JUZEAR 61T Latest 1DD+6BA IEMs

Juzear Butterfly 61st Review
.
One of the smoothest-sounding IEM I've heard.
.
The Juzear Butterfly 61t was sent to me through a review tour conducted by Hifigo, an online audio store; kindly check out their website. Thank you, Hifigo.
.
The Juzear Butterfly 61t (199 USD) is a hybrid IEM with a driver complement of 1 x dynamic driver for the bass and 6 x balance armature drivers for the midrange and treble, divided by a crossover.
.
The packaging is elegant and neatly designed; my unboxing experience was pleasant. It includes a useful carrying case that can fit in my pocket but could accommodate a dongle DC/Amp with the IEMs and the stock cable. The included eartips have soft skirts, making a seal slightly finicky.

.
The included cable is a thick 4-core cable with 1.8mm outer diameter thickness for each wire. It feels like a high-quality third-party cable; there is no need to upgrade the stock cable for sure, unless you want something that is thinner and lighter.


.
The IEMs, which are made of 3D printed resin material, is on the big side, but they are medium in weight, fit perfectly in my ears and feel very comfortable during long listening sessions.
.
Power handling and sensitivity:
.
The 61t can take a lot of power and go very loud without distorting, but on a very few occasions, when a music track with a very loud sub-bass is playing at very loud volumes, I detected that the tonality shifts, making the midrange more forward and the bass more laid back; this indicates a sort of incoherence between the different kinds of drivers used in the 61t; the dynamic driver for the bass cannot keep up with the balance armature drivers for the midrange and treble; though, I have to repeat saying this: this happens on a very few occasions and doesn't occur on normal listening levels.
.
The sensitivity is average, which is good, as I like my IEMs to have similar loudness when I switch between them.
.
Drivability and synergy:
.
The 61t is very easy to drive even with my small dongle DACs such as the BGVP T01s, BQEYZ LIN, QKZ TC MAX PRO, and others. The 61t is not choosy with the quality of the source you feed it; it is forgiving but can certainly benefit from high-quality and expensive sources.

.
Sound signature:
.

It sounds warmer than the imagined absolute neutral. The bass is sub-bass focused and smooth sounding with good texturing, the midrange is very smooth and lush, and the pinna gain in the upper midrange is very gentle and smooth. The treble is very smooth and devoid of any perceived peakiness in response and sounds unlimitedly extended; there is a very good air and decay to the sound. The 61t is truly a smooth-sounding IEM, one of the smoothest I've heard.
.
Technicalities:
.
The soundstage is big, lush, and deep; it feels very atmospheric, and the lushness of the sound in the midrange helped a lot in this. It sounds very natural and easy to feel like you are in a real environment.
.
The imaging is very good and palpable, way better than average; you can almost see the instruments that are projected in front of you by the 61t; the imaging is pinpoint yet retains a good and believable size. It is very difficult to fully describe the actual performance of the 61t in terms of imaging, but I can assure you that this kind of imaging performance is not common and only belongs to much more expensive IEMs like my (550 USD) Xenns Mangird Top with ePro EP00 eartips and (1,399 USD) Hiby Zeta that I have reviewed, just to give examples.
.
Compared to Letshuoer Cadenza 4 (249 USD):
.
The Cadenza 4 is much brighter sounding; the bass on the Cadenza 4 is more neutral and has a slightly leaner tonality. The treble on Cadenza 4 is much brighter and has a more forward presentation. The imaging on the 61t is better; the soundstage is deeper on the 61t but wider on the Cadenza 4.
.
Compared to Kiwi Ears KE4 (199 USD):
.
They have about the same warmth in sound and boost in the sub-bass, but the KE4 is more of a U-shape in sound signature, while the 61t is more of a neutral sound. The 61t has better imaging. They have about the same staging performance and dynamics, though I find the KE4 to have a slight edge in dynamics and contrast.
.
Compared to QoA Adonis New (186 USD):
.
The QoA Adonis New has a very different sound signature. It is V-shaped with a huge boost in the sub-bass; it sounds more bassy, slightly reccessed in the midrange, and has a more elevated treble; it has an overall warm sound similar to the 61t; the biggest difference between the two is the dynamics, the Adonis New has more dynamics. Both have a refined sounding midrange and treble, but the 61t is slightly smoother. They have similarly big soundstages, but I have to give the edge to the 61t when it comes to imaging performance, both are good but the 61t has a more palpable presence in imaging.
.
Pros:
.
Very smooth sounding
very good value for money
very good imaging
big soundstaging
very good stock cable
nice eartips and carrying case
.
Cons:
.
not the best in terms of dynamics and contrasts.
I wish the bass has more punch.
.
Conclusion:
.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Juzear Butterfly 61t is one of those rare and special gems of an IEM that I came across. A truly smooth-sounding earphone with very good imaging. A reference-grade and musical-sounding IEM that you won't regret buying. Highly recommended.
.
Happy listening, Cheers!

Quick Disclaimer: I am a beginner who just casually listens to music without thinking much about it and this is my fourth review. I’ve done more extensive research about terminologies and their meaning, sometimes I get them right and may get them wrong so feel free to correct me if there are some terminologies that I used which don’t apply to these IEMs. And as always, all these thoughts and opinions are my own; prior to this review, I did not read or listen to any reviews about this IEM(once again going in blind.) If you want to share your thoughts and opinions about these IEMs or about my review, please feel free to let me know.

The gear I’m using is just really simple: Ordinary Laptop, iPhone XS, Apple Lighting to AUX Dongle, Roseselsa 9039 Amplifier DAC(I will be using this for the rest of the reviews) and the JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T.

A special mention to HIFIGO for sending these IEMs over our local community for a review tour. Looking forward to working together with you all!

---

So let's begin.

The JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T is a 199$ IEM(which is around around 11.5k PHP) which is composed of 1 Dynamic Driver(DD) and 6 Balanced Armature(BA) drivers; since this IEM has 6 BA drivers, you should have an idea that these would highlight instruments and vocals giving you a sense of realism. Although this is true(spoiler alert) there are still many ways to test if the 6 BA drivers really do have an impact or just for show. After reviewing the LETSHOUER DZ4, S08 and BQEYZ Cloud, I can say that these IEMs are about to take the top spot for both price and sound quality.

The first thing you’ll notice about these sets is the beautiful color way; upon receiving these IEMs for review, I could not believe on how beautiful the design looks like, especially when the faceplates have that Opal-like design, You might mistaken these IEMs are over 500$ just from the design itself but rest assured that these IEMs go for less than 200$.

---

UNBOXING EXPERIENCE

For the price point of 199$, you might think what could the unboxing experience possibly be? Well to say the least I would say that it’s good; unlike the BQEYZ Cloud there was significantly more effort done. The outer sleeve has the IEMs printed in front and showcases the beautiful Opal-like faceplate design.

The sides just have “JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T” printed on them, nothing much to say.

Flipping the box over, you get to see the different types of aux cable options(2.5mm, 3.5mm or 4.4mm) and specifications such as: Sensitivity, Impedance, Frequency Response Range and much more. I’ve also spoken to some fellow audiophiles about graphs being absent from the packaging and basically they told me that “It’s not necessary since manufacturers test the IEMs with their own equipment” While a graph might be useful for a baseline/reference, most of our gears are different from one another so others might have a different listening experience.


Removing the sleeve and lifting the top cover, you’ll first see a sheet of parchment paper with the wings of a butterfly and “Listen to the sounds of nature” printed in the middle. Cool presentation and maybe a bit of foreshadowing with what you’re expecting the sound quality will be. Underneath the paper, you’ll then see the IEMS, carrying case, microfiber cleaning cloth and the user manual. The cable is already attached to the IEMs themselves and I have to say that the cable feels premium(almost the same quality as the NMD Audio Mist) and it is thick though it is lightweight and has never tied up. Lastly the carrying case has the ear tips stored inside.


I’d like to point out that the nozzle size is larger than most IEMs out there, fitting some ear tips were a bit of a struggle since you’d have to push it all the way through just to get it secured to the nozzle and when wearing the IEMs it felt like my ear canals were being stretched but I did not experience any discomfort while listening.

---

FIRST IMPRESSIONS with Apple Lightning to AUX Dongle

As always, my expectations are high since the BQEYZ Cloud IEMs proved that price should come with performance and the BUTTERFLY did not disappoint. Even when using the Apple Dongle it was relatively easy to power/drive; it has a bright tonality which really brings out the vocals on both male and female not to mention that it also emphasizes on the secondary and background vocals. The vocals sound natural without any harshness from sibilance which is already promising given the fact that it comes with 6 Balance Armatures.

What really stood out is that these IEMs have Noise Reduction listed on the specifications at 26dB. This is the first time I’ve seen this included on an IEM since I was always under the impression that these already have their own noise reduction because the built materials and the fitment of the IEMs on your ears. Unlike the other IEMs I've used, the noise reduction helps a lot since it lets you focus on the music and ignore all that noise outside.(This could also be a safety hazard when walking around the streets.)

It also has good sound staging, imaging and depth; it’s refreshing to listen to music that really utilizes the spacing between the vocals and instruments which I can describe as “holographic”. Another promising factor that this IEM brings since the theme it follows is nature and as you can imagine, nature has so many sounds going on from all the different directions and this IEM does have the ability to replicate it.

The mid-range is also good with once again a strong emphasis on vocals, both male and female almost have this ASMR like sound, the instruments do fall a bit behind but there is clarity in them though I would say that it does struggle a little bit when multiple instruments are present as the upper-mids sometimes mask over the lower-mids; when it comes to orchestral there are some compositions that it does very well but when it comes to compositions that have a lot of energy(I don’t really know how to describe it.) it struggles to bring out upper-mids as mentioned earlier.

Mid-bass has a slight punch to it and surprisingly has a good amount of decay, the sub-bass is present with a bit of rumbling but unlike the BQEYZ Cloud, it’s smooth and doesn’t cause any fatigue. Bass heads including myself are impressed by this as IEMs that have a good bass region tend to demand more power but in this case an Apple Dongle is good enough.

---

FIRST IMPRESSIONS WITHOUT ROSESELSA 9039

When using the BUTTERFLY directly to my laptop, I noticed that the tonality shifted from bright to dark; there is a notable difference here from the Apple Dongle since these IEMs do focus on detail and clarity thanks to the balanced armatures it has but I notice that the treble was lowered by a bit. Both male and female vocals are still beautiful in terms of clarity and surprisingly, I did notice that the vocals have a bit of air on them, the subtle detail may not be noticeable to some but it really adds some naturalism to the vocals.

While the vocals have been lowered by a bit, what stood out now is the change of the sound staging, imaging and depth; of course the laptop aux gives more power than the Apple Dongle so you can expect that these IEMs would get even better and it definitely did. The BUTTERFLY has a much wider staging; the imaging and depth remains but the feeling and sensation that you are in a wide room with sound waves bouncing from different surfaces to one another just unlocked another dimension that I never knew were possible.

And now the beauty of the 6 Balanced Armature truly shines in the mid-range. What I’ve noticed in the mid-range is that it brings the instruments forward but not to the point where it bleeds/overtakes the vocals. Each instrument has so much detail and clarity that you can identify each instrument that was used in the recording especially on orchestral music; the sound quality is also fit for high energy songs such as rock or electronic letting you hear and “feel” the instruments elevating your listening experience.

Of course we could never forget about the bass. Since the laptop gives out more power than the Apple Dongle, it is safe to say that both the mid and sub-bass had huge improvements. The mid-bass has gotten punchier and even has a tiny amount of decay while the sub-bass has that rumbling feeling that is sure to satisfy bass heads. I did not hear any bleeding or overlapping on both the mid-range and high frequencies which is a plus since some IEMs do that but not the BUTTERFLY.

---

FIRST IMPRESSIONS WITH ROSESELSA 9039

Using the Roseselsa 9039, there were only a few things that have changed but I believe that this is the true potential of the BUTTERFLY 61T.

The tonality went from dark to bright and warm. Yes, I know it sounds like a huge jump but let me explain. It would seem that it has taken both the strength of the Apple Dongle and weakness of my laptop’s aux port and made an agreement to keep the brightness of the highs of the Apple Dongle and fix the weakness of my laptop’s aux and turn it into a warm tonality with the lows.

Thanks to its bright tonality, both male and female vocals sound more natural, with the improvement of the detail and clarity to the vocals, the only way I could describe what I’ve experienced is that they almost sound as if they’re singing right in front of you. Although it is not comparable to ASMR, this builds a bit of resonance between us the listener and the composer of the song. The same way goes for the instruments, but there was a bit of shimmering and sparkle present but it would have to take a lot of listening again and again.

Similarly to the previous comparison, the IEMs already do a great job in sound staging, imaging and depth. I did not notice any difference before using the Roseselsa 9039 and currently using it. It still retains its wide holographic staging which once again really gives a new whole dimension to listening.

Last but certainly not the least is the bass. Because of its warm tonality, the bass region has increased. Mid-bass has gotten punchier and even has a satisfying amount of decay and the sub-bass has that improved rumbling. But unlike the BQEYZ Cloud, it will not shake your ear drums but it will surely satisfy bass heads looking for some oomph and rumble.

Overall, these IEMs bring out the most on the vocals and instruments. Both male and female vocals shine bright with these IEMs and even instruments that play around the high frequencies will have so much emphasis, clarity and detail will take your listening experience to a whole new level. For a 199$ IEM, you’re not only paying for its beautiful Opal-like faceplate design but you’re also paying for the sound quality that those 6 Balanced Armatures bring to the table. If you’re looking for IEMs that are easy to drive/power and focus a lot on the vocals then look no further than the JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T.

Blup blup 𓆟 and happy listening!

Disclaimer
Please note that I am not an audiophile, and this review does not delve into the technical aspects of the IEMs. My impressions are based on my personal preferences, and others may have different experiences with this product. I also have a very limited experience with audio products so please take this review with a grain of salt.

The Juzear Butterfly 61T was lent to me as part of a review tour in the Philippines.

Price: 219.99 USD
Link: https://hifigo.com/products/juzear-butterfly-61t

Part 1: General Product Details

Package Inclusions:

• IEM shells & cable
• Carry case
• A piece of microfiber cloth
• 5 pairs of eartips - 2 foam in and 3 silicon with differing sizes

The IEM Shells

• The shells are made of near-opaque black resin. The silver metal nozzles are substantially wider than what I’m used to, wider than my Moondrop May and Truthear Holas, even with the lips.
• The faceplate has a beautiful painted pattern with silver trim that really shines in natural light. The text “Juzear” is written on the left ear faceplate. Right and left iems are clearly labelled at the bottoms of each shell.
• Each earpiece weighs ~6.3g, but are well balanced that they won’t fall out of your ears.

The Cable

• The cable weighs ~37g and reminds me of NMD Audio’s Mist cable in terms of quality, both feel very premium, though this one is lighter by a few grams.
• The cable is well-wound and braided and doesn’t tangle easily.
• The earhooks don’t “lock in” behind my ears so I need to readjust them from time to time when I move my head.
• R and L are clearly labelled on the 0.78mm 2-pin connectors, and terminates with a 3.5mm jack.

The Carrying Case

• A basic silver-gray textured case with black zippers weighing ~47g. The Juzear logo is embossed on a badge on the front. This badge seems to have dislodged itself during shipping so I had to stick it back onto the case with CA glue.

Part 2: Subjective review



General Usage Impressions

• First time I tried this, it felt so tight with the provided eartips. I had to use the smallest silicon eartips in my collection, which was the SS from the Truthear Holas. This helped alleviate the ear pressure build up, and helped with the nozzles not scraping in my ear.
• I thought I would have a problem with the weight of this set but it seems like I’ve become used to bigger sized ones or the weight balance is well done so I don’t feel them.

Sound Impressions

• I don’t have the Dynaquattro on hand now but it seems like the Juzear Butterfly is just about at par with it in terms of sound quality.
• This set has great soundstage, imaging, and clarity, so much so that it’s great for competitive and immersive gaming.
• The bass is rich and the rumble it produces doesn’t overpower the higher frequencies, but without compromising on the details.

Final Thoughts
Despite the nozzle size issue (which just seems nitpicky for me), the Juzear Butterfly is PERFECT! This set is one of my favorites, contending with the Dynaquattro in terms of sound quality, and both are almost at the same price range.

I’m definitely putting this on my “Things I Want to Buy” list for later on. It’s just so easy to like!

Specs And Driver Configuration

• 1 DD + 6 BA Driver Setup Per Side
• CCP 10mm DD + Knowles ED x 2 + 3176 Custom BAs
• Crossover Setup Undisclosed
• Weight: 6.6g
• Impedance: 7Ω@1kHz
• Sensitivity: 115dB ±1dB SPL/mW
• Cable: 6n silver plated oxygen free copper

Before Starting the review I want to thank Hifigo for arranging a review tour of this iem in my country.

Unboxing Experience and Accessories Package


The unboxing experience is very good for the price. After removing the sleeve, you get the main box.



Once the lid is removed, the 61T is presented in front of you, and below it, there’s a zipper carry case with all the accessories inside.

The accessories provided are excellent. In the box, you get:

1. Cable
2. Zipper carry case
3. Three sets of balanced silicone eartips
4. Three sets of Juzear spring tips
5. Three set of foam eartips

The provided cable is one of the nicest in this segment. It feels soft and supple, yet sturdy and well-built. It has excellent flexibility and doesn’t have any kind of memory. One con is that it doesn’t have interchangeable terminals, but the cable quality more than makes up for it.



The carry case is also good—it’s very pocketable, and taking the IEM in and out of the case is easy.



The tips are also good, especially the spring tips, which resemble SpinFits and provide similar fit and comfort. The carry is also perfectly pocketable side and putting iems in after use is very easy, but it cannot fit dongle dac easily so you have to store that some where else.

Design, Fit, and Comfort


The design of the 61T is one of its highlights. It looks absolutely gorgeous, with a faceplate made from abalone with metal inserts.



The faceplate is on the blingy side—those who prefer a more understated look may not like this, but personally, I love it.



The IEM features a full resin build with a metal nozzle. The build quality is very good, with a slight heft that makes it feel robust and sturdy.



Fit and comfort are decent but not great. The medium-sized nozzle provides a good fit and comfort, and the shell shape offers good stability.



However, the main issue is pressure buildup. If you're sensitive to this, you might not enjoy the 61T. In my experience, using Tangzu Sancai tips and Divinus Velvet tips alleviated this issue for me. The upside of the venting is excellent isolation, making the 61T ideal for traveling and commuting.

Drivability


The Juzear 61T is very easy to drive. A decent dongle DAC is sufficient. It doesn’t scale much with power and sources. I used the iBasso DC07Pro and iBasso DC07Pro with the Topping A70 Pro to test this IEM.

Frequency Response


I used Divinus Velvet and Tangzu Sancai tips for sound evaluation. The 61T has a bassy, warmish, laid-back sound signature that’s very pleasing for extended listening sessions.



Bass


The bass profile is sub-bass over mid-bass, with a smooth transition from sub-bass to mid-bass. The 61T has both good quality and quantity of bass, with solid dynamics and punch for the price. Is it class-leading bass? No, but it performs well within its price range. The sub-bass hits deep and low, with good rumble and texture. The mid-bass thump and slam are also very good. No complaints about the bass.

Mids


The mids are what give the 61T its signature laid-back feel. The lower mids have slight warmth, and the upper mids are slightly relaxed, making vocalists sound somewhat in the background. This can be good or bad depending on your preference. Those who like a laid-back presentation will love this IEM, while those who prefer more forward vocals may find it slightly congested. Personally, I find the vocals slightly congested and wish there was more energy in the 3-6k range to make the vocals stand out more. The 61T favors male vocals, which have a sense of heft and body, while female vocals lean toward the husky side and lack openness. The instruments sound natural enough.

Treble


The treble is the element that completes the overall sound signature. It’s smooth and well-extended, never harsh or overbearing, but it doesn’t lack detail. The treble extracts both micro and macro nuances very well. The BA tweeters are well-implemented, and the sense of air is excellent, preventing the IEM from sounding too closed-in or dark.

Detail Retrieval and Technical Performance


Despite its laid-back, musical sound signature, the 61T has very good detail retrieval, competing with IEMs slightly above its price class. It presents both macro and micro details well. The technical performance is solid, with very good imaging—you can easily pinpoint instruments in the mix. Instrument separation and layering are decent, but the stage is on the intimate side, feeling more closed-in. The front-to-back depth is decent but could be better.

Juzear 61T vs Binary Acoustics Dynaquattro


In terms of styling, the 61T has a more vibrant and out-there faceplate compared to the more professional look of the Dynaquattro. Personally, I’m drawn to the blingy look of the 61T.
I prefer the fit of the 61T, which is slightly more comfortable in my ear canal. However, the 61T has some pressure buildup compared to the Dynaquattro, which results in better isolation for the 61T.

When it comes to accessories, the Dynaquattro’s case has better build quality, but the 61T’s case is more pocketable. In terms of cables, the 61T’s cable is non-modular, while the Dynaquattro’s is modular. That said, I prefer the 61T’s cable—it’s supple yet feels very robust.

Now, on to sound: The Dynaquattro has a balanced sound signature, whereas the 61T leans toward a warm, laid-back signature.
The 61T has more bass quantity, but in terms of quality, I feel the Dynaquattro edges it out. The sub-bass on the Dynaquattro feels more rumbly, and the mid-bass thump and slam are slightly better.
In the mids, the 61T has warmer lower mids and more relaxed upper mids, favoring male vocals, while the Dynaquattro favors female vocals. The 61T has a thicker presentation.
When it comes to treble, I prefer the 61T—it’s smoother, with better extension and detail retrieval.

In terms of macro detail retrieval, both are on the same level, but the 61T edges out the Dynaquattro in micro detail by a slight margin. The Dynaquattro has a wider, more holographic soundstage, while the 61T’s stage feels more 2D. Instrument separation is also slightly better on the Dynaquattro. Layering and imaging performance is a toss-up between the two.

Conclusion


This is the first IEM I’ve tried from the brand Juzear, and it left quite an impression on me. I would love to test other products from the same brand. If you're looking for an IEM with a warm, laid-back sound signature, good detail retrieval, and solid technical performance, the 61T is worth considering. If you own neutral IEMs like the Letshuoer Cadenza 4 or Harman-tuned IEMs like the Simgot Supermix 4 or Truthear Nova, the Juzear 61T will complement them very well.

Shout-out to HiFiGo and Gadget Generations for providing me with this IEM for this review. I will not keep it after the review. All thoughts and opinions are mine and completely true to my findings and observations. No one paid or influenced me to write anything good or bad about the products.

Unaffiliated Link - JUZEAR Butterfly 61T 6BA+1DD Hi-Fi In-Ear Monitors ( $26.40 discount for 818 Sale )

Introduction

This is my first experience with an IEM from JUZEAR. My initial thoughts on this IEM are quite intriguing. I haven't had the chance to try or read about their earlier models, so my perspective comes from a fresh start. The current retail price is quite competitive, but since I haven't tested many recent IEMs in this price range, I won't be able to provide many comparisons in this review.

First Impressions

My initial thoughts on this IEM were quite positive. It delivers a fun and engaging experience across the entire frequency range. Everything about this IEM is designed to enhance the flavour, leaning more towards an exaggerated presentation rather than a natural or reference sound. The bass is punchy and commanding, the mids have a nice warmth, and the treble adds a delightful sparkle. However, as I explored my music collection, I realized it may not suit everyone’s taste. Some listeners will absolutely love this IEM, while others might find it lacking in certain areas, which I’ll delve into later in the review.

Let us dive into the tuning of the IEM in detail, to dissect the fundamental philosophies of the tuning and see if this will fit you or not.

Subbass (Nicely done)

• The delivery of the sub-bass is extremely clean
• Amplitude is moderately high
• The sub-bass Reaches deep and extends to 20hz beautifully
• The attack and decay are very analogue consisting of good timing
• The midbass fall-off is kinda steep which might affect a few genres
• The resolution is OK for the price, it is not under-detailed nor hyperdetailed as well
• Texturing is great, micro contracts are vividly projected
• Pushing a good amount of air/thud to give the songs an added exciting element to the already fun-centric signature

Bass (Not as huge in amplitude as the sub-bass)

• Midbass is not as authoratative as subbass
• Attack is fast but decay is analogue like
• Texturing is not that great
• Aptly detailed / you can hear intricacies
• Feels pushed back into the mix
• The midbass is very clean and separated from the sub-bass in terms of continuity
• Slight hint of warmth in the vocals, but if
• The thud/thump of air is a bit missing
• The combination of sub-bass and midbass is plenty for digital music

Upper Midrange (Very likeable to me)

• Very neutral until 7khz if not slightly safe
• Good details for the price in terms of note definition
• Good Texturing, the micro contrasts are really good for the price
• Very good spaciousness and the air around the voice
• Zero Fatigue can be observed even the treble might seem to affect this range for long listening sessions
• No Sibillance is there
• Boderlining provides the sparkle and sizzle but misses a bit
• Very Good Timber especially in the upper-mid range for the price
• Separation is very good too for the price

Lower midrange (Special Sauce)

• Overall neutral in the frequency spectrum
• A hint of warmth can be observed (this is heavily dependent on the canal size of your ears)
• The treble compliments the lower mids in a very good way, in terms of providing a sense of details
• Very Good in resolution, micro details are good for the price
• Textuxing is well done, micro-contrasts are apt for the price
• The timber is hint exaggerated towards richness in tonality and can't be defined as neutral
• Zero Dryness/Roughness can be found
• The space is decent and the vocalists seem upfront and uplifted from the mix

Treble (Make or Break)

• The is some lack of resolution after 10Khz
• The lower treble on the other hand is a lot more detailed due to the fact that a few peaks are implemented there
• The treble feels snappy enough & not overly speedy
• The air extension is somehow managed very nicely
• Overall the transient nature is there
• I EQed the 10khz range and it is giving me a better trailing edge and micro-contrast
• The presence range felt a bit missing due to such an excellent treble
• The tonality aside timbre is not that great
• There are two to three peaks that affect the organicness

Soundstage

• Somewhat intimate and great for music intended for that
• Reverberations are not believable enough
• Not heady by any means
• Stretched Left to Right in stereo, which gives an added advantage of more snappy and clear stereo imaging

Imaging

• Stereo imaging is very good
• Pinpoint accuracy can be achieved in the stereo-width
• The depth perception is OK for the price
• Height is very average for the price

Resolution

• Very good in details and micro-contrasts
• The overall resolution is good too for the price

Dynamics

• It is as good as it can get under $250
• The speed is natural and yet snappy, doesn't feel very digital. (By digital I mean dynamics produced by vintage drivers)

Comparison

Aful Performer 5 - This IEM is better in every aspect except bass delivery & controlled timber characteristics. The punch and slam Aful Performer 5 offers is very well implemented. Apart from that everything is better in this IEM.

Intuaura Splendor 2 - This IEM sounds a bit more textured and the treble provides a bit of excitement here and there. Both are exceptional value propositions. 61T is a bit more energetic and more exciting.

EA1000 Fermat - I prefer it over simply because of the Tip and Source you have to shuffle through to get rid of that lower treble & upper mids shout. Fermat offers a more cohesive soundstage, whereas this one is more unique. Although timber is better in Fermat I would always take 61T for the special sauce it provides instead of sounding shouty in the uppermids.

Hype 2 - Soundstage and tech is better in hype 2. Else everything from tonality to resolution is better in 61T.

Conclusion

I enjoyed this IEM so much that I decided to buy it for my friend at full price. However, it may not suit everyone's taste since it doesn't deliver a very authentic timbre. Still, at this price, I think it's a fantastic option for certain genres like Hip Hop and Digital Music. It definitely deserves some consideration and is worth testing out before purchasing this price range.

Juzear is a relatively unknown Chinese brand with a rather familiar story. An independently crafted brand bringing together a team of seasoned audio engineers and equipped with advanced production facilities. Their mission is to become the beloved brand of audio enthusiasts. They continuously strive to enhance and optimize in terms of craftsmanship, materials, sound experience, and value for money. Let's see if they have something new to contribute to a very crowded market.



Juzear Butterfly 61T

The Juzear Butterfly 61T is a multi-driver hybrid IEM that features one dynamic and six balanced armature drivers per side. A 10mm composite carbon-based coated PU folded membrane DD unit is used for the bass and mid-bass. This DD is combined with multiple BA units from Knowles and some customized 31736 units for a high-res midrange and treble reproduction.

The drivers are combined together with a carefully designed 3D-printed acoustic cavity structure. The shells have properly designed duct tubes that go right from the driver’s mouth to the nozzle bringing in pure sound performance from each driver unit without any interference from the other units. This design also helps in reducing overall THD.



Non Audio stuff

The ear-shells are made from 3D printed resin material in black color combined with CNC machined abalone shell face covers that are decorated with iridescent butterfly wings that look very attractive. The design of the ear-shells is a semi-custom one with anatomically engraved curves that follow the shape of the human ear. The ear-shells are not very bulky, they weigh 6.6g per piece and they fit comfortably and securely without protruding too much outside the ear. Passive noise attenuation is very good too. One thing to note is that the diameter of the sound tube is rather large so you may struggle a little bit while fitting the ear-tips.

The cable

The included cable is a well made one, it is a four core braided design that uses 18AWG 6N silver-plated OFC wires and features a 2-pin detachable interface. It is sturdy, it doesn't get tangled and has very low microphonic noise. However, it doesn't have a modular plug but you have the option to order it with the plug of your choice.



Accessories

The package includes a high quality carrying case with a side zipper, three pairs of silicone ear-tips, a pair of memory foam tips and another three pairs of ear-tips that look like a SpinFit clone.



Power needs

The Juzear Butterfly 61T is rated at 46Ω with a 115dB of sensitivity so they are not that hard to drive while they have the benefit of being immune to source noise. For this evaluation, I have mainly used the iBasso DX180 and the FiiO M23 where low gain was more than sufficient for powering the earphones.

Needs careful positioning

The Juzear Butterfly 61T requires careful positioning inside your ear in order to avoid occlusion of the ear-tips which will mute the sound and kill the bass. You have to experiment and better opt for a semi-loose and not very snug fit. If you find the sound muffled then your fit is too tight and you should readjust.



Audio stuff

At first listen, the Juzear Butterfly 61T sounds like another Harman target variant but after a while you discover that it has a couple of hidden aces under its sleeve that make it sound really unique and different from the crowd.

The sub-bass is very deep and generously extended but then deviates from the usual Harman target curve as Juzear has decided to further emphasize the bass and mid-bass. The bass is definitely louder than the mid-range but it is not that overpowering as to make it suffocate and also allows plenty of room for the treble to shine. This kind of bass-emphasized but not bass-head tuning works well with almost all kinds of music and will reward you with a powerful, rumbling and visceral bass experience while you will still be able to enjoy clean mids and highs.

However, from a critical and reference point of view, the whole bass range is way more emphasized above neutrality and as a result it doesn't sound tonally accurate. All bass instruments of the symphony orchestra are reproduced with more intensity than the ideal and sound a little bit out of tune. Not that much to make them sound unrealistic but still far from correct. As an example, you can listen to the following track where the two solo cellos sound out of pitch and overpower the organ that struggles to get barely audible at the basso continuo line.

The bass of the Juzear Butterfly is powerful and impactful, weighty and full bodied with good speed and control but not that clear and well defined, lacking in layering when it is called to reproduce a complex bass line. However, it is still competitive from a technical point of view and thoroughly enjoyable with all other kinds of music.

The tuning surprises continue to the mid-range where Juzear opted for an even and balanced approach without rolling off the main portion of the mids, neither using excessive upper mid-range emphasis. The timbre here is accurate and realistic, instruments and voices sound well balanced and are reproduced with evenness, equal importance and great coherency. The temperature of the sound is mildly warm, cozy and pleasurable with plenty of colorful harmonies. The textures are full bodied and rounded, quite lush and nowhere lean or dry. The mid-range doesn't lack in resolution and definition, it is characterized by excellent clarity despite the emphasized bass. Smooth and enjoyable, the 61T will appeal to people who appreciate intense mid-range without the usual upper mid-range harshness and sibilant glare.

If you think that we are left out of surprises, think twice, because Juzear also steers away from the beaten track when it comes to the treble where we can hear a smooth and controlled tuning, avoiding any excessive peaks.
Somebody could rightfully argue about the treble being rolled off and lacking in extension or sparkle, however the highs have the right amount of energy that is needed to avoid dullness or darkness. This is not the most luminous or detailed and airy set of earphones but on the other hand it has a safe and tasteful tuning that makes it sound smooth, forgiving and devoid of any brightness or harshness. Very musical and enjoyable, the only deal breaker is the somewhat metallic and artificial timbre that is audible in certain overtones.

For an earphone with such a controlled upper mid-range and treble, it comes as a surprise that it has a very open and spacious soundstage with a rather precise imaging. The soundstage expands both in the horizontal and vertical directions, making for a convincing, layered and holographic listening experience without any traces of congestion even during the most demanding music tracks.

Comparison with the ISN Audio H50

There is no point in doing lengthy comparisons with competitive earphones that follow the Harman target and its variants because we all know exactly how they sound. An interesting alternative to the Juzear Butterfly 61T, that also bravely follows a unique tuning is the $295 ISN Audio H50. They do sound quite different though, the H50 has less emphasized bass, more prominent mid-range and even smoother upper mid-range but I am just mentioning it as a very interesting option for people who seek something else.



Conclusion

Smooth, a touch warm and very engaging, the Juzear Butterfly 61T is an excellent option for people who like strong and powerful bass combined with seductive mids and controlled highs. A special tuning that steers away from the mainstream and has indeed something new to add in a market that is flooded with earphones that follow pretty much the same target curve or its close variants, that not all people like. It's always good to have options and Juzear Butterfly 61T is a very interesting one that is well worth considering.

The review sample was kindly provided free of charge in exchange for an honest review.

The price of the Juzear Butterfly 61T is $219.99 and you can buy it from HiFiGo. (non affiliate link)

“Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee”

~~Cassius Clay Jr. a.k.a. Muhammad Ali, American Former Undisputed Heavyweight Champion.


JUZEAR in which previously known as JUNEAR AUDIO is one of the few audio brands that I usually encountered when I scrolling randomly on Aliexpress and Taobao to look some interesting IEMs and other audio products. If my memory serves right, JUNEAR released a hybrid driver set before and its driver set-up consisting of planar magnetic driver and balanced armature drivers which are quite an interesting implementation.



After that particular model that I've mentioned a while ago, JUZEAR also released the Flame and 41T which are probably the predecessors models of the set that will be featured here in this review article and all of them are also of a hybrid driver configuration. What I have here right now is JUZEAR's latest midrange set, The JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T and like its preceding models, it also has a multiple hybrid driver set-up.



On its internal part with its multi-driver configuration, it has a single dynamic driver and 6 balanced armature drivers. The dynamic driver is a 10mm with a polyurethane diaphragm coated with composite carbon which is known to have excellent mechanical and thermal properties that can be applied on such driver technologies in which can deliver a slamming, more dynamic and snappier bass. The balanced armature drivers which handles the rest of the frequency range, from midrange up to the ultra-high frequency are composed of two (2) Knowles ED series (mostly likely ED-29689) and four (4) custom ones (probably some modified Bellsing 31736) which give a smooth, rich and detailed sound. The drivers were connected with acoustic tubes that ensured seamless transmission for smooth , clean and clear sonic waves which also provided a good passive crossover for better separation on its frequencies.




The drivers along with some of its internal components are encapsulated in a 3D-moulded medical-grade resin shell in a UIEM-type pattern form. The shells are on a large size profile with an abalone colourway with some Polynesian-inspired designs etched on its faceplate. It has a brass nozzle and it implements a 0.78mm bi-pin connector as its interlocking mechanism for its detachable cable.



As for fitting and comfort, this set is quite comfortable to wear as it rests well into my lugholes for a long listening session and it gives me excellent passive noise isolation. There are some reports that this set tends to have some driver flex on some users but I didn't experience any of them in my ears even on the balanced bore stock ear tips.




The stock cable that was included here is a thick four-core high purity 18 AWG 6N silver-plated copper wiring with a straight gold-plated 3.5mm single-ended termination plug on its end, but you can choose a 4.4mm balanced one upon ordering. The cable seems to be very flexible, firmly braided and doesn't encounter any microphonics at all.



The JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T is fully-packed with some quality accessories included in its packaging box. Here are the following contents we can find inside:

• Pair of JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T IEM transducers.
• Stock cable
• Hardbound nylon storage case
• Three (3) pairs of opaque white balanced bore silicone ear tips in different standard sizes
• Three (3) pairs of grey coloured balanced bore silicone ear tips in different standard sizes.
• Two (2) pairs of memory foam ear tips
• Paperwork like instruction manual, warranty card and Q.C. stub.
• Cleaning cloth

For a multi-driver configuration that this set has, it is moderately sensitive that it can be driven by some devices with decent power output. If properly amplified, this one will have a full range sound with some good dynamics on it.



To determine its tonal feature, it appears that JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T has a “warmish-neutral” sound profile as it has a well-balanced and almost linear presentation in all frequencies.


(FR graph was provided by @baskingshark , credits to him on his effort)


LOWS/BASS:

The first thing I noticed about the bass presentation of this set is that it sounds quite balanced and that both sub bass and mid bass parts are equally presented. Sub bass has a good rumbling on its end while the mid bass has a sufficient texture to deliver a sufficient punchy and tactual bass response.

The sub bass rumble and reverberation are clearly perceived as they were generated from sub bass-focused like low tuned double bass and bass guitars, synthesisers and drum machines from some tracks of certain genres like classical, synth-pop and old school hip-hop. The mid bass has an adequate texture for better note weight definition for bass-clef instruments and deep male vocals. Bass guitars and double bass have enough weight with rasping and resonant sound from them while bass kick drums have its full and pounding sound every stroke. On some male vocals particularly on bass and bass-baritone, they have a sufficient volume and depth for their distinctive dark, rumbling and resonating deep tone voices.


MIDRANGE:

The midrange presentation of this set is quite almost linear but it has some enough warmth to give a texture and a tad richness on vocals and instruments to sound quite organic with some ample clarity and detailed sound in this certain section of its frequency range.

On the majority of male vocal types, baritones have a smooth, plush and warm sound on their vocals, while tenors have a robust, ringing and brassy sound in their voices, and then, countertenors have an emotive, graceful and tender sound on their voices. As for female vocals, Contraltos have a rich, lush and an ample depth on their vocals, mezzo-sopranos seem to have fiery and velvety voices on them and sopranos have silky and gleaming sound on their vocals.

On instruments, nearly all of them sound natural in most tracks that I've tested to determine tonal colour of each instrument, but I noticed some odd timbre in some types of instruments particularly in brass, strings and woodwinds. About string instruments, acoustic guitars have an ample crisp and lingering sound, cellos have a warm and lustrous sound although sometimes it sounds a bit too mellow in my liking and violins have lively and vibrant but in some instances, they sound a bit austere. Brasses like trumpets, trombones and horns, they sound sonorous, dramatic and velvety respectively but sometimes they sound either distant and a tad muffled. On woodwinds, piccolos sound clear and light, concert flutes have rich and graceful sound, clarinets have mellow and rich sound, and then saxophones have mild and sonorous sound, although in some occasional cases, they sound either hollow, weak and screechy. As for percussion instruments, snares have precise and clear sound, tom-toms have warm and resonant sound, field drums sound full and sonorous and kettledrums have a rounded and substantial sound. Meanwhile, pianos have an even and balanced tone as it has a sweet, mellow and clear sound on them.


HIGHS/TREBLE:

The treble response of this one is smoother and well-balanced. It has a proper accentuated upper-mids and presence treble section just to have a sufficient clarity and definition on vocals and instruments with any sign of harshness or stridency.

It has a good air extension and a good intensity on its sparkle for a substantial amount of harmonics. Cymbals have glistening and brilliant sound, hi-hats have shortened soughing tone on their distinctive chicky sound, celestas are brimming with a velvety sound and glockenspiels have a shimmering sound.


SOUNDSTAGE, IMAGING AND OTHER TECHNICALITIES:

The overall sound/speaker stage of this one is quite roomy as it has a wide lateral span, good height reach and immersive depth in both front and rear within my aural perception.

On stereo imaging, it projects a 3D-like atmospheric sound field in a multi-layered sections of tonal dynamics and frequencies of instruments and vocals with a good separation on each part where I can accurately locate its specific placement. Playing complex multi-instrumental tracks like orchestra and jazz genres will not be an issue of this set.

The multi-driver set-up of the BUTTERFLY 61T has very cohesive performance that harmoniously works well across its intended frequency range. The dynamic driver of the one is quite responsive and delivers a sufficiently fast transient speed while the balanced armature drivers conveys a detail and clear sonic qualities without any distortion although in some cases, it gives off a bit too energetic and buzzing sound.

Resolution capabilities of this set is quite resolving in both macro-dynamics and micro-dynamics as it has a more solid note density and compression on the former and a sharp definition on micro-detail retrieval that extracts nuances and details from an audio track.


PEER COMPARISONS:

LETSHUOER CADENZA 4

• Like the BUTTERFLY 61T, this set also has a hybrid driver configuration.
• It has a beryllium-coated diaphragm dynamic driver on bass frequency and uses a combination of Knowles and Sonion balanced armature drivers for the rest of the remaining frequency range.
• It uses a composite shell chassis as its encasement.
• This set is also pretty well-accessorised and it has a modular termination plug feature on its stock cable.
• It has a balanced-neutral sound signature as it has rumbly and tighter bass response, less warmer yet retains some balanced and neutral midrange and similar smooth treble response with less airy extension compared to BUTTERFLY 61T.
• On technical capabilities, while it has a less wider sound/speaker stage compared to the BUTTERFLY 61T but it has more correct and natural tonal tonality in terms of timbre and colouration.

KIWI EARS QUINTET

• The QUINTET offers four types of drivers consisting of dynamic driver, balanced armatures, piezoelectric driver and flat panel driver a.k.a. micro planar driver.
• It was encapsulated in a composite shell structure made of acrylic resin in its cavity base and a metal alloy faceplate.
• Unlike the BUTTERFLY 61T, this one is rather meagre in regards to inclusions and product packaging itself.
• KIWI QUINTET has a mild U-shaped sound signature which makes it a bit more coloured as it has more elevation on bass and treble frequencies.
• While it has more incisive and precise bass response, a linear and transparent midrange and a tad brighter treble response but it has less texture in its mid bass, a crisper and energetic sound on some strings and female vocals and some occurrences of sibilance on sibilant-laden tracks.
• On technical performance, while it has a wide lateral span similar to the BUTTERFLY 61T, but it has less depth that makes it less enveloping and too flat in my liking. I also noticed that it has less impressive layering capability too.

As I conclude this product review, the JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T is quite an impressive set on its own right given that there are some things that need some improvements like an inconsistent tonal, timbre quality, lack of modular features on its premium-grade stock cable and some reported driver flex from other users that causes occlusion effect on their ears. To whom will I recommend this IEM? If you are a type of listener who isn't a fan of typical Harman-ish type of tuning and loves technical performance above all else then this set is a match in heaven for you.


The JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T is currently available exclusively on HIFIGO, check out the unaffiliated link that I've provided below.


LINK: https://hifigo.com/products/juzear-butterfly-61t

SPECIFICATION:

MODEL: JUZEAR BUTTERFLY 61T
IMPEDANCE: 46Ω
SENSITIVITY: 115dB
FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 20Hz – 20KHz
CABLE LENGTH: 1.2m
PIN TYPE: 0.78 2-PIN CONNECTOR
PLUG TYPE: 3.5mm
DRIVER UNIT(S): (1) DYNAMIC DRIVER + (5) BALANCED ARMATURE DRIVERS


TRACKS TESTED: ( * = 16-bit FLAC, ** = 24-bit FLAC, *'* = MQA, '*' = DSD, *'= .WAV)

Alison Krauss -When You Say Nothing At All *
Jade Wiedlin - Blue Kiss**
Led Zeppelin - When The Levee Breaks **
Mountain - Mississippi Queen *
Queen - Killer Queen **
Guns N' Roses - Patience *'*
Eric Clapton - Tears in Heaven '*'
Sergio Mendes- Never Gonna Let You Go '*'
Pearl Jam - Daughter **
Roselia - Hidamari Rhodonite *
Assassin - Fight (To Stop The Tyranny)*
Celtic Frost- Visual Aggression *
New Order - Blue Monday *
The Corrs- What Can I do (unplugged version) *
Jimi Hendrix Experience - Voodoo Child *
The Madness- Buggy Trousers *
Metallica - Motorbreath **
Mariah Carey- Always Be My Baby *
Destiny's Child - Say My Name *
Malice Mizer- Au Revoir *
Mozart - Lacrimosa *
New York Philharmonic Orchestra - Dvorak- Symphony 9 " From the New World." *
Eva Cassidy - Fields of Gold (Sting cover)*
Michael Jackson - Give In To Me *
Exciter - Violence and Force *
Diana Krall - Stop This World **
Debbie Gibson - Foolish Beat *'*
The Sisters of Mercy – Lucretia My Reflection**
Suzanne Vega – Luka **
Lauren Christy – Steep *
Ottoman Mehter - Hucum Marsi *
Diana Damrau - Mozart: Die Zauberflöte*
Type O Negative - Black No.1 *
Felix Ayo - Vivaldi: Presto **
Three Tenors - Nessum Dorma *
Mercyful Fate - Witches' Dance *

P.S.

I am not affiliated to JUZEAR nor receive monetary incentives and financial gains as they provide me a review unit for an exchange of factual and sincere feedback from yours truly.

Once again, I would like to send my gratitude to Ms. Alice Xie of HIFIGO for providing this review unit. I truly appreciate her generosity and trust towards me and other reviewers.

Preface:

I would like to thank HiFiGo for sending this unit as part of the review tour.

You can purchase 61T at the following link (not an affiliate link):
https://hifigo.com/products/juzear-butterfly-61t

Also, I’m not a seasoned reviewer, so whatever I say is purely my observations and your results may vary.

I’m not the one to usually focus on specifications and numbers. I focus more on how happy I am with the equipment’s sound and that’s it.

Disclaimer: All impressions and opinions in this review are my own. I have not been paid or compensated by HiFiGo, Juzear or any other entity for this review. My assessment is based solely on my personal experience with the product.

Sources used:

• Dita Navigator
• D16 Taipan
• Qudelix T-71
• RME ADI-2 Pro FS R
• iFi Go Pods

Introduction:

Juzear, a relatively new name in the audio world, has quickly established itself with releases like the Juzear 41T, which was well-received for its engaging sound and solid build quality. With the 61T, Juzear aims to up the ante, offering a more refined sound signature and improved technical performance at a competitive price point.

Design of the IEM and Cable:​

The Juzear 61T sports a sleek and modern design, featuring a 3D-printed shell that feels both sturdy and premium in hand. The faceplates are crafted from iridescent Abalone, designed to mimic butterfly wings, giving them a unique and visually appealing aesthetic. The IEMs are slightly larger, likely to accommodate the seven-driver hybrid setup (six balanced armatures and one dynamic driver), but they manage to maintain a streamlined profile.





The included cable is robust, with a bit of bulk due to its thicker jacketing, but it’s well-constructed and durable. The cable's flexibility is decent, and it comes with both 3.5mm and 4.4mm termination options, adding versatility for different setups. The connectors and hardware are finished in a matching gunmetal gray, complementing the IEMs' overall design.

Fit and Comfort of the IEM:​

Given their size, the Juzear 61T fits comfortably in the ear, thanks to the well-thought-out curvature of the shell. However, the nozzle was on the larger size and I also did experience some occlusion effects, where the pressure build-up inside the ear canal caused a slight discomfort. After experimenting with various ear tips, the Asla Sedna Light Tips provided the best fit, alleviating the pressure a little while maintaining a secure and comfortable seal.





Sound:
Sub Bass:
The Juzear 61T delivers an impressive sub-bass response, characterized by deep rumble and satisfying impact. The sub-bass is prominent but controlled, avoiding any overshadowing of the mid-bass or bleeding into the midrange. The dynamic driver does a commendable job of rendering low-end frequencies with authority, making these IEMs particularly enjoyable for bass-heavy genres.

Mid Bass:
The mid-bass adds a rich, warm character to the overall sound, providing a satisfying punch to kick drums and bass guitars. The transition from sub-bass to mid-bass is smooth, although there’s a slight bloom that adds warmth but can sometimes affect the clarity of the lower mids. This tuning choice gives the 61T a full-bodied sound, enhancing the overall listening experience for most tracks.

Mid Range:
The midrange is slightly recessed, as expected with a U-shaped signature, but it still manages to hold its own. Vocals and instruments are rendered with decent clarity and presence, though there’s a touch of congestion that can make the mids feel less open. Despite this, the timbre remains fairly natural, with the upper mids carrying enough energy to keep vocals lively without becoming shouty.

Treble:
The treble on the 61T is detailed and well-extended, providing a nice balance of sparkle and air without veering into harshness. High-frequency details like cymbal strikes and string instruments are crisp and articulate, though not as smooth as some higher-end models. The treble extension helps in adding a sense of airiness to the soundstage, making the overall listening experience more immersive.

Tone and Timbre:
The tone and timbre of the Juzear 61T are generally natural and lifelike, with a slight warmth due to the mid-bass emphasis. While the timbre is good, the congestion in the midrange and slight roughness in the treble prevent it from achieving the level of refinement found in higher-priced competitors.

Staging, Instrument Separation, and Layering:
The soundstage of the 61T is wider than average for its price range, offering a good sense of space. Instrument separation is excellent, allowing you to pick out individual elements within a complex mix easily. The layering is also well-done, with each instrument occupying its distinct position within the sound field, contributing to a more three-dimensional listening experience.

Detail Retrieval:
Detail retrieval on the Juzear 61T is strong, especially considering its price point. It captures micro-details effectively, although it doesn’t quite reach the level of some higher-end models. The detail in the midrange is good, but it could benefit from a bit more transparency to really stand out.

Comparison:

61T vs DaVinci vs DynaQuattro:

Sub Bass

61T : The sub-bass is robust and provides a solid foundation, with ample energy that doesn’t overshadow the rest of the mix. It offers good extension and dynamics, making it suitable for genres that benefit from a strong low-end presence.

DaVinci: The DaVinci also delivers significant sub-bass, but it tends to have a more pronounced thud rather than a deep rumble. This characteristic can sometimes dominate the overall sound profile, especially in bass-heavy tracks.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro offers an exceptionally deep and textured sub-bass, characterized by a rich, meaty presence. It strikes a balance between providing impactful bass without overwhelming the other frequencies, making it ideal for a variety of genres.

Order of my pick for Sub Bass:

DynaQuattro > 61T > DaVinci

Mid Bass

61T : The mid-bass is impactful and adds weight to kick drums and other percussive elements. However, it can sometimes bleed into the lower mid-range, slightly veiling details.

DaVinci: The mid-bass on the DaVinci is tighter and more controlled, providing a punchy experience without significant smearing. It manages to keep the bass presence strong without overwhelming the mid-range.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro’s mid-bass is well-controlled and delivers excellent slam and impact. Its dynamic drivers ensure that the mid-bass remains tight and detailed, avoiding any unwanted bleed into the lower mid-range.

Order of my pick for Mid Bass:

DynaQuattro > DaVinci > 61T

Lower Mid Range

61T : The lower mid-range benefits from the added warmth of the mid-bass, providing a rich and full-bodied sound. However, the slight bass bleed can affect detail retrieval in this region.

DaVinci: The DaVinci’s lower mid-range is cleaner and more neutral. It avoids the bass bleed issue, resulting in clearer and more detailed mid-range performance.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro offers a flat and natural lower mid-range, ensuring that male vocals and instruments sound realistic and well-defined. The transition from bass to mid-range is smooth, maintaining clarity and detail.

Order of my pick for Lower Mid Range:

DynaQuattro > DaVinci > 61T

Upper Mid Range

61T : The upper mid-range is well-tuned to ensure vocals have enough energy without becoming shouty. This contributes to a pleasant and engaging vocal presentation.

DaVinci: The DaVinci excels in the upper mid-range, offering a beautifully natural and refined sound. Vocals and instruments in this range are rendered with exceptional clarity and realism.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro shines in the upper mid-range, offering a forward and detailed presentation. Vocals and instruments are highlighted without sounding shouty, making it ideal for vocal-centric genres.

Order of my pick for Upper Mid Range:

DaVinci > DynaQuattro > 61T

Lower Treble

61T : The lower treble is energetic but controlled, ensuring that higher-pitched instruments and cymbals have a good presence without becoming overly bright or fatiguing.

Dunu DaVinci: The lower treble on the DaVinci can come across as slightly dry and scratchy, though this can be mitigated with tip rolling. It maintains a good balance but isn’t as smooth as some might prefer.

DynaQuattro : The lower treble on the DynaQuattro is detailed and clear, offering a good balance between energy and smoothness. It avoids harshness and sibilance, providing a pleasant listening experience for higher-pitched instruments and cymbals.

Order of my pick for Lower Treble:

61T > DynaQuattro > DaVinci

Upper Treble

61T : The upper treble extends well, providing air and shimmer to the sound. It reveals fine details and contributes to a sense of openness.

DaVinci: The upper treble is somewhat relaxed but still provides good detail. It avoids harshness, but the overall treble timbre might not be as refined as 61T.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro offers a balanced upper treble which is detailed enough to provide clarity without any hints of sibilance or harshness. It does however sometimes leave you wanting some sparkle and air.

Order of my pick for Upper Treble:

61T > DynaQuattro > DaVinci

Timbre

61T : Timbre is generally natural, though there are slight compromises due to the bass bleed into the mid-range. Instruments and vocals sound realistic, but not as transparent as DaVinci.

DaVinci: The DaVinci offers a more natural and cohesive timbre, with instruments and vocals sounding lifelike. Its balanced armature drivers contribute to a more refined and accurate representation.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro excels in timbre, offering a highly natural and realistic sound. The use of dynamic drivers ensures that instruments and vocals sound authentic and lifelike, making it a standout in this category.

Order of my pick for Timbre:

DynaQuattro > DaVinci > 61T

Staging

61T : The soundstage is wide and provides a good sense of space, making it feel expansive. Instrument placement is mostly accurate, giving a solid sense of where each sound is coming from, though it may not be as immersive as DynaQuattro.

DaVinci: The DaVinci’s soundstage, while slightly more intimate, does well in imaging and separation. It provides a three-dimensional feel, allowing listeners to pinpoint the exact location of instruments and vocals within the sound field. This creates a more immersive listening experience.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro offers a wide and expansive soundstage with excellent depth. It provides a spacious listening experience, with precise imaging and separation that allows for an immersive and engaging sound.

Order of my pick for Staging:

DynaQuattro > 61T > DaVinci

Instrument Separation and Layering

61T : Instrument separation is very good, especially for its price point. The multiple drivers help in achieving clear delineation between different sounds, though the slight bass bleed can occasionally muddy the lower mids.

DaVinci: The DaVinci excels in instrument separation and layering. Each instrument is clearly defined, and the layering provides a sense of depth that enhances the overall listening experience.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro offers exceptional instrument separation and layering, with each sound distinctly placed within the soundstage. The use of four dynamic drivers ensures that complex tracks are handled with ease, providing clarity and depth.

Order of my pick for Separation and Layering:

DynaQuattro > 61T > DaVinci

Detail Retrieval

61T : Detail retrieval is strong, particularly in the treble and upper mid-range. However, the bass bleed into the lower mid-range can obscure some finer details, making it less transparent compared to higher-end models.

DaVinci: The DaVinci offers exceptional clarity in the mid range however falls short in the micro details compared to DynaQuattro and 61T due to the extremely tamed treble.

DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro does really well in detail retrieval, offering a good level of clarity and precision across all frequencies. Its ability to capture micro-details and nuances makes it a top performer across all genres of music despite it not having the best extension like 61T.

Order of my pick for Detail Retrieval:

Subjective : DynaQuattro > 61T > DaVinci
Objective : 61T > DynaQuattro > DaVinci

Conclusion of comparison:

All three IEMs—Juzear 61T, Dunu DaVinci, and Binary Acoustic DynaQuattro have few similarities but cater to different listening preferences and price points.

Juzear 61T: Priced around $220, it offers a robust and dynamic sound with a U-shaped signature emphasizing sub-bass and treble. While it excels in providing a wide soundstage and good instrument separation, it does have some issues with bass bleed affecting mid-range detail. It’s a strong contender in the sub-$300 category, particularly for those who enjoy a bass-forward sound.

Dunu DaVinci: At $300, the DaVinci delivers a more refined and balanced sound with a lot of focus on Sub-bass. It does well in imaging, instrument separation, and detail retrieval, though its bass dominance can sometimes crowd out the details. The treble timbre might require some tip rolling to optimize, but overall, it offers a decent level of technical performance. This IEM is ideal for those who prioritize a natural and cohesive sound with excellent clarity and realism.

Binary Acoustic DynaQuattro: The DynaQuattro, priced around $260, stands out with its use of four dynamic drivers, offering a rich, meaty bass, natural timbre, and expansive soundstage. It provides excellent detail retrieval and instrument separation, making it suitable for a wide range of music genres. This IEM is perfect for listeners who prefer a balanced yet engaging sound with a forward mid-range and detailed treble.





Conclusion:
The Juzear 61T is a compelling option in the competitive sub-$300 IEM market. It delivers a well-rounded sound signature with deep bass, detailed treble, and a spacious soundstage, all wrapped up in a comfortable and stylish design. While it has its quirks, like slight midrange congestion and a bit of treble roughness, it still stands out as a strong contender, especially for bass lovers and those who enjoy a lively, energetic sound.

It’s easy to be stuck in a rut and feel cynical that nothing ever changes when you see the same old thing over and over again. The hyper-competitive “mid-fi” market of the IEM world can induce this feeling in its followers and fans alike, due to the rapid and frequent releases of mostly good but somewhat homogeneous IEMs.

But every once in a while, something comes along to shake things up. Today, we’ll take a look at the Juzear 61T “Butterfly,” one of my recent surprises.

Forewords​

• What I look for in an IEM is immersion. I want to feel the orchestra around my head, track individual instruments, and hear all of their textures and details. I’m not picky about tonality, as long as it is not make the orchestra, violin, cellos, and pianos sound wrong.
• I rate IEMs within with a consistent scale from 1 (Poor) to 3 (Good) to 5 (Outstanding). An overall ranking of 3/5 or above is considered positive.
• Ranking list and measurement database are on my IEM review blog.
• The terminology for subjective impressions in this review is based on the Audio Wheel for reproduced sound defined in the technical report ITU-R BS.2399-0
• This review is based on a review sample from Hifigo (Thank you!). I have no affiliation with or financial interest in Hifigo or Juzear.
• The unit retails for $220 at the time this review was published. Unaffiliated link: Hifigo web store

---

General Information​

Juzear 61T is a 7-driver hybrid IEM equipped with a 10mm dynamic driver for bass, accompanied by 2 Knowles balanced armature (BA) drivers from the ED series for midrange, and 4 custom 31736 BA drivers handling treble frequencies. Unfortunately, the crossover design of the 61T remains undisclosed.

The drivers are housed within a 3D-printed acoustic cavity structure situated inside the shells. This unique architecture aims to seamlessly connects the drivers directly to the stainless steel nozzle, optimizing sound transmission.

---

Non-sound Aspects​

Packaging and accessories: The 61T comes with an average set of packaging and accessories. While the box design isn’t overly decorated, it features a stylish look thanks to the IEM photo on the front. Inside, you’ll find custom foam cutouts holding various ear tips including foam and in-house silicone ones (resembling Spin-fit), a nice cable, carrying case, and microfiber cloth.















Ear pieces design: The 61T’s earpieces are thick yet medium-sized and do not apply much pressure on the ears. However, the nozzles are medium-length but rather large.







Fit, comfort and isolation: The large nozzles make it challenging to fit the 61T deeply into your ears. When worn shallowly, the IEM offers good comfort even during long sessions. Juzear claims a full 26dB noise reduction, which is surprisingly high. Unfortunately, this effective noise isolation also results in slight driver flex (the crinkling sound when re-seating the IEM). No pressure build-up was experienced.











Ear tips recommendation: Due to the nozzle size, you have two choices for wearing the 61T: opt for medium ear tips for a shallow fit or use smaller ones for a deep fit. I prefer the former as it enhances the soundstage and gives the treble more bite. My recommended ear tip for the 61T is Velvet Wide Bore in medium size.

---

Sonic Performance​

Testing setup:

• Sources: HiBy R3II, iBasso DX300, FiiO K7, L&P W4
• Cable: Stock cable with 3.5mm output
• Ear tips: Velvet Wide Bore

The subjective impression is captured using the lexicon in the Sound Wheel below. I’ll clarify the terminology as I use them. If you want to see more details of the lexicon and related reference, please have a look at the technical report ITU-R BS.2399-0.



Timbre: It is helpful to think of an IEM as a filter that highlights or subdues different parts of the incoming audio signal. This effect can be measured objectively by the squiggly lines below, called Frequency Response (FR) graphs, which measure how loud an IEM is at different frequencies from 20Hz (bass) to 20kHz (upper treble). Subjectivity is how your ears and brain interpret the effect of that filter on your music and decide whether it is “enjoyable.” There are some “rules of thumb” when it comes to tonality, but most interesting IEMs usually bend the rules masterfully.



Figure shows the frequency response of XXXX against the Harman in-ear target. Measurements were done with an IEC-711-compliant coupler and might only be compared with other measurements from this same coupler. Above 8kHz, the measurement likely does not match the response at the ear drum. Visit my graph database for more comparisons.

The overall tonality of 61T can be described as “neutral-warm with bass boost.” The tonality of 61T sounds full, meaning it has full extension towards both ends of the spectrum. Additionally, its tonality appears homogeneous, offering an even-ness across the spectrum without any perceived holes or gaps.

The midrange exhibits a warm tilt due to the 2dB lift from the lower midrange. The upper midrange is boosted correctly and peaks at the right place (between 2.5kHz and 3kHz). The amount of upper midrange boost, at 8dB rather than the full 12.5dB dictated by Harman and Diffuse Field targets, contributes to a cozy and easy-to-listen experience without sacrificing naturalness or realism.



The treble of 61T is smooth and evenly extended into the upper treble region. It is not emphasized, sitting behind the midrange and bass but not muted or dull. The treble is well-controlled without any sibilance or harshness.

The bass of 61T is powerful, slightly louder than the midrange. Bass extends deeply into the sub-bass range, and the bass line feels thick due to 61T’s decision not to hollow out the midbass to accentuate the midrange. As a result, the bass feels rich and realistic. However, those expecting a razor-clean bass line may find the bass of 61T slightly boomy.



Next, let’s discuss how 61T presents various types of voices and instruments in some test tracks. The first track is Shivers by Ed Sheeran, which is invaluable for checking the harshness and sibilance of an IEM, as well as its balance across the midrange frequencies. An IEM with ideal tonal balance would be able to control the harshness (e.g., starting from the chorus section) and imbue an emotive “warmth” to Ed’s voice without making it muted or muffled. How does the 61T fare? To my ears, the 61T nails this track. It pushes the brightness of the Ed’s voice to the edge, likely due to the adequate emphasis at 3kHz region. At the same time, it never sounds edgy or harsh thanks to the pull back in the lower treble region around 5kHz. I’m particularly impressed by the nuances in Ed’s voice that I hear with 61T in less energetic sections such as around the 01:30 mark. My only criticism here is that the higher notes sound a bit uncanny, likely due to the so-called “BA timbre.”

The next track is Kiwi wa Boku ni Niteiru by See-Saw, which is an excellent song to test the ability of an IEM to handle female vocals in “weeb musics.” An IEM with ideal tonal balance should be able to make the voice bright and clear, while maintaining enough energy in the lower midrange to avoid making the voice thin and harsh (a common problem with many IEMs with too much upper midrange boost). At the same time, it must not make the bright female voices dull. 61T does an outstanding job with this track on both tonality and technical performance aspects. The voice of Chiaki Ishikawa is absolutely beautiful here: clear, brilliant without harsh, with enough lower-midrange energy to sound rich and detailed. 61T also flexes its technical capabilities throughout this track by pushing the stage wide outside the ears and maintaining crystal-clear separation of the overlapping elements such as the overdubs on the sides of the stage in the opening section of the track.



The next track is Now We Are Free by 2CELLOS, which assesses an IEM’s ability to render lower-midrange, particularly cellos. An IEM with ideal tonal balance should render cellos with a thick and authoritative tone and be able to reproduce the low pitch resonance and “rumble” of the cello body. At the same time, it must avoid cutting the upper midrange and treble to the point of making the cellos sound muffled, muddy, or lacking clear articulation. So, how does the 61T fare? Beautifully. I’m particularly impressed by the section around 00:40 to 01:10 when two cellos overlap. 61T makes it easy to distinguish the two cellos despite their similar timbre, suggesting an excellent reproduction of timbral nuances. The cellos sound rich, resonant, and just emotive. The sections such as the one around 02:45 and 03:50 made me stop and just sit and listen, rather than trying to take note or analyze.

The next track is Playing God by Polyphia. I focus on the tonal quality and the level of energy conveyed by the guitars. This track also helps assess the balance of the bass against the midrange, which is reflected by the relative loudness between the bass guitar and the rest of the music. How does 61T fare? Regarding the main guitars, I find 61T strikes a right balance: energetic, but not harsh. This observation is evidenced in the opening section of the track when two guitars pan to the sides and the plucks are loud and clear. The bass is also just right. The first bass drop is crisp and thick, full of energy. The bass guitar is fully audible and textured, without overpowering the rest of the mix. Cymbals and hats take a step back in the mix. On the plus side, this tuning makes the details of these instruments easier to discern.



The next track on our list is the aria of Bach’s Goldberg Variations, recorded by Lang Lang. I find that piano is the best instrument to assess the overall tonal balance of an IEM. Simply put, if the piano does not sound even across the frequencies, the midrange of an IEM is imbalanced. So, how does 61T fare? Perfectly balanced. 61T managed to avoid a problem of some “well-tuned IEMs” that push the midrange too far toward the upper midrange, making the middle and higher register of the piano overpowering the bass line. At the same time, it also avoids the problem of V-shaped IEM that makes the bass line and upper register unnaturally louder than the middle registers. With 61T, I heard a balanced piano across the spectrum, and none of the voices overpower others.

The next track on our list is Ciaccona from Bach’s Violin Partita No.2 in D Minor, performed by Kavakos. This track aims to assess two aspects: the rendition of violin and the reproduction of upper treble energy, which is reflected by the quality and detail of the reverberation and micro details at the decay end of violin notes. 61T does a beautiful job with violin in this recording. The tone of the violin is spot-on: enough brilliant without losing the body and resonance that makes violin “sweet” and realistic. I’m particularly impressed by the dynamic reproduction here: 61T can reproduce the dynamic variations from forte down to piano in a way that holds my attention and pulls me into the recording. Micro details are also well highlighted, as well as the reverberation of the violin in the recording hall. Simply put, 61T pulls a lot of information from this seemingly simple simple and sparse recording to hold my attention in a mesmerizing way. Few IEMs have been able to do Ciaccona as well for me.



The final track on our timbre test is Synchro BOM-BA-YE by Tokyo Kosei Wind Orchestra. This track aims to test the tonal balance and timbre of the upper midrange and treble region. There are two cues I focus on in this track: the hand claps at the beginning, and the tonal quality of all brass instruments throughout the track. How does 61T fare? Quite good. The claps are crisp and detailed yet natural, and the reverberation of the claps in the recording hall was easily discern, showing a high-quality upper treble response. My only criticism here is that the high brass instruments sound a bit dull and polite, possibly because drums and lower brass instruments are more present than the higher instruments.

In summary, 61T is an extremely well-tuned IEM. It’s correct, it’s natural, it’s pleasing to listen, and it accentuates the technical performance that the driver topology can produce. 5/5 - Outstanding!

Bass and perceived dynamic:

The bass and dynamics are both strengths and weaknesses of 61T. On one hand, the bass of 61T is quite powerful, offering thick, “grippy,” and full-textured lines that provide satisfaction when focusing on doublebasses or bass guitars. In punchy music, 61T delivers effectively. On the other hand, the precision of the bass attack isn’t as impressive as its power and texture. Fast basslines can result in a low-pitch rumble rather than precise note-by-note delivery. In many ways, the bass response of 61T reminds me of that of the ThieAudio Monarch II. If you’re happy with that bass response, you’ll be content with 61T. Conversely, if you aren’t, you won’t find satisfaction in the bass performance here either.



Let’s examine the bass and perceived dynamics of 61T with some test tracks. First up is “A Reckoning in Blood” from The Ghost of Tsushima OST (). I’ll focus on the crescendo at 01:10, which an ideal dynamic IEM should effectively communicate. Additionally, the beats from 02:50 need to be strong, snappy, and precise, requiring excellent control across the entire frequency range. 61T excels at conveying the increase in energy level of the track from 01:10 to a toe-tapping, blood-pumping level, with a thick, powerful bass line that’s full of great texture and “grip.” My only complaint is the lack of a razor-sharp attack on bass transients, making the whole bass line less incisive than preferred.

The next track is “Strength of a Thousand Men (Live)” by Two Steps from Hell (). Here, I’ll pay attention to the quality bass accompanying each beat. An IEM with perfect bass handling should convey a sense of “grippiness” and texture in the bass region, making the bass line growl rather than low-pitched hum. Lastly, every beat must be snappy and incisive to capture the marching energy of this track. In this regard, 61T falls short, as it delivers a constant low-pitch rumble without strong separation between beats. While still powerful and full of texture, this presentation reduces the sense of energy expected from the track.

In general, I consider the bass and perceived dynamic of 61T to be “very good” (3.5/5). The power and texture that its bass response carries set 61T apart from run-of-the-mill options (which I rate 3/5 - Good). However, the lack of an incisive and sharp bass attack hurts 61T’s ability to handle some faster bass lines.

Resolution: To me, “resolution” can be broken down into three components: (1) Sharpness, incisiveness, or “definition” of note attacks (see the figure above). (2) The separation of instruments and vocals, especially when they overlap on the soundstage. (3) The texture and details in the decay side of the notes. The first two give music clarity and make it easy to track individual elements of a mix. The last provides music details and nuances.



The presentation of 61T can be described as detailed and natural. The entire mix, rather than just the upper midrange, is highlighted. Possibly due to the tuning, details are quite prominent. As a result, music sounds dense with information when listening with 61T. However, it does not create a squeaky clean presentation with strong clarity and presence like IEMs that hollow out the lower midrange and midbass. Nevertheless, 61T does not sound congested or muddy thanks to (1) its soundstage and (2) its strong “true” resolution, reflected in its ability to separate overlapping layers of instruments in a mix.



Let’s elaborate on the resolution of 61T with some test tracks. For the first track, we’ll listen again to Ciaccona from Bach’s Violin Partita No. 2 in D Minor, performed by Kavakos. I focus on the micro details such as the bow catching the strings and the quality and nuances of reverberation and decays of the notes. As mentioned above, 61T does a great job with both micro details and reverberation in this track. In direct comparison against Moondrop Blessing 2 (my reference for “good” resolution - 3/5), the major difference was the reverberation, which was almost non-existent on Blessing 2. 61T also reveals more texture and nuances in the sound of violin (in other words, the violin reproduction of Blessing 2 is rather simplistic in this track). In direct comparison against Andromeda 2020 (my reference for “great” resolution - 4/5), I heard a significant difference with my DX300: the background hiss picked up by Andromeda. Other than that, both IEMs convey similar levels of micro details and reverberation. The last comparison is against the U12T (my reference for “outstanding” resolution - 5/5). I found that 61T is quite outmatched here. There are simply more micro details in the sound of violin and the reverberation to pay attention to with the U12T, which also has a dry, “gripping” sensation to the violin tone when listening.



The next track is the “controlled chaos” ABC feat. Sophia Black by Polyphia. With this track, I evaluate an IEM’s ability to handle the complexity of overlapping layers in the mix without faltering. An IEM with ideal resolution would make it easy for me to hear everything down to the faint overdub by Sophia Black on the side channels right from the opening of the track. The 61T does a formidable job with this complex track, not faltering even in densely layered sections. In direct comparison against Moondrop Blessing 2, I found that the 61T can reveal more information across the spectrum and has a more cohesive tonal balance. Despite not having as much upper midrange as Blessing 2, voices and instruments are better-defined and separated with the 61T. In comparison to Andromeda 2020, both detail retrieval across the spectrum and separation seemed to be on par. However, note attacks were edgier with Andromeda, creating an illusion of stronger clarity. The last comparison is against the U12T. In this case, too, I found that the 61T is outmatched in both detail retrieval and instrument separation. The U12T has sharper note definition, and separation of instruments is more effortless.

Based on the A/B test results, I would rate the resolution of the 61T as “great” - 4/5.

Stereo imaging and soundstage: Stereo imaging or “soundstage” is a psychoacoustic illusion that different recording elements appear at various locations inside and around your head. Your brain creates based on the cues in the recording, which are enhanced or diminushed by your IEMs, your DAC, and your amplifier. In rare cases, with some specific songs, some IEMs can trick you into thinking that the sound comes from the environment (a.k.a., “holographic”)



The shape of the soundstage is a strength of 61T: it possesses excellent width, good depth, and typically envelops the head. With various recordings in my collection, 61T often extends the soundstage beyond the ears, especially with instruments placed in the front left and front right regions. Instruments in a mix tend to sit further back, away from the phantom center of the soundstage within the head, contributing to an even more spacious sensation. The upper treble extension allows for well-conveyed reverberation and ambiance. The only limitation, to me, is that 61T lacks laser-sharp instrument positioning to fully maximize this soundstage.



Let’s assess the soundstage and imaging capabilities of 61T using some test tracks. First up is Original Sound Effect Track - Memory from Gundam Seed Destiny OST album. This track contains all sound effects used in the show, arranged atmospherically and immersively. An IEM with an ideal soundstage and imaging should effectively utilize this information to create a diverse soundstage, with sound elements appearing in three dimensions, offering contrast between near and distant sounds. Many elements on the left and right channels will seem to originate outside the ears. 61T excels at this task, particularly impressing me with its contrast between near actions occurring at the center of the soundstage and instruments positioned further away to the sides. Comparing it directly to Moondrop Blessing 2 (my reference for “good” soundstage - 3/5), the difference in depth illusion and instrument layering is quite noticeable. While Blessing 2 feels more two-dimensional, 61T offers a wraparound, three-dimensional experience. Comparing it to Andromeda 2020 (my reference for “great” soundstage - 4/5) yields similar results: both offer a wraparound, 3D presentation; however, the 61T’s stage expands further out to the sides, whereas Andromeda 2020’s center of the stage feels farther from the head. Finally, comparing it to U12T (my reference for “outstanding” soundstage - 5/5) reveals that in terms of soundstage shape and extension, 61T is quite comparable. However, the U12T outperforms 61T regarding the precision of instrument localization on the soundstage.



The next track, Shadow of Baar Dau, tests an IEM’s ability to convincingly portray background element distance, such as the string section at 00:20 on the front left and vocal chants on the front right at 00:40. A perfect soundstage and imaging should make this track feel spacious, creating an illusion that some background elements originate outside the head, providing a fully immersive experience. The term “immersive” accurately describes 61T’s presentation. When compared to Blessing 2, I found that Blessing 2 presents a more compressed and flat soundstage, lacking the forward-backward projection of 61T. Comparing it directly to Andromeda 2020 reveals consistent observations from previous test tracks: 61T’s soundstage is as wraparound and three-dimensional as Andromeda, but with better width, while Andromeda has more depth. Comparing 61T to U12T demonstrates that the overall presentation of the soundstage for both 61T and U12T are quite similar, yet U12T excels in precise instrument localization within the expanded soundstage.

Based on these comparisons, I would rate the soundstage imaging capability of 61T as great (4.5/5). The additional 0.5 over Andromeda 2020 emphasizes that its soundstage is more open and extends further out than Andromeda 2020; however, it still lacks the necessary precise localization to achieve an outstanding rating (5/5).

---

Driveability​

61T is easy to drive due to its higher than average impedance of 46 ohm and high sensitivity of 115 dB/mW. The high impedance positions the 61T in an optimal range for portable DAC/amps such as the famous Apple USB-C to 3.5mm adapter (also known as the “Apple dongle”). With this device, the IEM produces a satisfactory sound quality. The soundstage can still extend further in all directions; however, most of the audio concentrates in the middle and is quite forward, which doesn’t allow for optimal soundstage perception when using the Apple dongle.

Upgrading to sources with stronger amplifiers like R3II and DX300 results in noticeable expansion of the soundstage. Instruments at the center are more spread out, while those in the background are pushed further away. Incorporating the Topping G5 as an amplifier alongside the DX300 leads to another improvement, particularly in terms of soundstage expansion.

Based on these findings, it’s recommended to use a good USB DAC to fully harness the potential of 61T. That said, I wouldn’t shy away from using it directly with the Apple dongle or a laptop output.

---

Comparisons​

TBA

---

Conclusions​

“What’s the point?”

That’s a question I sometimes get asked when I talk about my hobby of testing and reviewing IEMs, a valid question in a fast-moving and somewhat homogeneous IEM market. For me, the point of this whole journey is to find “unicorns”: the ideal IEMs that sit in the Goldilocks zone of tonality, technical performance, and price tag. To me, 61T is one of those unicorns.

Should you buy the 61T? As usual, it depends. The first question you need to ask yourself is what you think about the tonality of “full Harman” IEMs. If you think Harman is just right, then you might find the tonality of 61T a bit too thick and dull. The second question is how often you listen to fast basslines in your music. If your library is primarily lightning-fast metal music, 61T’s bass might not keep up. On the other hand, if you listen to a combination of large orchestral music, soundtracks, acoustic recordings, songs, with a few rock and metal tracks here and there, if you value a neutral warm midrange, if you pay a lot of attention to the soundstage, imaging, and details in your music, 61T receives a recommendation and a seal of approval from this reviewer.

What I like about this IEM:

• Beautiful tonality
• Great soundstage with good expansion and forward projection/depth
• Good instrument separation and layering
• Great micro-details
• Strong and textured bass response
• Good isolation

What could be improved:

• Bass transients are not snappy enough for some fast bass lines
• Imaging could be more precise
• Large nozzles
• Driver flex

Absolute Sonic Quality Rating: 4.5/5 - Great

Bias Score: 5/5 - I love this IEM!



Updated: July 14, 2024

Unboxing and Build Quality​

The unboxing experience of the Juzear Butterfly 61T is a simple one. The packaging is elegant. Upon opening, you’re greeted with a beautifully crafted pair of IEMs, a high-purity 6N silver-plated OFC cable, and an assortment of ear tips for a customized fit.

The ear shells are made from high-precision 3D-printed resin material with CNC machined Abalone shell face covers, giving them a stunning appearance. The build quality is top-notch, and the face plates, adorned with “Butterfly” wings, add a unique and stylish touch.

Technical Specifications​

• Drivers: 10mm Dynamic Driver + 6 Balanced Armature Drivers (Knowles and customized 31736 units)
• Impedance: 46Ω
• Sensitivity: 115dB
• THD+N: ≤0.6%
• Connector Type: 0.78mm 2-pin Connectors
• Termination Plug: 2.5mm/3.5mm/4.4mm options

Sound Quality​

Bass​

The Juzear Butterfly 61T has a sub-bass-focused sound signature and delivers a rich and dynamic bass response, thanks to its 10mm composite carbon-based coated PU folded membrane dynamic driver. The bass is deep and impactful, providing a solid foundation for all types of music genres. It excels in mid-bass impact and texture.

Mid-Range​

The mid-range of the Butterfly 61T is tuned in a way that avoids any shoutiness. Vocals and instruments are presented with exceptional clarity and detail. It is not overly forward and is balanced with the rest of the sound.

Treble​

The treble response is smooth and well-extended, offering a lively and energetic sound without becoming harsh or sibilant. The high-frequency details are rendered beautifully, adding a sense of airiness and openness to the overall sound signature.

Design and Comfort​

Comfort-wise, the Butterfly 61T fits securely and comfortably in the ears. The lightweight design and ergonomic shape make them suitable for long listening sessions without causing fatigue. The excellent passive noise isolation and lack of sibilance make the listening experience more immersive.

Comparisons​

Binary Acoustics DynaQuattro​

The Binary Acoustics DynaQuattro offers a more powerful bass response and a forward mid-range compared to the Butterfly 61T. However, the 61T excels in treble extension, providing a more airy sound. Both IEMs have their strengths, making the choice largely dependent on personal preference for sound signature.

DUNU DaVinci​

When compared to the DUNU DaVinci, the Butterfly 61T holds its ground impressively well. The DaVinci has more bass, but it comes at a higher price point. The Butterfly 61T offers a similarly detailed midrange and smooth treble at a more accessible price, making it a compelling alternative.

Conclusion​

The Juzear Butterfly 61T is a remarkable IEM that delivers a rich and engaging sound experience. Its seven-driver hybrid configuration ensures a balanced and detailed audio performance across the frequency spectrum. With its premium build quality, noise isolation, detail retrieval, and exceptional sound reproduction, the Butterfly 61T is an IEM worth getting.

Juzear 61T Butterfly Review​

Full Review HERE

​

Juzear 61T Butterfly Review ​

Intro​

This review is covering the newest hybrid iem to come from the brand Juzear named the Juzear 61T Butterfly. The 61T comes hot off the heels of some relatively popular Juzear earphones in the Juzear Flame, Juzear 41T, Juzear Clear, as well as their planar set the Juzear TBS-01. Each of these sets made their own mark within the community. Especially the 41T and the Flame to a lesser extent. Now, I cannot say that I have actually checked out any Juzear’s iem yet. Full disclosure… I’m simply going off of the thoughts of others. Still, many respected reviewers gave the 41T, Clear, & Flame some very nice reviews. In the short time that Juzear has been an actual brand, they’ve crafted some underappreciated gems, going by the impressions of others of course. Juzear actually came around at a very good time in the hobby for consumers. In the same breath, it was also a very competitive time in the hobby, which made it all that much harder to stand out past this hobbie’s 5 minutes of fame each relevant set gets. Nevertheless, Juzear has become somewhat of a respected newcomer and I’m all for it.

Competition​

It’s a competitive market, friends. Never have we seen so many great sets in so many different price points. It’s truly a difficult process for anyone seeking out an iem in the +$200 price point anymore. Scratch that, it’s hard to choose in any price point anymore. Truth is, none of us have money growing on trees and $200 is quite a lot for any sort of casual listening device. After all, you can now get only incrementally worse sets for far cheaper than the 61T’s $212 price tag. It’s just the truth. Now, it remains to be seen how well the 61T will stack up as I haven’t spent time with them yet. Just an initial listening session. Of course, after that initial session I wrote a glowing 1st Impressions post on Facebook, and I meant every word of it. Still, there are some serious baddies out there in the Audioverse. This is the same price point of the Tanchjim Origin (Origin Review), Simgot EA1000 (EA1000 Review), Letshuoer Cadenza 4 (Cadenza 4 Review), Penon Fan 2, Aful Performer 5 (Mahir’s P5 Review), Dunu Falcon Ultra, BQEYZ Wind (Mahir’s Wind Review), BQEYZ Winter (Mahir’s Winter Review), Rose Technics QT9 Mk3 (QT9 MK3 Review), Raptgo Hook-X (Hook-X Review) and that’s just to name a select few. Folks, the price point is beyond littered with amazing iems. What is so special about the 61T Butterfly? Well, I suppose I am going to have to find out.

Lets get it…​

Now, the 61T is exactly as the name suggests, it’s a 1DD + 6BA hybrid iem and like I’ve said it has an MSRP of roughly $212 US. I want to quickly thank HiFiGo for sending the 61T to me in exchange for a full review and feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. Thank you very much. I think I’m now ready to do some long critical listening friends. The Juzear 61T Butterfly everyone….

​

Non-Affiliated Purchasing Link:​

–HiFiGo

Disclaimer:​

I received the Juzear 61T Butterfly from HiFiGo as a review sample and in exchange I will conduct a full review and feature at Mobileaudiophile.com. I have not received any payment or any other form of compensation for this review. This set is a review sample iem. HiFiGo has not requested to pre-read any review and doesn’t have any control over “what” or “when” anything gets published to mobileaudiophile.com. All thoughts within this review are my own, though please take note that I will always have my own biases. This is impossible to get around. I try to be as objective as my subjective self can be, but this is an opinion piece folks. Thank you to HiFiGo and thanks for reading.

​

Gear used for testing​

–Ifi Go Blu

–EPZ TP50

–Simgot Dew4x

–Hidizs S8 Pro

–Aful SnowyNight

–Fiio Q15

–iBasso DX240 with Amp8 MK2

–Shanling M6 Ultra

Packaging / Accessories​

Unboxing​

The 61T arrived at my house inside of a medium sized box which has a sleeve covering. That sleeve has the beautiful 61T’s imprinted on the cover. You’ll also see some specs on the back as well. It’s a nice-looking box I suppose. I know that none of you care about that sort of thing, so I won’t spend a bunch of time on it. However, you can tell that Juzear puts at least some effort into making a nice impression. Anyways, once you take off the outer sleeve you are met with a black box. Take off the lid and the Butterfly earphones with the gorgeous cable attached staring back at you in all their splendor. Next to the 61T’s is the hard case, and in the hard case you’ll find the eartips as well as a lint-free rag for wiping fingerprints and other debris from the earphones themselves. We’ll, that’s about it, not too much to report. It’s a nice showing from Juzear and fitting of the price tag.

Eartips​

Juzear provides a total of eight pairs of tips and three distinct styles of eartips within the packaging. They give you two sets of white foam tips which I didn’t use as I really don’t enjoy foamies. They also give you three pairs (S, M, L) of narrow bore orange and black silicone tips. I honestly don’t like the 61T using these tips as much. The third set of three is Juzear’s own “Soft Spring” tips which are a semi-wide bore pair of tips of certain different colors. The flange isn’t the sturdiest and slightly flimsy. However, I opted for the Divinus Velvet as they are truly perfect for me as far as fit is concerned. The eartips provided are all nice tips that work to help further tune the 61T to your liking. Certainly, good enough to use with other sets as well and who knows, maybe the tips provided fit you like a glove.

Carrying case​

Juzear also provides a nice sand colored hard zipper case with a fabric material covering it. You have a soft internal to protect your precious iems as well. I don’t usually use cases, but this one seems to be just small enough for a pocket and just large enough to fit your earphones and cable. Not a bad case at all and a nice inclusion into the packaging.

Cable​

Now we get to one of the coolest pieces to this package. That would be the beautiful white fatty of a cable that quite honestly beats every cable I’ve received form most any iem under $600. It is phenomenal. It’s super thick, about as thick as the Dunu Hulk cable (that’s THICK!) and reasonably pliable. The 61T’s cable is actually a 2-pin silver-plated-copper cable (SPC). This cable uses 6N copper and is 18 AWG and comes in either 3.5, 2.5, or 4.4 jack’s depending on what you order at purchasing. Friends, I cannot get over how amazing this thick white cable is to look at. It’s stunning when attached to the Butterfly. This is one area where many of these brands need to get it together. Juzear has the presence of mind to understand that the purchase doesn’t stop at the earphones. We want a solid cable, good tips, we want a good deal! Don’t skimp out on the cable “other brands”. Get it together. Oh, and nice job Juzear! This cable has a gorgeous white color to it which will go aesthetically with just about any earphone. White goes with everything. Really a stunning and fat, fatty-fat-fat cable. I love it.





Full Review HERE

Build / Design / Internals / Fit​

Build Quality​

The build is going to surprise some of you. No this isn’t some “everyday” 3D printed all-resin shells. Yes, it’s all-resin but there is some real solidity and robustness to these shells. To be exact, the Shells were DLP 3D printed with weather-resistant resin. The faceplates, or “shell panel” was actually CNC carved from abalone into this very intricate design. Only a programmed CNC machine could do this type of work without the cost being through the roof. It is truly a stunning design, but more on that later. Juzear added one relief vent towards the back of the unit as well as a flush female 2-pin connection. The nozzles are about medium length. Not too long or too short. The nozzles are roughly 6.5 mm in width as well so be aware when finding tips. Folks, this build is fantastic, it really is. This set doesn’t feel like it costs $200. I’d go as far as to say that the 61T’s build is premium against the field.

​

Design​

Now we come to the design. I figure that this design is going to be one that you either love… or not. It is a very pretty design, almost effeminate. First off, the colors on the faceplates are these metallic style blues, greens, oranges and they swirl in a beautiful pattern. On top of that layer is this silver metal butterfly wing design in a wavy pattern along with the company logo on one earphone at the center of the faceplate and “Juzear” written towards the bottom of the other and then overlaid with clear resin. Truly a beautiful design. I cannot say it enough. Even if you hate the look because you are too manly for it, you cannot deny how gorgeous they are. Whoever came up with this final design needs a raise like… yesterday. Great job once again Juzear. I do however have a tiny complaint about the overall finish of the resin as my unit does have some bubbles around the butterfly wings in some spots. Understand that it doesn’t bother me at all, and I realize it’s probably very difficult to lay down this resin without bubbles. Still, I felt it was worth noting.

Internals​

Juzear decided upon one dynamic driver and six balanced armature drivers to house in these fairly large shells. The dynamic driver which covers the low-end is a custom built 10mm composite carbon-based unit with a PU folded membrane. Juzear states that they used gold plated solder pads, neodymium magnets and a large black voice coil. The midrange is taken care of by two Knowles ED balanced armature drivers and the highs are replayed through two custom 31736 balanced armature drivers. I am very impressed by how well Juzear was able to tune this set with nice coherence across the mix and without any obvious distortions, even at high volumes.

Fit / Isolation​

The fit is fantastic for me. Like a glove. I don’t know how well the 61T will fit your ears but for me it’s great. Again, these are semi-larger shells which were made this size to house all seven drivers and so if you have very small ears you may want to consider that. Now, passive noise isolation is much better than most iems on the market that I’ve tried. Certainly, above average and that’s something that you can tell right away. Obviously, you need a good seal though. When I use the Divinus Velvet tips it is pretty remarkable how well the 61T attenuates the outside world.

Drivability ​

The Juzear 61T Butterfly has an impedance rating of 46 ohms and a sensitivity of 115 db’s. For all intents & purposes the 61T is “relatively” easy to drive. Without question I feel that you need a slightly more robust dongle dac at the least. Not that a simple smartphone cannot drive it to decent volume. However, volume doesn’t mean much when you aren’t getting the most out of this set. I feel the more power I threw at the 61T the better it performed. Of course there’s a cap to that though. You obviously don’t need a million watts powering it. I’d recommend a good dongle dac. That’s it. Certain areas of the mix tighten up, dynamic range seems to extend, the stage adds depth, bass feels denser etc. So, there’s a lot of reasons to get the 61T something talented to play them through.

Mobile Listening​

Using a slightly warmer Bluetooth dac/amp like the IFi Go Blu works like a charm but seems to open up a bit better through the 4.4 balanced port. The Go Blu has CS43131 dac chips which run a hint warmer from neutral which pairs nicely even though the 61T is closer to warm/neutral in tonal color. However, I don’t feel that warm or bright really matters too much paired with the 61T. It is in that perfect warm/neutral place that responds well to just about any dac chips. I did say “just about any” as nothing pairs well with everything. Just some more than others. I’d definitely say that the more sonically gifted your source is the better and it does seem to be more expressive with more power. The EPZ TP50 for example is a beast with this set. TP50 leans neutral, clean and precise, dynamic and seems to be just what the 61T needs. Aful SnowyNight is very similar in this regard. Both run on the CS43198 dac chips with a boatload of power for dongle dacs. Certainly, plenty for the 61T Butterfly. I also really enjoyed the subtle warmth and smooth demeanor of the Simgot Dew4x with the 61T which also uses the CS43198 dac chips. A hair less powerful but easily enough to bring out good dynamic range and musicality. Even the warmer Roseselsa RS9039 seemed to pair well. However, the lack of treble rise on the RS9039 does make the 61T sound a hair less energetic.

More juice​

Now, I was very happy with the Fiio Q15 which runs on the AK4499EX and AK4191EQ dac chips along with more power than the 61T will ever need (1.6 watts). Again, the neutral sound of the Q15 is a welcome sound on the 61T. However, the Shanling M6 Ultra is skewed warmer, velvet, smoother but also very resolving and the 61T takes to that type of source tonality perfectly. So, I honestly don’t see many issues with pairing the 61T as it seems to do well with just about anything.

What do you need? ​

Like I’ve said, the 61T does gain some dynamism and the spectrum tightens up a bit with more power. Still, that doesn’t mean you need a million watts of raw output to bring the 61T to its best either. Just be reasonable, a decent Dongle Dac should suffice. 100 mw @32 should do just fine and just about any dongle dac made anymore carries well over that. Beyond that, like most iems, the 61T will certainly scale to the sonic ability of your source as well. I’m sure a simple smartphone will do the trick, but the 61T has a good chance of surprising some folks when a little more output is added.

Sound Impressions​

The Juzear 61T Butterfly comes across with a slight bit of warmth (very slight) against an otherwise neutral sound. I would call this sound signature “U-shaped” as the midrange is not as recessed as a typical V-shaped sound. I go back and forth on that though. Anyways, the 61T is all about dynamism and big displays of controlled energy that come across just as musical as it is technically inclined. Nothing that I hear is veiled, not in the slightest. In fact, I’m more apt to say that the 61T is subtly airy and uplifted in its presence. The sound is upreared with a certain levity to the overall feel of my music library. Yet it’s not bright, not thin, or too trebly, and it’s definitely not a boring sounding set, not by any measure. Like I just said, it’s clean energy with control that has large and considerably vivid macro-dynamics. Notes can be either relatively vibrant or subdued, with a nice balance of crisp and smooth, depending on what the track is asking of the 61T. Never grainy, harsh, or sibilant and the metallic timbre is kept to a very low minimum. It’s a very nice sounding $200 set folks. This isn’t the warm type of musicality in the sense that it’ll draw out all of the emotion from a track, but instead, the 61T has a very nice mix of symphonious overtones and clinical glass lined crispness. Both show up when needed and it’s nice to hear. To me, the 61T is an engaging and very immersive sounding iem which shouldn’t struggle to hold your attention.

Timbre / Note Weight​

Again, note weight is lean-lush, semi-rich, but really, it’s just dense enough and isn’t sloppy. It’s a clean lined sound. I think you get that good lean-lush display when transients are pretty tight coupled with a slightly warmer hue to the sound. Maybe a hint, a feathering, a dash of low-end mixing in with the midrange. Very tastefully done which adds a more natural sounding timbre in this area. However, the timbre can get a hint more artificial at times (I said a “hint”) in the upper portions of the midrange, but I truly don’t see this as a problem because the 61T still sounds great and leans more organic. No, it’s not perfect… but the timbre has a certain authenticity to it which you don’t always hear with balanced armature drivers.

The 61T has a somewhat thickened note body. Definitely not a heavy note weight, and I don’t hear any veil across the mix either. Nothing tonally murky or muddy and nothing fuzzy, grainy, or too edgy at the note outlines. The sound is pretty transparent and comes with a black background which draws the micro-dynamics to the surface to a certain extent. The 61T handles rapid and quick changes in volume levels and sudden dynamic shifts well, without sounding compressed to my ears too. These are very generalized statements though, so please be aware that perception can change with a simple change in how we listen. Obviously, the track you are listening to, the source you’re listening with, along with other variables can alter how we perceive such things. Generally, though, the 61T does well in this regard. Good body yet still well controlled is a nice thing to be if you’re an iem.

Condensed Sound Between the 20’s​

The low-end is more sub-bass lifted, though the mid-bass still slams with good impact and weight. This isn’t some weak bass. Instead, this is a robust and quick bass per its quantity. The bass is also well textured, haptic, and palpable enough to feel. The low-end has the ability to dig deep with heavier rumbles, and again… not slow. Maybe too much for some but that is what it is. Nothing is for everyone. The midrange is nicely manicured with a certain precision to the transient swiftness. Note weight is very good, not thin, and the mids pay off with a nice vocal delivery as well as a decently detailed midrange. It’s warner towards the lower half of the mids and sprightlier and more sparkly towards the top end of the midrange. The treble is mostly non-offensive, isn’t shrill but there’s some mild brilliance there and the treble is also pretty well extended. There’s somebody to the treble here. Of course, treble heads will be left wanting, but I feel that the treble fits the overall character of this tuning very well. Detail retrieval is above average across the mix (my version of average) and I’ve already said that transients move along with some pointed attack, a taught and clean decay with a tighter release. Certainly not like some analytical set which is tuned for details illumination and the quick transients, but great for a fun sounding all-rounder type set. The stage is good in width, depth and height which leads to decent layering of sounds and good imaging, which also is helped by better than average separation.

​

Bass Region ​

The low end of the Juzear 61T Butterfly is very well extended & deep in its range with a clean-lined density that doesn’t sound overbearing even though it’s a larger quantity of low-end amplitude. I never got a sense that it’s too much and the bass never really overtakes the mix by influencing other areas in a negative way. The tuning is nicely accommodating of the midrange by only gradually spilling over. with a gentle glide downhill into the mids. Not a bass tuck in the sense that there is an abrupt line drawn in the sand but instead it’s a feathered-in blending coming across as nice cohesion between frequencies and between drivers.

Dense & clean​

There’s a harder surface on attack with a dense edge at the crest of a note in this region. I haven’t heard anything pillowy, thankfully. The bass has contour, definition, and is well texturized with a stony roundness. The 61T doesn’t come across in an analytical style, it’s not thin or weak. You still have that weighted and moist body to notes which doesn’t sound too wide in presence, or too flat to my ears. There’s some depth there, some roundness, some tactile feel and kinetic force which maneuvers around with pretty good agility for a $200 hybrid. You also won’t hear any sort of “one-noted” replay between the sub & mid-bass. I hear decent definition and good distinction between the two, not just a blur of bass. I hear a nice macro sense of details coming from this bass region. Of course, there are some overly bassy songs which will make me a liar to a degree. However, for the most part this is a well-tuned bass which suits the 61T overall tuning beautifully, acting as sort of a foundation for the rest of the mix. Possibly even a focal point. Oh, and one more thing, this is not what I would consider to be a “basshead” iem. It just misses that moniker for me.

Sub-bass​

The sub-bass isn’t polite, it isn’t weak, and it isn’t sloppy. It’s none of those things. Instead, the sub-bass sets the tone, forms the foundation while adding good depth as it stretches the sound field a bit. Like I’ve said a few times, this is a sub-bass which adds texture to the sound, the guttural grit, like the meaty growl of a dirty bass guitar. The 61T’s “lowest of lows” will get you there. Listening to the track “Mancey” by Andrew Bird shows off this low droning rumble in a visceral way. What I like is that the sub-bass is not overbearing, at least for mh ears. I’m sure some folks will think otherwise. The rumble is heavy when it needs to be, it’s weighted and solid in its note structure. Nothing plastic here. The song “Heavy is the Ocean” by Bush is another track which shows off a growling and mean bass guitar as the track begins with a bassy lead into the main verse. That bass guitar coincides with successive light kick drum booms and progressively gets speedier in tempo. The 61T sounds so authoritative folks! To add to that, I hear nice separation between instruments down low.

Mid-bass​

The mid-bass is slightly less authoritative. Actually, I should say it’s less emphasized in comparison to the sub-bass, but that doesn’t mean you don’t have a very nice impact and boom. To me the mid-bass is actually pretty nimble and rather dexterous depending on the track you’re playing at any given moment. In some ways the mid-bass is atmospheric and warm and in others it speeds right along with transients which can attack and release fairly quickly. All the while I hear good dense notes. Of course, much will depend on the track but the 61T is well able to replay a swift or even complicated bass passage. Obviously, not to the speed and articulation of something like a good BA or planar but on the flip side the DD’s inside of the 61T sound authentic and full bodied. Great for big bass drops, synth, and bulbous resonant kick drums that require that satisfying thud. I hear that distinctly on the track “Billie Jean” by Weezer (Michael Jackson remake). Each successive kick drum is fast, thundering and never soft. Each kick drum thud has that tacky wet edge on attack followed by the earthy and weighted hollow boom with resonating harmonics. Also, bass guitar has good fullness. They sound dirty (in a good way), guttural enough and gravely. Like in the track “Groove” by Ray Wylie Hubbard. Notes are hard edged and crisp. Also kick drums

Downsides to the Bass Region​

The downside for most folks will be the emphasis. That is usually the downside down low with a bass heavy iem. Not everyone will appreciate the warmth cast from the low-end and not everyone is going to be a fan of the slight masking that a bigger bass will provide on some tracks. Now, I don’t think it’s an issue and for a bigger bass I do feel that the 61T handles itself very well. However, you aren’t me and you may hate that. So… Downside. Honestly, that’s the only downside that I see. Many people really only want that tightly wound, always taught bass that comes and goes and doesn’t make any mess in the process. I get it. I like that too. The 61T is only partially that, but with a nice serving of meaty weight to go along with it.

Midrange​

When listening to the midrange I find the 61T Butterfly to replay this area well. Now, this set is not a vocal centric iem and it doesn’t exactly specialize in this area. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t do a very good job. I spoke earlier that the mids were only partially recessed and to be 100% honest, they aren’t really “recessed” at all. Maybe a hair, I suppose. The bonus is that the midrange presence is very nice with the 61T’s black background. So recessed? Eh, not really. Anyways, this set has a U-shaped profile, but I could see someone saying it’s more W-shaped. The only thing that keeps me at U is the fact that the mids aren’t pushed overly forward. Juzear tuned this set very crafty, in a way that portrays solid vocals along with clean and clear instruments. Separation is even pretty good and detail retrieval is above average. There’s a sliver of warmth against a mostly neutral tonality across the midrange, which carries a lean-lush profile. Cohesion is also really nice in this area with the very slightest metallic timbre in the upper midrange. So, little in fact that… I wasn’t even going to mention it. I hear good crispness when a track calls for it with a nice underlying smoothness. Nothing peaky, nothing sibilant and nothing fatiguing to my ears either and the vocals are really nice.

It has a charm to it…​

The midrange has good energy with good resolution apart from bassy tracks. The 61T has nice clarity as well, though that clarity focuses in an ever-so-slight warmer setting. I don’t hear a congested sound and separation of instruments and voices are very well done. I hear a nicely technical replay on a set that wasn’t tuned to be a traditionally “technical set”. This is still a more fun listen, less bright vibrance yet still a good and dynamic presentation. The 61T has a charm to its sound in my opinion. Is it perfect? C’mon, nothing is perfect. However, there is a certain authentic charisma to the sound. Of course, much will depend on your musical library, the source you listen with, etc. And obviously much will depend on your taste and preferences. So, there are variables which can teeter the listening experience one way or another. Still, for the most part I’ve really enjoyed what Juzear accomplished with the 61T Butterfly.

Lower-midrange​

I love good male vocals and I like how the 61T is tuned to add just a light feathering of energy into this area. The bass just barely spills over into the midrange and just barely pushes some added warmth into this region. Just enough to give males a little realistic authority to their voices. Just enough to help a man sound like a man. I call it lean-lush which kind of tells the tale here. It isn’t straight-up “thick”, it isn’t super rich and robust. But it is robust enough to give weight to strings, some resounding underlying vibrance to piano, and some solid “pang” to snares. However, I like a male voice with this set. Listening to Calum Scott in the song “You are the Reason” shows off just how melodic and clean the low-mids come across. The background is silent on this set which almost highlights Calum’s voice. It sounds great to me. A little weight, a little boldness, a little oomph to the body of his vocal notes. Another track is “Jake’s Piano” by Zach Bryan. His southern voice finds a home with this set as each and every inflection or shifting modulation in his voice is pretty clearly etched. Never edgy, never grainy. Not that I’ve noticed anyways. But again, there’s realistic and organic weight to his voice that isn’t too bogged down and full. There’s still some air to separate elements of the stage. Like I said, it’s a cleaner presentation. My opinion.

Upper-Midrange​

Now, females in the upper midrange are a hair more forward, they have some slight shimmer to them, a bit more on a pedestal in comparison. There’s a bit more vigor and vivacious style timbre compared to the low-mids. You only have around 7 to 9 db’s of pinna gain against roughly 10-12 db’s of bass shelf. Still, the upper-mids have enough of a lift to bring some semblance of sparkly energy. Like I said a bit ago, there is some BA timbre which can show up. I hesitate even saying that because the sound is so very cohesive, and it almost melts into the overall character of the 61T perfectly. If that makes any sense to you. Anyways, female vocalists do stand out a hint more. Adele for instance comes across well weighted and every intonation in her perfectly melodic voice comes through beautifully in the track “Someone Like You”. There’s enough subtle warmth in the fundamental tone of her voice as well as her harmonics to convey some emotion to this song. Almost like there’s a moist edge, some texture, some tactility. It isn’t a dry and thin voice or overly rich either. Closer to neutral with a pinch of warmth. Most females come across well. For instance, Olivia Rodrigo in the song “Driver’s License”. Her voice shows off her teenage emotion very well with the 61T. She sounds very nice. Details in this region are also fairly easy to hear so long as the bass isn’t taking over the spectrum. There is layering of the sound as well which does seem to give a more holographic listen.

Midrange Instruments​

Most instruments come across fairly organic apart from a hint of BA timbre in tracks which are a bit more energetic. Other than that, I don’t see many issues. The 61T is well tuned for what it is and “in general” a more fun sounding iem with expressive macro-dynamic energy which plays into most instruments. Now you don’t have the brighter tilt to some instruments that a more emphasized treble would’ve been able to color the midrange with. The 61T isn’t quite as luminant as some other sets in that regard. That said, I would never call the 61T dull or boring. It isn’t that. It simply doesn’t have the sheen of bright levity casted upon its midrange as some other sets like the Simgot EA1000 for example. A little more earthy, lusher, organic. What it also can provide is some nice transient behavior and decent separation of those instruments. Again, strings have good body, fantastic textured harmonics with very satisfying abrasiveness. Violin actually sounds very nice too, as in Lindsey Stirling’s album “Duality”. Pick a track. They can sound silvery, melodious, and slightly edgy too while harmonics are simply awesome. Percussion also sounds nice to my ears as they all have that good fundamental body, nothing splashy, good snap-on attack. I’m not going through every sort of instrument I’ve heard through this set and it’s best to just give a general idea about what you should expect. Otherwise, I’d be here all day. However, for the most part instrumentation sounds pretty good.

Downsides to the Midrange ​

The downsides of the midrange would probably come from those who desire a more clinical approach. Those who enjoy an analytical type of sound, dryer sounding, ultra speedy, and even more technically astute. The mids aren’t the airiest sounding in the world either. I’m sure some folks would want a bit more shimmer in their mids. Maybe a hint brighter energy and ear gain would make some folks happy. Transparency is pretty good, but I know there are plenty of hobbyists who want that crystal clear sound in conjunction with lightning-fast transients that a different tuning can provide. All in all, the midrange is a very nice mixture of musical and technical with a robust and semi-lush sound that should please the majority of people. Vocals are great, mids are lush and very pleasing to my ears.

Treble Region​

The treble region comes across a bit less bright as a whole compared to some similarly priced sets, but I wouldn’t ever call it rolled-off of dark. The treble has enough of a rise to add some level of subdued brilliance against the rest of the mix. I’d say the treble adds quality energy bringing some some air between instruments and even enough levity to the mix to strike a decent balance, though everything does tilt to the left a bit. However, just because the treble isn’t overly emphasized and bright doesn’t mean that it isn’t a very talented treble region. You still have some good energy up top and even some very good extension into the upper treble. What you don’t have is any forced resolution brought on by strategic rises and peaks in the treble region. Juzear added just enough of a rise up top to keep the Integrity of the timbre and the overall cohesion in good standing. I wouldn’t enjoy this set nearly as much if they would’ve pushed the issue and boosted this region even more than it is. I find it perfect. Texture in the treble region is what does it for me. There’s a roundness to instruments and even some good bite up top. You may not have the pointed snap at attack like some good EST drivers, but for BA’s I am very happy with the treble.

Pretty quick​

This is a quick treble too. Literally the 61T was able to take on any track I threw at it. Whether it was Yusef Lateef in the old school track “Bishop School” which has all kinds of treble activity, or whether it was “Secrets” from Billy Strings or even some Orchestral treble… The 61T does a very good job and does so without fatiguing the listener. On “Secrets”, I can hear each and every banjo string with good texture as Billy’s lightning-fast abilities are all caught in HD. I don’t hear that subtle smearing of treble tizz after the initial attack like so many sets do. The sound of each instrument is distinct from the next in a very transparent and clean treble presentation. Again, this is a quality treble region that doesn’t need to be overly boosted to hear its abilities. To add to that, detail retrieval in this region is actually great. Separation is also very nice. There is a crispness in the treble and slight crunch even which isn’t what I would’ve expected. Juzear nailed this one.

Again, I also hear very good extension which adds good air to the rest of the frequency. Usually, you’d hear a more emphasized treble region to establish decent air but that’s not really the case on this set. The secondary harmonics of a cymbal strike are very natural sounding to my ears. I love that I don’t hear that splashiness which so easily rears its ugly head. Instead, cymbals come across nicely bodied and the harmonics are clean.

Downsides to the Treble Region ​

There really aren’t many downsides that I could jot down here. I would say that treble heads may want even more brilliant energy and even more treble punch and texture. Maybe. Actually, treble heads will most definitely not be impressed with the output here. Honestly, Juzear really did a nice job creating a quality treble without the offense. Very nice job.

​

Technicalities​

Soundstage​

The soundstage is good. It’s a nicely laid-out sound field with what seems to be some dimensionality to it. Certainly not just a flat plane of sound in front of me. In the same breath the stage size is not going to change your life as these are iems so, keep that in mind. Still, for iems, the stage is above average with a very good and wide stage that helps greatly in separation and the feeling of extra space. The height is good too, but it’s the depth that gives this set its slight 3D style or holographic style presentation. It’s really a very nice stage. I hear actual layering of sounds too. I’d say that the soundstage presents a nicely open sound and a full sound as well.

Separation / Imaging​

Separation of elements within the imaginary stage on the 61T is better than I would’ve ever thought just looking at the graph. I would’ve thought the sound would be a hint too stuffy to be able to add that distinction between instruments and vocalists. Well, I was wrong. I actually feel that instrument separation is very well done. For this tuning, with its slight warmth, bigger bass section, robust note weight to be defined enough, transient swift enough and transparent enough for good separation is quite awesome. Cause that’s what I hear. There is air between instruments, there are delineated elements within this psycho-acoustically rendered stage. I’m not saying the 61T is going to separate as well as a set that’s tuned for that purpose. However, for a musical iem to also come across this well done is quite good. Imaging follows suit and is spot-on to my ears. Left to right & front to back are separated & layered well with compartmentalized and partitioned off instrumentation. Not bad at all.

Detail Retrieval ​

Now we come to detail retrieval. Once again, the 61T finds itself outperforming my expectations. Certainly, this is not a detail monster and bass heavy tracks will mask some of those details. However, all things considered the 61T is far better than I thought going into this review. Obviously a more analytically tuned, dry, more thin sounding set with a more illuminated treble region will draw out more subtleties within my music. However, for what the 61T Butterfly is, it does detail retrieval nicely.

Comparisons​

Aful Performer 5 ($219)​

The Aful Performer 5 (or P5 as I’ll call it) is one of those sets that took the hobby by storm. It was one of those sets that was on everyone’s lips and to be quite honest, it was hyped quite a lot. That said, the hype was justified as far as I’m concerned. It’s a very nice sounding set. A bit different from the 61T but we will get into that in a bit. The P5 is a five driver Hybrid iem consisting of one dynamic driver and four balanced armature drivers. Aful also added in a ton of tech and ingenuity inside of this set which you can read about here. The P5 can be found for as low as $175 at the moment.

Differences​

The original MSRP of both sets is about equal. Now, the 61T does have a couple more drivers as it’s a 1DD/6BA hybrid. The Juzear 61T Butterfly is also a bit larger in size so be aware of that if ever these are two sets that you are debating against. I feel the 61T is much better accessorized which really just comes down to the cable. Folks that cable with the 61T is absolutely amazing. It blows the doors off of the P5 cable. Now both sets are built relatively the same. Both are made of all resin, 3D printed, both are not super heavy, and both are pretty durable. However, when it comes to appearances, I do believe that the design of the 61T is on another level. That’s just me though. I could definitely envision some people not enjoying the 61T’s elaborate design and preferring the P5’s instead. Not me. That 61T is gorgeous. In the end, both sets are good looking, and both built well, and both come well equipped.

Sound Differences​

Between the two I find the P5 to be a hint closer to neutral whereas the 61T has a slight bit more warmth. Very close though. The 61T has a denser and more extended bass. More concrete and defined whereas the P5 actually comes across almost pillowy. Still pretty deep and emphasized but not as clean as the 61T either. The midrange of the 61T has a slightly thicker note weight, more authentic in that regard. However, the P5 has more shimmer in its upper-mids, a bit more sparkly and crisper by a very slight margin. The treble of the 61T comes across with a hint better body, more punch while the P5 has the smoother treble of the two. I find the 61T also has better extension up top. Not really as emphasized but more realistic to upper treble harmonics. Both sets offer very nice detail retrieval for what they are, both have a fun sound, and both have very nice timbre throughout. The stage of the 61T is wider, deeper and more 3D. Honestly, both sets are phenomenal, but the 61T is just a bit more refined to my ears. That said, the P5 is a hair brighter, more neutral and with a bit more luminant energy.

Final thoughts on this comparison​

This is a close battle but for me I would take the 61T all day and every day. It’s simply a better sounding set to me. I really enjoy them both, but I simply hear a more holographic sound out of the 61T with a more engaging and immersive sound. Both are nice sets and great for any collection.

Is it worth the asking price? ​

The one question I get asked more than most anything else besides how wide the nozzles are is whether the set I’m reviewing is actually even worth the asking price, or are there better sets for less, or comparable sets for less? The truth is, yes, there are some very good iems for less money. Are they comparable? Maybe. Also, by what metric? We pay hundreds of dollars for incremental changes in this hobby folks. Now, I don’t feel that you will find better than the 61T for that price. Not in a hybrid set. Providing that the 61T fits your listening preferences. Coincidentally, that is who this question is for. I’m not answering this for someone who hates this sound signature. Anyways, there are a ton of great iems around the $200 price point. Not just hybrids too. There is a slew of great single DD sets, planars, all balanced armature sets. However, I honestly don’t feel that you will find a straight-up “better” hybrid iem around this price. In fact, I feel you have to go a bit higher in price to find something comparable in the Dunu X-Gizaudio DaVinci (DaVinci Review), the Yanyin Canon II (Canon II Review) and many many more. Folks, I could not in good conscience report to any of you that this set isn’t worth the $212 asking price. Without question the 61T Butterfly is worth every penny and is a very good buy.

The Why…​

Have you seen this set? Look at this masterclass in design and aesthetic. My word Juzear! Great work! Not only does it look absolutely DOPE! But it’s also built and accessorized to the nines. That cable looks like it should come with a $1k set. Shoot, I’d almost buy the 61T simply for the cable! Okay I went a bit too far with that one, but man it’s a nice cable. Looks awesome, built awesome, and accessorized well. However, it’s all about the sound folks. The bass digs very deep, hits hard, it’s impactful, authoritative and can flat out bang. Yet it’s also nimble, ductile, and relatively quick without lingering lag in its harmonics. The midrange is great too. Thicker note weight, authentic, realistic but yet separated very well. The mids are well detailed, not sluggish, not veiled and clean. Best of all the vocals on this set are way better than I would’ve thought. The treble is extended very well yet non fatiguing. It has some bite, some punch, somebody and is detailed well enough. No forced resolution on this set. Technically the 61T surprised me. Again, separation is very nice for a set with actual body to its notes. Imaging is pretty much spot on across the board and the stage has a holographic and deep feel to it. To be honest, the 61T Butterfly hits in almost all areas very well. It’s a very nice iem folks and yes, it’s worth the asking price.

​

Ratings (0-10)​

Note: all ratings are based upon my subjective judgment. These ratings are garnered against either similarly priced sets or with similar driver implementations or styles with the unique parameters of my choosing. In the case of the Juzear 61T Butterfly ratings below, that would be $150-$250 multi-driver hybrid iems. Please remember that “ratings” don’t tell the whole story. This leaves out nuance and a number of other qualities which make an iem what it is. A “5-6” is roughly average and please take into consideration the “lot” of iems these ratings are gathered against. $150-$250 US hybrid iems is a decent sized scope of iems, and it’s also pretty competitive, though it’s not out of the question to see a rating above a “9.0”. My ratings are never the same and each set of ratings tells a different story. Each time you read one of my ratings will be unique to that review. Basically, I create a Rating that makes sense to me.

Aesthetic ​

–Build Quality: 9.7 Built well, all resin, very nice.

–Look: 9.9 Stunning & pleasing to the eye.

–Fit/Comfort: 9.3 Fit and comfort is great for me.

–Accessories: 9.5 Best cable in the price point.

–Overall: 9.6

Sound Rating ​

–Timbre: 9.1 Organic, natural, robust.

–Bass: 9.6 Big, deep, authoritative, clean, defined.

–Midrange: 9.3 Musical and engaging.

–Treble: 9.1 Talented treble region, non-offensive.

–Technicalities: 8.9 Technically great, better than expected.

–Musicality: 9.5. Very musical sound.

–Overall: 9.3

Ratings Summary:​

To summarize the ratings above I’d start by saying that I’m rating these from the perspective of someone who enjoys this tuning. Just saying that gets a lot of the confusion out of the way. Also, I don’t think there is any rating that I would change on here. If you take a broad scope of the lot of iems that I rated this set against, it’s a good portion of iems. Every multi-driver hybrid set between $150 and $250 US. That’s a very competitive range. Thankfully I had many on hand to actually compare against. One of my favorite parts of any review is deciding which sets fit my criteria. I went with $150-$250 because it just felt right. Trying to think of a consumer as best I can. I suppose I could’ve gone with $200 to $300 but if someone can afford a $300 iem, they are not likely going to go with a much less expensive set. We want the best we can get. So, $150 to $250 seemed to make sense. Maybe not. Also, these are ridiculous ratings folks. I don’t agree with them and barely can get myself to do them every review. They don’t help, they generalize too much for something which takes a ton of nuance to explain, and people put way too much stock into them. Anyways, you all know how I feel… moving on.

Explain Yourself! ​

There are only a few ratings which I feel some folks may take issue with. For one I’d say that the treble rating would most certainly rub some people the wrong way. What gives? The 61T isn’t even that emphasized, it isn’t overly brilliant and doesn’t really elevate the tonal color of the overall sound? The reason I gave the 61T a 9.1 against the range is because this treble is nicely refined, it isn’t going to cause any headaches or earaches because of too much shrillness and glare. It is nicely rounded and has some bite, and even some crunch from time to time. The treble is nicely detailed and well extended. No, it isn’t emphasized to the moon but that doesn’t make it bad. In fact, I kinda think it’s what makes this set good. The only other rating worth explaining is my “Timbre” rating. I gave the 61T a rating of “9.1”. Now, there are some other hybrid sets which come across with better timbre, or more natural. Interestingly enough, those sets rate higher. I think a “9.1” is a legit score. Yes, I spoke on the fact that the 61T does have a slight, very slight, very very slight bit of metallic BA timbre in some tracks. Honestly, I don’t find it that annoying or even too apparent either. To my ears the timbre on this set is great. Every other rating is what it is, you may agree or disagree and that’s okay.

​

Conclusion​

To conclude my full written review of the Juzear 61T Butterfly, I want to first say a huge thank you to the good folks over at HiFiGo. Their store has darn near everything, competitive prices and good customer service. However, what I love about them (as a reviewer) is that they have never even hinted at trying to tell me what to write in any review. They take constructive thoughts very well and they are always informative. The rep I deal with has never asked to pre-read any review and has never stopped dealing with me over a less than stellar review. Honestly, I cannot thank HiFiGo enough and the 61T is a great set to feature and so I thank you HiFiGo.

This has been a fun one to review. You have zero idea how many sets I get in that are not that great. You never hear about them from me because I don’t review what I don’t enjoy. Or at least a good portion of hobbyists would enjoy. I wanted to begin writing about this set after my first listen as it just sparked something in me. It has been a lot of fun, and I can say that the Juzear 61T Butterfly is an easy recommendation for me.

Other perspectives​

Please check out other thoughts about his set friends. Read, watch, or listen-to other perspectives because I am only me. These words you see here are my personal opinions and we are all so very different in how we perceive our music. The guy next to me may hate the 61T. I don’t know how anyone could hate this set but I’m not the next guy. So please check out other thoughts. These sets are a ton of money and $212 is a boatload of cash for the great majority of our world. Not everyone can afford to be wrong about these iems and audio devices. So again, look into other opinions and I do hope that you find the perfect device to make for the best listening experience for your dollar. Okay, I think I’m done. Thank you to each and every one of you who chose to read my thoughts. It means more than you know, and I do hope it helps you. Take good care, stay as safe as possible and always… God Bless!

Introduction
Firstly, I'm confessing that aside from hearing the Juzear Clear (which is quite a basshead budget set), this would pretty much be my early experience exploring the Juzear brand and yet to find their own portal or info website so I can't say how long they have been in the industry. With the Butterfly 61T though, it is apparent that they do not slack in creating a properly built and well designed philosophy. It seems that they were aiming for a natural-sounding theme with the gracefulness of a butterfly as their focus, given the faceplate design of a butterfly foil silhouette on the abalone faceplate. Let's take a look as to what the Juzear Butterfly 61T brings to the table in a competitive $200 price range market.



Packaging and Inclusions
The Juzear Butterfly 61T comes out from its cocoon of the slip cover box. You are then greeted by the IEMs with one of best and finest stock cables not is not tangly and retains almost no memory, which is also you have the option of termination choice whether go 3.5mm SE or 4.4mm BAL. The IEMs themselves are well-built, solid and polished with a classy looking design and a touch of premiumness but admittedly, despite the Butterfly monicker, the size of the IEM shells is quite on the large side and is a finicky fit especially for women. With a 6BA + 1DD configuration on each side hence the name, the 61T is equipped with a 10mm bass dynamic driver with a mixture of Knowles + custom BAs which might be responsible for that size formfactor. It's quite showy and attracts some attention but overall still comfy and is outright a good fit. Lastly it comes 3 pairs of light silicon custom-proprietary eartips, 3 pairs of narrow bore eartips, 2 pairs of foam tips, a cleaning cloth, and nice zip clamshell case.





Sound and Comparisons
It should be noted that the Juzear Butterfly benefits from let's say burn-in (in my case) and the sound comes out more loosely, separated and less veiled even after just 10hours of straight playback which is possibly brain adjustment as well. The first flight of the Butterfly if you will. This of course brings the power of nature motiff - in terms of rumble and generous lows that is quite satisfying and engaging though might be quite overpowering for some. Bass decay is not overdone and is quite nimble when the music calls for it. Playing some a cappellas, acoustic or vocal-centered music such as Adele tracks and those audiophile vocal albums shows one of the most beautiful and lush warm-as-sunlight vocal presentations on IEMs at this price range. Though it does take a backseat, literally, in the back row with clarity taking a hit with busy music such as rock, pop, and instrument-heavy genres. Highs are no slouch and not peaky but may be at times smooth or splashy depending on the music. It does give off a sweet, harmonious listen but yes, admittedly this is not a versatile, well-rounded set but does shine with specific genres. Layering and pinpoint imaging are at times average but staging can be quite remarkable for the price. Comparisons at this price-range is a bit difficult but if I would compare to $200 price hitters, I would classify this as a bassy counterpart to the Simgot EA1000 bright Harman, detailed execution or even the Tanchjim Origin's clarity and somewhat-neutral with bass boost implementation. The Juzear 61T is just quite unique that it does has its charm the longer you listen to it but at the same time, discover which music works best with it. It does share some similarities in how safe the dynamics are done with the Tangzu Nezha but I have to give the Butterfly its props due to that addictive bass thump.



Conclusion
The Juzear Butterfly 61T is just the IEM you would want for that sweet harmonious listen that gracefully glides across vocal-centric, jazz and acoustic genres while dodging the rock and instrument-heavy tracks like these are some predator-hunters. It's the type that excels and engages you once you listen to it more, not the most well-rounded set in its price range but still one to definitely try and just might be your calling with its somewhat unique bassy u-shape implementation in the $200 tier. Not to mention that the entire package, looks and that stock cable seem worth more than the entrance price. Try and you just might fly with these as part of your IEM collection.

Sidenotes:
IEM set has been listened via the Sony ZX-707, AK Kann Alpha, and ifi Go Bar Kensei separately using the proprietary stock silicon eartips over the course of multiple genres across FLACs (16bit&24bit) and streaming (Tidal). The Juzear Butterfly 61T is available in HiFiGo for $220 - https://hifigo.com/products/juzear-butterfly-61t?variant=45294431305967

DISCLAIMER

I would like to thank HIFIGO for providing this review unit.

The Juzear Butterfly 61T can be gotten here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007145327058.html or https://hifigo.com/products/juzear-butterfly-61t (no affiliate links).




SPECIFICATIONS

• Driver configuration: 1 x 10 mm composite carbon-based coated PU dynamic driver + 6 balanced armature drivers (2 x Knowles ED BAs for midrange + 4 x customized 31736 units for treble and upper treble)
• Frequency response: 20 Hz - 20 kHz
• Impedance: 46 Ω
• Sensitivity: 115 dB/mW
• Cable: 2-pin, 0.78 mm; silver-plated OFC cable; option for 2.5 mm, 3.5 mm or 4.4 mm termination
• Tested at: $219.99 USD

ACCESSORIES

Other than the IEM, these are included:
- 3 pairs of "soft spring" silicone ear tips (S/M/L)
- 3 pairs of narrow-bore silicone ear tips (S/M/L)
- 2 pairs of foam tips
- Cable
- Case
- Cleaning cloth

For a $200 set, the accessories are quite comprehensive, other than perhaps the lack of a modular cable. Nevertheless, when placing an order, one can opt for a 2.5 mm, 3.5 mm or 4.4 mm terminated cable, depending on your source needs.




Speaking about cables, the stock one is a 2-pin silver-plated OFC cable, which is very well-braided and hefty to the touch. It is supple with minimal tangling, coupled with just slight microphonics. There's a chin cinch to secure the IEM during usage. Definitely one of the better stock cables I've come across.




We have 3 types of tips available. The foam tips provide the best isolation though with some compression of soundstage and treble. The black narrow-bore tips boost bass but have slight compromises in staging. Juzear has also included a newly developed "soft spring" silicone ear tip too; these are a bit wider in bore size than the above silicone variant, and open staging and treble air.

With such an array of ear tips accounted for, do fiddle around and see what suits your needs in terms of comfort, fit, isolation and sonics.




Lastly, we have a cleaning cloth and a small compact zipper carrying case. The latter is semi-rigid to withstand compressive forces, with inner webbing to store accessories and the IEM.

The rest of this review was done with the stock cable and stock narrow-bore tips. No aftermarket accessories were used, so as not to add any confounders to the sound.


BUILD/COMFORT



The 61T's housing is fashioned from 3D-printed resin, and each shell is hand-polished individually. There is a beautiful CNC-carved abalone butterfly like wing motif in each shell, which aptly fits in with the "BUTTERFLY" namesake. Indeed, the 61T has one of the most alluring faceplates I've encountered in my IEM journey, and is a legit real looker.



The shells lie on the larger side, to accommodate 7 drivers per earpiece, but despite that, ergonomics are surprisingly decent. Each housing weighs a mere 6.6 g, with no poky inner edges, and a concha protrusion for better fit.



Despite being a vented IEM, Juzear advertises a 26 dB passive isolation, and on my field tests, it hits nearly there, with the 61T being a great option for noisy environments. I'm glad to report that there is also no driver flex.


INTERNALS

The Butterfly is a 7 driver hybrid. These drivers are arranged in the following setup:

• 1 x 10 mm composite carbon-based coated PU dynamic driver handles the bass
• 2 x Knowles ED BAs settles the midrange
• 4 x customized 31736 units takes care of the treble and upper treble

These drivers are housed within a 3D-printed acoustic cavity with DLP Technology, juiced by neodymium magnets.




DRIVABILITY

I tested the 61T Butterfly with the following sources:
- Apple dongle
- Cayin RU7
- Chord Mojo 2
- Fiio KA11 dongle
- Fiio KA17 dongle
- Khadas Tone Board -> Schiit Asgard 3 amp
- Questyle M15 DAC/AMP dongle
- Sony Walkman NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Sony Walkman NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One Neutral Mod)
- Sony Walkman NW WM1A DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Smartphone

This IEM is moderately easy to drive. With a slightly higher impedance of 46 ohms, the 61T would benefit from amplification.


SOUND & TECHNICALITIES


Graph of the Juzear Butterfly 61T via IEC711 coupler. 8 kHz is a coupler artefact peak.

Tonally, the Butterfly sports a warm U-shaped signature. It should be pretty all-rounded for most music genres.

The 61T is a sub-bass focused IEM. Descent of bass frequencies hits 20 kHz, with a reverberant visceral rumble heard when ear tips seal well. The Butterfly has a hard hitting mid-bass on show, with stellar texturing. There's some mid-bass bleed however, as expected of such copious bass amounts. Bass perception is partially dependent on ear tip choice and obtaining a good ear tip seal, so do play around with the ear tips to get your ideal bass amount - the "soft spring" tips give the least bass/rumble, compared to the foam/narrow-bore tips.

In keeping with the U-shaped profile, the lower midrange is a hair recessed. This region is warmed by the mid-bass bleed, which adds heft but contributes to some veiling. We hear much lushness to note weight, but understandably, the midrange isn't the most transparent. With the upper mids just hitting 7 dB ear gain, vocals are forwards without veering to shouty territory, which is a really tough line to balance (but it is much appreciated that they nailed it).

The Butterfly just has moderate treble extension, and it isn't the most airy set. Sibilance is present on rare occasions, and we have a decent sprinkling of clarity and resolution despite the bassier signature.

In technicalities, amongst the $200ish hybrid competition, the 61T has good soundstage (in width, height and depth) and imaging is pretty accurate, especially when amplified well. Instrument separation is above average with a good smattering of micro-details despite not being overly jacked up in the treble.

The 61T has a weakness in timbral accuracy, with BA timbre heard in the upper frequencies helmed by the BAs. Note weight sounds somewhat hollow for acoustic instruments like strings and brasses. This is quite genre dependent however, and some are more sensitive to timbre than others, so YMMV.


COMPARISONS

The Butterfly will be compared against other $200ish hybrids. Single DDs, multi-BAs, and planars are omitted, as they have their own pros and cons due to the different transducer types.




ZiiGaat Doscinco

The Doscinco is a darker IEM, with less treble and a thicker note weight. It is also bassier, though the bass isn't as tight and bleeds, with inferior texturing compared to the Butterfly. However, the Doscinco has less sibilance.

The Doscinco has poorer micro-detailing, soundstage and imaging. The Doscinco also suffers from driver flex, which may be a deal-breaker for some.


DUNU x Gizaudio Da Vinci

The Da Vinci is similar tonally to the Butterfly, but the Da Vinci has weaker imaging and soundstage.

The Da Vinci is a bit more natural in timbre. It is also better accessorized, even coming with a modular cable, though it loses to the Butterfly in passive isolation.


CONCLUSIONS



The Butterfly is beautiful on the inside and outside. It has one of the prettiest shells in the industry, living up to its Butterfly moniker perfectly. The 61T has a generous spread of accessories, and good ergonomics, despite the larger shell size. Passive isolation is another plus, hitting 20+ dB.

Soundstage and imaging are a highlight on the Butterfly, especially when it is powered well (46 ohm impedance). We hear a warm U-shaped profile, which is pretty all-rounded for most music genres. Bass hits hard with great texturing, though there is a hint of mid-bass bleed. This confers a lush and thick lower midrange, albeit there is some veil added to the signature. Thankfully, the upper mids are not overzealous, with just 7 dB ear gain, which translates to forward vocals without being a shout-fest.

I have to deduct some marks due to the BA timbre in the treble frequencies, especially when acoustic instruments come out to play. Timbral issues aside, the Butterfly is quite a versatile hybrid, even qualifying as a jack-of-all-trades - balancing technicalities, fun and musicality well. This is definitely one of the more memorable $200 bracket hybrids as of the time of writing.