Has anyone compared the BQEYZ Spring 1 to the Tri I3?
I don't have the Spring 1, but I asked
@DynamicEars who has both and he thinks TRI I3 is better, so I bought the latter based on his advise, very happy with my TRI I3 purchase.
BQEYZ Spring 2 is due to come out soon though, a lot of people found the Spring 1 (unmodded version) to have a too woolly bass based on reviews, so hopefully they fixed it here.
Right, having both, Spring 1 have great technicalities, I compared the Spring 1 mod grill version vs Tri i3, because the default Spring 1 is too bass bloated and seems like sounds are covered and air cant get through, made bass so bloated inside (think of tape-mod vent holes compared to vented shell)
and after long time
@crinacle got Spring 1 measurement about default Spring 1 vs grill mod Spring 1 and here the result :
the grill mod Spring 1 is noticeable better to me, with better texture also, more better tonality and timbre buttt, there is still 1 caveat that i mentioned in Spring 1 review that they have mid bass-upper bass focus (this is was long ago when Spring 1 came out, without seeing any graph) and Im sure enough what i heard before after see the crinacles FR afterward. So this mid-upper bass focus cant be fixed, unless using EQ, they dont sounded bleeding to mids, but just the bass is "hard" "dry" because of bigger mid-upper bass proportion rather than subbass.
if the high mids too harsh, i suggest to put on micropore tape over the grill but just make sure dont cover entire grill surface (or they just back into similar signature with default one) just around 50%-70% depend on your needs.
So comparing the grill mod Spring 1 vs the i3, overall I feel that the i3 is have more advantage, they are a better IEM to me, a level step up.
Sub bass : definite win i3 over S1
mid bass : decay speed & tightness is a tad faster on i3
bass overall tuning on i3 much better, they have same mid bass hump, but S1 is much worse on mid and upper bass while i3 just a little bit. Both have clean bass that dont intrude into the mids area.
Mids : this is a true battle between these 2 IEMs, because both are shining on mids. i3 have slight edge on these, the planar save the day, being faster, accurate, great timbre makes the mids on i3 really shines, a bit forwarded but not overly so, far from harsh. Male vocals have decent weight and warmness, but on upper mids there is 3khz peak (the pinna gain is right on 3khz) this can be a little harsh on higher volume level, just a little, dont mid the 1khz scoop valley its not too audible. On other side, S1 have slight edge on details, more details while being fast but cant be compared to planar speed. More details on your face and background micro details is lightly better on S1, but with trade off a little harshness to compared to i3, this is a matter of preference between (smooth with very good details) or (very great details with little harshness). both have great timbre on mids despite S1 using BA on mids area. S1 mids a little bit more forward than i3.
Highs : again matter of preferences, i3 is treble safe and smooth for everyone (although graph showing 8khz boost, but S1 have have boosted 8khz that can be more heard than 8khz boost on i3. the 10 and 12khz on S1 is same with NX7 pro piezo, extended with more details but tonality isnt perfect because of this little humps and made tizziness (its a very soft tizzy, not fatiguing but its there you can differentiate with other non piezo IEMs, i guess its the piezo characteristic)
Soundstage is wide on both, but i3 have slight better tonality on soundstage and noticeable better depth to my ears. While imaging is sharp on both, but S1 maybe have slightly better instrument placement and separation, you cant tell though if not comparing directly with AB-ing.
Fit and ergonomics the i3 is much better despite their giant size. If default cable also put into consideration, S1 default cable is better but a bit stiff.
Graph S1 vs i3, credit to
@crinacle :
Cheers!
