CCA Hydro Review​

Full review can be found HERE

​

CCA Hydro Review​

Intro​

Hello, this review covers one of CCA Audio‘s latest iems, the CCA Hydro. The Hydro comes in at $115 to $120 depending on what options you choose at checkout. From what I’m told, the Hydro is to be considered one of CCA/KZ’s high-end flagship iems. I definitely wouldn’t argue with that considering the price. We’ve seen higher priced KZ/CCA iems in the past, but this has been the largest asking price since the KZ AS24 over a year ago. The Hydro is actually a 10-driver hybrid set consisting of two dynamic drivers and eight balanced armature drivers. I don’t know if any of you are counting but… that’s a lot. This may just be the most advantageous iem from CCA to date. You simply don’t see many 10 driver hybrids under $200. The fact that CCA was able to bring the price as low as $115 is pretty impressive. Actually, it’s pretty much unheard of. Ya know, KZ/CCA are both sister brands, which both work under the guise of crafting and creating the best audio possible for the least amount of money to the consumer. Call me crazy but I think the Hydro is a good example of this. So, I’m looking forward to checking this out.

A few reviews​

I have reviewed a number of iems from these two brands over the course of the last few years. I’ve said it in many reviews that KZ/CCA seem to always get better. With every driver type, price point, and style, they get better. Eventually. It’s always incremental improvements and in doing so, they usually end up making some of the better iems you can buy at different price points. Here’s a list of some of the CCA/KZ sets I’ve reviewed recently:


– AS16 Pro
– VXS
– CRA+
– PR1 Hifi
– EDCX
– Linglong
– ZVX
– D-Fi
– X-HBB PR2
– Duo
– EDXS
– AS24
– Krila
– AZ20
– ZAT
– Rhapsody
– PR3
–ZSN Pro 2
–CCA Trio
–KZ Symphony

Folks there really are a number of great sets listed above and each are the product of incremental upgrades, like I said. There are those who state that KZ’s iem production is akin to throwing spaghetti at a wall to see what sticks. I am not in agreement with this. I think KZ/CCA is very purposeful in their releases, and I feel they put a lot of work into making the best product possible for the least cost to the consumer. Every series within their enormous catalog of iems is a product of incremental improvement. Each one seems to upstage the last and usually the newer and better model will cost less than the previous, or so it seems.

The CCA Hydro…​

Well, I’m really curious about this set and looking forward to breaking it down. I want to see how well the Hydro stacks up against some other hybrids in its price point and above. I want to hear if the Hydro has what it takes to tote around the moniker “flagship”. So, I’ll give this set a good 50 hours burn-in and I’ll see you in about a week. The CCA Hydro everyone…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing Links:​

–Kztws.com
–Linsoul
–Amazon

Disclaimer:​

I received the CCA Hydro from KZ as a review sample and in exchange I will conduct a full review and feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. I have not received any payment or any other form of compensation for this review. This set is a review sample iem. KZ/CCA has not requested to pre-read any review and doesn’t have any control over “what” or “when” anything gets published to mobileaudiophile.com. All thoughts within this review are my own, though please take note that I will always have my own biases. This is impossible to get around. I try to be as objective as my subjective self can be, but this is an opinion piece folks. Thank you to KZ/CCA and thanks for reading.

Gear used for testing​

–KZ AZ20

–Ifi Go Blu

-Hidizs S8 Pro Robin (not out yet)

–EPZ TP50

–Simgot Dew4x

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

–Fiio Q15

Packaging / Accessories ​

Unboxing​

Just like all KZ/CCA unboxing experiences, this really isn’t much of an experience. But also, who cares? KZ/CCA has long been known to put the money into the earphones themselves instead of adding a more elaborate box and better accessories. That said, they do provide a similar small black box as usual. Open that box and you’ll see the Hydro looking all handsome in foam cut-outs. Under the Hydro you’ll find the cable as well as the eartips and a switch tool. Like I said, not much to report here.

Eartips​

Within the packaging CCA provides four sets of tips in total. Three of those sets are the black KZ Starline tips (S, M, L). The other set is a pair of what I believe is a set of medium sized foam tips which come attached to the Hydro at purchase. Folks, I will always be a fan of KZ Starline tips. They are very good to have for any collection and I use them quite often. For those who don’t know, the Starlines are named this due to the Star pattern on the tip. What separates the Starlines are in their rigidity. They are a narrower bore eartip with a semi firm stem, firm flange and are slightly longer than most eartips. Great for really getting into the ear and sealing well. You get slightly attenuated treble, slightly boosted low-end as well. They really are great tips to have in a collection. For much of my listening I actually used the large sized Starlines. However, I ended up simply using the KBear 07 large sized tips after some time and kind of stuck with them. I feel the semi-wide bore of the 07’s does help the overall sound of the Hydro nicely.

Cable​

Okay, so this is new. The package I received brought with it a big fat and juicy cable. Well, actually it is an option at checkout whether you want the usual KZ cable or the newer and more visually pleasing KZ cable. I was quite surprised actually. I say that because every earphone that I’ve ever received from KZ/CCA has been the same opaque white 3.5 single ended QDC style cable. It’s a decent cable in that it is a piece of the audio chain and does work. But that’s about it. I’ve said in every review that any set past ultra-budget would be great if we saw cables fitting to the earphones. Well, count me as surprised folks because CCA added in a fatty. Now, I’m not saying that this is the best cable on planet earth, but it’s a start. The cable I’m referring to is actually one of KZ’s own cables. There is no actual name, but it is very cheap at only $8 on Aliexpress HERE. At any rate, the cable is an 8-strand cable with 784 total cores, and it feels very robust for an $8 cable. Definitely an upgrade from the usual. KZ states that this cable is a silver & blue colored C-Pin or QDC style 2-pin cable, silver plated copper and it terminates in a 3.5 single ended jack. To get this cable the price jumps a little bit, or you could simply purchase the usual cable for a bit less.

What’d I use​

So, for any 3.5 single ended listening I did use the better cable that came with the Hydro. However, I have a ton of balanced sources that I use and so it was imperative that I swap out cables for any of that balanced listening (which was most of the time). I used the KBear Show 4.4 balanced cable in white. Also, I used the cable which came with the Yanyin Canon as well which is also a gorgeous pearly white cable. Both did the trick quite well and I found the Hydro certainly responds to more power delivered through my balanced sources.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit​

Build Quality ​

The Hydro actually follows in step the style of the CCA Rhapsody, both in design as well as build. These same design principles are also found in the CCA Trio. Both the Trio and the Rhapsody are tops in my book for best CCA earphones. In comes the Hydro. Now, CCA has a few different styles of earphones that they constantly use on repeat. They usually just switch up the design a bit. I’m referring to the actual shell style. The Hydro is identical in size and shape to the KZ AS24, KZ ZAT, CCA Rhapsody etc. Basically, they’ve used this mold on any set with a tone of drivers. It’s big! It’s very big. Smaller ear folks may want to keep looking, even though CCA does a good job with nozzle angle to help out as much as possible.

The build is made of a DLP 3D printed and tinted transparent resin shell with an alloy faceplate. Everything feels very robust in hand, very durable feeling. In my opinion, build quality is one of KZ/CCA’s strengths. They usually craft some hardy earphones. The nozzle is a longer nozzle, no doubt to get them as deep as possible. The nozzle width is roughly 6mm which is about average. On the back of the Hydro, you’ll see four dip switches which there are to switch up the sound to your own preferences. Also, there is a pretty large vent on the backside of the faceplate which does provide a nicely open sound. Again folks, one thing CCA does well is their builds.


Full review can be found HERE

Tuning Switches​

I never go very long into these tuning switches because it takes too long to describe something that you’ll play around with anyways. That said, CCA and KZ have been on a long kick now of adding dipswitches or “tuning-switches” to their earphones and I must say… they’ve only gotten better. Truly, their dip switches are some of the better switches I’ve seen, and they do make some noticeable changes to the overall sound quality. In top of that, KZ/CCA make their switches very easy to understand and use. I realize that many folks are sick and tired of the switches. To that I’d simply tell you too… maybe… not look at them. I don’t get the hatred, I really don’t. You can tailor the sound to more fall in line with what you enjoy. How is this a bad thing? Anyways, CCA makes it easy on us hobbyists and I’ll try to break that down for you now…

What do they do?​

Like I said there’s four switches on each earphone labeled 1, 2, 3 or 4. You can either push the switch up or down. For review purposes “on” will be represented as “1” and “off” will be represented as “0”. So, all switches on will look like this: 1111. Basically, the first two switches (1 & 2) add one “level” of bass each with the switch turned on. I’m assuming by “level” they mean about 1-2 db’s each switch by the way. The third switch brings the mids & highs up 2 levels and the fourth switch simply turn up the entire frequency making the Hydro a bit more sensitive and a bit more energetic.

Do they work?
I can see how adding switches is mindless and more troublesome than not when the switches don’t do anything productive to the sound. In spite of that, the switches on the Hydro actually make a huge difference. Quite literally you can semi-drastically change the entire sound signature. You can go from a basshead set with the switches at “1100”, or you can go with a more treble loving setting with “0011”. Those are the extremes, but I actually favor the setting “1110” due to the fact that the sound is more balanced across the mix with a healthy dose of every area of the mix. Still V-shaped and fun, but also technically very good too. For your info I did use “1110” for the entirety of this review. I will briefly discuss other settings at times as well but for all critical listening this is the orientation that suited me best. So, to answer the question in the header “Do they work?”, I’d have to say that yes, the switches do work very well, and you’ll find some of the biggest changes with CCA’s switches then you’ll find on most any earphone with switches.

Design​

I gotta hand it to CCA. I know that the Hydro has the same type of design theme as a couple other KZ/CCA sets, but the Hydro just looks premium to me. What a beautiful looking iem. The faceplates are shined to a mirror polish with a convex little wave going down the center. You’ll also notice the name “Hydro” imposed on the faceplate as well, written in a very elegant cursive. I really enjoy the look of this set. Like I said before, the CCA Rhapsody is very similar in design, but the Hydro is easily their best looking iem that I’ve seen. How cool is it that I can peer into the Shells and see the inner workings. Plainly visible I can see both DD’s, and I can see the four dual array BA’s as well. I can see the tubing too. I realize that I may be going pretty hard in this, but I have to give credit where credit is due. The Hydro is a very good looking iem in my opinion.

Exceptional Craftsmanship
Immerse yourself in luxury with Hydro’s high-tech DLP high-precision resin 3D printing and personalized light luxury appearance design. Its high-density lightweight metal material offers a delicate touch and stunning metallic texture.
CCA Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Internals​

Now we get to the interesting part…the Internals. Again, CCA chose to stuff 10 drivers in total into these gargantuan shells. That’s two dynamic drivers and eight balanced armature drivers. That is a very high number of drivers to try to coherently tune together. It certainly isn’t easy. Beginning with the DD’s, CCA chose to go with the much beloved 8 mm dynamic driver which can also be found inside of CCA’s awesome set, the CCA Rhapsody (Rhapsody Review). They also added in their equally enjoyed Xun-7 dynamic dual cavity dynamic driver which can be found in the CCA HM20. To be precise, that’s a 7 mm dynamic driver. As far as the balanced armature drivers, CCA went with the 31376 BA’s that they’ve successfully used a lot recently. There are eight of these balanced armature drivers and each is situated in a dual array setup. All drivers seem to be of a high quality to my ears. I’m no expert on every driver in the market but I don’t detect distortions and these drivers all maintain very good control too. Beyond the drivers, CCA added in a crossover and their four-way frequency division technology which obviously helps to partition certain areas of the frequency to certain drivers.

Professional Acoustic Hardware Configuration
Elevate your audio experience with CCA Hydro’s advanced hardware setup, featuring 2 dynamic drivers and 8 balanced armatures. This exceptional configuration sets a new standard in HiFi IEMs, surpassing the capabilities of traditional earphones.
Unrivaled Bass Performance
Dive into deep, powerful bass with Hydro’s specially customized dynamic driver units. Experience bass and sub-bass response that outshines conventional IEMs, delivering a truly immersive listening experience.
CCA Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Fit / Isolation​

Okay now this is a divisive section. This is not going to be an iem that anyone and everyone can get to fit right. It’s simply huge! Small ears should seriously take a 2nd look at the size. Again, just like the AS24 and others, the Hydro is large so that it can house those 10 drivers. One benefit is the longer nozzles as you can downsize your eartips if need be and shove em’ in a bit deeper for a seal. As far as I’m concerned, I feel the Hydro was built to fit my ears. I guess it bares mentioning that I don’t have huge ears and the Hydro fits so nice you’d think they grew there. Still, I know a few friends who had serious troubles with the AS24 and so I’m sure there will be just as many who have issues with the Hydro. Fit aside, I also detect very nice passive isolation. Obviously, the Hydro isn’t attenuating all noises, but for casual listening iems I’d say they are better than your average set of earphones.

Drivability / Synergy ​

The CCA Hydro is rated between 15-20 ohms depending on your switch orientation as well as a sensitivity of around 102 db’s give or take. What that means is that the Hydro is a pretty sensitive iem. Meaning, I can listen at good volume and dynamics even with a phone if need be. I know because I always check my reviews with my iPad just to check for sensitivity and the Hydro was easy to drive with it. So, I’m assuming you should have zero issues with whatever you use. Heck, I even used the KZ AZ20 many times out and about and I found this pairing to be much better than I would’ve thought. Actually, the AZ20 drove the Hydro with good headroom to spare, believe it or not. Those earhook Bluetooth adapters aren’t meant to be overly powerful so that was good to hear.

Beyond sensitivity, the Hydro also pairs very well with many different source tonalities. This is mostly due to the switches ability to change up the signature to match whatever source I’m using at any given time. If I use a cooler source than I up the bass switches and turn off the mid/high switch. If I have a warmer source, I can choose to turn off some bass switches and enable the highs. Pretty simple and it works. I feel the Hydro simply has one of those sound signatures which does well no matter the source. Also, the Hydro most certainly scales with added output power and obviously scales to the ability of the source. Basically, better sources mean better sound. Pretty self-explanatory.

Mobile Listening ​

For mobile purposes I mainly used the IFi Go Blu (CS43131 dac chip) using the 4.4 connection which was a great Bluetooth option for me. The slight warmth of the Go Blu and expressive dynamics played right into the Hydro’s strengths. Plus, it has a boatload of power for such a device. The EPZ TP50 (CS43198 dac chip) is an excellent source, as well as the brand new Hidizs S8 Pro (also uses the CS43131 dac chip) as both seem to mesh tonally with the Hydro in different ways. I find it very cool that the Hydro doesn’t really have a tonal color that it cannot at least sound marginally good with. The only caveat was the Fiio KA3. For whatever reason the KA3 just inflated or exaggerated the upper-mids through the treble giving the Hydro a more tinny or metallic sound and depending on the track it would come across rather shrill. Even a closer to neutral source device (dongle dac) like the Aful SnowyNight is a fantastic option using its wealth of output (300mw @32ohms) through the 4.4 jack and its CS43198 dac chips. Such a clean and controlled sound with really awesome detail retrieval. I actually have a blast picking a few songs and going through all my devices seeking out synergy and differences.

More juice​

Now, when I use my more talented source devices it is pretty apparent that the Hydro does rise to the occasion. As it should. You have a better source sonically and you’ll likely have an earphone which reciprocates. There are three devices that I mainly use for my critical listening. Those being the Fiio Q15 (AK4499EX & AK4191EQ dac chips), the iBasso DX240 (ES9038Pro dac chip) with Amp8 MK2 attached and the Shanling M6 Ultra (AK4493SEQ velvet dac chip). Each one gives its own flavor and each one created nice synergy. I suppose for me, if I had to choose one that I feel really synergizes in audio euphoria per my particular tastes, I’d say the Shanling M6 Ultra is that device. What a silky, milky, and altogether resolving sound these two marry with. Just awesome. However, the other two which come across closer to neutral offered a fine contrast with the Q15 sounding ridiculously technically savvy with the Hydro attached.

What do you need? ​

I would think that whatever you have on hand will likely work. Just know that the Hydro does scale to a degree with amplitude, or power (in my opinion), and it does reward a more polished source. In most of my reviews I will usually tell you all that a decent Dongle Dac would suffice (with most iems anyways), and I would say that for the Hydro as well. All you need is a decently powerful dongle dac. I realize that we all have different financial situations, and some folks will only be able to afford the Hydro and the Hydro alone. So long as you have a 3.5 jack that you’ll be in business. If you can muster up a little bit more and get a $40-$50 dongle dac like the EPZ TP20 Pro for instance, it will be a drastically improved listening session from most smartphones (not named LG). I really enjoy the TP20 Pro (Review soon) with this set.

Sound Impressions​

Note: I want to preface this entire section with a couple things. I did burn the Hydro in for about 50 to 60 hours. I simply put it in my burn-in station and let it play “burn-in” tracks meant specifically for this purpose. They provide white noise, pink noise as well as many different looping tones which range throughout the spectrum, and I play those on a loop for days. I did notice that the bass tightened up. Of course that could just be me dreaming that up. But it did seem to have an effect on the transient response of the low-end. Also, I only use flac or wav files which are saved to my devices for any critical listening. I primarily listen with the UAPP app which is downloaded on all my devices as well as Hiby Music and Poweramp (at times).

No hype…​

The CCA Hydro seems to me to be the culmination of years of tinkering on KZ/CCA’s part. Years of hybrids within the budget sector have slowly and incrementally evolved into what I have before me now. I’ll just get this out of the way so that there’s no confusion; the CCA Hydro might just be the best hybrid iem that they’ve ever produced. It’s a fine set folks. I do believe the Hydro can and will compete with most hybrids within its price point ($100-$150). I didn’t say it’s better, but I did say the Hydro can compete and I’m sure that some would take that conservative statement even further. I’m not making any grand proclamations here, I’m not saying the Hydro punches above its price (it does… lol) or is the greatest thing since the invention of earlhones. I’m not doing that. This isn’t a hype piece folks. I’m not into that. I’m simply saying what I hear. This is a fine set.

Tonality​

The CCA Hydro comes across with very nice timbre for a 10-driver hybrid with a warm hue against a neutral canvas. The low-end & the treble region are emphasized no matter your switch settings. The tonal color of the overall signature does depend to some point on what switches you use. I told you I’m using (mainly) the “1110” setting. To my ears this setting provides a warm/neutral sound but tilting more towards the left (warm). I hear a very well-done V-shaped sound. Using the switches will change up the sound enough to make a noticeable difference in the overall listening experience.

The Hydro comes across with a good balance of smooth and crisp. Macro-dynamics have good energy on the Hydro as well. The Hydro does have a heavier presence down low, more full sounding and weighted. Hydro also has good energy and sprightliness towards the top end as well. Note weight is pretty nice too. There’s a certain richness to the sound while still feeling open and separated for instruments and voices. Transients are generally tight enough to cleanly contour most notes past the bass region and resolution is nice. It’s a pretty clean sound. Nothing grainy or muddy to my ears with “1110”. Possibly the more bass heavy settings can get a bit too full or bloated for some, but for the most part I don’t hear that. Furthermore, the Hydro doesn’t shy away from the technical stuff either as detail retrieval is very nice and imaging is nice too. The stage is big, round, pretty deep for a $120 iem with evident layering ability.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s ​

Starting with the bass. The Hydro can absolutely BANG! No doubt about it. Can the Hydro become a basshead set? It can get close I suppose. Yet using my favored setting (1110) I hear a very mid-bass focused sound, punchy too, with decent extension into the lowest of lows. Timbre is great down low with good transient swiftness per the tuning.

The midrange has a nice lean-lush note body with a slight intrusion of the bass into the lower mids. There is a very slight recession in the low mids but they come across with good enough energy. The upper-mids are certainly the focus here. Female vocalists sound awesome with good tactility and instruments have a fine lined note definition that is both transparent and shimmery. The treble region does not lack energy at all. This is a vibrant treble that is very nuanced and textured. While smoother in the note body there is still a good bite and micro-dynamic control as detail retrieval is quite good.

Treble transients have a tight attack through release sounding energetic and full of pep. Extension is pretty darn good too. Now, at times the Hydro may come across a bit too bright for some, maybe a slight bit too shouty or shrill depending on your switch settings. Still, when I use the “1110” I do not hear that nearly as much as the brighter switch settings. The graph below shows the “0000” setting for reference, sorry I do not have a graph with every switch setting.

Bass Region ​

It Bangs! ​

The first thing I’d say about the bass region on the CCA Hydro is that it can flat-out GET-IT! It’s emphasized quite a bit with a big pregnant hump cresting out at the mid-bass and spilling over into the midrange adding a slight warmth. Like I said earlier, this set can bang! With a 9-12-ish dB bass shelf (depending on settings) the low-end carries a good amount of weight in any switch orientation. That said, using my favored switch settings I found that the bass is offset a bit better with the treble region, leaving a less bulbous bass than other settings. This is a low-end which can go from just shy of basshead, to pretty well balanced and everything in between. Certainly, on the heavy side which will provide heavy kick drums, bass guitars, synth, and provide some very meaty and fun bass drops.

CCA Nailed it!​

I should also note that for the size and emphasis of this bass region… it isn’t sloppy at all. I hear very good tactility, texture and a clean impact. Perhaps a little soft at attack at times but not sloppy. The Hydro has very clean notes, clean hits, resolute and on point. The bass has a snap to it. Also, decay is on the tighter side of atmospheric, if that makes sense. Meaning, you have this forceful attack with a slightly lingering decay which I tend to enjoy. You can tell this is a good DD impact and decay. The body of the notes are dense, centered and authoritative, and the initial attack at the crest of a note seems to have a relatively hard snap to it. The Hydro has a controlled slam listening with the Hydro. There’s good depth in the bass with well-done layering of sub & mid-bass notes. Honestly, for a larger bass section, I think CCA really nailed this tuning down low.

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass comes through with a rigid and concrete-hard lower bass drone which gives off some nice haptic reverb and vibration. It’s certainly a physical bass and it really shows up on tracks which cater to that. Yet the sub-bass isn’t intrusive at all and doesn’t spread its influence past the bass region to an annoying degree. At least for me. It’s kept clean and tidy on the Hydro, which is really nice to hear. You find that on tracks like “Mancey” by Andrew Bird. You can hear it right at the outset of the song, it’s a low droning, air-moving, and sonorous bass guitar which serves as the foundation of the track. The Hydro doesn’t mince words here. It rumbles deeply and with nice sounding density (if you’re into that). Having said that, the sub-bass doesn’t really veil, cast a shade, or bloat the midrange. A cleaner approach against the deep rumble. It’s pretty well done. Also, the sub-bass is not the focus of the low-end as far as emphasis is concerned. I would never say it’s rolled off, but there’s a mild downhill slope from the mid-bass. Still, I don’t feel that anything lacks at all. Listening to “Heavy is the Ocean” by Bush it’s very apparent just how deep the Hydro can represent my music. This is a track that grumbles and growls right away progressively getting more intense and carries this deep pitched and solid rumble all the way through to the main verse. Like a lead-in almost. The Hydro doesn’t let me down and adds a tactile and convex type of guttural and very sonorous bass.

Mid-bass​

This is an area which slams with some good force on “1110”. Who am I kidding, it slams with any switch setting. Again, this is a more pregnant mid-bass that is kept pretty darn clean and doesn’t muddy up any other area of the mix at all. It’s hard to not at least be semi impressed here. The mid-bass notes never feel too muddied or too slow in my opinion. For me that is. You may feel different. Which isn’t the easiest thing to do with a more emphasized bass at $120. Granted, it’s not unheard of either, it’s just nice. Perhaps with the heavier bass settings you’ll have a slightly muddier experience, but in the “1110” I hear a pretty clean sounding low-end with a heavy but also concise thump and slam.

Mid-bass cont…​

The track “All Night” by Big Boi (former Outkast member) has a very reverberant steady bass drop and the Hydro sounds really great. It’s deep, textured, and keeps the midrange almost untouched apart from some warmth given. Big Boi’s voice seems unsullied from the bigger bass section. “Privileged Rappers” by Drake is another track with a very concise, clean, and robust bass. “Peace and Love” by Red Hot Chili Peppers has some of the deepest bass guitar and the Hydro shows off on this track a little bit. Very deep in its pitch with good control. The Hydro is ductile in the way it portrays each undulating bass guitar groove, without sounding compressed or flattened. “Move Along” by the All-American Rejects also shows off the Hydro’s abilities with this track’s thundering kick drums. I hear a nice tacky wet egde on the initial strike followed by a cavernous hollow boom. This track has successive kick-drums beats and each one is satisfying. If you like a slightly bigger bass than I’d suggest at least looking at the Hydro.

Downsides to the Bass Region​

Obviously, anyone who detest a larger bass section will probably not want to take part in the Hydro. It is a very much emphasized bass region although I don’t feel I hear exactly what the graph indicates that I should hear. At any rate, some folks don’t want that bulbous and rumbly bass and would rather have a tight and contoured BA style low-end. I get that. I could also say that in some switch orientations you will hear a slightly muddier presence. What I mean is that you don’t always have the counter of a more emphasized treble region with some settings like “1100” etc. Having said all of that I do want to state that I never consider this set a basshead iem. The graph shows this very convex hill within the mid-bass, but it never shows itself that excessive in real-world listening. Not to me anyways. The Hydro simply has very nice bass and a quality bass for an emphasized low-end. But I don’t consider this a basshead set. So bassheads may want to pass on it. Beyond that I think that most folks will be able to appreciate the low-end here and what these dual drivers can do.

Midrange​

The mids come across very well. No this isn’t some vocal-centric iem that will astound you with its ability to put vocalists on a pedestal. It isn’t quite that. This is a V-shaped set. Still, the midrange is very clean and very resolute. Even with a “slight” low-mid recession, I still hear a well highlighted and open sound. Never really foggy or veiled. Instruments are pretty much on point and imaged well, separated well and even crisp. However, it isn’t the type of “crisp” that sounds edgy or metallic. This is a clean crisp attack with a smooth body to notes. Note weight is a very nice version of lean-lush. There isn’t any extra fat on the bones, if you will. But at the same time each note does have a certain solidity to them. The midrange is also nicely detailed and nice resolution with good cohesion and good cadence for a set costing $120-$130. I hear nice vibrance throughout as well with a transient response that is pretty precise without sounding thin, anemic and analytical to my ears. Harmonics hang around just long enough but never overstay their welcome, so to speak. Also, timbre is close to natural. You still have that slight “balanced armature timbre” to a degree. Yet on the Hydro I really don’t hear that as I usually do. Granted…it’s there, but simply not an annoyance or a “con” for me. There’s an open and airy sound within the midrange with obvious layering as well.

Lower-midrange​

Males come across pretty spotless in their note definition. Partly this is due to the low-end precision and the sanitized nature of the spectrum as a whole. Like I said, there is the slightest recession, but that recession doesn’t really come across as pushed back. It just isn’t as vibrant as the rest of the midrange. Males still have good note body. Not thin by any stretch of the imagination. They are a speckles version of warm, which is very good to hear. Again, I don’t want to come across as though I’m hyping this set to the moon, but it’s refreshing to hear a good hybrid sound that actually does compete with some of the better iems in the price point. The lower-midrange has a nice part to play in that.

Low-mids cont…​

Tracks like “Rome” by Dermot Kennedy is a great example of how his voice cuts through so well with a nicely defined note structure and body. His voice is already harder and not as soft. His voice is edgy and composed and so the Hydro really creates a nice clean note edge in his vocals. What I like is that there is actual body behind his voice. The song “I Am the Highway” by Audioslave features Chris Cornell‘s (RIP) melodically raspy and gritty voice wonderfully. So many sets can and will lose their control with his voice. They’ll lose that edge. Grain and fuzz will be introduced into the sound at the outline of his vocals. However, the Hydro doesn’t really do that. This may be in part because of the warmth and body and smoother undertones. Even so, the Hydro does do those crisp inflections to his voice very nicely too. Instruments in this region sound natural and I didn’t hear anything which sounded off about them.

Upper-Midrange​

The upper-mids are where I feel that the Hydro excels the most within the midrange. This is a highly resolved upper midrange. However, that high resolution doesn’t steal the emotion from female voices like some sets can do. Basically, the Hydro didn’t necessarily have to sacrifice note body to get that resolve. It isn’t anything even close to analytical but the upper mids are transparent and highly detailed. Females like Rachael Scott from the band Lake Street Dive sound absolutely gorgeous. Obviously, there are sets which can pull off female voices better, but remember, this is a V-shaped iem here. Not vocal-centric. Anyways, in the Lake Street Dive track “I Can Change”, Rachael’s voice is simply beautiful. Her voice comes across full & open sounding with this lush vibrance against the rest of the melody. Perhaps some folks will feel that the upper-mids are too elated or shouty for them, but not me. Maybe those sensitive to upper-mid shout I suppose. The track “Stampede” by Jess Williamson is another example of a vibrant sound and a well delineated voice. Almost highlighted. Instruments around her voice don’t come across stuffy or too complicated. Tonality and timbre may be a bit less natural but not bad by any stretch. The layering in this track is nice as well. Front to back there is a 3d style depth to the song which is good to hear.

Instruments in the midrange​

Instruments in this region don’t always come across perfectly naturally. Let me just start with that. Of course, I really enjoy how they do come across, but I figured it made sense to at least speak in that. Also, it isn’t like instruments (and voices for that matter) sound wholly unnatural either. That said, instruments also are very precise and pinpoint in their separation and imaging with good air between all instruments while they also come across highly detailed in my opinion. Stuff like finger slides on a guitar, breath on mics, different harmonics etc. They’re fairly easy to pick apart for me. Honestly, I don’t hear anything strident or metallic. Nothing too knife edged or grainy either. Strings have that controlled edge to them. Violin generally can sound anywhere between silvery and mellifluous. Piano has that harmonious tunefulness with nice weight to each note (depending on the track of course). Percussive instruments all have a certain snap to them. Good crispness at attack. Whether it be snares, cymbals, bass drum, triangle, they all have that last little bit of extra energy to make them pop. Instruments generally sound nice. I won’t sit here and map out 100 different examples as that is too much for anyone. But I will say that nothing is so out of whack that it’s a problem.

Downsides to the Midrange​

One thing I would say off the bat is that the timbre isn’t perfect throughout. I should say that this is to be expected in a KZ/CCA set. However, I really don’t think it is as apparent as many sets from the brand. Having said that, this really isn’t an issue for me as the sound is still musical and very clean. Also, many sets from many brands display this with balanced armature drivers. Also, the midrange may be too bright or shouty for those sensitive to it. I know plenty of folks who would much rather have a warm to dark sounding midrange with an even richer note body. So, I could see how some wouldn’t really dig this set. Other than those two subjective issues (not really issues) I feel that the Hydro does a great job of balancing the technical stuff, resolute, tight transients, micro-dynamics, details, with at least some good musicality and emotion. Basically, KZ/CCA have come a long way in their balanced armatures and the tuning of those BA’s. The mids are nice.

Treble Region​

Emphasis​

The highs on the CCA Hydro can go from very bright to fairly bright depending on your switch selection. Using “1110” I don’t find them too piercing for my ears. In fact, I feel the treble fits the overall tuning very well. This is not the most crisp or crunchy treble I’ve ever heard, but it is very well detailed. I hear a smoother treble yet with very good transient attack through release. At least that I can tell. This is a nicely brilliant treble with very good energy, it’s sprightly, vivacious, and nicely controlled in that energy, it’s good. Of course this is my definition of “good”. I could certainly envision other people (who don’t want a brilliant and emphasized treble region) not thinking it’s very “good”. That said, I don’t feel this is one of those forced resolution situations either. Like I said, the treble fits the overall tuning scheme here with an appropriate level of emphasis that counters the bass region well. Of course, you can dial that in to better suit your tastes a little bit with the switches. I really don’t get that raucous or shrill sound from this set up top. I don’t hear anything shouty or too harsh. Side note, there is a slight metallic edge to notes in the treble region. Nothing that is bothersome to me, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least bring it up. Anyways, as far as the actual level of emphasis is concerned, I think the Hydro will fit many folks’ ideal brilliance. Again, you have switches to make some changes if you’d like.

Refined? ​

There’s a refinement in this treble region which shows it face in the bite you get in each note. Now, I am in no way comparing this to much more expensive sets which perform even better. Nor am I saying that the treble equals better driver tech like EST drivers for example. I think my praise comes from the fact that KZ/CCA seem to have really dialed in their approach in his set. Think of all the KZ/CCA iems and on many of them the main complaint will be the treble region. So much so that when a set like he Hydro actually sounds refined, controlled and cohesive, it is something to talk about. The truth is the treble is pretty well done. You’ll notice many sets dial back this region on purpose. It’s better to have a decent warm to dark treble than to have a shrill and piercing treble that is hard to control. The Hydro seems to have done well in this regard. It is brilliant and treble notes do have that subtle bite. Details are easily illuminated and there is good spacing between instruments.

Speedy treble​

This treble region is most certainly one which can handle complicated tracks rather easily. Especially when I listen with something like the Fiio Q15. Those two coupled together can take on most anything. Listening to Billy Strings in the track “Ice Bridges”, the Hydro literally hits every note with good separation to my ears. His tracks feature rapid fire banjo, mandolin and guitar play and Ice Bridges is no different. The Hydro truly stays at pace with this song very well. I use Billy Strings as an example often to try I get a sense of how review sets can handle those fast and precise notes without blending or meshing together. The Hydro does well folks.

Extension​

Extension is also very good on this set. The upper treble misses almost no info at all and does so with a relatively good timbre to my ears. Of course, nothing is perfect, but I don’t hear splashiness from the secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike for example. Listening to “In Bloom” from Nirvana you’ll hear those defined cymbals crashing away and the Hydro really does keep a good body, they aren’t just a mess of treble sheen, and they stay fairly well controlled. It isn’t just cymbals though. There is texture in the upper treble (basically all the upper treble is), there’s air and openness in the upper treble and it isn’t artificial to my ears or glassy like so many sets can sound like. For example, the upper harmonics of an electric guitar sound intact and energetic without coming across shrill to my ears. Violin close to this region has that edge and tactility. So yes, the extension is pretty good and does well to complete the sound when listening to my music.

Downsides to the Treble Region​

Of course, the biggest drawback of a larger emphasis of the treble region will be for those folks who cannot handle it. Some people are very sensitive to treble brilliance and brightness. Granted, I wouldn’t necessarily call the Hydro’s treble super bright, but even so it may be too much for some hobbyist’s ears. I understand this completely. I had to basically grow into enjoying a bright treble. Now I can very much appreciate it. Some people I know, audiophile people who really enjoy a good dark treble region. Treble that still has that highly resolving sound and treble punch and bite but simply comes across less enthusiastic. I feel that brightness is probably the most polarizing aspect of this set.




Full review can be found HERE

​

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

Folks, the soundstage is very well laid out. It sint some coliseum or stadium in my ears. It’s above average though in width and has a tall presence too. However, what I thoroughly enjoy is the depth of the sound field. CCA did a good job of creating actual layers to the sound. A psycho-acoustic front to back rendering of the sound which absolutely brings in an almost 3D sensation. This will vary by the recording, but the Hydro does have that sense of depth which to my ears is great to hear.

Separation / Imaging​

Another string point of the Hydro’s tuning comes in its control over the spectrum. This control is a huge contributing factor in its ability to separate elements of the stage. Instruments and voices both seem to be well compartmentalized and delineated. Obviously, this can all derail on a poorly recorded track or a highly complicated track. However, for he most part the Hydro does very well. Transients are tight, the sound is very resolving and clean, the stage is nicely wide and deep too. Each of these attributes helps instruments to sound as though they have their own little space, partitioned off from the rest of the instruments and vocals. The same can be said of the Hydro’s ability to image the stage as imaging is pretty much pin point in this set. Layering is nice as well.

Detail Retrieval ​

When listening for the minutia within my music I rarely had any trouble with the Hydro. Perhaps this is close to the most technically adept iems that CCA has ever produced. I know that is an easily debatable thing to say. Still, the Hydro really does bring out the subtleties in a nicely refined way for the price. Really bass heavy tracks may mask things to a degree and tracks featuring a ton of treble activity may as well. Though for the most part I’d say that the Hydro is certainly a very good detail set. Is it the best in the price point? No, I don’t think it is. There are iems around that price and even under the price of the Hydro which are quite literally tuned to be technical beasts. That said, the Hydro does a very good job at detail retrieval. For all the reasons I outlined in the “Separation / Imaging” section before this the Hydro does a fine job.

Comparisons​

Note: I simply want to preface this section by explaining that these comparisons are not to establish which set is best. It is not a duel of the death. That is unhelpful to everyone. Plus, everyone is different in so many ways. The best I can do is try to establish some differences as best I can. Also, I am only speaking in very general terms. I am not going to go too in depth either as I do have to watch my word count. This is always a problem for me.

CCA Rhapsody ($68)​

The CCA Rhapsody (Rhapsody Review) from the same brand as the Hydro is truly a special iem at its price point. Easily one of the better iems you can find at its price. Heck, there are times you can find the Rhapsody for as low as $48. A truly special deal for what you get in return. The Rhapsody is a hybrid iem consisting of dual dynamic drivers and four balanced armature drivers. Folks, I really gave CCA it’s props for that set. An easy recommendation. This is a set which came hot on the heels of a string of very good sets from KZ/CCA. I realize it doesn’t make much sense to pit the Rhapsody against the Hydro, but I do think it may help some people to understand the Hydro a bit better because of it.

Differences​

Aesthetically there really isn’t much which separates these two. They have the exact same mold of their shell. Exact same size, exact same shape, exact same nozzle length and width. The design is slightly different, but the materials are exactly the same. Same high polish faceplates, both have a minimalist approach, both have their names written in elegant cursive, both have a transparent housing, and both have four tuning switches. Obviously, the Hydro has the better cable but that’s only if you purchase the package with the better cable. Other than that, there really isn’t much difference thus far. Obviously, the driver configuration is similar but of course the Hydro has four more balanced armature drivers and the DDs in the Hydro are better. The Hydro uses the Xun-7 driver which is a quality DD along with the same 8mm driver as the Rhapsody. So, there are many similarities.

Sound Differences ​

Between the two the Hydro isn’t as warm as the Rhapsody with better note density across the mix and a more 3d style stage as well. The Hydro has a little bit more of a crispness to it whereas the Rhapsody is basically smooth at all times. The bass region hits a hair deeper and with a slightly more weighted boom on the Rhapsody. Though the Hydro has better clarity, definition, as well as a faster bass that can handle more while also having better control. The Hydro’s midrange has a much cleaner sound altogether with better detail retrieval and transparency. Rhapsody has a leaner note body and feels more recessed to the Hydro’s faster transient response but also more dense note body. Also, the Hydro has a bit more shimmer and vibrance in the upper midrange. Both sets have a nicely extended treble region, but the Hydro is certainly a step up in this regard. Hydro has more defined treble notes and details arise easier on the Hydro as well. Honestly, the Hydro is truly a step up in almost all ways. Unless you yearn for a slightly more bass heavy sound.

Technicalities​

The Hydro wins out almost across the board here. Whether it be separation of elements of the stage, Imaging of those elements. The Hydro comes across with cleaner and more rapid transients throughout. Detail retrieval is simply better on the Hydro too. Lastly, the stage is close on both of these sets as far as width and height is concerned. However, the depth of field is better on the Hydro.

Further thoughts on this comparison​

As if I thought this would go any other way when I set out to actually compare these two sets. It was very one sided to be honest. The Hydro simply has the more coherent replay while also having four more drivers on each earphone. It has better control over the frequency and the Hydro comes across with less of a metallic tinge in the upper portions of the midrange and treble region. I really do enjoy both sets and these differences are minor. However, we pay a lot of money in this hobby for small differences. Honestly, the Hydro is simply the more controlled, coherent, and polished iem. As the cost difference would suggest.

Hidizs MS3 ($120)​

Okay, now this is a much fairer comparison. I chose one of the best hybrid iems that $120 can get you in the Hidizs MS3 (MS3 Review). This is a set that really does compete well against any and every iem within its price point. The MS3 is a three-driver hybrid with a 10.2 mm dynamic driver covering the lows and mids and two Knowles balanced armature drivers taking on the highs. Hidizs really did a great job on this set, and it is a great one to just chill with and enjoy your music. They used quality drivers; it has a quality build and quality tuning was done to make a fantastic iem for the price.

Differences
Starting with the build, the MS3 is built like a tank. Made entirely of alloy it is simply built better. Not to take anything away from the Hydro either as it’s built very well. The design is different. It’s really up to you to decide what it is that you like better. For me I do enjoy the design of the Hydro better but the MS3 is a dope look too. Both are slick looking in my opinion. That Hydro is just elegant though. Internally, the Hydro has many more drivers to occupy the different areas of the spectrum which should be a major advantage. Still, Hidizs really uses quality drivers in its Knowles BA’s as well as its beefy DD. Without question the MS3 comes better equipped. Much better tips, much better cable, it has a pouch too.

Sound Differences​

These two sets have a lot more similarities about them than I originally suspected. It wasn’t until I spent about an hour comparing them that I noticed those similarities. The Hidizs MS3 is easier to drive by a small margin, better for less powerful sources. To be honest, both sets are a hint warmer than neutral with the Hydro coming across just a bit warmer. Extension is better in the Hydro both ways to my ears. The bass on the Hydro is deeper, more robust, and also a bit better layered. While the MS3 has the tighter low-end, more defined. Also, the MS3 only has a hair less weight in this region. Mid-bass is just much more pronounced in the Hydro. The midrange of the MS3 is leaner, less solid in its note body while the Hydro carries just a touch more weight. Both sets have that slightly recessed low-mid with a more vibrant upper-mid. However, the Hydro is a bit more resolute, detailed and does have a touch better control over the mids. I noticed the MS3 has a slight bit more of a tendency towards sibilance. The treble region of both iems is energetic and extends well. However, the MS3 simply doesn’t have the resolve of the Hydro. The Hydro has better detail retrieval. That said, the MS3 has better timbre up top with less of a chance for harshness. I would say that the MS3 probably has the better timbre overall in fact. Closer to natural I would think. The Hydro has more energy across the mix too.

Technicalities​

Looking at the soundstage, the MS3 is slightly narrower and has less of a 3d type stage featuring less depth of field. The Hydro has more of a holographic sense and does have better layering. Details retrieval is better on the Hydro, once you get past the bass region that is. Both sets offer good instrument separation, but the Hydro does edge out the MS3. Imaging is the same, both are very good for the price. Transient attack through decay is quicker and cleaner on the Hydro while the MS3 is more atmospheric to my ears.

Further thoughts on this comparison ​

I realize this looks pretty bad for the MS3, but honestly these two sets are much more alike than they aren’t. Even with 10 drivers against 3. I think timbre-wise the MS3 probably wins out along with low-end but in every other aspect the CCA Hydro does out duel the MS3. That all said, I truly enjoy both iems for what they are and have a great time listening to both.

Is it worth the asking price?​

I always hate answering this question. To be 100% honest with you all. I basically only review stuff I enjoy and so the answer to this question will almost always be yes. Unless something is drastically overpriced. However, most of the time it’ll be yes, because I like it. Still, I hate answering a question for you when the answer to this question is for me. Without question the CCA Hydro is worth every penny of that $120. Of course, there are some very nice hybrid iems at its price point and so there may be some sets which suit you better. That +$100 price point is a tough one. You have sets like the Simgot EM6L (EM6L Review), Kiwi Ears Quartet (Mahir’s Quartet Review), Fiio FH3, Sound Rhyme SR5, Juzear Flame, Celest Phoenixcall (Phoenixcall Review), Hidizs MS3 (MS3 Review), Rose Technics Star City 5 Pro (Star City 5 Pro Review), Tinhifi T5S (Sean’s T5S Review), Letshuoer Gizaudio Galileo (Mahir’s Galileo Review), among many others and yes, I know I left many out. That said, it would be hard to find anything that has even close to the driver count (not that driver count equates to good sound) of the Hydro. Also, you be hard pressed to find a set that is outright better technically as well. For me, the answer is a resounding yes.

The Why? ​

Because the CCA Hydro is equipped with 10 drivers in total, and it is the culmination of many years of trying to get this hybrid thing right. The Hydro is built very well and has a very minimalist but slick design and will look rad in your ears when out and about. Yes, the packaging and accessories aren’t the best, but you can pick up the better cable for the Hydro which is nice I suppose. Still, the real worth is in the sound and the sound does not lack on the Hydro. Truly this is a very good hybrid set. I’m not saying there aren’t some fantastic hybrids around its price point, but the Hydro does excel in many ways. You have that big, fun and deep bass that is well controlled and clean with good depth. The midrange has nice note weight and is very well detailed, separated well, and images very well too. The treble is sprightly, has nice brilliance, with very good upper treble extension and can handle just about anything you throw at it. Details come out of the woodwork with this set in my ears and resolution is very high across the mix. I’m not trying to convince any of you but for $120 I think this set is fantastic. Yes, the Hydro is worth the asking price.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the CCA Hydro ratings below, that would be $100 to $150 hybrid driver earphones. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $100 to $150 is a smaller sized scope of iems yet it is very competitive. However, it’s also a small enough pool of iems that seeing a “9.0” for example, shouldn’t be too amazing to see. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 8.3 Built well but not tops in class.

–Look: 9.0 Clean, fresh, simple, elegant.

–Fit/Comfort: 8.9 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 6.5 Accessories isn’t CCA’s strong suit.

–Overall: 8.2

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 8.9 Great timbre for a hybrid.

–Bass: 9.3 Deep, robust, impactful.

–Midrange: 9.0 Resolving, detailed, dynamic.

–Treble: 9.3 Extended, detailed, precise.

–Technicalities: 9.7 All technicalities are great.

–Musicality: 8.9 Nice mix of musical and technical.

–Overall: 9.2

Ratings Summary:​

To summarize the ratings above I decided to only include hybrid iems between the price of $100 and $150 US. I figured this rating made the most sense for anyone seeking out a hybrid set. Hopefully it’s helpful and if not then please comment. I never know if these ratings help anyone at all. You all know how I feel about ratings, they stink. They leave out nuance and rarely tell you anything useful. Looking at each rating I don’t see many that I feel I would have to argue against. Which is rare. Usually someone from the peanut gallery will chime in with his or her complaint. Oh well, such is life. We are all so different and how we perceive music can be drastically different among about a hundred other variables. So, as always… Grains of salt.

Explain Yourself! ​

Honestly, I don’t feel there is really a Rating that is very controversial here. If I were to pick one that may get some eye rolls it would probably be “musicality”. I gave the Hydro a “8.9” in musicality. I actually had a hard time with this one. By the way, musicality is a dreamt-up word which has no quantifiable standard and can mean just about anything to everyone. That’s it. It’s another ridiculous audiophile term that we like to think is an across-the-board understanding. Musicality to one may be polar opposite to musicality for another person. So yes, this is a Rating I could see someone thinking I’m crazy. Some folks think of musicality as though it has to be warmer sounding, less analytical. That makes no sense. Others feel that the word musical means the opposite of that…Yada, Yada, Yada. Folks, this is a subjective game, and we are all right 100% of the time. Beyond musicality, I suppose some folks may get on me about the “midrange” rating. Maybe its timbre isn’t organic enough for some, or maybe the midrange isn’t warm enough for another. Who knows. That’s about all I got though. This is a good set from CCA folks.

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the CCA Hydro, I must first thank the good people of KZ/CCA. Thank you very much for always letting me do my thing and never asking me to tilt my words in a more favorable direction towards your products. I have always had a good working relationship with this company because they let their products speak for themselves and when the dust settles, they don’t run even if I give a not so good review. I respect that quite a bit. So, no matter how you feel about the brand, I have no qualms with them. They make good products.

Different Perspectives​

Friends, please check out other thoughts of the CCA Hydro. We are all very much different as each one of us has our own ideals, likes & dislikes. We all have different gear, different hearing abilities, and we all haven’t been down the same journey through audio. Each of these can completely skew our thoughts for any particular product. It will be very beneficial to you if you just click a few more links. Don’t simply rely on me. I’m only one man and while I do give you my absolute most honest take, the next guy may feel entirely different. So please check out other thoughts about the Hydro. I think I’m done folks. I hope you all are well and good. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

​

Celest Pandamon 2.0 Review​

Full review can be found HERE

​

Celest Pandamon 2.0​

Intro​

Well, hello everyone, today I am reviewing one of the latest iems from the brand Celest Audio named the Celest Pandamon 2.0. Of course, the “2.0” references the fact that this model is indeed the successor to the OG Pandamon, naturally called “Celest Pandamon”. I actually reviewed the OG Pandamon (Pandamon Review) and was truly impressed. In fact, I still believe that the OG is a fantastic option at around $26 (last seen on Aliexpress). Which is an enormous sale price from its initial MSRP of $79. For that price it’s probably one of the better iems you can buy. At any rate. I thoroughly enjoy the 1st Pandamon which helped make famous the “Square Planar Driver” or “SPD”. At that time there were only a few sets floating around using the driver tech. Celest also has the Gumiho which is the set which revolutionized the tech. At least that I know of anyways. Well, now we have the latest addition to Celest’s lineup with the Pandamon 2.0, it looks as though we have a new and improved version of that same driver. It also appears that the newer version comes in with an MSRP that’s about $20 cheaper at $59 US.

Upgraded​

It’s also very apparent that there have been some aesthetic upgrades since the first Pandamon. It isn’t out of the question to say that the OG’s appearance was pretty polarizing. One might even say it was sort-of cartoonish. I certainly had to overlook the angry bear on the faceplates to enjoy the wonderful sound. Of course, that set was probably geared towards the younger generation. Well, this go-round Celest changed all of that with a gorgeous and appealing successor in the 2.0 that really is a special looking iem. More on that later. Also, like I said, there is an upgrade to the driver itself. Once again, we have a Kinera customized SPD driver, but now it’s supposedly better. I don’t know how it’s better, but that’s what the promotional material states. We shall see. Next, Celest also switched up the tuning. Now, when I read that I was a bit hesitant. Why change such a good thing? So, I guess we will find out about that too.

Celest​

I should add that Celest is a sub-brand of one of the more beloved audio brands… Kinera. Just by saying that you should at least perk up a little bit. Celest was created to be the budget arm of the Kinera umbrella. Of course, Kinera also has a sub-brand which is equally awesome in Queen of Audio (QOA). So, the lineage is there, and the doors are open for Celest to ride the Kinera wave, so to speak. However, I honestly feel that… from what I’ve heard from Celest… they’re creating waves all by themselves. I’ve reviewed a couple Celest iems in the recent past. Those sets are the Celest Pandamon (Pandamon Review), Celest Phoenixcall (Phoenixcall Review), and the ultra-budget Celest Wyvern Pro (Wyvern Pro Review). They do a fantastic job on a regular basis. From a build, design, & unboxing standpoint, as well as the actual sound of their products. Everything is usually covered. So, it’s always good to see a Celest/Kinera/QOA set to review.

Iron-eating beast​

They call it the Iron-Eating Beast. This is the actual face behind the name “Pandamon”. A ferocious warrior Panda! Well, to be perfectly correct, the image which was depicted was a bear which had black and white patterns. Hence the panda. This beast feasted on iron and copper (as one does) and has an extraordinary combat history. On a side note, this beast also had a penchant for sneaking into nearby homes and eating their copper and steel dishware, not joking. Enemies armor and devices for combat stood no chance against the iron crushing Jaws of Pandamon. We learn about this character in an ancient Chinese text… “The Classic of Mountain & Seas”. This story is where Celest draws its inspiration for the Pandamon series of iems. This tale is also known as “Shan Hai Jing”. Thought to be dated as early as the 4th century BCE, but the actual version we have today didn’t come around until the Han Dynasty. That we know of. This book is really a large collection of Chinese mythology and a very well regarded one if I’m not mistaken.

What’s in a name? ​

I say all of that to once again congratulate Celest/Kinera for another solid naming scheme. There is a lot to take away from how these audio brands name their devices. To a small extent anyways. You’ve probably read in some of my reviews where I do poke some fun at brands whose best effort to name their products is with “number names”. Not with Kinera, Celest & QOA. This is a brand who takes the careful thought and time to give their products a certain personality, if you will. Always there is a theme, or a story by which they use to name their iems. I am a huge fan of this. It shows that they care about their craft enough to give their products a certain identity. I like brands that show care for their artistry & put the effort in to create a theme. Also, it’s nice to follow along. At any rate, the Pandamon is a good character to use. I simply like the “not-so” cartoonish version.

Let’s dive in…​

I certainly want to see how well the 2.0 stacks up to the OG Pandamon. I have to admit that the 2.0 has some big shoes to fill as the OG has a very nice tuning. Also, I want to see how well the Pandamon stacks up to the sets within its price point. So with that, I think I’m ready to dive in folks. The Celest Pandamon…

Non Affiliated Purchasing Links:​

–Kinera Audio
–Amazon
–Hifigo

Gear used for testing​

–Ifi Go Blu

–Simgot Dew4x

–EPZ TP20 Pro

–EPZ TP50

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

This is a very quick rundown of the unboxing. Why do I do these? Anyways, the Pandamon 2.0 comes in a good-sized rectangular box with a nice moody purple mountain scene on the outer sleeve. Take the sleeve off to reveal the actual black box underneath. Open the box to get your first look at the very nice looking Pandamon 2.0 sitting pretty in some foam cut-outs. Next to the earphones is the black case. Inside the case you’ll find the eartips and cable as well. The whole package is up to par with $50 to $75 iems, in my opinion anyways. Kinera/Celest will always put together a well displayed first unboxing.

Eartips​

The eartips provided in the packaging are six pairs in total. There’re two different styles of tips. The first set (S, M, L) is a gray flanged and orange stem pair of what Celest calls their “608 balanced tips”. To be 100% honest, these tips look identical in almost all ways to the old school Fiio Bass tips. Or just a different colored KBear 07 tip. Same semi-wide bore, firm flange, and rigid stem. They are great tips. The second set (S, M, L) is a gray on dark gray pair of tips. Celest refers to these as their “221 vocal tips”. These tips are a shallower fit then the 1st pair and they also have a wider bore. Good tips as well. In fact, both sets are nice tips and should be great to have in a collection. I actually went with the 1st set which perfectly resemble the Fiio Bass tips and carry the exact sonic principles of the KBear 07 tips. They give the upper mids a slight vibrance and give the low-end some impact, some snap too, while being less fatiguing up top then the wide bore tips for me.

Tip-roll? ​

You may not enjoy the more neutral style of this set and may want just a touch more low-end oomph to your listen. For that I would point you towards a narrow bore tip. Any of them that I used would help give the Pandamon 2.0 that last little bit of low-end grunt while slightly attenuating the upper regions. I certainly don’t like the Pandamon 2.0 in that way, but I could see some folks wanting to change things up a bit. Some would say that foam tips would do the same thing, however I found that foam tips actually decrease the bass presence in the process on this set. Who knows, maybe it’s just my ear anatomy but I can assure you that this is what I have to report and what I heard. At any rate, it’s nice that you actually get nice tips for a change in a budget set. I would have thought nothing less of Kinera/Celest.

Carrying case​

I never use these things. Okay I can’t say never. I do occasionally take a carrying case with me when I’m out in the market or taking a walk. However, most of the time I don’t use them. Still, I know many folks who do. So, it is nice to see a decent case with the Pandamon 2.0. This is a smaller round case. Black in color. It has a faux leather type material covering it and it does have a working zipper (for a change). The included case is large enough to fit your earphones and a cable, maybe some extra tips too. However, it is also small enough to fit in your pocket and not look absolutely ridiculous. It’s a nice accessory and it’s a good case.

Cable​

Celest chose to offset the blue or black hues (whatever you choose at checkout) of the Pandamon 2.0 with a nice-looking pearl white cable. No, it isn’t the best wire that my eyes have ever seen, but also… the Pandamon 2.0 costs $59. It’s very nice for the price and nobody should complain because I’m telling you that you won’t find many outright better cables at that price. There are some outliers like the amazing cable that came with the Rose Technics QuietSea (thiccy-thicc gray fabric cable). Yet most of the time you are getting throw away cables that you will likely swap out anyways. I don’t feel that this is necessary at all. You can choose between the 3.5 single ended and 4.4 balanced jack options. I chose the 4.4 because I simply listen much more to 4.4 balanced on my sources. To each their own though. This cable is a 2-pin, straight plug, 5N silver plated copper cable with 49 strands and 4 cores in a circular braided design. It’s not super fat but it is lite enough to not tug on the ultra-lite Pandamon 2.0’s. I feel this cable is probably a good choice. It’s nice.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality​

I find the build quality of the Pandamon 2.0 to be pretty nice. I feel it is built to serve more of a function than anything. Made completely of a resin material which is very light in weight. I would argue that the Pandamon 2.0 may be one of the lightest iems that I have. The Kefine Delci is a close second. However, the Pandamon 2.0 only weighs about 3.5 grams, which is next to nothing. Hence the need for a slightly lighter cable. Now, one huge benefit of a build such as this, is that the Pandamon 2.0 will not induce fatigue on the listener due to its weight. I find it quite awesome that Celest was able to craft a set which is so lite without it feeling cheap. I don’t get that impression. This is a unique and structurally sound earphone and it’s made in typical Kinera fashion. Very nice.

Anyways, the Pandamon 2.0 are circular in build and much smaller than many other planar iems. Mainly due to the size of the SPD driver Celest was able to craft a set which would be great for those with smaller ears. The nozzle is medium in length. Not too long and also not too short. The nozzle opening at the tip is roughly around 6mm and so most any tips can be used with it. Celest also put a small vent hole near the two pin connectors as well. Again, at the end of the day, I do believe that the build was more functional than anything. This is a set that will not cause the listener to get fatigued over time and won’t come out of place due to the sheer weight of the housings. It’s a nice build, as always.

​

Design​

One of the coolest aspects of the Pandamon 2.0 is the beautiful look and design language used with this set. Again, the Pandamon 2.0 comes in two colorways, both blue and black. Both have transparent housings which showcase the neat looking square planar drivers. Additionally, the faceplates are actually hand painted! It is stated in the promotional material that the faceplates went through many different processes to present a more modest Pandamon “this time”. The difference from the cartoonist original Pandamon is quite a huge leap and much more respectable in my opinion. While I didn’t hate the OG design, it certainly wasn’t something I was willing to take out and be seen with. It was more for teenagers and those who could identify with the story behind the Pandamon. I actually love the design on the 2.0. The blue set is absolutely gorgeous with its deep indigo blue transparency. I love the cursive “Celest” so eloquently displayed on each faceplate area. The logo sits in the middle of a black canvas with tiny blue, white, & black speckles which are hand painted in such a way to mimic the look of what appears to be mountains or water splashing. I couldn’t think of a better sophomore try at this theme. It is much more mature and easier to get behind for more hobbyists.

Full review can be found HERE

Shell Design

Pandamon 2.0 adopts a translucent resin body shell with a hand-painted faceplate by artist, which has gone through several processes to present a modest and naive Pandamon, making Pandamon become gentle and dynamic.
Celest Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Internals​

This should be relatively quick. Celest chose to use their latest SPD 2.0 square planar driver. This driver does cover the full range of the spectrum quite nicely. I find that these square planar drivers are almost a good mix of DD energy and planar energy. Heck, there are times it sounds almost like a BA but with better low-end energy. It’s hard to put my finger on actually. That said, I really do enjoy these square planar drivers. They seem to be a comfortable median between planars and dynamic drivers. I can say one thing with 100% conviction though, the Pandamon 2.0’s “2.0” driver is a slight upgrade.

Kinera 10mm SPD 2.0 ™ (Square Planar Driver)

SPD™ 2.0 is an excellent full-range Square Planar Driver, based on reasonable structure and solid materials, compared with other driver have a small size, high sensitivity, smooth three-frequency articulation, balanced energy distribution characteristics. Ultra-low impedance makes it possible to drive a planar earphone from a mobile phone as well.
Celest Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Fit​

This will be an area that will depend wholly on your own ear anatomy. For me, the Pandamon 2.0 fits like a dream! This is an awesome set for fit and comfort. In fact, if the fit is good for you then the Pandamon 2.0 will be one of the most comfortable iems under $100. Obviously, you’ll have to find tips that seal well for you. Still, this is an extremely light iem folks. As honest as I can be, I don’t think I’ve had anything more comfortable in my ears for quite some time. Couple that with the big sound and there is just something special about that combo. The fit is great… If it fits you. I always wonder why I out this section in any review and always go back and forth about taking the time to add it in. Welp, the Pandamon 2.0 is my reason. Also, weirdly enough, the Pandamon 2.0 also does an admirable job with good passive noise isolation. I wouldn’t have thought that being the Pandamon 2.0 is a resin set, light as a feather and with a vent but… It does a good job here.

Drivability / Synergy ​

The Celest Pandamon is a really easy set to drive. This smacks in the face what we used to think that planar magnetic earphones were supposed to be. They are supposed to be hard to drive, hard to get the best out of them. Most planars will reward you with greater power and will sound more lifeless with less output. Not the Pandamon. With an impedance of only 9 ohms and a sensitivity of roughly about 108 db’s, the Pandamon 2.0 thrives with even low powered sources. Now, just like most iems, the Pandamon 2.0 will slightly scale with more juice. However, that is not a requirement at all. Even my iPad was able to bring this set to good volume. The Fiio UTWS5 made easy work of driving this set. So, you don’t need some massive uptick of power and should be perfectly fine driving the Pandamon 2.0, even with a phone not named “LG”.

Mobile Listening ​

When I’m out and about I love to have a few sources with me. I swap and switch out pretty regularly. I realize in the “Gear used for testing” section above that I list out a number of devices used. However, I use way more than that. Those are simply my most used devices. I did use quite a few more than what’s listed. One thing I found to be great was how the Pandamon 2.0 seems to pair with slightly warmer sources…sometimes. This wasn’t always the case but more often than not slightly warmer sources seemed to do well. However, I feel that far too often we consider “good synergy” to simply be the result of tonal coloration pairing. I don’t agree with that completely. I hear good results from both warmer and closer to neutral sources. Synergy is a tough thing to explain folks.

Nice pairings​

One great pairing is with the IFi Go Blu. It has a ton of power and a slightly warm skew to its sound, but it also has a very musical sound. Together they worked wonderfully over LDAC. Also, using the Simgot Dew4x was a real treat as well. I hear such a nice resolving sound and the Dew4x seems to provide a hint more depth than a lot of the other mobile sources. Also, the EPZ TP20 Pro. It has a nicely warm/neutral sound with warmer dynamics that simply fits the Pandamon 2.0 in a way which provides almost a milky sound with a boost to the low-end. So, there are a few different examples of good pairings on the go. I should add that more neutral sources don’t sound bad at all either. Something like the EPZ TP50 put on a technical clinic with the Pandamon 2.0 with great timbre. So, it really is dependent on the source and how it individually pairs with this $59 iem.

More juice​

Here is where I spend the greatest majority of my listening and without question my favorite source to use was the Shanling M6 Ultra. That velvet chip (AK4493SEQ Flagship dac) and its highly resolving sound was synergy at its finest for me. To me the Pandamon 2.0 scales very well with more advanced sources and will reward you for these types of pairings. I also feel that more power does tighten the transient attack through decay a bit as well. Maybe a bit more bass impact too but that is highly debatable.

What do you need?​

Pretty much what I’ve said, in my opinion anyways. I’d say just, have a source device that you enjoy with moderate power at the very least. Perhaps that is a dongle dac like I’ve mentioned above. However, if all you have is the money to purchase the Pandamon 2.0 and nothing else then I’d say you’d probably be okay with a simple phone through a 3.5 single ended jack.

Tuning Concept

Pandamon 1.0 sound fierce and in the tuner’s impression Pandamon has a very different character from the book. Therefore, in the Pandamon 2.0 tuning, the power of the sound to the mid-high frequency tilt, making the Pandamon 2.0 sound more rapid and relaxed, high-frequency extension is more excellent, so that the details of the song is detailed, easy to handle, such as ACG and a variety of other complex music.
Celest Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Sound Impressions​

Note: I just want to preface this section with a couple things. First off, I did burn in the Pandamon 2.0 for roughly about 50-60 hours. There wasn’t some huge change that occurred for me either, so I don’t know how imperative it is to do so. I listen using flac or better files which are stored on my devices. I also use the UAPP (USB Audio Player Pro) app. Occasionally, I use the Hiby Music app as well as Poweramp.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s​

Ialways add in this initial section into my reviews so that people can get a quick synopsis of my thoughts. I realize not everyone wants to read my longer reviews all the time. Of course, I elaborate in the following sections quite a bit more.

Listening to the Pandamon 2.0, I’d say that it comes across with a U-shaped sound. One thing is for sure, the midrange isn’t withdrawn or pulled back, certainly not attenuated. Instruments are more forward and so are vocals. Hence the “U-shaped” sound. The Pandamon 2.0 has a more relaxed energy yet doesn’t come across laid back, if that makes sense. Smooth over crisp, natural transients. Just smooth and musical, warm/neutral and clean. It’s one of those sets that can come across energetic and lively just as easily as it can inundate your temporal lobe with harmonious melodiousness. Just a free flowing and glass lined smoothness that rubs down those rough edges like water over a riverbed. Okay that was a bit romantic, but you get the point. For $59 it’s a nice sound. Is it for everyone? Absolutely not.

They can tune a set of earphones…​

There are good dynamics across the mix as the upper midrange/lower treble regions are elevated, adding vibrance and a sense of resolve to the sound as well. I feel that every area of the frequency is represented pretty well, with slightly less extension on each end of the spectrum. The Pandamon 2.0 does have some good macro-dynamics with a warm vibrant presence in my opinion. The dynamic expression is good and fun enough, definitely not boring, but there is a relaxed quality which is very nice to my ears. Beyond that, the Pandamon 2.0 doesn’t skimp on the technical stuff, not completely anyways. However, in the end I hear some nice musicality and an emotional skew to the sound which is great for just chillin’ and listening to your jams. Celest knows how to tune a set of earphones and while it may not be for everyone, it’s still a fine set.

Each 3rd of the mixed “condensed”​

I find that the sub-bass extension isn’t too deep or penetrative and doesn’t have a large amount of textured bite and haptic recognition that I enjoy. However, the Pandamon 2.0 still has enough grunt for most genres. It’s just moderate. There is good impact with a flattened attack, slightly softened but very well controlled. Decay is more like a tight DD, not quite like a planar.

The midrange has good note weight, especially nearing the low-mids. While the upper-mids have that shimmery quality to them. Again, this set presents vocals and some instruments slightly more forward and with good cleanliness. I find the mids to be kind of intimate, but also, they have good & quality timbre too. Nothing metallic or shouty.

The treble doesn’t have the best extension, but it is a lively enough treble. The lower treble especially. Certainly, enough lift to bring a clean and uplifted levity to the tonal color of this earphone. I hear no ear gouging peaks or unsightly sibilance. The treble is nice. Just enough energy to add some spice to the sound without oversaturating the mix in treble sheen.

Condensed technical stuff​

The stage isn’t what I’d call compressed, but it isn’t wide and spacious either. The extension both ways does hamper this a bit and lack of upper treble energy results in a less airy sound. However, the stage is decent. Separation is about average and wholly depends on the track being played. Imaging leaves a little bit to be desired, but again, alot depends on the track. Detail retrieval is actually pretty good so long as you aren’t playing a complicated song. Honestly, this is a good set, and I could see many folks really loving its sound. So, there you have the ultra-condensed version. In the next few sections, I’ll break down each 3rd of the mix…

Bass region​

I like the bass here. It isn’t the most pinpoint or exact in its textures. Then again it also isn’t a lazy or disheveled bass either. It’s nice. You don’t have that crystalline note structure all the time, and the bass does come across slightly softened at the crest of “some” notes…at times. That said, the bass has good control, it isn’t even close to sloppy and has enough impact to give kick drums that tacky edge and hollow boom. Of course, that “boom” may not be enough “boom” for some hobbyists, but there’s some boom. Again, not overdone. This is not an overly boosted low end, as the quantity really does fit the overall tuning very well. A few db’s here or there may throw the whole thing off and miss Celest’s target they were going for. Additionally, there’s a nice contrast against the lower-treble region creating a decent balance. Almost. The pendulum does tilt slightly to the right, but it’s within reason. Now, you do see the bass leach over into the midrange as there’s a little bit of carry over, but I don’t feel this is to a detriment. Instead, I personally feel it adds needed weight and warmth to male vocals. I don’t always need that granite hard density in my bass, and I don’t always need that low-droning rumble either. It just has to fit the overall sound character of the iem I’m listening to. In the case of Pandamon 2.0, I think it fits just fine.

Sub-bass​

The lowest of lows are not going to vibrate your ears or rattle your brain stem. This is a tastefully done rendition of sub-bass from the people at Celest. Now after saying that, I should also state that the Pandamon 2.0 is a bit reserved in this area. Not rolled-off per se, but slightly rolled-off. Sorry for the contradicting descriptions by the way. The Pandamon 2.0 doesn’t exactly have that earthy and grounded chasmic solidity that a dynamic driver can produce. It just isn’t that. Yet it isn’t devoid of some rumble either. It’s what we refer to as “moderate”. Another audiophile unquantifiable word that we use…a lot. Despite this moderate sub-bass quantity, I feel that the Pandamon 2.0 will rise to the occasion in many tracks which have a deep and bullish sub-bass. Especially in tracks that feature that heavy low reverb and drone. For instance, listening to “Mancey” by Andrew Bird, I do get that guttural sound to the extent that the Pandamon 2.0 can provide it. I don’t feel it lacks. It can be sonorous and reach some low pitches too. However, those descriptors aren’t maintained at all times. I would simply say that extension is not to the level of some other sets in its price point. Nevertheless, the sub-bass also won’t drown out other areas of the mix either. It’s a give and take hobby folks. The sub-bass has good control and even some good definition as well. Bassheads won’t be in love with this set, but I feel that most hobbyists will enjoy what Celest was able to accomplish here.

Mid-bass​

In my opinion, the mid-bass does have a slight bit more weight afforded to it than the sub-bass. In truth, the mid-bass does have some nice impact and actually has a good clean punch to it as well. This isn’t some “laid back” mid-bass as there is some liveliness and snappy spunk to it. Again, this is also an area which will rise to the occasion and provide some thump when needed. What’s more, it isn’t over cooked either. You don’t have the veil from a dominant bass region covering any other frequencies. In addition, the mid-bass has a nicely edged punch when needed, it has that textured impact when a track calls for it. However, in general it has a softer feel to it. It isn’t razor sharp in its attack unless a track specifically requires it. Moreover, this isn’t a traditionally big bass. Without question bass heads will want to look elsewhere. The Pandamon 2.0 has a tighter mid-bass with good agility but not quite as full as a dynamic driver, not as tight as the usual planar, or as defined as a balanced armature. It’s somewhere in between each of those. Bass guitar doesn’t always have that profuse reverb or fullness that I always want, but in all honesty the Pandamon 2.0 doesn’t miss by much. “2040” by Lil Durk is one of those tracks which doesn’t miss by much, though some folks may be wishing for a bit more thunder within its quantity. Still voluminous enough, still bulbous enough, but with a slightly smaller footprint than something like the Kefine Delci or CCA Rhapsody for instance.

Downsides to the Bass Region ​

If I were to spell out some flaws within the bass region I would first state that I don’t really see or hear any “flaws”. Just subjective downsides that some folks may not appreciate. One of those downsides obviously pertains to the amount of amplitude given to this general area. The quantity. Some folks will not enjoy that the bass isn’t as boosted, or fun then they may usually enjoy. I could also say that the low-end isn’t exactly that perfectly defined and perfectly sculpted low-end with great depth and layering. It isn’t that. I suppose it’ll always come down to your own preferences, as it should. Some will want a tighter, more analytical style bass. Then some will want the type of bass that warms the whole of the mix and shadows the spectrum in heaviness and lushness. The Pandamon 2.0 presents sort of a “middle ground” in both its technical approach and for the amount of bass and low-end grumble that it displays. From my perspective the Pandamon 2.0 sounds great, I think it’s punchy, tight and defined well enough while at the same time there’s still some atmospheric type of decay and some haptic tactility to the sound. Some folks may want a bit more guttural depth and resonant beef in the lowest of lows but for the most part the Pandamon 2.0 really isn’t missing much here. Yes, there is a slight roll-off in the sub-bass and not the mid-bass doesn’t give you that all-encompassing boom all the time. But the bass fits the overall tuning and counters the upper-mids and lower treble pretty well.

​

Midrange​

To my ears, the Celest Pandamon 2.0 is a more midrange forward iem which excels in the area of vocals. Timbre is actually very good with a natural and more organic hue to everything. Much like the OG Pandamon. I feel the midrange has good presence. It’s slightly highlighted. Not quite put on a pedestal, but highlighted and clear. I’ve heard some vocal centric iems that actually do favor vocals over anything and everything else and they are a bit more pronounced in this area. The Pandamon 2.0 isn’t quite there. However, the midrange does seem to be the Star of the show. There is the slightest recession in the lower parts of the mids and a slightly more forward & vibrant upper part. One thing which is maintained throughout the midrange is the clean presentation and the very nice timbre. Very natural sounding as I don’t hear any planar timbre. Much like the previous Pandamon, the 2.0 follows in its footsteps with an organic take on my musical library. That organic sound is helped by the fact that note weight is generally lusher than it isn’t. I would say it’s closer to lean-lush, softer in its dynamics but also, I hear a very nice smooth-dynamic projection of midrange notes.

Moving parts…​

Depending on how complicated the track is that you’re listening to will determine how complicated the music sounds when it hits your ears. Not that the Pandamon 2.0 cannot take on music with more moving parts, but I did notice a slight decline in its resolve of those types of tracks. As one should expect. This is nothing new. This is not a multi driver iem folks, but instead it has a single full range SPD taking on all of those little subtleties. So, I don’t say that to put this set down at all. In fact, I feel the Pandamon 2.0 does a nice job of illuminating details. I hear a very cohesive midrange with a gradual enough pinna rise that isn’t too steep or overtly boosted to the point of glare or shout.

Lower-midrange​

Like I stated already, the lower midrange has an ever-so-slight recession. Maybe. Better yet, it’s not that the lower mids are recessed, pushed back or attenuated, it’s more that they aren’t as energetic and dynamic as other areas of the midrange. They simply don’t stick out with the same verve & exuberance (not that the upper-mids are ultra exuberant), and I don’t want my lower mids to come across too energetic. Who wants vibrant male voices? Who wants forward and boxy sounding low-mid instruments? No sir, I want males to sound like males. I’ll take the slight “recession”. Give me weight, authority, warmth, density and give me that word which cannot be fully explained… “Presence”. I find that the Pandamon 2.0 does carry a couple of those rubrics quite well. Males like Marcus King in his track “Mood Swings” is a good example of how the Pandamon 2.0 shows off his breathy, blues-infused southern drawl so very well, with good note weight and presence. Or the track “Once Upon a Poolside” by The National is a track which features a gruffer voice, slightly lower in pitch, gravellier and the Pandamon 2.0 actually does provide some authority to the inflections in his voice. Instruments in the lower-mids present themselves the same way on the Pandamon 2.0. Good weight, a hint warmer, not as exuberant.

Upper-Midrange​

Females which hang around the upper-mids are certainly a hair more forward and more elated sounding than males. They come with just a splash of shimmer and vivaciousness. Obviously, instruments do the same. Piano, cymbals, strings, they all carry that slightly more vibrant tinge to their sound. Slightly more forward, closer to the listener. That said, timbre is great, nothing overly artificial to my ears which is saying something for the driver type. I could see some folks not enjoying the vibrance here, but I feel it really does add some sprightliness to the whole of the mix. To a degree anyways. Listening to Caitlyn Smith in the track “High” you get a velvety soft vocal to start the track in the main verse, which leads to a boisterous and resounding chorus. The Pandamon 2.0 takes to this song very well. I don’t hear the knife edged timbre when Caitlyn’s voice gets louder and more ballad-like. Nothing metallic either. Now there are some subtle separation issues during the chorus section but for the most part the Pandamon 2.0 does a great job of keeping control throughout.

Upper-mids cont…​

From my estimation, the Pandamon 2.0 excels at female vocals. They may be a hair thinner in this region, but I don’t hear anything frail and weak at all. Even with the leaner note body, the sound still has a very clean approach which seems to add some vibrant density. Instruments follow suit. Details come through pretty well also as the transient response is on the tighter side. Add to that, there’s a nice balance on this set which won’t really see a ton of masking happening in the upper-mids. Maybe a track which displays a lot of lower treble will sound slightly more congested with some masking happening.

Downsides to the Midrange​

I suppose there are a few possible subjective downsides that folks may have. Of course, I think the midrange is actually very well done for the price. However, I am not everyone else and I could see how others may take issue with a few things. I would say that the upper midrange may be a bit too shouty for some folks. My ears don’t hear that, but I could see it being an issue for those sensitive to it. I feel the upper-mids take me underneath that “shout-point”, but again, I’m not you. Next, those hobbyists who are warm or dark lovers will probably not appreciate how the Pandamon 2.0’s midrange comes across. Maybe not thick enough in note weight. On the other end of the spectrum, I could see some analytical lovers also not enjoying this set.

Honestly, for me the midrange has a lot going for it. I actually don’t think I outlined that well enough in the previous sections. This is a good midrange with good note weight, better than average details and pretty decent imaging too. I feel the midrange is more musical than anything yet also the mids come across well detailed too. Micro-dynamic low volume shifts come across pretty well for a $59 iem and the bigger and more robust macro-dynamics have good energy which is nice to hear. Transient behavior is relatively quick, yet it does so with smoother and softer fundamental notes. Attack isn’t always crisp and exact, but decay doesn’t lag at all either. Not bad for the price.

Treble Region​

This brings us to the treble region. I’d venture to say that the treble is probably the weak link of the tuning for some folks, or a huge benefit for others. It all has to do with emphasis, or lack thereof. Great for those who don’t enjoy a super energetic treble region. But treble heads or even moderate treble enjoyers will probably not be too thrilled. The treble has a nice rise in the lower treble which makes the transition from upper-mids a smooth one. Yet after that there’s a pretty large gulf of info that’s mildly attenuated within the presence region. I’ve heard some other friends of mine in the hobby complain that it isn’t zesty enough past the lower treble, and I get that. Some would like a bit more boisterous energy. Fair enough. In context to some of the other great sets in its price point… I do tend to agree. It’s a tad bit dull & not quite as engaging as I’d like. Having said that, this is not a bad treble. It still has adequate punch and transients move along quick enough too. I find detail retrieval to be pretty good and as far as the actual ability of the treble, I’d say it has good control for the price, but this is a smoother take on this area of the mix. In the same breath, the treble can still make its way through just about any undulating, complicated, or fast treble passage fairly easily. It does still have the planar lineage. However, I wouldn’t expect some ultra peppy treble.

Break it down​

To honestly break down the emphasis in this region, I’d simply say that it’s as brilliant as a treble region can be, without causing offense, or fatigue. Extension could be better as well. Personally, I’d like a touch more, but it isn’t a must. In a perfect world I’d like to hear more of a pointed attack as well. The Pandamon 2.0 is just missing that last little bit of info up top and that last little bit of crisp crunch. However, just like the bass region, the treble region does fit the overall tuning well, and in a way that doesn’t steal presence or mask over any other region. It isn’t artificially boosted either, seeking forced resolution. It isn’t going to kill your ears in shrillness or peaks. Again, the treble has good control for what it is. The Pandamon 2.0’s treble emphasis also won’t add unnatural brightness or change the tonal color either. However… it does add at least some levity. At least enough that it doesn’t come across as dark. Maybe not to the point that the Pandamon 2.0 sounds ultra-airy or open. But there’s enough of a rise in the lower treble and at 10k to give the treble some life, or some capped brilliance, if you will.

Downsides to the Treble Region ​

I feel this treble section has highlighted some of the subjective gripes that folks may have within the treble region of the Pandamon 2.0. Lacks some good and articulate extension. Isn’t as brilliant and bright as some would like. Could use some crispness and a bit more bite to treble notes. Not energetic enough. That’s about it.

At the end of the day, the treble will be perceived “by some” to be the weakest part of the spectrum. While this may be true, I certainly don’t see the treble as a “weakness” per se. It isn’t a weakness if many people will actually enjoy it. And I’m just saying it now, many people will enjoy it. So, I’d probably conclude that the treble simply won’t fit everyone’s idea of what a “strength” is concerning the tuning of the 2.0. To be perfectly truthful, I think the treble is perfectly fine. It fits the tuning, nothing sounds out of whack, nothing is under emphasized or dark. It’s decent. Is it my preference? Not really. Can I listen to and enjoy the Pandamon 2.0 for hours? You betcha.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage comes across full, but also pretty intimate. I hear good width, good height and a slight bit of depth. How I hear it is a closer sound field, not pushed very far back. Not a half circle in front of me but more a flat plane of sound. However, within that closer field of sound it is also pretty big in all directions. I don’t hear some stadium sized stage, or even a concert hall, as the Pandamon 2.0 really isn’t tuned in that way. Truthfully, I actually dig a closer presentation. There is a slight lack of layering and depth to the sound but that is to be expected from a $59 planar, or SPD. Typically stage depth is one of the attributes that can suffer on planar magnetic earphones. However, there is some depth, not all is lost. You still have ample width and height. I can tell you this, the stage is not small or congested.

Separation / Imaging​

I feel the Celest Pandamon 2.0 does an average job of separating elements within the stage. Certainly, in more congested tracks you won’t hear as good distinct separation. Besides those moments I think the Pandamon 2.0 does just fine in this regard. Imaging is another area where I could probably slap the “average” tag on it. Again, in congested tracks the imaging seems to blur a bit. However, I feel that the Pandamon 2.0 does a decent job of positioning each instrument within the sound field. The only real lack is in the layering from front to back where the Pandamon 2.0 isn’t the best in that regard as the depth of field is only average at best. Still, for the most part this set will sound pretty darn good for most folks.

Detail Retrieval​

Detail Retrieval is better than I would have thought. Looking at the sound in general we have a smoother note structure, the stage is nicely wide but it isn’t very deep and so you don’t have that good depth for layering of those instruments. That all said, the Pandamon 2.0 is certainly above the average set of earphones when it comes to detail retrieval. I find it pretty easy to pick out the subtleties within my music.

Comparison​

Note: just a sidenote, when conducting these comparisons, I will speak in broad strokes and in generalities. The point is that you all have a good idea of what the Pandamon 2.0 sounds like and using comparisons is a good tool to do so. I won’t go into great depth picking apart differences and this is not a duel to the death. Just a tool.

Celest Pandamon ($45 on sale: $26)​

The Celest Pandamon (Pandamon Review) is one of those sets that sort-of flew under the radar to an extent. Certainly, it performed better than many people would have thought. Me included. I have to admit that when I received the OG Pandamon I was somewhat put-off by the cartoonish angry panda. I figured I’d just give them to my kid. Then I actually heard them. Folks, I was taken aback because the Pandamon sounded (and still sounds) really great. I mean… really great. I reluctantly gave them to my son and thankfully they are still in perfect condition to use as a test comparison. Of course, the OG is the obvious set to use (for comparison) but there are a few others out there that makes sense too. Please DM me if you’d like another comparison conducted with another set. Anyways, there isn’t a whole lot internally which separates these two Celest brothers. We have an upgraded SPD within the Pandamon 2.0, and the OG Pandamon is a semi open-back set. Two very good iems with some subtle differences, let’s take a look.

Differences​

As far as aesthetic, these two couldn’t be more different. The OG has the cartoon teeth panda snarling at anyone who looks at him while the new 2.0 is crafted in more of a traditional Kinera style. Without question the new 2.0 is a huge upgrade. It’s not even close to which design I subjectively like more. The 2.0 has such a classy style and beautiful indigo transparent shells with the dope design on the faceplates. Yep, the 2.0. As far as build. This is tough. I’d actually say the OG is built a bit hardier. The resin on the 2.0 seems a bit less dense. It’s great for wearing without fatigue which is a benefit. However, the OG wasn’t exactly heavy. At any rate the OG probably has a slightly more robust build, but it all comes down to what you prefer. The shape of both sets is about the same. The shell is a round, almost disc shape while the nozzles are about medium in length. The cable on the new set is much better on the new set. Yet the new set doesn’t come with the angry panda charm or keyring like the OG. Both have identical tip selections.

Sound Differences​

Now, these two should be pretty similar in tuning but I honestly don’t hear that. They are actually quite a bit different. First off, the newer 2.0 has better timbre to my ears. More natural, organic and more musical. I hear a more emotionally charged sound on the new set even though the old OG is a slight bit warmer in comparison. The OG Pandamon is also a bit snappier in its transient attack through decay, leaner in note weight and a bit more technically sound as a whole. Pandamon 2.0 has more of a bass impact, punch and overall depth. The midrange on the OG is a hair more forward in the low-mids but is also a hint thinner in that area. Now, the 2.0 has the more forward and vibrant upper-mids with better timbre in my opinion for female vocals. Both sets have nice details in the midrange, but the OG wins out in that regard as the 2.0 definitely comes across smoother to the ear. The treble of the OG is more pronounced, sprightly, and crisper while the 2.0 has a less fatiguing treble with better note body. Extension into the upper treble reaches a hint further out on the OG. Both sets do Technicalities quite well, but the OG has the airier feel to it. Having said that, the 2.0 has a wider and slightly deeper stage. Both are very good sets.

Final thoughts on this comparison​

Honestly, these are two fantastic iems. Truly. For the cost they are both pretty special. Despite that, the OG only costs a mere $29 right now on sale and so I do think it is the better buy. However, the better set in my opinion is the Pandamon 2.0. It simply has that nice and natural timbre with a bit more weight afforded to vocals and a bit more emotion to the sound. I like them both a lot. Another thing to consider is the appearance of these iems. I know many people were not too keen on the OG’s look. Not everyone wants an angry panda. However, if you love that look, I’d definitely recommend checking out a great SPD iem in the OG. Still, the newer set is better looking, better accessories, and I feel it sounds a hair better. I wouldn’t call the new set a direct upgrade, but it is marginally better. My opinion.

Note: I couldn’t find a graph comparison of these two sets. The best I could do is add the OG Pandamon’s graph.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

This is a tough question friends. I want to say that yes of course the Pandamon 2.0 is worth every penny that Celest is asking. However, there really are a slew of iems within its price point of $50 to $75 that are absolute BANGERS! This will be the issue for any iem trying to break into this price point. Having said that, those sets aren’t square planar driver iems. I actually like the timbre and tonality quite well with these drivers. They have the lineage of a planar and they have dynamic driver tendencies as well. I could even say that there is almost a balanced armature feel to these iems at times too. They really are a cool driver tech that I’d love to see expounded upon. But when answering if the Celest Pandamon 2.0 is worth the asking price it will all come down to what the consumer is looking for and what their budget is. For me the Pandamon 2.0 is a no-brainer iem at $59 and I feel it’s easily worth the money, but I’m not the next guy. There is a lot it does well folks…

The Why…​

Because the Celest Pandamon 2.0 is a beautiful iem that is built in such a way that offers no fatigue on the listener. This is an iem that you could keep nestled in your ears for hours without even thinking about them. 3.5 grams is next to nothing friends. I don’t think you really have a gauge for how light that is until you put the Simgot EA500 in one hand and the Pandamon 2.0 in the other. It’s pretty impressive. Still, the build isn’t cheap somehow! It feels durable and built well. The Pandamon 2.0 does not have that chinsy feel at all. Also, the accessories are all good. Nothing is bad with this set. You don’t have to tip roll (unless they don’t fit you), you don’t have to swap cables and you get a carrying case. That all said, nobody buys an earphone for those reasons in particular. We buy earphones for the sound. Luckily, Celest/Kinera was the group of people tuning this set. I feel that the Pandamon 2.0 will fit many peoples preferred signature. The bass is punchy, tight, and has impact. Midrange is forward and melodic with nice musicality while not skimping on the technical stuff. The treble will not kill your ears as it is non-offensive and just brilliant enough to add levity to the mix. The sound is very clean and clear, with great transparency and expressive macro-dynamics. It’s a good set folks. The question is, will the Pandamon 2.0 hold up (in your eyes) against the competition?

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Celest Pandamon 2.0 ratings below, that would be $50 to $75 earphones of any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $50 to $75 US is a huge scope of iems that is extremely competitive. Basically, it should mean something special to see a “9.0” for example. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 8.4 Built well, very Lite and comfy.

–Look: 9.4 Clean, fresh, simple, elegant.

–Fit/Comfort: 9.8 One of the lightest & most comfortable.

–Accessories: 9.2 Very well accessorized.

–Overall: 9.2

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.3 Timbre is natural, organic.

–Bass: 8.8 Impactful, punchy, tight.

–Midrange: 9.5 Clean, resolute, forward.

–Treble: 7.0 Non-Offensive, brilliant enough.

–Technicalities: 8.1 Technically it’s a decent set.

–Musicality: 8.7 Musical over technical.

–Overall: 8.6

Ratings Summary:​

These ratings are always questionable folks. I’ll just be honest with you (as always). Ratings can change from person to person and there really are a thousand variables that go into conducting a Rating of certain aspects of an earphone. Also, none of them should be taken as Bible and all ratings should be taken with a grain of salt. That said, I think the ratings above check out. The Pandamon 2.0 was rated against any and every iem between the price of $50 and $75 US. It made more sense to me to pit the Pandamon 2.0 against the entire field rather than simply against other planars. If this was a planar war, then those ratings would be a lot higher. Many of those iems I have on hand, and I do sit down and try my best to get each rating right. Of course, these are very blanket ratings, and I don’t dig too deep so, it is what it is.

Explain Yourself! ​

I feel like there isn’t much to explain with this set. I really don’t. To me, an “8.8” makes sense for the 2.0’s bass. I wouldn’t go any lower because it’s a nice feature of this set. If anything, I’d go higher in rating. Also, an “8.8” is a large number for the sheer amount of iems in that price range. One rating that may get some weird looks is the “midrange” rating. A “9.5” is very very high. At this price point! That’s high. It had better be good. Well, I really think the Pandamon 2.0 is very nice for vocals, instruments sound clean, clear, voices sound realistic, and timbre is top notch (especially for an SPD). I feel it’s justified, but I could see folks thinking I’m nuts. I feel I went low on “Technicalities”. An “8.1” is a solid rating, no doubt. However, I feel the Pandamon 2.0 can swing an 8.4 or 8.5. The problem is that I had some real technical beasts in front of me when listening and comparing and I think it may have swayed my decision a bit. So, “8.1” may be a bit low against the $50 to $75 competition. Now, the last rating that WILL garner some grumblings from the peanut gallery is the treble. I personally feel it’s the weak spot on this set. Is it bad? Absolutely not. It just doesn’t hang with the best in the price point. A slight lack of energy, slight lack of extension too. Despite that, I know there are friends of mine who will tell me that they love this treble. It’s non-offensive, smooth, clean and honestly… the extension really isn’t that bad. Most people (85%) will not even notice. Anyways, that’s about it.

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Celest Pandamon 2.0, i want to thank each and every one of you for reading this review and clicking the link. I know this sounds like BS, but I truly appreciate it. Clicking the link and spending time reading is the best medicine for our website. We see the clicks and we smile at each one of them. So, thank you very much!

Other perspectives​

Please, check out other reviews of the Pandamon 2.0. Make sure to do so before you hit the “buy-now” button. Folks, I don’t know why this is so hard for some to understand, that we are actually all very much different. I cannot tell you how agonizing it is that hobbyists can’t understand this truth. We are different. One will love what the next one hates and vice versa. It’s a fact of life. Also, this hobby is thee most subjective hobby on planet earth. Name one more personal to the hobbyist. This is it folks. We are different. So, reading, listening, or watching other perspectives about this set will certainly help you to get a better understanding about how an iem or audio device will suit you. That’s all I want friends. I want you guys to be happy with your purchase and listening to your music with joy. Beyond all of that, I’m done. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

Fiio Q15 Review​

​

Fiio Q15​

Intro​

Hello, today I am reviewing and featuring one of the latest Fiio Audio dac/amps on the market named the Fiio Q15. The Q15 is simply the latest portable Bluetooth dac/amp in the very long and storied history of Fiio products. I was more than thrilled when the Q15 showed up at my door. Now, the Q15 is pretty pricey if you are pitting it against dongle dacs or other Bluetooth dac/amps on the market. However, against similar designed products the Q15 actually comes in at a great price of $399. When you couple in all of its capabilities as well as the fantastic sound of the Q15, it’s hard to argue against where the Q15 sits within the market. To put it bluntly… The Fiio Q15 is a downright beast!

Fiio​

Did you know that Fiio was established as far back as 2007?! I mean, I knew they had been in the business for quite some time, but I had no idea that they were only a few years away from 20!! Then I get to thinking of all the products that I’ve purchased from Fiio over the years. In truth, there was a long time that I was a huge Fiio fanboy and considered them the “creme dela creme” of the budget audio scene. Think about it, what brand consistently seeks to floor the consumer with features, build quality, unique aesthetic and flat-out sound quality quite like Fiio over the last 17 years, while keeping their prices relatively reasonable. The name “Fiio” is a combo word of “Fidelity” & “Hifi” (for obvious reasons) and “IO” (1 & 0, representing digital). The aspiration of the brand from the beginning was to try to uplift the reputation of “made in China”. Which is an honorable thing to do. Patriotic, I can dig that. I’m not going to go through every Fiio product, or the products from Fiio that I’ve had the pleasure of owning or trying over the years. It’s been a lot! From their earphones, both iems and tws iems, to dongle dacs, Bluetooth dac/amps, semi-portable dac amps, etc. they’ve always impressed. Some more than others I suppose. Still, Fiio has always made products that seem to last and always seem to craft products that are relevant and considered within top class in their relative price points.

Q15​

The Q15 battles amongst a growing number of similar devices with similar functionality, similar specs and similar price. I’m trying to figure out how the Q15 separates itself and where that separation is. We’ve seen other devices like this. Devices like the IFi XDSD Gryphon, Topping G5, etc. I could even cite one of the more popular units over the years and the Q15’s predecessors, the Fiio Q5 and Q5S. Finally, I would like to think of the Q15 as somewhat of a smaller and more cost-effective version of the flagship Fiio Q7. Of course, there are quite a few others not mentioned but I do feel that this type of power, flagship dac chips, mobile size and Bluetooth functionality does make these devices a bit rarer than some others out in the Audio-sphere. The Q15 comes in at a reasonable $399 and I will try my best to answer if this price is reasonable or not. That all said, I think I’m ready to get going on this one, the Fiio Q15…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing links:​

–Amazon
–HiFiGo

Gear used for testing​

-Tanchjim Origin

-Simgot EA1000

-Letshuoer Cadenza 4

-Yanyin Canon II

-Softears Studio 4

-Actually, I used many sets during my listening time, disregard above

Packaging / Accessories​

There is never a whole lot to say about the unboxing experience when the product is a source device. The same is true of the Fiio Q15. The Q15 comes in a medium sized (what’s medium?) cardboard rectangular box. On the front is a picture of the front and the back of the Q15 as well as some hi-res logos, and really… that’s about it. Once you slide the inner box out from the narrow end, you’ll notice a slim cardboard folded in the center. Inside is the manual and some other reading material. Lift off that layer and you are presented with the Q15. I gotta say, this device looks sweet. Under the Q15 are two more boxes. Inside the boxes you’ll find a usb-a to usb-c adapter, two silicone rings for strapping down your Q15, one 3’ type-c to type-c charging cable, and one very short type-c to type-c data cable. You’ll also notice a really nice black cloth drawstring bag that is easily large enough to store your Q15 as well as a few other goodies. Not a bad unboxing and I wasn’t expecting much.

Specifications​

Brand: Fiio

Model: Fiio Q15

Dac chip: AK4499EX / AK4191EQ

Bluetooth chip: Qualcomm QCC5125

Bluetooth codecs: Aptx-Adaptive, LDAC, Aptx, Aptx-Hd, AptxLL, AAC, SBC

Bluetooth Reception: Bluetooth 5.1

Weight: About 305g

Dimension: About 143.5×71.75×21.75mm

Display: 1.30-inch TFT (240*240) bezel-less display

MQA: Yes

-Audio

Sample rates: Cyan: 44.1kHz/48kHz, Yellow: 88.2/96/176/352.8/384/705.6/768kHz

Green: DSD64/128/256/512

Purple: MQA

Firmware Upgrade: Bluetooth firmware supports upgrade through OTA, XMOS/system firmware supports upgrade through USB

-Output power

3.5 single ended:

Super High Gain- @32ohms- 400mw @300ohms- 54mw

Ultra-High Gain- @32ohms- 625mw @300ohms- 85mw

4.4 balanced:

Super High Gain- @32ohms- 1060mw @300ohms- 215mw

Ultra-High Gain @32ohms- 1610mw @300ohms- 340mw

Output Impedance

3.5 single-ended:

Super High Gain- >1.0

Ultra-High Gain- >1.0

4.4 balanced:

Super High Gain- >1.5

Ultra-High Gain- >1.5

-Battery

Power Supply: Supports fast charging

Battery Capacity: 5500 mah lithium Polymer

Charging time: Roughly 3.5 hours

Battery Life: 3.5 single ended: +/- 9 hrs 4.4 balanced: +/- 8hrs

Build / Design / Internals​

Build Quality​

The actual quality of build on the Fiio Q15 is pristine. The sides of the unit are covered with aluminum while the front and back panels are completely made of high durability AG glass as well as some areas on the back panel made of plastic. Fiio of course had to do this for the Bluetooth antenna. Looking at the front you’ll find the fantastic IPS screen for relaying certain info back to the listener. Next, on the left side you have four easy to push buttons which all have their own functionality including play/pause, cycle through settings, as well as on/off etc. Finally, on the top you’ll find the volume wheel knob which doubles as a multi-purpose button. There’s the 4.4 headphone out as well as the 3.5 headphone out and line-out. On the bottom of the Q15 is the “phone mode” switch to press when you don’t want to draw power from your phone. You’ll also find coaxial in (with dustcover), and two usb type-c ports. One dedicated entirely for charging and one for data/decoding/charging. And finally, you’ll also see the desktop mode switch on the right-side bottom.

It’s a Fiio unit​

Everything is well thought on this device folks. The side bevels are slightly raised so as not to scratch the glass panels. However, one may take issue with the hulking and beefy size of the Q15. Now, I don’t find this an issue because I knew what I was getting. Still, the Q15 is rather large I’d say, and it is also on the heavy side. I certainly feel that the Q15 is a bit large for stacking units. Not bad with a slender phone like I have but stacking with a dap etc. will be a pocketful, that’s for sure. Folks, Fiio does many things right, but what they never get wrong is build quality. If you see a Fiio logo then you can be damned sure whatever device or earphone you are looking at is built well.

Well that sucks…​

By the way, you’ll see in most of my pictures that my Q15 is attached directly to my LG V60. I did this simply because I accidently dropped my precious Q15 from a 6 ft. bookshelf and it landed directly on the back panel of glass. Well that sucked! So, since the primary way I listen is with the LG V60 attached, kinda like a glorified dap, I simply used double sided tape from the Q15 to my LG V60. Problem solved, you can’t see the broken glass and I basically have one of the best daps on the market under 1k. So, forgive me if I don’t have many pictures of the Fiio Q15 by itself. I am still sick to my stomach over that. One thing I never do is drop anything, break anything, everything pristine, put away nicely, clean. Then my Q15 drops and my heart sinks. Ugh.

​

Design​

However, it’s the design that caught my attention. This is a beautiful looking unit with polygonal sides, which is nice for easy holding and gripping and it simply looks dope. That glass just looks gorgeous and the IPS screen really does pop out at you. Honestly, I feel the Q15 is one of the better-looking source devices out there. You can actually purchase the Fiio Q15 in two colorways, titanium and black. Both look tough. Obviously, the unit I have is the titanium model. Fiio always takes special consideration for aesthetics, and they always come up with fresh designs that aren’t overused or played out. The Q15 is no different.

​

Screen / Display​

This is one truly great component of the Q15. Fiio actually went with a 1.3” IPS screen with very vibrant colors that can be dimmed or made brighter in the settings. The display truly tells you everything about the Q15 and what settings are being used at any given moment. This screen has a 240 x 240 TFT bezel-less screen which really does pop, even in the afternoon sun. Of course, Fiio is not the first to incorporate a display screen into their design. But I do feel that Fiio makes one of the best screens for their devices. This goes for their cheaper dac/amps up to their flagship daps. Always a nice screen with vibrant colors. At the end of the day aesthetic really does play into the experience, no matter how much some crotchety “audiophiles” like to tell you it doesn’t.

By the way, around the collar of the volume wheel the Q15 also has an RGB light indicator which you can change within the app. Whenever you open up the settings menu with the top volume knob, you can cycle through those settings by turning left or right, and you can select different settings by pushing down on the volume knob. It takes a minute to get used to, but it works like a charm. There is a litany of settings on this screen. From picking SE output, BAL output, digital filters, max volume steps, gain modes, Line-out mode, MQA mode, usb/coaxial/Bluetooth, screen dimmer, screen timeout, idle time, rotate screen (very useful), u-audio, an option to put the Q15 in PEQ mode, change the language and a factory reset setting. Phew! I may have missed some, but you get the gist.

​

Button layout​

Like I already stated, the Fiio Q15 has some very useful buttons which control darn near everything on this device. Minus some very important features which I will talk about in the “Fiio App” section.

What buttons?​

So, the Q15 has four buttons on the left side of the unit when the screen naturally faces you. You have a power button on top which also doubles as a method to turn the screen on or off. Under the power button is the rewind/back button, the play/pause button, and the forward/skip button. Take note, the buttons on the side only function during Bluetooth usage. On top of the Q15 is a volume knob which can obviously run you through all steps of volume. However, it also acts as a button.

Now, on the bottom of the device you’ll also see two switches on each side of the bottom. One switch is labeled “Phone mode” and the other is labeled “Desktop mode”. The phone mode is a fantastic option as it allows you to not drain your phone’s battery when plugged directly to a phone. This is how I listen 90% of the time. I actually have my LG V60 attached to the Q15 using double sided gorilla tape and hooked together with a USB Type-C to usb Type-C wire. The Desktop mode switch allows the user to

​

Internals​

There’s a lot packed into the Q15. This portable dac/amp is absolutely loaded with functionality and processors, chips, etc etc. There’s no shortage of circuitry within the Q15. I will very quickly lay out what I know about the Internals. First off, let me just say that Fiio really does think of everything. These people are master class when it comes to building source devices.

What’s inside?​

To start, Fiio chose an awesome Bluetooth chip in the Qualcomm QCC5125 SOC Chipset, which of course brings you hi-res audio and Bluetooth 5.1. You also have many codecs in SBC, AAC, Aptx, Aptx-Hd, AptxLL, Aptx-Adaptive, and LDAC. This is a huge swath of codecs to fit whatever device you own. I prefer Aptx-Adaptive, though much of the audio world feels LDAC is the best. I disagree, please trust me that bit rate has little to do with the end result. But that’s neither here nor there. The Q15 also has a wonderful flagship dac combo with the AK4499EX and the AK4191EQ chips (both AK’s velvet dac chips). By the way, I am a huge fan of these chipsets and glad to see them on this device. Also, both digital and analog portions separate from each other for a higher fidelity sound. This helps in reducing crosstalk per Fiio’s promotional material. Fiio also implemented all digital components to be right at the same level as their flagship dac/amps, the Fiio Q7 and the Q15. Using an Arm processor the Q15 can faithfully decide USB, coaxial as well as Bluetooth signals. They actually went with a wonderful XMOS 16-core XU316 usb controller which supports up to 32bit/768khz, DSD512, and full MQA Decoding. On top of that Fiio chose to use a TI Cortex M4 processor which is used for various tasks. Basically, does all the menial tasks which make the user experience better. Now, I have zero idea what op amps Fiio went with, but I can assure you they are killers. They use dual audio crystal oscillators. Folks, these are the most notable internal components.

Premium Decoding with High-End AKM DAC: –
FiiO has featured AKM’s current flagship AK4499EX+AK4191 combo 32-bit DAC chipset. It provides excellent performance while decoding high-resolution audio signals. The resulting output is extremely clean and precise with ultra-low distortion and high SNR performance.
Qualcomm Flagship Bluetooth Chipset: –
FiiO Q15 adopts Qualcomm’s flagship QCC5125 chipset. It enables low-latency wireless Bluetooth connectivity with high-definition codecs including LDAC, AptX HD, AptX, and more. Enjoy high-resolution sound even wirelessly with the Q15.
XMOS 3rd Gen USB Processor: –
FiiO has opted for high-end chips to ensure top-quality performance on the Q15. The DAC adopts XMOS XU316 16-core 3rd-gen USB chipset. It enables high-resolution audio signal decoding supporting 32-bit/768kHz PCM, native DSD512, and full MQA signals.
Fiio Promotional​

Click to expand...

Features​

In this section I will quickly rundown some of the notable features on the Q15 that will aid in your enjoyment… Possibly. I won’t go into huge detail about each but instead simply quickly go through them so that you have an idea what they are.

Output power​

One thing the Fiio Q15 is NOT… is weak. In fact, the Q15 comes equipped with five gain modes to choose from so to best fit the iem or headphones you’re listening to. This device has some very serious output for a mobile device, with up to 1600 mw @32 ohms on Ultra-High Gain when the Q15 is put into Desktop mode. I mostly keep this unit on Super High Gain while listening on balanced as the Q15 will get you about 1060 mw @32 ohms. However, single ended at Super High Gain will provide up to 400 mw @32 ohms. So, no matter what, you have plenty of power for iems on either balanced or single ended. I don’t have any full-sized cans to check but I’d be willing to bet that the Q15 will be able to drive most sets just fine. The Q15 is a powerhouse folks.

Dual Headphone Output with Strong Amp Section & 5-Level Gain modes: –
FiiO Q15 features dual headphone output ports, a 3.5mm single-ended port and another 4.4mm balanced output port. You can pair different headphones and IEMs with both these ports effortlessly. The Q15 has a strong amp section with a five-level gain mode. It has a maximum output rating of 1600mW, and five-level gain modes enable easy connection with both high-sensitivity and low-sensitivity IEM and Headphones.
Fiio Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Fiio App​

One great feature of many Fiio products is the inclusion of their app. The “Fiio Music App”. Fiio also has a very handy app in the “Fiio Control App” which is specifically meant for their devices. You really can do a lot within these two apps, but it changes per the device. As for the Q15, you can check firmware updates, check volume, check battery, select the RGB gradient color for sample indicators, select Bluetooth codecs as well as channel balance. Beyond those settings, you also have Fiio’s very nice EQ and PEQ which really do work like a charm. Once you set those EQ parameters then they will save to the device itself. The PEQ is easy to use once you’ve played around with it for a while. It’s pretty intuitive I would say as they make it easy to configure and dial in the sound which suits you. Obviously, the 10 band EQ is also pretty cut n’ dry as well. Honestly, it’s a very good companion app that works very nicely with Fiio devices.

​

Connections​

I’ve mentioned already that the Fiio Q15 can be used in a variety of ways. It really is a very talented unit. You can listen over Bluetooth (I think we’ve established that) which will give you up to LDAC when your device supports it. The Q15 also supports a Coaxial connection, which is a fantastic route to go which will give the Q15 the ability to render up to 24bit/192hz audio and I believe DSD64 (if I’m not mistaken). And next you have a usb connection which will supply up to 32bit/768khz PCM and up to DSD512.

Bluetooth​

One of the best features of the Fiio Q15 is the fact that it does indeed have Bluetooth. However, it isn’t just any Bluetooth. Again, Fiio chose to use a very competent SOC Chipset in the Qualcomm QCC5125. This allows quite a few of the best audio codecs that we have on this earth of ours. Like I said before, SBC, AAC, Aptx, Aptx-Hd, AptxLL, Aptx-Adaptive, and LDAC are all codecs which are on board with this device. The Bluetooth range is fantastic as well. I have a 185 ft. driveway and I easily walked the entire length with my phone in the garage when I was getting the paper from my mailbox. No joke, folks the music didn’t even stutter. Now, this all changes when you introduce walls and other partitions. But still! 185 ft! That’s cray cray! At any rate, the Bluetooth is also the best sounding that I’ve ever heard in my life, and I have many good Bluetooth devices. Out of every device I’ve ever heard, this one is the champ. As always, there’s the faintest Bluetooth compression, but out of all the BT devices I’ve tried… the Q15 feels the most open and dynamic. Of course, whether on Bluetooth or through any other wired port, the Fiio Q15 really sounds great.

Battery Life​

Now we come to battery life. This is a very important thing to discuss. Nobody wants a device that loses its battery in two hours. Thankfully Fiio promises roughly 8 hrs of straight listening using 4.4 balanced and 9hrs using 3.5 single ended and that is with Super High Gain enabled. Folks, that’s pretty darn good. One great thing is that it doesn’t draw battery from your phone for instance, when connected by way of a usb type-c cable. So long as you have the “Phone Mode” switch enabled. To be completely honest, I have yet to drain the battery in one listen and I have not actually checked to see if Fiio’s claims are true. I am going on blind faith, and I ask you to forgive me for not checking this spec out. Still, 8-9 hours is very good for the amount of power the Q15 is shelling. That all said, remember that many factors will. Effect your battery’s performance. Volume level, gain levels, Bluetooth codecs (LDAC is a battery drainer) are all battery guzzling things to be aware of.

Desktop Mode​

To get the Ultra High Gain and 1600mw of raw power, you must have “Desktop Mode” enabled using the switch named… “Desktop Mode”. Pretty easy. However, you must also actually plug your phone into an actual outlet by using the dedicated type-c PD charging port on the Q15. Actually, plugging the Q15 into a dedicated usb-c PD power will bypass the internal battery altogether. For a smaller dac/amp which was created for portability, I feel that the Q15 really does rival some very good desktop setups, and I do feel that Desktop Mode takes my listening a notch higher. This is kind of the case with any desktop device. To be perfectly honest, when I listen to my music, I’m usually moving around. I really don’t enjoy sitting at a desk listening to music. I want to move and so I got rid of my desktop setup. Thankfully, I remember now why I enjoyed listening in this way. It won’t change your life or anything, and it’s only a miniscule step above some of my mobile setups… but it’s nice. Fiio does a good job at making it very easy to enjoy and set up.

Sound filters​

Okay, so this is a feature that most devices have anymore, even on less expensive devices. Heck, the EPZ TP50 dongle dac which costs much less than the Q15 has sound filters. These filters make barely discernible differences as each filter does what it’s programmed to do in affecting the phase of a signal. I have a very rudimentary understanding of exactly how these filters actually work. Enough to explain to a laymen audio newbie but not enough to actually teach you anything. At any rate, the Fiio Q15’s sound filters do make a slight difference. Much more than my old Fiio M11 Plus ESS or my iBasso DX240, heck even more-so than my Shanling M6 Ultra. I don’t know why that is. Maybe Fiio really brought it all together for this device. However, these differences are extremely small. Now, at the device itself, in the settings (press down the volume knob and cycle through to the “filters”) you’ll have to open up the “Filters” option. Inside you’ll see Fast, Slow, Mini, Mini Slow, Super Slow, and Low Dispersion. Those are the filters that you have to choose from and from my experience these settings do seem to help in some situations. Heck, maybe your ears are even better than mine and you can tell an even greater difference.

Sound Impressions​

​

The source difference…​

Folks, I’m just going to explain how I treat “source device” reviews really quickly. I don’t usually go through the same process in reviewing a source as I would an iem. For one, the sound that you get from your source has much more to do with your earphone or over-ear headphones. However, the source device does play a huge role in how that iem will come across. The point is, I’m not going to go through “Bass”, “Mids”, “Treble” to exhaustion, like I would an iem “transducer”. That all said, the source does greatly affect the sound and a source will make an impact on how a warmer sound signature, snappier sound, colder, more analytical, low-end emphasized, emphasized highs, and the list could go on for quite some time. What you this “synergy”, and I can’t come up with a better word for it. When iem and device “synergize” in a way that hits your sweet spot you’ll know.

Q15​

Friends, out of all my sources, the Fiio Q15 really impresses me. I cannot sing it’s praises enough. As I said earlier, I mainly listen to the Q15 attached by a type-c cable to my LG V60. I use double sided gorilla tape to hold them tightly together and it works better than anything I’ve tried to date. You’ll never use a rubber band again. Anyways, the Q15 is truly a fantastic device for the price and if I’m being honest it rivals plus 1k daps quite easily. It actually probably surpasses some of them pretty easily too. Using the LG V60 and its beautiful screen and the Q15 together makes this setup one of the best daps that I have in my possession. Truly a gem.

So what does it sound like? ​

When paired with my V60, the Fiio Q15 comes across neutral to my ears as the velvet dac chips internally aren’t nearly as warm as I thought they’d be. The Q15 has a very clean signature that will certainly benefit any number of iems. This is a device which tends towards the natural and organic side of sound. You won’t hear the Q15 coloring any portion of the mix all too much either. The Q15 offers a smooth approach, satin note edges, yet also isn’t devoid of crispness… at all. The sound simply isn’t ultra energetic which almost reinforces that smooth sound. However, I feel note definition is extremely well done on the Q15 as it’s able to to traverse those more knife edged notes, which may come across as crispness, but really, it’s just clean, less rambunctious and slightly less sprightly than some other sources. Clarity is phenomenal too. Even using iems on Super High Gain leaves a dead silent background. Nothing but absolute dead-black air in the backdrop of my listening sessions.

Contoured stability​

When I think of the Q15 a few descriptors come to mind. Those being “note density”, “cleanliness”, “precision”, “balance”, “extension”, “contoured” & “smooth”. All these words fit this device perfectly. I would usually say that a warmer iem/headphone would fit best with a device like this, but even cooler/brighter sets like the Simgot EA1000 (EA1000 Review) sound absolutely amazing with the Q15 attached. In fact, the EA1000 seems made for this device. So, the Q15 isn’t going to over emphasize certain areas of the mix, but instead provide contoured stability and definition to any set it seems. Let’s quickly run through each 3rd of the mix.

​

Low-end​

Compared to other source devices, the Q15 does seem to bring upon snappy lows with extra punch, good fullness and good solidity to notes on most any set I’ve used. This is not a super warm and profuse low-end emphasis, but instead one which adds awesome definition. You won’t find the Q15 turning a bass-lite set into a bass lifted iem. On the flip, the Q15 also won’t turn a bass heavy set into a bass moderate set. I feel the Q15 allows a set to simply… be what it is, just better. It refines the low-end to a degree. Also, like I said the Q5 does add some real quality punch to the low-end. I love this leaner but dense sound with wonderful textures and great layering of the low-end as well. It’s speedy, transient-swift and dynamic. But not overtly boosted.

I notice the Yanyin Canon II (Canon II Review) really does benefit from this area listening with the Q15. The Canon II has a slightly slower or more atmospheric style low-end which does sound more compact and less loose on attack through release. Transients come and go in a tight manner. The Simgot /EA1000’s low-end is already dialed in wonderfully. I can also hear that there’s a more layered approach from something like the iBasso DX240 for instance.

Midrange​

The midrange is slightly more forward than some devices and I feel it really helps to add an organic feel to midrange instruments and voices. Now, obviously a lot will depend on your iems/headphones, but for the most part the Q15 will help to bring the most out of any set’s midrange. The midrange operates in a neutral tonal coloration. Which is, no coloration really. Timbre will only be an asset to your earphones or headphones too. Again, just like the low-end I hear better transients and a more textured sound with the Q15. The Q15 will help with details, it’ll refine some aspects of your iems and it’ll add better macro-dynamics or micro-dynamic shifts. It has very good control from what I’ve gathered. Folks, the Q15 is really fantastic.

The Letshuoer Cadenza 4 (Cadenza 4 Review) has that milky midrange with smooth mm and a certain warmth that is absolutely engaging. When the Q15 is the source, it is quite noticeable that the Cadenza 4 has better spacing (to a degree), more succinct or concise, and with a more pronounced note presence. If that makes sense the already tight and smooth Softears Studio 4 almost comes across slightly more vivid and focused. That’s the Q15 difference, among other good quality traits. Obviously, I’m not going to keep listing every set I own, but I want you to at least get the picture. It isn’t easy describing sound on source devices and especially describing certain areas (bass, mids, treble) of a source device.

Highs​

The treble region is one of my favorite aspects of the Q15 because it isn’t overly cooked and force-elevated up top. Yet, it excels at note agility, definition, even adds some bite to notes on the right occasions. The Q15 will aid your iems/headphones with an ever-so-slightly better sparkle, a sense of air, and even a certain brilliance, while still holding tight to that smoother delivery. I hear nothing nasally, metallic, or any added sibilance and the Q15 treble is without any annoying peaks. The treble is another wonderful part of the Q15’s tuning. This is a treble region which is subdued in that… it isn’t overly raucous or shrill, it isn’t strident or blatantly grating to the ear. Yet it’s tastefully emphasized and has good extension which will bring out the best in many iems or headphones.

The Tanchjim Origin (Origin Review) is a fantastic iem. No doubt about it. However, I enjoy how the Q15 helps give the Origin better treble distinction. Just a bit more snap and presence. It gives the Origin a bit more bite and haptic feel to notes. Now, these are not world changing differences, but they are most certainly differences, nonetheless. Or the QOA Aviation (Aviation Review). Nobody would accuse the Aviation as having an amazing treble region. So how nice is it that the Q15 is able to give the Aviation some controlled levity. Notes have a more acute and precise sound to them. At the end of the day, the Fiio Q15 treble is quite nice with a natural feel to it.

Technicalities​

When speaking of the technical capability of a source device like the Fiio Q15 I find it’s a bit easier to explain because those attributes are usually easier to delineate and discern. Like soundstage. The soundstage does seem to have better depth with the Q15 and an altogether open feel to my music. The Q15 won’t turn a congested and narrow sounding set into a stadium or anything, but it will accentuate the openness of some sets. Separation of instruments and voices is certainly aided as well. Also, the Q15 has a knack at good imaging when paired with an adequate iem. Honestly folks, the second you listen with the Q15 you’ll notice that it is a natural rendition of a pleasing but yet technical tuning.

Is it worth the asking price?​

The big question that I will always get is if the device I am reviewing is worth the asking price. Does it stand next to similarly priced devices? In the case of the Fiio Q15, I feel it is the best I’ve heard in the price point for portable dac/amps. For me it’s a no brainer. As a mobile source, I feel the Fiio Q15 sounds closer to a +1k dap than anything else. Then, put it in desktop mode and it does sound a bit better. Of course, there is some competition out there with some formidable dac/amps which really do a stand-up job for their respective prices. You could also consider that most of the audio world relies on dongle dacs anymore which is far cheaper than something like the Q15. So, when asking about “worth” it is good to consider your own listening style. You may not want some bulky dac/amp to carry around. To you a dongle dac may serve the perfect purpose for you. Small, fairly compact, good enough sound quality and great for mobile situations. However, if you want something with fantastic versatility and even better sound fidelity than I would absolutely say with 100% confidence that the Fiio Q15 is worth the $399 to own it.

The Why…​

First off, it’s built very well. Even though I did crack the back faceplate glass on mine, by accident of course. Oh well. Anyways, for the most part the build is really exceptional. Just don’t drop it from about 6 feet off of a bookshelf so that it lands squarely on its back panel of glass. Yes, that sucked. Moving on. Anyways, the look is also very slick, like any Fiio product. Folks, the Bluetooth is simply amazing. Truly the best Bluetooth sound quality I’ve ever heard. It is almost imperceptible between wired and Bluetooth connection. Truly fantastic. Another reason why the Fiio Q15 is worth every penny is the features as well as the functionality of those features. The good battery life, the phone mode, desktop mode, the awesome screen, etc. Next, the output power of the Q15 makes it a powerhouse! Easily able to drive any iems and most headphones with ease. However, as always, it’s mostly about the sound and I won’t reiterate everything I’ve said this entire review, but the sound quality is 100% unrivaled at $399. I’d argue this with anyone. This is the best audio you can buy in this form factor… Hands-Down, under $500. Folks, the Fiio Q15 provides so many different ways to listen to some of the best audio that money can buy under 1k and even more and it costs only $399.

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Fiio Q15 I want to extend a huge thanks to any of you who took the time to read the words that I wrote. It means the world to us at Mobileaudiophile.com and it means the world to me. You took your valuable time to read my honest thoughts by clicking the link for this review which is the best thing you can do for us. In return I do hope I’ve helped you at least a little bit. It is my greatest hope every time I write a review.

Other perspectives ​

Please, do yourself a favor and watch, listen to, or read other thoughts concerning this awesome dac/amp. The Q15 is amazing to me, but the next guy may not see things this way. It’s just human nature folks and it’s something that shows up in our awesome hobby more than any other hobby on earth. Other than… maybe wine tasting. But that’s about it. Please find out as much as you can. I’m sure there are other reviewers who have better details about the Q15 and possibly can explain things better. Who knows. I just want you to get it right. $399 is a lot of money and a fortune for 99% of the people on our planet. Now with that, I think I am done friends. Take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

Simgot EA1000 "Fermat" Review ​

​

Simgot EA1000 “Fermat”​

Intro​

Finally! Finally, I am able to review one of the best iems that Simgot has released to date… the Simgot EA1000. I’ve had such a rigorous schedule of reviews over the past two months which put the EA1000 on the back burner for a little while. However, here we are… and here it is. I simply cannot listen to this set daily and not give my impressions. Whether anyone reads them or not. This is five months of enjoyment which writes the words in this review. I did go back and forth about even conducting a review since it is so far past the release date, but that feeling dies everytime I put the EA1000 in my ears. I just want to talk about it. Yes, this will be one of those reviews. No hype here friends, just pure audio joy from a sucker for things that sound good. The Simgot EA1000 is a set that’s been out for roughly about five to six months now and so I am clearly past the hype period. Of course, I feel that the community has clearly accepted the EA1000 as one of, if not thee… best single DDs under $300. The Tanchjim Origin (Origin Review) may have something to say about that but still, certainly we’ve established that the hype is legit.

Simgot​

Folks, the audio brand Simgot has been on a tear like no other. There is no other brand that has erupted like Simgot. They were at one point (not long ago) in the grips of relative obscurity, washed up, no longer a player on the scene. Questions like “what happened to Simgot?” would flutter around from time to time. Never completely gone as Simgot had a few sets floating around the Audioverse, but for the most part they were out of the picture. Then out of nowhere Simgot created a spark. That spark slowly grew. Reviewers began giving good reviews and positive thoughts about the brand with releases like the Simgot EA2000 and EN1000. In my opinion, it wasn’t until the release of the Simgot EA500 that a small spark erupted into something closer resembling a blow torch across a field of dry brush. Now it’s all green lights for this brand. One hit after another. The turnaround is remarkable, and it is good for the hobby.

EA1000​

The EA1000 is somehow directly connected to Pierre de Fermat, the mathematician who is famous for his mathematical theory. Including what’s known as “Fermat’s last theorem”. Finally proven 350 years after his death in 1995. Countless great minds spent their lives trying to prove it. You can read about that if you’d like but I am not going to break down what his contribution to mathematics has meant to society. What I am trying to figure out is how this great man’s contribution relates to the EA1000. I suppose it’s simply a tribute. Which is fine.
Anyways, the EA1000 “Fermat” is marginally harder to qualify as an actual single DD. I say that because Simgot also used a passive radiator which… isn’t necessarily a “driver” per se. It simply helps the EA1000 in producing the target sound that Simgot so wonderfully sculpted on the Fermat EA1000 (more on that later). At any rate I consider it a single dynamic driver earphone. So, it’s settled with me, single DD. The EA1000 also makes use of tuning nozzles. On top of that, it’s arguably the most gorgeous iem in its price point. I did say “arguably”. Again, the Tanchjim Origin may have a thing or two to say about that. So, there is a lot to talk about and go over. Let’s get into it. The Simgot EA1000 everyone…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing links:​

–Amazon
–Linsoul
–Aliexpress

Gear used for testing ​

–Ifi Go Blu​

–Aful SnowyNight​

–Simgot Dew4x​

–EPZ TP50​

–Fiio Q15​

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2​

–Shanling M6 Ultra​

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

The EA1000 arrived at my home in an average sized box. Purple-is in color and totally class from beginning to end. On the front of the outer cover says the words, “Fermat’s last theorem” with some of the driver tech as well. It’s neat, but we care about what’s inside. Slip the internal box out and you’ll see the same writing on a slim cardboard sheet held back by a cardboard tab. Open the sheet and you’ll see a cool pop-up card with Fermat’s likeness imposed on the front as well as a short synopsis of his life and what it’s meant to modern society. Lift that layer off and you see the beautiful EA1000 sitting comfortably in cardboard covered foam cut-outs. Next to the EA1000 is the box which holds the carrying case. Next to that box are the accessories which come with the EA1000. You’ll find the other two tuning nozzles, tips and cable there. I realize I really don’t do a lot of justice to the actual unboxing, but I can assure you it’s a decent one.

Eartips​

Simgot provides six pairs of eartips (L,L,M,M,S,S) of the same style and they are all sitting in a cardboard holder of sorts. The included tips look like a cheaper version of the KBear 07 tips but with a much flimsier flange. They are white silicone tips, semi-wide bore, black and rigid stem and they don’t seal in my ears… at all. The outer flanges are simply too flimsy, they just don’t work. I actually went with my tried-and-true KBear 07 large size tips which seal every time and actually work nicely paired with the EA1000. I went through what felt like hundreds of tips just to resort to the 07’s. Which is a normal progression for me. I’m sure the included tips will be good for someone, but not for me.

Carrying case​

The carrying case is gorgeous. It is a gray colored case layered in faux leather, soft to the touch, felt layered foam inside. Very nice. You’ll see the Simgot logo on the top and the nice-looking stitching around the sides. It’s a dope looking case folks! Pure class! This case opens on the top and is held shut with a strong enough magnet. I would say that the case is large enough for the EA1000’s, the cable and maybe a very small dongle dac. It’s not huge but it’s good for putting in a bag and not having to worry about your earphones getting destroyed. I don’t actually use cases ever, but if I did, I’d be happy with this one. It’s a nice addition.

​

Tuning nozzles​

Like I stated earlier, the Simgot EA1000 comes with three tuning nozzles which will slightly alter the sound of this set. Simgot provided a stainless-steel block with threaded holes where each nozzle can screw into for safe keeping. Basically, with these nozzles you are getting three variations of the same target tuning. Two of the nozzles have a damping material (mesh or foam) which does slightly attenuate the upper midrange as well as add a dB or two of bass emphasis. The nozzles come in red, black, & gold. I like each of them but for review purposes I went with the gold nozzle. Here is a very quick breakdown of those nozzles:

​

Black Nozzle (Stainless nozzle w/ black gasket) ​

“Simgot Classic target curve”:

The black nozzle has tuning foam inside of it which oddly enough gives the smallest spike to the treble region as well as adds a hint of sub-bass density (barely perceptible). You also get an upper mid spike with this nozzle which is not needed with this set. The stage seems less tall with this nozzle for whatever reason. The black nozzle has the sharpest treble region and it’s the most veiled of the three.

Red Nozzle (Stainless nozzle w/red gasket):​

“Harman 2019”

The red nozzle is the one which comes with the EA1000 out of the box. This nozzle sounds very similar to the black nozzle yet instead of the foam it appears to be foam/mesh contribution. The midrange comes across less articulate, less open and airy and thinnest as far as note weight is concerned with a slightly less detailed sound using this nozzle.

Gold Nozzle (copper or gold colored):​

“Simgot Golden 2023 target curve”

The gold nozzle is actually a copper nozzle and happens to be the nozzle of my choice. The reason being the overall technical performance isn’t hindered by mesh or foam and the sound is the most open and detailed. I do hear less bass emphasis but also a more subdued treble range to a slight degree. This is definitely the most balanced and neutral sounding of the three with the best staging and it’s the most holographic sounding to my ears.

Detachable Nozzles
The EA1000 features a threaded, interchangeable nozzle design, offering endless possibilities for sound customization. It comes with three meticulously crafted nozzles: one brass and two stainless steel. These nozzles, each with its unique tuning philosophy and approach, allow users to switch between 3 different tuning styles, expanding the headphone’s adaptability and catering to different sonic preferences.
Simgot Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Cable​

The included cable is a nice wire. Granted, I really wish that Simgot would have the foresight to add a 4.4 option. So of course I had to cable swap for my balanced sources. Anyways, the cable provided is advertised as a high purity silver plated OFC (Oxygen Free Copper) cable. Of course, it is a 2-pin 0.78 cable which ends with a 3.5 single ended jack. I honestly feel that the included cable is quite nice. The coloring matches the EA1000 very well aesthetically and and creates good synergy with the EA1000 too. During all of my 3.5 single ended listening I used the included cable and felt that it was very nice. No microphonics, pliable and soft enough, not too heavy and it is pretty fat. I love me a thicky-thicc cable ya’ll. However, for any balanced listening I actually chose two cables that I swapped at times. Those being a 4.4 balanced FSIjiangyi copper cable and oddly enough a FSIjiangyi balanced SPC cable which I feel are both absolutely perfect for the EA1000. Truly, folks check out these cables. They are beautiful and elegant and made of the best materials, and they aren’t ultra expensive. Still, at the end of the day you’ll be very happy with the included cable.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality ​

As far as the actual build quality, structural integrity, and good ole durability is concerned; the Simgot EA1000 is almost in a class by itself. Especially in that +$200 range of single dynamic driver earphones. Again, the Tanchjim Origin may give the EA1000 a run for its money, but wow is this set built well. The Shells are made completely out of highly polished alloy (I don’t know what kind, stainless steel?). This is not a large set of earphones, but Simgot found it necessary to add in a dual cavity structure. You’ll also notice on the bottom side of the earphones is the passive radiator’s speaker cavity (more on the PR next). Simgot chose to make the inside of the acoustic cavity somewhat rough, and coarse which does help suppress some standing waves. The faceplates are made entirely of what appears to be glass. Though in Simgot’s promotional material it only states that it’s a clear crystal. You’ll notice that from front to back, Simgot chose to go all-out and really crafted a well-built iem.

​

Design​

I absolutely love this design. Something so elegant is rarely seen in this hobby. However, Simgot seems to do so in every release. Look at the EW200, the EA500, the EA500LM, and I could keep going. Simgot designs their earphones wonderfully. Just Look at the high polished alloy, like a mirror at all times. Look at the glass faceplates and the white backdrop with the barely perceptible design which surrounds Simgot’s dope looking logo. Also, look at the bronze-colored trim which surrounds the glass faceplate. What a gorgeous iem. Truly a fantastic job Simgot. This is a set that screams elegance. With the subtle touches that could only be dreamed up by a team of imaginative and talented individuals. I think you’ll like it.

All-Metal Body High Transparency Crystal Panel
The EA1000 is the epitome of audio excellence, combining artistry and engineering in one extraordinary package. Its all-metal body exudes durability and sophistication, making a statement of premium craftsmanship.
Simgot Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Internals​

Another huge benefit of the EA1000 is the very talented driver inside. It is said that the driver inside took three years of development to finally get right. It is a 2nd generation 10mm SDPGD driver. Its full name is actually “SDPGD multi-layer sputter deposition purple gold diaphragm. That’s a mouthful. Simgot also added a passive radiator to help with extra resonance during Once the SDPGD driver vibrates due to the over 1 tesla force, the pressure and airflow makes the 6mm passive radiator vibrate as well producing small vibrations and reflections.

1DD+1PR Acoustic Architecture
Building upon EA2000’s success, the EA1000 utilizes a 10mm Dynamic Driver (DD) paired with Passive Radiator (PR) configuration. This innovative design enhances low-frequency texture and ambient dispersion. The interaction between the Purple-Gold Diaphragm and the airflow in the rear cavity generates subtle vibrations and reflections, fine-tuning the bass and adding a natural ambiance.
Simgot Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Fit​

The fit is pretty nice for me, though I’ve heard some folks having issues. Obviously, anything I tell you about the fit is going to be highly subjective and personal to me. It does take making sure that you find tips which work for your ears. For me the shape and size are great as I’ve never had a moment of bad fit with the EA1000 in my ears. What that means to you, I don’t know. Truthfully, even adding this section in my review is a little ridiculous. Also, for the most part isolation is pretty good. About average. If you have a good seal with good tips then the passive noise isolation isn’t bad at all.

​

Drivability​

The Simgot EA1000 is a very sensitive iem which can certainly be driven off of almost anything. Rated at 16 ohms of impedance and a sensitivity of 127 db’s (give or take) the EA1000 was easily driven from even my iPad. Having said that, I can also say with complete conviction that the EA1000 wants and desires more output power from your source. Basically, most any dongle dac with at least 100 mw @16 ohms will be more than enough. Any more is simply icing on the cake. I actually listened quite a bit on the IFi Go Blu on both 3.5 se and 4.4 balanced and I certainly enjoyed balanced more. That’s a gifted little device and pairs perfectly with the EA1000.

Mobile Listening​

Yes, the Go Blu worked like a charm over Bluetooth, but once I attached it to one of my dongle dacs over 4.4 is when the EA1000 really begins to shine. I found the Aful SnowyNight to be the perfect companion with the EA1000, especially on high gain. I had a similar reaction with the EPZ TP50 as well, but it was also the slightest bit more technical. However, listening with the Simgot Dew4x was also a sweet combo. Really a very good pairing with the EA1000. Who da’ thunk it? Now, the EA1000 adapts to different source tonalities very well. Whether I was listening on a warmer dongle like the EPZ TP20 Pro, or an almost dead neutral and sparkly source like the Moondrop Dawn 4.4, I found the EA1000 to shine. Almost no matter the source. It’s kind of a chameleon that way. Certainly more-so than other iems.

More juice​

Adding even more juice and better fidelity devices will most obviously create a better listening experience. Folks, the Fiio Q15 and the Simgot EA1000 form a pairing that is quite amazing. If I were to choose what my favorite listening was done with it would be those two. However, I spent just as much time with the velvet warm Shanling M6 Ultra as well as the neutral iBasso DX240 and I really can’t find fault with any of them. I use medium to high gain on each as well.

What do you need?​

Like I said, the Simgot EA1000 doesn’t actually “need” much. I honestly feel you’ll be good with a simple phone. That said, I feel that anyone who can afford the +$200 EA1000 will also likely have at least a decent Dongle Dac. I could be wrong though. I know that across this vast world of ours are all kinds of financial situations. So, at least a phone, but if you can get a good dongle dac. Heck, the Simgot Dew4x sounds fantastic paired with the EA1000 and sells for $59. So that’s a good option. Anything better than a phone is just icing on the cake and the EA1000 will reward you for it.

Sound Impressions​

Note: I want to preface this entire section with the fact that I did burn the EA1000 in for roughly 50 hours before I really began to judge them. Of course, I also didn’t see much of a difference with the EA1000 and so I can probably deduce that they don’t really need much burning in. I listen almost completely using flac or better files which are stored in my devices. The music player app that I primarily use is UAPP (USB Audio Player Pro). However, at times no do use Poweramp as well as Hiby player from time to time for different situations.

Special​

Folks, Simgot really knows how to craft and tune earphones that have a nice tonal balance. There’s a dynamic balance that is matched in each 3rd of the mix in a way that marries technical ability and musicality in conjunction with a solid timbre foundation. I am beyond impressed by the ability of the sound engineers, tuners etc. who craft these sets and dial in their sound. My word, look at their budget $40 iem the Simgot EW200 (EW200 Review) for crying out loud. Reviewing it I had to seriously question why in the world Simgot chose to make it so cheap. It is wonderful. Then the EA500 (EA500 Review), the EA500LM (EA500LM Review), and even the Simgot EM6L (EM6L Review). Each one is outstanding in their own right. Each set is made wonderfully and has a signature that is all their own. I haven’t tried any Simgot set above the EA1000 in price for longer than a day, but I can tell you right now that they also sound amazing too. Those being the EN1000 and the EA2000. Unfortunately, I only heard each set for a short period. They obviously always use the best drivers possible and use perfectly shaped housings to exact their respective target tunings. Truly a special brand whom I hope keeps on doing exactly what they have been doing for a long time.

EA1000​

The Simgot EA1000 is what I’d refer to as a W-shaped iem, possibly U-shaped as well. However, I lean much more towards the W-shape sound for reasons I’ll explain throughout the review. The midrange is forward enough to make a wonderful balance across the mix with equal emphasis in the bass and treble. The sound comes across as neutral to bright/neutral. However, that brightness is not to a fault. It isn’t forced. It’s perfectly blended into the overall sound in such a way that you almost yearn for more. Now, if you are coming off of a warmer sounding set, I would advise you to wait to judge until you’ve had plenty of time for your brain to adapt. The sound is equal parts smooth and crisp and quite literally dishes out exactly what the EA1000 is given. What you feed it will come out as it should. The timbre is truly special and comes across very clean with wonderful resolution. It seems that the passive radiator actually does aid quite a bit in cleaning up the resonant sound waves bouncing off the internal acoustic cavity. What’s left is a glass lined and contoured sound that is flat-out impressive.

Between the 20’s​

Looking at the bass region, the EA1000 has a snappy, tight and impactful low-end which is moderately extended and moderately emphasized. This is not a basshead set. Not even close. The bass is very well detailed and not even hinting at a one-noted style bass. There’re layers to this bass. The midrange is forward with a leaner note structure. However, within that leaner and tighter midrange note structure is a certain density that is obvious to my ears. The mids also are very detailed with awesome resolution. There is a slight shout on the right track but mostly that is kept in check. Still, there is wonderful vibrance and good separation and imaging as well. It just sounds great. The treble is also just as I’ve described the rest of the mix; vibrant, detailed, snappy, contoured, glass-lined and with a great type of lean density. The treble adds a great sense of air and openness with very good extension into the upper treble. All areas of the mix incorporate wonderfully natural timbre without much of any coloration at all. Again, separation of elements on a stage is top class for a single DD and imaging is spot on. What a nice set!

Bass Region​

Just because I say that the EA1000 isn’t a basshead set does not in any way mean that the bass is weak either. No sir. The bass is simply balanced across the mix. The dynamic balance is superb on this set with plenty of air between bass notes. This is a textured bass that operates within layers of sound, all of which comes across distinct and precise. I don’t hear any bleed over into the midrange whatsoever which makes for a very precise and resolute midrange. The EA1000 sounds as though more than one driver is operating down low as the sound doesn’t sound flattened or blurred. Every note has a round vividness to it with a low pitch vibrance that creates a certain presence for each note as well. It really is special considering this is a single DD.

Now, the EA1000 is not going to give you those super beefy and warm rumbles down low. You also won’t hear anything that is over the top booming either. It isn’t a traditionally big bass, or even a fun bass. This is a technically adept bass that comes with pin-point control and just enough of an emphasis to my ears. So bassheads, keep looking. But also, those who prefer an even sharper low-end with BA type transients than I’d also say keep looking. The EA1000 forms a perfect middle ground between the two distinctions and honestly… I’m all for it.

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass has decent extension into the lowest of lows. Certainly, enough of that low-pitched drone to accommodate most any track. In my opinion the sub-bass takes what it’s given and reproduces that sound right back to the listener. It’s a moderately healthy dose of guttural density that sounds appropriate with the rest of the mix while never seeming over colored. This set is all about balance and the sub-bass doesn’t shy from that. Like I said, the passive radiator does seem to strip some of those unwanted resonances from the final sound before it hits your ears. What you are left with is good texture and a very clean result.

Sub-bass cont…​

Now, fans of an ultra-extended and fun sub-bass within this region will likely not be impressed. I wouldn’t say that there’s a roll-off, but there is a bit less amplitude in the lowest of lows. In the track “Mancey” by Andrew Bird I find the deep bass guitar riff to have plenty of depth with a very streamlined rumble and drone which sounds very nice to the ear. It certainly isn’t lacking. What you’ll notice is just how condensed the sound is. There is tactility at the crest of notes that is utterly wonderful. Attack speed at the leading edge is rapid, with a very crisp, defined, and exact point of contact. Decay is not drawn out and is actually fairly quick. Let’s put it this way, decay is as quick as a natural sounding decay can come across, in my opinion. You’ll also notice that the extra resonances and fuzz which would usually be floating around the sound field are not there. I’m attributing that to the passive radiator’s ability to absorb those noises. The sub-bass moves along with nimbleness and dexterity for even complicated tracks while still sounding compact, bodied (weighted), deep enough and very well controlled. No tiny bit of sound is wasted here as all info is relayed straight to the ear and I feel nothing is missed.

Mid-bass​

I feel that the mid-bass has a perfect emphasis in conjunction with the sub-bass. For instance, bass guitars have just enough meat to them, as well as fullness without an overbearing sub-bass diluting the texture of most bass guitars. Kick drums are the exact same thing. I hear that very tactile initial hit with good tackiness and vibrance which is followed by a very well structured and defined hollow boom. Perhaps that “hollow boom” won’t be enough for some heavy bass lovers but for me, I feel that all kick-drums sound organic and real to life. What the mid-bass does well is rise to the occasion and I love it.

Mid-bass cont…​

This is not a bass that colors the overall sound or adds any veil whatsoever. This is as clean as it gets apart from using different drivers. Of course, BA’s, planars etc. can also come across as unnatural. No sir, Simgot did the mid-bass right and it fits the tuning. The mid-bass hits with very good impact and great low density vibrance that you can feel as well as hear. I feel it’s the texture and fantastic layering which separates this set from others. The mid-bass has wonderful definition with a clean lined, fine lined, and perfectly controlled note presence. It’s really nice. Unless of course you are a bass-boi, at which point you’ve probably already stopped reading this. This is the picture of a mature dynamic driver bass region and is some of the best you can buy for the money. Listening to “Billie Jean” by Weezer (MJ cover), it begins with some hefty and repititous kick-drums. One after the other. Each kick-drums beat is followed closely by a hard snare drum pang. The EA1000 hits with precision. No extra fluttering noises cramping the note definition. The hit feels tacky with a tight boom and a quick release followed by an exclamation point style snare hit. Again, one after the other. Or “Can’t Make Up My Mind” by Cmat. The EA1000 does so well as separating her slick vocals while simultaneously showing off its ability to take on a heavy bass guitar as well as consecutive drumbeats. It’s all so clean folks. Just wonderful.

Downsides to the Bass Region ​

The only downside would be for bassheads. That’s it. Okay, maybe I would say that there are some folks who enjoy a more atmospheric decay. I’m reaching though. Well, I suppose that some folks may want a bit more push into the midrange with the mid-bass so as to offer warmer male vocals and a slightly warmer approach altogether. I could see that. However, beyond that I find the bass region to be awesome and I also feel that Simgot really outdid themselves here. Nice work Simgot!

Midrange​

The midrange has a natural timbre, brighter in vibrance as well as overall energy which comes across as more rambunctious macro-dynamics. Note weight has that nice lean-lush or rangy type reminding me of lean-muscle-mass with no extra layers of fat to the sound. The midrange instrumentation is well separated with very good imaging boasting a very well layered approach. This is not your warm, lush, smooth type of timbre. The EA1000 is exuberant but yet pinpoint in almost all ways. Its forward sprightly energy and fast decay can be somewhat polarizing, in that… not everyone is going to be a fan of this style. This wide open and airy style of midrange comes across crisp, and knife edged with a glass lined note outline which will likely rub some the wrong way. You don’t get that smearing of the sound field within the midrange as it is always clean as a whistle, high definition and always high resolution. However, I also don’t hear that dry and analytical timbre all the time either. Though the note weight isn’t thick and overtly weighted, it still has a density which I feel has to do with the cleanliness of the sound and the hard-edged impact and transparency of each well-defined note. I don’t hear a frail, weak, dry or papery sound here. There’s moisture to it but in a compact form. If that makes sense.

Lower-midrange​

The low-mids are the primary frequency where males reside, some of the time anyways. Obviously, this isn’t always the case. Anyways, the males on the EA1000 are nice sounding, more forward than other sets and very much unsullied, with a very high resolution. Males have a very good presence. This isn’t that thickly weighted and slower style male vocal but instead it carries a very nice crisp edge for male voices. However, I don’t feel that the EA1000 exaggerates already sharp and edgy voices. Instead, the EA1000 simply defines them further, more crystalline, and without the abrasive edge that can be heard with lesser drivers and lesser tuning.

For instance, Stephen Wilson Jr. has that edge to his voice that I’m talking about in the track “Year to be Young 1994”. It’s raspy but sharp. To me he has this coarse, jagged and melodiously unpolished voice that can get absolutely derailed on a lesser set. The EA1000 doesn’t intensify the gritty and unfinished style or add any undue grain fuzz to his vocal rendering. Instead, it comes across as simply higher def. but with very nice separation against the thrumming bass backdrop. Also, voices like Dermot Kennedy in his track “Rome”, the EA1000 shows off his voice very well with nice forwardness yet still only slightly more forward than the Instrumentation. He really does sound nice. Of course, that is if this leaner and more energetic sound is something that you’d enjoy. I can get with it just fine and actually really enjoy the natural/bright hue to the spectrum.

Upper-Midrange​

Now, females are also simply a bit more forward, more vibrant, more energetically structured but with almost perfect resolution. No instrument goes unnoticed and every breath, every sigh, every inflection of a woman’s voice is captured in wonderful HD quality. You’d think that this vibrance I speak of would come across as wholly unnatural. I know I would. Usually, brightness in this region tends to skew the timbre and force some metallic texture or thin it out too much. That really is not the case. Also, when I say “bright”, what I mean is simply more aglow and heightened with slightly off-natural luminance. It’s tastefully done on the EA1000. However, this region can become shouty and too energetic to those who aren’t prepared for it. So, I would still say that the EA1000 is surely a set to make sure the signature fits your criteria of what “good” sounds like. To me, the upper midrange takes me right to the peak of my tolerance and stays comfortably controlled inside what I would consider as… “too much”. Females take on this slightly more elated sheen.

Upper-mids cont… ​

Listening to Caitlyn Smith in the track “High”, I am captivated at the wonderful resolution which holds tight to note integrity by softly feathering through the main verse with very nicely separated instruments and carefully tended vocals. Caitlyn’s voice goes from softly sweet and feathery to absolutely resounding within the chorus. Perhaps for some, this chorus will be a bit too biting. Not for me. Also, the chorus is one that will blurry and blend most sets with all of the chaos happening around her. Not with the EA1000. The notes here are crisp but not edged in abrasiveness, much like the rest of the spectrum. Notes have good solidity even in their leaner body and each instrument has more than enough room and space to operate.

Instruments​

One of the EA1000’s best strengths are in its resolving and transparent nature. I hear this daily in most any track as instruments come across very well layered behind the vocalist. Most percussion has a clangorous and very tight snap to them. Snares have that pointed energy to them which is completely satisfying. The fundamental tones of a cymbal strike are a hint thinner than some sets, but they also aren’t frail sounding. There’s a fine line there that not many single DD sets in the price point can duplicate with this much clean transparency. Strings have a good bite with that nice sharp edge to them. Acoustic guitars, banjo, mandolin, etc. They all sound natural but with some added zest. Violin sounds melodious enough, silvery at times and tuneful at others. Piano may not have the fullness that some may always enjoy but every note is so clean which sounds peppy and almost kinetic in its 3d type of soft enthusiasm. Again, there is vibrance, but also good and solid structure in that vibrance. Not the easiest thing to explain actually. Beyond these, just picture any instrument and add some soft intensity and dynamism.

Downsides to the Midrange​

The midrange will either be loved or looked down upon. As with any set. However, the EA1000 most certainly has that polarizing quality to it. Without question, if you love a thickly weighted and warm type sound that is smooth through and through, then the EA1000 may not be the set for you. Not everyone enjoys this type of replay. Many folks prefer musicality over a more analytical approach. Now, the EA1000 isn’t without musicality, but it is certainly more technical than anything. Yes, the transients are very tightly reigned in with exact definition on most every track, but sometimes folks want that emotional replay and the EA1000 will not always give you that in a smooth and warm way. However, I cannot sing it’s praises enough. I’ve loved this set since day one. If you’ve followed me at all than you’ll know that I usually have to warm up to a set. The EA1000 just has that “thing”, the “it” factor. I don’t hear any sibilance and I don’t hear a simple and flat plane of music in front of me. It’s textured in every note with distinct layers which makes for a great listening session.

Treble Region​

The treble region would usually be a slight point of Contention for me when listening to a single DD. This is not the case at all with the EA1000. The treble happens to be one of the main contributing factors that creates the awesome clarity in the overall sound. The treble has a very nice emphasis which balances nicely with the rest of the mix. You’ll hear a nicely brilliant treble that brings on heightened levity to the whole of the sound. I love the level of treble that Simgot saw fit to tune the EA1000 with. Honestly, the treble almost sounds like a hybrid type sound to my ears. Truthfully, the treble is one of the highlights of the EA1000, which is radical to me. It almost comes across with a BC-like haptic recognition in many of the more dynamic notes. With that said, I still don’t hear those ultra glaring and sharp ear gouging treble peaks as I usually do on sets with forced resolution and treble emphasis. The EA1000 offers actual tactile and contoured bite to every note up top.

Treble cont… ​

I hear a very nice transition from the pinna gain in the upper midrange working smoothly into the lower treble. There is such a clear and structured refulgence within the presence region that is very well highlighted, adding a fun and nicely detailed treble that never seems to over saturate the mix. You really don’t see this all too often in single dynamic driver earphones. Beyond that nice transition from the pinna gain, I also love the extension into the upper treble. There is plenty of information past 10k which actually is a bit refulgent itself. However, just because it’s brilliant and has a certain shine to it, doesn’t mean that stuff like the secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike come across sheen out in treble tizz. They don’t sound splashy to me. You still have that controlled timbre even at the extremities up top in the air region.

For what it is… It’s good​

This is a highly detailed and highly resolving treble that doesn’t shy away and take the easy listening route. The EA1000 forces you to pay attention to all the subtleties within your music. I don’t feel that the uplifted brilliance is necessarily so boosted that you lose that definition, which is something I listen for, especially as a treble boosted iem. This also isn’t necessarily an analytical approach either. Believe it or not. It isn’t so thinned-out or dry that you lose body within treble notes, kind of like blurred instrument separation from treble sheen and gloss which will flatten notes up top at times. The EA1000 still has a certain roundness and euphonic presence up top which has actual layers to the sound. I wouldn’t say it’s like a good est style treble, but for what it is… it’s good.

The EA1000 also has a speedy treble region which can take even the fastest and more complex treble passages and replay them with relative ease. The cadence is so on point with this set. Listening to Billy Strings in the track “Secrets”, or really any track by Billy Strings. Anyways, the EA1000 quite literally takes the lightning quick and congested banjo play and compartmentalizes each note and instrument with actual clean separation. Or “Bishop School” by Yusef Lateef. This is a track with a litany of treble activity that never stops and the EA1000 takes this poorly recorded jam and replays it succinctly and with good resolution. Honestly, it’s hard to really spot any huge issues up top but I’ll try to do just that…

Downsides to the Treble Region​

I would say that many folks only enjoy a more rolled-off treble region. I have friends who much more enjoy a warm, or even dark treble. They don’t want the brilliance and for those people I would probably tell you to keep walking and pass up this set. Beyond that, I cannot find any other glaring subjective gripes that some folks would have. I even think that treble junkies may like this set a bit more than most that I’ve reviewed lately. The treble fits the overall sound so very well and adds so much to the sound. It adds that last little bit of zestiness to the midrange and is very well detailed.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage has good depth of field and layering from front to back. The stage creates almost a psycho-acoustic style depth which is great to hear on a single DD. The width is roughly average to above average. Nothing colossal in width. Still pretty darn good. Height is also average as well. The stage as a whole is slightly pushed back with the center of the sound field not as up front and in your face as some sets lately. Also, when I say average, I mean… it’s good. This is not a bad thing. No, bad would be the stage feeling cramped and congested or narrow, with elements of the stage seemingly blending together. I can assure you that the EA1000 doesn’t have that. It also helps that you have an airiness to the sound which seems to almost exaggerate the openness and overall stage size in a 3D-like way.

Separation / Imaging​

Separation of elements within an imaginary stage is excellent on the EA1000. I feel like I’ve covered this multiple times already in this review, but it bears repeating. The Simgot EA1000 has very good control over the mix, simple as that. You have a fast and tight transient response, an open and airy replay across the board. You have that lean but solid note construction with clean-lined resolution. On top of that the overall signature is very well balanced without any frequency oversaturating the mix and masking anything. This all helps the EA1000 to come across very well separated. Obviously, there are sets with multiple drivers which can separate a hair better, but those usually will also have other issues too. You won’t have that single DD timbre and spectrum conformity, cohesive from the bass to the treble. This isn’t always the case with some other driver types. Imaging is honestly just as good in my mind. I feel that I never really have an issue placing instrumentation. Now, I haven’t gamed with this set but for music listening I haven’t heard much that trips up the EA1000. Maybe some ultra complicated music or congested style music. Blaring electric guitars may mask over some tracks but that’s to be expected. It’s all pretty good here.

Detail Retrieval​

Detail retrieval is another benefit of owning the EA1000. Just like separation and imaging, there really isn’t much that the EA1000 cannot handle. I feel like I get just about every nuance within my music which is awesome to hear. Especially because the EA1000 is a single dynamic driver earphone. Also, some sets with good detail retrieval will sound way too thin and papery for me. They will come across far too analytical. The EA1000 is somewhat analytical but it also has a penchant for musicality as well. Again, please tell me what musicality is? The sound is clean across the board, well balanced, tight, resolute and you have very good spacing with the EA1000. Add all that up and what you’re left with is a set that will draw out the subtleties very well. Truly you won’t be missing much. I feel the only real caveat would be very poorly recorded music, ultra bass heavy jams and tracks featuring a lot of congested instrumentation that is primarily focused near the upper-mids and lower-treble. Basically, heavy metal with ear gouging electric guitar play. There really sint much that will trip this set up.

Comparison​

Note: Some of this comparison is copy pasted from my Origin Review. For obvious reasons. My opinion hasn’t changed on this comparison.

Tanchjim Origin ($259)​

Of course, the one comparison that I choose is also one of thee best single DD’s that my ears have heard. That set is the Tanchjim Origin (Origin Review). The Origin has one of Tanchjim’s 5th generation 10 mm DMT5 drivers at the helm as well as some wonderful acoustic structure which helps this set to sound as good as it does. Truly a marvel at its price and the one set that I feel gives the EA1000 a run for its money in every aspect from the design, build, unboxing, and overall sound quality.

Differences​

Looking at the build, the EA1000 and the Origin are absolutely built exceptionally. Both sets are as premium as it gets. The Origin is all metal (as you know) and the Simgot EA1000 has a stainless-steel shell and a gorgeous glass faceplate. As far as design, again, how could I choose which is better? Truly they are both as handsome as they come at the price. The EA1000 is a bit more elegant, and the Origin is bolder. Both fantastic. The EA1000 has the better cable, the Origin has a much better case, both sets have decent tips (Origin edges it out), and both have tuning nozzles. Granted, the EA1000’s tuning nozzles actually work. I would say the EA1000 is slightly easier to drive.

Sound Differences ​

These sets are tuned a slight bit differently from each other. The EA1000 is more of a Harman tuned U-shape to W-shape with a neutral sound, more energetic, more dynamic. The Origin is neutral with the slightest spritzes of warmth and a slightly more poised sound with better note control and more of a balance across the mix. The EA1000 reminds me of a downed electric line sputtering and zapping everywhere, just energy everywhere. The Origin is a hint more organized, streamlined, with more structure to notes. Both sets are very close in so many ways with only slight distinctions that separate them. The EA1000 is again, more dynamic, while the Origin is a hint blander in comparison. Actually “bland” is an awful word. I think “poised” and “structured” say it better. But also, musicality is a bit better on the Origin, depending on your definition of “musical”. The Origin has less vibrance then the EA1000 but also has cleaner note edges than the EA1000 too. Pick your poison although you cannot lose either way.

Between the 20’s​

The bass in the EA1000 is deeper by the slightest margin but both have good control in the bass region as well as a tighter sound. Both have a good punch and neither come across soft. Now, the Origin has slightly less impact, but I find both sets have great definition down low. Both sets are also mostly naturally weighted, while the EA1000 sounds a hint more boosted. The midrange of the Origin is closer to the listener, maybe a hair more melodic and better for vocals in my opinion. At one point I would’ve said that details emerge easier on the Origin, but I take that back. Both sets really do an equal job of bringing out the smaller details. Now, out of both sets the EA1000 has more dynamism and is slightly more colored in the upper midrange. No doubt the EA1000 can get slightly shouty at times, whereas the Origin usually keeps a tighter rein on that shout. Timbre wins on the Origin as it’s a bit more lifelike to me which is partially due to the added vibrance of the EA1000. Purely subjective. The truth is, both sets sound truly special as far as timbre is concerned. The Origin also has thicker note weight by a small margin, while the EA1000 is more transient tight and dynamically expressive. The treble of the EA1000 is a hint more boosted and vivacious to the slightly less energetic Origin. Both iems have fantastic treble regions for single DD’s and both are extended well with good detail retrieval. Remember these are the slightest differences, I cannot stress this enough. This is hours of going back and forth.

Technicalities​

I feel that the two of these sets are both technically astute and very clean across the mix. Detail retrieval is great on both sets with the Origin having a slight advantage there. Imaging is great on both sets as well as the separating of elements on an imaginary stage. Also, the Origin has a wider stage while the EA1000 has the deeper stage to my ears.

Final thoughts ​

I hate these comparisons. Mostly because I forget to actually critically listen at times. What can I say… I get lost folks. I truly love both iems. It’s a complete toss-up for me. Really, whatever iem is in my ears… That’s the one I like better. The deciding factor for you may be the more energetic sound of the EA1000, or the more balanced and less vibrant sound of the Origin. Of course, another deciding factor for you may be the fact that the EA1000 is $30 cheaper at $219 rather than $249. Again, I couldn’t really give you a good answer as to which set is better. For me personally, I’d probably go with the Origin if I had a gun to my head. However, I truly adore them both.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

The question that I always will get in every review is whether the set I’m reviewing is actually worth the price the price to own them. I was asked enough that I decided to simply put this question in my reviews. At any rate, of course the EA1000 is worth the money they are asking! This set is ridiculously good in almost all ways. That said, you do have to actually enjoy the signature that Simgot tuned this set to. Not everyone will be a fan. Believe me, I’ve heard from many folks that the EA1000 does not fit their preferences. Which, by the way, is exactly how it should be. I really do feel that these differences are what makes the audio hobby, the best hobby. We are all so different. However, if you like this type of energetic, balanced, almost analytical sound with great control of the spectrum, and a knack for making your music sound spectacular… then the EA1000 is most certainly worth the $219 to own it.

The Why…​

The EA1000 is built with exquisite materials that truly make the design POP. They look more like jewelry than they do an iem at times. Just gorgeous folks. So, the build is great, the design is even better, fitment is also good. Simgot added a very good unboxing experience as well. However, it’s alway comes down to the sound on any iem. I feel the EA1000 is worth the $219 because it replays my library so precisely but yet without excluding musicality. The EA1000 is really a benchmark type set in many ways and should be considered at least in the top three for best single DD iems under $300. My opinion folks.

Heavy hitters​

I’ve heard all of the heavy hitters and gotten rid of a lot of those “supposed” heavy hitters. I have the Dunu Falcon Ultra and it is truly a special set for straight up timbre quality & balance, but it ain’t the EA1000. Also, I’ve owned the BQEYZ Wind, no chance for that one. It’s a good set but the timbre simply doesn’t stack up. I had a lot of metallic edged timbre in the upper portions of the mix. Other than that, there was a slight lack in low-end oomph. That one went packing. I’ve owned the Tanchjim Oxygen, own the Tanchjim Hana 21, the Penon Vortex, the Fiio FD5 and many more. The point is, you flat-out will not find many that can do what the EA1000 does… better. I feel the only REAL challenger is the Tanchjim Origin. That’s it. Again, this is my opinion, and my opinions are only true to me. So please don’t feel offended. I am not here to do that. So yes, the EA1000 is well worth the asking price, for me.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Simgot EA1000 ratings below, that would be $150 to $300 single dynamic driver earphones. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $150 to $300 is a decent sized scope of iems that is extremely competitive. However, it’s also a small enough pool of iems that seeing a “9.0” for example, shouldn’t be too amazing to see. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.8 Built very well, HeyGears builds are great.

–Look: 9.9 Clean, fresh, simple, elegant.

–Fit/Comfort: 9.5 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 8.1 Very well accessorized.

–Overall: 9.3

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.5 Top class timbre.

–Bass: 9.6 Impactful, detailed, defined.

–Midrange: 9.1 Clean, resolute, separated, dynamic.

–Treble: 9.8 Extended, detailed, precise.

–Technicalities: 9.7 All technicalities are great.

–Musicality: 8.3 Nice mix of musical and technical.

–Overall: 9.3

Ratings Summary:​

Folks, you need to read the fine print above. I get way too many DMs about these ridiculous ratings. They are always nullified and understood when I tell the person… “Did you read the note above the ratings?” almost unanimously the response is “No”. I always outline the parameters of each particular rating. I garner these ratings on what I feel the consumer would be looking for. Remember, these particular ratings are gathered against any single dynamic driver iem between the prices of $150 and $300 (that I’ve personally heard or have in my possession). I have to at least spend enough quality time with these sets to make this judgment. Again, I haven’t heard everything either so please don’t be upset. I’m not here to cause any division about something as ridiculous as earphones. People get really angry over this stuff, which is a bit odd. Moving on…

Explain Yourself!​

There really isn’t much to summarize here. I feel that each rating mostly speaks for itself, and they are all pretty cut-n-dry. Out of single dynamic driver earphones between the prices of $150 and $300, the Simgot EA1000 is simply one of the best that money can buy. With only one caveat, it has to fit your preferences. I gave the Simgot EA1000 a score of a “9.3” in overall sound. Coincidentally, I also gave the Tanchjim Origin the same exact score. They trade blows back and forth very well for me actually. Just to show you the company that the EA1000 keeps.

As for the ratings above. The EA1000 averaged a very lofty “9.3” and I really don’t feel there are many ratings above that I would argue about. Maybe some would argue that the “bass” rating is a bit too high. I could also see folks criticizing the rating I gave the EA1000 for “musicality”. I don’t think that I would really budge on them, but I understand any disputes. After all, this is a subjective game, friends. It just is, and it always will be. Shoot, the guy next to me may think I’ve lost my mind. I actually expect that. I’ve never liked rating anyways; they can strip away nuance and they don’t really show you the big picture. I said the same in the Origin Review as well.

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Simgot EA1000, I have to thank anyone who chose to stick it out until the end. Thank you for listening to my mindless babble. My greatest hope is that it helps you. At least to some degree anyways. These reviews take a ton of time, a lot of hours listening, and a ton of notes (⅓ of a 50-page notebook). I look at it as a second job that I don’t get paid for. I really give you my exact impressions from many careful hours of listening. So, I say all of that to say thank you for trusting me. It means the world.

Other perspectives​

As always, I also have to make sure that I at least try to persuade you to check out other reviews. We want you to get this purchase right and we want it to make sense for both your enjoyment as well as your pocketbook. Like I said earlier, we are all different, and the guy sitting right next to me may feel I’m crazy. Every reviewer is different as well. It would certainly give you an advantage to check out as many thoughts and opinions as possible. With that, I think I’m done. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

​

Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo Review​

​

Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo​

Intro​

Hello, this is a review of one of Kiwi Ears latest budget oriented iems named the Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo which comes in at $79. The Singolo is actually a collaboration effort between Kiwi Ears and the popular reviewer, YouTube personality and mastermind of “In-Ear Fideltiy”…Crinacle. Crinacle has been a staple of the audio scene for quite some time, carving out a spot for himself among some of the biggest names in the hobby. Whether you like him or not, or whether you enjoy his work, or you don’t, he’s certainly on a pedestal within the audio community and carries a vast amount of knowledge and fanfare. So, of course the hobby will react to any release that features an “X-Crinacle” within the name. As honest as I can be, I’ve only ever watched a handful of videos from Crinacle and used his awesome database of frequency graphs… a lot. Not that I don’t think he’s entertaining and very insightful either, because I certainly do. Everything I’ve ever seen involving Crinacle has been something I’ve learned from, at least a little. He’s pretty funny too. At any rate, this is not a discussion on Crinacle, this is a review of the Singolo and I don’t want the rails falling off this thing already.

Kiwi Ears​

It is difficult to say that you aren’t a fan of Kiwi Ears. How could you not like this innovative and hip audio brand? I for one have been a fan ever since I reviewed the Kiwi Ears Cadenza (Cadenza Review) a couple years ago. I did feel that Kiwi Ears crafted the best set that money could buy under $50 in the Cadenza, and it held that crown for quite some time. Of course it has since been dethroned, but that doesn’t take anything away from how special that set is and has been for audio in general. Also, it’s still a damn fine set for the price and still one of the best iems under $40 in my opinion. I also have owned a few other Kiwi Ears iems that I never got around to reviewing, like the Kiwi Ears Melody, Kiwi Ears Quartet as well. However, I did review one of my favorite iems that I’ve ever heard under $250 in the Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite (Orchestra Lite Review). I feel that the Orchestra Lite is a masterpiece for what it is and where it’s priced at. Even the Melody is one of the best planars that money can buy under $100. I suppose the point is that Kiwi Ears knows what they are doing and doesn’t seem to make many wrong moves. At least not from my vantage point. So, I was instantly intrigued to see what the Singolo was all about.

Singolo​

Well folks, I am quite interested to check this set out in more detail. I want to see how well the implementation of the KARS (Kiwi Acoustic Resonance System) technology (along the principle of a Helmoltz resonator) works to actually create a sense of separation of the sub-bass in a single dynamic driver by cutting the 300hz frequency, and only the 300hz frequency. This would essentially, or better said… “perceptibly” give the Singolo that detached sub-woofer clean cut. If Kiwi Ears is able to pull this off, it’ll be very special. We’ve seen this before in the recent past with the likes of the Truthear X-Crinacle Zero (Mahir’s Zero Review) and the QKZ X-HBB Khan (Khan Review). There have been a few others but that’s neither here nor there. However, those were also dual dynamic driver earphones. Again, the Singolo is just as its name suggests… single… solo… Singolo.

I have no idea why Crin and Kiwi Ears tried to accomplish this feat. It reminds me of Aful’s wonderful attempt to tune the MagicOne with its single BA driver. It’s almost like they do it simply because it’s a challenge. I’d push back on that a bit because there are other reasons why one may want to go this route with a single DD, but that’s for later. Right now, I just have questions which need answering. Okay, let me burn this set in and I’ll see you in about a week and a half. The Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo…

Purchasing Links:​

–Linsoul
–Amazon US

Gear used for testing ​

–Ifi Go Blu​

–Aful SnowyNight ​

–EPZ TP50​

–Fiio Q15​

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2​

–Shanling M6 Ultra​

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

The unboxing experience is really not an experience at all folks. If there was some glaring gripe about the Singolo is that the accessories are absolutely entry level. This is a very strange thing to see at the price of $79. I don’t want to beat a dead horse on this and I’m sure that the money must’ve gone into the R&D, drivers, as well as the actual making of this earphone rather than the accessories. So, I give em a pass. Furthermore, I don’t really care as I tip roll and cable swap all the time anyways. At any rate. The box is rather small with a picture of the Singolo on the front, some stats and specs on the back as well. Nothing we haven’t seen before. Inside the box you’ll find the Singolo looking tough in foam cut-outs. Next to the foam is another box which contains the tips and the cable. Folks let’s just put it this way, I’ve seen better accessories for $25 iems. Okay, the horse is dead.

​

Eartips​

Kiwi Ears provides a couple different sets of tips. Both sets are wide bore silicone tips, one set of three is white and the other set of three tips is black. Both sets (S, M, L) are shallow fit and both sets have very flimsy flanges. Folks, these are both useless to me. They truly don’t even try to seal in my ears. Just prepare to tip roll. I actually went with my standard KBear 07 tips which fit me like a glove.

Cable​

This cable is also very utilitarian and is just…Not good. I don’t know how to say it any differently. I have zero idea why Kiwi Ears went this route, but I feel they should know that we as a community of hobbyists do enjoy better cables. The provided cable is very light… I’ll give them that. It feels like nothing on the ear which I’m sure some folks will enjoy. Not me, give me a nice, braided cable. They are ridiculously cheap anymore and I’m sure that most consumers will pay the extra $10 for a decent cable that looks nice paired with the Singolo. Anyways, the cable provided is a 2-pin cable, white, thin, and there’s nothing else I can tell you because there isn’t any more info on it. I actually paired the Singolo with a 4.4 balanced SPC BQEYZ cable that worked well with it both aesthetically as well as sonically.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit​

Build Quality​

The build quality is actually very good. When considering not just the structure of the iem but also what’s inside the iem you can begin to appreciate the approach as well as the outcome. The Singolo is made entirely of resin and crafted by way of 3D printing. Kiwi Ears actually had to use the method of 3D printing as it would be next to impossible to achieve the Helmholtz Resonator tubing internally without 3D printing. It’s too intricately designed. Also, the build is simply nice. The Singolo is a smaller earphone that is very smooth all the way around with a shallow length nozzle, or a shorter nozzle than usual as well, and so using tips which work for you is a requirement. I will say this again, I used KBear 07 Large sized tips as well as Tenmak Whirlwind wide bore tips during my listening. I do believe it is paramount that you seek out the best fit for any set, but in particular the Singolo. Anyways, the resin looks and feels durable and well-constructed, from the front to the back. Nice job Kiwi Ears.

​

Design​

The design is gorgeous. The Singolo comes in two colorways, with a black option as well as a blue option like I have. This is a set with faceplates that starkly resembles a slightly less beautiful Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite. Still very nice looking though and one which certainly competes aesthetically with any set in its price point. That’s if you dig all resin builds. I enjoy that the Shells are crystal clear where I can easily see the inner workings. I can see the large 11 mm DD; I can see the resonator tubing as well and that is pretty cool. Honestly, it’s a nice looking iem that will look good on anyone strolling down the street, in the market, or simply out and about.

Internals​

Okay, so the Internals are interesting. This should be one of the most legendary acoustic marvels if Crinacle and the folks of Kiwi Ears get this right. The driver is an 11 mm single DD that was custom built with an LCP diaphragm. Internally you have what’s being referred to as a Helmholtz Resonator which has the ability to cancel out, or seriously attenuate certain areas of the frequency. However, this isn’t like traditional methods of using mesh, dampers, etc. Crinacle saw to it to actually attenuate the 300hz frequency which would act and sound like a clean cut from the bass region. He boasts that this would leave a clean and neutral midrange. Very much similar to the tuning seen in dual DDs like the Truthear Zero, or the QKZ X-HBB Khan among others. There’s a big bass tuck and a scoop out of the 300hz region. You can see my pictures of the tubes within the Singolo which shows the KARS technology up close. I certainly hope this works.

Kiwi Acoustic Resonance System (KARS)
KARS is not a gimmick – it is a discrete band-pass filter that manipulates airflow to the driver, regulating low frequency output. This patented innovation features an elaborate labyrinth tubing network that has been designed after numerous scientific and physical models to perfectly calculate the appropriate resonance point for the Singolo’s driver. KARS makes a tight sub-bass shelf possible; something that has been previously impossible in a single-driver IEM. The bass quality, quantity, and texture are all incomparable to any other tuning strategy used in a similar driver format.
Unlike traditional crossover networks that uses multiple drivers with RC (resistor-capacitor) networks, KARS instead uses Helmholtz resonance to regulate its tuning. Airflow to a dynamic driver regulates how much the diaphragm can respond, but also requires additional calculations of flow rate, direction, and volume. KARS allows exact regulation of this airflow to manipulate the sound as we desire. While capacitors and resistors provide a calculated means of crossover solutions, they also add unwanted artifacts to the sound in the form of distortion, especially when cheap SMD components are used.
Kiwi Ears Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Fit​

The fit is where we may have some issues. For whatever reason Kiwi Ears gave us tips that simply are not good. So, getting a seal and a good fit does require (at least for me) some tip rolling. I’ve heard the horror stories online and in threads from folks who couldn’t get them far enough in their ears. The shell almost gets in the way and the nozzle may not be long enough. I don’t know. Anyways, they fit me fine. As long as I get some tips that work, the Singolo fits like a glove. So, I have zero idea how this set will fit you. Obviously, there are folks who’ve had issues. Again, I don’t know why. It doesn’t look like it’s some odd shape or anything. I guess we are all just built differently.

Drivability / Synergy​

To drive the Singolo I would say that all you need is a decent Dongle Dac. Heck, you could probably be fine using a phone with a 3.5 jack. With a rated impedance of 32 ohms and a sensitivity of 108 db’s (give or take), this means that the Singolo is a pretty sensitive iem. I actually used many different source devices while critical listening and found that sources with a slightly more neutral tonal color seemed to work the best for me. Devices like the Moondrop Dawn 4.4, the EPZ TP50, Fiio Q15 or the iBasso DX240. Each is closer to neutral and sounds great. Not that warmer devices will sound horrible or anything. It’s just my preference with this set.

Output​

Now, the Singolo will slightly benefit from some more power output too. You’ll notice that the Singolo does seemingly stretch the stage a bit with more output as well as an increase in dynamics to my ears. Of course, my more powerful source devices are also my “better” source devices too. So, I think a little has to do with the output power, but I also feel that the sonic ability of a source device will make an even better and bigger contribution to the final result.

What do you need?​

Just get a decent Dongle Dac. You don’t need some amazing setup to bring this set to its best fidelity. There are so many low-cost dongle dacs on the market anymore that finding a suitable one for the Singolo should be no issue if you can afford it. That said, if you simply cannot afford anything greater than the Singolo itself, then you will be fine with a simple phone.

Sound Impressions​

Bad rap…​

Now we get to the polarizing part of the review. Folks, I’m just going to make a bold prediction. I’ll put on my Nostradamus hat for a minute on this one. The Singolo is likely going to be a set that you either really love, or really… not love. Some will have an issue with fit and others may have an issue with the tuning itself. Still, others will adore this set. Guys & gals… hear me out. The Singolo has gotten a bad rap and I’m not quite sure why. As honest as I can possibly be, the Singolo does not sound bad. It just doesn’t. I think the biggest crime that’s been committed here is that the Singolo doesn’t exactly sound the way that it was described and advertised to sound.

He said what?​

Folks, I’m trying to make sense out of the chaos here. However, the biggest crime of all (my opinion) is that Crinacle actually said (out of his mouth) that Simgot (ya know, the brand that took a blow torch to the hobby) makes “mid” iems, aka; average, meh or blah iems. Yes, he said that. However, he then proceeded to make a… not perfectly amazing set himself. Let this be a lesson to all of us. Of course, he is promoting his product collaboration, which is fair. However, the community sees it as “self-involved ego” and people don’t take well to it. Whether that’s what it is or not I do not know, it just comes off that way. Yet this is nothing new and Crinacle shouldn’t be looked down upon for promoting his product. Maybe he could’ve refrained from putting down an actual awesome brand. Also, it isn’t professional to belittle another brand (who’s done damn well by the way) and then proceed to create something that is in FACT… kinda mid (as a whole package). I’m not mad at him though; he’s just trying to make his way just like the rest of us. I could never have anything against Crinacle, he’s a staple in the Audio community and given way more than he’s taken. From my point if view, that is. I respect him quite a bit, but this whole ordeal was odd to say the least. There, I wanted to lead with all of that so that I wouldn’t harp on it the whole review.

Is it good? ​

Now, is the Kiwi Ears Singolo a good sounding iem? Yes, it’s a decent sounding set. Is the Singolo good as a package? Yes, it is, but only if it was about $20-$25 cheaper. It’s priced a bit too high if I’m being totally honest…that’s it. Still, I really feel that this set has gotten a bad rap. It really isn’t a bad set. Is it my favorite? No, it isn’t. It’s not even my preference. Will folks enjoy this set? Absolutely, there will be people who love and adore this set.

How does it sound? ​

The Singolo is a slightly warmer sounding iem down low and has a more neutral sound after that. The bass is obviously north of neutral (8db bass shelf) but it’s also not so infused into the sound that it creates a veil. Altogether I hear a slight V-shaped sound, smoother than it is crisp, decently technical and pretty musical I suppose too. I hear an average stage with even some hints of depth. Separation is decent depending on the track, Imaging follows suit and detail retrieval is fine for what the Singolo is. Not bad at all.

That all said, the Singolo has a more fun signature. It has a deeper and more bulbous sub-bass with only a slight sub-woofer like effect, on some tracks… maybe. What I mean by that is the bass region does cut itself off from the midrange to an extent. Okay, I have to stop again, folks, the Singolo simply doesn’t really have that sub-woofer sound unless you are listening to tracks that really bring it out. Some are great, and I mean… really great. The Singolo does have that abrupt decline but not enough of a low-mid 300 hz scoop to make the sound detached and separated like we’ve seen on some dual driver sets which are tuned for it. Maybe not to the extent that Crinacle was going for anyways. So, the new tech does its job, but it only slightly worked.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s ​

What the bass does sound like is a heavy sub-bass and a meaty mid-bass with a less-than sharp downhill mid-bass roll-off. More like a gradual hill. Again, not really a straight deep dive tuck with a deep cavernous scoop that doesn’t bleed at all into the mids. Not exactly anyways. Still pretty clean in the mids though. The midrange is only slightly recessed, it’s very clean and clear, a bit thin sounding, yet also it’s pretty laid back throughout without a lot of energy in the middle frequencies. Certainly not mid-centric, but vocals can be pretty nice. For me that means higher volumes though because there is a lack of vibrance for me. Perhaps it could use some vivacious gusto in the upper mids for some hobbyists, well, most hobbyists. The treble has some decent energy adding some levity to the mix and does have some toned-down brilliance to it. Detail retrieval certainly isn’t bad, though extension into the upper treble may leave a tiny bit to be desired. Altogether, this is not a bad set. I know you folks are hearing a lot from many reviewers, but I can assure you that the Singolo is not a bad sounding set. It simply has some real amazing sets around its price point. This also happens to be a problem for all under $100 iems.

Bass Region​

This is the type of bass that isn’t regularly heard in the budget range. Without question this is a valiant effort by Crinacle and Kiwi Ears. I find the low-end to be fun. I would never consider the bass region as mature, tight, swift or defined. It’s none of those things. Well, not all the time. Of course, some tracks play differently, and some tracks will surprise you with the Singolo. Shoot, some tracks sound down-right amazing. That’s no joke. However, in general the low-end is almost flabby. I did say almost. Kiwi Ears made sure to keep it all together. This isn’t that hard edged type of bass with concrete note outlines that sounds precise in its slam. I also wouldn’t consider the Singolo’s low-end as transient swift. It is definitely more atmospheric in nature with a very nice rumble and haptic/tactile feel which works for more than a few genres. However, it also isn’t that well defined and mature sound I’ve gotten used to hearing at the under $100 price point. I’m not going to begrudge Kiwi Ears attempt here though. After listening I can usually start to wrap my brain around the sound and begin to enjoy the Singolo. Scratch that, over time I can see how folks would enjoy it as I did begin to enjoy the Singolo myself.

Sub-bass​

The lowest of lows is exactly as the graph suggests, it’s deep, extended, and guttural with quaking bass that you can feel as well as well as hear. Certainly, the sub-bass takes the brunt of the low-end priority. I actually love a lot of my rap and hip-hop library listening with the Singolo as well as those deeper bass guitar riffs. In fact, deep and bulbous sub-bass comes up in songs in ways that may surprise you which makes listening to some songs almost new in a way. Now, the bass shelf only extends upwards about 8dbs give or take which doesn’t seem like a lot. Though with the less intense treble it does make it’s presence felt. Certainly not a basshead set. Maybe a hint softer on the edges, but the Singolo has a very compact and dense sub-bass note body. Listening to “Groove” by Ashley Monroe shows off the low droning bass guitar. This track also shows off the clean separation between the bass and the midrange. Ashley’s vocals are very clean and unsullied to my ears. Folks, the sub-bass has a nice texture, and it isn’t sloppy or too overwhelming either. I honestly don’t have anything bad to say about it. Unless of course you are allergic to a more lifted and extended “lowest of lows”.

Mid-bass​

Now, the mid-bass has a good amount of beef to it with a decent slam which sounds pretty nice with kick drums on more exuberant tracks. Songs like “Billie Jean” by Weezer start out with those exuberant and raucous kick drums that will tell you exactly how your iems sound. It’ll tell you texture, speed, and quantity very well. The Singolo comes across slightly soft and with a slower, or better said… an almost natural decay through release. The leading edge at attack has a little bit of fuzz to it, which isn’t always a bad thing. Not really to my liking, but I’m not you. Also, quite a few sets can handle these drums and sound a bit more condensed, compacted, glass-lined and with more fullness. The Singolo doesn’t do drums quite how I like. I want more exact impact, more snap, and direct palpable slam. The Singolo is another set that mimics the analogy of a hammer wrapped in a sock. It’s pretty dense and full, but soft at the crest of the note. Most kick drums have that leading tacky edge which is followed by a big hollow boom with a weighted and resonant decay. The Singolo almost gets me there. Also, “2040” by Lil Baby & Lil Durk. This is another track which should boom with authority. For the most part I hear that. Maybe the Singolo is missing that last little bit of texture and amplitude, but it sounds good enough and makes me bob my head. It did its job.

Downsides to the Bass Region​

The downsides for me are only a few. It really isn’t that bad folks. Especially if you enjoy this type of sound. However, I understand why reviewers would scorch it. Especially if they are judging it for its straight-up “quality”. So no, this isn’t the most refined, defined or separated bass. It’s a bit one-noted at times and doesn’t really follow faster bass passages very well. Also, to do a complete 180, there will be those who despise this much low-end activity. They will find it annoying and bothersome, and I understand that. To those folks I’d kindly advise them to move on. This set isn’t for you. Coincidentally, my entire purpose for these reviews is to try to help you figure out just that; is the Singolo for you, or isn’t it? For some, this bass will be heavenly, and I cannot just roll the Singolo through the mud just because it doesn’t fit my exact preferences. Granted, I honestly don’t find it bad at all and even quite fun. If any of you have been paying attention, the Singolo fits the criteria and preferences of the man who tuned this set. That’s the measuring stick folks. Not MY particular subjective wants and desires. The bass is deep, and it’s big. Yes, it’s also pretty unclear and ill-defined too. You already know if it’s for you or not. I told you this set would be at least slightly polarizing.

Midrange​

The mids come through with pretty good cleanliness against the bassy backdrop. Tracks without a lot of bass activity will sound very clean, refined even. However, even in bassier tracks the bass tuck “cut-off” is abrupt enough that the midrange does sound pretty distinct. Does this make it good? Maybe. I suppose it all depends on what you personally enjoy. Now, the Singolo isn’t exactly a “mid-centric” iem, and I do hear the slightest recession. Mostly in the lower midrange. Furthermore, there’s also a less vibrant energy in the midrange to my ears than on most good budget iems. This still doesn’t make it bad either, but it takes a minute getting used to. Especially if you are coming from most anything on the budget market of late, ie: Simgot EA500LM.

A few midrange notes…​

The midrange is a mix of crisp and smooth. It’s lean in body, yet with good structure to the sound. It isn’t weak and lifeless, or too sapless and frail. Transients move along with a natural decay to my ears. Not super ductile or nimble, but also the Singolo isn’t sloppy at all, or sluggish either. There’s decent texture and the midrange is also pretty technically adept too. You’ll hear some mellifluousness as well, which rears its pretty head at times. The complaint against the Singolo is that it lacks some energy, especially in the upper mids where we are used to hearing that more exuberant and vivacious pinna rise. I don’t know if I agree completely. Perhaps it’s less shimmery than some sets? In addition, another knock against the midrange is that it comes across kind of flatter than most and lacking those expressive macro-dynamics. The bonus is that there really isn’t anything which causes offense to the tuning. Unless of course this tuning itself is offensive to you.

Lower-midrange​

The low mids offer pretty nice male vocals. Of course, they aren’t as hearty as some sets which incorporate a slight bleed over from the bass region. You don’t have that brute weight like some sets (Rhapsody, Delci) and that is by design. What you are left with is supposed to be a cleaner male vocal with cleaner instruments in this region. I would say that this is pretty much what I hear. That said, I also hear thee slightest recession of this area and male vocals may also sound slightly thin and less authoritative. However, if you are cool with that then you’ll be cool with males on the Singolo. To be honest, they all sound pretty good. Maybe a hint thinner, but good enough. Maybe a hint recessed too, but this isn’t anything we haven’t heard before. Listening to Marcus King in the track “Save Me”, his voice comes across very nicely resolved. Yes, it isn’t as full bodied as some sets, but his voice does sound very good against the rest of the melody. The subtle but heavy bass riff never encroaches on the lead singer’s performance, while the electric guitar on the left side of the sound field can easily be heard, loud and clear. “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For” by Home Free is an acapella cover of U2’s famous hit. This is the type of song that the Singolo really shines with. Once you hear those melodic and perfectly timed harmonies of each male voice you will understand. However, there are some males that simply feel as though they lack authority and energy. It’s hard to put my finger on all the time. Like something is missing.

Upper-Midrange​

The upper midrange is where I really wish there was just a bit more energy. The Singolo doesn’t miss by much. However, this is where we start to see the issue I explained earlier. There are simply too many great sets within its price point that don’t have this issue. If you call it an issue. For me it’s subjective. It’d be one thing if the note weight was juicy, emotionally charged and more engaging. I don’t hear that though. Females tend to lack some vibrance and shimmer from time to time as well as weight and body. They aren’t as elated or lifted in their presence. Some tracks will sound better than others. Still, “More Hearts Than Mine” by Ingrid Andreas is a beautifully sung track that isn’t the most enthralling and energetic in tempo. The Singolo almost exaggerates this lack of enthusiasm. Ingrid’s voice needs some weight to it, in my opinion. Her voice and the inflections in her voice need that more shimmery engagement. It just isn’t there as I like hearing her. Then you have a track like “Oscar Winning Tears” by Raye which is recorded very well. More energy, bass, vibrance to a degree as well. This comes through with the Singolo. I also enjoy the bigger bass in this track which follows Raye’s vocals very well with the Singolo. The Singolo helps Raye’s voice to come across very clean against the bass foundation with an airy quality to it. So, there you go, some sound great while others… don’t.

Downsides to the Midrange​

Of course, the biggest glaring issue that I have is a subtle lack of sprightliness and vibrance. The midrange can come across as ever-so-slightly deadpan and slightly less colorful or kinetic in its macro-dynamics than I would like. I have a hard time saying this though, because generally I do enjoy this set. If I turn the volume up enough, and simply watch what tracks I’m playing… then no big deal. The truth is, there are moments when the Singolo can sound flat-out impressive. Despite that, I have to keep going back to the overarching issue that Singolo faces. There’re too many sets that simply out-performs the Singolo at that $80 price point. Maybe if the price was $20 to $25 cheaper than I wouldn’t be as much of a weakness, or issue. I mean, detail retrieval isn’t abysmal in the midrange and the mids are very resolute and clean. So long as the track isn’t bass heavy then what you’ll have is a tidy and clean sound. Also, the midrange isn’t shouty, isn’t glaring, minimal sibilance, not metallic sounding either. Separation of instruments is decent to good. Imaging is actually quite good on tracks without heavy low-end activity as well. I’m torn folks and I shouldn’t be torn at $80.

Treble Region​

The treble on the other hand is actually pretty nice. Again, we don’t have any offensive peaks or ear gouging glare which is good to hear. This isn’t the most energetic treble as far as brilliance and lift is concerned, but there’s still enough vivaciousness to add some fun to the sound. The Singolo walks that fine line pretty nicely. Just enough brilliance without it coming across as “too much”. So yes, it’s a slightly less energetic treble then some iems at the price point, but the Singolo also had a good quality timbre. I find it comes across slightly crisp, but with decent contour of treble notes and there’s a little bit of bite to the leading edge of attack up top. Resolution is actually quite good here, and I also hear some nice detail retrieval for how downplayed the treble is. What you won’t hear is an annoying level of emphasis or forced resolution. Believe it or not the treble actually works well for the overall tuning. Like I said, the Singolo isn’t an outright bad set by any stretch of the imagination and the treble helps in this regard.

Not bad for what it is​

Now, I don’t consider this a fast or transient agile type of treble region in a general sense, but for a budget single DD I think the treble region does just fine. Not as well in comparison to some balanced armatures, planar magnetic earphones or obviously est drivers (is there any budget est drivers?) However, the Singolo has good enough attack through release, as well as nice resolution, stage width and separation up top to tackle some more demanding treble tracks. Listening to Billy Strings in the track “Ice Bridges”, I find that the Singolo does an adequate job of handling Billy’s fast paced banjo play. Along with the banjo, the Singolo does great in parsing out separation of the other instruments for a single DD. I can hear the mandolin, chimes, etc. There are some moments of blending happening, but this is to be expected. For the most part it handles this and other tracks pretty well.

Again, I feel one of the strong suits of the Singolo’s treble region is its timbre and the way that the Singolo handles stuff like the secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike. I don’t hear anything even remotely splashy, but instead cymbals sound nicely bodied with realistic enough harmonics. Obviously, this can change from track to track. This really goes for most any instrument in the treble region that I zeroed in on during critical listening. Having said that, extension will leave a little bit to be desired. It isn’t ultra extended. I wouldn’t say it’s rolled off, but extension simply isn’t a “pro” of the Singolo’s tuning. But the timbre is good, instruments sound realistic enough, and I don’t hear anything metallic, too edgy, shouty or peaky. All In all, not bad.

Downsides to the Treble Region​

If I were to cover some downsides or issues, I’d probably first say that treble heads will be left wanting here. This is not refulgent in shimmering luminance. The Singolo doesn’t have that edged and crisp bite. Treble notes don’t have that contoured structure and super defined body. Also, I’d say that extension is only average. Nothing that will draw out all of the tiniest of details. Not extended enough to stretch the stage either. The treble isn’t so laid back that I’d call it relaxed, but it’s leaning in that direction. All things considered, it isn’t deplorable and does fit the overall tuning well enough.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage as a whole is about average. This isn’t a massive sounding iem that stretches the stage in width, but it also isn’t congested sounding. It’s average. Height fills out the sound field pretty well and depth is there too. The depth of field is not the type that adds a holographic or 3D type sound. Not completely anyways. Actually, the Singolo has its moments. At the end of the day, I would simply say that the psycho-acoustically rendered stage is average. Furthermore, average isn’t bad at all, it’s average. The stage doesn’t feel, or sound cramped at all which is the least of what we should be looking for.

Separation / Imaging​

Separation of elements within the imaginary stage are well parsed-out and delineated from one another. The Singolo has a tuning which tends to create space and the sound is crisp enough and defined enough to create those distinctions. It’s a cleaner sound throughout the midrange which takes up the bulk of our listening. The bass may be a bit compressed and not as clinical in its approach, but it all comes together nicely. So long as the track you are listening to isn’t loaded in bass activity then separation of instruments and voices is not bad at all. Imaging follows suit almost to the tee. I find the Singolo actually has good imaging, so long as the low-end doesn’t get in the way.

Detail Retrieval​

Detail retrieval is another area that I’d say is about average as a whole. Maybe above average midrange micro-details, but that is highly debatable. So much depends on the track you are listening to at any one moment. Less complicated tracks will obviously come through a bit better and more congested tracks will not sound as refined, defined, distinctly separated, and clean. Again, the bass will have a lot to say on how well you are able to perceive the subtleties within your music when the Singolo is in your ears. Again, I’d probably call the Singolo’s ability to draw out the finer details as average. I don’t want to commit to saying it is above average though it does have its nice moments.

Comparison​

Simgot EA500LM ($89)​

This was an easy choice for a comparison. Well, it’s appropriate anyways. The set I’m comparing against the Singolo just so happens to be the Simgot EA500LM (EA500LM Review). Of course, it only stands to reason that I’d choose the one set that Crinacle referred to as “mid”. That set is one of, if not thee, best set under $100. This is ridiculously debatable, but I would assume that the great majority of hobbyists would agree that the LM is at least a top five under $100 iem. The LM is also a single dynamic driver set with a 10 mm lithium-magnesium driver and one of the sickest builds at any price point. I truly adore this set and feel that Simgot deserves all the accolades and praise that they’ve gotten. The EA500LM is actually the successor to the much-loved Simgot EA500 (EA500 Review) which itself had received the same amount of praise and rich adoration.

Differences​

To begin, the LM is about $9 more but also comes with working tuning nozzles and one of the best builds that your money can buy for under $100. Made completely out of a high shine metal (stainless steel) that’s polished to a mirror finish. The Singolo is, as you know, an all resin iem and is very well built in its own right. However, I don’t think anyone would argue that the LM is simply more robust and clearly better built. Unless you need a lighter iem, at which point the Singolo would work for you as the LM is a solid and dense iem which is very weighted. As far as design and aesthetic, both iems are gorgeous. This would obviously come down to your own preferences. You may enjoy the clear resin with the beautiful Kiwi Ears design. Or maybe you are like me and cannot get over how tough and flat-out handsome the gunmetal high polished look of the LM is. Either way, they’re both dope. Now, the LM is much better accessorized with a much better cable, much better tips, and the LM also comes with a zipper case. So, from the outset, the LM is built better, arguably looks better, better accessorized, and even has tuning nozzles. Maybe “mid” means “awesome”.

Sound Differences​

To begin, the LM is much closer to neutral than the Singolo which does have that big bass that warms the sound a bit more. The tuning nozzles can slightly change this, but the nozzles really won’t affect the tonal color all that much. The LM has a more defined and airy sound with a better balance of the spectrum. While the Singolo carries that heavy bass which does tilt the scales a bit to the left. Transients come and go more swiftly on the LM and do so with better precision. The Singolo tends to let a note run its course a bit more. You could probably say that the Singolo has the funner sound. Of course this depends on what you consider “fun”. Traditionally, this means bigger and more rambunctious bass, more V-shaped etc. However, I find the LM is much more melodic in sound with a better mix of technical ability and musicality.

Between the 20’s​

Starting with the bass, the Singolo has a much heavier weighted, guttural deep and emphasized low-end. It’s deeper, slams harder too. However, the LM has the more mature bass while still having a moderate amount of thump. It’s quicker, better definition, more detailed. The midrange of the LM is richer and has better note weight across the mix and better detail retrieval. Between the two I feel that vocals come across better on the LM. It’s more shimmery in the upper mids and more engaging while the Singolo can sound flat at times and doesn’t have the same shimmer and vibrance. The treble region of the Singolo isn’t as lifted as the LM’s is. Now, the LM also has the possibility of coming across too bright for some whereas the Singolo isn’t offensive at all. That said, the LM is also more airy and open sounding too. Also, the LM has better extension into the upper treble within the air region, better note precision, definition too.

Technicalities​

Technically speaking, the EA500LM is pretty much better across the board. Having said that, neither set is flat-out bad technically. Both sets perform well here. However, the LM is clearly more detailed across the frequency. It’s pretty obvious and easily discernible to me. Separation of instruments are nice in both sets too, yet the LM has an airier approach, better resolution to my ears too. Like I said, the transient behavior of the LM is tighter, more exact in its approach. I find imaging is also pretty nice in both as well, but once again, the LM doesn’t have that huge bass to mask over anything to the extent that the Singolo does. Finally, the soundstage has more depth on the LM.

Final thoughts on this comparison​

Like I said, this was an appropriate comparison. I can say without a question in my mind that the LM is the set that I prefer. Also, I realize that this comparison looked much better for the LM, and it does stand to reason. I suppose that folks who are very sensitive to upper mid pinna glare and treble emphasis will take a second look at the Singolo. It’s much less offensive. Also, people who do enjoy that big and rotund bass that can really extend deeply may also want to check out the Singolo. However, for everyone else this is almost a no-brainer. I think that the LM is clearly going to reach a broader range of hobbyists and fit more genres better.

Is it worth the asking price?​

I will be short in answering this question. I do feel that Kiwi Ears is asking a hair too much for the Singolo. The Singolo is a decent set. However, I simply don’t think the Singolo competes with some of the sets within its price point all that well, for me anyways. Of course, I don’t know what all went into creating the Singolo. There could be a long and arduous back story that none of us are privy to which was rolled into the final price of $80. Who knows. The one thing that I do know is… the Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo doesn’t stand up next to the better sets in the under $100 price point. Yes, it is a decent set, and yes, I can vibe with them and enjoy them. However, I’d be lying if I said that the Singolo could equal the Kefine Delci, the Simgot EA500LM, and many more. There are simply better buys for your money.

Great sets in the price point​

These impressions are only my own folks. I could understand someone really enjoying this set and could easily understand someone who loves the sound. I am not here to upset anyone. The truth is, the Singolo is not a bad iem. I realize I’ve said this multiple times and I believe that. I can easily enjoy listening to them. Again, it’s only when I am going through some of these under $100 sets that it becomes apparent that the Singolo is priced a bit high. When there exist sets like the Celest Pandamon, Artti R1, Artti T10, Kiwi Ears Melody, BQEYZ Topaz, Fiio JH5, Fiio JD7, Truthear Hexa, Simgot EA500, Simgot EA500LM, Simgot EM6L, BGVP P05, Muse Hifi East 6, EPZ Q5, EPZ X-Tipsy Star One, Letshuoer DZ4, TangZu Fudu Verse, Moondrop Aria 2, Tripowin Olina, Tripowin OlinaSE, Dunu Kima, Dunu Kima Classic and that is just to name a few. There are quite a few more that will either outperform the Singolo, or perform somewhat the same, but have much better accessories etc. So, nothing against Kiwi Ears because I have greatly enjoyed many of their iems, but the Singolo should have probably been priced a bit less. My opinion.

​

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo ratings below, that would be $60-$100 iems of any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $60-$100 US is a huge sized scope of iems, and so seeing a 9 should probably be pretty special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.0 Built very well, all resin.

–Look: 9.4 Another beautiful Kiwi Ears Design.

–Accessories: 5.7 Not very good.

–Overall: 8.0

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 8.8 Timbre isn’t bad.

–Bass: 8.4 A fun and deep, bigger bass.

–Midrange: 7.8 Clean, slightly thin, laid back.

–Treble: 8.5 Non-Offensive with good details.

–Technicalities: 8.2 Technically a nice set.

–Musicality: 8.5 Musicality is very nice as well.

–Overall: 8.4

Ratings Summary:​

Rating the Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo was tough for me. Each rating could be argued for various reasons. In fact, I argued with myself over most of them. The ratings could go either way based on perception, preference and what one considers “good” or “bad”. Welcome to every rating ever given… ever. It all depends on what the criteria is. Basically, I judged the Singolo against any and every iem between the prices of $60 and $100 US. In case you didn’t know, that’s a ton of awesome iems. I have many on hand to actually listen to and make a subjective judgment, which is nice. But also, it’s a long process that gets tiring after a while.

Explain Yourself!​

Anyways, enough complaining. The Singolo is a pretty good set folks, and I stand by my ratings on this one. As you can see the Singolo is about 7 to 10 rating points off the best in the price point (if you’ve read any of my reviews). I gave the Singolo an overall “sound” rating of an “8.4”, which is basically an average of all “sound” scores added up and divided. That’s about what the Singolo is. Good, but not top tier.

Grains of salt​

The two ratings I had the most trouble with were the “Midrange” rating, and the “Musicality” rating. I kept going back and forth between those two. Basically, for the “Musicality” rating it isn’t always easy subjectively rating such a thing. Let’s put it this way… define “musicality”. Let me know when you have a good and understandable way to describe it. Let alone quantify it in a rating value. Musicality is a fluff word that is wholly subjective, and its meaning fluctuates and changes between people. Truth is, I shouldn’t even have it on my ratings. Actually, I shouldn’t even do ratings to begin with. Oh well, moving on. The midrange is another rating that I was going back and forth over because there really are some beautiful moments with this set. There are times it sounds strikingly good. On the flip, there are also times that the Singolo sounds like a $18 iem. The good outweighed the bad, I gave it a “7.8”. The rest of the ratings are questionable, but they are also my opinion in the end. You may disagree and I wouldn’t argue with you at all. We all perceive music differently folks, please don’t let any “high on their horse” reviewer tell you different. So once again, these are just painstaking little grains of salt.

Conclusion​

I haven’t had such a hard time writing a review in quite a while. I’ve been so conflicted during this whole process. Do you know that there were nights that I felt the Singolo was flat out awesome? Also, there were plenty of times I was wondering what it was that I was smoking. That’s what the Singolo has been for me. However, in the end, when all is said and done… the Singolo simply isn’t one of the top tiers iems, for me. There are too many good to great sets that can be had for the same price and even lower. It’s a good iem, it’s a fun iem, but it’s also got some subjective gripes that I personally can’t unhear which drops it below those “best under $100” iems.

Other perspectives​

Please listen to, watch, or read other thoughts about the Singolo. It will certainly be a benefit to you. Don’t simply rely on my words and my thoughts. We are all so very different. The next guy may absolutely love this set, and ya know what… they’re right. This is a hobby where every opinion is always correct. It’s all subjective and personal to the person listening. So please do yourself a favor and check out other perspectives. Also, I thank you for reading this review and I do hope it helps you. Okay, that’s about all I have. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

Kefine Delci Review ​

​

Kefine Delci Review​

Intro​

This review covers the latest iem from the brand-new audio brand Kefine which goes by the name of Kefine Delci. The Delci is a single dynamic driver earphone which boldy steps up to the plate against the vast market of $50 to $100 iems. Coming in at an MSRP of $79. However, the Delci went on sale to begin its life at $59 and hasn’t really budged since then. So, for this review I will simply look at the Delci as a $59 iem. Which is a fantastic price by the way! Being that Kefine is still in its infancy as far as an audio brand is concerned, I find it remarkable that they’ve crafted such a formidable entrant into the market. The Delci is only their second iem which comes only months after the Kefine Klanar (Pietro’s Klanar Review) which happens to be a planar magnetic earphone that received some very good praise. The Klanar was released in October of 2023 and the Delci in March of 2024. It appears that Kefine is about to go two for two.

Kefine​

Kefine Electronics Technology Co. Ltd. was founded in November of 2022. So yes, this company is about as fresh and new as a company can be. I can tell you all, after speaking with Collin Yang (one of the founders of Kefine) that this is a brand created from a group of friends who sought out to bring to market the highest possible sound value that they can muster. I cannot begin to tell you how refreshing it is to see a small brand such as Kefine defying the odds in a saturated market. There’s something special about a small brand. Even more special is that they are a group of friends, like minded individuals who understand the market, and the community. I feel this is a company that all of us can get behind. However, none of this would even matter if their products weren’t very good. I’ve always been a fan of small operations, mom & pop shops, etc. which are born out of joy, hope, and actual risk.

Value​

Kefine comes from the name of one of their founders “Ke” and the word “Refine” coupled together. They believe that “High quality is not equal to high price” and that squeezing every last cent out of the creation of their products is paramount. Kefine decided not to add any unnecessary features or accessories and the packaging is as simple as they can manage while still maintaining quality. Meaning, the money goes into the product itself. Folks, I found it was ridiculously nice to read THIS “about” section at kefineelec.com. This is what it’s all about friends! Real music enthusiasts who understand the consumer. They understand what we go through, constantly seeking the best value for our dollar. It isn’t easy to create real “value”. In this day and age especially. I think it goes without saying that I feel this is a brand to watch closely for every release they have going forward.

Delci​

I love a good name folks. It’s nice to see a brand actually name something with purposeful intent. We see it from time to time, but mostly we get “number names” with “pro”, “plus”, or “ultra” attached to the end. You can tell when a product is a labor of love. When there is true passion involved you would never name your product a “number name”. You’d think of the perfect name. I realize that I’m going kind of long on this and many of you could care less. But I care and I like seeing brands that care. I actually envision the hundreds of names floating around between this group of people, searching for the perfect name that embodies the character of their product. “Delci” actually means “Pleasure, delight”. I’d say that they just about nailed that one. It’s a fine name. With that all said, let’s get into this review. The Kefine Delci…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing links:​

–HiFiGo
–Linsoul
–Amazon

Disclaimer:​

I received the Kefine Delci from Kefine as a review sample and in exchange I will conduct a full review and feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. I have not received any payment or any other form of compensation for this review. This set is a review sample iem. Kefine has not requested to pre-read any review and doesn’t have any control over “what” or “when” anything gets published to mobileaudiophile.com. All thoughts within this review are my own, though please take note that I will always have my own biases. This is impossible to get around. I try to be as objective as my subjective self can be, but this is an opinion piece folks. Thank you to Kefine and thanks for reading.

Gear used for testing ​

–Ifi Go Blu​

–Aful SnowyNight​

–EPZ TP50​

–Fiio Q15​

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2​

–Shanling M6 Ultra​

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

Kefine states that they put less money into the unboxing experience so that they can better equip the actual earphones. Well, I’d say that they didn’t skimp all that much because the actual unboxing experience is pretty nice for a $59 iem. The box itself has a sleeve covering with a picture of the Delci on the cover, some stats on the back too. Slip the sleeve off and you’ll see a simple black box with Kefine imposed on the front. Open the box and you’ll see the Delci looking all dapper staring back at you. Next to the Delci is the carrying case. Inside the carrying case are the tips as well as the cable. I realize that I don’t really do much justice in explaining these unboxings, but I can assure you that the Delci’s is pretty good. That is always predicated on how good the actual accessories are. Altogether, not bad at all.

​

Eartips​

Now, the eartips are actually of pretty decent quality. Kefine adds in seven pairs of tips in total. They provide four sets of dark gray silicone narrow bore tips which lift the mid-bass and slightly soften the upper mids. They also provide three sets of semi-wide bore dark gray silicone tips which elevate the lower treble and add a bit more of a distinct impact in the bass. To be completely honest, I didn’t get my best seal with any of them. I actually went with the large sized KBear 07 tips which helped the Delci fit like an absolute glove in my ears. Not to mention that with the 07’s I hear a slightly more impactful low-end while adding some vibrance up top to a degree. Seven pairs of tips at this price are nice. Couple that with the fact that the tips they do provide are actually decent. Not bad.

Carrying case​

Providing a carrying case is another thing which kind of goes a hair above and beyond the usual call of duty at this price. Of course, it certainly isn’t unheard of, but I’d never expect a carrying case at $59. However, Kefine is trying to build their brand and they are thinking of the consumer here, so they did add in a case. It isn’t some ultra elegant case but it’s a nice addition. Especially for a first time iem owner or someone who uses cases a lot. I never use them but that’s me. At any rate, the carrying case is black and made of faux leather. It’s plenty large enough for the earphones, cable, extra tips and maybe a small dongle dac. This is a zipper case, and you’ll notice “Kefine” printed on the top. I appreciate the addition here and it shows that Kefine at least is trying to provide the best experience for us hobbyists.

Cable​

Now, this is an area that surprised me. The cable provided is a very good wire that looks really fantastic on the Delci. Brown-on-black looks flat out dope with the gunmetal color of the Delci. I don’t know much about this cable other than it’s a 2-pin black & brown twisted cable with 164 strands of OFC copper which terminates in a 3.5 single ended jack. Folks, this is a very nice-looking cable. It has some beef to it. It isn’t some flimsy junk cable that you’ll need to swap out. The colors match perfectly in my opinion as the earphones and the cable look very nice paired together. However, I did swap cable for use with my balanced sources. I actually went with a brownish/silver 2-pin 4.4 balanced Youkamoo cable. However, for all 3.5 single ended listening (which was a lot) I was more than happy using the included cable and I think any of you would be as well. Certainly, one of the better cables offered at this price.

​

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality​

I was kind of blown away by the Delci. I don’t think I’ve ever had in my ears an all alloy (aluminum) iem that feels this ridiculously light. The Delci weighs just over 5 grams, and it feels like nothing in the ear. I am very pleased by this. Anyways, the Delci is made entirely of aluminum by way of CNC machining and built to last folks. This is a very durable earphone as it is solid as a rock. The Delci also has two small vent reliefs, one closer to the nozzle and one near the rear of the unit which add relief to both sides of the dual-cavity design. The nozzles are of medium length and so as long as I tip roll then I will have a wonderful fit every time. Friends, there is something to be said for a very light all alloy earphone and weighing just 5 grams is taking things to a whole new level. For $59 this type of build quality isn’t unheard of, but I do think it’s a selling point and should certainly be noted. No rough edges, clean lines, smooth transitions, with great structural integrity.

Lightweight & Elegant Design
Experience comfort like never before with Delci’s lightweight and elegant design. CNC-machined from a single piece of aluminum alloy, Delci is both durable and stylish. At only 5.3g per side, Delci is one of the lightest metal earphones available, providing hours of comfortable listening.
Kefine Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Design​

Now, the design of the Kefine Delci has gotten some push-back. Some folks have messaged me saying that it is pretty plain and not really up to their liking. I wholly disagree, but I am not them. I only say this because I have to be fair and speak what I know. Not everyone is going to be a fan. That out of the way, I think it’s great. I have been on a kick of late, really enjoying sets that are less “flashy”. I love an iem which has that minimalistic and bold type of design language because if it is done right then you’ll have a very fine looking iem, and the Delci is just that. I’d say the Delci has this grayish/brown gunmetal colorway from front to back and no other colors to choose from. However, when paired with the included cable, the Delci looks very nice, very sleek. There is a masculine feel to the Delci but also with a hint of elegant design as well. The more I look at them the more I am bewildered by what a hobbyist can get for only $60. At any rate, all brown except the faceplate which has a tasteful raised face with the Kefine logo imprinted on it. It’s a very nice look and I usually do not like logos or names on my faceplates. This is an earphone done right. Nice work Kefine!

Durable & Stylish Housing
Delci’s sleek gunmetal finish is achieved through precise CNC machining, polishing, and anodizing on aviation-grade aluminum. The result is a durable housing that exudes elegance and sophistication, ensuring your earphones remain scratch-free and looking pristine.
Kefine Promotional​

Click to expand...

​

Internals​

Kefine chose to use a 10 mm dynamic driver with a DLC (Diamond-Like Carbon) and PU diaphragm with N52 neodymium magnets within a dual cavity. They obviously used some good drivers and acoustic components within the housing of the Delci, and you will understand that the moment you put these in your ears and add a little volume. No distortion, nothing that would indicate that the driver is being stretched further than its ability. Of course, we have to keep things within reason. Still, I feel that Kefine certainly did put the money into the earphones and I’m telling you people, this isn’t an advertisement, I truly believe that Kefine is a player in this game folks!

Fit​

The fit for me is very comfortable. This set weighs only 5 grams! It is so very light! The Delci feels like nothing in the ear. I get a good seal right away with tips which work for me (KBear 07’s), and the rest is history. Just a very comfy iem. For me anyways. I have no idea how well they will fit you but I’m happy with that I can wear them for many hours without having any sort of issues. Isolation is also pretty good; about average I’d say. Not much different than most iems on the market.

Drivability / Synergy​

The Kefine Delci is rated at roughly a 28-ohm impedance and a sensitivity of 108 db’s. Basically, the Delci is pretty easy to drive. It won’t take any crazy amount of power to get this set to good volume. However, I do feel that the Delci does improve in incremental ways using a bit more juice. I also don’t feel that the Delci reacts in a bad way too many sources. I’m assuming that the nominal tuning is such that it won’t matter as much with a warmer or cooler source. The Delci is a warm/neutral sounding earphone and so it does play nice with just about every source that I own. Also, I did notice some scaling happening with more output. Of course, I also feel that (like any set) a lot of this improvement comes through simply using better sources. However, you will notice that many times an earphone will come across with slightly heightened macro-dynamics, better separation, tighter transients, more bass impact with more actual raw power… stuff like that.

Mobile Listening​

I spent time with many dongle dacs over the course of critical listening with the Delci. Out of them all I found the slightly closer to neutral sounding Aful SnowyNight as well as EPZ TP50 were my favorite. However, I do get better bass impact and weight with a device like the EPZ TP20 Pro. Listening over Bluetooth with the IFi Go Blu was a nice pairing too, especially on 4.4 balanced. However, of my Bluetooth devices I preferred the Qudelix 5k a bit more. That ES9219 dac chip has a clean response which seems to really dial in with the Delci attached. Usually, the Go Blu will outperform the 5k across the board but… synergy matters. I suppose if it was up to me and my perfect preference, I would go with a slightly closer to neutral source but that is not by any means a requirement. Mainly because the Delci really does sound great with anything I put it on.

A bit more juice…​

Of my more powerful mobile devices, I use the iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2 attached, the Shanling M6 Ultra, and the Fiio Q15. Each is very powerful for an iem. I never have to go past low gain, though I choose to use medium gain as there is a tightening up of the spectrum. Of these devices I love all three. The M6 Ultra is slightly warmer, velvet, with its AK4493SEQ dac chip. The Delci is so nice and warm resolving with the M6 Ultra that it’s hard to put it down. However, both the DX240 (ES9038Pro dac chip) and the Fiio Q15 (AK4191 + AK4499EX dac chips) run a tad closer to neutral and synergize only slightly closer to my preferences. I won’t 100% lean any one way though and I do believe that the Delci sounds really great no matter the source tonality… within reason.

What do you need?​

All you really need is a decently powered dongle dac. Shoot, you could probably get away with simply using a phone and a 3.5 jack. The Delci is not difficult to drive, and the dynamic nature is such that it sounds pretty impressive on most anything. So, a decent Dongle Dac would suffice. You can find some very capable and very nice dongle dacs for relatively cheap. As the market saturates, competition gets heated, prices naturally go down, and the consumer reaps the benefit.

Sound Impressions​

Note: before I dive into the sound, I just want to preface it all by stating that I did in fact burn the Delci in for roughly 75 hours, give or take. I did notice a slight change for the better. I don’t usually say this, but I have to report what I hear. The sound relaxed a bit, less intense in the sub-bass (still heavy though) slightly more balanced as a whole too. Also, I listened to many different sources during this time which helps me to get a feel for how the Delci behaves using these different source devices. I generally prefer Uapp (USB Audio Player Pro) as my music app which can be found on all of my digital audio players. Occasionally I’ll use Poweramp, and Hiby Player too. I use all flac or better files stored on my devices.

All-rounder​

I’m going to straight-up come out and say that the Delci is an all-rounder set which can replay darn near my entire library pretty well. A very good mix of musical and technical too. Folks, I wouldn’t be surprised to see some folks Rating this set the best you can buy under $100. I don’t know if I’d go that far because it is an impossible thing to quantify. But folks, this is a nice sounding iem. Of course, we all have preferences and so what’s good to me, may not be good to you. Also, there are some real and true KILLERS under $100 anymore. That said, I’ll tell you all without skipping a beat that the Kefine Delci is an absolute stud! It deserves to be in the top five, maybe top three almost across the board. It replays all genres pretty well and excellent for the cost and the tuning.

What does it sound like? ​

The Kefine Delci comes across slightly V-shaped to even U-shaped to my ears with only mildly recessed low-mids. The sound is warmer than neutral but there are some moments of that neutrality coming through. There’s a very nice tonal balance across the mix with only a slight lean in favor of the sub-bass. No undue peaks, no huge, cavernous dips either. Just a bigger hill to the left and a smaller hill on the right. So, it is a warmer sounding set, but with a clean replay. It’s also an organic replay to my ears. The Delci provides a seemingly authentic timbre experience with a natural hue to everything I listen to. Also, the macro-dynamics are pretty vibrant and vivid for a warmer replay which adds some good energy to my music. Nothing boring here. It’s fun but it’s also composed, which is not usually the thing I’m saying at $59. Every area is represented well. From the bass, to the mids, and on through the treble, each 3rd of the mix has a stake in the dynamic balancing act that Kefine created. Not dry, analytical or thin either. This is a lush response which still creates space between instruments and still contours notes very well. Especially for the price (you’ll hear that a lot, just a fair warning). The stage is wide, Imaging is better than it should be, and separation of instruments is actually good!

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s​

The Delci has a very rotund, almost stentorian bass that doesn’t feel sluggish at all. Basically, I’m saying it’s able to bang and it does so with some precision while still being able to maneuver through more complicated bass lines with good micro-dynamic agility. The Delci’s low-end is pretty concise at decay and is nimble and ductile enough to move through the tonal shifts of even complicated bass tracks pretty well. I suppose some may want a hair less quantity and a slightly tighter rumble and slam (like a BA or Planar), but the Delci sounds very well done. It booms in a big way, sub-bass focused, haptic reverberant muscle. Still not for bassheads though. The midrange comes through only slightly recessed against the rest of the mix. Folks, the mids are very clean, rich too. But not in a warmly veiled and foggy way. This is a clear, relatively airy and open sounding midrange. There’s texture there, some definition to notes in the midrange as well. The treble is well extended, but it comes through with no annoying peaks. The treble is smoothened over and does well to uplift the sound as a whole. Technically the Delci is much better than it should be. I realize I’ve basically already said this.

I have a set for you…​

Folks, I just want you to get a good set that performs well across the board for the price. The Delci does so in its own way. There are so many tuning variations of what “good” sounds like. The Delci does V-shaped remarkably well, and it seems like the sound is effortless for these drivers. I want to give you options that won’t feel like a waste of money for you. I realize that some of you have already signed off on this set because it simply isn’t the sound you are looking for and I get that. However, if a nice sized bass, natural sound, a clean approach, good midrange and a non-offensive but also vibrant enough treble with a good technical foundation is what you are after… I have the set for you. Let’s check out each 3rd of the mix…

Bass Region ​

The low-end of the Kefine Delci can thump, and it can rumble deeply. Enough to satisfy those folks who enjoy some good ole’ guttural rumble. The low-end has some bravado, or at least some confident swagger and it does so in a physical way. What we have is a strong sub-bass presence and a nice glide downhill through the mid-bass on into the mids. The Delci does have some spill over into the midrange and I wouldn’t want it any other way. The sound is well structured, well textured, and there’s almost a certain deep pitched vibrance in the reverberant rumble. There’s a nice note edge as well. Not too smooth and with a nice amount of crispness too. Furthermore, the Delci also has good density and weight afforded to most notes in the low-end. Shoot, in the entire frequency. This is a well-done bass region which walks that fine line of mature and fun. Why can’t it be both?

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass definitely takes on the brunt of the low-end emphasis. This is a very physical, full-bodied and formidable bass that I can feel in a haptic sense. The Delci has a deep pitched grumble down low which extends better than expected. The Delci sub-bass has decent to good layering and textures to my music down low which does add some dimension and somewhat distinct layering of those sounds. I wouldn’t call the Delci pillowy or softly lined either. There’s contour to sub-bass notes (depending on the track) with good micro-abrasive edges to the sound. However, the nice thing about the Delci sub-bass is how deep it can rumble while still keeping the note edge. It’s a clean sub-bass for the price. Not quite basshead but great for fans of a good and elevated lowest of lows. Listening to “Mancey” by Andrew Bird, the bass guitar gets very low in pitch in this instrumental track and resounds in a very sonorous way. Most sets will carry the bass well but not all can do so with roundness to the note. With convexity. The Delci easily pulls this off while also sounding organic and ultimately pretty clean too. “Paradigm” by The Head and the Heart is another track that’s very deep with a raucous bassline. The Delci has no issues at all as it holds that low drone with nice energy and separates the lead’s voice in a well delineated manner. No real masking at all. The sub-bass (in my opinion) could be considered the cornerstone of the tuning.

Mid-bass​

The mid-bass is tastefully done. Kefine knew exactly what they were doing as the mid-bass isn’t as lifted and forward as the sub-bass, but it is still impactful and can add ever-so-slight amount of wholesome fullness to the midrange while also adding just enough boom to bass drops, kick drums etc. Listening to “Move Along” by the All-American Rejects is a track which begins with very heavy kick drums. With the Delci in my ears, it shows a slight lack of emphasis in comparison to the sub-bass. Just a tad less rambunctious and meaty then some iems with over emphasized mid-bass replays. However, the mid-bass is both fast and tight in its decay. Not as full-on robust in authority or as bulbous as most but I do find that it’s enough for most any genre. Slightly dry and less humid in its density but good for complicated bass passages in my music. I find the Delci’s mid-bass to have a nice leading edge at attack, but it isn’t as hard lined as some sets. Without question it sounds nice, but I did feel that is worth noting. It definitely leans mature, clean, detailed and still has enough punch to carry most any track.

Downsides to the Bass Region ​

Without question the number one downside will be the elevated nature of the bass in general. I have many friends who only want the ultra-tight and snappy low-end that doesn’t even hint at getting in the way of the midrange. In the Delci’s case, I do hear a slight bleed over into the mids. But also, I think that is a very good thing and helps in a myriad of ways. Other than that, there aren’t many issues that I see. The bass is deep, fast for its size, clean and decently well defined. Definitely a huge selling point for Kefine.

Midrange​

I find the midrange to be quite nice folks. I really do. This was one area that I thought for sure I’d hear a typical V-shaped sound. I couldn’t have been further from the truth. Instead, the midrange is only the tiniest of hairs pushed back, good clarity, speed, and separation. Also, the midrange has good note density. Meaning, there’s actual body to the notes. The mids are pretty milky if you ask me. Certainly not dry, thin or analytical sounding. Also not fuzzy, cramped or veiled but… milky. I think the mids are great folks. No this isn’t some mid-centric iem which is made for vocals to shine. Having said that, for a slight-V to U-shaped tuning; the midrange is very present and highlighted, especially for vocals of both male and females. No, they aren’t out on a pedestal or pushed further forward, but the depth of the midrange, the spacing, the cadence and the natural timbre do help the Delci’s mids to hold their own very well.

Lower-midrange​

The low-mids have just enough body imposed upon its notes from the low-end. There is an essence of warmth, north of neutral, and replays good and defined notes. Males have very nice tonality and separation is such that it allows their voices to sound almost prominent in the mix. Not quite though. It’s very tastefully done. The track “Colorado” from Cody Jinks features his deeper voice with a nice crisp inflection when the Delci is in my ears. I love the realism to his voice with this set. He sounds almost lush, but with enough crispness to also sound accentuated. If that makes sense to you. His voice doesn’t melt into the surrounding melody. The slight bleed from the bass region is showing its value on this track. Again, tastefully done. I keep saying “defined” and I’m looking for other words but English only gives us so many. However, Cody’s voice is defined well, and the body is there, and his voice does stand out and is well separated from the strumming guitar. Another track is “Time Stand Still” by Foy Vance. Now, in this track, his voice does sound a hint pushed back, not as forward I’d say. Or better said, his voice is in the same plane as the melody surrounding him. Of course this is the way the track is recorded too.

All in all, the low-mids are very nicely done for such a low cost. Instruments and voices come through with some added warmth, density and even some good depth for layering. I find I’m missing nothing with this set. Also, the low-mids are just clean enough to take this richer note weight and simultaneously have good separation and clarity.

Upper-Midrange​

The higher portions of the midrange which usually, but not always, is where females reside. Most female singers are forward and even have hints of elated shimmer which sound perfect in a female voice. The pitch, tone & timbre all stay organic but in a slightly more vibrant way. Despite that, I also don’t hear anything shouty… ever. I feel the Delci takes me right to the cusp of shout and then pulls the reins back in. There’s a pleasantly gradual rise in the pinna gain and a seamless transition into the lower-treble. The upper-mids are nicely displayed against the higher peaking sub-bass and bass region. Never too strident, never shouty, never metallic. This is organic and natural in a wonderful way folks. Listening to Caitlyn Smith in the track “High”, the Delci has no issues capturing her elegant and feather soft build up to the chorus with a sweet tone to her voice, clean edges and nice emotion. However, it is the chorus that breaks apart most every iem on this track. In this song Caitlyn is in “ballad” mode belting her heart out while musical mayhem goes on around her. No doubt to emphasize her feelings. The Delci takes this track and compartmentalizes each individual sound very well for a single DD. Obviously, multi-driver sets have the capacity to do a bit better (doesn’t mean they will) but for a single dynamic driver earphone, the Delci is great for females.

Upper mids cont…​

The upper-mids on the Delci are so much different from some of the other sets which head up the top-five in most folks under $100 lists. Most of those sets have a more pronounced upper-midrange with a slightly less natural and more energetic sound. There’re obviously a few detractors from that but for the most part it’s copycat tuning. Not Kefine. I actually love what Kefine did here. This is not a Simgot upper midrange. They didn’t copy anyone. Kefine took their own route and managed to absolutely nail this region folks. Females have body, they are crisp when they need to sound crisp, resounding when they need to be resounding, and they do it all within this wonderful capped upper midrange canvas. Never sibilant, never peaky, never glaring and never metallic sounding. Just pleasant. I suppose some folks will want more energy and I expect that. However, I cannot help but congratulate Kefine on a job well done. Females and higher pitch males sound very nice.

Instrumentation​

Instruments are just the same. I feel that all instruments hit my ear with a natural sound to them. I hear nothing that is straight up wrong sounding. Not with the Delci. The only issues that I hear with instruments is with how the tonal & dynamic characteristics of the sound come across. Like in some percussion you won’t have that super lively snap to the sound as some sets. Snares sound great but they aren’t quite as strident and punctually biting as something like the Simgot EA500LM for instance. Not bad by any stretch but I want you to know what you are getting. Kick drums also could use just a hint more immediacy in the leading edge. Better said, they need that tacky edge to the big hollow boom. This doesn’t mean the Delci doesn’t have that, but it isn’t as noticeable. All strings sound nice, edgy enough, detailed enough to pick up the harmonics very nice, the finger slides etc. Okay, I’m not going through every note on every instrument as it is a foolish undertaking, wastes far too much digital ink (that’s a joke), and uses too many words for a reviewer trying to keep his ever-growing word count down. The point is, the Delci recreates most instruments in a very organic way, and it really is nice to hear at the price.

Downsides to the Midrange ​

The biggest drawback of the midrange would be for those who would much rather have that ultra-snappy and transient swift type sound. The type of sound which is born and bred to be clinical and analytical. Despite that, the Delci does have good technical chops, it just isn’t tuned to be a proper “technical beast”. It isn’t planar or BA quick either. I would also flip that coin and say that people who enjoy a much warmer & darker sound with syrup thick notes which ooze emotion are likely going to want to keep looking. Besides those two types of hobbyists, I don’t think the Delci misses much. It’s musical, transients are actually pretty snappy for a single DD with just enough decay. The Delci has good clarity and resolution for what it is, and the sound does have an emotional element to it. Add to that, the midrange is fairly well detailed too. Honestly, I don’t have much to complain about.

Treble​

Looking at the treble region on the Kefine Delci, I would first point out that the sound is kept in check without any forced and unnatural vibrancy, or without oversaturating the upper portions of the mix in treble glare. Again, the Delci will take the listener right to the brink of intensity and then pull back the reins. There’s a soft cap on treble levels while still coming across with mild brilliance and sparkle. You won’t hear forced resolution brought on by boosting the treble through the upper treble. Many times, we will see these areas lifted too far in hopes to bring out micro-details and such. Just enough brightness to add some levity and luminance to the mix and this shows up at lesser or greater levels depending on the track and your source. Now, details are illuminated just fine in this region depending on the track of course. More on that later. Supplementarily, the treble also manages enough shimmer, air, and openness to create space, which adds some dimension to the upper portions of the spectrum. This isn’t some drab and boring treble either. I don’t want my words to come across that way. There is adequate and even better than adequate air and shine up top without offering any fatigue. This is as brilliant as a treble can get without coming across offensive. My opinion.

Not a treble head’s dream, not bad…​

For the most part, the treble has a smoother sound than it is crisp. However, this in no way means that the treble doesn’t have some bite to it when called upon. No this isn’t BA, Planar or EST etc. treble and DD’s do have a harder time portraying the contour and roundness to notes at times, but I find the Delci does pretty nice. At the very least I’d say that for the $59 that Kefine is asking for, the treble plays very well with the rest of the mix and really does fit the tuning perfectly in my opinion. Certainly not a treble head's dream though, as it isn’t so boosted that treble junkies will be drooling or anything. Also, the bass region does have the bragging rights of the frequency. So treble heads probably won’t be impressed. That said, the upper portions of the mix do have good clarity and transient swiftness while I also hear good separation of instruments, voices, and harmonics. Stuff like the secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike never sound tizzy to me, or splashy at all. Always under pretty good control and decay in a natural way.

Extended… but not overcooked​

Extension is another benefit of this tuning. I really like how Kefine kept the overall brilliance under wraps without losing control of the brightness while also giving the Delci a well extended sound up top. There is way more info past 8k then some folks probably know. I’m really not missing much of anything. Like I just stated, the extension isn’t the type which comes across metallic or splashy and never tizzy, which is a testament to Kefine’s tuning abilities. Is it perfect? C’mon, nothing is perfect and yes there are things I’d like to see. But also, this set is a budget iem folks! We can’t lose sight of that. There is only so much Kefine or any brand for that matter, can do at that price. So, with that thought in mind I really feel that this is a brand who knows how to be efficient with their time and resources to craft and create a set that replays my library like the Delci. The extension is nice, it’s actually good, and they didn’t have to overcook the treble to get there. They kept the treble in check, no peaks, no glare, no sibilance that is noteworthy. Brands like the “Simgot‘s of the world” really do boost these regions which ultimately will be a bit polarizing to a huge swath of hobbyists. Granted, I enjoy Simgot’s style, but I would say with assurance that more folks would enjoy the Delci and their approach.

Downsides to the Treble Region​

The first thing which comes to mind is that treble heads or fans of this area are not going to be hugely impressed. I wouldn’t think so anyways. I know a few treble heads who would certainly look at the Delci as boring and probably not as vivid as they’d like. Treble notes could use some more 3D style bite and contour as well. The Delci does have a smoother than crisp sound and so I could see some people wanting a bit better. Also, for fans of a darker treble, I also don’t feel that they will enjoy the Delci either. Honestly, the Delci sits right smack-dab in the middle of both extremes. I find the treble nice but not everyone will share my feelings.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

Okay, for a V-shaped iem, a single DD, a budget set, and for a bass heavy iem… the Delci has a much larger stage then I would’ve thought. Large as in… wide, tall, and reasonably deep. All dimensions are heard which does come across as slightly holographic. What I mean by that is the stage as a whole has a certain roundness of elements and layering which occurs. It isn’t some huge coliseum or even a large room, but the stage is very nice, and the overall sound quality is better for it. As always, not every track will come across this way. This is why I use the same 10 tracks to check for stage size. I will highlight one that I usually use in “Hook” by Blues Traveler. Right away the guitar persists past my ears with the drums beating in the background and the harmonica coming in just in front of the drums. It’s an easy song to pay attention to. After all, it’s the same damn chords played over and over again. Dimensionality, like front to back, width, and height comes through loud and clear. Once you’ve listened to a track such as this (along with any other track) then it’s easy to hear the ability of a set-in comparison to other sets. The Delci are pretty good friends. I’d say above average for a budget single DD. Which is pretty good.

Separation / Imaging​

For the most part separation is pretty good. Probably better than “pretty good” actually. Unless you are listening to a track with heavy and consistent bass play. The Delci bass will overtake and slightly mask the sound at times. No real good way to get around that. Maybe EQ, or tip rolling. Anyways, the separation of elements within an imaginary stage is better than they should be. The only other caveat would be complicated tracks. Obviously, single DD’s will usually have a slightly harder time creating a distinction between these elements (instruments/voices) in more congested songs. Though Kefine has done a good job crafting a set with a good dual cavity and good acoustic properties which does help in this regard. Imaging is actually very well done and easily parsed out in my opinion. The sound is pretty clean, good enough resolution, tighter than usual transients for a budget single DD, good space as well which does help to separate the sound field elements. I also feel this helps a lot with where each of those elements are within that sound field. I can hear the partitioned off instruments with good left to right imaging as well as decent enough layering and front to back depth. Not bad at all.

Detail Retrieval ​

Details are very good in a “macro” sense and better than they should be in a “micro” sense. Beyond micro-details, I find the Delci performs well with micro-dynamics too. The quality of the sound is of a very high value for the price and the quality of the drivers I feel must come into play as well. Details do emerge pretty well. Let’s just say this; I don’t hear anything awfully congested or mashed together. Again, unless the track has a heavy bass presence or the track you are listening to is overly complicated and congested. Those are your caveats for detail retrieval. Any other situation and micro-details are brought to the surface with good clarity. Good for a budget single DD anyways. Honestly, for a fun, V-shaped iem with a richer note weight the Delci has performed very well in this regard. Musicality first iems aren’t usually very technical. Like I said earlier in the review. The Kefine Delci toes the line of musical and technical very well for what it is.

Comparisons ​

Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo ($79)​

The Kiwi Ears X-Crinacle Singolo (soon to be reviewed) is Kiwi Ears latest budget offerings and another pretty good one at that. The Singolo is actually a collaboration effort between the YouTube personality “Crinacle” and Kiwi Ears. Folks, I love Kiwi Ears. They have made some special sets over the course of the last couple years. The Singolo is a single DD with an 11mm LCP driver and the special KARS (Kiwi Acoustic Resonance System) technology. This is a set which comes in with an MSRP of $79, just like the Delci. However, like I’ve said, the Delci went on sale and since hasn’t gone back up to MSRP. At any rate, the Singolo is a highly acclaimed and hyped iem which has gotten quite a bit of notoriety over the last month or so. Let’s find out how they differ.

Differences​

Looking at the build quality, the Singolo is made purely out of resin and is formed very nicely. However, the all-aluminum build of the Delci is a step up in my eyes. Both are very nice but there is a difference when both sets are in hand. As far as the design, I’d think more folks would gravitate to the Singolo. It has those Kiwi Ears gorgeous faceplates, cool logo, wavy glitter mixed with bold colors, a clear shell and a smooth feel, just like a few other Kiwi Ears sets. As for me, I like the Delci. I like the simple aesthetic. I like the minimalist but very confident look and appearance of it. Accessories go to the Delci. Much better cable, better accessories in general. Both fit nicely but the Singolo probably offers better comfort for most folks. These are minor differences though as I feel both sets are comfortable for me.

Sound Differences​

The Singolo has a closer to neutral sound as it’s big sub-bass presence really doesn’t warm the mix quite like the organic sound of the Delci. I find the timbre quality of the Delci is simply closer to realistic to my ears. It does take a couple more db’s to get the Delci to the same volume, but I’d also say that the Delci is rewarded a bit more with better sources and more output. The Singolo has that “Truthear Zero” type of bass-tuck tuning, where the mid-bass does a deep-dive roll-off into a scooped lower midrange to create a sort of sub-woofer effect. The Delci has the more typical tuning but with better perceived cohesion.

Between the 20’s ​

Listening to the Singolo I hear a more guttural sub-bass by the tiniest of margins, but the Delci has the cleaner bass to my ears. More exact in its leading edge, maybe a bit more precise too. Singolo sounds a hint softer, more detached (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing). The mid-bass slam of the Delci is bigger, a hair more authoritative and the transient response is tighter and better for complicated tracks, better defined. The midrange of the Singolo is thinner sounding, less rich but better technically. Details emerge a bit easier, and separation is more evident. Take nothing away from the Delci because its musical sound is a huge benefit against the Singolo’s drier midrange. I just find that Delci’s vocals, instrument timbre, and overall appeal will likely suit more folks. The treble region of the Singolo rolls-off sooner. It’s less brilliant, less air, thinner in note body and less engaging.

Technicalities​

Details go to the Singolo. I only say this because the bass doesn’t really congest anything on this set. Also, the midrange is very clean, neutral and transient attack through release is relatively quick. Instrument separation is good in both sets, but the Singolo probably makes it easier to discern. However, the imaging is a bit better on the Delci with better layering of sounds in my opinion. Of course, these are not huge differences, but they are in fact differences, nonetheless. The soundstage is wider, deeper and equally as tall on the Delci. I feel this is a huge thing because the more holographic type of sound does add a lot to my music.

Further thoughts on this comparison​

This comparison will come down to preferences. You really have to enjoy that deep sub-bass and rolled off mid-bass along with thinner, but also cleaner midrange notes. It takes a minute of brain burn to really grow to enjoy. I actually do like it quite a lot. However, between the two I feel this is a no brainer for me. I like the Delci, it is truly a top-class competitor in the price range that wins over for its musical sound, it’s fun sound, but also, it’s better than average technical chops. Both are very nice, and I’d understand anyone arguing against my thoughts but for me… Delci.

Simgot EA500LM ($89)​

This next comparison features one of thee best iems that money can buy under the price of $100. My opinion of course. That set is named the Simgot EA500LM (EA500LM Review). The LM is a true “top class” iem with a huge following. Simgot has truly been on a tear through audio, like nothing I’ve ever seen. They’ve single handedly changed the game and forced other brands to step up their game. As far as the LM, it’s the successor to the wildly popular Simgot EA500 (EA500 Review). The LM is another single DD which houses a 2nd gen. 10mm lithium-magnesium dynamic driver inside of a beautiful chassis. I have to admit, this is a tough challenge for Delci. However, I could also state that these are two entirely different sounding iems.

Differences​

Both of these iems are built entirely of metals, with the LM being stainless steel and the Delci completely made of aluminum. Both are built wonderfully but the Delci weighs only 5 grams. This is a huge difference from the LM which is as heavy as a brick. Both are comfy enough but no doubt the Delci takes the prize. One big difference with these two is that the LM actually comes equipped with three sets of tuning nozzles to tailor the sound to your preferences. Now, the look is an entirely different thing. The LM is truly gorgeous with its gunmetal color while the Delci also has its own bold charm to it. Both sets have a good unboxing experience. Honestly, as far as aesthetic is concerned, the LM is simply a beauty folks. I do enjoy both designs, however.

Sound Impressions​

Both sets come across very cleanly across the mix. The LM has an almost neutral sound, whereas the Delci has a warmer and richer sound. Without question the LM is brighter and gets very close to shoutiness much easier than the Delci. The LM has a bit rawer energy in its sound but both sets have plenty of exuberance. Between the two, the Delci has the more organic sound which is closer to realistic to my ears. I find the Delci to have a bit more of a traditionally musical sound as well, though that interpretation may be different for everyone. Unless you can tell me what “musical” sounds like. Lol. Having said all of that, the LM also has some fantastic timbre of its own and may be one of its strong suits. Both sets really do have a very refined and resolute sound respective to each sound signature.

Between the 20’s​

The Delci has a deeper sub-bass that comes across more authoritative and bolder. It’s just bigger across the board with less treble impacting the perceived bass quantity like the LM. The balance of the spectrum leans to the left for the Delci which naturally brings on more warmth to the sound. Listening to the LM you’ll hear more brightness which cancels some of the lower bass tones at times and in certain tracks. Both bass replays are very well perceived, but the LM is simply less guttural. I’d also say that the LM has a slightly softer leading edge to its bass notes. The midrange of the LM is more forward, possibly shoutier in some tracks, while the Delci is more reserved, less energetic, more emotionally charged and also less fatiguing too. Both sets do vocals very well for the price and both offer their own solid take on vocals. The LM is more forward, a hint thinner, more vibrant, slightly more energetic, tighter transients, more crispness & snap to percussion and better vocal clarity. The Delci comes across closer to natural, slightly smoother, lusher, with a more mellifluous type of midrange, debatably more musical. Again, both are very nice for what they are and the style of sound signature that they each represent. The LM has a brighter treble, more detailed, more crunch and bite, while the Delci has better extension into the upper treble without any undue peaks.

Technicalities​

Technically speaking the LM is probably the more detailed iem between the two but the difference is negligible. Honestly, I feel both sets are very good in this regard. However, the LM is simply more illuminated and not as rich in sound which does help to bring the subtleties to the surface easier. Again, negligible. I feel the Delci does just fine as it’s just as clean sounding but simply more robust in note weight and less luminance up top. The LM and the Delci offer good separation of elements though the LM makes it easier to distinguish for me. Imaging is nice in both sets, though the Delci does provide just a hair better layering of sounds. Which brings us to the soundstage. After a lot of listening to these two I found the Delci to have a wider and deeper stage. I’m not saying the LM is bad here either. Both have a nice rendition of the sound field, but the Delci is a bit vaster in size. However, these are “in-ears” and so the difference between the two is slight. At the end of the day, both iems are nice technically. Both sets are resolute enough and clean enough per their respective tuning. Let’s put it this way…neither is a slouch.

Further thoughts on this comparison ​

I don’t know why, but these comparisons always turn into battles. I really try not to do this. Rarely do I succeed. However, I cannot say which set is better between the Delci and the EA500LM. For me anyways, because I do love them both. Both iems are truly fantastic for the price point. Also, both iems offer a different take on my music. Once again, this is a comparison which comes down to the consumers preferences. Hence, a “preference battle”. The differences are stark enough that neither really “wins”. Your preference will decide the “winner”. Do you like warmer, richer, less offensive, bassier and more musically inclined sound of the Delci? Or do you prefer a more energetic, dynamic sound with a slightly more detailed replay of the EA500LM? Both sets have an awesome timbre. I’d say the Delci is a bit more earthy and organic and the LM is more bright/natural or “off-natural” (if that’s a thing). I feel that both sets complement each other very well and I couldn’t say which is actually “better”, or which is a better value. I would certainly say that if you feel the Delci fits your listening preferences better than at $59 it is an absolute steal and would likely be the better value.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

The $59 dollar question (at least while it’s on sale). Is the Kefine Delci worth the price that Kefine is asking for? To answer this question the best way you have to look at the landscape of iems within its price point. I can tell you straight up that if you get the sale price of $59 then the Delci is questionably the best iem you can buy. That’s if you enjoy this type of signature. There is a sea of good iems around that price, though many of those sets are tuned slightly differently, different driver configurations etc. No doubt there are some Ballers! Some awesome sets that easily could be sold for more than their price. However, the Delci is truly a champion of this price point in my opinion. At $59 this is the easiest no-brainer I’ve suggested yet.

Different story at $79?​

Now, if you are buying the Delci at the original MSRP of $79 then this is a different discussion. I still feel it’s worth the money but also you have better iems surrounding the Delci. The Artti R1, Artti T10, Kiwi Ears Melody, BQEYZ Topaz, Fiio JH5, Fiio JD7, Truthear Hexa, Simgot EA500, Simgot EA500LM, Simgot EM6L, BGVP P05, Muse Hifi East 6, EPZ Q5, EPZ X-Tipsy Star One, Letshuoer DZ4, TangZu Fudu, Moondrop Aria 2, Tripowin Olina, Tripowin OlinaSE, Dunu Kima, Dunu Kima Classic, and I’ll stop there. Please trust me that there are many more I could list. The point is, you simply have more options, and each option has its own realistic stake at one of the best under $100. So, at the price of $79 it’s a little bit more nuanced of an answer to the question of “worth”. However, with all that said, I still feel that the Kefine Delci is a no brainer. It really is that nice of a set.

The Why…​

Because the Delci is built like a champ. The all-aluminum design is one you don’t see every day, and due to it being aluminum, the Delci is ridiculously light. I don’t think you know how nice an ultra-light earphone is until you’ve used them for a while. Also, the aesthetic is one that is easy to enjoy with some of the better accessories within that loaded price segment. However, the sound is always the real reason why anything is worth its weight in audio…of course. Anyways, the Delci has a very engaging sound that teeters on being technically adept and musically inclined. Kefine did a nice job crafting a fun sound that doesn’t miss out on the finer things in my music. A nicely deep and authoritative low-end with a good transient swift slam. It’s not a bass which overtakes any other area of the mix in a detrimental way. The midrange is milky and creamy. Yet also resolute, which is a fine mixture of descriptors for an earphone. The Delci has a signature which doesn’t offer fatigue with a nicely rendered treble that has good extension too. In fact, the extension both ways help to give the Delci a nicely wide stage and good depth for a 3D type sound at times. Also, I love that Kefine is a small company made of actual enthusiasts within the hobby, I can get behind that. This is a very good set folks. I don’t even have to think twice about it, for me the Delci is worth every penny.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Kefine Delci ratings below, that would be $50-$100 iems of any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $50-$100 US is a huge sized scope of iems, and so seeing a 9 should probably be pretty special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.5 Built very well, all aluminum.

–Look: 9.1 Simple, bold, masculine.

–Accessories: 9.0 Pretty nice!

–Overall: 9.2

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.7 Top of class timbre (my opinion).

–Bass: 9.3 Hello quality… meet quantity .

–Midrange: 9.1 Warm, rich, musical.

–Treble: 8.5 Non-Offensive with nice extension.

–Technicalities: 8.6 Technically better than it should be.

–Musicality: 9.5 Musicality is very nice.

–Overall: 9.1

Ratings Summary:​

For a set being judged against any and every iem between the prices of $50 and $100, getting an overall sound score of a “9.1” is huge. That’s definitely up there in my book. However, ratings are a terrible way to determine worth. I’ve said it in almost every review that… I don’t like them. They tell you nothing in a sophisticated manner, and they can be taken for truth very easily. The actual truth is, ratings can only tell you individual attributes and how they rank in one reviewer’s mind, per each category. It’s almost a problem. There is so much more that goes into deciding the real value of something. There’s nuance to this game folks! Just as we are different as people, so are the devices which we review and listen with. It’s damn near impossible to label anything “the best” in anything. Too much subtlety, complexity, and variegated nuance. Rating values are simple, nothing nuanced. That said, I feel a “9.1” is probably about correct if I average out the scores. But as a whole if I were to rate the entire package that is the “Kefine Delci” … I’d give it a “9.5” without batting an eye. This is how ratings can be pretty deceptive. A set can look better or worse in individual rating points, but it may come together a certain way too. It’s not about the sum of the parts, but instead it’s about how it all comes together as a whole.

Explain Yourself! ​

One thing which will always be divisive is “bass”. For whatever reason it is one of those areas which takes on the most scrutiny from the peanut gallery. I get more DMs about bass ratings than anything else. Do you rate on its boom boom capabilities? Or do you rate the bass region on its refined quality? In the case of the Delci, it’s a little bit of both. A “9.3” is fairly high in this price segment but I stand by it. Not many sets have a good quality with an elevated bass in this price point. There’s a couple but it’s rare. Also, treble heads will think I’ve lost my mind. How in the world can a relaxed treble score an “8.5”?! I would answer that it’s not about the quantity of brilliance and forced resolution all the time. Sometimes even a less brilliant treble which actually fits cohesively with the overall tuning can actually sound… better. Still, in this relaxed state, the Delci manages good details, has some bite, and has better extension than you may think. No, it’s not an ultra-defined EST type treble. But also, name a set under $100 that does have that type of treble. Yes, there are more boosted treble replays, I know this because I listened to them ad-nauseum over this Rating period. And yes, there are flat-out better treble replays. Hence why it’s only an “8.5”. The rest of the ratings I feel confident in.

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Kefine Delci, I want to give a warm thanks to the good people of Kefine, in particular to Collin Yang for sending the Delci to me. This is a smaller company, a lesser-known brand, and a brand which isn’t trying to add flash and fluff or boast in an over-the-top manner while advertising their products. Their ascension has been organic. This is a brand formed by friends and like-minded individuals with a passion to create something that they would love and be proud of. I cannot tell you how important these brands are for the hobby. These are the enthusiasts who keep this hobby afloat, who challenge the status quo, and who keep the bigger brands honest. So, for a small brand who is trying to create a successful venture into audio and who has just begun… I thank you wholeheartedly Kefine! You have most certainly made a good product and I do hope folks take the chance on the Delci.

Thank you! ​

I also thank any of you who chose to click on the link and actually read this review. Similar to Kefine, we are a small website of reviewers who are trying to scratch out our spot in the hobby. So, it’s of great importance that any of you have clicked the link to our site. You are the deciding factor for whether we succeed or we fail and by all accounts… we’re doing pretty darn well. So, thank you. Beyond that, please check out other thoughts of the Kefine Delci. Not every reviewer sees things the way that I do. It’s that simple. We are very different, each and every last one of us. None two are alike. It would behoove you to look at other thoughts because we want you to make the right choice for you. After all, this entire journey is all about music folks. With that, I think I’m done with this review. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

Letshuoer Cadenza 4 Review​

Full Review HERE

​

Letshuoer Cadenza 4​

Intro​

Hello, today I have with me the latest iem to grace the market from the very popular audio brand Letshuoer, named the Letshuoer Cadenza 4. The Cadenza 4 is actually a four-driver hybrid which consists of one dynamic driver and three balanced armature drivers, but more on that later. Folks, I have been a fan of Letshuoer for quite some time and have owned a number of their iems and one thing I feel that I can say with complete conviction is that Letshuoer is only getting better. While other brands rest on their laurels and stop trying to innovate and create, Letshuoer is doing the exact opposite. They use different driver configurations, a unique company to partner with in “HeyGears” and some of the best tuning that we’ve seen over the course of the last three to four years.

Good history with this brand​

I’ve reviewed a few of their iems but have owned many more and each one I’ve been extremely happy with. Not that any of you asked. However, I reviewed and gave high marks for the Letshuoer S12 Pro (S12 Pro Review). Truly one of the best planar magnetic earphones that money can buy for under $150. I reviewed one of the better iems under $100 for vocals and simply great timbre in the Letshuoer DZ4 (DZ4 Review), and finally I reviewed the Letshuoer S15 (S15 Review) just last year. The S15 is my favorite planar iem… period. All of these sets mark some of my favorites in their price point. Something about this brand’s ability to tune and craft sets that have a rich and fun timbre without lacking in the technical stuff is flat-out intriguing. Truly they are fantastic at their craft.

Letshuoer​

Letshuoer was actually founded as “Shuoer Acoustics” back in 2016 by Jeff Wong & Danny To. From what I can see, they only seek out the best in the field to work on their products and it seems as though they are quite proud of their team. Letshuoer has a long history of bringing some very well beloved iems to market. We’ve seen sets like the Cadenza 12 which has been lauded in the community. There’s also sets like the EJ07, EJ07M, EJ09, which all fall into the high-end price point. Of course, Letshuoer has also done very well in the budget space starting with their Letshuoer Singer, Letshuoer Tape, Letshuoer Tape Pro as well as some of the most loved planar iems you can find. Sets like the Letshuoer S12, S12 Pro, Z12, S15 and more. I also really enjoy the Letshuoer D13 which is also a low-cost example of a fantastic single DD under $100, and finally the Letshuoer DZ4, as I mentioned earlier. Folks, all of these iems are well thought out, well built, well designed and well-tuned to the target sound that Letshuoer was going for. It’s safe to say that Letshuoer has built somewhat of a dynasty, and I’m all for it.

Tough competition​

There is a huge swath of iems that sit within the $200 to $300 price point that the Cadenza 4 fights against for your dollar. To be honest, this seems to be the one thing which holds most sets back. My biggest question and concern for the Cadenza 4 is if it can stand next to some of the greats in this revered price point. Well, I suppose that there’s only one way to find out. Let’s take a look at the Cadenza 4 friends…

Non-Affiliated Purchasing Link’s:​

-Letshuoer.net

Disclaimer:​

I received the Letshuoer Cadenza 4 from Letshuoer as a review sample and in exchange I will conduct a full review and feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. I have not received any payment or any other form of compensation for this review. This set is a review sample iem. Letshuoer has not requested to pre-read any review and doesn’t have any control over “what” or “when” anything gets published to mobileaudiophile.com. All thoughts within this review are my own, though please take note that I will always have my own biases. This is impossible to get around. I try to be as objective as my subjective self can be, but this is an opinion piece folks. Thank you to Letshuoer and thanks for reading.

Gear used for testing​

–Ifi Go Blu

–Aful SnowyNight

–EPZ TP50

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

I love a good unboxing folks. Always have. Even if it lasts a short moment and is gone. Just a small shot of dopamine, I’ll take it. Thankfully Letshuoer knows how to package their iems in a way which shows them off. Also, they have such a cool way of doing so. First off, the Cadenza 4 comes in an average sized rectangular box; roughly 6” x 4” x 3”. The box has a sleeve which showcases their Logo, a neat design and some specs. If you look at the pics you can see that it’s hard to describe. It’s a neat, clean, and Apple-esque in its presentation. Anyways, slip off the sleeve and you are met with the actual box. Open that box and you’ll see an envelope with some reading material (that I won’t talk about now). Under that you’ll come to the earphones themselves sitting in cardboard covered foam cutouts. Next is the cool part. Just like the unboxing for the S15, the Cadenza 4’s box has a cool little drawer at the bottom. Pull the fabric drawer handle and you open up to the case on the left and the modular connections on the right. Inside the case are the tips and the cable. This is certainly one of the more unique and inventive unboxing experiences. Nice work Letshuoer!

Eartips​

Inside the case you’ll find the eartips which are stuck on tabs on this round holder of sorts. The tips provided are of pretty good quality though I can tell you right away that I didn’t use them for my review. The first set (S, M, L) is a white shallow fit silicone eartip with a wide bore set with a flimsy flange. They drop down the low-end a bit too much and really pushes the upper mids/lower treble area for me. Not my favorite. The next set is a narrow bore set (S, M, L) that is able to insert a bit deeper and is semi rigid at the flange. I simply don’t get the seal I need with either of these tips. I actually went with the Letshuoer S15’s blue wide-bore tips in large. They seem to do everything I need them to sonically and fit like a glove. Honestly, if the included tips actually seal for you then I’d say you are good to go, and they are of decent quality.

Carrying Case​

The carrying case which comes included in the packaging of the Letshuoer Cadenza 4 is a hard plastic hockey puck shaped case with screw on threads. The plastic has that very cool feeling soft rubber coating over hard plastic. I’m sure some will feel that this material isn’t up to the price, but I completely beg to differ. This material has almost a soft texture to it, and it feels about as nice as plastic can feel. The size is great in that I can put the earphones, cable, tips, and possibly a small dongle dac as well (I haven’t tried to fit a dongle dac) inside and the top simply screws down nice and easy. This is actually almost identical to the carrying case which came with the Letshuoer S15. Perfect for throwing into a bag or even putting in a pocket without any worry whatsoever. Obviously, we’ve seen more elegant cases provided with iems. On the flip, we’ve also seen far worse from iems that were much more expensive. So, take that for what you will. Not a bad case by any stretch.

Cable​

One of my favorite aspects of the whole Cadenza 4 package is the cable. It’s a gorgeous white cable, it’s thick, it’s modular as well. Really, a well-designed wire folks. The white is almost glossy, and the braid, or twist, is awesome in appearance. I love a fat cable, it just makes my iems look that much better, and when they color match… now we’re talking. Anyways, the cable is a 2-pin, made using silver plating over high purity monocrystalline copper and 392 strands. Furthermore, the bonus is that this cable is also modular, coming equipped with 3.5, 2.5, & 4.4 right angle modular jacks. I also like that they used stainless steel (I believe) strain reliefs and 2-pin fittings and every other fitting as well. It’s a slick design and a great addition. The modular Jack’s tightly push onto the connector and are very firm and fitted perfectly. I do get the most minimal microphonic sounds when rubbing on my shirt. However, that is almost not worth mentioning because it is so faint. Thankfully I don’t have to purchase an extra cable. So, there’s that.

​

Build / Design / Internals / Fit​

Build Quality​

The build will either be something that is a very nice to you, or it will be something that isn’t. Some people have issues with Letshuoer’s use of HeyGears materials. I actually really like HeyGears build quality and feel that it only adds to the Cadenza 4, but I can see why others don’t like it as much. However, I’m speaking to those who do. The build is fantastic with that semi-soft, yet dense plastic formed by way of 3D printing. Inside there are also 3D printed acoustic tubing which are perfectly aligned to the drivers. In fact, everything internally is built in this method, the chassis, the casing for the drivers, the tubes, vents, the whole nine yards. This method ensures precise control over the acoustic cavity everytime. The faceplates are crafted by way of CNC machined aluminum with a cool textured matte finish. Also, the Cadenza 4 is very light which helps for long listening. The nozzles have three holes where the acoustic tubes terminate at which are also medium in length. I think the build is fantastic folks. If you are going to build using plastics… this is the way to do it.

​

Design​

This leads right into the design and aesthetic of the Cadenza 4 which I happen to adore. I love the minimalist, silver on white, clean aesthetic. Clean, clean, clean. You have that matte chalky white finish on the Shells that contrasts lightly against the silver matte finish of the faceplates. It’s tough looking. The faceplates have a small ridge running top to bottom to add some gradient texture with “Letshuoer” printed in parallel with that small ridge. I will say that this look won’t be everyone’s favorite, but I cannot help but be impressed. Iem design is always intriguing to me. I’m fascinated with how these brands try to separate themselves from the sea of sets. The visuals, the build, the graphics, whatever. The point is, I enjoy a brand who isn’t trying to simply win me over with flashy looks. The design is simple, but also sort of bold in that simplicity, and for that I say… “Well done, Letshuoer”.

Internals​

Letshuoer decided upon a quad driver setup. A “hybrid” quad driver setup that is. That’s one 10mm beryllium coated dynamic driver for the lows, one Sonion balanced armature driver for the midrange and two Knowles balanced armature drivers for the highs. As you can see the drivers are made by reputable companies whose sole purpose is to craft & create drivers. Now, I don’t know who the maker of the dynamic driver is, but I do know that it is the same or similar to the driver used in one of Letshuoer’s more high-end iems. Also, I’m speculating on what parts of the frequency each driver accounts for. We all know about the word “assume” though… it makes an “ASS” out of “U” & “ME”. So, take that as a grain of salt. Anyways, Letshuoer also added in a four-way electronic crossover as well as the acoustic tubes which both work to cohesively separate areas of the mix.

Fit / Comfort​

As far as comfort is concerned, I don’t have an issue whatsoever. Once again, I am reviewing a set that fits me like a glove. The only issue I had was with the included tips and finding a seal. However, the Cadenza 4 is made in such an ergonomically sound way that I would think they’d fit the majority of folks. Also, this set is extremely lite. They are not taxing on my ears and trust me, I’ve had these in my ears for over five hours at one time, many times. Comfort is great. That soft plastic seems to really be nice against the skin with no irritation at all. Beyond that, the isolation is better than most as well. Obviously not to the level of ANC sets but the Cadenza 4 still has very good passive isolation.

Drivability / Synergy ​

The Letshuoer Cadenza 4 is rated with an impedance of 15 ohms as well as a sensitivity of 102 db’s. This is a set that is not hard to drive to volume. However, just because you are getting them to volume doesn’t mean that you are getting the most out of the sound. The truth is, the Cadenza 4 is certainly a set which will provide an uptick in sound quality with more raw power. Also, the Cadenza 4 does react quite well (depending on how you look at it) to source tonality too. I can say with complete confidence that the Cadenza 4 will actually scale very well with more output. Usually, I’d say it’s about the source tonality and source ability rather than the actual power. Definitely some planars react this way and some other sets as well. There’s no “across the board” standard on it. It’s certainly something that we see. That is, power helping to bring out the most in an iem. However, by-and-large I feel that the actual sonic skill of the source brings on the better sound quality and a little extra clean amping helps to add dynamics at times too. As far as the Cadenza 4 is concerned, I don’t think you need a million watts to get it there. Maybe a good strong dongle dac at the least.

Mobile Listening ​

When on the go, out and about, in my office, doing chores, I’ll usually use a Bluetooth dac/amp or a dongle dac. Rarely do I bring a dap in these situations. I listed only a handful of devices that I used for testing but in reality, there were many more. Using the IFi Go Blu (CS43131 dac chip) was truly one of the nicest Bluetooth moments with this set. Using the 4.4 balanced output I found these two to pair very well. Also, I love the clean tuning and good power of the Aful SnowyNight and the EPZ TP50. Both devices use a CS43198 dac chip and both sounds very similar. Thankfully the neutralish sound of those two was a good mix with the Cadenza 4. However, I wouldn’t say that it is best to only use neutral sources. To be honest, I was more than happy with any source tonality that I tried. The only device that I tended not to enjoy was the Fiio KA3. Other than that, the Moondrop Dawn 4.4, EPZ TP20 Pro, Shanling UA2, Qudelix 5k, Hidizs S9 Pro Plus etc. all replayed the Cadenza 4 just fine. Still, warmer devices do slightly exaggerate the warmth. For whatever reason it wasn’t an issue though due to the Cadenza 4’s resolving sound and clean replay.

A bit more added power​

Listening with some heavier hitters I found gave me the same thoughts. I honestly enjoy my iBasso DX240, Shanling M6 Ultra and my Fiio Q15 dac/amp the same. Perhaps the Q15 was a little more on point and clean, but I feel that the warmer M6 Ultra actually replays beautifully. I like em’ all. Slight variations between them but each device is a bona-fide stud and does great while the Cadenza 4 is attached. Also, I did use medium to high gain on each, though I’m sure if I stuck to medium gain, I would’ve been good to go. Still, between any and all sources that I have used with the Cadenza 4, it is beyond obvious that the Fiio Q15 sounded the best paired with it. Truly a great sound when coupled together.

What should you use?​

If I were you, I’d try to pick up a good dongle dac. It doesn’t have to cost two hundred bucks either. There are some truly awesome dongle dacs under $100. Shoot, there are some great devices under $75! Even less. I would think that anyone who is affording the Cadenza 4 probably already has a decent source, but you never know. Everyone has different situations.

Sound Impressions ​

Oh Cadenza 4, how you have entrapped me in your lushness, your milky vibrance. Okay that sounded really weird, sorry for that. Moving on… The Cadenza 4 is what I would call lush and warmish, almost Harman-esque, U-shape to even W-shape sound. I also hear an excellent balance across the mix with the only outlier frequency division being in a slightly more forward midrange. It comes across smooth and has this lush presence across the mix. The Cadenza 4 has warm undertones but does have some added neutral vibrance as well. The sound is creamy but not thick, smooth and velvet but not murky or veiled. This is a colored sound that sits at the fringes of organic with very pleasant timbre & tonality. I would call the Cadenza a musicality first iem, a mostly relaxed iem, and an easy listening iem that is also pretty fun sounding. It simply replays my music so very well. Multiple genres are a treat on this set.

A testament…​

This isn’t a set that is going to unveil every last micro-detail (granted it is good for what it is) or separate instruments with perfectly fine-lined accuracy. No sir, this is a set that will either move your feet or make you close your eyes and simply melt away with it. Now, because this set replays in the manner that I described, I can tell you this… it won’t be for everyone. It is slightly polarizing in that way. Still, if you can appreciate all kinds of sound signatures then I cannot imagine you’d listen to this set and not be impressed. Very much in step with Letshuoer’s much less expensive triple DD, the Letshuoer DZ4. Just way more refined in every way. To have this warmly layered euphonic timbre, this casual smoothness which comes across so melodic and still staying true to each note without the rails falling off (covered in veil) … is a testament to Letshuoer’s ability to craft top class sets per their relative price points.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s​

If you’ve ever read any review from me then you know I add this section for those who don’t feel like trudging through another one of my 10,000-word reviews. Also, I do understand. However, I definitely cover more, with more detail past this point.

Anyways, the sub-bass has good extension while not overwhelming the mix. It’s clean and has steely density and rumbles nicely. The mid-bass isn’t the most impactful I’ve ever heard. Slightly soft and mellow in its attack but also doesn’t oversaturate the mix which helps to keep the mids less murky. The midrange is warm, lean-lush, forward and truly great for vocals. Maybe it isn’t the most separated midrange out there (not bad either), but I’d take that any day for this musical sound. Very melodic, mood inducing, and engaging. In truth, I find the midrange to be one of the best I’ve heard in the price point. The treble is safe across the board yet with some touches of brilliance peppered into the mix. Not dark, but warm & energetic, not rolled off but nicely extended. I also hear nice liveliness and energy, but it’s toned down a bit. This is non-offensive through and through. Slightly mellow but not without some upper treble spice. I find the bass and the treble do well to create a nice balance in this warmer setting while the midrange sits out front. It’s all very melodic folks and comes together very well. Really a very nice sounding iem. This is not a drab and boring sound, and I don’t consider it dull either. There is good macro-dynamic energy even in the non-brisk and tempered sound.

Bass Region​

The low-end as a whole is certainly elevated and does have a very nice presence against the rest of the mix. However, it does sit a touch behind the midrange. Enough to not oversaturate the other frequencies or create too much of a foggy shroud over the presence of the midrange. Pushed back enough to let the midrange shine while not encroaching very hard on them. I find the bass isn’t attenuated or “less-than”. It’s a full bass region. Really, the extension of the sub-bass is pretty deep, and the mid-bass slam is definitely there. Just not that ultra vibrant, sharp & impactful slam. The low-end is dense in body, but also slightly plush in its attack. With that all said, I want to preface the bass section with one thing; this bass region is definitely acting in a supporting role. Everything is about the midrange on this set. Yes, the bass is good and yes, it’s satisfying, but it seems to take a slight back seat.

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass is one which will rise to the occasion at a moment’s notice. I’d say that the greater emphasis in the bass region rests in the sub-bass as well. Now, I don’t find the sub-bass to be very overemphasized or aggressive, but it can certainly thump. It’s still full and formidable in its substance and weight but just not so sonorous that it overtakes any other area of the mix. In my opinion, I feel other areas are actually a bit more forward in the sound field like the mid-mid, upper-mids, lower treble too. Unless of course the track I’m listening to features a heavy amount of that sub-bass rumble. That’s a different story. At any rate, the sub-bass has a less defined attack and carries a softer lined but authoritative rumble. I find that it really works very well with the overall theme of the tuning. Enough to add some good haptic vibrational and tactile feel to my music.

Sub-bass cont…​

Listening to a track that is always used for review purposes is “Groove” by Ray Wylie Hubbard. I use this track because I know it so well. If a set has some good sub-bass extension or emphasis, then this track will tell me that. Along with about twenty others that I use. However, with the Cadenza 4 I don’t get that overbearing sub-bass growl as I would with other more emphasized iems. That said, I love the emphasis that I do get as it’s still full bodied, it’s still deep and defined and still very agile. Yet, within that semi-deep but full-bodied sound I actually hear Ray’s deadpanned vocals very well as the sub-bass isn’t masking his voice. “Stereo Colour Cloud” by Sampha is another track where the bass region is the foundation of the track. Again, I hear a good and dense bassline coming across, boosted in quantity and clean enough against the backdrop of the rest of the melody. In this way separation is very good. The sub-bass can dive deep and can do so with a more warmly weighted and lush presentation. Also, this is in no way a disheveled or untidy sub-bass. Like I said, agility is actually very good with a ductile and dexterous ability to maneuver through dynamic shifts. It’s deep, it’s penetrative, but it isn’t overdone.

Mid-bass​

The mid-bass on the other hand is less emphasized. Still, it has plenty of meat to it but simply isn’t elevated to the point of heavy slam. Let’s put it this way, bassheads won’t be impressed. However, I still find the slam and boom satisfying enough on some tracks and on others I’d say that the Cadenza 4 lacks a bit in this region. I find the mid-bass to be slightly pillowy or plush. Perhaps a hint fuzzy at times. Not perfectly defined or chiseled sounding to my ears. This doesn’t make it bad either. The tonality and timbre are great, very organic and on top of that… It’s still fun and indulging. Listening to “Billie Jean” by Weezer (Michael Jackson cover), the kick drums are certainly enough to provide some density and good weight. However, the drums weren’t as sharp in their attack as I’d usually like. Still, I go back to the fact that the mid-bass, just like the sub-bass, both play supporting roles. This is a warm U to W-shape iem with forward mids and lush engaging vocals. The bass never oversteps its bounds. Especially the mid-bass. In that respect I absolutely adore what Letshuoer has done. It’s big enough, bold enough, it slams, it rumbles, and it does its job. It simply isn’t that emphasized or ultra detailed & defined mid-bass. Also, it doesn’t have the most bullish quantity I’ve ever heard.

Downsides to the Bass Region​

The bass region certainly has issues but if you put those issues into context to the situation of the tuning… you may start to see why the bass helps this set to be pretty special as a whole. First, bassheads won’t want this one. It’s not basshead. Yes, it can boom when called upon, but it does not reach bass Boi levels. No sir. Secondly, this is a bass which isn’t pointed and refined. Texture slightly lacks, maybe it’s a bit pillowy at times. Those things are certainly true. I have to repeat myself though; the bass is playing a supporting role. This is so very evident. The tuning is fantastic on this set. Also, besides adding just a hint more mid-bass emphasis in db’s, I’d say I wouldn’t change a thing.

​

Midrange ​

Like I’ve already stated, the entire tuning in my opinion supports this beautiful midrange. The mids are like the rest of the mix but simply tuned forward in the sound field in comparison to the bass and the treble. It is so nice to hear because it is tastefully done. In fact, here’s my round of applause. Okay, apparently it is tough to mimic a round of applause in a review. Notwithstanding… great job Letshuoer. The mids are subtly milky through and through. They have their moments of crispness and precision. Still, for the most part the midrange has lean-lush note weight and is never too congested or too weighted, never veiled and never too blurry. The midrange comes through just left of neutral with some warmth. Closer to a creamy style of vocals with good solidity underlying. Without question the mids are emotionally and engagingly refined. Not refined as in precisely defined, expertly separated, or detailed. I mean refined as in well structured, great timbre, and it’s as transient tight as a smoother midrange note can be while still keeping a smooth demeanor. Also, before I go any further let me just say that the detail retrieval isn’t bad by any means. Certainly not a dry or analytical style and so it won’t bring out every last detail, but still resolving to my ears.

Lower-midrange​

The low-mids have a slightly warm type of tonal color with a smooth attack and a more velvet style inflection in general. There is some spill over from the bass region though mostly the bass and mids intersect in a clean way. Not quite as pinpoint or as precise as some sets and not surgically abrupt in its note definition. That’s not to say that the Cadenza 4 can’t be that either. In general, and on most tracks, the lower midrange prefers silky and plush over glass lined and crisp. It’s a heavenly way to listen to my music.

Males in this region have a slightly lean body which I would again describe as lean-lush, or svelte-richness. It’s the 1% milk of the audio world. The mass of a note persists whether the actual body is thick or not. Also, the transient attack through release is actually fairly quick and clean within this slightly warmer environment. Instruments don’t sound as though they have prolonged harmonics or lagging decay. It’s as clean a sound as lean-lush can be while still favoring that velvet style timbre. Actually, the beauty of this region (and the midrange as a whole) is that the timbre has that warm natural hue to it. No odd metallic timbre here. When listening to “Blue Wall” by Noah Guthrie, his voice is so well highlighted and etched out, full but pronounced. Male vocals are very well done here. Or Lewis Capaldi in “Someone You Loved”. The Cadenza 4 takes his hard Scottish cadence and smooths over the rough edges. It gently pushes his voice out front, and it really is nice to hear.

Upper-Midrange​

I feel the upper mids are the crown jewel of the midrange and the midrange is the crown jewels of the Cadenza 4. Females simply sound devine to me. Now, the upper mids feature thinner note body but still have that plush style of timbre which softens the macro-dynamic energy and vibrance just a hair. This is not an overly energetic or super lively upper-mid. Having said that, there’s still some good capped-off energy and sprightliness there that never goes out of control. I also enjoy the layer of shimmer that exists for all instruments and vocals in this region. Perhaps ever-so-slightly lacking some edge and snap to percussion and guitar plucks, but it really does make up for it in how well it portrays female voices. Still, there is a slight lack in actual pinpoint precision throughout the mids and this holds true for the upper midrange as well. You aren’t getting a Simgot EA1000 style upper midrange, but instead a luxurious one, dripping in emotion and tuned for musicality. Possibly its greatest selling point, which supersedes any of its shortcomings. It’s the engagement factor! Lean-lush richness in every moment, yet still the Cadenza 4 is able to do so in a very resolute manner.

Lovely females​

Females are simply great, sounding forward enough to feel out front and on a pedestal yet that forward sound is never overbearing. It’s tasteful. The upper mids come through with smoother textures, while never sounding sharp or glaring. In fact, the entire upper midrange is this way. Never any shoutiness, sibilance, or undue peaks. Listening to Lady Gaga sing “Always Remember Us This Way” comes across a hint thinner in body but also, she sounds sublime with her scratchy but resounding voice. The Cadenza 4 truly shines a spotlight on her vocals. Also, Kacey Musgraves in “Deeper Well” is an experience when listening with the Cadenza 4 attached to the Fiio Q15. Eh, take any source. Kacey’s vocals are so very gratifying and pleasurable for me. The Cadenza 4 really props up her sweet inflections with absolute ease. Females are lovely with this set.

Instrumentation​

Also, instruments like piano are very tuneful and full sounding without coming across blunted. Some strings could use a hint more sharpness and edge dynamics but for the most part they come across organic and very nice sounding. Percussive instruments have enough definition in their leading edge though they may lack some crisp snap for some folks. Stuff like snares won’t have that pointed edge to the initial “pang”, but also, they have enough energy to come across like an exclamation point in my opinion. Cymbals always have good weight afforded to them with great harmonics which trail off into the treble. Never splashy or layered in a glossy sheen. Most instruments are slightly smoothened and have that layer of warmth to them which really fits the overall theme of the tuning. Timing is great and so is cadence and it all comes together admirably. I won’t go too long on instruments as every track can replay them differently. However, generally speaking Instruments come through nicely. Maybe there’s the slightest lack of acute punchiness or crispness here and there, but I don’t feel that it is always the case at all. There is still some reserved energy that comes out when called upon. Just don’t expect some ultra lively replay.

Downsides to the Midrange​

The mids biggest issues are lack of perfect separation of instruments and the smooth nature of the timbre which sometimes lacks good energy for proper bite and dynamics. This is a set with a slightly softened macro-dynamic energy. Details are not going to emerge like some more technically inclined iems within the price point either. They are there and I do feel that the Cadenza 4 is probably above average, but it definitely isn’t tuned as a detail king in the midrange. Beyond those things, the mids can sound slightly congested in more congested tracks. This probably goes without saying and is likely the case on most sets, but it should be pointed out. However, I cannot help but love the midrange as a whole. Vocals are wonderful and the Cadenza 4’s musicality is really endearing, and the engagement factor is off the charts for the price point. This set takes casual listening to a new level.

Treble Region​

The treble is not one which will brighten the entire mix in luminosity and brilliance. It is not that. I hear a warm treble. Not dark at all, but simply warmer sounding with dashes of brightness and enough lift to add much needed levity to the entire spectrum. However, it is warmer, not exuding vibrance to the point that it’s beaming in effulgent luster or anything. This is a partially relaxed sound, albeit with a highly resolving nature. I hear good separation up top while also hearing good extension. Maybe leaning towards being melodious and subdued to a degree but not lacking energy in relation to the rest of the mix. It fits the overall tuning perfectly. I hear just enough shimmer while coming across only slightly less radiant than I’d like. There’s still a bite to the attack edge of notes and though note outlines come through smoother up top separation of instruments is not an issue for me. Also, I can appreciate the more gradual climb through the pinna gain and the nice transition into the lower treble, as cohesion is really great on the Cadenza 4. This is definitely not for treble heads, but I do feel the treble is well done for what it is. It’s cohesive, it’s not going to kill your ears in fatigue and technicalities are good per the tuning.

Good speed​

The treble also has pretty nice speed and agility too, but it all comes through in a less sprightly manner. I can hear the very subtle micro-details and micro-dynamic shifts rather well, even in those more complicated tracks. Again, there are sets which are born and bred to illuminate the treble region in forced resolution and are tuned to maneuver easily through any track you throw at them. I’d say the Cadenza 4 can do that to a degree because it has quality treble which simply isn’t overdone or overcooked. Listening to Billy Strings in his track “Secrets” is awesome on the Cadenza 4. His banjo truly moves at breakneck speeds, and I can easily make out each note. Again, I hear good separation of each instrument and the timbre comes across very naturally to the ear. Yes, it’s a tad relaxed, but not in a mundane way. It’s relaxed in its luminance and brilliance. There’s a difference. That takes nothing away from its abilities to be nimble at all times or when it’s called to do so.

Not bad​

Extension into the upper treble was not forgotten either. However, Letshuoer made sure that the Cadenza 4 took on the upper treble in a tasteful manner. Yes, it’s warmer, maybe dark to some folks even. Certainly, it stays true to the tuning as a whole. Obviously, they couldn’t pump up the db’s past 10k and throw everything off like some sets we see. Though there is a peak out there which adds some dimension to the sound, some air and openness that is sorely needed. Also, timbre up top is very well tuned into this region. The example I always give is cymbals because they are the most obvious example to use and one which I listen for all the time. The secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike decay very nicely and aren’t simply a splashy mess of treble tizziness. They have control about them. They sound natural to the ear. Well, as best as I can tell anyways. I feel this goes for most instruments. They sound natural up top. So often we hear sets that are either rolled-off or so endued with brilliance and shine that they come across unnatural. I realize that treble lovers may disagree but not everything is for everyone.

Downsides to the Treble Region​

I would first point out once again what I’ve already spent time saying. That is that treble heads or bright treble lovers will not want to spend their hard-earned money on this set. It is warmer and toned down, slightly more relaxed than some sets. Also, the energy needed for a solid bite at note edges isn’t as sharp and a crisp crunch isn’t there at all times either. Other than that, maybe the treble is not the most detailed within the $200 to $300 price point, although they are above average in my opinion so, not really a downside. Just not up to some of the best in the price point. However, I wouldn’t want it to be. I wouldn’t want to do anything to ruin the mellifluous musicality of this set. Don’t touch anything.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage is actually very nice. With the Cadenza 4 in your ears, you will hear a psycho-acoustic stage that sounds wide for an in-ear. This also goes for height. It’s a big and full stage presence. I feel nothing is overly cramped at all. On top of that, there is good depth for layering. Now, I hear this better with a cleaner source, but I find that layering is actually decent and front to back depth is also good. This is a very nice attribute to have. Almost 3D in its presentation of the stage. Obviously, the track will do a lot to dictate just how expansive the stage is for you and some tracks simply aren’t recorded in a manner to best depict this stage. Still, by-and-large the stage is certainly above average in my opinion. Of course, I haven’t heard every set in the price point, but from my journey through audio I find the soundstage to be good and even a “pro”.

Separation / Imaging ​

This is where we see some closing of the space within the sound field. Separation isn’t perfect. It isn’t bad either. It all checks out though. You have a richer sound with slightly lusher layers and less midrange air separation. Again, not something that takes away from my musical enjoyment, but something to point out. I labeled separation a “con” at the beginning of this review and I did so because there is some slight congestion at times. It’s a softly edged sound, plush, warmer than neutral and sometimes elements of a stage are gently squeezed a hair. Oddly enough, Imaging is fantastic with very nice placement of those elements. Left to right and front to back feature well laid out depictions of an imaginary stage. This helps in layering of sounds within the sound field. Perhaps, those sounds aren’t as defined as some would like but there are still well done and in keeping with the overall tuning.

Detail Retrieval​

Here is another area where I run into some slight issues. Well, they aren’t issues to me, but I could see that some people will likely wish that the Cadenza 4 had better detail retrieval for the price. Regardless, I still feel that the detail retrieval is actually quite good for how the Cadenza 4 was tuned and probably average to above average against the field of iems in its price point. The only real caveat is in hyper congested music or very complicated tracks as well as heavy bass jams. In those instances, the Cadenza 4 really doesn’t have the openness, air, transient swiftness or crystalline definition to skirt around more complicated and congested music. Again… I wouldn’t want it to. Still, all things considered… average to above average depending on the track.

Comparisons​

Note: These comparisons will not be a duel to the death. My approach is not to crown one set the winner over the other. I simply compare sets to hopefully explain the sound of the set I’m reviewing a bit better. Also, I use very general terms with very broad strokes. I won’t go I to great detail as I do try to keep my reviews under a certain word count.

Hisenior Mega5P ($239)​

The 1st comparison involves one of Hisenior‘s earlier releases, the Hisenior Mega5P. The Mega5P is a five driver Hybrid iem consisting of one 10mm dynamic driver as well as four Balanced armature drivers. Folks, the 5P is a special iem which made waves in its genesis. The sound and naturally neutral tonality as well as the balance across the mix is very endearing. Without question one of the best iems you can buy within the price point if you crave that clean mannered balance.

Differences​

Starting with the build, the Mega5p is an all resin-built set with a solid chassis and is very ergonomically gifted. Though the Cadenza 4 is probably built to be a bit more durable and at least for me it is just as comfortable. As far as looks go, the Mega5p has that gorgeous black and white swirling pattern that is simply awesome to look at while the Cadenza 4 is more minimalist and reserved in its look and appearance. I like them both. Without blinking an eye, I’d say that the Cadenza 4 has much better accessories with its awesome modular cable, and better unboxing experience.

Sound Differences ​

Between the two, the Mega5p is definitely the cleaner sounding set but they both have a wonderful balance across the mix. The Cadenza 4 has a much richer note weight and delivery to the 5P’s leaner note weight and more resolving and transparent sound. I find that both sets have about equal bass emphasis between the two. The 5P’s bass is a slight bit more forward in the mix but I feel the Cadenza 4’s bass is actually a bit more agile. The midrange of the Cadenza 4 is much richer and fuller bodied in comparison to the 5P’s midrange. I hear a more lush, creamy sounding timbre on the Cadenza 4, to the 5P’s more transparent and resolving sound. Definitely the 5P has better air, openness and separation in its midrange. That said, the Cadenza 4 is much more musical & engaging to my ears. The treble region is relaxed on both iems, but the 5P is once again the cleaner sounding set, while the Cadenza 4 has the more lush and musical sound. Extension is better on the Cadenza 4 with slightly better bite to treble notes.

Technicalities​

Detail Retrieval goes to the Mega5p almost across the board. It is simply tuned in a way to draw out the subtleties a bit easier than the Cadenza 4. Separation of Instruments and voices suffers the same fate for the Cadenza 4 as the 5P has a more defined note edge across the mix. Both sets have good transients that come and go pretty swiftly. I do think it’s easier to hear on the less rich sounding 5P though. Soundstage goes to the Cadenza 4 in all directions. I hear better width and depth with slightly more of a holographic sound. Imaging comes through about equal on both sets. They both do a very good job in this area.

Further thoughts on this comparison ​

As you can see, these two sets trade blows quite well. You may have also noticed that the two are very different from each other which makes for a classic preference battle. Meaning, your preferences will clearly align with one of the two. It should be obvious which one you think you’d enjoy most. As for me, I honestly enjoy almost all sound signatures and can truly appreciate them both as well as enjoy them both. I think that I am leaning towards the Cadenza 4 though because there aren’t a ton of iems that sound like it. The musicality is simply greater on this set. It is much more melodious and has that weighted and rich timbre that is simply spellbinding to me. I hear many sets like the 5P. So many sets are tuned similarly. Granted I take nothing away from it at all. There are many days that I reach for it when I have a chance to simply max n’ relax. However, the Cadenza 4 has something that the 5P simply doesn’t and that’s raw musicality. I love them both, but I totally understand if you disagree.

Penon Fan 2 ($279)​

The Penon Fan 2 is one of those sets that you either love or you don’t. It’s even more polarizing than the Cadenza 4 is, in my opinion. Anything that leans heavy either way of neutral is going to be pretty polarizing. More on that in a bit. So, the Penon Fan 2 is actually a four-driver hybrid iem with two dynamic drivers and two balanced armature drivers. All of the drivers are of great quality. Now, I never got around to reviewing this set, but I can assure you that it is a bona-fide stud. One of those sets that lean so heavy in one direction that brain burn all of the sudden becomes something that is a must. Truly a contender for the style of tuning that the Fan 2 has, but it won’t please everyone.

Differences​

First, the Fan 2 is molded wholly out of a very nice resin material while of course the Cadenza 4 has that nice HeyGears build. Again, I still feel the Cadenza 4 is made with better materials, just the feel them both in my hand tells me that. Still, both well made, both are dope looking. I do prefer the look of the Cadenza 4 but that may also be a prisoner of the moment type thing. As far as unboxing experiences go, the Penon Fan 2 has the better set of accessories. Except the cable… definitely the Cadenza 4 has a much better cable. Everything else goes to the Fan 2. Much better tips, much better case. Of course, the Fan 2 is also pricier. The Cadenza 4’s original MSRP is $249 (on sale for $229 now) while the Fan 2’s MSRP is around $279. Of course, the Fan 2 is also on sale constantly. I suggest getting on their (Penon) email list as they promote their sales to those folks who are subscribed. Always good sales. I got the Fan 2 for $150. As far as aesthetic differences I do feel the Cadenza 4 has the upper hand, but the Fan 2 is right there with it. Both worthy of their price tags.

Sound Differences​

To start, I thought that the Cadenza 4 was lush, warm and weighted. The Fan 2 is 100% lush! It is so far to the warm/dark side of the aisle that it will directly cut off half the listening population on that alone. However, if you can respect the tuning for what it is than you’ll see how special this iem is. Anyway, the Fan 2 is warmer, darker, and with thicker note weight. The Cadenza 4 is leaner in its approach, it’s cleaner, more balanced and less like molasses. The Fan 2 is a milkshake against the 1% milk of the Cadenza 4. Naturally the Cadenza 4 comes across cleaner and with more vibrant macro-dynamic energy. The Fan 2 however, has that dark sound, but a very highly resolved darkness to it. It is a unicorn of an iem. To be that dark and still come across as W-shape is a different approach that not many brands dare to try, well done Penon. However, the Cadenza 4 has more of a balanced sound that to me is special.

Between the 20’s​

The Fan 2 has a more bulbous, thick, full and all-encompassing mid-bass region. The Cadenza 4 is much more lissome, ductile, agile and impactful. Having said that, the Cadenza 4 also has better sub-bass extension, deeper in that region too. The Fan 2 has a quick attack but a slow decay, atmospheric to the umpteenth degree. Whereas the Cadenza 4 hits n’ gets with better control. The Cadenza 4 simply doesn’t cloud the rest of the mix with as much murkiness, while the Fan 2 does have a veil of warmth that permeates the entire tuning. Veiled, but in a very charming way. The Fan 2 has beautifully rendered warm and cozy vocals with a forward midrange that is very thickly weighted. Now, the Cadenza 4 also has good density of midrange notes, but they are also leaner, more sprightly, vibrant and better resolved. I do feel that the rich tonal presentation of the Fan 2 is great, but the clear winner in vocal playback goes to the Cadenza 4, for me. The balance is better on the Cadenza 4, while the Fan 2 is tilted way to the left. The bass of the Fan 2 encroaches in a very tactful way into the midrange creating that nice milky and rich sound while the Cadenza 4 is a bit more tasteful for most people. The treble region of the Cadenza 4 is brighter (if you can call it that), more detailed, faster, more bite, more energy, and better extension by a long shot. While the Fan 2 has this vivid and yet warm dynamic treble that is so nice if you can wrap your brain around it.

Technicalities​

Technically speaking the Cadenza 4 has better detail retrieval almost across the board. The Fan 2 specializes in “macro-details” whereas the Cadenza 4 is able to illuminate much more of the “micro-details” from my music. Imaging is special on both iems. Both can reproduce a good stage with good placement of Instruments and voices. Separation is better on the Cadenza 4, and I also find that the transient attack and decay is a bit more lithesome, malleable, and simply springier on the Cadenza 4 as well. With a bit more air, notes are better defined. When listening for soundstage differences I feel the Fan 2 has this intimate, average width, completely musical stage that is so engaging with very good depth of field. Layering is great even with the slightly clouded separation of those layers. The Cadenza 4 does have a wider, taller and more immersive sounding stage, it’s fuller and more all-encompassing and nearly as deep. Though depth is a tough thing to try to quantify, I simply hear slightly better front to back depth on the Fan 2. I think most technicalities go to the Cadenza 4, and it stands to reason. However, technicalities are neither set’s forte. Neither iem is a detail king, neither is dry and analytical in its approach and both have that rich and cozy lushness to their sound.

Further thoughts on this comparison​

Folks, I don’t know how to adequately say this but both sets are phenomenal. In truth, I love them both. How could I not love the Fan 2’s lush and vivid fullness and warmly weighted musicality. I love it. So easily I can get lost in how it portrays my music. However, I have been taken away by the Cadenza 4’s lean richness and beautiful midrange quality. I do think that the better iem for me is the Cadenza 4. At times. There are moments when the Fan 2 hits that urge within me. Moments that I want only what it can provide. However, I do think that the more talented and all around better iem is the less expensive Cadenza 4. I usually never say something like that, but I have to be realistic. Not as many people will fall in love with the Fan 2 as I and a few others have. Both are great for what they are, and I am blessed to have them both in my collection.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

The question posed in the header is one that I feel I’ve answered many times already inside my review. Folks, I would pay the $229 or $249 any day of the week for the Cadenza 4 without a thought! To have what the Cadenza 4 provides to my listening experience is priceless to me. It is fast becoming one of my favorite iems within the $200 to $300 price bracket. However, I have to be real. Not everyone will share my love. When you have sets like the Tanchjim Origin (Origin Review), Simgot EA1000, Rose Technics QT9 Mk3 (QT9 MK3 Review), OG Mangird Tea, Aful Performer 5, Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite (Orchestra Lite Review), Penon Fan 2, Penon Vortex, Seeaudio Bravery, Dunu Falcon Ultra, BQEYZ Wind, BQEYZ Winter, Kinera Hodur (Hodur Review), ISN Audio NEO 5, it’s a tough road for any set, and that’s only to name a few. There are many more iems that are legitimate studs within $200 to $300. Also, not everyone will yearn for what the Cadenza 4 offers tuning wise. So, I can only speak for myself when answering this question in this particular price bracket. For me, without question the Cadenza 4 is worth the price to own it.

The Why…​

Because the HeyGears build is so well constructed, with such a uniform, clean and durable feel. Also, because the Cadenza 4 is 100% comfort and ergonomics. The Cadenza 4 is partially worth the price because of how well the design language is. Such a beautiful design. Letshuoer didn’t need to add any flashiness because the actual charm of this iem is in its simplicity, and there’s something refreshing about that. Fully bold in appearance while at the same time it’s fully elegant. The accessories are some of the best you’ll receive within the price point, hands down. This cable is truly a special one and you’ll know that when it is in your hands. With all those nice words that give proper respect to a well-designed and well-crafted set… the true worth of every iem is in its sound, of course. Folks, Letshuoer obviously used very good drivers and they expertly tuned this set to a very particular sound style which is fastly becoming a Letshuoer brand “house sound”. I don’t know if labeling it that is in agreeance with Letshuoer, but it sure looks like it from the outside looking in.

Cont…​

The bass is a very well-done supporting actor which is tailored to prop up the midrange and does so with the perfect amount of depth, visceral slam and it does fortify the low end of the spectrum. Next, the treble has that never offensive but perfectly fitting emphasis which is another supporting role that suits this tuning to the tee. A few db’s added or taken away would change the overall dynamic and so bravo to Letshuoer for the vision that they had when going into this venture. The treble is just brilliant enough but warm in its approach, detailed enough and extended very well without any sibilance, splashiness, piercing peaks or treble glare. Nevertheless, despite how nice each end of the spectrum is, it’s all about the mids. The midrange is flat-out and hands-down one of the best I’ve heard in the price point. No bones about it folks, this midrange is delightful. The vocal reproduction of both male and female voices is exquisite. I don’t say this half-heartedly, friends. I say this with complete and utter conviction. The soundstage is above average in width, deep and with good layering which helps to provide better than adequate imaging. I know that not everyone will share in my enthusiasm, and that’s okay. But man is the Cadenza 4 a well done iem! Letshuoer! Here’s me patting you on the back! Yes, the Cadenza 4 is worth the asking price.



Full Review HERE

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Letshuoer Cadenza 4 ratings below, that would be $200-$300 iems in any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $200-$300 US is a pretty vast scope of iems that is extremely competitive, and so seeing a Rating above a “9.0” better mean something very special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 8.7 Built very well, HeyGears builds are great.

–Look: 9.5 Clean, fresh, simple, elegant.

–Fit/Comfort: 9.8 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 9.5 Very well accessorized.

–Overall: 9.4

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.4 Top class timbre.

–Bass: 8.5 Extension, great supporting role.

–Midrange: 9.8 Great presence in the mids.

–Treble: 7.8 Relaxed but great tonality.

–Technicalities: 8.4 Soundstage & imaging are great.

–Musicality: 9.7 Musical thru & thru.

–Overall: 9.0

Ratings Summary:​

Have I ever explained to you how little I enjoy Rating anything? Folks, please hear me, ratings are no good. I do it because I’m asked to. They tell nothing of nuance and never give the full picture. It’s a cheap way to explain anything. In each rating category, I could have multiple sub-categories. These are bare bones ratings, so give the proper weight to the importance of them. That’s very little. Grains of salt my friends. That said, I do have to rate the Cadenza 4. However, let’s not get things twisted, like most sets, the Cadenza 4 cannot be broken down into categories. This is a set which should only be rated and reviewed as a whole. This is something I say often in my reviews, and it couldn’t be truer than for the Cadenza 4. When each Rating is individually broken down and rated it simply looks worse than one grade as a whole. Even when I tallied the ratings and got a “9.0” total sound score it still is less than what I would give this set. It’s a “9.5” at least in my eyes. Probably more like a “9.8” against the field of sets that I’ve heard. However, you have to enjoy the tuning for this to be true to you as well. Not everyone will agree with that. Coincidentally, that is exactly what makes this hobby the best hobby on earth. I’m convinced of that.

Explain Yourself!!!​

Okay, so there are more than a few ratings which may garner some anger and DM’s (yes this happens). Some of you are crazy about this stuff and actually get mad, which is weird, so calm down and hear me out. Time to be adults and act like actual men… and women. I would say that the bass category could go a few points less for some folks. I’m sure they won’t find it as enthralling as I do. It isn’t the most defined, not the most glass-lined and clean, doesn’t have the best transient swiftness. So how did I give it an “8.5”? Because of what it is for the overall tuning. Yes, I could use a hint more lift in the mid-bass, but the extension is great, and the density is good too. It’s resolute enough for an 8.5, it does have adequate rumble and plenty of slam for most any genre. To be honest, I looked this over for a while and with a total of 10 iems in front of me I established that “for me” the low-end carries an “8.5”, give or take. Timbre may be a problem for some folks too. You do have to enjoy the warmer, richer and less vibrant timbre to agree with me that it is a “9.4”. Basically, you have to actually like the tuning and so these ratings could go either way. Also, ratings are personal to the reviewer so again, please take this ridiculous section as a grain of salt… please!

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Letshuoer Cadenza 4, I want to first thank the awesome people of Letshuoer for providing the Cadenza 4 in exchange for a feature at Mobileaudiophile.com and a full review. Letshuoer has never once asked me to skew my words, talk well of their products, pre-read my review, and never tried to bribe me or lead me in any direction. Kudos to Letshuoer, they have my respect. Instead, they simply let the chips fall where they may. They believe in their product and that in and of itself is a testament to Letshuoer. So, thank you very much!

Other perspectives ​

Please! Please look at other reviews. Do not simply read mine and hit “buy now”. Don’t do that! Read, watch, or listen to other thoughts. My thoughts are mine, personal to me. The next guy or gal may feel completely different. Please do yourself a favor and do your homework before shelling out the $250 to own this set. It will pay off in the long run to have a bit more of an educated decision. There are so many amazing reviewers out there and they may fit your preferences a bit closer than I do.

Thanks​

Also, thank you for reading this review and clicking the link to our website. This is of high importance to us. Every click is important, the time you are here is important, and I couldn’t thank you enough. We rely on you to build our site as we are a small group of reviewers, each with our own style and opinion. We rely on you and hope that you find our site worthy of your time. I think I’m done friends. Please take good care of you and yours, stay as safe as you can and always… GOD BLESS!

Artti R1 Review​

Artti R1​

Intro​

Hello, I have with me today one of Artti Audio’s multi driver budget iems, the Artti R1. I have had this set for some time now debating on whether I would even review them due to the fact that they’ve been out for quite some time. However, I don’t think that time should matter folks. I get great enjoyment from this hobby and the Artti R1 is a small reason for that. Honestly, it’s been an absolute treat for me. Just so you know what the mood of this review is going to be. The Artti R1 is a triple dynamic driver earphone which is ridiculously appealing to me. Why I waited so long to hear this set is beyond me. Being that this review is far past the release date of the R1, it is basically on sale all the time. At Volkchoi.com you can get this set for as low as $63, which, is an awesome price!

Artti​

Artti is supposedly a sister brand of one of my favorite’s… Letshuoer. I really mean it that I enjoy darn near everything that Letshuoer creates. I don’t know how connected the two brands are but there are obvious traits seen in the genetics of both brands. The style, the use of materials, the willingness to try new things, the sound and also… the sound. All of it is a testament to Letshuoer and their ability to provide very well rounded iems. From what I can tell, Artti is on the fast track to becoming a budget brand fan favorite. Move over Simgot. Okay, that’s going a little far and I may be getting ahead of myself a bit. Anyways, we’ve seen sets like the Artti T10, Artti R2 as well as the brand new Artti R3. I’ve actually purchased a few of their cables as well and each is very nice. I see that Artti is managing to create sets in every price point, beginning with the budget oriented iems. I am very curious where this newer brand goes from here. Will we see them venture past the $100 price point? Only time will tell. However, at least until now they’ve done pretty well for themselves.

Against the best​

I’m very curious just how well the R1 fits within the under $100 big boys. I can tell you that there are a vast number of iems which play at a very high-level ranging from $50 to $100. Just to name a few we have the Tripowin Olina, Simgot EA500 and EA500LM. The Truthear Hexa sits pretty in this range, also the Letshuoer X-Gizaudio Galileo, the Dunu Kima and Kima Classic, Fiio JD7, Fiio FD3, EPZ X-Tipsy Star One, KZ AS24, among many others (I realize I left many out). The point is, the R1 sits right in the middle of a loaded price range. The reason I bring it up at all speaks volumes on how I feel about this set. Can the R1 can mix-it-up with the best? We shall see. With all that said, I’m ready to explore this triple DD iem. The Artti R1…

Gear used for testing​

–Ifi Go Blu

–Aful SnowyNight

–EPZ TP50

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

The R1 comes in a small white box with a shot of the R1 on the front. There are some specs on the back as well. Open the box and you will see the R1 staring back at you in foam cutouts. Lift off the layer of soft foam and you’ll see the hard case underneath. Inside the case are the two styles of tips and the cable. There’s some reading material too. There really isn’t much to it but it’s a decent unboxing for a $60 to $70 (depending on the sale) iem. Nobody cares about this section so… moving on.

Eartips​

Artti actually provides two styles of eartips within the packaging. The 1st set (S, M, L) is a dark gray narrow bore silicone tip with a rigid and harder inner stem and a firm flange. Good tips for anyone trying to increase the perceived bass a little and knock back the upper mids a bit too. The next set is a white silicone eartip with a semi-wide bore, a firm stem and a firm flange. These are basically the KBear 07 tips in a different color. Hence, I love them. I also feel that these are the tips that pair the best with the R1. Out of the two anyways. Both are useful tips and it’s nice that Artti adds them in.

Carrying case ​

The R1 also comes with a decent zipper style hard case. The case is of a decent size to easily hold your earphones and cable and maybe some spare tips. It’s a stylish dark gray fabric covered hard case with the name “Artti” on the top in light blue lettering. It is actually a pretty nice case. We have seen a drastic downgrade in cases over the course of the last couple years. Usually, you’ll simply get a no name case that are all relatively inexpensive. Just cheap additions. So, I do like that Artti adds in at least a decent case for those who actually use them.

Cable​

The cable that comes with the R1 can be bought in either 3.5 single ended or 4.4 balanced terminations. This cable is said to be high quality copper made from Australia. I guess Australia is a hot spot for cables. The included cable is a 4 core 216 strand cable with a harder brown shield covering. It’s a nice cable for the price, I suppose. Certainly, better than most. I don’t get any microphonics either. However, I swapped the included cable for a better pairing aesthetically to another 4.4 Letshuoer cable. The one which comes with the DZ4 to be exact. So, I kept it in the company. The included cable is perfectly fine, and you really have zero need to swap it out. I’m just a cable snob as far as aesthetic is concerned and so I’m always trying to swap cables to best fit the sound and the design. You don’t have to be like me. Lol. The included cable is very nice for the price that you are paying to own the R1.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality​

Just look at this set. Made entirely of 6063 aero-space aluminum and CNC engraved shells with an anodized protective coating. No bones about it, the R1 is very well built. In fact, it’s one of the selling points for sure. The aluminum feels great in hand and is very light on the ear. You won’t even notice them, even after long listening sessions. The nozzle is medium length, not too long, nor too short. I see that there are three consecutive small vent holes on the back of the Shells as well. Artti did a wonderful job with this set, and I tend to like it slightly better than the “HeyGears” 3D printed shells that Letshuoer has been using.

​

Design​

The design will be one that is either loved or… Not loved. I think the color choice is very cool and a bit different too. The color of the R1 is a dark green which is contrasted by a silver “ropy” distorted looking… square (best way I could describe it) on the faceplates. That’s more of a question than a statement of fact. I have no idea how to describe it, but you can just look at my pictures. The look is actually pretty minimalist, a touch artsy maybe. It’s different. One of those things where, the more I look at the R1 and handle the R1, the more I like it. Between its build and the design, I simply enjoy the whole aesthetic. It is simply solid, and simply… simple. Machined very nicely. Everything is smooth, no rough edges, silver on dark green. Add in the nice-looking brown wire and you have yourself a match. Letshuoer/Artti knows how to design an earphone to be distinct, fresh and different from everything else on the market while keeping things simple. Look at the DZ4, S15, S12 Pro etc. etc. Letshuoer has always had very nice designs and the R1 is no different.

Internals​

The Artti R1 has a unique driver configuration consisting of three dynamic drivers in total. To be exact, that’s two 6mm PU suspension edge & titanium dome DD’s. The R1 also features one 8mm custom composite dynamic driver with a beryllium coating. Artti also boasts a physical as well as electronic three-way sound separation system (their words). They make use of a PCB crossover which does seem to do the trick at providing fairly distinct separation, in my opinion. I love the idea of triple DD’s and even more-so when I see titanium and beryllium in the description. Very nice.

Fit / Comfort​

This is a very subjective take, as with any of my reviews. The fit is like a glove in my ears. It’s darn near perfect. The depth of nozzles, the way the R1 seat around my ear holes. It’s also very comfortable to wear for longer periods of time. For me personally, I couldn’t ask for a better fit which is key in finding a good set of earphones. Obviously. Isolation is about average. Nothing worth noting here other than it doesn’t have perfect passive noise isolation and there is the faintest bit of sound leakage to the outside world too. Nothing that you won’t get from most any earphone.

Drivability / Synergy​

Mobile Listening​

Listed at Volkchoi.com The Artti R1 has an impedance rated at roughly 20 ohms and a sensitivity of 102 db’s. Basically, the R1 is easy to drive from most any source. I had zero issues driving the R1 from my iPad as well as the Fiio UTWS5. The Artti R1 has an overall tonal color leaning to the warm side of the aisle and so it does pay slightly to use a more neutral dac. If you are into pairing based on tonality that is. Maybe you enjoy warm + warm? At any rate, I found the R1 to pair better with the Qudelix 5k using 2.5 balanced and an adapter than I did the IFi Go Blu using 4.4 balanced. Both have plenty of power but for whatever reason the R1 simply sounds great on the 5k. As far as dongle dacs go, I used many of them during critical listening. However, I primarily opted for the EPZ TP50 & Aful SnowyNight (both use CS43198 dac chips) due to their more neutral sound color swing and the high amount of output they provide. Granted, the R1 sounds more than fine with almost any source I used. The Moondrop Dawn 4.4 (CS43131 dac chip) was also a great source for on the Go listening.

More juice​

Now, I notice a slight tightening up of the spectrum using a bit more juice, but I am much privier to think the real uptick in sound quality is simply because I’m using a more talented source device. I used the Shanling M6 Ultra, iBasso DX240 and the Fiio Q15. Each of them sounds fantastic in their own way. I am a bit partial to the Fiio Q15 as the sound is so very clean coming through the R1. However, listening with the Shanling M6 Ultra (AK4493SEQ dac chip) with its velvet sound somehow sounded so juicy. Perhaps, the bass became a slight bit less defined, but still awesome. The M6 Ultra gives the R1 a hint more note weight while adding some additional smoothness as well. Source tonality does make a big difference on this one. Truth is, the R1 sounds nice on almost anything, just different flavors.

What you need?​

All you really need is a decent Dongle Dac. You can find them cheap anymore. The R1 will play nice on almost anything. I’m assuming even a simple phone jack will suffice. Of course, I don’t own a phone with a 3.5 port other than my LG V60 (that doesn’t count). So, driving the R1 is really not an issue and there isn’t some earth-shattering change with a ton more power. Just plug n’ play.

Sound Impressions ​

Like I said earlier, the Artti R1 comes across slightly warm with an emphasized low-end as well as an uplifted upper-mid/lower treble area. The R1 definitely has a warmer hue to the sound mixed with some slight levity. It certainly isn’t dark, too warm, or veiled sounding. I would probably call this a very slight V-shaped to even a U-shaped iem. I’m actually privier to U-shaped. I wouldn’t argue with either descriptor though. A variation of Harman tuning on paper, but not to my ears. Each area of the mix is handled nicely as each has plenty of representation for most hobbyists, I would imagine. There is a slightly less exciting treble than on some sets but for the most part the sound has a good and dynamic balance. Maybe tilted a hint towards the low-end, but a balance, nonetheless. One thing that the R1 does extremely well is recreate a very natural and yet firm/compact timbre. On top of that, the macro-dynamic expression is enhanced and clear, more full-bodied with controlled intensity. The sound comes across in a lean-lush & rich style, but without any extra fat to notes. There’s no veil to the sound whatsoever and it’s very musical to my ears. The R1 comes across clean, resolving and does so in an effortless manner. Notes across the spectrum are a good mix of crisp and smooth, knife-edged but also glass lined. No real grain, fuzziness and not low-res. Folks, the R1 is really a fantastic iem for the price. Perhaps a bit less treble extension and brilliance than some may like but as a whole this has a very non-fatiguing sound.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s​

I use this section to explain my thoughts in a much more condensed manner so that you can at the very least get a grasp for how the R1 sounds. To begin, the low-end is warm, full, profuse in density but also a bit too much for many. This is certainly an emphasized and rumbly bass region. Relatively quick per the quantity. Definitely not a basshead set, but very satisfying just the same. The midrange is forward enough with very good presence in this range. Perhaps a hint less defined than some sets but the timbre in the midrange is really nice on the ears. Voices and instruments come through realistic and with good separation. The treble is not as pronounced as I’d like, and the extension isn’t the best on planet earth. However, detail retrieval is above average, and the treble has plenty of lift to add levity across the mix. The stage size is wide, tall and there is some depth. Imaging is also better than most.

Honestly, the R1 sounds very good friends. I don’t always like breaking things down per each 3rd of the spectrum. Some sets need to be explained as a whole. This is one of those sets. I’ve always enjoyed the timbre of a good DD and the R1 has an abundance of them, coincidentally. Under the $100 price there are a handful of very good iems that will really be a special addition to any collection. I do believe that the R1 can be that for a multitude of people.

Bass Region​

The bass on the Artti R1 has a full presence yet without the muddiness usually afforded to a more warm and elevated bass region. Especially those on a budget. I wouldn’t call this the hardest edged and clean delivery I’ve ever heard, but it fits the organic and atmospheric theme perfectly. I would consider this a quality bass without the typical qualifications of a “quality” bass. It isn’t tight, fast, detailed or super ultra defined. I would say that the low-end meets those descriptors with respect to the size and fun nature. This is a bass with some real nice punch. It hits pretty hard and does so without destroying the rest of the mix. Kick drums do have that tacky edge followed by a bulbous hollow boom and resonant decay. I’ve heard some complain about pillowness on this set, but I just don’t hear that. I will say that source plays a big part in how this set comes across. But pillowy is not a word I’d use to describe it. Maybe if you are comparing something that is much more expensive with cleaner, denser and more expensive bass and you have an expensive taste. Maybe then you could call it that. Compared to anything in its price range… not pillowy. At worst it’s simply not ultra speedy, ultra tight and ultra defined. Also, I love the easy slope into the midrange, it’s a job well done in my eyes.

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass is deep, fairly dense, clean enough to define note edges well. However, the R1 also doesn’t sound quite as clean, vibrant and porcelain lined as some sets when listening on a warmer device like the M6 Ultra and a few of my other warmer sources. Just something to keep in mind. The R1 really does react to the tonality of my sources. However, when attached to the Q15 I find there is a more refined nature to the sound, cleaner, faster to a degree as well. To be honest, the sub-bass isn’t the most heavy-handed and guttural, but it is pretty agile. Able to become pretty rigid and condensed at the leading edge on attack with a natural decay. Certainly not as concentrated and resolving as a few sets I have in mind within the price point, but it is full enough to sound fun while kempt and orderly enough to create distinct notes. Of course, the track you are listening to may change this to a slight degree but all in all the sub-bass does the trick well. It’s satisfying.

Sub-bass cont…​

Take the track “Heavy Is the Ocean” by Bush. Right out the gate you get that meaty, growling and impermeable sub-bass haptic feedback and reverberant rumble. Not as heavy as a true basshead iem, but the R1 makes for a very nice guttural drone heading into the main verse of this track. The sub-bass has great texture and very nice extension down low. For instance, the track “Can’t Make Up My Mind” by Cmat has that globular resonance that vibrates at pretty low frequencies showing the extension that the R1 provides. Couple that with the crystal clear and smooth vocals of the lead singer sounding perfectly separated without any harmful or unfavorable encroachment from the thrumming sub-bass. No, it isn’t basshead, it’s more like… quality-trumps-quantity without lacking quantity, does that make any sense? There’re limited ways to say it. Nice sub-bass

Mid-bass​

The mid-bass has a punchy quality to it. Along with that punchiness is a well textured sound on any bass guitar, bass drop, kick drum etc. There is tactility to notes in this region and within that tactile textured note there is also a certain fullness which is pretty quick with respect to the quantity. I don’t hear anything soft, pillowy, weak or muddy either. There’s definition to the crest of notes on this set and just like the sub-bass, the mid-bass also decays naturally. Definitely not fast or ultra tight. This is certainly a dynamic driver type of bass. Harmonics run to completion, the decay through a notes’ release carries a mostly timbre accurate, viable and organic type of atmospheric sound that I can appreciate. Actually, we like to call it atmospheric because there’s no other good word for it, but you don’t lose any info within a note. It’s “atmospheric”. It’s not some tightly wound or an ultra-nimble style bass as you’d find on a BA or Planar.

Also, the mid-bass can BANG when it’s called upon to do so folks. In the same breath I don’t hear any detrimental bleed into the midrange. Instead, what I hear is added weight provided to the low-mids as well as some much-needed smoothness. I find no real glaring issues unless you subjectively dislike this type of bass. I happen to really enjoy it.

Mid bass cont…​

“Stereo Colour Cloud” by Sampha has that meaty, rotund, and wholly convex type of mid-bass roundness when the R1 is in my ears. There’s depth to the note delivery and while this isn’t the most separated and fine lined bass replay or the most layered reproduction of my music, it’s good for its price and good for the type of fullness that the R1 provides. This isn’t the type of mid-bass which has that vibrant clinical punchiness to it. This is the type of punchiness which leans warm, thick and with softly layered compactness. I always say it’s like a pounding hammer wrapped in a sock. Still booming and dense but not as hard surfaced as some iems. Also, I love the bass guitar edginess and gruff sound in the track “Rose-Colored Rearview” by Grace Potter. This is a funky style bass guitar with plenty of mid-bass fullness and sub-bass vibrational density and rigidity. I love that nothing else is masked over and the rest of the melody is heard with good clarity. Artti really did a nice job of separation between the frequencies.

Downsides to the Bass Region​

If I were to pick apart a $60 to $75 iem’s bass region (as I have many times in the past) I’d 1st have to frame my words in a very picky nature. So, in the name of pickiness, I would probably say that the R1 will be too elevated in the low-end for some people. Again, this isn’t BA bass here. This is a pretty heavy DD bass. It’s exactly what Artti intended it to be. Big, fun and not concerned with every last detail. However, not everyone wants a bigger bass section. Next, I’d say that the bass could have a bit more definition and concrete style hardness. A hammer wrapped in a sock is not what everyone wants. However, I do like the dynamic shifts that the R1’s bass can adequately push air through in a moment’s notice. Yes, it decays a pinch longer than some but the agility that it has is not the norm. Personally, I love the low-end for what it is. It adds some dimension to the sound, some body to notes, and works really well with multiple artists, genres, and really just moves my feet. This is a great low-end.

Midrange​

The mids are slightly recessed against the rest of the mix but not even close to making them sound too pushed back or attenuated. In fact, the midrange has very nice placement. I would not consider this a “vocal lovers” type midrange and certainly not mid-centric either. Yet, vocals come across very nice, warm to warm/neutral, highlighted in the mix and with a good note body. Another case of lean muscle mass. I love it. It’s a nice V-shaped sound to even a U-shaped sound midrange that doesn’t lack body or density of notes. There are moments of that milky and moist timbre without losing resolution or cleanliness. You have a slightly warmer low-mid and a slightly more vibrant upper-mid. Again, it’s an organic warm/neutral in my opinion. You also have very nice transitions from bass to mids and mids to treble, it all comes together cohesively. One real nice aspect of the Artti R1’s midrange is that there is a 3D quality to the staging in this range. There’s nice layering of sounds which you don’t always see at these prices. However, my favorite aspect of the midrange, (other than the nice presence) is that the timbre comes across pretty naturally and the tonality is refreshingly good. Actually, to be even more accurate, there are subtle colorations here and there and so I kinda view the timbre as slightly “off natural”. Still, it’s a really nice timbre folks. Note weight is that lean lush style with good control. Nothing too thin and nothing too syrup thick. This is a difficult set not to like folks. If you haven’t already figured… I’m impressed.

Lower-midrange​

The low-mids feature male vocals with a tinge of warmth. Not thick, not veiled, not congested, not overly recessed. Males simply come across good. I find that any male vocalist seems to do well on this set. There’s enough sonorous fullness from bass singers, baritone. Even moving to tenors, they have such a nice and non-offensive smooth tonality. Pick any male, like Chris Cornell in “Nothing Compares 2 U” (cover of Sinead O’Connor track) (fast fact; he’s the original writer). What you have with Chris’s voice is this ultra gruff and abrasive style voice which cannot excel if my earphones come across either too thin or too veiled. The R1 is neither of those things. On many sets his voice can derail fairly quickly, but with the R1 I hear nothing but effortless timbre, smoothness and also clarity. Or another “Chris” in Chris Stapleton. He has a track called “Tennessee Whiskey” which is that dripping, almost swampy style southern melody. On the R1, Stapleton’s voice can quite literally pierce through darkness. I find the R1 is a set which can hold that note edge without faltering to grain and fuzz, even at louder volumes. You see this even more in his more strident moments of the somg. The R1 handles him and every other male very well. Instruments also come across nicely, naturally, sharp when they need to be sharp, robust when they need to be robust and always with smoother inflections and good agility on the R1.

Upper-Midrange​

Females as well as instrumentation in the upper midrange definitely have a more vibrant flare to them then the lower parts of the midrange. When listening to females they may have more of a shimmer to them but that doesn’t mean that the actual body to a note is necessarily too lean, flattened, sharp or sibilant either. I hear none of those things. For a Harman tuning the R1 handles females with a good lean-lush approach which really bodes well for a singer like Olivia Rodrigo in “Drivers License”. Her voice has that teenage emotional longing which is captured easily on the R1. The modulations within every shift and curve to her voice is eloquent and firm. Nothing sloppy. Or a singer like Jess Williamson in the track “Stampede” the R1 shows off her tuneful vocal chops while the piano plays softly behind her. Both come across very musical. I also never heard anything too sharp for me. Megan Trainor‘s track “Sensitive” is also sensitive to sharpness, however, once again the R1 holds that edge and never comes across too harsh. Perhaps the slightest bit of sibilance from time to time but nothing that I’d label a hard “con”.

Downsides to the Midrange​

I would say that anyone who wants that warm/dark molasses thick midrange that is even smoother, and more forgiving may not be completely impressed here. Also, anyone who yearns for a more snappy, analytical and detailed type sound may also not be perfectly happy here. Some folks like that dry and thin-lined clinical style that can come and go ultra-fast. So, for those folks I’d understand why they’d think the R1 is no good. Everyone is different. If I’ve learned one thing from this hobby, it’s that… nobody is the same. We all like different types and sounds and it’s just a fact of life. Now, I do feel that the vast majority of folks will love this musical style midrange with fantastic warm to warm/neutral timbre that simply sounds emotional when it needs to, detailed when it needs to, and mellifluous in every moment. Really a nice sounding set as a whole and the midrange does a lot to help in that.

Treble Region​

The treble is mildly elevated. The highest peak in the midrange is in the lower treble and then you have a soft decline through to the upper treble. Extension up top leaves a bit to be desired and I don’t always have that superlative open and airy feeling when the R1 is in my ears. It has its moments though. It certainly isn’t congested or dark sounding. It’s relaxed, somewhat warm and it doesn’t lack for detail retrieval either. Honestly, the Artti R1 is something of a unicorn in this way. Usually, these brands will over saturate the treble region in hopes to illuminate some extra fine details. That is one thing you won’t hear on the R1. That said, resolution is still very nice on this set; even with the warmer and less emphasized treble region, it still brings out some micro-details. Even the low volume micro-dynamic subtle shifts can be picked up rather well.

Not perfect, but good for what it is…​

Treble notes are generally smoother than they aren’t. They have a bit less bite to them and you won’t hear each note contoured to perfection. They also aren’t perfectly vivid either, but all things considered, the sound still follows that natural theme. The down slope in the treble region is well mannered and not abrupt and while extension isn’t the best, I still feel as though the treble fits the overall character of the R1 very well. Let’s put it this way, I’m not missing much up top. No, I don’t hear perfectly rendered, fine cut and emphasized note outlines, fundamental tones or secondary harmonics, but I also don’t feel as though the sound is blurry or too dark either. It’s a nicely detailed set up top for what it is. Also, I feel as though there’s a capped brilliance that never veers into sharpness or fatigue. So yes, notes are a bit less structured and chiseled than other sets which are tuned to define this area better, but there also isn’t anything that sounds out of place. I certainly could use a few more db’s past 8k though.

Enough luminance to fit​

This entire section has probably sounded pretty bad for the R1. However, I don’t feel that way at all. For me, there’s enough luminance up top to bring some levity to the mix. There’s enough treble energy to bring some shimmer to the upper mids and some snap to percussion. The secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike are generally less energetic but at the same time they aren’t anywhere near splashy or tizzy. I don’t hear that washed out sheen of treble that so many iems have. I feel the treble is just enough to help the R1 sound pretty organic as a whole. Just enough emphasis to counter the low-end enough to call the entire tonal color “warm/neutral”, or “warm”, I’d go with either. Also again, the treble is still lifted enough to hear some details up top. Imaging is spot on in this region as well as every note seems partitioned off and separated.

Downsides to the Treble Region​

The downside to this region is that it will be a bit too relaxed for some people. Plenty of folks will desire more energy up top with more brilliance and vibrance. Certainly, treble heads will be left wanting more. Honestly, it isn’t all that bad really. I’m sure this section reads much worse than the treble actually is. Altogether the highs on the Artti R1 are decent.

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage has very good width to it with sound completing outside of my ears. Along with good width is very good height as well. However, the best part of this set’s stage presentation comes from the depth that the R1 affords my listening ears. Enough that I can hear nice layering of sounds. Honestly, it is more of a 3D stage with a very holographic sound to it. I think Artti did a great job here.

Separation / Imaging​

Separation is for the most part pretty darn nice. Definitely the midrange is the best separated area of the entire mix with easy to delineate elements of the stage. I hear very good imaging as well as I have zero issues picking out instruments and voices and hearing the placement of each. The R1 has great imaging left to right and good front to back layering of sounds which helps each instrument to have that round-circle sound. Some tracks are better than others, some sources will affect this as well. Still, for the most part the imaging is simply another bright spot in the R1’s tuning.

Detail Retrieval​

As a whole I would say that the Artti R1 is just above average. Some areas of the frequency are better than others. Also, a little bit has to do with the track you are listening to, the tips you are using and the source you are attached to. The R1 is affected to a degree by each (tips & source) and maybe more so than most iems in its price point. At any rate, the detail retrieval is actually quite good considering that the R1 wasn’t exactly tuned to illuminate the subtleties. The R1 is pretty well resolving, it has a relatively good transient attack, the stage is pretty wide and deep, and you don’t have a huge amount of masking happening. These attributes all go into helping the R1 to bring out those little details. Obviously, this set is not tuned to be a Truthear Hexa and show off as a detail monster. It’s simply not that. This is a fun tuning which is musical before it’s anything else. It’s about musicality with the R1 and everything else is simply icing on the cake. The good news is that the R1 is also much better at the technical stuff than it has any business being. I attribute this to good drivers, a nice tuning, a clean sound, and a pretty open sounding stage. Nothing is cramped together or congested which is great.

Comparisons​

CCA Rhapsody ($50)​

I chose the CCA Rhapsody (Rhapsody Review) simply because it is such a well-tuned multi driver iem that I feel competes very favorably with the Artti R1. The Rhapsody is actually a 2DD + 4BA hybrid and so it really should have a sort of “leg-up” on the R1. Of course, we know that this is not true all the time and to be honest the Rhapsody and the R1 share some similarities in their tuning, to a degree that is. Now, many of you may be wondering why I didn’t choose the 3DD CCA Trio, the answer to that is that someone is borrowing it at the moment. I’ll edit it in later if I ever get it back. I don’t conduct comparisons without actually comparing in my ears. So, the Rhapsody is a true contender under $100 and is worth anyone’s time and money to own it. The wild thing is that KZ reduced the price to as low as $49. Crazy. Anyways, the Rhapsody actually has four tuning switches as well but for the comparison I am going with all switches up (1111), which happens to be my favorite switch settings.

Differences​

The differences are pretty obvious between the two sets. First off, as good as the build is on the Rhapsody, the R1 simply outclasses it in every regard as far as build is concerned. Now, I really feel both sets designs are great. Both look slick and classy with a unique aesthetic. I like the R1 a bit better, but they are both pretty sweet looking. Again, the Rhapsody has tuning switches which actually effect the sound. The Rhapsody is a bit larger as well. Artti provided a much better unboxing with much better tips, an actual case and a much better cable. Actually, the unboxing isn’t even close. The R1 wins out by a landslide in that area.

Sound Differences​

To begin, the R1 and the Rhapsody are both slightly warmer than neutral with the Rhapsody having the ability to get even warmer or cooler with switches. Both sets have a clean replay for what they are too. The Rhapsody is more V-shaped with a more emphasized mid-bass and a more lifted pinna gain. I find the bass of the R1 is harder edged and slightly tighter, but the Rhapsody has a bit more in quantity while the R1 has slightly deeper sub-bass rumble. The R1’s midrange is more forward with better timbre, more natural & organic while the Rhapsody is slightly more recessed. Both are nice here, but I do find the R1 is better suited for vocals, both male and female. Treble is one area that provides a bit more of a distinct separation as the Rhapsody has more vibrance, luminance and brilliance in this region. Both sets present the frequency in slightly different ways, but both are very well tuned.

Technicalities​

Technically speaking I find both sets are pretty much equal in many ways. The R1 has the more detailed, resolving, separated and layered midrange whereas the Rhapsody has a much better detailed, separated and extended treble region. Both are good for what they are, and neither is crafted to be detail kings. Both are musicality first iems and both are geared toward fun. The stage is about the same on both sets, but I do hear a bit better depth on the R1. These are minimal differences, but differences, nonetheless. Also, the transient attack through release is a bit quicker on the Rhapsody past the midrange but I do find that note definition is better on the R1.

Final thoughts about this comparison​

If I had to choose between the two sets I would probably… actually, I’d certainly choose the R1. I love the tonality and timbre in this set which I feel is the real deciding factor for me. I truly enjoy them both as I’m happy as a clam no matter what set is in my ears. However, the R1 simply fits my preferences a bit better. I could see this going the other way for many people though. Neither is distinctly better than the other. This was not a duel to the death at all. Both are worthy of a being in the “top 5” or “top 10” under $100.

Letshuoer DZ4 ($89)​

The Letshuoer DZ4 (DZ4 Review) is another awesome set under $100. Now, this is a real true “triple DD” comparison and also… I’m keeping it in the family. As we’ve learned, Artti is a sub-brand of Letshuoer and so you can see the genetics taking shape here. Again, the DZ4 is also a triple dynamic driver iem but it also carries a “R-Sonic” passive filtering system, or passive radiator. Letshuoer made some special sets in both the DZ4 and the R1 and I couldn’t be happier conducting this comparison.

Differences​

For starters, the DZ4 is built by the brand “HeyGears” which you’ll either feel is amazing or… you won’t. Then you have the all-aluminum R1 and so I suppose it comes down to preference on which you like better. I think the R1 is probably the better built set but the people of HeyGears may have a thing or two to say about that. As far as design goes, Letshuoer/Artti flat-out know how to design iems. Always unique and different. I actually love the look of the DZ4, but many would disagree with me. I think the majority of folks would likely think the R1 is a bit better looking. I’d certainly say that the DZ4 has a bit better of an unboxing. Comparable tips, better cable, better hockey-puck style case. Then again, I suppose that could be up for debate, but it isn’t a debate within my mind. The DZ4 is better equipped. In fact, I use the DZ4 cable on the R1 because it simply fits it better aesthetically. The R1 and the DZ4 are about the same size while both sets are equally comfortable for me. The DZ4 may have a bit better comfort but again, debatable. Now, the DZ4 uses three titanium domed 6mm DD’s and one PR whereas the R1 uses two 6mm titanium dome DD’s but with a larger 8mm beryllium DD. Both sets have very nice drivers.

Sound Differences ​

To begin, the DZ4 is closer to neutral, cooler to a degree and closer to a W-shape sound signature. As you know the R1 has what I’d call a U-shaped tuning. The DZ4 has a more smooth and lush timbre and very organic while the R1 has a slightly crisper leading edge across the mix. I find note weight is a bit richer in the DZ4 but that is also debatable. The R1 sounds cleaner, more exact in its note outline. In the bass, the R1 bangs harder while the DZ4 may be referred to as bass lite by some folks. R1 has deeper sub-bass, more rumbles, slams harder but the DZ4 is not bass deficient. The DZ4 has a slightly more pillowy bass. As far as the midrange, the DZ4 has a more forward low and upper mids. I feel that vocals are quite literally in center stage with the DZ4 which has some of the best vocal’s money can buy under $100. The R1 isn’t bad by any stretch but the DZ4 simply has them beat here. Details emerge better on the R1 with a slightly more defined note structure. The treble of both sets is not ultra extended but the DZ4’s treble comes through with a bit more brilliance. Both offer relaxed treble regions but the DZ4 sounds more uplifted without the low-end to counter like the R1.

Technicalities​

Details come through better on the R1 for me. Something about the cleaner approach and better definition. Soundstage goes to the R1 with a wider stage and a deeper stage. Both sets have great imaging in my opinion. Though separation is a bit more apparent on the R1. Also, please know that these differences are not night and day. Anyways, the R1 has a slightly snappier transient response while the DZ4 is smooth like butter all the way through. Neither set is a technical wizard, and both prefer musicality first.

Final thoughts on this comparison​

This is a very tough one for me. I really mean that. I truly adore the vocals and that sweet smooth replay on the Letshuoer DZ4. What a set. It got a horrible rap, but it truly is a hidden gem. Now, I do prefer everything else on the R1 a bit more and the vocals on the R1 are still very good. They simply don’t Excell there like the DZ4. I suppose if worse came to worse and I had to choose which to keep, I’d keep the R1. Maybe a prisoner of the moment but it does have the more fun sound, more musical, bigger bass, and simply fits more genres better. Definitely more of an all-rounder in comparison. Again, both iems are very good at being what they are. Letshuoer/Artti deserves a round of applause for these two.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

I’ve said alot here, and I feel that anyone who’s read this far already knows what I’m going to say concerning the question posed in the header. However, there is always nuance to everything. Speaking for myself, absolutely the R1 is worth every penny, and then some. It’s a fantastic iem with a unique driver configuration that sound very nice. However, this hobby covers all types of people with all types of preferences and all types of monetary situations. I could tell you this, if the R1 is at the top of your budget, absolute top, and you’ll have to skip a meal to own it. If that’s the case then no, the R1 isn’t worth your money. Instead, eat a meal and just buy the CCA Trio. Now, if you simply want a unique and totally dope set for your collection then 100% yes, the R1 is worth your dollar. I’d also say that against the current crop of iems “under $100” the R1 can stand against any of them and do so convincingly. For some it will be the best of the group and for others it may not. Some won’t enjoy its lack of treble extension, lack of brilliance. Some will want better detail retrieval, more bass, Yada Yada Yada. You guys get it. Still, for the rest of us who simply want something musical and technically adept too, the Artti R1 is a fine set and worth the loot to own it.

The Why…​

1st off, the R1 has a great build made completely of aluminum, it’s lite, it’s ergonomically sound, and it looks dope. 2nd, the R1 has great accessories with a nice case, good tips that actually work with the R1 and a very nice cable for the price point. Next, the R1 is loaded with talented drivers, and each was cohesively tuned to take on certain areas of the spectrum and I’d say that they nailed it. Truly. Lastly, those drivers, the entire acoustic cavity, and the tuning in general really helps this set to sing. It’s musical through & through. You have an emphasized bass that reaches deep and slams hard while keeping tight reigns on the note structure and definition. The midrange has a very nice presence with smooth undertones, top rate timbre and some very nice vocals. Also, the treble isn’t bad at all. Especially if you prefer a relaxed treble that still has enough lift to bring some levity to the mix. Never sharp, not sibilant, not sloppy, not glaring or splashy. The sound is very nice friends. To me this is a good budget all-rounder type set that will fit many hobbyists’ collections nicely. Without blinking an eye I’d say it’s worth the cost for this set.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Artti R1 ratings below, that would be $50-$80 iems in any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $50-$80 US is a huge scope of iems that is extremely competitive, and so seeing a Rating above a “9.0” better mean something very special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.5 Built very well, all aluminum.

–Look: 9.0 I feel the design is very unique.

–Fit/Comfort: 9.2 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 9.8 Very well accessorized.

–Overall: 9.4

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.8 Top class timbre.

–Bass: 9.4 Rumbles, slams, yet keeps it clean.

–Midrange: 8.9 Great presence in the mids.

–Treble: 7.8 Relaxed but great tonality.

–Technicalities: 8.4 Soundstage & imaging are great.

–Musicality: 9.6 Musical thru & thru.

–Overall: 9.0

Ratings Summary:​

Not much to summarize with these ratings. I feel a very lofty “9.0” is very well deserved by the R1. Certainly, one of the higher scores I’ve given out within the range. Of course, I didn’t extend it to $100 which does help the R1’s total score. Remember, I pitted the R1 against any and all iems between $50 and $80. So, you can imagine that it would do quite well. Of course, the overall score wouldn’t change much if it was against any and all iems under $100. At any rate, this is a very good set folks. However, once again it is an iem that doesn’t score quite as high in individual categories as it would score as a whole. I actually believe it is a set that should only be judged as a whole. It’s about how the R1 brings it all together in my opinion.

Explain Yourself!​

However, you could argue that I gave the R1 too high of a “bass” rating and I’d get it. It isn’t the most ultra-defined bass region. I feel it’s a “9.4” but that might as well be a “6.0” to anyone who wants something more snappy, detailed, tighter and more fast moving. “Technicalities” is another area that I went back and forth over. I had roughly 12 to 13 iems sitting in front of me that I feel are some of the best between $50 and $80 and to me the score is correct. The detail retrieval is just above average (what’s average?), separation is about average (what’s average?), but the imaging is fantastic, depth of field is fantastic, and the soundstage in general is great. That equates to “8.4” for me. Everything else I feel is right on the money but obviously you may feel different.

Conclusion​

To conclude this full written review of the Artti R1, i want to say that I have thoroughly enjoyed my time critically listening to this set. Ya know, I only ever review iems that I enjoy or sets that I feel others will enjoy. However, I don’t always recommend many sets. This is a set that I will gladly recommend. Artti is certainly a player in this game with whom I will watch closely. I’m a big fan of Letshuoer and now I’m starting to become a fan of Artti. They have that Letshuoer lineage. Also, I want to thank you for actually reading this far. I cannot thank you enough for clicking the link and visiting our site. It means a lot.

Other perspectives​

Please take some time and read some other thoughts and opinions about the Artti R1. I’ve said it countless times in the past that not everyone shares the same preferences and to get a good idea of how something will sound, it would pay off for you to check out as many thoughts as possible. We are different in so many ways folks. With that, I thank you again. Take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

KZ Symphony Review​

​

KZ Symphony ​

Intro​

Hello everyone, today I have with me one of the latest KZ/CCA iems, the KZ Symphony. It took me a bit longer to get to the Symphony as I was taking my time really getting to understand this iem and the direction that KZ was going with it. I try to have enough listening time to feel comfortable with the words that I write. The KZ Symphony is a dual driver hybrid iem which consists of a 13.2 mm Planar driver as well as a 6 mm dynamic driver. A very unique mix of driver tech, especially with such a small DD. Because of this driver configuration I was actually very ready to hear this set. Not every day you actually have the ability to hear a 1DD +1PL for roughly $60.

KZ ​

KZ has been on a couple year tear through the budget segment basically contending in every price point under $100 and that tear persists. Especially lately. It is actually hard not to be impressed by what KZ/CCA has been able to accomplish. Ya know, one great thing about this company is that they consistently add some of the best sets per their respective price points which gives the consumer the chance at owning a very nice sounding iem for cheap. It’s just the truth. I’ve personally reviewed quite a few over the last year. Ahead are some of those reviews:

– AS16 Pro
– VXS
– CRA+
– PR1 Hifi
– EDCX
– Linglong
– ZVX
– D-Fi
– X-HBB PR2
– Duo
– EDXS
– AS24
– Krila
– AZ20
– ZAT
– Rhapsody
– PR3
–ZSN Pro 2
–CCA Trio

I’ve had a little bit of experience with KZ iems and I’d say that they have really turned out some solid choices in multiple price points. However, now we shall see how well that the KZ Symphony stacks up against the current crop of under $75 iems. I think I’m going to cut this intro short and get into it folks. The KZ Symphony everyone…

Gear used for testing ​

–Ifi Go Blu

–EPZ TP50

–Aful SnowyNight

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories ​

Unboxing ​

The unboxing experience is the same as most KZ/CCA unboxing experiences, pretty cut n’ dry. Only this time around the Symphony came packaged in a black box with a simple KZ logo on the front sleeve. Take the sleeve off and you are met with the Symphony which are sitting pretty in some foam cutouts. Under the earphones you’ll find the eartips as well as the cable. That’s about it folks. Not a lot but also, we probably shouldn’t expect a lot.

​

Eartips​

The tips provided inside the box are the regular KZ Starlines tips (S, M, L). I of course love these tips and do make use for them. Whether it be reversing them to use as Reverse Starlines or use them as-is on another earphone. I’ve always liked them, and they do have their use cases. The Starlines are very well known in the hobby with just about everyone having at least a few sets of them by now. KZ also added in one set of medium sized foam tips which are actually decent. I’ve always used KZ’s foamies. For my listening purposes I went with the included foam tips. I just found that the foams knocked down some of the rougher edges which would otherwise be a hint too bright and edgy. In fact, I’ll go a step further and declare that the foamies are the only way to go with the Symphony. I tried silicone tips, and the treble was simply too much. However, it may pay to tip roll with these little bad boys as the sound is very particular. We will talk about that later.

Cable ​

The cable which comes packaged is your standard fare which has come with just about every KZ set for years now. This is one area that we simply never see upgraded. I would think that KZ does this for a reason. They know we’re swapping cables. They must! Anyways, the included cable is the same opaque/white silver-plated copper cable. It’s a QDC 2-Pin cable with a 3.5 single ended right-angle jack. Honestly, it isn’t a bad cable. For the price it’s not bad and does the job. However, for my purposes I did swap cables to a Youkamoo 4.4 balanced SPC cable which looks really great paired with the Symphony. It’s a dope looking cheaper cable and the Symphony is a dope looking set. Not bad at all. I also used the Tripowin C8 balanced cable as well. Both were great pairings. That said, I only use the balanced cable for balanced sources. You do not need to go that far at all. If all you have is a phone or 3.5 single ended source, then you’ll be perfectly fine using the included cable.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality ​

The quality of the build is as always pretty good. KZ usually crafts iems which have a solid build. Seriously, every set has some sort of alloy, usually the faceplates. While the Shells are almost always made of a hard formed plastic. The Symphony is no different. However, the Symphony shells are also made by way of 3D printing which helped to mold the internal cavity. Inside you’ll also see some sound tubes created into the mold as well. The overall size of the Symphony is rather large, similar to the Rhapsody in almost every way. If they are the same as the Rhapsody then they are the same as the AS24, the ZAT and many other sets which have the same general mold. It’s a good shape that fits most ears. Hence, why KZ still uses it… constantly. The nozzles are average length with some good-sized tips. It’s a nice build. Nothing that will wow you or change your life but it’s good for $60.

​

Design ​

Possibly one of the best aspects of the Symphony (other than the name) is the actual design and aesthetic of this set. Of course, this is very similar to other recent models like the KZ PR3 in that the faceplate has that industrial sleek look with the apparent grating used as the grill. It’s a very cool design. This is another area that KZ/CCA seems to excel at. The Shells are a darker amber/brown and are semitransparent. Clear enough to see the planar and dynamic drivers within. There are a lot of nice little classy touches on the Symphony. Like the cursive “Symphony” in thin white writing about the faceplate grating. The faceplates themselves are almost a chrome silver polish which is definitely a fingerprint trap. Under the faceplates is what appears to be a mesh of some sort. Now, I have zero idea if this is only for the purpose of design or if the Symphony really is an open back style. I am assuming it’s for the design though.

Internals​

Now, we get to the meat and the true purpose that I was so happy to get this set in my ears. Like I stated earlier, the KZ Symphony is a hybrid iem which consists of one 13.2 mm planar magnetic driver as well as one 6 mm dynamic driver. The dynamic driver is meant to specifically aid in the bass response. I can see where KZ was trying to go with this. For all intents and purposes, the drivers seem capable enough.

Fit​

Speaking for myself, I have a nice fit with this set. I also had a great fit with all the other KZ/CCA iems that used this body style. They seem to sit perfectly in my ears. Now I have no idea if the Symphony is going to fit you. I would assume that most folks would have a decent fit anyways. Yes, they are a hair on the large side of things, but the nozzle doesn’t reach super deep into the ear. Just find the right tips and you are in business. As far as isolation is concerned, I’d say that the Symphony has average passive isolation. Not better or worse than your average iem nowadays.

Drivability ​

The KZ Symphony is rated at 18 ohms but a sensitivity of only 95 db’s. However, the low impedance does help the Symphony to not be very hard to drive. Having said that, I definitely feel you need at least a decent dongle dac or Bluetooth dac/amp. Even better to have more juice though. That said, the best I have heard the KZ Symphony was with the Fiio Q15 and the Shanling M6 Ultra, both in high gain. This set turns into its best self with more power. I don’t feel that either driver comes alive unless you have more output. Anyway, I used the IFi Go Blu as well as the Qudelix 5k quite a lot while listening to the Symphony. Only due to the fact that I was doing a ton of housework and fixing up stuff around my home. Without question I felt the Go Blu sounded better with better synergy when using the X-Bass button. Without power the bass feels disjointed a hair. The 5k didn’t work for me, only due to the highs on this set as the 5k had a bit too much of the dual ES9219 dac chips and this embellished the highs a hint more. The Go Blu sort of rounded those edgy peaks off a hair. Plus, it has a hint more power too, which definitely helps.

Dongle Dacs​

I also used many dongle dacs. However, I used two almost predominantly, those are the Aful SnowyNight and the EPZ TP50. I actually listened to the TP50 the most for a review I was working on and so it was a constant in my ears while in my office. Folks, that brand new CS43198 dac chip within the TP50 and SnowyNight is so nice. They work pretty well on the Symphony. Both sounds very similar and offer a similar experience. Using high gain on both devices seemed to tighten up the bass a hint as well as contour the upper mids as well. To a degree. The Symphony is a set which could use a bit more power to perform at its best, along with foam tips. I do feel that finding the right source tonality to fit your preferred sound is a must with the Symphony.

A bit more juice​

For instance, listening to the iBasso DX240, Shanling M6 Ultra and Fiio Q15 each gave me a slightly different overall sound. Between them, I certainly liked the Q15 the most. It has that robust yet resolving sound with a great technical chops which seemed to pair perfectly with the Symphony. You have to consider synergy as it is always a cog in the listening experience and how well that experience brings you the greatest joy.

What do you need? ​

Like I said, at the very least you should find a cheap dongle dac. They are very inexpensive anymore and there are quite literally thousands on the market. However, I do feel that the more power you have, the better. The Symphony houses that 13.2mm planar which just like any planar… needs and wants a bit more power output. Still, to simply get this set to volume and begin listening I would tell you to use what you have. Just remember, more power the better. At least it is to an extent.

Sound Impressions ​

The KZ Symphony has a unique driver configuration as this is KZ’s 1st attempt at bringing a hybrid planar and DD combo. A very interesting mix with a full sized planar but yet a very small 6 mm dynamic driver. I find that most smaller DD’s usually won’t push as much air leaving some of the deep sub-bass rumble out. This is not a forgone conclusion though as there are definitely outliers that sound fantastic. So, I suppose it’s all in the implementation. As far as the Symphony is concerned, it’s most certainly a V-shaped overall sound signature with heavily emphasized sub-bass and a very uplifted treble region. However, this low-end emphasis doesn’t really come across with the meat that a larger 10 mm driver would have, unless you crank the power. This helps the drivers to balance out I feel. I hear very good detail retrieval with pinpoint imaging and good separation and a larger than average soundstage. There are some very good points to the sound as well as some things which will be issues for some folks. The sound comes across slightly disjointed between the bass, mids, and highs to a degree, but I like where KZ is headed here and very curious to see where they go.

Prerequisites ​

I should also add that prior to giving this set some real power, listening at lower volumes rather than what I usually listen, and using foam tips does help. Honestly, I thought it was one of the worst sets that KZ has ever made prior to that. I still don’t think it’s their best and certainly isn’t my preference, but I also think that it’s not bad at all. I’m telling you people, with high gain enabled on my almost 1-watt Shanling M6 Ultra and high gain enabled on my 1.6-watt Fiio Q15 the Symphony did in fact sound much better. The bass almost equaled the dynamic balance of the treble which is what was needed. Of course, the treble is still too much for me, but I could see how people would like this set. With the conditions I outlined. Also, higher volumes things get a bit out of cohesion I’ve noticed. Prior to that, I was not happy and bounced around even reviewing this set. I don’t review stuff I don’t like and so I was about to send them away and let KZ know that they just don’t jive with me. However, using foamies, lower volumes and power helped. Remember, this is a 6 mm dynamic and a 13.2 mm planar set. I cannot imagine it’s easy to make these two plays along cohesively. I do wish that KZ would’ve bumped up to a larger DD but that’s not the case. Please don’t take my words as though I’m rec’ing this set. That’s not what I’m saying. I am saying that I can see how v-shaped folks would like them.

Condensed Sound Between the Two 20’s ​

Beginning with the bass region, the Symphony has huge sub-bass rumble and deepness, but the mid-bass seems to lag a bit behind. The mid bass can still slam and boom, but not as earth shaking as the graph states. This is a reasonably tight bass with only a slightly lingering decay. The midrange is slightly recessed, like most V-shaped iems. There isn’t a ton of bleed over from the low-end into the mids as well which makes them a bit thin. The Symphony has a slightly warmer low-mids and a bit more shimmery and thinner upper-mids. The treble is very bright with a persistent treble sheen which overlays that region. Definitely enough to bring some levity to the sound as a whole. That’s putting it politely. Basically, the treble will be too much for some. Again, unless you have some foam tips which do knock down that treble enough and keep the volume down to a reasonable level. Details are actually very good apart from any heavy bass tracks. Imaging is spot on, and separation of instruments and vocals is good for the price too. I find the stage size to be above average to very good in all ways. There are certainly some issues to note, and I do cover those in the next few sections.

Bass Region ​

The low-end of the KZ Symphony has a very thick feel to it. A sub-bass beast wh3n powered well. For me that was high gain on the Shanling M6 Ultra and Fiio Q15. The bass generally is slower to decay and has a wide presence. It makes its presence felt. This is a very warm bass region that is closer to syrupy rather than compact and dense. I want to say that it is big, bulbous and unnervingly grandiose. Look at the graph! It looks like a low hanging pregnancy if you flip it up on its vertical. It should be the type which rattles the wax out of your ears. This boggles my mind wondering why there was this detached feeling to the bass region. With enough juice It is dynamic in its presence with that localized and dense vibrance down low. Without power it feels held back and pushed back. Then it dawned on me that we are in fact dealing with a 6 mm dynamic driver covering the low-end. You simply don’t get a huge amount of air and sound pressure. The surface area of a 6mm driver simply doesn’t produce the same experience. Like I said, I would’ve loved to see a slightly larger DD. Anyways, feed the Symphony some power and both drivers seem to come together a bit better, the sub-bass gets flat out nasty deep too. Still a slight lack of cohesion, but this is what worked for me.

Sub-bass ​

The lowest of lows can flat out bang! Now, with less power I didn’t get this, and the sub-bass felt held back and almost pushed behind everything else. It wasn’t until I began playing around (without EQ) to try to make this set work for me. The sub-bass can growl very deep and become pretty overbearing and boomy which does cover up and mask some frequencies. This won’t be a problem for folks who enjoy more bulbous and grumbling bass down low. Listening to “Groove” by Ray Wylie Hubbard you can hear and feel the haptic vibration that this little 6 mm driver can put out when pushed a bit. This track has a pretty deep bassline that moves along to Ray’s deadpan vocals. I did not get any masking of his voice, which is good, and I was impressed by the deepness of the bass. This can work for some genres. Granted, it isn’t my favorite type of bass but again, I can see how some would enjoy it.

Mid-bass ​

The mid-bass has a bit less weight to it than the sub-bass levels and does feel a little held back. Oddly enough, this isn’t all the time. Some tracks come across better than others to where the Symphony sounds like a fun set. Anyways, the Symphony has a bass that’s hard to pin down. Timbre-wise it is just fine, no issues there. The transient attack through sustain is reasonably quick and without a huge amount of decay drag and so the mid-bass doesn’t come across slow. I wouldn’t call it that. “I Can’t Stop” from Big Boss Vette off of the Across the Spider-Verse Soundtrack showcases a round, tight and springy bass which keeps up well with the surrounding digital melody and doesn’t mask over anything. Also, in “Stereo Colour Cloud” by Sampha, this is a bass that can easily begin to mask as the bass is the foundation to this track. The lead’s voice is never cast in veil, and it all comes across clean enough. The only slight subjective issue is that the bass sounds a hint pushed back. Still authoritative against the rest of the sound field. I figured that was worth noting.

Downsides to the Bass Region ​

This has been an up and down review of the bass region so far. There’re some good aspects as well as some not-so-good aspects of the bass. One thing I didn’t really speak on enough is that in bass heavy tracks the low-end can get pretty over saturated which can mask other frequencies. Then the mid-bass doesn’t sound like I’m getting that nice transition from the sub-bass. On the bright side, the bass doesn’t sound flabby or pillowy and has great density, especially in the sub-bass. Not at all perfect and I do think that KZ will have to go back to the drawing board but, not horrible either. Also, this is a first try at this driver configuration and so you’ll see some issues. It’s like anything else.

Midrange​

The midrange doesn’t get a whole lot of warmth and weight from the bass due to the more dramatic roll-off of that bass into the midrange. To my ears I hear a pretty hard recession which isn’t their best tuning to date unfortunately. I think fans of ole school V-shaped iems who don’t mind some thinner scooped mids, will find this appealing, but anyone looking for balance may think about moving on. Or, even checking out some of KZ’s very well-tuned iems. That said, I don’t want to beat a dead horse here. Also, after a while my brain adapts, and I can listen just fine. Is it my favorite? No, it isn’t. I like a balance, more forward style mids with a hint of warmth from the low-end. I like a hint more smoothness as well. However, here we are. The midrange is kind of thin, pretty resolute and fairly detailed but it will not give you that hearty note weight and is actually leaning to the artificial side of the aisle within the timbre. Similar to the KZ PR3, so if you enjoy the PR3 then you’ll like the Symphony.

Lower-midrange ​

Listening to the lower midrange I hear a certain thinness in this region compared to recent KZ/CCA releases. Kind of a departure from a winning tuning philosophy. Like I said it takes me a minute to gather my senses and get with the tuning. Anyways, it’s thinner and the note density isn’t there like I’d like. They just feel less present, less proportionally weighted across the spectrum with boosted highs and not a lot of warmth to counterbalance the mix.

What you end up with is Chris Stapleton coming across thin and a hair edgy on “Tennessee Whiskey”. His voice needs body and his voice needs just a hint of smoothness and warmth to really carry the inflections in that voice. Also, the sub-bass reverberant growling drone of the bass guitar is a bit much on this track, while the strumming guitar sounds almost a hint too thin and tinsely. I am being beyond picky here. I simply want you to know what you’re getting. Even deeper pitched singers like the bass singer Avi Kaplan (which I always use for review purposes) sounds a bit too lifted. The track “First Place I Go” sounds only slightly resonant and I’m missing that deep drone to his voice. Ya know, he has a voice with a fundamental frequency somewhere in the bass to low-mids, but his harmonics live in the midrange. Avi’s voice sounds a bit too pushed back in the sound field, thinner than usual, and his voice is less sonorous and more artificial vibrant than anything.

Then again… ​

On the other hand, The Paper Kites sing “Pocket Full of Rain” which truly comes across beautifully when the Symphony is in my ears. The tuning really fits the mellow sound of the track. Almost adding a slight vibrance to the otherwise more mundane and dull sound. The lead’s voice sounds natural and organic and just sounds great. This is the stuff you run into folks. On one hand I’m telling you thin, vibrant, artificial, and on the other I’m telling you something different. More mellow tracks sound fine. Tracks which won’t pull in those upper frequency notes.

Upper-Midrange ​

From the mid-mids to the upper midrange is closer to appropriate as far as presence. Females for example are generally more forward in the mix from their male counterparts. This isn’t an across-the-board truth, however. Generally, it’s true though. Now, having said that, I also find females still don’t come across as timbre accurate as I think most hobbyists would enjoy. Perhaps KZ needed a hint less treble emphasis and a hint more of a gradual slope from the bass to the midrange. However, once again this is not an across-the-board theme. The sound of some females is great. For instance, Olivia Rodrigo in the track “Teenage Dream”. Her voice sounds very melodic as the entire track is more reserved and withdrawn. This is an emotional track with this reticent style singing from Olivia which keeps the vibrance down and so it is a winning combo on the Symphony. However, once you play a track like “High” by Caitlyn Smith, you begin to hear that vibrance which also happens to bring out some sibilance and planar timbre. Especially in the more strident and vivacious areas within the chorus. Just a bit too much of that treble footprint shows up in the upper mids.

Downsides to the Midrange ​

The biggest downside of the midrange is that it is recessed a bit too much in the lower midrange which gives off a slightly distant feel. I realize this won’t bother everyone and some may actually really enjoy the sound. I don’t want to discredit you at all. But it’s just a bit recessed. Not horrible. The midrange also has some planar timbre show up which I assume comes from not enough balance in the mix. It truly isn’t always bad and there are plenty of tracks which come across beautifully on the Symphony. It’s when you push it a bit too much in the vibrance area that things start to become sheened- out and sibilant. Again, I am definitely talking up some of the worse infractions of the midrange and I don’t think it’s as bad as I make it come across in my words. It’s simply a departure from the great tunings we’ve seen lately.

Treble Region​

The treble of the KZ Symphony is very bright and very lifted, especially when pumping up the volume. Even with foam tips it can be a bit too much. Now, this isn’t every track. For instance, I was just listening through some critical listening playlists I happened upon one of the harsh tracks. Friends, it was far too bright. Of course this was also at higher volumes too. Without question the Symphony treble is better heard with less volume. This is a treble that is over emphasized, which contrasts in a negative way against the bass, and so you don’t have that nice balance and smooth transition. Almost like the 6mm DD is trying hard to play catch-up to the planar. So of course, the track that you are listening to plays a part and so does your source to a degree and the tips you use. However, I think it’s clear that the treble is pretty jarring at times. The treble is very tinsely and chimney rather than controlled brilliance. Simply too much of a direct disconnect and lack of cohesion between the frequencies for my personal taste. Again, it all comes together a bit better at lower volumes for me. I could certainly see some people who enjoy this though. Hence why I’m reviewing them. If I didn’t think anyone would enjoy them, I would not review them. Plain and simple. There are a number of sets where the treble doesn’t play as big a role and those usually sound okay. However, even without treble activity on a track doesn’t mean that the treble doesn’t affect other frequencies to a degree.

Redeeming Qualities​

On the good side the treble has fantastic extension. Yes, it’s a bit splashy but we are focusing on the good stuff. Also, this is a treble that is very well detailed and well defined with some very good note separation as well. I do feel that treble heads who enjoy some forced treble would also enjoy the Symphony as well. Another thing that the Symphony treble region excels at is in complicated tracks. This is a planar driver which can move pretty quick and doesn’t miss much. Billy Strings song “Secrets” has some fast paced near treble banjo play and the Symphony cooks right along without skipping a beat. So, there are certainly redeeming qualities here.

Downsides to the Treble Region ​

I feel like this section has been a downside and I never want to point out flaws over an entire section. Especially for KZ who has always been very good to me. Certainly, it isn’t personal. I don’t jump on the “hate KZ” bandwagon. I’m not that guy. I have heard way too many good sets from them. I mean way too many. Also, I’ve given rave reviews countless times for their products. So, I won’t list all those things again. You get the picture. Treble is bright. High volumes are a bit much and lack cohesion too.

Technicalities ​

Soundstage ​

The next couple sections are where the Symphony actually fares very well. Looking at the soundstage in particular, it’s a good-sized stage. I hear good width, good height and even a slight bit of depth. Which is not the norm for a planar. Even more-so with more juice. I wouldn’t call this a grand stage or a coliseum type of stage breadth, but for an in-ear costing $60…its big enough and it does make a difference in your listening.

Separation / Imaging ​

Another area where the Symphony shined. I felt it was very easy to pick apart different instruments with a fine lined control. The Symphony does a great job of making distinct elements of a stage that don’t seem to overlap or get confused. Even on more complicated tracks I was quite happy with what I heard. The only real caveat would be overtly bass heavy jams. Those types of tracks did have some masking going on and so separation was a bit more difficult to discern for me. Imaging is another bright spot as well. I feel that I haven’t had an issue with the placement of elements of a stage which is a good thing to hear. Left to right and even front to back (to a small degree) sounded as though everything was in its place pretty much all the time.

Detail Retrieval ​

Hearing all the subtle little details in my music really isn’t hard on this set except when the track I’m listening to has a lot of bass presence. Heavier bass jams will mask some frequencies at times but that is to be expected with a more elevated low-end. Other than that, the Symphony does have tighter transients, a wider and more separated stage, resolution is nice, and the treble is lifted which will always help to bring out some of the finer things in my music. All of this helps the Symphony to come across a bit better than most iems in the price point with detail retrieval. Certainly, above average.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

I can only answer for myself folks. This is always a tough thing to answer but I will come right out with it… no I don’t think so. For me personally. To be fair, the only reason I say this is because it simply isn’t my favorite sound signature. I don’t enjoy the ultra-bright treble and there really needs a bit more mid-bass emphasis to balance things out. There are so many other iems out there in the Audioverse at the same price point which make more sense. Shoot, there are KZ/CCA iems that would make more sense. Sets like the CCA Trio, CCA Rhapsody, KZ ZAT among many others. Now if it’s simply the planar tech that is driving you to get this set and you enjoy a hearty sub-bass with a bright treble, then yes, it’s worth it. I do think it’s an upgrade from the KZ PR3. However, I said the PR3 wasn’t my favorite sound signature as well. Now, does the Symphony have redeeming qualities? Absolutely it does. Also, it’s easy to EQ and takes to EQ very well, like most planar magnetic earphones. I actually increased the mid-bass and dropped the frequency past 4k down a few db’s and I can get this set to where it makes sense for me.

The Why… ​

If I’m answering “why” the KZ Symphony is worth the money that KZ is asking I would have to put myself in the place of a person who enjoys that brighter treble and deep sub-bass kick. Perhaps someone who loves the KZ PR3 but simply needs some oomph down low. The Symphony is worth it to the person who loves crisp over smooth and a highly resolute playback over musicality. The reason the Symphony would be worth every penny is because this set has a very unique driver configuration which is a great addition to a collection. Also, the Symphony takes to EQ very well. This is not a bad set folks. In fact, it’s quite good. However, it is simply a stretch that this tuning was going to appeal to many hobbyists. However, for those who do enjoy what I’ve described, you’re in luck because the KZ Symphony is a very cheap planar hybrid.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the KZ Symphony ratings below, that would be $40-$75 iems in any driver configuration. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $40-$75 US is a huge scope of iems that is extremely competitive, and so seeing a Rating above a “9.0” better mean something very special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 8.8 Built well, as per usual with KZ.

–Look: 9.2 This set is dope looking.

–Fit/Comfort: 8.9 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 5.5 This is expected, no big deal.

–Overall: 8.1

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 6.5 Some artificial timbre, planar timbre.

–Bass: 7.9 Beefy sub-bass that rumbles.

–Midrange: 7.0 Recessed low-mids, not bad, a little artificial.

–Treble: 7.4 Very bright but also technically very good too.

–Technicalities: 9.5 Technically a very fine set.

–Musicality: 6.3 Technicality over musicality.

–Overall: 7.4

Ratings Summary:​

To summarize the ratings above I first want to say that comparing any and all iems of any driver configuration at the price of $40 to $75. There are a ton of iems which sit very comfortably in this price range. Oh, and by the way, this also happens to be smack dab in the middle of one of the most successful and heralded price points in all of audio between $50 & $100. It’s simply a loaded range to try to come in with anything that isn’t perfectly stellar. So, the ratings may appear a bit lower but there is a good reason for that.

Okay, so there are some very debatable ratings above. One would be the bass rating. I could see this go either way. I could see folks Rating this much lower and much higher. It all depends on your likes and dislikes. The bass has such a heavy-handed sub-bass, but the mid-bass doesn’t really show up as much. Some folks will drool over this. Hence, a “7.9”. Still a great score. The treble rating is another which some will think I’m nuts. Treble heads may think the treble is great and I understand that. For me it’s simply a few db’s too boosted across the upper ranges but I know plenty of folks who love this type of sound. The rest of the ratings are pretty reasonable I suppose.

Conclusion ​

To conclude my full written review of the KZ Symphony, I have to first thank the kind folks of KZ as well as Tyvan Lam. KZ has always been good to me, and I have enjoyed listening to their sets for a long time. By and large I enjoy them and never got onto the KZ-hate bandwagon. I don’t do that sort of stuff. I follow my own lead and look at things from a perspective that I understand. Not like some other reviewers who feel they get bonus points from the peanut gallery if they put KZ down. Really strange. So no, I don’t play that game. KZ has made so many great sets for far cheaper than anyone else giving people of less fortunate situations the ability to have good sounding in-ears, in their ears. It’s a beautiful thing. How can you hate that? I’m telling you it’s weird folks. Also, who cares about their public relations? I hear worse at the jobsite by 8am then KZ has ever said and done. It’s time we grow up. Be tough. Also, thanks KZ for sending out this unit in exchange for a feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. Thank you for never asking me to change my words and always being content with my thoughts, no matter what those thoughts look like. I can respect that. Folks, I can count on my hand the number of brands who are similar in this respect.

Other perspectives ​

As always, please check out other reviews of the KZ Symphony. Please do this. Especially, because I told you all through this review that the tuning does not fit me. Please listen to, read, or watch other reviewers who may actually love this set. I know they are out there. It will only pay off for you to hear more voices concerning this set. With that, I think I’m done. Please take good care, stay as safe as possible and always…God Bless.

EPZ TP50 Review ​

Full Review can be found HERE

EPZ TP50​

Intro​

I have recently been trying out quite a few dongle dacs for mobile purposes which brought me to EPZ Audio‘s: EPZ TP50. I also have the EPZ TP20 Pro on hand for review but that will come at a later date. At any rate, the TP50 comes in at around $108 US, depending on where you shop. The price is competitive and is a very nice thing for consumers. Lately the market has been inundated with device after device which all promise great things. We hear and see brands pushing their “cutting edge” technology. Honestly though, they all kind of sound somewhat similar. Maybe just little deviations from each other. Don’t get me wrong, these are good problems to have. However, we don’t see too many outliers in this hobby. Not enough stand-out devices. One thing that isn’t so common is a dongle dac with the features and audio components that the TP50 has at this price. However, one thing we also have at the price it’s being sold… is other quality dongle dacs. I suppose this is where we find out if this EPZ product is worth the cheddar. If it can stand next to some of the other devices in the price point or fall into relative obscurity.

I’m all for it!​

I have reviewed a handful of EPZ iems in the recent past and have come away feeling the same after each one; impressed. EPZ Q5 (Q5 Review), EPZ Star One (Star One Review), EPZ G10 (G10 Review), EPZ Q1 Pro (Q1 Pro Review) are all very well done iems which quite easily compete in their respective price points. You can tell that a brand has their ear to the community when you see so many wins. EPZ sees the current trends and has really done a great job of producing earphones that meet those trends. The quality of their audio devices is obvious as EPZ seems to always stretch performance per dollar. This has been the case with each review I’ve completed. Of course, this is the first time I’m spending time with one of EPZ’s dongle dacs which has been very nice thus far. Now, EPZ has only recently begun rolling out their line of dongle dacs. Beginning with the EPZ TP20 (Pietro’s TP20 Review). Quickly following that was the EPZ TP30 (2023 VGP Gold Award) (Pietro’s TP30 Review), EPZ TP20 Pro (Review coming soon), as well as the latest TP50. So, EPZ seems to really have a handle on crafting competent source devices, and friends… I’m all for it. Well, I think I’m ready to get into this review folks. The EPZ TP50…

Purchasing links:​

–Aliexpress
–Amazon JP
–Concept Kart

Gear used for testing​

–Tanchjim Origin

–EPZ X-Tipsy Star One

–EPZ Q1 Pro

–Dita Project-M

–Letshuoer Cadenza 4

–Muse Hifi East 6

–Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite

–Dunu Alpha 3

–Penon Fan 2

–Simgot EA1000

–Aful SnowyNight

–Hidizs S9 Pro Plus

Packaging / Accessories​

There really isn’t much to explain here as the packaging is pretty simple. The box that the TP50 arrived at my house was a narrow one with the same pattern on the front as the pattern on the TP50 itself. Nothing too crazy. They have a line drawing of the TP50 along with some specs. Inside you’ll find the TP50 as well as the cable sitting in foam cut-outs as well as some reading material underneath. Not too much to talk about as the unboxing was pretty cut n’ dry.

I probably would have liked to see a couple useful adapters also included but I suppose that is never a guarantee. Maybe a type-c to usb-a adapter, but this is not the case with every dongle dac that I’ve reviewed. Also, most people in the hobby do have one laying around. Of course, if you do not and you prefer to listen over your computer then you may have to pick one up. No big deal.

​

Cable​

The included cable which comes packaged in the TP50’s box is a very nice copper colored and clear mixed braided cable. To be exact it’s an 8-core silver & copper mixed cable with a proper shielding. The materials seem to be of good quality. It has some black hard plastic strain reliefs which don’t feel cheap or easy to wear out. I think the cable is of high quality. Obviously one of the benefits of having a removable cable is that you can swap cables if needed. Now, I don’t necessarily feel that is required but I do feel the cable is a hair flimsy compared to the weight of the TP50. That’s not saying it is a heavy device either. Again, I don’t feel a cable swap is necessary, but it is something to keep in mind. Beyond that, the included cable looks very nice and only helps the overall aesthetic, in my opinion. Certainly, better than 99% of the cables which come with these devices.

Specifications​

-Brand: EPZ

-Model: TP50

-Dac chip: CS43198 x2

-Amplifier: RT6863 x2

-PCM: 32bit/768khz, DSD256

-Output: 3.5 single ended: 2vrms (121mW @32 ohms)

4.4 balanced: 4vrms [240mW @32 ohms)

-SNR: 3.5- +/-125db 4.4- +/-130db

-THD+N: +/- 0.0005%

-Dynamic Range: 3.5- +/-125db 4.4- +/-130db

-Outputs: 3.5 single-ended 4.4 balanced

-Frequency Response: 20hz to 80khz

Build / Design / Internals​

Build Quality​

One of the coolest attributes about the EP50 is its build quality. Folks, this thing is built wonderfully for the cost of owning this device. EPZ advertises the TP50’s build as a split design between the metal frame (aluminum?) as well as the carbon fiber panels. The frame was a process in and of itself. The TP50 frame went through 10 passes on a CNC machine which finely carved out the body. In hand, the feel of this lil guy is fantastic. Weighing in at only 28 grams the TP50 is not something that will wreak havoc on your type-c female port on your phone. I feel that EPZ did a great job of incorporating the carbon fiber panel without any visible signs of production scars. Everything is very smooth and cohesive. It has a rectangular shape (as you can see in my pictures), rounded corners and three slots for the buttons. I’m telling you; the build is quite nice. On one end you have the type-c female port and on the other end are the 3.5/4.4 female ports. Very nice.

Design​

I love well designed… well… anything. Looking at the unit you’ll first notice just how slick looking the TP50 is. At the top of the device is the screen which looks aesthetically pleasing in blue font which sits in the middle of a blue and black carbon fiber styled hologram panel. Turn the device over and you’ll see another carbon fiber panel on the back. I honestly don’t have a ton to say about the TP50’s design other than it looks pretty dope. EPZ did a nice job in keeping with other EPZ design cues. Nice work EPZ.

Display​

Yes, the build is very good, but I have to speak on the coolest part of the TP50 apart from its sound. That is the display screen. EPZ wisely added in a very nice and well-lit OLED Display which is roughly ¾” in length by about ⅜” in width. Perfect size for this device. I can tell you that the screen gets plenty bright, even in the sun. However, if it isn’t bright enough you can simply go into the settings on the device and change the brightness from 0-10. I have it on 10. The display gives off a lighter blue colored font and is easily legible. I love the screen as it is so very helpful. On it contains anything you’d need, any info you’d need like sampling rate, high/low gain, volume, sound filters, previous/next track etc. Truly a very nice addition that is more helpful than you know. Let’s put it this way, once you live “with” this nice display, it is very noticeable when you are using a device which doesn’t have it. I actually like it much more than an app. Though an app is nice to have too.

Buttons / Controls​

One thing which had me somewhat troubled at the outset of learning about the TP50 was that there is no APP to go along with the it, for different features and functions. Not a problem because I quickly learned that the TP50 controls (three button controls) actually serve every function on the device itself.

Everything can be changed​

You can bring up the screen by simply pressing the “M” button and holding down which also brings up the main screen which lists the current specs like sample rate, current volume, and sound filter being used. Pressing both the volume down and up at the same time cycles between the high & low gain. Now, from the main screen if you simply press and hold the “M” button you will be able to begin to cycle through many different settings. Next, by simply pressing the same “M” button you are able to actually go through those settings and changing them by using the volume +/- buttons. Those settings appear in this order: High/Low gain, left to right balance, Sound Filters, Dac Om which is a listening mode which converts the digital signal to analog for a more unfiltered listening experience. This is actually quite nice. Basically, a more uncolored and unsullied listening experience. Keep pressing the “M” and you will then get to S/PDIF off/on, H-Depop which is used to eliminate any crackles or pops, Display Brightness, Display Rotation, Display Timeout in seconds, Hide key on/off, UAD FW 1.20, and Reset settings.

That’s a lot folks. The number of settings controllable through the buttons is pretty outstanding. I find this feature to be completely helpful. EPZ made it very easy to cycle through everything and I also find it very intuitive. It took me doing it a few times and I was locked in. Really a simple and easy way to alter the sound to suit your preferences.

Internals​

Inside of the tough looking exterior lies some talented circuitry which makes the TP50 a viable option at its price point. The innards of the TP50 begin with the all-important dac chip (digital analog converter chip). The TP50 actually has dual Cirrus Logic CS43198 dac chips which are fairly new as not a ton of dacs operate using these talented chips. So far, I’ve seen a few of the CS43198 dac chips. Or actually, one. I reviewed the Aful SnowyNight recently and was impressed with that device and so it’s nice to see the same implementation of Cirrus Logic’s latest chip in use here. EPZ also chose to use dual Ricore RT6863 amplifiers as well which gives the TP50 the output that it does.

The internal components allow the TP50 to have some impressive specs. First off, the CS43198 dac chip allows the TP50 to get up to 32bit / 768khz and DSD256. They’ll give you 130db SNR using 4.4 balanced, total harmonic distortion rating of 0.0005%, a dynamic range of up to 130db’s on 4.4 balanced, and a frequency response with a very wide range of 20hz to 80khz. Obviously, humans cannot hear past roughly 20khz but it’s nice to see that higher topside range. On top of that, the TP50 can output 121mW @32ohms on 3.5 single-ended and 240mW @32ohms on 4.4 balanced. These are not unheard-of numbers, but they are very good for a dongle dac at this price. Wrap that up with all the other features and you got yourself one heck of a device. One more thing, these internal components certainly are very highly regarded for a device at this price.

Features​

High/Low Gain​

One of my personal favorite attributes of any source device is to have on-board gain switches. This may not seem like a big deal and in all reality, it probably isn’t but I happen to use this feature regularly. Like I said earlier, simply long press the “M” button and then cycle through the settings until you get to “Gain”. Once you find this all you need to do is press volume up or down to change the gain. I found that the difference in gain amplitude is significant enough to warrant having the feature.

Sound Filters​

The TP50 also has sound filters which actually does make some slightly noticeable differences in the overall sound. Keep in mind that these types of sound filters usually do nothing which the human ear can easily discern. So, I was quite surprised to see that the TP50 filters do effect some change. I cannot find much across the web about the filters anywhere. Keep in mind that most of the filters are pretty obvious as they tend to be similar across most devices. However, here is the list of filters in order: Fast-PC, Fast-LL, NON-OS, Slow-PC, and Slow-LL. I generally float between NON-OS and Fast-LL depending on the earphone. But if I’m being honest, I rarely ever even think to change them. Generally, it is advised to let the tonality of your earphones dictate what filter you use but I would just cycle through them until you find what suits you.

SPDIF​

One thing which is nice to see is an SPDIF through the 3.5 jack. SPDIF (Sony, Phillips, Digital, Interface) is a great feature for home audio setups, gaming, computers as well. I don’t really use this feature but it’s a feature, nonetheless.

Output Power / Drivability​

The EPZ TP50 comes in with some decent output power settings. In fact, they are better than decent with the 3.5 single ended output hovering around roughly 121mW @32 ohms and the 4.4 balanced around 240mW @32 ohms or 4vrms. These are good numbers. To be honest, for simple earphones (majority of folks), this is more than enough on either single ended or balanced. You’ll be hard pressed to find many iems that are too much trouble for the TP50.

It has some juice​

One thing I’m kicking myself over is selling my Final Audio E5000 and E5000 sets. These are perfect for testing source output. At any rate, I do have sets like the Aful MagicOne, certain earbuds like the Dunu Alpha 3, and many of my planar sets that arent exactly hard to drive, but they like more juice. That said, all of these were no trouble at all for the TP50, and each came alive using 4.4 balanced on high gain. Folks, we take these power numbers a bit too far sometimes. Also, just because a set is promoted as having some large amount of output, it doesn’t mean it’ll perform that way. I’ve seen this a few times over the past couple years. So much more goes into your listening experience. With this in mind, the TP50 is a powerful little device. Let’s put it this way, the Aful SnowyNight has a power rating of 300mw on 4.4 balanced to the TP50’s 240. Well, they quite literally drive my earphones the same. Almost no difference between them. The Hidizs MP145 is a set which can take anything you throw at it, and I love the sound pairing with the TP50, especially on 4.4 balanced. Beyond that, I am going to ask you all to forgive me as I have no full-sized cans to try to drive… unfortunately. I do hope you check some other reviews for help answering if the TP50 is enough. So, to cap this section, the TP50 has more than enough for any iem aside from maybe a couple outliers. Very nice.

Sound Impressions​

Keep it simple​

I’ve always had a hard time describing the actual sound of my dac amps apart from simply saying that they lean analytical and more transient tight or warmer and smoother etc. Trying to go through “Bass”, “Mids”, and “Treble” in categories of sound is a bit harder to accurately judge apart from how much more bass the TP50 adds compared to another source. Or did the TP50 supply the QOA Aviation with a bit more treble emphasis? Did the TP50 come across more forward here or there, more detailed, transient quick etc? I’ve always felt the best way to go about it is to simply generalize in and look for obvious changes so as to help you get a sense of the sound across the mix and how the TP50 may react with your iems/headphones.

Tonality​

The TP50 comes across neutral to my ears. Or better said, the TP50 isn’t coloring the sound of my earphones with any direct tonality changes. There is the slightest tinge of warmth and color, but I still consider this neutral. If anything, the TP50 will take a warmer iem and clean them up a bit to a slight degree but for the most part I feel that the TP50 lets an iem be what it is. In all of my listening I hear a more punchy and moderate bass with good sub-bass extension. There’s good texture to the midrange with a slightly more forward approach and it’ll only benefit your warm/smooth sets with a hint more resolving capability. The treble sounds a touch more brilliant and very well extended for a $100 dongle dac.

Tonal swing​

Take the Penon Fan 2 for example, this is a lauded and loved iem with a warm yet resolving sound. Attaching the TP50 will ever so slightly evaporate the warm veil I usually get with the Fan2. Still a milky, smooth and utterly musical sound though, nothing lost there. The bass region actually feels tighter. Probably less in weight, but tighter. However, the sound is tightened up from other “warmer” sources. The added air and treble energy also give the Fan 2 a slight feeling of levity. So, it doesn’t have some dramatic change. It’s a mild change that does either add or take away from the sound depending on your preferences. Like any source device. Again, nothing that will change the overall sound signature. On the flipside, because of the neutral tonal color of the TP50 you may think it would exaggerate this brighter quality on brighter sets. However, I don’t really get that to a detrimental degree. For instance, listening to the equally “neutral” to “bright/neutral” Simgot EA1000, I don’t hear the brightness expounded upon. I don’t hear anything that I’d consider out of control, sharp, glaring, or sibilant. Basically, the EA1000 sounds like the EA1000… just with some heightened technicalities. Yet, the TP50 is able to do so while never coming across as clinical to my ears. There’s a strong essence of musicality, punch and some macro-dynamic expression that really does come across nicely.

Examples​

Another example, when the TP50 is paired with the Letshuoer Cadenza 4 it is clear that the TP50 brings upon slightly more openness to the sound. Also, listening with the Dunu Alpha 3 earbuds I noticed 1st that high gain was plenty to drive these earbuds and 2nd… the synergy is great. Clean, detailed, wide stage (earbuds), and the sound came across nicely dynamic.

Tonality cont…​

I should also add that I don’t hear anything overly dry either. Like I just stated, the sound is dynamic enough, punchy enough, and holds onto some decent macro-dynamic vibrance enough to still sound engaging to me. That said, most notes generally won’t exactly have that thick and lush sound. Instead, most notes come across a hint thinner depending on your iems/headphones. Yet there is still some good density. Which again can vary depending on your iems/headphones. Generally, the TP50 has a nice crispness and note definition. This isn’t a smooth delivery per se. Note don’t sound blunted at the leading edge of attack and the transient swiftness is on the speedier side with less decay/sustain then some of the more rich and atmospheric sounding sources. Your warmer sets will more than likely sound slightly cleaner, maybe less veiled, and more resolving, give or take. Within reason of course. Your more neutral or brighter iems like the EPZ X-Tipsy Star One don’t all of a sudden become inundated with brightness and glare.

Technicalities​

Trying to pinpoint exactly what is helped or aided as far as “technicalities” are concerned (soundstage, resolution, separation, Imaging, transients, details etc.) isn’t always the easiest thing to accomplish in a source review. However, thankfully I have quite a few dongle dacs to compare against. For all intents and purposes, I would actually consider this device to be very technically inclined. Certainly, it is a more analytical approach, as I’ve said numerous times. I do feel that the TP50 is a nicely detailed device as well and will help your iems to come across better in this area. So, it should not come as a shock when I say that one of the benefits of the TP50 is increased resolution across the mix. Detail retrieval is also a benefit of the TP50. On top of that, I feel that the stage is not one which feels cramped or inward. It’s a wider stage presence that doesn’t flatten out, which is nice to hear. I can also say for certain that the EPZ TP50 does have solid imaging and aids in separation of elements on an imaginary stage quite well. The TP50 does a very nice job of balancing technical skill and musical flare and does so very well for the price.

Downsides to the TP50 sound​

If iI were to come up with some subjective issues or preferential gripes that some folks may have, I’d definitely say that the sound may come across dull to those who enjoy a more robust and fun sound. Those who want elevated bass and more warmth can find better dongle dacs for these purposes other than the TP50. That’s about it. I honestly feel that this is one of the better sounding dongle dacs in the price point. Really a nice device.

Comparisons ​

Note: I am going to keep these comparisons short and will also speak in very general terms using very broad strokes. As per usual with my comparisons. I simply try to find differences so to help explain the device I am reviewing. This is not a duel to the death and I’m not trying to crown one device better than the other.

Hidizs S9 Pro Plus ($90)​

The Hidizs S9 Pro Plus is Hidizs Audio’s successor to the wildly popular Hidizs S9 Pro. I reviewed the S9 Pro Plus (S9 Pro Plus Review) later last year and was one of my more favored dongle dacs of 2023. Coming in with an ES9038Q2M dac chip (old reliable) and a gorgeous design, the S9 Pro Plus certainly outclassed its predecessor.

Differences
First off, both devices use an aluminum chassis with very cool designs. Both builds are fantastic. Now, the TP50 has that awesome screen and so many more features and ways you can change up the sound. The S9 Pro Plus doesn’t exactly lack in this dept., but it is a huge plus to have the OLED screen of the TP50. I feel that both devices are equally cool looking as each has a bold and intriguing design. The TP50 does have quite a bit more output power on 4.4 balanced (240mW -180mW) but oddly enough, the S9 Pro Plus actually has a slight bit more power using 3.5 single ended (138mW-121mW). I would certainly say that the TP50 has the more updated and talented dac chip (CS43198 vs. ES9038Q2M) as well.

Sound Differences​

First off, the S9 Pro Plus has the warmer sound signature to the TP50’s closer to neutral sound. The TP50 has a slightly crisper note structure with more defined and contoured note definition. Certainly, the TP50 is the more technical of the two. Granted these are small margins but they will show up in your listening. I feel the low-end is a bit more colored on the S9 Pro Plus with slightly less treble extension. The stage is wider on the TP50 with easier to delineate separation and is slightly more detailed. Both devices are great for what they are, and both serve your iems/headphones just a little differently.

Final thoughts ​

If you are choosing between the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus or the EPZ TP50, I’d 1st ask you if you desire a slightly more colored and smoother take on your music? Or would you rather enjoy a cleaner presentation with better resolution, a tidier approach, a bit more power on balanced and that gorgeous screen with the multitude of easy to reach options? As for myself, I cannot help but enjoy the TP50 a hair more as I love the way it reacts to my iems and seems to synergize a bit easier.

Aful SnowyNight ($109)​

The brand new Aful SnowyNight is Aful Audio’s latest dongle dac to grace the market and I for one was sold on it, as it has a good number of features, and it also has the same dac chip that the EPZ TP50 has (CS43198). I reviewed SnowyNight earlier this year (SnowyNight Review) and it was one of the better surprises for me personally. At least for the price. The SnowyNight has a lot to like about it. Let’s see how they compare.

Differences
Both the EPZ TP50 and the Aful SnowyNight are built very well. I think the SnowyNight has a bit more of a streamlined and trendy look, but I like the solid build and display of the TP50 a bit more. Of course, they both look fine. We care about sound and functions though. So no, the SnowyNight does not have a display screen, yet it still has a multitude of functions as it does have a couple buttons for controls. However, the TP50 simply gives you easier control over more, which is nice when you have a screen looking back at you. The price is roughly the same for these units and so you can begin to see the value in EPZ’s product. Neither device uses an app, both have high/low gain, both have sound filters and sample rate indicators. Of course, the SnowyNight has an indicator light, whereas the TP50 has a screen. Other than that, the SnowyNight has a highly regarded and very good cable. In fact, it was one of the SnowyNight’s selling points. Not that the TP50 has a bad cable but it is something to mention.

Sound Differences​

Both devices use the same dual CS43198 dac chips and both have good output power. Granted the SnowyNight has the TP50 beat on paper. However, in real life usage I cannot tell the difference (300mw-240mw). Folks, if I’m being honest, both devices really do sound alike. Both using the same chips isn’t a given that the sound will be similar, but in this case, they are very close. I won’t go into huge detail, but I feel these both offer close to the same great sound. I would probably say that the TP50 has a hint of better extension into the upper treble as well as illuminating details a bit better. The SnowyNight does have a slightly smoother approach to the TP50’s “slightly” crisper sound to my ears, but the difference is negligible. Honestly, I don’t see many other huge differences between the two.

Final thoughts​

I guess this comparison all comes down to what you actually prefer aesthetically and functionally. I would say that the better device would probably be the TP50 just because of the use of that great screen and how easy it is to cycle through settings and such. However, you may feel that the inclusion of that awesome cable would be enough to put the SnowyNight over the top. Both units have basically the same functions. So, there you have it folks. Both good devices and both are fantastic for music playback.

Is it worth the asking price?​

The real question that you all should be asking is if the EPZ TP50 is even worth the price that EPZ is asking? Meaning, there could be many devices which eclipse the TP50 for your particular style or use case that are less expensive. I suppose this would all come down to what your own preferences are. Do you enjoy something warmer and more colored sounding, enhanced bass? Do you want a more fun sound? If so, then the TP50 probably won’t be worth the $109 that it’s going for…for you, that is.

The Why…​

However, if you like a very talented dongle dac for the price which rides the line of musical and technical and which doesn’t overly color your iems than I may have the exact dongle dac for you. If you wan’t a dongle dac that doesn’t break the bank yet has an easy to use and perfectly vibrant OLED screen, then I probably have the dongle dac for you. If you want a dongle dac with a boat load of easy to navigate features with very nice functionality than I’d say that I have the dongle dac that may just be your next purchase. For me, for my library, and for my particular use cases I feel that the EPZ TP50 is well worth the $109 that EPZ is asking.

Conclusion​

Thank you!​

To conclude my full written review of the EPZ TP50 I want to thank any of you who read this review. Truly it means the world for mobileaudiophile.com. Every click onto the site matters to us. We are a small operation but trying to expand in an organic way and each one of you are pertinent to our success. So yes… Thank you very much.

Other perspectives​

Please do yourself a favor and check out other reviews of the EPZ TP50. It will only benefit you. $109 is a lot of money to the great majority of our planet and we have hobbyists covering the globe. $109 is quite a bit. However, when you pan out and look at the landscape of dongle dacs, $109 is actually a great price for what you are getting. However, please don’t only take my word for it, read, listen to, or watch other reviews from other reviewers as it should help you to make an educated decision.

One last thing​

I cannot end this review without officially recommending the EPZ TP50. I feel it is one of the best you can buy for the cost. Of course, I haven’t heard them all but the TP50 does so many things so well. It truly is a very talented piece of audio equipment and EPZ deserves a pat on the back. Great job with this one! With that, I think I’m done. I hope each and every one of you are well and good. Stay as safe as you are able and always… God Bless!

Tanchjim Origin Review​

Full review can be found HERE

​

Tanchjim Origin​

Intro​

Hello, today I am reviewing the latest mid-tier flagship single DD from Tanchjim Audio dubbed the Tanchjim Origin. I am happy to get my thoughts out about this set. For a few reasons actually and one which I’ll explain here. I am excited because I’m a huge fan of Tanchjim’s single dynamic driver expertise. I’ve really enjoyed Tanchjim’s ultra-budget single DD’s like the Tanchjim Zero, Tanchjim Tanya, and the Tanchjim One which all seem to punch above their price. I also frequently spend good and quality time with Tanchjim’s more expensive, but also very impressive single DD, the Tanchjim Hana 21’. What a good set the Hana is, truly a gem at its price. However, only one of their iems reached legend status and that iem is the Tanchjim Oxygen. For many years the Oxygen was regarded the best single dynamic driver iem under the price of $300. Over the course of the last year or so I do believe it (Oxygen) has been eclipsed by the likes of the Simgot EA1000. But that’s up for debate. Regardless, the Oxygen hailed supreme for many years at the lofty spot of best in class & best single DD under $300. Comfortably perched on its throne. Dynasties don’t last forever my friends. In comes the Tanchjim Origin.

Origin ​

First off, how cool of a name is “origin”? I love it! At any rate, Tanchjim went back to the drawing board to try to repeat former glory with this latest Origin by upgrading many key internal features but keeping the clean design aesthetic and solid build. It cannot be easy trying to replicate and advance past the special sauce that was, and still is, the Tanchjim Oxygen. Funny story, I actually owned the Oxygen at one point and sold it, why… Because I was dumb. That was years ago now. Guess what, the Oxygen is still very much relevant and I’m still kicking myself. Fast forward to this moment right now. I have a set in my ears (Origin) that quite honestly gives me all the vibes that the Oxygen once did. The point is… Tanchjim knows exactly what they are doing. The Origin is a certain step up from that set (if my memory serves me well) in an incremental but noticeable way. Cleaner, more balanced tonally, technically better and the fit is much much better. That’s just the noticeable stuff folks.

Lets get into it​

Okay, no more mindless babble from me. Let’s get into this thing. I will do my best to explain the build, look (just look at my pictures), Internals, and set out to explain each 3rd of the mix. Also, I’ll try to compare the Origin to a few other single DD’s in the Simgot EA1000 (tough task for the Origin), and the Shanling MG600 (much more expensive). Of course, I don’t know how useful it is to compare against only single DD’s as I do think the Origin competes against any and all driver configurations within the price point. I will also try to answer the question if the Origin is even worth the asking price of $259. With all that said, I’m ready to jump into this review friends. The Tanchjim Origin everyone…

Gear used for testing ​

–Ifi Go Blu
–Aful SnowyNight
–Hidizs S9 Pro Plus
–EPZ TP50
–Fiio Q15
–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2
–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories ​

Unboxing ​

One thing you can surely expect from a Tanchjim product is a great unboxing. I always enjoy the packaging, even if it’s a short term shot of serotonin. Tanchjim’s unboxing experiences feel clinically clean and minimalistic with a very whitewashed and Apple-esque aesthetic. The Origin comes packaged in an almost square white/gray box. There’s a clean shot of the Origin on the front of the outer sleeve which covers the actual box. On the back of the sleeve is a Tanchjim frequency response as well as some other specs. Slip off the sleeve and you are met with a simple gray box featuring the company logo on the front-center. Open the box and you’ll see a cardboard envelope which holds the manual as well as some quick tips. Under the envelope is the gorgeous Origin sitting pretty in foam cutouts and in between them sits a steel slab which houses the tuning nozzles. Next to the earphones is a white partition, pull that away and you’ll see the awesome carrying case. Inside the case is the cable. Lift off the earphone foam piece and you are met with two cardboard trays which carry the eartips. I realize I go through this pretty quick, but I am impressed with the overall feel of the unboxing. It feels premium, luxury and a step up from the norm.

Eartips​

I adore the eartips which come with the Origin. I really do. They provide six sets of T-APB tips in total. Known for their pressure relief properties. The first type are very soft and pliable white silicone tips (S, M, L) with plenty of ear hugging cushion. These are very nice feeling tips. Very comfortable from usual silicone tips. Anyways, they have a narrower bore and do well to add some warmth to the sound. Maybe a slight boost in bass quantity and a taming of the upper midrange energy. Again, to a slight degree. The next type is also a soft and cushioned white silicone tip (S, M, L) but with a wide-bore. They have the same super comfortable feel and pliable softness. I really like these APB tips. For my listening I went between the narrow bore set provided as well as my go-to KBear 07 tips at times. However, I feel the included tips are really great and nice to have on hand. I’d actually like to purchase more of them.

Carrying case​

Tanchjim also provides a very elegant carrying case that looks more premium than almost all cases I’ve ever received. It is a very good-sized white fabric covered case that is solid in its structure. It opens from the top with a strong magnetic flap. Inside it has a soft lining to keep your iems safe and more adept to “not” get all scratched up. Which by the way is something that the Origin is prone to have… Scratches. So, anything which helps fight against that is a bonus. I used the word “elegant” to describe this case and I’m not sure there is a better word for it. It is very nice looking. I have found that it is also large enough to hold your earphones, cable, extra tips, tuning nozzles too. However, this is not a case to put into your pocket, it’s simply too big in my opinion. Unless you like huge bulges in your pants. We won’t talk about that though. The point is the case provided is perfect to throw into a bag or backpack. It’s a very nice addition.

Cable​

The cable that Tanchjim added in is not my favorite. It simply doesn’t add a visual appeal to the overall aesthetic in my opinion. It is a thin cable, very lightweight and not microphonic. So, in those terms, it’s great. The included cable is a 2-pin, 3.5 single ended high-purity OFC copper cable with silver plating. Great for stage use as it isn’t burdened by weight or pulling on your ears. Very comfortable too. However, it just doesn’t cut it when paired with the Origin. Not even slightly. The Origin deserves something at least mildly thick, with some beef to it. The Origin needs a dope looking cable. This is too beautiful an iem for a thin little thing. This is one reason why I instead chose to use the ultra-elegant, beautiful and very nice white FSIjiangyi 4.4 mm balanced SPC cable. I feel the look is awesome with this set and the sound pairs nicely as well. I thought about using a pure copper cable too but feel the FSIjiangyi SPC cable is such a nice pairing. I’m sure there are a hundred other cables on the market which would also pair well. At the end of the day, if all you have is the included cable, it’s fine. It sounds nice and is comfortable. Not a bad addition but in my opinion simply doesn’t boost the overall appeal.

Build / Design / Internals / Fit ​

Build Quality ​

This is a very nice build. I mean, extremely nice. Both in physical build and durability. Like all of Tanchjim’s iems, the Origin is crafted with structural integrity in mind. The Origin is an all-metal build, from the shells to the faceplates. Tanchjim added a high polished shell (fingerprint magnet) that is small in stature but also very durable in hand & in the ears. The build is definitely top notch on this set. The faceplates are also metal, but they have more of a matte, brushed steel look & feel to them. The finish has a slightly rougher feel. However, because of this texture, I found that they smudge very easily. Anytime the oil on your hands touches them you’ll get a dark gray smudge. Which by the way is not easy to wipe off. I have gotten to the point that I try to never touch the faceplates. Anyways, the build is better than solid, it’s almost perfect. The size is nice, good for smaller ears, not bulky. Very similar in shape and size to the Tanchjim Oxygen and Tanchjim Hana. The nozzles aren’t too long nor too short, just above medium length I’d say. Surely a departure from the ultra-short Oxygen nozzles. I find it is a much better fitment. My opinion of course. This is a body style which has worked for generations now, and I don’t see Tanchjim giving up on it anytime soon. I’m okay with that. You’ll also notice a recessed female 2-pin socket so be aware of this if you are choosing a replacement cable.

Internal cavity​

For the internal cavity design, Tanchjim used a wave guide FEA “simulation optimized geometry” which enhances the treble as well as overall sound quality. They also went with a dual cavity design. The back cavity has a larger back vent that you’ll notice is next to the 2-pin sockets. Also, there is small front vent next to the nozzle in the front cavity. Folks, this is about as premium build as it gets. Seriously giving the Simgot EA1000 a run for its money as far as the quality of the build is concerned.

Tuning Nozzles​

Friends, I am going to be brief with my explanation of the tuning nozzles. The reason being is that I don’t see the validity in adding tuning nozzles which basically do nothing. Or almost nothing. I honestly cannot hear a difference which is entirely confounding. They even graph identical. I have a hard time calling it a gimmick just because this is a Tanchjim product, but it is a strange thing. It is said that Tanchjim actually added different internal density and materials inside each nozzle which slightly alters the sound. I still don’t hear much of a difference, if any. Very strange that they went this route. One positive is that you can use the nozzles to do your own modding by swapping the mesh filters, altering the sound yourself. I don’t know friends, just giving them the benefit of the doubt. Who knows, maybe some of you can hear a difference. Of course, if I’m being honest, I haven’t exactly listened for hours trying to distinguish any changes either.

Tell me about em’​

You’ll notice a printed letter on the nozzle itself distinguishing what type of tuning you will receive with each respective nozzle. That is an “S” for standard tuning, a “L” for light tuning, and a “D” for dynamic. I don’t have any idea what “light” is. Maybe they mean treble boosted or brighter? Also, “dynamic” is a hair ridiculous since they don’t actually add any dynamism. I don’t know, I’m not at all complaining as it is better to have extra nozzles than it isn’t, but saying you are getting three different renditions of the sound signature is a bit of a farce. It is what it is friends. Maybe Tanchjim just wanted to jump on the tuning nozzle train. No problem, no harm… just don’t expect some huge changes. One solid thing is that Tanchjim advertised the nozzle mesh to actually help with any condensation as each has a waterproof layer on it. On top of that is the actual steel mesh. For the record, I used the standard nozzle for review purposes. Please comment if you’ve had a different experience than I have concerning the nozzles. Maybe I’m missing something.

Internals​

Tanchjim set out to provide very low distortion levels with their newly adopted and newly crafted dynamic driver. It had to be an upgrade from the Oxygen. Which isn’t the easiest task. So, Tanchjim went with a 10 mm 5th gen. composite Diaphragm, DMT dynamic driver with dual magnets and sits in a dual cavity. The Origin’s driver is said to have a high magnetic flux and the levels of distortion are very low. This provides a THD+N of less than 0.056%, which of you pay attention is a pretty low level. You can tell when listening too. This is a very nice driver.

Fit / Isolation ​

The Origin is extremely comfortable for me. If any of you have used the Hana or Oxygen, then you’ll know how the Origin fits. For me it’s like a perfect glove. They slide right in, seat nicely in my ears and seal very well. Just make sure to get tips which work for your own ear anatomy. I find isolation is average. There is that larger back vent which lets in some outside noise. However, once you have music playing that all goes away. At any rate, the comfort is top notch and wonderful for long sessions. I honestly have zero issues with the fit. Now, I don’t know how that translates for you, but I assume that most ears will find the Origin pretty comfortable.

Drivability ​

Sensitivity & Scalability ​

The Tanchjim Origin is rated with an impedance of 16 ohms and a sensitivity of 126 db’s. Basically, this is an easy set to drive from most any source. You should have zero problems bringing the Origin to volume off of a simple phone jack. That said, the Origin does seem to desire some juice. No doubt it helps to have a good amp adding some extra output.

Source tonality​

On top of that, the Origin is also a sort of chameleon (to a degree), in that it mimics the source tonality and changes slightly with your source tonality. This is nothing new. However, I do feel most people would enjoy a warmer source as the Origin does have an energetic upper midrange which can offer some fatigue over time and on the right tracks. Of course, I don’t feel that it is necessary. Just something to keep in mind when choosing a source. This isn’t a requirement either. Just because your source is a hint cooler in tonal color doesn’t mean the Origin won’t sound nice. It comes down to what you enjoy.

What I used ​

Now, the Fiio Q15 is a neutral dac/amp that truly sounds amazing with the Origin attached. Of course that is also a very talented dac/amp too. I also enjoyed the iBasso DX240 (more analytical / neutral) just as much as the warm and velvet Shanling M6 Ultra. It’s a chameleon folks. In truth, I would say that the Origin certainly scales with power (as most sets do), but it also really scales to the quality of source you have. So, the better source… the better listening experience. Yes, I know, you’d think this would be common knowledge and common sense. I actually listened with a number of source devices during my critical and casual listening. I realize I only list a handful for review purposes but that is only because these are the devices I used the most. For more mobile situations I actually spent an entire day with the Origin and the IFi Go Blu and boy is it a nice pairing using the 4.4 balanced output. I found that a wired connection using the Aful SnowyNight and the Hidizs S9 Pro Plus were both nice sources to use with the Origin as they both lean a hint warm against the neutrality of the Origin. However, like I said this isn’t always true because the neutral Fiio Q15 really brought the Origin to a new level. It’s resolute, powerful, and really drives the Origin to audio nirvana.

What do you need​

I would have at least a nice dongle dac that has some healthy output though the Origin can be driven easily with even a 3.5 phone jack. That doesn’t mean you should. The Aful SnowyNight I mentioned is only a $69 device, the Moondrop Dawn 4.4 is also a great pairing with the Origin and that you can find pretty cheap anymore. You may prefer a warmer source to offset the sound of the Origin, but this isn’t necessary. Obviously the better the source then the better experience so keep that in mind.

Condensed Sound Impressions ​

The Tanchjim Origin comes across as neutral, but with the slightest additional warmth. Perhaps, neutral with a bass slightly north of neutral. It has a nicely balanced sound as well without any one area of the mix claiming a huge amount of dominance. Possibly the upper midrange/lower treble area has a slight claim towards my focus when listening, but for the most part I hear very good balance. As a whole the Origin comes across pretty clean as resolution is very nice. The sound is airy and very well controlled. The timbre is absolutely lovely leaning more towards what natural sounds like to my ears. For the most part, this is an uncolored and unsullied sound and I really enjoy it. The transient attack through sustain comes and goes in a tight and rapid way without any real lingering decay to any notes between the 20’s.

Condensed Sound Between The 20’s ​

This portion of my review features a simplified and smaller version of some of the highlights of the Tanchjim Origin’s sound quality. Beginning with the bass, this is not a bulbous and very heavy bass. The Origin’s low-end comes and goes quick, it’s impactful, never one-noted and very well defined. Just not emphasized with “fun” in mind. I hear a mature low-end that honors quality over quantity. The midrange is not very recessed but actually it is nicely forward making vocals stand-out for both male and females. In fact, I’d say the midrange is probably the crown jewel of the Tanchjim Origin. Of course, the timbre has something to say about that. Never muddy, well detailed, airy, well separated with nice lean-lush note density and always musical. The treble is well extended, it’s also detailed nicely, there’s some treble bite & body and I love the way the treble fits into the rest of the mix. Just a very concise, precise, and mildly brilliant sounding treble. The stage is above average with that feeling of air in my music. I also hear some good depth too. Separation is generally very good for a single DD and imaging is as well. The name of the game is control and charisma here folks. This is a talented set. Obviously, there are subjective gripes that I could see some folks having but for the most part… the Origin is legit.

Bass Region ​

The low-end of the Tanchjim Origin can be characterized as tight and punchy with pretty nice extension in the sub levels of the bass. This is a low-end with nice definition for a single dynamic driver and nice speed for a single dynamic driver. Not to the point of BA or Planar speed, but deft, agile, dexterous, and ductile. There is good texture throughout the bass region, it’s palpable, tactile and substantive. Certainly, this is a “quality-trumps-quantity” type of low-end tuning. It’s tough to hear exactly where the greatest emphasis is down low, but I would probably say that the mid-bass is the dominant region here. Boy is it hard to tell too. I hear a bass that hovers right around moderate in quantity and so this will not be a bass that brings the bassheads out of the woodwork. I do find that the low-end is just enough to play well with most genres except those hard gangster rap bass drops, EDM, and really anything that requires some thicker, heavier and more robust bass.

Natural​

If anything, the best way for me to describe the quantity is… natural. It’s a natural level. It won’t color the rest of the mix to an extent which comes across muddy or intrusive. The bass hits quickly, it’s concise, hard edged and distinctly separated while being well able to keep up with most complicated bass tracks. Within reason. You cannot have this type of undulating and malleable tightly wound bass if the quantity is of the heavier variety. Unless maybe you spend a whole lot more. That’s just me speculating though. This also means that the Origin doesn’t have a lagging decay. Which also means that it isn’t the most atmospheric of all low-end replays… which some may not enjoy. However, when I pan-out and look at the bass as a whole, it’s clear that this is a special low-end.

Sub-bass ​

The sub-bass has a slightly less dominance of the low-end, but it still comes across as well extended and pretty deep. However, just because extension is good doesn’t mean that your eyeballs are rattling in the back of your head. That said, I do “feel” most sub-bass notes, as I get good haptic vibratory feedback. Such as in the track “Mancey” by Andrew Bird. I can feel as well as hear the full and droning bass guitar notes which reach pretty deep in pitch. The positive thing is that the bass doesn’t drown out the finger snaps & guitar which jam right alongside the bass. Very nicely separated and the placement of the instruments is layered and compartmentalized. That’s the beauty of this region on the Origin. It’s a skilled sub-bass that doesn’t muddy the range and isn’t so emphasized that you lose leading edge impact or definition in the mid-bass, all the while still providing a visceral experience. Again, bass-bois won’t drool over this as it is a mature sound. I think I’m drooling.

Mid-bass ​

The mid-bass has some impact. It has a stealthy, tight, and localized slam that makes a hard impact, resonates quickly and dissipates. This is a mid-bass with phenomenal control and pretty nice speed. Again, for a single DD. Nothing really seems to trip it up. Now, there is some bleed into the midrange, but in the most tasteful way as it isn’t so elevated that you’re hearing anything muddy, bloated, or veiled. I’m telling you; this is a full-sized bass that simply isn’t so convex and meaty that it claims any dominance. It’s a snappy type of full-sized bass and certainly not fun-sized. Kick drums have that hollow boom and tacky leading edge at the crest of the note, but the boom comes across as moderate rather than booming per se. “Move Along” by the All American Rejects begins with some seriously thundering kick drums. I really like the density I’m hearing. A very compacted density that stays in its own lane. They simply aren’t gargantuan in their note body. It’s mature, clean and precise. Very well defined. Nothing fuzzy, soft or hollow about it. “Stereo Colour Sound” by Sampha is another track which shows off the Origin’s ability to create a round and controlled bass note that has clean edges leaving room for other instruments to be heard and understood.

Downsides to the Bass Region​

Obviously, the biggest drawback is that the Origin simply doesn’t have the most bulbous and big bass region. Of course, that is only a downside for those who yearn for a bigger bass section. I get it too. I could maybe use a hair more in low-end thump myself. However, I’m more apt to not change anything. I’d hate to screw up the very nice sound of this set over a couple db’s. Also, there are certainly those folks who desire a more atmospheric bass that has slightly more lag in decay. Without question there are plenty of hobbyists who want that strung out reverb. Perhaps, some notes can feel a hint cut-off. Granted this is rarely an issue. Definitely isn’t an issue for me. For the most part the transient attack through sustain is natural sounding in my opinion.

Midrange​

The midrange is the Tanchjim Origin’s bread and butter. This is a good one folks. There is this refined musicality that edges on analytical yet all I can think of is how musical it sounds. The midrange is also very well detailed folks. To a degree that I’ve only heard a few times with dynamic drivers. Note weight is semi lush, lean-lush, or richly condensed, whatever makes the most sense to you. Yet it always keeps its composure which translates into a nicely natural sound to my ears. For the most part anyways. There are moments in the upper midrange that are a hair more edgy. But by-and-large the timbre is wonderful.

Vocalists thrive with the Origin in my ears. The midrange is positioned very nicely against the rest of the mix as it politely emphasizes vocals and instruments. I also hear a well textured midrange which can run either crisp or smooth depending on the track. You have slightly more girth and warmth in the low-mids and slightly more shimmer and an elevated upper midrange which all comes together very cohesive and entirely nice to the ear. Truly a very nice sound. Possibly a hint to bright in the upper midrange for some but not for me. Let’s put it this way, if you can handle the Simgot EA1000, then you certainly handle the Origin.

Lower-midrange ​

I hear a nicely done low-mids region with a slight bit of carry-over from the bass region bringing subtle warmth to male vocals and instruments. That said, it isn’t the type of warmth which veils, or flattens out the sound, or softens the sound. Instead, the Origin keeps that defined note edge with fantastic clarity and resolution. I love the dirty, gritty and sensational vocals of Chris Cornell as lead vocalist for Audioslave in the track “I Am the Highway”. So often his voice can derail into an edgy and fuzzy mess. It’s hard to spot at times though, because his voice is naturally so gritty and so abrasive. The Origin has an uncanny ability to come across very naturally. I don’t just mean natural in timbre either, but in the structure of a note as well. Also, in “Pain, Sweet, Pain” by Zach Bryan the Origin places Zach’s vocals nicely forward, but not so spotlit and accentuated that he sounds overbearing. The lower midrange is generally slightly forward, propping up male vocals with good note weight, good timbre, and great for distinguishing instruments.

Upper-Midrange ​

Females come across slightly more shimmery due to the pinna rise in this region which is great for those who enjoy a female who sounds, feminine. They’re more uplifted and slightly more energetic from the rest of the midrange. Grace Potter sings “Little Hitchhiker” and she has the air of being very melodic and harmonious as the acoustic guitars delicately strum behind her vocals. Everything is separated with fantastic instrument placement in the sound field. The Origin really does well with female voices. The tuning has that sweet sound to it that just resonates with females. Olivia Rodrigo‘s voice in “Lacy” sounds whispery sweet with a natural body to her voice and also very nice as she uses her head voice. The tonality of the Origin just fits proving that it truly excels in vocal centric tracks. Especially female voices. Now, this is not a warmly weighted and milky female vocal delivery, and it is likely to be a bit much for warm/dark lovers. I know there will be those in the community who will veiw the Origin as shouty. I don’t feel this way but I’m sure some will complain about that. Which is understandable. However, if you have a lot of female vocal tracks then you should like what the Origin can provide.

Instrumentation ​

The bonus is that all instruments come across very organic. They sound real to me. Nothing sounds as though it’s too colored or off in any way. Piano in this region comes across tuneful and resounding. Strings have that pointed energy that is satisfying. At the same time the origin picks up every last detail with ease. Finger slides, plucks, harmonics, it all comes through clearly and cleanly. Violin has that controlled edginess and they can be silvery too. Woodwinds sound wonderful, for the most part. Again, I could repeat this for almost all instruments in this region. I obviously won’t go into detail on every instrument but just know that nothing sounds out of tune or oversaturated. Instruments are a tough thing to describe because they can vary so much, and each track can present them differently. So, in general I am quite pleased.

Downsides to the Midrange ​

The biggest drawback of the midrange would be for those types who truly enjoy a warmer and thicker sound. I know plenty of people who won’t jive with the Origin. They won’t desire the pinna rise, they’ll feel it’s too sharp at times and not emotional enough. We are all so different and some will find the Origin shouty. I would disagree but of course we would both be correct. Honestly the midrange is very well done on this set. It’s very detailed, resolute, note body is dense enough, timbre is authentically organic, notes are well separated, it’s open sounding, airy, and for all of its analytical tendancies… It still comes across with very nice musicality for me. Of course, musicality is in the ear of the beholder so take that with a grain of salt. In fact, take it for a grain of salt when anyone says anything is musical. There is no quantifiable way to gage such a thing. However, in the case of the Origin I think most will agree. Not all… but most.

Treble Region ​

The treble region of the Tanchjim Origin can be described as smooth-over-crisp, energetic enough but never over-saturated or too much for my ears. Enough smoothness to not come across metallic, knife-edged or too crisp. Yet, it’s also crisp enough to sound defined at the note edges. The Origin isn’t so smoothened that I’m lacking some of the more subtle micro-details in the region. It also isn’t so smooth that elements of the stage sound blended or flattened. There is some roundness there, some distinctive qualities and even some bite to treble notes. Once again, this is another area that features very nice control for a single dynamic driver. Obviously, this is not to the level of a good and well-tuned balanced armature, and definitely not to the level of some well-tuned EST drivers, among others of course. Single dynamic drivers certainly have their strengths but sometimes the treble can slightly lack compared to those other drivers or driver configurations. That said, the Origin has proven to be very solid in the treble region and really does a nice job of fitting the overall tuning while not causing any offense to my ears.

Smoothly defined​

One thing which is nice to hear is the micro-detail retrieval in this range. I can hear the subtle tonality swings and even low volume micro-dynamic shifts as the Origin is very capable and very agile for the price and for what it is. Not saying it’s some treble master either but it does come across nicely detailed, very lithesome and pretty graceful. The Origin’s treble also has nice resolution along with a great balance across the mix and tighter treble transients with good separation as well. It just makes for a nicely studious note presence that isn’t just a flat plane of sound. Treble notes have some body. Nothing sounds washed out in treble sheen, nothing sounds metallic, and nothing sounds too dull either. I suppose treble heads will have a thing or two to say about that, but I feel the Origin does a nice job of tackling those details, doing so cleanly, with good definition and flexibility while not sounding over energetic, like forced details. You won’t hear that crunchy and too energetically abrasive sound. This is where the slight smoothness kind of rubs those edges down. Most would assume that you’d have a less defined sound being that it does have that smoother nature, but nothing could be further from the truth.

Well done​

Extension into the upper treble is well done too. I hear plenty of info past 8k, and that info doesn’t sound at all splashy or glazed over with over ambitious luminous luster. Again, the timbre holds up. The tonality stays the course. Secondary harmonics of cymbal strikes feel complete and sound like what I would consider natural to be. I don’t have cymbals in front of me to compare against in real life, but I cannot imagine the Origin is very far off. I think it’s fair to say that none of you should expect EST type ultra defined treble notes that keep that glass lined edge. The Origin isn’t perfect in that regard as they still come across with that layering of smoothness. However, as far as single dynamic drivers go, you’d be hard pressed to find much better treble in light of how the rest of the mix plays out. In my opinion the treble simply completes this set and rounds them out beautifully.

Examples​

Listening to Billy Strings in his track “Secrets” shows that the Origin can fairly easily take on some complicated notes as the banjo, guitar, violin, and mandolin all come together very cleanly. The Origin doesn’t have the issue of notes blending together. There is some snap to treble notes and very nice presence up top on this track. Another track which I regularly describe in my reviews is a track I don’t listen to for the joy of it but for the treble activity. That track is “Bishop School” by Yusef Lateef. There is a cacophony of different instruments with main verse changes and undulating mixtures of different treble instruments. I like how the Origin never feels tripped up while holding that natural hue the entire time. Nothing sounds off on this set and the timbre is simply wonderful.

Downsides to the Treble Region ​

When trying to come up with actual issues up top, I am having a hard time coming up with legitimate subjective gripes that some may have. To be honest I think most issues relating to the treble revolve around the fact that the Origin doesn’t have multiple drivers with dedicated treble sections. I think it sounds great though. You have that soft brilliance up top with just enough air, openness and overall treble energy to add some levity to the rest of the frequency. Again, it completes the sound in my opinion. Other than that, I suppose that the treble could be even more emphasized for folks who desire that ultra bright take on the treble region. That is a preferential issue though. Also preferential is anyone who desires much less treble energy. Without question there are those who want that warm, dark, rolled-off treble. We are so very different in what we prefer and so there will always be those who simply don’t enjoy what the Origin has to offer. I’m not one of those people.

Technicalities ​

Soundstage ​

The soundstage is quite nice. The Origin has good width that hangs past my ears. I think we have to remember that the Origin is an in-ear monitor and so you can only get so wide, so tall, and so deep. With that said, some iems are better than others. There’s certain psycho-acoustic magic which happens at times, and it seems that the Tanchjim Origin has a little bit of that magic involved with its makeup. Without question the Origin is better than the average in ear within the Audioverse. Of course, “average” is a loose term folks. All in the ear of the beholder. In my opinion I feel that the Origin has an airy, open and well extended sound which plays into the sound seeming grander in all directions. There are a bunch of variables, but I don’t want to waste the digital ink explaining them. The best part in my opinion is that I don’t hear a flat plane of sound, or a flat wall of sound in front of me. There’s depth, there’s layering of sounds, there’s a nicely holographic stage that really does add to my music. Is it tops in class? Probably not, but it’s above average.

Separation / Imaging ​

Separation is another area where the Tanchjim Origin has found some success. Again, we have great control over the spectrum. Notes are lean but dense, clean, and transients are tight while the spectrum as a whole has a great balance. This helps in the Origin’s pursuit to separate different elements of an imaginary soundstage. It is hard not to be impressed as the sound is simply very resolute which almost brings each note into focus a bit better than other sets. Imaging is outstanding which is pretty much par for the course with the Origin. No doubt you will be able to perfectly position all instruments and voices with precision. The only hang up is in extremely complicated tracks or horribly recorded tracks. Both separation and imaging are fantastic.

Detail Retrieval ​

Detail retrieval is another area that seems to go against the thinking that single DD’s aren’t the most detail friendly driver types. The Origin is very detailed. It has so much going for it. Again, clean sound, well separated, balanced sound across the mix, no one area masking another, good resolution, tight transient behavior. Each of these attributes helps the Origin to illuminate even very fine details. I will say this though, the Origin is not going to compete favorably in this area against some very good hybrids or planars. It will do much better than most but will certainly not beat the best. If that makes sense. We cannot forget that the Origin is a single dynamic driver iem. However, the beauty is that the Origin does so well in every technical aspect that it can do well in. At the exact same time it has a musical sound and extremely organic timbre (my version of organic). That’s the area that those other driver types can generally lack. This is obviously not always the case, generally. Hence, why I feel the Origin is so well tuned. Let’s put it this way, for a single DD the Origin is flat out special.

Comparisons​

Note: These comparisons will be very generalized as I won’t go into crazy depth. I already write too long of reviews… Lol. Just simple comparisons from my perspective over many hours of gladly going back and forth between them. These comparisons are also “not” a duel to the death. I’m not trying to crown one set better than the other. I do this to hopefully better explain the set I’m reviewing. Now, I’m not always successful at this, but I try.

Simgot EA1000 “Fermat” ($219)​

Okay, folks the Simgot EA1000 is one of those sets which seems to come around every five years and simply own its price point. That makes this a bit awkward because less than a year after the EA1000’s release we get the Tanchjim Origin. Anyways, I have yet to review the EA1000 but have spent so many hours with them in my ears and cannot say enough wonderful things about them. The Simgot EA1000 is a single DD with an extra passive radiator (PR). To be exact that is a 10mm with a 2nd gen. DMDC architecture as well as a 6mm composite passive radiator. I don’t really consider the PR a working driver, but it does help with the tuning. I still consider the EA1000 a single DD. Others may disagree. Whatever. Anyways, the EA1000 is a true contender and a tough set to put the Origin against. That said, I honestly love them both. They are different in how they approach their respective tunings and I’ll do my best to explain the differences. Many would probably consider both to be side grades to each other, but I do think that they are different enough to warrant preferences being the deciding factor.

Differences ​

Looking at the build, the EA1000 and the Origin are absolutely built exceptionally. Both sets are as premium as it gets. The Origin is all metal (as you know) and the Simgot EA1000 has a stainless-steel shell and a gorgeous glass faceplate. As far as design, again, how could I choose which is better? Truly they are both as handsome as they come at the price. The EA1000 is a bit more elegant, and the Origin is bolder. Both fantastic. The EA1000 has the better cable, the Origin has a much better case, both sets have decent tips (Origin edges it out), and both have tuning nozzles. Granted, the EA1000’s tuning nozzles actually work. I would say the EA1000 is slightly easier to drive.

Sound Differences ​

These sets are tuned a slight bit differently from each other. The EA1000 is more of a Harman tuned V-shape to U-shape with a neutral sound, more energetic, more dynamic. The Origin is neutral with the slightest spritzes of warmth and a slightly more poised sound with better note control and more of a balance across the mix. The EA1000 reminds me of a downed electric line sputtering and zapping everywhere, just energy everywhere. The Origin is a hint more organized, streamlined, with more structure to notes. This takes nothing away from the EA1000 because it is more dynamic, more energetic, while the Origin is a hint blander in comparison. Actually “bland” is an awful word. I think “poised” and “structured” says it better. The Origin has less vibrance then the EA1000 but also has cleaner note edges than the EA1000 too. Pick your poison although you cannot lose either way. Both are truly special sets.

Between the 20’s​

The bass in the EA1000 is deeper by the slightest margin but both have good control and a tighter sound. Neither are soft at all. The Origin has slightly less impact as well, but I find the Origin also has a slight better bass definition, it’s faster to my ears, naturally weighted while the EA1000 sounds a hint boosted. The midrange of the Origin is closer, more melodic and better for vocals in my opinion. I also would say that details are better on the Origin in this region. The EA1000 simply has more dynamism and is slightly more colored in the upper midrange that can get shouty at times whereas the Origin usually keeps a tighter rein on shoutiness. Timbre wins on the Origin sounding more lifelike to me. The Origin alos has thicker note weight by a tiny margin and comes across more organic. The treble of the EA1000 is a hint more boosted and vivacious to the less energetic but also more refined Origin. The EA1000 has a better chance of treble sharpness and fatigue whereas the Origin is bright but never really crosses that line. Both have fantastic treble regions for single DD’s and both are extended well with good detail retrieval. Remember these are the slightest differences, I cannot stress this enough. This is hours of going back and forth.

Technicalities ​

I feel that the two of these sets are both technically astute and very clean across the mix. However, the Origin does detail retrieval a bit better due to the clarity, transient swiftness and better balance. Again, take nothing away from the EA1000 because it illuminates the minutiae very well too. Imaging is great on both sets though separation is a hair easier to delineate on the Origin. Also, the Origin has a larger stage with depth that is easier to hear for me.

Final thoughts ​

I hate these comparisons. Mostly because I forget to actually critically listen as I get lost in the joy at times. I truly love both iems. I feel both have their reasons to be thought of as the “better” set. Personally, I enjoy the Origin’s display a bit better but that is probably the honeymoon talking. Also, the 2nd I put the EA1000 in my ears that thought shifts to its favor so… This probably didn’t help you at all and for that I apologize. Maybe the EA1000 was the wrong set to compare for me. Anyways, the deciding factor for you may be the more dynamic sound of the EA1000 or the more balanced and kempt sound of the Origin. The Origin simply feels less cluttered, less sprightly energy particles floating around the sound field at the edge of notes. The Origin is a hint more glass lined at the contour of its notes. Listening over long periods will likely be a bit more fatiguing on the EA1000 as well. However, the EA1000 seems a bit more fun. I love em’ both.

Shanling MG600 ($599)​

The Shanling MG600 is one of those sleeper sets from late 2022 that simply blew me away for a time being (MG600 Review). The MG600 is a single 10mm dynamic driver with an aluminum-magnesium diaphragm and is one of Shanling series where they practice using more unique driver materials. A cool concept and a cool set. Yes, the MG600 is quite a bit more in price than the Origin, however this doesn’t mean it’s better. Also, I don’t know if this is the best comparison, but it’s a good yard stick tool for the Origin.

Differences ​

First off, $600 against $260…that’s a difference. Past the price I am considering these the same price for this comparison. As far as the build, the MG600 has one of the most gorgeous and premium builds ever. The Shells are crafted from stabilized maple wood with a semi-open back faceplate. The Origin is just as I’ve stated all review, it’s built like an absolute tank. However, the MG600 is simply prettier. Nuff said. I love both designs and both builds but the MG600 looks like it costs a lot more, which should be expected. The MG600 has a much better modular cable, and the packaging is much more elaborate. Again, this should be expected.

Sound Differences ​

To begin the MG600 comes across warmer and definitely more V-shaped with brighter treble and more authoritative bass. Certainly a more fun V-shaped sound if V-shaped energetic big bass is what you consider fun. The Origin has a much better balance across the mix, better detailed and better control over the mix. The MG600 is only slightly easier to drive and both sets will pay off beautifully with a more powerful and more talented source.

Between the 20’s ​

The MG600 simply has that meaty bass but it is kept within tight reigns for its size. A very clean bass. The Origin has better bass definition and is better contoured. The Origin midrange is more forward, better for vocals of both males and females. However, the MG600 has the richer note weight of the two. MG600 has a more forward upper midrange which can get shouty. The MG600 has the better extended and more brilliant treble which can offer some fatigue for some folks. The Origin is all control and so it’s treble simply follows suit of the rest of the mix. Clean, defined, structured, while never losing control. The MG600 has very nice details in this region though the treble is also more brightly colored which focuses on more forced details rather than the natural sound and detail retrieval of the Origin.

Technicalities ​

Technically speaking the Origin wins out almost across the board. That balance and cleanliness does so much for technicalities. Detail retrieval is better, separation is slightly better as the MG600 can mask a bit with the bass emphasis as well as upper mid emphasis. The imaging on the Origin and the MG600 is very good. The stage is slightly wider in the Origin. Now, depth probably goes to the MG600 but that is up for debate. The MG600 is very clean for what it is but the Origin is tuned better for them.

Final thoughts​

Guys, this is an easy one if you are looking at which one is better for the price. I would say that if you have the money and want the most gorgeous iem out there (debatable) with a fun sounding V-shape and pretty clean for what it is than the MG600 may be the way to go. Believe me it has its redeeming qualities that doesn’t show up in a comparison. You’d have to actually listen to know. The Origin is much less expensive and out duels the MG600 in many key metrics. The Origin has a much more organic and natural tuning but the MG600 is probably a bit more fun. Again, I love both sets but if it was my money (which it is) than I’d choose the Origin every day of the week.

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Tanchjim Origin ratings below, that would be $200-$300 single dynamic driver earphones. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $200-$300 US single DD’s is a smaller scope of iems although it is extremely competitive, and so seeing a Rating above a “9.0” better mean something very special. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.5 Built exceptionally well.

–Look: 9.5 One of my favorite designs.

–Fit/Comfort 9.4 Wonderful fit, time tested.

–Accessories 8.4 Very nice unboxing.

–Overall: 9.1

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.7 Within the top class in timbre.

–Bass: 9.2 Clean, defined, precise, impactful, tight.

–Midrange: 9.6 The mids are great, vocals are nice.

–Treble: 9.2 Treble is clean, precise, non-offensive.

–Technicalities: 9.4 Technically a very fine set.

–Musicality: 8.9 Nice musicality against the competition.
–Overall: 9.3

Ratings Summary:​

Not much to explain here folks. All of these ratings are completely subjective and only can be garnered against what I’ve spent a ton of time with. Sets like the EA1000, BQEYZ Wind, BQEYZ Winter (both BQEYZ sets are +BC Driver), Dunu Falcom Ultra, Tanchjim Oxygen, Fiio FD5, Penon Vortex, Aune Jasper etc. etc. There’s many more single DD’s not mentioned which compete in the $200 to $300 price point which I cannot drum up at this moment, but these are the heavier hitters in my mind. I haven’t heard the Orivetti OD200 and a few others. So, it’s a decent scope of sets but it is pretty small by the hobby’s standards. Obviously, there are sets that I haven’t heard as well, so try to understand that. At any rate, friends… I went conservative on these ratings. From my perspective remember. Timbre might as well be a “9.9”, stuff like that. I gave it a “9.7”. Is there another single DD between $200 to $300 that has better timbre? I gave the Origin a “9.2” in bass basically based on its quality and not its quantity. The midrange is another that might as well be a “9.9” in my opinion. I take away points for my own reasons but all in all the Origin is a fantastic set and I don’t think there is anything I’d change about these ratings. I feel a “9.3” overall sound rating is justified. Some sets are more musical, some are more fun, some more dynamic. However, I do feel that the Origin seems to bring it all together very nice.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

As much as I love the Origin (I feel I’ve established that in this review), when answering the question “Is it worth the asking price?”, it is always a nuanced answer, especially when the set is a single DD costing more than $200. We all know that there are many single DD’s that are really special for far cheaper. I suppose it all comes down to your budget and what you value as… “worth it”. I cannot answer that for you. I would say that in the realm of single dynamic driver earphones which cost above $200 that for sure the Origin is worth it. However, maybe you could be more than happy with a Tripowin Olina, Simgot EA500, Simgot EA500LM, EPZ Q5, and the list goes on. Each of those sets are under $100. So yes, this is a nuanced question. That all said, in light of the current landscape of plus $200 single DDs which have begun cropping up of late, I couldn’t with a right mind say that the Tanchjim Origin isn’t well worth the asking price. It is a very well-tuned iem. Nevertheless, it is your money and there are also some fantastic iems for much less with only incremental differences from this latest Tanchjim product. Still, folks pay a lot for incremental differences. This is the only hobby where an inch might as well be a mile.

The Why… ​

Because the Tanchjim Origin is an exceptionally built iem with one of the best designs I’ve seen. It is strikingly gorgeous, and if I may be frank… the Origin is flat-out dope! Let’s not get things twisted, this set looks as premium as premium gets apart from encasing it in diamonds and gold. It is very well done. That’s my opinion though, you may not agree. The sound is the best reason though. It’s the sound which brings us together. Coincidentally, it’s also the sound (the music) that any of us are here in the 1st place. You have a clean sounding low-end with tight transients, dense enough body, visceral and energetic impact as well as perfectly fitting against the rest of the mix. The midrange is wonderful for vocals of all kinds. Its timbre is natural throughout with speedy enough note decay, good separation and a very well laid out sound field with good imaging and layering. The treble is non-offensive but still luminous and somewhat brilliant too. The treble also has good body to notes as it doesn’t sound dry, papery or too analytical. All in all, the Tanchjim Origin is a very nice mix of technically proficient and musical. The stage is big for an in-ear (above average), and the sound is well detailed. However, the best part of the Origin’s sound is in how it all comes together. A very well-done single DD iem. If it fits your tuning preferences than you’ll probably agree that the Origin is worth the asking price.

Full review can be found HERE

Conclusion ​

To conclude my full written review of the Tanchjim Origin I want to thank you for reading and I do hope it has helped you in making a purchasing decision. I waited to proclaim that in my opinion the Origin is certainly one of the best single DD’s that money can buy under $300. Depending on how it fits you, you might say it is the best. Personally, I haven’t heard one better. That’s with my love affair and affinity for the Simgot EA1000. This is certainly a rec from me. However, I can see how others may not enjoy it as much and that is the beauty of the hobby folks.

Other perspectives ​

Please do yourself a favor and read, listen to, or watch other reviews of the Tanchjim Origin. Don’t simply take my word for it. I can only represent my subjective opinion and others may not see things the way that I do. In fact, I know others don’t always agree with me. So, I hope you do your homework a bit and learn as much as you can. I’m not the last word on audio and simply a fan who likes to talk about it. Please take good care, stay as safe as you can and always… God Bless.