Just give up. Allow others to have an opinion, and share it. It's 2024. Freedom of speech.
-
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
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I was fully aware of the potential of the look alike products and diligently made every effort to buy direct from the Samsung store on Amazon. Fulfilled directly by Amazon.
You seem to be attempting to find fault with me. Whats your agenda?
I'm here and have the right to speak here, without being ridiculed by you.
drewdawg999
Active Member
I also prefer planars to the Zero 2, but it certainly is no turd. Very nice balanced sound with good bass, easy to drive. It's my best portable solution being a great all-rounder, and certainly a fine value. Some people only have 20 bucks to spare and the Zero 2 is a safe choice.
But if amplification is not a problem and you have 40 bucks, then the KZ PRX is a slam dunk. So much more clarity, better bass, mids, treble, and imaging too. The tuning is to my liking so it doesn't need EQ at all. Maybe I'll try EQing the Zero 2 to the PRX and see if I can tell a difference. I'm a sucker for planars though, my main speaker is still the Magnepan MMGs. For headphones I have the LCD-2, HE-400, and Argon mk3, and only the Argon can compete with the PRX without EQ. The PRX seriously competes with my little Maggies.
But the PRX needs juice, my DAP can't drive it properly by itself. The Zero 2 sounds great out of my Surfans F20, in all genres. So it has its purpose in my life as a specialist. I have a pair for just Hip-hop and EDM and big bass pop, the KBEar Rosefinch. Now that one has huge bass but also just barely passable mids clarity, a sound signature that probably wouldn't fly around here. I still love it for what it is, which is a devilish basshead set. It was $12, crap stock cable though. I dig having an army of cheap IEMs, they're like delicious little candies, one for every mood.
But if amplification is not a problem and you have 40 bucks, then the KZ PRX is a slam dunk. So much more clarity, better bass, mids, treble, and imaging too. The tuning is to my liking so it doesn't need EQ at all. Maybe I'll try EQing the Zero 2 to the PRX and see if I can tell a difference. I'm a sucker for planars though, my main speaker is still the Magnepan MMGs. For headphones I have the LCD-2, HE-400, and Argon mk3, and only the Argon can compete with the PRX without EQ. The PRX seriously competes with my little Maggies.
But the PRX needs juice, my DAP can't drive it properly by itself. The Zero 2 sounds great out of my Surfans F20, in all genres. So it has its purpose in my life as a specialist. I have a pair for just Hip-hop and EDM and big bass pop, the KBEar Rosefinch. Now that one has huge bass but also just barely passable mids clarity, a sound signature that probably wouldn't fly around here. I still love it for what it is, which is a devilish basshead set. It was $12, crap stock cable though. I dig having an army of cheap IEMs, they're like delicious little candies, one for every mood.
musichunter1x
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2024
- Messages
- 15
- Likes
- 4
Nah, far from turn. I just noticed that I missed EQ settings by Maiky76 on the first page. It did things I wanted in a less artificial way, I just may put my bass settings to it, but it is already similar.
Maybe you rly can not a good enough fit with them or something is messed up? Coz I am a bit doubtful about this big difference, but I am going to try T10 in a few weeks/
Edit. Ah I need to stop writting and get use to them with some EQ, coz soon I may end up with preset from them inside Q5k... But at least 2 EQs are different and good.
Last edited:
Spent a few days, few hours a day, comparing the T10 with some other IEM's including the Zero 2, and my impressions have changed. I now prefer the Zero 2, to the T10. It's more exact and balanced and accurate to the audio/music. My current opinion is that the T10 adds some candy, and I am not sure how coherent the FR of the earpieces are, cos in comparison, listening on the T10, sounds like elements in the audio are doubled, and my ear is more fatigued trying to fuse these multiple images into one, and the "focussing" never quite reaches, the same level as with listening to the Zero 2, which in comparison, has every element in the mix - pin sharp in placement and position. Much less effort for the ears, to focus, on any element.
Definitely took a while, but got there in the end. Still wish the Zero 2 had longer nozzles, to avoid needing to push them in a bit more than is comfortable, to obtain a good seal. But that's a minor issue.
Definitely took a while, but got there in the end. Still wish the Zero 2 had longer nozzles, to avoid needing to push them in a bit more than is comfortable, to obtain a good seal. But that's a minor issue.
I bought these 7hz x Crinacle Zero:2 IEMs based on this review and discussion. Wow, they really sound fantastic. I am using the EQ that @amirm suggested.
Also, based his review, I previously bought the Moondrop Chu II IEMs. These are also great, also using the suggested EQ.
Purely subjectively, of course, I mildly prefer the sound from the Zero:2s. For whatever reason, and this might bias my subjective experience of the sound, the Zero:2s fit my external ear and ear canals better. I think I saw somewhere that somebody here found the opposite on the comfort, so YMMV.
On a side note, I have grown weary of Apple Music's handling of my music, so I am using Neutron on my iPhone and Colibri or VLC on my Mac. Also, on the Mac, I use Rogue Amoeba's SoundSource for the EQ.
There are a lot of things I can't hear, in terms of high-end audio, but I can hear differences between IEMs/headphones/speakers and speakers. That's where the money needs to go--except that with sub-$25 IEMs, one doesn't even need to put the money there. So, I am left having to spend money on music.
Also, based his review, I previously bought the Moondrop Chu II IEMs. These are also great, also using the suggested EQ.
Purely subjectively, of course, I mildly prefer the sound from the Zero:2s. For whatever reason, and this might bias my subjective experience of the sound, the Zero:2s fit my external ear and ear canals better. I think I saw somewhere that somebody here found the opposite on the comfort, so YMMV.
On a side note, I have grown weary of Apple Music's handling of my music, so I am using Neutron on my iPhone and Colibri or VLC on my Mac. Also, on the Mac, I use Rogue Amoeba's SoundSource for the EQ.
There are a lot of things I can't hear, in terms of high-end audio, but I can hear differences between IEMs/headphones/speakers and speakers. That's where the money needs to go--except that with sub-$25 IEMs, one doesn't even need to put the money there. So, I am left having to spend money on music.
musichunter1x
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2024
- Messages
- 15
- Likes
- 4
Try using EQ tuned even closer to harman, which is at the end of first page: https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...crinacle-zero-2-iem-review.50534/post-1815422
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 21.20 Hz Gain -2.30 dB Q 1.07
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 209.49 Hz Gain -2.08 dB Q 1.03 (I have 2.0 coz Q5k can not fine tune values)
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 668.39 Hz Gain 0.75 dB Q 1.48 (I have 0.7 coz Q5k can not fine tune values)
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1336.52 Hz Gain -1.40 dB Q 1.81
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 5956.81 Hz Gain 4.72 dB Q 1.79 (my lower option is 2.5)
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 10120.43 Hz Gain 3.02 dB Q 6.10 (my lower is 2.0)
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 12629.07 Hz Gain -4.39 dB Q 5.99 (-3.0)
It makes them more "open / lighter". If it is a bit too bright then make spikes smaller.
I was used to mdr-ex1000 with good EQ, but after listening to full albums for a few days, Zero2 sound so good, that I do not to care to compare them anymore. I would need to spend hours or days to guess which one I prefer, but Zero2 are smaller, which allows me to wear them outdoors and I do not need to care about their rarity.
I am lucky to get a good, comfortable fit with blue tips, to the point I can listen them when laying on a side.
At least after years of being mostly in my drawer, finally mdr-ex1000 can be sold.
Spent the last few days (from about Xmas, till now), comparing with the few IEM's I own. The Zero 2 dethroned, my former champion - the ARTTI T10, and compared with my KZ/CCA cheapies - (CCA CRA, EDC Pro, Polaris, ZVX) no contest, the Zero 2 sounds so much more resolving. Like a veil was removed, a thick veil. So much easier to hear the tones of voices, inflections, and depth, width, height, definitely the Zero 2 is in another league.
I now use the Zero 2 as my closed back headphone when mixing audio for live events, for things like checking if I'm still getting a signal from a microphone or instrument, at the mixing desk, and checking the mix that's going out to the broadcast/online stream. That good.
But I must admit, it took a while to appreciate the Zero 2. And took a concerted comparison, for me to hear the relative clarity and balance. Will have to get at least one more copy as a spare, cos I now rely on it as my reference listening tool. Huge lesson, for me, price and performance, with respect to the few IEMs I have compared, are not directly correlated. The Zero 2 costs one third the price of the ARTTI T10.
The question is, and I did not want to start a whole new thread on this. Where do I go from here, if I want even better. This is the best head worn device I have ever heard, happy with it, quite happy with it and it is an easy item to recommend, as the minimum anyone should have., that I have heard.
I'm using these with the TRI Clarion eartips, which open them up nicely, less congested upper frequency than any of the stock tips, and a better seal for my ears..
That's my question - if I wanted even more balance and resolution, and even more clarity., (if such an improvement in sound quality/clarity/resolution was possible), what other IEM's should I consider buying.
I now use the Zero 2 as my closed back headphone when mixing audio for live events, for things like checking if I'm still getting a signal from a microphone or instrument, at the mixing desk, and checking the mix that's going out to the broadcast/online stream. That good.
But I must admit, it took a while to appreciate the Zero 2. And took a concerted comparison, for me to hear the relative clarity and balance. Will have to get at least one more copy as a spare, cos I now rely on it as my reference listening tool. Huge lesson, for me, price and performance, with respect to the few IEMs I have compared, are not directly correlated. The Zero 2 costs one third the price of the ARTTI T10.
The question is, and I did not want to start a whole new thread on this. Where do I go from here, if I want even better. This is the best head worn device I have ever heard, happy with it, quite happy with it and it is an easy item to recommend, as the minimum anyone should have., that I have heard.
I'm using these with the TRI Clarion eartips, which open them up nicely, less congested upper frequency than any of the stock tips, and a better seal for my ears..
That's my question - if I wanted even more balance and resolution, and even more clarity., (if such an improvement in sound quality/clarity/resolution was possible), what other IEM's should I consider buying.
musichunter1x
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2024
- Messages
- 15
- Likes
- 4
Are these the same? https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256806984506039.html?pdp_npi=4@pre!PLN!29,37 zł!!12,99 zł!!51.07!25.02!@211b816617355669233751025e693b!12000039691740889!sh!PL!758983812!X&spm=a2g0o.store_pc_allItems_or_groupList.new_all_items_2008303859961.1005007170820791&gatewayAdapt=glo2usa4itemAdapt
From my experience with EQ and mdr-ex1000 I do not think you can get much more. Probably good fit and EQ are more important, so the next step is a custom IEM, made from "template" of your ear. I was reading about them years ago on a local forum and I doubt prices changed for better.
Oh, probably even better is to have measurement equipment made from template of your ears, so IEMs can be fine tuned.
I've gone as far as most would go, in my position, where we do not have a measurement rig.
With the 7Hz Zero 2 (and I follow the same process with my other IEMs) :
1. Replaced the stock tips with the TRI Clarion (yeah the same one's you posted in the link), which I'm really happy with, cos they have a good seal.
2. Applied a layer of EQ based on Auto computed settings using Autoeq.app (the online web site of same name).
3. Added a 2nd layer of my own custom further improvements to personal taste.
4. Implemented cross feed solution in software, in the audio path.
So I am as happy as I think I ever will be with the Zero 2, even more so than my beloved ARTTI T10, which is sadly retired. I'm satisfied that I've done about everything that is reasonable to consider to do with the Zero 2 itself, to improve the sonics.
So the question I asked was about - the next step, what other IEM can I consider which would be an improvement on the Zero 2? I do not know what better would sound like, but it would be nice to explore. Curiosity.
Put it this way, if I have to spend more than $50 again, to get anything significantly and undeniably better than the Zero 2, I'll live with the Zero 2 goodness, and be satisfied with it. But I'm prepared to spend $50 to get another IEM, to pair with the Zero 2, so I have two good viewpoints. When I am listening to audio, And if the other IEM is even better than the Zero 2, that would be a bonus.
It's early days, and I am not a researcher, or academic, and not sure if this thread is the right place to post this. But since some of the "trouble" started with my initially terrible experience with the Zero 2, might as well post it here.
Long story short, I have flip flopped between two IEM's the ARTTI T10, and the Zero 2 in terms of preference, but through extensive listening and actions listed below, I am now enthralled by both of them. Each which brings their own very impressive slant to the listening experience. But this was not achieved overnight. And the steps that led to the acceptance and appreciation of each of these, has common aspects.
1. It takes time to learn, and for the ear to learn to hear better, as one encounters more resolving devices, than one has been accustomed to.
2. Based on my limited experience, with just these two, I do not think one can expect optimal performance from any listening device, stock, unless one is lucky that one's listening preferences just happen to exactly match the stock item. I have discovered that there is immense scope for "tuning" the performance of an IEM, and in my case, it's all done in software, no physical alchemy involved.
3. Iron sharpens iron. Each listening device gives us a window into what is possible, that is good, and we are able to take the insights gained from listening to one device, to challenge our optimisation efforts with other devices. In a round robin, lessons learned about improving one of a couple of IEM's fed into the optimisation of other IEMs. In an ever improving increment. Am convinced that it is optimal to own a few devices, for the purpose of learning, and that includes, the not so good ones, cos they teach us what to listen out for, and show us what bad sounds like. How do you cure a disease if you do not know what to look for. I.e to weed out the sore points of an IEM, you have to hear and know what needs fixing. Furthermore - the correct end result, will have something in common across good performing devices, so listening to them reinforces good, and teaches us to steer away from bad.
4. My goodness, 50% of good sound is fit. Getting a good fit that one does not adjust every few minutes, is heaven. Does wonders to accurately hearing the bass. and mids.
5. I have found benefit in using a wider bore than the stock tips, which opens the sound (i.e the throat) of the IEM. I hypothesise that manufacturers deliberately supply small and medium bore eartips, to cover up anomalies in the higher frequencies.
6. In my case, I note that the Harman 2019 v2 curve is one to be respected, not followed hook line and sinker, but when I have used it as a guide, in any manual EQ tweaks, I get better more insightful sound. Hope this is NOT placebo.
7. Playback volume is of the utmost importance. Comparing things at the same volume, cos louder will sound better. So many of the impressions expressed about devices, have no common foundation such as - what level of loudness was the human observation made, so it is hard to align human opinions, cos we are not comparing like with like.
8. Some products like the ARTTI T10, are like diamonds in the rough, great potential, but need a fair amount of EQ to chip away the rough edges and let the jewel shine. I've finally got it to sound really good, far better than the stock sound - which had begun to give me concern. and it sound amazing now, with all the issues I had complained about gone - now have pin point 3D accurate positioning of all elements, natural sound, no fatigue, still balanced if nevertheless still airy, with a high frequency that seems to go on forever, but the harshness is gone. Scarily resolving. Hearing things I could not believe were possible to hear in a recording.
Other products like the Zero 2, are pretty close to their optimum @ stock, even without EQ. But still respond to EQ well.
9. I think distortion is important to weed out, in the choice of products. My brief look at AmirM's reviews, arrives at a layman's conclusion, very likely important as a factor, Especially where extensive EQ will be applied, really important one is not also.
10. Part of the flip flopping of opinions, was caused by user error. I was using the same Crossfeed settings, for all IEMs. And this especially did not work well for the T10, so now each IEM is cycled through a number of crossfeed "presets", to identify what fits best. Because crossfeed is a key optimisation, in my listening, I have to set this on an IEM specific basis, not a one size fits all. Simply changing the crossfeed settings, like a lens in focus, cured the blurry sonic image that showed up in the T10 during critical listening. Now pin point sharp, and laser sharp, once I changed to more optimal crossfeed settings.
Just crossed into the new year - 2025.
In conclusion, I'm learning how to squeeze more out of each product, and think this is where effort should be made. Yes buy a decent, well designed and manufactured product as a starring point, but with EQ, The right eartips, and the other points raised above..
11. There is a potential for mismatch in the IEM, which is caused by poor design or poor Quality Control @ manufacture. Combined with inconsistencies in our own hearing, between left and right ears - such as canal length and shape differences, so much opportunity to get a wrong impression of what one is hearing, cos of the imbalance. Have learned how to use placement, i.e slightly different insertion depths to address this issue., combined with software adjustment of the stereo image. These are differences one does not notice as much on headphones, and may never notice on speakers.!
12. All this "retuning" in software takes time. One cannot get anywhere with a rushed attempt. But the end result is well worth the effort.
Long story short, I have flip flopped between two IEM's the ARTTI T10, and the Zero 2 in terms of preference, but through extensive listening and actions listed below, I am now enthralled by both of them. Each which brings their own very impressive slant to the listening experience. But this was not achieved overnight. And the steps that led to the acceptance and appreciation of each of these, has common aspects.
1. It takes time to learn, and for the ear to learn to hear better, as one encounters more resolving devices, than one has been accustomed to.
2. Based on my limited experience, with just these two, I do not think one can expect optimal performance from any listening device, stock, unless one is lucky that one's listening preferences just happen to exactly match the stock item. I have discovered that there is immense scope for "tuning" the performance of an IEM, and in my case, it's all done in software, no physical alchemy involved.
3. Iron sharpens iron. Each listening device gives us a window into what is possible, that is good, and we are able to take the insights gained from listening to one device, to challenge our optimisation efforts with other devices. In a round robin, lessons learned about improving one of a couple of IEM's fed into the optimisation of other IEMs. In an ever improving increment. Am convinced that it is optimal to own a few devices, for the purpose of learning, and that includes, the not so good ones, cos they teach us what to listen out for, and show us what bad sounds like. How do you cure a disease if you do not know what to look for. I.e to weed out the sore points of an IEM, you have to hear and know what needs fixing. Furthermore - the correct end result, will have something in common across good performing devices, so listening to them reinforces good, and teaches us to steer away from bad.
4. My goodness, 50% of good sound is fit. Getting a good fit that one does not adjust every few minutes, is heaven. Does wonders to accurately hearing the bass. and mids.
5. I have found benefit in using a wider bore than the stock tips, which opens the sound (i.e the throat) of the IEM. I hypothesise that manufacturers deliberately supply small and medium bore eartips, to cover up anomalies in the higher frequencies.
6. In my case, I note that the Harman 2019 v2 curve is one to be respected, not followed hook line and sinker, but when I have used it as a guide, in any manual EQ tweaks, I get better more insightful sound. Hope this is NOT placebo.
7. Playback volume is of the utmost importance. Comparing things at the same volume, cos louder will sound better. So many of the impressions expressed about devices, have no common foundation such as - what level of loudness was the human observation made, so it is hard to align human opinions, cos we are not comparing like with like.
8. Some products like the ARTTI T10, are like diamonds in the rough, great potential, but need a fair amount of EQ to chip away the rough edges and let the jewel shine. I've finally got it to sound really good, far better than the stock sound - which had begun to give me concern. and it sound amazing now, with all the issues I had complained about gone - now have pin point 3D accurate positioning of all elements, natural sound, no fatigue, still balanced if nevertheless still airy, with a high frequency that seems to go on forever, but the harshness is gone. Scarily resolving. Hearing things I could not believe were possible to hear in a recording.
Other products like the Zero 2, are pretty close to their optimum @ stock, even without EQ. But still respond to EQ well.
9. I think distortion is important to weed out, in the choice of products. My brief look at AmirM's reviews, arrives at a layman's conclusion, very likely important as a factor, Especially where extensive EQ will be applied, really important one is not also.
10. Part of the flip flopping of opinions, was caused by user error. I was using the same Crossfeed settings, for all IEMs. And this especially did not work well for the T10, so now each IEM is cycled through a number of crossfeed "presets", to identify what fits best. Because crossfeed is a key optimisation, in my listening, I have to set this on an IEM specific basis, not a one size fits all. Simply changing the crossfeed settings, like a lens in focus, cured the blurry sonic image that showed up in the T10 during critical listening. Now pin point sharp, and laser sharp, once I changed to more optimal crossfeed settings.
Just crossed into the new year - 2025.
In conclusion, I'm learning how to squeeze more out of each product, and think this is where effort should be made. Yes buy a decent, well designed and manufactured product as a starring point, but with EQ, The right eartips, and the other points raised above..
11. There is a potential for mismatch in the IEM, which is caused by poor design or poor Quality Control @ manufacture. Combined with inconsistencies in our own hearing, between left and right ears - such as canal length and shape differences, so much opportunity to get a wrong impression of what one is hearing, cos of the imbalance. Have learned how to use placement, i.e slightly different insertion depths to address this issue., combined with software adjustment of the stereo image. These are differences one does not notice as much on headphones, and may never notice on speakers.!
12. All this "retuning" in software takes time. One cannot get anywhere with a rushed attempt. But the end result is well worth the effort.
Unfortunately the low cost has to show somewhere… Time for a new pair, or a few pairs?
That's a bit of a shock. How did that happen?
Same here. Doesn't seem to have affected the sound though. Hopefully it didn't fall off inside my ear!
Sad to hear about this. Are you planning to get another Zero 2?
My opinion is obviously subjective. I had a love hate relationship, which has now turned to a love love love one with the Zero 2. I tend to EQ all devices I use for critical listening, to tailor them to my preferences, and it EQ''s very well. To me, with the TRI Clarion ear tips, they have, after suitable EQ a very balanced - neutral presentation, that is not dull, but just shows up what is in the audo stream. The most balanced listening device, I have heard extensively. Now like a reference/benchmark for me against which I can compare other IEMs. Now when I read a review of any IEM, next thing is a visit to squig.link to compare the Frequency response with that of the Zero 2, so I can easily appreciate some of what to expect from that other device, relative to the Zero 2.
I'm most likely going to get a spare of the Zero 2, or two spares, definitely before they ever go out of production. I'm now having to go back to a lot of material, to listen to them via the Zero 2's - thinking - so this is what this actually sounds like! I'm a musician. play piano, so some time is devoted to listening to piano reviews on Youtube or pianists on Youtube, have had an aha moment today - so this is what it actually sounds like, cos whatever I had been listening to before, was not as balanced. But also like that without EQ, it still sounds not too far from optimal balance. - definitely not night and day difference, between stock sound and EQ'd.
Similar threads
