[WoodyLuvr]

Some of those literal translations....wow.

Indeed, one major culprit of grandiose verbiage especially seen in the electronics industry (besides over-zealous sales marketing strategies) is simply language conflict.

Being one of the last true remnants of the ancient Chinese culture that emphasizes artistic conception (神), Chinese languages are expressive and unfortunately sometimes translate rather awkwardly into English due to their heavy use of free/separate morphemes. Simply put, Chinese expressions can/may/do come across as being rather corny and flowery, especially in regards to adjectives, as well as attributive and descriptive nouns.

Also, it is important to note that many Chinese characters do hold deeper, more complex meanings (and even stories) that are far too difficult and untimely to translate fully which may compound the awkwardness.

 

[WoodyLuvr]

Found a review on the Bell-Blue:

(was a bit scared when I saw "female poison" being mentioned.)


Seems to be on a similar level to the Chaconne.

https://www.bilibili.com/read/cv5313780

A much better description than mine!

 

[WoodyLuvr]

Welcome to the rabbit hole lurker aka @Rary ! It appears you are thoroughly entrenched and just as deep and/or as lost as the rest of us ! Great list there; I will add your ranking list to the ƎAЯBUD LINKS here shortly.

@Rary your awesome earbud ranking has been added to ƎAЯBUD LINKS !

 

[Rary]

@Rary your awesome earbud ranking has been added to ƎAЯBUD LINKS !

Thank you.

 

[RikudouGoku]

wow, just tried to fix the Bell-WE (bass version) with EQ and it actually worked!


Low-shelf: 80hz, Q: 0.6, Gain: 10db
Low-shelf: 300hz, Q: 0.6, Gain: -5db
High-shelf: 10 000hz, Q: 0,7, Gain: 3db
Preamp: -6db


Since both the Bell-WE and the LBB responded well to EQ. I tried to do the same for the LBBS, except that there was nothing to fix. So instead, I went full on basshead and gave it a:

Low-shelf: 80hz, Q: 1, Gain: 15db
preamp: -15db



(although I say the Bell-WE (bass version) with the EQ sounds better than the basshead boosted LBBS.)
(nvm, the LBBS still sounds better than the Bell-WE even with a 15 db sub-bass boost lol)

 

[Chessnaudio]

wow, just tried to fix the Bell-WE (bass version) with EQ and it actually worked!


Low-shelf: 80hz, Q: 0.6, Gain: 10db
Low-shelf: 300hz, Q: 0.6, Gain: -5db
High-shelf: 10 000hz, Q: 0,7, Gain: 3db
Preamp: -6db


Since both the Bell-WE and the LBB responded well to EQ. I tried to do the same for the LBBS, except that there was nothing to fix. So instead, I went full on basshead and gave it a:

Low-shelf: 80hz, Q: 1, Gain: 15db
preamp: -15db



(although I say the Bell-WE (bass version) with the EQ sounds better than the basshead boosted LBBS.)
(nvm, the LBBS still sounds better than the Bell-WE even with a 15 db sub-bass boost lol)

Does it actually make it better, or just alters it to make it more bass friendly?

 

[RikudouGoku]

Does it actually make it better, or just alters it to make it more bass friendly?

The Bell-WE clearly sounds better with that PEQ, literally cleans up the bloated mid-bass and gives it more air and micro details with the upper-treble elevation and also makes it more fun with the sub-bass boost which does not degrade the quality at all.

The LBBS still sounds better even with a CRAZY amount of sub-bass boost though, it can handle up to 25 (!!!) db sub-bass before the quality drops like a stone lol.


As for the more "reasonable" 15db sub-bass boost above on the LBBS, it obviously has more bass and sounds better with bass tracks (hip-hop, EDM, trance, etc) but otherwise I say the stock tuning is still the best.

Ranking wise, the Bell-WE is probably S- while the LBBS is at S with the presets I posted above.

 

[Luis1316]

Some of those literal translations....wow.

As a conclusion he just says that he preffers blue bell over chaconne because its smaller and more comfortable. The details in the treble region are quite similar between both of them; there's more clarity in the high mids on blue bell; a bit more bass on the blue bell.
Overall, it seems Blue bell highlights the vocals and especially female voices.

 

[miserybeforethemusic]

Can't believe the sound I can get from a combo like this...



Talk about a setup that disappears in your pocket. Haven't been listening to music much, lately. Lots of podcasts to catch up on. And, in those respects, I really do think the Traceless do it better. Just a little too much bass here and it creates a little boxiness. It's still good; Traceless does it better.

 

[Au13]

Yincrow RW-100 VS Apple Airpods 2019
(Borrowed the Airpods from my little sister)

Setup:
RW-100 (PC setup, Asgard 3 + Topping E10)
Airpods (mobile, LG G7, Bluetooth)

Sub-bass: Extends lower and rumbles a lot more on the RW-100, punch quantity is a lot higher on the RW-100 but similar speed, tightness and texture.
Mid-bass: The Airpods are a lot cleaner due to the faster/tighter bass along with more texture but more quantity on the RW-100.

Mids: Female vocals are better on the Airpods, due to the tonality being brighter and cleaner (no bass bleed on them unlike the RW-100) but also more natural with the timbre. Male vocals are also better on the Airpods due to the bass bleed bottlenecking (unclean) the RW-100 as well as more natural timbre on the Airpods. Similar quantity though.

Treble: similarly non-peaky but cleaner and airier sound on the Airpods, although tonality is somewhat similar, just that the Airpods sounds like they removed a blanket covering the drivers.

Tech: Wider soundstage on the Airpods but a bit deeper and more holographic on the RW-100. Detail, imaging, instrument separation and timbre are better on the Airpods.
Overall: The Airpods are more of an “audiophile” tuning than the RW-100 and made it look bad….

Comment on the Airpods: Well, I admit. They are actually better…a lot better than I expected (then again, I expected garbage from them since I don’t exactly like Apple lol).

Are they worth the price? For sound, no. There are better earbuds out there for sound, but if you want the convenience of wireless, then yes. I say they are worth it.

(FIY: They are more similar to earbuds than iems.)

Glad to see a recent talk about AirPods, they’re way better than they get credit for. Even if people don’t like Apple billions of dollars in R&D still translates to something for sound

 

[samandhi]

.

At early stages, and with not a ton of listening time on any one bud; so far my ranking of the ones I have are as follows (this will most likely change as I get more time with them and what-not:

Moondrop Chaconne
Smabat ST10S Black & Gold
Dunu Alpha 1
Smabat M2S Pro (stock driver)
Apple Classic Earbuds (2nd Gen)

 

[n00b]

.

At early stages, and with not a ton of listening time on any one bud; so far my ranking of the ones I have are as follows (this will most likely change as I get more time with them and what-not:

Moondrop Chaconne
Smabat ST10S Black & Gold
Dunu Alpha 1
Smabat M2S Pro (stock driver)
Apple Classic Earbuds (2nd Gen)

what genres do you listen to and what is your preferred sound signature/tonality?

 

[samandhi]

what genres do you listen to and what is your preferred sound signature/tonality?

I listen pretty much everything except classical (though I did download an MQA song to test out, and it does sound very good). But, if I had to say which I listen to most, it would probably be; prog rock, metal, rock, classic rock, hard rock, 80's (of pretty much anything including pop), and some pop, and R&B. But, if it has a great beat, I will listen. I have some bluegrass, rap, etc...

I like tight and quick bass over quantity, and I don't have to have a lot of quantity, but if it is tight and fast AND has quantity all the better (think a good planar). Overall I think I tend to gravitate to natural, but detailed. Analytical, but fun also. I don't like where manufacturers use too much 3k and 8k to give the illusion of "sparkle". To me this shows that the treble driver(s) is/are not good enough to tune the right way IMO. Plus I am sensitive to it. Technicalities and clarity are a big part of my likes... I prefer wide soundstage, but can live without it as long as the layering is there. Nothing worse than having great bass, and mids, and treble, only to have a song sound so congested that you can't pick anything out from it.

One of the reasons that the Chaconne is in the lead (for now) is that I find they have all of this in spades... They are so clear but not boosted in any one area, nor fatiguing. If I had to give them a grade (atm) such as @RikudouGoku does, I would give them an A+. Add about 4dB to 31Hz and 2dB 64Hz (on a simple 10 band), and they become S+ IMO. I would put them up there, in sound quality alone with my $1k iBasso IT07 (and in some ways they are even better). Hint: I like those so much that I swear that they tuned them JUST for me...

I don't listen at volumes that blow your ears out. I can listen for a very long time and not damage my hearing at the volume I normally listen at. But, I also don't listen at volumes so quiet that it puts you to sleep (unless that is what I am going for). I believe that every (decent) set has a "sweet spot" for volume. Some "sweet spots" are definitely louder/quieter than on others. One just has to find it!

How about you?

 

[baskingshark]

Found a review on the Bell-Blue:

(was a bit scared when I saw "female poison" being mentioned.)


Seems to be on a similar level to the Chaconne.

https://www.bilibili.com/read/cv5313780

"Female poison" in CHIFI terminology = boosted upper mids/lower treble = potentially shouty/banshee tuning

Better go in with your eyes (or rather, ears) open!

 

[samandhi]

"Female poison" in CHIFI terminology = boosted upper mids/lower treble = potentially shouty/banshee tuning

Better go in with your eyes (or rather, ears) open!

I came to that same conclusion...