[Craftsman]

The least expensive, guaranteed best bang for your buck cable is the stock cable that came with your gear. You already paid for it and it works perfectly.

Depends on what was supplied with the gear...

My OE cable (a 4 core) measures a resistance of 680 mOhm vs what's typically scene on this thread of in the 200 mOhm. Also, the cable itself isn't what's considered user friendly as it tangles easily.

 

[Craftsman]

when the stock cable is decent enough, i agree there wouldn't be noticeable difference by using a cheap "upgrade" cable.
but when using BA based iems, an stock cable having resistance above 1ohm (together with source's output impedance), can lead to noticeable tonal alteration (specially in highs).
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/res...omments-and-links.907998/page-3#post-15060900

Plus, if the resistance isn't approx. equal across the two channels (as in the TRN 8 core bicolour cable), you might get tonal alteration differences between the left and right.

 

[Sonic Defender]

Depends on what was supplied with the gear...

My OE cable (a 4 core) measures a resistance of 680 mOhm vs what's typically scene on this thread of in the 200 mOhm. Also, the cable itself isn't what's considered user friendly as it tangles easily.

There is no way those resistance differences have any impact whatsoever on the sound. Tangling cable, ok that makes sense for sure.

 

[Craftsman]

There is no way those resistance differences have any impact whatsoever on the sound. Tangling cable, ok that makes sense for sure.

I'll just refer you back to the previous post about resistance - https://www.head-fi.org/threads/low...ck-cable-thread.891911/page-134#post-15060928 - as well as to the linked post here - https://www.head-fi.org/threads/res...omments-and-links.907998/page-3#post-15060900 - since I have BAs in my IEMs.

 

[Sonic Defender]

I'll just refer you back to the previous post about resistance - https://www.head-fi.org/threads/low...ck-cable-thread.891911/page-134#post-15060928 - as well as to the linked post here - https://www.head-fi.org/threads/res...omments-and-links.907998/page-3#post-15060900 - since I have BAs in my IEMs.

So here I'll be honest and say that I know nothing about using IEM and BA gear, straight up. So are you saying that differences that small effect a BA driver, and these effects have been demonstrated to be audible? If so, then that would be my bad. Those differences in resistance that you were quoting seem inconsequential to me, but only in the world of full sized headphones so I can absolutely see how I would/could be wrong. Thanks for sharing, I try to learn wherever I go.

 

[Craftsman]

So here I'll be honest and say that I know nothing about using IEM and BA gear, straight up. So are you saying that differences that small effect a BA driver, and these effects have been demonstrated to be audible? If so, then that would be my bad. Those differences in resistance that you were quoting seem inconsequential to me, but only in the world of full sized headphones so I can absolutely see how I would/could be wrong. Thanks for sharing, I try to learn wherever I go.

I'm actually as knowledgeable about these things as you are. I'm relying on people like


hakuzen
to provide guidence from their expertise.

Personally, IMHO, if there was a difference of 100 mOhm over a potential 1 Ohm difference, I would be in your camp of how much of a difference can there be? However, between the OE cable and an 'average' cheap-o cable of almost 500 mOhm (or 50%), there may be an argument that can be made. Now if you assume this to be true, then cables like the TRN 8 core cable which has wide variations of resistance between the Left and the Right channels, may affect the 'balance' of the tonal response between channels rather than just a small variation in volume (which I believe was calculated out to 0.2 decibels).

 

[Craftsman]

Just an update on that TRN 8 core bicolour cable, I dissected it but instead of sawing the plug casing in half, I used a heat gun and softened the glue and pulled it apart. I can verify that 2 of the 8 cores are not connected with 3 grounds are connected and 2 for one channel and 1 for another also connected.

Update - I can also confirm as reported by @Slater that the two unconnected cores at the 3.5mm jack side of things are connected at the 2-pin end. Therefore, in theory, with a new 3.5mm jack, a bit of soldering skills, and some knowledge of how to properly and effectively remove any coatings and the fiberous material included in the silver coloured core, the cable can be rebuilt for the price of a 3.5mm jack. The result should be a cable with resistance measurements under 200 mOhm (most likely in the 150 mOhm range if done properly) if we use past measurements as a guide.

Now of course, the question is what's a good recommended 3.5mm jack? I was thinking of this one from Aliexpress for under $2 shipped - https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32885636910.html?spm=a2g0o.cart.0.0.4c0e3c00a1MZJ4. I like the fact that it has the proper holes to put the wires into prior to soldering for a good secure connection rather than just trying to solder them on to a flat surface.

 

[fokta]

it seems my 173 already arrived at home.... so let me try later after going back home

 

[fokta]

173, quite bling2...
first impression.. quite luxurious cable... Got the rhodium jack...

sound Impression, first I noticed, Micro detail & Soundstage really appear...
yes, Hakuzen was right, rumble decrease, Bass punchier, but very tight...

 

[courierdriver]

I'm hoping someone like @hakuzen or @Slater might be able to help me out here. I finally got to start listening to my new TFZ No.3 last night and wanted to swap out the stock 3.5 mm cable for my JCally 2.5 mm balanced one, which I am currently using on my KZ ZS10 PRO. I have another identical JCally cable on the way, because it appeared in pictures that the TFZ No.3 was using the same type of C connector 2 pin that the KZ uses, and I wanted one to use as well with the No.3. It turns out that the raised connection port on the No.3 is slightly larger than the KZ'S and the shroud on the JCally cable is just a bit too small to pass over the raised connector, so I cant get the JCally cable to fit. A search on Aliexpress turned up nothing I could find. I am really bummed out, because I really like to use all my earphones in balanced mode from my Fiio Q1MK2. Does anyone know if there are any balanced 2.5 cables out there with that C type connection system, that will fit the TFZ No.3? Has anyone tried to mod one of these cable connectors in an effort to get it to fit? Looking at the No.3 stock cable, I can tell that the diameter opening is just a smidge bigger than the JCally's. Was wondering about maybe trying to scrape out some of the plastic shrouding inside the JCally cable to make the opening a bit bigger but I have no idea if this will work, or even what kind of tool would be small and sharp enough to attempt this. Anyone have any advice on this for me? Thanks!

 

[Slater]

The only TFZ I own is the Series 2, which I assume has the same connector as the Series 3.

Anyways, the socket on the IEM is similar but a slightly different shape. The TFZ cable fits on the ZS10 Pro, but the JC Ally and KZ “Paragraph C” cables do not fit the TFZ.

You have 2 options:

1. Use a regular 2-pin cable on the TFZ (but it will stick up a little)
2. Take an Xacto blade and shave down the corners of the TFZ socket so the shape is more like the KZ Paragraph C shape. Then the KZ and JC Ally cables will fit the TFZ.

 

[courierdriver]

The only TFZ I own is the Series 2, which I assume has the same connector as the Series 3.

Anyways, the socket on the IEM is similar but a slightly different shape. The TFZ cable fits on the ZS10 Pro, but the JC Ally and KZ “Paragraph C” cables do not fit the TFZ.

You have 2 options:

1. Use a regular 2-pin cable on the TFZ (but it will stick up a little)
2. Take an Xacto blade and shave down the corners of the TFZ socket so the shape is more like the KZ Paragraph C shape. Then the KZ and JC Ally cables will fit the TFZ.

Thanks, bro! I knew you would be the first to respond! Lol! I'm using a silver and gold balanced TRN cable on them at the moment, but I'm a bit worried about the possible strain on the pins. Don't care too much about the cable, but I definitely don't want the pins to break off inside the iem. I might just use the stock cable for a while, out of the 3.5 out on my Fiio, until someone comes up with a balanced upgrade cable that actually fits these things. Why does every iem manufacturer seem to want to reinvent the wheel, when it comes to connection options? What's wrong with a standard 2 pin or mmcx? I gotta stop myself before I explode into a rant. As far as the iem "surgery"... I don't own a Xacto knife, only a box cutter. To paraphrase Bones from Star Trek: "Damnit, Jim!...I'm a courierdriver, not a surgeon!" Lol! Anyways, man...thanks for the suggestions. TBH, at this early point, I'm not even sure I will be keeping the No.3. Gonna break them in a while more, but so far...they are number 3 on my list! I like my KPE and ZS10 PRO much more...but I'm gonna give the TFZ a fair shake before I decide if I wanna sell them or not.

 

[baskingshark]

The only TFZ I own is the Series 2, which I assume has the same connector as the Series 3.

Anyways, the socket on the IEM is similar but a slightly different shape. The TFZ cable fits on the ZS10 Pro, but the JC Ally and KZ “Paragraph C” cables do not fit the TFZ.

You have 2 options:

1. Use a regular 2-pin cable on the TFZ (but it will stick up a little)
2. Take an Xacto blade and shave down the corners of the TFZ socket so the shape is more like the KZ Paragraph C shape. Then the KZ and JC Ally cables will fit the TFZ.

I don't have any 2.5 style cables but I can confirm the kz para c type cable can't fit the TFZ no. 3 (only realized and tested it now after you guys posted this). Although i tried the nicehck 8 core cable and it fits the no. 3 but sticks out a bit.
It's quite a bummer if you want to use 2.5 cables though.

 

[warriorpoet]

when the stock cable is decent enough, i agree there wouldn't be noticeable difference by using a cheap "upgrade" cable.
but when using BA based iems, an stock cable having resistance above 1ohm (together with source's output impedance), can lead to noticeable tonal alteration (specially in highs).
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/res...omments-and-links.907998/page-3#post-15060900

This is 100% correct, and I have confirmed this with 4 separate cables and a particularly troublesome, but brilliant, set of IEMs. The problem is, the stock cable works, but far less well than it should, and is noticeably improved by simple replacement.

 

[courierdriver]

I don't have any 2.5 style cables but I can confirm the kz para c type cable can't fit the TFZ no. 3 (only realized and tested it now after you guys posted this). Although i tried the nicehck 8 core cable and it fits the no. 3 but sticks out a bit.
It's quite a bummer if you want to use 2.5 cables though.

Yeah, I would've thought that the Para C type connection style would have been kinda standardized, since it's kinda a unique style of connection method. Guess I was wrong. Before I discovered my KZ ZS10 PRO (and from what I've seen, the ZSN/PRO), I'd never heard of or seen this type of 2 pin connector. Other brands like Moondrop KPE and Fearless (and many others) use more traditional standard or recessed 2 pins. I get how these Paragraph C type connections help prevent accidental breakage, but I sure wish there was a more standardized measurement/fit for this type of connector. It puts the consumer at a real disadvantage because there's no way (at the moment , anyway) to be able to upgrade the cable. TFZ themselves, don't even offer an upgrade cable or a balanced version, unless you get the Ti version, which is substantially more expansive. Even then, no balanced options. The cables don't even come with a chin cinch/slider. Wish they would've designed the iem to accommodate different cable options. So far, based on this, and the fact that the SQ isn't really blowing me away, I'm not very impressed by this set.