-
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!
TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero IEM Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I have found Dekoni Bulletz work the best for me on all my IEM's. they're memory foam and seal very tightly.
I found the highs very smooth and undistorted-each to his/her own but my Blessing 2's and a couple other IEM's are much "brighter". What is your source?My Zero IEM's arrived today. I was excited to try them based on the review. However, the Zero highs were harsh and didn't fit my taste. I much prefer the $10 Sony MDR-ZX110. They sound great, collapse for easy storage and are amazingly durable. No ear fatigue and great sound - that's what I look for. I use them when working outside or away from home. They are so inexpensive I never cared if I damaged or lost them. But I can't seem to break them even with dirty jobs (chain saw/yard work).
My HIFIMAN HE400SE phones also sound great for inside relaxing. Both Sony and HE400SE beat out the Zero IEM by a mile for my ears. I'm glad someone enjoys them - but it's not me.
Got mine in about an hour ago. I'm comparing them to the Moondrop Blessing 2 Dusk. I have the tips with small bore on them.
In general the differences are as what you would expect when you look at the measurements, but there is more bass then I expected. I do have the feeling that the Dusk has a little more treble than the Zero's but that could be an effect from the lower gain around 2-3kHz on the Dusk.
Overal I'm still undecided which one I like most, which is a very positive thing for the Zero's, when you take price in consideration.
Next session is some music with more vocals.
The ergonomics are great for me. They fit my ears better than any other IEM I have, except the Dusk.
In general the differences are as what you would expect when you look at the measurements, but there is more bass then I expected. I do have the feeling that the Dusk has a little more treble than the Zero's but that could be an effect from the lower gain around 2-3kHz on the Dusk.
Overal I'm still undecided which one I like most, which is a very positive thing for the Zero's, when you take price in consideration.
Next session is some music with more vocals.
The ergonomics are great for me. They fit my ears better than any other IEM I have, except the Dusk.
Yeah, I think the Dusk wins it. The more smooth transition between upper bass and lower mids makes bass guitars and standing bass sound more natural to me. The lower ear-gain makes the Dusk sound a bit softer/gentle too, without any loss in detail. But that does mean the Zero has as much detail as the Dusk and sometimes it seems to have more, but it clearly is because the extra gain in upper mids towards the treble, compared to the bass. When swapping back and forth between Dusk and Zero this becomes clear.
Isolation on the Dusk is also better. The resin used on the Dusk also feels more comfortable than the plastic on the Zero.
In total the differences are not huge at all. Tonality is really good on the Zero. If the Dusk would fail on me I don't think I would replace it now that I have the Zero. The extra ear-gain is much more agreeable than I expected. But I can also see why some find these "shouty". Certainly when you have IEMs that are more tuned like the Dusk and when you appreciate that kind of tuning.
Oh, the Zero's are power-hungry. Damn!
EDIT: It is actually quite OK. When running them from my Topping A50s I had the impression that I needed to turn the volume way up, for an IEM. Yes, higher then with other IEMs. But I'm running them now of a phone, powering an iBasso DC03, without any problem. So a decent dongle DAC/amp runs them just fine. It's not even running hot.
Conclusion: These (Truthear Crinacle Zero) are absolutely great. But I still like the Moondrop Blessing 2 Dusk better.
Last edited:
Nice selection, but too small for the stem of the Truthear zeros which really does seem to be quite wide (7.8mm if I read the specs correctly). The foam tips that come with it have quite thin walls
Moondrop MIS-TIp T55 fit and are quite comfortable. (I have tested the L and thinking about keeping them on: these are comfy!)
Last edited:
Do you have any advice on adopting this for use with the RME ADI-2 DAC FS? it has only 5 PEQ bands plus a low shelf and a high shelf. Looks like I could use the shelf on the low, but your highest filter has a high Q.
No seal issues at all on the Stealth.
IMO, five PEQ bands should be more than enough.
Marc v E
Major Contributor
Just received them and had a first listen.
Short story: They are great. And they confirm my experience so far that a great sounding system sounds "quite ordinary" but just "right" by tonality; has great seperation of instruments; and makes pretty much any music sound good.
I'm quite surprised too that such a "bass heavy" harman curve sounds so lean in headphones.
Short story: They are great. And they confirm my experience so far that a great sounding system sounds "quite ordinary" but just "right" by tonality; has great seperation of instruments; and makes pretty much any music sound good.
I'm quite surprised too that such a "bass heavy" harman curve sounds so lean in headphones.
Possibly because its response is actually likely up to 5 dB short of the Harman target's (sub)bass, combined with a slight deficiency in the upper bass and a broadband (more audible) excess over the target in the upper midrange/treble:
Last edited:
Based on my experiences over the past couple days, if they sound lean, they're not sealing well. Once I finally got them sealed, I think they're almost a little bass heavy. Plenty of it.
Marc v E
Major Contributor
I think you're right. I tried a smaller tip size and that just solved it.
Edit: and I like it better with 5db added to the lowest octaves. I am probably just used to a little extra oomph.
Edit 2: these truthears sound tonally just as good as my Beolabs and have better seperation. Goes to show that € 50 of inears can give you € 7500 in speaker sound.
Last edited:
Sounds like you prefer the Harman target then (as that 5 dB sub-bass boost likely brings the Truthear Zero closer to), just like the majority of listeners were found to in blind tests.
Well, my Truthears arrived today! Tried them out, remember I'm an IEM noob, never even tried them before (even though I have lots of over ear headphone experience EQ'd to Harman Curve & additionally some studio monitors with a sub). I followed the instruction on how to assemble them & wear them (easy enough), and used the medium sized silicon tip with the narrow internal bore (which is the one Amir measured) and it happened to fit my ear fine - I think they did anyway because the BASS was absolutely the first thing I recognised when I switched on the music through these! Initial reactions were that this is the best or equal to best headphone bass I've experienced - it was there in the right amount and there was a lot of definition & detail to that bass.
The second realisation I had was the rest of the frequency response felt like it was very well balanced, and there was certainly enough treble, wouldn't have wanted anymore treble but at the same time didn't really want to take any away - the tonal balance on my busiest track that I often use as the first port of call to assess overall tonality (Supermassive Black Hole by the band Muse) showed that tonality was absolutely fine. My next thoughts, third thought, I was wondering if the IEM was bringing out all the different levels of detail that I was used to with my best over ear Harman EQ'd headphones - on this point I'm not totally conclusive, it's possible I can get more into the different layers of the music more on the busiest tracks with my best over ear headphones (say HD560s EQ'd to Harman). I did briefly listen to my HD560s on some of the same tracks and my first realisation was that the IEM's sounded a bit thicker - I think this because the bass is very completely represented in the IEM, and the IEM Harman Target actually does have more bass (to make up for lack of tactile bass vs over ear Harman Headphone Curve) - and my theory is that this enables you to hear more definition in the bass as it's simply at a higher SPL even if tonality does sound right like that.
Last thoughts - soundstage. My first listening of the day today was with the IEM's and I wasn't disappointed at all in the perceived soundstage & imaging, it felt natural and panning effects transitioned well around your head. When I was trying the HD560s afterwards though I did notice that the soundstage was better, indeed a bit wider, and I think it felt less flat in terms of it's shape (IEM was maybe like the soundstage layed out on an A4 sheet of paper somewhere in your head, whereas perhaps HD560s felt like it didn't feel like a flat sheet of paper and instead had a bit more backwards & forwards shape to it - quite hard to describe and it was a quick listening comparison.
One of the things that impressed me with the IEM (apart from the bass & overall tonality) was when I was listening to Max Richter Vivaldi Four Seasons Recomposed - the track Winter 1 - the violin strings & other strings sounded potentially the best & most balanced I've experienced in a headphone, and the deep bass of the cellos (I guess they were cellos) also felt very well represented, along with the atmospheric lowest electronic bass elements/effects he puts onto that track. Interestingly that's not a busy track as there's not millions of competing elements (loose reference to one of the points I was making in the previous paragraph.....maybe this IEM's strength is not in seperating out every different layer on the busiest tracks). I wonder if the violins sounded so good because this IEM has a very smooth treble frequency response (no sharp dips or peaks), and perhaps this smooth frequency response has more probability of translating to what is actually experienced at your eardrum - as perhaps over ear headphones have more potential for sharp peaks or dips due to interaction with your outer ear to converge further away from the smooth frequency response that was measured on the dummy head - dunno, some loose intuition!
A thought on EQ. I decided it didn't need anything doing to it, apart from potentially putting in a +5dB Q1 Peak Filter at 20Hz - I looked at Crinacles graphs for this IEM and this filter allows Harman Level bass at 20Hz whilst it virtually stops it's influence by the time you get to 65Hz, which is what's required to match the curve. It was 50:50 whether or not it was an improvement or not, eventhough it was obvious that it made a difference to the experience. On the plus side I think it evened up with the treble even better, and it also made the overall bass that bit more prominent, but on the negative I felt on some tracks that it clouded a bit of the musical detail of the bass, as in it potentially obscured some of the detail in that bass, which is likely to be more of a psychoacoustic phenomenon I think rather than a distortion related phenomenon as these IEM's have low distortion in the bass, and certainly at the relatively normal to low levels I listen at (I'd be below the red line in Amir's distortion graph). So I think my preference for with or without bass EQ is related more to what my ideal Target Curve would be rather than anything distortion related in the IEM. I can definitely take or leave EQ with this IEM, it's literally 50:50 depending on the track.
My final parting words in this post: I haven't measured these on my miniDSP EARS yet, so I don't have any channel balance information for you. But I will be measuring them over the next days or week, so I'll post again with the results....and it should also give us an idea of the bass level (for my pair) as well as how good the channel matching is. Overall I'm very impressed with this IEM, I think it's probably the best £50 you could spend on any audio gear!
The second realisation I had was the rest of the frequency response felt like it was very well balanced, and there was certainly enough treble, wouldn't have wanted anymore treble but at the same time didn't really want to take any away - the tonal balance on my busiest track that I often use as the first port of call to assess overall tonality (Supermassive Black Hole by the band Muse) showed that tonality was absolutely fine. My next thoughts, third thought, I was wondering if the IEM was bringing out all the different levels of detail that I was used to with my best over ear Harman EQ'd headphones - on this point I'm not totally conclusive, it's possible I can get more into the different layers of the music more on the busiest tracks with my best over ear headphones (say HD560s EQ'd to Harman). I did briefly listen to my HD560s on some of the same tracks and my first realisation was that the IEM's sounded a bit thicker - I think this because the bass is very completely represented in the IEM, and the IEM Harman Target actually does have more bass (to make up for lack of tactile bass vs over ear Harman Headphone Curve) - and my theory is that this enables you to hear more definition in the bass as it's simply at a higher SPL even if tonality does sound right like that.
Last thoughts - soundstage. My first listening of the day today was with the IEM's and I wasn't disappointed at all in the perceived soundstage & imaging, it felt natural and panning effects transitioned well around your head. When I was trying the HD560s afterwards though I did notice that the soundstage was better, indeed a bit wider, and I think it felt less flat in terms of it's shape (IEM was maybe like the soundstage layed out on an A4 sheet of paper somewhere in your head, whereas perhaps HD560s felt like it didn't feel like a flat sheet of paper and instead had a bit more backwards & forwards shape to it - quite hard to describe and it was a quick listening comparison.
One of the things that impressed me with the IEM (apart from the bass & overall tonality) was when I was listening to Max Richter Vivaldi Four Seasons Recomposed - the track Winter 1 - the violin strings & other strings sounded potentially the best & most balanced I've experienced in a headphone, and the deep bass of the cellos (I guess they were cellos) also felt very well represented, along with the atmospheric lowest electronic bass elements/effects he puts onto that track. Interestingly that's not a busy track as there's not millions of competing elements (loose reference to one of the points I was making in the previous paragraph.....maybe this IEM's strength is not in seperating out every different layer on the busiest tracks). I wonder if the violins sounded so good because this IEM has a very smooth treble frequency response (no sharp dips or peaks), and perhaps this smooth frequency response has more probability of translating to what is actually experienced at your eardrum - as perhaps over ear headphones have more potential for sharp peaks or dips due to interaction with your outer ear to converge further away from the smooth frequency response that was measured on the dummy head - dunno, some loose intuition!
A thought on EQ. I decided it didn't need anything doing to it, apart from potentially putting in a +5dB Q1 Peak Filter at 20Hz - I looked at Crinacles graphs for this IEM and this filter allows Harman Level bass at 20Hz whilst it virtually stops it's influence by the time you get to 65Hz, which is what's required to match the curve. It was 50:50 whether or not it was an improvement or not, eventhough it was obvious that it made a difference to the experience. On the plus side I think it evened up with the treble even better, and it also made the overall bass that bit more prominent, but on the negative I felt on some tracks that it clouded a bit of the musical detail of the bass, as in it potentially obscured some of the detail in that bass, which is likely to be more of a psychoacoustic phenomenon I think rather than a distortion related phenomenon as these IEM's have low distortion in the bass, and certainly at the relatively normal to low levels I listen at (I'd be below the red line in Amir's distortion graph). So I think my preference for with or without bass EQ is related more to what my ideal Target Curve would be rather than anything distortion related in the IEM. I can definitely take or leave EQ with this IEM, it's literally 50:50 depending on the track.
My final parting words in this post: I haven't measured these on my miniDSP EARS yet, so I don't have any channel balance information for you. But I will be measuring them over the next days or week, so I'll post again with the results....and it should also give us an idea of the bass level (for my pair) as well as how good the channel matching is. Overall I'm very impressed with this IEM, I think it's probably the best £50 you could spend on any audio gear!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2019
- Messages
- 1,202
- Likes
- 2,101
If you could compare the wide and narrow tips as well as the spongy one it would be great for us here.
Also, you should try Maiky76's EQ for this: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...cle-zero-iem-review.37380/page-4#post-1315721
