• 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!

TANCHJIM One IEM Review

Rate this IEM:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 5 2.7%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 51 28.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 123 67.6%

  • Total voters
    182
No Data...
I scanned the picture so the scores are only (decent) approximations.

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.
Theoritical question: how difficult would it be to generate similar EQs with the constraints imposed by the Tanchjim One DSP version: only 5x Peak filters?

I understand it could be a slippery slope, causing a dramatic increase in requests for variants of your (much appreciated!) thoughts about the EQ, but when a manufacturer offers a DSP variant, there is a case…
 
Anyone has compared them with Tanchjim Zero? Andy from donglemadness as I see thinks that the Zero is better than the Onw.

A bit confused what to choose!
 
Autoeq optimizes for "matching the curves" I believe, which naturally improves preference score. I suspect so does any other EQ software, including maiky76's.

You can check the peq.py file that creates the filters, it is nicely commented.

This is the operating principle of peak filter:

The operating principle is to find the biggest (by width AND height) peak of the target curve and set center frequency at the peak's location. Quality is set in such a way that the filter width matches the peak width and gain is set to the peak height.

 
if you haven't seen it, I posted on Head-Fi how the DSP preset compare to different audio targets. (thanks to Kr0mka for the measurements.)
Also posted a scan of the manual for those that want to wear them upside down like IEMs.

I think the DSP sounds great and the app has nice presets but I was surprised to find they sounds even better with a standalone DAC (like the E1DA 9038s I'm using)
 
These vs. the 7Hz x Crinacle Zero:2?

Six of one half dozen of the other, or is one notably better?
If you can EQ you can easily tweak either (or plenty of other reasonably compliant IEMs) to fit your personal preference closely. So the choice really comes down to other things, primarily comfort. The Tanchjim seems like a really good option for people who prefer a shape intended to be worn cable down.
 
These vs. the 7Hz x Crinacle Zero:2?

Six of one half dozen of the other, or is one notably better?
Suspect it comes more down to if you want cable around ear or straight down. Easier to get a better seal therfore bass with around ear vs straight down for my money.
 
Suspect it comes more down to if you want cable around ear or straight down.
Granted that One can accomodate both.
Easier to get a better seal therfore bass with around ear vs straight down for my money.
Not always… I usually get a better seal (and therefore bass, totally agree) with “bullet” type IEMs and down cables—I can insert them deeper, which doesn’t bother me… With larger body, around the ear IEMs, the nozzles tend to be too short for me, and I have to use very large silicone tips (memory foam tips may also work). Sharp angles on the body are more an issue for me than deep insertion.

As stated above and multiple times, fit and comfort are very important when it comes to IEM, Go/No-go type characteristics…
 
Theoritical question: how difficult would it be to generate similar EQs with the constraints imposed by the Tanchjim One DSP version: only 5x Peak filters?

I understand it could be a slippery slope, causing a dramatic increase in requests for variants of your (much appreciated!) thoughts about the EQ, but when a manufacturer offers a DSP variant, there is a case…
I don't think you should have an issue. The presets appear to be very nice.

12226023.png


12226019.png

Ref: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/tan...ressions-thread.901366/page-101#post-17814895

Seems super solid honestly.
 
This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Tanchjim One In-ear Monitor. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $27.
View attachment 337333
Unlike many of its competitors, the ONE doesn't attempt to look like fake jewelry and instead, conveys a modern and stylistic design. The diminutive structure likely fits better in many people's ears. The supplied box and tips also look much more proper than recent $20 IEMs I have tested. I like it!

Let's put it on our GRAS 45-CA professional measurement fixture and see how it does. If you are new to these tests, please watch my video to understand headphone measurements.

Tanchjim One IEM Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response for the ONE:
View attachment 337334
We see very good to excellent compliance with our target. I probably should have adjusted the level at a higher frequency to get even broader (visual) match. Once there, the only issue is some boost in 150 to 350 Hz and some shortfall in 6 to 9 kHz. Both minor as you see in our deviation graph:
View attachment 337337
It may take some effort to match standard parametric filter shapes to those variations.

Distortion is very low, just shy of the best we have seen:
View attachment 337338
There is that one peak that stands out although its frequency is high enough to be of less concern:
View attachment 337339

Group delay is unventful:
View attachment 337340

Impedance is very low and flat:
View attachment 337341

Combined with slightly lower than average sensitivity it means just about any source can drive it quite loud:
View attachment 337342

Listening on my RME ADI-2 Pro, I have the volume around -40 dB for rather loud level.

Tanchjim One IEM Listening Tests and Equalization
Out of box performance was very good although I thought it had a bit too much upper bass. I dialed that down but quickly realized preference could go either way. I then added the sub-bass boost (which was without a doubt an improvement) and a couple of treble ones, optimized by ear:
View attachment 337343

The sound now became "hyper hi-fi" giving me goosebumps in the way it extracted enjoyment from my reference tracks. Performing blind and sighted EQ/vs non-EQ told me that we are talking about differences in taste. Explaining the difference, my EQ brought out this delightful sub-bass which I thought was better than stock performance of other IEMs while opening the sound a bit due to reduction of upper bass. The extra highs added beautiful spatial qualities (for an IEM) but some could object to the added (slight) brightness. Net, net, I can't tell you whether you need this EQ or not other than the sub-bass boost.

Conclusions
We have had very good luck in finding highly performant IEMs for so little money. Each provides a slightly different take on tonality, providing something for everyone to choose from. The Tanchjim One follows in the same theme, this time bringing a different form factor. For people like me who don't want colorful chunks in my ears in front of others, I much prefer this look. On the performance front, the out of box tonality is just a hair different than what I like. I would have no problem using it stock in situations where I don't have EQ capability and still enjoy it very much. With just a bit of EQ, performance becomes state of the art, once again beating many speaker and headphone systems.

Let me state once again that neither the measurements or my subjective listening tests are prescriptive enough at this level of detail to predict that you need something other than the stock tuning.

I am happy to recommend the Tanchjim One IEM. Get one and compare it to other choices you have. You may like it better but if not, gift it to someone else and make them happy! :)

------------
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/
is this DSP version or 3.5mm version??
 
Back
Top Bottom