Thanks! You've just nudged me into seriously contemplating my first IEM buy beyond $30 in years—non-KZ/CCA too. I could get a pair for ~$56 with free shipping. Perhaps I could knock it down even further with vouchers and such...
The arrays are a very smart idea to me. They can work similar to a string section in an orchestra - a beautiful smooth blended sound where several slightly different voices coming together in unison. Odd (harsher peaks) are diminished or canceled out by blending.
; and I am sure KZ did an acoustic design of the array.I transitioned from my CCA CKX to my TRI Starseas because they are more resolving. I can only attribute that to their use of Knowles and their own in-house HF BA driver. If they tune a number of drivers in a BA driver array to help smooth the peaks and troughs in their overall response while building gain through multiple drivers, then this is an absolutely fantastic idea. As far as I can tell, this is not what they have done. I know that is definitely not what they did in the CCA CKX, as denoted by the severe peak gain in the treble. Maybe they'll spend some time retuning their BA arrays to make their frequency response build more sensibly for a pro model, that's always a possibility, but their current graphs look... ...scary. my personal opinion on the matter: I love rooting for an underdog to sweep the market with a comparatively inexpensive solution. It's why I do still really like my CCA CKX. A bit of tip rolling and EQ and they do sound fantastic, way better than they really have any right to at that price point, but when you move more upmarket and your pricing treads on TRI's stuff but your graphs look way scarier than the obvious competition in the Starseas, you're not doing yourself any favors. And the worst part is that the tech they're using is really, really cool and has loads of potential. 3D printed sound tubes are such a cool bit of tech, especially in a sub-$150 product with this many drivers, but they don't appear to be capitalizing on what they've put into them in meaningful ways that would make it a more universally appealing product. What is more injurious to their cause is that this isn't even their first foray into multi-driver 3D printed sound tube IEMs. They've been doing it on their other IEMs which feature generally more reasonable FR graphs. I want them to succeed and really push into the Chi-fi mid-fi market in a big way, I really do, but the ASF doesn't seem like it'll do that in its current revision. That's why I'm so critical.The arrays are a very smart idea to me. They can work similar to a string section in an orchestra - a beautiful smooth blended sound where several slightly different voices coming together in unison. Odd (harsher peaks) are diminished or canceled out by blending.
BAs are easier to tune and to make sound as intended by design compared to violins
That also brings the point of Bellsings (or KZ-modified/developed versions of BAs) that you mentioned in another thread.
Bellsing BAs were used to be less dampened compared to Knowles and Sonion ones, that made them sound comparatively as steel vs. synthetic strings.
Yet, less dampened BAs are more agile with the faster response time (and hence details and resolution), and their arrays can be great for the best combination of resolution and less harshness.
I personally came to KZ from Fiio (F9 pro, FH1), where they used Knowles. I do prefer simple CA4 to FH1. Last year I got few Knowles and Sonion-based BA designs to compare "what I may miss" - these expenses taught me that I still can be very happy with KZ/CCA
Knowles 29689 is really great for the crystal clear midrange. KZ is yet to get this in "their mids" (if they opt to from their V-shape preferences). For the rest of the range KZ is doing perfectly fine to me, their recent "new generation" bass BA is really great, in my opinion/preference.
My ASX with the wide nozzles (replaced those mind-boggling sound-striangulating original narrow ones) work really great to my taste. For instance, I got recently Aria(2) out of curiosity, Aria is a nice design with a very well thought acoustic signature, yet less resolving and less fun to my ears.
Campfire actually used some Bellsings in their IEMs, as it was mentioned in the lawsuit of Knowles.
Hi, here is the FR of the CSN with the BA disconnected (XUN only). I also have the FR of the CSN with the BA and the DQ6 plotted here. Guess which is which. This result is more than interesting and confirmed my speculation is right. I also tested with my ears.
It is not exactly like this. I am not 100% sure but the 30095 makes up about 5% of the overall sound and the RC circuit together with the impedance of the 30095 actually cuts the response of the XUN. One of my units was wired incorrectly but I couldn't pick up any difference meaning the 30095 almost makes no sound. Both the CSN and the DQ6 I consider them very odd in design. There is a very tiny hole for the 30095 to transmit the sound to the nozzle so the volume is really low. Afterall the XUN is such a full frequency driver which needs very little tonal addition.
I do not have either CKX or Starseas.
Not sure about the accuracy, but BGGAR noted the mid bass hump is KX trying to compesate BA bass to be on par with DD bass
Been really hesitant to get this set for the exact same reason. Tried EQing my IEMs to simulate the roll-off and that's not too nice.
