CCA Trio 3DD IEM Review

[amirm]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the CCA Trio 3DD IEM. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $44.

The design is more understated than some other IEMs which I prefer. Can't talk about comfort as neither of the included tips fit my ear.

There are four switches that change the response by 1 or 2 dB in different bands. Company states compliance with HARMAN target with addition of such tunings.

CCA Trio IEM Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements with all switches in off state:

We see fair amount of extra upper bass and midrange boost. Alas, all the switches help to increase bass, not decrease it. I tried a couple of settings and that was indeed the case. I am not showing them to you as the moment I touched the IEM, it lost the good seal I had in the above measurements. Above my reference 425 Hz, compliance is very good. Here is the deviation to develop an EQ:

We have 4.6 dB extra energy at 135 Hz.

I was disappointed to see a strong resonance at 900 Hz in distortion tests:

We have seen much better in this class.

Impedance rises significantly in bass so be careful to not use tube amps and such to drive it:

Sensitivity is on the lower side, being worse than some regular headphones:

Still, you should be able to get reasonable loudness from just about any source.

Group delay as usual (for IEMs) is not very revealing:

Per note in the intro, the tips were too small for my ears, resulting in no bass when I tried to listen to this IEM. I expect it to sound "wooly" due to too much upper bass energy but easily corrected with a filter. Maybe you can counter balance it by setting the switches to boost the highs.

Conclusions
Nice to see another IEM target the "Harman" curve. Alas, whether it is due to measurement error, or different test fixture, there is too much upper bass to midrange. Hopefully they can revise this for a future model. As is, I don't consider that a major error and would predict listening results to be good.

I am going to recommend CCA Trio although there are better choices out there.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

 

[amirm]

Reserved for @AdamG to kindly post the specs.

Manufacturer Specifications:

 

[JSmith]

Not too bad, might suit the bass heads... thanks for testing.

A few pics from marketing for the thread;

JSmith

 

[Dazerdoreal]

All Switches Off (D = Down) is a rather bassy configuration. All Switches On should significantly reduce the bass level.
I have a Trio lying around somewhere and I am pretty sure this was also the case in practice.

 

[amirm]

They need to fix the documentation then.

 

[Maiky76]

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.
Please report your findings, positive or negative!

Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve (and other constrains) with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score, start your journey here or there.
  There is a presentation by S. Olive here.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be therefore more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF and maybe at HF).
• The range around and above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo, the boosts and preamp gain (loss of Dynamic range) need to be carefully considered to avoid issues with, amongst other things, too low a Max SPL or damaging your device. You have beed warned.
• Not all units of the same product are made equal. The EQ is based on the measurements of a single unit. YMMV with regard to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.
• I sometimes use variations of the Harman curve for some reasons. See rational here and here

NOTE: the score then calculated is not comparable to the scores derived from the default Harman target curve if not otherwise noted.

• Occluding IE devices generally must have very good fitting/seal in the user's ear canal for best performance.
  please spend a few minutes to pick up the best ear tip... Be sure to perform this step otherwise the FR/Score/EQ presented here are just worthless.
• 1. more bass = better seal
  2. More isolation from the outside world = better fit
  3. Comfort

Good L/R match.

I have generated one EQ, the APO config file is attached.

Score no EQ: 75.7%
Score with EQ: 95.%

CCA Trio Harman EQ
November252024-102736

Preamp: -2.90 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 126.9 Hz Gain -4.96 dB Q 0.65
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 634.0 Hz Gain 1.60 dB Q 1.52
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 3990.4 Hz Gain -1.75 dB Q 0.48
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 6630.3 Hz Gain 4.51 dB Q 2.81
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 11737.0 Hz Gain -4.37 dB Q 3.08

The folowing data is calculated using the Knowles target curve.
The scores are NOT comparable.

Score no EQ: 72.0%
Score with EQ: 94.9%

 

[Somafunk]

All Switches On should significantly reduce the bass level.

I was about to say that bass bleed into the mids would sound very muddy compared to my preferred tuning of a 15db+ bass shelf no higher than 150hz and with the 3khz to 6kHz Harman shout I’ll give it a poor, 5 years ago I probably would have been happy enough with it.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Thanks for the very fine review, Amir.

The real deal breaker is not the non-Harman tuning, but rather the two distortion peaks at 900 and 2250 hz. IDK how they would not be audible in normal play even at 94 db. Both of them are in the midrange/upper midrange and seem like they would be disturbingly present on vocal peaks, lending them a ragged character. IMHO the absolute cardinal rule with these sets is never screw up the vocals, and I have to think these do.

 

[SuicideSquid]

I am going to recommend CCA Trio although there are better choices out there.

It's wild that this IEM probably would have received an unqualified recommendation just two years ago, and now you can get better-measuring IEMs, like the Salnotes Zero/Zero 2 and Moondrop Chu II, for half the price.

 

[markanini]

Thanks for the very fine review, Amir.

The real deal breaker is not the non-Harman tuning, but rather the two distortion peaks at 900 and 2250 hz. IDK how they would not be audible in normal play even at 94 db. Both of them are in the midrange/upper midrange and seem like they would be disturbingly present on vocal peaks, lending them a ragged character. IMHO the absolute cardinal rule with these sets is never screw up the vocals, and I have to think these do.

A distortion peak is seen in a similar area of the graph on KZ Castor. CCA is a KZ sub-brand.

 

[Yasuo]

Thanks for the review, these are great! While this particular IEM is not for me, I love the "built in EQ" with switches (I think the first time I saw them was in some KZ a couple of years ago).

 

[renaudrenaud]

It's wild that this IEM probably would have received an unqualified recommendation just two years ago, and now you can get better-measuring IEMs, like the Salnotes Zero/Zero 2 and Moondrop Chu II, for half the price.

This is why we love Amir, this website, the contributors, the recommandations etc...

The ability to buy some first class equipment for not a lot of money and point of view it gives for most of high end brands, a kind of delicate revenge.

 

[WOLFAGRAM]

Hallo Folks.

A Good choice of product and (as usual) a good review. Thank you very much @amirm.

Given how good some of the 20-30$ IEMs sound, I believe it would be very informative if we had more info on build quality of these slightly more expensive ones.

The Logic: many of us might pay 50$ instead of 25$, If the build quality is considerably better. On the other hand, it is unrealistic to expect that 50$ IEMs are going to sound much better than best performing 25$ ones.

Cheers.

 

[Koeitje]

@amirm, I have a small suggestion for IEM reviews. As a person with small ear canals I need IEMs with small nozzles (so I can use smaller tips). I don't know if you have a caliper that can measure these kind of small sizes, but if you have it would be great if you could also quickly measure the nozzle size as part of IEM reviews. A lot of manufacturers don't have that available in their specs.

 

[Mr Swing King]

Thanks for the review Amir.
Looks fairly good albeit for the resonance spike.
I’m pretty much sorted with the 7Hz Salnotes Zero, Zero 2, Moondrop Chu ll, Tanchjim One and Truthear Hexa…but if I wanted something with various bass settings, maybe I’d look at these.
Again a testament to how insane the iem market is today. We can get whatever sound signatures we want for very cheap.
Makes it hard to consider iems that cost over 100€…because why would you?
Build quality, bragging rights perhaps…
As for sheer sound quality this market is flooded with sub 100€ contenders that more often than not wipe the floor with supposedly TOTL flagships.

 

[CedarX]

Hallo Folks.

A Good choice of product and (as usual) a good review. Thank you very much @amirm.

Given how good some of the 20-30$ IEMs sound, I believe it would be very informative if we had more info on build quality of these slightly more expensive ones.

Logic: many of us might pay 50$ instead of 25$, If the build quality is considerably better. On the other hand, it is unrealistic to expect that 50$ IEMs are going to sound much better than best performing 25$ ones.

Cheers.

Entirely agree… but how would you define objective criteria to characterize build quality? If it’s about durability, is a metal shell necessarily better than a 3-D printed resin one? Is weight a good criteria? How about cables: is a thick cloth-wrapped cable better than a thin PU-coated one? Is the packaging a good build quality criteria?

 

[WOLFAGRAM]

Entirely agree… but how would you define objective criteria to characterize build quality? If it’s about durability, is a metal shell necessarily better than a 3-D printed resin one? Is weight a good criteria? How about cables: is a thick cloth-wrapped cable better than a thin PU-coated one? Is the packaging a good build quality criteria?

One could write a few words about both subjective experience while handling them and about materials used.

It is not objective quality test with many repetitions till failure. However, none od the ASR tests, while objective, are not reliable. For reliable measures, one should measure multiple randomly sampled specimens of the same product. Still, ASR test are much more valid than subjective tests.

My point is that it is much better to have subjective info about build quality than no info about it at all.

 

[kemmler3D]

Might be decent if the switches do reduce bass, but +5dB at 150hz is going to sound really muddy / boomy to me. I don't personally enjoy much boost anywhere above 70-80hz. Kind of a dealbreaker with the distortion peak either way.

 

[markanini]

From what I've gathered the majority of CCA Trio owners prefer the UUDD setting the most, for the reason of balancing out an intense stock treble. Because of that CCA Trio could be seen as an example of where the graph doesn't reflect every listeners perception. With that said disparity between listener impressions and graph data mostly seems to happen with IEM, less so with headphones, and virtually never with DACs and amps.

 

[USER]

I like these A LOT with the UUUU setting and Moondrop eartips as they temper the treble a little. UUUU is the "Harman" setting though it seems to actually be copying the Truthear x Crinacle Zero Blues, which were considered an exemplary "Harman" IEM when they came out. They are much better than the Blues to me, and not only because the latter are extremely uncomfortable for my medium sized ears. The Trios can be found for under $20 and I do think they are worth consideration if one is thinking about the Blues and has a decent dongle that is compatible impedance-wise. (For me, direct to laptop affected the bass.)

I also do think it is confusing and a mistake to have the bass boosted version be "DDDD."

Please note that these are all IEC711 measurements so they don't have the pinna gain found in Amir's results and also exaggerate the resonances. 1 = Up, 0 = Down

I do prefer UUDD to DDDD but UUUU with Spring Tips sounds much more balanced to me.

I didn't realize that resonance was that bad, though I can't say I hear it. Thank you, Amir, for the in depth measurements as these really needed them.