Sorry, for me!, Ragnar is, to put it mildly “trance inducing” in the waves of bass that pass (literally) from head to toe. What ever way it’s tuned, it seems a perfect match for me.I don't think the Kublai Khan is going for the same overall effect with its bass as the Ragnar, so to say the Ragnar "trounces" it in that area may not be entirely fair. It's the breathy tickle of the BCD vs. the slam/vibration of the double DD. That is a matter of taste, imho. Also, to me, it's more about how all the many elements of the frequency range relate to each other and how the technicals then relate to the FR. Hard to comment on bass in isolation is my point. I happen to love the overall presentation of the KK. I may be in the minority but I think the KKs offer you a little bit of everything - deep sub-bass albeit not domineering, BCD effect, super clean midrange with a hint of warmth, wonderful treble tone and extension, great detail in the upper mids/lower treble, incredible imaging, holography and depth. To me it sort of combines the strengths of a lot of other TOTL IEMs but with no single element dominating the others, each given its bit of room to move around in. Quite intoxicating the more I listen.
The Kubali Khan and Legend X are also impressive in their own rights, I don’t get the sense of waves of bass, it’s there in the head and in the toes, but there is no sense of the sound moving through me.
I don’t know, I’m new to the Head-Fi scene, home hifi scene was/is my thing. What I’ve learnt on my Head-Fi journey is that synergy can make or break anything. But just because it’s broke or wonderful for me, others may struggle.
An apt old Viking saying:
“Oftentimes, it is not the numbers that win the victory, but those that charge forward with the most vigor”
Trounces … oh yea!
