[Seazer]

I'm in Malaysia so I should get them in about 15 days. Buying stuff from China is pretty solid here.

Standard shipping from China took less time to arrive here than USPS from the US did. (just received said items a week ago)

Btw has anyone benefited from burning in the ZSX? And has anyone experimented with blocking off the vents?

I personally haven't felt the need to. I enjoy it how it sounds by default. The stock cable is pretty bad so a replacement is nice, I just used a cheap cable from aliexpress I had lying around. Stock tips are pretty good, but I think the ZSX sound us perfected if you use the Sony hybrid style tips, like the stock tips that come with the Sony Mh755. Those tips + ZSX and it sounds great, no desire for burn in or blocking off vents (although by this time it's been plenty burnt in since I've used them so much)

These tips pictured perfect them imo

 

[IEManiac]

I'm in Malaysia so I should get them in about 15 days. Buying stuff from China is pretty solid here.

Standard shipping from China took less time to arrive here than USPS from the US did. (just received said items a week ago)

Btw has anyone benefited from burning in the ZSX? And has anyone experimented with blocking off the vents?

Don't you have domestic sellers in Malaysia? Here in neighboring Indonesia I could have a ZSX in my hands within days for about $35.

 

[seanwee]

Don't you have domestic sellers in Malaysia? Here in neighboring Indonesia I could have a ZSX in my hands within days for about $35.

I didn't really check. I just looked at shopee and lazada before buying mine.

What site are you using?

 

[IEManiac]

I didn't really check. I just looked at shopee and lazada before buying mine.

What site are you using?

Our domestic Tokopedia. That's where I've gotten all but one of my Chi-Fi IEMs.

 

[DynamicEars]

First Post on head fi in quite a while. Looks so different too. Had to stay away from here to suppress my upgraditis.

In any case, I am bored with my current gear just ordered a pair of ZSX and I am wondering if it would benefit from a cable upgrade.

How good/bad are the stock cables on the ZSX? Has anyone tried using higher quality cables with KZ iems and how much do they benefit from it?

The stock cable is useable but if you have better cable, they have benefit from it. If you dont have yet, you can try with stock cable, fit is good, quality is average good. No need to rush for upgrade cables.

And yes 100 hours burn in benefit to tighten the bass portion of them.

 

[ScrofulousBinturong]

So who want to be shocked?

V90 vs C12 vs ZSX

Now this VX vs C16.. KZ brand no contest?

KZ ZSXVI?

 

[seanwee]

Just wondering, what do you guys consider "detailed" to be?

Personally i consider it to be the degree of clarity or how resolving the iem/headphone is. How clearly and crisply it renders each note but also how revealing it is.

I'm asking this because I've tried a huge number of iems/headphones and a lot of them do not sound detailed to me even though many reviewers say so. For example, i was monumentally disappointed after trying out the Shure KSE 1500 and KSE 1200 which many reviewers called extremely detailed, it sounded the opposite to me. The sound was muddled and honestly if i were asked to guess its price by its sound i would have placed it in the lower end of $100-150 iems, not a $2999/$1999 TOTL iem. What gives?

Same goes for the andromeda and most of Campfire Audio's lineup in fact. The only decent sounding one to me was the Atlas but even then it wasn't worth its asking price.

There are some TOTL IEMs that i do find deserve to be called "highly detailed" like the Jomo flamenco and the Sony IER-Z1R (especially when paired with the DMP-Z1 single ended) but the problem is why does "detailed" sounding vary so much even if the reviewer is the same person?

Is my definition of detailed wrong?

I'd like to add that ALL warm or thick sounding iems are automatically muddy sounding by my definition. Warm daps are ok though.

 

[seanwee]

This is also the reason why I've stuck with my tuned Echobox finders for so long. It just doesnt make sense to upgrade for the last 10% if the last 10% costs 40-60 times more than what i have now.

After tuning they sound very similarly (only difference is a 5khz peak) to a Sony IER-M9 for reference.

 

[baskingshark]

Just wondering, what do you guys consider "detailed" to be?

Personally i consider it to be the degree of clarity or how resolving the iem/headphone is. How clearly and crisply it renders each note but also how revealing it is.

I'm asking this because I've tried a huge number of iems/headphones and a lot of them do not sound detailed to me even though many reviewers say so. For example, i was monumentally disappointed after trying out the Shure KSE 1500 and KSE 1200 which many reviewers called extremely detailed, it sounded the opposite to me. The sound was muddled and honestly if i were asked to guess its price by its sound i would have placed it in the lower end of $100-150 iems, not a $2999/$1999 TOTL iem. What gives?

Same goes for the andromeda and most of Campfire Audio's lineup in fact. The only decent sounding one to me was the Atlas but even then it wasn't worth its asking price.

There are some TOTL IEMs that i do find deserve to be called "highly detailed" like the Jomo flamenco and the Sony IER-Z1R (especially when paired with the DMP-Z1 single ended) but the problem is why does "detailed" sounding vary so much even if the reviewer is the same person?

Is my definition of detailed wrong?

I'd like to add that ALL warm or thick sounding iems are automatically muddy sounding by my definition. Warm daps are ok though.

It is very subjective topic, but I would consider clarity and details to be different. They generally go hand in hand, but some budget CHIFI cheat by boosting the upper mids and treble region, and this increased volume does give clarity to the music, but it may not be the same as giving better details. Warm IEMs, by their very definition of boosting the bass frequencies relative to the treble/upper mids, may sound "muddy" due to lack of upper frequencies, but some of these warm IEMs have extremely well textured and layered bass actually.

I would consider "details" to be certain fine nuances in the background eg vocal breath sounds, squeaks of guitar/bass frets, ghost notes of drums/cymbals, even passing traffic, bird sounds, and coughs/dropped objects in some live recordings. These are of course best heard in a quiet environment, and sometimes u might never have realized this song that you've listened to for months actually has this ghost note here or there. In general, at the budget price range, I find multi BA/hybrids tend to give better details than single DD IEMs, though exceptions exist of course. YMMV.

 

[seanwee]

It is very subjective topic, but I would consider clarity and details to be different. They generally go hand in hand, but some budget CHIFI cheat by boosting the upper mids and treble region, and this increased volume does give clarity to the music, but it may not be the same as giving better details. Warm IEMs, by their very definition of boosting the bass frequencies relative to the treble/upper mids, may sound "muddy" due to lack of upper frequencies, but some of these warm IEMs have extremely well textured and layered bass actually.

I would consider "details" to be certain fine nuances in the background eg vocal breath sounds, squeaks of guitar/bass frets, ghost notes of drums/cymbals, even passing traffic, bird sounds, and coughs/dropped objects in some live recordings. These are of course best heard in a quiet environment, and sometimes u might never have realized this song that you've listened to for months actually has this ghost note here or there. In general, at the budget price range, I find multi BA/hybrids tend to give better details than single DD IEMs, though exceptions exist of course. YMMV.

What about gear outside the budget price range?

Having experimented with EQ and making FR measurements i've noticed that what we percieve as well controlled bass is a dip in the 125hz region. You can give it a try yourself. If an iem doesnt reign in the 125hz region well enough they tend to sound bloated and muddy. Higher end warm iems generally dont have this issue (except for the isine and LCDi series from Audeze)

Its the way warm iems have their mids tuned that i dont like, forward mids take clarity and separation away from the sound.

Generally i find well tuned V-shaped iems to be the type I enjoy the most. Recessed mids help more with clarity than boosted highs which typically introduces more sibilance.

What i find strange is that reviewers find V-shaped iems v-shape but not for headphones although they have a similar sound (like the Meze Empyrean)

 

[chinmie]

Just wondering, what do you guys consider "detailed" to be?

Personally i consider it to be the degree of clarity or how resolving the iem/headphone is. How clearly and crisply it renders each note but also how revealing it is.

I'm asking this because I've tried a huge number of iems/headphones and a lot of them do not sound detailed to me even though many reviewers say so. For example, i was monumentally disappointed after trying out the Shure KSE 1500 and KSE 1200 which many reviewers called extremely detailed, it sounded the opposite to me. The sound was muddled and honestly if i were asked to guess its price by its sound i would have placed it in the lower end of $100-150 iems, not a $2999/$1999 TOTL iem. What gives?

Same goes for the andromeda and most of Campfire Audio's lineup in fact. The only decent sounding one to me was the Atlas but even then it wasn't worth its asking price.

There are some TOTL IEMs that i do find deserve to be called "highly detailed" like the Jomo flamenco and the Sony IER-Z1R (especially when paired with the DMP-Z1 single ended) but the problem is why does "detailed" sounding vary so much even if the reviewer is the same person?

Is my definition of detailed wrong?

I'd like to add that ALL warm or thick sounding iems are automatically muddy sounding by my definition. Warm daps are ok though.

It is very subjective topic, but I would consider clarity and details to be different. They generally go hand in hand, but some budget CHIFI cheat by boosting the upper mids and treble region, and this increased volume does give clarity to the music, but it may not be the same as giving better details. Warm IEMs, by their very definition of boosting the bass frequencies relative to the treble/upper mids, may sound "muddy" due to lack of upper frequencies, but some of these warm IEMs have extremely well textured and layered bass actually.

I would consider "details" to be certain fine nuances in the background eg vocal breath sounds, squeaks of guitar/bass frets, ghost notes of drums/cymbals, even passing traffic, bird sounds, and coughs/dropped objects in some live recordings. These are of course best heard in a quiet environment, and sometimes u might never have realized this song that you've listened to for months actually has this ghost note here or there. In general, at the budget price range, I find multi BA/hybrids tend to give better details than single DD IEMs, though exceptions exist of course. YMMV.

also the ones that can translate recording informations like reverb effect sound and size, delays, panning effects, etc. i read many people here saying "detailed" the same way as treble heavy/bright sounding earphones. i personally don't see the correlation between bright and detailed.

some of the best details and technicalities I've heard from IEMs is from Inear PP8.

from the KZs, the ZS10 Pro is the ones that i considered detailed for the price

 

[DynamicEars]

Right, details often misinterpreted as clarity or like @chinmie and @baskingshark said bright sounding also
Actually they are pretty much different thing. Details means the driver themselves can pull out the micro details, background instrument comeout on different direction, that you noticed there are never been heard on "not so detailed IEM".
Usually details is very much align or have strong correlate with separation and imaging too.
Detailed IEMs not always be bright IEMs. For example my IER M7 along with M9 have great details or decent (we are talking universally from budget to TOTL) while still having warm signature.

I agree if on budget level, ZS10 pro or ZSX can pull out good details level

 

[chinmie]

Right, details often misinterpreted as clarity or like @chinmie and @baskingshark said bright sounding also
Actually they are pretty much different thing. Details means the driver themselves can pull out the micro details, background instrument comeout on different direction, that you noticed there are never been heard on "not so detailed IEM".
Usually details is very much align or have strong correlate with separation and imaging too.
Detailed IEMs not always be bright IEMs. For example my IER M7 along with M9 have great details or decent (we are talking universally from budget to TOTL) while still having warm signature.

I agree if on budget level, ZS10 pro or ZSX can pull out good details level

yup, the Sony M9 and M7 are a great example of soft/polite tuned but detailed IEMs

 

[Seazer]

Just wondering, what do you guys consider "detailed" to be?

Personally i consider it to be the degree of clarity or how resolving the iem/headphone is. How clearly and crisply it renders each note but also how revealing it is.

I'm asking this because I've tried a huge number of iems/headphones and a lot of them do not sound detailed to me even though many reviewers say so. For example, i was monumentally disappointed after trying out the Shure KSE 1500 and KSE 1200 which many reviewers called extremely detailed, it sounded the opposite to me. The sound was muddled and honestly if i were asked to guess its price by its sound i would have placed it in the lower end of $100-150 iems, not a $2999/$1999 TOTL iem. What gives?

Same goes for the andromeda and most of Campfire Audio's lineup in fact. The only decent sounding one to me was the Atlas but even then it wasn't worth its asking price.

There are some TOTL IEMs that i do find deserve to be called "highly detailed" like the Jomo flamenco and the Sony IER-Z1R (especially when paired with the DMP-Z1 single ended) but the problem is why does "detailed" sounding vary so much even if the reviewer is the same person?

Is my definition of detailed wrong?

I'd like to add that ALL warm or thick sounding iems are automatically muddy sounding by my definition. Warm daps are ok though.

Off topic of your question but I always found the Cult of Sony audio gear amusing lol. I've owned a handful of Sony iems/headphones and everyone in their threads always talk about them needing to be paired with these specific Sony approved cables, and and Sony daps or dac/amps lol. The brand loyalty is strong.

 

[seanwee]

Off topic of your question but I always found the Cult of Sony audio gear amusing lol. I've owned a handful of Sony iems/headphones and everyone in their threads always talk about them needing to be paired with these specific Sony approved cables, and and Sony daps or dac/amps lol. The brand loyalty is strong.

I've always been skeptical of those claims as well but the IER-Z1R + DMP-Z1 (single ended) is really in a class of its own.

Thing is, i dont like the IER-Z1R + DMP-Z1 as much when running it balanced, the balanced output has a warmer and darker sound. Same thing with the WM1Z, balanced was warm and dark, single ended was neutral. on the WM1A its swapped though.