Best 'Bang for your buck' IEM - Poll

[majingotan]

Fit is indeed a very important characteristic for IEMs, and the ear tip is a significant part of it. Getting a good seal (no leak) is the first goal, and what works for an individual may not work for another individual. Beyond that, I am not sure the ear tip material & geometry are that important: in your example, is it really the tip bore size & stem length that cause the difference in perceived response, or the fact that different tips result in different IEM positions relative to your ear drum?

I have some IEMs where I could choose between a large tip resulting in shallow insertion, or a smaller tip resulting in deeper insertion. Subjectively, I hear differences (well... I think I hear differences!), but I suspect it has more to do with the tip enabling different insertion depth than the tip itself (material, construction, bore size & geometry).

How do you separate and determine the contributions to the perceived response of all these tip parameters?

Key is better seal = truer to the measured FR regardless of how deep the tip is inserted. Some materials are more flexible than others and that contributes to better seal to some ear canal shapes. Continue tip rolling until you find that perfect seal even under sweaty conditions. For me, Pentaconn Corier Brass tips have less flexible tip material, shallower fit than most tips, and a very rigid core to keep the seal perfect even under very humid conditions where sweat starts to break the seal between tip material and ear canal surface. For my anatomy, I find shallower tips seal far better on worst conditions than deep sealing tips

 

[markanini]

You have six sets? So the marketing was successful on you.

If you count browsing third party graphs as marketing(?), that was the deciding factor for me each time.

To clarify, if KZ's resources would be better spent on real ears evaluating their products, at least it would be better for the consumer, instead of their infamous marketing.

 

[USER]

Speaking of 7Hz x Crinacle Zero: 2 in the context of best bang for your buck:

If you think the new Moondrop x Crinacle DUSK is the improved version you may want to check out the Artti R2 for 1/9th the price! **For me** the slight bump between 4-6kHz (which you can control with tips) makes the Artti R2s the superior IEM. You may also get a supposedly better increased response above 15kHz too, lol!

 

[digitalfrost]

Speaking of 7Hz x Crinacle Zero: 2 in the context of best bang for your buck:

If you think the new Moondrop x Crinacle DUSK is the improved version you may want to check out the Artti R2 for 1/9th the price! **For me** the slight bump between 4-6kHz (which you can control with tips) makes the Artti R2s the superior IEM. You may also get a supposedly better increased response above 15kHz too, lol!

View attachment 365620View attachment 365621

View attachment 365622View attachment 365623View attachment 365624View attachment 365626

Very interesting. For the price I could not resist and also have ordered them.

 

[USER]

Very interesting. For the price I could not resist and also have ordered them.

I am impressed by them. I even like the looks of them more than I thought I would. The body is surprisingly small. Smaller than the 7Hz Salnotes Zeros, which I appreciate. I don't love the tips that come with them, but of course everyone has different fit and comfort needs. Luckily they are compatible with my Moondrop Spring Tips and the R2s work very well with them for my taste.

Edit: These may have above average distortion (for 2024 standards) above 4kHz, but my set-up is not dependable. Measured at 94 dB (450Hz). Specs say "<1.5%." So far I can't hear it (not that I would expect to) and luckily I won't ever be EQing these up there.

Edit 2 + 3: My initial results in white seem wrong because of a settings in REW. The second one in black is likely the best I can do and those results are good with everything under 1%. However, my results are still likely a bit worse than what someone like Amir can get with a better measurement set-up. In the end I think these perform well with distortion. See the next page more more information.

I was relieved to find good channel matching. It's now a bit of stressful to measure IEMs for the first time as issues will be made known and you can't unsee them!

 

[MayaTlab]

My point is I never assumed harshness had to do with 5k+. Or else I would not have proposed leakage as the problem.

I gave my reasoning about the length mode above. They like the ie200. Just look at its response on the bk 5128 compared with the zero 2, with is attached above. Thus I doubt that it is length mode that is the problem.

I don't understand how you think you can characterise how these IEMs behave under different length modes when looking at a single curve on a single fixture ?
You're right not to assume that "harshness" has anything to do with what is happening above 5kHz - and definitely right to suggest that leakage could be a factor, but you're also making an assumption that whatever is called "harsh" by different people here necessarily arises from leakage when other plausible factors come into play.

I think that it would be quite helpful for some people here to show how IEMs behave when exposed to different factors such as ear canal volume or length, or eardrum impedance.

Fit is indeed a very important characteristic for IEMs, and the ear tip is a significant part of it. Getting a good seal (no leak) is the first goal, and what works for an individual may not work for another individual. Beyond that, I am not sure the ear tip material & geometry are that important: in your example, is it really the tip bore size & stem length that cause the difference in perceived response, or the fact that different tips result in different IEM positions relative to your ear drum?

I have some IEMs where I could choose between a large tip resulting in shallow insertion, or a smaller tip resulting in deeper insertion. Subjectively, I hear differences (well... I think I hear differences!), but I suspect it has more to do with the tip enabling different insertion depth than the tip itself (material, construction, bore size & geometry).

How do you separate and determine the contributions to the perceived response of all these tip parameters?

I think that it could be both. The frequency at which the length mode occurs isn't necessarily 1:1 related to the distance between the eardrum (or mic in a coupler) and a specific physical reference point on an IEM such as, among others, the end of the ear tip or the driver.

I've done a few experiments on that subject, here's one of them. I used the JBL Run with the small eartip and inserted it repeatedly in a clone coupler, with the eartip either naked, or assembled with a silicone ring that narrows its inner bore, but stays flush with the tip's end :

What you see below is nine different individual seatings each (IEM fully removed and put back in the coupler at roughly the same physical distance - so trying as best as I could to keep the reference points such as the driver or eartip's end at a constant distance from the coupler's mic) for each configuration (naked - blue traces - vs silicone ring - red traces), the silicone ring having been removed and put back in three times (so 3x3), and the difference between the averages :

Please mind that I did not bother with putty to maintain the IEM in the coupler, so the small wiggles around 200-300Hz should be ignored.

In that test the difference is not entirely consistent with a change in insertion depth / ear canal length BTW, it's "its own thing".

This rather is a theoretical construct and I don't think that the modification here is representative of how eartip designs actually vary, but I think that it's a reasonable approach to try to keep some variables as constant as possible and to provide some answers to your question.

 

[InfiniteJester]

I am impressed by them. I even like the looks of them more than I thought I would. The body is a little smaller than the 7Hz Zeros, which I appreciate. I don't love the tips that come with them, but of course everyone has different fit and comfort needs. Luckily they are compatible with my Moondrop Spring Tips and the R2s work very well with them for my taste.

Edit: There may above average distortion (for 2024 standards) above 4kHz, but my set-up is not dependable. Measured at 94 dB (450Hz). So far I can't hear it and luckily I won't ever be EQing these up there.

View attachment 365640

I was relieved to find good channel matching. It's now a bit of stressful to measure IEMs for the first time as issues will be made known and you can't unsee them!

So ARTTI has distortion issues... 2% is very high in an IEM these days.

Maybe that is why R1 sound so unrefined and textured at higher frequencies, although the effect is not necessarily bad, it works for analog music.

 

[Doltonius]

I don't understand how you think you can characterise how these IEMs behave under different length modes when looking at a single curve on a single fixture ?
You're right not to assume that "harshness" has anything to do with what is happening above 5kHz - and definitely right to suggest that leakage could be a factor, but you're also making an assumption that whatever is called "harsh" by different people here necessarily arises from leakage when other plausible factors come into play.

I am not saying necessarily. I am saying most likely it is leakage. this is not just a theoretically point, but an inference drawn from the words that they used to describe their perception. it is so harsh for a person that enjoys the ie200 that it is unlistenable for more than a few minutes, and they don't mention the bloatedness when the delci is described as bloated. thus highly unlikely that this is just length mode problems and highly likely that leakage is involved.

 

[USER]

So ARTTI has distortion issues... 2% is very high in an IEM these days.

Maybe that is why R1 sound so unrefined and textured at higher frequencies, although the effect is not necessarily bad, it works for analog music.

It's only high because we have reached the ability to manufacture IEMs with effectively zero distortion for almost no money. This is a very recent development. Remember though that many fancy IEM companies won't take advantage of this because those drivers are considered "cheap." Take a look at the new Moondrop x Crinacle DUSK for the sheer gall of unnecessarily playing with inferior, esoteric drivers and failing to reach their target response in order to upsell to suggestible audiophiles. For home audio (though it may be different for IEMs but I have not read anything about that specifically) a target for high quality distortion in stress tests like 96 dB is <3% so we are still in a good place here. (Of course, with speakers it is usually bass that distorts faster, so it may not be apples to apples but also distortion in the most audible area is well below 1% here.) I would consider 94 dB as louder than what is safe to play for long. To think about this in a real world scenario I measured at 90 volume and am currently now loudly playing at 52 so I am definitely not at 2%.

Unless you know the distortion measurements and have conducted hearing tests that show you what percentage distortion you can hear I would refrain from making judgements about hearing something like 2% and calling it unrefined or untextured.

Edit: that being said I can understand if someone sees 2% and considers that a deal breaker. Totally respect that. But in my case, these are the best IEMs that I have heard with that tuning so I can live with it, especially as I don't hear it. Plus, I got them on sale for $32 .

 

[InfiniteJester]

It's only high because we have reached the ability to manufacture IEMs with effectively zero distortion for almost no money. This is a very recent development. Remember though that many fancy IEM companies won't take advantage of this because those drivers are considered "cheap." Take a look at the new Moondrop x Crinacle DUSK for the sheer gall of unnecessarily playing with inferior, esoteric drivers and failing to reach their target response in order to upsell to suggestible audiophiles. For home audio (though it may be different for IEMs but I have not read anything about that specifically) a target for high quality distortion in stress tests like 96 dB is <3% so we are still in a good place here. (Of course, with speakers it is usually bass that distorts faster, so it may not be apples to apples.) I would consider 94 dB as louder than what is safe to play for long. To think about this in a real world scenario I measured at 90 volume and am currently now loudly playing at 52 so I am definitely not at 2%.

Unless you know the distortion measurements and have conducted hearing tests that show you what percentage distortion you can hear I would refrain from making judgements about hearing something like 2% and calling it unrefined or untextured.

I have performed the well-known test online. I'm able to hear very clearly 0,5% distortion in a tone.

I can't distinguish lower. Either because of my hearing or because of the limits of the gear I was using at the time.

But I know that music masks distortion and I haven't tested that.

2% distortion is very audible for me in a pure sine tone.

You can check it yourself (with other IEMs, of course).

THD - Total Harmonic Distortion - Test Tones

Audio Test Tones : understanding Total Harmonic Distortion

www.audiocheck.net

 

[USER]

I have performed the well-known test online. I'm able to hear very clearly 0,5% distortion in a tone.

I can't distinguish lower. Either because of my hearing or because of the limits of the gear I was using at the time.

But I know that music masks distortion and I haven't tested that.

2% distortion is very audible for me in a pure sine tone.

You can check it yourself (with other IEMs, of course).

THD - Total Harmonic Distortion - Test Tones

Audio Test Tones : understanding Total Harmonic Distortion

www.audiocheck.net

Yes, I've taken the test and I am certainly good at hearing distortion in the most audible realm (let's say 800-4kHz). But 1kHz sine tones are amongst the easiest to distinguish and I can do that easily. But 6 and 8kHz is beyond that and I do much worse more quickly especially when it comes to 2nd and 3rd harmonics further up. I know that in more elaborate tests I fared worse than I thought I would.

I think there is a better Harman online test. Let me see if I can find it...

 

[InfiniteJester]

Yes, I've taken the test and I am worse than I thought I would be! I am certainly good at hearing distortion is the most audible realm (let's say 800-4kHz). 1kHz is amongst the easiest to distinguish and I can do that easily. But 6 and 8kHz is beyond that and I do much worse more quickly especially when it comes to 2nd and 3rd harmonics further up.

How old are you?

I'm 31 and I already feel some sparkle permanently gone from music.

 

[USER]

How old are you?

I'm 31 and I already feel some sparkle permanently gone from music.

43 and I spent my 20s in record shops and rock clubs. Shockingly my hearing is better than it should be! I can still hear 15-16kHz! Though probably not as well as before, lol.

 

[InfiniteJester]

43 and I spent my 20s in record shops and rock clubs. Shockingly my hearing is better than it should be! I can still hear 15-16kHz! Though probably not as well as before, lol.

Strangely, I needed glasses since I was a kid, but my vision kept improving as I became an adult and I have had perfect vision for the last 6 or so years.

I wish my hearing experienced the same. Being in concerts and playing music for years gifted me with a tinnitus in my right ear.

 

[CedarX]

If you count browsing third party graphs as marketing(?), that was the deciding factor for me each time.

To clarify, if KZ's resources would be better spent on real ears evaluating their products, at least it would be better for the consumer.

I probably have a few dozens of KZ & CCA IEMs. To me they are the "fast fashion" brand of IEMs: each one is a different combination of look, shape, technology, FR, etc.
Some I like..., other... not so much...
But when KZ does it right, each new IEM is like discovering a new flavor of my preferred music. Even when KZ does it wrong (not uncommon!), finding out what's wrong and why is very educational and interesting for me: What is it that I don't like? Why? Can I fix it with EQ?
KZ IEMs are usually cheap... None of their IEMs may claim the "best bang for your buck" title (though some like the recent Castor's or Trio are pretty darn good), but as a whole, if you consider them as a kind of subscription, they are not uninteresting either !!!

 

[markanini]

Yes, I've taken the test and I am certainly good at hearing distortion in the most audible realm (let's say 800-4kHz). But 1kHz sine tones are amongst the easiest to distinguish and I can do that easily. But 6 and 8kHz is beyond that and I do much worse more quickly especially when it comes to 2nd and 3rd harmonics further up. I know that in more elaborate tests I fared worse than I thought I would.

I think there is a better Harman online test. Let me see if I can find it...

Distortion products above 8kHz are outside the the hearing range of a healthy adult. Your results are expected. Everyone should be encourages to try empirical experiments like this for them selves and save their imagination for story time.

 

[InfiniteJester]

I probably have a few dozens of KZ & CCA IEMs. To me they are the "fast fashion" brand of IEMs: each one is a different combination of look, shape, technology, FR, etc.
Some I like..., other... not so much...
But when KZ does it right, each new IEM is like discovering a new flavor of my preferred music. Even when KZ does it wrong (not uncommon!), finding out what's wrong and why is very educational and interesting for me: What is it that I don't like? Why? Can I fix it with EQ?
KZ IEMs are usually cheap... None of their IEMs may claim the "best bang for your buck" title (though some like the recent Castor's or Trio are pretty darn good), but as a whole, if you consider them as a kind of subscription, they are not uninteresting either !!!

I have never tried any KZ or CCA, I almost bought the AS24, but I was dissuaded here because of the history of false drivers of the company.

They seem to be doing better now. I may try the CCA Hydro if the reviews are positive. 2 DDs + 8 BAs may provide an interesting flavour.

 

[CedarX]

I have never tried any KZ or CCA, I almost bought the AS24, but I was dissuaded here because of the history of false drivers of the company.

They seem to be doing better now. I may try the CCA Hydro if the reviews are positive. 2 DDs + 8 BAs may provide an interesting flavour.

I’m not sure if the false drivers story is entirely true… Poor QC, absolutely! Some of these false drivers (BAs) were actually plugged by glue, other were not soldered correctly or at all. And as for the very small measurable impact of these drivers in some case… yes, no different from any other brand, it’s the nature of using multiple drivers to fine-tune an IEM.
Not trying to excuse KZ !!! They are a “cheap-oriented” brand.

 

[InfiniteJester]

I’m not sure if the false story drivers is entirely true… Poor QC, absolutely! Some of these false drivers (BAs) were actually plugged by glue, other were not soldered correctly or at all. And as for the very small measurable impact of these drivers in some case… yes, no different from any other brand, it’s the nature of using multiple drivers to fine-tune an IEM.
Not trying to excuse KZ !!! They are a “cheap-oriented” brand.

Well, the Hydro will be $130 with the "good" cable.

Not ultracheap anymore. Although obviously cheap for this kind of configuration.

 

[CedarX]

Well, the Hydro will be $130 with the "good" cable.

Not ultracheap anymore. Although obviously cheap for this kind of configuration.

I’ll pass this one: 1. I’m not sure I trust KZ/CCA enough to deliver quality worth the price point, and 2. I’m not sure what a $130 IEM brings that can’t be had with say a $50 or even $25 IEM.
And if it is only to “taste” a new tuning flavor, then that’s too much money for me.

EDIT - Side comment about the CCA Hydro tuning micro-switches: I know the Moondrop Dusk DSP cable is not very well perceived when seen as a “DSP”—crappy app, limited settings, artifacts, etc. But if you consider that cable as the electronic equivalent of these micro-switches, I think it is a much better proposal…. A 7Hz Zero or Zero:2 + FreeDSP cable is still a winner for me!