[Scubadevils]

You don’t need, you WANT! …like many of us. Your first impressions about the ZEN Pro are very welcomed. Really appreciated.

About the 7Hz Timeless, well, up to you, I think these deliver some freshness into the crowded IEMs game. As I said in the dedicated thread, these are baby LCD-X.

Indeed - want, want, want! I will get rid of all of my other IEMs and just have DDs - change my name to DD-King (see what I did there?!)

I will definitely buy the 7Hz, just might push to next month on the basis of BF deals this week.

 

[gLer]

Actually, would someone be so kind as to explain what 'speed' means in the context of technicalities?

The way I understand it (and I stand to be corrected) is how quickly the driver/s can resolve one note to the next. Too slow and the decay of one note starts smearing into the attack of the next, impacting clarity among other things. Most notable in busy, fast-paced music on multi-instrumental tracks.

 

[davidmolliere]

You don’t need, you WANT! …like many of us. Your first impressions about the ZEN Pro are very welcomed. Really appreciated.

About the 7Hz Timeless, well, up to you, I think these deliver some freshness into the crowded IEMs game. As I said in the dedicated thread, these are baby LCD-X.

I was looking into those... all the more interesting!

 

[drftr]

Actually, would someone be so kind as to explain what 'speed' means in the context of technicalities?

For me personally "speed" is how fast a note is produced out of the blue. As in dynamics, attack, and (in the lower register) slam.

drftr

 

[Scubadevils]

The way I understand it (and I stand to be corrected) is how quickly the driver/s can resolve one note to the next. Too slow and the decay of one note starts smearing into the attack of the next, impacting clarity among other things. Most notable in busy, fast-paced music on multi-instrumental tracks.

Great, thank you. I find once I know what something is, I start to listen for it when critically listening.

 

[gLer]

For me personally "speed" is how fast a note is produced out of the blue. As in dynamics, attack, and (in the lower register) slam.

drftr

Dynamics is how quickly an IEM can shift from a low volume note to high volume note, so how 'explosive' it can sound. This is different to speed in how I've described it above, because it specifically relates to changes in volume (and dynamic range).

 

[drftr]

Dynamics is how quickly

You see what you did there? "how quickly" for me translates as "speed". So I don't think we're saying something different, only that you added what happens after the note is gone: decay.

drftr

 

[gLer]

You see what you did there? "how quickly" for me translates as "speed". So I don't think we're saying something different, only that you added what happens after the note is gone: decay.

drftr

I get the confusion but there is a distinction here.

Dynamics = speed (or rate of change) from soft to loud (or vice versa)

Speed = note to note transition (not related to volume or level)

 

[drftr]

I get the confusion but there is a distinction here.

Dynamics = speed (or rate of change) from soft to loud (or vice versa)

Speed = note to note transition (not related to volume or level)

So would your speed come closer to clarity then? I could see that because each note would be created and "destroyed" faster and therefore create a cleaner sound. Is that the same thing?

drftr

 

[gLer]

So would your speed come closer to clarity then? I could see that because each note would be created and "destroyed" faster and therefore create a cleaner sound. Is that the same thing?

drftr

Again the way I understand it, speed can impact clarity, yes. If a driver is too slow to keep pace with fast-paced music, the notes start to smear and clarity suffers. Conversely if a driver is too fast, this can impact how quickly we perceive attack and decay, which can often come across as unnatural. One of the reasons I enjoy the sound of dynamic drivers is because they're generally slower than BA drivers which results in a slower but more natural decay of bass notes. Whereas BA drivers are faster and come across as tighter (cleaner) but also less natural (to me). Which is to say faster isn't always good, and slower isn't always bad.

Speed isn't the only factor that affects clarity. FR balance and tonality play a big part too. As does the internal structure of the IEM. In fact none of these technical metrics exist in isolation.

We should get @Deezel177 in here as he's more of a domain expert on these things.

 

[Deezel177]

The way I understand it (and I stand to be corrected) is how quickly the driver/s can resolve one note to the next. Too slow and the decay of one note starts smearing into the attack of the next, impacting clarity among other things. Most notable in busy, fast-paced music on multi-instrumental tracks.

I think that's something that's carried over from instrument-playing (or musicianship) as well. When playing an instrument (especially one that can get especially busy, like the drums), you're taught that speed is nothing without control. There's a massive difference between a bunch of notes flying around and a bunch of notes clearly, purposefully and articulately played. I think that control is the difference between dynamics and speed. You can be explosive and punchy whilst having notes bleed into each other, but it takes speed (and control in speed) to be able to make sense of what's going on in it.

For me, the key tell of speed is if you're able to "see" the IEM's backdrop in between flurries of notes. If you can - in that split-second - almost hear the driver fall back into a rest position, then fire again, it's got great speed. Whereas, if it feels like it's only falling back into rest when there's a break in the music, it's clearly having a tough time keeping up. I personally think BAs only exhibit that too fast characteristic when they're tuned too thin or bright. I've heard BAs capable of exuding that vintage, almost-analog smokiness. I think their main drawback is actually tactility and texture. A DD can make notes feel like they're physically there and moving towards you, while BA's are typically more heard than felt. The gap can be close, to the point where only an A/B test will reveal those deficiencies. But, with everything I've heard so far, that advantage to the DD is always there.

 

[Mehran]

I think that's something that's carried over from instrument-playing (or musicianship) as well. When playing an instrument (especially one that can get especially busy, like the drums), you're taught that speed is nothing without control. There's a massive difference between a bunch of notes flying around and a bunch of notes clearly, purposefully and articulately played. I think that control is the difference between dynamics and speed. You can be explosive and punchy whilst having notes bleed into each other, but it takes speed (and control in speed) to be able to make sense of what's going on in it.

For me, the key tell of speed is if you're able to "see" the IEM's backdrop in between flurries of notes. If you can - in that split-second - almost hear the driver fall back into a rest position, then fire again, it's got great speed. Whereas, if it feels like it's only falling back into rest when there's a break in the music, it's clearly having a tough time keeping up. I personally think BAs only exhibit that too fast characteristic when they're tuned too thin or bright. I've heard BAs capable of exuding that vintage, almost-analog smokiness. I think their main drawback is actually tactility and texture. A DD can make notes feel like they're physically there and moving towards you, while BA's are typically more heard than felt. The gap can be close, to the point where only an A/B test will reveal those deficiencies. But, with everything I've heard so far, that advantage to the DD is always there.

You explained it very well.
What you said about speed is very evident with Fourte.

 

[drftr]

Is that true though, objectively speaking? Of note: This question is meant as a test for ME and not for you. Why? Because I always had the opinion that my true measure for tonality, timbre, etcetera, should be unamplified acoustic instruments that are like a few meters from my ears without any possible interference in between (yes, the humidity of the air and things make a difference, but...). I came to that "conclusion" because I wasn't able to tell how amplified, mixed, distorted instruments of which the signal goes through maybe 3 or more different cables with their own sonic characters, and finally loudspeakers that are tuned in a certain way, should truly sound. I know absolutely how I LIKE them to sound and maybe that's good enough to tell whether the representation through your IEMs sound great to me. But I'm of the opinion (until I'm proven wrong, so I can only learn from your opinion) that I have no way of telling whether an electronic instrument is represented correctly, or just extremely nice.

drftr

Am I very far off in your opinion @Rockwell75?

drftr

 

[Rockwell75]

From a post in Crinacle's thread today I learned about J Gordon Holt. Holt is thought of as one of the founding fathers of the high end audio hobby and was one of the first to try and use language to describe the finer points of sound. The following definitions were taken from Holt's Audio Glossary (1990) by @Edric Li:

- Resolution: See "definition."
- Definition: definition (also resolution) That quality of sound reproduction which enables the listener to distinguish between, and follow the melodic lines of, the individual voices or instruments comprising a large performing group. See "focus
- Focus: The quality of being clearly defined, with sharply outlined phantom images. Focus has also been described as the enhanced ability to hear the brief moments of silence between the musical impulses in reproduced sound.

- Detail: The subtlest, most delicate parts of the original sound, which are usually the first things lost by imperfect components. See "low-level detail." Compare "haze," "smearing," "veiling."

- Speed: The apparent rapidity with which a reproducing system responds to steep wavefronts and overall musical pace. See "fast," "slow."
- Fast: Giving an impression of extremely rapid reaction time, which allows a reproducing system to "keep up with" the signal fed to it. (A "fast woofer" would seem to be an oxymoron, but this usage refers to a woofer tuning that does not boom, make the music sound "slow," obscure musical phrasing, or lead to "one-note bass.") Similar to "taut," but referring to the entire audio-frequency range instead of just the bass.

- Clarity: Undefined by Holt.

- Imaging: The measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage. See "stereo imaging."
- stereo imaging: The production of stable, specific phantom images of correct localization and width. See "soundstaging," "vagueness," "wander."

- Separation: Undefined by Holt.

- Soundstaging: The accuracy with which a reproducing system conveys audible information about the size, shape, and acoustical characteristics of the original recording space and the placement of the performers within it.

- dynamic: Giving an impression of wide dynamic range; punchy. This is related to system speed as well as to volume contrast.
- dynamic range: 1) Pertaining to a signal: the ratio between the loudest and the quietest passages. 2) Pertaining to a component: the ratio between its no-signal noise and the loudest peak it will pass without distortion.

Reading these definitions really struck me. For the first time I see many of the different factors commonly taken under the umbrella of the term "technicalities" (resolution, definition, focus, detail, imaging, soundstaging etc.) as all contributing to the common goal of creating a fully realized, accurately positioned 3-d "phantom inage" in the mind of the listener. My overwhelming impression after listening to the Traillii on all 3 occasions was that putting them on is like stepping in to the Holodeck from Star Trek TNG. Thus my intuition that the Bird is the most technically accomplished IEM I've ever heard seems entirely consistent with the definitions above.

Edit: Also interesting from the above definitions is that what I naively think of as "instrument seperation" is actually what is really meant by "resolution".

Is that true though, objectively speaking? Of note: This question is meant as a test for ME and not for you. Why? Because I always had the opinion that my true measure for tonality, timbre, etcetera, should be unamplified acoustic instruments that are like a few meters from my ears without any possible interference in between (yes, the humidity of the air and things make a difference, but...). I came to that "conclusion" because I wasn't able to tell how amplified, mixed, distorted instruments of which the signal goes through maybe 3 or more different cables with their own sonic characters, and finally loudspeakers that are tuned in a certain way, should truly sound. I know absolutely how I LIKE them to sound and maybe that's good enough to tell whether the representation through your IEMs sound great to me. But I'm of the opinion (until I'm proven wrong, so I can only learn from your opinion) that I have no way of telling whether an electronic instrument is represented correctly, or just extremely nice.

This is fair.

 

[Rockwell75]

I just shared some early impressions on Facebook, dropping them here too!

I have had quality time with the DUNU ZEN PRO tour unit since yesterday and I've no doubt as to its clear step up from the original ZEN. I've tested numerous tracks, going back and forth between the two, noting my findings for each. I don't have the expertise to deep dive into technicalities but do my best to relay what I hear. I'm using the stock cable and AET07 tips on both IEMs.

An immediate and obvious improvement is a greater amount of space/air on the stage, allowing instruments to shine individually with improved timbre and an overall more cohesive whole. There is a sense of air that allows much more detail retrieval with no congestion.

The stage feels about the same size in dimension terms, maybe a bit bigger, but loses an at times wooly and harsh presentation which occurred on the ZEN when there are several instruments and vocals competing for space. The soundstage for me is perfect, a wonderful amount of space with instruments sitting where they should.

There is a reduction in bass which for me is an acceptable trade off for the marked improvements elsewhere. Kick drums when testing techno for example are more than adequate for my ears with a very nice thud - though not as dense as ZEN. Sub bass rumbles sufficiently and happily fuels the needs of say D&B. Upright bass in jazz sounds incredible, well positioned, sitting where it should. Though I must note, they don't compete with buds...

In isolation, the mids feel about the same and both quite beautiful for female vocals. The challenge on ZEN as previously noted is when the mids are competing for space, it can become cluttered and harsh, especially in more challenging/busy passages. I'm reluctant to compare to other single DDs for now in detail but a highly regarded DD from another brand failed when it came to female vocals versus ZEN PRO, sounding thin and lifeless compared to rich, smooth and engaging.

Treble is perfectly presented for my ears and higher frequencies can bother me. There is just enough there for me to enjoy complex drumming with a lot of frantic cymbals etc without ever becoming harsh.

Still only my 2nd day of testing but any genre I've tried has sounded fantastic, ZEN PRO can comfortably tick that all-rounder box and delivers a beautifully engaging, coherent and emotionally engaging listening experience. I'll be testing versus other DDs in my collection over the next few days, interesting to see how it competes.

It will be moving to the next tour participant next week but I'll certainly add this to my list of planned purchases. I'm a single DD fan and this is an essential addition to the collection... Apologies I can't delve into the technicalities that many look for in these impressions, still learning and I'll only discuss what I understand!

Thanks for sharing! These are definitely atop the old curiosity list for me at the moment-- Dark Sky is also a fascinating prospect. I would love to see a shootout between Zen Pro, Isa, Dark Sky, IE900 and FD7.

I'm also eager for more IEMs with a config like the Duo & Dorado-- DD low end with a speedier driver doing the highs or ultra highs. There's lots of fruitful tuning ground there imho.