[AndrewPL]

I wish I could hear the difference in sounding after burn-in of my it03 , they sound the same after 90h of listening, I can't hear the difference, bass is artificial,too digital.
Even JetEffect 7 in my Plenue M2  can't do much to make them sound warm or more natural. I'm a little bit disappointed 

 

[jamato8]

  I wish I could hear the difference in sounding after burn-in of my it03 , they sound the same after 90h of listening, I can't hear the difference, bass is artificial,too digital.
Even JetEffect 7 in my Plenue M2  can't do much to make them sound warm or more natural. I'm a little bit disappointed 

Interesting. That isn't what I hear at all. I wonder what the difference is. I have compared the IT03 to some very stiff competition and they do well. What is the output impedance of the source to the IT03? 

 

[AndrewPL]

 
Interesting. That isn't what I hear at all. I wonder what the difference is. I have compared the IT03 to some very stiff competition and they do well. What is the output impedance of the source to the IT03? 

My player has 1 Ohm impedance output, high and vocals sound great but the bass is awful

 

[HiFiChris]

  I wish I could hear the difference in sounding after burn-in of my it03 , they sound the same after 90h of listening, I can't hear the difference, bass is artificial,too digital.
Even JetEffect 7 in my Plenue M2  can't do much to make them sound warm or more natural. I'm a little bit disappointed 

 
What other IEMs are you using?
 
The IT03 has got a fast, controlled and tight dynamic driver bass, and I think this is what you are referring to when you say it is too "digital". I assume you would probably be better off with an in-ear that has a less tight and softer, slower bass attack and decay and more quantity in the root/lower mids (the IT03 has got an evenly climbing, straight-line-upwards-lift-like bottom end that nicely focuses on the sub-bass but avoids unnecessary spillage into the mids/root).

 

[AndrewPL]

I'm using over-ear headphones mostly, on the go I have ATH iM50 and RE-400. I bought it03 after reading all those enthusiastic recommendations like: "he it03 is easily one of the iem you can buy in the market without trying at all because it is just too good" etc..
I'm not saying these are bad , as I mentioned in my previous post I like the highs, crisp and clear vocals but the quality of bass is not what I like. Probably my expectations were too high after reading all those statements in this thread, that's why they did not impress me much.
And a few words about the case for those headphones that is included in the package. It's a joke it's too small, the headphones barely fits there and there are metal parts inside  that can easily scratch the glossy finish of the headphones. 
 

 

[HiFiChris]

@AndrewPL
 
I'm with you (well, just partially though as I think the IT03 is good/great at its price point) and also think that some of the posts might be misleading and raising some peoples' expectation by too much.
 
The IT03 is great for its price and does definitely have an edge over some about similarly priced products when it comes to separation, resolution, speed, tightness and tonality - in fact, the only sonic "flaw" I see is that I feel like the dynamic driver is not as resolving as with other hybrid IEMs that however cost more.
Imo the IT03 is one of the greatest/greater hybrid IEMs at its price point and is also more even in the highs than a good number more expensive models and a nice rise towards the sub-bass, however I don't feel like it is a TOTL product, which I didn't expect at the price point anyway.

 

[Paul - iBasso]

  I'm using over-ear headphones mostly, on the go I have ATH iM50 and RE-400. I bought it03 after reading all those enthusiastic recommendations like: "he it03 is easily one of the iem you can buy in the market without trying at all because it is just too good" etc..
I'm not saying these are bad , as I mentioned in my previous post I like the highs, crisp and clear vocals but the quality of bass is not what I like. Probably my expectations were too high after reading all those statements in this thread, that's why they did not impress me much.
And a few words about the case for those headphones that is included in the package. It's a joke it's too small, the headphones barely fits there and there are metal parts inside  that can easily scratch the glossy finish of the headphones. 
 

We had the case made so that it would be compact and convenient. The metal tabs on the inside are smooth. If the IT03 are placed in with the memory wire facing towards the other IT03 and the cable then coiled and placed on top and the flap closed everything fits neatly and securely in place. Small clam shell cases can be purchased for a few dollars and I have seen watertight types of cases on Amazon. I hope this helps.
 
I don't think any headphone or IEM will meet everyone's expectation. It is always best if possible to listen to anything before you purchase to see if it meets your needs and listening preference.

 

[koven]

 
Are these new or with the recommended 150 hours of burn in?

 
they're new, <20 hours. is something magical suppose to happen at 150 hours?  like.. hour #149 they still suck but hour #150 - wow complete transformation!? seems skeptical and i dont believe in such drastic SQ changes from burn-in, even with dynamic drivers.. ive never heard noticeable improvements to sound with any headphones/earphones after burn-in, they typically sound as they do day 1-2.. maybe my hearing is bad, or maybe its a nice tactic to get people to hold the product past return period, who knows
 

  I wish I could hear the difference in sounding after burn-in of my it03 , they sound the same after 90h of listening, I can't hear the difference, bass is artificial,too digital.
Even JetEffect 7 in my Plenue M2  can't do much to make them sound warm or more natural. I'm a little bit disappointed 

 
my experience is the same. artificial and digital are great words to describe the it03. to put it simply, i think these actually suck. and yes, i know how to wear/fit an IEM. i was ready to love them, but theyre really just bad imo. the andromeda is miles ahead in every SQ category, but that is to be expected at their price. however i dont think they are even as good as the $80 TFZ 5S, the $200 P1, or a lot of my other lower cost IEMs even the carbon tenores. in retrospect im sitting here absolutely puzzled and amused at the comments that say these compete at TOTL/$1k range, they dont even compete at their MSRP. 
 
this is the biggest letdown ive ever experienced in IEMs. i will eat the return shipping cost to annie-audio. the lesson here is to take head-fi FOTM hype w/ a huge grain of salt. i dont know if some of these "reviewers" gushing about the it03 is because they got free samples thus forced to not criticize or whatnot but they are way off imo. 

 

[nmatheis]

For those of you looking for alternative cases, I like these:



They snap shut and stay shut, have foam padding on the bottom, and come in two sizes. The small size for $1.75 shipped holds either a pair of IEM or smaller DAPs. Heck, even the PAW Gold will fit. The larger one will hold DAP + IEM for $2.99 shipped.

 

[dafos58]

For those of you looking for alternative cases, I like these:



They snap shut and stay shut, have foam padding on the bottom, and come in two sizes. The small size for $1.75 shipped holds either a pair of IEM or smaller DAPs. Heck, even the PAW Gold will fit. The larger one will hold DAP + IEM for $2.99 shipped.

Can you please send the weblink for these?

 

[nmatheis]

My phone keeps redirecting to AliExpress app. Just go on AliExpress and search "waterproof EDC case". These are one of the first (if not the first) product that pops up.

 

[all999]

they're new, <20 hours. is something magical suppose to happen at 150 hours?  like.. hour #149 they still suck but hour #150 - wow complete transformation!? seems skeptical and i dont believe in such drastic SQ changes from burn-in, even with dynamic drivers.. ive never heard noticeable improvements to sound with any headphones/earphones after burn-in, they typically sound as they do day 1-2.. maybe my hearing is bad, or maybe its a nice tactic to get people to hold the product past return period, who knows


my experience is the same. artificial and digital are great words to describe the it03. to put it simply, i think these actually suck. and yes, i know how to wear/fit an IEM. i was ready to love them, but theyre really just bad imo. the andromeda is miles ahead in every SQ category, but that is to be expected at their price. however i dont think they are even as good as the $80 TFZ 5S, the $200 P1, or a lot of my other lower cost IEMs even the carbon tenores. in retrospect im sitting here absolutely puzzled and amused at the comments that say these compete at TOTL/$1k range, they dont even compete at their MSRP. 

this is the biggest letdown ive ever experienced in IEMs. i will eat the return shipping cost to annie-audio. the lesson here is to take head-fi FOTM hype w/ a huge grain of salt. i dont know if some of these "reviewers" gushing about the it03 is because they got free samples thus forced to not criticize or whatnot but they are way off imo. 

Better than TFZ 5? Come on! I had both and there is no way to compare them. I really think the anatomy and seal is the thing. Nothing artificial here.

 

[FUYU]

Interesting observations koven. I agree with you on the Burn-In part. One thing I don't understand is why people are just not measuring earphones/headphones at 0 hours and XYZ hours, respectively?
I remember Brooko did it in his Mee P1 review. No difference. Now while frequency-response is not the only indicator of pure sound quality (THD+N and CSD plots for instance), it does refute this talk about: "treble coming alive, tighter bass" etc. The biggest gripe I have is why people say that Balanced Armatures Drivers are not affected by burn-in, even though their general principle is pretty much the same to any other type of driver (Moving diaphragm inbetween magnets). But then, what is Burn-In? Here's an excerpt from JLab Audio:

"The main purpose of the burn-in process is to loosen the diaphragm of a newly crafted headphone and to stress the headphone driver. Most audiophiles agree that the sound quality will be noticeably improved after burn-in."

Wouldn't this also apply to Balanced Armatures? Diaphragm and all. How can the stress be different when the signal input remains the same. Actually, wouldn't sound quality get worse over time? That tiny little diaphragm is always under so much stress. Here's another excerpt on Burn-In. (wikipedia)

"Burn-in is the process by which components of a system are exercised prior to being placed in service (and often, prior to the system being completely assembled from those components). This testing process will force certain failures to occur under supervised conditions so an understanding of load capacity of the product can be established."

I can't think of burn-in and their associated audiophile meaning as anything but a mirage. Maybe that's it! Perception of individuals are bound to change, and so is their impression of audio. Or in everyday terms: "I just got used to it."

/rant

Oh, koven maybe your unit is defective? Even with all the hype, I still don't believe that the IT03 are even below the TFZ 5s. Better make sure to kill all variables before coming to a final conclusion.

 

[nmatheis]

FUYU: I measured IT03 upon receipt with all three types of stock tips and will do so again now that I've reached the recommended 150 hour burn-in period. It's no professional rig, but it's given very consistent results when measuring IEM across different measurement sessions. I'm not going to necessarily publish the FR curves, but I will at least comment on any changes I do or do not see.

 

[mohdkhamsya]

   
they're new, <20 hours. is something magical suppose to happen at 150 hours?  like.. hour #149 they still suck but hour #150 - wow complete transformation!? seems skeptical and i dont believe in such drastic SQ changes from burn-in, even with dynamic drivers.. ive never heard noticeable improvements to sound with any headphones/earphones after burn-in, they typically sound as they do day 1-2.. maybe my hearing is bad, or maybe its a nice tactic to get people to hold the product past return period, who knows
 
 
my experience is the same. artificial and digital are great words to describe the it03. to put it simply, i think these actually suck. and yes, i know how to wear/fit an IEM. i was ready to love them, but theyre really just bad imo. the andromeda is miles ahead in every SQ category, but that is to be expected at their price. however i dont think they are even as good as the $80 TFZ 5S, the $200 P1, or a lot of my other lower cost IEMs even the carbon tenores. in retrospect im sitting here absolutely puzzled and amused at the comments that say these compete at TOTL/$1k range, they dont even compete at their MSRP. 
 
this is the biggest letdown ive ever experienced in IEMs. i will eat the return shipping cost to annie-audio. the lesson here is to take head-fi FOTM hype w/ a huge grain of salt. i dont know if some of these "reviewers" gushing about the it03 is because they got free samples thus forced to not criticize or whatnot but they are way off imo. 

 
When I first got the iems I think I mentioned that the IT03 has a very distinct TWFK flavor which some would probably describe as metallic or digital sounding. This would be in direct opposition to the kind of 'tubey', 'warm', 'gooey', 'analog', 'organic' sound that iems such as the tenores or TFZ5s are known for (I owned the tenores and modded TFZ5s which were hyped over at the 'website which cannot be named' and adored them for being cheap, fun and technically quite competent). But I still don't think the tenores or TFZ5s are at the same level as the IT03 (esp in terms of detail retrieval, separation, speed and imaging). Perhaps it's just the type of sound that your ears don't agree with.  
 
Another possible reason for you not liking your IT03 is source matching. I also have a feeling my DAP (DX80) plays a huge role in taming the energy of the IT03's BA drivers. I definitely prefer it out of my DAP than my desktop setup, the Audinst MX2 which most reviewers have characterized as being neutral-bright. 
 
In any case, I do believe that the tonality for my pair of IT03 has changed over the 5 days I've had them. They seem less digital, less metallic and more warm, more enveloping. It's almost as if the dynamic driver has taken charge of the sound reproduction, with the BA drivers filling in where the DD isn't able to, instead of the inverse, which is how I reckon most people would describe the tuning of hybrid iems. I have seen some reviewers measuring the effect of burn in and I'd love to see one done for the IT03.