Been MIA from the budget IEM threads lately as I've been quite busy with holidays stuff and using my over-ear headphones a lot more lately but just got the KZ AS06 in the mail today. Looks and feels like the AS10, but more bassy out of the box. Need to listen a bit more, obviously. Does not sound super detailed (less so than the ZSN to me on first listen). Will give more impressions later. Also working on my ZSN review next.
Knowledge Zenith (KZ) impressions thread
- Thread starter bhazard
- Start date
Please comment on the nozzle shape/length/diameter.
Some of us have like non-standard ear canals
The ZSA just won't 'stay' in my ears.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/kno...essions-thread.698148/page-2667#post-14683136
Edit : maybe post a pic like :
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/kno...essions-thread.698148/page-2663#post-14680330
Last edited:
Barusu Lamperouge
Headphoneus Supremus
Fingers crossed
SybilLance
100+ Head-Fier
Some 3 or so weeks ago I momentarily stopped listening to my baffling green ZS6 and decided instead to do some comparative listening between the KZ ED16 which I’ve had for several months now and the Purple KZ ZSN with which I’ve logged longer hours.
It wasn’t easy.
The shape and especially the length of the ED16’s shell, its short nozzle and the latter’s projection angle are sadly not ideal for me; to achieve a good fit and seal I have to twist it 2 or 3 times further inward but that prow-like edge at the base of the nozzle would cut into my concha cavum and it Hurts. The resultant very tender twin indentations in my ears at present preclude any in-ear listening for the next day or 2 perhaps but that does not mean I don’t like the ED16’s sound—for certain recordings, anyway.
To be fair all listening with the ED16 was done after a rest period sufficient to make the pain go away such that every time I start fresh. I’d listen to a track with the ZSN first then would switch to the ED16.
Quick rundown of impressions, ED16 vs. ZSN:
ED16 is warmer; ZSN is brighter.
ZSN is louder.
Initial perception of bass to middle range is quite similar for both but in time I could hear differences becoming evident: both have deep sub-bass but ED16 mid-bass has more impact; both have an upper bass that slightly intrudes or bleeds into the lower mid-range, but I encountered more of this occurrence with the ED16; ZSN bass has more of a finer grain, is less reverberant (the word is dry..?), thus more resolving.
Female voices have more body in the ED16; it will reveal why Sarah Vaughan is called “The Divine One”. By comparison vocals seem somewhat thinner with the ZSN yet more energetic, perhaps because they sound closer. As a whole mid-range in both are rather balanced, not as recessed, with regard to the rest of the frequency range compared to my few other earphones: KZ ZS6, KZ5 v1, KZ ATE c. 2016, QKZ DM300, Vido MX500, the Sennheiser IE80 (at its middle setting), save for the Ostry KC06.
Differences become pronounced from the upper mids up: ED16 is more prone to vocal sibilance (harsh S, T and Z and other fricative and affricate consonants generally heard from 4-5 KHz and oftentimes up to 8 or even 10 KHz); ED16 seems to resolve just a tiny bit more detail, drawing more textures but sometimes at the expense of tonality—drum brushes, hi-hats, ride cymbals somehow sound off, artificial; I perceive them as more natural with the ZSN; higher-pitched wind and string instruments seem a wee bit more defined in the ED16 at around 8-10 KHz, but definition starts to be lost beyond that; ZSN has a tad less definition but has more extension; there’s more of a sense of air with the ZSN.
Imaging, which is the reproduction of localization and spatial cues inherent in a recording, is very good in both. It is with the space and environment of the perception of the sound field that has to be created by the in-ear where the difference is stark; with the ED16 there’s this cognition of distance between you and the performers while proximity and intimacy characterize the ZSN. In well-engineered albums where care is given to arrangement or orchestration of instrument effects, like those of Steely Dan or generally in Chesky recordings, with the ED16 these effects, despite being all present, seem to be removed from the main instrument mix and merely stay in the background; whereas in the ZSN all these seem closer and delineated, as if at the exact moment a certain instrument stepped forward and made its presence clearly known.
Summary
Altogether, I would have liked to listen to female vocals and small intimate acoustic sets with guitars, or chamber music, with the ED16, if only I could listen for any length of time without the distraction of ear pain. The superlative binaural Three For All of the Bucky Pizzarelli Trio (Chesky, 2014) made me sit up straight as soon as it started with the ED16, and I’ve listened to this album countless times before with the ZS6.
Unfortunately with the ED16 I could only listen to an average of 3 or 4 tracks at a time. Going through entire albums or orchestral recordings would be painful and would leave those aforesaid twin indentations that would still be sore a day after. That was the case with my last session with them listening to Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue and American in Paris Suite.
The ED16, foremost, does not seem to have that extension at the higher range of the audible frequency spectrum. Within its confines it is a capable in-ear: deep sub-bass, strong mid-bass punch, a warm mid-range relatively rich in its presentation and sufficiently detailed in the presence until midway up the brilliance region. However, that strong mid-bass also results in masking of low mid-range details in complex tracks. That boost in said presence and brilliance regions also gives rise to an artificial sheen to certain instruments and more instances of sibilance.
As for the ZSN it is now clear to me it is not without its flaws—“limitations” would be more apropos, I think. However it and the Sennheiser IE80 are the most comfortable in-ears I own, or have yet tried. Its end-to-end extension makes it more than adequate. It is great. Easily driven, it imparts an infectious energy to music that translates to toe-trapping, head-bobbing and finger-snapping. If I’m simply rocking or grooving to my music, not doing any of that critical listening stuff (which is probably 99.9% of the time) it is a Fun IEM. As much Fun as my red ZS6 with the round NiceHCK foam ear tips.
Edit: Added Pics, fixed errors.
It wasn’t easy.
The shape and especially the length of the ED16’s shell, its short nozzle and the latter’s projection angle are sadly not ideal for me; to achieve a good fit and seal I have to twist it 2 or 3 times further inward but that prow-like edge at the base of the nozzle would cut into my concha cavum and it Hurts. The resultant very tender twin indentations in my ears at present preclude any in-ear listening for the next day or 2 perhaps but that does not mean I don’t like the ED16’s sound—for certain recordings, anyway.
To be fair all listening with the ED16 was done after a rest period sufficient to make the pain go away such that every time I start fresh. I’d listen to a track with the ZSN first then would switch to the ED16.
Quick rundown of impressions, ED16 vs. ZSN:
ED16 is warmer; ZSN is brighter.
ZSN is louder.
Initial perception of bass to middle range is quite similar for both but in time I could hear differences becoming evident: both have deep sub-bass but ED16 mid-bass has more impact; both have an upper bass that slightly intrudes or bleeds into the lower mid-range, but I encountered more of this occurrence with the ED16; ZSN bass has more of a finer grain, is less reverberant (the word is dry..?), thus more resolving.
Female voices have more body in the ED16; it will reveal why Sarah Vaughan is called “The Divine One”. By comparison vocals seem somewhat thinner with the ZSN yet more energetic, perhaps because they sound closer. As a whole mid-range in both are rather balanced, not as recessed, with regard to the rest of the frequency range compared to my few other earphones: KZ ZS6, KZ5 v1, KZ ATE c. 2016, QKZ DM300, Vido MX500, the Sennheiser IE80 (at its middle setting), save for the Ostry KC06.
Differences become pronounced from the upper mids up: ED16 is more prone to vocal sibilance (harsh S, T and Z and other fricative and affricate consonants generally heard from 4-5 KHz and oftentimes up to 8 or even 10 KHz); ED16 seems to resolve just a tiny bit more detail, drawing more textures but sometimes at the expense of tonality—drum brushes, hi-hats, ride cymbals somehow sound off, artificial; I perceive them as more natural with the ZSN; higher-pitched wind and string instruments seem a wee bit more defined in the ED16 at around 8-10 KHz, but definition starts to be lost beyond that; ZSN has a tad less definition but has more extension; there’s more of a sense of air with the ZSN.
Imaging, which is the reproduction of localization and spatial cues inherent in a recording, is very good in both. It is with the space and environment of the perception of the sound field that has to be created by the in-ear where the difference is stark; with the ED16 there’s this cognition of distance between you and the performers while proximity and intimacy characterize the ZSN. In well-engineered albums where care is given to arrangement or orchestration of instrument effects, like those of Steely Dan or generally in Chesky recordings, with the ED16 these effects, despite being all present, seem to be removed from the main instrument mix and merely stay in the background; whereas in the ZSN all these seem closer and delineated, as if at the exact moment a certain instrument stepped forward and made its presence clearly known.
Summary
Altogether, I would have liked to listen to female vocals and small intimate acoustic sets with guitars, or chamber music, with the ED16, if only I could listen for any length of time without the distraction of ear pain. The superlative binaural Three For All of the Bucky Pizzarelli Trio (Chesky, 2014) made me sit up straight as soon as it started with the ED16, and I’ve listened to this album countless times before with the ZS6.
Unfortunately with the ED16 I could only listen to an average of 3 or 4 tracks at a time. Going through entire albums or orchestral recordings would be painful and would leave those aforesaid twin indentations that would still be sore a day after. That was the case with my last session with them listening to Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue and American in Paris Suite.
The ED16, foremost, does not seem to have that extension at the higher range of the audible frequency spectrum. Within its confines it is a capable in-ear: deep sub-bass, strong mid-bass punch, a warm mid-range relatively rich in its presentation and sufficiently detailed in the presence until midway up the brilliance region. However, that strong mid-bass also results in masking of low mid-range details in complex tracks. That boost in said presence and brilliance regions also gives rise to an artificial sheen to certain instruments and more instances of sibilance.
As for the ZSN it is now clear to me it is not without its flaws—“limitations” would be more apropos, I think. However it and the Sennheiser IE80 are the most comfortable in-ears I own, or have yet tried. Its end-to-end extension makes it more than adequate. It is great. Easily driven, it imparts an infectious energy to music that translates to toe-trapping, head-bobbing and finger-snapping. If I’m simply rocking or grooving to my music, not doing any of that critical listening stuff (which is probably 99.9% of the time) it is a Fun IEM. As much Fun as my red ZS6 with the round NiceHCK foam ear tips.
Reference Notes
Comparative adjectives are used strictly within the context of how the 2 earphones compare to each other, unless otherwise specified.
These impressions were obtained alternately listening to the same reference tracks through the same gear setup (Cayin N3 low gain, Super Slow filter, EQ off, line out using FiiO L16 IC to Topping NX4 low gain, bass boost off, volume matched by ear as nearly as possible) and using the same generic medium-bore soft gray silicone tips with red cores. The purple ZSN has its stock cable while the ED16 has the type “A” brown SPC upgrade although I must admit I don’t hear any discernible difference among all my cables.
ZSN was set a little above 9:00 o’clock on the Topping NX4 volume pot while the ED16 ~halfway between 10:00 and 11:00 o’clock. That’s roughly a click of the iPhone 6+ side volume button (+3.5 dB) with an additional fractional move up its volume slider (~+2 dB). I’d like to emphasize all these are approximations. Many with better hearing and many others undoubtedly more authoritative on the subject will assert that volume- or level-matching by ear is questionable at best. In fine I’m merely stating that at least I tried.
Further I must note here that, coming from 2-channel stereo, my perception and definition of “soundstage” has always been in that regard; i.e., what I could hear when seated at the sweet spot of 2 stereo loudspeakers properly toed in, and with the various interactions of the sound waves with the topology of my listening room. Well, I’ve only heard a few earphones (mine and my husband’s) but I have yet to perceive that out-of-the-head field of sound with that phantom center channel some 10 virtual feet or so in front when listening to them, like I could to an extent with the HiFiMAN HE-400i. The KZ ZS5 v1 probably comes closest, but then its insertion depth should be just right, perhaps so that those vents aren’t blocked. Any deeper and the sense of an expansive sound field disappears; a more shallow placement would already alter the sound and of course a sudden turn of the head will have them falling off. Anyhow for this comparison I have to say that both KZ models though sounding markedly different still have their sound confined within my head.
On this subject I find this page and its related links quite fascinating:
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/tests/sound-quality/soundstage
I am also trying to reconcile the ideas put forward in said Rtings page—to which my own notions seem to jibe—with the thought-provoking theories put forward by darth nut in this prodigious effort:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/stax-sr-007-omega-ii-a-review-after-4-years-of-ownership.40313/
Some albums (only certain tracks unless specified) used for reference, in no particular order:
Sound the Trumpets - Alison Balsom (2012)
Bach: The Cello Suites - Steven Isserlis (2007)
Vivaldi: The Four Seasons - Julia Fischer with Academy of St. Martin in the Fields DVD (2.0 LPCM, 2002)
Wood II - Brian Bromberg (2006)
Mingus Ah Um - Charles Mingus (1959, 1997)
Like Minds - Burton, Corea, Metheny, Haynes & Holland (1998)
Eagles:The Complete Greatest Hits - Eagles (2003)
Stepping Out - Diana Krall (1993, 2016)
Stripped - Macy Gray (2016)
Ultimate Demonstration Disc whole album (Chesky, 1995)
Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc whole album (Chesky, 2014)
Steely Dan: The Royal Scam (1976), Aja (1977), Gaucho (1980), Two Against Nature (2000)
The Nightfly - Donald Fagen (1982)
Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue, American in Paris whole album - Leonard Bernstein, piano & conductor, Columbia Symphony & New York Philharmonic Orchestras
Paglingon: Return of the Native - Jacqui Magno (2000)
Live From Studio A in New York - Johnny Frigo with Bucky & John Pizzarelli (1988)
Birth of the Cool - Miles Davis (1949, 2000)
Kind of Blue - Miles Davis (1959, 2015, MFSL)
Sketches of Spain - Miles Davis (1960, 1997)
Bitches Brew - Miles Davis (1970)
Come Away With Me - Norah Jones (2002, 2014)
Billie Holiday at Jazz at the Philharmonic - Billie Holiday (1954, 2015)
Dream A Dream - Charlotte Church (2000)
The Guitar Trio - Paco De Lucia, Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin (1996)
Queen: Greatest Hits - Queen (2011)
Saint-Saens Concertos - Yo-Yo Ma, Cecil Licad, Cho-Liang Lin (1990)
Live at Rosy's - Sarah Vaughan (1978, 2016)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 50th Anniversary Album - The Beatles (2017)
Abbey Road - The Beatles (1969, 2009)
Let It Be - The Beatles (1970, 2009)
Time Out - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1959)
Time In - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1966)
Time Further Out - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1961)
Vocalese - The Manhattan Transfer (1985)
Mecca for Moderns - Manhattan Transfer (1981)
Ella and Louis - Ella Fitzgerald & Louis Armstrong (2014)
Heavy Weather - Weather Report (1967)
Sunday at the Village Vanguard - Bill Evans Trio (1961)
Three For All of the Bucky Pizzarelli Trio (Chesky, 2014)
Haydn: Three Favorite Concertos - Wynton Marsalis, Yo-Yo Ma, Cho-Liang Lin (1990)
Oh! One other thing: a year or so ago I could hear the 15KHz tone at the end of the Beatles' A Day In The Life (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 50th Anniversary, 2017); now I couldn't.
Comparative adjectives are used strictly within the context of how the 2 earphones compare to each other, unless otherwise specified.
These impressions were obtained alternately listening to the same reference tracks through the same gear setup (Cayin N3 low gain, Super Slow filter, EQ off, line out using FiiO L16 IC to Topping NX4 low gain, bass boost off, volume matched by ear as nearly as possible) and using the same generic medium-bore soft gray silicone tips with red cores. The purple ZSN has its stock cable while the ED16 has the type “A” brown SPC upgrade although I must admit I don’t hear any discernible difference among all my cables.
ZSN was set a little above 9:00 o’clock on the Topping NX4 volume pot while the ED16 ~halfway between 10:00 and 11:00 o’clock. That’s roughly a click of the iPhone 6+ side volume button (+3.5 dB) with an additional fractional move up its volume slider (~+2 dB). I’d like to emphasize all these are approximations. Many with better hearing and many others undoubtedly more authoritative on the subject will assert that volume- or level-matching by ear is questionable at best. In fine I’m merely stating that at least I tried.
Further I must note here that, coming from 2-channel stereo, my perception and definition of “soundstage” has always been in that regard; i.e., what I could hear when seated at the sweet spot of 2 stereo loudspeakers properly toed in, and with the various interactions of the sound waves with the topology of my listening room. Well, I’ve only heard a few earphones (mine and my husband’s) but I have yet to perceive that out-of-the-head field of sound with that phantom center channel some 10 virtual feet or so in front when listening to them, like I could to an extent with the HiFiMAN HE-400i. The KZ ZS5 v1 probably comes closest, but then its insertion depth should be just right, perhaps so that those vents aren’t blocked. Any deeper and the sense of an expansive sound field disappears; a more shallow placement would already alter the sound and of course a sudden turn of the head will have them falling off. Anyhow for this comparison I have to say that both KZ models though sounding markedly different still have their sound confined within my head.
On this subject I find this page and its related links quite fascinating:
https://www.rtings.com/headphones/tests/sound-quality/soundstage
I am also trying to reconcile the ideas put forward in said Rtings page—to which my own notions seem to jibe—with the thought-provoking theories put forward by darth nut in this prodigious effort:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/stax-sr-007-omega-ii-a-review-after-4-years-of-ownership.40313/
Some albums (only certain tracks unless specified) used for reference, in no particular order:
Sound the Trumpets - Alison Balsom (2012)
Bach: The Cello Suites - Steven Isserlis (2007)
Vivaldi: The Four Seasons - Julia Fischer with Academy of St. Martin in the Fields DVD (2.0 LPCM, 2002)
Wood II - Brian Bromberg (2006)
Mingus Ah Um - Charles Mingus (1959, 1997)
Like Minds - Burton, Corea, Metheny, Haynes & Holland (1998)
Eagles:The Complete Greatest Hits - Eagles (2003)
Stepping Out - Diana Krall (1993, 2016)
Stripped - Macy Gray (2016)
Ultimate Demonstration Disc whole album (Chesky, 1995)
Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc whole album (Chesky, 2014)
Steely Dan: The Royal Scam (1976), Aja (1977), Gaucho (1980), Two Against Nature (2000)
The Nightfly - Donald Fagen (1982)
Gershwin: Rhapsody in Blue, American in Paris whole album - Leonard Bernstein, piano & conductor, Columbia Symphony & New York Philharmonic Orchestras
Paglingon: Return of the Native - Jacqui Magno (2000)
Live From Studio A in New York - Johnny Frigo with Bucky & John Pizzarelli (1988)
Birth of the Cool - Miles Davis (1949, 2000)
Kind of Blue - Miles Davis (1959, 2015, MFSL)
Sketches of Spain - Miles Davis (1960, 1997)
Bitches Brew - Miles Davis (1970)
Come Away With Me - Norah Jones (2002, 2014)
Billie Holiday at Jazz at the Philharmonic - Billie Holiday (1954, 2015)
Dream A Dream - Charlotte Church (2000)
The Guitar Trio - Paco De Lucia, Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin (1996)
Queen: Greatest Hits - Queen (2011)
Saint-Saens Concertos - Yo-Yo Ma, Cecil Licad, Cho-Liang Lin (1990)
Live at Rosy's - Sarah Vaughan (1978, 2016)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 50th Anniversary Album - The Beatles (2017)
Abbey Road - The Beatles (1969, 2009)
Let It Be - The Beatles (1970, 2009)
Time Out - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1959)
Time In - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1966)
Time Further Out - Dave Brubeck Quartet (1961)
Vocalese - The Manhattan Transfer (1985)
Mecca for Moderns - Manhattan Transfer (1981)
Ella and Louis - Ella Fitzgerald & Louis Armstrong (2014)
Heavy Weather - Weather Report (1967)
Sunday at the Village Vanguard - Bill Evans Trio (1961)
Three For All of the Bucky Pizzarelli Trio (Chesky, 2014)
Haydn: Three Favorite Concertos - Wynton Marsalis, Yo-Yo Ma, Cho-Liang Lin (1990)
Oh! One other thing: a year or so ago I could hear the 15KHz tone at the end of the Beatles' A Day In The Life (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 50th Anniversary, 2017); now I couldn't.
Edit: Added Pics, fixed errors.
Last edited:
CoiL
Member of the Trade: Wood Audio Accessories & Modifications
ZSN does not have deep sub-bass (pretty fast roll-off) and is mid-bass "elevated" compared to sub-bass. This is confirmed by FR graphs.
What I`ve noticed in chi-fi threads is that many confuse mid-bass and sub-bass (maybe it has something to do with personal music preferences idk). Take a look at FR graphs and things become clear. Take some tone generator tests and things become even more clear.
What I`ve noticed in chi-fi threads is that many confuse mid-bass and sub-bass (maybe it has something to do with personal music preferences idk). Take a look at FR graphs and things become clear. Take some tone generator tests and things become even more clear.
teus
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2014
- Posts
- 26
- Likes
- 13
that's interesting. maybe over the ear IEM's have more variation in fitment than the normal ones.
maybe the ZST will fit you?
HAMS
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Posts
- 358
- Likes
- 102
My understanding is sub-bass is bellow 100hz and mid bass are between 100hz to 200hz? Alot of graphs rarely showing midbass above sub-bass level. So I'm often confused when people say ''not enough sub-bass" and "too much midbass."
Last edited:
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
Sub-bass is commonly defined to be below 60 Hz (20 Hz to 60 Hz).
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
A related question - how many KZs really go below 20 Hz, for instance to reproduce the lowest organ notes?
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
The human voice has a frequency range from down 100 Hz (Bass singing the low F at 87.3 Hz) upto around 1kHz (Soprano singing the high C3 at 1046 Hz). Upper Bass is starts from 98Hz and end at 82Hz, and then from 82Hz to 40Hz is all Mid bass, after that is the realm of Sub bass which end at 20Hz. after 20Hz is the realm of infrasonic, which feels like chest thump in PA speakers in club house or parties or the feeling of driver moving in and out in earphones.
above 1047Hz is Harmonics, which goes upto 4kHz. This is place which decides image of instrument and energy of vocal. It also define the space structure and Vocalist throat nature. Ocharaku Shizuku does this better than any IEM, and i mean this list goes upto the flagship. When this area is tuned properly, it gives the bell like high and balance the throat of singer. Above 4kHz is the Treble.
4kHz to 6kHz is lower treble and resonance area, this has to be tuned perfectly. When people say that this piece of earphone not my cup of tea, but some reviews them fantastic, is due to your ear resonance and earphone tuning didn't match, but his match. This area provides Naturalness and Instrument to Instrument space, amount and nature of Tape Hiss. Blackness of IEM said by some reviewers is due to this. 6kHz to 12kHz is mid treble is critical resonance area. Ear canal length is normally between 25mm to 32mm, which leads to ear critical resonance in sealed IEM between 5.8kHz to 6.8kHz. This area decides size of space and amount of ear fatigue you are going to receive. This area decides the energy of Harmonics which lead to exact placement of vocalist to instrument in given space.
after that is a lovely thing which i call air. I dont know why people dont focus on this area. This gives the ambience to sound. helps in removing the wall, or extension of size and makes gradual extension of echoes. that why i hate dampers in sound tunnel.
This may help you guys understand the sound
i tried to make it as simple as i can. It is from my research paper.
calculation of eardrum is removed and Resonator is removed otherwise my post will fill a page or two
I am sorry for posting Technical info again
Last edited:
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
KZ ES3, but it is muddy
HAMS
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Posts
- 358
- Likes
- 102
For me when using EQ, boosting too much sub-bass bellow 50hz relative to 100hz just make the bass sound slow and doesn't necessarily give the impact I want.
mbwilson111
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2016
- Posts
- 9,566
- Likes
- 18,844
This is why I have Spinfit tips on mine... the first ones I used Spinfits for.
SybilLance
100+ Head-Fier
Perhaps, @CoiL you failed to read the Reference Notes in the Spoiler. Its opening sentence states, categorically,
“Comparative adjectives are used strictly within the context of how the 2 earphones compare to each other, unless otherwise specified.”
Uhmm… alright.
I mentioned here that I came from a 2-channel stereo background. The love and affinity for music through stereo began with my father, who, I have also mentioned here, built his own Heathkit tube amplifier and pre-amplifier and DIY 3-way stereo speakers, to go with his battered Garrard turntable. That was when I was a baby. During the early ‘60s. As a child I learned what is bass and what is treble sitting on his knees as he was fiddling with the knobs of his pre-amp and telling me the distinction while listening to Louis Armstrong, George Gershwin and John Philip Sousa. During high school (mid-‘70s) I was already deep into music theory since I had lofty ambitions of being a musician. The passion for 2-channel audio continued well into college (late '70s to early '80s) where I together with my peers formed our own amateur “Stereo Society”. I have listened to systems fussed over with anal obsessiveness by their owners, systems that would not be out of place in any “audiophile” showroom or magazine. I have participated in double-blind stereo listening tests set up by my husband and his science geek friends just for fun. I know the distinction and gradations among the seven frequency bands of the audible frequency spectrum, and which particular musical instruments with their characteristic sounds fall into these ranges.
I would know the difference between sub-bass and, as popularly known and recognized, mid-bass. I would not confuse one with the other.
To be technically strict there are only 2 bass ranges, the sub-bass (20-60 Hz) and bass (60-250 Hz); but convention here further divides the bass range into mid-bass (60-125 Hz) and upper-bass (125-250 Hz) so, inasmuch as I’ve been conforming to it as well, it is not a problem.
The KZ ZSN does not have a “pretty fast roll-off” in its bass range. Rather, it has a more or less linear bass response, extending all the way down to the lowest registers, with just the slightest of mid-bass humps. This is what I hear, clear as a summer day at noontime.
As for frequency response (FR) graphs of the ZSN, I’m afraid I don’t have the requisite measuring equipment nor do I have access to them. I seem to recall, however, that antdroid has posted one that shows the frequency response curve of the ZSN as measured on his set-up or a link to it. Allow me time to search for it.
Tone generator tests in so far as I am concerned would be moot, unless again, the necessary equipment is there for evidentiary presentation.
If the FR graph alluded to that would tend to sustain the claim of the ZSN’s bass being sharply rolled off were presented with relevant information on how it was obtained, I would be most happy and receptive of the effort. This after all is a thread dedicated to impressions of KZ products, as indeed my post is.
Cheers!
PS: I made an unfortunate mistake, and I am sorry. Post edited accordingly.
Last edited:
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
..................
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
