Jul 20, 2018 at 2:48 PM
- Sep 13, 2009
- Reaction score
- Sep 13, 2009
I have been doing a lot of listening to the ED16 and ZS10, mostly just with my phone, a Nexus 6p. So, not a great source, but sounds pretty good. Neutralizer affects the ZS10 more than the ED16 on my setup, but post Neutralizer, both of these sound VERY similar. I agree a bit with what you say about the ZS10, as there is something in the sound that is a bit metallic, but I do not get the nasal effect you describe with trumpet, and I am a trumpet player. This is with symphonic music, in this case a couple of recordings of Sibelius symhonies, Berlin Phil, Simon Rattle. To me, the ED16 has a thicker and more real low end. The ZS10 has a better stage, width wise. Depth wise, they are similar. The ZS10 provides more space and 3d to acoustic instruments. I do not find vocals to be more recessed with the ZS10. I still overall slightly prefer the ZS10, as I find my level of enjoyment of the music to be higher. It just gets out of the way of the music for me. I suppose that could cause me to overlook its flaws somewhat more, I do not know. I am using Tennmak wide bores with the ZS10, and the stock KZ medium tips with the ED16.ED16.
Phonograph boost everything and test whether it distorts or not. They never tell about what it sound.
Its good as we can get to know the limits, but ED16 is way better in signature and tuning perspective and has a small blueprint compared to ZS10.
ZS10 is technically awesome but tuning is where I feel pity. ZS10 is nasal and upfront with trumpets and cymbal snare is soft yet metalic. Vocals are recessed(yet defined) and bass is strong creating weird stage and incoherency over spectrum. Not like some crappy iem, but still noticeable.
You will need a equaliser to shine these.
ED16 is very good from start