Separate names with a comma.
put some impressions on the C16 thread, it will start rolling
Only If you don't have any character, may be the case.
I found the KC2 bass to be near flat/neutral whereas the K2 has a slight lift. My assumption was, due to feedback from others, that the T2 bass and KC2 bass are comparable (well-extended but flat-neutral). I don't own the T2 to be able to compare them but am I mistaken about the quantity of bass on the T2?
I imagine that Tin Audio enhanced the bass on the T3 just slightly, like BQEYZ did with the K2. Just enough lift to give the low end a little more weight/body.
Whenever I have that issue I strip the memory wire/guides from the cable and use silicone ear hooks. Not all silicone ear hooks are equal. I will only vouch for these. Two and a half years and they work great.
Hope this was helpful.
You probably did better with KP. If they match your signature.
What makes think my kanas isn't superior to the oh1 is the strong sub bass presence. If it wasn't for that the more organic mid range and superior resolution (yet less pronounced) upper treble would count a lot more.
In the way that my kanas sound they are equivalent, both not ticking all the boxes.
I remember you liked your kanas pro with more bass, with the mod, right? In that case you would be wanting more bass on OH1 also. They ""lack"" presence in mid bass slam. Exactly what you get on kanas and probably on your kpe modded.
Don't think that I posted this here:
I've had them for a couple of days now and I'm far from impressed. They've got a really weird tonality making them sound like a very little coherent multi driver iem (quite the achievement with a single DD) with slow decay and rolled og heights.
I'm really struggling to find anything good in the way these sound and I must say that I'm a bit surprised with the good feedback these have got, different strokes for different folks I'd guess. They're certainly not for me and I could think of quite a few better performing IEM's for the same money or less.
Built quality seems good though and I love the way they look but they kind of missed on what counts the most, too bad......
Nice review! I think no one mentioned the treble congestion is because the treble overall is subdued compared to the mids and bass. It's also less apparent with the wide-bore "vocal" tips. I've also noticed more congestion with foam tips. I've also gotten worse congestion in mids by almost any earphone in this price range or costing more which to me is a lot more important in music. I can forgive some treble congestions at rare times when they are also lower in volume than the rest of the sound. For my primarily vocal ballad music, I can't fault these at all. They match my sound pref perfectly at a really low cost. Been listening to these side to side with my ESW10JPN which were a lot more expensive than these when I got em. But I guess that was over a decade ago...
Nicehck N3 measurements:
TRN H1 measurements:
Measured with a Dayton iMM-6 mic, Ugreen USB audio interface, and a vinyl tubing coupler.
Measurements are provided with 1/12 smoothing and without compensation.
The magnitude of the 8k valley is probably an artifact of the coupler, which I have seen on on other Dayton mic + vinyl tubing measurements.
Attached for comparison is the official Nicehck N3 graph:
The peaks are in roughly the same places, indicating that the manufacturer's graph is real, albeit squashed.
My C16 package will be arriving later today. Can't wait to burn them in and hear what everyone else is hearing!
I did the same with the Auglamour F200. Lots of people on here praised it. I bought it and thought it was a muddy mess with no details. Now, I pretty much ignore posts by people and review sites that praised the f200. In my books, they're either shills or have taste vastly different than mine that it's not worth listening to their impressions.
Actually, from what I saw hardly anyone on HeadFi praised it.
Most said it was a muddy mess and/or odd tonality, and not worth it. That’s why I avoided it. All seemed to agree that the build was nice, but that’s about it.
You are right though; there’s shills everywhere. Anyone with a YouTube channel or blog is all the sudden an ‘expert’. You have to be careful and should technically take all reviews for a grain of salt. Opinions are like arseholes; everybody’s got one.
No, You understood me wrong and atm running KP without vent mods thus no raised bass. And my little "gripe" was not about mid-bass slam ( I hate any bit of raised mid-bass) nor sub-bass quantity - it was about bass tightness and micro-detail, which by now, after 100+h has improved noticeably and has better extension. Additionally I`m currently using custom nozzle filter which is slightly "thinner" and lets pass more highs extension and micro-details in highs/mids also. I`m finding hard to find any faults with my KP atm... they are crazy good (to my ears and gear).
Both seem like pretty unrefined signatures. N3 might've been good if not for that large dip.
LZ A6 measurements
That N3 graph, by just looking at it for a 1sec, reminded me instantly KZ ZSN.
Wow, thanks for posting this. I was very confused when I saw HBB's video on the T4 and was wondering how our impressions could be so far apart. I hate when companies change a tuning and don't announce it, especially when the original tuning was so good and well received. To me, the original T4 stood out in the crowd with it's unique tuning and now are trying to play it safe by making it "more balanced." I'm confused as to why they did it, because the T66s and T88k already had a more balanced tuning and the T4 was different.