• 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

Rate this IEM

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 13 2.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 21 3.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 73 12.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 493 82.2%

  • Total voters
    600

USER

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 30, 2019
Messages
886
Likes
1,409
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!
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
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,700
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.
I'd use the bass filter for the low shelf and ignore the highest 13k filter.
 

Kremmen

Member
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
71
Location
UK
Mine arrived today and were bought for £50 on Amazon in the UK.

I am using the medium tips with the narrow internal bore and I am currently driving them with a Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 Pro mobile phone and listening to tracks on The Jazz Groove and several stations on SomaFM, particularly the modem jazz on Sonic Universe.

Simply put, these fit my ears very well indeed and sound fabulous. They are clearly a step up from my BLON BL03, which are still great in my opinion. These Crinacle Zero also have an uncanny ability to sometimes sound like the music is coming from anywhere but the little IEMs in my ears.

The bass can sometimes sound a bit overcooked with some bass-heavy tracks when compared to the BLON, but for the jazz I've listened to so far this evening I have never felt the need to apply any equalisation and I have simply enjoyed all that I am hearing. Their ability to go LOW whilst remaining controlled is something to behold too.

A worthy companion to my Hifiman Edition XS headphones and for £50 they are definitely a great deal.

Over and out! :D
 
Last edited:

stevenswall

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1,366
Likes
1,075
Location
Orem, UT
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). :D

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.

The biggest test for me is listening to something for a week or so, then going back to another earphone.

Doing this I've realized that in some cases I was used to brighness or muddy bass so new earphones would sound muted or thin, respectively, and after I got used to the new earphone I preferred it to going back, even if I tried the old earphone again for a handful of days to see if I could do the operation in reverse.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
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
Yes, good point, I'll for sure compare the wide internal bore vs narrow internal bore & the foam tips when measuring on my miniDSP EARS. This information could be quite useful for people to get a handle on what they're actually experiencing when switching tips, and I'd probably be able to provide some EQ's that would take say the effect of the foam tip and convert it back to the measured silicon tip - so that way people could use the foam tip whilst still knowing that they're getting the same great frequency response as the measured silicon tip here on ASR by Amir - as we think the foam tip changes more than just the bass.

Yep, re Maiky's EQ, I've recommended a few people try it, I didn't try it yet as I simply felt there was nothing that needed changing, and given I knew the measurements were almost bang on the Harman Curve I'm not expecting any big win with it in my case..........but I'm sure I'll try it just as a means of comparison. If people find the IEM shouty then people should definitely try Maiky's EQ, as his EQ would reduce that.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
No seal issues at all on the Stealth.
Ah, ok, the reason why you might be experiencing more bass in the Crinacle X Zero over your Stealth might be because there is a bigger bass shelf on the Harman IEM Target vs the Harman Over Ear Headphone Target. (attached a pic showing the different Harman Curves, the green line is one of their IEM Curves and the over ear curves are the other ones). After trying my first IEM today I didn't expect as much bass as I heard either, and I'm used to Harman Curve bass in over ear headphones......I think the overall tonality in IEM's is balanced out by some increased treble too vs the Harman Over Ear Curve, so the IEM Curve therefore doesn't sound unbalanced......but based on my experience today (my first IEM), then I can quite understand your comment. It certainly didn't sound bloated in the Crinacle X Zero though, not by any stretch.
Overlay-of-Harman-over-ear-headphone-and-in-ear-monitor-curves.-1100x589.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dro

Kevbaz

Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Messages
225
Likes
366
Location
West Yorkshire England
Mine arrived today, a week early :) really pleased with them on the initial listen.
Will come back after I’ve had more time to listen to a variety of music through them
Kev
 

julian_hughes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
657
Likes
901
Here are some thoughts about the EQ.


Code:
TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero Full APO EQ Flat@HF 96000Hz
September142022-145558

Preamp: -3.9 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 20.00 Hz Gain 3.88 dB Q 0.90
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 81.44 Hz Gain -2.05 dB Q 1.46
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1205.00 Hz Gain -1.23 dB Q 2.55
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 2175.35 Hz Gain -1.65 dB Q 0.85
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 4795.73 Hz Gain -2.97 dB Q 2.97
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6699.00 Hz Gain 2.57 dB Q 2.64
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 13229.75 Hz Gain -4.98 dB Q 5.00
I found this very useful, thank you. I've used my Truthears for a couple of days now and I did start to see what people mean when they describe them as shouty. It can get wearing. I found that I'm happy with the original bass response and that I am extremely unlikely to notice a 2dB deficiency at 6699 Hz and possibly could not even hear a change at 13229 Hz. Of greater concern is that these IEMs are extremely quiet as is and the last thing I want to do is use a -3.9 dB precut. So I'm trying this:

Code:
Preamp: 0 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 81.44 Hz Gain -2.05 dB Q 1.46
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 1205.00 Hz Gain -1.23 dB Q 2.55
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 2175.35 Hz Gain -1.65 dB Q 0.85
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 4795.73 Hz Gain -2.97 dB Q 2.97

It should just kill that shoutiness, keep the bass tight, while having no effect on level. That's the plan anyway.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
@txbdan , for your 5 band PEQ you need for your RME ADI DAC, do what Julian_Hughes is doing here:
That's totally valid for the reasons he mentioned. And then if you want the subbass to be increased to Harman levels then add in the following Low Shelf Filter (as you have to use that type of filter in your RME ADI): Low Shelf Filter, 30Hz, +4.7dB, Q0.707. I've traced the differences in REW between Maiky76's peak bass filter he was using and this Low Shelf Filter I've given you and they're very similar through their effects from 20Hz up through to 60Hz which is where the changes need to occur. And you've still got space left for one more Peak Filter, so you could still use Maiky's 13000Hz sharp peak filter if you want, but there's not much point using such a sharp peak filter all the way up there as the frequency response becomes more unpredictable as you go further up the frequency range & certainly above 10kHz, or you could use that last free Peak Filter slot for his 6000Hz peak filter.

EDIT: so your final EQ using your RME ADI would probably best be:

Preamp: -4.7 dB
Filter 1: Low Shelf 30Hz Gain +4.7dB Q0.707
Filter 2: Peak Filter 81.44 Hz Gain -2.05 dB Q 1.46
Filter 3: Peak Filter 1205.00 Hz Gain -1.23 dB Q 2.55
Filter 4: Peak Filter 2175.35 Hz Gain -1.65 dB Q 0.85
Filter 5: Peak Filter 4795.73 Hz Gain -2.97 dB Q 2.97
Filter 6: Peak Filter 6699.00 Hz Gain 2.57 dB Q 2.64
Filter 7: High Shelf: blank/empty
 
Last edited:

Rottmannash

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
2,969
Likes
2,606
Location
Nashville
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.
I powered mine off my S10+ 3.5 mm output and at full volume was loud but not painfully so. No headroom to speak of but any louder would be a bit dangerous for extended listening periods. If one wants to listen to a power hungry IEM try either of the Tin HiFi P1 or its successor-those are inefficient IEMs.
 

AdamG

Proving your point makes it “Science”.
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
4,637
Likes
14,924
Location
Reality
Here are my two EQ sets. Both based on the Harman and the Crinacle Curves and added a little moar Bass. Because I love the Bass and these IEM’s remain distortion free with added bass. Distortion free to my ears. Which are far far away from any golden standard.

E3967826-52A8-46B5-A70A-0AC7ECA3ED09.png

865AB96E-8344-44B4-B475-B254BBBC019E.png
 

MaxwellsEq

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
1,628
Likes
2,427
Mine arrived today. They seem certainly loud enough playing directly from my Android phone and Shanling M0, I don't feel a separate headphone amplifier is essential to be able to use them, but YMMV.

I found them relatively comfortable after several hours worth of listening. The sticky foam tips and the medium silicon (narrow bore) tips both work OK (the larger tips made my ears ache slightly).

On a couple of recordings, I felt voices had a hint of strain, as if performers were over-pushing, but it's not there on most recordings. As is often the case when changing transducers, some parts of recordings get highlighted and so I'm noticing some things I've not noticed before on pieces of music I know well.

These are good value at £50.
 

Dro

Active Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
221
Likes
205
Ah, ok, the reason why you might be experiencing more bass in the Crinacle X Zero over your Stealth might be because there is a bigger bass shelf on the Harman IEM Target vs the Harman Over Ear Headphone Target. (attached a pic showing the different Harman Curves, the green line is one of their IEM Curves and the over ear curves are the other ones). After trying my first IEM today I didn't expect as much bass as I heard either, and I'm used to Harman Curve bass in over ear headphones......I think the overall tonality in IEM's is balanced out by some increased treble too vs the Harman Over Ear Curve, so the IEM Curve therefore doesn't sound unbalanced......but based on my experience today (my first IEM), then I can quite understand your comment. It certainly didn't sound bloated in the Crinacle X Zero though, not by any stretch.
View attachment 232888
I think the different target bass levels are the explanation. I also noticed some higher treble. I would say the Zero sounds like a DCA Stealth with some loudness applied. I also don't think the sound is bloated yet, due to how the bass shelf is primarily boosting frequencies below 80 Hz, but there is a lot of bass in these IEMs, certainly more than in the Stealth.
 

AdamG

Proving your point makes it “Science”.
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
4,637
Likes
14,924
Location
Reality
So far this is the best time I have had for $50 bucks in a long time. Being a former Drunken Sailor sailing the seven Seas. Adjusting for inflation, that’s saying something. :cool: . These have also caused me to revisit the BLON-03’s and while not at this level they represent one hell of a value in comparison.
 

Chromatischism

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
4,767
Likes
3,706
Edit: and I like it better with 5db added to the lowest octaves. I am probably just used to a little extra oomph.
I will likely do the same, knowing what I currently have for IEMs and how they compare to my dual sub system, both of which have greater output down there.
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:
Depending how it sounds, it looks like eyeballing the graph would give:

+6 dB at 20 Hz
+3 dB at 30 Hz
+2 dB at 40 Hz
+1 dB at 50 Hz

-1 dB from 1 to 3 kHz

May give a better match to the target.

However @Maiky76 designed his EQ based on Amir's measurement, which is different. People should try both and see which one they think is better.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
I think the different target bass levels are the explanation. I also noticed some higher treble. I would say the Zero sounds like a DCA Stealth with some loudness applied. I also don't think the sound is bloated yet, due to how the bass shelf is primarily boosting frequencies below 80 Hz, but there is a lot of bass in these IEMs, certainly more than in the Stealth.
The way I understand it, the IEM Harman Target has more bass added to it than the over ear targets as you lack an element of tactile bass in the IEM's vs the over ears - so that's the thinking why there was a preference in the study for the subjects to have dialed in more bass. They probably then had to dial in more treble to avoid the psychoacoustic masking effects of the increased bass, so I think that's why the IEM Target is more V-shaped than the over ear target. I think that's also the same reasons why the 2018 Over Ear Harman Target has more bass and more treble than a Harman Curve Speaker in a room - less tactile bass from over ear headphones than speakers. It's a bit crazy when you think about the large changes, but I do like the sound of the Harman 2018 Over Ear Curve, and from my few hours of listening today to something very close to the Harman IEM 2019 Curve (ie these Truthear IEMs) then it seems I like the Harman IEM Curve too. It's a bit crazy when you try to relate these changes & curves to the idea or philosophy of neutrality, but then again if you don't dial in these changes then the experiences aren't as "authentic" overall. It does make one wonder if you have to dial in more bass when you go through the Smyth Realizer procedure when tuning your headphone to the speakers & room, as theoretically you'd have to if the reason behind the Harman Curve differences are real. But these musings aren't aimed at you, just I'm thinking through the implications. (Let's not trigger a big discussion on these points though as it's not the main topic of this thread).
 
Last edited:

julian_hughes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
657
Likes
901
I'm starting to think I prefer the Moondrop Katos (with the upper bass tamed). They don't have that deep bass slam but they do have lots of bass, and they don't get tiring. I find that the Truthears get kind of intense and closed sounding after a while. These are impressions, not assertions! On really busy orchestral pieces I think the Truthears can seem a bit congested or overwhelmed and dense, while the Katos reveal all and do generally sound a bit less "in the head" or "in your face" or a bit more airy. It can be hard to find the right descriptive term. I think the Katos are a bit more like loudspeakers as they offer an impression of space which I'm not quite getting with the Truthears. I am not convinced it's all about FR. The Truthears go deeper in the ear canal, a bit like Shure SE but not as deep as Etymotic (which go really deep and have a reputation for lack of dimensionality or soundstage), while the Kato have an unusually shallow fit for an IEM, so this might be a factor, not sure. I do think the Kato offers the better sound if you can eq it to stop the bass bleeding into the mids.
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,875
Likes
6,673
Location
UK
(It's probably the frequency response though)
 

julian_hughes

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
657
Likes
901
(It's probably the frequency response though)
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.
 
Top Bottom