Shozy Form 1.1 - Reviews
Pros: Warmer sound sig.
Good bass reach.
Good fit.
Good looking.
Good price point.
Cons: Cable is not the best.
Some may find the sound boring or have a "lack of enthusiasm"
Tough market segment.
Treble a bit bright for some tracks.
Shozy Form 1.1 ($75): What form doeth thee take?

Shozy 1.1: http://www.shozy-hk.com/form11

Linsoul

Amazon


Much has already been written about the Shozy 1.1, and the 1.4. Some reviews have noted the benefits of each, as well as the virtues of “upgrading” to the 1.4 or not. Many suggest not to upgrade and stay with the 1.1. After my initial listen, I tend to lean that way, but I have not heard the 1.4. My basis? The sound had good clarity and a reach of mid-bass that was quite pleasing. As per my usual, after an initial listen and a bit of tip rolling, the 1.1 was put on my Shanling M2x for 75-90 hours before critical listening. Yes, I snuck a listen but just to make sure all was still good.

I have had the pleasure of many Shozy models, starting with the Hibiki 2, which is still one of my early east-Asian favorites. Tuned with an exciting sound, and good bass I really enjoy the sound. I also participated on the AAW x Shozy Pola/Pola39 tour. While I applaud the combining of forces such as this, I could not feel full love for either Pola model. I preferred the straight Pola and found that (to me) it would be a hard compete for either to make headway at their respective prices. Many disagree, and that can be the “beauty and the beast” of reviewing. But this can also provide a valuable service as well, since if all like the product and nothing is written to the averse, then in this hobby you either found a TOTL CIEM, of much acclaim or you are looking at the Ferrari LaFerrari.

You need not worry here, though as the 1.1 is a very competent sub-$75 IEM and well worth a listen. I thank Linsoul for the sample and will provide an open and honest review. We would have it no other way. It is also understood that even though this is a sample, it may be asked back for at any time. Until then, it is implied to be mine to keep. But not to resell, because that is uncool. Really uncool.



Specs:

Frequency:
20Hz-20kHz
Sensitivity: 100dB (SPL/mW)
Impedance: 19 ohm
Driver(s): 9.2mm Be Dynamic Driver, single Balanced Armature
Connectivity: 2-pin 0.78mm
Cable: Pure copper


From Amazon:

  • 1BA+1DD Hybrid Driver. Shozy Form1.1 equips with one balanced armature for mids-treble region and one 9.2mm beryllium dynamic driver for sub-bass-mids region. The Large diameter dynamic driver (9.2mm) can move a lot of air while keeping the bass attack and response fast and accurate by using latest beryllium coating materials. The BA is tuned to sound lush and controlled. You can hear clean cymbals, clear vocals
  • Metallic Venting and Nozzle. Metallic back air vent design is developed for the dynamic driver to adjust the air pressure inside the chamber to control the bass decay and it’s positioned on the side without blockage when inserted. While the quality metallic nozzle is premium built for durability
  • Handcrafted Faceplate. The colorful cosmic theme faceplate is made from reflective materials with which you can get different reflected spectrum at different angles. It’s a fun and spectacular design. The handmade body also adopts the latest 3D printing framework and is post processed by applying resin topcoat, polished by craftsmen manually
  • 2 Pin Detachable Pure Copper Cable. Coming with the Form 1.1 earphones are a fabric-shielded high purity copper cable chosen for the project. There is good synergy for this combo and metallic parts and terminations are chosen for better durability and sound
  • What You Will Get? We at Linsoul are dedicated to give to utmost importance on our user’s satisfaction which is why we made sure to include a 12-MONTH limited warranty security for your audio investment, keep your mind and ease and focus on your audio sessions more

In the box:


Shozy Form 1.1 IEM
Copper cable
Soft-case-rectangular
3 sets white foam tips (s/m/l)
3 sets double-flange white silicon tips (s/m/l)
3 sets single flange black bass-enhancing tips (s/m/l)



Compared/Sources:

TinHiFi T4 ($79)
CCA C16 ($99)
Oriolus Finschi ($179)
Ikko OH-1 ($140)

Shanling M2x
Cayin N6ii (E01 module)
Dethonray DTR1



Songs used:

Dave Mathews albums, Come Tomorrow, Away From The World
Los Lonely Boys- Heaven (en Espanol)
Los Lobos album, Disconnected In New York City
twenty one pilots-Trees
twenty one pilots-Car Radio
twenty one pilots-Heathens
twenty one pilots-Forest
Damian Marley-Everybody Wants To Be Somebody
Damian Marley-So A Child May Follow
Damian Marley-The Struggle Discontinues
Ziggy Marley-Lighthouse
Ziggy Marely-See Dem Fake Leaders
Mark Knopfler-Laughs And Jokes And Drinks And Smokes
Santana w/ Mana- Corazon Espinado
twenty one pilots album, Trench
Mark Knopfler album, Down The Road Wherever



Unboxing:

You are met with a smaller rectangular box, replete with a nice presentation on the front and specs/frequency response graph on the back. It has been said that the frequency graph is a mistake, because it has not reference. And while I would agree that numbers and a graph would be nice, the point is still there with the dips and peaks. It is mostly flat until a peak about 4kHz, with a slight dip before that. Then the requisite drop until you hit 20kHz. No big deal to me.

OK, sidelight aside, you open the magnetic flap to reveal another “lid” with two flaps. Thinking that you pry one open to get beneath, I promptly ripped the lid. Taking the lid out, reveals the case with everything inside. While I appreciate presentation and a lack of foam (package is completely recyclable), some other solution might have been better. Oh well, I’m past it. Undoing the cases zipper reveals the IEM, cable and tips. In other words, the good stuff.



Fit-n-Finish:

All Shozy review units I have had in the past on both tours and samples have been of good quality. The Form 1.1 is no different. Essentially one solid piece forms the bud due to the cover finish, but I could feel a slight imperfection where the decorative cover attaches to the housing. The finish does a fine job protecting the overall unit though, and there is no worry. The decorative back plate is subtle and takes a good bit of moving to get that glittery finish to show. That’s OK in my book, as I prefer understated as opposed to garish.

The nozzle is silver, just like the 2-pin connection on the cable. The nozzle is of a larger diameter with a thicker rim than I have seen lately. There is a screen, and a nice lip, which helps hold tips in place. A flush 2-pin adjustment works well, and is a bit tight, which I would prefer versus too loose. With a longer-than-usual ear guide plastic sleeve, I appreciate the tactility and how easy it is to use. Not too stiff, not too loose again. The sleeve leads into a woven cover on the cable, which is again tactile of touch, soft and flexible as well. The thinner upper cable leads to a silver “ball” as the cinch adjuster, and if you want a cool photo, look up the @B9Scrambler photos of it.

A silver, carbon y-splitter takes the cables and magically “winds them” below in a tight fashion all the way to the straight silver/carbon 3.5mm jack. Instead of two separate plastic sleeve protectors, a 2-stage plastic sleeve protector is used. An interesting approach and a bit more professional looking in my book. Speaking of look, the overall appeal of the Form 1.1 is one of quality. Not TOTL quality, but solid workmanship and quality that shows the owner that Shozy meant business with the Form series. I appreciate it, and as stated at the beginning Shozy quality has always been good in my samples.

The fit in my ear is solid with either silicon or foam tips. Fitting nearly flush, the nozzle does not hinder comfort for me and long sessions. That said, the included foams do provide a bit of pressure on my ear canal, but seal nearly completely. Just about perfect for me. I do feel that sometimes a complete seal is needed, but other times a bit of “air” coming in and out is good. This would be a case of the latter and I appreciate the fit. The AZLA SednaEarFit mediums work, with a wider opening, which allows the mids to breath a bit more, but I did not have quite as good of a seal. The happy medium were the Final Type-E medium tips. Mids and vocals sang through quite nicely, with nary a loss in bass quality. Quantity of bass falls behind the foam tips, though. That said, I could gladly go between all three tips of choice and be happy. Most time was spent with the Final or foam tips, though.



Sound:

After the initial burn-in of approximately 85 hours, dedicated listening was done using the sources listed above as well as the three tips mentioned above. This is a case where those tips to me sounded better for various reasons, so I decided to utilize them. Sometimes I do, sometimes I do not.

Hooked to the ShanlingM2x and Tidal first, I went through my collection’s list. Starting with Dave Matthews Black And Blue Bird, the sound was melodic and I gained a sense of immediate appreciation for the combination of DD and BA working together. The bass shown through nicely and with a bit of rumble, enough to note that the bass was there. But, not so much that it tended to overshadow the whole show. Tidal presents a more forward bassy tone with their latest software pushes, which I do not mind. Here though, it was just right. Acoustic bass guitar laid the groundwork nicely until the bass guitar came in adding to the lushier tone. I was able to discern much from this song alone. But this is a sub-$100 IEM, and as such held its expectations in check nicely. Not underperforming mind you, but certainly not with the pretense of presentation that it was a post-$1k IEM. Very good so far.

Vocals, especially male come across clean and crisp with enough air between the other mid tones not to step on those vocals. I could discern a certain breathiness to the note from the same song listed above and this represented the song well. Moving on to Idea Of You, cymbal strike and bass guitar lay down another impressive sound, joined by the horn section in support. Dave’s voice moves to the front with all else supporting well. As a treat on this song, the cymbal hit accompanies that voice kind of like a parallel persona that comes along as a sidekick. Nicely done. There is little (if any) bleed of the bass into the mids, and here is where the union of DD and BA share the stage. I hearken to another of my favorites, the Oriolus Finschi, which also has a single DD and a single BA. This union seems to work very well in both instances and is one where simplicity is better than complexity.

Speaking of complexity, Ilse of Flightless Birds comes on, which has a very complex nature. And here is where that first chink to me comes out. The treble came across too brightly for my liking. Part of this is the song, yes, but some IEM’s I have were able to tame that tone enough on higher volumes to make it allowable at higher volume. This was not the case here, as I had to turn the volume down on the Cayin N6ii E01. The treble itself is quite good using the BA, and other than that song, I did not have too much trouble. I found its attack and decay made up for any potential sibilance or brightness nicely. Detail came across with well-thought out sound, but maybe not class leading. I could sense a bit of withholding on Drunken Soldier when the horns entered about 1:45 into the song. It could have been the recording, but a bit better push there would have completely energized the song at that point. There certainly is anticipation (especially after getting hooked on Outlander), but as bit more to me would have made this darn-near class leading.



This Dave Matthews song is also a good indicator of sound stage. Where this song demands a big, bold stage, the 1.1 can only come across as average. Not bad mind you, but with this song one expects a huge pirate ship fight and the chaos, which surrounds it. Cannonballs flying every which way, maiden in distress (always it seems with Claire...smh) trying her best to kick some arse. But the 1.1 presents this in more 2-channel approach where Dolby 7.1 surround would have hit the mark. Think 64Audio A12T or Empire Ears Valkyrie and that would describe what is needed with this song. But, for some genre this more intimate stage is appreciated, as further into my collection that intimacy is appreciated such as on Virginia In The Rain. Yes, more Dave Matthews, but I rediscovered a couple of fabulous albums of his recently...so...This carries over into If Only, where that intimacy works on such a good song. Good layering makes the song wonderful at which to listen and there is enough separation, so each note tends not to step on the others. This also allows the bass of If Only to come across deep and rich. And as mentioned, isolation is good with the right tips. This allows the user to immerse themselves in the song, and isn’t that really the point?



Comparisons:

*All comparisons were done using the same sources, which could be any of the above. But the sources remained constant across the IEM comparison’s below.


Shozy Form 1.1 ($75) vs TinHiFi T4 ($79):


The current iteration (5th gen) of the venerable T-series from TinHiFi is their best to me. It does seem that each subsequent iteration gets better, with more detail, more clarity, and better control. That certainly is the case here. Add in the best bass quality AND quantity of the T-series and this near-legendary (yes, it has only been a few years...) IEM gets tougher to beat with each iteration.

The two are very different in presentation to me. Where the T4 puts its treble where its mouth is, and it pretty much is brilliant in this accord, the 1.1 shines in the mids, melding the best of the DD and BA together to allow vocal presentation to be near top notch. Different approaches at the same price. If you want energetic, with crisp detail and presentation, then the T4 is the choice. If you prefer a warmer sound, melding all together in a good manner to present the whole picture, the 1.1 might do it better.


Shozy Form 1.1 ($75) vs CCA C16 ($99):

The CCA C16 has seemingly come back from the dead of late (CA16 variant), with many posting in online forums how they either really enjoy their model or just picked up a pair and cannot believe how wonderful they sound. So of course, I pulled mine out to compare here. This from the bygone era (2-years ago...) of the “driver wars.” While the C16 does have 16 BA’s, it is only 8 per side. To me CCA is like the R&D for KZ, the “sports car” branch much like Acura to Honda. They share DNA, but how that DNA comes across is markedly different. A bit more upscale than those same-time KZ’s, CCA equated itself well in the market, and I for one like the branch.

The C16 is brighter in sound characteristics, but again this is one in which it does not bother me, and I do like the characteristics. Deeper reach of bass adds to the signature as well. Vocals are forefront and present, but on higher note songs, some may find the treble characteristics a bit piercing. While on some songs such as Isle Of Flightless Birds I cannot raise the volume too much, on others such as Virginia In The Rain, I had little problem. A tale of two songs on the same IEM. I also enjoy the air and clarity of the C16. To me, it is among the better at this price and you should consider the C16 if you want a really nice pair that comes with those funky KZ cables (tangle, any color you want as long as it’s copper, etc...).

While the C16 is quite good, and should be considered, the Shozy fits my listening more. A better control of the treble does it for me.



Shozy Form 1.1 ($75) vs Oriolus Finschi ($179):

Since day one with the Finschi in house, it has been one of my favorites below $200. It still is, and I personally consider it my standard at that price. Older now, but nonetheless fabulous, the Finschi has the perfect balance of bass and treble to me. Some might consider its darker nature to be off-putting and lead to a “veiled” or muddy sound. To that, I say pish posh. The Finschi is dynamic, solid at both ends and with vocals that for my tastes simply sing. To think that this is their entry model makes me long to try their other wares. But even then, all is not perfect.

If I have to pick, the cable is below average for what I consider at this price. But to be honest, on par with older 64Audio cables of the same ilk. The over ear guides are not the most comfortable and the look could be better based upon todays standards. But I for one do not care one bit how snazzy it looks. The sound matters first. And here, the Finschi justifies its 2x price advantage over the 1.1.


Shozy Form 1.1 ($75) vs Ikko OH-1 ($140):

Another favorite of mine, especially at the sub-$150 price bracket, the OH-1 isn’t the OH-10. It is not meant to be. For it provides a stellar sound in its own. I will admit that going back to back with the Finschi, the mid instruments sounded pinched and slightly artificial, but once acclimated, the sound I remember as full and tight come out. Less bass than either the Finschi or the Form 1.1, but with excellent speed and control of that bass make it worthy of consideration. Treble can be a bit bright, but to me rounds off at the right point. Vocals come forward and can be a bit too forward, but not to the point where it diminishes the overall sound to me. I did have to turn the volume down a bit from the others on the aforementioned twenty one pilots song, but so be it. I still like the OH-1 quite a bit but feel the Shozy has passed it by. A shame really, for it is still quite good and should be in your consideration if you like electric-type music due to that fast decaying bass.



Sources:


The latest has become matching IEM to source. It did not always seem this way, but of late it has. Thankfully the 1.1 sounds really good out of pretty much everything. I took it on my walk last night during Futbol practice, attached to the Shanling M0, and can honestly state that the pair sounded phenomenal together. Good bass, air of note and a full, rich sound for less than two Ben’s. Quite an accomplishment. This could easily be your gym-pack or home-rack all together. Synergy sometimes is an overhyped thing, but the 1.1/M0 shows that this can indeed occur.

Switching to the Shanling M6 Pro, I find that while the M6P is a high-fi DAP at a mid-fi price, the pair nonetheless works well. I am still in the honeymoon phase with the M6P, so I obviously think it is the cat’s meow right now. That said, I did find the pair worked exceptionally well together and could happily live with the duo. That rich Shanling sound emanated from the Form 1.1, and it was marvelous. I really enjoyed the sound. Just enough warmth to enjoy without being muddy and detail retrieval of a high-end DAP as well. A good pairing.

The same could be said of the Dethonray DTR1. More “clinical” of sound than the other two, the added clarity was heard even by me. The 1.1 gives a good representation of note here but not too analytical either. Just enough succinctness to add to the slightly warmer tone of the 1.1, the DTR1 is another good compliment.



Finish, the end:

Much has already been written about the 1.1. Much of it good. Some even saying that you can consider the 1.4, but it is not enough of an upgrade to the 1.1 to warrant the extra cost. That I do not know, since I do not have the 1.4; but what I do know is that this is most likely my favorite Shozy since the Hibiki II, when you take into account cost and performance. A bit too bright on some tracks in the treble range for me, but this can be easily countered, or appreciated by those who prefer that signature. Yes, the Shozy x AAW Pola/Pola39 are good, but to me not good enough over the 1.1 to warrant the fuss. The combination of the companies is good to see, but I think I still prefer the 1.1 to either, especially when cost comes into play. I really enjoy the 1.1 and would heartily recommend a listen.


I thank Shozy and Linsoul for the sample, the Form 1.1 is quite good and worth a long listen. Cheers and stay safe, all.

B9Scrambler
B9Scrambler
Wonderful coverage of the 1.1 :)
ngoshawk
ngoshawk
Thank you, kind sir.
Pros: Vibrant, bassy signature that isn't fatiguing and doesn't skimp on mids - Visual flair and ergonomics
Cons: Cable is terrible - Many will find the shallow, small ear tips need to be replaced ootb
Greetings!

Today we're checking out the Form 1.1, an affordable hybrid earphone from Shozy.

Last month I reviewed Shozy's newest mid-range offering, the Form 1.4. At 199.00 USD it is a seriously impressive earphone bringing with it a classy, comfortable design and a hybrid driver setup that is bassy without sacrificing the midrange or treble quality or quantity. It has a wonderful sound stage, is strong in terms of its technical ability, and it has good timbre and tonality. To my ears, it makes for one of the most entertaining listens I've heard in a while. The Form 1.1 is clearly cut from the same cloth, which makes sense since it was the 1.1s cloth from which the 1.4 was sliced.

Where the Form 1.4 contains five drivers (1 dynamic, 4 armatures, hence 1.4) the Form 1.1 contains two, an armature and a dynamic with beryllium-coated diaphragms. While the 1.1's shells are a bit small they retain the premium trimmings of the more expensive 1.4; a hand-crafted resin finish, metal nozzles, flush 2-pin ports, and metal surrounds for the vents on the rear. Based on looks alone, this earphone could probably sell for a lot more than the 75 USD asking price without anyone batting an eye. But alas, looks aren't everything and it has to sound good. It is an earphone after all.

Thankfully, the Form 1.1 sounds fantastic. Let's check it out in greater detail.

IMGP2864.JPGIMGP2869.JPGP1060790.JPG

What I Hear The Form 1.1 is similar to the Form 1.4 in that it is unapologetically bassy, but where that earphone tones down the treble giving it a very smooth, warm and mellow sound, the Form 1.1 leaves the upper end prominent resulting in a very perceptively different experience.

I find the treble in the 1.1 well balanced with a slight skew in emphasis towards the lower treble. Upper treble provides a good shimmer and bite to notes without being overly aggressive, presenting with a quick attack and decay that really dials in a sense of urgency to every note. It has a very high energy feel to it, yet it isn't at all fatiguing unlike other similarly excited earphones. Lower treble is clean and tight and while certainly not a detail monster, clarity remains high and I never got the impression I was missing out on anything. Comparatively, the 1.4 noticeably dials down the upper treble emphasis leaving the entire presentation feeling much warmer and more mid and bass focused, all while managing to retain the air and detail.

Mids out of the Form 1.1 are quite satisfying. While slightly leaner than the Form 1.4, the same natural tonality and timbre is present. Detail is good but nothing you would consider analytic, while clarity is outstanding. Running the 1.1 through some of the same tracks, like Calyx and TeeBee's “Long Gone”, “Ashes” from Céline Dion, and Alicia Keys' “Un-thinkable”, I was hearing the same gruffness, power, and emotional fortitude that made each artists' performance so engaging through the 1.4. The armatures that Shozy have selected and tuned for this latest generation of earphones hit all the right notes when it comes to making something sound accurate, and as a result match up very well with the dynamic driver they are working in tandem with. They really do blend quite seamlessly, at least to my ears.

When it comes to the low end the Form 1.1 delivers a powerhouse performance. Subbass emphasis is dialed down a bit in comparison to the Form 1.4 leaving me missing the extra physical feedback that model provides, but it doesn't take too much away from the overall presentation. It is still nicely detailed and well textured with grungy notes coming across appropriately dirty sounding, but like the 1.4 not so much as to take away from the smoothness on hand. Technically it is quite satisfying as well. Despite the drivers performance being fairly quick and snappy overall, long, slowly decaying notes linger appropriately and sound quite realistic. Given the midbass emphasis present, on particularly midbassy songs the 1.1 can inch towards sounding somewhat bloats, but given the drivers speed any sense of this fades immediately and I never found it bleeding into the lower mids and hindering the presentation.

Sound stage is where the Form 1.1 is decidedly average, and slightly behind the 1.4. The default vocal positioning of the 1.1 is right at the entrance of the ear canal giving it a somewhat intimate feel. Not quite in the head, but not outside of it either. Unlike the Form 1.4, raising the volume on the 1.1 does not improve things and it remains consistently average. Imaging is quite good with very clean channel-to-channel transitions, while layering and separation is good enough to keep even busy, congested tracks from clustering up and smearing together.

Overall I really enjoy the Form 1.1. Not particularly surprising given my thoughts on the Form 1.4. That said, because of how much everyone was saying the two sounded alike, my initial thoughts on the 1.1 were positive but not mind blowing like they were with the 1.4. Don't get me wrong, there are certainly strong similarities in the mids and bass, but the extra treble the 1.1 has led to a vastly difference experience. While it is something I have a hard time putting my finger on, there is something about the way the Form 1.4 reproduces sound that the Form 1.1 just can't replicate. Maybe it's because of all the extra drivers, the slightly larger shell, or something completely different, but something about the presentation of the Form 1.4 is straight up more dynamic and that much more lifelike. That “special something” makes the Form 1.4 clearly superior to me. That said, the 1.1 is still amazing sounding for the price.

Shozy Form 1.1.jpg

Compared To A Peer

FiiO FH1s (69.99 USD): The FH1s is a good sounding set of in ears with an upper midrange that tends to throw its otherwise good balance off kilter. That is quite apparent comparing to the Form 1.1. Treble out of the 1.1 is smoother, leaner, and more controlled but provides less sparkle in the upper ranges. It gives up a little to the FiiO in terms of detail and clarity. The mids are where the 1.1 takes a huge stride forward. The FiiO sounds thin with a tinniness to instruments and especially female vocalists. It's more detailed and crisp, but at the expense of sounding unnatural and being quite fatiguing. These two earphones take a very different approach to the low end. While extension is excellent on each, the Form 1.1 is much bassier overall with a very meaty midbass. The FiiO takes a much lighter approach to the low end with a better mid/subbass balance that makes the excellent extension more apparent. That said, I don't really find it any more impressive when it comes to texture and detail, so which you find better will boil down to preferring either the Form 1.1s bigger more extravagant presentation, or the FiiOs more restrained, mature tuning. Soundstage is where the FiiOs lighter, leaner sound gives it a clear advantage. In comparison the Form 1.1 is notably more intimate with vocals being the biggest differentiation, sounding like they're playing from just inside the ear vs. just outside as heard on the FH1s. Imaging quality on the two is quite comparable, but the FH1s is a bit more competent when it comes to layering and instrument separation thanks to its thinner sound and larger staging.

When it comes to build the FH1s is nicely constructed and looks attractive, but the shell they're using is pretty common and outside of the unique faceplate, isn't anything special. The Form 1.1 easily has a more premium air to it. The cable, as expected, is a step down from the outstanding inclusion FiiO packed in with the FH1s. Sure it lacks the visual flair of the 1.1s cable, but it's not cloth. No kinking, tangle resistant, less noise, it's not going to fray, etc. Both earphones are equally comfortable and stable in the ear, but I feel the Form 1.1 will be the one that has a more universal fit thanks to it's smaller size and lower profile.

KB EAR Diamond (79.99 USD): The Form 1.1 has more upper treble presence with similar lower treble emphasis. The Diamond sounds a little more dry though with instruments displaying a softer attack and slower decay. It's also a step behind in clarity. In the Diamond review I complained about notes sounding almost splashy, something which is again apparent comparing to the 1.1 which has a tighter, cleaner presentation. The 1.1 has more forward mids with a warmer, slightly thicker, more natural tonality. Vocals out of the Diamond, female in particular, have an almost strained quality to them in comparison to the 1.1 which has a more effortless feel to everything. Bass is another area where the 1.1 is a step ahead in my opinion. There is more rumble to low notes and it is more textured through the entire range. The Form 1.1 has a punchier and more prominent midbass presence that fits will in the general tune of the 1.1.

“Wait a second” you might say. “You complained the Diamond was too midbass heavy, yet the Form 1.1 is even more midbassy and that's okay? What gives?”

It's all about context. In the context of the way the Diamond is tuned, to my ears the midbass is too prominent and draws too much attention. In the context of the Form 1.1 it is balanced by more forward mids and additional treble, and in itself is simply more appealing sounding to my ears. While the 1.1 doesn't present with a massive, open soundscape, it's still the more spacious of the two. The default positioning for vocals is actually closer on the 1.1, but everything else spreads further out behind and provides a greater sense of depth and layering. Neither clusters instruments together on busy tracks thankfully. I'd give the nod to the 1.1 for imaging though since channel-to-channel movement is cleaner and more apparent.

Looking at everything else, both are good looking, well-built products. I think the Shozy looks and feels more premium, but I prefer the durability of an all-metal design like you get with the Diamond. Comfort and isolation are also in the Shozy's camp as it's smaller, lighter, and does a better job of filling the ear and keeping unwanted sounds out. The Diamond's cable is light years more appealing though. No cloth, just a good looking, flexible, durable braided cable that feels like a quality piece in the hand and around the ear.

P1060798.JPGP1060797.JPGP1060796.JPG

In The Ear The Form 1.1 features organically shaped, 3D printed earpieces. Where the 1.1's big brother the Form 1.4 uses imported stabilized wood face plates that are unique to each earphone, the 1.1 imbues the dense resin coat with reflective materials to create a “cosmic” theme. The protective resin coating is polished by hand bringing further personalization and craftsmanship to the project. Despite the big price difference between the 1.1 and 1.4, the 1.1 looks and feels nearly as premium since it features basically the same build quality, but in a smaller shell. It has the same smoothly integrated 2-pin connectors, metal nozzles, and metal vent hole on the rear face of each ear piece.

While the ear pieces are a work of art, the cable is hit and miss. Mostly miss. Let's start with the good stuff, that being the hardware. The chromed 0.78mm 2-pin plugs look great and sit mostly flush with the body of the earphone. It would be better if they were recessed slightly to add some additional protection against bending, but I'm cool with them as-is. The straight jack feels like a high quality piece with a weighty metal and (faux?) carbon fibre construction. They even laser etched the Shozy brand name onto one of the chrome rings so you won't have to worry about it rubbing off over time. Strain relief is a little stubby, but the rubber used is soft enough to provide adequate protection. Above the y-split is a small metal bead that functions as a chin cinch. It works well despite the weight. The y-split carries on the chrome/carbon fibre aesthetic and looks fantastic, though there is a complete lack of strain relief. Normally this would be a red flag for longevity, but this is a fabric cable and that brings us to the main negative; this is a fabric cable.

I'm biased against them because my experiences have almost exclusively been negative. The Form 1.1's cable embodies pretty much everything I dislike about this style of cable, although, below the y-split its actually not terrible. The weave is loose but because of the way a fabric sheath reacts to twisting, feels sturdy and stable. Its not resistant to tangling though. Above the y-split certainly isn't either. Not only does it tangle with ease, but small kinks develop the moment the cable twists or loops in the wrong direction. You must be very careful when wrapping it up and putting it in the case, and equally cautious when removing it from the case for your next listening session. Do not absentmindedly toss this cable in your pocket unless you want to spend the next 10 days trying to unravel the chaos it will inevitably become. The preformed ear guides are thankfully fine. While they aren't particularly nice looking, they are flexible and do a decent job keeping the cable behind your ear where it should be. Personally, I recommend ditching this cable immediately. It is not worth the hassle.

When it comes to isolation, I found the Form 1.1 just as impressive as the 1.4. With no sound playing and the stock medium tips installed, the clattering of key strokes is reduced to a slight click, nearby voices muffled, and the roar of passing cars dulled. Bring music into the picture and all that is easily drowned out without the need to increase volume to compensate. With foam tips in place, the Form 1.1 would make a half decent set of ear plugs. Those who frequent the transit system or noisy coffee shops (if they return to normal operation in the near future as we are still in lock down from the Covid-19 pandemic right now) will find the Form 1.1 a welcome companion.

IMGP2837.JPGIMGP2838.JPGIMGP2839.JPG

In The Box Shozy seems to take the less is more route with their packaging, and that's on display here with the Form 1.1. The exterior box is quite compact with elegant, soft colouring and a very high quality image of the 1.1 on the lid. To the left of this image is the model info, a quick blurb telling you a bit about the earphones, notice that it is a hybrid, and mention that the 2-pin connectors were designed and manufactured by Shozy. Flip to the back to find a specification list, a frequency response graph that is lacking any axis information and as such is of limited value. There is also a more in depth description of the hybrid setup advising what frequencies each driver handles, and some additional bullet-points advising other features. Pulling back the magnetic flap and lifting the lid reveals another cardboard box inside emblazoned with the Shozy logo in silver foil. This box is tough to remove without damaging. Inside is the same awesome hexagonal case that comes with the Form 1.4 and all the accessories. In all you get:
  • Shozy Form 1.1 earphones
  • 2-pin 0.78mm fabric shielded cable
  • Fabric coated carrying case
  • Foam tips (s/m/l)
  • Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
  • Bi-flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
Checking out the case, the grey fabric you find coating this hexagonal beauty seems to be pretty popular right now. A similar aesthetic can be found on the various cases included with the Astrotec S80 and charge case of the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless. Not only does it look nice, but functionally it's useful too. Dirt and grime is well hidden and it provides plenty of grip in the hand. The Shozy logo printed on top will probably peel off over time, but that's a purely aesthetic change and will not affect functionality.

The included tips are the same as those found with the Shozy & Neo CP, at least in all but colour when looking at the single flange set. Material quality of the silicone tips is outstanding. It is durable and flexible. The large double flange and foam pairs fit me on the CP. While this rings true with the 1.1, you can now rope in the large single flange set thanks to the 1.1's deeper insertion. It would still be wise for Shozy to include a fourth pair of even larger tips, or even something a little more traditional in shape. Many will find themselves resorting to third party tips out of the box to guarantee a reliable seal. I'd love to see Shozy team up with Final Audio and include their E Type tips which pair well with the 1.1.

IMGP2851.JPGP1060787.JPGP1060800.JPG

Final Thoughts Shozy is on a roll with this Form X.X series of earphones. Not only do they look amazing, but they sound fantastic too. For the price the Form 1.1 is a do-it-all earphone that gives off seriously premium vibes visually, while having a smooth, refined, dynamic sound that goes head-to-head with the best in class. Like with the Form 1.4, the 1.1 is just flat out fun to listen to. It is boisterous and lively with good sparkle up top, a thunderous rumble down low, and a tonally correct midrange that is in no way overshadowed or falls behind. Sure, the cable is not great and the included tips aren't going to work for everyone, but those are easily rectified issues, if they even end up being issues for you at all.

Overall I cannot recommend the Form 1.1 enough and highly suggest checking it out if in the market for a bassy earphone under 100 USD.

- B9

**If you enjoyed this review, there are tons more to be found over on The Contraptionist.**

Disclaimer Thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging a sample of the Form 1.1 for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the Form 1.1. They do not represent Shozy, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Form 1.1 retailed for 74.99 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/collections/shozy/products/shozy-form-1-1

Specifications
  • Driver: Beryllium coated dynamic driver + balanced armature
  • Sensitivity: 100dB/mW
  • Impedance: 19ohm @ 1kHz
  • Frequency Response: 20Hz-20KHz
  • Cable: 0.78mm 2-pin
Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, Cozoy Takt C, Earmen TR-Amp, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams
Last edited:
RikudouGoku
RikudouGoku
Nice bro, would you say it is worth it to get the 1.4 if you like and already have the 1.1? From both Crinacle and BGGAR it seems you dont really get much of an upgrade for almost 3 times the cost. Oh and I actually kinda like the stock cable in the 1.1, it feels nice to touch it :grin:
B9Scrambler
B9Scrambler
@RikudouGoku If you already have the 1.1, probably not, but if you have neither the 1.4 is the one to get imo. The cable looks great and feels nice to the touch, but it tangles and kinks, it's noisy, just not nice to actually use, lol.
RikudouGoku
RikudouGoku
thanks, saves me some cash....to be used on some other iem loool :joy:
Pros: Natural Timbre
Detailed across the range
Excellent bass, tight and fast with good quantity
Equal balancing between male and female vocals
relaxed treble
versatile tuning
Fit
Accessories
Price
Cons: Instrument separation
comfort
some might find it a bit sharp with some sibilance prone songs
bit more speed in the bass would suit me more
20200212_153621.jpg


Disclaimer:
Bought at amazon.de at my own expense.

Price: 74,99 USD

Specifications:

One 9.2mm beryllium coded Dynamic Driver for Sub-bass -Mids
and a BA for upper Mids and Treble.
20-20KHz 19-ohms at 100dB SPL/mW
2 pin connector with fabric covered pure copper cable


20200212_153908.jpg

Accessories:

Large case

S/M/L foam tips

S/M/L double flange silicone tips

S/M/L narrow bore silicone tips

(good variation in tip style but their quality isn’t that good, except the foams that are quite good)

Cable: Quite good cable, it is a 2-core fabric coated cable that is braided and has a working chin slider. Doesn’t feel cheap and weak, but very sturdy. Feels and looks like it can handle some abuse, only downside is that the ear hooks have quite the visible plastic covering them.

No need to change cables if you don’t already have something better or want a cable that changes the sound to your liking more (if you are in that camp). Gives the 1.1 a warmer sound with more bass quantity while reducing tightness a bit. Since I prefer as tight bass as possible, I will change the cable for the review and when I use it.


20200212_154044.jpg

Build:
Resin made body and metal nozzle with metal filter. Has the Shozy brand printed in gold and a very beautiful but unfortunately not very visible (unless with good lighting) glitter decoration that makes the faceplate look like a star field.

Has a large vent hole that contributes to the bad isolation but also to the excellent bass which we get into later.

Fit: Really good fit and stays in place without needing to adjust from time to time. The size isn’t too big or too small so it should fit a lot of people.



Inked20200212_154044_LI.jpg

Comfort: Good comfort but not the best form for me personally, this bump right here is not that comfortable for me.

Isolation: Unfortunately, the isolation is below average, most likely due to the large vent hole.


20200216_141719.jpg

Setup:
Fiio M11, cable 173 (4,4mm), Final Type E Large


Lows:
Bass is on the clean side, being on the faster and tighter side even though there is a noticeable boost in the bass (mid-bass focused). Sub-bass has more rumble and can be seen as a bit looser in comparison to the mid-bass but this can definitely satisfy bass heads while at the same time still keep the quality.

Can you “hear” the beryllium in this? I am not sure as I do not have any other beryllium driver iems to compare to and some of my other iems are both faster and tighter than this, but it still sounds amazing. This has the kind of bass that makes me bob my head while still sounding clean and separate from the other sounds. Very suitable for Hip-hop, R&B, House and EDM. ( although I prefer a bit more speed)

Mid-bass:
The focus of the bass is the mid-bass, since it is on the fast and tight side it keeps the mid-bass from bleeding into the lower-mids which is done very well. It has quite a lot of quantity but the quality is the surprising part since it is clean.
Sub-bass: It can rumble and it can play clean, very versatile sub-bass and both bass heads and others can enjoy it.

Mids:
Mids are well balanced between male and female vocals, both are equally balanced. The mids is done in a way that suits a lot of genres, from acoustic to rock. Quality is excellent too.

(Acoustic songs that have bass in it can be a bit too bassy to sound neutral, but the mids is never the problem for example LiSA unlasting)

Female-vocals:
Sounds very natural but high-pitched female vocals can be on the sharp side. (For example, Evanescence bring me to life)

Male-vocals: excellent male vocals that are very natural and never sharp.

Highs: Surprisingly good naturality and quality, it is the relaxed kind meaning that the treble quantity is on the lower side while still keeping its quality.

There is a peak at around 8k but it is not bothering me at all, but some might find it sharp. (with pure copper cable the overall sound gets warmer by reducing the treble quantity, but I am using Pure silver.)

Soundstage: soundstage is on the average side

Tonality: The overall tonality is warm L-shaped, with the focus being in the very natural timbre and the mid-bass. (very similar to the Blon 03 and in my case, I actually prefer the 1.1)

Details: Excellent amounts of detail (especially in the bass and mids), only gets a bit “chaotic” on live and orchestral music as the instrument separation cannot keep up.

Instrument Separation:
below average instrument separation, really only affect live and orchestral music as I find it good enough for other genres.

Songs that highlight the IEM: , , ,
Good genres:
very versatile.

Bad genres: better to list genres that are bad. Orchestral, Live, Rock, metal and acoustic songs with bass.

Comparisons:

Blon 03:
very similar tonality and treble. 03 has basically the same bass quantity but it is much more boomy which can cause the overall sound to sound muddier compared to the 1.1 (this does make Hip-hop and R&B suit the 03 more than the 1.1). Female vocals are a bit more focused on the 03 while male vocals are just a bit behind the female vocals.

Treble is similar but it the 03 is a bit brighter than the 1.1. Instrument separation and soundstage is also similar but the 1.1 is just a bit better. Details are better on the 1.1, most noticeably is the bass due to it being faster and tighter. Isolation is about the same level but the overall packaging seems to be better on the 1.1. There aren’t any fit issues on the 1.1 either, much easier to recommend the 1.1 over the 03 and sibilance is not a problem with either.

Dunu DM-480:
The similar price point is the only thing that is similar to the 1.1, it has a much stronger coloration to it being U-shaped with an impressive amount of sub-bass. The sub-bass is on the Dm-480 has more quantity however it isn’t as tight or fast as the 1.1, mid-bass is much more linear on it though, but still not as fast or tight as the 1.1.

Mids on the Dm-480 sound more recessed and quality isn’t on the same level either. It does have more treble quantity but combined with its unnatural tonality it doesn’t sound good when compared to the 1.1. Instrument separation and soundstage is better on the Dm-480, details however are lacking. It comes down to whether you like the natural tonality and profile of the 1.1 while still having an excellent bass. Or if you prefer the more “fun” U-shaped sound of the Dm-480, while also having one of the best isolations of all iems I have.

LZ A6 (pink filter):The first thing you notice is how much more air the A6 has in the sound, it makes Live songs sound extremely real but it also makes non-live songs sound a bit unnatural. A6 also has much more treble quantity but that will also make the A6 more prone to sibilance. The treble quality is leagues above the 1.1 and there is an enormous amount of details in the treble and upper treble. Mids are the most similar between the A6 and 1.1, with both of them having an excellent combination of quality and quantity between female and male vocals. Although the extra air in the A6 makes the vocals crisper it might also be a bit too unnatural when compared to the 1.1 that has excellent tonality and timbre.

The A6 has a tighter and faster sub/mid bass but also not as much quantity as the 1.1 (especially the mid-bass). The 1.1 has a very satisfying bass that has a better texture than the A6. Technicalities such as Instrument separation and soundstage is also leagues above the 1.1, making live music especially sound very good. The A6 does have better detail although the biggest difference is in the treble and the quantity most definitely is a part of the reason why. Timbre is more natural on the 1.1 because it doesn’t have that extreme amount of air and treble quantity, otherwise they are on a similar level.

Overall package value, I would say that the 1.1 is a better value. Bigger storage case, better cable, tips and also much cheaper. As for which one has the better sound, I say that the A6 is “better” because of the better technicalities but it all comes down to preferences. If you like a bright energetic treble with tight/fast bass, get the A6. If you want a more relaxed warmish sound with a very good punchy tight/fast bass get the 1.1. (if you are wondering why I am not comparing the 1.1 to the A6 mini it is because the A6 has completely ruined the sound of the mini for me sorry.)


Conclusion: The Shozy Form 1.1 provides a very natural sound with a very satisfying bass at a very good cost, with a good packaging that makes it a very good out of the box iem with no problems with fit. Even though the so-called beryllium driver doesn’t make any hearable differences it is still a good sounding iem and right now it is the best recommendation I can give. Thank you for reading.

Cable source: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/resistance-of-cables-pics-comments-and-links.907998/


Pros: impactful and detailed sound signature
Cons: uncomfortable to wear for long periods
DSC05257.jpg
The Shozy Form 1.1 is a hybrid in-ear monitor with a 9.2mm beryllium-coated diaphragm dynamic driver and a balanced armature on each side. The Form 1.1 retails for $75 at Linsoul. The Form 1.1. was provided to me by Linsoul in exchange for a fair and objective review.

This review can also be viewed on my blog: Shozy Form 1.1 Review

SOURCES:

I have used the Shozy Form 1.1 with the following sources:
  • JDS Labs The Element
  • xDuoo Link
  • Apple USB-C to 3.5mm dongle
  • Fiio BTR1K (over Bluetooth Apt-X)
I have tested these headphones with local FLAC, Spotify Premium, and Amazon Music HD. Visit my last.fm page to get an idea of what I listen to.

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES:
DSC05236.jpg DSC05240.jpg DSC05250.jpg

Shozy Form 1.1 comes in a rectangular black box. The Form 1.1 is pictured on the front of the box. The front panel of the box features a brief description of the Form 1.1’s key design elements. These features are also listed on the back of the box , along with the Form 1.1’s technical specifications. The box contains a large Shozy-branded semi-rigid carry case. The Form 1.1 and its accessories are found inside this case. The Form 1.1 comes with a single detachable .78mm 2-pin cable and a sizable assortment of foam (S, M, L), double flange silicone (S, M, L), and single flange silicone (XS, S, M) eartips.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN:
DSC05316.jpg

The Shozy Form 1.1’s teardrop-shaped shells are made of lightweight glossy black resin with glittery decorative faceplates. The faceplates, which also bear the Shozy logo in gold print, remind me of a star field. The shells are among the largest I’ve used. The shells have a single circular vent on the rear-facing side, which is recessed at the bottom of a tiny metal pot. The Form 1.1’s nozzles are also metal with metal mesh protective grills. The Form 1.1 uses flush-fitting 2–pin connectors.
DSC05295.jpg
The Form 1.1 comes with a pure copper 2-pin cable sheathed in braided black paracord. The connector plugs are red and clear plastic, with the red plastic plug indicating the right-side connector. The connector housings have a reflective metallic coating but do not feel like real metal. The braided cable has pre-formed ear-guides without memory wire. The cable is not tangle-prone but is one of the most microphonic IEM cables I’ve encountered in recent reviews. There is a clear plastic bead-like chin-adjustment choker. There is strain-relief above the straight 3.5mm jack but none at the Y-split.

COMFORT / FIT / ISOLATION:
The Shozy Form 1.1 is intended to be worn cable-up only. The size of the shells makes them slightly uncomfortable for me to wear for extended periods. The nozzles provide a deep enough insertion depth to facilitate a good seal with the pre-installed large single flange stock eartips. Secureness of fit is excellent. Isolation is above average.

SOUND:
The Form 1.1 has a U-shaped tuning with accentuated mid-bass and lower treble.
The Form 1.1 has below average sub-bass extension. There is a noticeable mid-bass hump with a fair amount of bleed into the lower midrange. Kick drums land with plenty of slam. The bass has above average speed, articulation, resolution, and texture.
Instruments in the lower midrange are presented with warmth and plenty of body. Male and female vocals are level with each other, with good intelligibility for both. Male vocals are a little too smooth and a tiny bit thin. Female vocals are slightly sibilant. There is a healthy amount of presence.
The treble presentation emphasizes sparkle. There is a strong lower treble emphasis that puts detail front and center. The sizzle on cymbal hits can be too much on some but not most tracks. Treble transients are quick and do not smear. There is very little air.
Soundstage is smaller than average. Imaging is adequate but in no way noteworthy. Instrument separation is above average. Timbre is realistic.

MEASUREMENTS:
Form 1.1.jpg

My measurements were conducted with a Dayton iMM-6 microphone using a vinyl tubing coupler and a calibrated USB sound interface. The measurements use a compensation file derived from relating my raw measurements to published measurements from Crinacle and Antdroid. The measurements are presented with 1/24th smoothing. The magnitude of the valley around 7k is a coupler artifact. There is a resonant peak around 8k. Measurements above 10k are not reliable.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCE PAIRING:
The Shozy Form 1.1 can easily be driven to comfortable listening volumes with a smartphone or dongle. They do hiss depending on the noise floor of the source.

COMPARISONS:
Shozy Form 1.1 vs Nicehck M6 (with aftermarket brass filter)
Form 1.1 vs M6.jpg

The Nicehck M6 is a 2DD/4BA hybrid with interchangeable nozzle filters. I find the M6 to have bloated, muddy bass with its stock filters, and use the M6 with an aftermarket brass filter which dramatically reduces the amount of bass.
In this configuration, the M6 has significantly worse sub-bass extension than the Shozy Form 1.1. The Form 1.1 also has more slam and heft to bass notes. The M6’s bass response sounds hollow in comparison. The Form 1.1 has a faster, more resolving, better articulated, and more textured bass response.
The M6 has less mid-bass bleed than the Form 1.1, which results in a colder but clearer lower midrange. The M6 has better vocal intelligibility. Male vocals sound thinner on the M6 but have more grit. Female vocals sound more vibrant on the M6. The M6 is less sibilant than the Form 1.1.
The M6’s treble is less prone to harshness than the Form 1.1’s but is equally detailed. The M6 has far more air than the Form 1.1. The M6 has a much larger soundstage. Both have realistic timbre and both are prone to hiss. Neither IEM is appreciably harder to drive than the other.
Both come with semi-rigid carry cases. The Form 1.1 comes with a more varied selection of eartips. The M6 uses MMCX connectors as opposed to 2-pin connectors.

CLOSING WORDS:
DSC05283.jpg

The Shozy Form 1.1 is a worthy upgrade from sub-$50 IEMs with an impactful and detailed sound signature.
  • Like
Reactions: XERO1
Pros: Build quality is better than expected, V/U shaped signature is a fun listen with popular genres
Cons: Instrument separation is a step behind class leaders, treble tuning may seem a bit boring to some.



Disclaimer: I was provided the Shozy Form to review by Linsoul Audio. I have no financial interest in Shozy or Linsoul, nor have I received any incentives for this review. If you have an interest in this iem after reading the review, Linsoul Audio has them in-stock and ready to ship.

If you have an interest in the Shozy Form you can learn more about it from their website here.

Unboxing / Packaging:

The Shozy form arrived in a lift top box with a photo of the earpiece on the front along with most of the specs. On the reverse of the box, even more details about the build and internals are presented. Lifting the lid reveals the rubberized clamshell case with all the other items hidden inside. Outer packaging is well done, but inner packaging leaves a bit to be desired as it lacks the finesse of some of its competition. The kit hiding inside the case contains 9 sets of tips in 3 styles along with the cable and earpieces. It isnt the fanciest of kits at the price point, and the addition of a shirt clip, and a balanced cable would be welcomed with it being nearly $100 kit.





Build/Fit:

The shells are resin printed with hand-fitted face-plates and are well made and fitted with no slop, glue or gaps. The distinction between face-plate and inner shell is visible but not felt with a fingernail. The same is true of the vent on the rear, junction between resin and metal is neither raised or recessed and while visible is tough to feel even with a fingernail dragged across it. The bi-pin connector housing is visible due to a slight variation in color but is equally well fitted. Shells are on the smaller side with a shape somewhere between semi-circle (inner) and triangular (external) with the nozzles exiting the top of the lead edge with an upward and forward rake. The shape is ergonomic enough for long wear with good comfort, but the fairly shallow fit and venting means isolation is only average.




Internals:

The form is a hybrid in ear with a 9.2mm dynamic driver that utilizes a beryllium coated PVC diaphragm to handle the low end and a custom tuned balanced armature driver for the upper range. Nominal impedance is listed as 19Ω with a sensitivity of 100 dB/mW. Those numbers are very similar to the GR-i I recently reviewed with the big difference being the Form is externally vented while the GR-i is not. The Form performed well using a cell phone or tablet as source but does scale some both qualitatively and quantitatively as well. I found the Form paired well with the xDSD and the DTR1 .


Cable:

The form cable starts with a straight 3.5mm jack with a chrome and carbon-fiber housing with a short strain relief before the cloth wrapped cable exits in a twisted pair configuration. Shozy lists the cable material as high purity cooper with no silver plating. The splitter matches the jack with chrome and carbon fiber above which the strands exit as single cloth wrapped per side. A clear bead chin slider is somewhat loose and of limited utility. The last couple inches have plastic pre-formed earhooks before the cable terminates in .78mm bi-pin connectors. The connectors are housed in chrome, have a red plastic surround on the right and blue dots at the leading edge for alignment and orientation purposes.




Tips:

The Form comes with a better than average selection of tips with 6 sets of silicones and 3 sets of foams to choose from. I immediately found that I am not a big fan of the sound foams produce with this in-ear and began working on which of the silicone styles worked best for me. The large clear/white tip was the best of those provided for fit and sound in my case, but still not quite as good as the Shure olives (L) so sound notes are done with the Shure tips.





Sound:






Bass:


At the bottom end, the Form shows good sub-bass extension with ample rumble and roll-off not particularly noteworthy until well into the the 40Hz range. It has a boosted sub-bass and mid-bass presence, but has better than average control and is faster than many in its class in both attack and decay so that big bass stays fairly tight and defined throughout the range. Mid-bass while still elevated drops back from the sub-bass peak and while it still has some slam is not as potent as the sub-bass rumble. So while the Form may not be a bassheads dream, for those who want a bit of a bass boost but not at the cost of detail and texture, the Form does a good job. I’m impressed by the speed, detail, and texture here as I expect this in the $300 space but not in the $100 range.



Mids:

Lower mids are recessed and so have a slight mid-bass bleed but not such that it obstructs detail. Unfortunately, the mids seem a bit less detailed than the bass or treble but I can’t attribute that to the bass bleed, but more to the tuning of the cross-over and the fact that the mids come out a bit thinner as a result of the tuning. The mids climb back forward as you move toward the treble and vocals and strings benefit from that push albeit more the higher versions (violin vs viola and female vs male vocals) that seem to benefit the most. The upside is while female vocals seem a bit richer and more forward, they stop short of harsh or over-done.



Treble:

The lower treble continues the climb where the upper-mids leave off and at roughly the same level as the mid-bass leaving the sub-bass slightly ahead of it, but otherwise becoming one of the dominant features of the landscape. There is a drop off pretty rapidly above about 5kHz that troughs at about 7kHz before climbing back up to be even with the mids at about 8.5kHz and on upward to be even with the lower treble from about 10-12kHz before final roll-off above 12kHz. This gives the treble good energy while missing the area that often results in a shrill or piercing spike at the 7-9kHz range. Treble has good detail in the overall, and even with the trough doesn’t feel lacking in definition or texture. Cymbals are better than expected and snare rattle is closer to realistic than I usually anticipate at this price. There is some fatigue with long listening sessions, but not nearly as pronounced as it is with some others like the typical KZ iems. If I have to find fault here, pushing that final roll-off out a bit higher would give them a bit more open top end but that’s nitpicking.



Soundstage / Imaging:

Soundstage is wider than deep as expected but does have reasonable depth and even some sense of height in the presentation. I would liken the stage to a small arena like a high school auditorium rather than to a coliseum. Seating the orchestra is fairly straight forward with the occasional placement more beside than behind due to width. I think this is partially because the one place the Form seems to fall down a bit is the instrument separation. The more complex the track gets, the more jumbled the instrumentation begins to sound. For that reason, I recommend the Form be considered if your typical listening is small ensemble like rock, pop, even small jazz ensembles or string quartet. For full orchestral pieces, the Form struggles a bit. Imaging is reasonable good despite the separation issues and movement around the stage again is well represented as long as things don’t get overly busy and overwhelm it.



Thoughts / Conclusion:

The Shozy form is better than expected at its price point and while the kit is a bit lacking in comparison it otherwise reminds me a bit of the Ibasso IT-01 in both build and sub-bass although the Shozy is tighter and cleaner while the Ibasso is a bit bigger in that department. The V/U shaped signature is a good match for most popular genres but may not work for large ensemble pieces or classic orchestral works. I suspect Shozy was probably targeting the younger market that will mostly use a phone as the source and have current release popular music on their playlists. For that, it definitely is worth a look and competitive with things at considerably higher prices. If that defines your listening habits, you ought to give the Shozy a serious audition as you could do a lot worse and spend a lot more in doing so. Again, thanks to Linsoul for sending the Form to review and if you are interested, check their site.https://www.linsoul.com/collections/shozy/products/shozy-form-1-1
Pros: Shell is comfortable and has a thoughtful design
- Bass has decent impact and robust without bleeding out too much
- Very musical and can handle a variety of genres well
- High value for money
Cons: Soundstage is a bit narrow and clarity is middling even compared to its peers
- Treble has peaks that can be uncomfortable for more sensitive ears
Introduction



Shozy Audio a stalwart in the ever-developing Chinese audiophile scene have returned with a new series. The Form series which shall be heralded by the Form 1.1 a budget-friendly 1DD 1BA hybrid design that at $75 harkens back to the IEM that got their name into the budget-fi realm, the Hibiki and it's subsequent variations. Both carrying the promise to provide a superb value proposition at its price point, will the Form 1.1 deliver like the Hibiki that came before? Available now at Shenzhen Audio or Linsoul.



Specifications
9.2mm beryllium coated dynamic driver for sub-bass to mids range
Single BA for mids-treble
Hybrid design, enhanced treble
Metallic nozzle and parts
Hand-crafted faceplate
2pin Detachable cable with fabric shielding for better durability and shock resistance.
Premium ear tips designed for enhanced bass response
20Hz-20KHz Frequency Response
100dB SPL/mW Sensitivity
19 Ohms Impedance



Gear Used and Track List
Hiby R6 | FiiO Q1 Mk. II | iFi xDSD | Massdrop x Cavalli CTH | xDuoo XD-05

Unboxing
The Form 1.1 comes in a simple small carton that houses the classic carrying case and includes the IEM some spare ear tips in many varieties and not much else. The style is reminiscent of Campfire Audio simple packaging style without the extra premium feel, but at the price of $75, you can't really complain that much at the spartan loadout. The tip loadout has a good mix including some multi-flanges and some foam tips to cater to most if not all users.



Scalability
The Form 1.1 is an easy to drive IEM that is also not overly sensitive to hissing making a good match for mobile devices,
it's easy to drive nature also meant there weren't many gains when moving up the source stack as even phones and dongles had sufficient power and headroom to drive them, the gains you could get from the Form were incremental if at all. This isn't something anyone buying the Form should be all that concerned about and that makes sense for the price bracket of the Form.

Fit
A highlight of this design, the acrylic shell used by the Form is relatively compact for a universal that comes in this style, as well as relatively lightweight lending to a comfortable fit even when listening sessions get dragged on, and the vent seems to adequately prevent internal air pressure build-up within the ears. Isolation was good given it blocked a lot of the portion of the ear plus the smooth shape allowed for fewer gaps and those that were there were generally smaller compared to less form-fitting or more angular shapes. The faceplate is attractive and eye-catching without trending the line of gaudy. More on that below. Overall it's a well-fitting shell that should provide good isolation and comfort to most ear shapes.




Sound Review by Hoshi星
Sound Signature
The Form sorts a crowd-pleasing U-shaped tuning that is a less extreme take on the old classic V-shape that provides a fun musicality and makes a myriad of tracks and genres enjoyable to listen to
, and pretty much anything in the main charts right now will sound just at home on the Form. Of the three major frequency spectrum portions, the bass takes the center stage promptly followed by the treble and the midrange a little bit behind. None of this leads to an unnatural tonality but it still isn't what I would call neutral, closer to a warm bass-forward one instead. One thing to note is that the tuning will lead to some treble energy so more treble sensitive prospective buyers keep that in mind as I describe each frequency range in depth.

Bass
The most favored range tuning wise, the vented beryllium coated dynamic driver provides ample bass that reaches deep enough in the sub-bass region without being what I would call extensive
, this then transitions relatively cleanly into the more prominent midbass that provides a requisite punch and fullness, that while not always perfectly controlled, isn't sloppy either, especially considering the price it provides good weight and dynamics, sacrificing a little bit of bass resolution for fullness that translates well in rock tracks or tracks using similar drum styles as rock music. While not actually treading into basshead territory, the Form manages to deliver punchy, full bass that works well and doesn't manage to cloud the entire sound signature for the most part. Excellent value performance here.



Mids:
The mids take a step back, not incredibly so, but noticeable definitely
. While not totally absent, listing to tracks which strip down the song, especially the bass, the sound is further out than normal but still not to an unnatural degree, vocals still stand out just enough and the lower and upper vocal register are balanced enough that there is no unnaturality present. However given the more reserved nature of the mids once songs start increasing in complexity or dialing up the pace, bits, and pieces definitely get lost in the mix, and either the BA can't pick it up enough or the DD BA transition hits a snag that causes some of these snags. Climbing up the register past the crossover the Form smooths out and gently rising towards the lower treble that rounds out the dip in the U-shaped tuning.

Treble:
Probably second in command in my pointless frequency metaphor, the Form has a BA that is tuned to be mildly energetic providing a lift to the sound, however, there is a perceptible lack of total control as there are peaks in the treble that for the sensitive may cause irritation or fatigue, there is also very mild sibilance in tracks that are prone, but nothing that will be problematic for most people in general. The energy of treble reproduction falls short of being tizzy, but it in tandem with the bass creating a fun and engaging sound signature that can easily draw you into the music. While this energy provides nice sparkle and a decent amount of air, the slightly more weighted bass and the reserved treble work hand in hand to lower down the ceiling of clarity that the Form can approach. It is far from being muddled but even more prominent treble can't do all the heavy lifting in the overall resolution of the Form.



Soundstage and Separation:
Probably one of the true banes of the Form. Both in terms of staging as well as details and separation the Form falters a tad
. The soundstage is on the narrower side lending to a mildly congested presentation. As for the separation, the middling detail retrieval means that as stated earlier that congestion can cause a muddling of the sound field, once combined with the sound stage it overall gives a somewhat congested presentation, at least relatively, even at the price. Though still not to the point that totally drags the overall performance of the Form, rather it's just a dark spot on an otherwise pleasant overall item.

Comparison:
The Form 1.1 falls in an interesting spot in terms of comparison. In its currents price bracket, there really isn't anything close enough that really is a good comparison point precisely because of the price to performance the Form delivers. So instead I went with something more expensive but more adequately presents itself for comparison. The Periodic Audio Mg at $99 that is similarly tuned, priced higher but still trades blow for blow with the cheaper Form.

Periodic Audio Mg
  • SMOOTHER TUNING, PARTICULARLY IN THE TREBLE.
  • LESS RECESSED MID-RANGE.
  • WIDER SOUNDSTAGE AND BETTER CLARITY.
Shozy Form 1.1
  • MORE POWERFUL BASS.
  • BETTER BUILD QUALITY, AND MORE THOUGHTFUL DESIGN.
  • MORE ENERGETIC TREBLE




Aesthetic Review by Steve
Introduction:
Shozy is one of the lower-profile companies from China in terms of aesthetics. I personally know their boss and truly believe he's more technically oriented as opposed to being aesthetics or marketing oriented. However, by looking at their recent projects on the IEM stream, they seem to have found a formula to infuse a spark into a plain design, to make ordinary looking IEMs not so ordinary, a move from just plain solid or translucent colors. The Shozy Form 1.1 is a great example of making it simple, safe and nice.

Color:
Companies that lean towards a simpler aesthetic design tend to use black and grey tone colors. I guess it would fail you in mass production. The important thing is how to make it a bit more unique from the others. The Form 1.1 uses multi-colored glitter as a key factor in its core design. It's not something that wows you, but at least you can see that they put effort into it and not just on the sound. Comparing it with some other companies who provide only solid or translucent colors, this is an improvement. The multi-color may not appeal to everyone as it might come across as a bit too loud or slightly feminine especially for mature audiophiles who generally look for more minimalistic designs. Even though the average hue is not that vivid nor shiny, you also can't really compare them with their previous models like the Shozy Lite or the Shozy BG with gold flakes as they certainly look more luxurious. A similar formula, different outcome. For a 75usd product, I think they did a clever and effective job rather than just giving you a typical solid color option.



Craftmanship:
Nothing much to criticize about the craftsmanship
. Edging and glossy finish are nicely done. The whole faceplate and shell joined smoothly - no spikes on either side, no bubbles, dents or scratches as well. Both logos are evenly placed. Definitely satisfying for those who are picky in this aspect. Shozy seems to maintain good craftsmanship standards and QC process since I couldn't find any obvious flaws with their other models like the Lite, BG or even the lower tier V33.



Design details:
The multi-colored glitter on the faceplate is evenly spread and does not have an inconsistent size of the flakes in general.
On the photo above, you can see there are one of two flakes that are significantly larger, but unless you are extremely nit-picky or neurotic about fine details like this, I think it is acceptable for this tier. You can actually even see a more obvious one on the cover sleeve on their package. Glitter is easier to work with because it’s size is much smaller than gold or silver flakes so the proportion between the glitter and the faceplate wouldn't have any issues. On the other hand, flakes are much harder to even out and also the size difference of each flake is difficult to control.

Silhouette:
The curve line of the shell is smooth and without being clumsy
(too circular). The shape wouldn't give you an awkward feeling or any curves or corners that bother you. A very comfortable shape that most of the people would be satisfied with unless you are looking for a CIEM type fit.



Cable:
The cable itself looks good, having good texture and braid makes it looks fuller considering it is part of a 75usd priced IEM package.
However what really bothers me is the cable material - fabric coated. The downside is that if you have really sweaty hands, like mine, this would be a pain for you since it's not washable, unlike those ones you normally see with a PU coat on it. Also, the consistency of the plug, splitter, and slider could be better, especially for the slider. While the other parts used are carbon and silver plating, the slider uses a transparent plastic seems to be inconsistent compared with the other parts. Also using a carbon pattern with this target market seem to be a bit hardcore, in my opinion, a bit risky move on their part. I think just the silver plating would have done the trick, making the whole presentation of the cable nice and elegant.



Packaging:
The packaging at this price point is pretty decent
. It includes what you would expect in terms of accessories. The quality of the case is sturdy, nothing special about the design. On the other hand, I like the presentation of the packaging which uses actual product photography on the cover. The composition and font style with the description is neat and comfortable. It is a clear way to present the product and for this price range, you don't really need something artistic like what I did back then for Kinera with the Odin and Nanna. Sometimes a simple presentation with a more commercial design pattern might even be more productive for the dealer in selling. However, there is a tiny flaw on the back of the cover, the FR chart only gives you a basic idea of how the frequency looks but it doesn't really tell you anything since it doesn't have a grid and numbers on it. Might possibly be a mistake during printing procedure as it is rare to see an FR chart with just a curve on it.



Aesthetic Conclusion:
With just a 75usd product, everything is above average with regards to aesthetics,
unless you are really picky and comparing it with something beyond the price tag. After all, it does all come down to cost. With a simple but not boring look, a decent braided cable and nicely done package, the whole presentation is fair enough. I believe Shozy has a clear focus on balancing their style and marketing along with their formula of making their product line more consistent and memorable.
Ratings (Ratings are relative to the price range):
Colour: 4/5
Craftmanship: 4.5/5
Design details: 3.5/5
Silhouette: 4/5
Cable: 4/5
Packaging: 4/5

Sound Conclusion:
The Form 1.1 is by no means perfect. At this price point there are compromises that always have to be made, but what makes the Form 1.1 so appealing as a product is that it blends together enough strengths that together they make up for many of the deficiencies that it has. Shozy has leveraged its higher-tiered products and allowed the Form to have a shell whose design and quality is rarely found at this price, and coupled it with a sound that has enough punch and energy to create a musicality and engagement that often has users looking beyond its technical flaws. It's something relatively affordable that practically anyone can jam on. And while it's not flawless, the total package it provides is hard to beat.
Sound 4/5

Overall: 4/5
  • Like
Reactions: XERO1
Pros: Works well with EQ
Comfortable shell design
Great accessories
Fast driver and good resolution for budget price
Cons: Very bright

Before I get straight into this review, I would like to just point out that I’ve tried a few Shozy earphones in the past and I’ve yet to even come out of those experiences even lukewarm excited about them. Nothing I’ve tried has impressed me. Their last set that I had some significant time on and reviewed was the Shozy V33, which I really, really did not understand it’s tuning, nor did I think it was technically capable.

So, when Lillian, from Linsoul, reached out and asked if I was interested in trying the newest Shozy In-Ear, I was skeptical and not totally convinced. She sent me a link to a new page her team was making for the Shozy with the information regarding the new IEM, called Form 1.1, and it started to look a little more promising. The IEM is a dual-driver hybrid, and features a balanced armature to handle the mids and treble and also a dynamic driver to handle the bass and lower mids. What makes this IEM a little more unique is that this dynamic is a driver coated with a thin layer of beryllium. This type of driver design is also the centerpiece of my recent ZMF Verité headphone acquisition, and one I am quite fond of.

Beryllium drivers have recently made some appearances in a few headphones and IEMs – namely the Focal Utopia, the French company’s flagship headphone, and the previously mentioned ZMF flagship. While the Utopia driver is fully beryllium-based, the Verité, like the Shozy Form 1.1, is a Be-coated PEN driver, which allows it to share many of the similar properties of the former – that is, great resolution, quick, agile speed, and dynamics at a lower cost.

Release Date & Pricing Info
At this point, my curiosity piqued. And a couple days later, the Shozy Form 1.1 package arrived at my door. Now, I had to keep the information regarding its launch date and price a secret, but I am now able to disclose that this product will be available on Friday, September 27th (2019) as a pre-order special on Drop.com for $59.99. This will be approximately $15 below the regular price of $75. This product will also be available on Linsoul.com but not at the special drop exclusive price.





The Package
Shozy’s Form 1.1 comes in a small box that opens up with a flip top. Inside the box is a polyurethane-coated zipper case that contains the Form 1.1 IEM, the cable and a series of tips. The cable included is very nice. I really like how it’s designed – it has a braided cloth covering the copper wires and each channel is braided over each other and reminds me of a miniature Paracord-style over-ear headphone cable. The 3.5mm connector and splitter have a mirrored chrome look with black carbon fabric pattern, and the 2-pin connectors are also chrome colored. The cable is very soft and useable and overall a very nice touch to this package.

The shell design itself is a small and lightweight resin shell that fits relatively comfortably into my ears. The default tips are an interesting silicone tip that feels like foam. I really thought they were pretty cool. I ended up using the largest one of these provided, while I normally wear small tips on most IEMs. Using the large ones, I did get some occasional pressure point pains, and switching to the medium tips were very comfortable, but the bass response was tamed noticeably when I wore those.

Sources & Stuff

I played the Shozy Form 1.1 through a few different sources for this review. My primary unit is the Hiby R5 audio player, as well as running it through the iBasso DX220 and my desktop RME ADI-2 DAC. The RME DAC has a built-in EQ which I’ll go over a little later in this review. All of these sources had an abundance of headroom to power the Form 1.1. It’s not as sensitive as some of my all-BA IEMs, but it doesn’t require a ridiculous amount of power like the Tin Hifi P1 did, for example.

Quick and Nimble Speed

Putting the Form 1.1 on, I was met with a surprisingly detailed, nimble and articulate sound immediately. I actually didn’t know how much they cost when I first tried them on. I only knew their product information and that they’d be under $99. Even at $99, the level of detail retrieval was impressive right away.

Listening a little more, I quickly realized that they had a few small shortcomings. One was that I felt the treble was a little too elevated and gave it a false sense of resolution. The second was that I felt the sound stage was a little narrower than I normally would prefer. I’ll address these two things a little more in a second.




The bass response on the Form 1.1 has a bump to it and it’s got sub-bass that is present and a punch to it that is weighty, feeling more like a ported-sub than a sealed-sub. What separates this IEM from others in this price class in this area is the quality of the bass response. The dynamic driver decays faster than most normal drivers do, and that projects a cleaner bass response that still sounds like a dynamic (and not a BA), which gives the bass response more detail, more texture, and more definition.

I don’t know if I’ve really experienced that in an IEM in this price, so that’s why I was pretty impressed quickly. The stock bass tuning is warm, and provides the midrange a nice rich sound. Vocals in the mid-range sound natural, but as we move up to the upper-mids and lower treble, the female vocal range does seem a little stretched at times. Guitar plucks sound extremely detailed for an IEM of this price point and even more so. Each pull of the string has a nice resonating quality to it that feels lively and real.

The brighter treble response adds some remnants of sibilance and edgy artifacts occasionally. This type of response in IEMs can vary from ear to ear and some may find it sensitive and others not. For me, I am, or at least have become more sensitive to it if it’s within a certain peak range (approximately 8kHz). This IEM peaks at around 7.3kHz, and that’s why sometimes I find the harsh peaks painful and sometimes I do not.

At worst, it’s a little ear jolt of spiky edginess. At best, it’s a little annoying and may cause some longer-term fatiguing listening. And that’s a little unfortunate for me, personally, as I find this IEM tuned pretty well outside this big peak in this 7-8kHz range.

This type of boost, however, does provide a little more detail to push forward, so recording quality and mastering can affect sound quality. I don’t typically like to judge a headphone by this, because I typically review a headphone as something that can be used in many situations, and if it can’t then I try to give my idea of where they work best and don’t work in. The Form 1.1 isn’t the best for poor recordings, at least with not some help from equalization (see below).

So back to my original thoughts: Tonality.
My first negative was that I thought the treble was a little overexaggerated, and I’ve tried to explain it a little bit already. And normally in a lot of IEM reviews, I don’t always bother going in-depth regarding equalizer usage. I’m not against it either. I have the RME ADI-2 DAC specifically so I can do hardware-based equalizer for a number of headphones at once. But for my review sets, I only tend to spend time on this topic if I feel like there’s a small deficiency in a capable headphone that has potential, and I feel like this one is in that category.

I took my IEC-711 coupler measurements and threw it into Room EQ Wizard and worked out a Parametric Equalizer (PEQ) setting that was close to my ideal frequency response curve and set up the RME ADI-2 DAC with this setting and turned on some music. For reference and for your possible enjoyment, my PEQ setting as of the time of writing this is:


Peak: 200 Hz Gain: -3.0dB Q-Factor: 0.5
Peak: 7.3 kHz Gain: -3.5dB Q-Factor: 5.0
Peak: 7.5 kHz Gain: -5.0dB Q-Factor: 2.0


With most songs, flipping the EQ on, helped reduce the brightness just a smidgen, and enough to tame the treble for longer term enjoyment. I played around with it until I found a good balance of keeping that treble sizzle contained but without losing the sparkle it creates.


Equalizer Predicted Frequency Response: Light Blue is the Filtered Response and Dark Blue is the Original Response

Not all songs behaved though. I still struggled with Elton John’s classic 1970’s music. Perhaps it’s the recording and mastering or it’s just Elton John’s vocals back then, but the Shozy Form 1.1 presented occasional sharpness in his music.

But not all was bad. In fact, for the most part, I found that with or even without the EQ settings, a lot of rock music and country music excelled in this IEM. Obviously for my preference, I found turning the EQ on and providing a more neutral bass response, while still maintaining elevated subbass, and reducing the treble peak at 7-8kHz improved my satisfaction with this IEM significantly.

The ability of the drivers to project very intricate qualities was impressive. I’m really surprised by what I heard. Obviously, this IEM does better with more laidback music and not something very treble-centric, and that’s why I find these working really well with organic rock and country music, jazz, and classical. I don’t find this does as well with some other genres, because it can be fatiguing.

Soundstage & Imaging
Now, back to the other negative – the soundstage. I found the Shozy had a narrow soundstage right away. I felt that music was being played well within my ears, and it was narrow like what I’d hear from an Etymotics IEM. Music had width to it, but trapped inside my head, and there was never a sense of depth or verticality. Psychoacoustics is a real thing for me, and I use certain songs, like Tool’s “The Pot” as a way to hear music coming from left and right, above and below, and in front or behind me. The introduction is enough to hear that type of imaging to me on my headphones, and even IEMs like my qdc Anole VX can separate the instruments into that type of 3D space within my mind. The Shozy Form 1.1 failed that test.

There’s definitely a sense of left and right panning, but not as wide and dynamic as I would expect and some small sense of forward sounds (or a phantom center channel) but not nearly as defined as some other IEMs. With my EQ activated, some of this sense actually started to come back. And to be clear, in the song “The Pot”, the faint echoes give me some forward and depth, while at around 16 seconds in, the drum beat starts to kick in and pans around each channel above and below you (on the VX and some of my headphones).

That’s not to say that the Form 1.1 is extremely narrow. It’s just not up to my normal listening standards. I didn’t find them as congested and closed-in as the recent Tin Hifi P1 planar IEM nor as the Shozy Hibiki IEM. Those were extremely narrow and everything just came at you all at once and imaging became a bit of a disaster to wade through. The Form 1.1 manages to separate instruments decently, but lacks a large space to put all of them in as some others would. Still, I don’t find this too problematic at all.



Comparisons




GuideRay GR-I

The GuideRay GR-I and the Shozy Form 1.1 share some similarities. They both measure similarly, however the Shozy Form 1.1 is noticeably elevated in the higher frequency band. This is definitely audible, as the GR-I was pushing the border of harshness for me, but rarely crossed it. With the Form 1.1, in it’s stock form, it did become harsh with some music and caused some fatiguing. That said, the Form 1.1’s resolution of detail was a marked jump from the GR-I, and it’s bass driver has a more noticeable rumble with defined layers, where the GR-I lacked this level of detail.




Tin Hifi P1

In a battle of two detail monsters, the Tin P1 Planar might edge out the Shozy in resolution, but only by slightly. I found the P1 to very extremely narrow and closed-in and this caused a lot of issues for me in terms of proper imaging and just a feeling of chaos in busy selections. Both have accentuated highs but the P1 felt more piercing than the Form 1.1 does. The Form 1.1 has a more elevated bass with a lot more punch, and those who felt the P1 lacked in this region should be happy with the Form 1.1’s bass performance, along with a similar level of resolution and speed.




Moondrop Kanas Pro

The Kanas Pro, like I’ve mentioned several times in the past, is one of my favorite IEMs of any price. The fit on it is still more comfortable to me than the Form 1.1. I also like the way it looks overall and it has a sensible sound signature that is clean and smooth. The Form 1.1 may actually out-resolve the Moondrop Kanas Pro in every area, but also is a little brighter and has bigger rumble and punchiness.



KZ ZSX

The KZ ZSX is a warm balanced tuning that lacks the definition that the Form 1.1 has. I find the ZSX to have more flabby bass response, but at the same time, the lower mid-range is warm and rich and the treble is tamed down and well controlled from harshness, which I can’t always say with the Form 1.1.




Conclusions/Wrap-Up

I came into the beginning of this process extremely skeptical I’d like a Shozy in-ear product, but have come out of this rather impressed. The Form 1.1’s new driver does it’s job and gives the bass and lower midrange a fast, punchy, and very good definition, that is unmatched in the In-Ears I’ve heard in this price point. I do advise that the treble is rather sharp and can be harsh and fatiguing, depending on each individual’s sensitivity and their preferences in music.

I was able to come out this review with a parametric equalizer setting that works well for my needs: taming the treble beast and putting it down to a level that I can handle, while still keeping the spicy sizzle of cymbal crashes, and airy sparkle present but controlled. With this EQ, this becomes my favorite budget IEM I’ve heard and it can compete with much more pricey earphones that I’ve heard. Without the EQ, it’s still got a lot of promise to it, especially if you can handle more brightness than I can. The detail quality won me over on this one.

  • Like
Reactions: XERO1 and viatraco
Pros: A grate value just with build quality, comfort and sound alone, never mind the fact I personally think these are stunning especially when the light hits them and the colors shine.
Nice case and good assortment of tips with a unique cable.
Cons: Look may be a turn off for some people but I find them not overly flashy.
Cable is comfortable but again some may like a more coated one.
For me I found no cons just playing devils advocate here.
Opening the very tasteful box with a great shot of the Form 1.1 on the front. One finds another box inside and a very spacious case inside containing the Shozy , a cloth braided cable and three different tips in three different sizes. A unusually unique shaped silicon, a white dual flange silicon and Tin audio style grayish foam tips. A very nice assortment of accessories.

Build is light-weight yet quality is very good and the resin body is seamless, metal nozzle and a mesh filter with a metal vent towards the back. I like the two pin connector and the cable is different from anything I've used so far in a great way very nice choices Shozy audio.

Sound
Highs have a perfect extension with a nice stepped roll off never treading near the sibilant zone but slight forward and more emphasized with clarity and speed.
Mids are clear with a warmth and nice timbre that made both instruments and vocals have a unique presents to them. Defiantly not a mid centered IEM but does have a interesting quality to them that is pleasantly intimate and not thin.
Bass is super controlled and delivered a amazing depth and detail without being overly boomy but with a nice attack in the sub-bass and always perfectly represented with any distortion or bleed moving up to the mids. Mid bass is rapid and punchy with this extending to the upper part. Simplified its not a bass cannon its a bass sniper rifle.
Soundstage is natural and has a almost organic width to not the widest but more so its imaging and details are accurate giving one a pleasant and not cramped experience.
Comfort, Ill keep this part short with silicon or foam the answer is it is very comfortable due to its great rounded shape and nice quality tips. So yes its comfortable.

Overall this sub $100 space is filled with wonders and very competitive but the Shozy not only sparkles but shines bright as a star in the midnight sky.

20191103_122157-01.jpeg 20191101_121003_HDR.jpg 20191101_125129_HDR.jpg
Top