• 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:RED IEM Review

Rate this IEM:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 8 2.0%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 14 3.5%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 43 10.6%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 339 83.9%

  • Total voters
    404
The funny thing is, while attempting to reduce the original Zero's shoutiness, the Red has left the important 1-2 kHz region much the same, resulting in some still finding them somewhat shouty, including Resolve, Señor Shouty himself
No it didn't, it's more recessed through that region.
1687424071368.png

1687424105369.png


"Shout" as criticised on the likes of Grado is in any case further up, peaking around 2,200Hz, it's not really "1-2Khz", close, but it's higher than that. Grado has no issue whatsoever from 1kHz up to around 1.75kHz, it only ramps up after that (and boy, it ramps up, it's obnoxious). The "shout" in Grados is also next level, it's huge.
1687423267057.png

Red is 2-4dB down on Blue at 2,200Hz and maintains this lower level throughout the upper mids. I have both of them, both are good but Red is very notably less "shouty". You could also say it has less clarity and is more relaxed as a result, but it's objectively much lower though that whole upper mids region.

EDIT: and as for the allegation that "some still finding them somewhat shouty, including Resolve, Señor Shouty himself", no, he didn't. In the livestream you linked he is quoting someone else, it's not his opinion, and goes on to say "your tuning is less ear gain" to Crinacle... In his review of the Red he explicitly says the exact opposite:

"for the rest of the tuning it sounds clear but also not overly glaring and shouty or fatiguing like the original Zero was"

He thinks the upper mids could use "a little more refinement" around 4kHz, "one critique" is the "upper treble zing" with a peak at 11kHz... nothing about 1-2kHz or saying it's shouty, he explicitly says it's not shouty... like the original one was. So you are totally mis-representing his position.

And the guy he was quoting wasn't even talking about the Red, he was talking about "Moondrop, Tanchjim, and Crinacle's general tuning" (possibly, relating to previous stuff like the Zero Blue, as well as more Harman-upper mids Moondrops like the Blessing 2, Variations, SSR, or the Tanchjim Zero, which do have more there). So that's more misdirection and more misquoting from you, it's very intellectually dishonest.

I don't disagree with that Reddit link, incidentally, there has been a lot of hype and at the end of the day these are just a very well tuned $50 IEM. But they are still a very well tuned $50 IEM, and you seem to have a really weird objection to them. Is Amir part of the shill gang too?

Have you even heard these yourself?

I thought you prefer shouty Harman IE yourself anyway, so what's up with complaining that a tuning 2-4dB below Harman in the upper mids is still too shouty?
 
Last edited:
I don't disagree with that Reddit link, incidentally, there has been a lot of hype and at the end of the day these are just a very well tuned $50 IEM. But they are still a very well tuned $50 IEM, and you seem to have a really weird objection to them. Is Amir part of the shill gang too?
Let's rephrase "just a very well tuned $50 IEM" into "a very well tuned IEM with extremely low distortion". Since for IEMs tuning and distortion are (besides comfort and seal) basically everything (i.e. 'technicalities' don't exist and spatial properties play, unlike for headphones and speakers, basically no role), that is in principle all you can ask for in an IEM.
 
Is that a Qudelix 5K? I've been curious about them.

Does it offer any benefit to someone who uses Wavelet on Android for PEQ and doesn't have an issue with headphone/IEM volume? Could be useful with a laptop I suppose.
 
Is that a Qudelix 5K? I've been curious about them.

Does it offer any benefit to someone who uses Wavelet on Android for PEQ and doesn't have an issue with headphone/IEM volume? Could be useful with a laptop I suppose.
Crossfeed

Oh, and battery powered and Bluetooth of course
 
These are only the second pair of IEM's I've ever purchased. I put some Spinfit tips on them to compare, the same that provide a great seal on my iBasso IT01's, and my ear canals got warm fairly quick while trying to do some listening comparisons. Not a comfortable feeling. I guess between the weight and bore size, these just won't work for me. I need/use large tips so it's not like there isn't a "cushion" between the bore and the tip. Just something to be aware of as an inexperienced buyer.
 
This dongle is getting out of hand, but I love the sound!

View attachment 294267

I just got my Reds yesterday and tried them immediately with my Qudelix and was surprised to find (for the first time), I was unable to obtain sufficient volume with these :/ I wound up switching to my iFi GO Bar, which powered them well and sounded great.
 
I just got my Reds yesterday and tried them immediately with my Qudelix and was surprised to find (for the first time), I was unable to obtain sufficient volume with these :/ I wound up switching to my iFi GO Bar, which powered them well and sounded great.
Careful with your hearing! I have a Qudelix 5k and the Reds, and I had to enable the 1V limiter because I found myself blasting the volume when listening to certain songs. It's 117dB/Vrms sensitivity, but the clean sound makes cranking it super easy.
 
Careful with your hearing! I have a Qudelix 5k and the Reds, and I had to enable the 1V limiter because I found myself blasting the volume when listening to certain songs. It's 117dB/Vrms sensitivity, but the clean sound makes cranking it super easy.
I don't listen very loud :/ Even at max volume, this was only JUST loud enough to enjoy.

I'm almost thinking something is wrong, because I haven't had this problem with ANY other IEM and the Qudelix.

Will do some more tinkering today.
 
I don't listen very loud :/ Even at max volume, this was only JUST loud enough to enjoy.

I'm almost thinking something is wrong, because I haven't had this problem with ANY other IEM and the Qudelix.

Will do some more tinkering today.
I always recommend people to get a multimeter to diagnose such issues.
Measuring the output voltage of your dongles and Amps is really easy and takes all that guesswork out of the equation.
 
I don't listen very loud :/ Even at max volume, this was only JUST loud enough to enjoy.

I'm almost thinking something is wrong, because I haven't had this problem with ANY other IEM and the Qudelix.

Will do some more tinkering today.
Yeah, something is definitely wrong there. Got a different cable you could swap out on the Red? Also, check the filter mesh over the nozzles with torch and magnification- make sure not blocked or filters askew.
 
I just got my Reds yesterday and tried them immediately with my Qudelix and was surprised to find (for the first time), I was unable to obtain sufficient volume with these :/ I wound up switching to my iFi GO Bar, which powered them well and sounded great.
Really. I have it on the “normal” 1v output power and I listen at maybe 1/2 to 3/4 volume. That does sound odd. My source is my iPhone (100% volume) using Plexamp, all enhancements turned off, normalization off.
 
Last edited:
Careful with your hearing! I have a Qudelix 5k and the Reds, and I had to enable the 1V limiter because I found myself blasting the volume when listening to certain songs. It's 117dB/Vrms sensitivity, but the clean sound makes cranking it super easy.
Agreed!
 
Try this
View attachment 291532

Code:
Preamp: -3.6 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 30 Hz Gain 2.8 dB Q 0.500
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 330 Hz Gain -1.1 dB Q 1.600
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1400 Hz Gain -1.5 dB Q 2.000
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 3800 Hz Gain 1.9 dB Q 0.500
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 6400 Hz Gain 3.2 dB Q 2.000
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 7900 Hz Gain -5.8 dB Q 2.000
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 8100 Hz Gain 2.4 dB Q 1.200
Thanks, that sounds not bad. Strangely this EQ sounds a lot more natural than the AutoEQ target or Harman 2019 inear target made by https://autoeq.app/ though they are supposed to not differ much?
 
Thanks, that sounds not bad. Strangely this EQ sounds a lot more natural than the AutoEQ target or Harman 2019 inear target made by https://autoeq.app/ though they are supposed to not differ much?
Maybe just because I tuned it by ear a bit, via the alignment and max frequency parameters. AutoEQ.app is entirely generated OTOH.
 
Maybe just because I tuned it by ear a bit, via the alignment and max frequency parameters. AutoEQ.app is entirely generated OTOH.
If I just use the generated EQs by AutoEQ, the REDs will sound too bassy/muddy. For other IEMs there are useful generated EQs. I guess the frequency is not everything!
 
No it didn't, it's more recessed through that region.
View attachment 294167
View attachment 294168
much the same ≠ identical
Also the fact that those fake clone coupler measurements are so different to each other should be ringing some alarm bells. Here's a direct comparison of the frequency range in question on a genuine ear simulator from an actual proper company, the (claimed more accurate than GRAS) B&K 5128:
graph-92.png

And some units are even closer:
graph-93.png

So, a bit less but as I said, much the same between 1 and 2 kHz. The focus was clearly predominantly on bringing down the frequencies above this range.
Red is 2-4dB down on Blue at 2,200Hz
It's 2 dB.
Screenshot_20230623_002600.png

and maintains this lower level throughout the upper mids
Mids end at 2 kHz.
I have both of them, both are good but Red is very notably less "shouty".
Never said it wasn't less shouty.
You could also say it has less clarity and is more relaxed as a result, but it's objectively much lower though that whole upper mids region.
No, it's much lower in the treble, not mids.
EDIT: and as for the allegation that "some still finding them somewhat shouty, including Resolve, Señor Shouty himself", no, he didn't.
Yes, he did. See here (and his fellow headphones.com reviewer agreed too). The fact that this was omitted from the main Headphone Shillow review, instead hidden within the depths of a livestream limited numbers will see and only briefly mentioned in passing, unbeknownst to even his loyal superfans, is the real intellectual dishonesty here, and just reveals plain as day the extent of bias and conflict of interest headphones.con has with their buddy and partner in Crin business.
I don't disagree with that Reddit link, incidentally, there has been a lot of hype and at the end of the day these are just a very well tuned $50 IEM. But they are still a very well tuned $50 IEM, and you seem to have a really weird objection to them.
What's really weird is the hyperbolic fawning on a science forum over an IEM that is not in fact very well tuned according to our current best headphone science, deviating significantly from what this science says is likely to be the most preferable response, instead following a target that has zero valid preference evidence behind it in the form of controlled blind listening tests. In fact, there is independent evidence to suggest it would likely not be preferred to the Harman target, from companies like USound, where Oratory works, who's stated Harman IE is preferred in blind tests to his own IE target in non-noisy environments (which are the conditions audiophiles and reviewers judge sound quality under), as I've told you before. And oh would you look at that, the Red's (w/bass adapter) frequency response turns out to just be a copy of much of Oratory's target:
graph-90.png

Yet more recent independent blind tests corroborating Harman's in-ear research conducted by Danish scientists found listeners ranked tested IEM frequency responses in non-noisy environments in the order predicted by their adherence to the Harman IE target as calculated by Dr Sean Olive's algorithm. All the Harman Science Deniers refusing to accept the validity and utility of the in-ear research and predicted preference ratings don't have a leg to stand on.
Have you even heard these yourself?
I already got burned with the original Zero with its false marketing promises of 'full Harman' tuning which it really wasn't and 'subwoofer-like bass' when the sub-bass was in fact significantly lacking. Not falling for the hype a second time around. And there's no way I would buy another just retuning of this design with that same unrectified excruciatingly-massive bore size, not to mention the poor impedance design choices that mean I can't have consistent sound across all my devices with differing output impedance. If you're really desperate for an anecdote though, I've EQed my original Zeros to the Red using the 5128 data, and honestly this really does not sound good - significantly lacking in bass, treble and extension, just lifeless, dull and muffled, like someone's put a pillow over my ears. Yes, I'm well aware EQing to another IEM isn't 100% accurate, but this is using the (claimed) more accurate 5128, very similarly designed IEMs, and will at the least give a decent idea of overall tonality, and it just sounds wrong, unnatural, and really not enjoyable, just sucking the life out of my music.
I thought you prefer shouty Harman IE
Shouty according to whose controlled blind listening tests?
So what's up with complaining that a tuning 2-4dB below Harman in the upper mids is still too shouty?
It's not below Harman in the upper mids (1-2 kHz). The dips either side of the hump there could well perceptually accentuate how audible / bothersome the latter is for some, especially being in a critical range near where our hearing is most sensitive.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom