That's always exciting. Now you have impressions you can send off to those companies that have some hype around how price competitive they are for customs.
Precog's IEM Reviews & Impressions
- Thread starter Precogvision
- Start date
SHOOTINGTECHIE
100+ Head-Fier
TBH I enjoyed doing it twice during my intern duties haha !!! (on people, not on myself
)
More thoughts on the DUNU Falcon Pro (aka this is probably my review, I just haven't taken the photos yet)...
The Falcon Pro has three nozzles (Reference, Transparency, and Atmospheric Immersion) with which you can use to adjust the sound signature. In all cases, the Falcon Pro sports a mid-bass oriented curve and a mostly smooth treble response; the nozzles mainly affect the amount of midrange presence in the order of Atmospheric Immersion (least), Reference (middle), and Transparency (most). Personally, I found myself flip-flopping between the Reference and Transparency nozzles. I didn't really care for the Atmospheric Immersion nozzle. The overall sound here is a warm, colored one that will appeal to listeners after a more musical presentation and that are willing to sacrifice sheer clarity.
Bass: If there’s one thing I could change about the Falcon Pro, it would definitely be the bass response: I simply do not jive with the mid-bass emphasis. Aside from the Falcon Pro failing to dig into the deepest of frequencies adequately, and bass notes coming off somewhat hollow, my critiques follow in the name of intangible performance. I feel that the Falcon Pro’s ability to render textural nuance on Dreamcatcher’s “Silent Night” is somewhat lacking, perhaps due to a conjunction between the poor bass extension and slightly quicker bass decay. I’ve actually talked to Tom of DUNU about how most of their IEMs follow this type of bass shelf. While I’ve come to respect that it’s a deliberate tuning decision on DUNU’s part, the bass response here is not my cup of tea both tonally and intangibly. Listeners desiring a more “fun” or "mainstream" bass response and that are willing to sacrifice rumble and clean bass lines, though, will probably find the Falcon Pro more up their alley.
Midrange: The midrange of the Falcon Pro is pretty alright. Again, I’ll focus on it within the context of the Reference and Transparency nozzles. The Reference nozzle is generally warmer and more subdued with a gentle pinna compensation and upper-midrange; the Transparency nozzle brings back up the upper-midrange for more note definition and, overall, a slightly leaner midrange presentation. I think the biggest concern here would be something of a recession at 1kHz. Admittedly, I probably wouldn’t have called it without a graph. But for instance, I do feel like some of the presence - perhaps the overtones - to Lee Brice’s voice on “Love Like Crazy” is missing, and this has the effect of making him sound somewhat husky. I have to wonder if this recession was intentional, as it does have the perceived effect of lending more “space” around vocals and mitigating congestion like on the venerable Sennheiser HD800S.
Treble: That aside, the treble of the Falcon Pro is the most mature part of its tuning. When you’re dealing with IEMs in this price range, I’ve found that - quite frankly - most of them suck at treble. And not even on a technical level; it’s rare to find IEMs at this price with good treble tuning alone! With the Reference nozzle, though, the Falcon Pro is impressively smooth, devoid of any egregious peaks or valleys, and perhaps only a tad less impressive in terms of sheer extension. Of course, it’s not perfect. It’s almost too smooth - perhaps “sweet” if I’m being kind - with this nozzle which makes me gravitate toward the Transparency. Treble is more defined on the Transparency nozzle; however, the percussive hits on SNSD’s “Into the New World” come across as noticeably more compressed due to a subsequent emphasis at roughly 5kHz. But I digress - this is a commendable treble response all things considered.
Technicalities: For technical performance, “Uh-oh, this isn’t very resolving," was the first comment I made to myself when I heard the Falcon Pro. And yeah - more listening hasn’t really changed that opinion. I suspect that this is largely attributable to the warmer, mid-bassy tuning; furthermore, a limitation of the dynamic driver being used. The Falcon Pro simply isn’t going to trade blows against the likes of established single-DD heavy-hitters for clarity, and it’s a point of contention that some listeners will likely refuse to settle for.
Looking past this, however, I do find the Falcon Pro to be surprisingly competent for what I affectionately refer to as more “latent” intangibles. To start with, the Falcon Pro’s imaging is above average despite being far from pinpoint precise. By this, I am referring to the structural definition of the Falcon Pro’s staging. Notes actually sound big and the Falcon Pro has some semblance of soundstage height with the Reference nozzle. With the Transparency nozzle, I find the Falcon Pro’s layering improves slightly at the expense of some of this note size. In both instances, the Falcon Pro has commendable ambiance to its staging; in fact, I would say it beats out even much more expensive IEMs like DUNU’s own Zen and the Sennheiser IE900 for this metric!
The other instance with which the Falcon Pro makes its mark is dynamics. I don’t think its dynamic contrast is great - loud moments generally don’t come off as loud as they should and quiet moments don’t come off as quiet as they should - but for a general sense of physicality, the Falcon Pro is a very punchy IEM (at its price point, of course). On Taeyeon’s “Make Me Love You”, the bassline has that characteristic with which it feels like I’m being smacked by a wave at 0:52 and 2:01. Part of this feeling is ostensibly baked into the large amounts of mid-bass the Falcon Pro exhibits, and the Falcon Pro clearly falls behind its older brothers the Zen and Luna for dynamics, but the ECLIPSƎ driver technology is no joke.
Conclusion: Okay, so what's the verdict on the Falcon Pro? Well, I have to admit that I wasn’t super hot on the Falcon Pro when I first heard it. I could tell the tuning was good, don’t get me wrong, but I felt that the general technical performance of the IEM leaned more milquetoast. Further, closer listening, however, has forced me to reevaluate my stance on the Falcon Pro slightly. Generally, I think this is a warm IEM done right, perhaps not unlike the Vision Ears VE7 that I praised recently. The difference? There’s no need to cash out an arm and a leg for the Falcon Pro. Stack on a plethora of great accessories, user-adjustable sound signature via nozzles, consistently good build quality, and I think DUNU has put together a solid package for the warm-heads that I would recommend pending some minor caveats.
The Falcon Pro has three nozzles (Reference, Transparency, and Atmospheric Immersion) with which you can use to adjust the sound signature. In all cases, the Falcon Pro sports a mid-bass oriented curve and a mostly smooth treble response; the nozzles mainly affect the amount of midrange presence in the order of Atmospheric Immersion (least), Reference (middle), and Transparency (most). Personally, I found myself flip-flopping between the Reference and Transparency nozzles. I didn't really care for the Atmospheric Immersion nozzle. The overall sound here is a warm, colored one that will appeal to listeners after a more musical presentation and that are willing to sacrifice sheer clarity.
Bass: If there’s one thing I could change about the Falcon Pro, it would definitely be the bass response: I simply do not jive with the mid-bass emphasis. Aside from the Falcon Pro failing to dig into the deepest of frequencies adequately, and bass notes coming off somewhat hollow, my critiques follow in the name of intangible performance. I feel that the Falcon Pro’s ability to render textural nuance on Dreamcatcher’s “Silent Night” is somewhat lacking, perhaps due to a conjunction between the poor bass extension and slightly quicker bass decay. I’ve actually talked to Tom of DUNU about how most of their IEMs follow this type of bass shelf. While I’ve come to respect that it’s a deliberate tuning decision on DUNU’s part, the bass response here is not my cup of tea both tonally and intangibly. Listeners desiring a more “fun” or "mainstream" bass response and that are willing to sacrifice rumble and clean bass lines, though, will probably find the Falcon Pro more up their alley.
Midrange: The midrange of the Falcon Pro is pretty alright. Again, I’ll focus on it within the context of the Reference and Transparency nozzles. The Reference nozzle is generally warmer and more subdued with a gentle pinna compensation and upper-midrange; the Transparency nozzle brings back up the upper-midrange for more note definition and, overall, a slightly leaner midrange presentation. I think the biggest concern here would be something of a recession at 1kHz. Admittedly, I probably wouldn’t have called it without a graph. But for instance, I do feel like some of the presence - perhaps the overtones - to Lee Brice’s voice on “Love Like Crazy” is missing, and this has the effect of making him sound somewhat husky. I have to wonder if this recession was intentional, as it does have the perceived effect of lending more “space” around vocals and mitigating congestion like on the venerable Sennheiser HD800S.
Treble: That aside, the treble of the Falcon Pro is the most mature part of its tuning. When you’re dealing with IEMs in this price range, I’ve found that - quite frankly - most of them suck at treble. And not even on a technical level; it’s rare to find IEMs at this price with good treble tuning alone! With the Reference nozzle, though, the Falcon Pro is impressively smooth, devoid of any egregious peaks or valleys, and perhaps only a tad less impressive in terms of sheer extension. Of course, it’s not perfect. It’s almost too smooth - perhaps “sweet” if I’m being kind - with this nozzle which makes me gravitate toward the Transparency. Treble is more defined on the Transparency nozzle; however, the percussive hits on SNSD’s “Into the New World” come across as noticeably more compressed due to a subsequent emphasis at roughly 5kHz. But I digress - this is a commendable treble response all things considered.
Technicalities: For technical performance, “Uh-oh, this isn’t very resolving," was the first comment I made to myself when I heard the Falcon Pro. And yeah - more listening hasn’t really changed that opinion. I suspect that this is largely attributable to the warmer, mid-bassy tuning; furthermore, a limitation of the dynamic driver being used. The Falcon Pro simply isn’t going to trade blows against the likes of established single-DD heavy-hitters for clarity, and it’s a point of contention that some listeners will likely refuse to settle for.
Looking past this, however, I do find the Falcon Pro to be surprisingly competent for what I affectionately refer to as more “latent” intangibles. To start with, the Falcon Pro’s imaging is above average despite being far from pinpoint precise. By this, I am referring to the structural definition of the Falcon Pro’s staging. Notes actually sound big and the Falcon Pro has some semblance of soundstage height with the Reference nozzle. With the Transparency nozzle, I find the Falcon Pro’s layering improves slightly at the expense of some of this note size. In both instances, the Falcon Pro has commendable ambiance to its staging; in fact, I would say it beats out even much more expensive IEMs like DUNU’s own Zen and the Sennheiser IE900 for this metric!
The other instance with which the Falcon Pro makes its mark is dynamics. I don’t think its dynamic contrast is great - loud moments generally don’t come off as loud as they should and quiet moments don’t come off as quiet as they should - but for a general sense of physicality, the Falcon Pro is a very punchy IEM (at its price point, of course). On Taeyeon’s “Make Me Love You”, the bassline has that characteristic with which it feels like I’m being smacked by a wave at 0:52 and 2:01. Part of this feeling is ostensibly baked into the large amounts of mid-bass the Falcon Pro exhibits, and the Falcon Pro clearly falls behind its older brothers the Zen and Luna for dynamics, but the ECLIPSƎ driver technology is no joke.
Conclusion: Okay, so what's the verdict on the Falcon Pro? Well, I have to admit that I wasn’t super hot on the Falcon Pro when I first heard it. I could tell the tuning was good, don’t get me wrong, but I felt that the general technical performance of the IEM leaned more milquetoast. Further, closer listening, however, has forced me to reevaluate my stance on the Falcon Pro slightly. Generally, I think this is a warm IEM done right, perhaps not unlike the Vision Ears VE7 that I praised recently. The difference? There’s no need to cash out an arm and a leg for the Falcon Pro. Stack on a plethora of great accessories, user-adjustable sound signature via nozzles, consistently good build quality, and I think DUNU has put together a solid package for the warm-heads that I would recommend pending some minor caveats.
Last edited:
Some musings on why I'm an IEM guy
I was chatting with @aaf evo the other day and he mentioned how he sold his HiFiMAN Susvara in under a week and how he was an IEM guy at heart. Despite the somewhat tacit hierarchy between IEMs and headphones, I didn't blink an eye when he told me this. Getting to hear all the big dolla headphones at CanJam reinforced something I've known for some time now: I prefer IEMs to headphones too! As a quick disclaimer, yes, I absolutely recognize that headphones sound "better". They are undoubtedly more technical to my ears for traditional metrics of resolution and imaging. Still, I encourage you to hear me out.
The main reasons why one considers an IEM over a headphone are for portability, convenience, and isolation. In terms of isolation, let's establish that closed-back headphones are out of the question here. As Crinacle would say, "the best closed-back headphone is an IEM" because closed-back headphones almost universally sound like garbage. Most diehard audiophiles won't have isolation with headphones; that in mind, let's address portability and convenience. You can't listen to open-back headphones on the bus or while grocery shopping (or yes, feel free to look like a total nerd). A dedicated headphone setup merits use of a desktop AMP/DAC which effectively grounds you to at-home use. More specifically "at home, in a specific room, stuck in a specific chair at a specific desk" use. For someone like myself who's constantly biking around campus to classes and mostly listens in bed, that's far from ideal. And to go back to AMP/DACs, cost is 100% another consideration. If you want to get maximum performance out of your headphone, you'll be shelling out for source components that might cost just as much (or more) as the headphones themselves! Remember - I'm a broke college student here.
Outside the context of practicality, let me key you in on some less obvious reasons why I prefer IEMs. First, I find that one of the major distinctions between headphones and IEMs is tonality. Headphones are notoriously difficult to tune, and there are only a small handful of headphones that I have heard that I would consider to have remotely good tonal balance. Even within the scope of the headphones I'd consider to have good tonal balance, they all follow a similar frequency response (think along the lines of the Susvara or HE-1). It's not hard to see why that might get boring. But not so with IEMs. In particular, BA IEMs are easily tuned (at least by comparison to their headphone counterparts), thus catering catering to a variety of different tastes - tastes done well at that. There's good V-shaped, U-shaped, L-shaped, reverse-L shaped - the list goes on - tuned IEMs.
Further along the lines of sound, there's something of a funny dichotomy that headphones suffer from in terms of imaging. They can have great separation, localization, and by extension, layering, that no IEM could ever dream of, but I have not heard a single headphone that has impactful center imaging. Center imaging, or phantom center, is the phenomenon with which one perceives an illusory, "third" speaker coming from the center of the stage with a 2-channel speaker system. Within the context of headphones and IEMs, this is what I qualify as soundstage depth. No headphone I have heard has soundstage depth; positionally, vocals come from inside the head and stay inside the head. However, there are rare IEMs that, when I close my eyes, make it feel like vocalists and instruments on center stage are out-of-head if only by a couple inches. Avid readers and acquaintances are probably guffawing reading this, as I've memed center imaging to death in my writing and various conversations, but it's true! At least for me.
The final reason why I gravitate toward IEMs is because they're fun. As I alluded to earlier, there's just so much variety with IEMs. Every week, every month, you have new IEMs coming out. Sure, there's a ton of turds, but there's always something to look forward to. To be fair, this can definitely be a good or bad thing depending on whether you're trying to quit this scam of a hobby! From a more sentimental aspect, there's also something really satisfying about plugging such a tiny thing into your ear and having music grandly explode to life around you; that juxtaposition is something that I just don't get with headphones.
Anyways, I think that's enough thinking out-loud. At the end of the day, I'm comparing apples and oranges; I don't begrudge anyone who prefers headphones to IEMs. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, there's still definitely a natural pecking order between transducers when it comes to sound quality. But I'm not ashamed to admit that I like IEMs more than I do headphones, and here's to being forever "lo-fi" as some friends might affectionally deem IEMs.
I was chatting with @aaf evo the other day and he mentioned how he sold his HiFiMAN Susvara in under a week and how he was an IEM guy at heart. Despite the somewhat tacit hierarchy between IEMs and headphones, I didn't blink an eye when he told me this. Getting to hear all the big dolla headphones at CanJam reinforced something I've known for some time now: I prefer IEMs to headphones too! As a quick disclaimer, yes, I absolutely recognize that headphones sound "better". They are undoubtedly more technical to my ears for traditional metrics of resolution and imaging. Still, I encourage you to hear me out.
The main reasons why one considers an IEM over a headphone are for portability, convenience, and isolation. In terms of isolation, let's establish that closed-back headphones are out of the question here. As Crinacle would say, "the best closed-back headphone is an IEM" because closed-back headphones almost universally sound like garbage. Most diehard audiophiles won't have isolation with headphones; that in mind, let's address portability and convenience. You can't listen to open-back headphones on the bus or while grocery shopping (or yes, feel free to look like a total nerd). A dedicated headphone setup merits use of a desktop AMP/DAC which effectively grounds you to at-home use. More specifically "at home, in a specific room, stuck in a specific chair at a specific desk" use. For someone like myself who's constantly biking around campus to classes and mostly listens in bed, that's far from ideal. And to go back to AMP/DACs, cost is 100% another consideration. If you want to get maximum performance out of your headphone, you'll be shelling out for source components that might cost just as much (or more) as the headphones themselves! Remember - I'm a broke college student here.
Outside the context of practicality, let me key you in on some less obvious reasons why I prefer IEMs. First, I find that one of the major distinctions between headphones and IEMs is tonality. Headphones are notoriously difficult to tune, and there are only a small handful of headphones that I have heard that I would consider to have remotely good tonal balance. Even within the scope of the headphones I'd consider to have good tonal balance, they all follow a similar frequency response (think along the lines of the Susvara or HE-1). It's not hard to see why that might get boring. But not so with IEMs. In particular, BA IEMs are easily tuned (at least by comparison to their headphone counterparts), thus catering catering to a variety of different tastes - tastes done well at that. There's good V-shaped, U-shaped, L-shaped, reverse-L shaped - the list goes on - tuned IEMs.
Further along the lines of sound, there's something of a funny dichotomy that headphones suffer from in terms of imaging. They can have great separation, localization, and by extension, layering, that no IEM could ever dream of, but I have not heard a single headphone that has impactful center imaging. Center imaging, or phantom center, is the phenomenon with which one perceives an illusory, "third" speaker coming from the center of the stage with a 2-channel speaker system. Within the context of headphones and IEMs, this is what I qualify as soundstage depth. No headphone I have heard has soundstage depth; positionally, vocals come from inside the head and stay inside the head. However, there are rare IEMs that, when I close my eyes, make it feel like vocalists and instruments on center stage are out-of-head if only by a couple inches. Avid readers and acquaintances are probably guffawing reading this, as I've memed center imaging to death in my writing and various conversations, but it's true! At least for me.
The final reason why I gravitate toward IEMs is because they're fun. As I alluded to earlier, there's just so much variety with IEMs. Every week, every month, you have new IEMs coming out. Sure, there's a ton of turds, but there's always something to look forward to. To be fair, this can definitely be a good or bad thing depending on whether you're trying to quit this scam of a hobby! From a more sentimental aspect, there's also something really satisfying about plugging such a tiny thing into your ear and having music grandly explode to life around you; that juxtaposition is something that I just don't get with headphones.
Anyways, I think that's enough thinking out-loud. At the end of the day, I'm comparing apples and oranges; I don't begrudge anyone who prefers headphones to IEMs. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, there's still definitely a natural pecking order between transducers when it comes to sound quality. But I'm not ashamed to admit that I like IEMs more than I do headphones, and here's to being forever "lo-fi" as some friends might affectionally deem IEMs.
Amen to this. I feel exactly the same. I would like to explore the headphone world at some point but right now, the convenience and isolation of IEM’s give me so much more freedom and time to enjoy music. If I only had a headphone setup, I’d probably only get to listen to them once or twice a week at most. Having the freedom to take IEM’s with me anywhere I go is such a massive factor.
snapandslide
1000+ Head-Fier
Well said! I think the fun aspect is something not to be ignored - totl HP seem a little boring and cost a minor fortune to get the most out of. No thanks (at least for now.....)
I am an IEM guy too, but I really enjoy when I can take a while, sit quietly, and listen to music with my Focal Clear.
I have also verified that after hours of using IEMs my hearing suffers and I get an annoying tinnitus, which does not appear when I use headphones.
I have also verified that after hours of using IEMs my hearing suffers and I get an annoying tinnitus, which does not appear when I use headphones.
Some nice thoughts here, but the fundamental premise is needing to have a preference for one over the other. I think we can agree that HPs and IEMs each have strengths that the other does not have. So why limit yourself to one of the two?
Elements I disagree with somewhat are the isolation (closed backs work ok for me in that respect, I can listen to music in the living room while the family is watching TV with the volume cranked up..) and tonality. A Sony MDR-Z1R sounds very different from a Stellia, and again different from a VC. And that is just within the realm of closed backs.
But as I said, my main disagreement here is the premise. No need to choose if you like (and can afford) both!
My reasons for preferring iems over headphones
1. Headphone weight, clamp, heat and claustrophobia.
Headphones just are too uncomfortable for me, especially with sweltering hot weather at 37 degrees Celsius recently.
2. Intimacy. Even though I have speakers jbl305p in front of me, iems are still my preferred sound because of intimacy. For vocal centric music, this is very important. Although many people strive to get the sound out of their head, it's a territory that I've been comfortable with since young. Headphones and speakers don't have that ability even if you boost the volume to painful levels. I don't have tinnitus and I know how to angle my iems to prevent occlusion effect.
3. Noise isolation, for getting me in the zone =D
1. Headphone weight, clamp, heat and claustrophobia.
Headphones just are too uncomfortable for me, especially with sweltering hot weather at 37 degrees Celsius recently.
2. Intimacy. Even though I have speakers jbl305p in front of me, iems are still my preferred sound because of intimacy. For vocal centric music, this is very important. Although many people strive to get the sound out of their head, it's a territory that I've been comfortable with since young. Headphones and speakers don't have that ability even if you boost the volume to painful levels. I don't have tinnitus and I know how to angle my iems to prevent occlusion effect.
3. Noise isolation, for getting me in the zone =D
Last edited:
frix
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Posts
- 726
- Likes
- 522
Why not being a headphone and IEM guy. 
After having a long journey with this hobby, I found myself appreciating speakers more and more. It's an easy answer from me that I will choose to upgrade speakers related as it has the least diminishing returns from my experience. It does sound phenomenal. Im taking headphones and iems with a grain of salt lately.
Edit: spoiler. My speaker setup isn't cheap so, that translates pretty much of them. But hey, I've spend grands on headphones and iems as well. Didnt see myself as happy as having speakwrs
Last edited:
Don't judge speakers too early
the depth from speakers are different league when you have time to explore it. I've explored iem world quite deep and i cant see myself appreciating them as much as i could get from speakers.DAC plays a role. With topping d70s, there is like zero depth i could get with them. My X Sabre will change everything
I admit I haven't put in too much effort for desktop speakers. It will require me to arrange my cluttered room in a way I will have to face the sun and disturb my family members XD. So far I've installed acoustic foam and got a d30pro dac. I might consider a more subjectively well-known favourite dac to see if there might be any improvement, but maybe room is the limiting factor. With iems i don't have to worry about so many things lolDon't judge speakers too early
DAC plays a role. With topping d70s, there is like zero depth i could get with them. My X Sabre will change everything
riverground
Headphoneus Supremus
What’s your speaker setup?
Even though I love speakers as well.
The time and effort just to make sure the room is well suited for the speakers is a lot of work.
Headphones and IEMs eliminates that aspect and it’s an easier and more “affordable” solution for music pleasure.
Last edited:
Nothing fancy. Currently with Matrix Audio X Sabre - SMSL DA9 - Triangle Br03.
The depth I get from X Sabre itself changed everything. The source does give significant difference in speakers. Not much for iems.
Users who are viewing this thread
