Reviews by grumpy213

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and @Eric Chong for arranging the Australian Head-Fi tour of the School of Athens series of cables (Aristotle and Euclid)

The world of audio cables is one that is fraught with danger. Considering one of more commonly discussed topics is whether they make any difference at all, one would imagine that this is not exactly a cakewalk of a market. Eletech has managed to be one of the top choices within the IEM cable market however, seemingly focusing on ergonomics with their thinner and lighter offerings that seek to extract as much sonic benefit from as little conductors as possible.
Today’s review concerns a departure from such a philosophy, opting more for a thicker gauge of wire in the same vein as Eletech’s main rival, Effect Audio and more specifically, the Code series.
The Aristotle is one of two cables from their new “School of Athens” series and one must wonder how these compare to Electech’s own offerings, their main competitors and the constant spectre of ‘snake oil’.

The Factual Stuff​

Featuring twist of two 18AWG wires fashioned out of oil-soaked copper litz, the Aristotle is a departure from the usual 4 wire higher gauge combo that Eletech have traditionally enjoyed using.

The wires are also shielded with a 24 AWG “Active Shielding” and ohno continuous casting (OCC) copper shielding. These wires are terminated in your choice of termination and connectors (this review unit is 4.4mm and Versa, Eletech’s own interchangeable connector system).

Eletech opts again for some rather chunky and cool looking milled hardware to accent these rather thic wires.

The Opinion Stuff​

I can (or think that I can) hear differences with certain cables with IEMs. The magnitude of these differences differ from cable to cable and from IEM to IEM but I do indeed believe in them. Should you not and feel the need to berate me and question my intelligence, feel free to do so below.

The following impressions are written utilising the following IEMs:
- Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite (multi BA mid-fi);
- CCA Trio (triple DD cheapy);
- Campfire Audio Supermoon (Single planar kilobuck); and
- Unique Melody Multiverse Mentor (TOTL-ish hybrid).
Paired with a Shanling M6 Ultra (M6U).

Cables do not immediately carry over a specific sound signature in my experience, the extent of its sonic change changing with the IEM being used but there is a tendency to find some constants which I will speak about below.

Sound​

Bass​

The Aristotle presents with a healthy amount of lower end oomph, more often than not, imparting some additional emphasis in the bass frequencies with my IEMs when compared to the stock cable.
The sub-bass seems to emphasised somewhat, generating greater physicality in the low-end. Mid-bass also gets a slight heightening with punchiness becoming somewhat more prominent in the mix.
With certain IEMs, there is a loss of texture and detail in the low-end with the Aristotle seemingly emphasising it to the point of losing some greater granularity in the low-end. This was most apparent with the likes of the Mentor but this was not wholly detrimental.
I am of the opinion that any sub-bass focused element in your chain is not exactly a terrible thing to have. Sub-bass rears its head in more modern productions and a healthy shelf in this region is something that I find completely non-offensive. The mid-bass boost is subtle but on the Trio, it generated some slight muddiness in the crossover to the mids. This cannot be chalked up to the cable itself in isolation but rather a demonstration of the synergies that one must keep in mind.

Mids​

Moving to the mid-range of the Aristotle, I felt that the aforementioned mid-bass punchiness imparted a good sense of weight and depth to the lower-mids. With male vocalists on songs such as “What You Won’t Do For Love” and “Out of Time” presenting in a manner that was very endearing. On the latter song, which samples form a 1980s City Pop song, the lushness and warmth of the song is accentuated to a point that feels almost gooey to listen to (in a good way) with the Mentors. The Aristotle in this regard presents a more euphonic and warmed approach, eschewing clean and clinical for, dare I say it, a more ‘analogue’ presentation.
Female vocalists such as Arian Grande on “34+35” has a tendency to come off as overly thin and sometimes shrill on certain IEMs. The Aristotle seemingly recessed the upper-mids as Ariana felt less forward in the mix when compared to some of the stock cables with the IEMs I was testing with. There was a greater smoothness to her voice and the sibilance that was apparent on the likes of the Trio and the Supermoon fell away to a more relaxed presentation. The caveat of this was that notes felt less well defined but the comfort and ease of listening were definite benefits.
Overall, I feel that the Aristotle presents a more smooth and easy listening approach to the mid-range and imparts a sense of warmth overall. This is well suited to the sharper and edgier IEMs in this review, being the Supermoon mostly. On warmer IEMs such as the Trio and the Mentor, this felt a little overindulgent at times.

Treble​

In terms of treble performance, I felt that the Aristotle recessed certain instruments in this region. Percussion on “Reckoner” by Radiohead is a very prominent feature of the song and compared to the stock cable, the Aristotle seemingly pushed it back further into the mix. Despite this, there was no real loss of perceived energy as it sounded quite energetic and sparkly, which in my case was quite enjoyable to listen to.
“The Demon Dance” by Julian Winding has a brush on a hi-hat that underlies the entire song which is a quite dark and moody in character. The recessed nature of the brush was somewhat disappointing on the IEMs such as the Mentor as it felt more monotone and less engaging but a more critical listen yields that it still holds energy, just not as prominent in the mix.
This treble performance worked well with the Supermoon, which I find at times, quite fatiguing overtime. This is not to say that it is inherently sibilant or shouty but the edginess of notes in this region combined with its somewhat unnatural timbre often leads me to taking some breaks from time to time. The Aristotle seemed to synergise well with this as it simply pushes it back further and seemingly dampens some of its aggression.
Overall, treble performance is quite good despite recessing notes in this region. There is a retention of energy but overall, the Aristotle doesn’t place huge amounts of emphasis in this regard and for that, I feel like it is a good match for IEMs that you are trying to relax slightly.

Technicalities​

Technical performance of a cable may be a laughable matter for some individuals in this hobby, but I feel that certain cables yield greater performance in this regard. The Aristotle is an example of this in my mind as I heard a more grand and complete staging with the majority of my IEMs in this review save for the Mentor. The stock cable on the Mentor imparted a greater sense of holography and enveloping headstage but the Aristotle was no slouch.
Staging feels nice and open, with a good sense of depth and width when compared to the stock cables on the other IEMs. Detail and resolution was also quite good, there was no night and day difference here but perhaps due to the better staging, IEMs like the Trio and the Orchestra Lite sounded more coherent and articulate with their rendition of certain notes. Things were easier to pick out for me and felt more well detailed when compared to the stock cables.
Overall, the Aristotle’s technical performance is not a night and day difference, this is something that is quite rare with most cables that I have tried with the exception of the likes of EA’s Code 23, Fusion 1 and Cleo 8W Octa. The Aristotle doesn’t really reach this level of difference but it is a strong performer nonetheless.

Comparison​

vs Effect Audio Fusion 1 (from memory)​

The Fusion is a similarly configured 2 wire cable and comparing the two from memory, I note that the Fusion presented a greater revelation in terms of technical performance presenting a more complete stage and a more highly detailed note rendition.
Sound signature on the Fusion presents fairly similar to the Euclid with the exception that bass boost on the Fusion is more aggressive than on the Euclid presenting with greater decay. I recall that the Fusion did come off as a little too smoothed out in the upper end without the same etched nature as the Euclid and as a result I would state that the Euclid did a better job in the upper end of the FR curve compared to the Fusion. Quality of life wise, the Fusion was slightly more pliable and didn’t have as much memory as the Euclid but overall, both did respectfully for their rather thick wire configuration. TermX on the Fusion with its interchangeable terminations may be a benefit over the Euclid but I found that it was too easily detachable and poorly suited to my 4.4mm only setups.
ConX, the interchangeable connector system for the Fusion is not as secure as the Euclid’s Versa system which relies on screw down caps to keep the connector perfectly aligned and secured.
Overall, I found the Fusion to be the safer choice overall for those looking for a more prominent sonic difference but the Euclid’s treble performance seemed to outstrip the Fusion as it remains a distinctly prominent feature of my notes compared to the Fusion 1.

vs Eletech Aristotle​

The Aristotle and the Euclid embody some time-tested tenets relating to silver and copper with the former providing a greater level of low-end oomph and forwardness. I believe that the Aristotle has a stronger and more visceral sub-bass and mid-bass performance when compared to the Euclid which relies on more speediness and detail. Despite this focus, I believe that the differences are minute enough that the Aristotle handily wins this match-up.

In terms of mid-range, the Aristotle imparts some more warmth and smoothness than the Euclid. This is a particularly good feature in my books as I quite enjoy 'soulful' lyricists but the Euclid feels more immediate, less lethargic and more resolving with instruments such as piano. I believe that the Euclid imparts greater influence in this region compared to the Aristotle but overall its a matter of pick your poison.

The treble on the Aristotle is more laidback and smooth compared to the more etched and brighter Euclid. I found that the Euclid's impact on treble performance was very pronounced with a greater impartation of detail and resolution compared to the slightly darker Aristotle. In this regard, I found the Euclid a more exciting and addicting listen whereas the Aristotle failed to make anything really stand out in this regard.

Technical performance on the Aristotle is more suited to my tastes. In terms of staging, the Euclid seems more 2 channel in nature wheras the Aristotle seems to have a more 'wrap around' headstage. The former is not exactly bad as it does very well to resolve details within this unique stage well whereas the Aristotle seems to have some ineffectual notes in this wraparound stage and its smoother nature. Detail retrieval goes slightly to the Euclid as a result of that etched and drier sound signature but the difference, in my books, do not warrant the significant difference in price.

Overall, I find that Euclid is a more critical listening cable that is not nearly as versatile as the Aristotle. The Euclid is the master of its class whereas the Aristotle is a jack of all trades.

Quality of Life and Value​

Eletech are quite renowned for ergonomics opting to avoid overly cumbersome 8w cables for 4 wires. The Aristotle represents a departure, opting for 2 wires albeit with a thicker gauge of wire that is also shielded. The result of this is a rather sleek looking cable which doesn’t feel overly bulky but has some ergonomic issues. The Aristotle is not very pliable nor flexible and retains some of its memory when unfurling it from its case. The result of this is some minor annoyances when compared to their traditional 4w cables but when compared to the competition in the form of Effect Audio’s Code series, the Aristotle remains quite good. The Code 23 was unbearable, the 24 acceptable and the 24C being the best of the bunch. I feel like the Aristotle remains the best of these and I would definitely recommend it ergonomically over the Code series.

The inclusion of Versa, the interchangeable connector system that allows users to change between major conector types is a valuable one in my mind. I have qualms with competing solutions such as ConX by Effect Audio which remains quite unsecure (it unscrews itself from time-to-time) and may have issues with alignment. Versa features a rather elegant locking mechanism and I feel that it gives me a lot more comfort than EA’s solution. Furthermore, the use of Versa also means that the Aristotle is versatile enough to be used on all your IEMs in your collection. From Elysian’s using P-Ear, Campfires with MMCX and all your greatest Chi-Fi hits in 2-pin or QDC, the Versa can do it all.

749 USD is no slouch in pricing and for that you could buy a wealth of options in the IEM space which I feel your funds are better deployed. However, should you have something already quite expensive and are looking to eek out more performance, the Aristotle does a good job. It is however, more expensive than the likes of the Code 23 and Eletech’s other offerings such as the Raphael which contains some of the same sound signature.
One must wonder how much of this pricing is dedicated to the fancy looking hardware, the sleek unboxing experience and the cool leather case. All of these elements definitely adds to the wow-factor of the Aristotle but also raises questions (at least in my head) as to what percentage of my 749 USD is going to these elements as opposed to just good wire for my IEMs.

Overall, I feel that the Aristotle is decent cable ergonomically when looking at the competition in this product category. The Raphael, which is cheaper and more easily usuable on the go, is able to achieve similar sound but at the cost of some technical performance (more confined staging, less resolving from memory). If you’re already reticent to accept cable rolling as a valuable exploit then I would give this a miss. However, if you are looking for a good companion for even TOTL IEMs with already “good” cables, then the Aristotle presents a strong competitor in this market.

Conclusion​

The Aristotle represents a new design from Eletech who, in my mind, have limited themselves to thinner gauges and less wires when all I desire is 8 wire or 12 wire behemoth. And Eletech have done well, the Aristotle presents a ooey gooey listening experience that is wonderfully musical and well articulated. I do not feel that it was at a loss when comparing to the likes of the PWAudio Deep of the Universe that comes with the Mentor and it was a tangible upgrade on multiple IEMs which, admittedly are cheaper than the cable itself. With excellent sound, respectable ergonomics for the product category and the versatility of interchangeable connectors combined with the finish and design that Eletech brings, the Aristotle presents a good wow-factor to your cable rolling experience and I feel that you are an individual with a stable of multi-kilobucks, the Aristotle is a great choice.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and @Eric Chong for arranging the Australian Head-Fi tour of the School of Athens series of cables (Aristotle and Euclid)

Math and logic are hardly elements that I would associate with a topic as controversial as cables given the rather prolific thought that it is all hogwash and snake oil. There is, however, an inherent intrigue in the science (and to some, the pseudoscience) of various types of materials, their geometries, their properties leading to a potential change in sound. I, for one, am a believer in the idea that a cable roll can shift sound but not always in a positive manner. Today’s review concerns the Eletech Euclid, named after a famous mathematician, the Euclid seemingly tries to appeal to those who appreciate logic and the order of mathematics, but the more important question is, does it improve how your IEMs sound?

The Factual Stuff​

In a similar configuration of its similarly thick cousin, the Aristotle, the Euclid adopts two cores of 18 AWG wire fashioned out of ‘triple coaxial pure silver litz + 1% gold”. This is in a ‘multi-sized stranding design’ and has a 24 AWG active shield and shielding net.
This is all contained in a rather handsome looking silver coloured cable that features Electech’s milled hardware and is terminated in your choice of 2.5, 3.5 and 4.4mm terminations and your choice of connector. This particular model is 4.4mm and terminated with Eletech’s proprietary changeable connector system, Versa.
The Euclid comes with a handsome leather zip case and a little clip in the same fashion.

The Opinion Stuff​

Cables do not immediately impart a certain sound signature or improvement in quality but rather is a matter of synergistic pairings and whether or not an IEM is receptive to its influence. However, utilising cables across various IEMs usually yields certain signatures that can be associated with the cable itself albeit usually at varying degrees of obviousness.
The below impressions are common traits that I noticed in my listening time and in comparison, to the stock cable for each IEM.

Sound​

The following review is conducted with the following IEMs:
- CCA Trio – cheap triple dynamic driver IEM;
- Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite – mid-fi multi balanced armature;
- Campfire Supermoon – kilobuck single planar driver;
- Unique Melody MEST MKII – kilobuck quadbrid; and
- Unique Melody Multiverse Mentor – TOTL-ish hybrid.

Bass​

The Euclid appears to impart a more restrained influence in the low-end presenting as a more tight and speedier rendition of bass. Sub-bass and mid-bass both seemed to hit with a little less authority as quantity seemed to recede slightly switching back and forth from the stock cable. “The Plan” from the TENET soundtrack presented in a more shallow and restrained manner but perhaps a consequence of this more light touch is a more prominent sense of texture and detail. I was able to gather more appreciation for the detail within what is usually a booming bassline and dissect certain nuances that I was not able to with the stock cable.
Mid-bass presents with a good sense of punch still and not much changed from stock cable to the Euclid save for the aforementioned articulation of detail within.
There is a sense of speed and pacing to the low-end that presents a more metronome like rendition, cutting away the fat and bloat to reveal a more precise bassline.
Overall, this is not a basshead’s favourite cable as it provides a more restrained approach to the low-end in order to provide more detail and speed which are, in their own way, quite enjoyable to listen to.

Mids​

Midrange performance yielded an odd mix of characteristics. First and foremost, vocalists seemed to be pushed back slightly in the mix which was most apparent in the Multiverse Mentor, quite a mid-forward IEM. There is a benefit in that there is a greater sense of stage depth but there is also a caveat in that it feels less engaging in terms of vocal emotionality. It doesn’t descend into a veiled mess however, as the vocalists remained present in the mix, simply not overbearing. Male vocalists however, seem to present with a honeyed and thick sound that lends itself quite well to older soul and RnB. Female vocalists are also somewhat relaxed which is quite handy to have with more higher-register singers such as Ariana Grande, who on some of the IEMs mentioned above, comes off as a little shrill from time-to-time. The Euclid felt as though I could listen to these same IEMs for hours on end to a best hits playlist of Ariana.
There is a retention of energy and edginess to certain notes, but they simply feel pulled back enough to not hurt me over longer listening periods.
Overall, the relaxation of vocals with the Euclid lends itself to a more laid-back listening experience and the mids remain quite well detailed and well-timbred.

Treble​

Moving to the upper-end of the FR curve, the Euclid imparts a good sense of air and detail within that air. Percussion on songs such as “Reckoner” by Radiohead feels crystalline and etched in its presentation, there is a graininess and edginess to its rendition that is delightfully endearing. I found myself seeking out percussion to the detriment of my ears as whilst it is very detailed and engaging, it was also somewhat harsh to my ears. The aforementioned airiness generates a strong sense of space but the retention of energy in this space was addictive to listen to. I wouldn’t characterise this as a “bright” cable but there is definitely a character of indulgence imparted on this end of the FR curve to generate a strong sense of a U-shaped tuning versus a V-shaped tuning meaning that treble is accentuated to the upper-limits of human hearing.
Overall, I believe that the treble performance of my IEMs when paired with the Euclid was quite excellent for those seeking out a more detailed and strongly accentuated treble.

Technicalities​

A cable imparting a change in techs? This is something that I’ve noticed with several cables and the Euclid is no exception, whether or not it is a positive change is another question.
The main difference I noticed with the Euclid was an oddity in staging in that the Euclid seemed to impart a unique staging experience wherein it is distinctly in front of you. The Mentor, a very strong staging IEM with its BCD seems to envelop the head with music with its stock cable. The use of the Euclid with the Mentor seemed to present something akin to a 2-speaker set up in a medium sized room. This is not as impressive as the stock cable but is enjoyable in its own unique way.
Detail and resolution seemed to be heightened by the aforementioned treble characteristics presenting in a more etched, immediate and speedy manner. There is a sense of reduced decay on slower IEMs like the Trio generating a greater sense of granularity in the detail.
Imaging because of some of the above factors also sounds slightly more articulate. However, rear imaging did seem a little more blunted and difficult to ascertain.
Overall, the Euclid didn’t seem to offer up as dramatic as a technical boost as some other cables but overall, it didn’t make anything worse from an objective perspective.

Comparison​

vs Effect Audio Fusion 1 (from memory)​

The Fusion is a similarly configured 2 wire cable and comparing the two from memory, I note that the Fusion presented a greater revelation in terms of technical performance presenting a more complete stage and a more highly detailed note rendition.
Sound signature on the Fusion presents fairly similar to the Euclid with the exception that bass boost on the Fusion is more aggressive than on the Euclid presenting with greater decay. I recall that the Fusion did come off as a little too smoothed out in the upper end without the same etched nature as the Euclid and as a result I would state that the Euclid did a better job in the upper end of the FR curve compared to the Fusion. Quality of life wise, the Fusion was slightly more pliable and didn’t have as much memory as the Euclid but overall, both did respectfully for their rather thick wire configuration. TermX on the Fusion with its interchangeable terminations may be a benefit over the Euclid but I found that it was too easily detachable and poorly suited to my 4.4mm only setups.
ConX, the interchangeable connector system for the Fusion is not as secure as the Euclid’s Versa system which relies on screw down caps to keep the connector perfectly aligned and secured.
Overall, I found the Fusion to be the safer choice overall for those looking for a more prominent sonic difference, but the Euclid’s treble performance seemed to outstrip the Fusion as it remains a distinctly prominent feature of my notes compared to the Fusion 1.

vs Eletech Aristotle​

The Aristotle’s low-end performance seems to be more prominent than on the Euclid, with a healthy impartation of quantity and quality. The sub-bass rumbles more and the mid-bass punches harder on the Aristotle compared to the Euclid and for those looking for a more ‘fun’ listen, the Aristotle is a definite winner.
Mid-range performance on the Aristotle opts for a more linear experience than on the slightly recessed and relaxed performance on the Euclid. The mid-range on the Aristotle didn’t seem to yield as much to phone home about but it remained distinctly fine compared to the more dramatic shift on the Euclid that I feel might be slightly divisive.
Treble performance on the Aristotle is slightly brighter than on the stock cable and perhaps on par with the Euclid in terms of sheer quantity imparted. However, the difference in their articulation is quite present with the Euclid sounding more etched and grainy to the ear, creating a greater sense of detail and granularity compared to the Aristotle which is smooth but elevated on the whole.
Tech-wise, the Aristotle’s stage sounds expansive to the Euclid’s more front-on presentation, to which I definitely prefer the Aristotle. Euclid’s staging is unique but I find the Aristotle to be more suited for an immersive and relaxed listen.
Overall, I find the Aristotle to present a more well-rounded experience that is easier to love for the everyday listener whereas the Euclid seems to specialise in heightening detail for the more critical listener.

Quality of Life and Value​

The Euclid is expensive. There is no ‘real’ saving grace for the price and I feel that this price for what I deem to be a more specialist cable is a bit of a difficult thing to recommend. The Eletech unboxing experience is definitely something to behold and the care and detail put into the product makes it a special experience. However, when it comes to sound, I do not feel that the Euclid is a slam dunk, runaway winner in its category and for that I do not feel that it represents supreme value. What it does well, it does very well but the uniqueness of the Euclid is also what makes it (to me) more of a love it or hate it cable.

The build quality and quality of life benefits of going with an Eletech Euclid include a great leather zipper carry case, the Versa system which is the best interchangeable connector system in my opinion and a wonderfully finished cable with excellent hardware build quality.

Ergonomically, the Euclid is not nearly as good as Electech’s other options but when compared to the likes of the Code series from Effect Audio (23, 24 and 24C), I would be much happier to live with the Euclid due to its surprisingly good malleability. Memory is still an issue as it seems to retain its shape after unfurling it from its case but overall, this is a good performer for its product category (thicc boi 2 wire cables).

Overall, the divisiveness of its sound quality diminishes the sense of value I hold towards the Euclid, I found myself not liking it all with some IEMs and absolutely addicting with others. As such, this is a try before you buy situation and as such I am reticent to heartily recommend this from a value perspective.

Conclusion​

Snake oil remains a phrase associated with the world of cables yet the Euclid, with its underpinnings of science and mathematics seems to shake these epithets off in order to deliver a unique sound signature imparted on your IEMs. A tremendous treble performer which delivers speed and immediacy in the low-end and a unique staging experience, the Euclid doesn’t present an all-rounder. But its specialities are indeed special and that combined with a great package of goodies and excellent build qualities yields a competitive option in its price and product brackets.

Addendum​

I had mistakenly drafted the review under the impression that this was the MEMS-3S when it was actually the MEMS-3. Apologies to the team at Soranik for this mistake.
The original review has been corrected with relevant details for the 3 and the details for the 3S removed.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and Soranik for arranging the Australian Head-Fi tour of the MEMS-3.

The world of audio is a rather mature industry in that transducers are hardly a new idea. The underlying technology is grandfathered in and despite manufacturers stating something is a "3rd generation unobtanium forged ultra-fast dynamic driver with nanometre precision and nanosecond response", it is uncommon to see something groundbreaking.

That is, until MEMS have entered the consumer market and have found their way into an increasing number of IEMs. Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) are valued for being small, easily manufactured and very precise. Today's review concerns the Soranik MEMS-3 (M3), an IEM from a Vietnamese-based manufacturer that has a MEMS drivers coupled with the old-guard of transducer technology, two dynamic drivers (DD).

And so, I ventured to see whether the M3 is a signal of a changing of the guard, or simply an exercise in novelty. Does MEMS have a place in the very competitive market of audio and more importantly, does the M3 sound good?

The Factual Stuff​

The M3 house within their rather simple looking black resin shells a full-range xMEMs speaker (a type of MEMS), a full-range DD and one DD focused on the low-end.

This review unit came accompanied with Soranik’s MEMS-AP1 energizer which I understand to be an upgrade over the stock MEMS-AP0 energizer.

Otherwise, within the sleek and understated box, there is a 4.4 to 4.4mm IC, the energizer, a small metal puck case for your IEMs, some literature and eartips.

The M3 is priced at 1600 USD and 2200 USD for CIEM.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

This review was conducted using the M3 with its stock cable, Final Audio E-Types, the included IC and energizer hooked up to a Shanling M6 Ultra.

Bass​

Unfortunately, I start this review with perhaps the most jarring portion of the M3, the bass. The low-end tuning of the M3 is robust and generous with its sub-bass boost, generating a strong sense of presence and physicality with booming and engaging bass. Mid-bass also presents quite well, with a healthy amount of boost to counteract any leanness in the lower-mids and to provide a sense of punch to certain music. Songs such as “THE PLAN” from the TENET soundtrack booms with significant authority. This level of bass is quite endearing and entertaining to listen to but ultimately, that’s where the praise ends. The quality of the low-end is ultimately the most disappointing aspect of the M3 to me as it seems as though the dynamic driver is struggling to render the low-end with requisite texture, detail and speed. It is quite jarring to listen to this booming bass in the broader context of very fast and very detailed MEMs-based drivers rendering the full range of the frequency response (FR) curve. There is a lack of tangible detail in the low-end and this is compounded by a lack of extension and impact. This DD doesn’t seem to be pushing that much air as sub-bass, whilst obviously tuned aggressively, lacks that sense of extension and punch that one hears from a very capable and well tuned DD. The bass is quite surface level and lingers for a millisecond too long, it’s as though someone has strapped a subwoofer to a rusty old civic, it feels fragile.

Woke Up by XG’s bassline sounds too slow and seems too boomy, lacking the incisiveness and immediacy that one would desire from their bass.

Overall, the bass is slow, blurred and woolly to listen to. It’s only saving grace is that there is a tinge of guilty pleasure bass in that it is just aggressively tuned and gives me the boominess that I want from certain songs. Imagine an aggressive bass shelf on Spotify or something.

Mids​

Moving on to the mid-range, that’s where the M3 starts to flex its muscles. Female vocalists sound excellent and forward in the mix presenting with a slightly unnatural sheen to the sound but ultimately, very addictive to listen to. Melt Away by Taeyeon, Wait a Minute! by Willow and the boy is mine by Arian Grande are presented in a manner that renders tingles down the back of my neck and feel tangible.

Male vocals, whilst recessed slightly in the mix still come off as highly detailed and highly coherent with sense of naturalness to the timbre but with the caveat that it is further back in the mix.

Instruments is where the M3 seems to shine however, as notes seemed to attack me with such gusto that I felt myself highly engaged to whatever I was listening to, trying to process all the information that was being thrown at me. Strings felt tangible to me, rock music was highly impressive with electric guitars and hi-hats mixing together in a manner that was extremely detailed in songs such as Cochise by Audioslave.

More orchestral music such as Godfrey, First Elden Lord and Malenia, Blade of Miquella from the Elden Ring OST sound quite detailed and well executed, presenting strings with a crispness that is extremely fun to listen to.

Overall, I found the midrange performance of the M3 quite impressive with the only caveat being a slightly lean timbre. Vocalists and instruments are extremely detailed and there is a fineness to the quality that notes are reproduced.

Treble​

Supposedly the strength of these MEMS drivers, I was keen to see if the M3 reproduced treble with the requisite impressiveness to garner my attention given that this region is usually low on the list of priorities for me. I am pleased to report that the M3 did indeed capture my attention with its rendition of the upper-end of the FR curve, presenting instruments in this region with gusto. Rising synths and percussion in electronic music such as “Latch” by Disclosure present in a crisp and effervescent manner, it feels refreshing and slightly sharp to listen to but in a manner that is wholly enjoyable, a lemon drop candy if you will.

Hi-hats in “Let There be Light” by Justice combined with the discordant synths sampled by this French electronic duo has a tendency to be either wholly unengaging and confusing to listen to on a darker IEM and just nauseating on an overly-bright IEM but the M3 manages to straddle the line by being engaging and crystalline in its reproduction. Treble presents slightly forward in the mix on the M3 and whilst this has the tendency to being slightly fatiguing over time to the more sensitive listener, I felt that the M3 did an excellent job of leaning on its strength to separate itself from the market. Percussion, little spicy notes and just overall sparkle in any song became an enjoyable treat to me. Extension in the upper end seemed to be effortless, with an injection of airiness to anything that resided in the treble region that created significant spacing towards these notes allowing me to savour each morsel of goosebump inducing tssh on a hi-hat in “The Demon Dance” by Julian Winding.

The treble was an absolute standout in my mind being finely detailed, crystalline and crispy with all sorts of percussion that made me seek out productions that feature it heavily. I would venture to say that the treble performance of the M3 rivals IEMs that are multiple times more expensive but this is a very specific strength.

Overall, the treble on the M3 is its strength and what a strength it has in its reproduction here. There is a slightly etched and inorganic reproduction of notes in this region as they seem to stick out a bit in the grander scheme of things but when listened to in isolation, the M3 presents treble in a very enjoyable and crisp manner.

Technicalities​

Moving on to technical performance, the M3 sounds fast, extremely fast. More akin to the likes of the speedier planar magnetic drivers that I have had the pleasure to listen to, the M3 is able to render notes with great gusto and busily produced tracks do not seem to miss out on any rendering of detail. This only applies to the mids and treble however as the low-end seems to be lacking sorely on speed.

In terms of detail retrieval and resolution, I find the M3 to be wonderful in its performance presenting microdetails in the mids and treble in a manner that is readily dissectible and well-articulated. The bass again lacks detail and texture however.

Staging is a bit of an odd egg. There is a great sense of immersion in that the music seemingly surrounds your head but there doesn’t seem to be a great deal of extension of the stage either width nor depth. I find that these seem to stage in a manner that is akin to more narrow staging open back headphones. It is out of the head but just barely.

Coherency and cohesion is a key aspect to note on the M3 which, despite its impressive detail seems to fumble more macro-level resolution. Notes are finely detailed but sections of music seem to be poorly articulated and layered within the stage. It feels slightly jarring to view the entire picture of music that the M3 seeks to paint as the bass is slower and not entirely detailed and is paired with ultra fast, slightly drier and well-defined mid and treble notes. There is a sense of confusion with the M3 and that leads to a slight diminishment in the cohesion of its tonal balance.

Overall​

The M3 impresses with its mid-range and treble speed and microdetail but disappoints with its low-end performance. The contrast between these regions can be jarring and leads to a slightly disjointed overall package that leaves you loving certain songs and going ‘meh’ to others. This is not the complete package that will end your mindless search of audio but it remains something distinctly special.

Value & Quality of Life​

The M3 is a lightweight resin shell that is surprisingly light in the ear but ultimately doesn’t win any awards for ergonomics with the long and slightly intrusive nozzles being somewhat uncomfortable over longer periods of time. The shells are also quite wide and combined with the long nozzles feels like they will being to lean out of the ear and place pressure on the canal. Finding an appropriate ear-tip to get these to seal completely was also difficult and one should venture with caution.

These are open-back IEMs which are very rare and as a result have some poor levels of isolation. I can definitely hear my surroundings without any music playing and there are also some leakage of sound leading to these being a poor on-the-go choice for IEMs which is slightly self-defeating.

The M3, whilst terminated in 4.4mm is accompanied by an energizer to provide the MEMS drivers with adequate power. The energizer itself feels quite flimsy with a distinct rattle within that I cannot really seem to resolve. The need to carry an additional box is also a bit of a hit to the quality of life and seems to contradict the portable nature that IEMs encapsulates. Furthermore, the need to use the energizer as a secondary amp with no volume control essentially leads to double amping and with more noisy source chains there is an audible noise floor with silence.

Given it is also terminated in 4.4mm I took a chance and attempted to power it with my DAP alone. The result was the need to pump the volume up astronomically compared to a traditional IEM and even then, the xMEMs drivers seemed limp and ineffectual lacking all sorts of treble energy without the energizer.

Ultimately, the need to carry an energizer and the open back nature of these IEMs means that they are likely more suited to home listening and as such, I feel that these are a niche product market in the IEM space. In terms of sheer value for money, I feel that the M3 does an excellent job of providing absolute class leading treble articulation and speed that is some of the best I’ve listened to. But the vast contrast with the low-end leads to an overall distaste for the IEM in comparison to the competition.

Comparisons​

vs Symphonium Crimson​

Both priced at around $2000 USD, the Crimson doesn’t come with the glamour of having a new shiny piece of tech within it but is rather a technical marvel by drawing out performance from 4 BAs. The Crimson is on the whole, a far more tonally balanced IEM with its low-end being speedy and articulate compared to the M3's lethargy. The mids sound less digital and edgy on the Crimson but retains a certain level of crispness. The treble extension on both of these IEMs are impressive but the M3 take the edge here. Both present treble on a crystalline and crisp manner but the M3 seems to place more emphasis on this region.

Technical performance on both are great except of the M3 being quite poor in the low-end and lacking some staging. In the realm of creature comforts and convenience, the Crimson feels decidedly better built, more robust and ultimately, more well suited to everyday IEM listening. Whilst quite hard to drive, the Crimson is not to the level of requiring an entirely different box.

This comparison is truly an exercise of specialisation vs generalisation. The Crimson is an excellent all-round performer that perhaps gets within a spitting distance of the M3’s standout traits where as the M3 is a standout treble performer that distinctly falls apart in terms of low-end power.

I would go with the safe bet here and stick with the Crimson.

Conclusion​

One must wonder whether the M3 is a proof of concept or truly intended to be the flagship. If the former, then the rough edges and misgivings of the M3 can be forgiven as an exercise of Soranik’s pioneering nature. If the latter however, one must wonder how many ears of QC did this go through before approval. Inconsistent, not very cohesive and at times incoherent, the M3 represents some standout features but its overall audio signature is just confusing at times.

I wanted to love the M3 for its strengths but the red flags could not be ignored. However, for those who are seeking out the fastest note reproduction and treble that rivals TOTL IEMs, then the M3 represents good value for money if you are willing to ignore the bloated and blurred out elephant in the room.

The M3 has made me excited for what Soranik can do with their future IEMs featuring MEMS drivers as it seems like concept car rolled out at an auto show. Exciting yet an exercise in showcasing design and engineering rather than one in practicality.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and Simgot for arranging the Australian tour of these IEMs.

The concept of a ‘house sound’ is something that is quite interesting to have in the audio market. One would come to expect a certain sound signature from a brand and if it fits into their particular preference, it would be a tremendous benefit to know that you would like anything that the brand is putting out. The other side of this coin is that you inevitably will begin to tire of this house sound and start to branch out in search of a little spice in your life. Today’s review concerns the EA500LM, a budget option from the brand Simgot, an upstart of Chinese Hi-Fi that has already impressed me with the EA1000 and the Supermix 4. Simgot are rather close adherents of the Harman preference curve and thus, you could say that their house sound is Harman.

I sought out to find if the EA500LM is able to produce this house sound in a manner that separates itself from its brethren and perhaps if I myself am a fan of Simgot’s house sound.

The Factual Stuff​

Priced at 90 USD, the EA500LM is a budget offering from the Simgot brand but you wouldn’t really guess it from looking at it. The earpieces are fashioned out of metal, feeling quite robust, weighty in the hand and finished in a mirror chrome that really makes it difficult to photograph.

Within these earpieces are a single dynamic driver (DD) that is spruiked by Simgot’s marketing department as being a “2nd generation dual-magnet and dual-cavity lithium-magnesium diaphragm dynamic driver”…whatever that means.

Within the packaging you are greeted with a zip carry case that is functional, if a little spartan in its design, a 3.5mm terminated cable and some eartips.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The following impressions were taken using the EA500LM with Spinfit CP100 eartips, the stock cable and fed using a Shanling M6 Ultra with FLAC files.

Bass​

TL;DR: Sub-bass focused, the EA500LM does not punch in the mid-bass as much as I would like it but it manages to render bass with speed and accuracy.

What can I say about the low-end of the EA500LM that I haven’t said about other Simgot IEMs so far? The EA500LM brings about a sub-bass focused signature that is indicative of its target tuning curve that engages you with great physicality. There is a sense of robust tuning in the low-end to provide you with a good sense of low-end oomph. There is some shortcomings in terms of extension as the EA500LM does not seem to dive deeper into the frequency response as its (more expensive) cousins, the Supermix and the EA1000. “Undefeated” by XG hits fairly hard with its low-end bass-line and the EA500LM renders it with adequate power to provide an engaging listen without devolving into an overly boomy signature.

The mid-bass punch is an issue that I have with nearly all Harman tuned IEMs and the EA500LM is no exception to this unfortunately. “Bling-Bang-Bang-Bom” by Creepy Nuts has a distinct mid-bass focused drumline throughout the song that creates a sense of urgency in its pacing on ideal renditions of the song. The EA500LM is slightly limp and ineffectual in its rendition of mid-bass punch, more like a glancing jab to the nose rather than a fierce haymaker to the chin. It feels a little lakcing in this respect, weakening the sense of pace and rhythm that the song brings on more punchy IEMs.

“Glow” by Cubicore presents a booming bass line that seems to be produced in a manner that is quite bloomy in nature, decaying somewhat slowly leading to certain IEMs rendering it quite woolly. The EA500LM handles the bassline quite well presenting it cleanly and speedily.

The EA500LM therefore is quite adept in its bass quality, providing speed and cleanliness to the low-end but it is not hugely textured.

Overall, the low-end of the EA500LM is not bad at all, agreeably tuned and rather good in terms of detail, I feel it plays it a little safe and the aforementioned conservative approach to mid-bass leads

Mids​

TL;DR: Upper-mid thinness and a recessed lower-mid leads to a somewhat disjointed vocal experience but instruments sound rather accurate and enjoyable.

The midrange performance of any Harman tuned IEM in my books is always a bit…off. The EA500LM maintains some of the hallmarks of an IEM of this tuning style with a forward upper-mid that presents female vocalists in a manner that is rather intimate. “Magnetic” by ILLIT presents the very common trend of airy, heady female voices sitting in a higher register in a manner that is rather prominent which despite being quite enjoyable to listen to does also lead to some fatigue over time. There is a sense of thinness and shrillness here that may lead to more sensitive ears tapping out quickly.

Instruments in songs such as “Starscourge Radahn” from the Eldent Ring OST sounds sufficiently grand and well presented and male vocalists such as Lucky Daye in “Over” are presented in a manner that is further back in the stage. There is a slight detachment from vocalists residing in this register and there is unfortunately a lack of ‘soulfulness’, weight and emotion in this region.

The timbre of the EA500LM is decent save for the aforementioned thinness and there is a sense that there is a more smooth sounding mid-range here compared to the EA1000 and the Supermix 4. However, this may be a side-effect of lower-resolution rather than expertly done timbre.

Overall, the EA500LM presents mids in a rather straightforward Harman manner. Skimping down low and too edgy on the upper end, the midrange leaves vocalists wanting but instruments are reproduced in a quite robust manner.

Treble​

TL;DR: Lacking some extension but not exactly dark, the EA500LM is a little more laid-back but still present with its rendition of percussion.

Moving to the treble regions of the EA500LM, there is a sense of a little more laidback-ness in this region. There is a sense of less harshness in the upper end of the treble response (not upper mids) with songs such as “Language” by Porter Robinson with grating synths coming off as a little more balanced than with brighter IEMs. The aforementioned issues with lower-treble/upper-mids are made most apparent with higher register singers such as Ariana Grande in “the boy is mine” wherein there is a shrillness to her voice that amounts to some fatigue over time.

Percussion in songs such as “Lost Cause” by Beck present crisply, and strings feel rather balanced throughout, something that is lost when swapping to brigher IEMs.

Treble as a whole remains fairly forward in the mix but not in a manner that is overly fatiguing I feel. It is somewhat balanced with the bass and the mids leading to an overall tonal balance that I quite enjoy. It was less fatiguing (but also less exciting) than the EA1000 and more smooth and analogue in timbre compared to the Supermix 4.

I do feel however, where the EA500LM disappoints is in terms of treble extension. It is a bit of a hard ask to expect a single DD to cover all aspects of the frequency response curve in a manner that wrings out the full potential of all of the constitutive elements of that frequency response and the EA500LM is no exception. There is a lack of extension in the upper-end and a distinct lack of airiness that leads to the EA500LM sounding a little constrained or compressed.

Technicalities​

TL;DR: Not stellar for the price bracket but with a good sense of depth and some smoothness, it is fairly detailed listen.

Technical performance of the EA500LM presents a mixed bag in that it leaves you wanting when compared to the SImgots that I’ve tried already but still good in that it does sufficiently well for its price range.

Layering and separation of notes is well articulated on the EA500LM presenting in a manner that is readily coherent in busily produced tracks. However, imaging and directional awareness is slightly constrained with songs such as “Fine” by Taeyeon seemingly projecting from directly in front of you where other IEMs (albeit more expensive ones) allow you to pin point directional cues within the stage.

Speaking of stage, the EA500LM does decently to project a good sense of depth with “Woke Up” by XG presenting a layered stage wherein female vocals come forward, drums in the rear and strings behind that. Width is slightly more disappointing with songs such as “Fi’s Farewell” from the Zelda OST feeling rather constrained and limited in its staging width. Very obviously not a cinematic or grand performance of an orchestra. Microdetails are not stellar, it feels that the edges of notes are slightly rounded and blunted in their attack. There is not a huge level of crispness in note expression and nuances are lost. I liken it to a smoothing filter applied to a photo.

Macrodetails and dynamic range sound quite robust in that there is a good level of extension in the low-end but the upper end feels slightly rolled off and blunted. There is a lack of airiness and whilst the EA500LM does well with busy production, it does so in a confined and congested stage.

Comparisons​

vs EA1000​

TL;DR: The EA500LM is a EA1000 zipped by WinRAR, more compressed sounding and less extension.

What does literally twice the amount of numbers get you? The EA1000 presents a rather significant jump up in price (in terms of multiples at least) and does a rather good job of justifying its cost to me. The EA1000 presents with a much larger and grander stage compared to the EA500LM. The EA1000 also seems to do better in other technical factors such as macro and micro-detail rendition providing a greater sense of texture in the low-end, more crisp mids and piercing highs (this may not be a bonus for all).

Dynamic range feels more extended on the EA1000 as the EA500LM feels a little compressed overall. It is a more laid back listen compared to the EA500LM as the EA1000 is more harsh in the treble and renders music with greater edginess and crispness in the upper end. Excellent for rendering certain notes to give you that goosebump feeling but terrible for extended listening sessions wherein fatigue starts to inevitably creep in.

I feel that the EA1000 presents an obvious upgrade over the EA500 but the EA500 remains a fraction of the price and therefore the value proposition is questionable at best. I would happily pay extra for the EA1000 but more conscious consumers, EA500LM may get you far enough.

Value and Quality of Life​

TL;DR: Not bad for the price but not exactly a revelation. Competitive but not price-bracket redefining.

90 USD is a hell of a price to pay for a well-built and premium looking IEM. There are inevitably caveats with a drop down in price and I feel that the EA500LM is quite obviously a downgrade in sound quality compared to the Supermix 4 and the EA1000. These are significantly more expensive (as a % increase that is) than the EA500LM and one would wonder what the value of this sound quality jump would represent. For me, I would highly recommend going for either of the upgrades but the EA500LM still presents good value.

There was not revolutionary, “this costs how much?!?” that I got with the Supermix 4 and the EA1000 and therefore, I believe that the EA500LM doesn’t ‘break the price bracket’ in any manner. It’s signature is straightforward and its technical performance is quite good.

The included accessory package is not great by any means but the build of the IEMs themselves provides me with a sense of comfort in their ability to withstand daily wear and tear.

Overall, I believe that the sound quality provided is about fair for the price and where you would be winning is with build quality and a sense of design. In terms of value, I would say it is so-so, nothing outstanding nor disappointing.

Conclusion​

One must wonder if this more lukewarm review is a result of fatigue relating to the sound signature or a simple downgrade in quality reflective of the lower price. I am quite a fan of what Simgot does with the Harman curve with my previous experiences being a Moondrop Variation which I found wholly unengaging most of the time. But the EA500LM’s tonality is not my main issue but rather the fact that the dynamic range seems constrained in a manner that leaves me wanting a little more. Somehow or someway, it appears that the passive radiator in the EA1000 is doing a lot with that IEM’s single DD and the EA500 is more reflective of experiences with Chi-Fi budget single DD IEMs.

It remains fair in nearly all respects save for the Harman upper-mid/lower-treble energy which is poorly suited to my preference and the build quality remains excellent. The EA500LM is a good option in the market at its price bracket but does little for me in terms of getting wholly excited about its value and its sound quality.

Much like the earpieces, this IEM is solid and stalwart but will hardly set your soul on fire.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and Simgot for arranging the tour of the Supermix 4.

It is easy to be overwhelmed by a first impression and declare your love for something as notional as a brand, but a true litmus test is repeated impressions of various other items from the same brand. Today’s review concerns such a test for the Chi-Fi upstart, Simgot, who has managed to capture the imagination of many audiophiles in what is a very crowded market. My first impression of Simgot IEMs was the EA1000 and my impression was of a brand punching above its weight with a combination of good build quality and great sound for the price. Now I have some additional goodies from the brand in the form of the EA500LM and the subject of today’s review, the Supermix 4 (SM4). It is time to see if the EA1000 was a flash in the pan or if Simgot have some staying power in the dynamic and fast-paced realm of Chi-Fi.

The Factual Stuff​

The Supermix 4 is a hybrid IEM but a rather unique one, utilising a single dynamic driver (DD), a single balanced armature (BA), a single planar magnetic driver (PD) and a single piezoelectric driver (PZT). These four drivers are coupled with a four-way crossover and independent sound paths to minimise distortion and phase inconsistencies (in the words of Simgot).

The DD handles low-end response, the ‘large’ BA handles mids and highs, the ‘micro’ PD covers high frequencies and the PZT extends high and ultra-high frequencies.

The earpieces are rather spartan in design with black resin and matte black faceplates and comes coupled with a silver-plated copper 4 core cable terminated in 3.5mm and with 2-pin connectors.

Within the box you also receive a zip case and some eartips.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The majority of the below impressions was taken using the SM4 with the stock cable and Xlastec tips with a Shanling M6 Ultra playing FLACs.

Bass​

TL;DR: Sub-bass focused and well extended, the low-end lacks some mid-bass punch and texture but is speedy.

The SM4 is no slouch in the low-end and provides a booming response in the bass frequencies. This bass seems to extend deeply providing an excellent sense of physicality in the low-end that rumbles quite well. “The Plan” form the TENET soundtrack strikes with great low-end power but comes off as lacking a sense of texture and detail from higher-end IEMs.

Mid-bass punch is surprisingly good for a brand known to be strict adherents to the Harman tuning curve. There is a good sense of punchiness and pace provided by the DD with songs such as “Before Dawn” by Slander striking with the requisite thumpiness that I crave from IEMs that remains fairly tight and well controlled. That being said, there is not a huge amount here and the frequency response remains fairly clean and separated in this regard.

Texture and detail, the nuances one may find in a more articulate rendition of bass frequencies are somewhat lost with the SM4 which opts for a more forceful and blunt rendition of low-end frequencies. This is not a hugely disappointing factor, as I did not expect tonnes of detail from an IEM in this price bracket but is something to note with the SM4. Speed is still quite excellent on the 10mm DD as it maintains the pace of more fast-paced EDM songs such as “Rose-Tinted” by Shay de Castro whereas lesser IEMs would become an incoherent and boomy mess with a bass response that was half-a-step too slow.

Overall, the bass tuning and performance are not exactly a surgical instrument but rather a thunderous hammer that seeks to engage you with a thumpy response, imparting good fun to your listening experience.

Mids​

TL;DR: Surprisingly well timbred and quite well presented, the SM4 is let down by being a bit too thin and a little too hot in the upper-mids.

Moving on to the mid-range performance of the SM4, there is a number of positive elements and some less-positive ones.

In terms of male vocals, there is a lot to like with the SM4 with a natural and clean timbre in this region. Despite the aforementioned presence of mid-bass, this does not muddy up the frequency response by stepping on the toes of the lower-mids. Male vocalists on songs such as “I Had Some Help” by Post Malone and Morgan Wallen features country-style crooning and the SM4 renders it in a manner that has the requisite note weight without bloating their voices into a more incomprehensible mess. Male vocalists are slightly recessed in the mix, not being too overbearing nor sitting too far back in the mix to be ineffectual.

Female vocalists on the other hand come off as a little more thin and lacking in body for the most part. More relaxed vocalists like Billie Eilish on “Billie Bossa Nova” sound quite good and naturally timbred. There is an intimacy to this vocal presentation and the way in which the SM4 renders such vocalists is rather intoxicating to listen to. Higher register singers such as Ariana Grande on “34+35” comes off as sibilant and slightly shrill, almost too thin and too harsh to listen to on the regular.

Instruments such as a jazz band on “Tank!” by the Seatbelts is rendered with clarity and crispness that feels quite natural to listen to. Orchestral music such as “One Winged Angel” by Nobuo Uematsu are also rendered well on the SM4 as strings are harrowing, woodwinds feel nice and airy and piano feels nicely presented.

Overall, the SM4 does a rather good job of rendering a nicely tuned mid-range that is fairly naturally timbred but also with the speed and edginess that more discerning critical listeners enjoy. Where it falls short is too much edginess in the upper-mids leading to a slight unpleasantness with female vocalists.

Treble​

TL;DR: Well extended and crisp to listen to, treble performance is quite good but may come off a little fatiguing at times.

The treble region of an IEM is not usually something that I can articulately describe yet in my journey of audio but on the SM4, it presents in a manner that seems juuuuuust right. Perhaps the most impressive feature of the treble in the SM4 is a sense of extension in that there appears to be an injection of air in this region that creates a sense of spaciousness and extension throughout the upper treble region.

Quite often an aggressive roll-off results in a perception of ‘compression’ but the SM4 does well to sound as if it is covering a broad dynamic range. The upper-mids/lower treble regions feel slightly emphasised in the FR curve, generating a slightly brighter tonality that is a matter of hate it or love it. In my case, with the aforementioned sibilance issues with higher-pitched singers, the SM4 is not an ideal companion. IN more darkly produced EDM tracks with a splash of percussion throughout to contrast brooding basslines, the SM4 is exquisite to listen to. It remains speedy, crisp and nicely articulated in the upper end of the FR curve and whilst there is a harshness form time-to-time, it remains quite enticing in its tonal contrast.

Somewhat fatiguing but well extended and articulated, the SM4 does a good job of providing me with the necessary goosebump inducing cymbal crash to warrant having to put up with the more fatiguing tonal character. This is something that not all people would be willing to tolerate and therefore, I would venture with caution.

Technicalities​

TL;DR: Large stage, well layered and coherent to listen to, the SM4 punches above its weight in technical performance.

I am quite enamoured with the SM4’s technical performance as it manages to balance a good sense of technical prowess with musicality. The 4 drivers seem to be working well in order to provide the listener with detail retrieval and a strong sense of layering. Macro-detail is rather excellent as I do not feel that the SM4 is lacking in extension on either end of the frequency response curve. The low-end extends deeply and the highs are nicely airy, giving the impression of good dynamic range.

Micro-detail on the low-end is not world-beating but it is a hard nit-pick here. Mid-range detail is quite a bit better than the bass with notes feeling crisp and nicely defined. Treble notes are [insert]

In terms of layering, there is a good sense of discernment between the various notes coming at you. Imaging therefore is also quite good, with directional cues and panning instruments being quite easily imagined in the mind’s eye. Staging, perhaps as a result of the aforementioned layering and imaging, is also strong. It sounds as though it is projecting wide, fairly deep and quite tall in its stage. Whilst not to the extreme of being ‘holographic’ the SM4 extends to the outer confines of the head and perhaps slightly beyond. This may be a result of the PZT driver, which I understand is responsible for greater extension to the upper frequencies. There is a sense of airiness here but this is all conjecture as to the reasoning.

Overall, I feel that the technical performance of the SM4 meets or exceeds its compatriots in the price bracket but it does so with a great balancing of musicality. I feel that in this regard, it represents a great technical performer.

Variables​

The majority of my testing with the SM4s were done with the Azla Xlastecs but I also chucked on a variety of narrow bore and wider bore eartips as well as some experimentation with cables.

Using the stock 3.5mm silver-plated copper cable as a baseline, I used Simgot’s own LC7 cable with the SM4 to see if I could discern any changes. Similar to my experience with the EA1000, the LC7 does a good job of relaxing the upper end of the FR curve and bringing tuning closer to neutral. This ultimately leads to a more enjoyable and relaxed listening experience in my mind compared to the stock cable.

Eartip wise, if treble energy is an issue for you, narrow bore tips such as the Final Audio E-Types did a good job of blunting some treble energy to bring about a slightly darker and more easy-listening experience.

Comparisons​

vs Simgot EA1000​

TL;DR: EA1K is the more natural and musical option that presents with slightly more energy up top but with a smoothness down low that is quite addicting whereas the SM4 is faster and more edgier.

The previous experience with Simgot was a rather good one in my books and the SM4 is in for a tough fight. In terms of low-end oomph, I feel that the EA1K provided greater texture and detail in the low-end but the SM4 is more aggressively tuned in the sub-bass reigon. The added sense of warmth and punchiness in the mid-bass of the EA1K does well to impart some weightiness that is lacking in the SM4.

Mid-range note weight on the EA1K is also more impressive, creating a greater sense of emotional engagement for me and a more laid-back listening experience.

Treble performance on both Simgots are quite similar in that both experience a bit of brightness in the upper-mids/treble that creates some fatigue over longer-listening sessions but the SM4 feels more airy, more spacious and more speedy in this regard.

Technical performance is quite close but I feel that the SM4 sounds faster and more extended on either end of the FR curve, generating a good sense of macro and micro detail that seemingly trumps the EA1K.

Overall, the EA1K provides a more coherent and laidback listening experience that I feel is a rather smooth listen save for more female-vocal dominated tracks. The SM4 is a harder nosed rendition of music that is quite revealing. It is hard to determine a clear winner here but for the price of the EA1K you can grab a SM4, some ear tips and perhaps a new cable. I feel that if I was to use some arbitrary metric of sound quality per dollar, the SM4 would win.

vs Simgot EA500LM​

TL;DR: EA500LM brings about much of the same tuning experience but at the cost of significant technical performance. The SM4 sounds larger, grander and more well articulated.

The EA500LM presents a scaled back version of what I experienced with the EA1000 which is understandable considering 500 is half of 1000. Besides from some stupid correlations, the EA500LM is much in the same vein as the SM4 and the EA1K but differences are more easily discerned in terms of articulation and the detail rendered.

The EA500LM sounds distinctly more confined in terms of staging and its extension on either end of the frequency response curve sounds more limited, neither presenting with a deep physicality of bass nor with the airiness of a well-extended treble.

It remains fairly good value however but the differences in pricing would lead me to believe that the SM4 handily defeats the EA500LM.

Value & Quality of Life​

150 USD and currently on sale at 135 USD (at the time of writing), the SM4 provides great value for money in my mind. The driver configuration, whilst odd presents music in a fairly cohesive and coherent manner that is both musically and technically impressive. I feel that for the price, the SM4 beats out single driver IEMs in the price bracket through its impressive dynamic range and beats out other hybrids by virtue of its coherency and cohesiveness.

The included accessories are fairly limited with little in the way of an eartip selection and a rather poor cable that doesn’t have the interchangeable termiantions that you receive on even cheaper IEMs. But it appears the funds have been poured into the IEMs themselves, with a rather good build quality that inspires greater confidence than other manufacturers in the same price bracket.

The fitment of the earpieces are good with a well contoured resin shell that is nicely rounded and mid-sized. The nozzles are what I would term medium sized as well which is a cause for relief for more small-eared listeners.

Conclusion​

The SM4 is both novel and just plain good. This IEM is not exactly a ground-breaking revelation in the audio realm. First, it is basically the same tuning as many other IEMs in the market (Harman), second, it doesn’t kill kilobucks or any other form of hyperbole and thirdly, it remains a compelling option at its price bracket, much like any other IEMs in the same price bracket.

It is a good IEM, it is an interesting IEM but it is not going to turn the audio world on its head. And that’s okay. The SM4 represents innovation, excellent macro-technical performance and a great price tag and that represents excellent value in this price bracket.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and MiniDisc Australia for making this tour possible.

There is much to love about the idea of the audio dongle. Lightweight, widely compatible and very portable, the dongle has been a boon to the audiophile on the go. Their popularity has skyrocketed in recent years with options ranging from the venerable Apple Dongle, which many people state, “is all you need” to extremely expensive options from the likes of Luxury & Precision that seek to show you what is possible in a smaller form factor. Whilst not in the business of making audio sources typically, Dita is a well-known Singaporean brand in the audio business and their first stab at making a dongle is a rather peculiar one. The Navigator enters a rather crowded market and so it is necessary to separate themselves from the pack with either excellent sound or some design feature. Today’s review will look into whether they achieve any of these.

The Factual Stuff​

Built out of aluminium, the Navigator is somewhat large as far as dongles go measuring in at around 7cm by 3cm. Within the Navigator are unnamed dual DACs, dual field programmable gate array (FPGA) independent crystal oscillator clocks (whatever that means) and an amp stage that outputs 340 mW through 32 ohms of resistance through its 4.4mm balanced output and 110 mW at the same resistance through the 3.5mm output.
The Naviagtor has knurled buttons for volume up and down, a kickstand and a magnetic slide that houses a screwdriver bit.
Within the box, there is also a thick knotted lanyard, a USB-C to USB-C cable and a USB-C to Lightning cable.

The Navigator is priced at 300 USD.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

Bass​

The lower-end performance of the Navigator seems to be focused on the sub-bass frequencies, imparting a stronger sense of physicality to any IEM that I threw at it. The texture and detail contained within that sub-bass boost isn’t necessarily the best but this is a rather safe frequency to add a little shelf too. I do not think that it is a huge, measurable boost (looking at you iBasso PB5) but rather just a slight emphasis on sub-bass frequencies.

Mid-bass feels less emphasised with warmer IEMs such as the Multiverse Mentor with songs like “Bling-Bang-Bang-Born” by Creepy Nuts being less emphasised with its punchy bassline that lines the song.

Overall, this region is generally well done with some added fun-factor.

Mids​

Moving to the mids, there is a slight heightening of upper-mids to my ears as female vocals such as Mina Okabe’s on “Every Second” feeling distinctly forward in the mix.

Male vocals such as Daniel Caesar on “Japanese Denim” feel less emphasised, falling slightly further back on the stage and cleaner in its rendition with warmer IEMs. There is a reduction in note weight here as it tends to fall leaner and meaner in its rendition of these vocalists.

Instruments in grand orchestral pieces such as “Fi’s Farewell – Skyward Sword (Epic Version)” feels slightly shallow and lacking in drama. There is a flatness imparted on some of my IEMs that makes the experience slightly less engaging.

The Navigator therefore does not do so well with the mid-bass to lower-mids region, seeming leaning a little more bright in its rendition in this region.

Treble​

The upper end of the frequency response curve on the Navigator felt fairly linear with perhaps a slight smoothing on this region. I felt that previously brighter IEMs or IEMs with more ‘enthusiastic’ treble boosts were slightly less discomforting when using the Navigator.

Otherwise, the treble region on the Navigator were not particularly impressive in any particular way, looking to present the tranducer that it was connected to in a fairly straightforward way.

Beck’s “Lost Cause” retained the spine tingling upper-end that is felt on nearly all of my IEMs (save for the extremely dark ones) and was rather enjoyable to listen to without leaning too hard into the fatigue region.

Overall, I feel that treble is done quite well with the Navigator presenting in a manner that is wholly inoffensive.

Technicalities​

The Navigator’s technical performance was somewhat disappointing to me when comparing it to my DC04 Pro or my DAP. From recollection as well, the W4 and the RU7, both heavy hitters in the dongle world, impressed me far more (noting this perhaps from my rose-tinted memory).

The staging performance of the Navigator felt rather flat in its depth and somewhat confined in its width. There is an ‘overbearing’ nature to the Navigator that feels somewhat too forward and too centre to the stage. I felt the need to lower volume with various IEMs as I found songs such as “Gurenge (The First Take edition) by LiSA being just too much whereas this was not the case with other sources.

Detail retrieval and imaging was somewhat okay, I didn’t feel that there was a loss of this but it simply didn’t wow me with additional microdetailing. On a macro sense, there is a perceived lack of dynamics in that swings in volume feel limited in their reach (which is potentially part of the volume management mentioned above).

Even with ‘holographic’ and ‘layered’ IEMs such as the Multiverse Mentor, the Navigator felt as if it was projecting music from a single drive positioned right in front of you rather than a surround sound system. I speak in hyperbole of course but the metaphor represents what I felt when using the Navigator.

I believe that the Navigator also has a sense of poor dynamics, that being the ability to reproduce swings of volume. Whereas many of my IEMs on capable sources present crescendos and sparsely produced tracks in a manner that contrasts extremely well and leads to a dramatic sense of scale, the Navigator felt compressed, congested and just permanently loud. It was quite common for me to listen at lower than expected volumes with the Navigator whereas other sources felt considerably more open and able to pushed to higher volume.

Comparisons​

vs iBasso DC04 Pro​

I’ve owned the DC04 for some time and regarded it as a simple, clean and quiet source with a brighter lean. When A-B testing the two, the lower-end boost of the Navigator felt readily apparent and both did a rather linear job of handling midrange. The DC04 seems to add a little extra spice on the top end of the frequency response curve as some songs eeked out to be a little more sibilant.

In terms of technical performance, the DC04 felt even more confined than the Navigator in terms of stage width and depth. However, where it managed to escape this perceived issue is a greater sense of dynamism with volume swings. Crescendos and contrasting sounds within the stage felt big and bombastic. The DC04 is in-your-face with its reproduction but does so with greater verticality. The Navigator is similarly in-your-face but occupying a much smaller space and therefore, becoming fairly fatiguing over some time.

Between the two, and taking into consideration price, the DC04 Pro comes out as a winner.

vs Cayin RU7 (from memory)​

Caveating the below thoughts with the fact that it is from my memory of a dongle that I once owned, the RU7 impressed with a wonderfully analogue sound signature that felt smooth, warm and well rendered. The RU7 imparts greater tonal colour on my music compared to the Navigator but does so in a manner that is enjoyable to listen to. The mid-bass punch is greater on the RU7 and the mids are just butter to listen to. Technicalities wise, I felt the RU7, despite its smoothed out nature still managed to render detail well, perhaps just not in an obvious manner that the Navigator achieves. Staging on the RU7 is far greater in terms of depth and width compared to the Navigator which falters in this category.

The RU7 brings about some creature comforts in the form of a screen to display certain settings, various DSP settings (DSD64, 128 and 512) and line out functionality. The RU7 was also somewhat noisy as far as dongles go.

Overall, the RU7 brings about musicality in spades whereas the Navigator is a more straightforward endeavour. With that being said however, I would pick the RU7 in a heartbeat.

vs Luxury & Precision W4 (from memory)​

Once again, I will have to speak from memory as I no longer own the W4 but it definitely made an impression on me! I characterised the W4 as clean, lean and excellent in its detailing prowess. There is a slight dryness to its timbre that I recall which is not as pronounced on the Navigator but otherwise, the W4’s technical performance trumps the Navigator thoroughly. Outside of technical performance, the W4 felt far faster in its note rendition which is a good and a bad thing. Good in that the leading edges of notes felt readily apparent but bad in that it created a more etched sound that not all will enjoy. Tonally, the W4 seemed to lean slightly bright but with a slight sub-bass emphasis. On the topic of bass, the W4 rendered it tight and well detailed whereas the Navigator is more boomy and emphasised.

The W4 has creature comforts in the form of a screen, a volume wheel and a raft of DSP functionality that adds to its sound modifications. The W4 is considerably more expensive than the Navigator but I feel that it does an excellent job of proving its value. It’s sound quality means it is a win over the Navigator.

Value & Quality of Life​

Outside of sound quality, the Navigator raises some questions in my mind in the direction that it is taking design-wise. It is obvious that the Navigator seeks to appeal to the ‘everyday carry’ folks who enjoy showing flat lays of knives and wallets. There is a camping-chic quality to the design and whilst there is a feeling of ‘ruggedness’ there is similar feeling of ‘why would you make such a specifically targeted dongle?”. The kickstand is basically useless in my use-case, the thick knotted lanyard adds unnecessary bulk and the screwdriver is one of the most questionable inclusions in an audio device I have seen.

300 USD gets you one of the best dongles in the market in the form of the Cayin RU7, which in a smaller size, brings about a more impressive sound signature and with creature comforts such as a display and a line-out option. For a not-insignificant amount of money more, you can also get the crème de la crème in the form of the Luxury & Precision W4 which has a volume wheel, some considerable digital signal processing prowess and a very clean sound signature.

The Navigator feels as though they had a price target to meet and threw a shell around a dongle that came off the shelf of a Chinese OEM. The exterior still speaks of quality and a higher grade of finish compared to other dongles in the market but this feels as though it belongs on the subreddit /r/ATBGE. An acronym standing for “awful taste but great execution”. A very minor and perhaps petty bug-bear with me is the failure to name the DACs utilised in the Navigator. It’s often common that this is the case with some form of proprietary DAC chip or some heavily modified off-the-shelf option but it is common within the market to simply state whether it is a ESS, AKM, Cirrus or otherwise in the dongle itself.

Too bulky, silly inclusions and a loss of focus are definitive negatives of the Navigator which lead me to the conclusion that it offers poor value and outside of looking cool or you have a very particular desire to have a kickstand and/or screwdriver bit storage, I would look elsewhere.

Conclusion​

The Navigator is a unique proposition in the market but for reasons outside of its raison d’etre. In implementing novel design choices that do not concern sound, the Navigator presents something of an odd choice in the market that seeks to appeal to the intersection of audiophilia and other hobbies (EDC and campers I suppose). That unfortunately is lost on me and as such, the Navigator does not do much to sway me from the more tried and true choices that I compared it to above. It’s sound doesn’t amaze me in any particular manner or even have a distinctive character.

It is for that reason that I would give this a big miss.

Preamble​

The upper end of audio equipment manufacturer’s usually play in a certain price bracket looking to build a brand based on ‘luxury’ and ‘high-end’ audio. But given the proliferation of the hobby with the growth of Chi-Fi, there has been a delving into other markets for a number of brands. The decision to enter new markets is a big decision to make and also brings with it an expectation of all the connotations that one has built towards a brand. Today’s review concerns the Dita Project M (PM), a fairly affordable option from established Singaporean brand, Dita Audio. Dita have long played in the upper-end with single dynamic driver (DD) IEMs that command rather healthy price tags.
And so, one must wonder, can a luxury brand bring a semblance of what has made them held in high regard to a more affordable price bracket?

The Factual Stuff​

The PM consists of a single 9.8mm DD that was supposedly built specifically for the PM and a single Knowles balanced armature (BA) driver. The drivers are housed in a steel chamber and encased in clear resin for a very striking looking IEM. No mention is made about any crossovers or any other sort of tech in the PM.

The PM comes with the “MOCCA” cable that uses wires made by Cardas Audio, a quite famous cable maker in the audio game. The cable is terminated with what Dita terms their “Awesome Plug Version 2” (APV2) which is interchangeable terminations ala TermX.

The PM is accompanied by new glow-in-the-dark Final Audio E-Type ear tips and a German-made Systainer case made by Tanos.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The majority of the below impressions was written utilising the PM with Final Audio E-Type eartips out of the Shanling M6 Ultra using the stock cable terminated in 4.4mm.

Bass​

The PM is tuned with a restrained approach in the low-end with there being a present but slightly understated bassiness. The sub-bass extends quite well providing you with a sense of depth and physicality but it is rather conservatively tuned so there is no ‘kick-in-the-chest’ that some bassheads crave. That being said, these frequencies are well detailed and quite textured, providing you with a greater sense of appreciation for the low-end as opposed to simply trying to overwhelm you with power.
The mid-bass punch (or perhaps, the lack thereof) leaves me wanting for more. There is a sense of pacing that is provided by the PM but on the whole, it doesn’t wow you in this regard, maintaining a rather flat response in this area.

The restrained tuning of the bass makes this not the ideal IEM for bassheads in the market but I feel it does enough to satisfy the majority of the market. What I enjoy about the PM’s bass is that it provides the dynamism that you want from your low-end, striking rather deep and with a sense of physicality that you don’t get on an all-BA set for example. Moreover, the sense of texture and the details that you can extract from the bass-line is also quite impressive. These elements seem to speak to an overall image of neutral, tasteful tuning in the low-end that seeks to heighten technical prowess rather than just dumb fun.

Mids​

Moving to the mid-range, the PM presents a similarly neutral lean to this region. The aforementioned restrained mid-bass tuning lends itself to a clinical and clear lower-mid-range with very little to no bloat here. IT is common that a more generously boosted mid-bass tends to muddle up the lower-midrange to the point where male vocals feel veiled and less coherent. The PM suffers from no such problem but in the midst of clinical rendition, it does recess male vocals somewhat and leads to removal of some emotion and soul from this region. I am unabashedly biased towards greater note weight and slight warmth as I associate those aspects with more emotional and musical renditions. The PM doesn’t present these elements which would usually be a death knell for many IEMs but the PM does a good job of maintaining musicality and some heft in the mids in that it doesn’t suffer the curse of being overly sterile in the pursuit of technical supremacy.
Still well-timbred and natural to the ear, the mid-range is quite enticing to listen to, that is, except for a more spicy rendition of upper-mids.

Higher-pitched female vocalists have a tendency to come off a little shrill on the PM, especially when seeking it out with tracks such as “34+35” by Ariana Grande and “4 walls” by f(x). These are a little harsh to listen to on the PM and are likely to cause some fatigue over time. This was also with the stock E-type tips, which are narrow bore and in my experience, have been used to take the edge off of the upper-end of IEMs for a while now. I also tested it with the Eletech Baroques, which wide bore and place the nozzles quite close into the ear canal. The result of this was a much sharper upper-midrange response where songs felt just entirely too sibilant.
Overall, the PM, in my opinion, requires the stock ear-tips in order to be listenable for long periods of time with the upper-mid lift being a bit too much for my liking. This combined with its rather flat tuning in the lower-mids leads to an underwhelming experience which despite being well-timbred and somewhat musical in its rendition, does not do anything to wow me but leaves me wondering whether the next song will be a shrill mess.

Treble​

The upper-ends of the frequency response curve remain the most enigmatic region to me as I feel that it is the least of my worries unless it is obviously absent or obviously fatiguing. Unfortunately, the PM leans more into the latter as there is an unabashed spiciness to the treble that is most apparent with female vocalists (as mentioned earlier) and with percussion in songs such as “Reckoner” by Radiohead. There is a crispiness here that leans more into the fatiguing region as it hits sharply and with speed, quite apt for the instrument that it is rendering but tiring nonetheless. To qualify that description, I must state that I still enjoyed my listening sessions with the PM as I felt that the crispness and slight sharpness of the treble accentuated certain instruments in a manner that was highly enjoyable. There is a harrowing and slightly dramatic quality to the treble that whilst not being a laid-back listen, helped to really make certain songs shine.

This slightly brighter lean also helps accentuate microdetails in the region as the leading edge of each high-pitched note felt clear, concise and speedy in its rendition. I felt that this helped heighten perceived detail but the quality of the treble itself was also enjoyable.
With all of this said though, the PM will basically be unlistenable to some people by virtue of its more aggressive tune in this region. If you are particularly treble sensitive, there is a slight shrillness to the PM that may lead you to dislike it. But I found an almost masochistic enjoyment in this quality as there were plenty of instances of percussion or strings feeling like a breath of morning winter air, slightly painful but refreshing nonetheless.
Overall, the PM’s treble is overindulgent with certain vocals being too shrill for my liking but shorter notes sung out by percussive instruments are a very enjoyable experience.

Technicalities​

The technical performance of the PM is, on the whole, quite good! The flatter tune tapering up to a brighter signature is a method of tuning that often one associates with ‘faux-detail’. However, critical listening for very specific notes in certain songs that I have heard many-times over leads me to believe that the PM is just plain good at detail retrieval. From the low-end to the high-end of the FR curve, the PM sounds great at rendering microdetails and its dynamic range feels excellent. There is no compressed or constrained feeling here as the low-end extends sufficiently deep and the high-end feels airy and well extended as well.

Staging on the PM is fairly constrained providing me with a distinctly ‘in-my-head’ feeling without venturing into the fabled term of ‘holographic’. However, with that said, the PM also avoids the issue of being ultrawide and flat, a staging experience that I am not a fan of. There is a sufficient sense of width and depth with the PM that is immersive enough for my listening.

Imaging, layering and separation are elements that help distinguish an IEM from being an incoherent mess to being an articulate and readily dissectible monitor. The PM is the latter, separating notes, placing them within the stage and imaging them with the requisite microdetail to be an excellent companion for critical listening sessions.
Overall, I feel that the PM’s technical capabilities are one of its strong points, being able to handle busily produced tracks with a 2-driver setup is a commendable feat especially when tribrids in the price-range struggle do the same.

Comparisons​

vs Thieaudio Hype 2 (from memory and previous review)​

The Hype2 provided a rather strong low-end performance from the isobaric dynamic driver configuration with notes in this region striking with good power whilst retaining tightness. The Hype2 is the definitive winner in this region compared to the PM unless you are looking for a more tame and neutral approach to this region. In terms of midrange, the PM is a neutral with a brighter tilt whereas the Hype2 comes off as slightly darker with a degree of warmth. The treble regions are chalk and cheese with the PM being considerably more spicy than the relaxed Hyper2 resulting in an experience that is quite jarring to A-B. Technical capabilities are much more apparent on the PM due to its more revealing tuning but the Hype 2 does well to impress with its tremendous low-end detail and texture. Staging on the Hype 2 feels more tall than it is wide or deep leading to an oddly grand experience. The PM doesn’t feel too expansive in any regard.
Overall, the Hype 2 and the PM represent quite different tuning approaches with the former being slightly dark and smoother to the ear with great low-end power whereas the latter is a leaner and brighter tuning that seeks to attack you with its treble. The Hype 2 is a much safer choice in my books.

Value and Quality of Life​

325 USD is a bit of an odd price bracket with my experience at this price being fairly limited but for the price, I feel that the PM presents a fairly compelling package. Outside of the sound noted above, the experience of unboxing and using the PM is a rather enjoyable one. With limited accessories, the PM doesn’t overwhelm you with extra goodies but there is definitely a thoughtful and high-quality approach here.
The build quality of the PMs are rather impressive with the earpieces feeling robust, solid and well finished. Having experienced the Hype 2 which are priced similarly and other Chi-Fi brands such as Moondrop at higher price brackets, I feel that the PM provides a far more comforting build quality that leads me to believe that they will hold up for some time.
Comfort-wise, the PMs are rather good in my ears with its fairly well-moulded resin earpieces seating nicely in my ears. There is a potential for some fitment issues with individuals with smaller ears but I don’t think these would be much different from the usual hybrids in this price bracket.
The included accessories are both good and bad in that there is some high quality goodies in here but they come off a little odd. The Final Audio E-Types, whilst excellent with the PM are the only eartips that come with the PM and were best suited to the brighter IEM. The case, whilst quite well made, is a little too short for easy storage of the PM. I found myself adjusting positioning to get the lid to close properly.
The PM is a bit of a hard recommend at the price as I would term its tuning as divisive at best.

Conclusion​

Lean, mean and impressive for a company’s first foray into the hybrid market, the PM comes off as what it seems on paper. That is, an experiment and slightly half-baked at that. There are nuggets of gold with the PM from its handsome shell design, excellent build quality and certain portions of its FR curve. It is overindulgent in the upper-mids and treble boost leading to a harsher listening experience that restricts its everyman appeal. Stifled by this, there is little room for you to experiment with ear-tips (unless they’re narrow bore) and I would not be reaching for these as a daily.

Preamble​

I purchased the Questyle CMA18 Portable (CMA18) at my own cost and Questyle have had no input on the below review. The rating is a mix of both Sound and Quality of Life and Value. For the CMA18, Sound gets 4.5 stars and Quality of Life gets 3.5 stars leading to the resulting overall rating.

I note that the above rating is based on the testing of the CMA18 with the following IEMs:

• BLON BL-03 (Single DD budget);
• Campfire Audio Supermoon (Single planar driver kilobuck);
• Letshuoer S12 Pro (Single planar budget-ish)
• Unique Melody MEST MK2 (Quad-brid kilobuck-ish); and
• Unique Melody Multiverse Mentor (BA and Bone conduction driver hybrid TOTL),

meaning I had no testing with over-ear headphones.

It is rather ironic that in the quest for a better sounding portable setup that many end up with something that is less and less portable. It starts with a small USB dongle that evolves to a DAP which evolves to an even bigger DAP that is strapped to a separate discrete amplifier. Soon you will be carrying a car battery in your backpack to hook up to 4 amps daisy chained together. Whilst many may never end up at this point, it is important to look at what you get along this journey and whether sound quality is every worth the trade-off in convenience. Today’s review concerns a power-bank sized audio device, the CMA18 Portable from Questyle that promises a step-up from your tiny dongles but the question is, at what cost?

The Factual Stuff​

The CMA18 is a portable audio device featuring a DAC, amplifier and ADC in one rather sleek looking package.

Featuring an aluminium frame with two gorilla glass panels, there is a glimpse into the internal workings of the CMA18 much like my Gameboy Colour of yesteryear. Within the CMA18 is a single AK4493 DAC, 4x “PCT-class current-mode SiP” chips and a 4300 mAh battery.

The left side is flanked with a litany of buttons with power, input select, volume up and down, a hold slider and a gain slider.

In terms of input, there is a USB-C combo power and input at the bottom along with you choice of optical/TOSlink and Bluetooth with support for aptX and LDAC. In terms of output, you have a choice of either 3.5mm and 4.4mm. Out of the balanced output, you will be getting 1W through 32 ohms.

Within the rather cool box you get the CMA18, a charging cable, a USB-C to USB-C OTG cable, a USB-C to Lightning OTG cable and some literature.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

Whilst a source doesn't necessarily have a sound signature (or one at all if /r/headphones is to believed) that is universally applicable to all IEMs, there are a number of traits that I can discern that is generally applicable to the IEMs listed above.

Bass​

The CMA18 seems to impart a degree of low-end oomph that is quite satisfying to listen to. The sub-bass frequencies, especially on the single DD BL-03 got a greater injection of physicality with the CMA18 providing something that was very robust in its power. There is a degree of overdoing it with already bassy IEMs but on the whole, this provision of low-end power is something that I feel is wholly enjoyable. This is not the old crank the left-side of your graphic equalizer up in terms of bass boost, it remains tight, controlled and not overly boomy to the ear. Mid-bass frequencies also seem to get a greater level of presence and punch with songs such as “Dreams” by Fleetwood Mac which doesn’t seek to wow you with low-end production (I mean it was released in 1977) seems to get a great sense of rhythm and pace with the added mid-bass presence on the CMA18. Overall, there is a good sense of power and depth here that adds a great sense of fun factor to your IEMs.

Mids​

The midrange on the CMA18 seems quite well balanced with neither male or female vocalists stealing the show from the other. There is a slight forward nature to the mid-range as vocalists seem to sit slightly forward in the stage. The lower-mids sound quite nice to listen to with the aforementioned bass boost injecting a sense of weightiness in this presence that enhances my emotional engagement with music. This is a rather welcome signature as I feel that a lot of audio devices, not just sources, seek to be over clinical at times. Upper-mids sound sweet and natural with songs like “Billie Bossa Nova” by Billie Eilish presenting in a very natural and slightly forward manner, as if Billie was whispering into your ear.

Instrumental-heavy music such as orchestral pieces like “One-Winged Angel” by Nobuo Uematsu sound engaging and quite well timbred. The details of the strings sound coherent and well presented in the stage.

Overall, there is not much to hate here with a well-natured approach to the mids that seeks to enhance musicality and technical performance in a balanced way.

Treble​

Moving to the treble, the CMA18 also does a good job at rendering the upper-regions of the FR curve in a well-meaning manner, remaining quite enjoyable to the ear. There is seemingly, a slight smoothing out going on here with rather sharp IEMs such as the S12 Pro, quite often fatiguing at times managing to be quite listenable over longer-periods of time. I do not feel that this region loses out in terms of quantity but it seems to get relaxed a little and presents in a manner that is more laid-back. Some trebleheads may dislike the spine-tingling rendition of percussion and I found myself wanting a little more from songs like “Reckoner” by Radiohead but overall, I cannot fault the CMA18 here.

Whilst not the forefront of the CMA18, treble doesn’t seem to lose out its detail and its extension, with a greater sense of dynamic range compared to the Shanling M6U but its engagement level with me had dropped significantly.

Overall, the CMA18’s treble region is well-meaning and hard-to-hate for me. I don’t mind it but it’s definitely not the standout here.

Technicalities​

The technical performance of the CMA18 is likely its most impressive element. The music sounds dynamic, wide and just big in nearly every aspect. Detail retrieval and resolution is a definite bonus with the CMA18 when compared to lesser sources. The single AKM chip and the rather impressive amplifier in the CMA are working overtime to produce some very well defined notes that don’t seek to overwhelm you with detail but rather, balances musicality at the same time.

Soundstage on the CMA18 is seemingly expanded from the likes of the M6U and there is a greater sense of stage width, depth and height that comes to life on well-produced tracks in my library.

Imaging on the CMA18 is also excellent. When paired with a technically proficient IEM, there is a clear separation of notes and a great level of identifying certain lines of instrumentalization and vocalisation in busily produced tracks such as “Fine” by Taeyeon.

Where the CMA18 suffers however, is its noise floor. Noiser amplifiers fail to produce a ‘darker’ background which detracts from a sense of dynamism and just overall enjoyment of more sparsely produced tracks. “No Time to Die” by Billie Eilish has some sections with limited instruments and yet you hear a faint hiss throughout. This is something that I have been conditioned to notice after owning an Andromeda for a period of time and for some, this is a non-issue. However, it is something to note with the CMA.

Quality of Life & Value​

The CMA18 is priced at approximately $700 USD and for that you get a very versatile source. It is a DAC, amp, ADC and wireless Bluetooth player in a rather pocketable package. Based on versatility alone and its sound quality, I feel that the CMA18 represents great value. The ADC is a bit of an odd inclusion as I don't really have any use for it but I suppose measureabators and music-makers will enjoy it. I would have preferred the potential to use the CMA18 as a pure amp utilising the line-out of a DAP or external DAC in the same vein as popular solutions such as the iBasso PB5 Osprey, Brise Audio Tsuranagi or the Mass Kobo MK475. This is not to say you can pass through some analogue audio but it will be converted back to digital for processing by the CMA18's DAC.

There is perhaps a consideration for what IEM you seek to pair with the CMA18 as well. In my testing, the planar drivers and the dynamic driver IEMs that I had on hand seemed to work well with the CMA18 with an increased degree of shift in sound compared to my multi-BA sets. This may just be with my lineup of IEMs but is something that I noted with my Mentor seemingly sounding rather pedestrian with the CMA18. Some input from fellow audiophiles have stated that theoretically, a current-focused amplifier stage (such as that in the CMA18) will enliven dynamic drivers more so than balanced armatures. Snake oil? Perhaps. Coinciding with my anecdotes? Yes. Now taken as a truth for me? Sure.

Outside of the spec sheet, there are some quality of life issues that I would be remiss not to note. The CMA18, whilst quite cool looking with its industrial design, is glass and as such, is unlikely to handle the bumps and falls of other devices. It is also quite slippery on services and no one wants their device to be flung across the room when they forget to unplug it. The case that I have received with my CMA18 which is from a brand named Jutem (which I understand to be a China-centric brand) is a very necessary purchase.

The litany of buttons on the side is a rather necessary evil but they are quite rattly and loud to use. Furthermore, the volume steps that you get with the CMA18 is quite limited. It’s not hard to go from “I can’t hear anything” to “I can’t hear anything, anymore, ever”.

Bluetooth works a treat if you’re into that thing and I quite enjoyed having it in the pocket whilst playing around on my phone or just walking around the house whilst whatever device was doing playback remaining stationary. Range is not hugely impressive but it is completely fine for my rather limited adventures. Do not expect to have several double-brick walls between your CMA18 and your PC is what I am getting at.

Battery life was decent in my very unscientific testing. No run-time measurements were taken but through a variety of listening and input sources throughout a single charge, it didn't drop dead in a single day. I found myself reaching for a charger two or so times a week with an averaging listening time of 2-3 hours a day so I don't believe it hits its stated run time of about 10 hours but hey, what does nowadays?

The CMA18 also has a tendency to get a little toasty over longer listening sessions. Residing in my jacket pocket on a commute, it go noticeably warm over time and whilst it never got to the point of being nipple burning, this is something to note for more sensitive listeners out there.

The biggest L that the CMA18 takes is in its noise-floor. It is simply just not enjoyable to have a lapse in sound in a brief refrain of a song and be greeted with SSSSSSSS. This is not to say that it is deficient to the point of breaking the CMA18 but it is merely a disappointment that I cannot unhear. With some manufacturer-stated measurements (which is always to be taken with a grain of salt) and some bad math, my calculation of the noise floor is in the region of 5.66 microvolts, which is not exactly world-beating for portable gear. For comparisons sake, my calculations for the Chord Mojo 2 yields around 5 microvolts and for the Shanling M6U, 2.7 microvolts.

On the balance of things, the CMA18 presents good quality sound with a neutral + bass-boost sound signature that aligns with its portable use. Fun on the go seems to be the theme here and it sure is fun.

Comparisons​

Shanling M6 Ultra (M6U)​

The M6U is a more expensive all-in-one device that presents with a more v-shaped signature and a significant injection of warmth in the low-end. The M6U seems more musically inclined at the cost of technical performance with a smaller stage, more fuzzy imaging / detail retrieval and just overall lower resolution. The sub-bass physicality on the CMA18 is greater and the mid-bass tightness is better. The M6U has a seemingly more bloaty low-end that bleeds slightly into the lower-mids and whilst this may be enjoyable for its enhanced note-weight, it is also more woolly sounding overall. Mids feel more clear and crisper on the CMA18 with strings and wind instruments seemingly floating out to you in a clarity that the M6U cannot match. The treble is more forward on the M6U that seeks to enhance a sense of detail and it does well to balance out the warmth. The CMA18 is smoother in this region and seems to extend further.

However, the M6U does also have all the features of the CMA18 (outside of being an ADC) with the addition of a screen and a fully fledged Android OS to allow you to stream and otherwise play with apps.

The CMA18 is an upgrade in sound quality outside of tonal considerations over the M6U and for that, I applaud the CMA18 for being better than my daily driver.

Chord Mojo 2 (from memory and notes)​

I let go of my Mojo 2 but the sheer number of hours of listening I conducted on that device leads me to believe that I can make some statements in this comparison section. The Mojo2 and the CMA18 are quite similar in many aspects, as they seek to provide a rather neutral sound signature with a low-end boost that is subtle and enjoyable. Both devices are technically impressive with an etched rendition of notes that seeks to heighten a level of detail retrieval that is not found on many lower-end devices. Where they deviate is that the Mojo2 has the benefit of a litany of rather excellent DSP features including cross-feed. Both trade blows in terms of technical performance and I would state that the CMA18 is a close match with the Mojo2 with the benefit of a much more versatile use-case. Both also share similarly poor noise floors with both producing a water-fall like hiss with more sparsely produced songs and more sensitive IEMs.

Overall, I’d go with the Mojo2 only if you could live with the lack of versatility due to the DSP features but the amplification on the CMA18 seems to add more oomph to music and runs well with more power-hungry sources.

Conclusion​

The CMA18 is the best oversized dongle that I have ever used. It is versatile, cool to look at and sounds excellent. Where it loses with me is that I simply don’t want to use it over an all-in-one solution such as a DAP and the noise floor.

The latter portion is particularly disappointing with more sensitive gear but if you have a lineup of Singaporean IEMs (notorious for being power hungry) and headphones then I do not feel that you would be missing out on much.

I characterise the CMA18 as a modernised Mojo2 without the oddities of Chord. I believe it represents good value and is let down only by its rather noisy amp and its questionable design choices. If those caveats are worth living with for a very useful and nice sounding device, then I can heartily recommend the CMA18 as your next step beyond a dongle.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 and Symphonium for arranging the Australian Head-Fi tour of the Symphonium Crimson

It is interesting how an IEM can shape your perception of a manufacturer and create biases that influence further impressions of their products. The first impression is crucial, and missing the chance to captivate a potential fan with their initial experience can be significant. My first encounter with Symphonium, a lauded manufacturer from Singapore was the Helios. Armed with high expectations and hopes generated from some great critical response, imagine my surprise when I didn’t like it! Perhaps a result of hype or simply personal preference, whatever the case may be, today’s review of the Crimson provides an opportunity to turn this sinking hype ship (my personal one at least) around! But would my experience with the Crimson be a dispelling of preconceived notions? Or a confirmation of my experiences?

The Factual Stuff​

The Crimson is a 4-BA setup with a 4-way “TrueX” crossover. The Crimson spruiks Symphonium’s FLAT and PHAT technology to ‘provide low-impedence and immunity from impedence mismatch” and “no unnecessary frequency inversions or phase cancellation” respectively.

This is all housed in a lightweight aluminium shell that represents a departure from the shells on the Helios and features a forged carbon fibre faceplate. In the rather simple packaging is an aluminium puck case, Divinus Velvet Eartips and Azla Sednafit Standard eartips. Purchasers will also have the chance to choose between a 4 wire or 8 wire version of the Altalune Audio Novaron. The cable features 26 AWG Type 2 Litz copper cable with a changeable termination between 3.5mm and 4.4mm.

This particular review unit has the 8-wire cable.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The majority of listening with the Crimson was conducted using Divinus Velvet tips, the included cable and with a Shanling M6 Ultra.

Bass​

The low-end of the Crimson is something that is rather tastefully tuned and well performing in terms of technical performance. The Crimson is decidedly sub-bass focused with a rather prominent sub-bass shelf tune providing a clean and deeply extending bass line.
It is not the most aggressively tuned low-end that I have experienced (looking at you FatFreq) but remains heightened enough to remain fun and restrained enough to avoid descending the rest of the frequency response into the abyss.
“You Should See Me in a Crown” by Billie Eilish provides a boomy and deeply extending bass-line which the Crimson handles expertly with lesser IEMs failing to articulate the bloaty bass in a coherent manner.

Mid-bass performance on the Crimson is definitely less of a focus but it provides an acceptable amount of punch for the purposes of maintaining a sense of pace and rhythm with tracks. “Before Dawn” by Slander and its incessant bassline throughout the track immediately provides feedback as to whether there is not enough or too much mid-bass in a song. The Crimson provides a decent performance, there is a hint of punchiness, but it remains somewhat restrained in its presentation here.

The detail and the texture reproduced by the Crimson in the low-end is quite excellent with bass notes rendering with a level of detail and texture that would be not found on more over-zealous bass tunings. The speediness of the Crimson’s rendition is nothing to sneeze at, and it manages to keep up with busier recordings with gusto.
Some key shortcomings in my mind are that there is simply not enough bass for bass-heads here and that the bass itself seems a little shallow and perhaps too speedy in its production. There is a desire for the slightest more decay and a truer feeling of air pressure being forced down your earholes, but this is likely a technical limitation of a BA-driver.

Mids​

The gradual decent from the sub-bass to the rather flat mids provides a delicate balance between clarity and fun. Lower-mids and male vocals are still present within the mix and are imparted with a degree of warmth and emotional presence that is rather pleasing to listen to.
This is not to say that this is a ‘warm’ IEM, but the subtle mid-bass tuning and lower-mid presence adds a little bit of note weight and more ‘gravitas’ to singers in this region. With, these male vocals are still slightly recessed when compared to female vocalists. The upper-mid lift seems to place precedence on female singers and this tuning toes the line between sibilance and spine-tingle inducing vocals.
The Crimson would be likely seen as some as leaning slightly bright, but I feel that it toes the line wonderfully. I admit at times, that singers such as Ariana Grande hitting her higher notes or sss sounds would render some degree of fatigue, but for the most part, female vocals sounded great.

The rendition of instrumentalization is also similarly impressive. Listening to a wealth of original soundtracks and more orchestral based pieces yielded and appreciation for the Crimson’s ability to render the delicate details of certain instruments. Strings sounded quite visceral and piano was also similarly impressive. The timbre of the mid-range is also very good. There is a slight lean to a thinner rendition in the grand scheme of things but by no means is this describable as dry, cold, or lacking soul.
The speediness of note rendition, the crispness of those notes and the perception that you can hear the ‘edges’ of each note lends itself to a less ‘soulful’ or ‘warm’ rendition, but the Crimson retains a degree of naturality and enjoyability.

Overall, the mids provide a great balance of technical prowess and musicality that is quite easy to listen to with a slight edginess to it to keep you on your toes.

Treble​

Moving to the upper-end of the FR curve, one must wonder if the Crimson can be three-from-three in terms of tuning. And yes, yes, it is three-from-three. The treble regions of the Crimson is delightfully tuned, managing to maintain tonal balance and also allowing certain notes to absolutely sing when given their time in a song. Percussion cuts through the FR curve in a manner that is clear, concise and crispy in its rendition.

There is a sense of ‘spice’ here as it is not exactly a relaxed and smoothed out rendition and as such, may cause individuals some fatigue over time but boy is it sure fun. “Teenage Heartbreak” by Yuna features a triangle being struck during the chorus and it has never sounded so prominent nor enjoyable as it did with the Crimson. Whilst surprising and a little jarring perhaps, I found myself rewinding to that section multiple times. There is a crystalline and clean quality to the treble region, percussion feels like a standout here.

For more electronic music, I feel that piercing synths present in a manner that is wholly enjoyable, providing me with the goosebump inducing tickle of having a note straddle the line between being ear-bleed inducing and being simply enjoyable.
The treble extension is also a thing to note with the Crimson. I am no bat and am confined by the limits of human hearing but I did notice that there appears to be no discernable roll off with the Crimson. It has the airiness and extension to feel as though there is no loss of dynamic range, this extension lends itself to a more grand and airy experience wherein I do not feel like I am losing out on any sonic information.

Technicalities​

Perhaps one of the more impressive elements of the Crimson is its technical performance, which, in conjunction with its well balanced, neutral tonality, seems to add to the overall experience. The soundstage on the Crimson feels nice and wide, providing a wider out-of-head experience that feels grand with certain songs. The stage depth, whilst good, is not the best in its price category. There is a sense of layering and the ability to discern the foreground and background of music but this is a subtle experience.

The imaging and detail retrieval of the Crimson is quite excellent. The aforementioned crispness and speed at which the Crimson renders notes lends itself to providing the sensation of a highly resolving and highly detailed listening experience. However, where most IEMs err in this regard is creating an etched and overly-sharpened experience which detracts from the enjoyability of music.

Dynamics are a fair performer with the Crimson as swings in volume are noticeable and songs building to crescendos provide the sense of scale that is enjoyable to listen too. Microdynamics in particular feel very detailed and well rendered when compared to macrodynamics.

Synergy​

One thought coming to my mind here namely lessons learnt after multiple DAPs, DACs and Amps plus headphones and IEMs is synergy! Hoping for the one and only holy grail Setup is maybe just a nice wish unless buying according synergy transducers. There's a reason why people are having multiple devices in parallel or reducing inventory and keeping only the ones with right synergy.

Shanling M6 Ultra:

The M6U provides a low-end imbuement of warmth and a slight elevation of treble to generate a more weighty and musical listening experience. This is not a technical heavyweight in the DAP market but it definitely has a enough charm and character to be my main source. The M6U does a great job of generating a more engaging and enjoyable listening experience with the Crimson and I feel that the added weight to the lower-mids, mid-bass region does a great job of synergising with Crimson’s rather crisp and edgier note rendition to create a more balanced sound signature.

Definitely a favourite pairing here.

Apple Dongle

For a fun time, I chucked on the venerated Apple Dongle to see if the Crimson, a notoriously ‘hard-to-drive’ IEM, would sound worse. The Crimson and the Apple Dongle resulted in a rather odd situation wherein volume was 100% adequate but there was a seemingly reduced sense of dynamism in its sound. Low-end oomph faded away, treble extension seemed to be silenced and overall the staging felt a lot more flat. Before you get your pitchforks /r/headphones, the Apple Dongle and the Crimson sounded fine, but I preferred my mountain of snake oil.

Comparisons​

vs MEST MK3 (from memory and review notes)​

The MK3 represents what I feel is one of the best choices in the ~2000 USD mark and can be found for much cheaper on the used market. In this regard, the Crimson has to contend with the strengths of the MK3 in its unique bone-conduction driver and its technical performance. This unique element lends itself to generating a truly holographic sound stage with a particular strength in stage depth. Separation, layering and the ability to accurately image notes within this stage is a strong suit of the MK3 and in this regard, it edges out the Crimson. In terms of tonality, the MK3 is a warmer more bass-forward presentation which is a winner for bass heads over the Crimson. The mids feel more organic and crisper on the Crimson and the treble sounds more well extended, prominent in the mix and crisper on the Crimson as well.

The MK3 is the more laid-back listening experience but still wows you with its technical prowess, its stage depth being its main selling factor. The Crimson feels more balanced, more neutral and more clinical in its rendition comparatively speaking and whilst it doesn’t absolutely wow me in terms of any particular aspect, it is well balanced and is a jack of all trades. I feel that the Crimson is the more ‘safe’ choice whereas the MK3 attempts to be more unique to the detriment of its everyman appeal.

Vs Symphonium Helios (from memory and notes)​

The Helios is the first Symphonium product that I experienced, and it had arrived with much fanfare. However, from the outset, I was disappointed with the clinical and almost sterile rendition of music that was not wholly enjoyable to me. I was impressed by the detail and crispness of note rendition as well as the treble, but overall, I did not find it an enjoyable listen. The Crimson builds on this foundation and improves some major issues. The mid-bass dip on the Helios is an odd tuning that seemingly removes certain instruments from existence in the mix and detracts heavily from that enjoyable mid-bass punch that I enjoy. The Crimson retains mid-bass punch and adds tremendously to the note weight, generating a sense of pace and rhythm. Otherwise, the mids on the Crimson feel much more naturally timbred and well expressed, providing me with the crispness and detail I desire but not at the cost of pure enjoyability and musicality. The Helios has a tendency to lean slightly into ‘drier’ note renditions that whilst good for that ‘etched’ note feeling, detracts from simply laying back and enjoying your music.

I feel that the Crimson is a straight upgrade from the Helios in practically all aspects and I would be completely fine with paying the premium that comes with it.

Quality of Life and Value​

The build quality of the Crimsons are quite impressive, consisting of an aluminium shell and a carbon fibre faceplate, the Crimsons feel sturdy, nicely weighted and well built. The shells are no longer as cumbersome and awkwardly shaped as the Helios and take on a more traditional shape. They are not exactly small however and as such will still cause some issues with smaller conchas. The comfort level on the Crimsons are quite good but the flatter shape of the earpieces are not as comfy as what you get with resin moulds. The nozzles are not that long nor hugely wide and didn’t cause any irritation in my ear over longer listening periods.

The Crimson, as demonstrated in the Synergy section above, is a rather ‘difficult-to-drive’ IEM. That is not to say that you will need a nuclear power plant to get it to an adequate volume but rather the Crimson seems to scale well depending on the quality and quantity of power that you are running through it. A Shanling M6U with 760mW sounded great, a CMA18P with around 1W also sounded great (if a little different) and pairing either unit with an external amplifier like the Sound Tiger Sinfonia (160mW but seemingly with plenty of clean current) seemed to improve technical performance and dynamic range. As such, I would venture with caution if you wish to pair it with the Apple Dongle alone.

In terms of value within the accessories, the inclusion of Azla eartips and Divinus Velvets is very welcome as both perform admirably and usually command a not-insignificant sum if you had bought them after-the-fact. The puck case, whilst small is well built and sturdy enough to protect your Crimsons from any drops or falls. The Altalune cable is also quality, with a soft and supple cable that feels easily malleable and doesn’t retain much memory despite being 8 wires (in this case at least).

Overall, I believe for the combination sound, build quality and included accessories, the asking price of 1500 USD (1700 USD for the 8-wire cable) is rather fair. I believe that the Crimson provides a step above perennial kilobucks of yesteryear such as the Andromedas and the IER-M9 in terms of its technical performance and its easy to love balanced tonality.

Conclusion​

Effervescent, crisp and refreshing are words to describe a new soda but oddly enough, these are words that ascribe to the Crimson. With a clean and nicely-balanced tonality, the Crimson excels in its ability to balance technical performance and musical enjoyment. I believe that the Crimson represents a step forward in what to expect in this price range and feel that it is deserving as being labelled as a “benchmark”. There is very little to fault with the Crimson and whilst it did not punch me in the face with some silver bullet specialisation, it did well in nearly every regard. For that, I think that this is the quintessential ‘neutral’ IEM that simply just does everything well.

Preamble​

As you move up a product line, there is an expectation that you are receiving tangible and easily ascertainable benefits for your dollars. A higher trim on a car yields heated seats and a bucket of safety features you never knew you needed. A higher specced laptop provides you with greater benchmark scores. And a higher end cable provides you with…more sound?

It's a bit of a tricky one to explain but as I move into the top of the line cable for Eletech’s Virtues line of cables, I began to expect more and more. And for 529 USD, one would expect a lot more than its cheapest model (279 USD).

And were these expectations met? Or have I finally rid myself of my snake oil addiction?

The Factual Stuff​

Where Azrael and Cassiel were largely the same in terms of configuration outside of the material used, the Raphael takes a further step away from its cousins. Utilising similar 25.5 AWG wire, the Raphael opts for a belnd of ultra high purity gold plated copper and a gold-copper allow. This wire is 9 core litz meaning a single wire acutally consists of 9 smaller wires twisted together in a pattern that seeks to increase conductivity and increase efficiency.

Otherwise, like the Azrael and Cassiel, the Raphael utilises a multi sized strand design and a Kevlar resilient core. The wires are cryogenically treated which intends to ‘enhance audio quality’ by ‘stabilising molecular structures’, ‘improving electrical conductivity’ and ‘increasing durability and reliability’. (All in quotes because I am not a scientist).

The Raphael comes with Eletech’s signature milled hardware, enamelled strands and their “FlexiMax” insulation. The result of this is a rather handsome and lightweight cable.

These also feature Eletech Versa, their proprietary interchangeable connector system that allows you to swap between 2 pin and MMCX.
This cable is part of the Eletech Virtues series, consisting of Azrael (279 USD), Cassiel (329 USD) and Raphael (529 USD).

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The effects of cable rolling on sound is definitely a controversial topic but I am a believer in its efficacy. The value of this exercise is up to you but I for one can discern subtle but noticeable differences in cables. Call it copium or confirmation bias, you wouldn’t be reading this if you were not curious or a similar believer.

All impressions are taken using a variety of IEMs including UM MEST MK2, UM Multiverse Mentor, CFA Supermoon.

All A-B comparisons were conducted utilising:

• Campfire Supermoon;
• iBasso DC04 Pro; and
• a Campfire Audio Smoky Litz cable as baseline.

Bass​

The Raphael is an excellent candidate for what many attribute to copper cables, even when its plated in gold. The low-end when swapping to the Raphael is extended more deeply and its quantity is increased. The sub-bass frequencies seem to pop a little more and result is a stronger sense of physicality and the mid-bass gets a slight added sense of punch compared to the stock cables as well as the other Eletech cables.

This increase in bass quantity generates a more fun and engaging sound signature that definitely pleased me on hip hop as well EDM tracks. Bass quality remains similarly good with a strong sense of texture and detail that belies the increase in quantity. On the balance of things, I believe that the low-end of the Raphael is perhaps its strongest quality, providing me with a greater appreciation for the bass. This is not a bass boost for the sake of having one and it does a great job of being well extended and with a good sense of decay that is natural and powerful.

Mids​

Moving to the mid-range, the Raphael seems to confine the stage compared to the stock cable and to the Cassiel but this brings a nice intimacy to the stage that seems to heighten midrange frequencies. Unlike the Cassiel which brings the upper mids much more forward, the Cassiel remains nicely balanced and naturally timbred. There is a deepening of the stage and presents vocalists in a manner that is quite analogue in nature. There is the slightest hint of sibilance with certain female vocalists but on the whole, the mids here are natural, smooth and well reproduced.

Male vocalists receive a boost in terms of their engagement factor, perhaps by virtue of the low-end boost. And unlike the stock cable or Cassiel, this presents them in a manner that is wholly engaging and more emotive.

Mid-range frequencies seem to present in a more thick manner compared to stock and the result of this is a more euphonic listening experience wherein detail was not thrown at me but rather enveloped me in a manner that was quite enjoyable to listen to.

Treble​

The upper range of the FR curve on the Raphael presented smoothly and naturally. The cable appeared to increase extension on the upper-end like it did in the sub-bass frequencies. The aforementioned confinement of the stage seems to increase the engagement with notes in this range as I felt hi-hats and other percussion seemed more visceral and more effortless in their reproduction. There is a loss of the crystalline quality found in the Cassiel but the Raphael presents in a more smooth and easy-listening manner.

The aforementioned slight sibilance in the upper-mids means that the Raphael will not tame every bright IEM in the market but the smoothing it achieves in this region without deadening the treble entirely presents a well balanced tonal colour that seems to fit in well with the aforementioned bass and mid-range frequencies.

If I had to complain, I would have liked a greater sense of airiness but the Raphael seems to want to bring everything a little more forward to engage you in a more forward manner.

Technicalities​

The Raphael presents a number of oddities in terms of technicalities but I feel these all come together to present a more balanced tonal character.

The staging of the Raphael isn’t necessary the widest that I’ve tried, especially in the context of the Cassiel. The depth of stage is quite excellent, seeming to present with the greatest sense of depth out of the three Virtues cables. Those who are looking for huge concert-hall, holographic staging when swapping to the Raphael may be disappointed but the layered yet engaging nature of the Raphael is definitely something that can be enjoyed by most

Detail retrieval and resolution seems to be the best on the Raphael as I felt that notes could be easily picked out and isolated in my minds eye in spite of its smoother and more confined presentation. The aforementioned ‘layered’ effect that one gets with the Raphael is something that is helpful for critical listening but the tonal balance of the Raphael means it is also something to be enjoyed with more dissociative listening sessions.

Value & Quality of Life​

At 529 USD, the Raphael presents a hard pill to swallow for many audiophiles looking to invest in a cable. However, I feel that the Raphael presents a sound signature that is befitting its price point as I believe that more enthusiast products seek out to achieve elements of sound that are sometimes contradictory. Whereas the Azrael achieves low-end power at the cost of darkening the FR curve and the Cassiel achieves crystalline clarity at the cost of fatigue, the Raphael manages to achieve both on a balance of things. Comparing to main rival Effect Audio there is nothing in their product line at this price range and the closest would be the Code 24. I had enjoyed the Code 24 but the ergonomics and rather brash colour scheme of the cable make it less of an easy recommend compared to the Raphael.

The Raphael’s wires seem more thick and less easy to manipulate compared to the likes of Azrael and Cassiel but its ergonomics remain great. It remains lightweight, albeit not as lightweight as its Virtues stablemates and as such it is not the same ergonomic slam dunk as those cables. However, I did not feel that the Raphael was out of place at all and was still excellent for listening on the go. Outside of the similar complaint of its rather chunky hardware, the Raphael is still great in terms of its malleability and manageability with its well-formed ear hooks and supple wire.

Featuring Versa, the interchangeable connector system, Raphael is easy to manage, intuitive to use and when compared to Effect Audio’s ConX system, is a far better option. Utilising screw-down covers to ensure connector security is a much more well thought out idea rather than just using screw down connectors in the case of ConX. This is especially evident with MMCX as I have had instances where EA cables MMCX connectors have just fallen off. Utilising a screw down system with a rotating connector is not a great idea it seems.

Comparisons​

Vs EA Code 24​

Priced at 799 USD, the Code 24 is a jump up in price and the thought one would have would be a jump up in sound quality. Bass frequencies of the Code 24 are boosted subtly and have a slower sense of decay and attack that was pleasing to listen to. In this region, the Raphael and the Code 24 seem to share similar characteristics but I believe the Raphael retains a greater sense of speed. In terms of mid-range performance, the Code 24 seems to open up the stage and impart a greater sense of space to the mids and an elevation of upper-mids is emphasised. The Raphael confines this region and makes the mid-range present in a more intimate and engaging manner. Despite this difference, both are quite well-timbred. Moving to treble, both seem to heighten high-frequency sounds and both extend well in this region and this is largely a tie for me. In terms of technical performance, the Code 24 enlarges width and presents in a more sparse manner. This helps in critical listening and you ability to pick out certain notes in a larger stage but I do not believe the Raphael is far behind despite its smaller stage.

Ergonomics is a non-factor here, the Code line of cables have been the subject of my vitriol for their poor performance in this regard. Thick and unwieldy, the Code 24 is leagues behind the Raphael.

Similar in some respects and very different in others, I believe when viewed together, the Raphael presents a far more balanced cable but with the qualification that it presents music in a more forward and engaging manner.

Vs Azrael​

The head-honcho of the “Virtues” Series of Eletech cables, the Raphael provides tremendous low-end oomph but balanced with technical capabilities. The Raphael represents the Azrael but with refined to a greater level. There is great resolution here but the stage doesn’t feel as wide as either the Cassiel or the Azrael. There is greater intimacy here and a much greater sense of engagement. It sounds slightly brighter than the Azrael but not to the same extent as the Cassiel. These elements combine to make the Raphael perhaps the best sonically, providing a balanced approach to improving sound but at the cost of being the most expensive cable here. 529 USD is a much larger jump here but you get what you pay for and whether you’re willing to pay that is a question for you and your wallet.

Vs Cassiel​

The Cassiel has a wider stage compared to Raphael which is a bit of a surprise but the Raphael presents in a more engaging manner with a low-end boost that puts the Cassiel to shame. Whilst low-end detail is no longer easily discernible on the Raphael when A-B’d against Cassiel, it remains no slouch in terms of sheer resolution and I feel that the Raphael presents a more balanced approach in that is not as dry nor bright as the Cassiel. There is a greater sense of engagement with low-register vocals and there is a sense of great dynamic range. Raphael’s timbre is the most natural in the Virtues series and it retains treble performance which, whilst not as forward as Cassiel, remains a great performer nonetheless. The price differential cannot be ignored and for 529 USD you can have a more well rounded cable compared to the Cassiel that doesn’t suck the fun out of the low-end. In this regard, I feel the Raphael presents an overall improvement over the Cassiel unless you are actively seeking out a colder rendition of your music.

Conclusion​

The most expensive is the best? Seems like you’ve been drinking snake oil. I might have but I believe that the Raphael provides the most balanced tonal signature whilst boosting technicalities making it a very well rounded cable indeed. Whereas Cassiel and Azrael seem to take specific specialist routes, the Raphael achieves elements of both to the detriment of perhaps one factor, stage width. With an engaging and enjoyable sound signature combined with the versatility of Versa and the ease of ergonomics, I definitely believe that Raphael, despite its price, has a place in your collection.

Preamble​

SPC is a bit of the red-headed stepchild of cable materials in my reading. People love pure copper, pure silver or some hodgepodge of metal to create some Frankenstein alloy. SPC is usually connected with cheaper cables you find on Amazon from no-name brands but this is changing somewhat. Effect Audio (EA) Code 24 presented a more expensive cable with SPC and today’s review concerns their direct rival, Eletech’s entry into the SPC market. But can this cable shake off these preconceptions or is it to be relegated to the parts bin?

The Factual Stuff​

The Cassiel is a four wire cable consisting of 25.5AWG ultra high purity silver-plated OCC copper utilising a multi sized strand design and a Kevlar resilient core. The wires are cryogenically treated which intends to ‘enhance audio quality’ by ‘stabilising molecular structures’, ‘improving electrical conductivity’ and ‘increasing durability and reliability’. (All in quotes because I am not a scientist).

The Cassiel comes with Eletech’s signature milled hardware, enamelled strands and their “FlexiMax” insulation. The result of this is a rather handsome and lightweight cable.

These also feature Eletech Versa, their proprietary interchangeable connector system that allows you to swap between 2 pin and MMCX.

This cable is part of the Eletech Virtues series, consisting of Azrael (279 USD), Cassiel (329 USD) and Raphael (529 USD).

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The effects of cable rolling on sound is definitely a controversial topic but I am a believer in its efficacy. The value of this exercise is up to you but I for one can discern subtle but noticeable differences in cables. Call it copium or confirmation bias, you wouldn’t be reading this if you were not curious or a similar believer.
All impressions are taken using a variety of IEMs including UM MEST MK2, UM Multiverse Mentor, CFA Supermoon.
All A-B comparisons were conducted utilising:

• Campfire Supermoon;
• iBasso DC04 Pro; and
• a Campfire Audio Smoky Litz cable as baseline.

Bass​

Low-end power is hardly the focus of the Cassiel, in fact it is the last thing on its mind as far as I am concerned. There appears to be a flattening out of the low-end here as it feels distinctly less powerful than the stock cable as well as its little brother, the Azrael. This is not all meant to convey an image of a bad sounding cable as the Cassiel seems to present a more detailed and textured low-end when compared to the stock cable. There is an excellent sense of detail in the Cassiel that is fun to listen critically to, providing a more textured bass note allowing the end-user to eek out greater detail than what they would have been able to do with a lesser cable.

Bassheads will lament the Cassiel but to me, it does a great job of extracting greater speed and detail from the bass notes.

Mids​

Moving to the mid-range, the Cassiel provides a greater sense of resolution to these notes and seems to bring forward female vocals to the front of the stage. This is not overbearing by any means but enhances a sense of staging with the singer being the forefront of the song. There is a sense of fatigue here but it is an improvement on the stock SPC cable. Lower-mids, especially those concerning male vocalists seem a bit too thin for my liking and as a result they feel less engaging and less naturally timbred.

Speaking of timbre, there is a harder edge to the notes here and they feel drier in comparison the likes of the Azrael. Some might like this perceived ‘enhancement’ in detail and speed but the naturality of the Cassiel is slightly off for my liking.

Treble​

The Cassiel doesn’t seek to boost the hell out of the treble in order to create what I call ‘faux’ detail but rather it does a subtle job of extending further out in to the air region of the frequency response and provides a more crystalline and sparkly nature to the notes in this region when compared to the stock cable. This combined with its staging (more on this in Technicalities) provides the Cassiel with an airy yet crisp rendition of percussion. Its presentation of the upper end is quite fun to listen to as it feels as visceral as crashing a cymbal in a large stage, there is a reverberation in the air that is palpable compared to the stock cable, Azrael and even perhaps Raphael.

Overall, the treble region is nicely done with the Cassiel, providing a more resolving and more engaging sound signature to this region.

Technicalities​

Where I stated the Azrael was a boon to the technical performance of the Supermoon compared to the stock cable, Cassiel takes it further with a greater depth to the stage. Harder-edged in its note attack, and with a greater sense of speed and dryness, the Cassiel seeks to heighten detail and resolution when paired with an IEM. It is quite fun to listen too but some may dislike the brighter and thinner tilt of the Cassiel. These benefits represent a noticeable difference from stock and even the Azrael as I felt that the Cassiel presented a better technical performer than either. I would likely not pair this cable with already bright or thin IEMs as the Cassiel would heighten these elements to the point of being fatiguing to listen to.

Value & Quality of Life​

Priced at 329 USD, the Cassiel is not a cheap item but the nature of its technical performance and its slightly bright signature are discernible differences to be experienced should you pair them with the right IEM. I feel that the Cassiel is a greater value proposition than its cheaper brother, Azrael.

Ergonomics on the Cassiel are similar to the Azrael in that both are excellent. Thinner guage wires, 4 wire construction and great earhooks result in a lightweight, malleable and manageable cable that will hold you in good stead for listening on the go.

Eletech’s Versa technology allows you to change connectors easily and retain their security when on the move. This tech is a better thought out system than EA’s ConX system and makes the Cassiel a good choice for those with a rather varied and large IEM collection. Versa is easy to manage, intuitive to use and when compared to Effect Audio’s ConX system, is a far better option. Utilising screw-down covers to ensure connector security is a much more well thought out idea rather than just using screw down connectors in the case of ConX. This is especially evident with MMCX as I have had instances where EA cables MMCX connectors have just fallen off. Utilising a screw down system with a rotating connector is not a great idea it seems.

Like the Azrael, the Cassiel has similarly chunky hardware that looks odd with the thinner wires and may prove cumbersome for some.

Comparisons​

Vs Cadmus S​

EA’s similarly specced SPC cable comes in at 199 USD and for the 100+ price difference is a hard value proposition to pass up. The Cadmus has some of the hallmarks of the Cassiel in that it heightens detail and has a slightly brighter tilt but the extent to which the Cassiel achieves this seems to be more prominent and more noticeable than the Cadmus. The largest difference however seems to be bass quantity in that the Cadmus retains a greater sense of power in this region.

Ergonomics have to go to Cassiel here as the wire feels more manageable and malleable than the Cadmus. The not-insignificant price difference may be a hard pill to swallow for some but I have to state that the Cassiel represents the better cable sonically and as such, I have to say that I would buy a Cassiel over a Cadmus despite the price differential.

Vs Azrael​

The Cassiel provides greater technical performance and a more balanced sound signature for 50 USD more than its younger brother, Azrael. The Azrael is a better cable for those looking to enhance bass quantity but the quality on the Cassiel is far better with the low-end being thinned out and more textured than the Azrael. The stage improvements and the heightened focus on upper mids may present some synergistic issues with certain sources and certain IEMs whereas the Azrael presents its most prominent feature in the form of booming bass. The Azrael is a safer bet I suppose, but the Cassiels’ performance is something I cannot ignore and as such will have to state that the Cassiel is worth saving an extra fifty bucks for

Vs Raphael​

The Cassiel has a wider stage compared to Raphael which is a bit of a surprise but the Raphael presents in a more engaging manner with a low-end boost that puts the Cassiel to shame. Whilst low-end detail is no longer easily discernible on the Raphael when A-B’d against Cassiel, it remains no slouch in terms of sheer resolution and I feel that the Raphael presents a more balanced approach in that is not as dry nor bright as the Cassiel. There is a greater sense of engagement with low-register vocals and there is a sense of great dynamic range. Raphael’s timbre is the most natural in the Virtues series and it retains treble performance which, whilst not as forward as Cassiel, remains a great performer nonetheless. The price differential cannot be ignored and for 529 USD you can have a more well rounded cable compared to the Cassiel that doesn’t suck the fun out of the low-end. In this regard, I feel the Raphael presents an overall improvement over the Cassiel unless you are actively seeking out a colder rendition of your music.

Conclusion​

The Cassiel may be seen by some as bright, sterile and somewhat dry. I see it as a technical performer that expands the stage in a visceral manner and presents music in a more airy and neutral manner. These factors present a good value cable for those looking to wring out as much detail retrieval and edginess out of their IEMs and when put in an ergonomic package combined with adaptability to various IEMs makes the Cassiel a good choice to have in your cable collection. I can recommend it but with the caveat that you shouldn’t pair these with an already bright and thin IEM.

Preamble​

There are usually a few steps into the world of cable rolling. First, by circumstance or by curiosity, one would usually order a cheaper cable off the list of usual suspects being NiceHCK, XINHS or Tripowin. The next logical step would be a more established and well-known manufacturer such as Effect Audio or Eletech. Before you know it, you’re spending the price of a used car on a PWAudio Orpheus Shielding. But today’s review concerns the cheapest cable in the Eletech family, Azrael. And, despite being the cheapest, the Azrael comes in at 279 USD. But what does this price get you? Is it truly something worth upgrading or is /r/headphones right and I’m just a kooky idiot?

The Factual Stuff​

The Azrael is a four wire cable consisting of 25.5AWG ultra high purity OCC copper utilising a multi sized strand design and a Kevlar resilient core. The wires are cryogenically treated which intends to ‘enhance audio quality’ by ‘stabilising molecular structures’, ‘improving electrical conductivity’ and ‘increasing durability and reliability’. (All in quotes because I am not a scientist).

The Azrael comes with Eletech’s signature milled hardware, enamelled strands and their “FlexiMax” insulation. The result of this is a rather handsome and lightweight cable.

These also feature Eletech Versa, their proprietary interchangeable connector system that allows you to swap between 2 pin and MMCX.

This cable is part of the Eletech Virtues series, consisting of Azrael (279 USD), Cassiel (329 USD) and Raphael (529 USD).

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The effects of cable rolling on sound is definitely a controversial topic but I am a believer in its efficacy. The value of this exercise is up to you but I for one can discern subtle but noticeable differences in cables. Call it copium or confirmation bias, you wouldn’t be reading this if you were not curious or a similar believer.

All impressions are taken using a variety of IEMs including UM MEST MK2, UM Multiverse Mentor, CFA Supermoon.

All A-B comparisons were conducted utilising:

• Campfire Supermoon;
• iBasso DC04 Pro; and
• a Campfire Audio Smoky Litz cable as baseline.

Bass​

The low-end of the Azrael is symbolic of what one has attributed to copper cables. Bass quantity is heightened creating a more ‘fun’ low-end in that sheer bass quantity is increased. The quality of this bassline is somewhat boomier than stock but presents with greater extension and greater quantity. Sub-bass seems to be less of a focus here with mid-bass punchiness seemingly taking a front-seat with the Azrael. Texture and detail when swapping to the Azrael takes a bit of a hit surprisingly, perhaps due to the nature of the bass boost. I am not saying that the Azrael will turn your anaemic earbuds into an absolute bass-monster but the boost is noticeable.

Overall, the low-end quantity and extension is increased presenting with a more bass-forward sound signature over the stock cable but this is also boomier and less defined than what would be optimal in my mind.

Mids​

Moving to the mid-range the Azrael presents the mids with less of an edge and with greater body. Lower-mids receive a slight injection of warmth with male vocals presenting with more throatiness and greater emotional impact compared to the stock cable. The upper-mids present with far less sibilance compared to the stock cable, creating with lesser harshness and providing me with a more smooth and natural timbre compared to the stock cable.

Instruments on the Azrael are far better than on the stock cable, with greater separation and a more natural rendition compared to the cold and sterile reproduction on the stock cable.

These elements demonstrate the value of utilising something like the Azrael to alter the sound of your IEM, in this case, the Supermoon’s quite harsh mid-range became a lot more relaxed and easy to listen to.

Overall, the pairing of the Supermoon to the Azrael and perhaps, whatever similarly thin/harsh IEM you have in your collection, is an excellent one as it appears to bring more body to this region.

Treble​

Moving to the upper end, the Azrael provides greater extension in the upper end, presenting a more airy rendition of the Supermoon when compared to the stock cable. There is not much in the way of sibilance which is great and percussion particularly receives an injection of crystalline-quality and greater crispness. This is not a huge amount of change, with the Azrael presenting as a more dulled treble production than what you can achieve with other cables.

There is no tremendous night-and-day difference between the stock cable and the Azrael but unlike other copper cables in my experience, the Azrael does a rather good job of heightening the upper-regions of the frequency response curve.

Technicalities​

The Azrael’s most prominent element when compared to the stock cable is the step up in technical abilities. With a wider and deeper stage, there is a sense of immersion provided by the Azrael. With greater separation between regions of the FR curve and notes within the respective regions, there is an increase in the sense of depth to the music that was not seen on the stock cable. Detail retrieval and overall resolution appears to be much better than the stock cable and overall, technical ability of the Azrael present a great value to users looking to step up performance from a poorer quality cable.

Value & Quality of Life​

Priced at 279 USD, the Azrael is hardly the bargain of the century. The step up in technical ability is a rather excellent one but the difference between this and free (i.e. the stock cable) is something that cannot be denied. I would advise you to listen prior to your purchase but in the case where that is not possible, there is a need to look at external factors.

The quality of life when living with the Azrael is perhaps its greatest attribute outside of sound. The combination of ergonomics and the lightweight nature of the Azrael present an easily manageable cable for listeners on the go. Four wires of rather low diameter wire combined with the insulation incorporated by Eletech present a cable that is easily malleable and doesn’t weigh you down. The earhooks are well formed and combined with the thinner nature of the wires present comfort that feel like you’re wearing nothing at all. The memory of a cable is a bit of bugbear for many a cable and the Azrael is no exception. With that being said, it is not easily tangleable and can be manipulated and hung out to impart straightness to the cable again.

Where the ergonomics may pose some issues are with the Y-splitter and the hardware which despite being extremely aesthetic, are quite cumbersome considering the thinness of the wires.

The Azrael feature Eletech’s Versa interchangeable connectors which is an absolute godsend for those with a variety of IEMs in their collection. Versa is easy to manage, intuitive to use and when compared to Effect Audio’s ConX system, is a far better option. Utilising screw-down covers to ensure connector security is a much more well thought out idea rather than just using screw down connectors in the case of ConX. This is especially evident with MMCX as I have had instances where EA cables MMCX connectors have just fallen off. Utilising a screw down system with a rotating connector is not a great idea it seems.

Comparisons​

Vs EA Ares S​

The Ares S is EA’s cheapest cable at 179 USD and for a $100 less you still get some of the hallmarks of an Azrael. Low-end boost and an injection of warmth relaxing brighter IEMs are characteristics that apply to both Ares and Azrael. Where they differ is the perceived improvement in technical abilities that seem to fall in favour of Azrael. These are not huge differences, but the Azrael still presented with greater separation and a more expanded stage compared to the Ares. I am reticent to say it is a $100 difference but there is indeed a difference.

In terms of ergonomics, the lighter weight and the better formed ear hooks of the Azrael make it the more ergonomic choice and the Ares hardware, whilst pretty is even chunkier and more cumbersome than the Azrael.

I still believe that the Ares is a greater value as I do not feel the difference in sound quality and ergonomics warrant the price differential but the Azrael is still a good option if you’re looking to expand your budget.

Vs Eletech Cassiel​

The Cassiel shares similarities in its construction with the exception of its utilisation of silver-plated copper versus pure copper. The Cassiel seems to focus on upper mids by bringing forward female vocalists but also suffers from a greater sense of fatigue over time. Cassiel renders greater detail and seems to present with greater resolution as well as a more expansive soundstage. Unlike the low-end focused Azrael, the Cassiel takes a more balanced approach that leans slightly on the brighter side. Ergonomics are essentially the same here and as such it is a pick-em on this front.

Priced at 329 USD, I feel that the uplift in price is definitely warranted and if presented with a choice, I would pick Cassiel for its greater technical performance over the Azrael. This is with the caveat that if you enjoy low-end oomph, the Cassiel will not provide that. It seemed to thin out the bass a little compared to Azrael but also provided an excellent sense of detail and texture ot this region.

Vs Eletech Raphael​

The head-honcho of the “Virtues” Series of Eletech cables, the Raphael provides tremendous low-end oomph but balanced with technical capabilities. The Raphael represents the Azrael but with refined to a greater level. There is great resolution here but the stage doesn’t feel as wide as either the Cassiel or the Azrael. There is greater intimacy here and a much greater sense of engagement. It sounds slightly brighter than the Azrael but not to the same extent as the Cassiel. These elements combine to make the Raphael perhaps the best sonically, providing a balanced approach to improving sound but at the cost of being the most expensive cable here. 529 USD is a much larger jump here but you get what you pay for and whether you’re willing to pay that is a question for you and your wallet.

Conclusion​

The Azrael is the cheapest cable that Eletech makes and provides a good entry point into the world of Eletech. Its main virtues (pun intended) are its great ergonomics and its low-end boost combined with technical performance. The Versa system is well thought out and provides you with greater versatility with your collection of IEMs but considering the Ares has a similar system for $100 less, I do not believe that the Azrael is the obvious buy here. I would either save up more for Cassiel (if you’re ok with brighter signatures) or just stick with the Ares. The Azrael is good, just not good enough for it to be my obvious choice.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Yifang for lending me his personal unit for this review.

There are some items in this hobby of audio that become something of lore. These items seem to transcend their raison d’etre of producing sound into your earholes and become something that essentially dominates the hobby in terms of conversation and benchmarking. From the IEMs such as the Moondrop Chu causing an arms race amongst Chi-Fi manufacturers of a race to the bottom of the price bracket, the Moondrop Blessing 2 Dusk becoming the defacto choice in its price bracket, the Campfire Andromeda 2020 becoming the IEM to have for a ‘holographic stage’ and so on. Today’s review concerns an IEM that has garnered significant praise and attention from reviewers and casual audio enjoyers alike at a rather eyewatering price bracket. The Elysian Annihilator has become renowned for its energetic and engaging sound signature combined with what some have termed ‘best in class treble’. But does the myth match the reality?

The Factual Stuff​

Fashioned by Lee from Elysian Audio, the Annihilator consists of a 7 driver set up consisting of 1 Fostex dynamic driver, 2 electrostatic tweeters and 4 balanced armatures put together by a four-way crossover.

Proprietary technologies (and their sometimes hilarious names) are rather common in the IEM space and Elysian is no different with its DiVe Pass System for Dynamic Driver which promises controlled bass and zero driver flex and a 3D AccuPost System to provide staging.

This all comes together in a laquer finished resin housing adorned with your choice of a polished gold or silver coloured face plate or a brushed titanium faceplate for a premium.

The Annihilator comes with a number of accessories including the Liquid Links Martini cable with the requisite Pentaconn Ear connector for the Annihilator.

The Anni is priced at $3000 USD.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

This review is conducted with the Anni with Spinfit CP145 eartips connected to a Luxury & Precision P6 Pro.

Bass​

TL;DR: The Anni provide a detailed and punchy mid-bass experience without overwhelming the tonal balance, ideal for listeners who appreciate nuanced bass but may disappoint those seeking more aggressive bass-heavy tunes.

Low-end oomph is hardly the defining feature of the Anni in that it does not seek to overwhelm you in any regard. The Foster DD does a rather good job of maintaining a speedy and detailed rendition of bass with fast-paced basslines being reproduced with gusto. The quantity of bass is also quite good, it doesn’t overwhelm the tonal balance of the Anni nor does it sit so far behind that it becomes an afterthought. Sub-bass extention is good but exactly excellent and the mid-bass punchiness of the Anni lends itself to an enjoyable listening experience. I believe that the focus here is a mid-bass tuning experience that provides the Anni with an excellent sense of pace and rhythm.

Booming basslines on songs such as “THE PLAN” from the TENET soundtrack do not jump out at you like they do on more aggressively tuned IEMs and so there is a disappointment factor in this regard but for those of you who are not bass-heads, I believe that the Anni’s conservative tuning may be beneficial.

"The Calling (Da Tweekaz Remix)" by TheFatRAt is an energetic hardstyle song with a slow build-up to an extremely energetic and fast-paced bassline after the drop and the Anni does an excellent job of keeping and retaining a sense of detail and texture despite the business of the production.

“Before Dawn” by Slander provides a booming and consistent bassline that is focused on mid-bass excellence and the Anni shines here, keeping up with the pace and providing me with a wonderfully detailed and punchy bass experience that does not detract from the rest of the song, but rather adds to the experience.

Overall, the Anni’s lower-end renditions is not the killer app that provides its claim to fame. The Anni’s focus seems to be more on the mid-bass and sub-bass enjoyers who want a greater ‘physicality’ to their music may be disappointed. These quantities sought are hugely subjective and in terms of technical performance of bass, the Anni is able to provide you with a speedy, resolving and detailed rendition of the low-end that helps generate a sense of pace and rhythm to keep your toes tapping along with the music.

Mids​

TL;DR: Anni offers a midrange performance that enhances male and female vocals with warmth and presence, delivering an energetic and detailed listening experience.

Moving to the midrange performance of the Anni, the aforementioned mid-bass punchiness imbues a subtle sense of warmth to the lower-mids that is quite good. There is not bleed here by any means but a slight heightening of note weight and a swelling of euphonia with male vocalists. Crooning RNB in the form of “Water Runs Dry (Strat Mix)” by Boyz II Men is a tremendously engaging experience with a more guttural quality to the vocals that envelops the listener.

Female singers in the upper mids/treble region present in a heightened manner, the tuning here seems to bring them to the front of the stage creating an engaging listening experience that tickles the ears…perhaps a little too much. More sibilance inducing songs in the form of “34+35” by Ariana Grande and “4 walls” by f(x) have a lot of sss sounds from female vocalists in a higher register and the result is a slight fatigue factor here.

More relaxed renditions such as “Billie Bossa Nova” by Billie Eilish avoids the aforementioned sibilance by sitting in a lower register with less of a heady voice and the result is a tremendously engaging experience that balances detail and enjoyability.

Combining the two in a duet such as "2easy" by Nive and Heize, presents a well balanced combination of the two. There appears to be no favourtism with the Anni but if I really had to put money on it, I’d say that female voalists are slightly more forward in the mix. “Godfrey, First Elden Lord” from the Dark Souls OST combines booming drums, strings, horns and a choir to give that does a great job of depicting the peril of a boss fight in a video game and the Anni resolves it in spades. Strings render and convey great harrowing peril through crescendos and, horns present in a manner that is befitting their bombastic nature. Instrumentalisation focused music such as orchestral pieces sound similarly excellent.

Overall, the mids are not a warm and enveloping experience but rather a harder nosed, edgier rendition of instruments and vocals. This may disappoint some, but the energy of its mid-range rendition is something that may be seen as beneficial for some listeners.

Treble​

TL;DR: Anni's treble response provides a crisp, sparkly, and engaging listening experience with well-balanced high frequencies that enhance percussion and synth elements without causing discomfort or fatigue.

Moving on to the most hyped element of the Anni, the treble response has been praised extensively by many people. Noting that preconceived expectation, I have to say that treble is usually the last thing that really jumps out to me. Call it deafness or just a lack of experience, treble is something that is only really apparent to me when it is missing or is overly spicy.

With all that being said, the Anni provides me with a nicely sparkly and almost crystalline experience with instruments residing in this region. Hi-hats, cymbals, wind chimes and all kinds of percussion sound crisp, engaging and without sibilance or harshness. Synth stabs and crescendos of high pitched EDM are well placed in the tonal balance of the Anni, it presents in a manner that tickles the eardrums without deafening me. There is a sense of speed here where percussion doesn't seem to step one each other's toes and is reproduced in a very clear and coherent manner.

There are definitely moments with the Anni wherein the hairs on the back of my neck stand-up but I am not discomforted by long listening sessions with it. Airiness is rather good and seems to open up the stage of the Anni, not in a manner that renders it diffuse and ineffectual but there is an ease in staging that makes certain portions of the FR curve more easily discernible. As mentioned earlier, upper mids feel a little hot from time-to-time but this is not a huge deal for me as I note that I am generally sensitive to this. "Exigece" by Koan Sound presents with a wonderful mix of both orchestral instrumentalization and the somewhat grating synths of EDM production, to which the Anni handles with gusto presenting the low-end, mids and the treble with an energy that is addicting to listen to.

Overall, the treble on the Anni has made me, a very deaf man (joking but maybe not), an appreciator of the higher-end region of the FR curve. Treble continued to jump out to me throughout listening experiences and I sought out percussion, piercing EDM synths and the like in order to feed my desire to listen to the Anni's wonderful reproduction.

Technicalities​

TL;DR: The Anni excels technically with its spacious and energetic staging, excellent detail retrieval, and dynamic volume swings, offering a grand and engaging listening experience across various music genres.

Moving on to the technical performance of the Anni, the staging of the Anni is rather excellent. With a sense of grandness with the width, depth and even height of its staging, the Anni performs well with a range of genres. On “One Winged Angel” by Nobuo Uematsu, the rendition of a music hall is almost faithful to the real life thing. There are definitely wider and more holographic stages out there, but they also have a tendency to feel more diffuse and seem to disconnect you with the music. This is not the case with the Anni where everything seems immediate and energetic enough within the stage.

Outside of staging, detail retrieval and resolution is also excellent with its aforementioned staging chops. It presents music in a layered and well articulated manner within the stage, presenting you with detail to pick out at your leisure. Dynamic swings of volume such as a sudden crescendo present with a sense of scale that is quite enjoyable to listen to.

Overall, the Anni is an excellent technical performer, providing you with great energy within a spacious stage, resulting in a grand and engaging listening experience.

Overall​

The Anni is an energetic and exciting listen, with a U-shaped sound signature, it seeks to enthrall you with low-end power and upper-end sparkle in a manner that is extremely satisfying to listen to. Those who enjoy mid-forward IEMs and more acoustically focused music may want to look elsewhere but for the thrill seeking lover of EDM, or pop, the Anni presents music in a manner that is extremely enjoyable.

Comparisons​

vs Unique Melody Multiverse Mentor​

TL;DR: The UM MM lacks the Anni's dynamic driver and visceral low-end but offers a warmer, more intimate sound with a unique holographic soundstage, presenting a laid-back alternative to the Anni's energetic and crisp listening experience.

The UM MM is lacking a DD compared to the Anni and the result in the low-end is a bit predictable. The MM cannot match the sheer displacement of the Anni and lacks the visceral physicality of the low-end. That is not to say it is a slouch in this regard, with a more mid-bass focused presentation, it still satisfies my need for punch and pace but it cannot replicate the throaty sub-bass of the Anni. The mids are were these IEMs seem to diverge, with the MM taking a much warmer and mid-forward tilt. The result of this is a more intimate vocal that is honeyed in its reproduction whereas the Anni sounds slightly drier in its rendition. This is not an L to the Anni but more so a different flavour.

The treble continues this divergence with the Anni presenting with far greater energy and crispness in this region. The MM, whilst not bad in this region, doesn’t have the same level of engagement, lacking the edginess that the Anni possesses.

In terms of technical performance, the MM has the benefit (or perhaps curse) of a Bone Conducting Driver (BCD), the result of which is a holographic sound stage that extends past the confines of your head and layers music in a unique way. It therefore has a more expansive stage but certain notes within this stage do not have the same energy and clarity as the Anni. Resolution and detail retrieval on first listen is an Anni win but this is more due to the tuning and I do not feel that the MM is far behind on more critical listens.

Overall, I believe the energy of the Anni lends itself to favour more genres and seeks to demand your attention. The MM presents in a more laid-back and warm manner in order to envelop you the music rather than command your attention. This is a matter of different strokes for different folks and I would welcome the two into a collection as complementary rather than as competitors.

vs Campfire Supermoon​

TL;DR: The cheaper Supermoon, with its V/U-shaped tuning, offers dynamic bass and treble but falls short of the Anni’s more balanced and natural sound, superior technical performance, and overall ease of listening.

This is a far cheaper IEM but there is a slight alignment in energy and tuning in that the Supermoon seeks to adopt a V/U-shaped tuning to highlight lower-end oomph and upper-end energy. The Anni unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) trumps the Supermoon conclusively apart from the speediness of the Supermoon’s presentation. Low-end punch and physicality leans towards the Anni as the Supermoon’s ultra-fast rendition of basslines, whilst uniquely enjoyable is less punchy. Mid-range timbre on the Anni is superior as the Supermoon leans slightly too thin and lacking in naturalness and treble energy, whilst impressive on the Supermoon can be a little too overwhelming over time. The Supermoon requires a cable roll and some specific tips in my mind whereas the Anni is excellent out of the box.

Technical performance on the Anni trumps the Supermoon in terms of stage space, layering and overall resolution. The Supermoon seems to lean on a more energetic upper-end and a drier rendition of notes to heighten a sense of detail but longer-listening sessions yield a win for Anni.

The Supermoon, whilst quite good (when on sale) cannot match the tuning balance of Anni and its overall ease of listening. Those who demand speed from their IEMs may turn to the Supermoon but for everything else, I would much prefer the Anni.

Synergy​

One thought coming to my mind here namely lessons learnt after multiple DAPs, DACs and Amps plus headphones and IEMs is synergy! Hoping for the one and only holy grail Setup is maybe just a nice wish unless buying according synergy transducers and I don't believe even the best sources are an exception here. There's a reason why people are having multiple devices in parallel or reducing inventory and keeping only the ones with right synergy.

Luxury & Precision P6 Pro (P6P)​

The majority of this review was conducted on the P6 Pro and for good reason, the P6P provides a smooth and rounded rendition of sound but without blunting the resolution and detail retrieval of the Anni. It presents in a manner that is naturally timbred, easy to listen to and wonderful in terms of technical performance. There is little influence on the tuning and the nature of the Anni is retained. The P6P does blunt the energy of the Anni somewhat if used in NOS mode but for the most part, this presents a wonderful pairing that I can recommend wholeheartedly.

Shanling M6 Ultra (M6U)​

The M6U provides a slight u-shape tuning with an injection of warmth and spiciness in the upper regions. This is less of a neutral source compared to the P6P but has some characteristics in terms of smoothness and a rounding of notes. There is an imbuing of note weight with the M6U that makes the Anni punchier and more in your face with its presentation but this does also increase the fatigue with longer-listening periods. Technicalities are retained for the most part and there is a slight uptick in sibilance with certain songs but overall, I believe the M6U leans into the strengths of the Anni without overindulging. This is a good choice if you do not wish for mids to be brought forward in the mix.

Chord Mojo 2​

The Mojo 2 is a slight warm-neutral source that has a harder edged note reproduction to heighten detail and resolution. The Mojo 2 does a decent job with the Anni but there seems to be a slight blunting of dynamic range. This is a fairly inoffensive source pairing but with the benefit of DSP, I was able to heighten staging through crossfeed and alter the FR curve to better suit my preferences. Overall, its a fine source but nothing too amazing.

Value & Quality of Life​

The Anni was an object of desire of mine for a long period of time. Priced at $3000 USD, the pricetag is a bit of a hard ask for many audiophiles but for those who are willing to spend are rewarded with an energetic and fun-infused listening experience. This price range holds some key competitors and whilst the Anni is not a slam-dunk please everyone choice, its energy and treble performance creates a wholly enjoyable listening experience. I do not feel remiss stating that the Anni is worth the dollar you pay for it so long as you don’t expect the world’s best bass nor a mid-forward approach. Expect a respectable low-end and a great upper-end combined with a wonderful technical performer and the Anni is well worth it.

The shells are rather large but for my particular ear shape they feel right at home with no fatigue over time. I would have liked something a little more sculpted for the concha but overall, I do not think these would be too cumbersome unless you had a smaller ear.
The nozzles are rather large and whilst this was fine with me, it will prove cumbersome for smaller eared individuals. The P-Ear connector is the bane of many a cable collector but I am quite partial to its adoption as I feel it is far better than MMCX and has greater manoeuvrability than 2-pin.

The Anni requires a fairly powerful source and seems to scale well with additional power. Requiring high-gain on nearly all my sources and a rather healthy amount of volume, the Anni does even better when powered by an external amp such my Sound Tiger Sinfonia. The scaling of the Anni bodes well for more discerning audiophiles who have a number of sources but I do not feel it will be that great for more minimal setups such as dongles.

The Anni is a handmade item and therefore, there is a bit of waiting period for them, with vendors usually taking pre-orders before they are made. This is a bit of a frustrating process but Lee is definitely speeding up with the production of Anni but this is something to note should you be running out to buy one.
And as with any handmade item, there is a tendency to be some issues or imperfections but I have only heard limited experiences with this and I would be confident in purchasing one.

Conclusion​

Energy, engagement and excitement are what I would use to describe the Anni. It is not a specialist IEM but its tonal colour is heightened when thrown EDM and pop music. Technical performance is excellent and doesn’t leave me wanting for anything else but its deficiencies in the mid-range ultimately led me to the UM MM. This is less of an indictment of the Anni but rather a highlighting of the need to understand your library and the suitability of your IEM to your music. With that being said, it was much longer after purchasing the UM MM that I began musing about the Anni as a complementary IEM in the collection. It commands your attention and leaves an indelible mark, its treble wonderful, its stage grand and its detail impeccable. Anni is one for the ages, and I feel is worthy of its mythical status as a must-have IEM.

Luxury & Precision (LP) P6 Pro (P6P)​

Preamble​

Digital audio players (DAPs) harken back to the past of dumbphones and the need to carry around a dedicated device for music playback. From the Walkman to the iPod and now to the modern day DAP, these audio players are far less ubiquitous amongst the general population now and are more specialised devices for the discerning audiophile. But the variety that exists within the ranks of DAPs is something to behold, there are devices that harken back to the iPod Shuffle with tiny screens, devices that resemble bricks and are able to match some desktop devices for raw power output and perhaps, most unique of them all, are the offerings from LP.

Today’s review concerns the LP P6P, a device that is rather old in the fast-moving realm of DAPs but presents a unique proposition in that it utilises an R2R DAC, doesn’t run Android and costs an eyewatering $3,900 USD. But what does the extra money in what is essentially an iPod get you?

Many thanks to @Damz87 and the Australian Head-Fi Tour for this review unit.

The Factual Stuff​

Fashioned out of aluminium, the design of the P6 Pro takes some flourishes with the extruded side that acts as a guard for the gold rotary knob. The aluminium is then broken up with a wonderful wood grain back. The buttons are nicely tactile and you receive the playback buttons on the left side, some navigation buttons on the right side and the power button to the top. Sitting alongside the power button are the two outputs, 3.5mm and 4.4mm with both supporting power out and line out should you wish to connect the P6P to an external amp. The bottom of the P6P also has a USB-C port and a SD card slot.

Within the P6P is an resistor-to-resistor digital to analogue converter (R2R DAC) that consists of various resistors cherry-picked from the P6 parts bin to create what LP calls “the equivalent to using 16 PCM 1704K R-2R chips in parallel”…whatever that means.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The following impressions are with the P6P on the latest firmware (1.0.1.4), high gain, fast attenuation filter (with some additional notes on NOS) and connected to one of the following IEMs:

• Unique Melody MEST MK 2
• Unique Melody Multiverse Mentor;
• Campfire Audio Supermoon; and
• Elysian Annihilator.

Bass​

The low-end of the P6P is unlike some of the DAPs that have crossed my table over the last year or so. Whereas many seem to take the approach of lifting this region in order to present a more bombastic and engaging sound signature, to which I have no issue with, the P6P doesn’t really do much in terms of quantity. IEMs seem to sound similar or less bassy to other sources on hand when used with the P6P but where it really shines is in its quality.

The P6P imbues a natural and analogue quantity to the low-end whilst retaining control. There is a visceral feeling of air vibrating not unlike a bass drum reverberating and kicking up dust in the process. But this also remains tight and controlled, not descending into a boomy mess. There is a natural sense of decay imbued by the P6P which is most evident in the very fast, planar magnetic Supermoon. There is an enjoyment in the sheer speed of the Supermoon, but the P6P seems to relax it, take the edge off and imbue a nicely smooth rendition of it that is really enjoyable to listen to.

Low-end notes have a great sense of texture and detail that allows the end-user to listen critically to notes but not at the cost of the pace and rhythm of their music. Unlike the usual ‘analogue, natural’ source chains that I have tried (Cayin RU7, RU6 and some tube amps), there is a retention of dynamism and timing. It is not slow nor is it super fast, it strikes a balance between the two and the result is, in my opinion, wholly enjoyable.

This is not the be all, end all for super fast EDM nor metal but the balance struck in the P6P is an excellent listening experience once you are used to it.

Mids​

Listening to mid-range focused music on the P6P is an absolute treat. Vocalists feel naturally timbred and analogue in their singing with a very slight honeyed quality to it. I say that in that there is all smooth and rounded edges here that do not seek to overwhelm you with detail and (sometimes) corresponding edginess that comes with it. There is a distinct lack of emotional engagement with certain soruces in the market with many seemingly placing a sharpening filter over the top of mids in order to draw out heightened detail and perceived ‘resolution. The P6P presents in a smoother, more relaxed and euphonic experience. It is very easy to get lost in a playlist of strong vocal performances and certain songs caused goosebumps.

This is not to say that the P6P is for the deafer half of audiophiles as it still retains a strong sense of detail and resolution that will be more touched upon in the Technicalities section below.

Instrumentalisation is also similarly excellent. There is a caveat in the smoothness of the P6P in that harder edged plucking of a guitar seems to lose that strong edginess that one would come to expect but otherwise, it all feels visceral, emotive and easy to listen to.

These insights were most apparent on the Elysian Annihilator and the Supermoon, both taking a more lifted upper-mid region that seems to eek out a sense of sibilance on certain sources. The P6P seemed to tame this region and generate a less fatiguing and still very enjoyable experience.

Treble​

The upper-regions of the FR curve is hardly the most standout element to me and I am far from a treble head. With that being said, I do not believe that the treble region of the P6P provides any standout aspect. If anything, the P6P seems to reduce the level of energy in this region providing me with a more ‘laid-back’ rendition of spicy hi-hats and piercing synths. There is basically no sense of sibilance or fatigue generated by the P6P when listening for long periods of time but for whatever reason, there is a want for this. It is natural to expect that a belting singer or a sizzling synth or a crash of a cymbal cause a minutia of wincing that leads you to feel the hairs on the back of your neck to stand up. In this regard, the frequency that the P6P provided this was few and far between.

It doesn’t devolve into something I would describe as ‘dark’ but the lack of energy in this region leaves a little more to be desired. I cannot commit to describing any aspect of this region as being crystalline and crisp nor can I say it is sparkly and hugely engaging in the context of its tonal balance. The treble feels safe, which is not a wrong thing by any means but may be disappointing to some.

The previously mentioned Anni and the Supermoon both have unique treble responses, the former being overall just excellent in balancing a sparkly and forward treble region and the latter being very speedy and somewhat edgy. The P6P doesn’t muddle these IEMs into being dark and veiled but rather present them in a new manner that is both enjoyable and manageable from a fatigue standpoint.

Overall, the treble region of the P6P is the audio equivalent of wanting medium salsa and getting mild. Nothing wrong with it but I just wanted a little bit more pain oddly enough.

Technicalities​

The P6P’s technical performance is excellent despite its tonality. This is not a DAP that renders hyper detail and throws it at you non-stop, but rather is more laidback and smoother in its rendition. The P6P seems to meander out the notes and leaves it up to you to discern. Like the cute girl who just showed up to the house party without an invite, you weren’t expecting detail but you’re happy to see them regardless. Listening sessions with the P6P are very easy and there is nothing that commands your attention and so there may be a tendency to not believe the P6P to be great in terms of resolution. But listen closer and you can pick out notes, certain regions of the FR curve and image them precisely in a rather large stage.

The P6P retains coherency and resolution concurrently as I feel that a more ‘hyperdetailed’ DAP may seem a little too incoherent and jarring form time-to-time. Microdetails are there for you to notice at your leisure instead of jamming a minor mistake by the sound engineer into your earholes.

Staging is wiiiide and deeeeep. The extra letters are for emphasis and for good reason, the combination of its natural and smooth tonality combined with this great staging provides for an excellent experience of being enveloped in your music. I believe that the experience is a truly holographic stage experience that doesn’t push it to the point of being overly-diffuse and unengaging.

The noise floor seems excellent and whilst I no longer have super sensitive IEMs, the P6P, even when amplified by an external amp, provides me with very little hissing.

Overall, the technical performance of the P6P are not elements that jump out at you but rather slowly win you over and then you realise when switching to a traditional DAP that you were hearing everything all along, just in a more natural and smooth manner.

Variables​

The P6P comes with a number of digital filters for you to use at your leisure. Whilst these differences are subtle, I feel that they are as follows:

• NOS – non-oversampling on an R2R DAC is just dipping your music in honey and applying a beauty filter on it. This is the smoothest and most easy to listen to filter and it is the default for good reason. Natural and effortless in its rendition, it is only let down by a reduced sense of detailing.
• Fast attenuation – This sharpens up your listening experience and details start to present themselves in a much more aggressive manner. Leading edges of notes are clearly defined and microdetails become far more easier to discern in the mix. The downfall of this is that certain songs become more fatiguing and less easy to listen to.
• Slow attenuation – In between fast and slow in my opinion, there is a level of smoothness and ease of rendition but the details of the music are still presenting themselves in a manner that are dissectible. Oddly enough, I do not love this filter as I feel that things get a little lethargic without being hugely enjoyable.

There are some basic EQ profiles but I wouldn’t bother with these really as they are vaguely described and not exactly specific.

Comparisons​

Shanling M6 Ultra (M6U)​

This is hardly a competitor in terms of price, but this is the only DAP I have on hand worth comparing. The M6U presents music in a similarly smooth manner but also with a heightening of warmth and a slight uplift in the treble region. This DAP seeks to be an engaging one and it does so with some slight issues. The warmth of the M6U presents itself as slightly boomy with certain IEMs whereas the P6P remains distinctly linear despite its smooth rendition. Technical performance on the P6P far outstrips the M6U in terms of stage, resolution and dynamics. The M6U is a decent DAP and has been my daily driver for a long period of time but counts only UI / UX as benefits over the P6P and sound quality, except for a subjective affinity for any particular tuning that the M6U has, is a significant gap.

Mojo 2 ​

The Mojo 2 is a very compact DAC / Amp that provides you with a slight warm tilt tuning and a technical performance that rivals devices in higher price brackets.
The addition of DSP features in the Mojo 2 do provide a distinct advantage for the end-user but for the purposes of this review, I will not be addressing this.
Tonally, the Mojo takes a slightly warmer approach to neutral that is quite enjoyable to listen to but unlike the P6P, it retains an edge to its notes that is readily discernible.
The technical performance of the Mojo 2 is quite excellent but unlike the P6P it opts for a more in your face rendition of detail that is less cohesive. The sound is less smooth than the P6P and there is a greater ‘edge’ to the notes being produced. The Mojo 2 also has a higher noise floor than the P6P and still manages to trump the P6P from a usability standpoint despite its Chord quirks.
Sonically, the Mojo2 presents a well rounded and capable device for detail rendering and DSP capabilities. Where the P6P trumps it is in its ability to render detail whilst providing an extremely cohesive and smooth sound signature.

Value & Quality of Life​

Time to come to the elephant in the room. As much as I enjoyed this DAP and listened to it for hours on end, there is a distinct and perhaps, fatal flaw in it. It is an absolutely nightmarish user experience. Opting out of Android was likely done to minimise interference from the components required to run the operating system and they have opted for a lower-powered CPU and their own OS. The result is a user interface from an MP3 player from any other company than Apple in 2003 and a corresponding level of responsiveness. There are a laundry list of issues and a learning curve that is quite difficult to overcome yourself. First, the SD card you’re using must be FAT32, which is ancient at this point. Second, you should name your library in a manner that suits LP, this includes a numbering convention and maybe remove some symbols to allow it actually complete indexing your SD card. Thirdly and finally, I hope you like shuffle, no gapless playback and just having a bad time scrolling around.

These issues are frustrating to say the least and not at all intuitive. But therein lies the rub. I spent a few hours renaming folders, files and reformatting SD cards and running scripts found on Head-Fi to get this thing to work. That’s just how good it sounds! But I didn’t pay for this, and if I did without doing any research, I would say that I would be extremely annoyed and likely requesting a refund. The P6P is not for the faint of heart, and definitely not for the price. However, if sound quality is all you are after and you have no reservations about these creature comforts, then this is simply the best DAP and perhaps portable source I have listened to.

Outside of these UX concerns, the P6P is considerably smaller and lighter than other flagships in the market that resemble bricks and are on the very borderline of portable. There are some nice features such as Bluetooth connectivity and ability to be used as a USB DAC/AMP which alleviates some of the issues of directly interacting with the UI. The line-out is also variable and allows for fine tuning volume output to external amps for great usability. This is a killer feature for amps such as the Sound Tiger Sinfonia with a fixed output. The P6P manages to pack all this sound quality into a rather pocketable package that is easy to manipulate and that is an achievement in of itself.

Conclusion​

The road to audio nirvana is paved with good intentions that turn out to be horrendous in practical use. Slow, headache-inducing quirks and a distinct lack of features, the P6P when viewed and experienced without IEMs in is an absolutely terrible option for a DAP. But the key point here is that it is a DAP, it’s raison d’etre is to produce music and boy does it produce music. Smooth yet detailed, spacious yet engaging, tight yet relaxed, the P6P envelops you in a warm-hug of music that is easy to enjoy, get lost in and simply forget about the 4.5 hours you spent getting it to work.

For that I commend LP and pray that they hire some more people for their OS development.

Preamble​

The proliferation of Chinese Hi-Fi (Chi-Fi) in the audio scene in the last decade has led to a tremendous growth of audiophiles in the hobby. The barriers to entry have been lowered and appreciation for good quality audio is now in the mainstream. However, it is not all rainbows and candy unfortunately, as the prolific nature of Chinese manufacturers has led to unprecedented levels of choice for consumers. Herein lies the rub, there is now the paradox of people being crippled by the freedom of choice.

Today’s review concerns a Chi-Fi manufacturer attempting to enter the rather crowded price bracket of ~$200 USD. Simgot, a product of the Guangdong region that has produced many an audio company in the last decade, seeks to captialise on this rather dynamic market with their EA1000. But is the EA1000 another flash in the pan to be superseded by some new upstart in about 2 weeks? Or is there some staying power here?

The Factual Stuff​

The EA1000 contains a dynamic driver and a passive radiator. The latter is somewhat novel with examples in recent memory being products from LetShuoer and essentially is a cavity for sound tuning purposes.

The earpieces are seemingly steel polished to a high chrome finish and are adorned with crystal faceplates leading to a modern and clean aesthetic.

The EA1000 comes with some accessories including nozzles to tune sound, eartips, a carry case and an SPC cable terminating in 3.5mm

This review unit was also accompanied by Simgot’s cable, the LC7, consisting of mixed strands of silver and copper and terminated in 4.4mm, the LC7 is a $70 upgrade cable.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

The following impressions were taken using the stock cable, silver stock nozzles, Spinfit W1s and paired with a number of sources primarily with the Shanling M6 Ultra.

Bass​

The low-end performance of the EA1000 is impactful and powerful in its production with a slight emphasis on the sub-bass region. Extension and physicality on the EA1000 are rather impressive with songs such as “THE PLAN” from the TENET soundtrack providing me with a strong and detailed reproduction of the opening bass line that extends quite deeply. This is a visceral listen with strong low-end oomph.

Mid-bass is dynamic and punchy, providing me with an impactful experience with speedier songs such as “Before Dawn” by Slander, which has a rather high BPM. Apart from quantity, the EA1000’s bass quality is heightened by a sense of speed as it handled both songs with gusto, providing fast decays and seemingly being able to keep up with faster-paced EDM.

Outside of these elements, the EA1000 also did quite well with detail and texture in the bass region, with lower-end notes being reproduced quite clearly and comprehensibly. There is no real boominess or woolliness to the bass region (perhaps owing to the speed) as it feels as though note edges are clearly defined and reproduced with distinct clarity.

Overall, the EA1000’s low-end presents a fast and dynamic reproduction of bass notes that presents a fun and enjoyable sound signature that heightens the impact and engagement factor of whatever you are listening to.

Mids​

The aforementioned push in the mid-bass lends itself to the imbuing of warmth and note weight to the lower-mids. Male vocalists such as The Weeknd in “Out of Time” presents with some low-end body. Unlike other ‘warm’ IEMs in the market which have a tendency of muddying up the lower mids and the mid-bass, the EA1000 manages to stay coherent and clearly separated.

“Comedy” by Gen Hoshino presents the laidback male vocals with a sense of depth and that was very enticing to listen to, however, this did feel a little bit more recessed in the mix than what I would’ve liked with the bassline and some instrumentalization sitting front and centre. In the grand scheme of IEMs however, I believe the EA1000 leans a little thinner in this region but is similar to Chi-Fi in the price bracket.

Moving to female vocals, “Winter Without You” by XG presents a wide variety of female vocalists in different ranges and the EA1000 manages to reproduce them fairly well with the slightest hint of shoutiness and edginess to the ‘sss’ sounds throughout. There is a slight fatiguing element here but also a rather dramatic and engaging experience.

For more instrumentalization I put on “Malenia, Blade of Miquella” from the Elden Ring soundtrack for some dramatic string production and the EA1000 handled it with gusto, presenting the rather harrowing sentiments that boss-level video game soundtrack should have!

Overall, the EA1000 presents some slight issues with its mid-range production with male vocals presenting in a more recessed manner and female vocalists presenting with a slight edginess and sibilance. These may be interpreted as being more soulful for the former and more dramatic for the latter and I think the EA1000 rides this line quite well.

Treble​

Moving to the upper end, the EA1000’s treble region is surprisingly reigned in at the highest regions of the FR curve. Whilst the upper mids have a tendency to be somewhat shouty, the reproduction of percussion in songs such as “Reckoner” by Radiohead don’t feel too harsh on the ear but rather sparkly in nature.

Electronic synths can be rather heavy on the ears in certain songs and I threw some of these at the EA1000 to see how it performed with “You & Me (Flume Remix)” being my go-to for a grating white noise in the ‘chorus’ to which the EA1000 generated a slight level of discomfort but nothing like more aggressively tuned IEMs in the market.

More nuanced productions that don’t lean too heavily on the upper regions like “The Demon Dance” by Julian Winding which has a brush on a hi-hat throughout the majority of song presented well with the little production flourish being clear and present in the mix with a slight edginess and speed to its production.

Overall, the upper-mids to lower-treble can be somewhat grating to the ear over time but as a whole, the treble is tuned rather well in consideration of a balanced approach towards excitement and ear-piercing fatigue.

Technicalities



As previously mentioned the above, the EA1000 stood out to me as having an excellent sense of speed and urgency to its production presenting notes in a clear and concise manner. This may not be everyone’s cup of tea but I feel it seemed to heighten a sense of detail retrieval and resolution as edges of notes were clearly defined.

Combine this with the rather excellent layering of notes presented a cohesive and coherent production that defied preconceptions held to the price tag.

Staging is also quite good presenting a nice sense of width and depth. It is not hugely wide nor deep by any stretch of the imagination with the former being sufficient when listening to wider orchestral pieces and the latter being mostly due to its ability to effectively layer notes with speed but is a good performer nonetheless.

Imaging and positioning are rather good cues for the sheer technical performance of an IEM and the EA1000 performed well with my preferred test of “Fine” by Taeyeon having a number of vocals layered over one another to which the EA1000 rendered them clearly and coherently whereas poorer performers seem to send out a single blob of vocals from one central location.

Call it confirmation bias but the passive radiator seems to do a great job of enhancing the performance of the single dynamic driver as my experience with single DD IEMs (especially in this price bracket) lacking technical abilities such as staging and perceived dynamic range.

Additional Round – LC7 Cable



Preaching the virtues of a $70 cable upgrade in a $200 IEM review sounds like asking for some ridicule but the review unit came with Simgot’s own LC7, a combo of SPC and copper terminated in 4.4mm.

If you’re dubious or perhaps a vehement cable denier, I’d recommend you skip this section as I believe the LC7 offers some sonic changes to the EA1000.

Compared to the stock cable, the LC7 seems to flatten out the tuning a little more as bass feels less present and the brightness is tempered somewhat as male vocals present more forward and female vocals sound less sharp to the ear.

The mids as a whole seem to get an uplift in presentation and that is not to say that the bass and treble is reduced to zero.

Otherwise, technically, the stage feels more deep and slightly wider to the ear as notes and layers of sound (that is, instrumentalization and vocals) feel more dissectible to my ear.

The LC7 presents the EA1000 with a balanced and enjoyable tonality and a technical improvement that I thoroughly enjoyed but whether or not it’s worth the price tag, especially being a significant percentage of the cost of the IEM itself, is another question.

Additional Round - Nozzles​

The inclusion of tuning nozzles has become somewhat common in Chi-Fi and allows for some fine-tuning of sound which provides the end-user with the ability to really dial in their new toy to their liking. However, I found that the EA1000's nozzles altered sound fairly minimally despite being noticeable on a quick change and repeating the song.
Ultimately, I prefered the stock nozzles for their balanced tonality and based the majority of my review on these.
The included alternative silver nozzle (with red marking) seem warmer to the ear but at the cost of some perceived resolving power and detail.
Finally, the gold nozzles feel more airy to the ear but also heightened the shoutiness of female vocalists even further, which exacerbated the grips that I had with the stock configured EA100.

Comparisons​

vs Dunu Zen Pro​

Hardly a fair fight at approximately 5x the price but considering the similarity in driver implementation, how much does 5x the money get you?

The Zen Pro has a similar lift in the upper mids to the EA1000 where things get a little shouty but has far less sub-bass to temper such tuning. The Zen Pro’s wheelhouse seems to be a punchy mid-bass and satisfying lower-mid region. In terms of tuning, it is a matter of personal preference but I would say the Zen Pro feels more tonally balanced compared to the EA1000’s more bombastic low-end. In terms of technical performance, I feel that the Zen Pro presents one of the most dynamic presentations available at nearly any price point with swings in volume presenting in a thoroughly enjoyable manner and helps add to the sense of ‘scale’ to the sound. The Zen Pro eeks out slightly more perceived resolution and layering to the sound in an A-B but not enough to warrant the 5x price tag.

Ultimately, I feel that the EA1000 presents a more exciting tuning and ultimately loses out in terms of dynamics, which does not sit at the highest of my priority list in terms of determining the IEM for me. I think the EA1000 in this regard punches above its weight and I would likely be disappointed if I had bought the Zen Pro unless I was truly seeking out dynamics as the main focal point of my listening experience.

vs BLON BL-03​

The consummate ideal budget IEM in my eyes, the BL03 presents a bombastic and fun sound signature at a low-cost but how would it deal with a more technical and balanced approach?

The BL03 whilst enjoyable and respectable for the price point, feels less defined and more slow than the EA1000 which excels in such aspects. The result is a slightly lethargic sound with a more bloaty and woolly bass and a diminishment of mids.

The BL03 whilst enjoyable for short spurts of dumb fun, feels far less refined for a longer-term listen to my ears as I started to get tired of the coloured tuning and wanted a more technical performer for more acoustic focused music.

The EA1000 feels more tonally balanced, more technically proficient and overall a better IEM in every aspect except for the subjective elements of tuning.

This is no fault of the BL03 given the price point but the EA1000 represents a noticeable step up that I feel warrants the price difference.

vs LetShuoer S12 Pro​

The future vs the past, still a single driver but this time in the same price bracket and using a planar driver instead of a dynamic one, how does the EA1000 deal with something in the same wheelhouse?

The S12 Pro is a technically excellent IEM that punches beyond its price bracket, resolving music with a tremendous sense of speed and edginess that exudes detail. The perceived dynamic range is also impressive with deep-extending sub-bass and airy highs that present music with an edginess and excitement to it.

The S12 Pro doesn’t have the greatest sense of physicality or impact to the sub and mid-bass (respectively) as compared to the EA1000 it feels more incisive and detailed as opposed to having sheer volume and impact.

The mids of the S12 Pro are more recessed in the mix compared to the EA1000 and have a tendency to come off as a little thin and floaty. The timbre of the S12 Pro is also slightly ‘metallic’ in its tonality in that I feel things sound a little unnatural to the ear.

In terms of the upper-mids to treble region, the S12 Pro also elicits a similar sense of harshness and edginess that can be fatiguing overtime but when combined with the aforementioned timbre feels much more difficult to listen to over long periods of time compared to the EA1000.

Ultimately, I feel that the S12 Pro outperforms the EA1000 from a technical standpoint with a more hard-nosed approach to resolution and detail but the EA1000 feels like a more enjoyable listen.

Quality of Life & Value​

The EA1000’s steel earpieces do a great job of imbuing a heftiness to the IEM that adds to the perception of build quality. They do less of a good job at adding to ergonomics as the shells, whilst not the heaviest I’ve experience presented some discomfort over long listening sessions and were quite quick to fall out if the seal was not perfect.

This is supplemented by the fact that the earpieces themselves were on the smaller side, something that I honestly struggle with getting a good, sealed fit with. This is likely a lesser issue with other people’s ears but something anecdotal I wished to point out.

The included cable with the EA1000 is only terminated in 3.5mm and usually this is not an issue given the limited price but considering cheaper IEMs these days are coming with modular cables with interchangeable terminations, I was somewhat disappointed at this.

The included accessories were rather limited but the carry case was a welcome addition despite being a mixed bag of a cheap looking finished combined with a premium-feeling magnetic clasp system.

Overall, the value proposition of the EA1000 at its price bracket, considering the accessories, the build and of course the aforementioned sound signature presented me with a wonderful combination of value. I feel that the EA1000 was a more agreeable, more enjoyable listening experience than the S12 Pro as well as provided me with a more ‘premium’ feeling unboxing and handling experience.

To this effect, I believe that the EA1000 represents excellent value.

Conclusion​

The EA1000 at first glance looks like any other Chi-Fi offering at the price range but looking closer reviews some nuanced design choices and additions that seem to separate itself from the market. With a relatively simple design language combined with the use of more ‘premium’ materials as well as novel tech in the form of the passive radiator, I feel that the EA1000 presents something of a uncommon approach to the Chi-Fi market that is highly enjoyable to listen to and can remain a part of a collection for a longer period of time than the flash-in-the-pan IEMs that pop-up every couple of weeks.

I can highly recommend the EA1000.

Preamble​

Thank you to @Damz87 and @EffectAudio for arranging the Australian Head-Fi Tour of the Effect Audio Code 24 and 24C.

In the history of product lines, there has also been the sense of wanting more for less but ultimately being sad that you don’t have the best of the best. A Civic Type R pulls up to you in your Si, a WRX STi pulls up to you in your WRX, a Continental GT pulls up to your plain old Continental and there is a sense of wanting.

Today’s review concerns the smaller brother of a newly released cable, the Code 24, and whilst limited and finished in a rather pretty hue, the Code 24C isn’t exactly the initial choice for discerning snake oil enthusiasts.

But with a shift in material composition, a lower price and a more tolerable colour scheme (in my opinion), could the Code 24C represent a tremendous value proposition and potentially beat its flagship brother?

The Factual Stuff​

The Code 24C is a limited edition cable featuring a very unique purple hue termed “Galactic Purple”. Unlike the Code 24, the 24C has a thinner gauge of wire at 18.5 AWG instead of 16.5 AWG but still features similar hardware and a two-wire construction. The singular wires consist of a trio of solid cores surrounded by 17 multi-core sized bundles which are then insulated. These wires are fashioned out of UP-OCC Copper Litz as opposed to silver-plated copper in the Code 24.

The 24C features EA’s Conx and TermX system.


The prototype and the production model side-by-side.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

I believe in sonic changes as a result of cable rolling. If you do not, please skip to Quality of Life & Value.

Notes made in this review are in comparison to the stock sound of whatever the IEM is, that is, with its original cable (save for the Maestro Mini) and some commonalities that I experienced.

The Code 24 was reviewed with a variety of IEMs including:
- Letshuoer S12 Pro;
- Unique Melody MEST MK II;
- FatFreq Maestro Mini;
- FatFreq Scarlet Mini;
- Softears Twilight; and
- Elysian Annihilator 2023.

Bass​

Given the constant tropes that one reads on head-fi forums, one would generally believe that copper is what you go with for low-end performance. On the Code 24C, the bass regions strike with decent authority over stock cables used with the aforementioned IEMs (some of which include copper cables). However, there is not world-beating transformative existential experience that arises from this cable roll, the bass-response remains somewhat middling with the extent of the sonic shift caused. On all IEMs, the changes were quite subtle to hear and required a rather critical listen to point out. This may just me playing mind games with myself to believe in the value of cables but ultimately I arrived at a very, very minor uplift in terms of sub-bass quantity but a more obvious shift in speed and texture of the bass. This latter aspect seemed to create a greater sense of immediacy and excitement to the bass regions and I enjoyed it with more exciting uptempo songs.

Mids​

The Code 24C when compared with the stock cable for the IEMs above seemed to create a more upper-mid forward representation of music. Female vocalists came to the forefront of whatever music you are listening to and as a result, there is a slight sibilance at times with the brighter IEMs in this shootout.

The rest of the mid-range seems to present with great crispness and speed overall, with instruments such as keyboards striking out with speed and a slightly drier rendition when compared to stock cables and to the Code 24.

Male vocals receive a shorter end of the stick as they are slightly recessed but also feel well bodied and deeply emotional in their reproduction. With certain IEMs I felt as though there was poor synergy between the two leading to an almost overbearing female vocal without the same airiness and larger stage to accommodate this boost.

Overall, I feel that the Code 24C is great for those with libraries heavy with female vocals and wish to elicit greater, more intimate renditions of such songs. However, beware synergising this with certain IEMs that already place precedence on these elements (see Elysian Diva for example).

Treble​

The Code 24C presents a more sparse and spaced out reproduction of treble regions with slower decay and being more reverberant than some of the stock cables and with the Code 24. There is a retention of sparkle but compared to the Code 24, there is a lesser ‘in-your-face’ rendition and it does not strike with the same attack and speed as the Code 24.

Otherwise, the treble region of the Code 24C seems relatively straightforward and not too forward in the mix, there is a decent crispness to hi-hats and the rendition of higher pitched synths seem to come off rather well. As mentioned previously, there is a slight sibilance to the Code 24C when compared to the stock cables (in most cases) but on the whole it remained perfectly sufficient and well-rounded in its treble performance.

Overall, there is not dramatic shaping of the upper regions of the frequency response here but rather a smoothing out and lighter rendition of treble.

Technicalities​

The Code 24C does a rather mixed job of ‘improving’ the technicalities of anything you’re listening too.

Unlike the 24, there is no expansion of the sound stage to the same extent, but it has decent depth to the stage and is nicely layered within that stage. The mid-forwardness presents a sense of depth wherein the vocalist is front and centre. Outside of staging, the 24C seems to heighten the ease at which I am able to pinpoint the direction of certain notes and sounds within a mix, creating an excellent sense of imaging with panning and alternating sounds within the head-stage which remain very clear and easily discernible.

There is no huge shift in resolving power here, but the mid-forward nature of the cable seems to lend itself to certain types of music and helps you ascertain certain nuances and details within vocalists hitting their notes.

Overall, the shift in technical performance was not that dramatic but rather created a smoother and mid-forward listen that helped to be more engaging with certain types of vocal heavy music.

Value & Quality of Life:​

Ergonomics​

I have waxed poetic about how much I disliked the Code 23 for its ergonomics and within my Code 24 review I will talk about how it improved it but ultimately remained not viable for my use case. The Code 24C takes its improvements even further opting for an even thinner wire gauge than the Code 24 (which already took a thinner guage than 23). The result is a more manageable cable that whilst thick remains rather malleable and less prone to retaining its shape. However, it continues to be a rather thiccboi and more awkwardly shaped IEMs such as the Twilight suffered with slight movement as the thiccboi earhooks seeming threw themselves out of wack and just fell out of place.

The hardware design follows the Code 23 with an industrial and rather bulky splitter and jack accentuating its presence. However, compared to the 23 and the 24, the 24C does indeed have smaller hardware which means it is less likely to annoy you on a regular basis.

EA’s ConX and TermX connectors are always a welcome companion to improve the longevity of your cable as you are able to switch connectors to survive any changes to your IEMs or to your source device of choice.

TermX I am not a huge fan of as I use mostly 4.4mm in any case and there is a tendency for both TermX and ConX to unscrew themselves overtime but this is not a huge issue for 2-pin IEMs.

Cost​

Coming at 499 USD the Code 24C is hardly a budget item but I retain that its influence on the sonic signature of your IEM is greater than that of other EA cables such as the Cadmus and the Ares. However, this is with the caveat of whether you would actually enjoy the mid-forward nature of the Code 24C.

Unlike the Code 24 which I feel has more everyman enjoyable influence on your IEM, the Code 24C seems more picky in terms of synergistic pairings in my opinion and for that reason I am reticent to say that this worth the cost of admission.

Whilst I feel that this is practically ergonomic bliss compared to the likes of Code 23 or 24, the 24C seems to be more niche and specific in its application and as such I might be more likely to recommend the EA Christmas Cable (if you are able to grab it since it is limited) or looking to even more ergonomically viable offerings from other manufacturers.

I do not feel that the Code 24C is a safe choice for the price so this will be a demo before you buy pick.

Comparison​

vs Code 23 (from memory and notes taken from my review of the Code 23)​

The ergonomic beast that is the Code 23 is no longer in my possession but I recall and my notes evidence that it seemed to provide a greater sonic shift with IEMs than with the Code 24C. Code 23’s notes represent that there was a very much enhanced sense of stage width and depth and a tremendous injection of airiness whilst retaining some low-end oomph.

The Code 24C provides a more subtle influence but seemingly goes in the opposite direction by confining things slightly to provide greater levels of engagement and forwardness of sound. I noted that the Code 23 had a more boomy bass that was ever so slightly bloated in my opinion and the Code 24C seems to have a more textured and speedy rendition of bass when paired with my IEMs.

Ergonomics are drastically improved in the Code 24C but in the grand scheme of things, that is not much of an achievement in my books.

Overall, the Code 23 is a $100 more than the 24C and what you get with that extra $100 is a tremendous decrease in ergonomics but a rather dramatic shift in sound. Both Code cables are rather difficult to recommend to absolutely everyone but the 24C is the safer choice by far.

vs Code 24​

The Code 24C presents music with a distinct emphasis on upper mids as I felt female vocalists were brought front and centre of the stage and presented in a very forward and engaging manner compared to the 24. In terms of bass performance, I would have to give it to the 24 in terms of sub-bass extension, texture and detail whereas the 24C seems to have greater emphasis on mid-bass frequencies adding to the sense of punch but in the process, seemingly diminishing the level of detail.

Treble regions for the 24C does not sound all that great compared to the 24 as I felt that it had a less-engaging upper end. There is not great articulation, sparkle or drama imparted in this region and overall slightly recessed in the mix.

In terms of technical abilities, the 24C’s staging is not as wide as the 24 but there is a great sense of depth imparted, perhaps as a result of that very forward vocal line. Otherwise the detail retrieval of the 24C and imaging chops do not feel as articulate or well defined as the 24.

Ergonomically, the 24C, with its thinner wire gauge, is the most ergonomic Code series cable yet and feels more manageable than the 24. Still not world beating or ergonomically viable for small-eared, glasses-wearing folk but still pretty good.

Overall, I feel that the 24C represents some rather good value in terms of price and its ability to inject some extra boom and punch in the low-end combined with a female forward colouration that seeks to engage you with your music. However, I do not feel it is as refined as the 24 and the seemingly reduced dynamic range when A-Bing the two seems to make the 24 a safer choice.

vs PWAudio 1950s Replica​

There were murmurs that the PWAudio 1950s cable was constructed out of the same wire as a Cardas Clear headphone cable, and when informed, I was intrigued enough to procure one made by an enterprising Queenslander. Both are made with copper.

The 1950s presents a similar staging to the 24C in that neither are that large. The 24C however feels a bit more confined by virtue of the very forward upper mids leading to female vocalists practically whispering into you ear. The 1950s presents with greater layering and separation between notes with no sense of overlap or veil from an overaggressive tuning profile. I feel that the 1950s was more resolving and speedy in its presentation whereas the Code 24C seemingly took a more relaxed approach to offering up notes for you to listen to.

The ergonomics are beyond compare in that the 1950s is far more viable in my use case despite having some memory issues.

Overall, both are tonally similar with the difference in upper-mids and a reduction in resolution and separation offered by the Code 24C.

Conclusion​

The Code 24C presents a rather mixed bag of goodies for the discerning snake oil enthusiast. It looks great, is more ergonomic than its Code cousins (but ultimately not that ergonomic), has a rather enjoyable sound signature, but also may not synergise well with certain mid-forward IEMs.

Ultimately, I feel that the Code 24C presents a gateway to the Code family of cables if you have been apprehensive about the chonk invading your life. I do not feel that it is as good as an all-rounder as the Code 24 and may leave some blind buyer’s wanting. Overall, I feel that if you just want a cool looking purple cable then its great but if you looking to synergise this cable with a specific IEM, I would definitely try before you buy.

Preamble​

Thank you to @Damz87 and @EffectAudio for arranging the Australian Head-Fi Tour of the Effect Audio Code 24 and 24C.

The world of cable rolling is fraught with pitfalls. “Ackchually, there is no measurable difference”, “bro, $1000 on a cable, are you smoking crack?”, “holy crap the XXX cable didn’t do anything, what do I do?”. These are some of the common events that one may encounter in their pursuit of very expensive strands of copper, but is there really a point?

I would venture to say yes, yes there is. In my experience on these audio tours, wherein no hard-earned money has been put forward, Effect Audio (EA) cables have made a difference in my listening experience for the most part. One such EA cable had been the Code 23, and today’s review concerns the Code 24, the creatively named successor to that grey behemoth. But does the Code 24 continue on the tradition of EA in fashioning a well-made cable that indeed improves sound quality?

The Factual Stuff​

Finished in a blue hue, the Code 24 consists of two strands of 16.5 AWG wire made out of silver-plated copper. Diving further in, the wires are made of a three solid cores, surrounded by 12 multi-sized core bundles and finished in EA’s flexible insulation.

These are accompanied by rather industrial design-forward hardware with the splitter and the termination being rather thick and unique in their appearance.

The Code 24, similar to other EA cables, feature their TermX and ConX swappable systems which allow the end user to change from 2.5, 3.5 and 4.4 terminations as well as 2-pin, MMCX and P-ear connectors.


The prototype and the production model side-by-side.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

I believe in sonic changes as a result of cable rolling. If you do not, please skip to Quality of Life & Value.

Notes made in this review are in comparison to the stock sound of whatever the IEM is, that is, with its original cable (save for the Maestro Mini) and some commonalities that I experienced.

The Code 24 was reviewed with a variety of IEMs including:
- Letshuoer S12 Pro;
- Unique Melody MEST MK II;
- FatFreq Maestro Mini;
- FatFreq Scarlet Mini;
- Softears Twilight; and
- Elysian Annihilator 2023.

Bass​

Switching from the stock cable to the Code 24 elicited a common occurance of increased low-end extension accompanied by a subtle sub-bass boost. In addition, the Code 24 seemed to emphasise a slower sense of decay and attack, creating a more boomy and more prominent low-end that was quite pleasing to listen too. The result of these elements seemed to generate a more naturalistic reproduction of bass with a subtle but noticeable extension into the sub-bass regions and a very, very slight increase in punchiness in the mid-bass.

The pairing of the Code 24 and all the IEMs in this review yielded a perceived improvement in bass response but some may lament the loss of detail and texture that is brought about in the slowing of bass notes. There is a loss of a sense of speed and resolution with more faster paced songs in my library but for more relaxed productions, the Code 24 was a nuanced but rather enjoyable influence on the low-end.

Mids​

The Code 24 seems to impart a greater airiness to the mids and an elevation of upper-mids, predominantly seen in the rendition of female vocals. This is not to say that male vocals are left in the dust, absolutely not. The imparting of greater mid-bass punch outlined above, adds a sense of weight and emotional impact with male vocals that is very much needed in leaner IEMs and seeks to add more to already-warm IEMs in the market. The heightening of upper-mids lends itself to a more ethereal and floaty rendition of female vocals that is quite addicting to listen to but does not become tiresome compared to other more, mid-forward cable pairings available.

Similar to the low-end, there is a greater sense of relaxed and easiness in the attack and decay of notes in this region, with instruments and vocals seemingly floating out with an easygoingness that lends itself to being characterised as ‘natural’ or ‘analogue in nature.

That is not to say there is a loss of resolution in this region as I feel that the improvements in layering and staging, outlined below, help generate a greater sense of articulation and subsequent digestion by the listener.

Overall, I feel that the Code 24 imparts a greater spaciness to the mids that allow for a relaxing and smooth listening experience. It’s pairing with already mid-forward IEMs may be a concern given the heightening of this region.

Treble​

With the upper-regions of the frequency response (FR) curve, the Code 24 minorly improves the sense of crystalline and sparkly sounds. There is an improvement in the air and extension of the IEM that I am listening too that generates an increased sense of space and sparkle of percussion. This is ultimately a subtle change in the upper regions, I do not wish to mislead readers that this cable will turn whatever your IEM is into an Elysian Annihilator but the subtle and nuanced shift in the treble lends itself to creating a greater sense of dynamic range.

I do not feel that this uplift ever ventured into the region of being bright or sibilant (unless of course the IEM is already bright or sibilant) but added a little spiciness to the top end.

Technicalities​

The staging on the Code 24 is rather excellent with great width compared to the stock cables and within that wider stage there is an increased sense of layering. Instruments and vocals are readily discernible form one another and there is a great sense of imaging within the headstage. These benefits help provide a greater sense of technical prowess from the IEM that I was listening to at the time and the Code 24 seems to share some of the qualities of its predecessor the Code 23.

The imaging chops of the 24 was similarly good in this rather wider stage with panning instruments and voices presenting with excellent discernment on my end as I was able to pin-point positioning of certain notes.

Detail and resolution seem to benefit from this slightly more sparse staging and imaging improvements as I feel that microdetail and nuances in certain beats throughout a song became more prevalent in the mix.

Value & Quality of Life​

Ergonomics​

Let’s not beat around the bush. The Code 23, the predecessor to the 24 was an absolute dog when it came to ergonomics. The thicker gauge wire and the rather inflexible nature of the cable combined with its predilection for maintaining whatever shape it was morphed into created a wholly unenjoyable experience with IEMs.

The Code 24, with its structural changes including breaking down the previously single core to three individual cores as well as other changes seems to have paid dividends resulting in a more manageable cable.

I say more manageable, but the Code 24 remains a rather thick cable and as such there are some quirks with its use. The earhook section is still rather difficult to maintain behind a smaller ear and will be rather difficult should you wear glasses.

Otherwise, it remains fairly flexible, malleable and does not appear to hold its shape as readily as its predecessor.

The hardware, whilst excellent to look at for its industrial design is rather thick and unwieldy.

The ConX and TermX connectors make a welcome companion to the fussy audiophile who is constantly rotating gear or simply wants their cable to outlast their IEM purchases.

TermX I am not a huge fan of as I use mostly 4.4mm in any case and there is a tendency for both TermX and ConX to unscrew themselves over time, but this is not a huge issue for 2-pin IEMs.

Cost​

The cost of the Code 24 is rather steep. Coming in at 799 USD, the Code 24 commands a price that is equivalent to a whole ass Moondrop S8 and for that, you would want something remarkable.

I cannot justify the price for this cable considering the rather mid-fi collection of IEMs that I possess but for those looking at bigger, badder TOTLs and want to alter their sound signature or maybe just achieve a cool colour scheme, the Code 24 becomes more relevant.

With that being said, I retain that the Code 23 remains a much more sonically proficient, albeit possessing a much coloured tone despite being cheaper than the Code 24.

Ultimately, I feel that the Code 24, in terms of sonic improvements does not value as great as a value proposition as the Code 23 but if you’re willing to pay more, both in terms of monetary and sonic concessions, to benefit ergonomics, the I would say that the Code 24 is a good choice.

Comparisons​

vs Code 23 (from memory and notes taken from my review of the Code 23)​

Alas, I do not have the Code 23 on hand but from my notes and memory of the cable, I recall the following elements. The Code 23 seemed to generate a more dramatic sonic shift for whatever IEM I was listening to as I previously noted that the changes in staging were far more dramatic than the 24. They both seem to enhance a sense of depth and width but the Code 23 appears to be doing so at another level. This is for better or for worse in that it seemed to ‘colour’ the signature of the IEM in a manner that was more prominent than the 24. Bass performance on the 23 was noted to be more boomy and slower which I cannot attribute to the 24 which is fairly fast and articulate.

Mid-range performance seems to be rather similar in that both did quite well to present vocalists front and centre of this widened stage. Treble performance seemed to be more prevalent on the 23 due to the enhanced lightness and effortless reproduction of higher registers that I pin-pointed in my notes.

Ergonomics are a mixed bag in that both are rather thick and unwieldy behind the ears but unlike the 23, the 24 is readily malleable and does not seem to hold its shape as reticently as the 23. In this category I feel that the 24 is the no-brainer.

Overall, I noted that the 23, whilst commendable for its rather significant impact on sound, was less of an all-rounder and seemed to synergise well with only particular IEMs. I do not think this is the case for the 24 which has subtle but noticeable shifts that may suit a wider variety of IEMs in the market. On that basis, I feel that the 24 is the safer choice but the 23 is for those looking for a larger change in their sound signature.

vs Code 24C Limited​

The Code 24C presents music with a distinct emphasis on upper mids as I felt female vocalists were brought front and centre of the stage and presented in a very forward and engaging manner compared to the 24. In terms of bass performance, I would have to give it to the 24 in terms of sub-bass extension, texture and detail whereas the 24C seems to have greater emphasis on mid-bass frequencies adding to the sense of punch but in the process, seemingly diminishing the level of detail.

Treble regions for the 24C does not sound all that great compared to the 24 as I felt that it had a less-engaging upper end. There is not great articulation, sparkle or drama imparted in this region and overall slightly recessed in the mix.

In terms of technical abilities, the 24C’s staging is not as wide as the 24 but there is a great sense of depth imparted, perhaps as a result of that very forward vocal line. Otherwise the detail retrieval of the 24C and imaging chops do not feel as articulate or well defined as the 24.

Ergonomically, the 24C, with its thinner wire gauge, is the most ergonomic Code series cable yet and feels more manageable than the 24. Still not world beating or ergonomically viable for small-eared, glasses-wearing folk but still pretty good.

Overall, I feel that the 24C represents some rather good value in terms of price and its ability to inject some extra boom and punch in the low-end combined with a female forward colouration that seeks to engage you with your music. However, I do not feel it is as refined as the 24 and the seemingly reduced dynamic range when A-Bing the two seems to make the 24 a safer choice.

vs DIY PWAudio 1950s​

There were murmurs that the PWAudio 1950s cable was constructed out of the same wire as a Cardas Clear headphone cable, and when informed, I was intrigued enough to procure one made by an enterprising Queenslander.

The 1950s cable provides a more intimate stage compared to the Code 24 but generates a similar sense of clarity and separation. There is a greater sense of speed and urgency when compared to the Code 24 as the 1950s seems to want the IEM you are listening to resolve and image things as quickly as possible. I feel that the low-end oomph imparted by the 1950s seems to outstrip the Code 24 in terms of punch and mid-bass presence whereas the Code 24 seems to do a little better job with sub-bass.

Ergonomically, the 1950s replica is a 4 wire cable made of some relatively thin wire gauge and as such remains very lightweight. There is some memory to the wire and it is not exactly an ergonomic paradise but it remains far more teneable in my books compared to the hulking mass of the Code 24.

Overall, I feel that the Code 24 colours whatever your IEM in a manner that is more obvious with an expansion of staging and an injection of air whereas the 1950s seems to just highlight technical performance along with a low-end injection.

Conclusion​

The Code 24 manages to impart a shift in sonics that seems to extend the sub-bass and the treble whilst bringing the mids forward with a floaty quality to them. The result is a rather subtle shift in sound quality that seeks to create a more technically impressive and tonally similar experience that you had with the IEM you know and love.

The ergonomics and the value proposition of the Code 24 is questionable but much improved from the Code 23. However, when compared to the likes of Fusion 1, or the Cleo or smaller, lighter weight offerings from competitors such as Eletech, I find that the sonic advantages are not worth the rub, that being the rather comically thick cable and its impact on my portable, day-to-day use.

If you can live with that caveat than the Code 24 represents a more subtle impact on your IEMs that seems to lift technical capabilities. However, if you’re living with a thick boi cable such as the Code 24, I would just go whole hog and grab a Fusion 1 or a Code 23 instead.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 for arranging the Australian tour of these and special thanks to @tfaduh for lending his personal unit for this review.

It’s not uncommon to see new entrants in the world of audio but it is less common to see on as prolific as FatFreq. In a short span of time, this Singaporean manufacturer has managed the capture the imagination of many an audiophile through their rather extreme tunings and their rather robust product line up consisting of musician targeted monitors and the Maestro line. Today’s review concerns the baby of the family in the form of the Maestro Mini, an IEM that FatFreq states was created with the purpose of bringing all the goals of the Maestro line at a competitive price point. And what does the Maestro line aim to bring to audiophiles? A “lifelike concert experience” with their Bass Cannon that attempts to create a deep subwoofer-like experience. But can their IEM deliver?

The Factual Stuff​

Utilising a single dynamic driver and 2 balanced armatures, the Maestro Mini is a hybrid IEM that is encased in a rather handsome blue resin housing. The retail MM comes in a FATBOX pelican-style case with foam to protect your precious new IEMs as well as a dessicant to wick away moisture. A 4-wire silver-plated copper cable comes as stock with an option of a upgrade silver cable. Otherwise, the MM also comes with an assortment of silicone tips and cleaning brushes.

This review concerns the personal unit of @tfaduh which is an earlier production model and is without its stock cable.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

Bass​

The MM’s purported strong suit is its bass region with a very healthy amount of boost applied to the low-end to separate itself from other options in the price category. This is not a situation of pure low-end grunt at the cost of speed or detail however, the MM manages to balance both rather well. Whilst there is a healthy amount of bass in terms of quantity, the MM manages to be rather tonally balanced overall and doesn’t reach the same boot shaking quantity of bass as its younger cousin, the Scarlet Mini achieves.

Sub-bass extends deep and the physicality of certain songs is felt in a rather engaging manner, with songs such as “Tokyo Calling” by Atarashii Gakko striking with speed and weight in the low-end. The low-end grunt is not at the cost of detail as it remains distinctly textured and readily discernible. Speed was perhaps the most impressive element of the MM as bass notes hit with an immediacy that belies its strong level of boost in the region.

Overall, the bass regions of the MM actually do not really reflect the FR curve (at least in my books) as it remains rather tonally balanced with the rest of the FR curve and whilst strong, is not overbearing by any means.

Mids​

Perhaps the most surprising element of the MM was its rather strong performance in the midrange. Following the Scarlet Mini review, I expected the MM to be similarly overbearing in the low-end to the point of diminishing mid-range performance. However, vocals and instruments within this region maintain a level of balance and presence throughout my listening.

“Seven” by Jungkook contains a rather strong and present bassline throughout the song accompanied by a rather simply guitar chord and the male vocals of Jungkook. The MM maintains a tonal balance and imparts a level of weight to his voice that creates a very enjoyable listening experience that doesn’t feel incoherent nor incomprehensible.

“Walk With Me” by Cosmos Midnight is a floaty and ethereal production of electronica and the flighty vocals of Kučka sung in a higher register and the MM manages to combine its robust low-end with the necessary delicacy of the song as a whole in a manner that was extremely enjoyable.

Despite this surprisingly good mid-range performance, the MM is not perfect by any means as I have some slight issues regarding note weight and the timbre of the mid-range. Mids come off on the leaner side with some thinner note weight that is not entirely natural. The timbre of the mids have a slight plasticky twang to it that does not feel as effortless or as analogue as other IEMs. This is not to say that that the mids descends into the highly unnatural territory of more clinical and edgy IEMs in the market but this tonal characteristic is something that I noted in my listening.

Overall, the MM provides a rather excellent reproduction of the midrange with a slight edge to the upper mids but with an overall thinner body.

Treble​

I am far from a treble aficionado with it being the region that is least impactful to my overall listening experience but for want of a better reviewer, I would deem the treble on the MM as being wholly sufficient and for something as bass heavy as the MM, I would be inclined to believe that this is a victory for FatFreq.

The MM does not wow you with a sparkly and airy treble section but rather is sufficiently energetic and detailed in its reproduction with songs such as “Reckoner” by Radiohead, with its rather heavy use of percussion, providing you with well articulated and smooth treble performance. Unlike more aggressively tuned treble regions, the MM does not give you that hair-raising tingle and the slight jarring that one experiences with a cymbal crash but it remains sufficient for my listening experience.

Lower treble regions is sufficiently well controlled as higher register female vocals remain restrained enough to not elicit large amounts of fatigue over time. Upper treble and the airiness of the MM is similarly restrained as I do not feel that there is a huge amount of extension here to open up the overall FR.

Overall, I believe that the MM’s treble remains dramatic and prominent enough to create a fairly detailed and smooth listen that is not sibilant nor does it elicit fatigue but it is not a hugely prominent element of the MM. It remains balanced and rather good but does not do enough to standout from the rest of the MM.

Technicalities​

The aforementioned tuning choices of the MM is not conducive to creating a hugely detailed sound signature as the rather underwhelming treble does not highlight the leading edge of certain notes, generate the requisite space between such notes and ultimately does not highly the microdetails. However, the MM is detailed enough in my books, remaining rather well resolving from a macro level, managing to provide a detailed enough listen throughout any region of the FR curve without muddying up the mids nor the treble through its zealous bass tuning.

Imaging is rather good despite the rather significant bass boost with each section of the FR curve still maintaining a sense of layering and separation throughout. Multi-layered songs and directional cues are rather easy to discern but are not extremely pin-pointed with songs such as “Fine” by Taeyeon maintaining a sense of layering but not providing the same directional definition as more standout IEMs in the class.

Staging is sufficiently wide but not exactly a ‘holographic’ out-of-head experience. It feels wide and slightly flat in terms of staging so not the best sense of stage depth. There is some depth imparted by the rather generous bass boost but the rest of the response curve creates a sense of vocals and percussion sitting behind the drums ever-so-slightly.

Overall​

With a strong lower-end, the MM manages to present a fun and unique tuning that maintains a semblance of tonal balance in that the mids are surprisingly good. With a slightly middling treble region, the MM is hardly the perfect balance of all regions of the FR curve but remains engaging and fun to listen to.

Comparisons​

vs Scarlet Mini​

The red cousin of the MM is a successor of some sort occupying a price-bracket that represents a minor uplift from the MM’s and shares a similar footprint size wise.

The difference in sound is a rather dramatic one as I feel that the Scarlet dispenses with all subtlety in order to pursue bass. The lower-end is surprisingly more impactful, more punchy and more physical than the MM. The boost in the bass seemingly overwhelms the mid-range on the Scarlet as it is more recessed in the mix when compared to the MM. The treble region of the Scarlet is slightly more bright and sparkly when compared to the MM. This region is definitely more of a standout on the Scarlet when compared to the MM but may eek out some more sibilance out of female vocalist and more jarring percussion.

Technicality-wise, the tuning approach of the Scarlet seemingly reduces its technical proficiencies as the mid-bass into the lower-mids feel more smeared when compared to the MM and the mids as a whole feel recessed to the point of minimising macro-details in this region. The Scarlet requires a far more engaged and critical listen to discern such aspects whereas the MM feels more prevalent in its resolving capabilities comparatively speaking. The treble uplift in the Scarlet does seemingly create the sense of sparkle and air required to highlight micro-details but on the whole I feel like that the technical performance of either IEM is similar enough but less apparent on the Scarlet.

Overall, I feel that the Scarlet is a specialist IEM that occupies a slot in the collection for short-term listens whereas the MM is a daily driver that is more versatile.

Value & Quality of Life​

Priced at 600 SGD the MM is one of the cheapest of the the FatFreq family and provides an entry point to the revered bass cannon. Compared to its competitors in its price range and even those above it, the MM provides a coloured yet still surprisingly tonally enjoyable experience. Unlike the Scarlet, it does not overwhelm the song entirely with its bass boost and whilst it loses out in terms of treble sparkle compared to its red cousin, the MM maintains a coherent and enjoyable mid-range that really accentuates its tonal balance overall compared to the unabashed specialist nature of the Scarlet.

The MM is a bit left of field choice in the price range but considering its significant bass boost, it delineates itself from the market of rather safe Harman tunings and instead opts for an accentuated low-end combined with a competent mid-range and relaxed treble region. In doing so, I believe that the MM is a bit of a dark-horse in the market and whilst you can look at FR curves and immediate dismiss the MM, I feel that it’s coloured tuning creates character and that the IEM is far more listenable on an ongoing basis than what the FR curve would have you believe.

The shells are lightweight and rather small. Getting them seated into my ear was rather fiddly given the accentuated curves of the resin moulding but once seated they remained in-ear happily for hours on end. I cannot speak to the accessory package from an anecdotal basis given my review unit is without these accessories and has an aftermarket cable on it but the inclusion of the FATBOX is a wonderful boon to the value proposition of the MM.

Quality control has become a rather sore point of FatFreq in recent times and combined with some experiences of customer service being slow, it would be remiss of me to not mention that FatFreq may not be the best should there be anything wrong with your MM.

Conclusion​

I was expecting a bassy fun fest for all of about 10 minutes before I got bored and switched back to something more manageable. What I got was a bassy fun fest that was surprisingly balanced and enjoyable for hours on end.

The MM, unlike the Scarlet is not an unabashed bass cannon but rather reigns things in a little bit to be a better daily driver. The bass boost is enjoyable, not for everyone but remains more liveable than the Scarlet’s overwhelming bass region.

Compared to other IEMs in its price bracket, the MM is unique with its tuning and is just plain fun. It is not effortlessly natural nor is it clinical in its presentation but instead blurs the line of what is a ‘listenable tuning’ for me and I can thoroughly recommend it.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87 for arranging the Australian tour of these and special thanks to @reallynotareview for lending his personal unit for this review.

In a world of Harman tuned IEMs, there seems to be a prevailing idea of what constitutes a well-tuned IEM (at least below a certain price point). Adherence to targets with minor adjustments and a FR curve seems to be enough for a not-insignificant number of audiophiles to praise or malign an IEM. FatFreq is a Singaporean maker that is seemingly hellbent on subverting these targets to attempt to achieve a hugely bassy IEM, in a tuning approach that seems to be unprecedented in its apparent ridiculousness. This review concerns their latest release, the Scarlet Mini (Scarlet) which promises more of this bass power. I mean, just look at this thing:

One can imagine what this would sound like but with the benefit of @ really not a review’s personal unit, I would embark on an odyssey in bass. But would this odyssey leave me high and dry in the middle of the desert? Or lead me to a bass oasis?

The Factual Stuff​

The tour unit came in a strikingly red pelican-style hard case that FatFreq terms the “FATBOX” with some rather nice foam within to protect your new toy. Additionally, the FATBOX includes a silica capsule to draw any moisture away from your IEMs, a cleaning brush and a red coloured pure silver cable with various terminations.



The earpieces themselves are seemingly made of resin with a tastefully red faceplate that is quite handsome to look at. Within the earpieces is a bit of a mystery as the driver configuration is not readily apparent from the FatFreq website. However, they do note their “Bass Cannon” technology to achieve deep yet strong bass with “zero mid-range bleed” as well as their linear impedance to match any source, Sonar La Trompa to provide nice highs and Phasealign to improve coherency.

They are priced at around 799 SGD to 999 SGD depending on your cable combo (this is the 999 SGD cable combo). This is around 600 to 750 freedom dollars at the time of writing.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

Bass​

Well let’s not beat around the bush. The Scarlet is an absolute bass cannon as advertised. The tremendous boost in the low-end creates a strong sense of low-end body and presence. It is not just powerful in terms of sheer volume, it also manages to provide such a boost with sufficient clarity and depth. The sub-bass extends deep and rumbles very nicely with authority. “How” by Ella Mai has a pervading bass-line throughout the entire song befitting its genre and the Scarlet reproduces it with deep and resonant bass that adds a palpable texture to the music.

Moving to the mid-bass, I chucked on “Second Life” by Slander that has a mid-bass focussed bass line throughout the song and to no one’s surprise, the Scarlet provides an extremely powerful reproduction of the song. The punchiness and strength of the bass boost in the Scarlet manages to provide a strong sense of excitement and physicality to a rather small IEM that belies belief.

In terms of quality and textures, the Scarlet is not best in class, but this is not a situation of quantity trumping quality. By virtue of the rather aggressive boost, the Scarlet does not render the full detail of certain basslines such as that on “THE PLAN” from the TENET soundtrack opting for a more full and perhaps rounded presentation of bass versus a reigned in but readily dissectible form of bass.

Overall, the bass on the Scarlet is indeed its strong suit, the significant boost applied here does not turn the Scarlet into a indiscernible mess but rather remains controlled, quite detailed (considering the boost) and hugely fun to listen to. The only detriment to this robust bass tuning is that the detail invariably suffers despite remaining rather good considering the context and that this hugely bassy signature would not exactly be everyone’s cup of tea. I found myself somewhat nauseous after extended listening sessions with the Scarlet.

Mids​

Given the tremendous bass boost, I was very keen to see the effect on the mid-range, understanding that a rather robust mid-bass region tends to bleed into the mids and detract from its coherency at times. Listening to “Out of Time” by the Weeknd, a track that uses a rather lush and warm sample from a city-pop track from the 80s combined with the male vocals of the Weeknd. On overly warm IEMs, this song has a tendency to sound rather incoherent with male vocals being thrown into the abyss and injected with a distracting amount of note weight. The Scarlets managed the song very well, with the Weeknd, despite being somewhat recessed in the mix, still managing to come off as coherent, intelligible and with a somewhat natural timbre. However, the male vocalists still remain recessed in the mix as the tuning of the Scarlet is invariably bass focused.

Putting on a duet to see the shift from male to female vocalists, “Can’t Love you Anymore” by IU and OHHYUK contains the heady and airy voice of IU and the crooning of OHHYUK. The Scarlet manages the balance between these two voices rather well, seemingly providing both with ample focus as the song switches between the two. The bridge of the song also contains a call and response between the two singers and the Scarlet doesn’t seem to place precedence on either voice.

Moving to female vocalists, “Billie Bossa Nova” by Billie Eilish contains a rather intimately staged song that is rather sparsely produced and has a focus on Billie’s whispering singing voice. The Scarlet creates a rather excellent reproduction of the vocals but unlike other IEMs with a more “balanced” tuning, the Scarlet seems to place Billie’s vocals further back in the mix and detracts from the detail and emotion behind such vocals.

More acoustic and less bass heavy productions such as Laufey’s “Second Best” presents in a surprisingly good manner. Without the ever-present bass throughout, the mids are reproduced quite well, specifically the soulful voice of Laufey.

Instrumentalization in this region is a key selling point to me as I do enjoy a full and well detailed midrange. “Just the Two of Us” by Grover Washington and Bill Withers contains a wealth of instruments as well as the lovely voice of Bill and the Scarlet manages to do a decent job of rendering both. The saxophone, the keyboards and the steel drums are rendered quite well but as was the case outlined above, are thrown to the rear of the mix and inevitably lose a sense of detail and engagement.

Overall, the Scarlet is a bit of middling mid-range performer with the region recessed rather veiled and somewhat lose a sense of engagement. However, the Scarlet does well when considering the context of the FR curve as a whole as still remains intelligible, just not that engaging.

Treble​

Moving on to the treble region, one would usually believe that an absolute bass cannon such as the Scarlet would likely have a terrible upper end. To that I would say that you are wrong. The treble on the Scarlet can provide a rather good rendition of percussive instruments such as those on “Reckoner” by Radiohead. The claps, hi-hats and maracas manage to present themselves rather forwardly in the mix and with a slight sense of sparkle and tinkling quality to them that belies the robust low-end.

The brush on the hi-hat throughout “The Demon Dance” by Julian Winding is a constant test for treble response as it is a busily produced track and poor treble tuning usually leads to it being lost completely. The Scarlet renders this hi-hat with a whispery quality that is soft, subtle yet articulate in its nature. Treble therefore does not have the same splashy and spine-tingling quality that it has on brighter IEMs but it is definitely not completely dead as one would usually believe on a “bass-head” IEM.

Higher register female vocals reside in the upper-mids and lower-treble and a more aggressively tuned IEM has the propensity to be sibilant at times. The Scarlet has such qualities with sss sound coming from f(x) in “4 Walls” (and perhaps female K-pop vocals as a whole) having an edginess to them that is ever-so-slightly grating on the eardrums. I would not term these as hugely sibilant but there is a slight sharpness and pronounced edge to notes in this register.

Overall, the treble of the Scarlet is not too aggressively tuned but done in a manner that retains the fun-factor of having a present and well defined upper-end. There is no goosebump inducing moments when a cymbal crashes but there is a subtle and refined approach to the treble that allows it remain present in an overwhelming wave of bass.

Technicalities​

Staging on the Scarlet is rather confined in the grand scheme of IEMs. There is no real sense of width nor height on the Scarlets with orchestral recordings such as “One-Winged Angel” by Nobuo Uematsu remaining rather pedestrian in terms of stage size. There is perhaps, an enhanced sense of depth in the staging owing to the robust bass and slightly elevated treble leading to a very forward low-end and everything else sort of sitting behind it “on the stage”.

The imaging abilities of the Scarlet are rather good in its ability to adequately position instruments and vocal lines on its rather confined stage, presenting a layered and articulate rendition of overlapping instruments and voices in busier productions such as “Fine” by Taeyeon.

In terms of sheer resolution there is a loss of micro and macro detail by virtue of its aggressive tuning. The recessed nature of the mids seems to present a more ‘muffled’ and ‘veiled’ rendition of music that makes it harder to discern detail in the mid-range and to a lesser extent in the treble regions. That is not to say that the Scarlet is slouch, it remains competent but detail is not exactly jumping at you by virtue of its tuning. Subtle details on songs such as “Rush Over Me (Acoustic Version)” by Haliene which are readily apparent on more neutrally tuned and resolving IEMs in the market remain rather indiscernible on the Scarlet unless listening carefully.

Overall​

There is no mistaking what the Scarlet is all about and that is bass. Powerful in quantity and surprisingly articulate in its quality, the Scarlet is an IEM that could be characterised in a phrase of “in spite of”. In spite of such an overwhelmingly bass-focussed tuning, it remains still coherent, in spite of a ridiculous and sometimes nauseating bass tuning it retains rather good treble performance. The only issue with the Scarlet is that it appears to me to be a ‘gimmick’ IEM as I do not feel that this would be the ideal daily driver of any audiophile but it manages to be enticing in spite of this rather extreme tuning. Mids suffer slightly and if you’re a fan of acoustic folk songs of the 60s recorded in mono, the Scarlet is likely a miss.

Comparisons​

vs FatFreq Maestro Mini​

The Maestro Mini (MM) is a predecessor of sorts with its spot in the product line being prior to and under the Scarlet. However, the footprint and price-tag remain fairly similar and as such it would be key to compare the two. Thank you to @tfaduh for providing his personal unit for the purposes of this comparison.

The MM presents a greater overall tonal balance when compared to the extremes that the Scarlet pushes. In terms of the low-end, the MM, whilst being no slouch in the grand scheme of things, has a lesser bass boost and perhaps is actually not as detailed or speedy as the Scarlet. The mid-range is the key advantage that the MM holds over the Scarlet as it’s presentation feels more in line with the rest of the FR curve. There is a slight thinness to notes in this region but it feels much more balanced overall. In treble, the Scarlet seems to be more sparkly and more dramatic in this region creating a more crystalline and precise rendition of treble whereas the MM feels more restrained and smoothed out comparatively speaking. IN terms of technical performance, the two are relatively similar in terms of micro and macro detail retrieval on a critical A-B listen. However, anecdotally, spending 2 weeks with the two as my daily drivers I found that the Scarlet feels comparatively more veiled and less detailed due to the more aggressive tuning approach. Stage-width is perceived to be greater on the MM but is not as deep as the Scarlet.

Ultimately, the Maestro Mini could potentially be a daily driver, the Toyota Corolla to the Scarlet’s weekend warrior Miata with a roll cage with an LS motor that has somehow has been shoehorned in and is ready to kill you at a moments notice. Pick your poison.

Synergy​

One thought coming to my mind here namely lessons learnt after multiple DAPs, DACs and Amps plus headphones and IEMs is synergy! Hoping for the one and only holy grail Setup is maybe just a nice wish unless buying according synergy transducers and I don't believe even the best sources are an exception here. There's a reason why people are having multiple devices in parallel or reducing inventory and keeping only the ones with right synergy.

Chord Mojo 2​

I would term the Mojo 2 as a slightly warm but very technical source. The combination of the Scarlet and the Mojo 2 yielded a rather good result, providing a powerful yet controlled low-end, a competent mid-range and some rather crisp treble.

The bass on this combination provided the full-bodied and robust boost offered by the Scarlet but in a controlled and detailed manner, not smearing into a mess like the M6U.

The vocals, whilst slightly recessed in the mix, remained still fairly present enough to enjoy and both female and male vocalists retained a level of emotional engagement.

The treble, whilst not as sparkly nor spine-tingling as the M6U below, created a manageable and non-fatiguing rendition that was still quite crisp in its rendition.

Technicality-wise, the Mojo does not disappoint by drawing out some microdetails in what is a rather coloured tuning. The crossfeed function of the Mojo 2 did help to improve the perception of stage width but considering the already-congested feeling of staging on the Scarlet, it was hardly a revelation.

Overall, I feel that this was the best syngergistic combination for the Scarlet in my small collection of sources.

Shanling M6 Ultra (M6U)​

I would term the M6U was a warmer source that seeks to enhance note weight.

The M6U and the Scarlet is an indulgent pairing that essentially boosts a low-end tuning that doesn’t really need any boosting. The combo with more bassier productions rounds out and smooths out the low-end far too greatly. Bass notes become too smeared and lacks the incisiveness seen on other source chains to the point of creating a more indiscernible sound signature.

Utilising the two with more acoustic music such as “Take Me Home, Country Roads” covered by Lana Del Rey being rather veiled and bloaty at times, imbuing a note weight that is highly unnecessary for the sparse production and focus on female vocals. Vocalists, both male and female are fairly recessed in the mix in this combo, overpowered by bass and treble.

Treble is very sparkly and some female vocalists do tend to get a little sibilant as was the case with Ariana Grande’s “34+35”.

Overall, my time with the M6U and the Scarlet was limited and that speaks to the poor synergy between the two.

Luxury & Precision W4​

The W4 is a rather crisp and fast source, providing a somewhat w-shaped sound. The combination of the W4 and the Scarlet was a bit of a mixed bag. The heightened upper mids and treble seemed to draw out some sibilance from female vocalists but also added a layer of crispness and sparkle that was excellent with certain tracks. The mids were brought more forward into the mix and the overall tonal balance became much more in line with other competitors in the market.

However, the aforementioned Bass Cannon was reduced to a bloaty and boomy mess with the W4 with the bass performance being degraded quite heavily. The results of this pairing were very glaring to the ear and whilst some elements were quite good, the bass was basically unforgiveable in my books. This was alleviated somewhat with some fiddling with digital filters but the overall performance in the low-end left a lot to be desired.

Overall, this is not a pairing that I would recommend.

Value & Quality of Life​

Priced between 799 and 999 SGD, the Scarlet inhabits the rather competitive sub-kilobuck market that is crowded with plenty of IEMs. Where the Scarlet seems to separate itself from the pack is its extreme tuning that emphasises low-end. And whilst it does detract from other elements of sound (as outlined above) it presents a wholly unique offering in the market (FatFreq compatriots excluded) that is able to satisfy a rather niche group of audio-enjoyers and appeal to a larger crowd looking to fulfil specialist slots in their collections.

The included accessories are rather excellent with the FATBOX providing a rather robust albeit large means of transportation and protection. The silver upgrade cable is rather striking to look at in its red hue but remains lightweight, ergonomic and rather pliable. The colour and the lightness and thinness of the wire used does present some other thoughts of cheap and chintzy but ultimately I cannot detract any other points from the cable.

The earpieces themselves are rather small and lightweight. When compared to the absolute huge earpieces and huge nozzles occupying the market, the Scarlet is a great breath of fresh air with its smaller and ergonomically shaped footprint. I found that the Scarlet felt at home in the ears for long listening sessions and I would not be too hesitant to say that this will likely work with a lot of ears in the world.

It would be remiss of me not to mention the rather public concerns of FatFreq build quality in recent weeks and months with mention in certain cricles of audiophilia relating to their poor customer service, slow turnaround times and a high instance of QC issues on their range of IEMs. This is something that has not presented on the Scarlets in my time with them but ultimately is a consideration I feel is worth pointing out.

Overall, I feel that the Scarlet, by virtue of its extreme tuning, has carved itself out of the pack and into a neat little niche. There is nothing boring about the Scarlet and that alone is perhaps worth the price of admission. I would not buy it to be my only IEM nor my daily driver (unless you were an absolute bass-head) but I feel what it brings to the table is wholly unique and that is definitely a great boon to its value proposition in the market.

Conclusion​

It is a common theme for marketing to overpromise and then underdeliver. In the case of FatFreq and the Scarlet, bass cannon did not underdeliver. The Scarlet provides a unique but potentially polarising sound signature that has more bass than most know what to do with, a middling lower-midrange, a slightly spicy upper-mid range and a rather competent and subtle treble region. These elements combine to create a rather mixed bag of sound but what it does well in, it does unlike any other IEM in the market. To me, this is a specialist through and through and whether that is worth the price, is really up to how much you love bass or perhaps, whether you have been looking for the fun weekender IEM to complement your daily driver workhorse IEM.

Preamble​

Many thanks to @Damz87, @Vision Ears and Minidisc for arranging the Australian tour of the EXT and the PHöNIX.

Ask anyone on the street about audio brands and the likelihood that they rattle off brands such as Apple, Beats and Bose is very high indeed. Ask people slightly more interested in the topic and you might get the likes of Sennheiser and Audio Technica. The chances of them stating “Vision Ears” are very low, and for good reason. The German company keeps a fairly low profile mostly sticking to CIEMs and some rather high-priced universal IEMs, keeping their target audience largely musicians and hardcore audiophiles. Today’s review concerns the EXT, a rather garishly coloured anomaly, even for audiophiles, in its approach to tuning and technology. But is the EXT something worth escalating to popular knowledge? Or within the confines of this audio community?

The Factual Stuff​

The EXT comes in a rather spartan-looking cardboard box containing within it, a garish purple case machined out of aluminium. Within the case contains the earpieces fashioned out of black acrylic and adorned with a wonderfully machined aluminium faceplate anodised in a handsome purple hue. Within these earpieces are a rather odd combination of dual dynamic drivers and four electrostatic drivers. The dynamic drivers are 9.2mm and 6mm responsible for the bass and the midrange respectively. The four electrostats are dedicated to the treble region.

The EXT comes with a cable terminated in 2.5mm and features 8 wires of 28AWG silver-plated copper.

The Opinion Stuff​

Sound​

Bass​

The low end of the EXT presents a rather robust performer in terms of sub-bass with a generous amount of boost applied to the lowest depths of the frequency response curve. The result is an impressively deep and textured bass response. However, the EXT is not simply a bass-boosted monster but rather it manages to balance it with some nuance and clarity in its reproduction of the low-end. It manages to articulate the finer details of bass drums and remains fairly speedy despite the generous boost. “Ghosts” by Tchami has a rather thick and rounded bass note throughout the song, which on a lesser IEM seemingly turns into a pillowy mess with a woollier reproduction of the drawn-out note whereas the EXT handles it with great gusto. “THE PLAN” from the TENET soundtrack has a booming bassline in the initial seconds of the song and the EXT reproduces it with great detail and texture without muddying up the entirety of the song. There is a unique presentation to the bass notes of the EXT as it provides a rather ‘floaty’ reproduction of the low-end when compared to the likes of the Elysian Diva or the FiR Audio XE6 with both providing a very forward and in-your-face bass presentation.

Overall, the 9.2mm dynamic driver seems to be doing excellent work in the low end with a great level of presence and detail in the low-end that feels rounded and smooth to the listener. It is boosted but doesn’t remain overbearing or out of place with the tonal balance of the EXT.

Mids​

Moving onto the midrange of the EXT, there is not much else to say but it is rather good. The presentation of instruments, as well as vocals in this region, is done organically, with music presented in a very natural and analogue manner. Songs like “Dreams” by Fleetwood Mac present an organic reproduction of the strumming of a guitar and the vocals of the female vocalist throughout. There is no metallic or plasticky timbre here, simply a relaxed presentation of music. In an attempt to draw out some sibilance and trip up the EXT, I threw on “4 walls” by f(x) which has a large amount of sss sounds from female vocalists singing in breathy head voice. The EXT does eke out some harshness out of these sounds and thus is not exactly the most relaxed presentation of mid-range notes but still manages to be quite enjoyable.

Otherwise, the EXT does feel ever so slightly lethargic in its reproduction of the mid-range with certain instruments seemingly lingering a fraction of a second too long and the leading edge of hard and fast notes coming from strings or a piano not presenting with the same edginess as one would hope.

Overall, the mid-range performance of the EXT is somewhat of a love-hate element of the IEM. I felt that whilst natural and organic in its presentation, it lacked the speed and edginess of what you wanted out of some notes.

Treble​

Moving on to the upper regions of the EXT, treble performance is somewhat a given considering the technology mix in the IEM. The EXT does not fail to impress in this region. The speed and detail that the EXT manages to eke out of songs wherein treble is somewhat of an afterthought is something very enjoyable indeed. “Walk With Me” by Cosmos Midnight has a tambourine and a hi-hat permeating the pre-chorus and chorus and they remain distinctly present throughout listening with the EXT. Lesser IEMs simply have these elements lost in the sauce and if they are more treble forward, still do not reproduce them with the highly detailed presentation of the EXT.

“Reckoner” by Radiohead has oodles of percussion from the outset of the song, the EXT speedily reproduces the claps and metallic tonality of the percussion with gusto, creating a tremendous sense of dynamic range as it extends from the bass up to the tippy-top of the FR curve.

The EXT is somewhat fatiguing however, It remains distinctly within my acceptable level of ear tingle and fatigue-inducing painfulness. However, this may be an element to look out for if you are particularly treble-sensitive.

Overall, the treble of the EXT flexed the muscles of the ESTs that were implemented, providing a very present treble region that sparkled and shined amongst the generous bass boost and overly produced songs wherein treble seems to be a very small element of the song itself.

Technicalities​

The EXT’s imaging chops are decent with songs such as “Fine” by Taeyeon being able to be dissected somewhat with its various layers of overlapping vocal tracks. However, for the price, I don’t think the EXT does a standout job of imaging and positioning certain sounds when compared to the likes of the Phoenix or the RN6.

The staging of the EXT is somewhat inflated by the heavy injection of air in the FR curve creating a sense of spaciousness and width that belies its in-ear nature. However, with that being said, it remains a fairly intimate sound stage with orchestral music not being fully reflective of its concert hall recording. The depth of the stage is something that is rather lacking on the EXT which I feel is partly due to the heavy emphasis on the bass and the treble but also simply due to a lack of layering and separation potential of the drivers themselves.

The resolving power of the EXT is a bit of a mixed bag, with the aforementioned props given to the low-end and high-end of the FR curve. However, the mids do not feel that they are providing all of the necessary microdetails one would come to expect from the TOTL price tag.

Overall, I feel that the EXT does a rather decent job in presenting detail and resolution in its strengths, that being the bass and treble but on the whole, it is rather lacking in terms of mid-range resolution. Otherwise, the staging is not a standout element of the EXT with the airiness of the IEM creating a “faux” sense of space but lacking a significant amount of depth and height that one would want in their TOTL.

Overall:​

With a heavy emphasis on bass and treble, the EXT takes a more U-shaped presentation and it plays to its strengths extremely well on a technical basis. However, the mid-range, despite being rather organic in its reproduction, remains a step too slow and a little undefined for my tastes. The result of this is a wonderful sound signature for a very specific portion of the audiophile community. Strong bass performance combined with sparkly treble within the context of a smoother and spacious presentation create very obvious “signposts” of a great IEM but as a result, it perhaps makes its deficiencies more readily apparent.

Comparison​

Vs RN6​

The RN6, like the EXT, injects a significant amount of airiness into the FR curve and as a result, provides a more spacious and ethereal-sounding IEM that maintains a powerful low-end. This approach means that the RN6 and the EXT share some broad tonal similarities but how do they compare? The EXT’s low-end, whilst impressive lacks the sheer force and physicality of the 10mm Kinetic Driver that the RN6 utilises to deliver its bass frequencies. The result is a much more present and powerful low-end on the RN6 but whilst intoxicating, it may be a little bit overbearing on the sound signature. The EXT feels a little more woolly and floaty with its bass compared to the RN6 and as such loses some of that physical rumble but ultimately remains more tonally balanced and more unique in its bass presentation.

The mid-range of the RN6 and the EXT are also different with the RN6 being slightly more recessed in its presentation yet remaining distinctly detailed and crisp whereas the EXT, as outlined above, is slightly more smoothed out leading to a more relaxed presentation. The upper regions of the EXT and the RN6 take different approaches with the RN6 being distinctly less sparkly and crisp compared to the EXT which lays on the treble pretty thick to heighten the crystalline nature of the upper regions.

Ultimately, the RN6 takes on a more coloured tonality and seems to push the tonal signature of the EXT to the extremes for better or for worse. I believe that the EXT is the more safe choice but the RN6’s bass performance is best-in-class whereas the EXT doesn’t have a valid claim to best of anything in my books.

Vs VE Phoenix​

The VE Phoenix was a wonderful IEM that I had spent time with and whilst not excelling in any respect, provided a sweet and enjoyable tonality combined with excellent technical performance. The Phoenix errs on the side of warm whereas the EXT, whilst still presenting a decent sense of mid-bass presence remains rather airy and ethereal in its presentation. Speed and detail are where the two most differ as I believe the Phoenix excels in providing micro and macro detail in any region in a natural and relaxed manner whereas the EXT trumps it in the treble region but at the cost of some harshness. The bass on the EXT is much more prominent and the quality of the bass is quite odd in that it feels rounded and “blobby” whereas the Phoenix provides a more fast and punchy bass presentation comparatively. The mid-range on the Phoenix is more present in the mix and resolves excellently with a natural timbre that feels fast and direct. The EXT feels more organic and relaxed in its delivery but at the cost of some detail. Both do not have the largest staging but the Phoenix does much better in creating separation, layering instruments and resolving them in a manner that creates a deeper and more dissectible stage.

Overall, the Phoenix presents what I feel is a much more enjoyable tonality that will likely be enjoyed by most people compared to the EXT where its U-shaped tonality seems to elevate the drama and engagement factor some but at the cost of long-term listening enjoyability in my books.

Synergy​

Shanling M6U​

The M6U is characterised by a slightly v-shaped tonality combined with a strong emphasis on note weight and smooth reproduction of music. The result of this with the EXT is an emphasis on the EXT’s strengths imbuing a strong sense of low-end presence and heightening the upper regions of the FR curve. Whether this approach overcooks the overall tonal balance of the IEM is a question for your tastes but for me personally, the recessing of the mids and the imbuing of strong low-end presence had the effect of muddying up the overall performance of the EXT. Whilst the emphasis on these two elements seemed to heighten the sense of dynamism and drama felt whilst listening to the EXT, I found the experience overbearing over time and ultimately something that I did not find enjoyment in after the novelty of booming bass and piercing highs wore off. Overall, this is not a combo that I would heartily recommend unless you want a more U or V-shaped tonality at all costs.

Mojo 2 + Poly​

Characterised as a slightly warm yet ultimately neutral source, the Mojo 2 provides the EXT with perhaps the most neutral representation that I can get out of my sources. The combo doesn’t seem to heighten the tonal characteristics of the EXT in any prominent manner but rather simply reproduces the music as what I believe Vision Ears would have imagined. The resolution and ability to pick out detail in any area of the response curve on the Mojo was better than the M6U and alleviated some of the concerns that I had regarding the lack of resolving power in the mids that I had highlighted in my review above. This is not to say that the Mojo cured it completely.

The crossfeed function of the Mojo expanded the stage somewhat coalescing with the already airy nature of the IEM to broaden and deepen the stage. The effect seemed slightly heightened on the EXT when compared to other IEMs when used with crossfeed.

Luxury & Precision W4​

The W4 on the stock settings (fast filter, Tune 02 and all other settings off) presents a thinner and drier reproduction of sound when compared to the previously mentioned source chains. The result of this is a more edgy reproduction of sound that is faster and more precise in its presentation. The combination of the W4 and the EXT leads to a rather mixed bag of results. The bass and the mids provide a needed sense of speed and precision that seems to correct some of the issues that I previously wrote about and imbue a greater sense of detail and resolution in these regions. However, the added thinness and sharpness to the treble sections of the EXT began to move the IEM into the distinctly sibilant territory as the edgier combination seemed to make female vocalists a bit jarring and cymbals noticeably splashier and harsher. Despite this increase in harshness, the treble was undoubtedly detailed and airy to the ear with songs that were not too treble-happy.

This is ultimately something that was alleviated with the shift to slower filters and the NOS mode of the W4 that seemed to smooth out and roll off the frequency response curve somewhat, creating a more balanced sound signature.

As a result of this, the W4 is a rather good pairing that seeks to correct some of the misgivings of the EXT but may lean too hard into its strengths. Ultimately, the W4 is a rather good choice if you don’t find that you are that treble-sensitive.

Hiby R6 Pro 2​

The R6P2 presents a highly dynamic sound signature that follows what I would term v-shaped tonality. The elevation of the sub-bass and slight heightening of the treble lends itself to a great sense of engagement and dynamism with several IEMs but given the EXT is already emphasising these elements, how would they fare together?

The bass frequencies become a bit too much for my ears with the sub-bass boost becoming slightly more undefined and muddy to the ear, perhaps owing to the already “floaty” nature of the EXT’s bass. The mids remain the same for the most part but with a very slight improvement to the resolution and rendering of micro detail of certain instrumentalization when compared to the likes of the M6U above.

The treble gets a very slight boost but not to the extent of the W4’s overly bright presentation at times. This is a more subtle addition to the already prominent treble regions but did not bother me that much in the grand scheme of things.

The R6P2 also provides a wealth of DSP to a greater extent than the W4 and is seemingly on par with the Mojo with the exception that the R6P2 isn’t necessarily “lossless DSP” as claimed by Chord. This provides you with the ability to alter the sound signature of the EXT and ultimately you can ensure synergy to a certain extent.

Overall, the R6P2 seeks to enhance the already emphasised v-shape nature of the EXT but the improvements in dynamic performance create a great sense of engagement and presence in the low-end. I would say that the R6P2 is a respectable pairing but with the caveat that some tweaking may be required.

Value and Quality of Life​

Priced at the hefty sum of 3000 USD, the EXT commands a princely price for its sound. But I cannot wholeheartedly say that the EXT is deserving of this price. The value proposition of the EXT is hard to justify with my experience with TOTL IEMs (albeit limited). The Phoenix seems to be the greater all-rounder with a safer tuning that is sure to appeal to more people and the RN6 provides a similar airy yet bassy sound signature that feels tighter and more resolving. The EXT excels in terms of treble performance and the uniqueness of its strong bass tuning but I do not feel that this avails my concerns with the price tag and the middling reproduction of the mids.

The shells are lightweight despite the hefty metal faceplate and thus feel rather comfortable to have in-ear for extended periods. The caveat of this statement is that they have to get into your ear in the first place. The EXTs, like the Phoenix, take a rather odd earpiece shape that intends to get deeply inserted and sit nicely in your ear canal. Whilst they did so with my ears, I would be reticent to say that this would work with a lot of people. As such, I feel that the earpieces would likely be a difficult fit for some folks and not as universally appealing as some other earpiece designs in the market.

The included cable is a rather flexible 8-wire cable which was fine from an ergonomic perspective but the hardware and connectors were somewhat disappointing for a product of this price class. The 2 pin connectors felt rather loose in the earpieces and it wasn’t an uncommon experience to open up the case to see that one of the earpieces was no longer connected to the cable. Pin security is not just for ATMs but is pretty much crucial when you have a TOTL priced IEM in your ear. The 2.5mm jack is a 2.5mm jack and I’ll leave it at that.

Conclusion​

The EXT seeks to demonstrate its superiority through its fairly exaggerated U-shaped tuning approach and it does so rather well. The mids, whilst seemingly an afterthought maintain a level of organic presentation that is quite enjoyable and this is book-ended by a uniquely floaty bass that remains robust and a sparkly upper-end that incites some excitement and energy in the treble.

This tuning is rather exciting but diminishes its suitability for more acoustically focused music and the technical prowess of the EXT leaves one wanting for more in terms of detail retrieval and resolution in the mid-range in particular.

Ultimately, the EXT is a rather tough sell for me at its pricepoint, I do not believe it is the best at bass regions despite having a unique presentation, is quite far off in mid-range reproduction and the treble, whilst rather good is not good enough to warrant the price-tag in my books.

The EXT is a TOTL for those looking for a rather pronounced U-shaped tonality and if that is not your bag then I recommend spending your bag on a more well-rounded IEM like the Phoenix.