Tanchjim Origin IEM Review

[olieb]

As a general rule, measurements above 10 khz are not reliable anyway.

I tend to agree, but there is a big difference already around 6-7 kHz.
And there are quite a few reviews of cheap IEMs lately that show quite good match between left and right (often even above 10 kHz).
So your mearurements might even be better than you think ;-)

 

[macauley86]

I have tried a few IEMs (FiiO JD7, Kiwi Ears Cadenza, triple driver ones) and hate them. I find them all very uncomfortable (the JD7 IEMS sound very good, though). My go-to earbuds are the Apple EarPods. I can wear them all day long without any problems, they have a good mic for calls and a very pleasing, non-fatiguing sound signature. And they are $20.

 

[Art of sound]

The solution for all of this is simple: develop your own EQ starting with the measurements. Try what I and others produce. Then make small adjustments to taste. There is no solution other than this. It is absurd to chase this and that target, worry about this and that fixture as they are doing in that video.

It is also completely wrong to state that IEMs are objectively worse. There is no such thing. IEMs create a different experience but that is it. Their ability to produce high fidelity music at times is superior to any other transducer at any price.

I recommend watching the video. yes i do use squigly measurements to create eq profiles and AB between them with different genres. but i do prefer different eq profiles for different iem's. for orchestra lite that has 8 BA's i prefer the default eq i.e given the slump at 2.5-7k. The treble is already so front and centered, spacial qualities are so good on this iem it makes moondrop variations imaging look weak. Its weird that different drivers do vary a little bit so it makes sense to tune iem's slightly differently and that 8k hump can be EQ'ed based on nozzle fitment into your eardrums.

 

[amirm]

I recommend watching the video.

I don't. I watched it and it presents completely wrong approach here, debating difference in targets that matter not in practice. It also seems to want to put down IEMs since they don't do much testing of them.

 

[markanini]

Well, firstly, fit is a personal thing, but I assume, as they are rather small, larger tips might resolve fitting issues for many, as well as sticky tips like the Azla Sednafit. My ears they fit like a glove. And secondly, concerning the bass, it is quite neutral. It is almost perfectly on target down to about 50Hz and just a bit above at even smaller frequencies, not more than 2-3 dB. Since there is very little content between 20 and 50kHz, for about 95-99% of the music this should be inaudible.

Those tips cost as much as the IEM https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08BRK3FKH

 

[MacClintock]

Those tips cost as much as the IEM https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08BRK3FKH

You are apparently not even capable of reading properly what is provided in your link . 2 pairs cost $19, the IEM about $25. Do the maths, please.

But even if the tips would cost as much as the IEM, $25 + $25 = $50 <<<<< $260. So you could buy 5 pairs of Salnotes Zero 2s, 5 pairs of Azla tips and still would have better sound (better target compliance) than with the Tanchjim Origin.

But in fact, it is as I a wrote elsewhere before, get a decent and beautiful cable for $35, the Azla tips for $10 and the Zero 2 for $25, that is a great set up and you only spend $70. What more to wish for?

 

[Chromatischism]

Looking for hypothetical upgrades to my Zeros I had the Origin on my shopping list but the following 3 have better measurements. I'd probably have to dial in a little EQ on either of the first two, but less than most others. If I wanted to just throw money at it and be done, I'd get the Studio 4. I can't say I would ever spend more than that on IEMs.

Binary Acoustics × Gizaudio Chopin
Kiwi Ears Quintet
Softears Studio 4

The AFUL Performer 5 also gets an honorable mention but I'm skeptical of its upper mid measurement.

 

[Resolve]

I recommend watching the video. yes i do use squigly measurements to create eq profiles and AB between them with different genres. but i do prefer different eq profiles for different iem's. for orchestra lite that has 8 BA's i prefer the default eq i.e given the slump at 2.5-7k. The treble is already so front and centered, spacial qualities are so good on this iem it makes moondrop variations imaging look weak. Its weird that different drivers do vary a little bit so it makes sense to tune iem's slightly differently and that 8k hump can be EQ'ed based on nozzle fitment into your eardrums.

Given that the guy thinks it was about "different targets", clearly he didn't understand it. And the idea that we don't do much testing on them is... laughable. Par for the course.

To be clear, EQing to Harman IE as a starting point to see if it's a good fit for you isn't unreasonable at all, so I endorse that take. But don't imagine that's where this process should stop for individuals.

 

[Maiky76]

This is a review, detailed measurements and listening tests of Tanchjim Origin IEM. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $260.
View attachment 353863
Everything from packaging and look and feel of the Origin is a huge step up from the budget IEMs we have tested in the past. The ear pieces themselves feel like solid metal and have high polish. Despite the extra weight, I had no trouble keeping them in my ear (stationary position). The cord is soft and seemed to be tangle free. Even the act of inserting the cables into the IEM felt good without excessive force and a final feeling of it being properly seated.

Two versions of the tips are provided. One said better bass and another, better treble. I chose the former for testing.

Three sets of nozzles are provided. There is no documentation on what the difference is. I measured all three (see below).

Company touts low distortion and compliance with their target:
View attachment 353864

It is good to see them using such a target but alas, it is not what we like to see. Let's measure it with my GRAS-45CA fixture using Audio Precision APx555 analyzer.

Tanchjim IEM Measurements
Let's start with the included nozzle and better bass tip:
View attachment 353866
We see a response that is very close to the manufacturer. As is however, it has too little deep bass, and slightly boosted upper bass. And maybe some shortfall around 6.4 kHz. Testing with different nozzles is tricky as it requires removal, changing the tip and re-inserting into the fixture. There is no way I can do this consistently but I tried:
View attachment 353867
There appears to be slight change below 1 kHz but not enough to get it compliant with our target. Let's stay with the default (red). Relative response error is thus:
View attachment 353868
Should be easy to dial in filters if distortion is low which it is:
View attachment 353869
View attachment 353870

Group delay is uneventful in IEMs due to lack of reflections that other headphone types have and such is the case here:
View attachment 353871

Impedance is flat and very low:
View attachment 353872
Combined with average IEM sensitivity, it should be an easy drive for many sources:
View attachment 353873

Tanchjim IEM Listening Tests and Eq
First listen wasn't bad and produced an inoffensive sound signature. I could not tell you the exact issues with doing the EQ:
View attachment 353882
I dialed in the bass boost first and wow, was this IEM able to produce very clean and substantial amount of bass (for an IEM). Overall though, it was a big boomy so I put in the filter next to it to pull down that 200 Hz hump. That cleaned up the bass. I wasn't sure if I needed treble boost but I put it in (based on the channel needing the least) and it nicely balanced the newly found bass response.

I then ran through my reference clips and the experience was jaw dropping at times. Full range sound with detail to die for and dynamics to go with it. I could have listened for hours. Turning off the EQ, pulled things down substantially, taking out the smile factor. Not terrible mind you but equalization took the Origin to proverbial next level.

Conclusions
I know, I know, I have reviewed IEMs going for $50 that need little EQ and sound great. But they feel quite cheap. While the Origin does need some EQ, once in place, you get both the luxury feel and sound fidelity. Ideally we would not need EQ and I hope the company takes note and changes its tuning to what we like to see. If they had done that, it would have gotten a perfect score from me.

As is, I can only recommend the Tanchjim Origin with equalization.
------------
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/

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.
  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 regards to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.
• I sometimes use variations of the Harman curve for some reasons. See rational here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pro-review-headphone.28244/page-5#post-989169
• https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pro-review-headphone.28244/page-6#post-992119
• 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: 73.2%
Score Amirm: 81.9%
Score with EQ: 98.1%

Tanchjim Origi Harman EQ
March042024-131918

Preamp: -5 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 22.71 Hz Gain 4.20 dB Q 0.40
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 201.18 Hz Gain -3.61 dB Q 0.73
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 622.00 Hz Gain 1.72 dB Q 1.42
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1606.89 Hz Gain -2.27 dB Q 1.13
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 4099.26 Hz Gain -2.01 dB Q 3.33
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6422.67 Hz Gain 5.52 dB Q 2.73
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 12523.50 Hz Gain -4.90 dB Q 3.31

Hereafter is the EQ for the Knowles target, the scores are NOT comparable

Tanchjim Origi Knowles EQ
March042024-133008

Preamp: -9.2 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 22.86 Hz Gain 4.2 dB Q 0.4
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 203.43 Hz Gain -3.61 dB Q 0.73
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 638.64 Hz Gain 1.74 dB Q 1.22
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1603.39 Hz Gain -2.24 dB Q 1.06
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 4096.07 Hz Gain -2.07 dB Q 3.33
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6428.67 Hz Gain 5.65 dB Q 2.56
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 16509.66 Hz Gain 9.14 dB Q 1.45

 

[Chromatischism]

^ I think adding 5.65 dB at 6428.67 Hz is going to be potentially painful. Anyone going to try it?

 

[amirm]

Given that the guy thinks it was about "different targets", clearly he didn't understand it. And the idea that we don't do much testing on them is... laughable. Par for the course.

To be clear, EQing to Harman IE as a starting point to see if it's a good fit for you isn't unreasonable at all, so I endorse that take. But don't imagine that's where this process should stop for individuals.

Creating a bunch of FUD against IEMs and taking us farther and farther away from standardization is a huge disservice to audiophiles. You keep doing this and never get this larger picture. Or maybe you do and like the confusion that it creates. Unlike stuff you are throwing at the board, Harman's IEM research is backed by correlation to listening tests -- something you have never, ever done. That you then proceed to complain about their work while having never done yours, is stay the least, preposterous.

 

[amirm]

^ I think adding 5.65 dB at 6428.67 Hz is going to be potentially painful. Anyone going to try it?

I think he is averaging the two channels to arrive at that whereas I used the amount for the one channel with least correction. I am not a fan of any kind of averaging but sure, you would want to listen and adjust to taste.

 

[FrantzM]

Count me among the spoiled. I shant purchase any IEM priced above $65 (provision made for taxes and shipping).
On top this one doesn't perform better in term to compliance to an accepted (at least by me) target curve. THD is not better than those TRUTHEAR or even the 7Hz $35 IEM ... It may feel great, but the TURTHEAR do not embarrass themselves in this department.

Not worth it, IMHO considering what is available, and superior at1/4 of the asking price...

Peace

 

[MacClintock]

Looking for hypothetical upgrades to my Zeros I had the Origin on my shopping list but the following 3 have better measurements. I'd probably have to dial in a little EQ on either of the first two, but less than most others. If I wanted to just throw money at it and be done, I'd get the Studio 4. I can't say I would ever spend more than that on IEMs.

Binary Acoustics × Gizaudio Chopin
Kiwi Ears Quintet
Softears Studio 4

The AFUL Performer 5 also gets an honorable mention but I'm skeptical of its upper mid measurement.

If you are really prepared to spend that amount of money, I would strongly recommend the Truthear Nova. It has almost perfect target compliance and is cheaper than any of those mentioned (about $ 120 -150, might be less on sale).

 

[HD800Fan]

Only so much you can do with a single driver I suppose.

 

[redeyes]

Why are you comparing with harman In Ear? Compliance to this target is not necessary or wanted by a ton of people.

 

[Chromatischism]

If you are really prepared to spend that amount of money, I would strongly recommend the Truthear Nova. It has almost perfect target compliance and is cheaper than any of those mentioned (about $ 120 -150, might be less on sale).

There is a reason the Nova is not on my list and it is because of the frequency response. That, and I already have the original Zero.

 

[Human Bass]

Looking for hypothetical upgrades to my Zeros I had the Origin on my shopping list but the following 3 have better measurements. I'd probably have to dial in a little EQ on either of the first two, but less than most others. If I wanted to just throw money at it and be done, I'd get the Studio 4. I can't say I would ever spend more than that on IEMs.

Binary Acoustics × Gizaudio Chopin
Kiwi Ears Quintet
Softears Studio 4

The AFUL Performer 5 also gets an honorable mention but I'm skeptical of its upper mid measurement.

The Chopin and Origin has pretty much the same pina gain, the difference is in the bass.

Squiglink - IEM frequency response database by Super* Review

Compare hundreds of frequency response graphs between IEMs and earphones from manufacturers like Moondrop, Sony, 64 Audio, Fiio, and more.

squig.link

Although I believe the high mids will sound different even if they are pretty much the same in the graph, thanks to the different thd between Chopin BAs compared to the Origin DD.

 

[Ambient384]

It is also completely wrong to state that IEMs are objectively worse. There is no such thing. IEMs create a different experience but that is it. Their ability to produce high fidelity music at times is superior to any other transducer at any price.

The video nothing more than just rage-bait because they don't wanna admit that there BA based IEM's that can rival full sized headphones.

 

[mAthay]

Why are you comparing with harman In Ear? Compliance to this target is not necessary or wanted by a ton of people.

It's a known measurement point, which a lot of people are familiar with. Also Amir seems to mostly be a fan of Harman's research. I don't know what other target he should use, I guess no target whatsoever, but that'd make reading the graph harder for a lot of people. Most of these targets made by reviewers/manufacturing groups have no scientific basis, it's just some random dude's opinion of what is preferred or is neutral etc etc.