Waddiewadkins
100+ Head-Fier
Its just that the volume ceiling is low, I'm boosting to get it up there. So that alone should be justification
A/B Comparisons - iems, buds, cans, daps, and more - Tips & Impressions
- Thread starter 291079
- Start date
The Andromeda is sadly one of the most fussy IEMs with source pairing.
Hisses on sources with poor noise floor control, and it has a low impedance, so it synergizes best with sources with low output impedance, otherwise the frequency response will get skewed.
Unfortunately that is also my experience. I find it to be true of a lot of CA's offerings, but the andro is one of the fussiest in terms of sibilance.
177. chord mojo 2 vs ifi gryphon (W):
Mojo 2: slightly leaner mids and treble, a little clearer, slightly more transparent.
Gryphon: faster bass, slightly wider soundstage, airier, better layering, a little more height, overall slightly smoother, better instrument separation, 4.4mm
The differences between the two are not that big imo, and features might be more of a decider than sound.
Mojo 2: slightly leaner mids and treble, a little clearer, slightly more transparent.
Gryphon: faster bass, slightly wider soundstage, airier, better layering, a little more height, overall slightly smoother, better instrument separation, 4.4mm
The differences between the two are not that big imo, and features might be more of a decider than sound.
178. campfire audio trifecta vs empire ears legend evo (W):
Trifecta: more sub-bass, more bass, smoother mids and treble, slightly wider soundstage, more analog sounding.
Legend evo: clearer, more transparent, better background detail, airier, tighter clearer bass, better bass/mids/treble balance, better layering, more natural, more forward mids.
The trifecta does have an attractive analog tonality, but that does not mean it has better timbre. Strangely, it goes better with my sr35 than other more expensive DAPs.
Trifecta: more sub-bass, more bass, smoother mids and treble, slightly wider soundstage, more analog sounding.
Legend evo: clearer, more transparent, better background detail, airier, tighter clearer bass, better bass/mids/treble balance, better layering, more natural, more forward mids.
The trifecta does have an attractive analog tonality, but that does not mean it has better timbre. Strangely, it goes better with my sr35 than other more expensive DAPs.
I auditioned the Trifecta 3x, and found it very lowFi sounding. Quite overpriced, and a lot of cheaper sets beat it in technicalities.
For those who love the "analog" sound, I can see why it's so popular, but as you say, its strength is not in technicalities. I guess its biggest strength is having a distinct flavor, which I actually think is quite prized in totl land. Tbh I did enjoy it a little (my parents had a very analog speaker setup), but I wouldn't keep it for the price. And yes, the lack of technicalities can make it sound quite lowfi. A polarizing iem to be sure.
179. sony ier-z1r (W) vs empire ears legend evo:
Z1r: clearer and more controlled bass, sharper treble, airier, slightly wider soundstage, more transparent, better instrument separation, overall clearer, more forward mids.
Legend evo: more metallic treble, more bass, smoother lusher mids, sub-bass hits harder, more height, better layering, bass doesn't bleed into mids even with the amount.
I prefer the mids of the legend evo but the bass and treble of the z1r (even though the treble can get too hot sometimes), so the z1r gets my preference.
Z1r: clearer and more controlled bass, sharper treble, airier, slightly wider soundstage, more transparent, better instrument separation, overall clearer, more forward mids.
Legend evo: more metallic treble, more bass, smoother lusher mids, sub-bass hits harder, more height, better layering, bass doesn't bleed into mids even with the amount.
I prefer the mids of the legend evo but the bass and treble of the z1r (even though the treble can get too hot sometimes), so the z1r gets my preference.
180. empire ears odyssey (W) vs fir audio krypton 5:
Odyssey: clearer, more transparent, better background detail, better bass/mids/treble balance, more natural, leaner treble.
Krypton 5: More sub-bass, more bass, airier, more forward mids, wider soundstage, warmer mids.
Odyssey: clearer, more transparent, better background detail, better bass/mids/treble balance, more natural, leaner treble.
Krypton 5: More sub-bass, more bass, airier, more forward mids, wider soundstage, warmer mids.
Last edited:
181. a&k sr25 (W) vs ibasso dx170:
Sr25: clearer, blacker background, more focused sound, tighter bass, more transparent.
Dx170: more bass, wider soundstage, more expansive, better layering.
Sr25: clearer, blacker background, more focused sound, tighter bass, more transparent.
Dx170: more bass, wider soundstage, more expansive, better layering.
Rant 4: $20 vs $10,000
So, this is a comparison between a $10k set (shanling m9plus + pwaudio first times shielding + AK EE odyssey) and a $20 chu 2 run straight out of my laptop (lg gram 2022).
I'm not going to go into details, because obviously the $10k set is going to be better at everything.
However, the question I wanted to answer was, just how much better it is?
Well, on a scale of 0-10, where 0 is hearing nothing and 10 is sitting right in front of live music, I would rate the 10k combo as a 6.5, whereas I would rate the chu 2 as a 3.
So yeah, according to this scale, 500x the money buys you about twice the sound.
Law of diminishing returns, as they say.
If you are wondering, in my scale, I would put a good susvara chain at a 7.5, and focal grande utopia speakers run by uniti nova as a 8.5.
There was one westminster speaker chain (at least 6-figures) that I heard which I would rate at 9-9.5.
Man, that one was great. I would have been fooled if someone told me there was a violinist sitting insider the speakers lol.
So, this is a comparison between a $10k set (shanling m9plus + pwaudio first times shielding + AK EE odyssey) and a $20 chu 2 run straight out of my laptop (lg gram 2022).
I'm not going to go into details, because obviously the $10k set is going to be better at everything.
However, the question I wanted to answer was, just how much better it is?
Well, on a scale of 0-10, where 0 is hearing nothing and 10 is sitting right in front of live music, I would rate the 10k combo as a 6.5, whereas I would rate the chu 2 as a 3.
So yeah, according to this scale, 500x the money buys you about twice the sound.
Law of diminishing returns, as they say.
If you are wondering, in my scale, I would put a good susvara chain at a 7.5, and focal grande utopia speakers run by uniti nova as a 8.5.
There was one westminster speaker chain (at least 6-figures) that I heard which I would rate at 9-9.5.
Man, that one was great. I would have been fooled if someone told me there was a violinist sitting insider the speakers lol.
182. Thieaudio Prestige LTD vs FiiO FH7(red filters on)
PrestigeLTD: warmer ss, beefier more visceral bass, more organic midrange and airier,more extended treble, deeper sound stage,more holographic and more pronounced layering.
Requires no eq... exceptionally well tunned.
FiiO FH7: greater clarity ss,great quality leaner,tighter,faster bass, a more resolving and transparent midrange,better vocals(with the red filters on).The treble is sharper but sometimes a bit more natural. The soundstage width is o par with the Prestige LTD . The FH7 responds very well to eq.
PrestigeLTD: warmer ss, beefier more visceral bass, more organic midrange and airier,more extended treble, deeper sound stage,more holographic and more pronounced layering.
Requires no eq... exceptionally well tunned.
FiiO FH7: greater clarity ss,great quality leaner,tighter,faster bass, a more resolving and transparent midrange,better vocals(with the red filters on).The treble is sharper but sometimes a bit more natural. The soundstage width is o par with the Prestige LTD . The FH7 responds very well to eq.
Last edited:
Thanks for the comparison!
Last edited:
182. a&k sr35 (W) vs ibasso dx170:
Sr35: clearer mids, blacker background, fuller bass, better instrument separation, better background detail, airier, slightly wider soundstage, tighter more focused sound, better imaging, more natural, a little more transparent.
Dx170: better screen, better button, lighter.
Sound-wise, I much prefer the sr35, but I actually do like the hardware of the dx170 more. Especially the buttons. I really hope a&k will do something about their buttons. Having four small, easily pressable, grouped-up buttons is not fun to use.
Sr35: clearer mids, blacker background, fuller bass, better instrument separation, better background detail, airier, slightly wider soundstage, tighter more focused sound, better imaging, more natural, a little more transparent.
Dx170: better screen, better button, lighter.
Sound-wise, I much prefer the sr35, but I actually do like the hardware of the dx170 more. Especially the buttons. I really hope a&k will do something about their buttons. Having four small, easily pressable, grouped-up buttons is not fun to use.
183. sennheiser momentum 4 vs hifiman sundara closed (W):
Momentum 4: more bass, more sub-bass, sharper treble.
Sundara closed: better mids, clearer treble, airier, clearer, more transparent, more natural, wider soundstage, sounds more as a whole, better bass/mids/treble balance, better background detail, better instrument separation.
Momentum 4: more bass, more sub-bass, sharper treble.
Sundara closed: better mids, clearer treble, airier, clearer, more transparent, more natural, wider soundstage, sounds more as a whole, better bass/mids/treble balance, better background detail, better instrument separation.
Users who are viewing this thread
