FastGecko5
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Posts
- 254
- Likes
- 1,502
KZ Castor - Harman or Bass Improved? Anyone have both?
The discovery thread!
- Thread starter Dsnuts
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aful blon bl03 db3 ibasso am05 isn d02 isn h40 jq audio jvc-ha-fx101 jvc-ha-fx40-b-earphone-kv6902 nx7 nx7 pro philips-she3580-28-in-ear-headphones philips-she9700 pioneer-dje-1500-k-professional-dj-in-ear-headphones sony-mh1-livesound-hi-fi-stereo-in-ear-headphones sphere thermaltake-in-ear-headset tri i3 vsonic-vc1000
r31ya
Headphoneus Supremus
i have both for awhile,
- Harman have cleaner sound, have bass with decent "thump" and a bit of texturing. but it can sound a bit thin.
- Bass have thumpy boomy bass that covers other freq (mids and all), but it also have better body in sound.
i don't particularly like the obnoxious bass, so i prefer harman more.
and after i got trio, i gave away my Castor Bass to a work friend.
tough now, for the near the OG price of castor you could buy KZ Vader balance instead, it was around $15 in my place.
but then again few days ago a redditor could get CastorBass for $9.5 or something
Last edited:
Lexington99
New Head-Fier
Trying to get a handle on the staging of Davinci - does it have that speaker like presentation where most of the music is happening inside and/or contained slightly in front of your head, or does it have that immersive wrap-around-your-head effect that only gets more pronounced with volume?
Hello there,Looks very very nice, thanks!Your thoughts vs Explorer?
I A/B tested the AFUL Explorer and DUNU DaVinci for 30 minutes. Here’s what I found:
Bass
Both IEMs offer similar bass quantity, but the quality differs significantly. The Explorer's bass is excellent with a satisfying rumble, resembling high-quality 2-channel speakers with precise, clean bass. Enjoyable and honestly lacks nothing. You enjoy the bass as well as the vocals and instruments. The DaVinci, on the other hand, provides more texture, a more powerful slam, more separation, punch, and impact. It delivers a tactile experience, making bass-heavy tracks feel more tactile and in-your-face. It’s like adding a subwoofer to those 2-channel speakers, drawing attention to the clean, impactful bass in every song. I can feel the bass of the DaVinci in most songs with bass guitars (clean and separated) and bass heavy hip hop and EDM tracks. I found myself raising the volume (for a second or two) more when listening to the DaVinci because of the bass, same way you raise the volume to hear more of that enjoyable subwoofer bass. (Please use moderate volume to protect your hearing)
Upper Mids
The DaVinci presents more forward upper mids, enhancing instruments like cellos, violins, and higher-pitched vocals. While the Explorer offers balanced and clear vocals, the DaVinci makes them slightly more forward and pronounced. The Explorer compensates with an intimate, close-to-ear vocal presentation, making the difference less pronounced unless directly compared.
Treble
The DaVinci has more treble extension, offering more forward and defined cymbals and synths. On the Explorer, these elements sound clear and balanced without being fatiguing. A/B testing revealed that the DaVinci brings synths, and cymbal strikes closer to the ear, providing more definition and clarity.
Soundstage
The DaVinci has a wider soundstage with good sense of depth, while the Explorer has a more intimate presentation. Both are enjoyable in their own ways.
Resolution
Overall, the DaVinci offers higher resolution due to its forward upper mids and better treble extension. It provides greater clarity and instrument separation, making individual guitar strings and vocals more pronounced. The bass also has more detail and separation. Other than the bass, this is the other aspect that is easily audible to me when comparing them. More clarity, resolution, and instrument separation on the DaVinci.
Comparing the AFUL Explorer side by side with the DaVinci was revealing. Here are some key takeaways:
- I spent more time than usual on this comparison, highlighting the Explorer's impressive performance.
- The Explorer offers incredible value, especially considering it’s being compared to the more expensive DaVinci with twice the number of drivers.
- In my opinion, owning both isn’t necessary since the DaVinci is an upgrade to the Explorer.
FreeWheelinAudioLuv2
Headphoneus Supremus
Just reading about the tech and the pics got me hyped. Lotto play!! LOL
FreeWheelinAudioLuv2
Headphoneus Supremus
I want a equally or upgraded tuning with a ST9 (piezo??)!!
Thanks!Here we go my FRC partisans, we finally have our first direct comparison of the Explorer and the DaVinci from one reviewer with one and the same technical measurement setup. This should give us now a better reliability of the curves (as always 60 dB @ 500 Hz):
In this context, big thanks @atechreviews, good job!
More impressions to come, but the Delci is better.
r31ya
Headphoneus Supremus
i keep hearing good thing about delci,
i'm currently looking for a better successor for one budget iem that i haven't give away.
seems its close enough,
there is one second hand for $45-ish, i'm currently negotiating,
tough that cash it might turn into Shadow of Erdree preorder
JEHL
1000+ Head-Fier
Wonder what explorer vs supermix 4 looks like. And any other potential IEM in this same budget segment for that matter.
... Although knowing myself, I'm likely not buying any IEM until late 2025 at least.
... Although knowing myself, I'm likely not buying any IEM until late 2025 at least.
Wow great comparison, thanks a lot!!Hello there,
I A/B tested the AFUL Explorer and DUNU DaVinci for 30 minutes. Here’s what I found:
Bass
Both IEMs offer similar bass quantity, but the quality differs significantly. The Explorer's bass is excellent with a satisfying rumble, resembling high-quality 2-channel speakers with precise, clean bass. Enjoyable and honestly lacks nothing. You enjoy the bass as well as the vocals and instruments. The DaVinci, on the other hand, provides more texture, a more powerful slam, more separation, punch, and impact. It delivers a tactile experience, making bass-heavy tracks feel more tactile and in-your-face. It’s like adding a subwoofer to those 2-channel speakers, drawing attention to the clean, impactful bass in every song. I can feel the bass of the DaVinci in most songs with bass guitars (clean and separated) and bass heavy hip hop and EDM tracks. I found myself raising the volume (for a second or two) more when listening to the DaVinci because of the bass, same way you raise the volume to hear more of that enjoyable subwoofer bass. (Please use moderate volume to protect your hearing)
Upper Mids
The DaVinci presents more forward upper mids, enhancing instruments like cellos, violins, and higher-pitched vocals. While the Explorer offers balanced and clear vocals, the DaVinci makes them slightly more forward and pronounced. The Explorer compensates with an intimate, close-to-ear vocal presentation, making the difference less pronounced unless directly compared.
Treble
The DaVinci has more treble extension, offering more forward and defined cymbals and synths. On the Explorer, these elements sound clear and balanced without being fatiguing. A/B testing revealed that the DaVinci brings synths, and cymbal strikes closer to the ear, providing more definition and clarity.
Soundstage
The DaVinci has a wider soundstage with good sense of depth, while the Explorer has a more intimate presentation. Both are enjoyable in their own ways.
Resolution
Overall, the DaVinci offers higher resolution due to its forward upper mids and better treble extension. It provides greater clarity and instrument separation, making individual guitar strings and vocals more pronounced. The bass also has more detail and separation. Other than the bass, this is the other aspect that is easily audible to me when comparing them. More clarity, resolution, and instrument separation on the DaVinci.
Comparing the AFUL Explorer side by side with the DaVinci was revealing. Here are some key takeaways:
We live in an exciting time for audiophiles. Brands like DUNU, AFUL, and many others are constantly pushing boundaries, and we’re the ones benefiting from their innovations.
- I spent more time than usual on this comparison, highlighting the Explorer's impressive performance.
- The Explorer offers incredible value, especially considering it’s being compared to the more expensive DaVinci with twice the number of drivers.
- In my opinion, owning both isn’t necessary since the DaVinci is an upgrade to the Explorer.
Seems like both are great choices in their respective price point. So many great sets coming out now. Exciting times indeed! 
countryboyhk
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2010
- Posts
- 223
- Likes
- 676
Imagine KZ has a waifu sound 
The balanced version of Libra is more like an ungraded version of EW200 with better clarity, soundstage and bass to me, rather than the Aria 2. Btw, wish you are the lucky one to win a free iem.
The balanced version of Libra is more like an ungraded version of EW200 with better clarity, soundstage and bass to me, rather than the Aria 2. Btw, wish you are the lucky one to win a free iem.
Last edited:
FreeWheelinAudioLuv2
Headphoneus Supremus
I keep forgetting about the Libra. SOAB!! LOLImagine KZ has a waifu sound
The balanced version of Libra is more like an ungraded version of EW200 with better clarity, soundstage and bass to me, rather than the Aria 2. Btw, wish you are the lucky one to win a free iem.
I have both. It's your personal preferences that decides which one to choose. If you're a basshead go for Castor Bass. If you like a cleaner, more "audiophile" sound go for Castor Silver.
None of them are in my rotation anymore, replaced by Rhapsody. (Which costs more).
Bass is too bassy for me and Silver while it's good I prefer a "thicker" sound. Used up up down down on SIlver.
Last edited:
FreeWheelinAudioLuv2
Headphoneus Supremus
KZ ZS10 Pro 2 vs CCA Trio with Aur Audio Aure throw in!!
So I'm gonna make it brief. It's late and I'm been doing this compare in between clients at work, and now after work. It's getting late and I'm getting sleepy.
Compare playlist (full CD):
1. Katherine Whalen - Dirty Little Secret
2. Robert Glasper Experiment - Black Radio
KZ ZS10 Pro 2 >> Treble extension (It's a tad more refined and shimmers longer than the Trio, but falls short of the shimmer and extension of the Aure, though it has more timbre refinement than the Aure), Instrument separation, female vocals are more emotive and richer than Trio (but once again fails to reach the depth and detail of the Aure), Bass speed, bass punch and sub bass reach and rumble are equal to the Trio. Soundstage height and depth. Resolution is superior to Aures and Trio.
CCA Trio : Mid bass presence and warmth, detail retrieval, Stage expanse is very similar to ZS10, as is spacing and imaging. Treble is a tad more smooth and safe. Upper mids are safe, but a tad bit thinner, while lower mids have a touch more warmth. This is the warmer "darker" of the two. Less V shaped.
Aur Aures have deeper bass, with the sub bass slam superior to both. The single DD really delivers some bass helf, punch, speed, and slam, while the mids are pushed forward, and with a touch of warmth, allows male and female vocals to be emotive, clear, and detailed. Treble has a tad bit of metallic timbre, but it's ridiculously extended and controlled, shimmers without ever getting sibilant, which cannot be said of the ZS10 (Trio is also never sibilant), though ZS10 is only occasionally that way, and only with tracks that are inherent to sibilance. Soundstage is wide and has depth, with height about equal to Trio, and lagging behind the ZS10. Piano keys and guitars are sharp, clean, clear and resolving. More so than the Trio by a country mile, and just edging out the ZS10, while overall resolution across the spectrum goes to the ZS10. Instrument separation, imaging, and detail retrieval are comparable to the ZS10 and maybe edges the Trio, but all are pretty strong in these attributes. Between the bass and refinement, the Aures are pretty much a step up from the ZS10. Let's do a rating to give you an idea of where they fall in the heirarchy, shall we?
Aur Audio Aures (4/5)
KZ ZS10 Pro 2 (3.5/5)
CCA Trio (3/5)
This ranking would encompass taking all the attributes of each, and giving them a median score, and coming up with the final rating based on the averages of those attributes. It's close, and not much separates the Aures from the Trio, but a few refinements in sound and presentation.
Thanks
So I'm gonna make it brief. It's late and I'm been doing this compare in between clients at work, and now after work. It's getting late and I'm getting sleepy.
Compare playlist (full CD):
1. Katherine Whalen - Dirty Little Secret
2. Robert Glasper Experiment - Black Radio
KZ ZS10 Pro 2 >> Treble extension (It's a tad more refined and shimmers longer than the Trio, but falls short of the shimmer and extension of the Aure, though it has more timbre refinement than the Aure), Instrument separation, female vocals are more emotive and richer than Trio (but once again fails to reach the depth and detail of the Aure), Bass speed, bass punch and sub bass reach and rumble are equal to the Trio. Soundstage height and depth. Resolution is superior to Aures and Trio.
CCA Trio : Mid bass presence and warmth, detail retrieval, Stage expanse is very similar to ZS10, as is spacing and imaging. Treble is a tad more smooth and safe. Upper mids are safe, but a tad bit thinner, while lower mids have a touch more warmth. This is the warmer "darker" of the two. Less V shaped.
Aur Aures have deeper bass, with the sub bass slam superior to both. The single DD really delivers some bass helf, punch, speed, and slam, while the mids are pushed forward, and with a touch of warmth, allows male and female vocals to be emotive, clear, and detailed. Treble has a tad bit of metallic timbre, but it's ridiculously extended and controlled, shimmers without ever getting sibilant, which cannot be said of the ZS10 (Trio is also never sibilant), though ZS10 is only occasionally that way, and only with tracks that are inherent to sibilance. Soundstage is wide and has depth, with height about equal to Trio, and lagging behind the ZS10. Piano keys and guitars are sharp, clean, clear and resolving. More so than the Trio by a country mile, and just edging out the ZS10, while overall resolution across the spectrum goes to the ZS10. Instrument separation, imaging, and detail retrieval are comparable to the ZS10 and maybe edges the Trio, but all are pretty strong in these attributes. Between the bass and refinement, the Aures are pretty much a step up from the ZS10. Let's do a rating to give you an idea of where they fall in the heirarchy, shall we?
Aur Audio Aures (4/5)
KZ ZS10 Pro 2 (3.5/5)
CCA Trio (3/5)
This ranking would encompass taking all the attributes of each, and giving them a median score, and coming up with the final rating based on the averages of those attributes. It's close, and not much separates the Aures from the Trio, but a few refinements in sound and presentation.
Thanks
Last edited:
