Intro
So far, I've been more familiar with SoundMagic's in-ears and am an obvious fan of the E11 in particular.
In fact, there are even some sonic parallels to the company's flagship over-ear model, the HP1000, especially in the bass and midrange, although (to preface this) I appreciate the E11 more for its tonal consistency.



Handling
As expected, the build quality is very good considering the price. I like the simple and slim design, which conveys value and also confirms this haptically. Plastic and aluminum form an attractive symbiosis here.

The comfort is very pleasant due to the soft PU leather (sheepskin) ear pads. Despite the noticeable weight of the headphones, they nestle very well against the head and can also be worn for several hours without any problems. The space inside the ear pads is ample and with the adjustable headband, the HP1000 should fit any anatomical requirements.

The HP1000 comes in a hardcover case along with a cloth pouch, a detachable 3.5mm cable with 6.3mm adapter as well as extension and a 4.4mm upgrade cable. The connection is a bit unusual and looks like a banana jack of a speaker cable split in the middle. Still, the connection is secure and without restrictions.

The isolation is certainly not a selling point and is quite permeable in both directions, which does not really do justice to a closed headphone.



Sound
Bass
In the bass range, the HP1000 is quite balanced, with a slight mid-bass focus. It is not interested in making any bass head claims, but mostly stays in a focused, neutral base posture with pleasant warmth. For me, it is quite well proportioned within the signature and generally does not tend to exaggerate. Sometimes he even lets it go a bit too restrained for my taste. In contrast, however, on rare occasions it is too present in the upper bass and slightly boomy.
A very solid, balanced bass with a warm note, with slight wobbles.

Mids
Basically, the mids are very detailed and of the somewhat brighter variety in the upper range, but slightly warmed up in the basement. This bears the risk of not always acting tonally correct. Voices can sound a bit thin around the top in some cases and fade into the background or sound a bit muffled and too warm. In general, the mids lack a bit of effervescence here and there, but this also depends a lot on the instruments used and their arrangement. For example, guitars tend to have a full character, but violinists or pianos do not always have the desired physicality or an authentic timbre.
Here, the HP1000 turns out to be a bit of a grab bag for my taste and seems somewhat inconsistent as a result. This means that the HP1000's mids can be breathtaking on the one hand, but on the other hand there are also moments where the timbre could be judged as simply off the mark. This is where getting used to the sound plays a role above all. The more you are willing to give the HP1000 some time, the more the mids will unfold their magic, but the tonal fluctuations will always accompany you.

Trebles
The trebles are mainly present in the lower range and around 10 kHz. This ensures that sibilants and sharpness are minimized, but as with the mids, there is a bit of a feeling of not always being on the right track tonally. The emphasis in the upper range can seem a bit artificial, and substance is sometimes lacking. Thus, some songs sound rather slightly brightened and overdrawn in the absolute high frequencies than that the level increase also brings an added value in terms of content. I would gladly trade some "brilliance" for airiness and fullness.

Stage
This is clearly where the HP1000's strength lies. For a closed headphone, the stage extension is enormous and clearly extends beyond the head. However, this is not true to the same extent in the deep.

Imaging
Basically, the HP1000 draws a fine and well-divided 3D image. Even though the X-axis seems much more lush than the Y- or Z-axis, the amount of space and its use surprises one again and again. However, the instrument placement could be a bit more accurate and sharper separated in some cases. Nevertheless, the HP1000 is technically very well positioned and more than lives up to its price tag.



Outro
The HP1000 impresses above all with its stage extension. This is definitely comparable to an open design and is clearly the HP1000's strength. However, you sometimes get the feeling that musical content gets a bit lost in the expanse.

Tonally, the HP1000 can be a bit of a grab bag and in some cases act a bit too thin and uninspired or as a contrast too warm and a bit dull. That's complaining on a high level, but still ensures that I can't give the headphones my complete trust musically, which limits them somewhat for me in daily use and it always takes some getting used to at the beginning in any case. Technically, however, the headphones definitely convince me and those who have their preferences in this area and can put up with the one or other tonal fluctuation should risk an ear.

Thanks to SoundMagic for providing the test headphones.

___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.6
Sound: 8.5

Intro​

New IEM companies keep sprouting up and it's hard to keep track of them all. SEEAUDIO is one of them, and with the YUME they want to fight for a place on the market in the middle class. With the NEO or KAGUYA they still have slightly higher priced models, but the YUME more or less represents the "door opener" in the highly competitive IEM market up to $200. There are already three models of this in-ear, which have been adapted depending on the market (tuning) (Japan - ANOU and a YUME-HK version). The standard YUME is available everywhere, the other two only in the respective country/state.

The YUME is a hybrid, consisting of a DD and 2BA. In the run-up one could already examine some graphs, which looked very promising, but do these advance laurels also confirm in the listening test?

Handling​

The YUME is already one thing, damn comfortable. The shape of the case is very ergonomic and also due to the compact size, there should be little difficulty in achieving a good fit and thus a very good seal. The included tips also contribute to this, which have paid off just as quickly for me with other IEMs. Especially the silicone tips, which are available in 4 different sizes. The same selection of foam tips is also provided.

The cable (8-core, 2-pin, copper) is haptically very appealing and the round transport case is also wisely chosen. The packaging is perhaps a bit too big, but you eat with your eyes. Fortunately, the anime was not also transported onto the faceplate, but a somewhat simpler, but quite decorative design was chosen.

In a nutshell: the YUME is haptically and workmanship-wise on a very high level, without any noticeable weaknesses.

Sound​

The key words for the YUME are clean and clear. Even if one could accuse it of being boring, it is for me one of the tonally best in its price range (especially in the mids).

The bass is not necessarily a force of nature, rather a breeze. Sure, a more powerful punch and authority could certainly have been gotten out of the dynamic driver, but that was apparently not the tuning goal with the YUME. The bass has a sub-bass emphasis, but it looks more promising on the sheet paper (graph) than it sounds. On the one hand, this is certainly due to the fact that many pop, rock or acoustic mixes emphasize more the mid-bass to create a more fun punch, or the selected instruments do not really reproduce the sub-bass. On the other hand, the YUME is almost deathly flat in the upper and mid-bass, which makes it almost anemic and sterile, and the sub-bass can hardly get anything out of this. It lacks musicality and a bit of dynamics, so to speak. At times, it reminds me more of a clean and precise BA bass (but with better depth) than a dynamic driver. This is certainly a major point of criticism for many, as this very presentation cannot be perceived as particularly lively and rather monotonous. It simply lacks some warmth and punch, but the bass makes up for it with accuracy and speed. Likewise, I find it quite detailed when you get into it. Still, it's a bit too little level in that area for me. The sound quality can't be denied, but it doesn't peddle it.

The mid-range is the YUME's sweet spot. Clear, transparent and tonally very authentic, describes the listening experience very well. While they may lack a bit of bass impact to make them a bit fuller, I find them close to my ideal as is (the MOONDROP S8, for example, would be an IEM that comes even closer). There is actually little to criticize the YUME for here tonally, but also technically. On the one hand, the slight coldness and here and there it lacks a bit of body and power, but that is ultimately a matter of taste. Above all, I like the reproduction of instruments. No matter if piano, brass or guitars, everything sounds very realistic and clean, almost too clear, which brings us back to the topic of "sterile". Voices have a natural timbre and you quickly get lost in the vocals, no matter if woman or man.

The treble is handled by the "bugaboo", the KNOWLES 33518 (identical in construction to the 300095). Why bugaboo? Many budget IEMs use BELLSING, or KZ variations of the Knowles driver, which are often poorly implemented and the driver has fallen somewhat into disrepute. Unjustly, actually, because if you are able to take the sharpness out of it and dampen it a bit, you get a very detailed airy high frequency with a fine resolution. The YUME manages this very well. The high-frequency sounds neither cheap nor artificial, but very grown-up. It lacks a bit in extension, which was deliberately cut, but I am very pleased with the tuning work in the treble range. Sibilants are thankfully in short supply and even if the YUME sometimes sounds a bit brighter than it should, it works cleanly and consistently in the treble. To dispel the prejudice: the 30095 can be an excellent tweeter BA if you have the tuning know-how and, above all, the will to apply it. It is not for nothing that the driver is also found in many TOTL IEMs. Nevertheless, of course, the treble is also not perfect and especially in the upper range goes a bit out of air, but for me the two BAs (29689 & 33518) harmonize very well with each other.

Even through these two BAs, the technical characteristics are remarkable. The stage has a lush extension and likewise the imaging is excellent. If now the bass would develop a little more pressure from below, you could certainly create an even better layering and a more rounded overall picture, but for my sensation the YUME perform here really very well.

Outro​

Is it fun to listen to music with the YUME? Well, that is in the eye of the beholder. For some, it may be too unmusical or even emotionless. Sometimes, however, it is precisely this sober observation that is so appealing. The YUME is serene, without mood swings, no matter what you put in front of it and it has to plow.
In other words, the YUME is quite honest, and you either appreciate that or prefer to be wooed. I waver back and forth with the YUME, sometimes with the fervent wish that the YUME flatters my ears more, or slams me in the face with even more brutal facts, like I'm used to from a Moondrop Blessing 2 (which, by the way, is also not my first choice in everyday life). The YUME couldn't quite match its resolution, but you can definitely talk about its little brother here. The Blessing 2 (B2) is more neutral in the bass (but still more physical) and has the greater extension in the treble. Nevertheless, the two IEMs are tonally very similar, especially in the midrange. Here, the point even goes to the YUME for my taste, as it doesn't bring the slight garishness of the B2 and generally plays in a more relaxed manner, but can keep up in detail and separation.

For me, the YUME is a very competent IEM that does a lot right, but not perfectly. Frankly, I find it lacking by a few dB in the bass from 200 Hz. Also due to the somewhat emotionless presentation, it is certainly not a general recommendation, especially for the mainstream, but it is a fantastic addition to the IEM collection (if you are looking for some diversity in signatures here) and one of the most tonally authentic of its guild (midrange). However, not necessarily something for everyday use or in between. Musicians and producers might even rather enjoy the neutral and realistic playing style of the YUME.

Thanks to OARDIO for the review unit.
https://www.oardio.com/see-audio-yume-anou-iem-global-worldwide-international-earphones.html


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.8
Sound: 8.7

Intro​

THIEAUDIO has quickly grown into an established company. Probably the most decisive reason for this is the tuner(s) behind the models, who always has the tonality in mind, but can also technically get a lot out of the chosen drivers. Despite different signatures, the individual models are mostly aimed at the general listening habits without great experiments (I exclude the Voyager 3).
The company (which is run under the patron Linsoul) knows how to convince in almost all price categories from 100$. However, I assume that a budget model (perhaps a single-DD) will be added to the portfolio in the future.

But back to the essentials. The LEGACY 4 is the fourth and currently newest representative of the series, alongside the L3, L5 & L9. Who has been missing with the L3, or L5 some energy in the upper mids and treble, gets this now with the L4. For me, an absolute value and tonal, but also technically a fantastic IEM in its price class.

Handling​

IEM case in an accessory case (on-ear format), again in a box packaging. Unpacking the LEGACY 4 is a bit reminiscent of a matryoshka. The lush accessory case in particular is very unusual and of limited use when traveling, unless you want to take your portable DAC collection and 10 cables with you. "Unfortunately" the inlay is not removable and so you are somewhat limited in its use (toiletry bag, makeup case, Ü-egg collection...).
Nevertheless, this is of course nice to look at and makes a high-quality impression.

Yes, posh is the way the world goes down. The tip selection (exclusively silicone of one type in 3 different sizes with 2 pairs each) is presented impaled on a metal plate. The silver-plated cable is in the IEM storage case, along with a SIM card remover for dip switch adjustment.
The 8-core cable is quite good, though I found the cables of the L3 and V3 more satisfying to the touch. Likewise, I would have liked a 2.5mm (balanced) cable with a 3.5mm adapter. In this case, it is "only" a standard 3.5mm stereo connector. However, that can be changed with an extra $54, which is a bit high for my taste.

The L4 has a classic custom-style design and is extremely comfortable to wear. In addition to the ergonomics, the low weight and the size are also beneficial. Compared to the Moondrop Blessing 2, for example, it has much narrower sound openings and doesn't seem as bulky, which makes it suitable for smaller ears as well. The faceplate and body can be customized for a surcharge.

The workmanship is without complaint and the isolation is also quite good. However, you can't expect absolute shielding, since outside noise can penetrate better through the air vent for the bass. Nevertheless, the isolation is in a good range, even without music.

The L4 can also be made as a custom (CIEM). For this service, you pay $70 more if you can provide an ear impression.

Sound​

The Legacy 4 has a warm fundamental tone with warm/neutral mids and slight brightness in the treble, which gives it a fresh but relaxed signature that takes its cues from HARMAN. In other words, a tuning suitable for the masses, which turns out to be a sovereign all-rounder and also invites closer listening due to the good technical characteristics. The description of the sound is based on the switch setting 0|1.

The low frequency is covered by a dynamic driver and scores with an extended bass and punch. However, it doesn't hit dry and too hard, but retains a certain softness that reflects a natural response of the bass and doesn't seem anemic or sterile. On the contrary, the bass adds warmth to the signature, which, however, does not contribute to falsification, but rather creates more of a natural body and solid foundation. The bass can provide fun depending on the genre and mix, but never overdoes it and does not fall apart even in faster passages. Still, I would like to see a bit more texture and precision. The low end is very reminiscent of the L3, though the L4 sounds a My tidier and tighter.

The similarity to the L3 cannot be denied in the mids either. Here, the bass (DD) harmonizes well with the midrange (BA), resulting in a warm/neutral tonality.
Since the L4 has a bit less level in the upper bass in contrast to the L3, the mids seem a bit clearer and not quite as voluminous, but this is also strongly influenced by more level in the upper midrange. This makes them sound a bit fresher and a bit more in-your-face, but without becoming garish or unpleasant. I particularly like the midrange's balancing act between assertiveness and simultaneous relaxation with tonal accuracy. Instruments sound natural and voices have a correct timbre, even if they sound perhaps a tiny bit brighter than neutral.

This is due to the treble, which has a peak just around 5 kHz that gives voices presence, which might be too much for some. However, this falls within an absolutely tolerable range for me. I like the gained effervescence and also the created airiness. Since the treble does not veil very much, the music should be mixed well, otherwise it can quickly become a bit tinny with cymbals, for example, and the treble sounds more unclean than it is. As I said, however, this is then clearly a weakness of the music material, since the L4 is quite uncompromising in the high frequencies. It lacks a bit of extension and level in the overtones, but still the brilliance does not come up short and will leave if only absolute treble fanatics with a disillusioned look. Personally, I even find the treble to be the absolute strength of the L4, which basically also sets it apart from the L3 and gives it more added value.

Technically, the L4 is very solidly positioned and more than commensurate with its price tag. It creates a light out-of-head experience with very good separation and layering. Listening to music with the L4 is fun not only because of the good tonality and punchy foundation, but also because of fine details that are very easy to locate and always keep you entertained and interested. The 4 drivers harmonize with each other and can play to their respective strengths. Yes, you can hear that BA drivers are responsible for the midrange and treble, but not because this area sounds unnatural, but just the advantages of the driver type come to the fore.

Switch - the L4 is equipped with 2 dip switches on the housing. Similar to the L3, however, the first switch is practically useless and a sonic change requires some imagination.
The second switch, however, makes an audible difference and is a nice tool to modify the sound according to one's preferences. I personally favor the 0|1 setting, as it brings more balance to the signature. In the 0|0 setting, the L4 goes more in the "V" direction with more level in the bass and treble. For me, it then becomes slightly unpleasantly spiky and the mids recede a bit more into the background. Nevertheless, this setting can provide added value for rock music, for example.

Outro​

For me, the Legacy 4 is an IEM that not only plays tonally on a very high level due to its, to say the least, balanced mainstream tuning with a slight brightness, but also doesn't have to be accused of much technically. Whoever decides to buy the L4 will also have a lot of fun with the IEM beyond the new-toy bonus, because in addition to its all-rounder qualities, it also brings the necessary pinch of sensitivity to make audiophile hearts beat faster.
The L4 is for me the symbol of the middle class with features of the upper class. Of course, you won't find absolute resolution, scalpel-sharp separation or excessive extension at both ends in the L4, but that would also be a (wishful) TOTL-IEM, which is much more expensive.
What must be credited to the L4, however, is the authentic, refreshing and natural playing style with fine details and level stability. Tonally without gross blunders, even if certainly not neutrally tuned and in addition an extremely long-term reliable IEM, which delivers an outstanding overall package and brings out the clear advantages of a hybrid IEM.

If you like it a bit more crisp and technical and want to focus more on neutrality instead of musicality, you should take a look at the SEEAUDIO YUME in the same price range, which is also an amazing value.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.5
Sound: 7.3

Intro​

After the two ("expensive") full-BA models (ASF & ASX) that were clearly behind expectations, KZ is getting back to the price segment and market they have always been able to dominate and hold their own in in an impressive way. Even if their model policy and especially its variance is questionable, they always manage to bring good budget IEMs to the market and satisfy the average music consumer with a strong price-performance ratio.

The DQ6 is now supposed to strike in the same notch as well. What is certainly special here is the return to the company's origins through the exclusive use of dynamic drivers (3). This lets us hope for good tonality and, in the best case, better technical characteristics than with the EDX. Let's see

Handling​

The KZ DQ6 has quite good ergonomics and seems very robust. However, I don't like the modular cabinet design, which consists of at least 3 parts including the sound outlet, as this results in more gaps than with 2-piece units (body and faceplate). This system was already used in the ASX du ASF, which are much wider and clunkier than the DQ6. This one is comfortable to wear and the isolation is also very good. I also like to use the supplied transparent silicone tips for other IEMs, since they fit me (at least the medium size) excellent and seal properly.

About the accessories is KZ-typically few words to lose. Except for the silicone tips which I see as an enrichment of my collection, we still get an average cable that serves its purpose.

Sound​

You can hear immediately that the DQ6 does not have a BA driver under the hood, because it does not have the metallic basic timbre of many KZ/CCA models, which I find on the one hand as a positive, but I still lose something technically. Not quite as drastically as the EDX, which admittedly belongs together with the DQ6 to the tonally better KZ-IEMs, but technically just does not act on a particularly good level. This destroys a lot, because a good tonality alone is not enough, even if it already makes a lot of difference. The DQ6 sounds a bit like a good UE boombox, where it's more about punchy bass, with recessed mids and from time to time a bit unpleasant in the highs, especially when you turn it up.

The bass is of the punchy variety but unfortunately not the fastest, which then becomes quite noticeable. That makes it not particularly precise and somewhat opaque, since I can't follow bass notes exactly, but rather get a bass ground mass in front of me. Still, I find it a fun alternation for bass-hungry tracks. I also like the physicality, which I appreciate in a good V-signature. Lots of steam behind it, but sometimes a bit out of control, unfortunately.

The mids are a bit more of a problem for me, they are not bad tonally at all, but lack transparency and detail. They are set back a good amount, which makes voices slightly fade into the background. In addition, they sound a bit dull and warmed up by the bass. As with the EDX, I have a bit of a feeling of consuming a jumble of music rather than making out a clear delineation of instruments.

The treble doesn't have the basic metallic timbre of many KZ models and sounds much more natural and not artificially boosted, but sibilants still annoy me from time to time and I would wish for more brilliance. The trebles did a solid job, but didn't stand out in a positive or negative way. Although, it does stick out to a moderate extent, which can diminish the audibility.

Technically, the DQ6 is not a total failure, but here it falls a bit short and one longs for the KZ-BAs, which do not always sound completely accurate, but can contribute openness and transparency. As well as more detail, a wider stage or a more differentiated imaging (of course there are negative exceptions - ASF/ASX) . You shouldn't expect more than good average from the DQ6.

Outro​

The DQ6 does what it is supposed to do: Deliver music to our ears. It does this with solid tonality, but completely lacks technical features that make the music interesting and lively. The comparison of a good Bluetooth speaker with emphasized bass reproduction is not that wrong. The bottom line is that the DQ6 is an average IEM with a good level of comfort, but it does not play above its price range and is certainly not made for detail fanatics and music virtuosos. Therefore, it clearly lacks speed and precision. In the gym, or as background sound, but quite suitable.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.2
Sound: 7.2


Intro
CVJ didn't take too much time to launch two new products. The CSE and MIRROR represent the company's new line-up and are meant to follow up on the debut successes of the CSA and CS8 (I'm excluding the CSN here).
For me, rather a shot in the oven as far as the CSE is concerned, since the CSA (with which the CSE competes in the budget segment), sounds much more mature and natural and does not try to artificially suggest things that have no substance.

Handling
The CSE is a typical budget IEM, sharing a similar body with many other models in the price category, such as the KBEAR LARK, KZ ZSN (PRO), etc. This fit has been proven for several years and wears comfortably. The CSE does not appear particularly valuable (also due to the plastic faceplate), but it still makes a robust and durable impression. The faceplate even feels quite interesting haptically due to the ribbing.

The accessories are not particularly lush and are limited to the most necessary, such as 3 pairs of silicone tips and a budget cable, as known from TRN, or BQEYZ. However, we still get a useful cloth bag for storing the IEMs.

The isolation is good and can be further reinforced with foam tips.

Sound
If the CSE is supposed to be the successor of the CSA, then a lot has gone wrong. An admittedly somewhat too warmly tuned IEM (CSA) with a good tonality was bred up to a mid-range and treble testosterone monster, which is completely lost the naturalness.

I would have liked the bass of the CSE in the MIRROR (at least in terms of quantity). It would not make sense to sing the praises of the bass performance of the CSE, because it is good, especially in the budget range, but nothing more. It concentrates more on its area of responsibility and doesn't press the mids so hard. To be honest, that's also difficult in this case, but at least the lower mids remain equally largely unimpressed. Bass performance is actually quite solid on all CVJ models, and so the CSE's bass also scores with an appealing texture and firmness, but without the very greatest dynamics.

The CSE is a bit of a screamer. It's not as bad as the graph would suggest, but the CSE pretty much loses everything that could be considered natural in the midrange. The good clarity here is dearly bought and, to me, out of proportion. The mids lack body and sound overly bright. Here it makes sense to experiment with the Micro-Tape (3M) (2/3 coverage of the sound opening), but the treble is quite unimpressed by the mod, which can then become a problem.

The treble brings a similar high energy as the MIRROR. However, since the relationship with the mids is a different one, the sibilants and tinny are not quite as noticeable at first, but you can quickly tell where the fish stinks here as well, even though the mids naturally do their part as well.
I find the treble artificial and exhausting. There aren't many more words to say here then. Yes okay, they are quite airy and you can't deny a certain transparency either, but nothing sounds natural here and it stings and hisses constantly.

The stage shows upwards quite open and also the stereo image fits. However, there is a lack of depth and honestly, the "technical" capability of the CSE seems artificially created. Clearly, one should not expect miracles from a budget model, but especially in the segment for small purses, I think that more emphasis should be placed on a correct tonality than on technical features without substance.

Outro
I really hoped for something more from CVJ's new releases. The CSE in particular, which I see as a bit of a successor to the CSA, really only needed to subtly tweak a few screws to become an excellent budget IEM. A little less bass here, a little more treble there, done. The result, however, is an overly bright and unnatural-sounding IEM that sounds highbrow and is supposed to artificially create details and tension, which it does not succeed on.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.5
Sound: 7.3

Intro
The MIRROR represents the current flagship of the company after the CSN and goes a sonically very interesting, in theory very appealing way. However, the potential was unfortunately wasted here and so the MIRROR even draws the short straw for me against the CS8, even if it actually has more to offer tonally.

Handling
Visually, I associate the MIRROR more with a penguin wing than with a mirror, but this IEM is probably the most discreet and at the same time the most appealing of the series in terms of design. It looks like it was cast from one piece, is compact and wears very comfortably. In addition, the robust construction makes the MIRROR a value both visually and haptically.

The accessories are not particularly lush and are limited to the most necessary, such as 3 pairs of silicone tips and a budget cable, as is also known from TRN, or BQEYZ. However, we still get a useful cloth bag for storing the IEMs.

The isolation is good and can be further reinforced with foam tips.

Sound
CVJ fortunately tries to stand out a bit from the budget chi-fi market by tuning their IEMs. The MIRROR has a fairly flat signature that is more akin to "neutrality" in parts. However, for my taste, they don't manage to eradicate the typical maladies and are not quite consistent with the (apparent) basic idea either.

The bass puts its focus on the mid-bass, which gives it a good punch. However, this is partly also a bit dry and not particularly organic. Certainly a matter of taste. In terms of quantity, I'm more than satisfied and would even welcome a few dB less to play up more neutrally here and give the mids a bit more sparkle. The bass has a pretty good texture and is not limited to a one-note bass. Bassheads certainly won't be happy here, but for me it also hangs in the air a bit, as it seems they couldn't decide where they wanted to go with the bass. The speed is certainly worth highlighting, even if it would like to be a bit crisper and could resolve better.

The mids are somewhat overshadowed by the bass, which brings more energy to the mid-bass in particular than the overall mids. But I don't find that too bad, because I generally like somewhat warmer mids and associated with it a usually somewhat more intimate voice presentation. The MIRROR often meets my taste exactly in midrange, even if I would sometimes like a bit more clarity. Still, I really appreciate that voices don't scream at me, but also don't disappear in the mix. To that end, they basically have a fairly natural timbre (even if the highs are more or less a destructive force of nature). Some might accuse them of a certain lifelessness, where I partly go along, but I don't always need a Himalayan plateau in the upper mids to be happy, on the contrary. Still, I'd like to see 2dB more around 2-3 kHz, or 2 dB less in the bass (60 - 200 Hz).

The treble is now the sword of Damocles for my ears with the MIRROR, because my listening happiness stops relatively abruptly when it goes into the higher frequencies and I only find fewer songs that I can listen to reasonably stress-free. Why the hell isn't the range around 6 - 9 kHz at least somewhat mitigated. Yes the peak is also a coupler resonance, which certainly amplifies the peak, however the energy in that range can't be dismissed either. Apart from the fact that I have seen such a pronouncement so far only with the MIRROR and maybe with the KBEAR LARK (seen in relation to the mids and the bass), the sibilant emphasis and associated sharp sibilants is not only annoying, but partly unenjoyable. This has nothing to do with treble extension, transparency or detail, as it simply sounds artificial and piercing. As is so often the case, a basically good signature is run into the ground again by an exaggerated high-frequency response (we're not talking about a special extension here, because this is rather average), or rather sent into space (Team Rocket sends its regards).Too bad, there was clearly more possible here.

The MIRROR has solid technical characteristics with an appealing imaging and a reasonable stage extension, which is still somewhat artificially extended by the exaggerated high tone. Reasonable for the price I would say.

Outro
The idea was good, the implementation less so, at least if you (like me) have a high sensitivity to sibilants and peaks, especially in the high frequencies. I welcome seeing an "experimental" signature under 50€ that deviates from the masses, but then they should have implemented it more consistently. Here was probably more the Asian market in mind, which appreciates a high-frequency emphasis significantly more or even requires it than others.

Unfortunately, even a micropore tape mod can't work wonders here and so only a drastic equalizer helps. With it the MIRROR can be bent then well to right, but that should not be the requirement.

My favorite of the CVJ series therefore remains the CSA.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.8
Sound:7.9



Intro
VALCO is a fairly unknown audio company from Finland that specializes in Bluetooth headphones and came out with their first model in November 2019. This review is about the successor model, which appeared in 2020.
Through the witty marketing as well as promotional posts on Facebook, you quickly realize that the company, especially Jasse Kesti (producer and sound engineer), doesn't take itself quite so first and thus earns sympathy points, because the VMK20, on the other hand, is not a joke, but a sophisticated Bluetooth headphone.
The sound of the VMK20 was tuned by Jasse Kesti, who also has a lot of experience from live mixing and is probably one of the best-known sound men for the studio and live events from Finland.

Advertising video



Handling

• Bluetooth: 5.0 APTX LL, SBC and AAC
• Chipset: Qualcomm QCC3008 with custom DSP setup
• ANC: Analog Devices Inc. (ADI) Active Noise Cancellation with 4 microphones
• Amplifier: Class AB Stereo elements: 40 mm
• Weight: 250g
• Battery: 1050 mAh
• Charging time: 2-3h, USB-C connector
• Battery time: up to 45 hours of constant listening on ANC, 40 hour on phone call
• Package includes all the necessary cables and dongles (3.5 mm, airplane adapter and USB-C charging cable)

Design-wise, the VMK20 is a pretty average looking contemporary that focuses more on functionality. Keep it simple, I think is a good approach and so I have little to complain about here. However, the ear pads are a bit small, so that my ear touches the inside of the case. This creates a somewhat unpleasant pressure in the long run, but it is still tolerable. Otherwise, the padding of the pads and the headband is comfortable and the VMK20 makes a robust impression despite the almost exclusively used plastic.
You have enough play as far as adjusting (click mechanism) the headband to the individual user is concerned and the contact pressure is moderate, which provides more for a secure fit than headaches.

Passive isolation isn't bad even without ANC, but is optimized a good bit more when activated, as the lower monotone frequencies are then filtered out, whether on the bus, train or street, and the stressful background noise (conversations, wind, traffic, etc.) is also curbed. However, one should not expect absolute isolation, but I always find it a blessing to be able to actively isolate oneself from outside noise, even if it is only a reduction of it.



Sound
Bass
In contrast to many other Bluetooth models, the VMK20 has a fairly balanced signature and does without a classic bass boost. This does take away from its fun factor somewhat, but the headphones are indeed also aimed more at the discerning music consumer and dare to take on even higher and more professional tasks.
However, the bass is not the crispest and acts a bit slow for my taste. Nevertheless, it finds a good compromise between quantity and quality. It is not anemic, but can deliver enough impact to every genre, as long as you don't expect a bass cannon. It satisfies me with the rating of "good", even if I wouldn't emphasize it much, since it's not the most consistent.

Mids
It's a similar story with the sound of the mids. These sometimes get a bit of bass pushed on them and are quite flat and restrained, but accurate. Some might call this unagitated and relaxed playing style boring, while others might call it authentic and natural. Admittedly, they are also a bit too weak on the chest for me, or I would wish for an even more restrained bass in this case, in order to play out the full strength of the detailed and tonally correct mids. Thus, the VMK20 leaves a few grains behind here, but still plays quite above average, especially in the Bluetooth category. I would wish for a bit more energy and liveliness, but I appreciate the mids all the more in quieter passages, where they do not necessarily have to assert themselves.

Trebles
The treble is the area that stands out for me, even though the VMK20 doesn't allow itself to fluctuate too much downwards or upwards, but performs well throughout.
It does have a few deficits in extension, but it is very detailed and resolves finely. It doesn't shove the details in your face unasked, but it doesn't want to withhold anything from the interested listener either. I find it most coherent and would wish for the same clarity from the mids and bass. It does not become unpleasant, but it will not really enhance worse recordings, which I find positive due to the more professional claim of the VMK20.

Stage
The stage can be described as average. It lacks a bit in depth and most of it takes place in the panorama image.

Imaging
The VMK20 doesn't really create a 3D feeling, but the separation works quite well, even if the VMK20 sometimes loses track in hectic passages and doesn't separate as sharply. Here you notice again that the mids in the upper range could have benefited from a few dB. Nevertheless, the VMK20 delivers a credible sound image, which, however, cannot distinguish itself with absolute transparency and seems rather more intimate.



ANC
ANC is no longer a special feature in Bluetooth headphones, but there are still significant differences in quality, on the one hand in terms of "isolation", but also how much the sound changes with ANC turned on.
SONY is certainly worth mentioning when it comes to unadulterated sound with ANC turned on.
With the VMK20, on the other hand, quite a bit happens when the button is activated. The bass loses presence, especially in the lower range, the mids sound a bit more "telephonic" and voices come more to the fore. This is a bit irritating when switching, but you also get used to the "new" sound after a while, although it sounds more falsified in comparison and no longer seems as homogeneous.

Cable
The VMK20 can also be operated with a classic 3.5mm connection (cable included). However, the sound then meets my taste less, because the bass gets more volume and pushes back the mids even more. You lose some resolution here and you notice that the drivers were tuned for Bluetooth mode (which makes sense). Still, I would have liked to see less sound compromise in wired mode.
ANC can also be used in wired mode, with the aforementioned sound changes.



Outro
The VALCO VMK20 is a somewhat different Bluetooth headphone that doesn't go the conventional route, but has a bit more of the audiophile market in mind.
As a result, the VMK20 is certainly not a fun headphone that blasts driving bass into our ears while playing sports, but rather focuses on the quieter, more relaxed tones and strives for a balanced signature where no frequency range particularly stands out. That doesn't always sound compellingly inspiring, and a bit more dynamics and peakedness certainly wouldn't look bad for the VMK20, but in return you get a fairly natural-sounding headphone that also cuts quite a fine figure on the couch. However, I would not dissect music with the VMK20, but that should not be its claim.

Despite the detailed and "refreshing" sound signature due to the rather neutral tuning in the Bluetooth world, I still have the feeling that a bit more would have been possible here sonically. With aptX LL, AAC, SBC, BT 5.0 and a decidedly long battery life (a good 40 hours with ANC), it doesn't let its guard down, at least in terms of basic technical requirements.

If you are looking for a more balanced Bluetooth over-ear and want to turn your back on the well-known bass and treble boosts, you should give it a try, since the price-performance ratio is not bad either, although APPLE should not be a role model here.

VALCO
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.7
Sound: 7.5



Intro
AVANTREE may not be a household name to everyone. They are a company that specializes in various audio products. They have some Bluetooth speakers, headphones (with and without Bluetooth), and IEMs in their portfolio. I haven't had many opportunities to test their products yet, so my experience with the company so far is rather modest. However, one thing that runs through their products like a common thread is the somewhat exaggerated bass emphasis, at least as far as their headphones and IEMs are concerned.

The ARIA ME is one of their latest BT over-ear models with some very interesting features. One of the special ones is probably the adaptation of the sound to the user's hearing ability, which is determined via APP using test frequencies.



Handling

• Bluetooth: 4.2
• Audio codecs: aptX-HD, aptX-LL, aptX, SBC, AAC
• Bluetooth profiles - HSP v1.2, HFP v1.7, AVRCP v1.6, A2DP v1.3.1
• Operating range: Class 2, up to 10 m
• Bluetooth pairing: up to 8 devices remembered by the ARIA ME
• Simultaneous Bluetooth connections: 2 mobile devices
• Driver unit size: 40 mm
• Speaker impedance: 32 Ohm ± 15%
• Frequency response: 20Hz-20KHz
• Battery capacity: 650 mAh
• Play time: ≤ 24 hours (ANC OFF); ≤ 15 hours (ANC ON).
• Standby time: approx. 35 days (ANC OFF).
• Product weight: 0.23 kg
• Inner diameter / depth of ear cushions: 6 x 4 cm / 3.5 cm
• Outer diameter of the ear pads: 10.1 x 8 cm

The ARIA ME is a typical BT headphone in terms of design, as it is often seen from other manufacturers. A quite functional design has prevailed here over the years and is picked up again and again.
It sits very comfortably, as the ear pads are neither too big nor too small and enclose my entire ear. Unfortunately, I do bump the inside slightly, which creates a bit of pressure in the long run.
The headband is quite sparsely padded, but in the end, this is not more elaborately made on the TEUFEL REAL BLUE, or SONY WH-1000XM3/4. However, there is one circumstance with the ARIA ME that I find somewhat annoying. The ARIA ME is not padded in the middle of the headband, as this is where the connectivity to the included headphone stand with built-in charging function is located. This ensures that the padding in the middle falls away and creates a solid point, which I also notice after a while (I'm not blessed with a particularly large amount of hair). But that's complaining on a high level, because the wearing comfort is good in total and I can also use the ARIA ME for several hours.

The generous battery life also ensures that. I easily get 18 hours (without ANC) at high volume. As a codec, the ARIA ME not only supports AAC and SBC, but also aptX (HD & LL), which ensures a higher data rate. BT 4.2 is no longer the current state of the art (BT 5.2), but I cannot detect any connection problems. Even with 2 walls in between, I still have a stable connection at about 10m (laptop).
Another nice feature is the use of the included "boom microphone", which can be connected via the 3.5 jack connector. This provides much better speech intelligibility and can also be useful for gaming and in the office.
In the scope of delivery we also get a 3.5 mm cable, a charging cable (USB-C) and a robust but plain hardcover case. The build quality is also good, even though the ARIA ME does not look particularly sophisticated. In return, I find the complete operation via push-buttons more pleasant than via touch because I subjectively find the haptic feedback more reliable.

The isolation is quite good on the inside even without ANC, but some noise penetrates to the outside world (at high volumes).
The ANC does a good job on the ARIA ME. The low, monotonous frequencies are filtered well and the entire sound is dampened, although not completely eliminated. However, I don't know of any ANC headphones that can currently do that, even though the SONY WH-1000XM4 does an amazing job. However, the ARIA ME is always good for isolating oneself from the hustle and bustle in the office or on the road. Nevertheless, there is a slight background noise when ANC is turned on, but I personally do not find it particularly annoying.

The ARIA ME can be personalized via APP (AVANTREE AUDIO APP) and the created audio profile can be loaded onto the headphones. This is then permanently implemented and available on every device. However, you cannot change the profile without the APP. If you want to delete it completely from the headphones, you have to reset the ARIA ME to the factory settings (+ & - button pressed simultaneously). Test tones (125 Hz, 250 Hz, etc.) are used to check how well you can hear certain frequencies and you turn down the volume until the test tone is barely audible. This is tested for the left and right ear.



Sound
Since the sound is even more subjective due to the individual adjustment of the sound to the hearing than without this option, I will briefly say a few words about the factory settings here. However, the review is then based on the sound adjustment to my hearing, even though cheating is possible here, of course. As far as possible, I tried to set the volume of the test tones to an absolute minimum, meaning when I virtually only suspect the noise.

Without this setting, I have to say that the ARIA ME would not have achieved this score. Likewise, the ARIA ME is one of those candidates that I like better (because it's thinner) with ANC turned on. Without ANC, it is very bass-driven out-of-the-box, which has too much presence in the upper bass and therefore also seems quite boomy and overloaded. The mids can hardly assert themselves and seem quite muffled and veiled. The trebles lack transparency as well as energy and basically the ARIA ME is more of a bass slingshot without the need to create a differentiated sound image. The addition of ANC tames the bass a bit and the mids come through better. Thus, you can guess that there is more to the ARIA ME than expected, and so personal sound customization now comes into play.

Bass
I can turn 125 Hz as well as 250 Hz completely to 0, because even then I still perceive these frequencies without problems. This shows well how these frequencies are already boosted in the house signature. However, the bass now sounds much more balanced and tight than without the modification. Still, it is not the fastest and sometimes a bit uncontrolled. It does have a good punch and doesn't lose its fun character, but it no longer pushes the mids as hard and a few more details can be elicited from it. As it is, it does a solid job, even if it would like to be a bit tighter and bring more sub-bass extension.

Mids
For the mids, I work my way up more and more on the tone generator in terms of volume. At 500 Hz, as with the bass, I don't have to add any level, and even at 1000 Hz it's only a small volume increase of maybe 10% until I perceive the sound (starting from 0). At 2 kHz it is already 20%.

Here perhaps my age-related loss of hearing abilities already comes into play, but it also shows me that out-of-the-box the ARIA ME (also due to the bass influence) has too little energy in the upper mids, which then makes them sound rather dull and lifeless. With the correction, they have much more playfulness and the sound clears up. I sometimes disagree when it comes to tonality, but basically they play rock solid now, even if they have slight deficits in separation. They are also still a bit too warm, but you quickly get used to that and the ANC mode (see below) can also help.
The ARIA ME is not a detail wonder, but enough information is provided for relaxed listening, movies, or audio books.

Trebles
This is where it really becomes clear what the ARIA ME lacked. Likewise, the weaknesses of my left ear are again demonstrated to me here, but I was already aware of them before. So 4 kHz get a boost of about 40%, 8 kHz and 12.5 kHz even about 60%. In contrast, on the right ear it is 30% at 4 kHz, 10% at 8 kHz and 40% at 12.5 kHz. To me, this shows that my right ear is much more sensitive around 8 kHz, but also that the ARIA ME generally needed a significant refresh in the high frequencies.

With the gained energy and transparency, the ARIA ME sounds much more lively, but remains relaxed. It's only very rarely unpleasant in the high frequencies and that must be strongly favored by the respective recording. Of course, this can be additionally influenced by the listening test, for example, by adding more level than necessary at 8 kHz, which can then affect sibilants, for example, but in my case I find the high frequency of the ARIA ME to be very pleasant and to stand out positively after the adjustment.

Stage
I find the stage of the ARIAME somewhat limited, despite the increase in treble. Little to nothing happens outside the head, and so the stage can be described as quite intimate without seeming cramped, however.

Imaging
The ARIA ME is able to produce a realistic 3D image in width and depth despite the rather small stage. However, the separation is not the best and I would like to see more airiness.
The ARIA ME seems a bit ponderous rather than light on its feet, but all within acceptable limits that don't limit the enjoyment of listening to music..



ANC
I actually like the ARIA ME best with ANC activated. I audibly lose volume in the sub-bass, but also (to a lesser extent) in the mid- and upper-bass. As a result, this now sounds a bit leaner and more balanced. The mids can assert themselves a bit better and the highs remain at the same good level. This means that the ARIA ME sounds most balanced with ANC and the sound adjustment, which is a clear difference to out-of-the-box and you like to listen a bit more carefully with the ARIA ME. If it should be a bit more bass for hip-hop or electro, I simply turn ANC off again. ANC only works when the headphones are also turned on (but there does not have to be a Bluetooth connection).

Cable
The sound in cable mode is basically the same as in Bluetooth mode, except that the personalized sound profile is not available, which again degrades the sound for my taste. For additional ANC, you need battery and headphones turned on. The cable mode has priority over Bluetooth.



Outro
At 149€, the ARIA ME is not a cheap BT headphone, but is at home in the mid-range. This price segment is just as strongly occupied by the usual suspects, such as SONY, TEUFEL, BOSE, SENNHEISER, etc., even if their top models are still significantly more expensive. But what distinguishes the ARIA ME now, or what makes it competitive here?

I think that the personal sound adjustment to the individual hearing performance is to be emphasized. Likewise, the conversion option to a full-fledged headset (but the integrated microphone can also be used for phone calls and the quality is satisfactory), as well as the headphone stand with integrated charging function. Sound-wise, it is only usable for me if you also use the sound adjustment feature. I would also have liked to see more customization options, as SONY impressively demonstrates with their Headphones app.

For the older generation, the ARIA ME could be a very interesting solution, since adjusting the sound to the hearing performance can perhaps bring to light new details that have been lost over the years. The bottom line is that the ARIA ME is a BT over-ear that performs on an average level in terms of sound without being able to stand out, but it has some nice features that can possibly justify the price to some extent.

AVANTREE
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8
Sound: 7.8



Intro
MEZE always has the ambition to combine design and sound, so that their products not only functionally provide what they are made for (music playback), but also an aesthetic claim behind it.
Since I rather value the functional aspect, I often complain that this part comes too short with some manufacturers and then you have a headphone sparkling in the sunlight with unique hand paintings of Native Americans, but in the best case can also hold a tin can or a shell to the ear, where then the "sea noise" still sounds more natural than from the extravagant work of art.
For my taste, MEZE usually finds quite a good mix, even if the SOLO (IEM) could not fully convince me sonically, as well as the 99 NEO.
The 99 NEO is the successor of the 99 Classic and enriches the company's portfolio with a warm, bass-heavy and relaxed sound, which, however, brings enough energy to make the L-signature musical and lively.



Handling
The 99 NEO is not only visually very appealing, it also does not show any weaknesses in terms of workmanship. The only weak point might be the ear cup's attachment to the headband, but that's more of a haptic "weakness" than the materials would give in.
The ear pads could be a bit larger and deeper, but the padding is extraordinarily comfortable, even if it rests slightly on the (large) ear. Other pads (e.g. those of the Brainwavz HM5) provide a remedy here.
Even though I am very sensitive especially with the padding of the ear cups, for example, if my ear bumps against the inside or the pads do not completely enclose my ear, I have no major problems with the NEO even after hours, except for a slight feeling of pressure. The headband automatically adjusts to the shape of the head with rubber grippers and distributes the 260 grams (which also makes the 99 NEO lightweight) evenly across the skull.

The scope of delivery includes a robust, fabric-covered cable with microphone and remote control, which is connected to the left and right of the headphones via mono jack (3.5mm). In addition, there is an airplane as well as 6.3mm adapter and a small fabric box for the cable. All this incl. the 99 NEO is in an attractive hardcover case.

With 103 dB at 26 ohms, the 99 NEO plays extremely effectively and also without problems on the smartphone.
The isolation, on the other hand, could be a bit better, at least in terms of sound emission to the outside world. Direct neighbors can sense music on the bus or train even at moderate volumes and certainly sing along at slightly higher levels if they know the song. However, the isolation to the inside is quite good when the music is playing.



Sound
Bass
The NEO actually offers me exactly what I expected in advance. A musical and full sound. This is primarily due to the bass, which clearly wears the pants on the NEO. Unfortunately, it sometimes lacks the necessary precision and firmness, so that it sometimes grumbles grumpily instead of hitting hard. Actually, a bit of a pity, since this fact is the only serious point on my list of shortcomings of the NEO, respectively runs like a red thread through the signature, together with the somewhat limited stage dimensioning. Nevertheless, the bass does a good job overall, as it is not outrageously overloaded or overpowering despite the clear elevation.
Somewhat more neutral and colder music sources are recommended here in combination, since warmer ones could thicken the bass even more. However, it is always fun due to its powerful punch and it can also present finer passages without too much exuberance. In addition, it has an appealing sub-bass response if you cut back the upper range a bit with the help of an equalizer.

Mids
The mids are equally relaxed as they are detailed. Musicality is certainly the keyword here as well. However, they are warmed up a bit too much by the bass, especially when music provides a lot of "boomy" upper bass. In general, bass guitars are a bit too fat and boomy. This detracts somewhat from the overall performance of the mids, although it depends on the genre and mastering here. But the problem is more the interaction of the upper bass with the lower mids, which makes some things sound too fat and emphasized. I would wish for a bit more directness and firmness there. Towards the top, the mids clear up well and have a lively character. Voices sound a bit too warm, but still authentic.
If you like very physical mids that can still score with a good range of detail and transparency, especially with less bass-intensive music, you might find what you're looking for here. To me, however, they are a bit "hollow" at times. Garishness or other nasty peaks are not discernible.

Trebles
The treble blends in with the relaxed, warm and softer sound of the 99 NEO. They lack a bit of bite and certainly some brilliance, but they still don't necessarily lack liveliness. They shouldn't pull back much more at all, otherwise the 99 NEO would slip into absolute darkness. So they more or less keep it alive. Sibilants or unpleasant harshness are a foreign word for the NEO. Even if cymbals could like to sound a bit more grippy and it sometimes gets thinner in the treble, I can't complain about the variety of information. However, you have to listen a bit closer so that you don't miss anything.

Stage
The stage won't make you tip backwards from your chair, because it has more of a studio character than live event feeling. On the other hand, it is just as well positioned in terms of depth as it is in terms of width, even if there are limitations in both cases.

Imaging
The imaging can convey a good 3D image due to the good utilization of the individual axes and an appealing breakdown to different layers, if the songs were produced that way. However, the bass ensures that the finest blade is not unpacked in the separation, as it sometimes acts a bit growly. However, instruments and details can be located well, even when things get hectic.



Outro
Unfortunately, I have no comparison to the MEZE 99 Classic. However, I can deduce from MEZE's own advertising that the 99 NEO will not necessarily meet the taste of those who already found the Classic too bass-heavy. Even if optics and sound are not necessarily connected, the appearance of a headphone can already give an indication of the expected sound, especially if the design is deliberately used as a support by the manufacturer.
The 99 NEO looks robust and powerful to me (especially due to the headband and the silver brackets). Like a warrior that always attacks in the dark.
For me, this is also directly reflected in the warm and rather darker sound, which is nevertheless quite musical and despite its physical character does not seem oppressive.
I would still wish for a bit more bite and firmness, especially in the basement, but the NEO is for me a good example of how a harmonically tuned L-signature can sound, albeit a bit too relaxed for my taste. Despite the bass emphasis, mids as well as highs still have enough room to breathe and the audiophile demand does not come up short. For me, it performs consistently in a good range within the targeted signature over the entire frequency range. However, a few dB less in the bass can work wonders.

MEZE
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8
Sound: 7.8

Intro
AUDIOSENSE is maturing more and more into a professional IEM manufacturer from China that is to be taken very seriously. The company has developed steadily and offers IEMs with a wide variety of configurations at an always fair price.
With the T180, the company already has a single-BA driver IEM in its portfolio, which is, however, no longer really up to date technically. The DT100 is supposed to change this now, but at three times the price. Can this be justified?

Handling
AUDIOSENSE never disappoints with the presentation and accessories.
A set of spinfits, as well as another set (S, M, L) of somewhat firmer silicone tips. Plus a good, silver-plated cable (MMCX) and a carrying case with a fur interior, something you're used to from companies like CAMPFIRE AUDIO (e.g. Solaris).

The DT100 is completely molded. This means there is no cavity, but the driver is completely enclosed by the resin inside. In addition, it is very compact and ergonomic, which results in a very good wearing comfort. The faceplate together with the transparent blue of the case/resin is nice to look at. A really successful presentation with good and useful accessories, paired with an appealing design.

The isolation is exceptionally good, especially with the spinfits. Here, the passive isolation is certainly also a selling point.

Sound
By now, I've really taken a liking to BA-only driver configurations and also use them in my own IEM designs. Aside from being a bit easier to maintain, and more durable if the IEMs are used properly, I especially love the midrange reproduction of well-tuned BAs.

Knowles' single BA has no easy task. Usually, BA-only IEMs distribute different frequency ranges (bass, mids, treble) among several shoulders, since a pure BA (depending on its orientation) is often not capable of satisfactorily covering a complete frequency spectrum. Many BA-IEMs are often described as mid-centered or vocal-centered, because the bass is usually too limited and the focus is on the mids.
I am all the more surprised by the bass of the DT100. It has some quantity and can even reproduce lower frequencies sufficiently. However, it is a bit plumped up in the mid-bass, which also continues in the upper bass and affects the mids. Likewise, it is not always 100% stable, but also tends to drone sometimes. Nevertheless, I am quite satisfied with the performance of the Single-BA in the low frequency. For me, however, it is almost a bit too much or not tight enough.

The mids sound a bit warmer than they should, but still they are exactly of the caliber I expect from a good BA driver. Voices sound intimate as well as natural and instruments quite smooth and authentic without becoming garish or shrill. Surely all this could be better and a jump in the cold water would do the mids quite well to cool down, but I like this soft, warm and emotional presentation of the mids.

The highs are equally positive for a single-BA. They are not the most lively and with a second BA driver, which exclusively takes care of the treble, you can certainly get a bit more brilliance and transparency out of it, but you can also cut your own flesh and make the sound artificial and unpleasantly spiky.
The highs have enough energy and keep up with the mids quite well. There are no sibilants or other annoying peaks that could lead to fatigue.
Together with the mids, they demand more than enough detail to come to light while maintaining their relaxed and authentic character. Not for trebleheads and perhaps a bit too dark for some in tandem with the potent bass, but to me everything seems quite harmonious.

The stage has a realistic extension without venturing into unknown worlds. Nevertheless, the 3D image produced is within a very good average, as the BA driver doesn't let its guard down too much in imaging and separation. However, the DT100 certainly doesn't have any groundbreaking technical features.

Outro
The DT100 can bring a smile to the face of anyone who prefers a warm and relaxed BA sound and finds accurate but smooth mids more important than a rich punch or micro-detail fireworks. I've only heard better from QDC Neptune so far, although my single BA-IEM selection to date is also rather modest and this statement should therefore be taken with a grain of salt (TIPSY BLUE AURORA, AUDIOSENSE T180, KBEAR F1, NICEHCK X49).

For my taste, the DT100 is a bit too expensive, but for that you are equipped with an extensive and valuable accessories. You also get a completely molded IEM that fits like a glove. In addition, it is a clear upgrade to the T180 from our own house.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.6
Sound: 8.6



Intro
The HE5XX is another collaboration between DROP and HIFIMAN and is supposed to be more similar in sound and appearance to the DEVA than to the HE500, or other models in the HE5 series, but I can't judge that because I don't have a comparison. What I can compare the HE5XX with, however, is the DROP X SENNHEISER HD6XX, which I currently rate as one of the best value for money and which thrills me with its neutral, detailed, unagitated and relaxed sound. At the same price tag, the HE5XX is a successful counterpart to the HD6XX, as it plays more openly and freshly, but has its strengths less in emotionality and does not bring the stoic composure of the HD6XX.



Handling
When I read the weight of the HE5XX, I had to look twice as it seems much lighter on my head.
The headband is basically identical to the HE4XX, but the ear cups including the pads are lighter. Somehow, this also makes them seem a bit cheaper, but that's just a subjective observation based on the feel. The contact pressure is almost non-existent and yet the HE5XX sits very stably and thus also extremely comfortably. The pads could still be a bit softer and fluffier, I prefer those of the HE4XX, but they have the better space in comparison.

The scope of delivery is similar to that of the HE4XX and is limited to a robust cable (3.5mm jack) with an adapter to 6.3mm.
There are certainly headphones that leave a more valuable impression, but in the processing I can not reproach the HE5XX, even if you notice here the attempt to save costs of DROP in the material and design. I found this a bit less obvious in the HE4XX. In return, the HE5XX has the headband's ratchet back, which I like.

All in all, the HE5XX is a very comfortable, open headphone with enough space for everyone, which is hardly noticeable on the head. The isolation is quite modest due to the construction.



Sound
Bass
In the end, you get a very good planar bass with the HE5XX, just like with the HE4XX, with a great resolution and homogeneity. However, the HE5Xx adds a little more depth and sounds somewhat fuller in the bass range. Suits him well and is for me as an upgrade to the already great bass of the HE4XX to evaluate.

I appreciate more and more the bass characteristics of a planar driver, as I hear the low frequencies all detailed out, but these are presented to me with a wonderful lightness, even if I would give priority to good dynamics in total, as I also like it a bit more physical. In return, I am impressed by the speed of the bass, but this is also slightly at the expense of dynamics.
For me, the HE5XX still has fantastic bass performance and offers a new experience.

Mids
Unlike the HE4XX, the HE5XX sounds more lively in the mids and voices seem more open and not quite as intimate. However, it also loses some of the emotion and the HE5XX may sound a bit like a robot, working through the music with absolute precision and matter-of-factness. However, it does so in outstanding quality and the mids excel in detail and transparency. Sometimes voices lack a bit of body, but tonally I'm very satisfied, as everything also sounds like it's all of a piece. Electric guitars are particularly fun for me and even if I repeat myself, the HE5XX has a very pleasant lightness in its sound reproduction. Robotic might not be the right word in sum either, as the mids exude playing joy, but are perhaps a bit dry here and there. In addition, they move a bit more to the foreground compared to the HE4XX.

Trebles
An extremely discreet artificiality in the treble has remained, but the HE5XX seems more homogeneous and also more natural compared to the HE4XX, since the mids are on eye level with the treble.

The treble is not additionally emphasized and is more on par with the HD6XX with its relaxed nature, even though the latter appeals to me even more and sounds more natural.
Slight sibilants can be detected here and there, but that is negligible and not annoying for me, although I am very sensitive there.

Stage
In contrast to the HE4XX, one immediately has the feeling of listening to an open headphone. The stage clearly increases in width and the HE5XX also has the better arguments in the Y, as well as Z-axis.

Imaging
The ample space is translated very well into a multi-layered 3D image, which also takes place outside the head, even if this is mostly only the case on the X-axis, i.e. in the stereo image. Nevertheless, the separation is more airy, which means we have more space between the individual instruments than with the HE4XX. I would make slight criticisms about the location of the bass, as it is sometimes hard to pick up. This is not different in a hi-fi system and even desired or normal that the bass has no real locatability, but in IEMs and headphones it is usually centered behind the voices. At least there the "kick" is always well locatable, the HE5XX is here somewhat more diffuse and thus, if you will, more speaker-like.



Outro
In the end, the HE5XX does almost everything better than the HE4XX, which I sometimes find quite exhausting due to the treble emphasis and which also does not necessarily act like an open planar driver in terms of technical performance. In direct comparison, the 30 - 40 € more for the HE5XX, depending on the dollar rate, are well invested.
I find the musical and transparent playing style with a lush stage and very good separation particularly appealing. With its lively nature, it can be a fitting counterpart to the DROP X SENNHEISER HD6XX, depending on your preferences. Tonally, it is similarly authentic and has the last word in the bass in comparison, however, I find mids and treble of the HD6XX more appealing, even if this is the more "boring" of the two in total and does not seem quite as open and unstrained, but can generate emotions more easily.

The HE5XX is a great overall package and that at a very appealing price. If you prefer something more intimate and emotional, you can take a look at the HE4XX as a planar entry.

I think, with the HD6XX and HE5XX you have two headphone weapons in hand and for both together not yet spent 400 €.



DROP
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.2
Sound: 8.1



Intro
DROP tries in cooperation with established companies to make their products accessible to a wider mass at lower prices by taking former or current products with a good reputation, giving them a little more mainstream (soundwise) and also trying to implement more cost-effective variants in the design. Although DROP does not always succeed with these "slimmed down" versions to land a big hit, but in collaboration with SENNHEISER (HD6XX & HD58X), for example, respectable headphones have been created, which can represent a benchmark in the price range.

So let's take a look at how this cooperation with HIFIMAN is bearing fruit, where several models have already been released (HE35X, HE4XX, HE5XX & EDITION XX).



Handling
The HE4XX makes a very robust impression, which is certainly also subjectively generated by its weight. This is not particularly low at just under 400 grams, but it is well distributed on the head and ears, so that the wearing comfort is in a good range.
The very comfortable pads are angled slightly to provide better ergonomics. However, I find the contact pressure a bit high at the beginning, but you get used to it just like with the SENNHEISER HD6XX, or HD58X. Nevertheless, this is, for example, better managed with the HE5XX.

The headband has sufficient padding, but it could be a bit softer. I also miss a grid device for size adjustment, but the headband automatically slides into a well-fitting position when put on.

The scope of delivery is somewhat modest. There is only a rather thick cable with a 3.5mm jack connection, which can be adapted to 6.3mm (included). The headphones are connected on the left and right via 3.5mm jack, which also makes it easy to convert the HE4XX to balanced operation.

The isolation is hardly worth mentioning due to the open design, but it is slightly better than the even airier HE5XX due to the better sealing of the ear pads.



Sound
Bass
The HE4XX was basically my first planar over-ear headphones and I was initially a bit skeptical about how the bass performance would turn out here, since I was used to more dynamic representatives. Absolutely unfounded, because the bass of the HE4XX does not quite come close to this organic and dynamic of such a "conventional" driver, but it brings completely new qualities. Of course, not every dynamic headphone is equal to a high pleasure in the bass. There is a wide control in both directions here.

The HE4XX's bass is not only interesting because of its detailed, drying playing style, it adds a certain lightness to the sound. Even though it doesn't bring the fattest kick in the subrange or build up any noticeable punch, it's very accurate without slipping into the mids or overdoing it. This not only makes it very clean, but gives it an unexpected sense of spaciousness. To that end, it persists in any genre with consistent quality and speed. Absolute bassheads might want to look to closed-back dynamic headphones, though, for the absolute kick.

Mids
I would describe the mids as quite neutral, even if they sometimes seem a bit restrained to me and don't sparkle with energy. Basically, I quite like these relaxed, natural, but detailed mids in this form, though in that case I would like a bit more liveliness to create a symbiosis with the treble. Thus, the relationship is a bit discordant to me, but I don't blame the mids as much for that, since they basically do little wrong. Voices are intimate and instruments that are more in the midrange sound largely realistic.

Neither garishness resonates nor any other unpleasant background noise. However, the mids sometimes sound a bit veiled, but this only becomes noticeable when you switch to the HE5XX, for example.

Trebles
The treble should be taken with a grain of salt here and there, as it is noticeably artificially boosted, which can amplify the sibilants and cause the HE4XX's tonality to slip a bit into the bright and unnatural at times. This is song-dependent, but for me there is always something slightly artificial resonating, although you also quickly get used to it.
Nevertheless, the trebles are transparent and have a good resolution, but they don't necessarily invite you to turn up the volume. However, it is precisely the good detail and transparency that finally make the highs attractive and give them not only quantity, but also quality, even if this is not always produced in a natural-looking way.

Stage
The stage is well positioned in terms of width and depth, although this is certainly not where the HE4XX's absolute strengths lie. I would describe this as quite realistic, without the stage being classified as above average in width. Compared to the HE5XX, the HE4XX sounds a bit more compact, but this could also suit some people.

Imaging
Despite the more accentuated highs, the HE4XX is not quite as airy and quite intimate, especially in the voice presentation. The separation is decent and voices and instruments are clearly separated from each other, but if you compare this to the HE5XX, you'll notice a few deficits. However, the HE4XX is not bad from a technical point of view and is certainly still very decent in its price segment. However, you shouldn't expect an outstanding holographic sound despite an open planar driver.



Outro
The HE4XX is an interesting and competent planar headphone in its price segment! However, in comparison with other price-performance powerhouses from DROP, it can't quite keep up for my taste (HE4XX < HD58X < HE5XX < HD6XX) and for me that has something to do with its slightly artificial, sometimes peaky highs, because the bass and mids are really good tonally. Here is certainly still a bit what to get out with an equalizer.

In the end it is also a question of taste and above all tolerance, as far as the treble is concerned.
However, I would have liked either a bit more lively mids or slightly more relaxed highs a la HD6XX to make the HE4XX sound even more harmonious overall. The HE4XX is a very good, high-resolution all-rounder and a great entry into the planar headphone world.
If you have a few more bucks in your pocket and prefer a more lively, open sound, you should take a look at the HE5XX if you want a HIFIMAN (DROP edition).

However, with the HE4XX, you should keep in mind that despite the successful overall performance, we are still talking about a planar headphone of just under 150 €, which makes it very well positioned in its price range and more than competitive!



DROP
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8
Sound: 7.8



Intro
SIGVA has specialized in developing headphones with a noble wood finish. The PHOENIX is their current flagship and is aimed at bass-hungry listeners with audiophile demands. Whether the PHOENIX can do justice to this remains to be seen. The low impedance and high sensitivity of the PHOENIX should make it suitable for any playback device.



Handling
Zebra wood sounds promising, but in the end it is a type of wood (which exactly is not specified) that has a naturally zebra-like grain, which means that several woods can be considered. It's nice to look at, though, and gives the otherwise more filigree PHOENIX a rugged character. Likewise, this also raises sonic expectations, as I associate wood looks with a warmer and more physical sound, which the PHOENIX indeed delivers.

In general, the PHOENIX turns out a bit small, which means it may not fit on every growler, which I would count mine among. On me, the comfortable and flexible headband is on full stop. The ear pads are comfortable, but unfortunately also fall out a bit too small. Here SIGVA probably had rather smaller people in focus when dimensioning their headphones. However, they have recognized the problem and deliver larger pads, for which, however, another 12 € are added. With the original, soft and ergonomically shaped pads, the PHOENIX wears more like an on-ear, but still quite comfortable. Here, however, I also see problems with people who provide their brain even more space than I do.

In the package we get a fabric-covered and supple cable with 2.5mm mono jack as headphone jack and 3.5mm stereo jack for the music source. An adapter to 6.3mm is included in a small cloth pouch.

In addition, the cable has a reinforcement at the stereo connection to prevent cable breakage.
There is also a nice hardcover case for transporting the headphones.

The isolation suffers from the open design, but there are even airier representatives.



Sound
Bass
The PHOENIX clearly focuses on the bass. I can't think of any open headphones where I felt such an impact from the bass, because the bass of the PHOENIX is quite physically perceptible. It has a good texture, is full-bodied and quite punchy. However, it lacks a bit of firmness, which is then also noticeable in the interplay with the mids. For me, this limits the usability of the PHOENIX a bit, because I would reach for this headphone less for rock or pop (which should not exclude these genres, however), but all the more for electro or hip-hop, where it can also fully play out its bass performance. I enjoy the bass and even if it is not the tightest representative, it convinces me with its organic and dynamic character. Nevertheless, certainly not for everyone, especially when it comes to critical listening, although the PHOENIX is equally capable of bringing out finer bass passages.

Mids
I have a bit of a hard time with the mids. These are very physical and voices have an intimate character. For me, they are a bit too influenced by the bass and lack clarity. If you prefer more restrained and thicker mids, you can certainly do better with this presentation. I would like to see more liveliness and a cleaner transition between bass and mids. Rarely, the mids can get a bit harsh, but that is absolutely tolerable for me.

Details are brought out well and tonally the mids are largely correct, if a bit too warmly tuned.

Trebles
The highs are fundamentally solid. They don't have outstanding extension or the very highest resolution, but I like the relaxed approach as I don't feel like I'm missing anything either. Yes, hi-hats could be a bit zippier and sharper, and I'd also like more transparency overall, but here the mids tend to be the spoiler, as they already provide a somewhat spongy foundation, which is then harder for the highs to enhance. Sibilants are not discernible and generally the treble has a very good longterm listenability and a silky character.

Stage
What surprises me is the much more intimate stage than we are used to from open headphones in general. This is also a small drawback for me, as I feel a bit constricted here and there and this fact sometimes stresses me out when listening to music, as I always have the feeling that the PHOENIX wants to, but doesn't manage to break the imaginary wall. Nevertheless, the stage doesn't seem claustrophobic or anything like that.

Imaging
The imaging works well within the available space and is also divided into several layers. However, it isn't particularly airy and is laid out more like an ellipse with an eye on the stereo area, so there is certainly still " air upwards" on the Y-axis.



Outro
For me, the SIVGA PHOENIX is more of a fun headphone, but it certainly has audiophile qualities, especially with its unobtrusive and relaxed signature, though it is not something for critical listening. For this, it lacks a bit of clarity and resolution, or rather, the dominant bass and the somewhat shy, warm mids are a shortcoming.

Since the PHOENIX could be operated at a more than sufficient volume without any problems at all tested sources (HUAWEI P40 lite, LG G6+, various USB DACs (including ZORLOO ZTELLA), Lenovo P51, various headphone amps (including SMSL SH-8)), it is certainly also an idea for mobile use, but you should always be aware of where you are due to the open design. Likewise, the technical performance can vary somewhat.

To that end, the PHOENIX is comfortable for extended periods of time despite its smaller pads, which make it on-ear. However, these can be replaced with a circumaural version, where there is an additional cost (€12).

If you're looking for a fairly competent open headphone for electro, hip-hop, EDM or R&B with a relaxed and intimate signature, the PHOENIX is well worth a try.



Thanks to SIGVA for providing the test headphones.
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating. 8.7
Sound: 8.7

Intro
After the DH3, the second IEM of the ArtMagic series from BGVP has now also made it into my hands. It is the middle class car within this series, so to speak, but it has the technical features to compete even higher. The VG4 is an IEM with wow-effect and knows how to convince with the first notes. Its immediately outstanding features are an extremely expansive stage, wonderful, clear and accurate mids, as well as trebles and a punchy BA bass which, however, has good dynamics. In short, the VG4 is exciting and in my opinion, another highly competitive IEM from BGVP, moving in a more neutral direction with the ArtMagic series, as opposed to the more mainstream DM-series.



Handling
BGVP always relies on a quite similar housing in universal "custom" construction for its models. In contrast to the more compact DH3, the VG4 is thicker and larger than its little brother, probably also due to the larger dip-switch panel. It even beats the DM7 in size, but that doesn't make it any more uncomfortable to wear. It adapts well to the shape of the ear, seals excellently and, due to its closed design, does not let any noise out.
A range of different colours (transparent or opaque) is also available for the housing selection.

I've already mentioned the extensive scope of delivery for BGVP a few times and of course this also applies to the VG4. Vocal, bass and standard silicone tips, as well as a pair of foam tips are standard equipment with BGVP, as is a robust case. To my delight, the wonderful, soft and high quality cable of the DM7 returns with the VG4.

Furthermore, this time three dip switches are used for sound modification, which also serves as a crossover.



Sound
In contrast to its little brother, the DH3, the VG4 has one more dip-switch, which gives us a total of 8 tuning options. With them you can influence the frequency response in the bass, the mids and the highs, with sometimes more, sometimes less effects. I'll limit myself to two settings (001 - bass/midrange & 000 - neutral), whereby the primary sound description will refer to setting 001, as I like this setting most due to the additional warmth and body and the resulting more emotional and natural mids.

In contrast to the DH3 the VG4 uses a BA driver for bass and although I prefer a hybrid with a dynamic bass, the bass BA driver is, as with the DM7, really powerful and competent. With the DM7 the bass is a bit softer and more voluminous. With the VG4 it is more direct, punchier and faster. The sub-bass is well covered, however, the mid-bass is in the foreground. Nevertheless, the quantity is quite similar to the DH3, which sounds more dynamic and natural, but has less bite. Depending on the genre I even like the bass of the VG4 a bit better, but in the end both are of equal quality, even if they set a slightly different emphasis.

As with the DH3, the mids are very detailed, transparent and captivate with their clarity and voice reproduction. In contrast to the DM7, they are not quite as warm and voluminous, but are more lively and forward without being uncomfortably prominent. As with the bass, the mids have a positive bite and are extremely accurate. This is also very noticeable in the instrument separation. I personally like the timbre of the VG4 men's voices a bit better, because women's voices sometimes radiate a bit too much energy. I prefer the somewhat reserved presentation of the DM7, but the VG4 is more to the point and has a better grip.

The trebles are basically the real improvement over the DH3. They sound more mature and no longer have that unpleasant peak that pops up every now and then with the DH3. Also the sibilants are better controlled, but they are not completely eliminated. On the other hand, the trebles of the VG4 are extremely detailed and are still quite stable even in the absolute high frequencies. But the absolute highlight of the VG4 for me is the expansive stage, where the highs play a big part due to their open and transparent nature. This stage is really remarkable, especially in width, but also in depth. In contrast to the DM7, the stage opens further upwards, making the DM7 look more intimate in comparison. The trebles still have room for improvement, as I think they could be a bit more level-headed, but they fit in very well with the overall sound concept of the VG4, which is designed to bring you on board with clarity, separation, detail and accuracy.

Let's move on to the neutral setting (000) with which the VG4 is also delivered. This is indeed one of my second favourite configuration.
In this setting the VG4 sounds flatter and more neutral. The frequency response is very linear and no area is really emphasized. As with the DH3, this setting is more for purists and goes in the reference direction. I prefer a little warmer and more voluminous, but this setting is highly recommended for classical music, for example. The mids and highs come more into focus in contrast to 001, which for me leads to fatigue more quickly, but as I said, this setting can be a blessing for some genres.

I deliberately omit the treble boost setting (1st switch), as it increases the presence of the treble and subjectively makes it sound a bit more sophisticated, but also amplifies the sibilants and unnecessarily brightens the signature, which can lead to fatigue. I also find the VG4 sounding more natural without this additional boost. The changes with the 2nd switch (midrange) are quite subtle and only in combination with the 3rd switch (bass) worth mentioning.



Outro
The VG4 starts where the DM3 reaches its limits and is an upgrade for me, although not a major one. Basically it stalks on my previous BGVP favourite, the DM7 and pulls even. Both go a different way in tuning, but that's what makes both so unique, in their own way. The DM7 is the unexcited, stoic all-rounder, which is one of my favourites with its fatigue-free, warm and detailed sound, without annoying overtones. The VG4, on the other hand, is the snappy, clear and transparent audiophile, which is dedicated to the open mid and high frequencies and comes across more lively, tidy and crisp.
In contrast to the DH3, it has better control of the more or less random sibilants, but is not completely free of them.

Due to its detailed, separated, bright and neutral presentation it is (like the DH3) especially good for complex and vocal music, but also as an allrounder it cuts a good figure, but may not always deliver the desired pressure in the absolute low frequencies, but shines more with punch in the mid-bass.

The scope of delivery is without complaint and also the versatile, even if sometimes only subtle tuning possibilities, make the VG4 for about 200 € an outstanding product in its price range.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.2
Sound: 7

Intro
The SHUOER TAPE had made a name for itself in the Chi-Fi world (even with misleading marketing - it's a dynamic driver with a low voltage electrostatic unit in front of it, just like the BGVP ZERO), with a good and fun V-signature, without the quite high audiophile claim.
The TAPE PRO now wants to make you forget the shortcomings of the TAPE with the same technology, at the same price tag.
Well, in my opinion, the engineers at SHUOER should have slept another night over their result before releasing the TAPE PRO for sale, but maybe someone will find happiness with the TAPE PRO, even if I will never reach the end of the rainbow with this IEM.



Handling
The TAPE PRO is similar to its predecessor in design, except that it is now also available in silver. In addition, the cassette wheels are interchangeable (filter). The sound hole is unscrewable and replaceable if too dirty or otherwise worn (1 pair enclosed), but also thicker than the original TAPE.

SHUOER already knows why the TAPE PRO is not enclosed Foamtips, because an even greater reduction of the high tone and emphasis of the upper mids would not be tolerable with the TAPE PRO, but more on that below. Instead, we get two sets of silicone tips in three sizes, though they don't make much difference sonically. In terms of comfort, I prefer the slightly softer white tips.
However, if the sound hole (7mm) had turned out even thicker, I would no longer need tips to achieve a seal in the ear. Why this large diameter? Apart from the fact that an unpleasant pressure can arise in the ear, it is a small test of patience to put on the tips. Likewise, not all of them (3rd party) will fit.

The cable is haptically a very successful one for my taste, though. For some it may seem a bit too clunky/robust, but I like this design and also the feel. In addition, it is a 2.5mm balanced cable with a matching adapter to 3.5mm jack (stereo) enclosed.

The faceplate has a slot that serves not only as decoration, but also as ventilation. However, this takes away the usefulness of the bass filter, since the sound / air can look for another way. In addition, the isolation is impaired.



Sound
Let's start with the bright spot of the TAPE PRO. Even though the bass tends to take a step back compared to the TAPE because the extension in the subrange is less, it is still the best thing about the TAPE PRO. Lessons have not been learned from its predecessor in any way, however, as the bass still penetrates the mids and is slightly lacking in firmness. It has a fun quantity and also convinces with a good structure, but is also sometimes a bit bloated and not always on the point. In contrast to the TAPE, you can replace the cassette wheels this time, as these serve as an additional filter and should influence the bass. Basically, I find this consistent and a nice feature if it didn't completely turn out to be a gimmick. I honestly don't hear any real difference when I replace the filters. True, this should also only increase the bass by 2 dB, which is not the biggest difference. But it should at least be measurable, which turns out to be a miss for me.

Often, for me, the tonality of the mids rises and falls in my favor with the 2 kHz range of an IEM/headphones. I can't stand it when voices have even the slightest semblance of shrillness or electric guitars become roaring bugs. Exactly in this frequency range so much can be influenced, since our hearing also reacts most sensitively here (2 - 4 kHz). The old TAPE certainly did not cause any great jubilation in the mids, since it also has the stronger V-signature. However, it just doesn't highlight the 2 kHz range as intensely as the TAPE PRO, but rises steadily to 3 kHz, where it provides the most energy. This makes it brighter than the TAPE PRO and puts the mids more in the background, but is more tolerable, at least for me.
The TAPE PRO's mids, in sum, sound more wrong tonally than right and kind of hollowed out.

I am aware that not every signature can meet my preferences and that is fine. However, it is not easy to remain reasonably objective in such a case. I am less comfortable with a darker timbre, as well as when it gets too bright. The highs have an extreme roll-off after 4 kHz, which now completely robs the TAPE PRO of its claim to be a tonally correct and coherent IEM after the mids that took some getting used to. They come back between 8 and 10 kHz with a peak, but this is rather negligible in terms of sound. Thank goodness this does not additionally provide for an increased sibilant emphasis, as a result I would then have more or less completely lost faith in SHUOER. If you will, the trebles are the only element where SHUOER has listened to the listeners, but has overshot the mark by far.

The treble usually has a strong influence on our subjective perception of the stage and its space, imaging-wise. Neither can live up to the price tag. The stage seems more or less compressed and the imaging is okay within the possibilities, but can't pull the cart out of the mud either. The voices, which are placed in the foreground and sound a bit slanted, also cause even more irritation.



Outro
The TAPE PRO is, for me, an exemplary example of how a fairly good product can be made worse with the wrong approaches. If I'm not mistaken, many reviews of the TAPE have pointed out that the bass should be a bit tighter, the upper mids/lower highs have too much energy, which can quickly make them shrill, the mids seem thin in some cases, and the highs could be smoothed out slightly. Now, in my opinion, these are valid suggestions for improvement and not all that difficult to implement.
However, what prompted SHUOER to focus more on the mid-bass in the low frequency range, to rob energy from the lower treble, but to distribute it to the sensitive 2 kHz range instead, and to more or less cut off the treble, is a mystery to me. I can't think of a single thing that the TAPE PRO does better than its predecessor. The TAPE PRO sounds dead, dark and uninspired in total, without any dynamics.

Be that as it may, my opinion is only ONE of many on the Internet and certainly not universally valid, but for me the SHUOER TAPE PRO is a shot in the oven and in no way an upgrade to the original TAPE. Sometimes I am a bit shocked by what you can read and see about the TAPE PRO. There are big words like "monster of detail" or "top-class imaging" and so on. Here I am wondering whether there are perhaps 2 different versions / production series or what the motives are. Well, to each his own...
The TAPE PRO is in my world an average and thus also overpriced IEM with a somewhat weird tonality. You can get similar sound material with the TIN HIFI T1 PLUS, for example, for a decent €25. This does not make the T1 PLUS better, but who is looking for such a signature, has a much better price-performance ratio here.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.1
Sound: 8

Intro
MOONDROP does exactly what I would like to see other companies do. Even though the SSP is not fundamentally different from the SSR, as it is basically just blessed with more bass impact, the buyer has a choice between the two models. Other companies would perhaps quietly launch a revised version without the buyer having the slightest idea. MOONDROP is also taking the economically smart route by remarketing an existing product with a fairly mundane adaptation, which provides transparency and also diversity, as the price also remains the same and the SSP is not marketed as being further, faster, higher than the SSR.

Handling
Here the SSP does not differ from the SSR. Except for a new anime character, the packaging and contents are also the same, so I'm treating myself to a copy of the SSR.

>> The SSP is made of metal, which together with its minimalist design makes it look classy and sturdy at the same time. The comfort is excellent, especially the protruding sound openings I find successful, which for me guarantees a comfortable fit in the ear as well as good insulation.

When it comes to cosmetic flaws, the transition from the faceplate to the body is a bit too rough for me, but that's no different with the STARLIGHT or KPE.
Otherwise, I find the design successful and especially the compactness is very good for an IEM, which is worn over the ear.

The cable (2-pin) is both visually and haptically passable and for me better than the fiddly and thin cable from the STARLIGHT. However, I would have rather put the SSP on a copper cable. The included silicone tips are usable, even if I prefer to use foam tips with the SSP. A small carrying bag is also included. <<

The SSP is compared to the SSR available in blue and has a powder coating, which I still find a bit more valuable.

Sound
As mentioned at the beginning, the SSP is basically an SSR with more bass emphasis. However, this of course has an effect on the overall signature as you can rarely look at the bass separately and it will have an impact on the overall tonality.

I already liked the bass a lot on the SSR, as it seems very plain, but acts very crisp and fast. In addition, I did not find it to be particularly anemic, but subtle, however musical and precise. Especially with electronic music (admittedly with some equalizer help) it brings fun and so I was looking forward to the SSP, because this basically seemed to bring exactly the icing on the cake, which I still wished for the SSR.
The SSP fully meets my expectations in that sense, as the bass is now more physical, but still maintains control and is far from overdoing it or slackening in agility. Despite the increase in level, the SSP retains the strength of the SSR. Top.

The mids enjoy more body and thus have a slightly more natural character than the SSR, yet they are still quite close tonally. The SSR is a bit zippier and has the better resolution, but the SSP sounds a bit more organic in return. Clearly, the SSP's signature is more in the V direction (SSR - diffuse-field/neutral), which does indeed make voices seem a bit more recessed, especially males.
Harsh mids are often reported, both on the SSR and the SSP, but I can't really attest to either. For me, they never exceed the imaginary pain threshold and I have no problems in audibility, even at higher volumes. Here MOONDROP really does a good job of making this diffuse-field signature, which is normally not easy to consume, suitable for long-term use.
Here, the point even goes slightly to the SSR, as it gives me a bit more resolution still, though perhaps only imagined.

At high frequencies, both IEMs have a linear drop, but the SSR brings more level around 6 kHz, which is also noticeable in the sound comparison. The SSR sounds a bit brighter and seems more transparent, even though neither IEM shines with extraordinary extension. There is a bit of dreariness in the absolute high frequencies, and so neither can certainly fulfill treble-head demands. However, the SSP and also the SSR provide more than enough information in the high frequency, even if it sometimes even seems a bit muffled. Here I see the SSR a bit more energetic and thus also better positioned, the SSP but even safer in tuning, even if here a safer driving compared to the SSR was actually not necessary.

In stage and imaging, the point goes to the SSR, since the SSP sometimes sounds a bit more pressed and also doesn't come close to the airiness of the SSR. On the other hand, I like its intimacy quite a bit, even if I would like to bring voices a bit more to the fore. This is not really where the SSP's strengths lie, and so it is rather good average in this area.

Outro
I have to admit that I find both the SSR and the SSP to be very sonically appealing products and can attest them a uniqueness in the price segment. Certainly not to everyone's taste and may take a little getting used to, but Moondrop delivers excellent value for money with the two models.
The SSP is an IEM that basically transforms the SSR more into a mainstream IEM, but without losing its basic characteristics.
So now the customer has a choice and can make a decision depending on his personal preferences. Sonically, the SSR is for my taste the more neutral and also more lively, the SSP instead is the more emotional and somewhat more natural of the two. Due to the slightly better audibility, I see the SSP slightly ahead, but both have some catching up to do in the midrange and in the high-frequency extension.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.2
Sound: 7

Intro
TIN HIFI remains a bit of a grab bag when it comes to the sound quality or rather sound characteristics of their products. The reputation through their T2, they have slowly used up and one no longer has the feeling that every new release from the company must be a world hit.
However, it should also be mentioned that TIN HIFI tries to cover a wide range with their products and that therefore not every IEM can meet your own taste, should also be clear. From this point of view, you can not blame them (as long as you do not expect a neutral and natural sounding IEM from the company with every new IEM release), but should simply see which IEM of the TIN HIFI family meets your preferences best, because there is enough choice.
The T1 PLUS is a bass-rich and dark IEM that will please some bassheads, but has some tonal weaknesses.

Handling
Actually, TIN HIFI often makes the effort with their products to leave a professional and high-quality impression, both in the processing of the headphones as well as in the packaging and accessories.
Thus, we have so far been spoiled by the scope of delivery and the consistent metal construction usually above average in the respective price segment.

The T1 PLUS is a pure budget IEM and this time you can see that at first glance. TIN HIFI makes no effort to disguise the low price here, but it doesn't need to, because even if the plastic case and sparse accessories don't make your jaw drop, this is good standard in the price range.

The packaging reminds a bit of the current budget models from Moondrop (SSR & SSP), but in plain (cheap), without artwork or the like, whereas the cable (4-core/2-pin) as well as the silicone tips show parallels to the BLON BL-01, which especially does not speak particularly for the cable. It is usable, but fiddly and tends to get knotted.

The case is made of full plastic, but that doesn't bother me much, since the comfort is absolutely right for me, which is also achieved by the low weight.
Sure, the T1 PLUS looks a bit cheap and even KZ and TRN have in the past at least put value on metal faceplates, but on the exterior it matters little to me, as long as the IEM is comfortable to wear.

The isolation is quite okay, but would perhaps have turned out even better with a resin or metal housing, as these can swallow more level, rather than the thin and hole plastic.

Sound
At first listening impression, I was a bit baffled, as I didn't expect such a sound presentation from TIN HIFI, in a negative sense. I don't know how the T1 (predecessor) sounds, but the T1 Plus is very bass-heavy and darkly tuned. So far, TIN HIFI was more known to me for a brighter and more neutral presentation, but I am open to new things.

The bass can be a bit of a force of nature, especially when you add fire under its butt. It's not always the firmest, and the mid-bass emphasis can be overpowering at times, but it's a tasty snack for the bass hungry. The punch is really noticeable, although that alone doesn't make a bass, at least not for me, but can be a lot of fun with hip-hop or electro. The T1 Plus provides me with a quantitative bass that can definitely excite depending on the genre, but I still find it lacking in subtlety and some texture, especially when it doesn't really need that much bass. Still, I see the bass as a clear strength of the T1 PLUS and it feels particularly at home in hip-hop.

The mids are clearly a victim of the propulsive bass, as they get too much body and warmth. In addition, they lack assertiveness and thus sound somewhat muffled depending on the song material. This is slightly cushioned by the boost in the direction of the high-frequency transition, but this also leads to a garishness that often resonates slightly, especially with voices, which I don't find particularly authentic. Instruments also have a somewhat slanted tonal character. Here I feel negatively reminded of the new SHUOER TAPE PRO. Especially when a lot of information comes together, the T1 PLUS often gets a bit carried away and it becomes exhausting for the listener.

The comparison with the TAPE PRO is not so far off the mark, as both share the extreme level drop after 4-5 kHz. This makes them unnaturally mid-focused with bass emphasis, which cannot be picked up in the treble. There is a lack of extension and brilliance, although I always find that word a bit fuzzy. I miss transparency, the feeling of clarity as well as openness and I have to listen very closely to locate details. For me, the treble is just within the acceptable range. It may not get much darker, but for that sibilants are not an issue at all.

The stage is more extended in width, though clearly compressed. In addition, there is an average separation that lacks "sharpness", so that instruments often blur into each other. Imaging is a bit of a mess in places, and so critical listening isn't really possible for me either. However, it is sufficient for background music.

Outro
Where the T1 PLUS can actually add value is with poorer/compressed recordings (whether that's in favor of the T1 Plus or not remains to be seen), as it handles this input very generously, also due to the strong rolling high frequency. Likewise, it works well in parts with rock/punk. Drums can make a decent ruckus without the cymbals getting too tinny, at least not really audibly, and electric guitars have a fat sound (if you're into that).

Otherwise, TIN HIFI has released an average budget IEM that you can visually see and hear the price. For pure bassheads, however, it is perhaps just the right niche product in the TIN HIFI product family.
Admittedly, one also gets used to the sound presentation, so that the T1 PLUS doesn't sound so dark and depressed after a short time. However, this then becomes apparent again quite quickly when switching to a tonally more natural IEM.
TIN HIFI shows KZ that it only needs one driver instead of 10 (ASX) for such a signature and that at a quarter of the price if you are looking for such a sound.


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.7
Sound: 7.7

Intro
A lot of attention was paid in advance to LARK, the new budget model from KBEAR.
This is not so much due to the marketing, but rather to a kind of hype within the community, as the tuner(s) have also expressed themselves more often.
So everything waited anxiously for the release date until it became known that LARK deviated from the actual intention and the final beta model due to a production error (wrong filter). Unfortunately, many buyers had already pulled the trigger and the "wrong" LARK was shipped before the problem was recognized. The wrong filter lets around 2-3 kHz and 4 kHz "too much" volume through, resulting in two peaks, which can be interpreted as positive or negative, depending on your listening habits. First of all: Whether with or without emphasis on the lower trebles, the problem is much higher (8-12 kHz).

In the further course of the whole thing, one can now clearly see how impressively fast KBEAR (representing China) was able to react to this, as they immediately took the 4K LARK out of circulation and replaced it with the revised version, which must be a great logistical effort, as KBEAR has several distributors, even though they are probably sitting door to door in China. Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that some still sell the "old" LARK unknowingly or knowingly in order to get rid of their stock, because a note on the packaging is missing and without a measuring rig it will be difficult to tell the difference if you don't have both at hand.

Here, however, it becomes clear how such a problem is handled in China (especially in the budget area, where mass is more important for the margin).
Fortunately, I have both models at hand and after I got the 4K LARK and contacted KBEAR to see how they would handle the different versions, I was also asked what I thought of the 4K model.
I meant that I didn't really mind the 2-4 kHz range at all, as it didn't seem too much for my taste, though a bit too bright, but more about the strong sibilants and the unnatural high frequency extension. The advice was thankfully accepted, but the "final" LARK now has a reduced lower high frequency, but the nasty peaks remain in the upper high frequency range and so the LARK clearly gives away its potential.

In my imagination, I would have left the 4K LARK's stock on the market without continuing to produce, taken more time for the revision of LARK V2 and waited to see what the general resonance is like instead of quickly extinguishing a fire that actually has its source somewhere else. Then one could have marketed the LARK as a new version, which I think is most important anyway. Not everyone has the insight into the CHI-FI world and will probably never know which LARK he has or that there are two versions at all.
I know, LARK "merely" is one budget model of many, but here KBEAR could have distinguished itself with professionalism and sustainable work, but failed to do so. Apart from that, the LARK has potential, which has been wasted for my taste, unless you listen to music with less vocals.
Sorry for the long INTRO!

Handling
The LARK has a catchy faceplate design. The honeycombs on the "brushed" metal make it look quite noble. Under the faceplate, however, is the standard plastic housing that we know from many KZ models, with a golden sound opening.
I haven't really had any comfort problems with this IEM design so far, and so the LARK is a pleasant companion to wear.

The packaging of the LARK looks quite high quality at first glance, but you can't really talk about sustainability here. My highlight is the robust and chic transport case. If you want to think ecologically, you leave out all the individual packaging, pack the silicone tips in a small bag for hygienic reasons and pack everything together with the cable in the hard case, as already practiced by other companies. The package size (which could then also be omitted completely) would shrink to at least a third. A package inside a package inside a package doesn't make that much sense, but I think you get my point.
I'm a big fan of useful inserts, but please save some resources and also production costs. However, such a presentation is still nice to look at.

The 2-PIN cable is budget standard and nothing special. The isolation is also average.

Sound
The review is based on the revised and current LARK.
I inevitably remember the review of the TIN HIFI P2, where I wished I could stop after the mids.

The bass is successful in itself. It finds a good measure of quantity so that it can still sufficiently serve bass-hungry tracks, is never overpowering, generally stays discreetly in the background and lets the mids shine. It's too tame for bassheads, but I also find it lacking a bit of organicity and thus a natural keynote. The bass seems a bit stiff, but can score with details and also copes well with fast passages.

The mids lack a bit of body, which sometimes makes them sound a bit thin, but in and of themselves they are quite linear in a mild V-Signaur, with an open and slightly bright sound (which, however, comes more from the treble). Here is actually the biggest difference with the "4K" version (which is a bit misleading, as the range around 2-3 kHz is likewise already boosted by 2-3 dB), as this still seems a bit brighter. However, I don't find this particularly disturbing or unnatural. It gives the signature, which then slides more into the V, a bit more effervescence and freshness, which then continues in the lower treble. The final LARK might sound too flat and emotionless to some. However, I don't think the more neutral orientation is a bad thing either, and so there could have happily been two versions, with appropriate labeling. Voices are not the liveliest, but very clear, with realistic timbre.

It now becomes somewhat problematic in the treble. Here I find the final LARK almost even an aggravation, because due to the level loss in the upper mids & lower treble the upper treble range asserts itself even more clearly (compared to the 4K LARK unchanged). This means that an unnatural emphasis is created here, which makes the LARK thinner than it should be, since the bass and mids actually harmonize very well and could have used an equally relaxed, slightly darker treble. Admittedly, the sibilant emphasis and also the sometimes nasty peak at 8 kHz is song-dependent and not constantly destructive, but still to a degree where I find it annoying and consciously avoid songs. Warm sources are preferable here, silicone tips with wider openings (not included) or foam tips. A good example is "White Walls" by Macklemore. Here, the sibilants on his parts are tolerable, but the bell (peak) and chorus (woman) is above the pain threshold for me. With less vocal-heavy music, a bright shimmer always resonates, but here the emphasized area around the 8- 12 kHz is not so noticeable. The treble, however, has a nice transparency and also knows how to please with information diversity.

It also contributes to a lush stage as well as good separation, where locating details and instruments is child's play. This is clearly the LARK's strength.

Outro
With the high frequency dropping earlier, the LARK could be quite a neutral and natural sounding no-brainer in the budget range and thus a welcome and largely unique alternative. As it is now, one should bring a certain tolerance for high frequencies and in the best case already have suitable tips at hand to control them somewhat. An equalizer helps too, of course, but out-of-the-box the LARK could cause problems, at least it did to me. Maybe there will be another 3rd version soon, but this time please with labeling!


___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 7.5
Sound: 7.7



Intro
>> The AKG K141 MKII is a semi-open studio headphone with supra-aural earpads.
So it says in the German advertising text and here first of all no discrepancies between marketing claim and reality are to be recognized.

The K141 MKII is the successor of the K141 with detachable cables and slight design adjustments, which should increase the benefit. A workhorse that performs well in terms of sound, but cannot and does not necessarily have to serve hi-fi demands. It's a good tool for monitoring vocals and instruments, but you shouldn't take too much time when singing in or recording, because the on-ear is not one of the most comfortable.

Meanwhile the K141 MKII is no longer in production, so you can only fall back on remaining stocks and used models.



Handling
Probably the biggest change to the original K141 is the removable cable. With each 3m and 5m (spiral) it is too long for mobile use, but you are flexible in the studio and the K141 MKII can also work as DJ headphones, at least concerning the handling.
Two different pairs of pads are also included. The imitation leather (pre-mounted) and velour pads can be exchanged quickly. The imitation leather pads are slightly softer, but also less durable and more predestined for sweating on the ear. The velour pads are firmer, but have the better comfort characteristics for me.
An adapter from 3.5 mm to 6.3 mm is also included.

I usually have a hard time with on-ears. They can certainly be an advantage for me as a wearer of glasses, but the general pressure on the ear is usually too much for me to be able to listen to music with them for a long time. This is also the case with the K141 MKII, even though the headband is quite comfortable due to its flexibility. The pads are the clear sticking point for me here. Nevertheless, it is a pressure I can bear, even if I always perceive it and find it disturbing.

Apart from that the workmanship is solid, even if the K141 MKII does not come close to the valuable impression of the "bigger" series of AKG. Due to the half open construction, some music gets to the outside world and also the isolation to the inside is not very given, apart from the on-ear wearing.



Sound
Bass
The bass is not the voluminous one and certainly cannot satisfy the pure bass hunger, but it is very direct and on the point. Its qualities are more in the detail work, but it can still strike when asked. But then not to the full extent, because there is something missing in the subrange. Parallels can be seen here to the K702, whereby the bass of the K702 seems slightly slower, but sounds more natural, especially due to its reaction behaviour. The bass of the K141 MKII is a bit more crisp, but it lacks a bit of the atmosphere. Nevertheless, it is very appealing and quite musical.

Mids
In the mids, as so often, you can hear immediately that you have an AKG sitting on your head. On the positive side, they are not quite as obtrusive around 2 kHz as the K702, which gives it better audibility and better all-round qualities. On the other hand, they sound a bit thinner and not quite as homogeneous as on the K702. Apart from that they have a quite high degree of realism, even if I miss some body in the mids. At times they can appear a bit dull, but this is also produced in combination with the highs, as they are not the most sparkling.

Trebles
Even if the highs lose a little of their effervescence and brilliance, they are extremely safe and therefore also perfectly suited for monitoring. Here it is not a matter of the finest micro details or the notorious need for ultimate resolution and level fidelity, which can quickly lead to exaggeration and fatigue. The K141 MKII's treble is very relaxed in this respect, like a K240 MKII for example, with the willingness to provide enough information to remain realistic and equally musical. Furthermore, the high frequencies fit in well with the neat overall sound presentation of the K141 MKII, without literally sticking out magnificently. Sibilants are also not an issue.

Stage
Despite the half-open construction, the stage has no special dimensions. For the monitoring requirements this is not necessary at all, because sometimes people are working in mono anyway, when they are not singing or playing along to a already mixed song.
But the stage is not claustrophobic or something like that, it's just in good average.

Imaging
Imaging is not the best in the somewhat centered sound presentation, but instruments are still easily located and decently separated. Here, too, one can speak of good average. However, one should not expect a highly sophisticated, finely differentiated 3D image.



Outro
In conclusion, the K141 MKII is musically versatile, even if it does not have the most quantitative bass range and is more concerned with safety than throwing every detail or recording error around your ears. Of course, this is not an advantage for the purist, but it does allow the K141 MKII to "overdub" worse input material. Due to the high efficiency at relatively low impedance it can be operated spontaneously on a cell phone without any problems, but you should always be aware of where you are due to the weaker insulation caused by the construction. Due to the quite high contact pressure of the K141 MKII an unpleasant pressure can develop after some time.



Thanks to Sattler Electronic Showtronic AG for providing the test headphones.
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/

Rating: 8.9
Sound: 8.9



Intro
The SRH1840 is in the end an open SRH1540, even though I can't tell if the hen or the egg was first. But in the end it doesn't matter, because SHURE manages the transformation in both directions.
For me, the SRH1840 is a very harmonic and coherent headphone that is convincing over the whole frequency band. Musical, always unobtrusive, detailed, authentic and balanced.



Handling
The SRH1840 shares the design with the SRH1540. Accordingly, it is one of the most comfortable headphones I have been allowed to test so far, even if there are still little things for me to achieve my personal comfort nirvana. For example, the velour pads could be a little bit thicker as well as the headband padding. Apart from that I am almost perfectly happy, also because of the secure hold, despite the low contact pressure and the weight.

You can't design a headphone much simpler and that's exactly what I like. Metal and plastic form a harmonious symbiosis without any big frills and splashes. The focus is unmistakably on the usability, which for me enhances a product more than gold-plated headbows.

In addition to the positive haptic impression, also regarding the workmanship, we receive a useful selection of accessories, like a second spare cable, a hardcover case, another pair of velour pads and an adapter to 6.3mm. The cable has a MMCX connector, which is rather unusual in the world of headphones and more common in the IEM universe. Unfortunately the connectors are a bit too far into the case, so I can't connect my own MMCX-IEM cables to the SRH1840, even if the connector would fit. So a quick changeover to a balanced operation would have been possible without investing money in an expensive special cable. A small downer.

Due to the poorer isolation caused by the construction, the SRH1840 is less suitable for noisy places at low volumes. It is also not the right companion in quiet environments, if other people should not be disturbed.



Sound
Bass
The bass of the SRH1840 is not only surprisingly present for an open headphone, it is also almost perfectly tuned. It has depth, texture and is more linear than the SRH1540. It retains the slightly softer touch, but sounds very natural and not too dry or sterile. It doesn't tend to droning and despite the slight speed limitation it can handle fast bass passages without having to give in. He also convinces me with his dynamics.

Mids
In contrast to the SRH1540, the SRH1840 sounds more airy and somewhat more harmonious in the mids. I can't make out the slight garishness of the SRH1540 here, since the open design also reduces the probability of disturbing resonances. The midrange of the SRH1840 is as soft as butter and sounds very homogeneous. The lower mids have a pleasant physicality, which is combined with a nice clarity in the upper range. Voices have a natural timbre in both genders and are equally present. I can't find any discrepancies in the instrumentation either, which makes the SRH1840 extremely versatile.

Trebles
The high frequencies were especially successful with the SRH1540 and they are also the same with the SRH1840. Here, they just don't stand out so positively, since the bass and the mids operate at the same high level, which makes the SRH1840 stand out from the SRH1540. The highs have a silky character with a mature variety of information and a transparent presentation. Sibilants are not noticeable and in general there are no limitations in audibility.

Stage
I wouldn't call the SRH1840 a stage monster, but as so often made clear in the review, it has an absolutely realistic extension in all directions for me, which again gives the SRH1840 the predicate "natural".

Imaging
The SRH1840 achieves a slightly better imaging performance compared to the SRH1540. The similarly inclined SENNHEISER HD6XX also has the disadvantage of separation, locatability and "3D illusion", which is also due to the more pronounced expansion and thus more level at both ends of the spectrum with the SRH1840. It is therefore not only an authentic, but also a technically mature headphone that can certainly attack higher price ranges.



Outro
I fell in love with the tonality of the SRH1840. Not only does it have a natural sound, but also a good extension at both ends and a very harmonious tuning.
In addition, the extraordinary wearing comfort, which is mainly due to the low total weight, but also the comfortable velour pads play a big part in it.

In terms of sound I wouldn't know in which field of application I could not imagine the SHR1840, even though the open construction means that there are obvious limitations in terms of isolation, especially if you care about your environment.

The SRH1840 is definitely not a headphone endgame, but it does a hell of a lot of things right and convinces with its simple design and authentic sound whenever it is needed.
Compared to the more midrange-oriented HD6XX, the SRH1840 sounds a bit fuller and more musical, with a more linear sound profile, but has great tonal similarities, even though the HD6XX appears slightly cooler and slimmer.

Thanks to SHURE for providing the test headphones.
___________________________________________________________
More reviews: CHI-FIEAR
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CHIFIEAR/