[ChristianM]

So LCP & LC drivers are the same or different? If they're the same then I believe ESX sound close to T3 Plus (depends on tunning) right?

 

[baskingshark]

So LCP & LC drivers are the same or different? If they're the same then I believe ESX sound close to T3 Plus (depends on tunning) right?

The driver type/material or even driver count and driver brand isn't as important as the tuning and implementation. I've seen some brands using so-called gourmet ingredients like Knowles/Sonion multi drivers, but the sound is crap. And we have some TOTL companies (cough cough campfire & JH) using Bellsings and they sound fine.

2 years ago every CHIFI brand was riding on the beryllium driver (which some were shown to be fake marketing), last year was the LCP hype, this year seems to be the planar hype. So the LCP driver seems a bit "outdated" in 2022 in terms of hype, but honestly, even if they claim that it is LCP, someone can open the shell to expose the drivers, but who has a spectrometer to prove that the company's claims are legit? Most of these driver material claims are probably marketing gimmicks to some extent.

 

[kalo86]

Hello, I'm comparing the ZAX with the ESX.
The iem's are completely different.

Dap: iBasso DX220 with AMP8-EX.
Cable: balanced Tripowin

ZAX is more balanced, no boomy basses, huge soundstage, microdetails, separation, nice puch of the bass.

ESX emphasizes the lower region, the bass is more present but maybe less precise, medium and high are way less detailed if compared to the ZAX. Soundstage is good but not wide as the ZAX. Air between instruments and separation is not good as the bigger sister ZAX.

Now I'm waiting the burn-in, maybe something changes on the 12mm dynamic driver?

If you have also the ZAX and ESX, it would be nice if you can share your experience and first thoughts.

Best regards,
kalo86

 

[PhonoPhi]

Hello, I'm comparing the ZAX with the ESX.
The iem's are completely different.

Dap: iBasso DX220 with AMP8-EX.
Cable: balanced Tripowin

ZAX is more balanced, no boomy basses, huge soundstage, microdetails, separation, nice puch of the bass.

ESX emphasizes the lower region, the bass is more present but maybe less precise, medium and high are way less detailed if compared to the ZAX. Soundstage is good but not wide as the ZAX. Air between instruments and separation is not good as the bigger sister ZAX.

Now I'm waiting the burn-in, maybe something changes on the 12mm dynamic driver?

If you have also the ZAX and ESX, it would be nice if you can share your experience and first thoughts.

Best regards,
kalo86

I do have ZAX and ESX (got one few days ago) - would not dare to compare them now - different beasts, different categories

ZAX would be my ideal IEM with the BA bass instead of its DD.

I am trying to compare ESX now with CRA, EDA set (largerly balanced), HZ Mirror and Aria. Hopefully, CRA+ would come soon.

So far, I like ESX. The bass subsided after few hours (still there but not overwhelming) and overall impressions are that of clear and transparent, though Mirror is more detailed in direct comparison, and CRA is more agile, but more brittle.

I will try to compare more and organize my impressions in few days

 

[kalo86]

I do have ZAX and ESX (got one few days ago) - would not dare to compare them now - different beasts, different categories

ZAX would be my ideal IEM with the BA bass instead of its DD.

I am trying to compare ESX now with CRA, EDA set (largerly balanced), HZ Mirror and Aria. Hopefully, CRA+ would come soon.

So far, I like ESX. The bass subsided after few hours (still there but not overwhelming) and overall impressions are that of clear and transparent, though Mirror is more detailed in direct comparison, and CRA is more agile, but more brittle.

I will try to compare more and organize my impressions in few days

Also you find the ZAX better even if the price is completely different?

 

[G777]

Hello, I'm comparing the ZAX with the ESX.
The iem's are completely different.

Dap: iBasso DX220 with AMP8-EX.
Cable: balanced Tripowin

ZAX is more balanced, no boomy basses, huge soundstage, microdetails, separation, nice puch of the bass.

ESX emphasizes the lower region, the bass is more present but maybe less precise, medium and high are way less detailed if compared to the ZAX. Soundstage is good but not wide as the ZAX. Air between instruments and separation is not good as the bigger sister ZAX.

Now I'm waiting the burn-in, maybe something changes on the 12mm dynamic driver?

If you have also the ZAX and ESX, it would be nice if you can share your experience and first thoughts.

Best regards,
kalo86

The ZAX has more upper mids and treble than the ESX, which should help with detail perception. ESX has a more laid-back tuning.

 

[PhonoPhi]

Also you find the ZAX better even if the price is completely different?

It is hard for DD to compete with BA's upper mids and treble, and ZAX offers very good implementation of them to me. The bass in ZAX is more present/ample compared to ZSX and bass BAs, and I personally prefer the latter.

For a single DD - coherency and organic presentation are the preferred features to many, and there budget multidrivers are in a difficult position to compete.

So far, I enjoy ESX and the fun of comparison with other DDs.

 

[kalo86]

ESX, for the price, it's a nice iem.
For more critical listening (orchestral tracks for example) I will use ZAX.
For movies and random tasks, ESX is more than enough.
Anyway, the 12mm DD is not so miraculous as I thought.

 

[Carpet]

ESX, for the price, it's a nice iem.
For more critical listening (orchestral tracks for example) I will use ZAX.
For movies and random tasks, ESX is more than enough.
Anyway, the 12mm DD is not so miraculous as I thought.

It sounds like the ESX is closer to the CA16, which had more prominent mid-bass, less aggressive pina gain and smoother treble. Both the ZAX and the CA16 are $60. It shows how fast things are progressing. KZ/CCA are releasing single DDs at $20, that are close to releases at three times the price, from two years ago.

 

[PhonoPhi]

ESX, for the price, it's a nice iem.
For more critical listening (orchestral tracks for example) I will use ZAX.
For movies and random tasks, ESX is more than enough.
Anyway, the 12mm DD is not so miraculous as I thought.

No such magic in Aria as well.
The resolution of BAs will be much- much costly in single DDs.
So it makes a good case, when 2-3 IEMs can one lot of experience and enjoyment more cost-effectively than a single ultracapable IEM.

 

[countryboyhk]

It sounds like the ESX is closer to the CA16, which had more prominent mid-bass, less aggressive pina gain and smoother treble. Both the ZAX and the CA16 are $60. It shows how fast things are progressing. KZ/CCA are releasing single DDs at $20, that are close to releases at three times the price, from two years ago.

CA16 has thicker and warmer mids to me, I have a 150hr burn-in ESX, which is more airy, elevated highs, but smooth overall, soundstage is wide. I like ESX over CRA, it's just more refined and smooth.

 

[punpun]

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but it looks like I got fooled. I felt that there could be a chance they will still try to ship it from China, it's very rare to see recently released IEM's in European warehouses... The tracking is not moving at all, the courier is still waiting for the package to arrive from the seller, while the ETA is on June 15. I'll still wait for this week to end, after that I will have to place a dispute because they have charged me extra for the shipping. Just scummy of them to even offer this shipping option.

I take my words back. They are in my country already and only took one week. That is extremely fast if it was coming from China. I should receive them tommorow.

 

[Carpet]

CA16 has thicker and warmer mids to me, I have a 150hr burn-in ESX, which is more airy, elevated highs, but smooth overall, soundstage is wide. I like ESX over CRA, it's just more refined and smooth.

I'm still waiting on ESX. New Zealand isn't exactly the best place to see new releases early.

 

[ChristianM]

Does ESX also have typical KZ house sound or is it different? I had 4 KZ (zsn pro, zs10 pro, zsx & dq6) and they all sound very similar like boomy/boxy bass, metallic/artificial treble (cymbals).
I have T3 Plus and it has different sound, I mean it has softness in all frequencies, I don't what words do I use but if you have T3 Plus and KZs you'd understand. The only problem I have with T3 Plus is the comfort and that's why I'm looking for a new IEM with similar sound.
The funny thing with T3 Plus is that the left earpiece is tiny bit smaller than the right earpiece, both earphones are not exactly the same size and it cost me $50. Never saw this kind of imperfection in KZs or my TRN CS2.

 

[XerusKun]

Does ESX also have typical KZ house sound or is it different? I had 4 KZ (zsn pro, zs10 pro, zsx & dq6) and they all sound very similar like boomy/boxy bass, metallic/artificial treble (cymbals).
I have T3 Plus and it has different sound, I mean it has softness in all frequencies, I don't what words do I use but if you have T3 Plus and KZs you'd understand. The only problem I have with T3 Plus is the comfort and that's why I'm looking for a new IEM with similar sound.
The funny thing with T3 Plus is that the left earpiece is tiny bit smaller than the right earpiece, both earphones are not exactly the same size and it cost me $50. Never saw this kind of imperfection in KZs or my TRN CS2.

Newer KZ IEM specially the DD releases doesn't have that metallic treble anymore and boxy sound. So far out of the newer KZs I have, EDA Trio, CRA+, EDX Ultra, ESX..ESX is the safest tuned and has the most likeable signature, the bass may be too much in some tracks, but you just need a widebore tips like Kbear07 to counter that. Imho, all KZ iem should include a tips that is somehow similar to Kbear07 or just straight up widebore tips, the KZ starline/stock tips degrades the overall sound quality in my experience.