[Precogvision]

7Hz x Crinacle Salnotes Dioko Impressions

Price: $99
Configuration: Planar
Unit kindly provided for review by Linsoul: https://www.linsoul.com/products/7hz-x-crinacle-salnotes-dioko?variant=43008001999065

I'm expecting quite a few people are waiting for my impressions on this IEM which happens to be Crinacle's latest collaboration. As a quick disclaimer, it seems there was a mix-up at the factory with the filters, leading to the incorrect filters being applied to some early units. This doesn't appear to be the case with my unit; however, just in case, I'll still be receiving the replacement filters that will be sent out to all early adopters. In the meantime, I've been given the go-ahead to drop some early thoughts:

• Bass is anemic and comparison with the ER2XR - which graphs nearly identically in the bass - illustrates a noticeable gap for a sense of slam and texture.
• Midrange is thinner in a good way and doesn't have the odd contrast between lower-and-upper midrange that the Timeless might have. Immediately reminded me a lot of the Symphonium Helios.
• Treble needs work. It's spicy around 8kHz, as there simply isn't enough bass to mask the peak. Extension is expectedly good.
• Timbre generally could use some work; see comments on bass. Also sounds like a high pass filter has been cranked on the upper-midrange and up which seems to lend to an odd head voice-y quality at times.
• Very good sense of resolution even if it might just be a product of the lean and mean tonality. Trades blows with most of the other planar IEMs for this.

So here's the deal with the Dioko based upon some quick listening. In my opinion, the tuning isn't anything mind-blowing for $100. I've said it before, I'll say it again...all of these new planar IEMs sound like they have their fare share of tonality issues to me. Listeners who want a smooth, natural listen should probably give this a pass; 7Hz's own Timeless would suit better. But technicalities, if you just want technicalities, you could probably snap this up now, as I'd be hard-pressed to think of an IEM more technical for $100. The Dioko has excellent clarity across the board even if it falls short in more "latent" intangibles, such as dynamics, to my ears. The detail and the EQ heads can eat their heart out on this one.

 

[Precogvision]

The Pregod delivers again. Much appreciated. Probably not a worthy upgrade from the ER2XR I'm guessing then? And where did you get the chance to try it? You're like 1 of maybe 10 people who have impressions of it, let alone graphs of it.

I heard it in Singapore courtesy of Lee of Elysian. I think his friend makes them? I don't recall exactly haha

Hi Precog, normally I lurk without posting much but I got curious hope you don't mind.

1. I've noticed that on your first post here (the directory post) you've struck through several of your headers. Does that mean you find these posts no longer relevant? Especially regarding your post on "macro-dynamics".
2. Sorry if this has been asked before, but is there a reason why your u12t S1 measures differently from S2 & S3 in your squig database?

Thx!

1. Yes, I don't really consider those posts indicative of what my understanding is of those topics these days. Or at least the posts are in strong need of more clarification.
2. Probably unit-variance, but here's some more discussion on the topic: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/precogs-iem-reviews-impressions.937468/post-16529552

Thanks for reading my reviews!

 

[WAON303]

Looks like I'll be sticking with getting a Moondrop S8 or an EJ07m instead of buying this which probably doesn't add anything to my collection, especially when I have a JVC HA-FDX1 which fills a similar role to the Dioko.

I think it's time companies move on to the $300-500 IEM planar space instead of making more budget sets, it's a space more deserted than the state of Wyoming.

 

[baskingshark]

7Hz x Crinacle Salnotes Dioko Impressions

Price: $99
Configuration: Planar
Unit kindly provided for review by Linsoul: https://www.linsoul.com/products/7hz-x-crinacle-salnotes-dioko?variant=43008001999065



I'm expecting quite a few people are waiting for my impressions on this IEM which happens to be Crinacle's latest collaboration. As a quick disclaimer, it seems there was a mix-up at the factory with the filters, leading to the incorrect filters being applied to some early units. This doesn't appear to be the case with my unit; however, just in case, I'll still be receiving the replacement filters that will be sent out to all early adopters. In the meantime, I've been given the go-ahead to drop some early thoughts:

• Bass is anemic and comparison with the ER2XR - which graphs nearly identically in the bass - illustrates a noticeable gap for a sense of slam and texture.
• Midrange is thinner in a good way and doesn't have the odd contrast between lower-and-upper midrange that the Timeless might have. Immediately reminded me a lot of the Symphonium Helios.
• Treble needs work. It's spicy around 8kHz, as there simply isn't enough bass to mask the peak. Extension is expectedly good.
• Timbre generally could use some work; see comments on bass. Also sounds like a high pass filter has been cranked on the upper-midrange and up which seems to lend to an odd head voice-y quality at times.
• Very good sense of resolution even if it might just be a product of the lean and mean tonality. Trades blows with most of the other planar IEMs for this.

So here's the deal with the Dioko based upon some quick listening. In my opinion, the tuning isn't anything mind-blowing for $100. I've said it before, I'll say it again...all of these new planar IEMs sound like they have their fare share of tonality issues to me. Listeners who want a smooth, natural listen should probably give this a pass; 7Hz's own Timeless would suit better. But technicalities, if you just want technicalities, you could probably snap this up now, as I'd be hard-pressed to think of an IEM more technical for $100. The Dioko has excellent clarity across the board even if it falls short in more "latent" intangibles, such as dynamics, to my ears. The detail and the EQ heads can eat their heart out on this one.

Thanks for your impressions!
How does this set compare against the Timeless?

I wasn't really a fan of the Timeless' timbre and soundstage depth. The timbre sounded quite artificial and the soundstage depth was missing (kind of 2D soundstage only).

 

[Precogvision]

Thanks for your impressions!
How does this set compare against the Timeless?

I wasn't really a fan of the Timeless' timbre and soundstage depth. The timbre sounded quite artificial and the soundstage depth was missing (kind of 2D soundstage only).

Ya sure, I A/B-d them briefly!

For timbre specifically, I think the Dioko doesn't fare as well. The lack of warmth exacerbates the "planar timbre" in the bass, and the leaner bass and midrange brings more attention to the 8kHz peak in the treble. So I generally don't find the Dioko is as accurate in terms of timbre production as its frequency response might suggest. Staging on the Dioko might be better than the Timeless. It does sound more open than the Timeless does to me, although I don't really hear most IEMs as having much depth (if at all, unfortunately). Generally, I think I prefer the Timeless overall, especially for its tonality (the Dioko is really just too lean for me), but you are getting comparable technicalities with the Dioko at less than half the price.

 

[o0genesis0o]

@Precogvision: just saw your review of A3t on headphones.com. I have never seen such detailed breakdown of 64 audio technologies with figures from their patents. Good job, mate.

However, it stands that EQ is not an ideal solution, especially with IEMs, and you’re usually better suited by purchasing an IEM with an ideal frequency response from the get-go

Agree with this one as well. Also, I have a feeling that some IEMs do not change their frequency response in the way that matches the predicted results from EQ. To my ears, hybrids like Blessing 2 respond to EQ better than single DD across the spectrum. Andromeda does not seem to respond to bass EQ that well. Still waiting for my coupler to arrive so that I can verify this hypothesis.

 

[goodvibes]

Your description makes it sound like the bass may be underdamped. Might be a sacrifice to get that response but than would lose solidity that will also affect the character-tangibility of the mids.

 

[barber]

Sony XBA-N3 Impressions

This was previously requested by @redguardsoldier.

Price: Discontinued
Configuration: 1DD/1BA
Special thanks to "Grawlix" for lending me this unit.




On first listen, the XBA-N3 reminds me of the Sennheiser IE600/900 IEMs with more emphasis in the mid-bass. The XBA-N3's dynamic driver implementation is probably the best I've heard for its ~$300 street price. It's got 10dB of sub-bass boost - exactly where I like it - and a hair of bloat past ~300Hz. The drum machines on Apink's "My oh My" are beautifully saturated and decay with generous amounts of reverb and texture. Extension is also superb with zero roll-off down to 20Hz and the ear-pounding pressure I've come to associate with Hans Zimmer's "Why So Serious". There's just something about this bass response that's best described as larger-than-life, perhaps over-exaggerated, but I'm not complaining. It's not hard at all to hear where the inspiration for the Sony IER-Z1R's legendary bass came from.

Midrange tonality is fairly pleasing, or at least there's no major dealbreakers to me. It's slightly warmer with a more gentle rise to the pinna compensation and 3-5kHz slightly clipped, aptly avoiding harshness on my shouty listening discography. Due to its less distinct bass shelf, the XBA-N3 also plays nicely with male vocals unlike the IER-Z1R, and there's none of that slight harshness to timbre. Treble on the XBA-N3 is mid-treble oriented with good amounts of sparkle at 8-10kHz, hence the Sennheiser IEM comparisons above. Extension and upper-treble are actually really impressive and there's basically no question - to me - that this is a proprietary Sony tweeter. More mounting evidence? It neither has any egregious timbre issues nor does it sound compressed; I thought the XBA-N3 was a single-DD on first listen.

I'd caution that the technical performance of the XBA-N3 is more middling. Like the IER-Z1R and IER-M9, I get the impression that it is not the most detailed IEM despite its very pleasing timbre. Transients have a noticeable blunting which is at least partially a consequence of the minor bass bloat and more relaxed midrange. There's less of this issue in the treble. Imaging is average which is a shame given the IER-Z1R and EX1K IEMs are far more open-sounding from memory. I will say that the XBA-N3's pinna compensation works better for my HRTF and perception of center image. Dynamics are, again, mostly average - there's not a huge sense of immediacy to sudden jumps in volume - but there is a good sense of air being pushed by that dynamic driver.

The bottom line: to me, the XBA-N3's tonality is simply excellent. It sounds coherent and exciting, making very few mistakes when examining its bass, midrange, and treble, either in isolation or as a whole. It's the type of IEM that I can get lost listening to for hours and that, even when I swap to another IEM that might be significantly more technical, makes that other IEM sound dull initially. In this vein, if you enjoy Sony's distinctive flavor of sound, I believe there's a strong possibility you won't mind taking a small hit in technicalities with the XBA-N3. It's honestly hard to believe the XBA-N3 was released 5+ years ago, as I think it's still very relevant even in the context of today's cutthroat market. This is an IEM definitely worth giving a listen in the sea of increasingly uninspired Chi-Fi, especially if you're indexing for good timbre and bass.

Bias Score: 6.5/10

All critical listening was done with Azla tips, a XINHS cable, and my iBasso DX300 and Apple dongle.

because of your writing, I confidently bought used Sony XBA-N3 (then I sold my FiiO FH3) No regret. Thanks. The best tips for me is Moondrop Spring tips. It gives best isolation, deep insertion, comfort and sound details. I also Azla sednaearfit light, spinfit cp100, final E, radius deep mount, JVC spiraldot+, sony comfort, and some others. Spinfit cp100 and Azla came second best but still useless because too less details. Spring do not tame the bass too much. Just a smidge.

 

[Precogvision]

@Precogvision: just saw your review of A3t on headphones.com. I have never seen such detailed breakdown of 64 audio technologies with figures from their patents. Good job, mate.

Thanks man. I think that review hit almost 4K words (not that word count is any indication of writing quality, I think your concise style with visuals is great for example!); I just couldn't stop writing about it once I started.

Agree with this one as well. Also, I have a feeling that some IEMs do not change their frequency response in the way that matches the predicted results from EQ. To my ears, hybrids like Blessing 2 respond to EQ better than single DD across the spectrum. Andromeda does not seem to respond to bass EQ that well. Still waiting for my coupler to arrive so that I can verify this hypothesis.

EQ is a very useful tool; however, it does have its limitations. To what you said, if you have a coupler for reference and plug in the values specified by Auto EQ, you'll notice that what you measure is not always what Auto EQ predicts. There's also the lack of accuracy in the treble regions and the potential for unit variance. I've noticed a recent trend of listeners "demoing" other sets by using Auto EQ on their current set, which can be very misleading.

Outside of that, one of the reasons behind why the Andromeda might not respond well to EQ has to do with leakage tolerances of BA drivers. My A3t has an even tighter fit compared to my A4s; however, I've noticed that SPL drops off more strongly in the A3t's bass even with a slight break of seal. But I don't think it all comes down to seal either, as CIEMs seal very tightly compared to universals which should be more prone to leakage. I've tried adding in a sub-bass filter on the A3t, and it doesn't quite sound like a good DD does. It almost sounds like the driver is straining, especially if you keep the mid-bass. To that point, I think one of the easiest ways to have a BA closely mimic a DD is by boosting the sub-bass while pulling down the mid-bass. When you look at the best IEMs for "BA bass" they almost universally have this characteristic.

Generally, I think that playing with EQ - provided you understand what you're doing with it - is a real eye-opener. I don't care much about the tonality (FR) vs. technicalities debate, but I do tend to believe that what we traditionally refer to as technicalities are largely a product of tonality these days. So many issues can be fixed by adjusting FR via EQ. Simultaneously, I've gained stronger insight into what might not just be a part of FR, or what perception of certain characteristics can't be remedied with EQ for me.

 

[jlemaster1957]

…I've gained stronger insight into what might not just be a part of FR, or what perception of certain characteristics can't be remedied with EQ for me.

Agree with @o0genesis0o— the A3T review was one of the best I’ve read, not just in terms of that IEM BUT as a general primer on 64 audio IEMs (BA configurations, LID, the Apex modules). Can you say more about this last statement, I found this intriguing…

 

[pushyo2khun]

Hi @Precogvision . I ordered the Elysian Diva a while back but then was told that it would be delayed from 1-1.5 mths expected time to 2.5-3 mths.

I'm considering cancelling my order and use the credit to buy Monarch MK2 +other stuff. How does Diva & Monarch MK2 compare?

 

[o0genesis0o]

Generally, I think that playing with EQ - provided you understand what you're doing with it - is a real eye-opener.

Absolutely. I’m in no position to physically retune IEMs, so I rely on EQ to digitally retune them. Such exercise teaches me a lot about sound reproduction and frequency bands in general.

but I do tend to believe that what we traditionally refer to as technicalities are largely a product of tonality these days. So many issues can be fixed by adjusting FR via EQ

Totally agree.

• I found that macro details are mostly FR. If the frequencies are balanced enough, you can hear almost every element in a mix. On contrary, tuning with suppressed lower mid can hide bass guitar and reduce the bite of cello.
• A part of micro details like background reverb relies on the interaction between 4k, 8k, and 16k. If you can balance them to avoid masking, you can hear a lot of background details and decay.
• Soundstage shape can be controlled by 1k dip, ear gain, 10k dip and air frequencies. It’s a balancing act between extending soundstage and timbral correctness.

stronger insight into what might not just be a part of FR, or what perception of certain characteristics can't be remedied with EQ for me.

No matter what I do, I cannot simply copy the resolution of Andromeda with EQ. How about you?

Edit: I wish there are some other audiophile around my city so they can blind try my retuned KZ. When many other IEM struggle for air, this one has way too much of everything, so quite easy to EQ for “holography soundstage”

 

[WAON303]

Mark from Super Reviews said technicalities was a meme, I think I'd be inclined to agree with him to some degree.

I've dabbled a bit with Wavelet, seems like treble extension affects the perception of soundstage.

Still fairly new to the IEM hobby, it can be confusing when learning audiophile terminology for the first time given that some terms are misused quite often ("Holographic" soundstage is probably the biggest offender.)

Same goes for dynamics, some people think it has to do with how well a driver renders bass response when it's actually how well a transducer scales volume differences (Assuming a recording has plenty of dynamic range and isn't brickwalled to oblivion.)

 

[Samuelueluel]

@Precogvision: just saw your review of A3t on headphones.com. I have never seen such detailed breakdown of 64 audio technologies with figures from their patents. Good job, mate.


Agree with this one as well. Also, I have a feeling that some IEMs do not change their frequency response in the way that matches the predicted results from EQ. To my ears, hybrids like Blessing 2 respond to EQ better than single DD across the spectrum. Andromeda does not seem to respond to bass EQ that well. Still waiting for my coupler to arrive so that I can verify this hypothesis.

I'd be interested in seeing what happens with this.

Andromedas are a pain to EQ. I'll agree with @Precogvision that part of it is that the original bass shelf will always be smaller due to your seal not being as good as when it is coupled to a measurement rig. We know that leakage attenuates bass for BA drivers unless there is some extra engineering involved---I think 64 Audio's "apex" technology addresses this to some extent (maybe by lowering the frequency at which a broken seal causes lower SPL). But there is also the extra pain that the measurement you are using may not have been taken at the same output impedance as your source...in which case the entire bass shelf could be off by a couple db.

I've mostly taken to fixing my Andro's bass by ear...and I end up adding a lot more sub bass than I would expect going by the measurements.

 

[Precogvision]

Agree with @o0genesis0o— the A3T review was one of the best I’ve read, not just in terms of that IEM BUT as a general primer on 64 audio IEMs (BA configurations, LID, the Apex modules). Can you say more about this last statement, I found this intriguing…

Okay, this is really just more geeking out on FR, but...

Let's take a look at a couple of the IEMs, such as the Storm, Annihilator, and U12t, that I would subjectively consider to be the most "dynamic" for their sense of slam and dynamic contrast. They all have minor aberrations - peaks and valleys - to their frequency response, particularly moving into the treble regions. There is so much more "information" (this isn't the correct term according to more scientifically inclined folks, but I'm sticking with it) in these frequencies than are in the bass and midrange frequencies because of the way sound waves speed up as they rise in frequency. Now, technically, these peaks and valleys on the graph don't contribute any more or less to our ear than the bass and midrange frequencies because of the way we perceive sound logarithmically. But I think there can be a case for these aberrations being responsible for characteristics like dynamics.

The Abyss 1266C is another good example within the context of headphones. One of the worst flagship headphones that I've seen on paper (and it sounds all sorts of wrong in actual listening too), but holy cow is it dynamic, possibly one of the most dynamic headphones I've heard. It strongly makes me consider the possibility that it sounds great for these subjective technical qualities exactly because it doesn't graph like a traditionally "good" headphone (the HD6XX for comparison above). Regarding my comment "what perception of certain characteristics can't be remedied with EQ for me", these unique peaks and valleys aren't something that you can hope to replicate with EQ because 1) they're too granular, and 2) the measurements are unreliable at the treble range, especially with headphone measurements. I should also add that, in the case of the Abyss headphones, you're not going to get consistency between what you measure on the rig versus what's on your head. The Abyss headphones make use of an air gap to boost the bass response (a common phenomenon with planar headphones) so that what you hear in practice is usually more bassy than what you see on the graph. This is somewhat similar to the BA vs. DD phenomenon discussed earlier.

Spatial qualities are also something that I think are intertwined with FR (everything is really intertwined with FR), but qualities for which I don't think FR tells the whole story. Ported and open IEMs/headphones simply sound more open in terms of their staging to me. I think this is a quality that even objectivists admit is distinct from FR? My friend who has worked on building his own IEM also tell me that they found that playing with increased tubing length during R&D also led to subjectively more open staging.

Again, all of this is just speculation and my personal opinion; please don't take the stuff I've written here as fact!

Hi @Precogvision . I ordered the Elysian Diva a while back but then was told that it would be delayed from 1-1.5 mths expected time to 2.5-3 mths.

I'm considering cancelling my order and use the credit to buy Monarch MK2 +other stuff. How does Diva & Monarch MK2 compare?

Yeah, my unit is stuck too. Apparently, Lee's guy didn't build the nozzle correctly so it has to be re-built or something. I'm honestly getting a bit frustrated at this point, but it is what it is. He tells me he's working on getting his logistics together, so hopefully this becomes less of an issue in the future.

Regarding a comparison between the Diva and Monarch MKII, I've never A/B-d them, but they have different presentations from memory. The Diva doesn't sound realistic; it's colored in a fun, aggressive way. The Monarch MKII can also be aggressive, but works better for stuff that's been mastered better, and it's generally not as exciting. My preference is definitely the Diva.

No matter what I do, I cannot simply copy the resolution of Andromeda with EQ. How about you?

Edit: I wish there are some other audiophile around my city so they can blind try my retuned KZ. When many other IEM struggle for air, this one has way too much of everything, so quite easy to EQ for “holography soundstage”

Hmm, I have not tried EQ-ing any of my IEMs to the Andro's FR before. Even if I did, though, I don't own an Andro for comparison anymore so I wouldn't be able to tell