Ostry KC08T

General Information

Specification
  • Transducer unit: 16mm CCAW driver
  • Distortion: N<1% 102dB(@20upa)
  • Diaphragm:the EBT diaphragm
  • Channel imbalance:<1.5dB @1kHz
  • Sensitivity:≥l05dB @1kHz
  • Rated power:10mN
  • Impedance:40Ω±15%
  • Plug:3.5mm three stage
  • Frequency response:20Hz-20kHz
  • Cable: cotton knitting+TPU cable

Latest reviews

jogawag

1000+ Head-Fier
Ostry KC08T review
Pros: Beautiful instrument sound, wide soundstage, very good sub bass, all rounder with the excellent build quality.
Cons: The only thing would be that they are not re-cableableable.
The texture is also much better.
Burn-in requires about 100 hours.

The sound is very clear, almost a mild U-shape, and at the same time the sound resolution is such that the distortion of drums and guitars sounds "real" without being crushed.
The sound is impressive, with a wide soundstage that only earbud can provide, and a bass so heavy that it is hard to believe this is earbud.

Includes a uniquely designed foam cover that provides complete coverage while allowing high frequencies to pass through (the foam cover exposes the midrange).

In my source environment, I am connected to the iFi Gryphon.

This earbud seem to be underrated. There are many other expensive earbuds with good sound quality.
If you have a chance to listen to this, please do.

Thanks for reading!
povidlo
povidlo
@jogawag how do these compare to newer but cheaper KC08A?
jogawag
jogawag
The KC08A sounds reasonable for the diameter of the driver and the price.
sofastreamer
sofastreamer
compared aurvana air and ff3 soundstage again. the aurvana stage is wider and a little deeper than the ff3, but the ff3 is taller and has better layering/imaging and separation. also the ff3 pushes the listener a little further away from the stage, while with the aurvana you are in the front/row or even on stage with the musicans. so to me the ff3 mimics speaker sound a little better specially because of the deep bass that has better special information than with the Aurvana. But as you said, if you are into details and like more of a v shaped sound, specially if you like treble glare, you might better go with the aurvana. technically i would see them on par. Both loose at least in soundstage depth against the Faaeal Iris 2.0 by a mile.

Comments

There are no comments to display.
Back
Top