[DUNU-Topsound]

Will the Titan S be one tire up than Falcon pro? Or vice-versa?

TITAN has always been our entry-level model series. The TITAN S continues that tradition.

 

[kmmbd]

TITAN has always been our entry-level model series. The TITAN S continues that tradition.

The original Titan 1 is still one of my most favorite IEMs under $100, the staging and imaging is exceptional in that price point. Hopefully the Titan S (or a subsequent model) upgrades on that front.

 

[kmmbd]

Just noticed that the Zen Pro graph is out already (courtesy of @Precogvision). Seems to have "fixed" the upper treble reach though I think it's lost some of the signature warmth of the OG Zen in the process. Nonetheless, something's gotta give. Keen to hear and compare vs the original (still my daily driver alongside UM MEST).

 

[Scubadevils]

I'm curious but a bit miffed to see an upgrade less than 8 months after Zen was launched! Depends I guess on whether Pro carries a price premium and they both remain current lineup... I'd probably end up buying it then

I don't use Zen as much of late but definitely has a special place in my heart as my first love IEM, I'll never forget the unboxing experience when it arrived, absolutely top class.

 

[Queen6]

I'm curious but a bit miffed to see an upgrade less than 8 months after Zen was launched! Depends I guess on whether Pro carries a price premium and they both remain current lineup... I'd probably end up buying it then

I don't use Zen as much of late but definitely has a special place in my heart as my first love IEM, I'll never forget the unboxing experience when it arrived, absolutely top class.

Personally I applaud DUNU for advancing & progressing the range, learning and moving forward. Zen is hardly a poor listen, nor is Zen Pro likely to be magnitudes better more the enhancement to an already very good single DD IEM.

Q-6

 

[kmmbd]

I'm curious but a bit miffed to see an upgrade less than 8 months after Zen was launched! Depends I guess on whether Pro carries a price premium and they both remain current lineup... I'd probably end up buying it then

I don't use Zen as much of late but definitely has a special place in my heart as my first love IEM, I'll never forget the unboxing experience when it arrived, absolutely top class.

I also wondered why they went through with an update less than a year after release, esp since the Luna is still a top dog in the single-DD contender and the closest upgrade to Zen is the Sennheiser IE900 that costs significantly more.

It appears that the driver limitation on the OG Zen was surpassed and thus Dunu went on with the newer gen driver since it was too good to be kept under wraps. However, the tuning difference is subtle yet noticeable enough (from the impressions post), and thus I guess this is more of a "remaster" of the Zen's signature rather than a wholesale upgrade that renders the OG below par.

 

[frix]

You can bet that a version with "pro" in its naming is likely more expensive. Though it looks like they are really trying to improve it based on the feedback.

 

[Scubadevils]

Personally I applaud DUNU for advancing & progressing the range, learning and moving forward. Zen is hardly a poor listen, nor is Zen Pro likely to be magnitudes better more the enhancement to an already very good single DD IEM.

Q-6

True, I guess why should they hold back if they've new and improved technology!

 

[antdroid]

I tried out the new Zen Pro right after precog. It has a better tonal balance than the original one to me. Fixed the upper mids "shoutiness" that I didn't like. It does come at a cost of some dampened dynamics, but both of these are still my favorite single DD IEMs that I've tried.

 

[Codename john]

That's the nature of the beast. Always the way with new tech. Same happens with smartphones. I suppose this is like the ZEN ultra. I never had a problem with the spike in the upper mids. After a while the drivers seem to settle or I got used to it. As much as I am slightly miffed the new ZEN as appeared so soon after the original I get that competition is fierce. You snooze you lose

 

[M3NTAL]

I look forward to hearing from people who have heard the Dunu ECLIPSƎ's and the IE900. I had a little bit of time with the IE900 and enjoyed quite a bit about them, but a more balanced signature would be welcomed.

 

[DUNU-Topsound]

It seems folks are already discussing the ZEN PRO. We'll make a formal announcement about it in the coming days, and we'll address why we decided to release it so close in succession to the ZEN then.

The short answer is that ZEN is all about introspection, and ZEN PRO is a manifestation of our desire to continually look inward and reexamine ourselves. Even as we were releasing ZEN back in December, we were already looking at how the ECLIPSƎ driver could be improved upon.

Without getting into the details, the driver originally introduced in the ZEN has been reworked in a number of small but critical areas. A major question we wished to have answered was whether all this effort brought about a listening experience that was commensurate. Thus, we designed a small pilot study intended to examine:

1. whether individuals felt the ZEN PRO was better than ZEN (tested with 20 different descriptors of various aspects of sound)
2. whether individuals were consistent with their blind listening impressions, before and after seeing a frequency response curve
3. how we can further evolve the ZEN platform for derivative products in the future

To do so, we designed three different lengthy questionnaires. The first established baseline characteristics of the listeners' assessments of the original ZEN; the second polled the listeners on their assessments of the ZEN PRO following a listening session (blinded to measurements of the ZEN PRO and blinded to details of the product). The final component asked listeners to reflect on the consistency of their findings after having seen measurements of the ZEN PRO, and after having been briefed on details of the product.

We want to take this moment to thank @Precogvision , @MRSallee , @antdroid , and @Resolve for taking their time to participate in our small but time-consuming pilot study.

We recruited these four reviewers because:

1. they have great (stellar) reputations within the portable audio community and are well-regarded for their critical listening skills, as well as their honest critiques on audio products,
2. they all have their own electroacoustic measurement apparatuses,
3. they all have had prior experience listening to and reviewing the ZEN,
4. they were all located within a 1000 mile radius of one another, making shipping in quick succession a possibility.

Needless to say, the study went smoothly, and we hope to expand the scope of a study of this type to future products, with more study subjects.

Initial analyses on the collected data indicate a clear positive preference for most aspects of ZEN PRO's sound, but fall outside the realm of statistical significance, likely because of the extremely low number of study subjects (n=4).

The critical blinded listening assessment was most revealing of the differences in sound characteristics between the ZEN and ZEN PRO. Respondents were asked to grade, on a scale of −5 to +5, how ZEN PRO performed relative to ZEN. Positive numbers favor ZEN PRO more strongly, and negative numbers favor ZEN more strongly.

The mean, standard deviation, and 95% confidence intervals (calculated via T-score with n-1 degrees of freedom) for the 20 categories of sound are tabulated below.

Sound Descriptor​	x̅ ± σ​	95% CI (df = 3)​
Overall Tonal Balance​	+ 1.75 ± 1.50​	(−0.63, +4.14)​
Bass Texture​	− 1.00 ± 0.82​	(−2.29, +0.29)​
Bass Layering​	− 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−2.27, +0.77)​
Bass Extension​	− 0.50 ± 0.58​	(−1.41, +0.42)​
Midrange Resolution​	+ 0.75 ± 1.50​	(−1.63, +3.13)​
Excessive Vocal Forwardness​	+ 1.00 ± 0.00​	(+1.00, +1.00)​
Vocal Realism​	+ 1.25 ± 0.96​	(−0.27, +2.77)​
‘Shout'​	+ 1.25 ± 0.96​	(−0.27, +2.77)​
Sibilance​	+ 0.25 ± 2.50​	(−3.72, +4.22)​
Harshness​	+ 1.00 ± 1.41​	(−1.25, +3.25)​
Treble Presence​	+ 0.25 ± 1.71​	(−2.46, +2.96)​
Treble Extension​	+ 1.00 ± 2.16​	(−2.43, +4.43)​
Treble Smoothness​	+ 1.50 ± 1.00​	(−0.09, +3.09)​
Timbral Realism​	+ 0.50 ± 0.58​	(−0.41, +1.41)​
Dynamic Range Reproduction​	− 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−2.27, +0.77)​
Soundstage Size​	+ 0.25 ± 0.50​	(−0.54, +1.04)​
Imaging​	+ 0.75 ± 0.50​	(−0.04, +1.54)​
‘Air'​	+ 1.00 ± 1.63​	(−1.59, +3.59)​
Transient Speed​	+ 0.25 ± 0.50​	(−0.54, +1.04)​
Overall Resolution​	+ 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−0.77, +2.27)​

16 of 20 sound categories were signed as positive, indicating a mostly positive preference for ZEN PRO. Non-parametric statistical tests have not yet been performed, and thus no conclusions have been drawn.

However, on an informal level, the data is a positive sign for us, as it suggests we did substantially improve on the ZEN PRO relative to the original ZEN, even with a very limited sample size.

 

[antdroid]

I look forward to hearing from people who have heard the Dunu ECLIPSƎ's and the IE900. I had a little bit of time with the IE900 and enjoyed quite a bit about them, but a more balanced signature would be welcomed.

I think @Precogvision has heard the IE900 and all the recent Dunu DD's.

 

[FcConstruct]

It seems folks are already discussing the ZEN PRO. We'll make a formal announcement about it in the coming days, and we'll address why we decided to release it so close in succession to the ZEN then.

The short answer is that ZEN is all about introspection, and ZEN PRO is a manifestation of our desire to continually look inward and reexamine ourselves. Even as we were releasing ZEN back in December, we were already looking at how the ECLIPSƎ driver could be improved upon.

Without getting into the details, the driver originally introduced in the ZEN has been reworked in a number of small but critical areas. A major question we wished to have answered was whether all this effort brought about a listening experience that was commensurate. Thus, we designed a small pilot study intended to examine:

1. whether individuals felt the ZEN PRO was better than ZEN (tested with 20 different descriptors of various aspects of sound)
2. whether individuals were consistent with their blind listening impressions, before and after seeing a frequency response curve
3. how we can further evolve the ZEN platform for derivative products in the future

To do so, we designed three different lengthy questionnaires. The first established baseline characteristics of the listeners' assessments of the original ZEN; the second polled the listeners on their assessments of the ZEN PRO following a listening session (blinded to measurements of the ZEN PRO and blinded to details of the product). The final component asked listeners to reflect on the consistency of their findings after having seen measurements of the ZEN PRO, and after having been briefed on details of the product.

We want to take this moment to thank @Precogvision , @MRSallee , @antdroid , and @Resolve for taking their time to participate in our small but time-consuming pilot study.

We recruited these four reviewers because:

1. they have great (stellar) reputations within the portable audio community and are well-regarded for their critical listening skills, as well as their honest critiques on audio products,
2. they all have their own electroacoustic measurement apparatuses,
3. they all have had prior experience listening to and reviewing the ZEN,
4. they were all located within a 1000 mile radius of one another, making shipping in quick succession a possibility.

Needless to say, the study went smoothly, and we hope to expand the scope of a study of this type to future products, with more study subjects.

Initial analyses on the collected data indicate a clear positive preference for most aspects of ZEN PRO's sound, but fall outside the realm of statistical significance, likely because of the extremely low number of study subjects (n=4).

The critical blinded listening assessment was most revealing of the differences in sound characteristics between the ZEN and ZEN PRO. Respondents were asked to grade, on a scale of −5 to +5, how ZEN PRO performed relative to ZEN. Positive numbers favor ZEN PRO more strongly, and negative numbers favor ZEN more strongly.

The mean, standard deviation, and 95% confidence intervals (calculated via T-score with n-1 degrees of freedom) for the 20 categories of sound are tabulated below.

Sound Descriptor​	x̅ ± σ​	95% CI (df = 3)​
Overall Tonal Balance​	+ 1.75 ± 1.50​	(−0.63, +4.14)​
Bass Texture​	− 1.00 ± 0.82​	(−2.29, +0.29)​
Bass Layering​	− 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−2.27, +0.77)​
Bass Extension​	− 0.50 ± 0.58​	(−1.41, +0.42)​
Midrange Resolution​	+ 0.75 ± 1.50​	(−1.63, +3.13)​
Excessive Vocal Forwardness​	+ 1.00 ± 0.00​	(+1.00, +1.00)​
Vocal Realism​	+ 1.25 ± 0.96​	(−0.27, +2.77)​
‘Shout'​	+ 1.25 ± 0.96​	(−0.27, +2.77)​
Sibilance​	+ 0.25 ± 2.50​	(−3.72, +4.22)​
Harshness​	+ 1.00 ± 1.41​	(−1.25, +3.25)​
Treble Presence​	+ 0.25 ± 1.71​	(−2.46, +2.96)​
Treble Extension​	+ 1.00 ± 2.16​	(−2.43, +4.43)​
Treble Smoothness​	+ 1.50 ± 1.00​	(−0.09, +3.09)​
Timbral Realism​	+ 0.50 ± 0.58​	(−0.41, +1.41)​
Dynamic Range Reproduction​	− 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−2.27, +0.77)​
Soundstage Size​	+ 0.25 ± 0.50​	(−0.54, +1.04)​
Imaging​	+ 0.75 ± 0.50​	(−0.04, +1.54)​
‘Air'​	+ 1.00 ± 1.63​	(−1.59, +3.59)​
Transient Speed​	+ 0.25 ± 0.50​	(−0.54, +1.04)​
Overall Resolution​	+ 0.75 ± 0.96​	(−0.77, +2.27)​

16 of 20 sound categories were signed as positive, indicating a mostly positive preference for ZEN PRO. Non-parametric statistical tests have not yet been performed, and thus no conclusions have been drawn.

However, on an informal level, the data is a positive sign for us, as it suggests we did substantially improve on the ZEN PRO relative to the original ZEN, even with a very limited sample size.

Wow this is great. Love to see statistical analysis like this. Wish more companies would be this transparent about how they approach customer feedback.

 

[M3NTAL]

I think @Precogvision has heard the IE900 and all the recent Dunu DD's.

I kind of figured it would be basically you four that DUNU chose. You guys are all doing solid and appreciated work for the community. I hope DUNU doesn't go fully into the design-by-community route and still keeps some of their heart and passion in it also. The driver tech here is really something neat.