Please don't take this the wrong way, but this was something that's already been discussed today. Please comb through so we're not repeating the same notes across multiple pages.
Knowledge Zenith (KZ) impressions thread
- Thread starter bhazard
- Start date
mbwilson111
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2016
- Posts
- 9,563
- Likes
- 18,811
The search function really works quite well. Tips always depend on the user, but generally the stock Stalines works well will the models that include them
Slater
Headphoneus Supremus
Not just today, but every day for weeks.
The search is very easy to use. You can set it to it just searches this specific thread, and by a date range (I would do since June 1st). That way, it allows you to zero in on super specific information in minimal time.
As far as tips, it’s different for everyone. Most of us have to try different tips and find which fits and/or sounds the best. What is perfect for me could be the total opposite for the next 5 people.
Last edited:
Wait wait wait, i already tried basshead headphones.
The problem is that they all share the same horrible thing --> recessed mids
I know i can't have JH Layla sound at 30 euros, but i just need a good headphone that does well in the mids with a good soundstage and can dig down into the sub-bass and bass.
As far as i understood, t2 is not able to do that without creating other problems or ruining some other frequencies, so i think i'm gonna ask @B9Scrambler how does it feel with the zsa and how could he compare in edm tracks with the tin audio t2 (i know b9scrambler has a website where he reviews the headphones and i even saw he reviewed both the t2 and zsa).
So @B9Scrambler how would you compare the tin audio t2 with the zsa?
What would u tip me as far as you tried both of them?
For now, i'm trusting slater for his huge experience, but another direct opinion is welcome if u wanna help me!
Slater
Headphoneus Supremus
I see.
Which one of these sounds like what you're shooting for:
1. Neutral/flat tuning, but with sub bass that has deep extension. I.e. no sub bass roll off.
2. A basshead tune (dominant sub-bass/bass), but with forward mids. Like W shaped.
3. A basshead tune (dominant sub-bass/bass), but with mids and treble flat (ie no recessed mids)? Like L shaped.
Last edited:
Is the ZSR considered v-shaped? U-shaped?
Long thread......
Long thread......
Slater
Headphoneus Supremus
And while on this U vs V topic, I have been meaning to clarify this for a while.
It dawned on me the other day that what I have always thought of as the different between V and U may not be what others view it as.
@Otto Motor brought up this a while ago, about the ambiguity of describing tuning with letters and how the Germans don't do it (they use the concept of bathtub instead of U I think).
Anyways, here's 2 very crappily drawn versions of how the relationship between V and U could be interpreted. I say crappy because I didn't draw the shape of the letters right (ie the frequency range extension of the U in #1 is narrower and I didn't mean to do that). Just ignore that for a minute.
#1 the U is basically INSIDE of the V (ie the curve at the bottom of the letter). In this version, theoretically the V has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the U. The U would have LESS recessed midrange, and a little more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the U is "closer to neutral" when compared to V.
#2 is the opposite - the V is INSIDE of the U. In this version, the U has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the V. So it is the V shape that would have more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the V is "closer to neutral" when compared to U.
So when you think of U or V shaped, which one do you think of?
It dawned on me the other day that what I have always thought of as the different between V and U may not be what others view it as.
@Otto Motor brought up this a while ago, about the ambiguity of describing tuning with letters and how the Germans don't do it (they use the concept of bathtub instead of U I think).
Anyways, here's 2 very crappily drawn versions of how the relationship between V and U could be interpreted. I say crappy because I didn't draw the shape of the letters right (ie the frequency range extension of the U in #1 is narrower and I didn't mean to do that). Just ignore that for a minute.
#1 the U is basically INSIDE of the V (ie the curve at the bottom of the letter). In this version, theoretically the V has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the U. The U would have LESS recessed midrange, and a little more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the U is "closer to neutral" when compared to V.
#2 is the opposite - the V is INSIDE of the U. In this version, the U has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the V. So it is the V shape that would have more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the V is "closer to neutral" when compared to U.
So when you think of U or V shaped, which one do you think of?
Last edited:
paramoreds
New Head-Fier
Which is better for high and bass, ed16 or zs10?
If you look at the reviews at "the phonograph" the ZS10 have a better rating in sound (bass,mids & highs).
But there is still the question how will they fit in your ears? If you have smaller ears pick the ED16 otherwise the ZS10.
Maybe you can order both and sell one of them.
Qualcheduno
100+ Head-Fier
To me U shaped is something similar to a little recession in the mids but with a very low Q factor, while V shaped is a stronger recession with a higher Q factor.And while on this U vs V topic, I have been meaning to clarify this for a while.
It dawned on me the other day that what I have always thought of as the different between V and U may not be what others view it as.
@Otto Motor brought up this a while ago, about the ambiguity of describing tuning with letters and how the Germans don't do it (they use the concept of bathtub instead of U I think).
Anyways, here's 2 very crappily drawn versions of how the relationship between V and U could be interpreted. I say crappy because I didn't draw the shape of the letters right (ie the frequency range extension of the U in #1 is narrower and I didn't mean to do that). Just ignore that for a minute.
#1 the U is basically INSIDE of the V (ie the curve at the bottom of the letter). In this version, theoretically the V has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the U. The U would have LESS recessed midrange, and a little more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the U is "closer to neutral" when compared to V.
#2 is the opposite - the V is INSIDE of the U. In this version, the U has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the V. So it is the V shape that would have more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the V is "closer to neutral" when compared to U.
So when you think of U or V shaped, which one do you think of?
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
The above one most of the time.
The outer set of V and U is extreme shape.
I would say extreme V or U shape
If I am saying u or v shape, that means the inner one.
And if I am saying rare U shape, that means the mid is not recessed but sensitivity of that region is at a offset of 3dB from where the bass and treble is on Maximum state.
The outer set of V and U is extreme shape.
I would say extreme V or U shape
If I am saying u or v shape, that means the inner one.
And if I am saying rare U shape, that means the mid is not recessed but sensitivity of that region is at a offset of 3dB from where the bass and treble is on Maximum state.
And while on this U vs V topic, I have been meaning to clarify this for a while.
It dawned on me the other day that what I have always thought of as the different between V and U may not be what others view it as.
@Otto Motor brought up this a while ago, about the ambiguity of describing tuning with letters and how the Germans don't do it (they use the concept of bathtub instead of U I think).
Anyways, here's 2 very crappily drawn versions of how the relationship between V and U could be interpreted. I say crappy because I didn't draw the shape of the letters right (ie the frequency range extension of the U in #1 is narrower and I didn't mean to do that). Just ignore that for a minute.
#1 the U is basically INSIDE of the V (ie the curve at the bottom of the letter). In this version, theoretically the V has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the U. The U would have LESS recessed midrange, and a little more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the U is "closer to neutral" when compared to V.
#2 is the opposite - the V is INSIDE of the U. In this version, the U has more frequencies "scooped out" and missing vs the V. So it is the V shape that would have more upper bass through lower treble frequencies "filled in". In this example you could say that the V is "closer to neutral" when compared to U.
So when you think of U or V shaped, which one do you think of?
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
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
That's good to know ... won't let them fool me anymore~
dhruvmeena96
Headphoneus Supremus
It is still good to know the limits of drivers, so I check phonograph
maxxevv
500+ Head-Fier
So would you call this a ZS6 clone or a CA Andromeda clone ?? *head scratcher*
Users who are viewing this thread
