CK Moustache (previously active as "HiFiChris") – Audio Review and Measurement Index Thread

[mhamam]

changed

 

[CK Moustache]

Fidue Thunder


Source:

Review sample.


Foreword:

I haven’t written a review in quite some time as there is no real benefit for me from it. I came to realise that I have settled when it comes to in-ears and that I don’t desire anything more than what I have. This means that for critical listening, my Etymotic ER-4S and the ER4SR are my usual go-to in-ears, and sometimes my InEar ProPhile 8 for very demanding recordings, whereas for recreational listening there are several models that I really like to use, such as the Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered to-go, Oriveti O400, NocturnaL Audio Atlantis, Eternal Melody EM2, Custom Art Ei.3, Etymotic ER2XR my Knowledge Zenith AS06, SoundMagic PL50, Moondrop Starfield or whatever I fancy. When I don’t want isolation combined with a non- occluded fit, I use the Shozy Cygnus earbuds.
I could go on and write about full-sized headphones, but that would take up even more unnecessary time and space, as I have realised that I have definitely somewhat lost the ability of making a review short and focused and writing this one as a full text instead of my usual key point, note-like review style present in the other reviews in this thread was a mistake as it has made this particular review unnecessarily repetitive, washed and long without the usual compact precision that I personally want when I read a review.
But as I’m already amidst writing this review as I write this foreword and have already spent several days and hours just of taking notes and writing (yikes! I used to complete a review text in one to three hours in the past), I’m not going to change this right now. So it is up to you whether you want to read my gibberish or not.
And for those who don’t and also for myself, I have, for the first time as it has become available since the last time that I have written a review, asked artificial intelligence to put my full-text review into a detailed, key-point structured summary that I have attached to the end of the full text.


Miscellaneous:

The concept of hybrid earbuds is not new, with models such as the DUNU Alpha 1 and Sambat ST-20 Pro, but it definitely remains a rarity due to obvious acoustic challenges.

The Fidue Thunder feature a triple-driver hybrid design with one dynamic driver and two Balanced Armature drivers per side. Each of the drivers has got its unique sound outlet.

The unboxing experience is simple yet satisfying.
The earbuds’ build quality is excellent and their design is visually really appealing to me.
The shells are made of metal.

The beautiful, replaceable cable features with 2-pin connectors instead of MMCX which is something that I highly welcome, and the modular plug that connects to the audio source either as a TRS 3.5 mm configuration or 4.4 mm balanced configuration is a welcome addition.
The silver cable features a nice chin-slider and y-divider, however it is ultimately a bit too heavy and tends to pull down, so a cable or shirt clip would have been a useful addition. Therefore slightly less weight for a better portable/semi-portable experience would have been preferable even though the Thunder seem to be designed for a stationary or desktop-focussed use case anyway.

The storage case, while aesthetically pleasing, could be more spacious. The lid, held shut by magnets, pops open too easily. A taller or wider case, or one with a zipper or button closure, would have been preferable.
A notable feature is the inclusion of two small pouches for each earbud, preventing the beautiful shells from knocking against each other and taking potential visual damage.

The Thunder Hybrid Earbuds have an Apple EarPods-like fit and inner shell design but are angled downwards. This design ensures that the two Balanced Armature micro-drivers fire directly into my ear canals. Since my EarPods fit me well (but also a bit loose, which is also true for the Fidue), it’s great to see that the same is true for the Thunder, but just like with my EarPods, the Thunder don’t lock in my conchae as securely as for example the Shozy Cygnus and rely more on being held in place by the tragus and anti-tragus. Logically and as intended, there is however virtually no passive noise isolation.

Sound:

For what it is worth, I have got large ears, conchae and ear canals.

Tonality:

Reference-y tuning with a smidgen of Fidue’s signature w-shape.

In all honesty, I didn’t really expect anything good from the Thunder, as past hybrid earbud concepts like the DUNU Alpha 1 were a clear failure when it comes to pure sound signature based on modern approach. The more was I surprised when I initially inserted them into my ears and found myself hearing something that sounds incredibly good: very even, reference-y and reminding me largely of my Etymotic ER-4S that I then took out for some direct comparisons. My thoughts were that they didn’t sound like earbuds but were much closer to well-tuned, balanced, reference-oriented in-ears, and that’s exactly what describes the Thunder really well.
Listening to music, the Thunder indeed sounded a lot like my ER-4S in the mids and highs when it comes to tuning, while being closer to the ER4XR in the lows and fundamental range (the Thunder are a bit warmer in the lower fundamental range which leads to a stronger punch). It is especially nice to hear that the midrange is mostly free of any colouration except for a mild fundamental range lift, and that the highs are neither underrepresented nor peaky and mostly realistic in timbre.

Therefore the tuning is realistic and also not too forgiving with coloured recordings, although ultimately not perfectly as smooth/realistic/uncoloured/coherent in the mids and upper highs when compared to my Etymotic – only few in-ears are, though – and sometimes portray claps, trumpets and cymbals with a little colouration in a slightly artificial way. With past experience, this is usually the case when there is an elevation or peak before 10 kHz, followed by another one above 10 kHz, so I went on to listening to sine sweeps that confirmed this, but more on that further below.

Listening to sine sweeps, first and foremost, what I hear is a mostly even sound without any sudden peaks or tuning errors.
I can hear a lift in the lows that reaches its maximum altitude around 200 Hz and starts around 800 Hz, thankfully without much warmth around 500 Hz but already an audible elevation at 300 Hz and 100 Hz, with still sufficient bass at 60 Hz and a steep roll-off below that. Therefore as expected and totally fine for earbud standards.
I can hear a slight non-narrow lift around 1600 Hz, a broad recession around 4200 Hz, somewhat of a rather narrow lift at 6700 to 6900 Hz, with level decreasing back to normal afterwards, just to come back with a rather bright peak at 11 kHz and a roll-off starting somewhere around 12 kHz with not really much tonal information above 14500 Hz.
Playing around with equalisation, the two treble lifts are less than 3 dB in absolute levels to my ears (actually only about 2 dB for the lower of the two), and reducing them by this amount leads to a perfectly even and smooth, realistic treble reproduction.

Even though the two lifts are just minor, they ultimately lead to the leading edge and decay of above-mentioned tonal elements/instruments being sometimes reproduced slightly artificial and not as spot-on realistic as my Etymotic or the Oriveti O400 that really spoilt me in this regard (there is something a slight edge/sizzle with cymbals and claps), and it is the only thing that prevents the Thunder from having an excellent instead of good tuning – if something aims for perfection, I also want that, and while the Thunder come close, they don’t reach the summit yet.

As a result, one could definitely say that Fidue somehow managed to successfully implement a hybrid design into earbuds. It is even scary to say that if they had a litte less 200 Hz punch and were as smooth and even, realistic, in the upper highs as my ER-4S or the O400, the Thunder would had what I consider as perfect tuning and realism to my ears. As they are, they reach this by around 80% to 85%. It even somewhat scares me how well they are tuned, but as they are only good and not perfect when it comes to the upper treble realism because I am too spoilt by the O400 and my ER-4S or the ER4SR, I just wish that they had that extra bit of realism. Argh, so, so, so, so close.

Resolution:

… is really good and suitable to the reference-y tuning.

The bass is nicely quick and tight for dynamic driver standards without any undesired softness but still textured enough to sound natural and realistic. Overall, I would place it more on the technical side.
Midrange resolution, especially speech intelligibility and details (here the Thunder are very strong), and treble details are unfamiliarly high for earbud standards and actually make me rather think that I’m listening to in-ears. In this regard, they inherit some of the typical advantages that traditional hybrid designs (one dynamic driver with one or more Balanced Armature Drivers) or multi-driver designs in general, if implemented well, often have over single-driver designs, which is resolution.

As such, the Fidue are more or less comparable to my ER-4S in terms of detail retrieval but not as resolving and capable as the O400, which I didn’t expect anyway. Also as such the Thunder are by far the best and most capable earbuds that I have encountered.
Separation is very good and precise for earbud standards but not on $400 in-ear performance level, with ultimately somewhat more smear also compared to the Ety.

There is, however one aspect where the Thunder, like most hybrid configurations regardless of in-ears or earbuds, also differ from single-driver designs: coherency. Compared to, for example, Etymotic’s in-ears or the Shozy Cygnus earbuds or perfect multi-driver implementations such as the O400, I just somehow notice that there is “something” that is different, perhaps the phase or something else, but the Thunder, like most multi-driver designs, just don’t sound as coherent despite not having any tuning issues (as an interesting fact, in my initial notes, I wrote down that I suspect the crossover frequency to be somewhere around 4kHz, which even was confirmed later by Fidue (sure, this is a fairly typical crossover frequency, but it indicates that I was onto something)).

As a result, while the Thunder make no noteworthy mistakes here and definitely and quite audibly benefit from the advantages that most multi-driver implementations usually have over single-driver designs (such as minute detail retrieval and separation especially in busy, dense, fast recordings), they appear a bit less coherent than single-driver implementations.

Soundstage:

I perceive the soundstage as fairly realistic/open but not overly large as in being speaker-like. Circular to somewhat oval and a bit more open than congested, but not spherical yet and probably closer to the head than outside of it.

Spatial precision (perceived “empty space” around/between instruments/musical elements) is good for earbud standards but not as good as that of in-ears, with the Thunder having some spatial smear/blur – here they cannot hide that they are earbuds.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Comparisons:

Shozy Cygnus (no foam covers):

The Cygnus lock in much more securely in my large ears and their cable is much lighter as well since it is less than half as thick and while also beautiful, ultimately not as beautiful as the Thunders’. While the Shozys’ shells are super light and unnoticeable in my ears, the Thunders’ are a bit more noticeable but don’t really feel heavy yet. As for skin feel, I prefer the Shozys’ plastic to the Fidues’ metal shells.

Tuning evenness and smoothness are highly comparable when performing sine sweeps, with the Shozy only appearing a bit smoother due to their generally somewhat darker approach to sound with a moderately, broadly recessed lower treble around 3 kHz where the Fidue are closer to flat neutral (the Cygnus are generally tuned to be darker and a bit warmer). Both are ultimately not as realistic when it comes to upper treble reproduction/treble realism as my ER-4S, but neither the Fidue nor the Shozy are better or worse than each other and only differ in terms of tuning (dark-ish relaxed on the Cygnus, reference-y on the Thunder).
The Shozy have got a stronger 100 Hz punch while the Fidue are a bit fuller around 200 Hz.

Resolution-wise, the Thunder are quite a good bit ahead especially in the midrange andalso in the treble (but with a smaller resolution gap than in the midrange that is just a good bit ahead on the Fidue) with the audibly higher precision, micro detail retrieval and speech intelligibility, especially in fast and dense music situations where the Cygnus appear muffled. Bass quality is closer but still superior on the Fidue whose lows are a just little quicker/tighter, more detailed and somewhat more layered.

The Cygnus have got the somewhat wider, more open sounding soundstage as well as slightly more perceived spatial depth than the Fidue.
Spatial precision/separation is higher on the Fidue that however don’t reach in-ear quality of spatial instrument separation/portrayal of “empty” space either.

- - -

The Cygnus are by far my favourite earbuds. When it comes to tuning, the Shozy and the Thunder are equally good to my ears, with the former aiming for a somewhat darker, more relaxed and thus warmer sound reproduction whereas the latter are closer to a reference tuning. In terms of resolution and technical performance, though, the Thunder are audibly ahead and appear much more like well performing in-ears than earbuds.
Are they worth the $300 price difference? That is a good question. While I can comprehend why the Thunder are priced exactly where they are (tuning and sound quality, build quality, earbud alternative to good in-ears), I personally feel like at least $100 or 150 or even 200 less would be more justifiable if I were to buy them for my own, as that’s what I would feel more comfortable with when I remind myself of that nowadays there are so many excellent in-ears available in the price range up to $400, such as the Oriveti O400, that are superior in terms of resolution and separation – but the Thunder fill a niche as they are hybrid earbuds that sound and perform (resolution, separation) closer to good in-ears, whereas the Cygnus, while I personally love them, only perform like good earbuds or okay-ish dynamic driver in-ears even though their tuning is done very well, too. So when measured by earbud metrics, the Fidue are very good and stand out from the competition, but if measured by in-ear metrics, they are only good and ultimately just don’t reach the same level of speed, separation and performance.
The thing just is – do I, for the recreational scenarios that I use earbuds instead of in-ears, really need that more of resolution and sound quality that the Thunder offer over the Cygnus? Realistically speaking for myself, no, I don’t, as the Cygnus are already good enough and offer such a great package at their much lower price point, but there is one area, the midrange resolution and speech intelligibility, where the Shozy don’t fully reach my expectations/standards, and where the Thunder perform a good bit better than what I desire from earbuds. But is it really worth the extra money? This is a tough question that I still cannot fully answer for myself.
When it comes to fit and comfort, I ultimately prefer the Cygnus.


DUNU Alpha 1 (Balance/Musical silicone rings):

The DUNU lock in more securely in my large ears. The DUNUs’ cable is much lighter but not as beautiful.

The Thunder easily outperform the Alpha 1 when it comes to tuning as the DUNU have got a strongly elevated, forward, telephonic midrange and seem rather like a concept study just for the collection than like earbuds for actual music listening. Easy win for the Fidue in this aspect, no question.

When it comes to resolution, especially midrange and treble details, the Thunder outperform the DUNU, which is also somewhat the case for general speed and tightness. There is however, one aspect where the Alpha 1 are ahead, which is bass layering that appears more textured and detailed on the DUNU while speed and tightness are slightly better with the Fidue.

The Alpha 1 have got the deeper and therefore better layered soundstage to my ears while the Fidues’ is slightly wider. Spatial precision is about comparable and perhaps a bit cleaner one the DUNUs’ side.

Conclusion:

One should not fully expect the performance of similarly priced in-ears, nonetheless the Thunder are definitely much closer to in-ears in terms of tuning and sound quality than to earbuds.

Hybrid earbuds done right? I guess so.
But because of how good the Thunder are, I just cannot fully convince my mind to not judge them by in-ear standards. They simply don’t sound and perform like earbuds. And that is actually their main problem for me personally: while they portray excellence when judged by earbud standards, they don’t stand out enough when judged by in-ear standards as they cannot fully eliminate the technical disadvantages that earbuds have when compared with in-ears that occlude the ear canal and only convince me by 85%. As a result I would most likely not buy them personally at $400 as I am definitely more of an in-ear person, but things would most likely look much different if the pricing were different or if I mainly used earbuds for music listening, because the Thunder really are this good despite not fully reaching my definition of perfection.


Photos:

- - - - - - - - - - - -



Artificial Intelligence generated, detailed, Key Point structured, compact Summary of the Full Text Review:

Foreword:​

• Review Writing: Haven’t written a review in a while, no real benefit from it.
• In-Ears Preference: Settled with current in-ears, no desire for more.
• Critical Listening: Uses Etymotic ER-4S and ER4SR, sometimes InEar ProPhile 8.
• Recreational Listening: Uses various models like Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered, Oriveti O400, NocturnaL Audio Atlantis, etc.
• Earbuds: Uses Shozy Cygnus for non-occluded fit.
• Full-Sized Headphones: Avoids writing about them to save time and space.
• Review Style: Prefers key point, note-like reviews. Finds full-text reviews repetitive and long.
• Current Review: Spent several days writing, not changing it now.
• AI Assistance: Used AI to create a detailed, key-point structured summary.

Miscellaneous:​

• Hybrid Earbuds: Concept not new but rare due to acoustic challenges.
• Design: Triple-driver hybrid with one dynamic driver and two Balanced Armature drivers per side, each with a unique sound outlet.
• Unboxing: Simple yet satisfying experience.
• Build Quality: Excellent, visually appealing metal shells.
• Cable: Beautiful, replaceable with 2-pin connectors, modular plug (TRS 3.5 mm or 4.4 mm balanced). However, a bit heavy, making a cable or shirt clip useful.
• Storage Case: Aesthetically pleasing but could be more spacious. Lid held by magnets pops open too easily. Inclusion of two small pouches for each earbud to prevent visual damage.
• Fit: Apple EarPods-like fit, angled downwards. Fits well but not as securely as Shozy Cygnus. Virtually no passive noise isolation.

​

Sound:​

• Tonality: Reference-y tuning with a hint of Fidue’s signature w-shape.
• Initial Impression: Surprised by the even, reference-y sound, similar to Etymotic ER-4S.
• Comparison: Thunder sounds like ER-4S in mids and highs, closer to ER4XR in lows.
• Midrange: Mostly free of coloration, mild fundamental range lift.
• Highs: Realistic timbre, neither underrepresented nor peaky.
• Tuning: Realistic but not perfectly smooth/realistic/uncolored/coherent in mids and upper highs.
• Sine Sweeps: Mostly even sound, slight lifts and recessions in specific frequencies.
• Treble: Minor lifts lead to slightly artificial reproduction of some instruments.
• Overall Tuning: Close to perfect but not quite there, around 80%-85% perfect.

Resolution:​

• Bass: Quick, tight, natural, and realistic.
• Midrange & Treble: High resolution, comparable to in-ears.
• Detail Retrieval: Comparable to ER-4S, not as resolving as O400.
• Separation: Very good for earbuds, not on $400 in-ear level.

Coherency:​

• Comparison: Less coherent than single-driver designs like Etymotic’s in-ears or Shozy Cygnus.
• Crossover Frequency: Suspected around 4kHz, confirmed by Fidue.
• Multi-Driver Benefit: Minute detail retrieval and separation in busy recordings.

Soundstage:​

• Perception: Realistic/open but not overly large, circular to somewhat oval.
• Spatial Precision: Good for earbud standards but not as good as in-ears, some spatial smear/blur.

Comparisons:​

Shozy Cygnus (no foam covers):​

• Fit: Cygnus lock more securely, lighter cable, plastic shells preferred over Fidue’s metal shells.
• Tuning: Comparable evenness and smoothness, Cygnus darker and warmer, Thunder closer to flat neutral.
• Resolution: Thunder ahead in midrange and treble, higher precision, micro detail retrieval, and speech intelligibility. Bass quality slightly better on Thunder.
• Soundstage: Cygnus wider and more open, Thunder better spatial precision/separation but not in-ear quality.
• Overall: Cygnus favorite for tuning, Thunder ahead in resolution and technical performance. Thunder priced higher, but Cygnus offer great value at a lower price point.

DUNU Alpha 1 (Balance/Musical silicone rings):​

• Fit: DUNU lock more securely, lighter cable.
• Tuning: Thunder easily outperform Alpha 1, which have a strongly elevated, forward, telephonic midrange.
• Resolution: Thunder ahead in midrange and treble details, general speed, and tightness. Alpha 1 better in bass layering.
• Soundstage: Alpha 1 deeper and better layered, Thunder slightly wider. Spatial precision comparable, slightly cleaner on Alpha 1.

Conclusion:​

• Performance Expectation: Thunder closer to in-ears in tuning and sound quality than to earbuds.
• Hybrid Earbuds: Successfully implemented.
• Judgment: Difficult not to judge by in-ear standards due to their performance.
• Main Issue: While excellent by earbud standards, they don’t stand out enough by in-ear standards.
• Technical Disadvantages: Cannot fully eliminate the disadvantages of earbuds compared to in-ears.
• Personal Preference: Would not buy at $400, prefers in-ears. Different pricing or primary use of earbuds for music might change perspective.
• Overall: Thunder are very good but don’t fully reach the definition of perfection.

 

[Raketen]

Moustache review! Almost as rare as new headphones from Fidue, which are almost as rare as hybrid earbuds.

Did you try foams on the Thunders?

 

[CK Moustache]

Moustache review! Almost as rare as new headphones from Fidue, which are almost as rare as hybrid earbuds.

Did you try foams on the Thunders?

Haha, yeah. I've just sort of lost the interest in posting new/reworked old reviews (of products that have been discontinued long ago anyway), even though I have still got some completed/near-completed ones in my vault. And I've also realised that I have long settled in the headphone/IEM world (actually right at the moment when I bought my Etymotic ER-4S and figured out how to wear them correctly) with only little desire to really try new stuff.
For neutral critical CD listening, I don't really need more than the Etymotic ER-4S/ER4SR and sometimes InEar ProPhile 8 for very crowded/busy stuff (although I don't necessarily need them and could well live without them), and MrSpeakers AEON Flow Closed (not neutral but natural, definitely prefer them over my Sennheiser HD 600). And for recreational listening/films, I usually grab the ORIVETI O400, SoundMAGIC PL50 (meutral-ish and convenient), FiiO FA1 (likewise), Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered to-go (likewise), Eternal Melody EM-2, Shozy Cygnus, Fidue Thunder or whatever I fancy at the moment (I just realise that I haven't used the Etymotic ER2XR, Shure SE215m+SPE, NocturnaL Audio Atlantis, Lypertek BEVI, Sony XBA-N3, Moondrop Starfield, Knowledge Zenith AS06, Fischer Amps FA3E, Koss KPH30i or Superlux HD-668B and others, all models that I like for that purpose as well, in a long time).
But if I had to settle with just one pair of IEMs for critical listening, one pair for recreational listening, one set of full-sized headphones, one set of on-ears and one set of earbuds, it would most likely be the ER4SR, O400, AEON Flow Closed, KPH30i and Apple EarPods with attached earhoox (they don't sound good, but are very convenient and inexpensive - otherwise it would be the Cygnus (but I wouldn't want to damage the cable in all-purpose use), and while the Thunder have got by far the best tuning and sound of all earbuds that I have, they are quite limited to desktop/stationary listening due to their rather heavy, thick cable and heavy shells whose skin feel I regard as inferior because the metal can feel a little cold upon direct insertion). Ah well, I've definitely spent way too much money on IEMs and headphones that I don't really need over the years (Audeze LCD-X, Sennheiser HD 800, Campfire Audio Andromeda, and many, many others... I really have way too many).

Regarding your question, no I haven't tried the Thunder with foam covers, but also doubt that they would work well with them. It doesn't really help either that I think that there has been pretty much no event when I preferred any earbuds with foam covers to the "bare sensation", sound-wise.
Did you get a listen of the Thunder as well? It still amazes me how well they perform and how well they are tuned. Definitely something that people who prefer earbuds and/or want about no passive noise isolation at all can consider, but the overall cable and packaging as well as shells definitely predestinate them as desktop earbuds, which is totally fine, but a somewhat stronger focus on portability is ultimately missing to make them fully love/appreciate them (they're nonetheless fabulous for static listening). In the end though, the only two big advantages they have over similarly priced in-ears is the lack of noise isolation and that they don't occlude the ear canal, and while they are tuned exceptionally well and also perform well on the technical side, the O400 (that I by the way have in my ears just as I type these lines) have set such a high bar in this price range (and obviously outperform those earbuds, but that was quite clear given that they are in-ears) and along with the ER4SR/4S (and a few others such as the Atlantis) sound exceptionally even and coherent in the treble that they have spoilt me quite a bit.

 

[Raketen]

Regarding your question, no I haven't tried the Thunder with foam covers, but also doubt that they would work well with them. It doesn't really help either that I think that there has been pretty much no event when I preferred any earbuds with foam covers to the "bare sensation", sound-wise.
Did you get a listen of the Thunder as well? It still amazes me how well they perform and how well they are tuned.

Thanks for the reply. No I've not heard them. In recent years I've also gotten into the habit of rotating through a fairly stable set of gear- Incidentally also including ER4 and KPH (P and 40i, in my case) Though there are a handful of classics, unusual designs and, occasionally, new products that manage to pique my interest (a hybrid earbud like Thunder or Alpha for example- also hope to demo an xMEMS-based set eventually, and the PP8 remain on my "to try" list as well).

Foams-wise, I generally find them worth trying (preferring the Heigi brand ones), though I've never used them with a "pod" style earbud like the Thunder. Of my two earbuds I prefer the Shozy BK/Starlight (similar to cygnus I believe?) with foams, but the VE Zen 2 without.

 

[CK Moustache]

Though there are a handful of classics, unusual designs and, occasionally, new products that manage to pique my interest (a hybrid earbud like Thunder or Alpha for example- also hope to demo an xMEMS-based set eventually, and the PP8 remain on my "to try" list as well).

Yeah, some of the new unusual designs appear to be quite interesting, and it seems like manufacturers may have overcome the past limitations of tonally and technically "ancient" IEM/headphone technology that wasn't known to perform at all (such as bone conduction drivers, piezoelectric drivers and mechanical vibration actuators). But there's nothing that really sparks my interest. For critical listening, I am more than happy with my ER-4S/the ER4SR in at least 75% of the time (actually most likely even much more), and my ProPhile 8 are really only there for when I really need that extra resolution and control in trade of a slightly smoother "natural neutral" interpretation of the sound (I wouldn't really need them but they are definitely "nice to have" in those aforementioned situations, and definitely a technically better performing choice over the Ultimate Ears Reference Remastered to-go). And my AEON Flow Closed, while not perfect and flat, are tuned well enough for me when I want to use circumaural headphones. Logically, for recreational listening or watching films, I have so many more in-ears and headphones than I need, therefore I don't feel any urge to try anything new.

Speaking of films, the Fidue Thunder have proven to be an excellent choice for me and something I don't really want to miss anymore. The non-isolating openness, very high midrange resolution and speech intelligibility and overall good performance along with a balanced and natural, yet not too sterile tuning, make them excellent for this scenario and I tend to use them more often for this than in-ears even though they would better suit my preferences if the cable were less heavy, along with the cold metal shells that aren't really lightweight either. But yeah, as mentioned, they seem to be designed for a stationary/desktop use, so I guess it's fine.

What I however don't take lightly at all is however the way I am treated by GSE (Fidue's ODM) - I only accepted their review invitation under the condition that they would handle all of the import fees beforehand, which they agreed to but still somehow failed to, so I had to pay those fees on their behalf, and despite reassuring me that they would arrange a refund of those fees because they promised me that there wouldn't be any fees because their shipping agent would pay them upfront but clearly didn't (in fact, in the FedEx shipping portal, they can select who to send the invoice to (consignor, recipient, or third party), and I was selected, so what they told me was not true from the beginning), and in the weeks and months after that, what I heard back from them feels like excuses and as if they never intended to pay the import and handling fees (it wasn't much, but I don't support the practice of promising something and not keeping that promise and only replying with excuses and what seems to be lies, to the point of not having replied anymore at all in the past two weeks, as it was what I required them to do for me to even accept their review enquiry).

 

[CK Moustache]

What I however don't take lightly at all is however the way I am treated by GSE (Fidue's ODM) - I only accepted their review invitation under the condition that they would handle all of the import fees beforehand, which they agreed to but still somehow failed to, so I had to pay those fees on their behalf, and despite reassuring me that they would arrange a refund of those fees because they promised me that there wouldn't be any fees because their shipping agent would pay them upfront but clearly didn't (in fact, in the FedEx shipping portal, they can select who to send the invoice to (consignor, recipient, or third party), and I was selected, so what they told me was not true from the beginning), and in the weeks and months after that, what I heard back from them feels like excuses and as if they never intended to pay the import and handling fees (it wasn't much, but I don't support the practice of promising something and not keeping that promise and only replying with excuses and what seems to be lies, to the point of not having replied anymore at all in the past two weeks, as it was what I required them to do for me to even accept their review enquiry).

Lol, they eventually replied and asked for my bank details but haven't refunded me a dime and don't mind to reply to any questions. It's been several weeks and all I've heard is crickets. Doesn't really shed a good light on them, and also makes me want to use the Thunder less for recreational audio things and films lately. Well, so it's the UERR to-go that are have sort of become the main set of IEMs that I use for watching films.