Simgot Supermix 4 (1DD + 1BA + 1 Planar + 1 PZT)


New Head-Fier
New King Around $150: Great Tuning + Awesome Technicality!
Pros: - Good texture and power in sub-bass and bass
- Musical and forward vocal presentation
- Smooth and clean treble
- Wide and grand soundstage
- Excellent imaging and technicality in its price range
- Good coherent drivers
- Very good micro-detail
Cons: - Basic accessories
- Prone to shoutiness in high-tone female vocals
- Vocals are too forward (preference)
- Source needs to be considered for optimal sound (but that’s true for all IEMs, haha)
- No other cons, it’s affordable and sounds great

New King Around $150: Great Tuning + Awesome Technicality!​

First of all, thank you to Kuping Sensi for providing this unit for an honest review. If it's bad, I'll say it's bad; if it's good, I'll say it's good.
Who doesn’t know Simgot? (Well, some might not, haha). But for audiophiles in Indonesia, it's almost impossible not to know them, especially in the last year where their IEMs have been nothing short of excellent. And now, they have released a new IEM with a 4-driver configuration, each being a different type, and it falls into the mid-range IEM category in Indonesia.
Let’s get right to it... Simgot SuperMix 4.



All impressions were tested using my usual setup (list below). So if there are differences in sound impressions, it's likely due to our subjective hearing differences, a defective unit, or the source used. All my impressions and reviews are subjective and follow the belief "I only lie to myself about my savings, my reviews are always honest". Agree? Fine. Disagree? Fine. I review because I want to and I like it, not because I need to, haha.
Important!! I recommend you still audition it yourself, who knows if it’s my ears that need an ENT doctor or yours (haha).


- Symphonium Crimson
- Kinera Verdandi
- 634ears Loak 2 OP
- Simgot SuperMix 4
- Fiio Q15
- Chord Mojo 2
- HibyDigital M300
- Hiby R4
- Ear Tips Eletech Baroque, Spinfit W1 Premium, Azla Sedna Crystall
With a price around $150 or about 2.5 million IDR, it turns out Simgot still sticks to the usual box and contents. But fortunately, there have been improvements, especially in the cable compared to other Simgot IEMs below its price. Contents include:
  • The IEM itself
  • A carrying case (thick and slightly large)
  • 2 braided cable with 2-pin connector and 3.5mm jack (Thank goodness, no more sticky plastic aquarium hose cables. Still wrapped in plastic but with noticeably better quality)
  • 3 sizes of ear tips (these ear tips are still just "meh")
  • Documentation
A 4-driver hybrid undeniably requires more space. This is evident from its thicker shell compared to other Simgot IEMs like the EA500LM. The surprising part is the shell material; it's all plastic and lightweight, unlike the usual sturdy metal shell from Simgot. The nozzle itself is slightly longer than average but with a smaller diameter. It can be tricky to find suitable ear tips, but once you do, it’s comfortable and no problem to wear.



From the first listen, the SuperMix 4 has an enjoyable sub-bass texture. The rumble is round and long enough to be enjoyable. The somewhat slow and long impact gives the music a grander feel. Similarly, the produced bass is punchy and textured, but with slightly less power than the sub-bass, making the drum slam feel less deep even though the texture is good and dynamic. Sub-bass is much more prominent than the bass.
This turns out to be the main star of the SuperMix 4. Yes, the vocals. It has a forward presentation with a natural timbre, which is a selling point. The tone thickness for both male and female vocals feels just right and airy, making the sound musical and pleasant to listen to. Unfortunately, the elevation in the upper-mid makes high-tone female vocals in some songs sound shouty. Additionally, instruments like the snare drum and finger snaps in some songs can sound unclear, which I find quite disturbing, such as in the song "Thunder" by Imagine Dragons.
The treble is smooth and fun. The extended treble sounds long on the shimmering parts of the song, making it very enjoyable for treble-heads. The treble is clear with engaging power, delivering micro-detail in the treble very well. There is no sibilance or unclear treble. This treble configuration is great for long listening sessions.
Despite the shoutiness in high-tone female vocals in some songs, this IEM offers super clean and clear sound in all aspects. Its micro-detail is one of the best in its price range.
Wide and grand. The airy sound from dynamic instruments and excellent sub-bass adds to the spacious feel.
Another best sector of this IEM is its imaging and technicality. This IEM has 4 different types of drivers but very coherent sound between the drivers, really impressive. 3D imaging is clearly felt with great separation and layering of instruments in its price range. It’s tough for an IEM to achieve such good technicality.


  • Mojo 2 (analog, neutral, a bit warm):
Recommended, the shoutiness in high-tone female vocals disappears, and the low frequency sounds more textured. The forward vocals are polished, feeling analog and very natural, making it a favorite for vocal lovers. The treble is slightly less sparkling but still with good micro-detail and engaging power.
  • Fiio Q15 (neutral, analytical):
Recommended, the micro-detail and soundstage are pushed to a better level. The sub-bass is not as maximal as with the Mojo 2, but the treble feels crisper and more detailed.
  • Hiby R4 (warm, not bright):
Okay, the sub-bass feels long, but the bass impact is less powerful. The vocals feel more engaging but slightly thinner than with the Mojo 2. The treble is really off and less engaging. Additionally, the treble becomes slightly unclear in some songs.



  • With bass that has good texture and power, smooth and clean treble, and forward vocals, this IEM has a W-shaped sound signature. Not only is the tuning excellent, but the technicality of this IEM with good driver coherence and great layering is outstanding.
  • Unfortunately, the high upper-mid elevation makes high-tone female vocals prone to unclean sounds.
  • Is it worth buying? For me, the key to SQ is sound signature and technicality. Both are very well achieved in this IEM.
  • Best Value to Performance IEM (at this price range)
That's all.
Thank you, Kuping Sensi.
Trust Your Own Ears.


New Head-Fier
Review of the Simgot SuperMix 4 and comparison to the Oracle MKII with and without PEQ
Pros: 1. Excellent Value for Money
2. Good Fit, good build quality and nice cable included
3. Quad-brid driver set that's done right
4. Fast and detailed
5. Great vocals
6. Accepts PEQ's very well and has the potential to be a giant killer
Cons: 1. Out-of-the-Box Bass is a bit weak
2. Can be a bit shouty on some tracks
3. Not a lot of tips choice
Review: Thieaudio ORACLE MKII (the old) and Simgot SUPERMIX 4 (the new) and this isn’t about the accessories!


Old Method: Both IEM’s were base lined against a library of 30 songs. Then the fun begins!

New Method: You might want to grab a cup of coffee. This might take a while. I EQ just about everything. I also tip roll with the best of them, but after finding the right fit, feel and sound from tips I make my own Parametric EQ’s (PEQ’s) in

Step 1: Measure the frequency response of the IEM’s. I could just trust others measurements here, but to get the best possible result measuring the exact IEM with a 711 coupler in REW is best.

Step 2: Upload the traces for right and left into

Step 3: This is where it becomes time consuming and complicated. I’ve made 42 “target” files to PEQ any IEM squig graph against. This is a 6x7 matrix, 6 bass lift levels x 7 Bright to Warm treble settings


Step 4: Uploading all 42 custom PEQ settings into a FiiO M17 DAP, then loading them into Poweramp Player.


Step 5: Listening to the same library of 30 songs again, but this time changing the PEQ settings on the fly until the best one is found specific to the track. Record the PEQ selected to each track and build a graph that shows which PEQ works best across the majority of the songs.


The Oracle MKII and Supermix 4 might seem similar from the graphs below, but this couldn’t be further from the truth in the graph above. The Oracle MKII is known for being overly bright and a bit shouty. While the Supermix 4 is slightly bright, but has better detail retrieval. Both lacked the Bass Punch and Slam I prefer, but this was easily corrected.


This is where this journey takes a bit of a twist. I started out trying to develop a method for getting the most out of any IEM, what I learned was enlightening. You see it wasn’t just these 2 IEM’s, but 5 sets in total.

1. A library of 30 songs, mastered in different ways, from different genres can require vastly different PEQ settings to be optimized. I knew there’d be some variation, but I wasn’t expecting as much as I saw, with Bass variations of up to 4.5dB and a shift from bright to warm.

It was like a lightbulb went off in my head. Maybe, just maybe, a big part of the variation we see in reviews of the same IEM by different people, could be down to the library used, more so than the source or the tips chosen..?

2. An IEM that has great reviews, like the Mega5EST, for example, (also used as one of the 5) can be improved and at the same time has a much tighter spread. They are tuned well and have good quality drivers to begin with. This yields a better chance of finding one standard PEQ setting that can be used across multiple tracks


Notice from the graph how the grouping is tightly focused around a 4.5dB bass elevation and only shifting slightly right and left of treble neutral. This explains a lot why so many people are falling in love with the Mega5EST. It’s a true jack of all trades.

3. This then got me thinking how this projects approach to tuning could be reversed as feedback for manufacturers to make the next great thing by understanding what’s possible with the drivers, shell acoustics and crossovers, or where they might need changing

Step 6: Listen to the 30 Song library with the best PEQ setting and re-evaluate both IEM’s. Report on the before (no PEQ) and after (with PEQ) sound qualities.

Oracle MKII: Picked up new for the bargain price of $240, this set usually retails for $549. We worth the investment, despite the reputation for not being as good as its predecessor.


The Sub-bass and Bass regions of the Oracle are weak out of the box. While being a Tribrid with DD, BA and EST drivers, the DD just doesn’t deliver the thump or slam I was hoping for. After the PEQ was applied, the rumble, thump and slam I was used to in the Monarch MKIII was now present in the Oracle MKII.

The mids were overshadowed by the treble region and vocals were a bit sibilant and shouty. I attribute this to the spike around 4k. The PEQ also pulled the spike down. The drivers are now being their best self and delivering much better mids, treble, detail and layering. This also delivered better timbre and texture, giving an overall score of 8.4/10. Making this a real competitor in the MidFi Range for only $240


Supermix 4: Out of the box this set is getting mixed reviews. I blind bought it because I believe in Simgot and the driver configuration, 1DD+1BA+1Micro Planar+1PZT. The mids and treble were getting good reviews, but I was hearing the Bass could do better, confirmed by my initial rating. I was also reading some slight shoutiness (again, very much track dependent).


What really impressed me was the speed, tonality and texture of this set at a price of $135. If it wasn’t for the bass region letting it down this set would be competing with sets more than 2x the price and after PEQ it absolutely does. I was able to get the score up from an 8.0, very good to start, to an 8.6, where sets in my collection cost between $500-800!

When the bass region is elevated it can impact the treble adversely. To my surprise the vocals in me mid region and sparkle in the treble were made even better. Across all 30 tracks I was hearing clear vocals with no sibilance and excellent detail. You can see from the graph that the traces pretty much cross and bring this set to have a signature that tilts left and again becomes a bass beast.


  • Any IEM can be made better through the use if Parametric Equalizer, but it’s not a simple process to get it right
  • One size doesn’t fit all. Different tracks need correction in different regions. Finding a good average setting can make this almost perfect, but having a few PEQ settings is ideal
  • My library isn’t your library and it isn’t the other guys library etc. etc. Having a broad range of songs from different artists and genres will help to balance out the overall performance and give better impressions. It also makes it difficult “out of the box” for reviewers to get it right
For any purists out there who don’t believe in EQing, and those that do, I hope you enjoyed the review for what it is. I’ll continue my work using this new method and be doing my reviews with and without PEQ going forward. I liken PEQ to tuning a stock sports car to get every bit of performance out of something that’s capable of being better. We all enjoy tip rolling. This is performing it’s own little EQ with each tip type.


  • 1717983943458.png
    51.5 KB · Views: 0
Thank you for your wonderful review! I believe eq'ing has a major part in this hobby. Definitely looking to apply your values when I get my set. I am a sensible basshead in addition. I'll enjoy this! Please drop them here if you can. Thank you.


Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: -sweetly balanced warm W shape tonality
-smooth in intensity yet muscular in dynamic
-dense vibrant sub bass that deliver fleshy natural bass line
-warm round mid bass punch
-lush and energetic mids with wide presence
-excellent for both piano, saxo and vocal
-enough lower mids substance
-crunchy and snappy treble with it’s own wide space
-cohesive timbre between 4 different drivers
-big holographic soundstage
-you part of music yet not mixed up in a mess
-good note weight
-versatile tuning that can deliver both fun and balance
-lush timbre, just a hint of warmth coloring that doesn't erase texture info
-one of those safe but not boring tuning that is so rare yet so needed
-potent sound layering that avoid macro muddyness
-nice enough cable
-excellent sound value
Cons: -hint of warmth mean hint of bass bleed into lower mids
-not the cleanest nor the crispest spatiality
-air around instrument isn’t pristine limpid
-not most transparent sounding (some noise in timbre)
-piezo don't deliver a lot of sharp brilliance with airy decay release
-not the most detailed sounding resolution
-need power to shine yet don’t like too much output impedance (extra warmth+bass boost)
-all plastic + aluminum backplate construction might not promise longest durability
-treble head or neutral head will perhaps not be in awe like me

TIMBRE: 8.5/10
IMAGING: 8.2/10
MUSICALITY (subjective): 8.8/10


Simgot is one of most respected chifi companies due to their high sound value offering that show both tuning and engineering knowledge and seriousness.

IEM like EA500, EW200 and EA1000 are all incredible success stories that still are praised today, every week a fan of one of those IEM expresses its satisfaction on ChiFi Love group. Personally, I consider EW200 as a sub50$ single DD benchmark then EA1000 as sub300$ single DD benchmark.

But today it's a new Simgot era I'm going to discover, sure they have released hybrid IEMs before but no tribrid or quad drivers config, which is why 2024 is a big year for them and why i'm so intensely excited about their Supermix4 release.

Priced 150$, the Supermix4 is a quad drivers IEM using 1x10mm DD for bass-1 full range large custom BA for mids-1 micro planar and multi layered piezoelectric driver for highs, all this finely tuned RC 4 way crossover.


This make alot of audio engineering work for only 150$....but here it's not about more drivers like those over packed with BA IEM that sound disastrous in balance, it's about finding coherency between different driver with similar timbre and attack speed, if the DD is slower, it will be matched for the extra elasticity it can deliver.

But will it sound cohesive and musical and still deliver potent technical performance for its budget but not ultra cheap price? Let see in this review my honest impressions.




The SM4 uses a plastic resin shell with a light aluminum back plate. In your hands, plastic seems thick and sturdy enough and it's half transparent so you can see drivers through a light source.
Back plate has a matte finish. Design is sober and elegant, not particularly impressive or eye-catching. It reminds me of an eclipse.
The housing is light and smooth, it’s quite comfortable. 2 pin connectors aren't recessed so cable pairing is versatile too.

In terms of durability, I'm always a bit concerned about glued back plates like this, so I'll be cautious to not drop it on a hard floor.


The included cable is good, it’s well built and sturdy, this doesn't throw away cheap cable that will negatively affect the sound dynamic of your IEM. It’s an oxygen free copper silver plated cable with 4 thick cores. Alas it only comes in single ended 3.5mm termination, which is only a bummer here.


As for packaging, like the IEM design it’s sober, elegant and minimalist. It comes in a small box with a metallic green cover. It includes a carrying case, the cable and a bit underwhelming number of silicone eartips (6 wide bore that don’t do full justice to SM4 potential).

All in all, more than decent packaging and accessories.



(SM4 has been tested on at least 10 different source, which include Questyle QP2R, Ibasso DX90, Xduoo X20, Penon Tail, Questyle M15, Tempotec V6, Aune Yuki, Fiio KA17 etc)

Okay oh man those are big crushes so i will let myself loose if you permit. When musicality is that immersive, fun yet well balanced and even offers impressive technical performance, we must not hide our enthusiasm.
Especially at 150$ price that would feel as legitly priced at 300$.
It’s rare I use hyper sentences like this, but I own nearly 100 pairs of iems in the 200-500$ price range so I know what I say isn’t irrational nor based on lunatism.

The fact is, these aren’t technical sounding nor analytical nor ultra boosted in resolution, even if they use 4 different type of driver to tonal balance is smooth and natural, slightly spicy but not spiky, we are in warm W shape territory where the bass line are thick and vibrant, kick round and punchy mellow way, mids are forwards and lush and treble is gently bright, not dark at all yet not aggressive and over begging your attention with forced micro details or percussions intensity on the listener.

These are true all arounder, between fun and balanced, near mid centric and offering a cinematic and holographic grand musicality that you can get lost in for hours and hours. This type of special sound experience is very rare in budget market, when its achieve their some trade off like recessed mids and center stage, too much mid bass scoop which mean cold boom à la Harman-Crin, or too much treble lift to add fake air that don’t inflict on multi layering 3D effect.

With the Simgot Supermix4 everything is treat at same level yet everything sound dynamic and meaty too, instruments has flesh, bass has vibrancy and elasticity, treble has crunch and speed, a hint of warmth glue this together and feed lower harmonic need too which mean wide range of vocalist and instrument range will get this natural full tone and widely open presence.

Even if great, the SM4 aren’t end game IEM in terms of technical performance, these aren’t monitor purpose IEM, these aren’t end word in fine resolution nor very sparkly, piezo drivers don’t really produce brilliance, it’s more about snap and crunch of attack that get extra accent. Yet I could say this about a lot of kilobucks IEMs too….SM4 goal is to be musical and offer a different type of sound experience, it take full advantage of holographic layering and seek a tonal balance that will do good for wide variety of music, it’s barely safe tuning but bass boost and upper mids energy as well

The bass is one of highlight of SM4, it’s rare I'm that addicted to Simgot bass, it does happen with EA1000 but in a less fun and musical way the thicker rumbler bass of SM4.
This bass digs deep, very deep and it’s not about resonance mimicking true rumble goodness here since double bass and cello sound full bodied and oh so lush and vibrant.
We have both the sub woofer like fully extracted bass line or rumble loudness release as well as a round mid bass, slightly thicken with warmth yet both can coexist without going muddy, the layering and transient being very good and the boom not too excited to the point of veiling anything, this bass stay in the back of an open holographic sound tapestry, yet, not thin nor compressed in this soundscape, it’s tactile and fleshy and very weighty but not hard hitting to the point of creating basshead level fatigue.
Yet, I would suggest those for mature basshead seeking a well balanced musicality with excellent bass quality and generous enough quantity.
As a big fan of cello which is one of my fav instrument even more so than violin, i was truly euphoric about how lush, bodied, wide in presence and vibrante in attack sustain-release this instrument sound, it’s rich in texture details too, complemented by other driver without going too much in texture boost, her it’s the tone and fullness of instrument that is put forward, its corpulancy which is anything but thin or lean, this mean you can confound the cello with violin which do happen with too much lower mids and upper bass scoop, again with bright lifeless harman target which Simgot bypass here. The SM4 are a must for both cello and piano lovers.
Yet, double bass while a notch warmer than cello in term of attack release is very good too, it have a rounded and densify sustain giving it more weight and presence fullness but affecting transparency of its otherwise lean extension that in fact isn’t suppose to be that thick, nonetheless i tremendously enjoy jazz trio with this, it’s more fast complex jazz that will make the double bass less accurate in attack and clean in separation.

Ok i think i will say every part of frequency is an highlight in it’s own right with this very enthusiastic review, so, in fact, if my mind wasn’t hooked that much by well layered bass section I would consider the SM4 mid centric because nothing sound recessed or lack weight within this range, as well, when piano sound rightly restitute in both tone fullness and weight or impact, it does mean mid range is fully cover and focused, which is the case here.
Piano has a perfect mix of warmth and transparency to me, each note is round and has a natural resonance that doesn’t feel forced and blossoms gently without mixing and blurring other notes. Higher pitches don’t suddenly sound too loud either, so the whole piano range is treated in similar balance, without harsh peak or overly boosted texture grain, this is pure lushness bliss.
Then as if it wasn’t enough, both male and female vocal sound great, sure the female vocal are a notch more forwards and loud than male but none sound recessed or shouty or too edgy in timbre, it’s in fact slightly creamy, fully bodied and widely extracted in presence, it don't feel smaller than reality, perhaps a notch bigger and more stretched in presence so it do capt the attention more than other instruments yet the holographic layering permit you to focus on other layer, but not with as easy readability nor as carved fully in presence.
This is the thing here, SM4 mids aren’t plain crispy clean and transparent, we have lower mids warmth that rounded note and presence fullness, vocals are meaty not thin and forced in transparency not lacking proper tactility of presence, it’s well defined and forwards without going shouty. It’s not a mid range that make you distracted with too much sound info or excited macro dynamic of center stage, you tend to focus on main instrument or vocal which is magnify here, then you can appreciate other sound layers like you’ll appreciate other color of an impressionistic painting, vibrant with diversity of sound info stroke but not sharply define in presence micro details, this isn’t over edgy mids nor analytical, it’s even laid back.
As well, attack sustain release as a hint of balanced armature euphony, as if what is used is a vented BA, sustain dominant release adding this chunkiness to timbre.
It’s not an open yet thin mid range that feels recessed due to a U shape tuning that scoops whole lower mids, again, we are in near mid centric territory-well balanced.

The treble is thick, crunchy and rounded, percussions are bodied not just about short attack lead intensity, it’s not very sparkly yet not too dark or rolled off, we don’t lack air as a whole here, just a hint of brilliance and clean sparkly resonance. This is inherent to both planar and BA and some might wonder how these were implemented, I think Simgot chose to filter the intensity of air flow which means it makes highs more vibrant and densify than sharpen and intensify in attack and release. The planar seems to mix and complete upper mids and lower treble then the rest is rather smoothen and then we have an extra attack energy in percussion crunch and snap which has their own space for proper layering and dynamic freedom.
That mean its no splashy percussions, its fast and thigh, hithat ar thick and abrasive and free of unwanted resonance, crash cymbals are dense yet soften in long release, acoustic guitar are full sounding, not over boosted in any part, perfectly layered with again shorten brilliance release but this doesn't annoy me as much as with other IEM cause it sound full and real, not too warmed by lower mids in attack lead so even electric guitar has enough texture bite.
Finger snap and snare too will reveal this smoothen attack sharpness, but the planar extract alot of texture info and mix it fluidly into timbre for a very pleasant result: both captivating yet smooth, both 3D yet not concert hall cold like a Sennheiser HD820.
I find this treble as refined as a Final E4000 with greater technical prowess.
Nothing sound mixed together with SM4, and even if just a notch darken in sharpness, you’ll be surprise to find new micro details or texture richness, both piezo and planar can really surprise by easy of transient and what it can dig up, but here, it’s not boosted for a wony wow effect, it’s balanced and creamy.

The soundstage is another positive surprise with those: wide, tall and holographic. It’s not the deepest, blackest or cleanest. It's layered and out of your head with a feeling you're being on your shoulder an intimate surround system. It’s the kind of spatiality that can make you turn your head to check what's up with this sound at the back of my head?
Immersive to the max, you are in the middle of grand spatiality.

As for imaging, it’s not the end word in terms of lateral instrument spacing, it’s more the sound layers dynamic that float toward you and don’t mix up together. So for simple music it will be impressive, you’ll extract bass line, singer and percussions effortlessly and be able to track their playing singularity but when it comes to more complex polyphonic jazz, rock or classical, separation will feel a bit foggy, lacking precision for proper tracking. I’ll not suggest those for monitoring unless you're a bassist or singer, yet even for their better stuff, even EW200 is more precise in that regard.



The Supermix4 are odd in term of impedance and sensitivity, they have super low 7.2ohm (!!??) of impedance yet high sensitivity of 120db/Vrms. This means they are quite source picky, too low impedance or Vrms will greatly inflict on dynamic while too high impedance can warm and add distortion to sound, this will make macro dynamic more mushy as if some driver dominates other.
Yet sources like Aune Yuki, Penon Tail (bal-low gain) and Fiio KA17 are all good matches since we have both power and average impedance gain, the later having lowest one. Sm4 can get warmer and bassier with some source, Tail at high gain is a great example.
So, at they end this make the SM4 even more fascinating to enjoy in diversify flavor, it’s a polymorphous yet versatile sounding IEM that can get crisper or bassier or warmer depending of source, this will most likely explain different appreciation of its timbre and dynamic from reviewers and consumers.

Then they are very eartips picky too, it’s expected with such a thick nozzle with 3 holes in it connected to 4 drivers, those holes are near nozzle lip so prompt to be blocked with ear tips that don't have a wide nozzle enough. I suggest short wide bore with those, if you can see 3 holes of IEM nozzle thru eartips hole it’s a good sign. This will greatly widen and deepen spatiality, make balance smoother, notch warmer and instrument and vocal wider in presence, the sense of layering has a bit more air and space around them too.

Then for cable, those that tend to add gain to dynamic are best match, it means it doesn't damp impedance of source. I’m no electrician so I can't really explain physics law about this. I guess betting on low impedance cable with lotta strands and silver plated material is a better bet since it’s the Simgot LC7 I use the most with SM4. I don’t suggest all copper cables that warm and smoothen dynamic energy or add mid bass cream, since bass is already warm enough with SM4, cleaning it is a better idea.



VS GEEKWOLD GK100 (3DD-2BA-4piezo-200$)

The GK100 is brighter, more W shaped and analytical, less bassy and warm and not as cohesive and organic in drivers timbre and dynamic flavor balance.

The bass is dryer, it has less density, less round chunky slam, less rumble and sub bass feel roll off. Bass lines are thinner and more about presence which has more texture details but less tone vibrancy and tactility. Acoustic kick drum of GK100 is less warm, cleaner and tighter in attack which is better defined and not as prompt to get lost in the mix of speedy rock or jazz.

Mids are brighter, thinner and more forwards and centered with GK100, it feels compressed in center stage yet has more boosted resolution and edgier definition of different instruments which are less warmed by bass. Mids are more prompt to shouting and sibilance and have more grainy timbre. Male vocals are more recessed and boxy with GK100 too. Mids are darker and lusher with SM4, vocal presence is wider, piano has more note weight and natural timbre, trumpet doesn't sound loud and boxy.

Treble is way more energetic with GK100, 4 piezo truly extract greater number of micro details and limitation of 1 piezo is evident with SM4, though the balance is more natural and smooth it doesn’t have as much sharply extracted percussions, they aren’t as clean and snappy, sense of snap is sure more authoritative with GK100 but this can go borderline trebly since sound info it extract include background noise artifact which SM4 avoid. SM4 percussion and high pitch instruments are thicker, dense with more euphony. Hardcore treble heads will surely be more wowed with GK100 treble.

Soundstage is notably taller and wider with SM4, while depth is similar since both these IEM don't have perfectly clean backgrounds and spatiality.

Imaging while more compressed with GK100 is still superior due to higher resolution and edgier separation of instrument, which are closer to each other but better carved in presence. I mean, if the GK100 is analytical, it means we can easily perceive diverse sound layers.

Here i struggle to conclude GK100 is superior technically, but I think even if tuning is inferior in cohesiveness and don’t trigger emotional response for me due to harsh timbre and overly forwards upper treble, the GK100 technical prowess is more upfront and since it deliver higher resolution, faster and more controlled attack as well as superior imaging, the GK100 is indeed the unbeatable treble head winner. Yet for bass and mids lover as well as soundstage lover the Supermix4 is the one that I prefer and will use daily, unlike GK100 I barely ever touch.


The Phoenix is brighter and more hard V shape in balance and it’s again more analytical, as well as more crisp and sparkly.

Sub bass is more resonant and thin, overall bass feels more detached and artificial, it's really less lush, dense, natural in balance and pleasant than the SM4. It feels more mid bass focus and more excited in speed, not as round in punch, not as warm too.

Mids are a bit similar to GK100 here, it’s more forwards and aggressive in upper mids, timbre is thinner, more prompt to sibilance with female vocal which aren’t pleasant at all and more shouty and artificial (again but that DNA of this IEM)...hum, yet mids are more open and clean too, more transparent and resolved, edgier way, harsher way. Mids are more recessed and thin, lacking lower mids fullness of lusher more mid centric SM4.

The treble is more upfront and aggressive, more analytical and speedy and snappy, cymbals have more brilliance and percussions can be followed more easily, in fact it’s forced on the listener. Instrument attack from guitar and violin is more edgy and abrasive, yet rougher and noisier too.

Soundstage is notably wider with SM4, but taller and a notch deeper with Phoenix that has a more recessed center stage to magnify a sense of concentrated openness.

Imaging is superior with Phoenix though less realistic in balance, macro sound layering is crisper and more edgy in separation, everything but bass line is easier to track with Phoenix.

All in all, i can’ handle to listen the Phoenix more than 5 min while im addict to SM4 musicality for hours and hours, so no doubt in term of tonal balance it’s from another league of refinement and well rounded fullness….as for technical performance, these are on par, treble is similar since both use planar, bass performance is better with SM4, mids are fuller and more even but treble isn’t as boosted and vivid, so again, plain hardcore treble head might prefer the Phoenix

VS Letshuoer Cadenza 4 (1DD+3BA-250$)

Cadenza4 more U shape and lean sounding, less bassy, a notch smoother as well as less airy and holographic.
SM4 feels more W shape and dynamic sounding with more punch and more vibrant rumble, it’s snappier and more airy and extended on top (past 10khz) and we have more air around the instrument for a more spacious and layered soundstage.

The bass is weightier and has more slam roundness and more impactful intensity, making Cadenza4 feel very mellow in attack, while for sub bass Cadenza is more lean and foggy. Attack is more speedy and tight with SM4, warmth doesn’t soften mids as much too.

The mids are more energetic and forwards with the SM4, the presence is less widen with resonance and not as light and as centered, its evident Cadenza use higher end balanced armature, it's more transparent and rich in texture, attack is more controlled and less warmed in sustain release which make timbre a notch thinner with Cadenza.

The treble is leaner and less airy and crunchy with Cadenza, its dryer and even less sparkly than more energetic SM4 which is far from being aggressive already so Cadenza is safer in tuning, more neutral and again the knowle BA show its refinement in term of greater fine details and cleaner texturing, less creamed with euphony yet less dynamic and colder overall too.

Soundstage is notably wider and taller with SM4, a notch deeper and cleaner with Cadenza.

Imaging is superior due to greater sense of transparency and clean clarity with Cadenza.

All in all this comparison underline how good yet similar in balance these 2 IEMs are, the fact Cadenza cost 100$ more sure permit the use of better BA driver which is main different here, but this don’t mean treble extend further since past 10 khz the SM4 offer more piezo sparkle and air. Cadenza feels more refined and neutral in musicality, while SM4 is more fun and immersive, warmer overall but more energetic in dynamic too. Personally I find more musical pleasure in Supermix4 but for classical music I will choose Cadenza4.



After having tested more than 300 IEMs in all price range possible, i finaly conclude hardest thing to achieve is the balance between musicality and technicality, in fact, all in technical performance with wonky tuning or timbre is way easier to achieve than proper coherency of drivers timbre and dynamic energy as well as unspiky smoothness that will not feel overly damped in attack intensity.

This is when i consider an IEM is exceptional, and this musicality magic is very hard to find in sub200$ IEM market, so this explain my sincere intense enthusiasm about the phenomenal Simgot Supermix4.

To get such an wide open holographic 3D musicality with weighty vibrant bass, lush and full bodied mids and a fast crunchy treble that don't stole attention nor feel out of place is a statement of love of music and to get this transient articulation, effortless sound layering capacity as well as well carved presence of each instrument and vocal without going analytical, too bright or too focused on one part of sound spectrum is a tour de force in it's own right.

Sure, this isn't end word in crispness nor resolution, it have some warmth darkening definition sharpness of mids, but this avvoid cold and clinical presentation, this avoid some issue i have with IEM like EA500LM and EA1000, it goes buttery musicality instead of ovverly edgy one.

The Supermix4 is a do-it-all versatile, fun, immersive and musical sounding IEM that can please everybody but hardcore treble head. Mid and bass lover will love those, as well as soundstage sucker and those listening to wide range of music seeking for proper performer. This isn't an IEM tuned solely to listen to K-pop. This isn't a cold harman tuning.

The Supermix4 are familiar yet different sounding, all about magnifying your musical experience.



PS: I want to thanks Simgot for sending me this review sample. As always, i'm wild and free minded and Simgot will discover this review at same time as other reader with zero positivist or biased compensation from my part. I have zero official affiliation or financial compensation to write this review either.

A great and detailed review. Since I got mine three days ago, I haven’t taken them off, they really are special
Excellent review!
David Haworth
Haven't read it yet boss but in the pros....-you part of music yet not mixed up in a mess"" Huh? Now I have read it and good review esp the comparisons. Still not sure how I'll like it. Find out in about 3 weeks :)


New Head-Fier
Super Mix 4 - The Simgot step up!
Pros: Pros:
Comfortable fit
Very good isolation (To my ears)
Well-balanced U-shaped sound profile, ideal for various music genres
Strong technical performance, especially in imaging, layering, and soundstage category
Preserves good timbre and coherence despite the challenges of having multiple driver types to make work together
Smooth treble response
Clear midrange
Quick bass with minimal bleed and satisfying sub-bass rumble
Cons: Very low impedance might require source-dependency like DAC amps or DAP for meatier sound.
Upper mids can become sibilant at higher volumes
Mid-bass lacks some texture
This review reflects my genuine impressions after a week of in-depth experience with the Simgot SuperMix4.

In my opinion, Simgot is not a brand that relies on stacking multiple drivers, aligning more with the philosophy of major brands like Sony.

I believe Simgot has the capability to achieve high-quality sound with fewer units, even with a single dynamic driver. Therefore, when I saw Simgot launch the four-driver Quad-brid earphone featuring 1 Dynamic Driver, 1 Balanced Armature, 1 Planar Driver Tweeter, and 1 Piezoelectric Ceramic Driver, I was intrigued. Initially, I was puzzled, but after listening, I understood the rationale.

Simgot aims for excellence, refining their product before releasing it to the market.

I also suspect this approach is setting the stage for a future flagship product.
With thorough R&D, the integration of each unit will naturally lead to superior quality and density.

Thus, I see the SuperMix4 as both a market test and a foundation for future innovations.
Now, let's unbox it.

From the packaging, I inferred it would be around USD 200 range, simple and clear quad carton packaging, three pairs of silicone earplugs, and a fixed 3.5mm plug design.
You can purchase from the link below:

The official price is $149.99 USD, showcasing Simgot's commitment to value.

The build quality features a metal cover with a resin cavity, and a black and gray color scheme that is understated and low-key.

The panel has a simple gold ring. It might not be as visually striking as other full-metal headphones in this price range, but it is comfortable to wear and feels well-made.

Sound-wise, the SuperMix4 offers a balanced, detailed, and natural listening experience.
Tuned according to the Harman 2019 curve, it embodies Simgot’s signature sound: accurate, clean, and low in distortion. The four distinct driver units complement each other, creating a harmonious and unified sound.
The SuperMix4 employs a Quad-brid four-frequency configuration.
The low frequency, powered by the dynamic driver, is natural and powerful, with moderate reverb that provides a robust atmosphere without overwhelming the mid and high frequencies.

The dive is deep and clear, ideal for those who prefer balanced bass.
The mid-frequency is a strength of the balanced armature, offering concentrated imaging and slightly close distance, with sharp, crisp vocals that shine, especially female vocals.

There is minimal sibilance, and it retains a HiFi character suitable for both enjoyment and monitoring.

In the high frequencies, the SuperMix4 combines the finesse of the piezoelectric ceramic unit with the smoothness of the planar driver, resulting in excellent detail and extension without excessive sharpness.

This balance ensures long listening sessions remain comfortable.

The integration of these diverse units by Simgot results in a cohesive sound greater than the sum of its parts, demonstrating their expertise in tuning.

While the soundstage is not the SuperMix4's standout feature, it is competitive within its price range, offering decent width and depth with accurate instrument positioning.

The dynamic performance is also commendable, providing a lively and detailed listening experience.

Overall, the SuperMix4 is a meticulously developed product by Simgot, representing a great value in the hybrid earphone market.

If you are eager to explore new technologies, I highly recommend the SuperMix4 for its unique blend of drivers and superb sound quality.

It offers an exciting and refined audio experience that won’t be outdated anytime soon.

In summary: Four-in-one, amazingly satisfying!


  • _DSC5019.JPG
    361.4 KB · Views: 0
  • _DSC5038.JPG
    335.3 KB · Views: 0
  • _DSC5037.JPG
    214.1 KB · Views: 0
  • _DSC5027.JPG
    237.3 KB · Views: 0
  • _DSC5031.JPG
    240 KB · Views: 0
  • _DSC5042.JPG
    389.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:


Headphoneus Supremus
Pros: Comfortable to wear
Above average isolation
Balanced U-shaped profile, quite all-rounder for most music genres
Good technical chops, with imaging, layering and soundstage a highlight
Decent timbre and coherency despite packing a multitude of different driver types
Smooth treble
Transparent midrange
Speedy bass without bleed, good amount of sub-bass rumble
Cons: Dearth of accessories
Very low impedance; this IEM may be fussy to pair source-wise (for sources with high output impedance)
Upper mids may be borderline shouty (more apparent at louder volumes)
Mid-bass could do with better texturing

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

The SuperMix 4 can be gotten here: (no affiliate links).

Supermix 9.jpg

  • Driver configuration: 1 x 10 mm polymer diaphragm dynamic driver + 1 x balanced armature driver + 1 x micro-planar driver + 1 x piezoelectric driver
  • Frequency response: 20 Hz - 20 kHz
  • Impedance: 7.2 Ω
  • Sensitivity: 120 dB/Vrms
  • Cable: 2-pin, 0.78 mm; oxygen-free copper silver-plated cable; 3.5 mm termination
  • Tested at: $149.99 USD


Other than the IEM, these are included:

- 3 pairs of silicone eartips (S/M/L)
- Cable
- Carrying case

The accessories are disappointing for something retailing north of a 100 bucks. Usually, gear at this pricing would incorporate a variation of eartips, in addition to perhaps a modular cable.

Supermix 3.jpg

The sole set of silicone eartips are ergonomic and are serviceable sound-wise, though as stated, a wider selection of silicone tips or even foam tips would have been much appreciated.

Supermix 1.jpg

The stock cable is an oxygen-free copper silver-plated cable, coming in a 2-pin termination. There is only a single-ended 3.5 mm option available, and it is nothing to write home about in terms of haptics. This cable is Litz braided and hefty, though it is somewhat tangly with a smattering of microphonics. There is a chin cinch for securing the IEM during usage.

Supermix 7.jpg

Last but not least, we have a semi-rigid zipper carrying case. The innards have webbing and a soft material to cushion the contents, and the externals are tough enough to survive some compression.

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


Supermix 6.jpg

The shells are fashioned from black 3D printed resin, with CNC-machined matte metal faceplates.

Weight and size is moderate, and comfort is surprisingly decent even when using the SuperMix4 for longer listening sessions. The inner aspects are smooth, with a concha protrusion for stability.

Supermix 8.jpg

Isolation is above average, and it can be used in outdoor environments without much issues. I did not find any driver flex on my set.


The SuperMix4 sports an eclectic array of drivers. We have 4 disparate driver types paired in a 4-way RC crossover design:
- 1 x 10 mm polymer diaphragm dynamic driver handles the bass.
- 1 x self-developed balanced armature settles the midrange - we do not have any information on the brand of the BA unfortunately.
- 1 x micro-planar driver takes care of the treble.
- 1 x piezoelectric driver with a multi-layer ceramic + copper coating pushes the upper treble.


I tested the SuperMix4 with the following sources:
- Apple dongle
- Cayin RU7
- Chord Mojo 2
- Fiio KA11 dongle
- Fiio KA17 dongle
- Khadas Tone Board -> Schiit Asgard 3 amp
- Questyle M15 DAC/AMP dongle
- Sony Walkman NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Sony Walkman NW A-55 DAP (Walkman One Neutral Mod)
- Sony Walkman NW WM1A DAP (Walkman One WM1Z Plus v2 Mod)
- Smartphone

In terms of headroom requirements, the SuperMix4 is moderately drivable, and should be okay to be driven off weaker sources.

However, due to its ultra-low 7.2 Ω impedance, this IEM may be a potentially tricky pairing for sources with high output impedance, due to the rule of 8ths. Ideally, it should be used with sources with < 0.9 Ω output impedance, otherwise the frequency response might be skewed, and it may sound bassier (this may or may not be desired).


Simgot SuperMix 4.jpg

Graph of the Simgot SuperMix4 via IEC711 coupler. 8 kHz is a coupler artefact peak.

Tonally, the SuperMix4 can be described as having a U-shaped signature when paired with a low output impedance source. This frequency response is pretty all-rounder for most music genres.

The SuperMix4 is sub-bass focused, with good extension and rumble. It isn't a basshead IEM, though the sub-bass is quite copious. The mid-bass has average texturing, though it is speedy with no mid-bass bleed.

The lower midrange has a small scoop-out as per the U-shaped signature, though it isn't as deeply depressed as a typical V-shaped IEM. This region is clear and transparent, with no mid-bass encroachment. The upper mids hit about 8 dB ear gain, which is at the edge: at low to moderate volumes, this region is forwards without shout - but at louder volumes (as per the Fletcher Munson curve), it may possibly be harsh for female vocals.

After the upper mids peak, the SuperMix4's treble tails off early, and this translates to minimal sibilance and a smooth treble. This will be a safe recommendation for the treble-sensitive, though understandably, trebleheads might want a bit more pizzaz here.

The SuperMix4 has commendable technicalities. It has an expansive soundstage in all 3 dimensions, with music projecting beyond the ears and forehead. Imaging is pinpoint, with superb layering and instrument separation. Indeed, the SuperMix4 handles complex tracks with aplomb. For something not overly steroid-boosted in the treble, the SuperMix4 still retains a good grasp of micro-details, but perhaps there are rivals which have better resolution.

I appreciate that despite packing a Frankenstein-mix of diverse driver types, the SuperMix4 has decent timbre for acoustic instruments and vocals. The myriad types of drivers match each other in speed and coherency, unlike some less well-implemented quad-brids, which suffer from phasing issues between the bass and treble for example, or have marked timbral differences.


Supermix 4.jpg

The SuperMix4 will be compared against another MidFI quad-brid with a similar heterogenous driver configuration in the Kiwi Ears Quintet. The latter does have an additional BA, but otherwise is a suitable comparison, compared to traditional hybrids, single DDs, multi-BAs, and pure planars, which have their own pros and cons cause of the different transducers.

Kiwi Ears Quintet

The Quintet is more expensive at > $200 USD, and it utilizes a 10 mm diamond-like carbon (DLC) DD, 2 Knowles BA drivers, a 5 mm MPT (micro planar transducer) driver, and one piezoelectric driver.

The Quintet has a thinner note weight, with less bass but more treble. The Quintet also has less natural metallic timbre, and is notably more aggressive and harsher in the treble region, with sibilance in spades.

In technicalities, the Quintet has better micro-detailing, with imaging on par. However, the SuperMix4 beats it in soundstage and layering.


Supermix 2.jpg

The SuperMix4 is a unique quad-brid, accommodating a varied - and exotic - array of driver types. This mishmash of transducers could easily flop in terms of timbre or coherency, but I'm pleased to report that Simgot has put them all in without much penalties in balancing.

Espousing a consumer-friendly U-shaped signature with a smooth treble, transparent midrange and speedy bass, the SuperMix4 is pretty all-rounded for most music genres. This set also has superb imaging and soundstage, and one can easily pinpoint instruments on a dark background. And this is without veering to an overly sterile soundscape or overzealous treble, with the robust sub-bass adding some musicality back to the equation.

Perhaps some minor flaws would be the upper midrange being at the border of shoutiness - this is apparent at louder volumes (as per the Fletcher Munson curve); using the SuperMix4 at lower to moderate volumes mitigates this - and the mid-bass could do with better texturing.

The SuperMix4 is ergonomic enough despite the moderate sized shells, with above average isolation. Sadly, the accessory line-up is lacking for the price, and its ultra-low 7.2 Ω impedance may potentially be a problem with higher output impedance sources, as per the rule of 8ths.

In the big scheme of things, the SuperMix4 does most departments well for a $100ish set, balancing musicality and technicalities, and it is something different from the run-of-the-mill sidegrades we see on a weekly basis.
Last edited:
Hi @Tamizhan Wind has a deeper and taller stage, whereas the SM4 has a wider stage.
That still leaves both options on the table. Just a last question. Does the layering and separation on SM4 better?
@Tamizhan about on par technically. I see them as sidegrades.


100+ Head-Fier
SIMGOT SuperMix 4 IEM Review
Pros: Harman tuning
Clear and detailed bass with no bleed into the mid-range
Clean and detailed vocals
Well-extended treble adds clarity and airiness
Decent technical performance across the frequency range
Versatile configuration with four distinct drivers
Cons: Upper mid-range can be shouty or shrill at higher volumes
Bass lacks slam and thump, with average texture
Treble can sound harsh and with an unnatural timbre at moderate to loud volumes
EA500 LM has better bass slam and texture, less energetic upper mid-range, and similar technicalities
The SIMGOT SuperMix 4 IEM is an ambitious piece of audio engineering, featuring a unique hybrid driver setup that includes a dynamic driver, a balanced armature, a planar driver, and a piezoelectric (PZT) driver. This combination aims to deliver a comprehensive and nuanced sound signature, catering to those seeking detail and clarity across the spectrum. However, the execution of this ambitious design comes with both strengths and notable weaknesses.

What's in the box:

1x SuperMix 4 IEM
1x Cable
1x Carrying case
1x Set of ear tips


Build and Comfort​

The build quality of the SuperMix 4 is impressive, showcasing a sleek and modern design. The housing is sturdy, made from a combination of a metal and resin that feel nice. The fit, however, may be subjective; while some users might find it comfortable for extended listening sessions, others might struggle with the size and shape of the ear shells. Personally, I found them to be reasonably comfortable.

Sound Analysis​

graph - 2024-05-27T154833.375.png


The bass performance of the SuperMix 4 is characterized by its clarity and detail. The low frequencies are defined, providing a good foundation without bleeding into the mid-range. However, the bass lacks the visceral slam and thump that many listeners crave. The texture is average, and while it is sufficient for most genres, it doesn't deliver the kind of impact that makes the music come alive. This is particularly noticeable when compared to the SIMGOT EA500 LM, which offers a more textured and impactful bass response with a stronger, more impressive bass slam and texture.



The mid-range on the SuperMix 4 is a mixed bag. The lower mids are clean and detailed, providing good separation and clarity for instruments and vocals. However, the upper mid-range have a tendency become shouty and shrill, especially at higher volumes and with certain genres. This can make listening fatiguing over extended periods. It's advisable to keep the volume at a moderate level to avoid this issue. In comparison, the TruthEar Nova offers a more balanced mid-range with better control, avoiding the shoutiness that the SuperMix 4 can exhibit.



The treble on the SuperMix 4 is well-extended, adding a sense of airiness and clarity to the sound. This extension, however, comes at the cost of harshness and an unnatural timbre at moderate to loud volumes. The PZT driver contributes to this extended treble, but it can sound piercing sometimes, detracting from the overall listening experience.


Technical Performance​

In terms of technicalities, the SuperMix 4 performs admirably. The soundstage is wide for an IEM. Imaging is accurate. The overall detail retrieval is commendable, on par with other IEMs in its price range, such as the TruthEar Nova and the CKLVX 4.



Compared to the SuperMix 4, the EA500 LM is a more engaging and fun IEM. The bass on the EA500 LM has more texture, slam, and impact, making it a more enjoyable listen for many genres. The upper mid-range on the EA500 LM is less energetic, resulting in a smoother and more pleasant listening experience. While both IEMs offer similar levels of detail retrieval, the EA500 LM's overall tuning makes it a more versatile and enjoyable option.


graph - 2024-05-28T103225.401.png

Kiwi Ears Quintet

The Kiwi Ears Quintet has a similar driver configuration with the exception of an additional BA. The Quintet has a more impactful bass with better texture and slam, providing a fuller and more dynamic low-end response. The mid-range has some BA timbre and has less tendency to become shouty, offering a more pleasant listening experience with better technicalities.

graph - 2024-05-28T132336.398.png

TruthEar Nova​

The TruthEar Nova offers similar technicalities to the SuperMix 4 but avoids the tendency for shoutiness in the upper mid-range. The Nova's bass has better slam and impact, though the lower mid-range can sound a bit thin. Despite this, the Nova provides a more balanced and controlled sound, making it a better option for those who find the SuperMix 4's upper mid-range too aggressive.
graph - 2024-05-28T103314.884.png


The CKLVX 4 is another competitor that handles the vocal gain region more effectively than the SuperMix 4. It never sounds shouty or harsh, though it does have a treble peak above 10kHz. The ear shells are on the larger side, which can be uncomfortable for some people. Despite this, the CKLVX 4 offers a more relaxed and pleasant listening experience compared to the SuperMix 4.

graph - 2024-05-28T103357.681.png

AFUL Explorer​

The AFUL Explorer stands out with its superior bass slam, impact, and texture. The mid-range is more intimate, controlled, and smooth, never sounding harsh or shouty. While the SuperMix 4 is more vocal forward and has more treble extension, the Explorer's treble is detailed and smoother, providing a more enjoyable listening experience for those sensitive to treble harshness. The Explorer's overall tuning makes it a more refined and balanced option compared to the SuperMix 4.

graph - 2024-05-28T103334.464.png



The SIMGOT SuperMix 4 is a well-built IEM with a unique driver configuration. For those who prioritize detail and clarity and can tolerate its tuning quirks, the SuperMix 4 might be a worthwhile consideration. However, for a more balanced and enjoyable listening experience, alternatives like the SIMGOT EA500 LM, Truth ear Nova, CKLVX 4, or AFUL Explorer are worth exploring.

Last edited:
Nice review!
I feel like either there's QC variance or people are genuinely listening to these at different volumes or smth that can affect their judgement on these..

There's a lot of praise, but all that don't like them all mention the same things - better at low to mid volume, shouty..
@atechreviews curious, what source do you use for supermix and other iems? heard supermix has very low impedance so a powerful source can sound different (worse or better)