[Progisus]

Just switched 1960’s to Odin and Stormbreaker to Fourte. The 1960’s takes off just a bit more of those upper mids from the Odin. I’m not sure why as they are supposed to be the same cable. My1960 is much more supple than the storm also.
I’m so confused! For me the Fourte wins out over the Odin with my Chord dacs.

 

[gLer]

Just switched 1960’s to Odin and Stormbreaker to Fourte. The 1960’s takes off just a bit more of those upper mids from the Odin. I’m not sure why as they are supposed to be the same cable. My1960 is much more supple than the storm also.
I’m so confused! For me the Fourte wins out over the Odin with my Chord dacs.

That is strange, they're supposed to be the exact same cable. Maybe one has seen more use than the other, or the soldering is slightly different. Could also be psychoacoustics. These things are never a precise science.

 

[xenithon]

That is strange, they're supposed to be the exact same cable. Maybe one has seen more use than the other, or the soldering is slightly different. Could also be psychoacoustics. These things are never a precise science.

It may also be a slight tuning change (which may possibly just be a case of solder et al). Similar to the Traillii which comes with a 1960 4W which is meant to be tuned slightly differently to match the bird.

 

[W1ll1eTheP1mp]

To be fair it's only the Bird and the new UM. The usual suspects are still hovering around the $3K-$4K range. And the cable debate is very relevant, because right now that's what's making the $4K to $6K jump. If EE can release a bona fide flagship for $3.4K with a $1200 cable, then so can others. If you add a $2K cable to any of the other flagships (Fourte, Noir, Erlky, Thummim...) Then we've been at ~$6K since 2017. The day they start selling flagships for $6K without a kilobuck cable, that's when we need to take pause.

PS. This cable story seems to be a very IEM thing. Even the $4K+ full size headphones ship with $300 cables at best, and many don't bother upgrading them.

NOT starting a cable debate and Im probably gonna be unpopular here saying this, but cables in my opinion is just a "marketing trick" and a way for companies to earn ALOT in money with minimal effort. Im actually quite suprised that many people here actually defend expensive cables,

And its sad, cause when people believe in SQ improvements in cables, it will get more expensive, manufacturers included expensive cables to jump up the price to insane levels. The Oriolus Trailli is a good example! 6K and the cable in that package is a extremely expensive one. Just to be able to charge 6K!

Cant blame them for wanting to earn money, but all IEM manufacturers IMO should have atleast an option to buy the IEM with a generic ONE, but most if not all doesnt. Why so? Soundquality improvements has never been documented in in cables in an reliable way. People get tricke by there own ears with some help for the marketing hype from some companies. Buy cables for the quality, termination and feel. Not because off SQ improvements.

Thats today rant and now i have made myself intarget its an interesting discussion though. And i really really dont hope that 64Audio in the future bundle up their IEMs with expensive cables to charge more just cause off that.

 

[Tiax]

A comparison review from @MRSallee

 

[kdl0123]

NOT starting a cable debate and Im probably gonna be unpopular here saying this, but cables in my opinion is just a "marketing trick" and a way for companies to earn ALOT in money with minimal effort. Im actually quite suprised that many people here actually defend expensive cables,

And its sad, cause when people believe in SQ improvements in cables, it will get more expensive, manufacturers included expensive cables to jump up the price to insane levels. The Oriolus Trailli is a good example! 6K and the cable in that package is a extremely expensive one. Just to be able to charge 6K!

Cant blame them for wanting to earn money, but all IEM manufacturers IMO should have atleast an option to buy the IEM with a generic ONE, but most if not all doesnt. Why so? Soundquality improvements has never been documented in in cables in an reliable way. People get tricke by there own ears with some help for the marketing hype from some companies. Buy cables for the quality, termination and feel. Not because off SQ improvements.

Thats today rant and now i have made myself intarget its an interesting discussion though. And i really really dont hope that 64Audio in the future bundle up their IEMs with expensive cables to charge more just cause off that.

I would say most cables definitely make difference in sound but it is not actually a “improvement”.

Some cables offers more durable plugs and better noice resistance “skin” which improve physicality is definitely reasonable to pay for.

I am also someone hate companies bonding those expensive cables with their iems. But for 64audio, I would prefer they just spend $100 to make a cable that won’t tangle.

 

[GiullianSN]

It may also be a slight tuning change (which may possibly just be a case of solder et al). Similar to the Traillii which comes with a 1960 4W which is meant to be tuned slightly differently to match the bird.

Solder or even the Length of the cable that change its resistance.

 

[DavidS11]

NOT starting a cable debate and Im probably gonna be unpopular here saying this, but cables in my opinion is just a "marketing trick" and a way for companies to earn ALOT in money with minimal effort. Im actually quite suprised that many people here actually defend expensive cables,

And its sad, cause when people believe in SQ improvements in cables, it will get more expensive, manufacturers included expensive cables to jump up the price to insane levels. The Oriolus Trailli is a good example! 6K and the cable in that package is a extremely expensive one. Just to be able to charge 6K!

Cant blame them for wanting to earn money, but all IEM manufacturers IMO should have atleast an option to buy the IEM with a generic ONE, but most if not all doesnt. Why so? Soundquality improvements has never been documented in in cables in an reliable way. People get tricke by there own ears with some help for the marketing hype from some companies. Buy cables for the quality, termination and feel. Not because off SQ improvements.

Thats today rant and now i have made myself intarget its an interesting discussion though. And i really really dont hope that 64Audio in the future bundle up their IEMs with expensive cables to charge more just cause off that.

+1

We don’t need expensive cables with 64 Audio IEMs

 

[Progisus]

+1

We don’t need expensive cables with 64 Audio IEMs

But do we need different than stock? hehe

 

[Vitaly2017]

NOT starting a cable debate and Im probably gonna be unpopular here saying this, but cables in my opinion is just a "marketing trick" and a way for companies to earn ALOT in money with minimal effort. Im actually quite suprised that many people here actually defend expensive cables,

And its sad, cause when people believe in SQ improvements in cables, it will get more expensive, manufacturers included expensive cables to jump up the price to insane levels. The Oriolus Trailli is a good example! 6K and the cable in that package is a extremely expensive one. Just to be able to charge 6K!

Cant blame them for wanting to earn money, but all IEM manufacturers IMO should have atleast an option to buy the IEM with a generic ONE, but most if not all doesnt. Why so? Soundquality improvements has never been documented in in cables in an reliable way. People get tricke by there own ears with some help for the marketing hype from some companies. Buy cables for the quality, termination and feel. Not because off SQ improvements.

Thats today rant and now i have made myself intarget its an interesting discussion though. And i really really dont hope that 64Audio in the future bundle up their IEMs with expensive cables to charge more just cause off that.

Broooooo in some point you are right but not at same time, aftermarket cables do improve sound quality just take the straight and easy example of 64a own premium silver cale!

You just need to be carefull and educated, I mean just learn the cable science and if it make no sense and the price tag is 5k on the cable then we have a red alert flag here ( this was an example lol )

I understand there is a lot of confusion and misconception even by manufacturers as they want to wow you and look so fancy... But I reassure you cable do sound better if you use the right materials and good soldering technique it all matters.

Bare in mind you also have the burn in notion in the way, if he had 1 cable with barely any use and other one is around 350 hours there will be also a sound affectation. In my sacred book of Mr. Tiger Ears all cable must be burned in at least 100hours, daps and iems or headphones 200 hours. Full ba iems 100hours is fine even after 50 they are already opened up. Its really the DD iems that need at least 200hour.


Any ways I was just trying to guide a bit to the right direction, not all aftermarket cables a fluke or cash grabbing trap, eventually you will learn which brands you trust and which are traps!
Good luck on ya journey

 

[MRSallee]

A comparison review from @MRSallee

Awesome, thanks for sharing it! I'll add some notes:

Headphones.com loaned me 5x 64 Audio IEMs, so I got to spend some extended time testing them. U12t, Nio, U18t, Tio, and Fourte. I've heard some of these before, with U12t being the one I've spent most time with and liked the most, so I used that as a sort of baseline for comparisons.

• U12t: Unsurprisingly, I love it. It's bassier than I typically like, but the bass is well done, well isolated into the lower bass regions and doesn't smear up the midrange. That midrange is warm, thick, rich, and still crystal clear. Honestly, this isn't my typical preference for tuning, I generally prefer a more forward presentation, but the detail and imaging of U12t makes up for it. Treble is well extended and never fatiguing. But all this description doesn't really do justice to what makes the U12t so good. U12t is a very engaging sound, with powerful bass slam, textured midrange, and comfortable treble extension that's both exciting and never fatiguing. Pretty impressive. If I had one complaint, I'd say timbre on U12t is the least natural of the bunch, it never quite achieves transparency in its presentation -- possibly down to the frequency response, though it's not the oddest FR of the group so I'm not certain of that.
  
  
• Nio: Of the three models here with the Apex modules, Nio is the only one that I prefer with the mX module. TBH I'm not usually a bass guy, but U12t is really fun with the m15 module. The Nio, however, I think sounds pretty bloated and smeared with the m15. Too much bass, the midrange becomes borderline muddy. With the mX module, the Nio does get quite solid, which I think the best timbre of the bunch and a generally pleasant tone that doesn't seem to emphasize much. It's maybe a tad boring -- especially compared to some of the others here -- but for a warm-neutral sound, this is pretty well done.
  
  
• U18t: Imagine U12t with more lower treble presence and more mid-bass. These tweaks add a bit of instant excitement to the sound (and IMO tonally the top end sounds more "correct" to my ear), but the enjoyment is short-lived. The treble emphasis becomes fatiguing, emphasizing sibilance where the U12t sails through it, and the extra mid-bass is just not needed. Unlike the Nio, with its dynamic driver, I think the U18t doesn't do great with the mX module -- needs more body, which means needs the m15, which means it's a bit bloaty and soft. This is honestly not a bad set, but it does lack a hook, a something special.
  
  
• Trio: I kinda ignored this one for a while, expecting I wouldn't like it much. I thought I had demo'd Trio before and didn't love it (maybe I did? not in my notes), so I had some negative bias going in. But I was pretty surprised to realize I actually love this one. Trio's tuning is definitely odd if you just look at a frequency response, but where I would expect it to sound a bit underwater with vocals the Trio instead sounds perfectly "normal." It is, like some others here, a warm, laid back tune, but it's not as thick as Nio, and the extra treble emphasis here adds a sense of clarity without over-stepping into fatigue. The added detail on guitar transients adds a real tactility. I think the others (above) are pretty impressive for their imaging and staging, but Trio takes it up a notch with a really impressive head stage. Where the others do great horizontally, the Trio seems to blow that out in three dimensions, adding more front-back depth. If I were a bigger bass guy, I'd probably be less satisfied with what's here -- there's plenty of bass volume, it's just not as tight and punchy as a DD can be. But, I'm satisfied with HD 600 bass softness, so not too bothered here.
  
  
• Fourte: OK, this is kinda what I expected with the Trio. I don't like the tuning of the Fourte, the upper midrange is pushed back too far, it sounds underwater, vocals muffled, and the treble presence of the Trio has less to contrast against so it gets an extra degree of emphasis. I think the trade of is that, yes, the Fourte seems to have an even bigger head stage, and the sound generally has a stronger sense of heft to it -- even cymbals ringing have an added weight, in addition to a meatier low-end. But for me, the trade-off isn't worth it, the tonality is too off with the Fourte.

If I'm ranking them, I'd say...

1. Trio
2. U12t (m15)
3. Nio (mX)
4. U18t (m15)
5. Fourte
6. Nio (m15)

And finally, some squigs. You can inspect them closer here: https://squig.link/?share=64_Audio_..._Audio_Trio,64_Audio_Nio_(mX),64_Audio_Fourte

U12t vs. U18t


Nio with mX vs. m15 modules


Trio vs. Fourte

 

[dleblanc343]

Outstanding write-up.

Your impressions line up exactly like my hearing too - so kudos on the good hearing

 

[Mehran]

Awesome, thanks for sharing it! I'll add some notes:

Headphones.com loaned me 5x 64 Audio IEMs, so I got to spend some extended time testing them. U12t, Nio, U18t, Tio, and Fourte. I've heard some of these before, with U12t being the one I've spent most time with and liked the most, so I used that as a sort of baseline for comparisons.

• U12t: Unsurprisingly, I love it. It's bassier than I typically like, but the bass is well done, well isolated into the lower bass regions and doesn't smear up the midrange. That midrange is warm, thick, rich, and still crystal clear. Honestly, this isn't my typical preference for tuning, I generally prefer a more forward presentation, but the detail and imaging of U12t makes up for it. Treble is well extended and never fatiguing. But all this description doesn't really do justice to what makes the U12t so good. U12t is a very engaging sound, with powerful bass slam, textured midrange, and comfortable treble extension that's both exciting and never fatiguing. Pretty impressive. If I had one complaint, I'd say timbre on U12t is the least natural of the bunch, it never quite achieves transparency in its presentation -- possibly down to the frequency response, though it's not the oddest FR of the group so I'm not certain of that.
  
  
• Nio: Of the three models here with the Apex modules, Nio is the only one that I prefer with the mX module. TBH I'm not usually a bass guy, but U12t is really fun with the m15 module. The Nio, however, I think sounds pretty bloated and smeared with the m15. Too much bass, the midrange becomes borderline muddy. With the mX module, the Nio does get quite solid, which I think the best timbre of the bunch and a generally pleasant tone that doesn't seem to emphasize much. It's maybe a tad boring -- especially compared to some of the others here -- but for a warm-neutral sound, this is pretty well done.
  
  
• U18t: Imagine U12t with more lower treble presence and more mid-bass. These tweaks add a bit of instant excitement to the sound (and IMO tonally the top end sounds more "correct" to my ear), but the enjoyment is short-lived. The treble emphasis becomes fatiguing, emphasizing sibilance where the U12t sails through it, and the extra mid-bass is just not needed. Unlike the Nio, with its dynamic driver, I think the U18t doesn't do great with the mX module -- needs more body, which means needs the m15, which means it's a bit bloaty and soft. This is honestly not a bad set, but it does lack a hook, a something special.
  
  
• Trio: I kinda ignored this one for a while, expecting I wouldn't like it much. I thought I had demo'd Trio before and didn't love it (maybe I did? not in my notes), so I had some negative bias going in. But I was pretty surprised to realize I actually love this one. Trio's tuning is definitely odd if you just look at a frequency response, but where I would expect it to sound a bit underwater with vocals the Trio instead sounds perfectly "normal." It is, like some others here, a warm, laid back tune, but it's not as thick as Nio, and the extra treble emphasis here adds a sense of clarity without over-stepping into fatigue. The added detail on guitar transients adds a real tactility. I think the others (above) are pretty impressive for their imaging and staging, but Trio takes it up a notch with a really impressive head stage. Where the others do great horizontally, the Trio seems to blow that out in three dimensions, adding more front-back depth. If I were a bigger bass guy, I'd probably be less satisfied with what's here -- there's plenty of bass volume, it's just not as tight and punchy as a DD can be. But, I'm satisfied with HD 600 bass softness, so not too bothered here.
  
  
• Fourte: OK, this is kinda what I expected with the Trio. I don't like the tuning of the Fourte, the upper midrange is pushed back too far, it sounds underwater, vocals muffled, and the treble presence of the Trio has less to contrast against so it gets an extra degree of emphasis. I think the trade of is that, yes, the Fourte seems to have an even bigger head stage, and the sound generally has a stronger sense of heft to it -- even cymbals ringing have an added weight, in addition to a meatier low-end. But for me, the trade-off isn't worth it, the tonality is too off with the Fourte.

If I'm ranking them, I'd say...

1. Trio
2. U12t (m15)
3. Nio (mX)
4. U18t (m15)
5. Fourte
6. Nio (m15)

And finally, some squigs. You can inspect them closer here: https://squig.link/?share=64_Audio_..._Audio_Trio,64_Audio_Nio_(mX),64_Audio_Fourte

U12t vs. U18t


Nio with mX vs. m15 modules


Trio vs. Fourte

Nice review.
I watched it live and your reviews are always informative and entertaining.
Although our preferences in sound is quite different, I say this based on your review of the Dusk. So I think the Nio and Fourte is the way to go for me.

 

[Tiax]

If I'm ranking them, I'd say...

1. Trio
2. U12t (m15)
3. Nio (mX)
4. U18t (m15)
5. Fourte
6. Nio (m15)

Oh man, you are not making selling these any easier for me

 

[Mehran]

Oh man, you are not making selling these any easier for me

May I ask why you are selling?