[gadgetgod]

Based on your comment, I'd say yes the Sa6 is a great complement and easily one of the best near neutrals under $600 in my book.

Thank you man!!!

 

[Sphinx]

Managed to get an "open box" of the EST 112, should arrive on Thursday can't wait to give this a try.
I was going back and forth between these or spending a bit more and get the Excalibur, however i've read in certain threads about thieaudio andQC issues. I didn't want to take the chance of spending $500+ on something so new and risk something failing.

 

[Sphinx]

Received the EST 112 and they do sound rather spectacular, question for you guys, I'm using it with an ifi hip dac connected to my iPhone 11 pro and I'm noticing noise on the 4.4mm connection when I load my music app, I've also noticed that I barely turn the volume knob when playing muisc. Is it possible that the EST's are too sensitive for the dac/amp combo? And should I be looking at something else?

 

[IEMusic]

 

[HuoYuanJia]

I had the measurement online for quite a while already:

 

[Banbeucmas]

Received the EST 112 and they do sound rather spectacular, question for you guys, I'm using it with an ifi hip dac connected to my iPhone 11 pro and I'm noticing noise on the 4.4mm connection when I load my music app, I've also noticed that I barely turn the volume knob when playing muisc. Is it possible that the EST's are too sensitive for the dac/amp combo? And should I be looking at something else?

I haven't got that experience in the DX160, do you have any other sources you can try with right now?

 

[Sphinx]

I did experience that same kind of effect with my Tab S7+ on the USB C port, I'm going to give the 3.5mm and see if the noise floor goes down a tad.

I mean they are still amazing just annoying that turning the volume knob 1mm is almost twice as loud

 

[cleg]

My video about EST112, in short… well, you already know that they are great

 

[Sphinx]

Great Video!!

 

[Techfixation]

Thought you guys might like a bit of a comparison between the EST112's and the Thieaudio Oracle! I've actually regrettably decided to sell my EST112's after spending the last couple of months enjoying them thoroughly but only because I've decided it's pointless keeping both them and the Oracle as they're both so similar!

I really was in two minds as to which to keep as I love them both so much but I think it was the extra upper treble emphasis on the Oracle that was the deciding factor.

Both IEM's are relatively balanced with great extension both ends, without sacrificing the mids which sound wonderful! They are both very airy with fantastic separation and a large soundstage which is definitely the closest I've experienced in IEM form to my previous open back Audeze LCD-2c's!

Where they differ is the more elevated upper treble on the Oracle compared to the smoother but still very extended upper treble on the Dunu's. I would say the Dunu's have a little more bass presence, with more impact due in part to the fantastic 13.5mm dual-sided beryllium coated dynamic driver! I find myself having to EQ the Oracle by adding a 4db bass shelf which gives a nice thump and seems to emphasis the sub bass more in comparison to the punchier mid bass on the Dunu's.

Despite what people have said about them both being large I actually find them both to be very comfortable in my average sized ears. The Oracle's give more of a custom like fit and are lighter but I can always feel I'm wearing them unlike the Dunu's which have a bit more room to breath and just disappear after a while!

In terms of accessories the Dunu easily wins out! The cable is the best I've ever used and I personally prefer it over the Dunu Zen's due it being lighter and softer. The Dunu also has way more tips and a really well made decent sized leather case.

Have gone from owning several open back 'over ears' including the Hifiman Sundara and the Audeze LCD-2c, to then venturing into the world of IEM's including the Fiio FH3, Dunu Zen, and Softears RSV I'd say the Dunu EST112 and the Thieaudio Oracle easily best the lot and I honestly think I'd need to spend another 1k to see a worthwhile improvement!

Anyway I think whoever buys the Dunu EST112 is going to love them, I think they really are quite special for the price and definitely worth a listen!

 

[DUNU-Topsound]

Apologies to everyone who have been eyeing the EST 112, but can't seem to find one in stock. We had a number of issues related to the supply chain, leading to a shortage in stock. We're happy to let everyone know that there is we've been able to remedy these problems, and that the EST 112 is now back in stock.

On another note, we've received a number of comments over the past number of months relating to whether our manufactured-published measurements should be believed. A number of months ago, we elected to publish our measurements in a format we believed most listeners would be able to interpret. Thus, our graphs are generated in an aspect ratio that is highly similar to that of the squig.link project, which a good number of hobbyist review sites have elected to adopt as a means of maintaining a measurement database.

We harvested all the measurements we could find on the EST 112 published to the squig.link project and plotted them here (in various shades of blue below). The plot points were aligned so as to generate the least intersample variance. The highest concordance of sound pressure values exists between 200-300 Hz. As we head to lower frequencies, we notice that there is some small variance, depending on the level of seal contributing to bass leak. There was also one outlier that plotted significantly stronger bass response than the rest. Barring discrepancies in treble resonances related to depth of insertion into the coupler, treble frequencies tended to diverge to a great degree with increasing frequency, as much as 7.5 dB in some areas, with more variance at anti-resonance nadirs than at resonant apices.

In general, we were satisfied with how well our own published measurements (in red below), one from a B&K Type 4157, and another on an IEC 60318-4 compatible CRY711, represented the overall tonal response of the EST 112 as it relates to the IEC 60318-4 standard. However, the larger than expected variance in hobbyists' 'clone 711' couplers is concerning, and we will continue to monitor this ever increasing trend of hobbyists utilizing low cost IEC couplers to obtain frequency response measurements, and how they relate to our own data.

 

[Banbeucmas]

Apologies to everyone who have been eyeing the EST 112, but can't seem to find one in stock. We had a number of issues related to the supply chain, leading to a shortage in stock. We're happy to let everyone know that there is we've been able to remedy these problems, and that the EST 112 is now back in stock.

On another note, we've received a number of comments over the past number of months relating to whether our manufactured-published measurements should be believed. A number of months ago, we elected to publish our measurements in a format we believed most listeners would be able to interpret. Thus, our graphs are generated in an aspect ratio that is highly similar to that of the squig.link project, which a good number of hobbyist review sites have elected to adopt as a means of maintaining a measurement database.

We harvested all the measurements we could find on the EST 112 published to the squig.link project and plotted them here (in various shades of blue below). The plot points were aligned so as to generate the least intersample variance. The highest concordance of sound pressure values exists between 200-300 Hz. As we head to lower frequencies, we notice that there is some small variance, depending on the level of seal contributing to bass leak. There was also one outlier that plotted significantly stronger bass response than the rest. Barring discrepancies in treble resonances related to depth of insertion into the coupler, treble frequencies tended to diverge to a great degree with increasing frequency, as much as 7.5 dB in some areas, with more variance at anti-resonance nadirs than at resonant apices.



In general, we were satisfied with how well our own published measurements (in red below), one from a B&K Type 4157, and another on an IEC 60318-4 compatible CRY711, represented the overall tonal response of the EST 112 as it relates to the IEC 60318-4 standard. However, the larger than expected variance in hobbyists' 'clone 711' couplers is concerning, and we will continue to monitor this ever increasing trend of hobbyists utilizing low cost IEC couplers to obtain frequency response measurements, and how they relate to our own data.

I personally measured the 112 and from my reading experience to your data, it's fine.
The major concern is that whether the consumer have enough interpretation skill or not.

 

[DUNU-Topsound]

I personally measured the 112 and from my reading experience to your data, it's fine.
The major concern is that whether the consumer have enough interpretation skill or not.

Our concern is that consumers in this day and age inherently mistrust manufacturer-released measurements, and opt to rely on third party measurements. However, the large variation in third party measurements may also lead individuals to be misled into conclusions that aren't necessarily reflective of how it sounds.

We get this kind of question all the time: how much is the pinna gain on so and so model? While we could make a legitimate argument against 'pinna gain' (an incomplete term, in our opinion) as a surrogate for "shoutiness", as it relates to the EST 112, a consumer may be led to believe it could be anywhere between +7 to +10 dB, leading to very different opinions.

Thus, we encourage everyone to always try to get a firsthand listen. Measurements are a very good tool, but they rarely, if ever, tell the whole story.

There indeed is a large variance in how well people are able to interpret measurements as well. That's why we try to work with reviewers who take the time to actually explain how their listening experience relates to what is or isn't reflected in the measurements. However, many do not. Some also do not have the knowledge base to generate an explanation that is reflective of acoustic science, as most hobbyists are self-taught through informal encounters with other individuals. There is no curriculum that reduces all of acoustics to just the portion that relates to earphones.

Over the past half year, we've been slowly preparing educational materials on our approach to acoustics and the subtle art of tuning. Much of this material, however, is geared toward the entry-level enthusiast generally confused by the many measurements floating around the internet. Eventually, we hope to ramp up the complexity of these materials, but making them easy to digest is a big challenge, and we're also limited by the resources and time available to us.

 

[Ichos]

Thus, we encourage everyone to always try to get a firsthand listen. Measurements are a very good tool, but they rarely, if ever, tell the whole story.

That is very true but unfortunately a lot of people jump into rushed conclusions by just reading frequency response measurements.

 

[KutuzovGambit]

That is very true but unfortunately a lot of people jump into rushed conclusions by just reading frequency response measurements.

Well, there’s also the fact that in many parts of the world it’s simply impossible to audition items firsthand prior to purchase, so all we have to go on are reviewers and graphs.