• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero IEM Review

Rate this IEM

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 13 2.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 21 3.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 73 12.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 493 82.2%

  • Total voters
    600
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
That's why professionals like acoustic scientist Sean Olive, and acoustic engineer Oratory, control for this by standardizing the insertion force, and measuring at 5 different insertion depths respectively.
Careful there. There is a difference between research goals and real life. You have no idea how you are inserting the IEM in your ear. So the fact that research uses fixed insertion depth doesn't do you any good. As to averaging, that is a form of a filter and worst of the kind. It gets skewed heavily by outliers.
 

Peluvius

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 5, 2021
Messages
513
Likes
543
That's why professionals like acoustic scientist Sean Olive, and acoustic engineer Oratory, control for this by standardizing the insertion force, and measuring at 5 different insertion depths respectively.

My real life experience has been that the quality of the seal makes a much bigger difference than how far in you stick it. Depending on the tip you use they are not always directly related and there is a diminishing return once you have achieved a good seal. ie. a tip with a good seal won't sound better/much different if you push it in further.
 

earlevel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
545
Likes
776
Your right, I’ve just checked the floor in my office and they were under the seat.
Blimey these things are tiny, they should put them in a small envelope or plastic bag. I can imagine I’m not the only person to loose these. I’ve put them in a small sleeve so I don’t loose again :)
Kev
Hm, mine did come in a plastic bag...

IMG_6350.jpeg
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Hm, mine did come in a plastic bag...

View attachment 233335
That's good, maybe they've updated their packaging, mine didn't come in that bag, instead just in that tiny little plastic slip that you can just about see the metal discs resting in.
 

earlevel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 18, 2020
Messages
545
Likes
776
Now your next task: EQ using Crinacle's measurement instead of Amir's. For any given frequency range, if you're below the line, increase the PEQ. If you're above the line, cut. See if it sounds better when you make changes. That will tell you if getting closer to the target is for you or not.
Good advice, but I'll leave it as is. It would be one thing if the IEMs could remember their own EQ (wouldn't that be nice?), but otherwise for my purposes it's better to be a constant, whether they are plugged into my iPhone, computer (via DX7 Pro), mixer, or even directly out from an instrument. If I mainly listened to prerecorded music, and needed to (or preferred to) do it with IEMs or headphones, yes it would be something I might spend time optimizing (not just for my ears, but best fit for music I'd be listening to).

Not to derail or start a sidebar, just a comment: Like I said, over the years I haven't relied on headphones and the like for general music listening. One thing that struck me, first playing with some headphone EQ a year or so ago, and now with these, is how all over the map the listening experience is with pre-recorded music on 'phones. Of course there are binaural recordings, and the new Dolby Atmos related binaural processing. But for classic stereo mixes in general. Some classic tracks sound pretty good on 'phones. Some sound odd, wrong, or just lose some magic. Yes, I'm just saying that some mixes intended for speakers don't necessarily work out as well on 'phones. No, I'm not implying that they should sound good on both. I'm just saying...for those people who listen primarily on headphones...doesn't that drive you nuts? :p

I guess it's just something people get used to, if that's their preferred way to listen, and certainly that the way many listen, due to smart phones. And I expect the shift to binaurally processed tracks (via Dolby Atmos on Apple Music) changes things—more music specifically tuned to be listened to that way.
 

Robert C

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2017
Messages
90
Likes
91
Location
London, UK
Update: couldn't get a proper seal with any of the supplied tips. Dug out my trusty Creative EP-630 earbuds, which always give me a great seal using their stock large tips, and noticed that the Creative's tips are shallower than the Zero's. Swapped the tips over and, hey presto, perfect seal and comfortable fit!

The sound on these earphones is very good. I listen mainly to classical music and what I'm noticing most is a sense of space between the frequency bands, no sense of overlap or intrusion. The sound is 'clear', and bass is present when it's there on the recording. Contrary to what others are saying about detail being delivered 'to the brain', I actually think these IEMs present a small but apparent sound-stage slightly outside of my ears. Very pleasant indeed.

Now, how do I find out what type of tips Creative used so I can stock up?
Had a very enjoyable listening session at home with these yesterday.

Took them out again with me on my commute today, no issues this time with the seal or them coming loose from my ears when moving about. Train and bus sounds were sufficiently damped and I was able to enjoy Roussel's First Symphony at about 80% volume from my phone.

I think the only issue that I could identify this morning is that the shape of the IEM seems to channel wind directly into my ears where it gets amplified and muffles the music considerably. So these earphones probably aren't suitable for walking around in. Sitting still though outside would probably be fine, as was the aforementioned public transport.
 
Last edited:

nickdino

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2021
Messages
12
Likes
4
I‘m using an iPhone with their dongle adaptor, it powers it easily. Never have to go to max volume.

I wouldn‘t say the bass is ridiculous, it rolls off past 50Hz. It is though much better than what most any open-back headphone will give you.
Which version dongle is it? US/EU, usb-c/lightning?
 

DarwinDaDude

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2022
Messages
7
Likes
19
I was hoping some of you might have comments about the following story about the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEM. I had an interesting reaction to their sound vs. some of my other equipment and though others might want to comment. I'm a measurement based person, bought them based on the measurements Amir performed here, and this caused part of my surprise to their sound. Of course, I'm 59, and for my age, I have good hearing... but not perfect. Other than some frequency differences between R/L in my hearing, I'm pretty good up to about 13khz, which I'm very happy about. But we all know about the weaknesses of the human hearing system.

My speakers are Neumann KH80s. I have an Elac S10EQ sub, and I sit very close to my monitors and keep the volume relatively low to reduce room interaction. I also have Shure SRH1840 headphones, and a Schiit Magni Heresy headphone amp. I use a Dayton DSP-408 to distribute the analog signals, and perform EQ.

First the uninteresting part, I had trouble making them fit in my ears. They were not deep enough for my ear canals. I made them work by having different ... ear pieces. Which might be a problem sonically?

As far as testing them for sound, I used the song Dr. Feelgood by Motley Crue which was produced by Bob Rock. I'm a fan of Rock's production style and have listened to the 16 bit digital master of the original production hundreds of times. The song/album has gone through several remasters, none of which I've liked as much as the original production. Audio wise it's a messy song. There are competing arenas of sound in the song that I think Rock blends masterfully. I've listened to the song hundreds of times on various types of equipment. So I'm using that song and various bits and pieces of it to compare the "sound" of what I'm used to, and the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs.

They seem like they are very high quality. I was able to get them to fit using two different sized silicon ear pieces. My ear canals are deeper than the reach these provide. But once I got them functioning properly my first response was, "they sound good." But then very quickly alarm bells started going off about the differences between how I'm used to hearing the production of the Dr. Feelgood song, and what I was hearing. I thought the mid-low end was pretty good, but the high end I found... It's hard to describe. So, I decided to focus on one aspect of the sound I could define.

Part of the Dr. Feelgood song is Tommy Lee's playing on the cymbals. They are very large sounding and he does interesting things with the high hat during the song. Specifically I found that the "sound envelopes" of the cymbals was different from what I was used to. First of all they were quieter, and the envelopes, therefore sounded as if they started later and ended sooner, in the mix. The frequency response and distortion levels on these headphones are fantastic as shown in the measurements, but I heard the cymbals/high hat in a different way on the Truthear phones. I do not at all like non-audio words to describe audio phenomena. But simply, the cymbals on my Shure headphones were louder, and "larger." Perhaps them being louder meant I could hear more of the envelope of the levels of the cymbals better. I did not think that the high end on the Truthears was distorted, only that the levels were lower, and so the cymbals, at least, sounded... somewhat cut off.

That's all I have to say and would welcome some comments or suggestions. For me, my experience has been, if the measurements are right, and you buy it, then it sounds relatively transparent. These sound good, but ... not "transparent?" I question my ability to define any differences in detail, especially with the measurements, but would love any comments. I really like the Truthear headphones and would definitely recommend them as well, they sound very good.

Here is how I the frequency response set for each thing. For the Shure SRH1840s the frequency is set based on I think... Amir's measurement of them, or perhaps someone else's. The notch at the top was the main thing he pointed out. I like low end, and the SRH1840s were a bit shy there, and I do not over-stress these headphones volume wise. I tend to like a little less on the very high end, so tend to take that back a bit. The Elac subs have their own frequency response setting and I feed them everything below 80hz, crossed over with the Neumanns.

View attachment 233277

My speakers:
View attachment 233293

View attachment 233302

I was hoping some of you might have comments about the following story about the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEM. I had an interesting reaction to their sound vs. some of my other equipment and though others might want to comment. I'm a measurement based person, bought them based on the measurements Amir performed here, and this caused part of my surprise to their sound. Of course, I'm 59, and for my age, I have good hearing... but not perfect. Other than some frequency differences between R/L in my hearing, I'm pretty good up to about 13khz, which I'm very happy about. But we all know about the weaknesses of the human hearing system.

My speakers are Neumann KH80s. I have an Elac S10EQ sub, and I sit very close to my monitors and keep the volume relatively low to reduce room interaction. I also have Shure SRH1840 headphones, and a Schiit Magni Heresy headphone amp. I use a Dayton DSP-408 to distribute the analog signals, and perform EQ.

First the uninteresting part, I had trouble making them fit in my ears. They were not deep enough for my ear canals. I made them work by having different ... ear pieces. Which might be a problem sonically?

As far as testing them for sound, I used the song Dr. Feelgood by Motley Crue which was produced by Bob Rock. I'm a fan of Rock's production style and have listened to the 16 bit digital master of the original production hundreds of times. The song/album has gone through several remasters, none of which I've liked as much as the original production. Audio wise it's a messy song. There are competing arenas of sound in the song that I think Rock blends masterfully. I've listened to the song hundreds of times on various types of equipment. So I'm using that song and various bits and pieces of it to compare the "sound" of what I'm used to, and the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs.

They seem like they are very high quality. I was able to get them to fit using two different sized silicon ear pieces. My ear canals are deeper than the reach these provide. But once I got them functioning properly my first response was, "they sound good." But then very quickly alarm bells started going off about the differences between how I'm used to hearing the production of the Dr. Feelgood song, and what I was hearing. I thought the mid-low end was pretty good, but the high end I found... It's hard to describe. So, I decided to focus on one aspect of the sound I could define.

Part of the Dr. Feelgood song is Tommy Lee's playing on the cymbals. They are very large sounding and he does interesting things with the high hat during the song. Specifically I found that the "sound envelopes" of the cymbals was different from what I was used to. First of all they were quieter, and the envelopes, therefore sounded as if they started later and ended sooner, in the mix. The frequency response and distortion levels on these headphones are fantastic as shown in the measurements, but I heard the cymbals/high hat in a different way on the Truthear phones. I do not at all like non-audio words to describe audio phenomena. But simply, the cymbals on my Shure headphones were louder, and "larger." Perhaps them being louder meant I could hear more of the envelope of the levels of the cymbals better. I did not think that the high end on the Truthears was distorted, only that the levels were lower, and so the cymbals, at least, sounded... somewhat cut off.

That's all I have to say and would welcome some comments or suggestions. For me, my experience has been, if the measurements are right, and you buy it, then it sounds relatively transparent. These sound good, but ... not "transparent?" I question my ability to define any differences in detail, especially with the measurements, but would love any comments. I really like the Truthear headphones and would definitely recommend them as well, they sound very good.

Here is how I the frequency response set for each thing. For the Shure SRH1840s the frequency is set based on I think... Amir's measurement of them, or perhaps someone else's. The notch at the top was the main thing he pointed out. I like low end, and the SRH1840s were a bit shy there, and I do not over-stress these headphones volume wise. I tend to like a little less on the very high end, so tend to take that back a bit. The Elac subs have their own frequency response setting and I feed them everything below 80hz, crossed over with the Neumanns.

View attachment 233277

My speakers:
View attachment 233293

View attachment 233302
My subjective experience: based on bore size of the tips. The larger bore seemed to shift the frequency response to the right (more highs and less lows) while the narrow bore ones seemed to shift the curve to the left. i.e., increase in bass frequencies decreased highs. Would need corroboration with measurements. Cheers!
 

GaryH

Major Contributor
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
1,348
Likes
1,804
Careful there. There is a difference between research goals and real life. You have no idea how you are inserting the IEM in your ear. So the fact that research uses fixed insertion depth doesn't do you any good. As to averaging, that is a form of a filter and worst of the kind. It gets skewed heavily by outliers.
My real life experience has been that the quality of the seal makes a much bigger difference than how far in you stick it. Depending on the tip you use they are not always directly related and there is a diminishing return once you have achieved a good seal. ie. a tip with a good seal won't sound better/much different if you push it in further.
The pinnaless set-ups used by Harman and Oratory for IEMs allow for easy sealing. I believe they both also check to make sure a seal is achieved. So insertion depth likely only really affects the coupler resonance frequency (and possibly slight changes in bass independent of seal as explained by Oratory here). I would have thought we do insert IEMs with around the same force each time in real-world listening - enough force until there is some resistance but not too much to be painful. So that seems like a reasonable control when measuring.

As he says in the post I linked in a previous comment, Oratory measures at 5 insertion depths to identify the resonance frequency(s) (as I understand in order to account for that when developing his EQs). I don't know if he also averages the measurements, and if he does whether this is the arithmetic mean, geometric mean, median etc. (the latter two of course are less skewed by outliers), or whether he only takes an average when there is little variation (which I believe he does when reseating over-ear headphones).

Harman use averaging in their measurements e.g. from the over-ear paper (not sure whether it's the same for in-ears):
The final measurements were based on average of 3 re-seats of the headphone.
So if a measurement is being used to judge likely adherence to the Harman target (and for EQing to this target), a similar methodology to theirs used (including averaging) when developing that target would statistically yield a more accurate approximation. Perhaps @Sean Olive and @oratory1990 can comment further on their in-ear measurement methodology and the rationale behind it themselves.
 
Last edited:

oleg87

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
302
Likes
540
Location
California
Decided to give these a shot for $50 but so far I'm 0 for 2 with cheapo Harman-target hugging headphones. Both the AKG371 and these things are a bit too harsh in the ~4-6kHz region for my taste without EQ. My favorite/daily driver headphones are the HD600s with some EQ to correct their low end deficiency, though EQ presets that bring them closer to the Harman target (like Oratory1990's) sound just fine to my ears, so I'm not sure what's going on - am I just too used to their particular signature/FR dips?
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Decided to give these a shot for $50 but so far I'm 0 for 2 with cheapo Harman-target hugging headphones. Both the AKG371 and these things are a bit too harsh in the ~4-6kHz region for my taste without EQ. My favorite/daily driver headphones are the HD600s with some EQ to correct their low end deficiency, though EQ presets that bring them closer to the Harman target (like Oratory1990's) sound just fine to my ears, so I'm not sure what's going on - am I just too used to their particular signature/FR dips?
The Maiky76 EQ will reduce 1-6kHz by a shade under 2dB over that range, and it does tone down just a slight edge that the Crinacle Zero can have for me during longer listening - it is a more pleasing experience with the EQ, but still enjoyable without. I think your tonality is quite spot on if you like the HD600s with a little bit of low end added, so you'd probably be a candidate for benefitting from Maiky's EQ. If I was you I'd just omit his 13000Hz peak filter though (don't use that one, ignore it), it's not reliable to use sharp filters that high in the frequency range & additionally his EQ's are based on a 96Hz sample rate, so above 10kHz peak filters won't give the same result if you run at your standard 44kHz, which is another good reason not to use that particular filter.
 

SuicideSquid

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 20, 2022
Messages
699
Likes
1,647
Decided to give these a shot for $50 but so far I'm 0 for 2 with cheapo Harman-target hugging headphones. Both the AKG371 and these things are a bit too harsh in the ~4-6kHz region for my taste without EQ. My favorite/daily driver headphones are the HD600s with some EQ to correct their low end deficiency, though EQ presets that bring them closer to the Harman target (like Oratory1990's) sound just fine to my ears, so I'm not sure what's going on - am I just too used to their particular signature/FR dips?
These do exceed the target in that range by a couple dB, but also, everyone has different preferences. I also find headphones that hug the target a bit bright in that range - it doesn't bother me if I don't have access to EQ, but if I do, I dial back around 3-5kHz by about 2dB.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,765
Likes
3,703
As he says in the post I linked in a previous comment, Oratory measures at 5 insertion depths to identify the resonance frequency(s) (as I understand in order to account for that when developing his EQs). I don't know if he also averages the measurements, and if he does whether this is the arithmetic mean, geometric mean, median etc. (the latter two of course are less skewed by outliers), or whether he only takes an average when there is little variation (which I believe he does when reseating over-ear headphones).
Often times when averaging statistics, it is good to remove the outliers that are out beyond a certain %.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Often times when averaging statistics, it is good to remove the outliers that are out beyond a certain %.
I agree, and I've done that (by eye) when using EQ on a few of my headphones that have been based on me measuring them on my miniDSP EARS rig......I also understand that Oratory will ignore/remove some strange outliers certainly when it comes to determination of the bass frequency part of the measurement that he publishes (I think he's more lenient on the rest of the frequency range in terms of averaging all recorded measurements).

EDIT: I'm mainly referring to his over ear headphone measurement procedure, I know less about his IEM procedure.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 6, 2022
Messages
86
Likes
297
Location
Pacific Northwest, USA
The Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs have arrived! What follows is my 100% subjective, pseudo-review.

Disclaimer: I'm a professional classical musician, with many years of playing in professional orchestras, and as a result I have light hearing damage (incuding faint tinnitus) and my own idiosyncrstic audio preferences.

Further disclaimer: I like Amir's reviews and feel inclined to wish to agree with him.

Listening set up

Optical disc player: Yamaha Aventage BA-A1060 (CD, SACD, and Blu-ray)
Headphone amp: Schiit Magni Heresy

Audio selections

Béla Bartók: Dance Suite. Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Georg Solti. London/Decca (1981, CD).
Richard Strauss: Ein Heldenleben, Op. 40. Berliner Philharmoniker, Herbert von Karajan. Deutsche Grammophon (1959, remastered 2014, Blu-ray Pure Audio Disc).
George Frideric Handel: Messiah. Arnold Schoenberg Choir, Concentus Musicus Wien, Nikolaus Harnoncourt. Deutsche Harmonia Mundi (2005, SACD).
The Beatles: Abbey Road. EMI (1969, remastered 2009, CD).
Bob Dylan: Blood on the Tracks. Columbia (1974, remastered 2004, CD).
Maurice Ravel: Gaspard de la nuit. Martha Argerich. Deutsche Grammophon (1975, remastered 1995, CD).

Immediately ditching the waifu packaging nonsense, I was pleased with the build quality of the IEMs, and appreciated the inclusion of a nice faux leather case. I selected medium-sized ear pads, and carefully attached the delicate, polarized cable to the IEMs. Fit and comfort seemed fine.

My initial listening impression was, Wow! These are impressively detailed and clear, and certainly feature a substantial and impressive bass. Distortion levels and noise are definitely far below anything I could hear. The impression of soundstage width and depth was much better than I had expected.

But I soon began to wonder whether the Harmon Curve is actually a good fit for classical music: the sonic character has a bit of glare to my ears, I suppose corresponding to the curve peak at around 3khz. It's not always pleasant, with acoustic instruments. Or maybe I myself not a good fit for the curve? I think I prefer a flatter midrange. I'm tempted to pull down that 3khz peak a smidge and bring the midrange back slightly nearer to flat. The glare bothered me a bit less with vocal soloists in Handel's Messiah than with just the orchestra and choir, but it was something I noticed and didn't always find pleasing; this was the case with all three classical selections.

On to some rock and/or roll.

The sonic character of the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs as they snuggled the Harmon Curve like a blanket definitely pleased me more with popular music. I guess I shouldn't surprised by this, since classical music remains sadly a niche market, nearly drowned to oblivion by the so-called free market and pop music, and so the target of these products is overwhelmingly the vastly larger market. Are there classical music targeted IEMs? I doubt it.

But I will say I haven't enjoyed Abbey Road nearly this much in a good while, and these IEMs are responsible. With Blood on the Tracks, still Dylan's greatest work in my opinion, my thinking is definitely, yep, these are really, really good for popular music, and will surely please most people. They are clear, punchy, and exciting.

With classical, though? Hmm. I think I might want to at least pull down that 3khz peak some.

I concluded with Maurice Ravel's greatest work for solo piano, performed by the incomparable Martha Argerich, and the Harmon Curve suited the solo piano just fine to my ears. I'll have to do much further listening to see whether the "glare" is something I can truly live with happily for orchestral and choral.

Final comment: for the price, I'd say these are exceptional value. There is the question of how much the close adherence to the Harmon Curve is what you'd prefer. For me, it's definitely: these sound awesome for popular music! ...but perhaps the curve goes too far for classical?

Still, these are a pretty easy recommendation, especially for the price.
 

respice finem

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
1,867
Likes
3,774
The Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs have arrived! What follows is my 100% subjective, pseudo-review.

Disclaimer: I'm a professional classical musician, with many years of playing in professional orchestras, and as a result I have light hearing damage (incuding faint tinnitus) and my own idiosyncrstic audio preferences.

Further disclaimer: I like Amir's reviews and feel inclined to wish to agree with him.

Listening set up

Optical disc player: Yamaha Aventage BA-A1060 (CD, SACD, and Blu-ray)
Headphone amp: Schiit Magni Heresy

Audio selections

Béla Bartók: Dance Suite. Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Georg Solti. London/Decca (1981, CD).
Richard Strauss: Ein Heldenleben, Op. 40. Berliner Philharmoniker, Herbert von Karajan. Deutsche Grammophon (1959, remastered 2014, Blu-ray Pure Audio Disc).
George Frideric Handel: Messiah. Arnold Schoenberg Choir, Concentus Musicus Wien, Nikolaus Harnoncourt. Deutsche Harmonia Mundi (2005, SACD).
The Beatles: Abbey Road. EMI (1969, remastered 2009, CD).
Bob Dylan: Blood on the Tracks. Columbia (1974, remastered 2004, CD).
Maurice Ravel: Gaspard de la nuit. Martha Argerich. Deutsche Grammophon (1975, remastered 1995, CD).

Immediately ditching the waifu packaging nonsense, I was pleased with the build quality of the IEMs, and appreciated the inclusion of a nice faux leather case. I selected medium-sized ear pads, and carefully attached the delicate, polarized cable to the IEMs. Fit and comfort seemed fine.

My initial listening impression was, Wow! These are impressively detailed and clear, and certainly feature a substantial and impressive bass. Distortion levels and noise are definitely far below anything I could hear. The impression of soundstage width and depth was much better than I had expected.

But I soon began to wonder whether the Harmon Curve is actually a good fit for classical music: the sonic character has a bit of glare to my ears, I suppose corresponding to the curve peak at around 3khz. It's not always pleasant, with acoustic instruments. Or maybe I myself not a good fit for the curve? I think I prefer a flatter midrange. I'm tempted to pull down that 3khz peak a smidge and bring the midrange back slightly nearer to flat. The glare bothered me a bit less with vocal soloists in Handel's Messiah than with just the orchestra and choir, but it was something I noticed and didn't always find pleasing; this was the case with all three classical selections.

On to some rock and/or roll.

The sonic character of the Truthear Crinacle Zero IEMs as they snuggled the Harmon Curve like a blanket definitely pleased me more with popular music. I guess I shouldn't surprised by this, since classical music remains sadly a niche market, nearly drowned to oblivion by the so-called free market and pop music, and so the target of these products is overwhelmingly the vastly larger market. Are there classical music targeted IEMs? I doubt it.

But I will say I haven't enjoyed Abbey Road nearly this much in a good while, and these IEMs are responsible. With Blood on the Tracks, still Dylan's greatest work in my opinion, my thinking is definitely, yep, these are really, really good for popular music, and will surely please most people. They are clear, punchy, and exciting.

With classical, though? Hmm. I think I might want to at least pull down that 3khz peak some.

I concluded with Maurice Ravel's greatest work for solo piano, performed by the incomparable Martha Argerich, and the Harmon Curve suited the solo piano just fine to my ears. I'll have to do much further listening to see whether the "glare" is something I can truly live with happily for orchestral and choral.

Final comment: for the price, I'd say these are exceptional value. There is the question of how much the close adherence to the Harmon Curve is what you'd prefer. For me, it's definitely: these sound awesome for popular music! ...but perhaps the curve goes too far for classical?

Still, these are a pretty easy recommendation, especially for the price.
Interesting, esp. the "glare" part. Yes, preference curves don't have to fit everyone, and they're not even meant to, I guess.
I'm looking forward to (subjectively) test my pair on a "real" system, after the laptop output "epic fail".
 

Astoneroad

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 16, 2022
Messages
999
Likes
2,046
Location
a Cave in the desert
But I soon began to wonder whether the Harmon Curve is actually a good fit for classical music: the sonic character has a bit of glare to my ears, I suppose corresponding to the curve peak at around 3khz. It's not always pleasant, with acoustic instruments. Or maybe I myself not a good fit for the curve?
I'm really enjoying the fact that we can discuss the pros and cons of both the IEM and the curve to a broader range due to the price and Amir's review. This is the first time that I've ever actually heard it, and it looks like there are a lot of others. Without a $50 "tuning fork" as a common thread, this wouldn't get the sample size that's we're reading here. This should ripple through the future markets and a broader understanding for "the rest of us"... lol.
 

Jhify

Active Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
127
Likes
98
Never had IEMs of that kind before. Bought these to have an idea of what the (almost perfect) harman curve target sounds like. Impressions so far are positive especially for 50$, great details, low distortion but I wasn't impressed either. But the bass is too heavy for my taste. It sounds like 16 yo me who cranked up the subwoofer for fun when dad wasn't home. It's not neutral to my hears but it can be fun to listen to. I wonder why amirm call that "tonally correct" ? And why loudspeakers are judged to be flat neutral whereas headphones are rated on following a curve which is not ? I do assume there must be something about how sound from speakers interact with our ear shapes and other factors like distance, room, for the mids and highs but the difference with my studio monitors and HPs in the low end region is too different to my hears. I am genuinely intrigued.
I quickly tried a low shelf somewhere about -6db to -9db which was an improvement for my taste. Anyway, it's a great buy.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom