KZ ZSX IEM Review

[jhaider]

There's no open back IEMs, it would result in massive low end loss. More likely the marketing is referring to back venting, which is a standard feature in IEMs. It's being made out to be something bigger than it really is.

Audeze iSine10

 

[kysa]

Truthear Nova w/ Foam tips.

But do you actually own them?

These aformetioned claims are often by people who seemingly use Audio Science Review as their single apparent source

You retype the opinion of a well known grifter word for word and don't even hide it, but berate others for blindly believing the expert opinion. Cool!

and the people who have it should be satified knowing that they would likely need to spend 135 USD or more to have a valuable positive difference on their IEM audio quality

You don't need to consume every new product out there. Zero with EQ is perfectly fine. Although i can't recommend Truthear products because of the fitting issues, i get why people love Zero:Red.

also be careful of the different rigs

And here I thought you could take two measurements from different rigs, make a "virtual IEM" equalization, and then record a product review...

 

[nerdemoji]

But do you actually own them?

No, just commenting on measurements.

You retype the opinion of a well known grifter word for word and don't even hide it, but berate others for blindly believing the expert opinion. Cool!

I am not trying to berate others. Give an example of "berating" please, so I can avoid it in the future. Again, I am not trying to berate others. Also, please link where someone said what I said word for word. I guess my KEF joke wasn't very original. Welp. That comment was an observation that I felt many people do not look at measurements from other websites and instead rely on measurements exclusively from this website.

You don't need to consume every new product out there. Zero with EQ is perfectly fine. Although i can't recommend Truthear products because of the fitting issues, i get why people love Zero:Red.

Wow, I'm incoherent! What I meant was that the Zero:Red was so good that anyone who has it should not need to buy anything unless they are willing to shell out at least 135 USD.

And here I thought you could take two measurements from different rigs, make a "virtual IEM" equalization, and then record a product review...

Now, I do know about this...and I agree with ASR on this one. Good measurements can prove products are good quality, but it is indeed impossible to make one product sound exactly like another based on measurements.

Just a heads up, putting down the Truthear Zero series is a thing on the Apple House Sound discord server, a place where people put down successful IEMs, and praise some obscure and questionably tuned sets.

Finally, I will not hide the fact that I do view this server. I do not agree with everything there, same with here. In fact, I'd say that most of the people on there lack any kind of knowledge on audio/audio science. It's comical in a way. Do they put down successful IEMs? Sometimes. Most people there have different opinions. That is why I am there. People have discussions and usually both sides are wrong. But what really is "right"? It's getting philosophical here. In short, viewing in or engaging with a community is not an agreement with that community. Instead, it is opportunity to understand a different perspective.

I really do see where you guys are coming from with this; the Zero:Red is certainly a good IEM. I cannot dispute that. It may be the best for some people.

 

[markanini]

Finally, I will not hide the fact that I do view this server. I do not agree with everything there, same with here. In fact, I'd say that most of the people on there lack any kind of knowledge on audio/audio science. It's comical in a way. Do they put down successful IEMs? Sometimes. Most people there have different opinions. That is why I am there. People have discussions and usually both sides are wrong. But what really is "right"? It's getting philosophical here. In short, viewing in or engaging with a community is not an agreement with that community. Instead, it is opportunity to understand a different perspective.

This demonstrates perfectly how AHS/Sharur discourse normalizes lack of awareness, and social seppuku. It goes beyond product vs. product or server vs. server.

Recommending products without owning a them, in most contexts, weirds people out. Triply so to recommend products that you don't own, as an alternative for a product with a proven track record. From a technical standpoint there are many good reasons why this is unwise for IEMs.

 

[kysa]

No, just commenting on measurements.

I am not trying to berate others. Give an example of "berating" please, so I can avoid it in the future. Again, I am not trying to berate others. Also, please link where someone said what I said word for word. I guess my KEF joke wasn't very original. Welp. That comment was an observation that I felt many people do not look at measurements from other websites and instead rely on measurements exclusively from this website.

Wow, I'm incoherent! What I meant was that the Zero:Red was so good that anyone who has it should not need to buy anything unless they are willing to shell out at least 135 USD.

Now, I do know about this...and I agree with ASR on this one. Good measurements can prove products are good quality, but it is indeed impossible to make one product sound exactly like another based on measurements.

Finally, I will not hide the fact that I do view this server. I do not agree with everything there, same with here. In fact, I'd say that most of the people on there lack any kind of knowledge on audio/audio science. It's comical in a way. Do they put down successful IEMs? Sometimes. Most people there have different opinions. That is why I am there. People have discussions and usually both sides are wrong. But what really is "right"? It's getting philosophical here. In short, viewing in or engaging with a community is not an agreement with that community. Instead, it is opportunity to understand a different perspective.

I really do see where you guys are coming from with this; the Zero:Red is certainly a good IEM. I cannot dispute that. It may be the best for some people.

I don't speak gibberish.

 

[GaryH]

They don't.
View attachment 325283

To clarify, the vertical scaling in the graph I posted above simply allows for easier readability of the magnitude of the deviations. No matter the scaling, the numbers do not lie: the graph shows the original Truthear Zero is up to 4 dB deficient in the sub-bass relative to the (probabilistically most likely to be preferred / perceived neutral) Harman target, with nearly 3 dB too much energy in the mid- to upper-bass, and a broadband (more audible) excess up to 3 dB over Harman in the upper mids to treble where our ears are most sensitive, the latter contributing to a somewhat bright overall spectral balance. (The Red has similar magnitudes of deviation below target, but a flatter overall spectral balance relative to Harman, which is likely largely the reason why some may prefer it to the original Zero). These are not insignificant deviations, well within audibility. Note those measurements were taken by Oratory who uses the GRAS RA0045 undamped coupler (without artificial pinna), the exact same set-up as used by Harman when devising their IEM target, so will offer the most accurate depiction of compliance to this target. And Oratory has now published his official measurement / EQ pdf for the Truthear Zero, along with its Harman predicted preference rating which he calculates at 79%. This is good, but by no means 'excellent' Harman compliance, which is specifically defined by Dr Olive in his papers as a rating of 90% or above. This is what the numbers from our current best headphone science and measurements most accurate to that science tell us.

 

[IAtaman]

This demonstrates perfectly how AHS/Sharur discourse normalizes lack of awareness, and social seppuku. It goes beyond product vs. product or server vs. server.

Recommending products without owning a them, in most contexts, weirds people out. Triply so to recommend products that you don't own, as an alternative for a product with a proven track record. From a technical standpoint there are many good reasons why this is unwise for IEMs.

Adding tomato to a fruit salad is unwise, making comments about headphones without listening to them, and pretending an FR graph tells you everything you need to know is at best idiotic.

 

[MacClintock]

Adding tomato to a fruit salad is unwise, making comments about headphones without listening to them, and pretending an FR graph tells you everything you need to know is at best idiotic.

This applies to headphones, but not to IEMs, as their sound is almost exclusively determined by frequency response. By the way, the Harman research used "virtual headphones", i.e. heaphones who's FR has been EQed. I wouldn't call their research idiotic.

 

[MacClintock]

Note those measurements were taken by Oratory who uses the GRAS RA0045 undamped coupler (without artificial pinna), the exact same set-up as used by Harman when devising their IEM target, so will offer the most accurate depiction of compliance to this target.

Note that they used just 10-15 listeners to determine the IEM target.

And Oratory has now published his official measurement / EQ pdf for the Truthear Zero, along with its Harman predicted preference rating which he calculates at 79%. This is good, but by no means 'excellent' Harman compliance, which is specifically defined by Dr Olive in his papers as a rating of 90% or above.

I marked you in the thread of the Truthear Nova, this one will pass these 90%, I would bet.

 

[nerdemoji]

Adding tomato to a fruit salad is unwise, making comments about headphones without listening to them, and pretending an FR graph tells you everything you need to know is at best idiotic.

we were all using the wrong target. thats why. gotta use the honest audiophile hand-drawn IEM for peak audio

see? moondrop variations are trash

 

[IAtaman]

This applies to headphones, but not to IEMs, as their sound is almost exclusively determined by frequency response.

If FR is meant to be the FR measured with a measurement rig, no it is not.

By the way, the Harman research used "virtual headphones", i.e. heaphones who's FR has been EQed. I wouldn't call their research idiotic.

That’s because the research did not pretend to explain everything about in ear headphones, it is about establishing a statistical preference target based on tonal balance while keeping all other parameters equal. People do research on twins to understand the impact of genetics for certain diseases. Does not mean genetics is the only contributing factor to health. People who claim it is are misinformed. People who claim it is in the name of science are idiots in my view.

 

[IAtaman]

we were all using the wrong target. thats why. gotta use the honest audiophile hand-drawn IEM for peak audiosee? moondrop variations are trash

Sorry, I cannot see how this is related to what I said.

 

[MacClintock]

If FR is meant to be the FR measured with a measurement rig, no it is not.

What is the basis for your claim? Since IEMs have no interaction with the pinna, there is little left to have any iadditional nfluence on the sound besides the measured FR (low noise and distortion granted). Remember, the FR entails via Fourier transform also all the temporal information.

 

[markanini]

What is the basis for your claim? Since IEMs have no interaction with the pinna, there is little left to have any iadditional nfluence on the sound besides the measured FR (low noise and distortion granted). Remember, the FR entails via Fourier transform also all the temporal information.

The onus is on you to prove that bypassing the pinna leaves "little left to have any iadditional nfluence".

 

[IAtaman]

What is the basis for your claim? Since IEMs have no interaction with the pinna, there is little left to have any iadditional nfluence on the sound besides the measured FR (low noise and distortion granted).

Well, there is still the ear canal, and the "circuit" ear canal and IEM creates isn't there? B&K people say they created the ear canal of the 5128 s based on MRIs of real people's ear canals so I suspect it should have a significance, isn't it?

Allow me to ask you this please: When you say FR measurements almost exclusively determine the sound of an IEM, to which measurements are you referring? 5128, 711, 711 'inspired' couplers you can buy on Ali Express? All of them?

5128 proponents claim 711 couplers do not measure bass response correctly due to incorrect acoustic impedance of the coupler. I am not sure if this is correct but it is clear that the measurements differ. So which of these measurements is the exclusive and absolute one?

There is some research (will find the link) that suggest people prefer around 3db higher above 12KHz as they get older. Which measurement rig can measure 12K and above accurately?

What about granularity - at what granularity does the FR measurements almost exclusively determine the sound of IEM? 1/24, 1/12? Raw? When I see a sharp peak or a dip in the FR, can I be 100% certain that will not hear that peak or dip?

Remember, the FR entails via Fourier transform also all the temporal information.

Yes, indeed FR entails temporal information as well - but it does not mean that's how our brains process it. An uncompressed digital music file contains all the sonic information about a song . Can you look at the bits and hear the music or do you need to play it?

 

[MacClintock]

Well, there is still the ear canal, and the "circuit" ear canal and IEM creates isn't there? B&K people say they created the ear canal of the 5128 s based on MRIs of real people's ear canals so I suspect it should have a significance, isn't it?

Allow me to ask you this please: When you say FR measurements almost exclusively determine the sound of an IEM, to which measurements are you referring? 5128, 711, 711 'inspired' couplers you can buy on Ali Express? All of them?

It doesn't matter. For sure the same IEM will measure differently at the 711 or the 5218 or on any other rig. But two IEMs that measure the same on the same rig, will sound identically for the same person, that is the claim. Please don't try to deviate and stray away from the original argument.
That one IEM will sound differently to two different persons, having totally different ear canals, is trivial and not at all the point of discussion.

Yes, indeed FR entails temporal information as well - but it does not mean that's how our brains process it. An uncompressed digital music file contains all the sonic information about a song . Can you look at the bits and hear the music or do you need to play it?

Again, some nice try to obfuscate the original argument. Analogies that don't fit don't contribute to the subject.

 

[staticV3]

But two IEMs that measure the same on the same rig, will sound identically for the same person, that is the claim.

Which is unfortunately not always true.
Different IEMs will react differently to the same load, even if they were previously calibrated to one specific dummy load (rig).

 

[MacClintock]

Which is unfortunately not always true.
Different IEMs will react differently to the same load, even if they were previously calibrated to one specific dummy load (rig).

You are talking about IEMs with wildly differring impedance? What is the basis for your claim? Do you have any examples?

 

[markanini]

Since IEMs have no interaction with the pinna

VSG has measured numerous IEMs that graph significantly different with the mere presence of a pinna. Why would you not seek out data like this before arguing on a forum? This happens a lot with AHS talking points.

TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero Red

So do you dislike the method itself or just that he doesn't use the exact the same rig as in the research? That can't be for Amirm to answer. "Guy Incognito" is referring to Harmans method, but using a different method. Effectively positing the claim that his method is equivalent. That's ok if...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[MacClintock]

VSG has measured numerous IEMs that graph significantly different with the mere presence of a pinna. Why would you not seek out data like this before arguing on a forum? This happens a lot with AHS talking points.

TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero Red

So do you dislike the method itself or just that he doesn't use the exact the same rig as in the research? That can't be for Amirm to answer. "Guy Incognito" is referring to Harmans method, but using a different method. Effectively positing the claim that his method is equivalent. That's ok if...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Why don't you manage to remain polite on a form? The measurements you show there have only signifcant variation for quite high frequencies, where the measurements aren't reliable anyways. It has also a lot to do which rig you use and how, insertion depth etc. The 711 doesn't even have a pinna so I guess the influence of the pinna shouldn't be that big, right?