Rose QT-9 MK2

General Information


Model: QT9 MK2
Driver: 10mm Goertek Tungsten Alloy Film dynamic driver + 2 TWF30018 balanced armature + 2 TWF30019 balanced armature
Sensitivity: 108dB
Impedance: 12Ω
Frequency response: 20-20kHz
Maximum sound pressure: 99dB
Plug: L-shaped 3.5mm gold-plated
Cable length: 1.25m
price: $239

4N single crystal copper detachable cable
1 pair noise isolation eartips
Silicon eartips(S/M/L/L)
double flange in medium
Storage box

Latest reviews


500+ Head-Fier
Potent bass, clean sound, outstanding technicalities
Pros: Balanced, clean, and versatile W-shaped tuning
Outstanding imaging
Well-proportioned soundstage with excellent layering and separation
Very good resolution and clarity
Agile, well-controlled subwoofer-like low end
Airy and detailed treble
Well-built and extremely comfortable shells
Excellent price/performance
Cons: Some BA timbre in the treble region
Mediocre isolation
Slight recession in lower mids
Introduction: While Rose Technics is not exactly a newcomer to the Chinese IEM scene, nevertheless they seem to have largely flown under the radar of most Western enthusiasts (at least as far as IEMs go, while their earbuds do seem to be receiving more recognition). When people do know Rose they tend to know them for two things: a uniqueness of sound, and knack for efficient engineering which allows them to produce IEMs with extremely small shell sizes. All of these characteristics in my opinion hold true for their latest hybrid, the QT-9 MK2: it has gotten very little attention in the West, it possesses an extremely interesting combination of sonic characteristics, and it has probably the single most ergonomic shell design for my medium-small ears that I have ever experienced.

I would like to thank Penon Audio for sending me a sample of the QT-9 in exchange for my honest review. I am not affiliated with either Penon Audio or Rose Technics, nor will I be compensated in any way for this review which will consist solely in my honest opinions.


Packaging & Accessories: Upon removing the outer sleeve of the box, a white lid is revealed bearing the Rose Technics logo along with the company name and the slogan: “Create Difference.” Taking off the lid brings us to an introductory page which, when turned as a page in a book, shows us the IEMs themselves encased in a black foam insert, alongside a white package containing a low-profile carry case. Beneath this initial layer is a second black foam insert containing the tips, a 6.35mm adapter plug, and the stock 2-core 4N single crystal copper cable. Altogether the included accessories are:
  • 3 pairs of silicone tips (S/M/L)
  • 1 pair of foam tips
  • 1 pair of double-flange silicone tips
  • Low-profile black hardshell carry case
  • 2-core 4N single crystal copper cable (MMCX/L-shape 3.5mm termination)
  • 6.35mm adapter plug

Though the quantity of included accessories is rather middle of the road, they are nevertheless of quite high quality. I was particularly impressed with the stock cable, which is obviously well-made (although not the most supple owing to its thick gauge). The long, low-profile carry case is also quite unique, and well-suited for storage in a bag or luggage during travel. All of the included tips synergize well with the QT-9, though I have a slight preference for the double-flange silicones as they result in the best isolation. I did later experiment with tip-rolling and found that the QT-9 is quite tip-dependent: narrow bore tips like Final E, for example, enhance cleanness of sound and tightness of bass, while wide bores like the ePro Horn give the QT-9 a richer and more atmospheric presentation. Given this fact, it would have been nice if Rose had included a wider variety of tips to give users the chance to customize the sound to their liking.


Build & Comfort: One would never suspect at first glance that the tiny, lightweight QT-9 sports no fewer than 4 balanced armature units as well as a 10mm Goertek dynamic driver. Behind the faceplate is a transparent resin shell which reveals all 4 BAs clustered together near (but not in) the nozzle, and at their back the dynamic driver. Rose Technics claims the acrylic-like polymer shells can withstand drops of up to 10 meters without breaking, and although I have not put this to the test I can affirm that though the looks are understated, the build quality is top notch. Of particular note are the tight and well-made MMCX sockets, which even after a bit of cable-rolling give absolutely no cause for concern as regards longevity or eventual loosening of the connection.

As I mentioned in my introduction, the ergonomics and comfort of the QT-9 are just about the best I have experienced in any IEM. Although the shells themselves are perhaps a bit larger than the similarly diminutive LZ A7, they are nevertheless lighter in weight and more ergonomically contoured. The QT-9 fit my medium-small ears like a glove, and I can easily tolerate not only marathon listening sessions but also side-sleeping while wearing them, which in my case is quite a rare feat.

Unfortunately, however, when it comes to isolation the excellent fit is mitigated by the double-vented configuration of the dynamic driver, and while overall isolation is somewhat tip-dependent it never exceeds average. On the positive side, the double-venting of the DD means that there is never any driver flex nor vacuum effect.

The nozzles are of average diameter and length, though overall I found the fit of the QT-9 to be somewhat on the shallow side, requiring the use of slightly larger tips than average to achieve a good seal.


Initial Impressions: The first thing that struck me about the QT-9 was the visceral impact of the low end, which nevertheless was situated amidst an extremely clean and technically accomplished overall presentation. It seems that Rose Technics has calculated, with ruthless precision, the maximum quantity of bass boost it is possible to add while neither distorting the mids nor sacrificing a near-perfect tonal balance across all frequencies. I also noticed that the bass has a slightly slower decay, producing a hint of atmospheric richness which serves as a nice anchor for the more airy and ethereal upper-mids and highs. Upon further listening I also became quite impressed by the outstanding technical abilities of the QT-9, especially the pinpoint imaging and the well-proportioned soundstage.


Signature: The QT-9 has a balanced, W-shaped tuning with emphasis on the bass, vocals, and treble. It has a quite coherent and homogenous sound for a hybrid unit, and although the low end is certainly highlighted more than the other frequency ranges, the bass never predominate over its partners. Rose Technics has managed a masterful tuning here, certainly not neutral, but nevertheless quite balanced and versatile, and excellent blend of analytical capability and musical engagement which suited every genre I threw at it.

I found these inherent strengths of the QT-9 to be enhanced when replacing the stock cable with the Penon PAC480, a mixed copper and silver-plated cable with two thick cores. To my ear, this cable brought a bit more weight to the BA-powered upper-mids and highs, augmenting the already very good coherence of the unit and ultimately producing an extremely homogenous sound. I also found the silver in the mix to bring a little more brilliance and sparkle to the upper treble, which I found welcome.


Bass: The bass of the QT-9 is potent, visceral, and impactful, having no trouble moving a good amount of air through its 10mm dynamic driver and displaying a subwoofer-like presentation. To my ear it is fairly linear, possessing good sub-bass rumble as well as mid-bass punch (though it is perhaps biased ever so slightly toward the mid-bass). Its good texturing is also noteworthy.

While in general the bass is agile and well-controlled, nevertheless as I mentioned before it has a slightly slower decay, which produces a bit of an atmospheric effect and breathes a hint of warmth into the lower mids. I actually find this to be probably the single aspect of the QT-9 that manages to most effectively tie the IEM together as a whole. Without this touch the QT-9 would perhaps have strayed too far into a dry and analytical sound, possessed of undeniable technical prowess but lacking a cohesive musical foundation. Yet Rose Technics has managed here to “walk the line” in an impeccable fashion, and as I mentioned above a judicious choice in tips can serve to shepherd the sound in either direction according to individual preference (small bore tips highlighting the QT-9’s analytical abilities, and wide bore its musical expressiveness).

Mids: The lower mids of the QT-9 are undoubtedly the least emphasized region, although this is somewhat compensated by the addition of a bit of warmth from the accented mid-bass. As a mid lover, to be honest I found this slight recession to be one of the few shortcoming of the QT-9 for my personal taste. Nevertheless the mids are not buried or scooped by any stretch. Texture is good, detail and resolution are both excellent, and the timbre is natural as well.

When it comes to the vocals, they are somewhat forward and certainly take center stage in the overall presentation even despite the potency of the low end. Male vocals could perhaps use just a bit more weight and body for my personal taste, while female vocals on the other hand are close to perfection, sounding vibrant with no sibilance to my ear at all.

Treble: The QT-9 possesses an airy and detailed treble region. The lower-mid treble is somewhat emphasized, accenting vocals and certain instruments quite well while shying away from the point of being piercing or fatiguing. Extension is very good. There is however some BA timbre and dryness of sound (especially in cymbals), although I found this somewhat ameliorated by the replacing the stock OCC cable with a mixed Penon PAC480 as mentioned above. With the addition of that silver I found the upper treble to gain some sparkle and clarity, while the added body helped smoothen the overall presentation and coherence.

Soundstage & Technicalities: The QT-9 boasts amongst the best technicalities of any IEM I have experienced in the price range. The imaging, aided by the 4 BAs, is pinpoint-accurate. The soundstage, while perhaps not quite holographic nor the absolute largest in diameter, is nevertheless well-proportioned with very good width and height, and good depth. Layering and separation are outstanding, with the space being not only well-proportioned but also extremely well-ordered. Resolution, clarity, and details are all very good.

Conclusion: I found the QT-9 MK2 to be a very surprising IEM: I never would have expected a subwoofer-like low end to form the foundation of a refined, coherent, and even delicate sound signature such as Rose Technics has accomplished here. I think that very few will find reason to be dissatisfied with the combination of a balanced, clean, and versatile tuning, impressive technical prowess, and impactful low end on offer here. If one is able to overlook a bit of BA timbre in the upper registers, there are few more compelling options as an all-rounder in the $200 price range than the Rose QT-9 MK2.

Last edited:
Ace Bee
Ace Bee
Hi, can you provide a comparison between this and UM 3DT, so that I can have a idea about its sound? Even though I have another great 200 USD iem, I am still quite interested in it.
@Ace Bee The 3DT has a bit warmer lower mids and a bit more energy in the upper mids/lower treble. It is also somewhat more textured, more liquid, more organic and cohesive in its sound (though the QT-9 is quite cohesive for a hybrid, it can't compete with the all-DD setup of the 3DT). Likewise the 3DT certainly has the better timbre.

The QT-9 on the other hand has a more subwoofer-like bass with more impact and presence, yet combined with a very open and airy sound in the mids and treble. The soundstage is probably a bit larger on the QT-9 and noticeably more open. It has a cleaner presentation than the 3DT and therefore has greater analytical ability, although technicalities in general are pretty comparable between the two.
Ace Bee
Ace Bee
Thank you...I'll probably get one for myself now...


500+ Head-Fier
How easy it is to get used to the Good!
Pros: Great combination of low and mid range, providing a powerful bass and present mids.
- Very natural, rich and detailed sound.
- Excellent soundstage feel and placement of the elements, thanks to very good separation and technical capabilities.
- Small size and weight of the capsules for excellent ergonomics.
- Excellent tuning, even for long listening.
Cons: The cable is somewhat rigid.
- There is no option to choose a balanced cable.
- The storage box is narrow.
- The treble extension is not very high.

I was looking forward to reviewing a new product from Rose Technics. The last time was in June 2019. On that occasion I had the pleasure of testing the Mini2 MKII 2.0 model, a small Dual BA that surprised me with its tiny design and balanced sound. Then, I was able to realise that Rose is not just a brand name, but that the name itself is implied in its design and also in the sound, silky and delicate as a rose. This time, the model to review is the QT9 MK2. They are IEMS with a capsule whose shape is somewhat more conventional, using again, a transparent part, which reveals all its internal potential: a hybrid composition of 4BA plus 1DDD of 10mm. No less than 5 drivers inside a rather reduced cavity, something that for Rose seems to be easy and usual. As in the past, Rose has opted for an MMCX connection, with a 4N single crystal copper cable, which adopts a 3.5mm gold-plated plug. These few features alone are enough to attract the attention of many fans. But, in reality, what's to come is much better. Read on to find out...

Rose QT9 MK2 01_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 02_r.jpg


Penon Audio Store, offered me this model, in exchange for writing an honest review. I want to make it clear that all my opinions written in this review have not been conditioned by this fact, nor will I ever write anything that I do not really think or feel here. I will only write about my personal opinion in relation to the revised product.

Rose QT9 MK2 03_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 04_r.jpg


  • Driver Type: 10mm Goertek tungsten alloy film dynamic driver + 2 balanced armatures TWF30018 + 2 balanced armatures TWF30019.
  • Frequency Response: 20-20kHz
  • Sensitivity: 106dB
  • Impedance: 10Ω
  • Maximum sound pressure: 99dB
  • Jack Connector: SE 3.5mm, gold-plated, L-shaped.
  • Cartridge Connection Type: MMCX
  • Cable length: 1.25m

Rose QT9 MK2 05_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 06_r.jpg


The Rose Qt-9 Mk2, which is how they are labelled on the front of the packaging, come in a white cardboard covered box, whose dimensions are 161x145.5x58.5mm. On the main side, with a white background, there is a real photo of a capsule and the cable, with its MMCX connection, located on the right side. On the left side, at a medium height, is the model name, in black letters, and underneath, the colour. On this occasion, the colour is "CLASSICS BLUE", which is why the letters are also blue. In the upper left corner, the logo of the brand and the name in grey capital letters. At the bottom left, also in grey capital letters, although lighter and smaller, is the text "IN EAR HEADPHONES". This cardboard cover slides sideways, so it has only 4 sides, front, back, top side and bottom side. The latter is dark grey and has some product characteristics in white letters in Chinese language. The back side has a white background, an exploded view of the capsule and the rest of the descriptions in grey letters, also in Chinese. The only texts in English are the above sentence and the slogan "Enjoy the sound of nature", located in the lower left corner of this back side. On the upper side is the name of the brand and some drawings with icons indicating that the product is compatible with "Phone", "Pad" and "HiFi Player".
After removing the cardboard, a white lid with the brand logo, the brand name and the slogan "CREATE DIFFERENCE" in capital letters and silver ink is visible. The logo is in the centre of the lid and is large. The back is empty and also white. The two parts do not touch and reveal the dark grey inner box. After removing the lid, there is a grey sheet with white lettering welcoming you. After turning this page, as if it were a page in a book, you can see the capsules with the cable connected, inside a black foam mould, on the right side, and on the left side, a hard, rubbery, hard plastic case with the brand's logo inscribed in the middle. Underneath are the tips, a 6.35mm plug adapter and the rest of the coiled cable inside a second layer of black moulding. In summary, all the contents are as follows:

  • The two Qt-9 Mk2 capsules.
  • 1 4N single crystal copper cable, with MMCX connectors.
  • 3 pairs of silicone tips, sizes SxMxL, red core, dark grey translucent exterior and internal diameter 4.5mm.
  • 1 pair of foam tips, size L and internal diameter 4.5mm.
  • 1 pair of white silicone tips, double flange, size M and internal diameter 4.5mm.
  • 1 warranty/instruction card, in Chinese.

The content is not lavish in number of tips, the previous Rose model that I own came with many more and in quite particular shapes. Here there are three types, but only one complete set, the classic silicone one.
The transport box is different, it opens like a chest and its hinge allows it to remain open without closing, as it locks, almost, at 90º. Its interior is lined with black velvet to protect the product. Its dimensions are 131x76x24mm. It is striking that it is long and narrow, a bit tight to hold the IEMS in an easy way, being the storage operation a bit slow, as it must be done carefully so that it closes correctly.
The inclusion of the 6.35mm adapter is appreciated, but I would have preferred a balanced cable with the corresponding adapters. Or, at least, the option to choose one. It is becoming more and more common for sources to incorporate this type of output, so it would also be normal for such a cable to be available.

Rose QT9 MK2 07_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 08_r.jpg

Construction and Design

The construction of the capsules is notable for their small size and their completely transparent inner side. This is made of a polymeric material, similar to acrylic, capable of withstanding falls of up to 10 metres without suffering any damage. Despite this proven resistance, the material is highly transparent and its very low weight seems to give a false sense of fragility, which in no way corresponds to reality. The outer face is opaque blue and can be chosen in three colours, blue, grey and green. It looks like it is metallic, but it is not. I think it is made of the same material as the capsule, but in an opaque version, as the feel and the weight confirm this. The word "Rose" is written in white letters, in a font that simulates handwriting, in bold script.
I insist again on the small size of the capsules: the largest width of the external face is no more than 20mm and the thickness, measured at the foot of the mouthpieces, is less than 12mm. This gives a good idea of the small size of the capsules, especially when they contain a 10mm dynamic driver protected by a metal grille and 4 BA drivers. The dynamic driver is in the centre of the capsule and the 4 BA drivers are next to it, but oriented towards the mouthpiece, but not in it. The dynamic driver is constructed of Goertek tungsten alloy film. The BA drivers are paired: 2 TWF30018 and 2 TWF30019. Being paired means that they are connected by a single plate with a single output. Attached to this output are two channels that conduct the sound to the outside of the mouthpiece. The mouthpiece, measured from the base, is just over 6mm. The neck of the mouthpiece is approximately 4.5mm in diameter. The crown is 2mm thick, with a diameter of 5.6mm. Its interior is protected by a metal grid with very small holes. Inside the neck of the mouthpiece is a small metal pipe. If you look through the grille, you can see a kind of duct in the centre, which seems to be the channel that conducts the sound generated by the dynamic driver. While on the sides, there are the channels of the BA drivers.
Below the drivers, near the outer plate of the capsule, some discrete components can be seen: some resistors and what appear to be capacitors. You can also see a multiwire foil, which connects these components to the BA drivers, and other wires connecting the MMCX input to these components and the MMCX input to the DD driver. Thus, I would say that the divider filter is passive and only connected to the BA drivers, although this is the feeling I get, as far as I can see through the capsule. Continuing with your description, on the edge, next to the MMCX connector, there is a hole. You can also see two other holes on the opposite edge, on the vertical of the nozzles.
The cable consists of two thick strands of 4N single crystal copper. The coating is highly transparent, revealing the way the copper wires are wound and their brilliant colour. The connector is 3.5mm SE gold-plated, with a simple, black, cylindrical, angled sleeve. It has two parts: the elbow part is made of black plastic and the part near the plug is a metal cylinder on which "ROSE TECHNICS" is inscribed in white letters. The splitter piece is a small black metal cylinder, just as simple. The adjustment piece is accordingly, although it is smaller and made of black plastic, but it performs its role very well and is useful for adjusting the cable under the chin with an average firmness. The cable to each earcup is single-stranded and when it reaches the MMCX connectors it has a clear plastic over-ear shaped coating.
Personally, I like copper cables and I like this one, because it is simple and shiny. What I like less is that it is slightly stiff and has a slight tendency to get a little bit shaped. I don't think it is necessary to change the cable, though, unless the stiffness becomes annoying for some.
On the other hand, the capsule stands out for its small size and although it may seem the opposite, it is robust, very well built, as the assembly of both sides is perfect, with no leftovers. It also stands out for its light weight.

Rose QT9 MK2 09_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 10_r.jpg

Adjustment and Ergonomics

The fit of the capsules in the pinna is very good. They fit very well in my ears, resting remarkably well inside. The tips have a medium length, but the insertion is rather shallow. With longer silicone tips or a bi-flange model, the insertion could be medium. Be that as it may, the ergonomics, without being the best due to their simplicity, are very effective and, together with the small size, light weight and good fit, the Rose QT9 MK2s are perfect for long listening, everyday use, even for walking, running or other moderate activity. Excellent.

Rose QT9 MK2 11_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 12_r.jpg



The profile of the Rose QT9 MK2 could be categorised as a soft, balanced "w". It has an emphasis on the sub-bass, high mids and mid-treble. Although, this emphasis is decreasing, from the low end to the high end, it cannot be said that the sound feels polarised in any one band, as balance and a sense of homogeneity between all ranges predominates.

Rose QT9 MK2 13_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 14_r.jpg


The low end possesses a good degree of authority and its power starts from a very linear and present sub-bass. Its execution is a mixture of dynamism, agility, fun factor, depth and descriptiveness. That's right, the low end cannot be described in a single word. Thus, the questions to explain what the bass is like are self-explanatory: Is there punch? Sure. Is it predominant? Not completely. What else stands out? Its texture. Is it a very rough or descriptive bass? There is technique, definition, but it has a slight smoothness. It is not abrupt, nor markedly fast, but there is a certain analytical capacity that allows the ears to focus on the planes, their depth, the details and the development of the notes, without losing sight of the level of resolution. All this together builds an evocative, pleasant low end, which is enjoyable from the very first moment, thanks to its predisposition, dynamics and vivacity. Without being the best in its class, the low end of the QT9 Mk2 is loaded with good resources, which are mixed with great talent, so that little or nothing is missing. This is how you get a lower range full of great qualities, which can compete in a slightly bass-heavy terrain, but with a sure audiophile vocation.

Rose QT9 MK2 15_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 16_r.jpg


In my opinion, there is a clear symbiosis between the low end and the midrange. It is as if one could say that the best of the midrange is the bass and vice versa. This may sound totally incongruous, but it is a very particular way of commenting on the mutual complementation that exists between the two ranges. After a clear low end in presence, the midrange is surprisingly active and close, as if it were pushed by the power of low-end, but always with respect, so that one's own showcasing does not feel compromised. It is clear that the transition between the two zones is very smooth, as if the passive filter performs its role in a fundamental, homogeneous way, with a very pleasant and cohesive result. The result is wide, deep-bodied, quite complete male voices, with a warmth, a closeness, but without being predominant, but clearly emancipated. The female voices are perceived as a little lighter in body. But, on the other hand, they benefit from the gentle emphasis of the upper mid-range, to linger in that close line, with a point of enhanced, but not forced, clarity. The balance of the midrange is noteworthy: on the one hand it keeps some warmth from the bass, but does not dazzle or obfuscate at the top end. The midrange is very coherent, not lacking in power or presence, quite complete and without any strange hollows. In this sense, the light of the mids is clear, but not very luminous. There is no hint of darkness, rather a slight sparkle of brightness, but within a natural and calm restraint. The result is a very natural presentation, balanced at both ends, producing a very realistic, neutral timbre that is neither contrived nor spectacular. In this respect, the QT9 Mk2s do not produce a midrange that is striking at first glance, but rather a very mature, pleasing range with a remarkable sense of width and space: there is room for everyone and everyone has their place. The instrumentation and vocals are perceived with great separation, if the vocals are in front, the distance is felt as such, and the planes are presented very harmoniously, yet with great simplicity; so much so, that it is not surprising. This characteristic seems trivial, but when compared to others, what the QT9 Mk2s do with ease is not available to the rest, and it is then that an experienced listener realises that the midrange of these Rose's is no joke, but is a real standout.
The conclusion is settled, then: the Rose QT9 Mk2s have one of the most complete and natural bass and midrange ranges I've ever experienced, a wonderful blend of presence, vibrancy, realism, dynamics, timbre, cohesion, simplicity and balance.

Rose QT9 MK2 17_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 18_r.jpg


I find the high end of these Rose's to be the perfect ally for the rest of the range. Certainly, I don't find them to be brilliant headphones, but rather they exhibit a controlled ambivalence. On the one hand they have a subtle sparkle, capable of bringing the necessary brightness and detail to the middle notes, but in a quiet way, without sounding artificial or overdone. On the other, there is the necessary air to expand the scene and separate the notes, although the extension is not very pronounced. The treble exposition is restrained and its execution does not provoke any fatigue. However, it lacks a certain dynamism and liveliness that would give the sound a little more instant sparkle or a more savoury crunch. The styling of the QT9 Mk2s doesn't quite match the fireworks, but instead offers a more cosy and comfortable warmth. But like all good BA-driven equipment, the treble has a dryness of delivery and resolving power that manages to pinpoint notes with great precision. It is here that the true power of the high end steps forward and manages to bring out quite hidden micro details, in that simple and carefree, almost effortless way that is already characteristic of them.

Rose QT9 MK2 19_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 20_r.jpg

Soundstage, Separation

How is it possible to breathe so much air and space in such a confined enclosure? Make no mistake, this is not a holographic or three-dimensional recreation, but the stage responds to the familiar naturalness exhibited by the Qt9 Mk2. In this way, the presentation is defined as quite wide, with a remarkable sense of height and depth. The amount of separation responds, among other parameters, to the precision of the drivers and their high degree of resolution. The finesse of the notes occupy a very small space and the rapidity of the details, which evaporate easily, create a sense of distance between the sounds, which is very noticeable from the very first moment. On the other hand, the closeness of many elements, in contrast to the power of the sub-bass, causes the easy appearance of multiple sound planes, a fact that amplifies the sensation of depth and separation. This, together with a more than remarkable placement of the elements, allows for an easy semi-spherical recreation, but without being complete enveloping, nor providing that "out of the head" sensation, but a more realistic and logical scene.

Rose QT9 MK2 21_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 22_r.jpg


NS Audio NS5MKII Bass Enhanced Version

The NS5s (I'll call them that for short) are one of my reference IEMS in this price range. They are one of the best dynamic drivers I have ever heard and they also have one of the smallest bodies. In that sense, they are smaller and thinner than the Qt9s, but of course, they don't house anything but 10mm 1DDs. The construction is definitely different, because the NS5s are made of machined metal. For those looking for something smaller and possibly more comfortable, I don't think you'll be hesitating against the Qt9s, although the Rose is very good in that department, too.
The NS5s are 32Ω and are a little harder to move than the Qt9s, so they need a little more power to match volumes.
In terms of sound, both start from a broadly similar curve, but there are differences that change the final sound. The NS5s have a more linear bass, which has less impact on the overall sound. On the other hand, both the high mids and the first treble have more presence, something that clearly differentiates them from the Rose. In general, the NS5s are more balanced in their first half, but brighter thereafter. Meanwhile, the Qt9s are denser, drier, have less sparkle, but even they seem more homogeneous from low to midrange. It's a more energetic and complete profile in the low end, but with a quieter and more relaxed second half.
The low end of the NS5s is faster and disappears earlier, so the bass impact on the sound is less. They have good punch and depth, but the Qt9s have more power and some more extension in the sub-bass area. This, combined with a somewhat slower decay, generates a more abundant low end, which allows the low end to be bigger, more impactful, with more body, density and presence. Despite this, I find the bass of the NS5s technically superior, although they have a less descriptive texture.
The mid-range is certainly tuned differently in both IEMS. The Qt9s are warmer and dryness is more apparent in this range. Meanwhile, the NS5s have more sparkle and brightness, something that could generate more sibilance than in the Rose. It is clear that the emphasis of the NS5s is on detail, highlighting them over the Qt9s, whose efforts are more focused on the body than the edges. Thus, the tonality is different in the two: the NS5s are cooler and the Qt9s are warmer. Comparatively speaking, the voices on the Rose seem darker, even though they are not. Again, their texture is better and more perceptible, as opposed to the greater smoothness offered by the NS5s, something that makes the central area simpler, in the face of the Qt9s' greater surface complexity and musical density. In reality, it is difficult to lean towards one model or the other, and one's taste will do the rest. It's true that I like the NS5s a lot, because technically I find them good and I like their sparkle and amount of top air. But the Qt9s have a power and a tonality more in line with my original tastes, something that instinctively makes me stick with them, apart from the fact that I think their central zone is richer for its body and homogeneity, a particularity that makes them transmit more emotion and soul.
In the treble, the differences in tuning are clear: the NS5s, despite not using BA, have a more realistic treble colour and timbre, as opposed to the same notes in the Qt9s, which sound more controlled and/or muted in some areas. In principle, the differences are a matter of presence, tonality and timbre orientation. Just as I find more body in the low end of the Qt9s, the same is true here, but in favour of the NS5s. However, the BA drivers of the Qt9s are capable of extracting more micro nuances than the NS5s, a sign of a better resolution capacity, superior definition and a more refined technique.
The scene looks different on both IEMS. While it feels flatter, more frontal and closer on the NS5s, there is more width and depth on the Qt9s and a more immersive feel. The presentation is different in both, perhaps feeling taller in the NS5s, and its higher gloss feel may give it more air. But there is also a very good sense of separation and distance on the Qt9s, thanks to their technical ability, which gives you a better placement of the elements within the stage.
In conclusion I should perhaps comment that my beloved NS5s already have substitutes as a reference point: no doubt they are the Rose Qt9 Mk2s.

Rose QT9 MK2 23_r.jpgRose QT9 MK2 24_r.jpg

BGVP DH3 (01 mode)

One brand that has been very active lately is BGVP, bringing out new and interesting models. And personally, I find their models to be extremely attractive and their technology is above their selling price. This time I want to compare the Qt9 with the BGVP DH3 because they both have a dynamic driver and several BA drivers. Specifically, the DH3s use a classic configuration, which features 1DDD+2BA. In addition, they have two mini-switches that allow the frequency response to be modified. For the comparison I have used the most bassist configuration, the 01 mode.
But starting with the size of the capsules, the DH3s are larger and bulkier, and the mini-switches are located on the edge of the capsules. Their inner side seems more ergonomic, but the mouthpieces are not very long, so their insertion is also shallow. They also weigh little, although the size is larger, and their fit is also comfortable, although the smaller size of the Qt9 gives them an advantage in this respect. One negative thing about the DH3 is the driver flex feel, with some tips being very occlusive.
The DH3s have a very similar sensitivity to the Qt9s and the differences in volume are small and depend on the profile of each model.
In the 01 mode, with bass boost, the DH3s have a fairly similar frequency response in the sub-bass region. However, despite what the comparison graph indicates, the greater power falls on the side of the Qt9s, which have a more powerful and more pronounced punch. Their energy is greater, and so is the impact of the bass on the sound. But this is not a big difference, perhaps the fact that the Qt9's driver is larger (10mm vs. 8mm) is able to generate more sound pressure. On the other hand, the bass definition of the DH3s seems a little lower than that of the Qt9s, which gives it a darker and less descriptive level, as well as a muddier feel to the sound. The sub-bass depth is very similar, but the Qt9s' cleaner sound gives them a more refined and accurate reproduction of the lower notes, with a better recreation of planes and a more elongated depth. The mid-bass of the DH3s feels boomy, with slower decay and later dissipation, resulting in a denser, busier area, which gives the sensation of a more diffuse sound.
In the mid-range, the sensation of higher elevation in the first half of the DH3s produces a closeness in the vocals, which feel warmer than in the Qt9s. However, there is a downside to this sensation, which carries over from the bass: the feeling of less clarity that muddies and blurs the sound, causing a slightly dark veil sensation. There is less clarity throughout the midrange of the DH3s, something that is extrapolated to the rest of the range, too. Despite the closer proximity of their midrange, the timbre is not as accurate and natural as in the Qt9s. The Rose's better resolution gives it a more agile and realistic, more pleasant and refined sound, less opaque and more separated.
The DH3's lesser refinement is most apparent in the high end. Their treble sounds more crisp and energetic, but with a point of uncontrol that makes them dirtier, with a poorer resolution and a somewhat more artificial sonority. None of that happens on the Qt9 and both the timbre and the execution of the higher notes is more precise, chordal and musical. Clearly, they are on a higher level and have more air and extension.
The Rose's stage is wider, its placement is more pronounced, more accurate. They have more distance between the elements, the depth is more perceptible and the separation is clearer. Overall, the sound is crisper and more crystalline, as opposed to the denser, more clustered, darker, closer and more intimate sound of the DH3.

Rose QT9 MK2 25_r.jpg


The Rose Qt9 Mk2 are one of those IEMS that you miss when you take them off. When you use others, you realise that something is missing, or rather, a lot of what the little Rose's bring to the sound. The good thing is that it's not all about the music, because size matters here too, and of course comfort. And here, too, these Rose are stellar.
The Qt9 Mk2s base their power on the combination of a deep, present, descriptive, energetic and rich low end, with large, close, wide, detailed, separated and airy mids, to offer a cohesive, logical, close and detailed sound, with great resolution and abundant nuance, where the timbre is natural and realistic. All this is presented with astonishing simplicity, with a wide scene and an exemplary recreation, but without artifice. It is this sensation that makes one think that the sound must always be like this, and it is easy to forget how difficult it is to find it in this form. Because yes, it's not easy what these Rose guys do. And if not, ask the rest, and see what they say.



Sources Used During the Analysis

  • S.M.S.L Sanskrit 10th MKII + iFi ZEN CAN
  • E1DA #9038D
  • Burson Audio Playmate
  • Earmen Sparrow
  • Earmen TR-Amp
  • HiBy R3 Pro




  • Construction and Design: 85
  • Adjustment/Ergonomics: 90
  • Accessories: 70
  • Bass: 91
  • Mids: 92
  • Treble: 83
  • Separation: 92
  • Soundstage: 91
  • Quality/Price: 92



Purchase Link


You can read the full review in Spanish here:

Last edited:
Got them, no pressure no driver flex whatsoever :)
  • Like
Reactions: cqtek
Sorry, I didn't see your question. But I'm glad you did, I haven't suffered from driver flex. And I must confess that it is one of the IEMS I am using the most and I have....
I hope you like them.
Like you said, it's one of the Iems that you really miss when you put it away :) its so comfortable, very easy to use and to enjoy. Nothing to complain about, no obvious flaws beside the beautiful but a bit stiff cable :)
it sits well beside my Penon Orb and Dunu sa6 :)
  • Like
Reactions: cqtek


Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Strong smaller form factor for 4BA+ 10mm dynamic hybrid from ROSE Technics
Excellent comfort and construction, Included cable and tips matches extremely well with sound design. Bass infused technical W shaped tuning with a full bodied dynamic sound signature. Very easy to drive but not a hiss magnet. Decent isolation with foams. Build is supposed to handle a 10M drop according to online publication. A serious option for Bass fans.
Cons: Easy to overlook due to lack of online reader or reviews. Even though the acrylic resin filled housing is supposed to be nails strong the housing looks a bit generic looking. Could use more tips. Cable roll and tip rolling highly recommended for best sound. Though not a 100% necessity. Not for neutral folks.
Rose QT9-MK2
Rose is a company I had no idea about and while browsing the express interwebs I noticed these guys have been making earphones for a while. Call it instincts or just sheer curiosity the QT9-MK2 caught my attention. It wasn’t the looks but more so their configuration, a 10mm Goertek tungsten alloy film diaphragm with 4 BAs on tap. It certainly has enough drivers to make a complete sound. So I went ahead and got myself a set just to check out. This here are my thoughts about the newly acquired QT9-Mk2. DSC07915.JPG

There are two types of hobbyists that I see on the threads on headfi. The no cost is too much headfier and the, it has to be the absolute best for my money headfier. I have to admit I am of the latter group. I mean who wants to spend money and not get the absolute best for what you're spending right? Everyone that knows me on the threads knows I am gonna shine a light on phones I feel deserves some spotlight and I feel the QT9-MK2 is just this type of product.

Rose Technics is the company's official name and it seems they are a relatively newer company out of China making iems and earbuds since 2017. Their facebook page is here. These guys have an entire catalog of all types of earphones and earbuds they have made throughout the years and today I will shed some light on one of their newest offerings.
Much to the chagrin of my wife who seems to think I have too many earphones and headphones in the house. She wasn’t thrilled to see yet another package in the mail for yours truly that had inside a new earphone from a company I have never tried before. Married guys know what I go through here.
The package includes a nice flat plastic clam shell type case. Makes for a slim line packaging as the case is the slimmest case I have seen for earphones but considering the QT-9 MK2 is a smaller earphone it ends up working.
3 sets of silicones, a set of medium double flange and a set of foams in the package with a stereo adapter for accessories, more a standard set of accessories. I don’t expect a huge variety here but some more varieties of tips would have been nice. Thankfully the included tips are usable.
The included cable is a decent looking 4N crystal copper cable in single ended 3.5mm configuration. The cable is certainly better than most included cables but upon careful inspection it is a good but not an excellent pure copper cable with some minor issues. It has some spring and memory to the cable which ultimately shows its quality and build. Not the best finish so I would actually advise trying some other mmcx cables you own, especially if you plan on using these in balanced. Again much like the included tips the cable actually matches up very nicely with the sound design of the QT-9 MK2s so no real cable swap needed but I know you. You're gonna throw on your best cables on them anyway. Just know that if you don’t have better cables. The included cable matches up sonically extremely well with the sound design of the QT-9 MK2s. If you're gonna go for a cable upgrade stick with the copper variety.

Sound analysis was done using my DAPs and amps. Fiio M15, Shanling M6 pro, M5s, M3s, Ibasso DX160, Sony ZX300 FEv2 mod by Mr Walkman, IFI Black label, 2Stepdance,Ibasso PB3
The surprising aspect of the MK2 is its size or the lack thereof, you do the math, 10mm dynamic + 4BAs per housing. Housing is gonna be at the least, moderate in size or medium in girth right? Nope the shells of the QT-9 MK2 is actually one of the smallest compact housings I have seen for a hybrid which includes 5 drivers per shell. Here is a picture of another 10mm dynamic using 4 BAs per housing the Moondrop Blessing2 vs the QT-9 MK2.

This will give you a good idea what I am talking about here. So take a wild guess which one is gonna be more comfortable. As compact and comfortable as the QT-9 Mk2, it has to be worth it to keep them in your ears in the first place.
Dunus DK2001 is the only other hybrid that uses this type of hybrid design that is not using a bulky housing that I can recall. DUNU earphones are still some of the most comfy for me but a close 2nd would be the QT-9 MK2. Why does this matter? For walking, exercise or activities where you need your music in your ears for hours. A comfortable fit is pretty important. I can’t do that with the Blessing 2 for example.

Onto the sound.
The QT-9 MK2s is what I call a technical fun sound signature. Some call it musical but to my ears it is one and the same thing. Don’t mistake the word fun here with a lesser sounding unit. I associate fun with what the bottom end does on the QT-9 MK2s but the rest of the sound is all business. The QT-9 MK2 shows a colored balanced sound signature and the very reason why we listen to our music. You want a full bodied low hitting bass end that rumbles into the abyss. You get that. You want a full immersive vocal performance for both male and female vocals you get that as well, But then it might be lacking for treble or detail right? Nope on that action, here is where this set gets interesting. These will trade punches with any earphone in and around the price range and then show you it is possible to throw all that great sound in a smaller shell for comfort. Now there is a novel idea, how's about a great sounding hybrid a small form factor?
Where's the hype?
These have none. Like nothing, no reviews online, no mention on the threads, I could very well be the only person in all of North America that owns a set. Yes but are they worth considering?

Hmm here is where I say absolutely. I am gonna break my normal writing conventions and do some head to head comparisons to some popular earphones in and around the price point to prove my point. Keep reading and toward the bottom of the reader there will be more than a few comparisons to some of the most popular earphones in the price range.
Don’t Judge a book by its cover.
A popular saying and despite what you know about hybrids and have heard in the years in the hobby. The QT-9 MK2 does not stand out as a flashy earphone in fact how many budget hybrid designs in a similar shell shape have we seen on aliexpress. But ultimately what matters here is how they get you into your music.

Despite its smaller design, the sound is not small in fact here is where I find the sound of these fascinating. They have a big bold punchy dynamic sound, a sound you would not assume coming from such small shells. First time I heard them the sound was emanating from all around me with authority, surprised and intrigued I took them through my usual run in process, tried some tips, cables with different sources and realized this is an earphone I have to let my fellow enthusiasts know about.
Out of the box the treble end had a touch of glare and it definitely has some enhanced treble emphasis and here is where some run in and tip rolling seem to help out on the sound. Treble for the most part is controlled well and has a good amount of emphasis but does not quite step into fatigue or splashiness territory. It has an emphasized treble energy coming from the lower to mid trebles to a less graduated upper treble extension. Sound has a bit of air due to the extension. Treble has plenty of shizzle when it matters and shimmer when you hear it. It has the type of sparkly treble that is also associated with a musical tuning.

No early roll off or lack of treble, the QT-9 MK2 is using 2 BAs for the treble end with very good results. Treble comes off clean crisp, shimmery when called upon, has enough emphasis to pick off micro details in the treble. It does have some of that BA treble coldness however detail is surprisingly very good. Rose did a fine job of not over emphasizing the region, a touch more emphasis would lead into fatigue land but as it is, it has just enough energy to give off a higher fidelity tuning but not enough to cause you to skip on your brighter sounding tracks. Treble tonal ability mixed with the BA ability for quick transients in the region and these make for satisfying high end treble ability. I noticed treble can be influenced with different types of tips so wether you like more or less emphasis in the region. Tip rolling is highly recommended for best results for you.
Musical Mid bands
Folks that like natural sounding mids. These have that and then it uses an above average sense of height and depth for the mid bands. Instrument and vocal timbre sound natural with good weight to the mid bands. The sound design to my ears sounds like a W shaped frequency as vocals can sound a touch forward at times. I also noticed with some tip rolling that it can sound more V shaped in sound design as well due to the strong bass end on the QT-9 Mk2. Lower mids show a bit of a recession to let that bass breathe but not to the point where tonality suffers. Tips will change up how the sound is perceived on the set. Rose included a single set of double flange tips and a cable that matches up perfectly with the sound design on the MK2s. Unfortunately the included double flange is a bit smaller for my ears so I dug up my own double flange that is a bit larger. Double flange tip extends the nozzle of the Mk2 and enhances the bass end for bass enthusiasts. Try them double flange tips.
Mids has a good sense of layering, stereo imaging and a spacious sense of separation. As compact as the design is that is perhaps the most surprising aspect when getting to know the sound of the MK2. It actually has a spacious sound presentation. Nothing sounds compressed or forced. While sounding spacious with excellent sense of verticality and a depth to match if I was to issue one complaint about the sound. I think due to their compact design as the entire housing fits flush into your concha, it could use a better sense of width. You can’t expect a world class stage from a compact design as the trade off there is a very comfortable fit to use for hours. These don’t show the widest of stages compared to something that hangs outside your ears like the Blessing 2 or Sony Z5 for example. I don’t find the stage confined sounding but I am thinking if this exact sound had a bit more stage in width it would be hanging with much more expensive in ears. It has a solid moderate amount of head stage for in ears but has an above average height and depth to the sound.

Stage is very immersive and engaging regardless and I also found that using your better balanced cables expands the sound stage even more so than the stock cable. It is advisable to try these in balanced with your favorite balanced out on your sources.
Double the flange. Double the fun
Rose seems to have taken some liberties with the bass design using a newer metal type coating on their dynamic driver the results is some authoritative bass. Bass end has a good mix of mid bass punch and deep low hitting sub bass. No roll off at all in the sub regions It is about as good as it gets for a 10mm dynamic driver especially for bass fans. Bass end of the MK2s has a physical presence that is missing in a lot of hybrid earphones. It isn’t just about more bass per se, bass notes be it from instruments or synthetic has a real impact and presence that lets you know you're hearing a capable bass woofer. Bass tone here in the goertek tungsten dynamic is reminiscent of some of the best I have heard in the price range. Be it the DUNU DK2001 or the bass end of the Fiio FH3. Both utilizing beryllium coated dynamics.

Bass here makes no bones about letting you know you're getting bass presence with your tunes. Bass notes sound natural with a slightly slower woofer like decay vs most standard dynamic bass. Bass has a tendency to linger a touch which makes them sound more like a sub woofer. Adding once again that musical touch to the sound tuning on the MK2s. For most part mid to upper bass stays in its own realm but I have noticed tracks with heavy bass emphasis these will come out to play and hence have a bit of a shadowing over the lower mid bands, only on bass heavy tracks however. Before you say bass bleed, you can’t expect bass authority without some of it spilling over in a $240 compact earphone.I can argue heavy hard hitting bass tracks are supposed to sound like that especially when heard through bass capable speakers. With bass light tracks the bass stays well behaved.
Bass end of the QT-9 MK2 is well rounded, surprisingly agile, punchy and yes my friends these will rumble with the best of em. Sub bass texture is a stand out for the bass, due to the slight slower decay of the bass notes bass is not the speediest or the tightest as it is going for a more immersive bass experience. Overall I found the bass end to be enjoyable as bass tonality is rich, and bold in character and is excellent for bass infused music.

Rose FTW
There was a lot of surprises for me getting the ROSE QT-9 MK2. It has a clean detailed relatively balanced colored sound with a good technical sound tuning. Very easy to drive yet not a hiss magnet which is important. Bass fans will enjoy this one. These are just a few dbs shy of basshead levels yet has a good detailed sound presentation that utilize all of the compact real estate of the QT-9 MK2 housing with a pleasing foot tapping dynamic bold sound signature. An enthusiast bass fan earphone, musical full bodied spacious sound that expands in all directions. The comfort and sound is very good in the price range. For this one I will do some in depth comparisons to earphones that are competing in the price. Read on for the comparisons.
Blessing 2
As seen in the earlier pic no question which one you can use for hours without the earphones stretching out your ear holes. As for the sound, both have good technical foundations for their respective sounds. Blessing 2 due to the larger housing has the wider stage but I find the QT-9 MK2 much more dynamic sounding due to that bass. Treble emphasis is similar between these two but it is the bass end that really is different. I don't know what the DUCK version sounds like but I read that one has more bass which is exactly what the Blessing 2 needed.

It was surprising to me that Moondrop incorporates a capable 10mm bass dynamic and it has a fairly limp bass end, it is just there. No question which one has more authority and digs deeper. Blessing2 sound design is all about their version of the harmon tuning so you have to be a fan there and the sound design is all about the upper mids on the Blassing 2 with the rest of the sound signature more neutral by design. QT-9 MK2 is a much more colored signature but is much more dynamic sounding as a result. Blessing2 tonality sounds a bit more dry vs the QT-9 MK2 and is much easier to drive. The saving grace of the Blessing 2 it took a much higher end cable to make them sound to my liking but out of the box the stock cable is worse than what comes with the MK2 and does not optimize the sound of the Blessing2 like the stock cable does for the MK2.
These share more than a few similarities between them. It is the one earphone that is even more compact than the QT-9 MK2. Sound signature wise these also share some similarities. Both utilizing some outstanding bass drivers both these will go toe to toe with each other in the bass arena. DK2001 does have a touch speedier tighter bass but not by any real marginal differences. QT9-MK2 sub bass has a bit more dbs in the sub region. But both are very comparable for bass.

DK2001 sounds a bit more cleaner due to a more elevated mid treble shelf vs the QT-9MK2 having a larger dip around 6Khz. Both share a more intimate sound stage but surprisingly it is the MK2 that has a bit wider stage. Otherwise both fill that technical but fun sound signature niche. The DK2001 has been discontinued so here is where the QT9-MK2 comes into play. Both can be worn for hours without physical ear fatigue. As for sound these are more closer to each other in terms of sound design and enjoyment factor, so I call these a draw. Bass on both sets are very musical and rich. Out of all the comparisons here the QT9-MK2s and the DK2001 are like brothers from another mother. They are the most similar in the type of tunings and the sound designs.
Shozy 1.4
Shozys hybrid is designed very similarly to the ROSE QT-9 MK2. Shozy1.4 housing is thicker and bulkier vs the MK2. As compact as the Shozy 1.4 is the MK2 is less bulky and fits in my ears even better. As for the sound. Shozy has a warmer smoother tonality vs the more agile cleaner tonal character of the ROSE QT-9 MK2s. MK2s has more pinna gain/ upper mids emphasis with a better treble extension hence better perceived clarity and air on the MK2s. Bass on both sets has similar emphasis. Both having a punchy low end and extended in the sub bass. The MK2 has more subbass emphasis while the Shozy has a bit more mid bass emphasis relative to each lower mids emphasis. Here is a bit of a surprise as larger the housing is on the Shozy I find the sound stage to be very similar while height and depth is better on the MK2s. QT-9 MK2 has greater sense of detail and imaging in comparison with better clarity. Overall more dynamic sounding than the Shozy 1.4. I suppose if you like your sound easy going, smooth by nature Shozys house signature is just this so it will depend on how you like your sound here but I would take the ROSE QT-9 MK2 over the Shozy1.4 as it sounds more dynamic, more engaging with a greater extension on both ends.
The versatile king of $300 plus earphones. LZ A7 has a few tricks up its sleeves with all of its tuning nozzles and switches. At the base of the A7 it has some solid technical foundations as well in fact one of the better earphones in the price range. I find one if its tuning sets in the monitor mode with the black filter makes them similar sounding in sound design to the ROSE QT-9 MK2. Monitor mode brings up the mids a touch for the sound tuning on the A7 hence it is more proper in comparison to how I hear the upper mids on the MK2s. The MK2s are easier to drive yet sounds just as dynamic if not more so than the A7 in monitor mode. Bass end both trade punches but I would say the A7 has the tighter speedier bass with a quicker decay in the sub bass. Bass is not as emphasized vs the QT-9 MK2 in general.

Both are capable of low reaching bass but sub bass texture I have to give it up to the MK2s which also digs a bit deeper in the subs. Sound layering is also quite similar for the mid bands and both have capable dimensional mid character with great imaging. Treble shows a bit more natural sparkle on the MK2s with the A7 showing similar emphasis for treble with the black filter, a touch more in the lower vs upper in the MK2s but don't sound as natural possibly due to the dual ceramic piezo drivers for the ultra highs. Clarity is a toss up between these two with the A7 showing a touch better sound separation. One thing I learned with this comparison was that the MK2s don’t fall off terribly vs another earphone that is more pricey. In fact I find the MK2 just as enjoyable and a bit more dynamic sounding vs the A7. MK2s again is easier to drive and I find the sound quality level to be on a very similar level to the A7 tuning filters and all.
Thanks for reading about the new ROSE QT-9 MK2. Happy listening always


  • DSC07925.JPG
    898.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Never heard the Tea. Don't know too many that has this earphone and the tea you can certainly ask on the discovery thread. The QT-9 Mk2 is a bit under the radar so not too many own them or heard them. I would go off of review descriptions and see if either one suits your kind of sound and go from there.
Looks very interesting budget iems!
Is it more similar to TSMR Land than ISN EST50?
It is essentially a cheaper LAND. Similar sound balancing but it has good stage and imaging with a nice bass end like the LAND. Of course it is not quite as refined as the LAND but it is one of the most comfortable earphones at it is much smaller than the LAND.



100+ Head-Fier
Great Review! What do you think of the quality of the MMCX Connector of this IEM? After a few cable changes, did the connection remain secure? I was very interested on this IEM, but I am concerned with the reliability of the MMCX connector.
Thanks in Advance!


Headphoneus Supremus
Actually that resin they poured into the housing secures the mmcx tightly no give at all. I use my finger nails and wedge between the connector and the housing and it disconnects and reconnects perfectly. If you use this method of taking out the cable and connect another cable there should be no issues with the mmcx portion. It seems sturdy given the smaller housing.


100+ Head-Fier
Actually that resin they poured into the housing secures the mmcx tightly no give at all. I use my finger nails and wedge between the connector and the housing and it disconnects and reconnects perfectly. If you use this method of taking out the cable and connect another cable there should be no issues with the mmcx portion. It seems sturdy given the smaller housing.