[Precogvision]

Hey everyone, I wanted to share content from my trip to Singapore - one of the premiere hubs of the audio world! This is probably one of the coolest trips I've taken, especially because this was my first time traveling out of the country on my own. I got to meet in-person so many people I've been chatting with online and binge out on equal parts good food and audio gear. There's coverage of hanging out with Crinacle, checking out Zeppelin & Co (probably the coolest audio store I've visited), and much more. It took a while to get this content out, but I'm super eager to share more about what the experience was like!

Written article: https://www.headphones.com/community/reviews-learning-and-news/audiophile-in-singapore

CanJam SG 2022 coverage (in case you missed it): Day 1 IEMs, Day 2 HPs

Video re-cap:

 

[vsg28]

Hey all, here's the Singapore trip write-up and video!

https://www.headphones.com/community/reviews-learning-and-news/audiophile-in-singapore

Just finished watching it and I had to go back and make sure I heard the " wake up at 7:30 to go twerk on a tree top" part right

 

[vietzerg]

Now someone in the US plss lend Precog an IER-M7 to try out x)

 

[Precogvision]

SoftEars Volume Impressions

Configuration: 1DD/2BA
Price: $285
Unit kindly loaned for review by MRS.

As most would know, SoftEars is a brand associated with opulence, but more expensive doesn't necessarily mean better. I had the opportunity to demo their wares in Singapore courtesy of Crinacle and walked away with the following impressions:

• I found that the Cerberus, their co-flagship IEM, was easily the worst out of the line-up. Its bass was poor to the point of which I questioned whether it was even a DD, plus it had seriously mediocre treble extension.
• The RS10 was decent enough, but it more or less sounded like the Hidition Viento-B with less treble extension which axed its value proposition.
• The Turii was good - certainly one of the better DDs that I've heard. But its $1400 MSRP made it a tough sell relative to new blood like the IE900, IE600, and Zen Pro.

Ironically, I would consider their previous cheapest model, the RSV, to be their best model in terms of sound quality alone! That in mind, I was interested in how the Volume, their latest point of entry to the lineup, would fare. Given the brand's connections to Moondrop, would we possibly be presented with a similar situation where the brand iterates and undercuts themselves? Time to find out.

To answer my question...I wish that were the case.

Right out the gate, I am not a fan of the Volume's bass response. It's a winning combination of blurred transient attack and noticeably limp slam with Moondrop's spring tips (which I first used when listening to the Volume), and mostly the former after switching to the stock silicone tips. Still, there is a noticeable gap for bass quality between the Volume and the Moondrop B2's dynamic driver implementation, which, for reference, I am not fond of to begin with. The Volume's bass generally sounds dampened and plasticky, yielding little excitement on my bass-heavy discography. It's a funny thing to say given that the Volume actually has a generous amount of bass boost, but there's no mistaking this for mediocre dynamic driver bass, and quality trumps quantity in my book.

The Volume's approach to the midrange is passable. It's upper-midrange tilted, but mostly in the sense that female vocals simply sound forward and present; 3-5kHz is sloped off to avoid sibilance. The Volume actually has a similar quantity of pinna gain as the SSR (which I find shouty), but ostensibly, the Volume's extra bass quantity balances some of it out. Not much else to comment on here. However, the Volume's weakest point in terms of tuning would no doubt be its treble response. It doesn't have any offensive peaks; in fact, it has the opposite: a pronounced recession in the mid-treble. This kills a lot of crash and energy on cymbals and shakers, and it doesn't help that there's a slight lack of stick impact around 5-6kHz. You effectively have a quite blurry treble response in terms of transient attack. There is enough presence and sheer extension to prevent treble information from being completely inundated; however, there's equal parts the sense that something is missing.

And herein lies another major issue with the Volume: surface-level detailing. It has the dreaded combination of blunted transients and plasticky decay that I dislike. In terms of frequency response, these perceived issues are no doubt partially a consequence of the artificial boost at 3kHz contrasted to the depression at 5-6kHz. This is then likely exacerbated further by the generous bass shelf which lends to masking issues. I don't really see much point in talking about other aspects of technicalities with the Volume, as they're also mostly just average for this price - or at least certainly a peg behind the Blessing 2 in A/B comparison.

That completes my tour of the SoftEars lineup. The Volume is not bad, but I'm still hoping for something from SoftEars that lives up to the strong precedent the RSV set. The Volume isn't it, especially not in the cutthroat $300 space.

Bias Score: 5/10

All critical listening was done with the stock tips, cable, and my DX300 and iPhone 13 with lossless files.

 

[baskingshark]

SoftEars Volume Impressions

Configuration: 1DD/2BA
Price: $285
Unit kindly loaned for review by MRS.

As most would know, SoftEars is a brand associated with opulence, but more expensive doesn't necessarily mean better. I had the opportunity to demo their wares in Singapore courtesy of Crinacle and walked away with the following impressions:

• I found that the Cerberus, their co-flagship IEM, was easily the worst out of the line-up. Its bass was poor to the point of which I questioned whether it was even a DD, plus it had seriously mediocre treble extension.
• The RS10 was decent enough, but it more or less sounded like the Hidition Viento-B with less treble extension which axed its value proposition.
• The Turii was good - certainly one of the better DDs that I've heard. But its $1400 MSRP made it a tough sell relative to new blood like the IE900, IE600, and Zen Pro.

Ironically, I would consider their previous cheapest model, the RSV, to be their best model in terms of sound quality alone! That in mind, I was interested in how the Volume, their latest point of entry to the lineup, would fare. Given the brand's connections to Moondrop, would we possibly be presented with a similar situation where the brand iterates and undercuts themselves? Time to find out.



To answer my question...I wish that were the case.

Right out the gate, I am not a fan of the Volume's bass response. It's a winning combination of blurred transient attack and noticeably limp slam with Moondrop's spring tips (which I first used when listening to the Volume), and mostly the former after switching to the stock silicone tips. Still, there is a noticeable gap for bass quality between the Volume and the Moondrop B2's dynamic driver implementation, which, for reference, I am not fond of to begin with. The Volume's bass generally sounds dampened and plasticky, yielding little excitement on my bass-heavy discography. It's a funny thing to say given that the Volume actually has a generous amount of bass boost, but there's no mistaking this for mediocre dynamic driver bass, and quality trumps quantity in my book.

The Volume's approach to the midrange is passable. It's upper-midrange tilted, but mostly in the sense that female vocals simply sound forward and present; 3-5kHz is sloped off to avoid sibilance. The Volume actually has a similar quantity of pinna gain as the SSR (which I find shouty), but ostensibly, the Volume's extra bass quantity balances some of it out. Not much else to comment on here. However, the Volume's weakest point in terms of tuning would no doubt be its treble response. It doesn't have any offensive peaks; in fact, it has the opposite: a pronounced recession in the mid-treble. This kills a lot of crash and energy on cymbals and shakers, and it doesn't help that there's a slight lack of stick impact around 5-6kHz. You effectively have a quite blurry treble response in terms of transient attack. There is enough presence and sheer extension to prevent treble information from being completely inundated; however, there's equal parts the sense that something is missing.

And herein lies another major issue with the Volume: surface-level detailing. It has the dreaded combination of blunted transients and plasticky decay that I dislike. In terms of frequency response, these perceived issues are no doubt partially a consequence of the artificial boost at 3kHz contrasted to the depression at 5-6kHz. This is then likely exacerbated further by the generous bass shelf which lends to masking issues. I don't really see much point in talking about other aspects of technicalities with the Volume, as they're also mostly just average for this price - or at least certainly a peg behind the Blessing 2 in A/B comparison.

That completes my tour of the SoftEars lineup. The Volume is not bad, but I'm still hoping for something from SoftEars that lives up to the strong precedent the RSV set. The Volume isn't it, especially not in the cutthroat $300 space.

Bias Score: 5/10

All critical listening was done with the stock tips, cable, and my DX300 and iPhone 13 with lossless files.

Thanks for the impressions!

One other thing that scared me off the Softears Volume is the extremely low impedance of 5 ohms, which will make it quite fussy with source pairing (based on the rules of eights for source output impedance). FR might be skewed with higher OI sources.

 

[Precogvision]

Thanks for the impressions!

One other thing that scared me off the Softears Volume is the extremely low impedance of 5 ohms, which will make it quite fussy with source pairing (based on the rules of eights for source output impedance). FR might be skewed with higher OI sources.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's affected by higher OI sources. I saw a couple reviews (Animagus' and Rikudou's) mentioning this. The RSV also has this issue, although it might not be such a bad thing if you find the RSV lacking sparkle. It gains some extra energy in that region with higher OI stuff like the SP1000M I had on-hand a while back.

 

[pseudomagick]

Sorry, missed this. Tia Trio is actually more forward with female vocals than the U12T. The 1kHz recession is there, but you have to listen for it and I want to say it should affect male vocals more than female vocals. Perhaps the best way I can describe it as losing a sense of “depth” to the foundation of their voice at times. Of course, that’s part of what gives the Trio its diffuse presentation.

I noted this in my review, but I still think the Trio’s overall tonality is very good. At least for me, it worked well for all my genres. It’s just one of those IEMs that you have to hear for yourself because it’s difficult to gauge from the frequency response alone.

Hi Precovision.
I heard IEM 64 Audio U12t today and I decided to buy it during few month.
My question is: How much will be sounds better with "Premium Silver Cable" from 64 Audio (for the price 499,- USD)?
Is it worth buying this one cable?
Or will be enogh FiiO LS-3.5D, perhaps also Dunu Blanche?
Thanks a lot.
Many regards from Prague.
Sorry for my english.

 

[Precogvision]

Hi Precovision.
I heard IEM 64 Audio U12t today and I decided to buy it during few month.
My question is: How much will be sounds better with "Premium Silver Cable" from 64 Audio (for the price 499,- USD)?
Is it worth buying this one cable?
Or will be enogh FiiO LS-3.5D, perhaps also Dunu Blanche?
Thanks a lot.
Many regards from Prague.
Sorry for my english.

Congrats! Honestly, cables don't really make differences to sound for me and, if they do, they're very subtle differences that I wouldn't necessarily call improvements. I would focus on ergonomics before sound with cables - better ergonomics are something that you certainly don't need to spend more on to yield benefits. In fact, I've noticed that cheaper cables tend to be constructed better and are more ergonomically sound than a lot of their expensive counterparts.

That said, the Blanche is a good cable. It's a lot more pliable than 64A's premium silver cable, uses aluminum hardware, plus you get the interchangeable connectors.

 

[Gromu]

Congrats! Honestly, cables don't really make differences to sound for me and, if they do, they're very subtle differences that I wouldn't necessarily call improvements. I would focus on ergonomics before sound with cables - better ergonomics are something that you certainly don't need to spend more on to yield benefits. In fact, I've noticed that cheaper cables tend to be constructed better and are more ergonomically sound than a lot of their expensive counterparts.

That said, the Blanche is a good cable. It's a lot more pliable than 64A's premium silver cable, uses aluminum hardware, plus you get the interchangeable connectors.

Unfortunately, it seems the blanche is out of production so it might be difficult to find one. I do really like Dunu's cheaper cables like the DUW-02S.

 

[jlemaster1957]

Congrats! Honestly, cables don't really make differences to sound for me and, if they do, they're very subtle differences that I wouldn't necessarily call improvements. I would focus on ergonomics before sound with cables - better ergonomics are something that you certainly don't need to spend more on to yield benefits. In fact, I've noticed that cheaper cables tend to be constructed better and are more ergonomically sound than a lot of their expensive counterparts.

That said, the Blanche is a good cable. It's a lot more pliable than 64A's premium silver cable, uses aluminum hardware, plus you get the interchangeable connectors.

I guess that would be a ‘no’ re the 64 Audio Premium Silver cable…

Seriously, since you have made clear in mutiple venues (as here) that you are not a ‘cable believer’ in terms of them making any difference to SQ, for those of us still on the fence, would you be so kind as to provide details of different high end cables that you have compared, using the same IEM, music and source? There are some who assert that “non-cable believers” have often not performed a detailed analysis of the impact on FR and technicalities using high quality cables on high end IEMs, eg Plussound or EA or Eletech using the same high quality IEM such as the U12T or the Trio (as 2 examples with different characteristics). There are good examples of such cable reviews elsewhere on this forum by @twister6 and others. I’m not trying to start and certainly not ‘pick a fight’ here- I don’t currently own any high end cables, but I am considering their purchase, and I respect and appreciate the detail to which you review IEMs. I would appreciate reading a review by you at the same level of detailed attention as you use for high end IEMS to review just 1 or 2 of those most highly tauted, say the EA Leonidas II or the PWA 1950. If you have done something like this already, pls indicate where I can read. If you don’t hear any difference, i think it would be good to read your critique at the same level of detail on this issue as you provide to IEMs. Pls think of it as a service to those neophytes among us who are still trying to figure it all out.

 

[InvisibleInk]

would you be so kind as to provide details of different high end cables that you have compared, using the same IEM, music and source?

You know, if Headphones.com started selling lots of high-end cables, they would probably hire a colleague of Precog's to compare cables the way you suggest. Realistically, I wouldn't expect much on that front until then.

 

[Precogvision]

I guess that would be a ‘no’ re the 64 Audio Premium Silver cable…

Seriously, since you have made clear in mutiple venues (as here) that you are not a ‘cable believer’ in terms of them making any difference to SQ, for those of us still on the fence, would you be so kind as to provide details of different high end cables that you have compared, using the same IEM, music and source? There are some who assert that “non-cable believers” have often not performed a detailed analysis of the impact on FR and technicalities using high quality cables on high end IEMs, eg Plussound or EA or Eletech using the same high quality IEM such as the U12T or the Trio (as 2 examples with different characteristics). There are good examples of such cable reviews elsewhere on this forum by @twister6 and others. I’m not trying to start and certainly not ‘pick a fight’ here- I don’t currently own any high end cables, but I am considering their purchase, and I respect and appreciate the detail to which you review IEMs. I would appreciate reading a review by you at the same level of detailed attention as you use for high end IEMS to review just 1 or 2 of those most highly tauted, say the EA Leonidas II or the PWA 1950. If you have done something like this already, pls indicate where I can read. If you don’t hear any difference, i think it would be good to read your critique at the same level of detail on this issue as you provide to IEMs. Pls think of it as a service to those neophytes among us who are still trying to figure it all out.

Sure, I can do that. Some of the more pricey ones I've played around with in the past that come to mind are the following:

• Effect Audio Cleopatra from the EE Wraith
• Eletech cables from the MMR Thummim and Homunculus
• Nightjar Mira & Bifrost
• PW Audio from the Oriolus Traillii
• PW Audio Stormbreaker from the EE Odin

Most of these were compared off of my 64A U12t relative to the Moondrop SSR's cable and the ThieAudio L4's cable. The Eletech cables were done using the 64A Nio I used to own relative to some generic cables off Aliexpress. The Nightjar cables were compared to each other off of the Symphonium Helios. Players used were the DX160 (when I still had it) and the DX300. Like you said, my stance is pretty clear on the sound differences, so no need to rehash it - that type of discussion doesn't lead anywhere.

However, my previous hobby was actually in EDC (everyday carry) which puts a strong emphasis on high-quality goods. Because I was doing reviews on these goods, it was common for me to assess build quality and ease-of-use. Machining marks, tolerances, smoothness of threading, and practical implications were all things that I became very nitpicky for, especially because that's usually what separates custom or low-production gear from the mass-production stuff.

Spoiler

Here are some of my comments on the Traillii's cable from my review if you really want to read an example of my thoughts and the standards I index for, but they're quite harsh:

Spoiler

But maybe, just maybe the cable can salvage this. Hmm, I wonder about that. The included stock cable is modeled after the PW Audio 1960’s cable, a cable that is supposedly valued to the tune of more than a kilobuck. Why? Unfortunately, I couldn’t tell you. The heat shrink wrap at the 4.4mm termination hasn’t been cut consistently. The plastic wraps for the respective ear guides have been cut at different lengths. The wooden Y-splitter has stray splintering - evidence of less than stellar workmanship - and the text hasn’t even been stamped centered. And the cable is bulky and microphonic to top it off. Lest you think this is an isolated case, no, I had similar sentiments about the other cables I’ve handled from this brand in the past. Without even going down the avenue of sonic quality, I sincerely don’t get it. This cable does seem to be SN:768 though, so hey, maybe I’m the crazy one.

 

[stenog]

Precog you are one of the few(plus a few others, you know who) that can actually be trusted in this hobby.

Thanks for that

 

[illumidata]

I'll just leave this here...

64A use some kind of resistor implementation (LID) to keep their impedance curve dead flat, so all their sets should be cable agnostic (though you might notice an overall volume increase using a very low resistance cable versus a very high one).

Thanks to @RikudouGoku for the measurements, and @Precogvision for services to audiophilia.

 

[firesign]

I'll just leave this here...

64A use some kind of resistor implementation (LID) to keep their impedance curve dead flat, so all their sets should be cable agnostic (though you might notice an overall volume increase using a very low resistance cable versus a very high one).

Thanks to @RikudouGoku for the measurements, and @Precogvision for services to audiophilia.

I'd like to see measurements like that made by other people, and with different headphones.

I'm sorry, but for me a single measurement made by a person, without knowing under what conditions, and with a single IEM and 2 cables... does not tell me anything.

Call me skeptical (I am).