TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero IEM Review

[GaryH]

Maybe regardless of FR it really matters a lot how far the things are stuck down your lugholes?

IEM insertion depth has measurable effects on...frequency response.

 

[movehome]

Mine arrived and I like them. Thanks for the recommendation!

Cats tore up my old pair of IEM's that came free with a phone so it's nice having another wired pair of earbuds.

 

[julian_hughes]

IEM insertion depth has measurable effects on...frequency response.

Is that measured on a rigid and unchanging electro-mechanical device, or by some fantastic new method of measuring how the typical brain responds to stimuli? Which may vary from one individual to another?

To be clear, I am not disputing the usefulness or accuracy of these kinds of measurements. I'm suggesting that however useful these measurements are they do not *rigidly* define how they are actually experienced by actual humans using the same measured products. They are very useful, very interesting, make for easy comparison of certain aspects, and yet are not measuring hearing but something else which is in fact a mechanistic interpretation of a neurological and bio-mechanical experience.

 

[sweetchaos]

Arrived today.

Only listened to a few songs, but initial impression is excellent.

My reference is Genelec 8040’s and Sennheiser HD560s with Amir’s PEQ.
Felt on par with Gennys in terms of overall balance.

I love that I don't need to use EQ out of the box.

I'll be giving these as Christmas gifts to everyone I know.

I can see benching my HD560s for the summer, and using these primarily then.

This is easily my 2nd favorite headphone, after HD560s, regardless of piece. #1 favourite for US$50.

Would never have considered IEMs if it wasn't for Amir’s review.

 

[julian_hughes]

A

IEM insertion depth has measurable effects on...frequency response.

And another thing (sorry, am on the ale): If insertion depth is genuinely significant then all the measurements which ignore it become less valid. It means we cannot compare an Etymotic with a Moondrop with a Shure. All comparisons of IEMs with different insertion depths are misleading.

 

[julian_hughes]

And another another thing (sorry, but it's late): With the upper bass bleed tamed the Moondrop Katos are much more enjoyable than these Truthears in another way: with the Truthears I experience that thing of three distinct points: "sound on the left, sound on the right, sound in the middle". With the Katos I hear a cohesive environment. No, not quite like loudspeakers but very close. Crossfeed not a temptation.

 

[pauze]

Received my ZEROs yesterday. I settled on the small aperture tips (perceived more bass impact and better imaging) and have been running comparisons against my other headphones (Drop/Sennheiser 6XX, Beyer DT880 600 Ohms > run off a Topping NX4) and my home studio setup (MOTU Ultralite mk5 into KRK V8S2 monitors in a treated room) ever since receipt and I am coming away seriously impressed. In particular, they put the 6XX to shame (though tbh never could really get on with that set). While they don't have as nice of a stereo image as my studio monitors, the tonality is better in comparison since the sound doesn't have a room to fight with. Definitely adding them to my mixing arsenal/workflow. I can't believe these are so cheap, though I can see needing a new cable at some point if this gets heavy use (and I expect it to).

 

[amirm]

A

And another thing (sorry, am on the ale): If insertion depth is genuinely significant then all the measurements which ignore it become less valid. It means we cannot compare an Etymotic with a Moondrop with a Shure. All comparisons of IEMs with different insertion depths are misleading.

Not if you start to gradually ignore the response errors above 6 kHz as I do.

 

[julian_hughes]

Not if you start to gradually ignore the response errors above 6 kHz as I do.

Can you expand on that and clarify?

 

[Chromatischism]

Can you expand on that and clarify?

This might help.

What (physically) causes the 7.5-8.5kHz peak in human hearing with IEMs and why it's important...

I'm sick of people saying "it's a resonance peak of the measurement rig" because it's not just that. I hear it clearly in every IEM with direct correlation to measurements and the peak's intensity. What varies of course is the exact position of the peak (7.5-9.5kHz range in 99% of cases...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[julian_hughes]

This might help.

What (physically) causes the 7.5-8.5kHz peak in human hearing with IEMs and why it's important...

I'm sick of people saying "it's a resonance peak of the measurement rig" because it's not just that. I hear it clearly in every IEM with direct correlation to measurements and the peak's intensity. What varies of course is the exact position of the peak (7.5-9.5kHz range in 99% of cases...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Not really, as I don't see how test results published here acknowledge or reflect that.

Also, why should the points I raised be corralled into a narrow discussion about the response between 7.5 & 8.5 kHz?

 

[Chromatischism]

Also, why should the points I raised be corralled into a narrow discussion about the response between 7.5 & 8.5 kHz?

Maybe read the thread.

 

[amirm]

Can you expand on that and clarify?

There are too many vagaries from mounting the driver to differences in measurement rig. I don't believe in averaging to dial these out as that then doesn't represent any unit. You can see this in my measurements of left and right units even though the measurement rig is the same:

There is excellent tracking to 3 kHz but above that deviations start.

Also, the target is highly smoothed as otherwise it too would have those ups and downs. So comparisons against it are not totally valid either.

As such, I EQ to ear instead of relying on measurements alone. If the EQ in that region sounds better, then it is a good bet.

 

[julian_hughes]

edit: the following was a reply to Chromaticism, not Amir or anyone else.

Maybe answer a reasonable question with a reasonable answer instead of deflecting it off into a somewhat but not entirely related issue. If that constitutes an answer then there's not much point in asking.

 

[julian_hughes]

There are too many vagaries from mounting the driver to differences in measurement rig. I don't believe in averaging to dial these out as that then doesn't represent any unit. You can see this in my measurements of left and right units even though the measurement rig is the same:

There is excellent tracking to 3 kHz but above that deviations start.

Also, the target is highly smoothed as otherwise it too would have those ups and downs. So comparisons against it are not totally valid either.

As such, I EQ to ear instead of relying on measurements alone. If the EQ in that region sounds better, then it is a good bet.

So would 3k be the limit of what different measurement rigs can reliably distinguish? After 3k what are we really seeing in measurements? Tendencies?

 

[amirm]

So would 3k be the limit of what different measurement rigs can reliably distinguish? After 3k what are we really seeing in measurements? Tendencies?

There is no hard limit. In your mind, gradually distrust the measurements from then on and focus on larger picture. Certainly above 10 kHz it is a crapshoot.

 

[SuicideSquid]

Mine arrived and I'm listening to them now. Few thoughts:

1. Wow, these really do sound fantastic, with smooth and balanced frequency response and loads of bass. They absolutely demolish my Altec Lansing and Ultimate Ears IEMs, both of which are getting a bit long in the tooth and both of which cost at least 3x was these did.

2. The packaging is (aside from the cringey waifu) really impressive for a product in this price class. Lots of options for tips, a very nice carrying bag, detachable cable, and good quality packing overall.

Definitely very impressed.

 

[julian_hughes]

There is no hard limit. In your mind, gradually distrust the measurements from then on and focus on larger picture. Certainly above 10 kHz it is a crapshoot.

My experience of FR measurements of stuff I actually own and use is that they very accurately describe bass response, and if it is overcooked and ruins the mids. And then there are the frequencies of the human voice. And that's what we notice, what we actually pay attention to and *hear*. The rest, unless truly awful, matters a lot less. I have EQ apps on my desktops and laptop and phone and smartphone which can import and apply AutoEQ profiles. But in the end I go back to just correcting the grossest errors (which is usually bass bleeding into mids) and not worry about minor stuff. The unusual thing about the Truthears is that the bass doesn't need correction, but the frequency range of the human voice does. They are decent enough and worth the price, and I like a lot how they engineered the crossover to be like a very well implemented low shelf filter, but I'm not convinced by them because that human voice range is not so well executed as the bass, and it matters at least as much.

 

[Robbo99999]

Even if they are eq'd to supposedly sound the same? I'm not a measuring apparatus. Maybe regardless of FR it really matters a lot how far the things are stuck down your lugholes? Hearing is an amazing thing. Someone right beside you can be practically yelling and you might not even notice. Or a twig might snap 20 metres away and you are instantly alert. I can't sleep well in a noisy place. I have a friend who can't sleep well outside of a busy city as he needs the noise. The hair cells in our cochlea don't always respond the exact same way to the same stimulus. We are not mechanical but bio-mechanical and our brains, where hearing actually happens, which control those hair cells, are not an open book. Everyone who is certain that they understand hearing is mistaken. This focus on FR measured, necessarily, on electro-mechanical devices is really useful for identifying differences or certain characteristics but using it as "one graph to rule them all" is a very narrow focus.

Ah, you EQ'd them to the same curve did you? My comment was more related to the fact that the measured frequency responses of the IEM's are different, which would explain particularly some of the points you mentioned in that post of yours I quoted earlier. (But for this post now, I don't really understand the relevance of your examples about twigs / shouting / sleeping / hair cells in your ear.)

 

[amirm]

My experience of FR measurements of stuff I actually own and use is that they very accurately describe bass response, and if it is overcooked and ruins the mids. And then there are the frequencies of the human voice. And that's what we notice, what we actually pay attention to and *hear*. The rest, unless truly awful, matters a lot less.

Very true and important lesson here.