[Precogvision]

Very nice take on the 7hz Timeless! I guessed your score would be around a 6/10. Do these require a ton of power? I'm torn on getting the Timeless or the JVC HA-FDX1 as my next IEM given that both are arguably the two most technical IEMs under $200ish and I currently want a technical set that doesn't break the bank.

Thanks! I don’t think they need a lot of power, maybe about the same as the Moondrop single-DD IEMs. I feel like the Timeless is more of an attention-grabber than the FDX1 in the technical department, but I haven’t A/B-d them.

@Precogvision Would you take the Kato over the Falcon Pro?

If I could only have one, probably. The Kato’s noticeably more technical for clarity and the sound signature is closer to my usual preferences. I still think the Falcon Pro has its niche for the warm-heads. Also the treble response sounds slightly higher quality on the Falcon Pro with the Reference nozzles.

 

[Ace Bee]

Very nice take on the 7hz Timeless! I guessed your score would be around a 6/10. Do these require a ton of power? I'm torn on getting the Timeless or the JVC HA-FDX1 as my next IEM given that both are arguably the two most technical IEMs under $200ish and I currently want a technical set that doesn't break the bank.

Man, they cannot be any more different. With Timeless you are getting a very dynamic sound - emphasised bass, emphasised treble, clean and dark background and sharp, attacking notes.

Whereas, FDX1 is a more relaxed set, and if my memory serves correctly, with a more holographic presentation. However, the low end has notably les emphasis - so much so that I never really felt engaged to the music with it.

Timeless wow-ed me initially with its very dynamic sound and very good clarity, however, in the long run it became a bit fatiguing, and trebles were stealing my attention almost always (Eluveitie - Inis Mona)
FDX1 wow-ed me with its stage, however, the linear bass made it sound lifeless.

 

[twiceboss]

Hey all, I know I haven't been very active here, which is mainly a combination of being bombarded with school work and not really having access to as much stuff as I did before. Anyways, I'm visiting home this weekend so I swung by MRS to catch up on some of the newer stuff that's come out this last month. I have units on the way for most of these IEMs, just on the slow boat as usual so I figured I'd get down my thoughts so y'all don't have to wait haha.

7Hz Timeless: I saw this a while ago and, probably like most people, I didn't really care about it until Crin gave it a cursory ranking of 5/5 in his unboxing video. The general tonality of the Timeless is neutral with bass boost; however, I can't say I'm particularly enamored by the tonality here. Yes, the Timeless is better in the tonal department than any planar I've heard to date, but that doesn't mean it's good tonality either. Noteweight on the Timeless generally skews toward the thinner side, almost like there's too much upper-midrange, and there's a similar phenomenon going on in the treble where the Timeless exhibits a strong peak at 7.5kHz. It's fatiguing to hear despite the perceived detail it lends, and the general timbre of the Timeless is overly dry in tandem with its characteristically planar transients. By this, I mean that notes generally decay a millisecond faster than they should; there's not sufficient "bloom" to notes. This is probably just a limitation of the driver type; however, timbre-heads really need to look elsewhere. I like the bass on this IEM, though, and it hits hard with remarkable control despite decaying a little quicker than I'd like.

Still, the Timeless' biggest strength would lie in its technical performance. It definitely sounds like a planar should in a good way. Notes are crisp - hell, more crisp than they have any right to be for $220 - and dynamics on the front of macro-contrast are strong. Imaging is really only the department with which the Timeless lacks. While localization is slightly above average, the general staging and ambiance of the Timeless sit somewhere within the realm of average. It stands that layering suffers as a result. So what are my concluding thoughts after demoing this IEM for about an hour? First, I definitely think it has a place in the $200 bracket, as it is probably the most technical IEM I've heard for the price. Second, props to 7Hz for making the world's first competent planar IEM. But third, I also don't find myself completely sold on it, and there's a nagging feeling that it's a tad unrefined.

Moondrop Kato: Moondrop's proclaimed successor to the Moondrop KXXS. I haven't shilled that IEM in a while, but I hope it's no secret that the Moondrop KXXS is one of my favorite single DDs (my first real IEM at that) so I had high expectations for the Kato. Let's see. It's definitely a slight technical improvement all-round while maintaining the general tonality of the KXXS. Slightly better resolution, bass slam, imaging, etc. The Kato's treble doesn't sound particularly more extended; however, it's eschewed the 13kHz peak of its predecessor for a less hazy response. So it's better than the KXXS; that was to be expected. Now how does the Kato stack up against its closest competitor, the Tanchjim Hana 2021? Well, I'm not a fan of the Kato's dynamics. They sound sluggish, as is typical of most DD IEMs of this price caliber, but most notably they lack aplomb - they sound slightly soft - in the macro-contrast department relative to the Hana 2021. Generally I get the impression that the Hana 2021 uses a slightly higher-quality driver; outside of this, I could see it going either way even if I prefer the stronger sub-bass focus of the Hana 2021.

Nicehck TopGuy: I got the review unit for this about a month ago and simply couldn't find the motivation to take it with me back to college. Why? Well, when you look at the FR of this IEM, it actually tracks scarily close to the dreaded Shuoer Tape Pro. I think that about says it all, but to be fair, I don't think the TopGuy's that bad. It's just really mediocre. The mid-bass is trash and the sub-bass rolls-off audibly, it's got what sounds like a weird, immeasurable dip the upper-midrange that makes everything sound veiled and slightly edgy, and the treble sounds like it has all sorts of tonal imbalances. Now, I feel like the imaging on this set is not bad at least in terms of diffusion; however, notes are blunted and there is nothing else remarkable (scratch that, acceptable for $250) about the TopGuy's technical performance. This thing needs to go back to the drawing board if it's being touted as a flagship IEM because it's not even playing in the $50 category for sound quality to be perfectly frank.

HarmonicDyne Poseidon: LOL. Sorry, these are not good. They sound like they roll-off under 100Hz; there's no sub-bass at all to this headphone. Seriously, if you think the Sennheiser open-backs are bad for bass extension, this is way worse. This headphone also has an upper-midrange recession right around 3-4kHz which isn't doing resolution any favors. Now, I think treble would be OK if it weren't for the contrast of this recession to 5kHz which doesn't seem to work as well with headphones. The Poseidon's treble sounds overly sharp in the initial impact of percussive hits whereas, as I alluded to just above, the midrange sounds plain hazy. Don't get me wrong, there's still nothing really outright offensive about the Poseidon's tonality, but it's sooo far from sounding good. This is basically the textbook example of what mediocrity sounds like.

Scores:

7Hz Timeless	6/10
Moondrop Kato	6/10
Nicehck TopGuy	3/10
HarmonicDyne Poseidon	3/10

Have you tried Yuan Li? I think Yuan Li DD is quite fast and still does sound correct timbre wise.

 

[DrewVz]

7Hz Timeless: I saw this a while ago and, probably like most people, I didn't really care about it until Crin gave it a cursory ranking of 5/5 in his unboxing video. The general tonality of the Timeless is neutral with bass boost; however, I can't say I'm particularly enamored by the tonality here. Yes, the Timeless is better in the tonal department than any planar I've heard to date, but that doesn't mean it's good tonality either. Noteweight on the Timeless generally skews toward the thinner side, almost like there's too much upper-midrange, and there's a similar phenomenon going on in the treble where the Timeless exhibits a strong peak at 7.5kHz. It's fatiguing to hear despite the perceived detail it lends, and the general timbre of the Timeless is overly dry in tandem with its characteristically planar transients. By this, I mean that notes generally decay a millisecond faster than they should; there's not sufficient "bloom" to notes. This is probably just a limitation of the driver type; however, timbre-heads really need to look elsewhere. I like the bass on this IEM, though, and it hits hard with remarkable control despite decaying a little quicker than I'd like.

Still, the Timeless' biggest strength would lie in its technical performance. It definitely sounds like a planar should in a good way. Notes are crisp - hell, more crisp than they have any right to be for $220 - and dynamics on the front of macro-contrast are strong. Imaging is really only the department with which the Timeless lacks. While localization is slightly above average, the general staging and ambiance of the Timeless sit somewhere within the realm of average. It stands that layering suffers as a result. So what are my concluding thoughts after demoing this IEM for about an hour? First, I definitely think it has a place in the $200 bracket, as it is probably the most technical IEM I've heard for the price. Second, props to 7Hz for making the world's first competent planar IEM. But third, I also don't find myself completely sold on it, and there's a nagging feeling that it's a tad unrefined.

Really, really good perspective on the Timeless. I think I agree with 90% of this. I've been listening to planar headphones for a while now, so I have no issues with the tonality, although I admit that it can be perceived as a bit thin and cool-neutral for many tastes. I do have to disagree with the bolded portion above, however. What you are saying is a personal preference, not a fault of the Timeless. For me, I tend to listen to very fast, technical electronica, and the fast decay really helps bring out the detail in what would otherwise be very congested passages. Try listening to Infected Mushroom - Savant on Mushrooms with anything but TOTL resolution and crisp dynamics and you'll see (hear) what I mean. The Timeless handles this track like a walk in the park. Not even my Aryas can handle it quite as well. Lesser phones just sound like a muddied mess and completely change the nature of the track.

Acoustic guitar, for instance, suffers a bit from the tonality constraints of the Timeless, but not by much. Again, it's more of a preference thing - I'd rather listen to stringed instruments on my Oracles, or a single DD like the Isabellae. But unless you're doing an A-B comparison, you won't be missing much enjoyment. I just find the Timeless at $220 to be a ridiculously great deal and quite frankly a very special IEM at anything under $1k. While I don't think it suffers from a "lack of refinement" as you've stated, I do feel that it might benefit many genres by using a warm source or perhaps a cable upgrade. Or maybe a slight EQ tweak here and there. But I'm nitpicking here. If 7Hz came out with a Timeless Pro with some of these tweaks, I'd be first in line. Really the first IEM I've tried in a while that I have found to be truly captivating in its presentation. Nothing but thumb's up from me on this one.

 

[firesign]

Really, really good perspective on the Timeless. I think I agree with 90% of this. I've been listening to planar headphones for a while now, so I have no issues with the tonality, although I admit that it can be perceived as a bit thin and cool-neutral for many tastes. I do have to disagree with the bolded portion above, however. What you are saying is a personal preference, not a fault of the Timeless. For me, I tend to listen to very fast, technical electronica, and the fast decay really helps bring out the detail in what would otherwise be very congested passages. Try listening to Infected Mushroom - Savant on Mushrooms with anything but TOTL resolution and crisp dynamics and you'll see (hear) what I mean. The Timeless handles this track like a walk in the park. Not even my Aryas can handle it quite as well. Lesser phones just sound like a muddied mess and completely change the nature of the track.

Acoustic guitar, for instance, suffers a bit from the tonality constraints of the Timeless, but not by much. Again, it's more of a preference thing - I'd rather listen to stringed instruments on my Oracles, or a single DD like the Isabellae. But unless you're doing an A-B comparison, you won't be missing much enjoyment. I just find the Timeless at $220 to be a ridiculously great deal and quite frankly a very special IEM at anything under $1k. While I don't think it suffers from a "lack of refinement" as you've stated, I do feel that it might benefit many genres by using a warm source or perhaps a cable upgrade. Or maybe a slight EQ tweak here and there. But I'm nitpicking here. If 7Hz came out with a Timeless Pro with some of these tweaks, I'd be first in line. Really the first IEM I've tried in a while that I have found to be truly captivating in its presentation. Nothing but thumb's up from me on this one.

I have seen graphs and they are almost identical ( Timeless and Isabellae ).
I am in love with the sound of the Isabellae, for me it has no fault.
Do I go for the Timeless without hesitation?

 

[rggz]

If I could only have one, probably. The Kato’s noticeably more technical for clarity and the sound signature is closer to my usual preferences. I still think the Falcon Pro has its niche for the warm-heads. Also the treble response sounds slightly higher quality on the Falcon Pro with the Reference nozzles.

Speaking of filters, did you play with both KATO's filters? It's not quite clear and they seem to produce a slight difference in intangibles.

 

[Precogvision]

Have you tried Yuan Li? I think Yuan Li DD is quite fast and still does sound correct timbre wise.

Nope, haven't tried it yet. FR looks pretty good, though, so maybe I'll try and get one in.

Speaking of filters, did you play with both KATO's filters? It's not quite clear and they seem to produce a slight difference in intangibles.

Nah, I think I just used the stainless steel ones.

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

@Precogvision , when will you be doing your review of the Elysian X? I want to know what you think. I am getting mixed messages about it based on current impressions.

 

[Precogvision]

@Precogvision , when will you be doing your review of the Elysian X? I want to know what you think. I am getting mixed messages about it based on current impressions.

Whenever Lee sends it

It’s been delayed so long that I can no longer A/B it with the Annihilator as it’s been returned to its owner, but I still want to hear X too.

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

Whenever Lee sends it

It’s been delayed so long that I can no longer A/B it with the Annihilator as it’s been returned to its owner, but I still want to hear X too.

maybe he is having a hard time justifying sending you a unit when he has a backlog of paying customers.

 

[Nabillion_786]

Thanks! I don’t think they need a lot of power, maybe about the same as the Moondrop single-DD IEMs. I feel like the Timeless is more of an attention-grabber than the FDX1 in the technical department, but I haven’t A/B-d them.


If I could only have one, probably. The Kato’s noticeably more technical for clarity and the sound signature is closer to my usual preferences. I still think the Falcon Pro has its niche for the warm-heads. Also the treble response sounds slightly higher quality on the Falcon Pro with the Reference nozzles.

What are some of your favourite iems for male vocals?

 

[Precogvision]

What are some of your favourite iems for male vocals?

Maybe the 64A Nio? Extremely rich sound. Vision Ears VE7 is probably up there as well. Not quite as thick or as intangibly pleasing as the Nio in terms of timbre for male vocals, but sounds fantastic with male vocalists like George Strait. There are others that I think are good, but those are the IEMs that come to mind first. Neither are strong performers for resolution, of course.

 

[Nabillion_786]

Maybe the 64A Nio? Extremely rich sound. Vision Ears VE7 is probably up there as well. Not quite as thick or as intangibly pleasing as the Nio in terms of timbre for male vocals, but sounds fantastic with male vocalists like George Strait. There are others that I think are good, but those are the IEMs that come to mind first. Neither are strong performers for resolution, of course.

Thanks for your reply but what would be your choice for male vocals upto the 500 price range. Personally I have disliked all ba iem I have tried due to them not sounding life-like when compared to my single dd's (oxygen and Kanas pro etc). But tbf I have never heard sonion ba's and hear they fare better which i am not too sure of that's why I stick with single dd's. Also I hear people say that the oxygen is one of the best single dd's and whilst I love mine I kind of feel male vocals lack emotion due to sounding lean. However the cheaper Kanas pro had a good weighty sound that expressed male vocals very nicely but the driver is kind of lacking these days. What is the next best upgrade do you think for me? I have Kato's coming but am not sure if they have better vocals then the oxygen.

 

[baskingshark]

Thanks for your reply but what would be your choice for male vocals upto the 500 price range. Personally I have disliked all ba iem I have tried due to them not sounding life-like when compared to my single dd's (oxygen and Kanas pro etc). But tbf I have never heard sonion ba's and hear they fare better which i am not too sure of that's why I stick with single dd's. Also I hear people say that the oxygen is one of the best single dd's and whilst I love mine I kind of feel male vocals lack emotion due to sounding lean. However the cheaper Kanas pro had a good weighty sound that expressed male vocals very nicely but the driver is kind of lacking these days. What is the next best upgrade do you think for me? I have Kato's coming but am not sure if they have better vocals then the oxygen.

Bro what source do u use with the Oxygen? I also find them having a slightly thinner note weight when used on a neutral source, but using a warmer source can thicken the note weight a bit.

 

[Nabillion_786]

Bro what source do u use with the Oxygen? I also find them having a slightly thinner note weight when used on a neutral source, but using a warmer source can thicken the note weight a bit.

Thanks for your advice but I can only use my phone which is the Asus Rog phone 2. Need to use my iem with YouTube aswell which makes me limited with other sources.