• 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!

7Hz x Crinacle Zero:2 IEM Review

Rate this IEM:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 4 1.1%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 10 2.7%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 39 10.7%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 311 85.4%

  • Total voters
    364
OMG I got them recently and they were just ok but with these EQ settings they are fantastic.. BASS ftw!
 
Last edited:
So (@amirm, et. al.), on a measurement-centric audio forum we're seeing vanishingly low measured THD levels for this product across the audible spectrum (to include sub bass) at 114 dBSPL, and yet we still have qualitative reports on the interwebs and this thread that the EW200 and other proximally-but-higher-priced earphones technically outperform this. What metric are we missing here to bridge the quantitative/qualitative gap? For transducers, it's not tube/last-gen-R2R-DAC second-order harmonic distortion preferences, like you'd find elsewhere.

Can we find an additional measurable correlate?
 
So (@amirm, et. al.), on a measurement-centric audio forum we're seeing vanishingly low measured THD levels for this product across the audible spectrum (to include sub bass) at 114 dBSPL, and yet we still have qualitative reports on the interwebs and this thread that the EW200 and other proximally-but-higher-priced earphones technically outperform this. What metric are we missing here to bridge the quantitative/qualitative gap? For transducers, it's not tube/last-gen-R2R-DAC second-order harmonic distortion preferences, like you'd find elsewhere.

Can we find an additional measurable correlate?
For IEMs, there are still many problems with the metrics. There's variability in individual's ear canals, and the variability in test rigs too. And there's fit, comfort, seal and plethora of different tips too. It's not been sorted yet. Time will tell if all those problems can be adequately addressed, but if they can, it will be measurements that got us there.
 
Last edited:
For IEMs, there are still many problems with the metrics. There's variability in individual's ear canals, and the variability in test rigs too. And there's fit, comfort, seal and plethora of different tips too. It's not been sorted yet. Time will tell if all those problems can be adequately addressed, but if they can, it will be measurements that got us there.
I get that there are ergonomic variations with IEMs in particular, but the bridge between qualitative/quantitative thresholds with transducer systems is ever-present. I’m convinced there are still measurements to be developed that can be standardized to help consumers identify better candidates for purchase.

If this particular one is shown to have such fidelity to the source, once tuned, are ergonomics, psychoacoustics, and cognitive bias really the difference- or can we find other measurable differences? Even this thread has many commenters with middling opinions of its perceived relative “technicalities”, despite its superior measured performance.
 
Last edited:
I get that there are ergonomic variations with IEMs in particular, but the bridge between qualitative/quantitative thresholds with transducer systems is ever-present. I’m convinced there are still measurements to be developed that can be standardized to help consumers identify better candidates for purchase.

If this particular one is shown to have such fidelity to the source, once tuned, are ergonomics, psychoacoustics, and cognitive bias really the difference- or can we find other measurable differences? Even this thread has many commenters with middling opinions of its perceived relative “technicalities”, despite its superior measured performance.
If at your eardrums you are getting the frequency response you perceive as natural (it's really useful to have live acoustic music as a reference) with inaudible distortion at a realistic volume, you're all set. And you can get that with simple 1 DD designs for around $20, especially if you can provide a bit of EQ. Further spending gets you bling, or special attributes like extreme noise isolation (Ety).
 
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.

For me it works a lot better than both Amir's and Maiky's filter designs. It adds that last 10% of realism without any noticeable drawbacks.

I've put the required preamp into the file name, but not into the actual filter settings.
That way, you can setup your EQApo config like this and only toggle the EQ on/off, without a change in overall volume:
Screenshot 2024-06-17 232418.png

I'm using MH755 eartips in S and an Apple dongle at 44.1kHz (keep in mind that filter response is Fs dependent).

Of course I'm aware of issues regarding HRTF and insertion differences, as well as good old unit variation, but thought that some of you may still enjoy the preset :)
 

Attachments

  • Zero2 to target combined (-4,2dB).txt
    574 bytes · Views: 82
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.

For me it works a lot better than both Amir's and Maiky's filter designs. It adds that last 10% of realism without any noticeable drawbacks.

I've put the required preamp into the file name, but not into the actual filter settings.
That way, you can setup your EQApo config like this and only toggle the EQ on/off, without a change in overall volume:
View attachment 375830

I'm using MH755 eartips in S and an Apple dongle at 44.1kHz (keep in mind that filter response is Fs dependent).

Of course I'm aware of issues regarding HRTF and insertion differences, as well as good old unit variation, but thought that some of you may still enjoy the preset :)
I would, but both of the sets I bought died, without ill treatment.
 
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.
I will give it a try, but those last three settings I can get APO to accept them at those frequency values? Do I need to change or enhance settings somewhere else in the app? Are they necessary?

Most of the time to be honest I can sense a difference between one EQ profile and another, but I couldn't tell you exactly what it is that has changed.

Thanks for work though staticV3!
 
And there's fit, comfort, seal and plethora of different tips too
Has any manufacturer tried to manufacture the IEM in the silicone ear tip material itself, it would be great to squeeze the casing into the ear and let it expand back to its natural shape in place.
 
I will give it a try, but those last three settings I can get APO to accept them at those frequency values? Do I need to change or enhance settings somewhere else in the app? Are they necessary?
Could you be more specific?

The last three filters have a frequency value of 21, 34, and 54Hz.

EQApo should have no issues accepting them.
 
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.

For me it works a lot better than both Amir's and Maiky's filter designs. It adds that last 10% of realism without any noticeable drawbacks.

I've put the required preamp into the file name, but not into the actual filter settings.
That way, you can setup your EQApo config like this and only toggle the EQ on/off, without a change in overall volume:
View attachment 375830

I'm using MH755 eartips in S and an Apple dongle at 44.1kHz (keep in mind that filter response is Fs dependent).

Of course I'm aware of issues regarding HRTF and insertion differences, as well as good old unit variation, but thought that some of you may still enjoy the preset :)
Static, if say I usually have my EAPO's preamp at -9dB without any EQ, would it be a fair comparison to compare this against your EQ setting with the preamp set to -13.2dB? (iow simply slapping the -4.2dB on top of the -9dB)
 
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.

For me it works a lot better than both Amir's and Maiky's filter designs. It adds that last 10% of realism without any noticeable drawbacks.

I've put the required preamp into the file name, but not into the actual filter settings.
That way, you can setup your EQApo config like this and only toggle the EQ on/off, without a change in overall volume:
View attachment 375830

I'm using MH755 eartips in S and an Apple dongle at 44.1kHz (keep in mind that filter response is Fs dependent).

Of course I'm aware of issues regarding HRTF and insertion differences, as well as good old unit variation, but thought that some of you may still enjoy the preset :)
What target are you using for your EQ? If it's to Harman Curve then why would it be any different from Maiky's? (What's different?)
 
What target are you using for your EQ? If it's to Harman Curve then why would it be any different from Maiky's? (What's different?)
No one target was used. Just a lot of iteration, A/Bing different IEM responses, both GRAS and 5128, different target curves, splicing bass from one with treble from the other.

At each step, I used both music and pink noise to determine a winner.

FWIW, I've A/Bed it against every major GRAS and 5128 target curve and for me, it came out on top.
 
No one target was used. Just a lot of iteration, A/Bing different IEM responses, both GRAS and 5128, different target curves, splicing bass from one with treble from the other.

At each step, I used both music and pink noise to determine a winner.

FWIW, I've A/Bed it against every major GRAS and 5128 target curve and for me, it came out on top.

Would you share your staticV3 target for us to upload to Squig and play with it?
 
Would you share your staticV3 target for us to upload to Squig and play with it?
Right now, I'm not very confident that I can declare this Zero:2 preset a target that'll seamlessly carry over to other IEMs.

So for now, I'd encourage you to see it for what it is: a model-specific hand-tuned preset from one dude on the internet.

Give it a try if you're curious. Beyond that, don't read too much into it.

If you'd like to see a graph, my recommendation would be to open Crinacle's 5128 measurement of the Zero:2, then to import my preset under the Equalizer tab:

That way, you have a response graph which you can compare to other IEMs.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious if anyone using stock Equalizer APO would like to give my EQ a try.

For me it works a lot better than both Amir's and Maiky's filter designs. It adds that last 10% of realism without any noticeable drawbacks.

I've put the required preamp into the file name, but not into the actual filter settings.
That way, you can setup your EQApo config like this and only toggle the EQ on/off, without a change in overall volume:
View attachment 375830

I'm using MH755 eartips in S and an Apple dongle at 44.1kHz (keep in mind that filter response is Fs dependent).

Of course I'm aware of issues regarding HRTF and insertion differences, as well as good old unit variation, but thought that some of you may still enjoy the preset :)
Tried. Thanks Static, I've appreciated your EQ better than standard Harman's one. As for concerns eartips, I'm currently using stock orange ones, but I'm not very satisfied, because I think they could fit better. Do you think that foam tips - e.g. Sonicfoam SF01 - could be an improvement?
 
Tried. Thanks Static, I've appreciated your EQ better than standard Harman's one. As for concerns eartips, I'm currently using stock orange ones, but I'm not very satisfied, because I think they could fit better. Do you think that foam tips - e.g. Sonicfoam SF01 - could be an improvement?
Eartips are extremely subjective. We all have different ear canals, and so all have different optimal eartips (which can vary with IEM model).

Me recommending eartips would be like recommending shoes to you, based on what fits me best. It makes no sense.
 
No one target was used. Just a lot of iteration, A/Bing different IEM responses, both GRAS and 5128, different target curves, splicing bass from one with treble from the other.

At each step, I used both music and pink noise to determine a winner.

FWIW, I've A/Bed it against every major GRAS and 5128 target curve and for me, it came out on top.
Ok, I see, you've tried to combine different measurements from different sources and then verified what amalgamation you like best through listening. Quite a personal result you've come up with, but I suppose no harm in people trying your EQ. It's obviously a bit nebulous how you've done it, but yeah I was just curious how you came about your EQ.
 
Back
Top Bottom