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

VS the BLON BL-05 (non S):

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

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

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

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

VS the Tin HIFI T2 Plus

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

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

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

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

VS the Moondrop SSR

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

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

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

VS the iBasso IT00

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

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

VS the HZSound Heart Mirror

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

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

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

Comfortable, light, good build. Well fitting.
Good sound quality for TWS.
Good timbre for acoustic instruments.
Charging case for extra playback (up to 30 hours), up to 10 hours on single charge for the TWS.
ANC.
Strong and easy BT connectivity and range.
Supports voice assistant.
IP45 dust proof and water proof.
Superb for movies due to the subwoofer like subbass.
Volume controller.
Tronsmart has just released an app that supports various EQ profiles and configurations for the TWS buttons. They are continuing development of the app that possibly may have more features like aptX HD support in the future.

Cons:

May be too bassy for some when ANC or ambient mode is on (the just released app has EQ profiles to possibly lower the bass for our bass averse breathen).
Not the best passive isolation, occasional wind noise.
May have muffled sound during calls.
No wireless charging support.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold is a great all rounder TWS set, packing many features, and providing good sound, stable connectivity, long battery life and ANC/Ambient modes. It has IP45 waterproofing and is very comfortable too.

Sound wise, it is a basshead set (when ANC/Ambient mode is on), but the recently released app has EQ profiles to lower bass (for our bass averse friends).

SPECIFICATIONS

• Bluetooth: 5.0 TWS+. Mono or True Stereo. Qualcomm QCC5124 chip with customized LDS antenna (for more stable/longer transmission)
• TWS+ Binaural synchronnus tranmission technology
• Bluetooth codec: SBC, AAC, aptX
• Driver type: Customized graphene driver 10 mm
• Connection distance: Up to 15 meters / 50 feet
• ANC: rated at 35 dB noise cancelling, 360 degrees hybrid noise cancelling via 6 mics
• Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
• Impedance: 35 Ω ± 15%
• Waterproof level: IP45 (sweat, light rain and splash proof)
• Playtime: Earbud: up to 10 hours (50% volume); up to 4 hours (100% volume). Charging case: up to 30 hours (50% volume)
• Charging time: Earbud: 2 to 2.5 hours. Charging case: 2.5 hours
• Tested at $99 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the TWS IEM, it comes with:

1) Soft carrying bag

2) Silicone ear tips (3 pairs in total)

3) USB C charging cable

4) Charging case

• On the small side size wise, and can fit in a pocket.
• It can charge earpieces fully 3 times.
• There’s an inner magnet so the earphones won’t drop out when the charging case is held upside down.
• The charging case supports type C quick charging, and one can get about 1 hour usage with 10 minutes charge.
• I like that some aftermarket tips can be put on the Tronsmart Apollo Bold and can still fit inside the charging case and be charged at the same time (some other charging case models won’t charge if the eartip causes poor contact with the charging pins). It may rattle sometimes depending on the aftermarket tip, but one can put padding inside the charging case so as to give a more secure contact with charging pins.
• Unfortunately, it doesn’t support wireless charging.

BUILD/COMFORT

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold is very comfortable, light and ergonomic, no issues using it for hours, you even forget sometimes it’s in use. It doesn’t look too secure, but I was pleasantly surprised the fit is rather secure when in use (it does have a three point structure to secure the fit when worn).

Passive isolation (without ANC mode) on the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is above average but not the best, and wind noise can occasionally get in.

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.

FUNCTION/CONNECTIVITY

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold powers on when taking it out of the charging case. Putting them back into the charging case once powers them off. I had no issues with pairing it with BT devices, they recognized the Tronsmart Apollo Bold on the spot.

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold starts music spontaneously when the buds go into the ear (ANC mode is the default mode when first using it out of the box), and they pause automatically when one takes them out of the ear. This might be useful when someone is talking to you when ANC mode is on. The Tronsmart Apollo Bold can be used in mono or stereo usage too.

Function for the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is as per this picture:

BT connectivity on the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is good, it can hit about 10 meters or so with thin walls/obstructions, but I did get a few drop outs in the past 1 month I’ve been using it. On some occasions also, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold did fail to connect to the last device, which necessitated deleting it from the device and re searching for it. But overall, the BT connection and range was pretty stable compared to my TFZ B.V2 TWS set.

Tronsmart just released an app for android and IOS a few days back. You can check out this link on how to install the app: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/goi…e-we-there-yet.861024/page-1738#post-15892622/. This first iteration of the app allows various EQ profiles and to customize what the button touches do. The default EQ mode is still a bass cannon, but the jazz preset is quite good to tame the bass in ANC/ambient mode, especially for our friends who ain’t bassheads. The classical preset is also a tinge lighter in the bass, though I find the mids a bit overcompressed on this preset. There’s future versions of the app to be developed, and Tronsmart is possibly looking into providing aptX HD support in future releases, so as and when there’s further developments in the app, I’ll update this review accordingly.

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold supports SBC, AAC and aptX codecs. As above, Tronsmart is supposed to be releasing further iterations of the app that may allow aptX-HD in the future.

Battery life wise, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is marketed as having up to 10 hours (50% volume) and up to 4 hours (100% volume) in the specs sheet, on a single charge. Indeed, when bringing it out for a spin, I found the battery to last about 4 – 5 hours (ANC on) and about 8 – 9 hours (ANC off). I don’t have iron ear drums to pump the volume to 100%, so these numbers were tested with listening at moderate volumes. If one factors in the charges provided by the charging case, there should be ballpark 12 – 15 hours playback with ANC on, and about 24 – 27 hours without ANC on (dependent on loudness of volume it is used at). I suppose in general the battery life would also decrease subsequently with repeated charges, but these numbers are already quite good for daily use for sure.

The ANC mode blocks out most of the lower frequency noises for me, such as droning traffic, air con sounds, low rumble of construction work etc. It may not block out higher pitch stuff like children’s squeals or intermittent sounds eg dog barks/car horns, but I find it very adequate for ANC purposes. I ever tried some other ANC sets before that gave me giddiness/nausea, and am glad to report the ANC on this set doesn’t.

Ambient Mode allows in some higher frequency environmental sounds, it might be useful say if one wants to have some awareness of their surroundings.

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold boasts 6 mics for noise cancelling, and the sound quality is adequate for calls. Some other callers have fedback that the sound may be occasionally muffled when speaking to me, like as though one were speaking thru a mask, but they said it was still intelligible.

I didn’t detect much latency with videos and music, unlike the TFZ B.V2. I don’t usually do gaming, but I think the latency speed is excellent for this set for non gaming purposes.

Soundwise, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is a L shaped warm basshead set. Indeed, the bass becomes a bass canon when ANC/ambient mode is used. I’m a basshead and I like the bass quantities, but I suppose some of our friends who prefer a neutralish bass or are bass averse may not. The bass can be jawrattling on some recordings with a visceral grunt in the subbass. The bass slam and attack is very good. Watching movies with sound effects is a real treat as the subwoofer speaker like subbass gives an excellent rumble. Good news for our bass averse friends is that as per above, the jazz and classical preset EQs on the app can help to lower the bass a bit in ANC/ambient mode. Or one can consider using some aftermarket tips with wider bores to lower the bass a bit. With the normal mode on (without ANC/ambient mode), the sound is less bassy and more balanced.

Headroom is good, it can get very loud. Timbre is very good for acoustic instruments, though the bassy tuning may ironically not be that suitable for acoustic genres such as classical and jazz.

The upper mids and treble are a bit tamed and not fatiguing, but there are still quite clear. Despite the copious bass quantities, there’s still room for the mids and trebles to shine, though they aren’t the prominent frequency as discussed, with a slight midbass bleed present on ANC/ambient mode. Soundstage, imaging, details, clarity and instrument separation are good for a TWS, but probably won’t beat some wired gear in this aspect.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tronsmart Apollo Bold is a great all rounder TWS set, packing many features, and providing good sound, stable connectivity, long battery life and ANC/Ambient modes. It has IP45 waterproofing and is very comfortable too.

Sound wise, it is a basshead set (when ANC/Ambient mode is on), but the jazz and classical preset EQs on the app can help to tame the bass a bit.

I’ll write an updated review once future iterations of the app is released. But even currently, the Tronsmart Apollo Bold is already a set I would recommend for those looking for a feature packed TWS with ANC.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Joy from Tronsmart for providing this review sample, my views are my own. It can be gotten at $99 USD at multiple sites/shops.

You can check out this link for more details: https://www.tronsmart.com/products/tronsmart-apollo-bold-truewireless-stereo-plus-hybrid-anc-earbuds

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Tronsmart Apollo Bold Review – Dancing In The Moonlight appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

SPECIFICATIONS

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

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

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

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

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

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

Get the CCA CX4 from Wooeasy Earphones Store!

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

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

Light and comfortable.
Superb imaging and instrument separation at sub $50 price point.
Excellent soundstage.
Natural timbre.
Non fatiguing.
Balanced and sublime mids.
Comes with Final type E (black) tips! (ironically these black Final E tips are not a good pairing with this set, as they may muddy the Final Audio E3000’s treble actually).

Cons:

Noodle thin, non detachable, microphonic cable.
Requires a powerful source to shine.
Poor isolation.
Midbass on the slow/nebulous side, with lack in subbass extension.
Rolled off treble, not the most detailed treble (may be a pro or con depending on your treble sensitivity levels).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Final Audio E3000 is a good example of old is gold: sometimes older gear may be better sounding than some newer (almost weekly) CHIFI budget releases, with the Final Audio E3000 sporting a warm mild V shaped non fatiguing tuning, with excellent soundstage, imaging and instrument separation at the sub $50 region. Mids are quite sublime and well balanced. It requires amping to shine though, and the noodle thin non detachable cable may be a deal breaker for some. But if one can look past the cable issue, subdued treble and a slow bass, I can see this being an end game budget DD set for those that like a warm and thick sound signature.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver Unit: 6.4mm dynamic driver
• Sensitivity: 100 dB/mW
• Impedance: 16ohms
• Cable: non detachable

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Final Audio E black tips – these are one of my favourite tips that I use on many other IEMs, especially brighter IEMs as they tighten the bass and tame the treble, and are very comfortable too. In fact, I know some audiophile friends that bought the cheaper Final Audio E500 and E1000 just for the Final E tips, as a pack of Final Audio E tips retail around $15 USD or so by themselves. Myself, I bought a cheap Kinera Tyr at second hand recently primarily for the Final Audio E tips that came along with the Tyr, so I look at it as buying the Final E tips and getting a free IEM along with it. (I think the Kinera Tyr is in a drawer somewhere, sound is pretty meh, but their tips are being utilized daily on a myriad of my other IEMs).

The Final Audio E3000 is already quite treble shy especially at the higher treble, so these black Final Audio E tips ironically aren’t the best pairing with the Final Audio E3000. These stock tips lower the treble further, so trebleheads or those wanting an extended/airy treble may not like it. Personally, I found that something with a wider bore boosted the treble and lowered the midbass hump a bit, giving a somewhat more extended treble, but as usual YMMV as we have different ear anatomies and sonic preferences (I’m not a treblehead to begin with, and I already thought the Final Audio E3000 was a bit subdued in the treble).

For the purposes of this review, I persisted with the stock tips on the Final Audio E3000, as probably most lay consumers will not be doing tip rolling and just listen to it OOTB with these tips. However, I find that tips are a very underrated aspect of an IEM, they can literally make or break an IEM (see example of the BLON BL-03 with crap stock tips giving poor fit). Hence, if you have some spare tips lying about, no harm tip rolling to see what suits your sonic preferences for the Final Audio E3000.

2) Silicone Ear hooks

3) Pouch

BUILD/COMFORT

The Final Audio E3000 has a metal bullet shape shell, and is very comfortable and light, I can wear it for hours with no issues. I didn’t detect any driver flex.

The biggest bugbear of mine is that the cable is noodle thin and is non detachable with no strain relief at the housing insertion. This may be a potential issue for longevity for this set, it is one awkward yank away from being a white elephant. Some of us may also want a detachable IEM so as to use balanced aftermarket cables or wireless/BT adapters. In fact I’m in the anti nondetachable cable camp, I’ve had a few non detachable sets fail on me at the cable in the past, and it is a dealbreaker for me to buy any IEM or earbud more than $40 USD with nondetachable cables. Despite good reviews, I hesitated on buying the Final Audio E3000 for a year cause of this, and only FINALly (cough cough) bought the Final Audio E3000 at $29 USD from a local secondhand shop as it was cheap. At full price of $50 USD, I honestly wouldn’t have bought it due to the cable, but YMMV.

The cable is unfortunately also a bit microphonic, but I found that wearing it over the ears (or with a shirt clip) may lower the microphonics, though I’ve had a few curious stares from passerbys when I was using the Final E3000 over the ear. And in view of the lack of strain relief in the non detachable cable, I’m not sure if wearing it over ear for a long period may stress the cable at the point it bends into the ear.

ISOLATION

I brought the Final Audio E3000 for a spin on the subway, it failed my subway test unfortunately (sorry I’m a bit anal about transit isolation for protection of hearing health). The Final Audio E3000 has poor isolation due to the semi open back design, but I guess that very design gives it an excellent soundstage (which we will speak about later), so it is a double edged sword.

As usual, YMMV, I know some friends of mine purposely want less isolation for safety reasons when going outdoors, but there’s a danger in jacking up the volume due to the suboptimal isolation to overcome traffic noise (which can hit 85 – 90 dB sometimes), so that’s not safe for hearing health in the long term.

DRIVABILITY/SOURCE

The Final Audio E3000 is one power hungry little beast, despite its specs on paper. It sounds quite meh with just a low powered smartphone, but scales superbly (especially in soundstage, imaging, dynamics) once amped.

Also, as the Final Audio E3000 is a warm IEM, I find that pairing it with overly warm sources made things too hazy and nebulous, so I preferred it with a neutral or brighter/analytical sources.

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

I know I’ve been hard on the non detachable cable, the isolation and the drivability of the Final Audio E3000. But now comes the good part, in the area of tuning, soundstage and imaging, the Final Audio E3000 not only redeems itself, but surpasses my expectations by a country mile.

The Final Audio E3000 sports a warm mild V shaped tuning with a non fatiguing treble. The tuning is overall very smooth and midbass centric, with excellent coherency especially in the mids. The tuning is not neutral, and is pretty coloured, but it is quite enjoyable for laid back chill and smooth music listening, and actually is my cup of tea tuning wise. The very first word I thought of when I first tried the Final Audio E3000 was “effortless”. Some budget CHIFI artificially boost the upper mids and treble to get a fake sense of perceived details, but the Final Audio E3000 manages to get the details in without these artificial steroids. Those that want a more energetic tuning than the smooth laid back feel of the Final Audio E3000 might need to look elsewhere, but this is a very non fatiguing set that allows one to chill and listen to music for hours for sure.

Technicalities wise, the Final Audio E3000 has one of the best soundstages and imaging at this price point of sub $50 USD. Soundstage is very wide and tall, but not the deepest, and music never felt congested with the Final Audio E3000. With amping, it can sound rather speaker-like even. Instrument separation in the mids are especially well done too. As it has a laid back treble with not the best treble extension, it doesn’t have the best clarity and details compared to some other contenders at the same price bracket, so this isn’t a set for those wanting something analytical to do critical listening, and trebleheads also best look elsewhere.

Timbre is very organic and natural. Note weight is on the thicker side. Vocals are well balanced in the mids for both male and female vocals, and acoustic instruments sound quite legit.

Bass:

The Final Audio E3000 is midbass centric, with subass extension not being the best. The midbass is on the slower side for decay, and occasionally I felt the midbass was a bit too hazy and nebulous. Bass quantity is north of neutral, but not at true basshead levels. Nevertheless, despite the slow bass, there isn’t significant midbass bleed, and the Final Audio E3000’s bass didn’t encroach into the mids/treble frequencies, which is quite a common problem for bass heavy budget sets.

Mids:

The mids are very well balanced on the Final Audio E3000, with male and female vocals not being dominant over the other. Instrument separation is excellent in the mids, coupled with the great imaging and superb soundstage, music and vocals float around effortlessly in the mids. The excellent timbre caps off one of the best mids I’ve heard in a sub $50 set. There isn’t the usual boosted sawtooth upper mids CHIFI tuning that we frequently see at this price range. This set is definitely one for mid lovers, though some folks may find female vocals a bit too laid back/lacking bite due to the tuning.

Treble:

The treble of the Final Audio E3000 is extremely safe and smooth, and perhaps may border on being dark, especially without amping. Treble doesn’t extend as high as the typical CHIFI sets at the same price segment, and has some roll off. Details are not overly emphasized like treblehead sets. As such, the Final E3000’s treble has no sibilance or harshness, and is very suitable for long listening sessions, though I think trebleheads will not like the treble tuning here. It’s a love or hate thing for the treble, I’m treble sensitive and actually appreciate this for chill sessions. As discussed above, perhaps tip rolling may improve the treble extension and quantity a bit, YMMV.

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. Comparing some single DD type sets at $100 and below:

BLON BL-03 ($25 USD; more with aftermarket tips/cables due to the poor stock fit)

Sorry to those from the BLON cult, but I find that the Final Audio E3000 is an upgrade over the BLON in a lot of areas. The Final Audio E3000 eats the BLON BL-03 for breakfast, lunch, dinner and supper (and all the snack times) in fit, accessories, soundstage, details, instrument separation and imaging (when amped).

Both sets have excellent timbre, maybe the BLON BL-03 is better in this department, but even in the area of tonality, which is supposedly BLON BL-03’s forte, it loses to the Final Audio E3000. The BLON BL-03 has a too bloated midbass with midbass bleed, and the upper mids get hot with louder volumes on the BLON BL-03 (Fletcher Munson Curve). Both sets have a slower mid bass and won’t win awards in bass speed or accuracy.

The BLON BL-03 has a detachable cable, but the stock cable and stock tips are crap, which necessitates most folks to source for aftermarket tips/cables, which may very well bring the cost of the BLON BL-03 to equal or even exceed that of the Final Audio E3000 ($40 – 50 USD).

BLON BL-03 scales better with amping, but the Final Audio E3000 much more so. Isolation on both sets is poor, but the BLON BL-03 is slightly better, though I personally won’t bring both sets on the subway (to protect hearing health).

TFZ No. 3 ($109 USD)

The TFZ No. 3 is much more V shaped than the Final Audio E3000, and the TFZ No. 3 is a bona fide basshead set with better bass quantity and extension. Quantity is not quality however, and the TFZ No. 3’s bass is bloated, boomy and not precise, with a midbass bleed. The TFZ No. 3 has better clarity due to the boosted upper mids, but by the same token, can get very harsh in the upper mids with louder volumes (Fletcher Munson Curve). Final Audio E3000 is better than the TFZ No. 3 in soundstage, imaging, instrument separation, timbre and tonality. TFZ No. 3 though, has better isolation and has detachable cables, but costs more than double that of the Final Audio E3000.

I wouldn’t recommend the TFZ No. 3 over the Final Audio E3000 unless you are a diehard basshead and listen to mostly bass forward music.

Urbanfun YBF-ISS014 ($69 USD)

CAVEAT: The following comparison is only assuming one gets a true beryllium driver Urbanfun with a working MMCX connector (and this is a BIG if). The Urbanfun has slightly better timbre and isolation. Imaging and soundstage are better in the Final Audio E3000. Details and clarity are slightly better on the Urbanfun. Subbass extends deeper and is of greater quantity on the Urbanfun with the beryllium driver providing fast transients and a more textured bass than the Final Audio E3000.

Mid and vocal lovers best take the Final Audio E3000 over the Urbanfun though, as the lower mids are a bit too recessed in the Urbafun. Those that want a more bassy and “fun” sounding set can opt for the Urbanfun.

There are many reports of bad QC in the MMCX connectors and driver doubt in the Urbanfun, even in newer stock, so between a wonky detachable MMCX connector (in the Urbanfun) and a noodle thin non detachable cable (in the Final Audio E3000), I’ll take the latter any day.

iBasso IT00 ($69 USD)

The iBasso IT00 has a mild U shaped tuning, and it isn’t as laid back sounding, with a better extension at both ends (treble/bass) than the Final Audio E3000. iBasso IT00’s bass is faster, of larger quantity at the subbass, and there is more accurate and textured bass on the iBasso IT00. Both sets are non fatiguing, but the IT00 has better clarity and details. Soundstage and imaging is better on the Final Audio E3000. The iBasso IT00 has detachable cables, but suffers from quite bad driver flex, which is not present in the Final Audio E3000. Accessories are more generous on the IT00, and the IT00 has better isolation too.

HZSound Heart Mirror ($44 USD)

The Heart Mirror is tuned neutralish bright, with thinner note weight, but the Heart Mirror has better timbre for acoustic instruments and vocals. The bass is much more anemic on the Heart Mirror, though the bass is faster. The Heart Mirror has its upper mids boosted, so female vocals are more forward compared to the Final Audio E3000, and it can occasionally get hot in this area with louder volumes. The Heart Mirror has better isolation and treble extension and has detachable cables. Soundstage is more compressed on the Heart Mirror.

Both sets scale better with amping, the Final E3000 more so. The Heart Mirror has much faster transients than the Final Audio E3000 and has better details and clarity also.

They are tuned very differently, but can be seen as complimentary sets for the different sound signatures they bring to the table.

CONCLUSIONS

The Final Audio E3000 is a good example of old is gold. Newer is not always better, and I’m honestly getting fatigued by some budget CHIFI releasing almost weekly sidegrades/marginal upgrades. Or worse still, they treat us consumers as guinea pigs (e.g. when a “Pro” version comes out a few weeks after the first model was released, or even a Pro version of the Pro version LOL? Cough Cough NiceHCK NX7). It kinda feels sometimes like some of these CHIFI companies are throwing stuff on a wall and hoping something finally sticks, and/or using us as beta testers.

Sorry, rant over, back to the review. Anyways, a very good gauge of whether an IEM is stellar, is when after the initial hype has died, there are still folks recommending it on audio forums and using it 2 – 3 years after it was released. The Final Audio E3000, though not a CHIFI, seems to have stood the test of time as such.

The Final Audio E3000 sports a warm mild V shaped non fatiguing tuning, and while the tonality is coloured, it brings to the sub $50 table an excellent soundstage, imaging and instrument separation. Mids are sublime. It requires amping to shine though, and the bass may be too slow and nebulous for some. Of note, the noodle thin non detachable cable may be a deal breaker for some, but if one can look past the cable issue and the slow bass, I can see this being an end game budget DD set for many, other than trebleheads or those wanting a little more energy in their music. Maybe said trebleheads can try exploring with different tips, as the stock Final Audio E black tips may tame the treble too much.

If the audio world’s Santa is watching, my Christmas wish is if Final Audio can release a E3000 version with detachable cables with a slightly tighter bass for about $20 more, it would be a day one purchase for me, and I promise it will be the FINAL (cough cough) single DD set I ever get. (I typed the last part under duress from my wife).

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I bought the Final Audio E3000 at a secondhand shop at my own expense, for $29 USD. It can be gotten around $40 – 50 USD usually from physical or online shops.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Final Audio E3000 Review – Old Is Gold appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Cons:

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

SPECIFICATIONS

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

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

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

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

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

BUILD/COMFORT

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

I didn’t detect any driver flex.

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

ISOLATION

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

DRIVABILITY

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

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank the TRN Official Store for providing the TRN STM review unit.

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post TRN STM Review (2) – Transformers, Different Tunings In Disguise appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Comfortable, light, good build.
Neutralish sound – doesn’t colour frequencies, and potrays the connected IEM as it is.
Excellent sound quality.
Charging case can fit large IEM inside, has airbags to cushion precious IEMs and magnet to secure them.
Up to 24h playback with charging case. Supports wireless charging.
Dedicated amp for better headroom, dynamics.
Strong and easy BT connectivity and range. No dropouts for BT.
Has a mic to take calls.
IPX5 water resistance.

Cons:

No volume control.
No LDAC or aptX LL/HD.
Hisses with highly sensitive IEMs (generally not noticeable when music starts).
MMCX only (but u can use 2 pin to MMCX adapters with no issue).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The iBasso CF01 is a really nifty bluetooth wireless adapter that allows one to bring their favourite detachable IEMs on the go. Its sound quality is superb, coupled with an innovative charging case, good BT connectivity and headroom, and up to 24 hours playback, this is one wireless gear that didn’t make me miss my cables too much.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Bluetooth version: Bluetooth 5.0 (Qualcomm QCC3020)
• Bluetooth coding: SBC, AAC, aptX
• Wireless range: 10 meters
• Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
• Output power: 9 mW @ 32 ohm
• SNR > 98dB
• Audio decoding: 24 bit 192 kHz
• THD + N < 1% (20 Hz – 10 kHz 1mW)
• Playtime: 4.5 hours (adapter) + 20 hours (charging case)
• Charging time: 1.5 hours (adapter) + 2.5 hours (charging case)
• Waterproof level: IPX5 (sweat and rain resistant)
• Tested at $149 USD

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the BT adapter, it comes with:

1) Charging case, which incorporates many innovative ideas:

• It is very roomy and can fit big IEMs.
• It has a well designed upper and lower “airbag” to provide cushioning and extra protection for your precious IEMs.
• The charging case has magnets to accept the iBasso CF01, so even if one holds the charging case upside down or at an angle, the iBasso CF01 (and connected IEM) remains securely stashed inside.
• The charging case can be charged via wireless devices/pads or via USB-C.

2) USB-C charging cable

BUILD/COMFORT

The iBasso CF01 is very comfortable, light and ergonomic, no issues using it for hours, you even forget sometimes it’s in use. The wire guides are quite flexible (neither too stiff nor too floppy) and build quality is sturdy. The buttons are found on the top of the iBasso CF01 when it is worn in the ear.

The iBasso CF01 has IPX5 water resistance rating, and that potentially means it may be used for exercise or in the gym.

Unfortunately, the iBasso CF01 only comes with MMCX connectors, but I managed to use some aftermarket 2 pin-MMCX adapters with no issues, when pairing it with 2 pin only IEMs. They cost around 2 bucks from places like Aliexpress and don’t really degrade the sound quality, so worth a shot if you wanna try 2 pin IEMs on the iBasso CF01.

FUNCTION

The iBasso CF01 powers on when taking it out of the charging case. The left and right sides pair up automatically when taken out of the case, and I had no issues with pairing it with multiple BT devices, all devices recognized the iBasso CF01 on the spot.

Putting them back inside the charging case switches them off and starts charging them. Pressing the power button on either side of the iBasso CF01 for 3 seconds can also turn on or off the iBasso CF01 on their respective sides. Pretty foolproof in terms of function.

The iBasso CF01 has a mic and can take calls, with very good sound quality for calls. To answer calls, short press the power button. To reject the call, press the power button for 1 second. There’s an option to use a smartphone voice assistant (if your phone has such as function), by pressing the power button 3 times consecutively.

When playing music, pressing the power button pauses it. When music is paused, pressing the power button restarts it. Double pressing the right side power button skips to the next song, while double pressing the left side power button goes back to the previous song.

There’s no volume controller on the iBasso CF01 unfortunately, but I guess one can always change the volume at the source, though that limits convenience somewhat.

Connectivity is excellent, I have not a single drop out whatsoever in the past 1 month that I’ve been using them. The BT range is about 10 meters or so, assuming no walls/obstructions are in the path.

The specs claim that the charging time is 1.5 hours (for adapter) and 2.5 hours (for charging case) and that playtime is 4.5 hours (adapter) per charge. I think it is thereabouts with my usage at moderate volumes. The specs also state a 20 hour playback with charging case and it seems correct, I’ve used it for about 3 days (6ish hours or so per day) before needing to charge it.

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

The iBasso CF01 uses the Qualcomm QCC3020 TWS chipset, which is supposed to provide the most up to date wireless features (as of the time of writing). It has BT 5.0 with support for aptX, SBC and AAC, but unfortunately doesn’t support LDAC or aptX LL/HD.

For the purposes of this review, I paired the iBasso CF01 with the Audiosense T800, Blon Cardinal, iBasso IT00, Nicehck M6, Toneking Ninetails and Westone W30. The iBasso CF01 is quiet with lower sensitivity IEMs, but does have a slight hiss with highly sensitive IEMs, but this hiss is not apparent when music starts playing. The iBasso CF01 has a dedicated headphone amp and that provides good headroom for most IEMs. Other than power, this amp gives better dynamics too, though this might explain a slightly lower battery life (4.5 playtime on 1 charge) compared to say the TRN BT20S (at about 5 – 6 hours), when both are played at moderate volumes.

Soundwise, the iBasso CF01 is excellent, it provides a neutralish and transparent sound, with no colouration of frequencies, and as such this allows the IEM connected to it to paint its true sound signature without embellishments. I did note a very slight subbass and higher treble roll off, I don’t think these extremes of frequencies are too noticable on the go or outdoors TBH. Soundstage is slightly bigger with the iBasso CF01 compared to a lower powered source such as a smartphone.

I’m a hardcore cable guy, and this nifty little device has made me marvel at how far wireless gear has come in just a few years. With the iBasso CF01, I didn’t really miss my cables much to be honest, and the convenience it brings is very good in some situations, such as doing housework, exercising or for on the go use.

COMPARISONS

Even among wireless gear, I generally prefer BT adapters (like the TRN BT20S and TRN BT20), rather than TWS buds, as I’d like to use my favourite detachable IEMs (with famililar sound signatures) on the go, and hence these BT adapters allow me to reuse the IEM. Plus I think that TWS buds are limited sooner or later by the BT tech or battery life (with repeat charges), so at least the IEM can be kept even if the TWS bud dies/gets outdated.

So I previously bought the TRN BT20 and TRN BT20S for this purpose, they are cheaper than the iBasso CF01, but do not come with a charging case. There’s a newly released TRN BT20S Pro that has a charging case and swappable 2 pin/MMCX modules (though different modules are sold separately). I would very much like to buy the TRN BT20S Pro one day to compare with the iBasso CF01, as both have a charging case and I’ll gladly update this review thereafter if I get the TRN BT20S Pro.

However, do note that TRN’s QC is sometimes not the best and my TRN BT20 and TRN BT20S wireless sets are both dead after just a few months of use. As such, I would have really liked to have done a thorough A/B testing of these TRN gear vs the iBasso CF01, but off the top of my head, the TRN BT20 and TRN BT20S adapters lose to the iBasso CF01 in BT connectivity and slightly in sound quality. The TRN BT20S had a bad hiss with highly sensitive IEMs, worse than the iBasso CF01. Battery life is perhaps a bit longer on the TRN BT20S. Comfort and fit is better on the iBasso CF01 than the 2 TRN wireless gear. These 2 TRN models (not the TRN BT20S Pro) don’t come with a charging case too, and headroom and dynamics aint’ as good as in the iBasso CF01.

Of my other TWS earbuds, the TFZ BV2 has worse battery life, worse sound quality/connectivity, with frequent drop outs. The Tronsmart Apollo Bold has added ANC, but it has slightly worse sound quality/connectivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The best compliment I can give a wireless gear like the iBasso CF01 is that it didn’t make me miss my cables too much. Even Jim Carrey will become a cable(less) guy with this nifty set. The iBasso CF01 packs good sound in a good build, has a charging case with innovative ideas, doesn’t colour any frequencies, and has good BT connectivity and a dedicated amp inside. Having IPX5 rating for water resistance tops off the icing on this set, as it may potentially be used for exercise or in the gym, which is one of their better uses for a wireless gear compared to wired sets.

While I would have wished for a volume control and LDAC function, and a 2 pin option (though this can be easily fixed with a 2 pin to MMCX adapter), this is just nitpicking, and I am very happy with the iBasso CF01 for my wireless needs and the convenience it brings to the table.

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank Paul from iBasso for providing this review sample, my views are my own. It can be gotten at $149 USD at multiple sites/shops.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post iBasso CF01 Bluetooth Adapter Review – Jim Carrey Has Become The Cable(less) Guy appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Cons:

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

SPECIFICATIONS

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

ACCESSORIES

In addition to the IEM, it comes with:

1) Wooden plywood box

2) Velvet pouch

3) Silicone tips (S/M/L)

4) OFC cable (2 pin)

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

BUILD/COMFORT

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

ISOLATION

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

DRIVABILITY

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

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

SOUND & TECHNICALITIES

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

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

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

Bass:

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

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

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

Mids:

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

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

Treble:

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

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

COMPARISONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post CVJ CS8 Review – Breath Of Fresh Air appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Anytime there is a “new” version of anything you have to wonder if the new shiny item will only be a placebo or if it actually does anything different. BQEYZ does a good job of putting out models that are never overlapping, and I don’t think there is a single model in their lineup that has disappointed the majority of users. I consider them the budget Moondrop moonshot. So now that the BQEYZ Spring 2 is out, they reach even deeper into branching out from their semi-budget roots. At a tested price of $169, the market competition can be tough and there are much higher expectations at this price level than say a $50 pair. I thought highly of the BQEYZ Spring 1 in my past review, so enough jibber jabber let’s get on with it.

GOOD TRAITS

• Improved fitment
• Improved cable
• Solid construction
• Balanced tuning
• No sibilance

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

• Bass still has some minor bleed and comes off flubby and lacking speed

PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES

As mentioned in the picture porn section, they definitely made changes to the physical fitment of the nozzle, the angle is slightly different and moved inward so as not to push the shell up into areas of the outer ear. It is such a minor change, but I can feel the change over longer listening sessions. Changes were also made to the cable, I do appreciate the less plasticy feel on the Spring 2 that caused the ear hooks on the original Spring 1 to bounce around from simple walking. The rest of the package remains the same, good case, two different types of tips- small bore vs wide bore. I prefer the wide bores and use them and the Alza Sedna for the evaluation. I find the Alza Sedna Light a better match for the Spring1 and Spring2. They are a tad stiffer silicone and the sizing is in between the provided tips so I get a better seal. Your individual experience may differ of course. Isolation is medium, but should get the job done for certain circumstances. IEM’s that either have a deeper insertion, or fit more tightly to the outer ear will provide more isolation.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

• Two different sets of ear tips narrow bore, vs wide bore
• Carrying case
• Detachable 0.78 2 pin cable

SOUND

One of the biggest criticisms of the BQEYZ Spring 1 was the medicore wooly, flubby bass. The BQEYZ Spring 2 doesn’t really fix this other than bring the level down, real bummer. Bass still on the slow side, decay is too long, cohesion of the bass suffers as a result I get the sensation it is behind, almost as if there is a valley in the punch region. It’s as if they tuned the woofer too low for what it can reasonably can reproduce. Again not terrible, but definitely the weakest point of the Spring series. As suggested from another head-fier/ blogger Alza Sedna tips fix this a little on both Spring models. The bass on the Spring 2 has been toned down, but I can still pick up the mild mid bass bleed (200-600hz) more noticeable at higher volumes. Female vocals still have a thickness to them as a result, male vocals sound really strong maybe a tad over-juiced it is easy to hear the cracking in the vocal portion now. The BQEYZ midrange is still intact and sounds great as usual, there is some additional boost now in the middle treble that creates a more forward vocal sound. Horns, electric guitars and shakers pop more and are brought to forefront.

The simplest way for me to describe the BQEYZ Spring 2 is a live sounding nearfield IEM. If you liked the more intimate studio sound wine sipping Spring 1, the Spring 2 is going to have you pulling out your live albums to give them a good listen. They are not overpowered in the typical huge upper midrange/lower treble peak. Most of the changes are in the middle treble. The treble is improved on the BQEYZ Spring 2, the Spring 1 had a washed out sound to things like shakers and cymbals. Now with the Spring 2 you have more crash and sizzle whereas the Spring 1 was more sizzle. It could be due to the extra 2 layers on the piezo driver, or just better integration between the BA and piezo, or the fact they removed the filter behind the nozzle grill. Whatever is responsible there is a much noticeable change. Below is a comparison graph showing the Spring1 with the nozzle grill removed compared to the Spring2. It appears they were able to keep the lower treble/upper midrange tuned the same.

TECHNICALITIES

Timbre is still great, the only hiccup is the slight midbass bleed again that makes some things sound tubby, thicker, and slower. I sense good separation and depth is great. Width does not sound closed in at all and is balanced with the depth. The Spring 2 requires more gain on the volume so regular smartphone users might want to consider an external headphone amp/dac. I used an LGV30 without issue, but the BQEYZ Spring 2 require about double the usual volume compared to more sensitive IEM’s. Resolution is good, I would say for this price range it competes well.

COMPARISONS

Spring 2 $169 vs Moondrop Kanas Pro (KPE) $179 (discontinued)

Kanas Pro has a peaky upper midrange which results in more forward vocals. Bass is less tubby sounding on Kanas and better extension, but the Kanas bass was always considered a bit slow as well. Instrument separation on Kanas Pro is better than the BQEYZ Spring 2 which sounds slightly congested as a result. Spring 2 sounds better balanced through mids and highs and timbre is better. I always struggled with this part of the Kanas Pro. Things like shakers sound like they are supposed to on the Spring 2 whereas on the KPE they sound a little off. Isolation is better on Kanas due to deeper nozzle. The Kanas Pro also has slightly better resolution.

BQEYZ Spring 1 $139 vs Spring2 $169

They are siblings for sure, the is bass similar but Spring2 is toned down slightly but still exhibits the slight bleed giving that thicker tubby sound. Cymbals have more character more crash with the shimmer and the Spring1 was mostly shimmer. Things like shakers and horns come more front and center. The Spring 2 sounds more like a nearfield / live sound experience and the Spring1 a large room that is more muted and neutral in the middle treble section. The Spring 1 had a way that made certain instruments just float and feel separated whereas the Spring 2 is more homogeneous. Vocals on the Spring1 were pushed to the background, and the Spring2 brings them forward to sit inline with the rest of the presentation.

Spring2 vs Simgot EN700pro $149

Bass on the Simgot EN700pro is a bit more extended and boosted to have more boom. The EN700pro sounds flatter soundstage wise. It does not have that live feel the BQEYZ Spring 2 brings to the table, but tonality is very similar otherwise. Fitment on the EN700pro provides more comfort, but they have short nozzles and can more easily work loose. The Simgot EN700pro was never really a boner in the normal circles, but I find it was a good one to highlight what the Spring 2 can bring to the table. I sort of wish the Spring2 had the bass of the Simgot EN700bass or Pro for rock music to combine with the better soundstaging capabilities of the Spring2. If the Spring2 had used the bass tuning of the EN700pro and combine it with the bass speed of the Nicehck NX7, then I might have something that was just wonderful.

OUTRO

Again referring simply to the BQEYZ Spring 1 vs Spring 2 comparison two things standout-the treble on the Spring 1 was muted and could use more definition which the Spring 2 has now rectified. I think this change has transformed the Spring 1’s ability to float certain instruments in the sound staging, to now a more stable live sounding Spring 2. If this sounds like $30 of improvement then by all means go for the Spring 2, they are not same earphone. Value is tough to define I liked the Spring 1 at the street price of $120, but I have only purchased a few above that price range. I think it is a solid product at $169, but listeners in the price range might be disappointed in the bass reproduction capabilities. I would need to experience more in this price bracket $150-200 to establish a baseline no pun intended. I still think BQEYZ has a good hit, it’s just a matter of who will bite at this price.

SPECIFICATIONS

• Type: Hybrid, 1 BA+1 DD+9 Layers Piezo Electric
• Frequency Response: 7 Khz-40 Khz
• Sensitivity: 110 +/-3 dB
• Impedance: 32 ohms +/- 15%
• Connector type: 0.78 mm-2 PIN
• Earphone Jack: choice of 3.5 mm/2.5 mm/4.4 mm

GRAPHS

• BQEYZ Spring 2 Atmosphere vs Reference Ear-tips
• BQEYZ Spring 1 vs BQEYZ Spring 2
• BQEYZ Spring 1 no nozzle grill vs BQEYZ Spring 2 reference and atmosphere tips
• Impedance Plot
• 30Hz square wave
• 300Hz square wave

MY VERDICT

Our rating scheme

Contact us!

You find an INDEX of all our earphone reviews HERE.

DISCLAIMER

Set provided by distributor Hifigo available @ $169 here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About our measurements.

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

The post BQEYZ Spring 2 Review (1) – Putting The Band Back Together appeared first on Audio Reviews.