Introduction

Hi everyone, this a review of the Dunu DM-480, a $70 IEM that utilizes an isobaric "dual-push" configuration with two 8 mm titanium dynamic drivers. Full disclaimer: I was sent the Dunu DM-480 as a review unit from Dunu themselves in exchange for my honest opinions. You can pick one up at their official Aliexpress store or from your standard ChiFi distributors such as Linsoul or HiFiGo.

The Dunu DM-480 is made from a 3D printed resin with an ergonomic shape. They fit my ears quite nicely. They are also fully sealed without a vent, leading to a vacuum-like fit that may be uncomfortable to some depending on the tips used. Due to being fully sealed, isolation is quite solid on the DM-480.

In terms of accessories, the Dunu DM-480 comes with a nice fabric case, a shirt clip, and 2 sets of S, M, L tips. The included cable is a simple 2-pin cable with little cable noise and very little cable memory, which is nice. For this review, I used the S tips. While I typically use the M tips, I found that they sealed too well, creating quite a strong vacuum effect, and actually seemed to stifle the bass response a bit. Small tips were more comfortable and had a cleaner bass presentation.




Sound

Overall Sound Signature
The Dunu DM-480 sounds like a balanced IEM that had a bass boost flip switched on. Other than that, the DM-480 is a fairly standard IEM that doesn't push any technical boundaries. This is an IEM for bassheads, for those who enjoy EDM-like genres while still wanting to maintain clarity in the rest of the spectrum.

Bass
The first thing I noticed when listening to the DM-480 is the sheer amount of bass quantity it has. There's a visceral amount of it. Subbass and mid-bass are large and in charge without any roll-off in the low end. It rumbles. The transition from mid to upper bass is a smoothed deescalation. Thus, the bass response in the DM-480 is quite well contained without much bleed to the mids. Bass impact is heavy-handed with a lot of impact and well-defined with a note decay that is rather quick. Tonally, the DM-480 a little dry and to be honest, a little one-dimensional. As mentioned before, I did find that the S sized tips helped open up the bass a bit, allowing for a better subbass response.

Mids
The lower mids are lightly elevated as the boosted bass settles down to a more balanced signature. This adds a slight sense of thickness to the overall tone of the DM-480. Otherwise, the mids are fairly standard in a good way. There is an appropriate amount of pinna compensation around the 2 kHz mark for a natural vocal presentation though they do sound slightly distant. Above that at around 3-4 kHz is a small dip that tames the aggressive bite of electric guitars. Once again, timbre is on the dry side, especially for stringed instruments. As a whole, the mids of the DM-480 is easy to listen to with no real flaws to speak of.

Treble
There's a small peak in the lower treble to give the DM-480 some energy for the attack of the hats/cymbals and chime-like instruments. Beyond that however the DM-480 starts to wind down as its mid and upper treble responses are quite tamed. Thus, you get more of a crisp initial impact for hats/cymbals but little in the way of shimmer and decay. The treble response of the DM-480 helps maintain an overall clarity to the sound but isn't particularly remarkable. I find that the tamed treble does suppress the sparkle or airiness to a certain extent in a number of tracks. On the up side, the DM-480 isn't ever sibilant for me.

Staging and Imaging
The Dunu DM-480 has a mediocre stage with an in-your-head feel for the most part. While height and depth are present, they are shallow and the width of the stage extends to your ears at most. That said, the DM-480 has solid imaging capabilities within that stage. There's quite a bit of nuance past the normal Left, Right, Center and the DM-480 does a commendable effort in attempting create a realistic image.

Resolution and Separation
Resolution is quite average for the price and doesn't strive past that. Separation is pretty good as the DM-480 doesn't feel congested and instruments have their own small pockets to play in for the most part. As a whole the DM-480's technical ability here is what I'd consider average for good budget IEMs.


Should you buy it?
To be honest, while it's not my first choice, the DM-480 is fundamentally a solid little IEM with no real flaws and a heavy bass boost. It's perhaps the only budget IEM I can think of that I can confidently recommend as a basshead IEMs as other budget IEMs either simply don't have the same amount of (sub)bass quantity or are horribly flawed in other respects. If you're someone who perpetually leaves the bass boost setting on your DAP on, the Dunu DM-480 would be for you. That said, the budget IEM market is hyper competitive and the Dunu DM-480 doesn't necessarily offer anything new or exciting. For $70, the DM-480 manages to stay competitive thanks a well managed basshead tuning with a great fit and solid set of accessories despite a middling overall sound quality. Personally, I think the Tin Audio T3 for the same price present a very challenging proposition to the DM-480. And if you can catch the Tin Audio T4 for $80 during a sale, well, those blow the DM-480 out of the water (tuning aside).

Introduction
Hi everyone, this a review of the Shuoer Tape, a $130 IEM that has recently garnered some fame for it's sound quality at an affordable price. While the Shuoer Tape advertises that it utilizes an electrostatic driver, it is actually a magnetostatic driver. Full disclaimer: I was sent the Shuoer Tape from Linsoul as a review unit in exchange for my honest opinions.

The Shuoer Tape has a black full metal shell with a shape that is reminiscent of the Campfire Andromeda. It appears to be vented in the back but rest assured there is very little sound leakage. The Tape utilizes an MMCX connector and comes with a braided 2.5mm MMCX cable. Included is a short 2.5mm to 3.5mm adapter. Just like the Shuoer Singer, it's interesting that Shuoer has decided to include a 2.5mm cable with an adapter instead of just a 3.5mm cable.

In terms of accessories, the Shuoer Tape comes with a circular green metal screw case. Accessories are limited to two identical sets of silicon S, M, and L tips. I'm not a big fan of the quality of these silicon tips but they work well enough.

The fit of the Tape is fine for me though it does feel a little shallow. Isolation is decent enough for being vented but likely won't be enough for those in very loud environments.



Sound
Overall Sound Signature
The Shuoer Tape sounds classically V-shaped to me with a notable bass and treble presence while having thin mids. What's interesting with the Tape is that they manage more treble extension than a lot of IEMs do and adds an interesting dimension to it's sound. One thing that I did note was that the Tapes felt compressed to me; large choruses and outstanding transients feel a tad squashed and lacking it's usual energy. It's not bad but enough to make me think of it.

Bass
The Shuoer Tape's bass is tastefully elevated for a V-shaped IEM. I think it finds a nice balance between overtly bassy while still remaining a solid bass presence. Additionally, the Tape's bass is well controlled and does not bleed into the mids; it's quick and a little light. Despite the magnetostatic driver, the timbre of the bass feels quite close to a traditional dynamic driver. The Tape has good subbass rumble and doesn't roll off at the lower ends. Bass quantity does slope down as it approaches the mids but still enough remains to keep mid-bass clarity for bass guitar lines. If I had to nitpick, I'd say the Tape's bass is a little on the soft side and does slightly blurry at times.

Mids
There isn't much to say here. It's thin. Other than that, can't really complain about instrument tonality. The magnetostatic driver continues to show good speed and prevents the Tape from sounding muddy. There is a larger upper mid elevation that gives the Tape have a forward slant to it. The upper harmonics of stringed instruments are slightly exaggerated and brings out a good amount of clarity while vocals stand out clearly in the mix.

Treble
The most notable thing about the Shuoer Tape is its treble. It's immediately apparent that it has a solid amount of treble extension. There is a "sparklyness" to the sound that may be a little understated but present nonetheless. I quite like it as it adds flavor to music that partially goes missing as the vast majority of IEMs that start to roll off at the upper end. Yet at the same time, I wouldn't call the Tape bright. It has a minor dip in the lower and middle treble compared to the large upper mids boost. This prevents the Tape from having sibilance in the vocals or sounding shrill. While the dip in the lower treble does mean the crisp attack of the hats/cymbals are diminished, the Tape makes this up with a clearer shimmer and decay. That said, the Tape does sometimes sound a little brittle in the treble.

Staging and Imaging
The Shuoer Tape has a surprisingly wide stage, likely thanks to it's vented nature, but lacks adequate height or depth to have a well rounded stage presentation. Imaging makes good use of the wide stage and places different instruments in the stage nicely with good nuance.

Resolution and Separation
Resolution is solid for the price. The extended treble response adds small details that are normally hidden (whether or not this is "fake" resolution is another topic). The upper mids boost additionally accentuate note definition. Separation is quite good as well especially when combined with the wide soundstage.





Comparisons
MoonDrop Starfield
The MoonDrop Starfield is bassier and much more thicker than the Shuoer Tape. Resolution is also a clear step up on the Starfield despite its very tame treble response. Tonality in the Starfield also feels more realistic, if a lot warmer. Where the Tape gains an edge is in the wider soundstage it brings to the table and of course, its treble extension. The Starfield's staging is more well rounded with height and depth if smaller.

Tin Audio T4
While the Tape is thin, the T4 is lean. I find that the T4 has better clarity and resolution compared to the Tape. Treble wise, the T4 sounds brighter in comparison to the recession in the lower and mid treble in the Tape that keeps it tamed. While the T4 is no slouch when it comes to treble extension, it can't beat out the Tape.

Shuoer Singer
While the Shuoer Singer doesn't compete in the same price bracket, I thought I'd compare the two Shuoer budget IEMs. Overall, the Tape beats the Singer pretty handily. It has better resolution, better sound stage, and better tuning. The only place where the Singer has a bit of an edge is in a heavier hitting bass response.

WG T-one
To me, the WG T-one is the closest comparison to the Shuoer Tape. They have about the same technical ability in terms of resolution and separation. The WG T-one trades a wider soundstage for a more well rounded one much like the Starfield. Treble wise, while I like the Tape's treble extension, the WG T-one does a better job of presenting the delicacies of the hats/cymbals. Thus the choice between these two IEMs comes down to the tuning. I enjoyed the balanced tuning of the WG T-one more than I did the V-shaped nature of the Shuoer Tape during the week I spent listening to the two. That said, the Tapes do sound more unique compared to the WG T-one which can sound a little generic. While they both sound pretty good, they don't quite match live up to the sound quality presented by the Starfield or the T4.

Should you buy it?
If you like a V shape signature and "sparkly" treble, the Shuoer Tape is a good choice. I do want to go back to the start of the review where I mentioned it sounds slightly compressed. This slight compression makes the Tape feel less lively to me than it's competitors, making it easy to tune out at times. Otherwise, the Tape does bring good to the table. It has solid technical ability for it's price, treble extension beyond the vast majority of IEMs, and a wide soundstage. I don't think it's the standout choice for $130 but does establish itself as a reasonably competitive option.

Introduction:

Within the last few years, there has been a glut of new Chinese IEM makers eager to have a piece of the budget pie. Unfortunately, early attempts at making good budget IEMs were not always met with great success. Brands such as KZ have become notorious for overly hyped but ultimately disappointing IEMs. This has led to a general perception of "ChiFi": cheap Chinese audio products that compromise sound quality for the price.


In recent times, however, ChiFi has made a strong comeback against this sentiment. Starting with (or at least popularized by) the Tin Audio T2, new manufacturers have begun making well built (QC aside), competently tuned IEMs that have effectively decimated the budget market for Western IEMs. Just within the last 6 months, I've reviewed the KZ ZSX, BLON BL-03, Guideray Gr-I, TRN v90, Tin Audio T4, MoonDrop Starfield, and most recently, the WG T-one. For the price, the performance of these IEMs, each from a different company, range from being either simply good to truly great.


One such new company is Shuoer, of the recent Shuoer Tape fame. Today, this review focuses on the Shuoer Singer, a new $75 IEM that features a DD and an electrostatic driver. Full disclaimer: I was sent the Shuoer Singer from Linsoul as a review unit in exchange for my honest opinions.





The Singer:

As with the Tape, the Shuoer Singer utilizes an "electrostatic" driver in a hybrid set-up. The exact details of this electrostatic driver are not clear. I won't make any assumptions as to what the technology truly is but suffice it to say it is unlikely to be an electrostatic driver as seen in the Shure KSE series or the Stax headphones as it doesn't require a specialized energizer.


The Singer uses a small bullet-shaped shell with white text on a blue body. The white text prints a short marketing paragraph that unfortunately sullies the otherwise handsome blue shell. Interestingly enough, the Singer comes with a 2-pin 2.5mm braided cable and a short 2.5mm to 3.5mm adapter. Accessories wise, the Singer also comes with 2 sets of foam tips and 2 sets of standard silicons (S, M, L), a black carrying case, and 2 sets of tuning filters.


For this review, I used the silver-threaded tuning filters. I briefly tried the blue-threaded filters but found that they made the Singer sound significantly worse. The Singer becomes seemingly bassier, more bloated, and sounds more smeared out. Interestingly enough, they measure almost identically on a frequency response graph (courtesy of antdroid). My guess is that the tuning filter somehow affects the decay of the driver to turn the sound into a smeary mess. At any rate, I can't explain it via the FR graph so to quote WhatHiFi on why things sound different: "Because, dear readers, we can assure you they do."





Overall Sound Signature:

The Shuoer Singer is lively with a thunderous bass response and a focus on vocal clarity. It has a boomy low end, a large recession in the mids, a peak for vocal forwardness, and another steep recession in the treble. It's like the tuning of a night club. For some songs, this tuning seems to work decently well, especially on slow, ballad-like songs.


Bass:
The Shuoer Singer is very bassy. It has a visceral feeling of sheer quantity. It rumbles and slams at every turn and feels quite lively overall. In general, the bass is boomy when it comes to the kick and toms of the drums. During busy sections, this boominess can obscure the bass guitar as it gets lost in between the drums. In the same vein, the drums sometimes mask themselves as they bleed into one another due to a lack of note definition. Surprisingly, timbre in the low end remains fairly realistic even if it is boomy. Despite the significant amount of bass in the Singer, it doesn't actually sound like pure mud. The DD driver feels strangely quick even through the boominess.


Mids:
With the amount of bass in the Singer, the bass obviously bleeds into the mids. The majority of instruments become colored by the large elevation in the lower mids, taking on a much warmer tint to them. The more subtle nuances of a lot of instruments are lost behind the thundering drums. You can hear other instruments on top of the drums but they are without any tonal complexity. There is a large dip in the middle of the mid-range causing instruments that rely on harmonics in that range to become recessed. That said, the Singer does do vocals fairly well. The Singer compensates for the large bass bleed into the lower mids through a significant amount of energy in the 3-4kHz region to force vocal clarity through. The result is that vocals sound slightly warm while not being too forward. It's a roundabout way of resolving the hole Shuoer dug for themselves, but it seems to work well enough here. The combination of the Singer's lower mids that mask many different instruments' tone and the upper mids boost makes many instruments sound shallow. Notes feel superficially played. The best example is the acoustic guitar where, during busy songs, I don't hear the richness of the guitar's body but only the upper harmonics of the strummed strings.


Treble:
After giving everything it's got for the bass on the vocals, the Singer seems to give up here. While the Singer is not a dark IEM, treble is quite recessed with a steep decline following the upper mids. The hugely boosted 4kHz region bleeds partially into the lower treble and gives a bit of energy here. But otherwise, the treble is quite dead. Hats and cymbals sound cheap and one-dimensional on the attack. They completely give up on the shimmer and splash. Chime-like instruments feel lazy without brilliance. I expected the treble to be where the electrostatic driver makes its appearance but perhaps that was sacrificed for the vocals instead. At least there's no sibilance, harshness, nor peakiness.


Soundstage and Imaging:
In terms of soundstage, the width is about average for IEMs but there is a bit of height and depth added. Imaging is vague but it does use up the given soundstage to give a sense of instrument placement beyond the standard left, right, center.


Resolution and Separation:
Resolution is competitive for its price point with modern standards. Nothing outstanding but nothing to complain about. Separation is less than ideal as the lower mids mask a lot of note definition.




Should you buy it?:
No, not really. At $75, the Singer is in a highly competitive market spot. The Singer doesn't do much in terms of technical ability to exalt itself against similarly priced or cheaper IEMs. Instead, it offers distinct vocals against a booming bassy backdrop that isn't completely muddy. If that's exactly what you're looking for, the Singer might be the ticket. Otherwise, I don't think the Singer has the sound quality to be competitive. Ironically, many of the new ChiFi IEMs that have come out recently or are coming out are quite competently tuned with much more balance than the Singer. To me, the Singer acts as a contrast that reminds us how far we've come in ChiFi sound quality. While earlier ChiFi "tuning" was synonymous with bass bloated messes and peaky treble, the Singer improves upon this formula by suppressing the treble, forcing vocals forward, and managing to prevent a fully muddied low end. While I didn't hate the Singer and actually came to somewhat enjoy its tuning over time, I cannot seriously recommend it.

The WG T-one, a new $100 single DD IEM sporting a Tesla magnetic driver. Full disclaimer: I was sent the WG T-one as a review unit from Linsoul in exchange for my honest opinions.

The WG T-one has a nice black metal shell with a ripple texture on its faceplate. It comes with an equally nice 8-core MMCX braided cable that has pre-molded ear hooks. The cable feels solid with minor cable noise and no cable memory. It additionally comes with faux-leather carrying pouch and 6 sets of tips, including a set of foams.

The fit is quite good for me. My only complaint is that the bore size is quite large, making the WG T-one fatiguing in ear after a couple of hours.

Sound

Overall Sound Signature:

The T-one has a fairly balanced signature that leans towards being slightly warm. As the title suggests, the T-one is a jack of all trades. It doesn't particularly excel at anything nor does it do poorly at anything either. Conveniently enough, WG includes the frequency response of the T-one on the back of the box. I find that it matches what I hear reasonably well before that 10kHz mark.





Bass:

The amount of bass in the T-one's is what I would consider a good balance between being too lean or bassy. A Goldilocks situation. While the subbass does roll-off towards the very low end, the bass response is elevated equally without any area standing out. The balanced bass response of the T-one presents a sort of double-edged sword. As nothing stands out, nothing truly draws the listener's ear to anything. Despite the fancy-sounding Tesla driver, the T-one's bass doesn't hit particularly hard though it does sound full. In crowded tracks, the T-one can feel a little blurry as bass definition starts to get lost in the energy of the drums. Tonally, the T-one sounds just fine.


Mids:

The mid-range is elevated in the lower and upper mids with a dip in the middle. This allows for a warmer mids response giving body to instruments such as vocals, acoustic guitars, and electric guitars. "Lush", if you will. The dip in the middle followed by upper mids elevation provides a nice separation to bring out clarity in the vocals. Consequences of the dip mean that certain instruments that rely on this region are somewhat recessed. Notably, the lead line of synths are less forward and, depending on the setup, the crack of the snare. As with the rest of the T-one, the upper mids are also well balanced. Vocals are clear without being too forward or shouty.


Treble:

Once again, it is well balanced. Present but not hidden. As the T-one's treble isn't too elevated, there isn't a sense of sparkle or crispness though it does have some decent treble extension. Personally, the treble is where T-one does the best. The T-one handles the attack, shimmer, and decay of hats/cymbals quite well. Typically, this is where the vast majority of IEMs fail for me as they fail some aspect of reproducing the delicate timbre of these instruments. In the T-one, these instruments are well-rendered if a little boring due to a lesser treble emphasis as a whole. While there is a 5kHz peak according to the graph. I don't have an issue with this peak; there is no sibilance or harshness in the T-one to me.

Staging and Imaging:

Average for what I'd consider a good IEM. Stage has a good amount of height and depth. Imaging is a little vague but has nuance beyond the flat 3-point left, right, center.

Resolution and Separation:

Resolution is solid for the $100 mark but nothing crazy. Separation is similarly quite good except during crowded bassy sections.




Comparisons:

MoonDrop Starfield:

In the lower frequencies, the Starfield outclasses the T-one. The resolution and nuance in the Starfield is simply much better. The Starfield is also bassier.

In the treble, the T-one has the edge. Here, the T-one's treble is elevated compared to the very tame Starfield. I think the Starfield would be a better IEM if it had the T-one's treble response.

In both, I'd consider the soundstage, imaging, and separation to be about the same while the Starfield has better resolution overall.


Tin Audio T4:

The T4 is leaner and more analytical compared to the T-one. While treble is elevated in the T4, it can sound too aggressive and harsh at times compared to the more balanced T-one. The fuller low end response of the T-one also makes it smoother to listen compared to the T4, which feels like bass-boosted neutral curve.

The soundstage of the T-one is more well rounded than the T4, which is mediocre at best and flat at worst. Resolution wise, the T4 outstrips the T-one.


Should you buy it?:

No, but actually yes. To me, the WG T-one has no real flaws but it doesn't stand out either. To be honest, it made writing this review somewhat challenging as I was tempted to just say "Bass good. Mids good. Treble good." It's a very safe tuning and a very safe buy in my eyes. The downside lies not with the T-one but with how extremely competitive the IEM $100 market is. In the general $100 landscape, the WG T-one meets expectations for a solid IEM. However, the advent of the MoonDrop Starfield and Tin Audio T4 presents high bars to beat and the performance of the T-one simply falls short of their exalted status. That being said, I can recommend the T-one's safer, more balanced tuning as an alternative to the thick and bassy Starfield or the leaner, more aggressive T4.

While writing this review, I debated if I would end up giving it 3.5 stars or 4 stars. In the end, I chose 4 stars. Ultimately, I did very much enjoy listening to the T-one for this review despite recognizing it's a half-step below the Starfield and the T4. It is good, just not great. And at the end of the day, I think that enjoyment does warrant a 4 stars.

The MoonDrop Starfield is a new $110 single dynamic driver offering from MoonDrop that boasts a carbon nanotube diaphragm. Full disclaimer: I was sent the Starfield as a review unit from HiFiGo in exchange for my honest opinions. Edit: HiFiGo has provided a $5 coupon for the Starfield. The code is HIFIGO5.

The Starfield has a glittery deep blue shell with asymmetrical designs on its faceplates. Under the right lighting conditions, it's rather aesthetically pleasing. The shell has a decent amount of heft to it and is made fully out of metal. It's very comfortable in my ears, though the nozzle bore is on the larger side. It comes with a supple braided blue recessed 2-pin cable that matches the shell's aesthetic.

The box additionally comes with a few other goodies such as 2 extra sets of S, M, L tips, a small case, and oddly enough, tweezers and nozzle filters. I'm not exactly sure how to replace these filters but it's comforting to know that it's there.




Sound

Overall Sound Signature:
The Starfield is a full-sounding, bassy IEM with a generous amount of warmth and a very polite treble response. It would excel in many modern bass-heavy genres with a special mention of electric guitar tracks.

Bass:
Unashamedly bassy, the Starfield is coherent in the low frequencies with excellent bass note definition and solid sub-bass rumble. Bass guitar lines are clear, distinct, and nuanced. The Starfield trades quick transients for a heavier (and fatter) impact with a slight trailing decay that accentuates the full thump of the kick. It attempts to re-create that body-impact of a live room and does so with limited success. The trade-off is that the bass can sound "rounded-off" as if the skins on the drums are just a little loose. Even though the bass is elevated significantly, the Starfield does not bloat much into the mid-range. I have no issues with the timbre here; the Starfield proudly boasts a quality dynamic driver nature. If you love the feel of a thick, full bass response, especially a rolling bass guitar, the Starfield will satisfy.

Mids:
The lower-mids are the name of the game here. They are undoubtedly thick, contributing to the warm, full-bodied sound the Starfield embodies. At times, the Starfield can get overwhelmed in complex passages with too many instruments occupying the lower mids. There, the Starfield starts to blend notes and becomes a touch muddy, though this is rare. The tonality of instruments is quite good; there wasn't anything I could pick out as being off in any way. Vocals on the Starfield lean towards the warm and thick side of things, with enough upper mids to stand out from the mix without being recessed. Otherwise, the vocals on the Starfield isn't too special; don't expect any haunting female voices from it any time soon. Interestingly enough, electric guitars are what stood out the most for me in the mids. The tuning of the Starfield somehow managed to lend great body and a superb tone to the electric guitars. It's awesome if you listen to gritty rock.

Treble:
The Starfield's treble is polite. Too polite. It is never harsh nor sibilant to me. There is a good amount of lower treble that allows for the crisp attack of hats/cymbals and definition in the upper harmonics for acoustic guitars. However, the treble does start to slowly recess past that point, taking along with it the delicate decay of the cymbals or the airiness of the track. On occasion, I felt that the Starfield was almost suffocated or even choked (particularly in the vocals) due to the lack of treble, especially when coming from a more neutral IEM. This feeling went away over time as I got used to the Starfield's tuning. While the Starfield keeps a polite treble to craft a non-offensive experience for everyone listening, I can't help but feel that it partially compromises greatness for mere goodness.

Staging and Imaging:
The Starfield does a good job here. I'd classify it as an all-rounder. Not extraordinary but a good and competent effort. Good width and depth to the soundstage. Imaging is equally solid with more nuance beyond the 3-blob phenomena.

Resolution and Separation:
The Starfield earns major points here. It has fantastic resolution in spite of a light treble response. In particular, the lower-mids and bass regions are very well resolved. Both the electric and bass guitars benefit greatly from the Starfield's dynamic driver and are beautifully rendered in most tracks I tried. Instruments have a nice separation without feeling congested, though as noted above, they sometimes do step on each other's toes when passages get too dense with lower-mid energy.




Comparisons

I chose the Tin Audio T4 to compare the MoonDrop Starfield to as both IEMs hover around the ~$100 mark and represent a new generation of Chi-Fi monitors. In addition, ever since I first reviewed the T4, it remains my standard for comparisons for budget IEMs due to it's neutral tuning and solid technical foundation for the $100 mark.

When A/Bing, the tuning differences are immediate. The Starfield is thick in comparison to the T4's lean nature, with significantly upper-bass to lower mids that make the Starfield sound fuller. The recessed treble in the T4 is apparent against the T4's unashamed treble response; while the T4 carries the delicate drawn-out shimmer of the cymbals better, the attack of hats/cymbals can sometimes sound harsh compared to the ever polite Starfield. Conversely, the mid-upper treble in the T4 is a breath of fresh air to the Starfield lack thereof. Surprisingly, both have a comparable amount of sub-bass response, with the Starfield edging it out slightly. Technicalities wise, the Starfield is a quarter step above the T4, mostly due to a well-rounded staging presentation than the T4's flatter stage and strong resolution in the face of heavy low-mids emphasis.

Between the two, I think most customers would be better served with the Starfield. It has a much more forgiving and fun tuning compared to the T4's analytical slant without sacrificing technicalities. Fit is also better with the Starfield and the 2-pin connection tends to be more reliable than an MMCX. Congratulations MoonDrop. I thought it would be a while before another ChiFi IEM comes along to meet or exceed the $100 standard the T4 set but here is the Starfield less than half a year later.

Should you buy it?

Yes. For $110, the MoonDrop Starfield is an IEM that has no major flaws while sporting a consumer-friendly tuning for popular modern genres. Price tag aside, I think of the Starfield as a solidly mid-fi IEM that few would complain about. Its thicker nature and lack of airiness in the treble may be a little off-putting initially to those coming from more neutral IEMs but likely that feeling will go away with time. For most people, the Starfield will be a superb good starting point into the world of IEMs as you'll need to start spending quite a bit more to solidly beat them. I'll be interested to see how the IEM scene develops as companies like MoonDrop make better and better products at very competitive prices.

This a review of the Tin HiFi T4, the single dynamic driver successor to Tin HiFi's T2 and T3. I got the T4 early as a review unit from Linsoul and it will go on sale on November 11, 9:00AM EST on Indiegogo for $79 as an early bird special + $20 in-store credit at linsoul.com Otherwise, it will have an MSRP of $110. Here's the Indiegogo link: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tin-hifi-t4-in-ear-monitor-earphones

About Me: I've been a live sound tech for the past 6-7 years at a church as a hobby and I play the piano occasionally on the side. My current daily driver is the Sony MDR-EX1000 though I do enjoy dipping my toes in the ChiFi world. Rock is my favorite genre (stuff like this) though I'm impartial as long as there's great musicianship. I'm fairly new to the HeadFi scene but I've written a few reviews on reddit on other budget ChiFi IEMs before.

Build: The full metal shell is almost identical to the T2 with minor modifications. The first notable one is that the the nozzle is slightly longer than in the T2. The second is that the back vent hole is now moved to near the MMCX connector. The third is aesthetic with the turbine backplate. Otherwise, everything is the same. The nozzle is similarly wide, the weight is the same, and the other vent hole is still right next to the nozzle.

Accessories: The stock tips are pretty decent. You get 2 sets of silicon and a set of foamies. Despite looking like SpinFits, they are NOT SpinFits sadly. One thing to note is the stock silicon tips are about 50% longer than the stock in the T2 (9mm vs. 6mm). The included over-ear cable is quite nice, a 2 core cable with a simple braid. It's fairly soft and pliable, if a little bit grippy. It does have some cable noise, but it's not too bad. Oh, you also get a premium-looking leather case. It's a bit on the bulky side IMO, more of a toss-in-your-bag rather than put-in-your-pocket type of thing.

Fit and Comfort: The T4 actually fit better than the T2. The longer nozzle and tips really help the fit as you don't need push the wide nozzle as deep into your ear to get a seal like you did with the T2. Additionally, the pre-molded over-ear cable does a good job holding up the weight of the T4s. That said, if you had major issues with the T2's fit, this might not work for you. I personally didn't have an issue with the fit.

Overall Sound Signature: A neutral bright tuning with enough bass that doesn't feel lacking yet not bassy. Bright because it is slightly treble focused and may potentially be harsh or sibilant depending on your music. The T4 is particularly clean with solid resolving ability, having an engaging and almost sterile or analytical presentation.

Bass: Bass is clearly present without being overbearing, with more of a subbass focus than a midbass one. It leans a touch towards punchy than boomy and has a fairly quick decay. Bass impact is nice and tight though nitpicking says it would be improved if it were a little more authoritative. The strength of the T4's bass is that is well controlled without a hint of muddiness or bloat while maintaining a good sense of nuance in tone. Bass lines are smooth with well-defined notes that pop off in tracks.

Mids: Thanks to the single DD, the mids stay nicely in step with the transition from bass and to treble to maintain coherency. The lower mids are very lightly elevated while the middle mids are neutral, leading to a lack of coloration here. The upper mids rise reasonably around the 2kHz mark to meet the pinna compensation similar to both the DF and Harman targets but are tamed as to not be overly strident. Instruments are presented cleanly with their natural tone coming through nicely. One instrument that stood out to me was the clarity of the snare drum timbre paired with a good dynamic response. Vocals are clearly presented without being too forward or favoring male or female vocals.

Treble: The T4 starts its treble response with a soft peak around 5kHz in the lower treble that elicits a crispness to the sound. Past this peak, the T4 maintains an elevated treble response with good treble extension. Vocals benefit from this elevated lower treble response as it brings out clarity in voices. Additionally, individual note definition is distinctly apparent in the hats and cymbals, and the T4 is able to render the delicate sound of these instruments quite well, with a crisp initial attack and clean, nuanced shimmer. Speed is not an issue. This is something many IEMs struggle with and I'm very pleased that the T4 can handle this region without trouble. Some may find it harsh or sibilant, especially if they're sensitive around that 5kHz mark or listen to music that hasn't been too well mixed. I personally don't have any problems.

Staging and Imaging: Here the T4 stops being so stellar. The staging and imaging are quite average as far as IEMs go. While it never feels congested and there is enough staging and competent imaging, it doesn't push any new boundaries and has a slight in-your-face feel that makes the T4 more engaging.

Resolution and Separation: Compared to all the other ChiFi I've reviewed in the past, the T4 is a very solid step or two above in the resolution department. I'm able to pick out extra notes or nuances in instrument timbre in many of the tracks listen to that were previously obscured in other budget IEMs. I've used the words "clean" and "clear" multiple times throughout this review and honestly, that's because the T4 is just that. Notes and chord changes are distinct and instruments are well separated. Together with it's tuning, the T4 culminates into an IEM that sounds almost sterile and analytical at times with how clean it is.

Comparisons to the Tin HiFi T2: I spent a few days listening to the T2 before I got the T4 and the constrast is fairly stark. In terms of technicalities, the T4 defeats the T2 in every way and reveals the T2's weaknesses. It has greater resolution, less graininess, and a cleaner sound. Where the T2 is able to compete on is tuning, as it has sweeter vocals and better electric guitar body thanks to the small bump in the lower mids.

Comparisons to the BLON BL-03: These two IEMs are quite different from each other. The BL-03 has relaxed and bassy tuning compared to the more engaging neutral-bright signature of the T4. The BL-03 has a softer bass response that lies more in the midbass than the tighter subbass focus of the T4. Additionally, the BL-03 also sounds more smeared out while the T4 has a much cleaner note presentation. Resolution wise, the T4 does beat out the BL-03, but the gap isn't as wide as it as it was in the T2. Staging and imaging is about the same for both. The T4 handily beats the BL-03 in the treble thanks to it's ability to manage complex hats/cymbal passages where the BL-03 cannot. However, the BL-03 does have a warmer tone that may be more enjoyable for those who are treble shy.

Should you buy it? At it's MSRP of $110, I think it's absolutely worth it. It's a very good IEM that checks almost every box for what I believe a great IEM should sound like (tuning aside). I would have to nitpick to point out flaws. If you aren't treble shy and don't need a ton of bass, the T4 may fit the bill beautifully as a starter IEM (or even ending depending on you). It's engaging and coherent with great resolution and minor flaws. I can't say what it can beat above the $100 mark but I'm confident that the T4 will be a major benchmark for the entry into midfi.

This is a review of the TRN v90, a $53 hybrid IEM that boasts a single DD and 4 BAs. I got this as a review unit from Linsoul. If you're interested in it after reading this review, you can grab one here.


Overall Sound Signature: Generically V-shaped but otherwise inoffensive with a notable BA timbre and decent DD.



Bass: As a V-shaped IEM, it has a significant bass boost that makes it undeniably bassy. Subbass extends low with solid rumble and minor roll-off. The DD is neither boomy or punchy, with OK transients and a slightly slow decay response. Bass quality itself is fairly decent and nothing to complain about. Honestly, there isn't much to say here. It's good without any real outstanding pros or cons or noteworthy points.



Mids: The bass response does bleed into the mids, bringing some thickness and warmth into the lower mids. There is a slight muddiness to it overall, but nothing outside the ordinary. Vocals are very slightly recessed but are nicely separated and as mentioned, on the warmer side. Both male and female vocals are well balanced. One thing to note is that the BA timbre is a little noticeable in the mids, particularly with the electric guitars for me. It has that feeling of "dryness" to the timbre while being quick.`



Treble: The treble is pretty smooth without any troublesome peaks, though once again the BA timbre is noticeable. As a V-shaped IEM, it does have an elevated treble response, but it's quite tame. Particularly, there isn't a strong emphasis on lower treble energy and thus they lack a crispness to the sound. However, it has just enough mid-upper treble to keep your attention in the region without being fatiguing. Thankfully, unlike the V80s, the V90s are not sibilant. There are times when the treble does get messy with the hats/cymbals, a common issue with many IEMs.



Staging and Imaging: A little above budget IEM level of staging and imaging. It's never claustrophobic sounding or without some form of imaging but is otherwise unremarkable.



Resolution and Separation: Like many of the newer BA based budget IEMs, the V90s have an above-average amount of resolution. Separation is fairly decent as the V90 doesn't feel very congested even with its thick lower mids.



Build and Fit: The V90 has a solid build, being fully made from metal. The fit is very good and is comfortable for long listening sessions. The 2-pin included cable and tips are your standard stock accessories. Not the best, but they'll do the job.



Should you buy it?: For $53, the TRN V90 is nothing but a solid budget IEM and I would recommend it to anyone looking for a dependable budget V-shaped IEM. It doesn't really do anything wrong and is a good all-rounder. At the same time, it doesn't do anything particularly well and to be honest, it still has that budget feel to it and feels ultimately forgettable. To me, they're an example of something very generic but done well. It won't be the first thing I recommend to someone, but it'll be somewhere in the shortlist of things I would. If you're looking for something on the bassy side and can't make up your mind on what else exactly what you're looking for in your first IEM, the V90s would fit the bill.

This is a review of the KZ ZSX, a $50 KZ IEM that contains 5 BA and 1 DD. I got this as a review unit from Linsoul. If you're interested in it after reading this review, you can grab one here.

Overall Sound Signature: A very enjoyable and unapologetically energetic V-shaped IEM that is unfortunately marred by BA timbre.

Bass: The bass on the ZSX is elevated and at the forefront of its presentation. The DD is quick and provides a deep punchy bass response with great subbass extension. Decay is quick and the ZSX never gets boomy nor bloomy. However, like the many other KZ models, it suffers from a one-notedness to the sound quality, lacking the nuance in note timbre found in higher quality DD's (or even its budget friend the BLON BL-03). Midbass response is likewise pushed forward and the tightness of the DD helps bring out note clarity in quick bass lines. There isn't much bass bloat or muddiness, with the DD having a distinction from the BAs of the mids.

Mids: The lower mids have a slight incoherency issue as the midbass transitions into the lower mids and the BAs take over from the DD. At times, you can hear when notes are caught in that midpoint where the note timbre sounds distinctly off. Although the lower mids are elevated as part of the tuning, the ZSX doesn't sound too warm thanks to its pronounced upper mids. Vocals are forward and clear with surprisingly good vocal separation. Electric guitars are crunchy without lacking body. Once again, however, the BA timbre does shine through and doesn't sound fully natural.

Treble: As a V-shaped IEM, the ZSX is a little odd in that it has lower treble in spades but quickly drops off when it comes to the higher registers. The lower treble on the ZSX is crisp and distinct, especially when it comes to the cymbals/hats with nice definition upon the initial attack of the lower notes. However, sustained playing on the cymbals/hats at higher frequencies gets relegated to the background almost as a messy noise since the ZSX simply doesn't emphasize the frequencies there. The upside to this is that the ZSX doesn't have any sibilance in the vocals for me, is not peaky, and is not fatiguing to listen to. That said, it's not as if the ZSX doesn't have upper treble, it's just much less pronounced in comparison to its forward upper mids/lower treble.

Staging and Imaging: Like many other KZ models, the staging and imaging are that of traditional IEMs. That is to say, average at best. Nothing to complain about, but nothing great either.

Resolution and Separation: The resolution of the ZSX is definitely above that of similarly priced IEMs thanks in part to speedy BAs and the lower treble emphasis, making it feel clean compared to the smeariness of other budget models. As mentioned earlier, separation is great for vocals and other instruments with a distinct upper mid focus but can get fuzzy at crossover points like the lower mids or at in the treble.

Build and Fit: KZ seemingly has evolved their products to have a very standard style nowadays, and the ZSX is no different. It sports an over-ear design with a largish ergonomic shell design that seals easily for me. However, the issue I have with the ZSX is that it is relatively shallow fit while having a large nozzle that is uncomfortable to wear for longer periods of time. The cable and included tips are standard KZ, so nothing special there.

Should you buy it?: For $50, I highly recommend it. I think the KZ ZSX is a great value with a fun tuning that fits almost everyone. I very much enjoyed listening to the ZSX, something that I can't say for any of the past KZ products I've had to listen to before. It's simply a solid V-shaped IEM that you can't go wrong with, either for yourself or as a gift. While it may not be as technically proficient as the BLON BL-03, I do personally prefer the ZSX's more energetic tuning, especially for rock. Just watch out if you really care about bass quality and a more natural sound than what BAs provide.

This is a review of the BLON BL-03, a recent $40 IEM that features a 10mm carbon diaphragm dynamic driver. I got this as a review unit from Linsoul. If you're interested in it after reading this review, you can grab one here.

Overall Sound Signature: The BL-03 has a bassy sound signature that is fun, colored, and inoffensive. It shines with slower well-recorded tracks while stumbles a little on faster-paced music that has an emphasis on the hats and cymbals.

Bass: Without a doubt, the bass is front and center of this IEM and is surprisingly very good considering the BL-03's budget status. The BL-03's DD is nuanced without the one-notedness of its competitors, being able to show off the underlying note and timbre complexities in well-recorded tracks. The BL-03's DD is also fairly balanced to me, without too short or long of a decay, having a realistic DD timbre that isn't too punchy nor bloomy. There is a minor roll-off in the subbass compared to the midbass but both are present in spades. The subbass rumbles cleanly while the midbass adds plenty of color to tracks, be it quick bass guitar lines or the thump of the kick. Even though the BL-03 is bass heavy, it doesn't come off as overly boomy to me. The only complaint I have with the bass is that it can come off as a little soft at times compared to something like the enormous subbass slam that comes with the (in)famous MH755.

Mids: The BL-03's mids are a little on the thick side thanks to the emphasized low end of the IEM. However, I don't get a sense of muddiness from the BL-03, something that is rare to find in bass-heavy budget IEMs. Similarly to the midbass, the lower mids of the BL-03 very colored. Backing synths pads fill out tracks more fully while electric guitars take on exaggerated grittiness. Vocals are slightly warm and are well presented, neither recessed nor too forward. For the fun, colored sound signature the BL-03 shoots for, the mids serve their part just fine.

Treble: The BL-03 is a little treble light, lacking both the airiness of upper treble extension and the energy that comes with the lower treble. While there is good individual note definition in slow, well-recorded tracks, its DD cannot keep up with hats/cymbals in faster tracks and becomes trashy quickly, a common issue with many IEMs. Thankfully, however, the BL-03 doesn't have any treble peaks, keeping it from ever sounding sibilant, fatiguing, or having strange timbre.

Staging and Imaging: The soundstage is a touch above average, with stage depth but lacking stage height. Imaging is fairly decent with a couple more "steps" horizontally rather than the standard 3 blobs of left-center-right but can feel vague.

Resolution and Separation: Resolution is solidly above average for the <$100 range while instrument separation is good as the BL-03 doesn't feel congested even with so much going on in its lower range.

Build and Fit: The BL-03 sports a shiny, all-metal shell that's meant to be worn over-ear. The included 2-pin cable isn't great but is serviceable. It has a very shallow fit, leading to low isolation and an often awkward fit and seal. The included tips have a spinfit-like mechanism as you can see here, the short and narrow flexible region between the stem and the tip head. This is necessary for extending the length of the tip to compensate for the short nozzle. If you have larger ears, the BL-03 may not fit as I needed to move up from medium tips to large and even then I feel like I could go up a size to get a better seal. Something to keep in mind when thinking of purchasing.

Should you buy it?: For $40, the BLON BL-03 is definitely worth its price tag. I was surprised listening to it as I expected another bassy, low-res boom monster but instead got a fun sounding IEM that's rather clean with an outstanding budget-fi dynamic driver. This should be a superb IEM for most genres except for fast-paced technical tracks.