Simple Man’s review – Fender Puresonic Wired (~45 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: Φ9.25mm Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 16 Ohms
Cable: non-detachable, 1.2m, with 3 button mic
Shell: Hard plastic
Nozzle: ~4 mm
Price: 39 EUR (thomann.de)
(This is the price i paid. In Amazon these go for upto 99 USD)

Build – 4/5
Housings are made of hard plastic, and they seem very well made and durable. They look really pretty and stylish. Easily one of the best as far as looks are concerned. Cables are permanently attached in this version. The detachable cable version is named Fender NINE. I strongly guess they are the same earphones, driver, sound and all, with detachable cables minus microphone. The cables are very hard and plasticky and retain a lot of memory. Roll em up and leave them on the table and you shall see them slowly return to their ugly spread out state. I wish they had a more supple and flexible cable.

The Puresonic wired also has the inline mic, which unfortunately does not work with my HTC10. The mic simply records a high pitch tone when activated using my HTC10. They do work properly on my laptop though. This cost them a point.



Unboxing Introducing a new section here for unboxing. These earphones win a prize for the most complicated and annoying unboxing experience I’ve ever had. Removing the plastic base will be most challenging for anyone. I’ve unboxed 2 units, and both were equally hard to remove. I nearly broke the plastic hook thingy on top in an effort to pull out the plastic plate that hide the cables, and accessories beneath. Putting them back in place is near impossible, so one must resort to placing them upside down to close the box after retrieval of earphones. Terrible experience!

Accessories – 4/5
Includes 1/4" plug, airline adapter, cleaning tool and carrying case, and 4 sizes of proprietary ear-gels
The small zipper case provided can hardly hold these earphones.

Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Isolation is great! And so is sound leakage. The snug fit ensures that this section gets a good score. Isolation improves with proper tip selection. The stock eartips are great.

Fit – 4/5
Fit is great as mentioned already. The housings seem like they are almost made for my ears. They seat perfectly, and fit securely without issue. The shallower fit with stock eartips is more comfortable.



Eartips:
These eartips are like no other. One might call them bad, and i can understand this sentiment. The stems barely have any height and the diameter is also very small. The stock tips provide a greater sticky seal which improves with pressure on the skin surface. They say the body heat helps the ear gels to stick fast and fit more like comply foam. Choosing the right tips can really improve isolation and comfort. (I'm using these eartips for Ortofon E-Q5, and they sound great!). When I use some after market tips like ATH tips, for eg, sound quality increases a bit at the expense of slight discomfort. The nozzles are on the thin side, so we can’t safely use JVC spirals and many other after market eartips. Final E tips however manage to stay fit on the thin nozzles, so does some ATH tips. I’m using the medium small stock ear-gels.

Microphonics – 3/5
Present, but not overly annoying.

Drivability – These are not too easy to drive, I must say. The sensitivity is not rated, but I find myself around 50-60% volume in my HTC10s, a couple of notches more than usual.

Sound –
The general signature is W shaped, with big bass, and somewhat forward vocals, with a little extension into the treble region. The tuning is quite commercial and can appeal to the masses who wish to bob their heads to bassy beats and who have a love for rumble and sub-bass.



Soundstage: Soundstage is pretty intimate and forward. One wouldn’t call it wide or spacious. The dynamic fun sound is thrown in your face and is not very sophisticated in this sense.

Bass: BASS! This one is all about the bass. And the sub-bass. The rumble and punch is everlasting and lingers throughout the track. The quality of the bass however is mediocre and I wouldn’t say they spout out a lot of definition. They are more the boomy, visceral, kind of bass.

Mids: The mids are mostly about the vocals, which come through clearly despite the big bass. They do carry a lot of warmth from the bass. The other mid range sounds are generally coloured by the bass, and play a kind of supporting role to the vocals. Details are more on the macro level, and they don’t try to retrieve much more that what is necessary to sound musical.

Treble: Treble, or rather we can say the lower treble has some presence and shimmer. The cymbals don’t sound thin and carry good body. They do lack some micro definition, and detail extraction across the spectrum is average at best.

Comparisons

Round 1 – Fender Puresonic Vs Zero Audio Duoza
ZA Duoza is a bass-head IEM with copious mid-bass and equally rumbling sub-bass. Not my favourite, but when we have a bassy fun IEM, it makes sense to do this comparison. Personal Rating: 7.5



The bass is greatly authoritative in the Duoza and is ever present. The rumble lingers on for longer than necessary, and it has a general boomy sound. Mids and vocals come through easily but are somewhat tame in relation to the big bass. Treble shimmer gives an impression of clarity. Overall definition is decent.

Switching to the Fenders, I notice that the sub bass rumble is equal in intensity and reverb. Mid bass is cleaner and better behaved. The clarity seems improved and we notice a bit more detail in the mids. Instrument definition also is slightly better in comparison. Vocals come through much clearly. Highs are also less harsh and more easy on the ears, Duozas do reach and retrieve more treble details.

The Fenders sound more correct and are closer to natural sound. I give this round to the Fenders.

Round 2 – Fender Puresonic Vs iBasso IT01s
Let’s jump up to the next level and see how the Fenders fare alongside iBasso IT01s. Personal rating: 8.5



IT01s is a decent IEM with a warm, balanced sound. Everything is in its place with the IT01s, with some added shimmer in the highs. The soundstage is immersive, had good depth and the general sound is quite natural.

Switching to the Fenders we do see the fun bass kick in and make the song more dance-able. Lots of details that were quite clear with the ibasso is now kind of smeared and suppressed, lacking certain definition. The treble extension is also evidently lacking in comparison. iBassos do lack the bass punch that is so adequately displayed in the Fenders, but the IT01s is on the whole cleaner sounding in comparison.

Fenders are not able to muscle their way ahead of the iBassos against their more spacious and detailed presentation. The expensive iBasso wins this round.

Round 3 – Fender Puresonic Wired vs LG Quadbeat 3
Let’s bring it down a bit, and see how they stand against the LG Quadbeat 3 which came along with my LG G7 box. Free earphones that sound really good! Personal Rating: 8.1



The Quadbeats are tuned keeping the Harman target in mind, adding some bass to pack a bit of punch. They sound quite clean and the vocals are clear and life-like. The cleaner sound also is able to extract more details, and the general timbre is quite good. They do lack a bit of warmth, and a certain dynamic quality, but in general everything sounds right in the Quadbeats.

Switching to the Fenders, we see a lot of bassy warmth added now, and we also see a lot of leak into the mids affecting some intelligibility in this region. Clarity takes a step back in an effort to give you a head-banging experience. I much prefer the tuning of the Quadbeats.

Safer tuning with more disciplined bass blocks Fenders progress here.

Round 4 – Fender Puresonic Wired vs Moondrop Crescent
These are similar to Quadbeats and are really good for the price. I rate these just a step behind the LGs. Personal Rating: 8.0



The Crescent has a similarly clean sound, like LG quadbeats, but with slightly recessed vocals. The treble comes out a little brighter and in general they sound quite clean and extract a lot of details for the price. They are still a touch behind Quadbeats in this respect as well.

Crescents score important points in timbre and detail retrieval. They also provide enough sub-bass, and yet come out as the cleaner sounding IEM. The Puresonic, going for a fun-bassy sound, does not impress me as much.

Round 5 – Fender Puresonic Wired vs ATH LS50
ATH LS50 is a dual dynamic, full sounding, good low range IEM., that is decent all around. The sound is slightly coloured, but they sound pretty impressive and detailed for the money. Personal rating: 7.8



As you can see the signature is pretty similar, with lesser bass quantity in the LS50s. LS50s sound very natural, and the timbre is great in the bass region. Clarity is really good and immediately perceivable. Vocals are especially forward and clear. There is a slight honky tone due to a certain dip around the mids, but they still sound great overall.

Switching to the Fenders, we hear a darker sound. The bass colours the mids much more, leaks, as opposed to the unhindered, relatively clean mids of the LS50s. When the bass hits, they are a little overwhelming. The focus is much more rooted on the bass. I wouldn’t be listening to bassy tracks with the Fenders, they kind of ruin the overall sound for me. Still, the vocals comes through which kind of saves them from sounding bad.

I have to say the LS50s are tuned much better compared to the bassy Fenders. ATH LS50 wins without question.

Short rant
I did put in some hours with these earphones, but it was hard for me to really like them. And I tried because they are just so pretty. They aren’t bad, vocals do sound quite good, but I expected them to sound much better than this. I think these are worth the 40 Euros I paid. The original asking price of 79 - 99 USD is a little high in my opinion.

Overall Sound rating of Fender Puresonic Wired: 7.6 / 10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 3.5/5
Instrument Separation 3/5
Details 3.5/5
Timber 3.5/5



Conclusion –
Fender's entry IEM, Puresonic Wired, is tuned for the masses who love big bass and forward vocals. They look beautiful and sit gracefully on the ear. They nailed the design and comfort. They play mainstream music quite well. The Puresonic Wired, however, lacks some clarity for my taste and can pass for a decent 50 dollar commercial earphone.

Simple Man’s review – Yamaha EPH-200 (~130 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: 6mm Single dynamic driver
Impedance: 22 Ohms; Sensitivity: 101.5dB/mW@1kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable
Shell: Aluminium housings
Nozzle: ~5.5mm
Preferred eartips: Stock small size.
Release year: Oct 2017
Price: ~130 USD (bought from Amazon Japan)



Build – 5/5
Solid Aluminium metal housings, with very hard plastic cable connectors. I don’t see these breaking with any kind of rough use.
Cables are of decent thickness and are super light. They feel a little plasticky and get a little stiff. I would have preferred them to be a little more flexible and smooth.
The MMCX connectors used here are a little special. They are enclosed within a plastic bridge that locks the cables in place with the housing connectors. This prevents any free cable rotation. I like the design, but, these cables will mostly not be compatible with other MMCX earphones. However, most aftermarket MMCX cables can be used with the EPH200s sans locking feature.



Nozzle: The nozzles are pretty large in diameter and are lengthy as well. Wave good-bye to any tip rolling possibilities.

Accessories – 4/5



We get the necessary stuff. Love the big spacious carry case. These can easily hold any IEM.



Fit – 5/5
The preferred wearing style is over-the-ear with a very deep insertion using the smallest sized eartip. We get incredible isolation this way.
Wearing them straight down forces a relatively shallow fit, and one would have to use a bigger sized eartip to get a proper seal.

Eartips: They are not your standard eartips. The stem is long, and the diameter is large as well.
For comparison, (L to R) IEM housing, Stock size-S, Stock size-M, Spinfits-M, JVC Spirals-M


Isolation and leakage – 5/5
Over the ear with a deep insertion isolates, seriously, as much as Etymotics! Once these are plugged in I can’t hear a thing, even without music playing in my ears.
Wearing comfort is surprisingly great since these don’t use pointy eartips like Etymotics. The cylindrical tips rest comfortably on certain non-sensitive parts of my ear.

Microphonics – 4/5
Over the ear , not a problem! Straight down, one can hear the wires easily.

Drivability – Very easy to drive, i don’t go more than 50% volume using my HTC10s.

Sound –
Clean sounding is what comes to mind when i listen to the EPH200. The mids are clear without any interference whatsoever from mid-bass. They have great body, and space. Treble is smooth, yet nicely detailed. Soundstage and instrument separation, positioning are especially great! Overall, they go for a very balanced musical tuning with a nudge in the sub-bass.

Yamaha EPH-200 measurements


Bass: The sub-bass rumbles authoritatively when invoked. They don’t shy away from showing how deep they can go. They could do with a little more definition though. Mid bass, in contrast, is extremely clean and quick without any sense of bloat or smear. Timbre is incredibly real, and there is absolute no bleed whatsoever into the mids. Bass is near perfect, and would be touted as the winning quality of these earphones, if not for their exceptional mid range.
Mids: Mids are simply perfect! They are really clear and sound very real. These, i must say, are one of the best mids i’ve heard out of a single dynamic earphone. Vocals are really special and no matter who sings they are presented in the best possible way. They don’t go for that lush, warm sound, like final E4000. Instead they impress with their clean, well separated presentation using just the right amount of body.
Highs: Highs are more about body and texture than detail retrieval and splash. They sound very mature, and i really love them for this reason. The treble plays around with the staging and positioning, and do not try to take over or dominate the sublime mids. Details are presented in a tasteful manner rather than shoving them down the listeners throat.

Timbre: I must say the instruments and vocals throughout the FR sound very real, and timbral authenticity is up there with the best!

Soundstage:
Soundstage and positioning of these earphones are also very special. The stage is wide and high, and the depth is also very impressive. They have a very rounded soundstage, with a lot of treble action playing over the head.

Comparisons


Round 1 – Vs MEE Pinnacle PX (~110 USD)
Single Dynamic with a balanced tuning. I rate these at 8.2 in my ranking list.These lie very close to the price i paid for the EPH200s. Let’s see how EPH200s do against these in the first round.



Pinnacle PX has a little more treble detail. But, they sound very thin and metallic. Treble is also forward in the PX; and when there are some continuous chimes going on in the track, that is pretty much all you hear, they are so up front. Mids are a bit recessed and not as resolving. The EPH200s sound more real and authentic. Treble has better body and texture, and i can’t pick a single aspect where the PX really wins this round.

Yamaha EPH200 prances to meet the iBasso IT01s in the next round

Round 2 – Vs iBasso IT01s (~179 USD)
I rate these higher than the PX, at 8.5. Let’s go!



Moving to the IT01S after the PX is greatly relieving, and shows how good the IT01s is in comparison. The sound is grand, and there is a good amounth of warmth in the mids. IT01S is a full sounding IEM and they really fill the soundstage with musical goodness.

Switching to the EPH200s, we immediately notice that the brightness is turned down a notch. The sub-bass rumble is also accented, giving it a nice dark touch when the music reaches deep. Mids are less warm in comparison, but they never sound thin or dry. They really nailed the mids in the Yamahas. I guess this is an effect of actually nailing the mid-bass quantity. The stage is more spacious with the EPH200s, and we see a lot of room between the instruments. Details and treble information is a little up-front with the iBasso, whereas in the Yamahas, they play a nice supporting role to the mids.

The difference is not big in terms of technicality. For me, though, the cleaner and more roomy presentation with subtle highs make the Yamahas a better and more musical earphone. The IT01s don’t do anything wrong, really. It is just that they don’t impress me the way EPH200s do.

Round 3 – Vs JVC FXT90 (discontinued)
I rank these just above the IT01s, with 8.8, for their fun and aggressive signature. I don’t know which way this round will go. Let’s get to it.



God damn! Every time, everytime, i pick the FXT90s i’m seriously impressed by their dynamic sound! Amazing detailing, surround soundstage. Fun signature done right! After all, these were the very IEMs that got me into this hobby! Let’s switch and see where the EPH200s stand.

After the head-banging, foot tapping, fun sound of the FXT90s: coming to the EPH200s appear like stepping from a loud night club into the peaceful night outside. The EPH200s soundstage height and width are actually equally to the FXT90s. The Yamahas have a little more depth to the stage as a bonus. And, similar to the difference against IT01S, there is a lot more room in the stage with the EPH200s. Everything is better separated and have their own space to rock about. Positioning is clearer. Voices are more authentic and real in the EPH200s, a bit forward too. Detailing is subtle and the presence and treble region really plays a supporting role to the magical mids. The bass impact is better in the FXT90s due to the punchier mid bass delivery. Driver speed seems similar. The sub-bass of the FXT90s are better in impact and quality than the accented, slightly lesser defined sub-bass of the EPH200s. Except this point, i would say the EPH200s really show the FTX90s that they are playing at a more mature level.

And so, the Yamahas emerge as a winner in this dramatic round!

Round 3 – Vs Sennheiser IE40 Pro (~99 USD)
Competitively priced monitor IE 40 Pros are up next. They are rated at 8.9, and have a similarly boosted sub-bass, with a bright and detailed treble. Let’s see if the finesse of EPH200 takes them higher into the 9.0 club!



Let me first say, that the IE 40 Pros sound great!

Super detailed with a really wide soundstage. They have a very monitoresque presentation with their lateral arrangement. The stage does not have much height. But positioning in the x-axis is impressive. They strike a nice balance between fun and balanced sound.

Moving to the EPH200s we see a couple of new dimensions added to the stage. The highs float above in a mesmerizing manner as opposed to the distinctly forward positioning of the highs in the IE 40s. The Sennheiser bass has more perceivable quantity, but they do appear slightly slow in comparison. Due to this, the snappier mid bass attack of the EPH200s sound cleaner and more resolving. The treble details in the IE40s, although clear and up-front and better detailed, kind of loses to the tastefully subtle, but clear, presentation of the EPH200s. The Senns also come across as bright and they do tease along the sibilance regions. We see no harshness whatsoever in the Yamahas

The overall cleaner and snappier presentation of the EPH200s takes them ahead of the Sennheiser IE40 Pros.

Round 4 – Vs Co-Donguri Brass (~40 USD)
The superbly detailed, true audiophile grade, dirt-cheap diamonds, Co-Donguris are up next! The Brass is as good as it’s brother, Shizuku. I rate them at 9.0! To beat the Donguris, one has to play a different game and take a completely different approach to presenting sound. Somewhat like the Final Audio tunings, for example. The EPH200s are in fact tuned differently. Let’s see if the Yamaha’s can stand their ground and maybe inch ahead of the Donguri Brass!



The upper-mids of the donguris are really special. Their airy delivery of this region is also very distinct and amazing. In this aspect, the EPH200s lacks some of that air, and magic surrounding the bells and chimes. But, they do make up for this with better note weight and texture in the treble. Donguri driver is faster throughout and churns out more micro-information in the track across the FR. As opposed to the aggressive detailing of the Donguris, the subtle approach works well with the EPH200s. And without doubt, the EPH200s can be enjoyed for a longer period of time without any detail fatigue. The mid-range of the EPH200s also have more room between instruments, and the vocal body is somewhat better than the airy, feather-light delivery of the Donguris. They both have these distinct traits, like apples and oranges.

Although the Donguris are not clearly beat, I would say the Yamahas easily hold their ground with their own special prowess.

Tie! This calls for extra comparisons!

Injury Time – Vs Sennheiser IE 400 Pro (~350 USD)
The bigger brother comes now, to stop the progress of Yamaha EPH200. These are rated at 9.1.



The IE400 Pros are quite bassy, even more than the IE 40 Pros, due to greater mid-bass quantity. The rumble and impact is thumpy and punchy. The drivers are faster than IE40, yet i’m not sure if they match or beat the speed of EPH200s. The IE400 Pros are also warmer sounding, all that bass gives a lush tint to the mids. They also sound more cohesive. The EPH200s sound sublime in comparison due to their perfect mid-bass quantity. Timbre is definitely better in the EPH200s. Stage is again spacious, and we see better separation and room for instruments with the Yamaha unit. Some micro-information does not come across as easily with the EPH200s.

The IE 400 Pros sound big and grand in comparison. If you like bass, then you will lean towards IE 400 Pro. If you like a cleaner sound, then the EPH200s do sound better in that regard.

Slightly lesser mid-bass in the IE 400 would have made them a clear winner. Anyway, that is IE 500 Pro, which is rated much higher

This round, against the IE 400 Pros, i must say, for my own tastes, the Yamaha’s inch ahead of the IE 400 Pros.

Injury Time – Vs ATH CKR100 (~350 USD)
Pet favourite IEM! These do everything perfectly in my humble opinion. I rate these at 9.2
Let’s see if EPH200s can play at this level.



The CKR100s are another clean sounding IEM, which has the perfect bass impact and quality. Vocals are amazing, and super clear. They also sound very refined and are not very aggressive within the treble. Switching to EPH200s, to my surprise, i find that i’m not missing much of anything here. The stage depth is evidently better in the CKR100s. I think CKR100s are just a hair thicker in their delivery, with slightly better weight to their treble. The CKR100s are full-er sounding, a bit more cohesive. They also slightly lean towards the splashier side, just a bit. Separation and positioning is equally convincing in both the IEMs.

Both of them are equally good. The CKR100s inch ahead as a better technical performer.

Injury Time – Vs Etymotic ER2SE (~130 USD)
Okay, this is almost impossible to beat by a single dynamic. Neutral dynamic Etys. I rate them alongside CKR100s with 9.2.



So much details in the ER2SEs! They are so incredibly transparent. Detail retrieval is at a whole new level compared to all the earphones we compared so far. They are also significantly brighter and the neutral sub-bass does not help much with impact or rumble as in the EPH200. This gives the EPH200 a certain reverb quality that is missing in the ER2SEs. They have more attack.. EPH200 also has a pitch-black background which helps in clear positioning and localisation. ER2SE fill the soundstage with micre-details. ER2SEs come across as a little high-nosed, looking down upon bassy sounds.

Of course, Etys are much more detailed and they pay their due by letting go of some sub-bass fun. The EPH200s, on the other hand, have a little more sub-bass than really needed.

Ultimately, i must say ER2SE's neutral, mature tuning makes them superior.

Overall Sound rating of Yamaha EPH-200: 9.1 / 10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 4.5/5
Instrument Separation 4.8/5
Positioning/localisation 4.8/5
Details 4.4/5
Timbre 4.8/5



Conclusion –
Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve struck gold! The EPH-200 is one of the most perfect sounding earphones I've ever heard. They are not detail monsters, neither are they fun sounding. They aren’t neutral, aren’t bassy, not middy, nor trebly. All they do is impress, in every way you see them! They are tuned with long-listening sessions in mind, and they work well with all genre of music. It’s a shame no one talks about these little gems. I did a blind-buy and am now gifted with a daily IEM.

Simple Man’s review – Grado GW100 (250 USD);
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product features:


Product Specs:


Build & Design – 3/5
All plastic light-weight goodness, which are obviously not the unbreakable kind. I wouldn’t be surprised if a couple of drops, landing directly on the plastic cups, break them. Being on-ear design affects wearing comfort. With Stock pads, i can’t wear these for more than 45 mins before my ears start to warm up. More on alternative earpad choices later.

Another little annoying thing is this:
The ear cups swivel 90° outwards rather than inwards! This means that when you rest the headphones on your neck the cushions are on display rather than the earcups. I wish they swapped the Right-Left drivers to fix this.

Accessories – 3/5
In the Box: Headphones, Warranty, Grado story-sheet, micro-USB charging cable, 3.5mm audio cable

We get the bare minimum accessories, only the most necessary stuff. An extra set of earpads would’ve been welcome. So would a carry case.

Ease of Use – 5/5
Did i say these are my first Grados? Being a music lover that is on the constant hunt for best IEMs, headphones, i always knew about Grado and their cult following. Yet, i never invested in them because of their heavy, bulky, lengthy non-detachable cables. Being someone that mostly listens to music from a smartphone, carrying those cables around were daunting enough for me to never consider buying a Grado. I do have an old ATH AD900X which i never pick up just because of their bulky attached cables!

With the wireless series, Grado had to go for a detachable, one sided cable solution. The provided cable is also light and of the right length for mobile use. Yay! And i now have a Grado!

I really wish they upgrade their entire line to use such detachable cables. Knowing the Grado sound now, if they did this i will probably buy all of them.

Drivability: They are really easy to drive, and run comfortably off of my HTC10.

Bluetooth Option
Talking about ease of use, the 3-button control on the left earcups are simple and immediately usable. The learning curve would be 1 minute tops. Really, they’ve nailed this one.



One button powers the device on, the same button on continued long-press enables pairing to a new device. I’m not sure how many devices they can be paired to at a time (think i read max of 2 devices somewhere), but i have paired these to 2 devices, and if Bluetooth is ON on the transmitters the headphones instantly latch on to them. The 2 volume buttons are well separated from the power button and they’ve place the “+” button, very thoughtfully, above the “-” button. The buttons protrude well enough from the cups so that one can easily feel them, and there will be no messing about during use.

I also answered calls over Bluetooth, and faced no issues reaching the caller on the other end.

A word of advice:
When you power the device on, a female voice says “POWER ON”, “CONNECTED” at the highest volume. She does the same: “POWER OFF”, “DISCONNECTED” when you turn them off.

So, the simple advise is, do not wear the headphones already when you press that power button. Keep them in your hands away from your head. I’m so clever sometimes I impress myself

Apt-X
Grado GW100s receive using Apt-X codec. This is good! While they were here they could have already packed an AptX HD receiver. But, i’m not so bummed about this anyway.

I own a couple of other headphones too that use apt-X and aptx-HD, and i also have a bunch of aptx HD receivers, and i can tell you that none of them are really great for music listening on the go. To be able to use them you are constrained to a specific position or a line of sight relative to the transmitter.

It is the same, if not worse, with the Grado GW100. You CAN safely use the BT option when you have the transmitting device right in front of you, eg: television, or a laptop, or if you place your smartphone right in front of you. This works OK. If you have them in your pockets though, they can annoy you with little breaks and cuts as you move around or bring some flesh and bones between the transmitter and the headphones.

Also, over Bluetooth the sound is somewhat inferior to the wired output. Over the wire you can easily perceive better instrument separation and definition. The difference is not too much, in fact, i use them as Bluetooth headphones for casual listening, or while watching youtube videos.

When i’m in a musical appreciation mode i do have to resort to those trusty ol’ cable connection.

Isolation & Sound leakage – 2.5/5
Of course these are the world’s first Open back Bluetooth headphones. Being that they don’t isolate much, nor do they prevent a lot of sound leakage. I still give them 2.5 points because at low volumes they can give you good music without disturbing someone that is not too close to you.

Sound, Fit and Earpads:
Ah, the infamous Grado fit and the world of earpad mods!

Anyone exposed to the Grado sound for the first time, like me in this case with GW100, is immediately smitten and enamoured by the sheer “realness” of the sound. I was completely awestruck by these and went absolutely crazy. It was reminiscent of the first time, the magic that i felt while listening to my first good pair of IEM: with all that soundstage, details, etc.

With the brain all fired up after this revelation, one has to go about playing with those earpads!

If you are exposed to the older Grados or seen some reviews of SR80s, etc, you know that they have a little complaint of lacking Bass. These GW100s actually have great bass, the mids borrow a nice lushness from the bass, which is actually not lacking at all in quantity. So, my intention with the GW100s was to somehow work on decreasing that mid-bass quantity using different earpads, and also finding the most comfortable fit.

I went online and bought a couple of after-market earpads for Grado.



1. Grado WS stock cushions
2. Geekria replacement earpads, mimics Grado L cushions
3. Geekria replacement earpads, mimics Grado G cushions
4. Packaging foam strip (from iBasso box). I couldn’t find any thinner than these.
5. Kitchen towel/dish cloth from local supermarket – made of 35% cotton, 35%Viscose 30% Polyester



Note: All the sound impressions below are via the wired interface.
Test track: Layla by Clapton, Unplugged (1992) - 320Kbps MP3

Grado GW100 w/ Stock WS cushions (1.)
Sound: Incredibly detailed, and it sounds like you are right there with Clapton. The listener is on stage with Clapton, and the crowd is in front of you. Sound has great spread, every instrument is distinctly positioned and clear. Bass plucks are thumpy and induce great pleasure. Slightest touches at the bass drum are clearly transported to the ear. Backing singers, every chime, shimmer, keys are all clearly heard and the overall result is magical. These drivers are fast. Absolute bliss. Smitten, i say!
Comfort: Clamping force is not too tight with these, for my head. They are light and apply a gentle pressure on the ear. These on-ear cushions are really comfortable, but sitting right on top of the ear they start warming up the ears gradually. It is not pain or sore-ears with the WS cushions but the warmth that would make one remove the headphones after 45 mins or so of continuous listening.

Sound: 9.6, Comfort: 4/5

Grado GW100 naked, without earpads
Sound: The same song without earpads sounded extra clear and louder. The highs however were slightly thinner and also sharper/harsher. Overall sound became tighter, and bass showed more definition. Mids now had less of the lush character. The increase in midrange clarity is significant, and timbre is more real.
Comfort: It’s not as bad as i thought, really. I can listen to 15 mins or so with these since there is no clamping discomfort. There is a lack of grip without earpads, and one is better off staying still. After 15 mins one wouldn’t want to have these flat surfaces with the plastic mesh rubbing on your ear anymore.

Sound: 9.7, Comfort: 2/5




Grado GW100 w/ Geekria L cushions (2.)
Sound: The L cushions sound really close to the naked GW100s, as there is still no filter or foam between the ear and the driver. However, a little distance is now introduced, and if i really focus and look for differences, i can see that the spread of sound is a little more and soundstage becomes wider. The highs are as sharp, if not a little sharper than the naked setup. Clarity and all other traits remain the same as GW100 w/o earpads.
Comfort: Comfort increases now as they are almost over the ear, and they are quite good for upto 20-30 minutes. Again, the ear is not completely free of contact from the driver surface, one part of the ear, for me, the anti helix, actually rests on the plastic mesh. Over time, after 30 mins or so, they really start to get sore. After 45 mins or so, i remove them to great relief of my ears. If i touch the affect part of the ear now, i can feel how much they were bothered. Until this point, they are really nice.



Sound: 9.7, Comfort: 3/5

Grado GW100 w/ Geekria G cushions (3.)
Sound: The distance between the driver and the ear is now increased a little further. The clarity is as amazing as the previous setup. The highs are still slightly thin and piercing. As you can guess i do notice a slightly wider spread in the soundstage as well.
Comfort: These cushions are by far the most comfortable over a short-period, only upto 25-30 mins. There is a lot of surface area in these cushions, and we can position our ear anywhere over the soft cushion or within the hollow of the earpad. We still might manage to get a little rub over those dreaded plastic mesh, but the discomfort is not as bad as those from the L cushion. However, the downfall of these earpads are the warming factor, they are much worse than the stock pads as they warm not only the top of the ear but all around it as well, and that quickly.

Sound: 9.7 Comfort: 3/5

I’ve now run out of ear pads, and i shudder to do any irreversible mods. So, i sat and had a little think.

Think #1
The thick WS cushions add a little more warmth than the naked sound. The treble with these are perfect and tamed, but the clarity and separation are not as good as it can be.

Think #2
Both the L and G cushions, although increasing the clarity and soundstage have the slightly piercing, thin highs. The G cushions have the widest stage, but continuous ear time is 30 mins at most before the ears crave for cool air. This is winter, we can forget about these cushions in Summer. With the L-Cush we can go on for upto 45 mins before the antihelix starts to complain. Anyway, G-cushions are now out of the race.

Using the L-Cush, my ear cries because it gets into contact with those miserable rough plastic mesh thingies!

I started digging into my numerous earphone boxes because i knew that some of them used packaging foam sheets. The ibasso IT01s package came to the rescue. Although the IEMs themselves aren’t that great, i was really happy that i bought them because they had a thin foam sheet in the packing.

Grado GW100 w/ Geekria L cushions + thin foam strip (2.&4.)
Application: we can tuck these foam strips directly under the cushions while they are fixed, or we can place them above the plastic mesh and then install the earpads. It’s quite simple.
Sound: The clarity is as good as minus the foam strip. Great details and definition. The highs are slightly tamed, still they are slightly thinner than the WS cushions. But details are much better and there are no negatives using the foam strip with L cushions!
Comfort: The foam strip makes a comfortable pillow for the anti-helix. The ear-soreness issue is now addressed. Now, i can listen to the GW100s for a longer period of time. However, when we reach near the 45 minute mark, the growing warmth starts to bother. And shortly after we have to relieve ourselves and cool down our ears. This is because the foam strips are still a little thick, and causes a good amount of ear contact as they are resting on them.

Sound: 9.75 Comfort: 3.5/5

This calls for more think time!

Think #3
The sound is probably as good as it gets. I must now reduce ear contact with the foam strips! I tried slicing these foam strip with a hot knife, but i could never do this properly. I was considering buying new thinner foam sheets, etc. Finally a great idea dawned on me. I made a visit to the local super market.

I went to the kitchen towels section to look around for foamy sheets or tissues. And luckily i found these “dish cloths”, is what they call in Germany. And, guess what? They had a Red+Blue combination pack! I also got some strips of denim to see if they are good enough. The denims muffled the sound so much that this was quickly discarded.




Grado GW100 w/ Geekria L cushions + dish cloth strip (2.&5.)
Application: Simply tuck these beneath the cushions.
Sound: We have a winner! The sound is amazingly detailed without sounding as warm as the WS cushions. Resolution and sound spread are between the WS and G cushions. The highs are also not too sharp or tizzy like the naked setup. This is it!
Comfort: These make lesser contact with the ear compared to the slightly thicker foam strips that I used earlier. So, the ears now don’t get warm too quickly, and the soreness is alleviated by the foamy-cloth strip. In this setup i can now go on for more than an hour. Unfortunately, after so much continuous listening i have to remove them as, by this time, i’m starting to feel a little warm and the anti helix is also starting to feel the pressure build up.

Alas, i believe this will be work in progress. I wish for some L-Cush that have greater height to avoid total ear contact. I will search for them.

Sound: 9.75 Comfort: 4/5


Sound rating over Bluetooth: 9.5 (They still have that Grado magic!)

Compared to other headphones
My German Maestro 8.35s sound more neutral across the spectrum, and my ATH MSR7SEs have a deeper bass reach with an elevated upper mid range clarity. The German Maestro’s and the ATH units are good for diverse genres. They sound good with most music including certain EDM and dance music because of the greater sub-bass reach. They also isolate better being closed cans. If your playlist has too much of electronic sub-bass sound, or hip hop stuff, the GW100s may leave you wanting more rumble and thumping bass. They might even sound outright bad and the highs maybe a little more forward than you might like. But, if you're listening to Jazz, Classical, or acoustic music, and so on, the Grado will give you something nothing else does.

I’ve seen some comparisons with other Grado Wired headphones, from Prestige series, etc, and the old fans believe these are really not up there with the classics. They say these have a little extra bass to them and lack some air and soundstage, than the SR80, for example. Of course, i, having heard no other Grado, am in no position to support or refute these comments.

Until Grado upgrades their older models to use detachable cables, or lighter mobile cables, this will be my only Grado, and I’m a happy Grado fan with the GW100.



Conclusion
The Grado GW100 scores higher than all my other earphones because their mids have a magical airy quality to them. The warm bass skimps along like a river flowing over rocks and pebbles, feeding the necessary life for vocals and percussion instruments. The piano keys strike with reverberating clarity and weight like no other I’ve heard. Violins are absolutely mesmerizing, soaring to great heights and displaying great detail. Strings vibrate with your soul! Yes, you can say I love them! I say I love them! Thank you, Grado!

Simple Man’s review – iBasso IT01s (~179 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: 10mm Single DD (DiNaTT – DLC coated Carbon Nano tube Diaphragm, Tesla magnetic Flux)
Impedance: 16 Ohms; Sensitivity: 109dB@1kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable terminating with 2.5mm jack (3.5mm adapter provided)
Shell: Metal anodized housings; Weight: 8g
Nozzle: ~5-6mm
Preferred eartips: JVC spiral (Size: MS)
Release year: December 2018
Price: 179 USD

Build – 4.5/5
Housings are made of metal, seems durable. Cables are thick, yet not heavy. This terminates at a 2.5mm pin. A small adapter is provided to convert this to a 3.5mm jack. I wish it was the other way around though, as I will never be using a 2.5mm connector.

Ergonomically shaped housings are smooth, and they do seat well in the ear concha when you find a good fit.
The nozzles employ a screw-able filter, which increases the length and the diameter considerably. As a result finding the right tips were very challenging.

Accessories – 4.5/5
We got everything we need. Not getting into the details since we have so many reviews here.
One point though:
The provided case is, although very good, are quite small and cannot really hold the IEMs. This is a little disappointing.

Fit – 3/5
Really challenging, initially, until you find the right tips. Get ready to invest some time for tip-rolling.

Isolation and leakage – 4/5
Isolation is pretty good. And there is no leakage.

Microphonics – 4/5
Not bad since we wear them over ears.

Drivability – They get really loud on very low volume. At a 109dB-16Ohm, these are really easy to drive.

Tips: I almost always use Medium sized tips, but for IT01S i had to go for smaller tips (Medium-Small).
JVC Spirals are best, followed by Ortofon silicon tips, ATH tips and Final E tips. All medium small size. Using JVC sprirals for this review.

Sound –
Balanced sound without sacrificing bass quantity. Slightly warm lower-mids with somewhat forward upper-mids, without sounding bright. Safe tuning.

Measured with Dayton IMM-6-PVC tube coupler.


I will not be translating the graph as i assume the readers here need none of that. Please read ahead.

Bass: Punchy mid bass and well behaved sub-bass that does not fall short. Authoritative mid bass adds good body to the sound. We are left wanting a little speed, probably due to slower decay. Bass guitars plucks are slightly slow and linger a bit. They deliver good impact though.

Mids: Mids come through without sounding recessed. Lower mids could use a bit more clarity for the price. Some of that mid-bass slightly interferes with this band. There is some warmth in this region as well. This is especially noticeable in pop music where there is a good emphasis on bass. Upper mids pick up some energy as we approach female frequencies. Clarity is good in the “presence” region and we see a good deal of details as well.

Highs: Treble extension is good, we are impressed with some sparkle and shimmer without ever going overboard. Highs never foray near sibilant frequencies, and they are tuned perfectly to avoid this nuisance.

Timbre: Pretty natural sounding- thanks to the dynamic drivers!
Soundstage is wide and tall, also with decent depth, never stretching too much in any direction.
Instrument separation is not something very glaring about the IT01S. They are good, and work with the music.

Comparisons


Let’s gradually climb my Personal Sound rating ladder in this comparison.

Round 1 – Vs JVC FXT90 (Personal Rating: 8.8, Price: 80 USD Discontinued)
Cult classics, FXT90s, hold a special place in my heart- my gateway drug into this hobby. They are a bit close in terms of signature.

FXT90 sounds fun, with copious bass and shimmering highs. Great clarity in the mids too! They also get a touch bright when there is lot of action in the highs.

IT01S sound more balanced, with lesser bass impact and less shimmer in the highs too. Switching from FXT90s shows the IT01Ss lack of lustre. The bass is also evidently slower in IT01S. Also, there is a bit of a leak from bass into the mids in IT01S which affects the mid-range clarity. The highs come across as a little thin, but are able to separate better than the FXT90s.

Ibasso scores some important points in separation and soundstage.

To be honest, i expected the IT01S to walk all over the FXT90s and proceed in grand fashion to the next round. But, in my opinion the FXT90s hold their ground and win this first round.

Round 2 – Vs Sennheiser IE40 Pro (Personal Rating: 8.9, Price: ~99 USD)
OK, this is the next level. The IE40 Pro is sub-100 contender that is hard to beat. Let’s see how the IT01s fare against these.

The IE40 Pro’s soundstage presentation is more wide than tall. The details are impressive, and the mids are clear and well separated. The IT01S sound very dynamic and has more of rounded stage.

Sub-bass is slightly overpowering with the IE40 Pros, IT01S has a more balanced sub-bass rumble.
Bass speed appears to be almost similar, probably due to the weightier sub bass in the Senns.
Mids are clearer and more detailed in the Senns., IT01S sounds a little congested here.
Highs sound a bit boosted in the IE 40 Pro, they sound thinner, but extract a great amount of information. The IE 40 Pros, however, touch sibilance occasionally in which regard the IT01S is a much easier listen.

The IT01S has a more safer tuning. The Sennheisers sound more ambitious. Clarity is better across the spectrum in IE 40 Pro. IT01S has better soundstage depth. Sub-bass is better in IT01S vs IE 40 Pro’s excess sub-bass.

Weighing in the pros and cons, i must say the IE 40 Pros emerge a clear winner, literally.

Round 3 – Vs ATH E40 (Personal Rating: 8.9, Price: ~99 USD)
These stand alongside the IE 40 Pros gatekeeping the 100 dollar range. The E40s have a much different signature compared to the IE 40s.

Switching from IT01S to the E40 is a big change. The E40 has a very coulourful, ATH-Sound, that take a minute or two to accommodate. Once we get acclimatized we can see that the bass is faster and also very defined in the E40s. They have better attack. The mid-bass playing at a safe distance helps to retain a surprising amount of clarity in the mids. The vocals are initimate and up-front in the E40s.

In contrast, the IT01S come across as a bit dull. Working against IT01S is its slightly congested mids range and its lack of speed.

The upper mids, and treble clarity is comparable, maybe with a slight edge to the E40s. IT01S shows a more roomy stage.

The E40, once again, blocks the progress of IT01s into the next level.

Round 4 – Vs Co-Donguri Shizuku (Personal Rating: 9.0, Price: ~99 USD)
This is higher up the ladder of Sound-rating. This comparison is just to see where the IT01S stands against the Co-Donguri Shizuku. Co-Donguri Brass because has a more forward upper-mid.

Switching to the Donguris after IT01S is like a breath of fresh air. The bass impact is better and cleaner. Everything is better separated in the Donguris, even better than the Sub-100 IEMs that we saw above. The mids are airy and detailed. Upper mids sing like a bird!

IT01S has a relatively thicker presentation overall. This aids in male vocals, which in contrast sounds slightly thin in the Donguris. The soundstage of IT01S is also somewhat wider and deeper. This works somewhat to its advantage.

The IT01S sounds quite pedestrian, or to use an uglier word, they sound like a commercial earphone. Priced more than 5x times cheaper, the Donguris sound like an audiophile IEM. The irony!

Round 4 – Vs Acoustune HS1004 (Personal Rating: 9.0, Price: ~200 USD)
This is again rated higher., but i wanted to compare them. So here it is.

The HS1004 has a massive soundstage, that is wide and tall! They sound grand like big surround speakers, with reverberating bass. The mids are unhindered and display impressive clarity.

These are really playing at the next level and i don’t see a single aspect where the IT01S can match them.

IT01S must concede to these superior IEMs.

Overall Sound rating of iBasso IT01s: 8.5 / 10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 3.5/5
Positioning/localisation 4/5
Details 3.8/5
Timbre 4/5

Conclusion –
The IT01S is a balanced sounding earphone that is priced a little too high. They are tuned in a safe signature that is sure to satisfy the anyone at a basic level. Nothing stands out as nothing sounds off either. The earphones are shiny and are very attractive. You pay for the looks and accessories to get a decent sounding earphone with the iBasso IT01S.

Simple Man’s review – Akoustyx R-220 (~200 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks, no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs
Driver: Dual BA (Custom tuned Knowles drivers)
Impedance: 29Ω; Sensitivity: 109dB@1kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable, with Microphone, 3-button remote
Shell: Aluminium alloy & polycarbonate housing
Nozzle: ~3mm (like Etys)
Preferred eartips: Comply foam tips
Release year: October 2018
Price: ~200 USD



A word about Akoustyx
Akoustyx is an American company whose founder is the same person that founded the old Rock-It Sounds, if you’ve heard of them. There was a cult following for their R-Shield headphones- a drummer’s favourite, and the dual BA IEM R-50. So, they're into the headphone business for quite a while. However, Akoustyx is in no way related/connected with Rock-It Sounds and are completely separate business entities.

Build – 4.5/5
Housings are two-piece. It’s part metal – aluminium alloy, and the second half that turns 90 degrees for the MMCX connectors is made of high-density polycarbonate, or hard plastic. They are very lightweight and black in colour. You can see the Akoustyx logo on one side of the metal bit of the housing, and the L/R markings on the other side.
Cables are same as what we get with their little brother (Akoustyx R-115), twisted, copper-coloured, secured in a transparent braided plastic tube. The ear loops are permanently bent and return to their resting state when left alone. The cables are aesthetically pleasing and smooth to touch. The Y splitter is solid and loaded with strain reliefs on every protruding end. They are also equipped with a flat neck-cinch.
3-button remote module functions as expected.
L-Shaped jack is solid and sturdy. They match the Y splitter and the connectors in colour.

Accessories – 5/5
A small soft Neoprene pouch is provided which looks great and is of the perfect size to hold an IEM. A little external zipper pocket provides a nice space to hold some ear tips. They are very light and padded with damping cushions to protect the IEMs. A very intelligent and practical IEM case.
Tips We get 1 pair of double-flange and 1 pair of Comply foam tips. And 3 sets of single-flange tips in S/M/L sizes.
Customization kits
We also get a set of ear-braces, EarLock customization kits. This helps to secure the earpieces fast to the ears and get a good consistent fit. Three sizes are provided to cover almost any ear in the market.



Fit – 5/5
The cables we get with the R-220 are designed to go around the ear even though the general design of the housing allows both ways of wearing. I prefer around-the-ear any day. I use the supplied Comply tips with the R-220s since they dig deep, and the full seal helps to squeeze all the bass that the earphones have to offer. They also help to tame the treble a bit. The supplied double-flanges also give me a good/proper fit. Even with my Etymotic I keep my foamies away and use the silicon tips because I do like a bit of treble action. But with the R-220s I simply gave in to the Comply foams.
I don’t see the need to use them but for anyone having trouble with a stable fit, possibly while moving about, I suggest using the ear-braces as they safely lock the earpieces in place. They are very comfortable and feel smooth against the ear causing no irritation, etc.



Isolation and leakage – 4.5/5
With a deep seal using the double flanges I get excellent isolation, still a notch below the Etys. Sound leakage is zero for all practical purposes.

Microphonics – 4/5
Not an issue at all, over the ear wear eliminates much of the cable noise. I see no issues while walking about with the wires jumping about me.

Drivability – Very easy to drive, I don’t see myself pushing above 45% volume in my HTC10.

Sound
Neutral with a treble tilt. The signature is very diffuse-field neutral (like Etys) until upper-mids, and then we get a nudge in the treble which paints the signature quite bright. I suspect the second BA is a tweeter for the treble. The signature is extremely detailed and clinical.

Akoustyx R-220 Measurements by the manufacturer


Bass: Typical BA bass, tuned dead neutral. These are clearly the monitoring type of bass that you hear from Etymotics – non-XR version. It is lean, fast, and highly detailed. Sub-bass rumble is present and audible - just not the head-bobbing kind.

Mids: Mids are uncoloured and, again, detailed. They appear a touch forward relative to bass. They show no extra trace of warmth other than what is there in the mids. Voices are detailed and have just as much body as the singer’s larynx. The Ssss and the zzzs can carry that sharp hiss if the recording has it. They are very unemotional just the way they are tuned to be. I must say they deserve a word of appreciation to have worked around the sibilance problem as much as possible given the tuning.

Highs: The highs are accented around the treble region to give extended clarity in this region. They are not smoothed-out, and as a result sound a little exciting. Comply tips are really recommended to handle the attack in this region. As a result, we see some insane detail extraction here rivaling the 400-dollar Etymotics. The R-220s make full use of the extra driver. They tend to get a little bright on certain tracks. Of course, this is subjective, and some may be more tolerant, and some less.

Timbre: Being completely uncoloured aids in timbre, although the lack of warmth and the sheer speed of bass slightly removes that organic quality which really accentuates timbre.

Soundstage
The soundstage, being tuned neutral, is not very wide. They are very similar to Etymotics, with a little bit of height added due to the shimmery highs. Very monitoresque soundstage, one will also notice some lack of depth, which is typical of this type of tuning.

Comparisons


Round 1 – Vs Etymotic ER2SE (~130 USD)
The ER2SE, although single dynamic, is the only earphone I have that has the same neutral bass quantity below 200 dollars. Also, we can see how the dynamic driver stands against the dual BA.

The ER2SEs are considerably harder to drive than the R220s. The R220s, predictably, are quicker and deliver a lot more details to the listener. Every guitar strum, every little reverb and echo is clearly transferred with the R220s. The bass quantity is quite similar. The SEs do have a little a little more earthy quality to it. The dynamic driver with its relative lack of speed help to add more warmth. As a result, the male vocals carry a touch more body. Timbre is better with the 2SE. Sub-bass reach is similar. The R220s are brighter and the treble carries significantly more energy and presence as opposed to the smooth delivery of the 2SE. Treble has this certain attacking quality to it that can be quite shocking to those who aren’t used to this level of treble clarity.

R220s are quite a level above in terms of clarity, and micro-detail extraction. The 2SE does have a bit more body that works to its advantage. Wearing comfort is also much better with R-220s where the nozzles (to my ear) are of perfect length. With the Etys I must stop at a point where they start scratching the sensitive bits of the ear canal.

Round 2 – Olasonic FLAT4 NAMI (~250 USD - discontinued)
Another dynamic, dual driver this time. Comparing the two because the NAMIs are also trebly. This is mainly to compare the treble quantity and quality between the two.

The NAMIs bass is really thumping especially coming from the previous comparison. The vocals are slightly muffled with the NAMIs. Still, the Sss and Zzss come popping up (using silicon tips). The treble is shimmery and super-detailed. They don’t mind getting a bit sibilant. And of course, their soundstage is WIDE.

Switching to R220s, you quickly notice the bass getting tight. The vocals pop-up nicely up front. The difference in treble attack, if any, is minimal. The Sss and Zzss are much more tolerable with the R220s. Clarity is in this region is comparable, maybe a slight edge to the BA drivers. This is expected. The soundstage is more disciplined with the R220s as well, while the NAMIs stage is very expansive.

Nailing the vocals right gives the edge to the R220s. In terms of sheer clarity, as well, the R220s push slightly ahead of the NAMIs. R-220s excel with their neutral presentation. Real treble heads would find the NAMIs boost in this region more to their liking. Where the R220s take one step over toward the treble the NAMIs go a good five steps over. NAMIs also have better bass quantity.

Round 3 – Vs Zero Audio Doppio (~120 USD)
Dual BA drivers. Balanced tuning with exciting treble. They were 120 dollars when I bought them. Now, they seem to be harder to get and are getting more expensive.

Wow. The attack on the Doppios are quite incredible. The clarity is also staggering. Very exciting tuning, with impactful bass and popping treble. Vocals are forward and clear. Let’s see how the R220s fare against this budget bomb!

This is harder than I thought. It sounds like they are the same earphones. I’d be stumped in a blind test. Damn, I need to check out a few more tracks here. Zappa help me!

OK, I’ve been at it for quite a bit now and I can surely say that the Doppios are just a bit warmer in the mids. The male vocals especially have an extra layer of depth/warmth. The treble presentation is extremely similar. The R220s separate a little better and churn out a hair more micro-detail. R-220s are a bit more neutral where the Doppios, very slightly, tilt toward "balanced" signature. Very tough call between the two.

I can only say I’m glad I bought the Doppios for that cheap. They really give the R220s a run for their money.

Round 4 – Vs Etymotic ER4XR (~400 USD)
The ER4XRs are twice the price and have slightly extra bass. Let’s see who the more detailed player is.
Again, the 4XRs are quite a bit harder to drive compared to the R-220s.

The extended bass is quite evident with the rumble the 4XRs present easily. The vocals also borrow a bit of warmth and sound very authentic with the right amount of forwardness. The positioning and separation are painfully distinct in the ER4XRs – like it’s really made to pick out the information. I can also notice a touch more space between instruments with the 4XRs.

Switching to the R220s, the first thing apparent is that they play louder. The treble also has more shimmer and presence compared to the smoother delivery of the ER4s. Transient details in the upper-mids/treble is more apparent with the R220s. It gives the R220s an exciting sound, like the Doppios.

The R220s are like Etymotics, after a couple of tequila shots. You can really feel that extra excitement in the treble and they do retrieve as much, if not more, information as the 4XR. The ER4XRs do possess that little extra sub-bass quantity that add some warmth. The 4XRs also sound a bit thinner and drier in comparison, typical of Ety BAs, but separate a bit better. The R220s, having lesser bass quantity, sound a touch brighter.

Personal Sound rating of Akoustyx R-220: 9.1/10
Vocals 4.5/5
Soundstage 4/5
Timbre 4/5
Instrument Separation 4.5/5
Positioning/localisation 4.5/5
Details 5/5



Conclusion
Akoustyx R-220 is a neutral earphone with a slight treble tilt to make things a little exciting in that end of the spectrum. Etymotic fans who felt the treble was too smooth with the ER4s will be completely satisfied with the R220s. The bass is extremely linear all the way down to 20Hz and the micro-details are handed in spades. For all they have to offer the asking price is extremely reasonable and I don’t think anyone looking for a neutral or reference tuning in an IEM will be disappointed by the Akoustyx R-220.

Simple Man’s review – Akoustyx R-115 (~120 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



A word about Akoustyx
Akoustyx is an American company whose founder is the same person that founded the old Rock-It Sounds, if you’ve heard of them. There was a cult following for their R-Shield headphones- a drummer’s favourite, and the dual BA IEM R-50. So, they're into the headphone business for quite a while. However, Akoustyx is in no way related/connected with Rock-It Sounds and are completely separate business entities.



Product Specs
Driver: Single BA (Custom tuned BK Knowles driver)
Impedance: 22Ω; Sensitivity: 114dB@1kHz; Rated FR 15Hz - 22kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable, with Microphone, 3-button remote
Shell: Plastic
Nozzle: ~3mm (like Etys)
Preferred eartips: Stock-double flange tips or SpinFits CP800 (with Pronged customization sleeve)
Release year: October 2018
Price: 120 USD



Build – 4.5/5
Housings are made of high-density polycarbonate, or very hard plastic, which are very lightweight and colourless, through which you can clearly see the big BA driver.
Cables are twisted, copper-coloured, secured in a transparent braided plastic tube. I’ve never seen a cable in this colour, I really like them, and they don’t come across as flashy. The cable is smooth and good to touch. The Y splitter is solid, spells Y, loaded with strain reliefs on every protruding end. They are also equipped with a flat neck-cinch.
3-button remote module functions as expected.
L-Shaped jack is solid and sturdy. In transparent white, they match the Y splitter and the connectors in colour.

When left lying on the desk the entire unit looks nice and elegant.

Accessories – 5/5
A small soft Neoprene pouch is provided which looks great and is of the perfect size to hold an IEM. It also has a little external zipper pocket to hold some eartips, etc. They are very light, and are layered with damping cushions to protect the IEMs, from a fall for instance. A very intelligent, and practical IEM case.

Tips. We get 1 pair of double-flange and 1 pair of Comply foam tips. And 3 sets of single-flange tips in S/M/L sizes.
Customization kits:
We also get a bunch of ear-braces, or Customization kits – which were designed in collaboration with a third party company - Freebit. This helps to secure the earpieces fast to the ears and get a good consistent fit. Different sizes and design choices are provided so that any ear would be able to benefit for these kits. The silicon gels used are soft and are very comfortable, they feel like cushions to the ear.



Fit – 5/5
We get two types of these customization kits to help achieve the perfect fit,

One, with ear prongs, the pointy things, which seat themselves in the upper Concha of the ear, called Concha Cymba. We are supplied with 3 sizes of these ear prongs that are varying in length. The one with the smallest prong works well with me, the medium size also hugs my ear very securely.

We are also supplied with one pair of sleeves that are without the prongs. These help to increase the surface area of the housing and help to get a better seat in the lower concha (in case none of the prongs work for you). The housings are on the smaller side to accommodate the customization sleeves. But still, i was able to get a nice deeper fit without any of these customization units.

Basically, all of these work well for my ear. I choose to use it with the pronged-sleeves, using the supplied double-flange tips that help me to get a deeper seal.



Isolation and leakage – 4.5/5
There are no vents in the housings. As a result, with the deep double-flanges, we get excellent isolation. With music ON you’re near totally isolated even in a noisy environment. I would say these are just behind Etys in this aspect. No leakage is noticed, and these are office proof.

Microphonics – 4/5
Not an issue at all, over the ear wear helps to eliminate any cable noise. I see no issues while walking about with the wires jumping about me.

Drivability – Extremely easy to drive, possibly the easiest to drive in my IEM collection. They get quite loud with 40% volume driven by HTC 10.

Sound
The Akoustyx R-115 sounds full and is a musical IEM. It has plenty of warmth and the mids sound very organic indeed. There is certain lack of air in the treble region. As a result, the centre is rooted on the mids and bass, and the treble plays at a distance, politely, and does not try to grab the spotlight.

Akoustyx R-115 measurement by the manufacturer

Bass: The BA bass, surprisingly, reaches low and adds a good amount of punch and warmth to the mix. We strike a nice balance between detail and impact quantity. Sub-bass rumble presents itself tastefully, and there is some reverb that can be really felt. The bass never gets boomy and sounds like it should. Although not dynamic, the bass out of this single BA is natural and correctly tuned.

Mids: The mids are intimate, and highly musical in nature. They sound thick and notes are weighty. The tonality is slightly coloured and one will notice this immediately. Male vocals sound authentic and intimate, done very well. Female vocals lack some of that shrill quality and sometimes come across as a bit dull. Pushing the volume too much will make the mids shouty, like it is usually the case with mid-centric IEMs. Sibilance is completely avoided, and any amount of SSSs and ZZZs will be of no bother to even the most sensitive listener.

Highs: The highs are very polite and inoffensive. These are definitely tuned with long listening sessions in mind. Going for the inoffensive route also results in a certain lack of detail retrieval from the treble regions. This can be noticed in the cymbals and hi-hats where they restrain from attack. They are present but are not the most resolving in detail. If you have one complaint against this IEM, this will be it. The tuning also keeps the IEM from sounding bright.

Timbre: The mids and bass instruments are portrayed clearly and with an extra dose of warmth. We are left a little wanting in the treble for more definition and attack.

Soundstage:
Soundstage envelopes the listener and shows some depth. Not very wide since the stage is intimate. We can call it a well-rounded stage, extending a bit in all 3 dimensions albeit not too much.

Comparisons


Round 1 – Vs Sennheiser IE 40 Pro (~100 USD)
Sennheiser‘s recent iteration of single dynamic Stage monitor series is a good benchmark IEM priced below 100 USD. Let’s see how different the R115s are in comparison.

The IE40 Pro are a balanced IEM with a big bass and big treble. There is great detail retrieval and the vocals/mids are (only) slightly recessed. The soundstage is quite wide with limited height. High pitch voices and treble come out crisply and they tend to sound bright when there is much treble action.

Switching to the R115s, we can immediately notice a great dose of warmth introduced to the tone. R115s are full sounding, and the male vocals are up front, and are delivered with great clarity. The notes are heavier, and they sound greatly organic. There is absolutely no hint of harshness in the treble. In fact, the treble is very inoffensive as it plays only a supporting role in the background. Especially in contrast to the emphasised treble of the IE40 Pro, one will notice a lack of attack and detail retrieval in this region.

Between the two, R115s are better in playing the bass and mids. But the Senns do treble better at the cost of coming across as brigher. R115s play intimately while the Senns spread out to a larger, more breathier soundstage.

Round 2 – Etymotic ER2SE (~129 USD)
Same price. Let’s see how the R115s BA driver stands against the Dynamic driver of the ER2SEs.

The mid-bass quantity/ impact seems to be very similar. The R115 sub-bass is greater in quantity and gives us better impact than light attack of the ER2SE. The lower mids are slightly more forwarded in the R115 unit, which adds greater amount of warmth in this region. The impact and details are near perfect. Male vocals are absolutely clear and forward. They sound very up-close in the R115s, even more so than the ER2SEs for certain deep voices due to the extra thick delivery. R115s also display a decent amount of depth in the stage.

The upper mids of the ER2SE are more neutral/forward, where the R115s restrict themselves to a smooth and warm level. Female vocals are better with the ER2SEs as a result. The Etys are also able to extract more details compared to ER2SE.

Striving towards neutrality, ER2SE sounds more balanced over the mids and treble. The R115s give you a better bass, including sub-bass, but leave you wanting a little bit of treble action. Immersive, organic R115s vs brighter, more detail oriented, monitoresque presentation of the ER2SE. Their intentions seem to be completely different.

Round 3 – Vs Final Heaven IV (~120 USD)
Let’s compare the R115s, to a similarly priced, and similarly warm Final Audio Heaven IV, that also runs on a single BA driver.

Comparing the two, again, we notice a more intimate sound centred on the mids with the R115s. The Heaven IVs display better instrument separation and detail retrieval, and accordingly sound slightly thinner in comparison. The R115s are warmer and come across as slightly darker – possibly due to the polite treble delivery. Certain male vocals are done better in the R115s than the Heaven IV due to the extra warmth and clarity in the lower mids.

The R115s are much more intimate than the Heavens, and they have a tendency to get a bit cluttered in busy passages. The Heaven IVs take a middle ground tries to give us a little bit of intimacy and a bit of treble excitement as well. There is a certain distance from the stage with the Heavens and the soundstage opens up considerably, whereas with the R115 you are right in between the players. You might say the heavens are slightly more V shaped and retrieve more treble information where the R115s are a little more middy.

Round 4 – Vs Flare R2As (~120 USD discontinued)
Comparing the two since the R2A is also a warm IEM, with a thick sound. Let’s see where the R115s stand again the dynamic drivers of Flare R2A.

The bass of the R2A are HUGE. And the sub-bass rumbles are copious. On the other end the treble is thin and spikey. The mids, as well has a certain thinness to it. Detail retrieval is decent.

Switching to the R115s in this case is relieving, and we see a great increase in mid-range clarity due to the controlled bass. The BA clarity with vocals is also much better to listen to. Compared to the boomy bass, thin mids and spikey treble of the R2A, the R115s subdued treble delivery works better.

The R115s play on another level.

Further musings
The R115s remind me of the Ultrasone Tio in the intimate sound that they deliver. The Tio goes further and extracts more information from the treble, sounds clearer, at the risk of sounding harsher. Here the R115 takes the safe route by letting go of some treble clarity. For my own taste, spoiled by all the studio monitoring IEMs, i would have preferred a bit more detail retrieval. But we must consider that the Tio was around 300 USD, whereas the R115s are a little above a 100 dollars.

Personal Sound Rating of Akoustyx R-115: 8.4/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4/5
Timbre 3.8/5
Instrument Separation 3.8/5
Positioning/localisation 4/5
Details 4/5



Conclusion
The Akoustyx R-115 is a full sounding, immersive IEM that is very musical. They provide great isolation and the fit is supremely comfortable. Tuned for the stage, they provide a very intimate listening experience. The bass is perfect all the way down to 20Hz. If monitoring and detail extraction is not your priority and immersing yourself in the music for a long time is, then the R115 will keep you smiling with their fatigue free tuning.

Simple Man’s review – Etymotic ER2SE (~129 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: Single, high performance, moving coil driver
Impedance: 15 Ohms; Sensitivity: 96dB@1kHz; Rated FR 20Hz - 16kHz
Cable: 4 foot MMCX detachable cable (with the Etymotic tab to lock the cables in place)
Shell: Metal anodized housings
Nozzle: ~3mm
Preferred eartips: Shure Soft Flex (EASFX1-10M)
Release year: Feb 2019

Build – 5/5
Housings of dark blue colour are nice to behold, and the anodized coating reflect some light. There are some serial numbers in the bottom of the housings (mine are 2620 and 2621). They don’t spoil the aesthetics but it might have been better without them.
Cables are of good thickness, not flimsy. The also feel good and behave, not jumpy or inflexible like some of those ATH wires. Detachable cables with MMCX connectors, but they have this little notch in the connector that is designed to sit in the tab present in the housing, just like the ER4XR, which helps to keep the wire from rotating. So, for after market MMCX to work, you might have to chip away some plastic at near the connectors. The ER4XR/SR cables can be used here and vice versa.
Y-splitter looks good, matches the colour of the housing and is not too long. They have “ETYMŌTIC” written on them so people will know we mean business. Strain reliefs are deployed all around, and we also see a nice little neck cinch to hold the wires in place.
L-Shaped jack is solid and sturdy.



Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience is simple and practical. Nothing showy or grand here. Aesthetically pleasing.
A small soft leather pouch is provided which looks good and is of decent size. It also has a little netted pocked within that can be fastened with velcro.
Tips. We get 1 pair of large silicon tri-flange and 1 pair of foam tips. The small tri-flange is included in the earpieces.
We also get a filter removal tool, and a set of spare filters as well, which is pretty cool.
A huge shirt clip is also provided

The ER4XR, in contrast, provides one extra pair of silicon tri-flage, one extra foam tips, one extra set of spare filters, and a 1/4 inch stereo adapter. We also get a humongous hard case as opposed tot he small pouch here. We also get a little Certificate of Performance slip with the official measurements, which is not provided with the ER2SE.



Fit – 4/5
Fit is very good. I tucked away the tri-flanges and installed my Shure tips. Deep insertion is not my thing, i’m perfectly happy with regular insertion.

Isolation and leakage – 5/5
With deep insertion you’re as good as deaf. But even with my relatively shallow insertion, we get very good isolation. And there is no leakage.

Microphonics – 4/5
Definitely better than the ER4XR, but is still present when we wear it straight down. Over the ear minimises the problem to a considerable extent.

Drivability – Not the easiest. I’m around 60-70% volume in my HTC 10. Similar to ER4XR plus 1 notch volume.

Please note that the following impressions are based on using them with the Shure eartips with insertion of a normal depth – somewhere between deep and shallow. I get a really tight seal and as a result get adequate bass. So, i don’t think i’m missing anything significant due to this.

Sound –
These are Etymotics and they sound like it. However, the dynamic drivers have a rather strong character and differs quite a bit from the BA delivery of the ER4s. I will compare them to my ER4XR in depth in due time.


Bass: It is really tight, and the sub bass impact is on the softer side. The sub-bass is touched as opposed to punched/hit. But it does reach deep, and we hear the rumble adequately. The rumbles stay low at the foundation and are perceived as song details instead of adding to the fun factor. They still sound very natural, and carry enough warmth to save them from sounding bright.

Mids: The ER2SEs are neutral and detailed with just enough warmth in the mids. Voices are perfect, and carry the right amount of warmth and detail. The notes also have enough body to them and do not sound thin. They sound very true and correct. There is a tint of organic quality to them that is missing in the BA models

Highs: Pleasant to the ears, and super clear. The highs are smooth and detailed, and they never touch sibilance. Detail retrieval is not BA level, but the dynamic drivers squeeze every bit they can. Cymbal hits carry some weight to their notes and sound well rounded.

Timbre: The dynamic drivers retain the natural and organic character of the percussion instruments. The timbre is on point and perfect. It’s a pleasure to listen to them. In this aspect, i think they sound a bit more natural than the ER4XR. Violins and guitars sound clean and have the perfect amount of bite and brightness to them. They are also very cohesive, and have a certain fluidity in them which makes them lean toward musical than monitoresque. This is a very special earphone tuned in the right signature.

Soundstage:
The soundstage has decent width and a bit of height. Not very wide but i wouldn’t say they are overly constricted. Although similar in dimensions to the ER4XR, the ER2SEs don’t suffer from a very monitoresque presentation. They sound a bit more cohesive.

Let’s jump into some comparisons to know more about the ER2SE

Comparisons



Round 1 – Vs Sonicast Dirac + MK2 (~51 USD)
These are a Korean Single Dynamic earphone that are tuned to be very neutral close to the Harman target response. This earphone has a bump in the sub-bass below 100 Hz, otherwise super neutral.

Going back and for the between the two, i find that the ER2SE’s mids are much better. The Dirac driver’s lower mids are slightly pulled back which sucks out some of that important warmth from the midrage. As a result the Dirac comes across as brighter. The male vocals in the ER2SE has more body and depth to the voice. Voices are dry in the Dirac and the overall presentation is on the thinner side. ER2SE on the other had sounds more cohesive and i would even call it a more musical IEM in comparison. Detail retrieval is also clearly better in the treble region. The only thing going for the Diracs in this competition is that they produce a better kick drum thump. And when the deepest sub-bass in invoked they deliver a much satisfying impact.

For less than 50% of the price, the Dirac is a worthy audiophile/monitor recommendation. That said, the ER2SE sings on another level.

Round 2 – Vs Sennheiser IE 40 Pro (~99 USD)
The IE 40 Pro, released end of last year, is a great monitoring IEM that has seen a lot of unanimous praise in these circles. Designed for stage monitoring use, they impressed me with very good clarity and usability for the price.

The Senns really bump that bass. ER2SE has bass setting at 0, and here we come to a level 6 or so. AS a result the IE40 Pro are warmer, and sound thicker. The mids/vocals are also pulled back slightly in the mix. We can feel some restraint in the singers. The treble details are impressive and saves the IEM from sounding overly warm.

Moving to the ER2SE, i see a great drain in bass as if a tap was suddenly open. It takes a couple of seconds to adjust to the missing bass thumps. As a result, the bass and midrange clarity increases tremendously. Voices come up front, and more vocal details pop up front. We see a lot of hidden details come to light.

The IE 40 Pro is saved partly because of their wider soundstage and lateral arrangement. If not for this we would have seen a lot more masking and bleed from bass to mids. The ER2SEs play in a (slightly) narrower stage, and yet have similar or even more breathing space between the details. Of course the ER2SE paid the price of bass-impact. And if your playlist reaches low frequently you will miss some juice with the ER2SE.

The IE 40 Pro driver also comes across as a slower compared to the quicker ER2SE. It appears like each drum beat and thump take their own sweet time in delivering the meaty-impact before moving to the next beat. ER2SEs hit and move faster ignoring any need for impact.

I favour the ER2SE mainly because i don’t miss the sub-bass for most of the songs in my playlist. If you’re in a more fun mood, you would pick the IE 40 Pro, which will also deliver great treble details with a wider soundstage. ER2SE also excels in timbre and sheer detail retrieval, and are able to carry enough warmth with lesser bass quantity.

Round 3 – Vs ER4XR (~400 USD)
Finally, the most important comparison. Against the ER4XR. I believe the dynamic bass of Studio Edition would be closer to the BA bass of 4XR, which is why i chose to buy this instead of the 2XR.

The shells are the exact same size:

Y-splitter:


Measurements comparison:

From ER4XR to ER2SE – To get similar output i had to push the ER2SE’s volume one notch higher in my HTC10. The 2SE appears brighter in comparison – also in line with the reduced bass quantity. Yet, they are smooth and do not offend the ears. The voices still get the necessary warmth and timbre is perfect. The treble crashes, strings, etc, have slightly more body, but seem to be missing some micro definition. The mix is also more cohesive and kind of plays together rather than the more precisely separated presentation of 4XR.

Switching from ER2SE to ER4XR. The bass impact is actually better as the XR promises. The BA driver is significantly faster and there is a certain effortlessness in the 4XR model that makes everything sound sublime. The speed really helps to extract a lot more details and that in the best resolution. Of course, the mids and treble details are a touch thinner and lack that little body that make the dynamic drivers sound a little more natural and organic. Retrieving so much information in the treble makes the edges a little sharp, a teeny bit harsh. The ER2SE in this aspect is quite inoffensive and smooth.

Clearly, the 4XR is superior and we can actually see how sheer speed helps in bringing out all the micro details. However, i still think i would reach for the ER2SE more than the 4XR, as the 2SE is also greatly detailed, and they do have the dynamic character which add some body and depth to the sound. In this aspect, the cheaper dynamic Etymotic will score a point against the big daddy ER4s. When i’m listening to my favourite blues or jazz albums i miss absolutely nothing with the 2SE. For this reason i think any owner of ER4s or ER3s should still consider buying the ER2s.

For my own tastes, i thought the ER2XR might just add a little too much bass. I would have preferred if they kept the bass completely linear as opposed to downward slope of the SE and the upward tilt in the XR series. I really hope they put out another iteration with dynamic drivers trying to further increase the speed, etc.

Overall Sound rating of Etymotic ER2SE: 9.2 / 10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 4/5
Positioning/localisation 4/5
Details 4.5/5
Timbre 5/5



Conclusion –
Tuned in the same neutral house signature, the dynamic drivers in ER2SE give us a little peek into the character and nature of the moving coil dynamic driver. Even though they lose out on sheer detail extraction and speed to the more expensive ER4XR model, the ER2SE does take the middle path and impresses with its natural timbre and cohesive delivery. It reassures the Dynamic-driver believer that there is indeed some magic to the output of the driver itself that cannot be replaced by the Balanced armature technology.

Simple Man’s review – Sennheiser IE 400 Pro (350 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: 7 mm “broadband transducer” Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 16 Ohms; Sensitivity: 123dB/mW
Weight: 18g
Cable: 1.3m; proprietary detachable cable (Compatible only with IE 400 and IE 500 Pro - Not compatible with IE 40 Pro)
Shell: Hard Plastic Shell
Nozzle: ~5mm
Total Harmonic Distortion: < 0.08 %
Release year: April, 2019



Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience was really nice, and the presentation is elegant.
Apart from the earphones themselves, we get the following accessories.

• 3 Silicone adapters (S, M, L)
• 3 Foam adapters (S, M, L)
• 1 Transport case – really spacious and can hold 2 of these earphones easily.
• 1 Cleaning Tool
• 1 6.3 mm jack-adapter

What more can one ask for ?

Build – 3.5/5
The build quality is very similar as its little brother IE 40 Pro, which had no flaws to speak of. The hard plastic shell and the black wires are retained in the IE 400 Pro (Note that the IE 40 Pro connectors are not compatible with the IE 400 Pros). The plastic shell might sound cheap, but this really keeps the weight of the housing and wearing comfort at an optimal level. They’re also using their expensive 7mm micro driver in this model, the IE 40 Pro had a larger 10mm driver. I’m happy with the build in general as I had no complaints against the design or build of the IE 40 Pro.

There are, however, a couple of small enhancements incorporated in the IE400 Pro if you take a closer look. The earphone nozzles now have a protective mesh. This is very thoughtful, and for the asking price I would have been slightly bummed if they forgot to add this trusty mesh. . IE 40 Pro instead has some foam inserted into the nozzle to keep dust out. There is a change in the nozzle length and thickness in the 400 and 500 Pro models, the IE 40 Pro has a slightly longer and thinner nozzle. Detachable cables are great and easy to use and replace.

EDIT 23.01.2020: AFTER 10 months of continuous use and tip rolling with the IE500 Pro which has the exactly same build as IE400 PRO the driver housing in the left earpiece just popped out yesterday. To be fair i tried so many tips with these IEMs (including ones with smaller diameter than the nozzle, twisting them back and forth, etc.) I had to re-glue it back in. Sound quality is the same. If you're not playing too much with tip rolling, you should be good! Bringing down the rating in this section from to 3.5 due to this.



Fit – 5/5
Fit is excellent. Over ear universal fit can’t get better than this. The slim housing sits very comfortably and seamlessly in the ear concha. Sleeping with this won’t be a problem at all.

Isolation and leakage – 3.5/5
Sound Attenuation is rated at <26dB, and they are OK with music ON. Perfect for indoor use, however, if you are talking a walk outside, outside noise tends to creep in letting you know of your surroundings. The earphones even allow you to have a conversation without taking them off when no music is playing, as would be preferable for on-stage musicians to get together for a small chat between tracks. Sound leakage is very minimal at normal listening levels and shouldn’t bother a loved one trying to sleep.

Microphonics – 5/5
None. There is no touch noise from the cable, and walking with these are a pleasure indeed. Just make sure the earbuds are placed securely in the ear and you wouldn’t notice any cable noise.

Drivability – Easy to drive with a smartphone. With my HTC10s i’m mostly between 40-60% of the volume. It gets a slightly louder than the IE40 Pro, as the sensitivity is nudged a bit higher here.

Before we get to the sound-
Eartips: I’m using the stock tips, which have some foam filter in it. These tips are right in between Final E tips and JVC spirals in terms of bore width. I think the stock tips works as good as any.

Sound –
The general signature can be called balanced, again very similar to IE 40 Pro. They sound very similar. With the Pro series Sennheisers are going for what they call a “precise” sound as opposed to neutral. This is basically a balanced tone with a little nudge in the bass to sound more natural, and a little push in the treble to get that treble extension and splash.



We have good bass emphasis, the mids aren’t forwarded like ATH or Donguri, for instance, they play on the right level without sounding restrained. The highs really extend well and display great amount of clarity. It’s up there with the masters in terms of detail retrieval. Every treble touch with the snares and crash will be delivered precisely to the listener’s ear. We can see more about sound in the following passages.

Soundstage:
The soundstage is nice and wide. They really stretch from left to right and if you like wide soundstages the IE Pro line-up will not disappoint. The stage is not very tall seeing they tend towards a monitoresque presentation. The presentation is rather lateral, with good pin-point localisation of individual instruments. They never get clinical so as to distract from the music, thanks to the bass emphasis which keeps things together. Overall, the stage is very similar to ER4XR



Bass:
The bass delivered by IE 400 Pro is punchy and impactful. If your track is bassy, you will feel all the bass fun intended by the artist. The same holds true for the entire series. You get that impactful bass with very decent definition and separation. The sub-bass quantity is slightly below the mid-bass from what I hear. The bass is tight and defined, and mostly stays in its spot without disturbing the clarity of the mids. The mid bass impact is also good, it is the kind of bass that hits and lets the impact sink in for a moment before vanishing. Not the fastest driver. The timbre and natural quality of the bass instruments come through very authentically. The reverbs from cello and double-bass can be enjoyed to the fullest.

Mids:
The mids are neither forwarded nor pulled back to sound like a V-shaped tuning. The slight bass emphasis and treble tilt gives it a kind of reserved positioning. The intention is to present the mids in a more level-headed manner, rather than boost the mids to get that intimate W sound. Staying where they are, the mids never get out of the spot-light and plays with authority and great clarity, even. The vocalists don’t pop out (unless recorded that way) and sing at a decent distance in the stage. There is a certain airiness to the mids and they sound breezy and happy. This probably plays out more due to a certain drop in the sub-bass emphasis. And of course, with a balanced signature the timbre is mostly right on with a dynamic driver and the IE 400 Pro scores in this respect. Mids sound very natural and defined. The instrument separation is also very evident and commendable.

Treble:
The treble really extends well beyond 10Khz unlike many IEMs that I’ve had the pleasure of using. Again, true for the entire line-up. Every tick on the snare is clearly presented in its accurate position. The signature tilts bright due to a certain emphasis in the treble region. It’s not overly done, but one will not go and call this smooth (think Final E series, or even Etymotic for that matter). As a result, there is great clarity in the region which sounds crisp, sharp and refreshing. This also gives that little splash which some of us audiophiles crave in an IEM. Due to the great extension here, the transient harmonics are very impressive. If you have songs with a lot of echoes and such, think Pink Floyd or Chemical Brothers, both the IE 400 and 500 Pro sound really mesmerising. The dying echoes of the strings and the high-notes have a beautiful spread in the soundstage and makes for an immersive experience.

Comparisons

Round 1 – Vs Sennheiser IE 40 Pro (~100 USD)
Obligatory comparison with the lesser brother. Let’s see if the IE 400 Pro sounds a whole 250 bucks better than its younger brother.



The general signature of the two is very similar. IE 400 Pro gets slightly louder in the same volume than the IE40 Pro. The bass is tighter in the IE 400 Pro, and also has a slightly lesser sub-bass slam. IE 400 has slightly better bass definition as well, being relatively faster. The mids, also pop out slightly better with the IE 400s, and is clearer by some margin. Vocals comes through with better intelligibility compared to the cheaper IE 40 Pro. The IE 40 Pro’s highs are little more on the splashier side and have some rough edges. This is tamed in the IE 400 Pros, and they also sound much clearer and have more precise positioning. As a result, they also display better micro-definition in the treble.

Clartiy and definition is better throughout the spectrum with the IE 400s compared to the younger brother.

You can say, these are a direct upgrade to the IE 40 sound, not very different from how the IE 500 Pro is a direct upgrade to the IE 400 sound.

Round 2 – Vs Acoustic Research AR-E10 (discontinued)
Fairly new IEM released by Acoustic Research. I wanted to do this comparison to check how the IE 400 Pro stands against this hybrid IEM, which has very good resolution despite having a big meaty bass.

AR E10 has a big emphasis in mid-bass, and sub-bass. The mid-bass bloom, although not very bloaty, is very evident and colours the signature dark. The driver being a little on the slower side does not help as well. This also masks certain mid frequencies and affects clarity. The E10 are also tuned towards a W-shape response, with the mids/upper mids pushed up to add extra clarity, and has a little emphasis on lower treble as well to give that shimmer up top . When switching to IE 400 Pros, the increase in clarity is quite surprising, and we can readily see how the linear response greatly helps to increase resolution and clarity throughout the spectrum. The driver is tighter, mids clearer, and vocals also have better clarity.

Easy win for IE 400 Pro.

Round 2 – Vs Olasonic FLAT4 NAMI (discontinued)
Only challenging comparisons here on out. FLAT4 NAMI is renowned for its treble clarity and vast soundstage. They are armed with 2 dynamic drivers.

NAMI’s separation is very distinct in their super-wide soundstage. The treble is clearly up in the mix, and the extension is really great. Treble transients fly through the shimmery soundscape. The Nami also hits a little close to the sibilance region, never really touching it, ever teasing. The upper-mids emphasis is also apparent with NAMI. The bass has great definition and decent impact.

Switching the IE 400 Pro, we immediately notice more weight in the bass, with great impact and fullness. Compared to the wide and spread out presentation of the NAMIs, the Sennheisers sound rather intimate. The mids are also clearly in front of the mix in comparison. The NAMIs sport a U shaped tuning where the vocals are slightly pulled back in relation. NAMIs are an easily brighter earphone and the treble splash comes across as slightly thinner. The relatively lesser sub-bass quantity of the NAMIs also help to extract more definition from its bass.

This round must be called a tie. The Senns score some points with vocal clarity and a slightly closer, true to source presentation. The NAMIs are a touch more resolving, and extract slightly more details, but at the expense of sounding slightly harsh and taking the bright signature. IE 400 Pros sound more balanced and the warmth and splash nicely even out for a natural presentation.

Round 4 – Vs Etymotic ER4XR (~350 USD)
I use these with SpinFits. Another relevant and challenging comparison since they are similarly priced.

The Etymotic clarity impresses straight-away, and being XR, the bass is also delivered precisely with nice impact. Detail extraction is, well, Ety level. Mids are crystal clear, and the vocals precise. They do reach a little close to sibilance with the zzzs and sssszs.

Switching to the Senns, we notice better attack and impact of the dynamic driver. The IE 400 Pros add a dash of warmth coming from the ER4XR. Sub-bass impact seems similar, with some added mid-bass attack in the IE 400 Pro. Clarity of the mids are slightly better in the Etys, with the vocals coming through as dry, neutral. The 400 adds that little warmth and soul to the sound. The highs of the Etys are rather thin and the quick hits don’t help much in delivering any sense of depth to the treble. Here, the Sennheisers portray a more convincing treble presentation. The Cymbals and crashes are more life-like, with that added weight. The dynamic driver also has impressive extension into the treble, and yet avoid sounding bright or thin, like the Ety.

The Etys sound a touch cleaner, and leaner, sacrificing warmth and bass impact to the Sennheisers. You might get bored with the Etys, not so with the Senns

Round 3 – Vs Sony EX800ST (~250 USD)
Another single dynamic with a massive soundstage. Also tooted as a monitoring earphone. Let’s see how this fight goes.

Amazing soundstage depth and width, with great clarity in the mids- this is EX800ST. The bass is precise and linear. Mids get the necessary warmth and timbre is top notch. The upper mids are slightly bumped to sound really nice.

Switching to Sennheiser IE 400 Pros, the sub-bass impact is better, with equal warmth spreading to the mids. The treble is slightly nudged up front with the Sennheisers, which make it the brighter of IEM. The notes are all slightly weighty with the Senns, with vocals carrying a little more body. There is better instrument separation with the Sonys as they put their wide stage to perfect use. The Sennheisers squeeze all the sounds a little closer to each other, thereby giving us some extra intimacy as well.

Sonys score with Soundstage, separation, mid-bass, upper-mids.
Sennheisers score with sub-bass, treble, cohesiveness, also outdoor proof.

I had to go back and forth between the two so many times, and i would say they stand in the same tier, while leaning slightly toward Sony, because they have that upper-mid nudge.

Round 5 – Vs Ultrasone IQ Pro (~450 USD)
A very highly competent hybrid from IQ Pro packing 1 BA and 1DD, also aimed at monitoring professionals. I can already say we are near the top of the food-chain here.

The IQ Pro soundstage is vast with great depth, width and height. They display amazing clarity and timbre that it’s quite astonishing. Instrument positioning and spacing is also impressive. Sub-bass is reserved with decent dynamic impact and the driver is quick and resolves extremely well. IE 400 Pro impresses again with equal clarity and I would go so far to say slightly better resolution as well. Despite delivering a much better impact with sub-bass, we can see that the vocals are a touch clearer in the IE 400 Pro, and slightly forward in comparison. The upper treble as well extends further, and you hear slightly more details in the mix.

In terms of sheer detail retrieval and resolution, the IE 400 Pro might just edge the IQ Pros out. Where there IQ Pro impresses is with its greater soundstage, layers and instrument positioning. The Senns hold their lateral positioning, with a relatively constricted space, not so different from Etys, which is preferable for monitoring purposes. Before comparing I thought IE 400 Pro might be on the losing end of the stick. I’m completely surprised by how the Sennheisers rose up to the occasion with their clear and dynamic sound!

Round 6 – Vs InEar Stage Diver SD2 (~450 USD)
OK. This is summit. SD2s loaded with 2 BAs, are a bit pricier than the IE 400 Pros. We already saw how the SD2s put up with its elder brother IE 500 Pros’ punches. Let’s see how the 400s fare against the SD2s.

SD2s are immensely clear with a strictly linear bass, that adds a nice warmth to the mids enabling excellent timbre reproduction. The soundstage is deep and wide quite similar to the IQ Pros. And the sheer clarity in the mids is staggering. The notes have good depth and weight to them and comes across as very real. Treble extension and clarity as well is top notch.

Switching to IE 400 Pros, we can immediately notice a bigger sub-bass reach and impact, but at the same time the driver this time is a bit slower and we can notice layer of muddiness in the bass-mid region. The constricted soundstage does not play to the IE 400 Pros advantage as well. The Sennheiser highs show impressive extension and reach, but not enough to out-do the SD2s in this regard. The note weight is also slightly lacking in the IE400 Pros and they come across as slightly thin. The sheer clarity and greater soundstage earn a convincing win for the SD2s this time. For 350 bucks, the IE 400 Pros are still unbeatable from my little experience.

Bonus round: Vs IE 500 Pro here in the detailed review.


A word on the single dynamic driver – Sennheiser, with their Pro series, have more than convincingly busted this whole “BA driver for Clarity” myth. The treble resolution and the vocal clarity are TOTL – especially with the IE 500 Pro. Using the dynamic driver also means that bass is on point, and the timbre is closer to the natural sound. Sticking to the single dynamic is also a class-act and I really commend Sennheiser for not condescending to take the multi-driver route.

Both final and Sennheiser will have my respect for sticking to their core values.

Overall Sound rating of Sennheiser IE 400 Pro: 9.1 / 10
Vocals 4.2/5
Soundstage 4.4/5
Instrument Separation 4.2/5
Positioning/localisation 4.3/5
Details 4.3/5
Timbre 4.3/5



Conclusion –
The entire Sennheiser IE Pro line-up are decently priced and deliver great quality sound for the money. The IE 400 Pros are a significant upgrade from the IE 40 Pros. They are highly resolving and stand to contend against the best in the price range. The IE 400 Pros also take you one step closer towards the fully realised 7mm driver, which is the IE 500 Pro. If you're looking for a fun, detailed sound you cannot go wrong with the IE400 Pros.

Simple Man’s review – Sennheiser IE 500 Pro (599 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: 7 mm “broadband transducer” Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 16 Ohms; Sensitivity: 126dB/mW
Weight: 18g
Cable: 1.3m; proprietary detachable cable (Compatible only with IE 400 and IE 500 Pro - Not compatible with IE 40 Pro)
Shell: Hard Plastic Shell
Nozzle: ~5mm
Total Harmonic Distortion: < 0.08 %
Release year: April, 2019



Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience was really nice, and i was impressed with their elegant presentation.
Apart from the earphones themselves, we get the following accessories.

• 3 Silicone tips (S, M, L)
• 3 Foam tips (S, M, L)
• 1 Transport case – really spacious and can hold 2 of these earphones easily.
• 1 Cleaning Tool
• 1 6.3 mm jack-adapter

Neat!



Build – 3/5
The build quality is the same as their brothers. The family resemblance is uncanny. They retain the same plastic housing in this expensive model as well. This does help to keep the weight of the housing and wearing comfort at an optimal level. Since they’re also using their expensive 7mm micro driver, I believe using these shells is a cost-cutting initiative to bring the sound of the IE800s at a relatively accessible price. I’m happy with this as I had no complaints against the design or build of their little brothers. The nozzle lengths are prefect and not overly protruding. They are also equipped with a plastic-mesh closure which prevents any dirt from entering the housings. You also get the proprietary detachable cables which are easy to remove and connect. I don’t see these breaking with any regular or even rough use. All of this is exactly same as the IE 400 Pro.

Of course, we have the more attractive cable with the IE 500 Pro, whereas the IE 400s have the same regular black cable. Here they use a twisted pair cable for “excellent resistance against structure-born noise”. I guess this is something special compared to their lower offerings. However, I must say that my experience with these silver cables were that they tend to turn into a buish-green colour over time. This doesn’t affect the sound in any sense whatsoever, but the aesthetics of it is marred over time. To know if the Sennheiser cable will fall for this malady I must wait and see.

EDIT 23.01.2020: AFTER 10 months of continuous use and tip rolling, to be fair i tried so many tips with these IEMs (including ones with smaller diameter than the nozzle, twisting them back and forth, etc.), the driver housing in the left earpiece just popped out yesterday. I had to re-glue it back in. Sound quality is the same. It is just that for 600 bucks, we expect this to never happen. Of course if you're thick handed, and twist it hard enough, the wires could also give in and break. If you're not playing too much with tip rolling you should be good! Bringing down the rating in this section from 4.5 to 3, and kicking off half a star in overall rating due to this. Sound rating remains the same.

Fit – 5/5
Fit is excellent. Over ear universal fit can’t get better than this. The slim housing sits very comfortably and seamlessly in the ear concha. Sleeping with this won’t be a problem at all.

Isolation and leakage – 3.5/5
Sound Attenuation is rated at <26dB, and they are OK with music ON. Perfect for indoor use, however, if you are talking a walk outside, outside noise tends to creep in letting you know of your surroundings. The earphones even allow you to have a conversation without taking them off when no music is playing, as would be preferable for on-stage musicians to get together for a small chat between tracks. Sound leakage is very minimal at normal listening levels and shouldn’t bother a loved one trying to sleep.

Microphonics – 5/5
I’ve been walking with these every day the last 3 weeks, and i must say there is absolutely no sound transferred from the cables when i have a good fit. This is really great, and using these on the go has been a very satisfying experience.

Drivability – Very easy to drive with a smartphone, easier than its siblings due to higher sensitivity. With my HTC10s i’m mostly around 35-50% of the volume.

Before we get to the sound -

Eartips: I’m using the stock tips, which have some foam filter in it. These tips are right in between Final E tips and JVC spirals in terms of bore width. I think the stock tips works as good as any.
(EDIT: after much tip rolling, i find the moondrop eartips (mine are the stock tips that came with Moondrop Crescent) to bring out the best in the treble! This makes for a significant improvement in overall clarity. SpinFits and JVC spirals are also great alternatives.)

Sound –
The sound signature is balanced and highly detailed. Rather than going that neutral way, they aim to sound “precise”, which has a little punch in the bass and some splash in the highs. The mids stay neutral without any forwardness or retraction. The clarity throughout the spectrum is simply incredible and you can clearly see that the driver is really fast. This is the definition of dynamic sound in my opinion.



Soundstage:
Like all of the Pro line-up IEMs, the IE 500 Pro has a very wide soundstage with a little bit of height. The stage isn’t too tall because these are not V shaped or do not have that upper-mid or treble spike. The positioning is highly disciplined, and the note separation clear. We also see a lot of blacks between the instruments which presents music in a certain “glowing” fashion, it also indicates quick decay. The presentation is more lateral somewhat like the Etys, with a little added depth from the bass and height from the treble presentation.

Bass:
The IE 500 Pro takes its bass seriously. The attack is very impactful and yet stays really snappy. Sub-bass extension is really impressive. North of neutral for sure, but thankfully it does not have an overly emphasised sub-bass which makes an IEM sound boomy, and one would not mention the word “bloat” when we talk about mid bass. The driver is no slouch when it comes to speed. They fire and disappear all in an instant. This aids in presenting a very refined bass and prevents any leakage whatsoever into the neighbouring bands. The decay is quick and micro definition is apparent. A fun song will be fun to listen to with the IE 500 Pro. From what I read about the original IE800, the IE500 Pro sounds like it has a more balanced bass, that is less boomy, in comparison to the bigger bass of the IE800. Alas, I’ve never tried the IE800.

Mids:
The mids are awfully clear and has great definition. Considering the impactful bass delivery this is quite an extraordinary feat to have this great midrange clarity. The timbre is top-notch and the driver squeezes out all the micro-details in the track. The vocals are life-like with all the little details- breaths taken, clicks of the tongue, and what-not. The voices also have just enough body without ever getting into the lush territory. Upper mids are polite and not in your face. That said, female vocals are not missing any body and they come out really well. Thanks to the dynamic driver the notes also enough weight and soul to boot.

Treble:
The accented treble extends greatly. They paint the signature bright, but not overly so. It flashes with a splash and sometimes comes across as brittle, with sharp edges – carrying all that definition with it. If your rock song has too much crashes and cymbal hits, they have the tendency to dominate the song. However, despite the slightly forwarded treble, sibiliance is completely avoided and stops short of hitting any resonance peaks, due to a little dip in lower treble. The drivers are quick throughout the spectrum and extracts all the details in the region, at the risk of coming across as slightly thin. And of course, having this great extension, transient harmonics are magical, and any reverberating echoes fill up the soundscape in an impressive, encompassing display.

Comparisons


Round 1 –Vs Sennheiser IE 400 Pro (350 USD)
First, an obligatory comparison with the younger brother IE 400 Pro. We will straightaway see where the two stand against each other.



IE 500 Pro sounds slightly louder than its sibling at the same, and along with this the you can see an overall increase in clarity. The IE 500 bass is more impactful, and has better quality, rumble and definition as opposed to the thumping bass quantity of IE400. This increase in sub-bass compared to mid-bass makes the IE500 slightly darker, relatively. The IE400 has a breathier feeling to the sound switching from the impactful, thicker, delivery of the IE 500. The upper-mids of IE400 sounds more prominent compared to IE500. IE400 plays the female vocals a little more up-front, and the region appears more spread out in the sound stage. Aided by greater bass definition, the timbre shines with the IE500. Male vocals sound thicker and more soulful. Bass hits are quicker in IE500 compared to a slower impact with IE400. The IE500 driver also comes across as a touch faster throughout the spectrum, presenting more information with greater clarity and micro-definition, gives a sense of speed to the song, as a whole. The IE 500 impresses with a wider soundstage and instrument positioning is also easily better with the IE500.

Round 2 – Vs Etymotic ER4XR (~300 USD)
Another essential comparison when you talk about earphones for monitoring. I'm using the ER4XR with spinFits.

The soundstage of the two are quite similar in height, with 500 Pros reaching wider. The ER4XR has a decent sub-bass thump when the beat reaches deep. But the impact and the amount of meat delivered is significantly higher with the IE500 Pro. The biggest difference you will notice between the two is with the amount of body that the musical notes have. Dynamic driver works its magic here. ER4XR is known for its thin presentation which enables it to squeeze every drop of detail in the track. IE 500 Pro has a satisfyingly thicker note presence which aids in timbre. Still, the IE500 doesn’t lose on the detail extraction as it stands toe to toe against ER4XR detail delivery. The ER4XR however, being BA and all, is a snappier driver and is faster, and this slightly helps in singling out certain notes that are more subtle with the IE500 Pro. ER4XR can be called a touch cleaner as a result. The highs have a little bit of splash with the IE500 Pro compared to a smoother delivery with the Etys. I would venture to say the treble extension is better with the IE500 Pros. In terms of overall musical enjoyment, and also for monitoring, i would take the IE500 Pro over the ER4XRs as i don’t lose much detail and get that extra bass and weightier notes.

Round 3 – Vs InEar SD2 (450 USD)
Of all the earphones I own, these are my highest rated IEMs. Let’s see how the IE500 Pros stand against these.

First off – the most obvious thing anyone would say – the sub-bass delivery and impact of the dynamic driver leaves nothing wanted in the bass department. Here, the impact of the SD2 is soft and lacks punch in comparison. The sheer clarity and separation in the mids help the SD2 to make up for the loss of the bass body. The IE500 pro, as expected, pays the price of delivering all that good bass, by losing just a little bit of that extra clarity in the mids. The SD2 also has a certain magical depth in the sound field, which makes for a mesmerising listen. That little bit of warmth in the mids adds the perfect amount of weight to the notes as well. The upper mids of the SD2 are also a little up front and high-pitched vocals sound crystal clear with the SD2. The even-handed treble delivery of the BA driven SD2, surprisingly, doesn't out-do the clarity offered by IE500 Pro’s dynamic drivers. They both resolve equally when it comes to micro-details in the treble region.

In a word, we can say SD2 focuses on the mids more than the extremes of the sound spectrum, and does, as intended, provide a more interesting and immersing mid-range presentation. The IE 500 Pro handles the entire spectrum masterfully, and using the dynamic driver to its full potential delivers a great overall sound experience. Calling a winner here will be driven by one’s taste and the genre of music.

Round 4 – Vs Ultrasone IQ (~600 USD)
Equally expensive, the IQs are armed with one dynamic and a BA driver.

IQs have a big bass, with great sub-bass impact and mid bass attack as well. As a result, the IQs tilt a little towards V or W shaped compared to the relatively more balanced IE 500 Pros. The mid-bass of the IE 500 Pro being more disciplined , therefore are able to present a little more detail in the mids in a cleaner and less coloured manner compared to the IQs. The Sennheisers also wins in the timbre game. The IQs also have a taller soundstage and the vocals also play a little forward in comparison. The highs of the IQs as well are a little boosted to stand against its impactful bass. The detail extraction is about the same, but here the Senns come out as a little thin sounding in the treble. The IQs clearly go for a very exciting sound signature as opposed to a more balanced sound of the Senns which strives to present a precise sound. The soundstage and presentation of the Senns are more linear with lateral arrangement that stretches wide. The IQs are quite special when it comes to stage depth and layering. Instrument positioning is as good in one as in the other. The IE500 Pros will definitely suit better for monitoring purposes. I will take the IQs when i want to jump about in excitement.

Round 5 – Vs Audio Technica ATH-CK100iS (~400 USD)
Armed with 2 dynamic drivers, the CKR100s are a close favourite of mine.

The CKR100s have the best bass tuning i’ve ever heard in an IEM. It has the perfect quantity vs quality ratio. The sub-bass impact is just enough and the mid-bass has that perfect amount of air (not literally), but you know what i’m talking about! In comparison, the Sennheisers have a greater sub-bass impact and gets a to downward slope toward neutral mid/upper bass. The mids are popped up front in the CKR100s, and an extra boost is given to the upper-mids. ATH has a very unique colouration which is very japanese-y. I personally go nuts for this kind of tuning. The IE500 Pros sport a very neutral-ish vocal presentation, and don’t try to grab your attention unlike the CKR100s. The soundstage of the CKR100s is very rounded with good width and equally good height. The layering and depth of the soundstage is readily apparent and very tastefully done. On the other hand, the IE 500 Pro takes a more monitoresque approach great width and lateral alignment. In terms of sheer detail extraction the Senns will edge the Audio technicas. The CKR100s hide some of their details in their layers and they are more subtle and coloured. The highs of the CKR100s are laid-back and present micro-details in measured doses where one might be confused if they are super-detailed or not. The Senns have greater extension in treble and present more information in this range.

This is a matter of taste. Technically, the sennheisers have a greater range and a straight-forward approach to presenting sound. CKR100 has perfect bass, and the vocals are forward and mids have better depth and more layers, albeit coloured. IE500 pros have a faster driver and excel in clarity. Instrument separation is also stronger with the IE500 Pros.

Round 6 – Vs Sony EX800ST (~250 USD)
One of the best single DDs made. I use these un-modded with Final E tips

The soundstage of the EX800 are freaking massive and gives a whole new experience. Timbre of the EX800 is top-notch. There is a certain warmth in the mids that is very similar to that of SD2 – only dynamic this time. Female vocals are amazing. The sound as well is very clean with great detail extraction and clarity. The mids in general are really great in the EX800. IE500 Pros reach deeper in the sub-bass against the stock configuration of EX800. The Senns are a faster driver and we can easily notice this. The impact is greater and also quicker when pitted against the slightly laid-back bass action of the Sony drivers. In terms of sheer detail retrieval the Senns will inch ahead of the Sonys. The treble is also greatly extended with the IE500 Pro, a little greater than the Sonys. The faster IE 500s are also better with instrument positioning and separation. The Sonys win excel with their massive soundstage and timbre, and a very natural, magical presentation. The Senns edge the Sonys out with greater extension, speed and positioning.

Round 7 – Vs Ocharaku Donguri Ti Plus (~550 USD)
Single dynamic wonder, my secret lover and guilty pleasure.

Again, the Donguris is so coloured and unique that one can easily love it or hate it. You know where i stand in this matter.

The sub bass and mid-bass quantity are almost on the same level with the Donguri, there is great slam when called for. With the Senns the sub-bass is greater and the driver starts to drop to neutral levels as it approaches mids bass. The soundstage of the Donguris are unique. Flip the soundstage of the Senns 90 degrees, and you have the Donguris. All sense of positioning and placement is out of a Lynchian dream. The detail extraction is on par, and i would even say the Donguri is capable of extracting more information than the Senns. The upper mids are greatly boosted to achieve a new sound and a unique place for the female larynx. As you approach the treble the Donguris takes a big step back and acts like a shy maiden, displaying only the bare minimum of extension. The Senheisers extract a lot of information in the upper frequencies and have great transient harmonics.

Of course, there is no comparing an IEM with the wildly ambitious tuning of the Ocharaku Donguri. IE500 Pros take music very seriously and presents them in a very precise and balanced manner.

Overall Sound rating of Sennheiser IE 500 Pro: 9.3 / 10
Vocals 4.5/5
Soundstage 4.5/5
Instrument Separation 4.8/5
Positioning/localisation 4.5/5
Details 4.8/5
Timbre 4.7/5



Conclusion –
The IE500 Pros are an incredible set of IEMs. This new iteration of the Pro series are made to put Sennheisers back in the audiophile scene. The bass is very precise, vocals clear, and the detail extraction and extension of the treble is second to none. The IE500 Pros are clearly tuned with stage professionals in mind although any audiophile would be impressed with the detailed and spacious presentation of the IE 500 Pro. The highs are smooth and great for long listening session. Though a bit pricey, i think i would be right in saying these are fairly priced, seeing we have IEMs running into several thousands today.

Simple Man’s review – InEar Stagediver SD2 (399 EUR)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.


Product Specs:
Driver: Dual Balanced Armature (1x Bass, 1 Mids+Highs)
Impedance: 40 Ohms; Sensitivity: 119 dB
Weight: 17.5g (apprx.)
Cable: 2-pin(0.78mm) detachable 1.4m cable (3.5mm), L-shaped connector
Shell: Acrylic – plastic-like, but hard and light.
Nozzle: ~4.5mm
Release year: 2013
Price: ~450 USD




Accessories – 5/5
Simple and practical presentation. Nothing fancy, just what you need stored exactly where you want them.
The case provided is large and spacious. A beast in terms of construction. Guess it’s the same one we get along with the other upper models from InEar. It’s not very portable, due to its size and weight. We do get a carabiner with the box that can be latched onto to your belt loops, for instance, to make portability possible.
Tips. 4 sizes XS, S, M, L.
A gold-plated adapter is provided (3.5 mm to 6.3 mm jack)
Cables: The cables are black (the earlier version had transparent cables which has the tendency to turn blue over time). Now, we get black wires. They are light, and of great quality.



Build – 5/5
The housings, although made of acrylic, are really solid and light which make for really easy and comfortable use. I don’t see these breaking with normal use. The nozzles are armed with cerumen filters to protect dust or wax from entering its chambers. Etymotic ER4XR/SR uses these filters as well, and one can buy extra filters and easily replace them if needed. These are pretty cool. The nozzles are colour coded, even though one can’t possibly see them with the ear-tips on. One doesn’t really need this for over the ear type of housings, IMO. The cables are light and carry no touch noise from rubbing against fabric, etc.

Fit – 4.5/5
Let me reinstate that I have the regular sized model, the SD-2. I tried both of them in the stores in Germany and found that the SD2S is rather small for my ears and does not completely fill my ears. The SD2 fills them completely and isolate really well. You can check my inventory, if all these other earphones that I own, fits you without issues, then the regular SD2 is the one that should fit your ears. Cutting half a star here because these earphones, since they touch some parts of my ear that are usually left untouched, gave me some mild discomfort over long sessions initially. However, with more frequent use I feel they get more and more comfortable.



Isolation and leakage – 4.5/5
They state an external noise reduction approx. 26 dB. It’s really good, and up there right next to the Etys. Leakage is also none whatsoever.

Microphonics – 5/5
None.

Drivability – Very very easy to drive, with the high sensitivity of the drivers. With my HTC 10 I never went above 40% volume.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s, plus some IDM these days. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Justice, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Preferred eartips: Stock. They are really the best, IMO, but some other tips come close as well.

Sound –
The general signature tends towards neutral, with primary focus on the entire mid range. They sound really rich, and organic. Really natural sounding, better than anything else I’ve heard so far.

Soundstage:
Soundstage is simply incredible. They are very wide and show incredible depth. Layering is apparent and precise as well. Top!

Bass:
Bass is very linear and have absolutely no emphasis on any part of the nether regions. They sound really natural and have an organic quality to them that sounds so real. Detail extraction is maximum due to the neutral curve. Sub bass is easily heard and provides precise rumble and impact. Mid bass behaves so well that it can stand as a class example in this respect. They have the speed of the BA drivers and the natural quality of the dynamic earphones. Dynamics might edge them out in impact, just off my mind, I think the IQ Pro’s linear bass has a more impactful bass presence. We can see more about this in direct comparisons. Even then, I miss nothing when I’m listening to SD2.

Mids:
Like I mentioned earlier, mids are the primary focus of these earphones. They are absolutely stunning. Natural, organic, and extremely detailed, all at the same time, it’s like a miracle. I really didn’t know this kind of quality was achievable. They are quite the revelation. Vocals are so precise and natural. The singers directly sing to you. Male and female alike. There is no other way to put it. Every instrument and note struck is served with authoritative presence and unmatchable clarity. Very musical earphones, one can buy them for sheer musical pleasure. Just a word, since they are mid-focussed it is suggested to keep them at decent hearing volume. Pushing them too much to get more bass, etc, would make the mids louder and vocals tend to get shouty. So, please don’t do that. In a word, these earphones deliver the best possible mids.

Treble:
Highs are presented just like the bass, honestly. They are very precise and linear to my ears. The clarity is incredible, they don’t lack anywhere. Every chime and cymbal hit conveys with every transient scratch of a sound that is there in the record. What I find interesting, and what makes these earphones so special for me, is their unique tuning of the highs. The highs, instead of going the splashy route with some extra emphasis after 2Khz, go for a very level and restrained curve. Instead of going higher towards the Harman target, they retract and strain to stay level. Amazingly, there is no impact in the detail retrieval and they still manage to deliver more details than the Etys. The result of this is, you hear the highs carry more weight and stay at their position, instead of flying away with an exciting splash over the soundstage. I love this sound, really.

Instrument positioning/separation
The instrument position and separation are especially stellar. They are the best I’ve heard, bar none. These earphones are perfect for monitoring, mixing for this feature. The soundstage accommodates for gratuitous privacy for the instruments to hold their own space.

Comparisons


Round 1 – Vs Etymotic ER4XR (350 - 440 USD, depending on location)
Straightaway, let’s see where it stands against the detail monster. The XR also delivers good bass impact, and provide a satisfying musical experience as well. Let’s get to it.

SD2s are considerably easier to drive compared to the Etys.
The sub bass of the Etys are perceivably more emphasized than the SD2., It rumbles quite a bit more and gets close to muddy, in comparison.
The SD2 carries more warmth in the mids than the Etys.
Soundstage is wider and deeper in SD2 – gives a more immersive experience. Etys are more narrower but precise nonetheless.

As for the sheer amount of detail retrieval, I struggle to call a winner. The SD2’s make more details much more apparent in its impact and presentation. The details pop with the SD2 are fall nicely on your ears. The stage also greatly helps the SD2 in presenting more details convincingly to the user. The mids of Ety is slightly more forwarded compared to the SD2’s slightly warm vocal range. SD2s have that warmth which slightly muddies some details in the mids in comparison to the Etys.

The Etys, however, show the same malady in its sub-bass with its extra emphasis there, losing out just a little bit there over the SD2s. Etys sound drier in comparison. It sounds more clinical, and the details come across as cluttered when compared to the roomy stage of the SD2.

The ER4XR also comes across as the faster of the drivers when it comes to quick hits. The SD2s go for a more natural and organic beat which calls for a more grounded driver that lingers a little more to deliver on the timbral authenticity.

In terms of musicality and even for monitoring purposes, for me, the 2 BAs of the SD2 take the crown when pitted against the renowned single BA of the Etymotic ER4XR. Two is a little too much this time for the Etys. Though, like I said, the SD2 gives in a point or two to the Etys in some specific areas.

Round 2 – Vs Massdrop Plus (300 USD)
Well, being in Germany I had to pay 320 EUR for these including taxes. Anyway, the MD+ has more drivers, 3 BAs. Let’s see if the extra driver can throw extra punches at the SD2s.

The MD+ has a sub and mid bass boost to give more impact and make a fun sound keeping the mids and highs of the Ety’s signature.

Comparing the two, I could see that the MD+ is going for the fun sound. There is more apparent bass, and the bass-lines take the front stage and grab your attention. At the same time the MD+ manages to show its nicely pronounced mids. The highs are left a little wanting, but the majority of the details are there. The soundstage of the MD+ has some depth and width to it. The vocals really come up front and show themselves clearly. The vented BAs give us a very satisfying rumble.

All said, the MD+ does not excite the audiophile in me. They sound alright, but that’s all I can say about them. They are very comfortable, slightly more than the SD2. They are highly detailed and the bass is good. What they lack is the micro-definition. The transient harmonics. They are not there. The fine details at the ringing edge of a note. That’s missing. The limited soundstage and depth struggles to accommodate all the fine artifacts of music. The boosted bass pervades throughout the soundstage muddying all these little details. Instrument separation and positioning is lacking. MD+ can be called the Jack of all trades, master of none. It’s not a bad thing per se. It just doesn’t help in this comparison with SD2, which is the master of basically everything.

SD2 is much more refined and one can see directly that it is the more sophisticated than the MD+.
Do I need say more ?

Round 3 – Vs ATH E70 (~350 USD)
Another triple BA, this time from Audio Technica. The E70s are aimed at monitoring users, has boosted bass and are extremely detailed. Let’s see how this goes.

After this A-B one would easily say that they are pretty neck to neck when it comes to detail retrieval. The E70s generate a meatier sub-bass which is greater in quantity. The bass generally is the star of the show with the E70s. Those who know E70 know that they suffer from a rather harsh spike near 10K, which helps to bring a little more detailing to the forefront, which is albeit accompanied by a rather harsh sibilance. The screech sometimes, with some tracks, are so over-powering that it becomes close to unbearable. Finding the right tips are an absolute essential to live with the E70.

Coming to the comparison, they both are tuned very differently. The SD2 is much more balanced and well behaved. The E70 just comes across as though it is on steroids. Similes aside, The E70 is more of a drummer’s friend. The drum-kit come across as the most dominating sound in the band. With the SD2 there is more magic to the mids, because of the well-behaved bass and highs. The highs of E70s are also quite shrill and thinner in comparison to the SD2s more organic notes/tone.

E70 has a wider soundstage with less depth+height compared to the SD2, which comes across as more spacious, and that not because of its great width, but due to its great depth and usage of the stage. The SD2 sounds more real and musical compared to a relatively cold and more monitoresque delivery of the E70.

I would say the SD2 is quite a bit ahead of the E70 and is the mature player of the two.

Round 4 (bonus) – Vs ATH CKR100iS (~450 USD)
Alright, this could be easy for the SD2, but I just want to see how this match goes. Costing as dear, CKR100 is my favourite double DD, and has a very very satisfying natural sound to it. Let’s get to it.

Ok, I just did a bit of the good ol' back and forth. CKR100 is amazingly musical. In terms of sheer musical enjoyment I might give a slight edge to the CKR100 even though technically the SD2 is clearly superior. The dynamic bass is still something, and the quality of it can’t be beat by a BA especially when it’s done so well as in the CKR100. The soundstage of the CKR100, although slightly lesser in width and depth, is very well rounded. They seem like the perfect soundstage for enjoying music- as a whole. If you just want to immerse in music CKR100 would still be a good choice.

Anyway, going back to SD2s, their soundstage is quite massive, and the depth is like a real room full. The superiority in instrument positioning is very apparent and precise. Separation is significantly better in comparison. You get more details in music. And the drivers, obviously, and faster that the DDs. It’s quite apparent. The SD2s strike the perfect balance between monitor quality and musical ability. It’s perfect, one can do both without sacrificing anything. The CKR100s might just provide a more cohesive musical experience. But that’s the one point, along with bass realism, where CKR100s will score against the SD2.

Round 5 – Vs Ultrasone IQ Pro ( ~430 USD)
Alright now. Let’s get to the hybrids now. Best of both worlds. Choosing the IQ Pro instead of the IQs, because the bass is comparable in this case. This will be close, I already know

After some ping pong, I can say the following:
The IQ Pros have a similar bass response, and the dynamic bass impact still is a little more satisfying that the BA punch. The IQ Pro dynamic drivers are a touch faster than the CKR100 drivers, but still fall slightly behind the BA hits of the SD2. The highs of the IQ Pro are more forwarded and they go for a more flashier presentations. The highs play generally higher with the IQ Pros. The soundstage width and depth are very close to each other. They are very good. IQ Pros also, like the SD2, can be used satisfactorily for musical appreciation as well as monitoring.

Where the SD2 wins is with its greater micro-detail extraction, precise positioning, and greater instrument separation. There is more black spaces in the soundscape which makes all the details glowing with the SD2.

Ultimately the IQ Pros have to bow down to SD2s superiority.

Round 6 – Vs Ultrasone IQ ( ~650 USD)
Can the IQs save the day for Ultrasone? Let’s see. This is my most expensive earphone. If this doesn’t beat the SD2, then I doubt anything can.

Okay, i’ve now had a bit of back and forth between these two.
IQ actually comes significantly closer to the SD2 than the IQ Pro did with respect to detail retrieval, which is good seeing that IQ is 200 EUR dearer than the Pros. The bass impact is perfect with the IQ where the mid bass impact is slightly pushed up to have that extra bit of head banging effect. However, there is a noticeable nudge with the high frequencies as well which makes the highs a bit more splashy which also helps to add more detail to the sound. So, the IQ is better than the IQ Pro even in terms of detail.

But, I must say they still fall short of the finesse and sheer clarity of the SD2s. IQs are more splashy in the highs and get a little teasy close to the sibilance range. The SD2 is also perceptibly ahead in terms of micro-definition and separation. They seem quite unbeatable, and for the price I think these are really no-brainers. The Ultrasone flagship IEM, also, has to submit to the greatness that is InEar SD2.

Overall Sound rating of InEar Stagediver SD2: 9.5/10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 5/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Positioning/localisation 4.8/5
Details 4.8/5
Timbre 5/5



Conclusion –
InEar SD-2 is the best set of earphones i’ve heard. After all my IEM experience I still felt positively dumbfounded by the clarity and natural timbre of these. The SD2 is extremely linear, musical, and organic in tone. I always thought musicality comes with a little sacrifice of micro-details. The SD2 just proved that I knew too little, still. Listening to the SD2 has been a revelation and a humbling experience. I’m proud to own this little gem. These are really cheap at the selling price to be honest.

Simple Man’s review – Acoustic Research E10 (~150 - 250 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs:
Driver: 8mm Beryllium driver + Balanced Armature Driver
Impedance: 25 Ohms; Sensitivity: 95 dB
Weight: 17.5g (apprx.)
Cable: 2-pin(0.78mm) detachable 1.2m cable (3.5mm, 3-pole) and 1.2m balanced cable (4.4mm, 5-pole), plus bluetooth 4.0 aptX cable. No mic for cables except the BT cables.
Shell: Hard Plastic inner shell, with light aluminium face plate.
Nozzle: ~4.5mm
Release year: April, 2018




Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience is neat, and the goods are nicely presented. We get the following accessories:
A nice roomy zipper case, perfectly sized.
Tips. 3 sizes silicon ear tips provided, plus we also get 2 sizes of foam pair, not comply, which rebounds fast. The silicon tips’ bore diameter could have been a couple of millimeters larger to enable easier insertion, it can be managed with some effort, however.
Cables: The provided cables are not super thick, feels a little fragile and rubbery, but AR says “Cables reinforced with para-aramid ballistic fiber for enhanced durability”. The ear hooks maintain the same small curve and cannot be tailored to you preference, they spring back to the same natural state upon movement, which makes it slightly annoying. I would have much preferred the regular memory loops which can be moulded as we like. This is the only small negative i see in the whole package. Full score.



Build – 5/5
Very pretty to behold per se. The housings are shiny and feels rich in the ear. They are very solid and I see no durability issues. The nozzles pop out at a very obtuse angle, ~150°, which prevents inner ear entry (The Ultrasone IQ in comparison, angled at ~120°, can enter deeper into the canal and provide greater isolation and seal). The nozzle length is neither too much nor less. They have a couple of tiny vents, one in the inside of the shell, and one near the nozzle exit. The cables house a discreet Y-splitter and a nice strong neck cinch as well. 2-pin connectors are solid as well.




Fit – 4/5
Fit is shallow, and easy. These are just going to sit like semi-open IEMs on the very outer crevice of the ear, that is the way they are designed. They do sit flush in the ear, given the housing/wear design, and there is no fear of them popping out or anything like that. In fact, i use these while running. They are very comfortable, being non-intrusive. Also, the part of the housing that rests on the ear concha is nicely angled/shaved that they rest flat and easy on the ear. Very thoughtfully designed.

Isolation and leakage – 3.5/5
Isolation – not great, leakage prevention – good. These are not designed to isolate. They let some outside noise in. With the music playing though, they are all good. Leakage is not bad since there is no opening in the housings themselves. They can be safely used at silent work-places if you keep the volume to sensible levels. You can compare them to any of the semi-open styles like JVC woodies, ATH CKR phones.

Microphonics – 3.5/5
The shallow fit transfers some wire-bounces in. But, the over-ear wear helps to alleviate this, and good use of neck cinch will keep microphonics to minimal levels.

Drivability – Quite easy to drive. With my HTC10 i’m mostly at 50%. They can get really loud!

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s, plus some IDM these days. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Justice, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Preferred eartips: I’m using the Final E tips. The stock silicons are also as good. I don’t see the tips affecting the signature to any significant level. Just make sure there is a proper seal on the outer ear.



BT Module - Adding a word on the bluetooth module here, they work great with my Inear Stagedivers. I'm happy to report that there is no annoying noise, which is present in many of these mmcx/2-pin BT cables from china. We get clean noiseless transmission using aptx.

Sound –
The general signature is tending towards V-shaped without going overboard. The vocal band does not appear recessed, and possibly has a little bump to save this from drowning. They have an exciting sound and deliver Big impactful bass, with added clarity and details in the mids and upper ranges. We can safely say that these are masterfully tuned to satisfy a casual user with an ear for details.



Soundstage:
Soundstage displays good width and decent height. I can also perceive some depth in some good recordings. Overall, they are good and i have no complaints on this front.

Bass:
Beryllium bass! This is my first taste of Beryllium drivers, and guess what? I am floored, and the bass impact that these drivers shove in keeps me there. The bass is meaty and so tasteful that one might drool. Taming the bass quantity any more here would be a sin because the Berylliums really got it, so let them flaunt it! There is good mid-bass impact and also sub-bass rumble. The bass delivered is also of decent definition and quality. Those coming from neutral earphones may frown in the beginning, but believe me, these are done well, and deliver the fun-factor. These definitely reach 20Hz, easily. While these dynamic drivers are very authoritative they don’t mess up the mids. Please note that this is not a bassy earphone. I wouldn’t call these basshead material. The nether regions are bumped up to fun levels, but not to crazy levels (like ZA Duoza). The rise in bass falls to decent levels as we reach the upper-bass or the danger zone where overlapping with mids becomes a concern. So, they steer clear from the mids, and also colour them with the soul that is needed to save them from sterility. With some interesting comparisons below, we will exactly see where they stand in bass quantity and quality.

Mids:
Though it’s not stated anywhere i believe the BA drivers take over from here on. The mids are really detailed and sound correct. The have the right amount of warmth in vocals and also come across with great clarity. The female vocals sound really great with these. That shrill quality of the female larynx comes across delightfully with the E10s. I think there is a nicely placed emphasis in the upper mids which helps with the clarity and presence here. No sibilance can be detected in the voices as well. i’m a little tolerant anyway, so take that as you may. If you’re very sensitive, maybe you would hear very slight sibilance in the S’s and SH’s depending on the recording. In a word, superb mids.

Treble:
Highs, again, are delivered with excellent clarity and resolution by the same BA driver. The lower treble band is slightly emphasized relative to mids. One wouldn’t call these smooth sounding. So, this adds a nice zing, rather a ting, to the treble. There is decent splash and presence without ever crossing the line. This makes the overall sound exciting and not lacking in any particular area. There is a safe dip around the 6-9 mark, i dare to guess, and just a little comeback around 10k for more details and information- not overly so to avoid sounding metallic or harsh, something which the MEE Pinnacle P1 suffers from IMO. That’s how i hear it. Overall, they are really nicely done and i don't see myself wanting any more.

Coherence
The E10s call for an extra word on coherence. Using the Beryllium driver in the hybrid combination was a very balls-y move, i think, considering the dominating nature of the Beryllium bass. I couldn’t help but clearly hear the two drivers playing music for me. The juicy impactful bass juxtaposed with the great clarity and sharply resolving mids and highs. Also, this clarity is possible only with a certain thinness to the notes, which is quite contrasting to the thick lows churned out by the Beryllium dynamic. This was very apparent for me in the beginning during my brain-burn phase. I would actually say it was a fun experience and this, sort of, also got me excited for some weird reason. Anyway, one gets used to such things fairly quickly. These are not my first hybrids, i also own the Ultrasone IQ and IQ Pro, and never got this feeling from them.

Instrument positioning/separation
The E10s are not super detailed or clinical. They aren’t going for a monitersque presentation, and as a result instrument separation doesn’t really pop out in its presentation. They are very musical earphones and everything appears in its place to make sure you enjoy your music. This is not their forte. This is not their weakness.

Comparisons


Round 1 – AR E10 vs FAD Heaven IV (~150)
Only doing challenging comparisons here. Let’s get to it right away.

Final's Heaven IV sounds amazing. I just have to say this every time i pick these up for comparisons. The FAD is a very balanced IEM that has the “heaven” warmth in its mids. It’s bass delivery lands midway between a typical BA and a typical dynamic bass quality and speed. Vocals are amazing, highs a perfect with the right balance of smoothness and edge. Highly detailed as well. Let’s see how the E10 sounds after this.

Switching to E10, i can immediately say that they have a very similar signature, and both of them sound very enjoyable. Of course, the greater bass impact and air delivered by the E10’s are obvious. E10s have more quantity, especially in the sub-bass, and they don’t shy away from showing their presence, whereas in Heaven IV they are little more wary of coming up front. Heaven IV however display more definition and details in the mid-bass. The E10’s have a slightly more pronounced upper-mids, which throws more details in the mids and highs. As a result it does tread closer to the sibilance region, where the Heaven IV plays it smooth. There is more warmth in the Heaven vocals, but more details and excitement in the E10 vocals. Female voice soars higher with the E10.

So, if we take the heaven IV, add a little beryllium oomph, and sculpt the mids and high to add some excitement, we have the E10. The heaven IV beats the E10 in coherence and timbre, but gives in to resolution, bass delivery and details. I would say the E10 just edges out the Heaven IV in detail retrieval.

Round 2 – AR E10 vs Acoustune HS1004 (~200 USD)
Stepping up, let’s see how the Beryllium driver stands against the famous Myrinx Reverb driver of the HS1004.

Acoustune HS1004 is a very dynamic earphone. The bass impact is visceral in the sense that it speaks with sheer impact and the details come in through the reverb it generates. As a result the Acoustunes have more warmth coloured in their mids. The treble is also very exciting and full of details. The vocals also manage to hold their ground and come through with intelligibility.

Switching to the AR E10s, we notice slightly better clearer and resolution. The BA driver has a certain clarity that is very apparent when we switch to the E10s. There is also lesser warmth in the E10s signature and mids are relatively forward.

Although the HS1004 scores more points with excitement and fun, the E10 proves it competence with resolution while being no slouch in the fun department as well. They really have used the hybrid to its full potential. It is worth mentioning that the Acoustune Single driver is more coherent than the E10s hybrid unit.

Round 3 – AR E10 vs ATH CKR100iS (~400 USD)
Wow! The E10s are really rocking these comparisons, i didn’t expect this. I’m a little worried as a fan for my CKR100s. Nevertheless, i swear to not let my bias taint this comparison. Alright, lets get to it.

After sifting through multiple trackings with these 2 earphones, i can report the following differences.
AR E10 has a bigger bass quantity and impact. The beats just land with much more authority on the E10s albeit with lesser definition when compared to the CKR100s bass delivery. The Audio Technica unit has a very linear bass that is not as enhanced down low as in the E10s. So, E10s give you a more fun bass as opposed to the CKR100s more balanced and precise bass. The details and micro-definition in CKR100s are clearly superior to the E10s BA driver. The CKR100s are a little brighter compared to the warmer mids of the E10s. The CKR100s extract considerably more micro details in the mids and upper mids, aided by this relative lack of warmth, at the expenses of slightly thinner note delivery. Instrument separation is slightly better and overall resolution also goes to the more expensive CKR100. AR E10s also deliver gobs of details but going for the extra bass and more fun tuning has its price. CKR100 also has slightly better timbre and they sound very wholesome altogether.

Anyway, in terms of sheer sound AR E10s have to make way for the more expensive CKR100s and admit that they play in the next level.

Round 4 – AR E10 vs Ultrasone IQ Pro (~400 USD)
Only because they are of the same hybrid configuration. Dynamic plus BA. I’ll keep this short because it’s not really fair for the fairly priced AR E10s.

Wow, the IQ Pros just walk all over the E10s. They are way ahead in every way, except of course the bass quantity and impact. The IQ Pro presentation is much more roomier with lots of space between everything. The timbre is really supreme and the resolution and details as well are on the next level. IQ Pros also get you a little closer to sibilance than the E10s. That’s something to think about.

The CKR100s would put up a good fight with the IQ Pros. The CKR100 will concede to the IQ Pros in terms of technicalities and resolution while scoring some points in overall timbre and musicality.

Overall Sound rating of AR E10: 8.2/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 4/5
Positioning/localisation 4/5
Details 4.2/5
Timbre 4/5



Conclusion –
AR E10 is a fun sounding earphone that takes music seriously. They deliver great clarity and detailed music accompanied by juicy, impactful bass. It’s fun to listen to, and as a bonus you also get the 2-pin aptX cable plus a balanced-4.4mm cable. These earphones are definitely tuned for the masses who place importance on detail extraction. These would also be good choice for an audiophile to unwind to from his critical disposition without sacrificing too much of what he believes in. The entire package is well worth the asking price, IMHO. If you find an offer less than 200 just jump on it already.

Simple Man’s review – Ultrasone IQ (~650 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: 2-way Hybrid - One 8mm Dynamic driver + One Balanced Armature driver
Impedance: 20 Ohms; Sensitivity: 104dB/mW
Weight: 10g
Cable: MMCX detachable cables. One with mic+remote, another without
Shell: Hard die-cast metal housings
Nozzle: 3mm (like Etys)
Release year: 2012

Build – 5/5
Same as Ultrasone IQ Pro with a flashy colour theme that adds some bling. (Skip directly to Sound if you already checked out the IQ Pro review). The housings are super hard metal compressed under high pressure, robust and yet, super light. They housings seat very comfortably in the ear. These are one of the best designs I’ve come across in term of comfort. No part of the ear feels any unnecessary pressure. Excellent design. The nozzles however could have been a couple of couple of millimeters longer for a little more penetration. Nevertheless, we are loaded with a plethora of tips to ensure no trouble on this front. The wires are very comfortable and light and appear strong as well. The memory ear guides are thick as well, and I don’t see them breaking for any reason. The detachable part swivels around smoothly which could be slightly annoying during wear. The L-shaped connector is same one used by the entire family, and they are super sturdy as well with a safe strain relief.

Accessories – 5/5
Inside the box we get,
An excellent tall hard leather case which flaps shut on top, without a zipper. Perfectly size and can hold the earphones without suffocating them
Tips. We get a lot of tips. Same set as provided with all Tio or IQ Pro. We get two sizes of Comply Tx-tips (with ear-wax guard this time), two sizes of conical tips, and 3 sizes of redular-styled tips. You can use these tips with you Etymotic earphones as well, if you are going for a shallow fit there.
We also get one Flight adapter and one OMTP adapter



Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Ias i touched upon earlier, a the nozzles could have been 2 cms longer, which would have improved isolation greatly. But as it is it’s still very good, and leakage is NIL for all practical purposes.

Fit – 5/5
Personally, for me, fit is easy and very straight-forward. I faced no problems whatsoever. I use the silicon tips, both the conical ones and the cylindrical ones work good for me. I’ve read some earlier reviews where they whine about getting a good seal, but for my ears, it’s good and easy enough, and the comfort is amazing as well. With a shallow fit they sound great. I find no reason to dig in for a deeper fit.

Microphonics – 5/5
Microphonics are minimal, close to non-existant. The thick cables stay put and around the wear wear style nearly eliminates any concern of this. If you get a tight fit where the housings don’t move, you won’t hear the wires no matter what.

Drivability – Being a little low on Sensitivity, they aren’t super easy to drive. But with my HTC10 60% is sufficiently loud for me. I don’t see any issues driving these with any smartphone. Maybe you will push the volume a little further than usual.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I’m using the stock silicon eartips with the IQs, as they penetrate well and i also get a good seal. On some days conical tips work better than the other ones. I think it depends on the amount of wax in my outer ear.



Sound Signature–
The overall signature is balanced, with some extended treble presence. The general frequency curve sounds very much like their younger dynamic driver Pyco, very balanced, with bass that is big and tight in presentation. Only, the IQ has a roomier soundstage and delivers details in spades. The presentation is more intimate than monitoresque.



Soundstage:
The soundstage is very wide and deep. The depth is very evident with all the micro details popping up at different distances into the soundstage. And all the notes have a lot of breathing space for themselves. Being slightly intimate, the soundstage also displays good height, but not overly so. The players play at a distance that is neither far nor too up front. They are close enough to keep your toe tapping, and also give you some privacy, a little distance, to look up and appreciate the beauty of music. Perfectly positioned.

Bass:
The bass is tight and punchy. Very snappy, but at the same time they carry enough meat and land with an authoritative impact. It is very BA-like like in terms of speed, but dynamic-like in the thud it delivers. The sub-bass stands alongside the mid-bass, equal in quantity, and does not leave the user missing any of the rumble, definition or impact from the bass regions. They sit on a nice middle point between quantity and quality. Good definition and micro details are perceivable as well. Electronic music sounds great with the snappy and well defined punchy delivery of bass lines. Natural instruments also land in the right timbre. Overall, it’s all very nicely done. It’s monitoresque brother, IQ Pro, has slightly better definition in bass sacrificing the punchy impact that IQ delivers successfully.

Mids:
Mids are very detailed and play on the level. They are very slightly brought forward in the mix, just enough to hold your attention. Very perfectly positioned, and does not fall back in presence even in bass or treble heavy music. But one will not call these mid-centric. They are very much in line and balanced, somewhat like Sony EX800. Voices are crisp and clear and have nice warmth to them. The instruments present all the micro-details in the deep stage, and the guitar plucks ends in a satisfying echo displaying superb transient harmonics. We see no colouration in the mids except for the added warmth from the impactful bass regions. Definition and instrument positioning are stellar and flagship level.

Treble:
This is where the sound signature departs considerably from Pyco. The upper-treble, for me that is around 10Khz+, has more presence in the IQ, and presents greater shimmer and micro-details up-front. The clarity, if you aren’t used to high-end earphones, will initially shock you with the details it presents in its deep soundstage. Although up-front, for my ears, these are not piercing in nature, although they do take you dangerously close to sibilance to deliver all the micro-details as possible without coming across as harsh or over-emphasised. They avoid this by not introducing any annoying peaks to the signature, but rather bringing the whole neighbouring band a little to the front of the mix. Complys do help a little to tame this, just a little, without sacrificing any details. From what i read about the EX1000, if you are used to them the IQ should be no different or harder to handle, even with silicon. I wouldn’t call the IQs treble tilted, like FLAT4 earphones, for instance. These are much more balanced and use the treble to the maximum extent to present musical information without making them dominant.

Comparisons

For an internal comparison within the family, please refer to my IQ Pro review comparisons. In this review i’m simply comparing the Ultrasone IQ with the other most expensive earphones in my inventory to see how similar or different they stack up.

Round 1 – Ultrasone IQ vs Audio Technica CKR 100iS (~400 USD)
OK, first let’s see how different they are from my top favourite dual-dynamic earphones CKR100iS. The original CKR100s would run you up to 400 USD (Don’t buy the cheap Chinese counterfeits. It’s simple, fakes will never sound like the original)

OK. Switching from IQ to CKR100, I could immediately say that the CKR100s are more mid-centric and have a lush quality to them. Voices carry more warmth and soul. The soundstage of the CKR100 is more rounded and intimate, compared to the slightly more distanced and wide presentation of the IQs.

Switching back to IQ from CKR100s, i could perceive that the IQ unit has more clarity and sounded significantly cleaner than the push-pull drivers of CKR100. This could be due to the more balanced tuning of the IQs that they are able to present all the details in superior clarity, sacrificing the intimacy and lushness. The bass of IQ also seems a little more elevated, but at the same time it’s much quicker than the CKR100 in attack. IQ is more punchier and also has slightly more quatity to its mid-bass. The snappier attack also adds to the perceived clarity of the bassline with the IQ. This added definition seems a little lacking in the CKR100. The soundstage of IQ is much more roomier, and instrument separation is significantly greater. There is also more depth to the IQ’s soundstage. Localisation as well goes in favour of the more expensive IQ. The treble is slightly laidback in the CKR100, which makes for an easier listen, versus the IQ, which demands a somewhat stronger ear in terms of treble toleration. But one is rewarded with a bounty of details in exchange.

Ultrasone IQ clearly the more superior phone technically. Snappier bass attack, definition, micro-details, separation and localisation all go to Ultrasone flagship IEM IQ.

Where the CKR100 reigns supreme is with its lusher mids, vocals, and a more intimate and thicker presentation, and slightly better natural timbre.

Round 2 – Ultrasone IQ vs Audio Technica E70 (350-400 USD)
This round, IQ is up against the Audio technica flagship of the monitoring E series, E70. These are armed with 3 BA drivers, and are notorious for their detail retrieval ability while sounding thick and dark. Let’s get to it!

Switching back and forth, we can notice that the E70 is much darker and thicker sounding, giving gobs of detail within it’s dark soundstage. Straight away, we also notice the big E70 treble peak flexing its enhanced treble presenting chimes in a flashy manner. There is also greater mid bass volume with the E70, and the male vocals are much thicker and up-front in comparison to IQs.

The IQs on the other hand, sound really balanced, and have none of that dark and fluid feeling to the music. Instrument separation is significantly better and there is so much space around each sound in the IQ, compared to which the E70s come across as cluttered. The male vocals in IQ are not so up-front but play at a slight distance compared to E70. IQ sounds cleaner, and its airier soundstage present the entire music in a much more satisfying manner than the E70. IQs come across as slightly thinner, it sounds better for this reason.

Easy win in my opinion for the more expensive IQs. If you like darker and thicker sound, then the E70s would suit you better.

Round 3 – Ultrasone IQ vs Ocharaku Donguri Keyaki Ti Plus (~500 USD)
The Donguri Keyaki Ti plus is the most expensive earphones that i own, after the IQs. The single dynamic wonder is an absolute bliss to listen to if you’re like me, who likes a little upper-mid tilt. I love the Keyaki Ti Plus so much that i keep it locked up in a special place and refrain from using it too much.

Comparing the two, i found that both of these earphones were similar in certain aspects. Both had similar amounts of information, detail and micro-detail. Both had similar quantities of bass. Both can generally be placed in the balanced signature bucket. Of course, there are a number of differences which keep them apart.

The soundstage of two are very different and the overall presentation differs. The Donguri has this vertical soundstage, with certain elements of the song filling out the sides of the soundstage giving a little width. The vertical layering is very unique to the Donguri Keyaki and it is more about height than width. The IQ has a wide soundstage and has better lateral positioning of instruments, which presents information is a roomy manner. The Donguri has a nice emphasis on the upper-mid and it contains that ringing bell-like clarity so unique to the Donguri sound. This can be a little polarising and one might love it or hate it. IQ is more correct sounding with no excessive peaks. It has a little forward upper treble, then again it’s not overly enhanced. Vocals are very mesmerising in the Donguri Keyaki Ti Plus. IQ play vocals at a decent distance and doesn’t have this magical quality. Male vocals have more weight with the IQ, whereas the Donguri prefers female singers. Micro-details retrieval is almost the same, maybe, just maybe, it will go to IQs using their vast soundstage for easier picking of the details.

Really can’t call a winner here. But a single dynamic standing its ground against the 700 dollar IQ speaks volumes about the Ocharaku driver capability. That said, IQ has better space and localisation. Keyaki Ti Plus will win with timbre and musicality. I’m proud of my Donguri Ti Plus.

I thought i’ll only do these three comparisons, but after the Ocharaku Keyaki comparison, i’m in the mood for a little comparison with FLAT4 NAMI that i own.

Bonus Round – Ultrasone IQ vs Ocharaku FLAT4 NAMI (~300 USD discontinued)


Flat4 NAMI is a dual dynamic unit which flaunts great soundstage width and is biased towards the treble. Let’s see how it stands alongside the IQ

Just as i suspected, the Nami has significantly wide soundstage than the IQ. It is so wide it feels unreal. Sounds appearing from far right and far left, it’s like American politics. Anyway, the treble tilt also is immediately noticeable with the Flat4 unit where you have exaggerated highs. It’s still fun to hear and is exciting without sounding sibilant. Being dynamic drivers the definition somewhat suffers slightly in comparison to the BA driver used in the IQ. The dynamic timbre again sounds great for the instruments in the mids and lows. The IQ soundstage has more depth which can be easily perceived. The IQ generally feels more tighter all around with stronger positioning and sounds quite matured in direct comparison. IQ is the more balanced sounding IEM between the two.

The wide soundstage experience has it going for the NAMI, with its ringing highs and greatly separated presentation. Otherwise, IQ is the technically superior phone with better instrument definition, micro-details and positioning.

Bonus Round II – Ultrasone IQ vs Sony MDR-EX800ST (~250 USD discontinued)

Alright, i just had to do this. Just to see how to old EX800 stands up against the old IQ.

Switching back and forth...
Sony sounds warmer and fuller, and is a little more upfront. Timbre is top notch with the dynamic driver. The bass is very tasty in the Sonys and has a certain reverb that has a magical quality to it. The EX800 also sounds very cohesive in the sense that there is less air between instruments, they all seem to be working closer to each other in comparison. This is surprising because the EX800 has one of the widest soundstage for an IEM, slightly less than the FLAT4 NAMI, and has decent height as well, a little more than NAMI. The EX800 sounds more exciting as well, and has sharper highs which pop-up when in the right frequency.

The Ultrasone IQ has the same soundstage width and height. There was no difference in the size when is switched back and forth. But, the IQ (and IQ Pro as well) had much greater separation and stronger positioning. The bass is tighter with the IQs and quicker as well, much snappier decay which aids in greater definition. Micro-details are considerable greater in the IQs with their BA taking them ahead. IQs also have deeper stage depth, where the EX800 has very minimum depth to the stage. The IQ seems like they can hold limitless amount of instruments in their vast stage with their strong localisation and use of depth.

IQ (and also the IQ Pro to the same extent) trumps the EX800 easily in terms of technicality. Sony has a more dynamic and fun sound in comparison providing a juicier bass reverb and a closer presentation.

The IQs are definitely more expensive, but i really didn’t expect them to walk all over my favourite earphones the way they did. Only my Donguri Ti Plus which is 500 bucks was able to hold its ground with a completely different presentation.

Overall Sound rating of Ultrasone IQ: 9.3/10
Vocals 4.5/5
Soundstage 5/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Details 5/5
Timbre 4.5/5



Conclusion –
The Ultrasone IQ is simply amazing, and sounds like a high-end flagship IEM. Technically you can’t really fault them in any area of sound reproduction. They will simply blow your mind if you haven’t listened to any IEMs greater than 500, sure blew mine. The 2-way hybrid drivers play very synchronously and present music with great micro-details and separation like no other i’ve heard. I compared them to all the great earphones i have, and being the most expensive this also is technically most sound in my collection. The only competition is their own IQ Pro which has monitoresque bass. Ultrasone IQ, thank you!

Simple Man’s review – Ultrasone IQ Pro (~400 - 450 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: 2-way Hybrid - One 8mm Dynamic driver + One Balanced Armature driver
Impedance: 20 Ohms; Sensitivity: 101dB/mW
Weight: 10g
Cable: 1.2m; non-detachable
Shell: Hard die-cast metal housings
Nozzle: 3mm (like Etys)
Release year: 2014



Build – 5/5
The housings are super hard metal compressed under high pressure, robust and yet, super light. They housings seat very comfortably in the ear. These are one of the best designs I've come across in terms of comfort. No part of the ear feels any unnecessary pressure. Excellent design. The nozzles however could have been a couple of couple of millimeters longer for a little more penetration. Nevertheless, we are loaded with a plethora of tips to ensure no trouble on this front. The wires are very comfortable and light and feel very strong as well. The memory ear guides are thick and I don’t see them breaking for any reason. The cables in the IQ Pro are non-detachable but I don’t see this as a problem at all considering the build quality of the wires. The L-shaped connector is same one used by the entire family, and they are super sturdy as well with a safe strain relief.

Accessories – 4/5
Inside the box we get,
A hard leather case which is the same case as that of Pyco. The case is simply is too tiny for the IQ Pro, and stuffing them in is near impossible. However, it is is useful to store other smaller IEMs though. Minus one for this.
Tips. We get a lot of tips. Same set as provided with the Tio. We get two sizes of Comply Tx-tips (with ear-wax guard this time), two sizes of conical tips, and 3 sizes of redular-styled tips. You can use these tips with you Etymotic earphones as well, if you are going for a shallow fit there.
We also get one Flight adapter and one OMTP adapter

Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Isolation is great, The 3mm nozzles penetrate into the canal and secure a good seal maximizing isolation. It’s as much as you can get with a shallow insertion. Sound leakage is minimal to nil on normal listening levels.

Fit – 5/5
Personally, for me, fit is easy and very straight-forward. I faced no problems whatsoever. I use the silicon tips, both the conical ones and the cylindrical ones work good for me. With a shallow fit they sound great. I find no reason to dig in for a deeper fit.

Microphonics – 5/5
Microphonics are minimal, close to non-existant. The thick cables stay put and around the wear wear style nearly eliminates any concern of this. If you get a tight fit where the housings don’t move, you won’t hear the wires no matter what.

Drivability – Being a little low on Sensitivity, they aren’t super easy to drive. But with my HTC10 60% is sufficiently loud for me. I don’t see any issues driving these with any smartphone. Maybe you will push the volume a little further than usual.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I’m using the provided regular silicon eartips with the IQ Pro, they sound great and fit great.




Sound Signature–
The overall signature is neutral. Very highly detailed and clean sounding IEMs. The bass is handled by the dynamic driver, however, they are really linear all the way down and don’t have any emphasis in this region. Imagine the Etymotic (XR) bass quantity produced with a tight dynamic driver. So, it does have slightly better impact than a BA driver, but with almost the same quality and definition as we would get from a BA driver. The better impact adds a teeny bit of warmth to the mids which does it good. The mids are not super forward as the Etymotics, or Tio, but i believe it is very linear through and through, with no extra emphasis at any point.



Soundstage:
Very similar to the top end IQ. The soundstage is very wide and also has considerable height to it coming from the highs. The details are astounding and every sound painted in the soundstage has a lot of room around it. It seems like the space is limitless with equally unlimited depth. They also have a black background free of noise which paints a clear and vivid picture. Layering is very impressive. The presentation a little distanced which is perfect for monitoring use, yet not too much. They never sound too clinical or lifeless and at the same time don’t get too close and intimate. It’s beautifully placed.

Bass:
The bass is tight and taut. Very snappy, but at the same time they carry just that little bit of body required to carry to the mids. It is very BA like in nature. The sub-bass presented is a little tame and is more about definition than impact. You can still hear the rumble and it does reach deep all the way to the bottom. Even with dance tracks and heavily bass oriented genres you will not get the head-bobbing effect with the bass impact. The bass is all about quality and definition. More of hear the bass, rather than feel it kind. Natural instruments sound great with perfect on-the-spot timbre and sound very real. The notes in the mids and bass also carry enough weight and don’t come across as thin, like Etymotic. If you’re not a bass-head, you will appreciate these.

Mids:
Mids are very detailed and precisely presented. They are neither forward nor behind even by a centimeter relative to the extremes of the spectrum. Just like the bass and treble. The vocals carry enough soul with a touch of warmth, just enough to avoid sounding very dry. Female vocals also come across as with good body and don’t sound too thin, and if you have a bunch of singers going at it, you will hear all of them separated at their respective pitches. Upper mids aren’t boosted, they are perfectly in line with the rest of the spectrum. The guitars, especially, sound really amazing with the IQ Pro, every strum is blissful to hear. The electric guitar riffs have the perfect bite, and fall on your ears with all the definition possible. Every little finger movement come clearly and that bite is so satisfactory, i feel it beats even reality. Listening to Tool on these earphones can only be considered a guilty pleasure. It’s incredible. Imagine the Ety bite with zero harshness or sharp edges. And everything is so separated, with lots of space around them, and sound clean and clear. Micro-details presented are second to none. Instrument positioning is stellar. Absolutely nothing is left wanted with mids here.

Treble:
The treble is greatly extended without any emphasis. They are not harsh, nor do they come across as spikey. The micro-details, driven by a very technically sound BA driver, up to the tiniest detail is reproduced faithfully and presented in a very neutral manner. There is no exaggeration or unnecessary spikes. No sibilance to my ears. They are more on the smoother side without losing any definition. Perfect tuning!

Comparisons


All in the family: Ultrasone Pyco, Ultrasone Tio, Ultrasone IQ Pro, Ultrasone IQ
So, we have a total of 4 IEMs created by Ultrasone. Let’s do a quick round-up of each in a couple of sentences.

Family traits. All of the 4 IEMs share these sonic characteristics.
Tight and punchy bass. None of the IEMs have a bottom end that sounds boomy, or one that will interfere with the mids. There is no perceivable mid-bass hump/bloat in any of them. They are quick and tight.
Not V-shaped. You won’t find any of them going for an exciting, enhanced bass + enhanced treble, presentation. Meaning, also, no recessed mids.
Instrument positioning/Localistation All 4 earphones have very impressive positioning. They get progressively better the higher you go in the line-up.

If we look at the 2 single driver units, Pyco and Tio, these two share similar soundstage width and height. Both are not extremely wide or tall. Both have nicely rounded soundstage and display good depth of field. But their presentation is very different.

While the 2 hybrids, IQ and IQ Pro, have very wide soundstages with decent height and impressive depth. Very similar in stage dimensions. Here, again, the presentation differs.

The youngest Pyco and the flagship IQ have similar tuning. Both of them have a balanced signature and have the same amount of bass in quantity. The mids, as well, in both the IEMs come up front to show their presence, and so does the treble. All in a very balanced manner.

Pyco is the balanced player, nothing great or out of the world in terms of detailing or technicality, but everything is very nicely presented in a mature way. Music is more intimate than distanced and sounds like decent room-speakers with good definition and positioning.

Tio is the unique one of the lot. It stands apart in its mid-centric presentation. They sound very intimate and get seductively close to the listener. They are extremely detailed and sound a little lush at the same time. Vocals are simply amazing in these earphones.

IQ Pro is the monitoresque player and sport a very neutral tuning with a slight emphasis in the bass, maybe just a couple of dBs north of neutral. Some might even find this anaemic. The soundstage opens up in a big way compared to the younger brothers in the line-up. Great width, and so much room for the instruments. Presents gobs of details and micro-details with great resolution and definition. Distanced presentation which makes it very apt for monitoring purposes and professional use, as intended.


IQ. The flagship earphone takes one step closer to the listener from the distanced presentation of IQ Pro. Not as intimate as the Tio, but right in between the two. The signature is elevated slightly to balanced levels. The bass gets a few more decibels of meat for impact, the mids and vocals take a step forward, treble seems the same. None going overboard, but staying balanced at all times. The IQ Pro is really 95% of the IQ in every way. If you don’t need that little tight and punchy bass presence, you will save a lot of money with the IQ Pro. With the flagship IQ you can enjoy music a little more than with the IQ Pro.

Ultrasone IQ Pro Vs Etymotic ER4XR (~400 USD)
Just one comparison outside the family with the master of monitoring, ER4XR, similarly priced and targeting the same audience. Let’s see how they trade punches in a direct comparison.

Switching from ER4XR to IQ Pro is like moving from your house out to a spacious park. The IQ Pro has considerably wider soundstage with more room around the instruments, whereas the Etymotics overload all the details into their comparitively smaller soundstage. IQ Pros add a little bit of warmth to their mids, which is slightly drier in the Etys. In terms of sheer detail retrieval, ER4XR is still unbeatable, but the IQ Pro isn’t far behind presenting atleast 95% of what the Etys are able to churn out. Both are special IEMs and have their own forte. But for practicality and ease of use, i find myself using the IQ pro very often. With the IQ Pros, you can also get to enjoy music, which will be a little challenging with the Etys.

So, this is where they all stand in these different sections of evaluation
Vocals: Tio > ER4XR > IQ > IQ Pro > Pyco
Soundstage: IQ = IQ Pro > ER4XR >= Tio = Pyco
Details: ER4XR > IQ = IQ Pro > Tio > Pyco
Instrument separation: IQ = IQ Pro > ER4XR = Tio > Pyco
Positioning/Localisation: IQ = IQ Pro > ER4XR = Tio > Pyco
Timbre: Tio > IQ = IQ Pro = ER4XR > Pyco

Overall Sound rating of Ultrasone IQ Pro: 9.2/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 5/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Details 5/5
Timbre 4.5/5



Conclusion –
Ultrasone IQ Pro gives us 90% of what the flagship model IQ offers for a little more than half the price. The other 5% gives us a little more boost to the neutral bass offered by the IQ Pro and makes the IQ a little more fun. Soundstage, details, and definition are stellar, and as good as the flagship model. If there are electric guitars in the song, the IQ Pro plays them the best, no contest. To top it all off, they provide a very easy and comfortable fit, and look great on your ears. For professional and monitoring purposes, you can’t get better than this.

Simple Man’s review – Ultrasone Tio (EUR 319)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: Single Balanced Armature driver
Impedance: 18 Ohms; Sensitivity: 103dB/mW
Weight: 5g
Cable: 1.2m; non-detachable, with in-line 1-button microphone
Shell: Aluminium Shell
Nozzle: 3mm (like Etys)
Release year: 2012

Build – 3/5
Decent. The aluminium earphone housings are super light and feel durable. The form factor is similar to Pyco, perfect for both straight-down and over-the-ear ways of wearing. The housings, being slimmer and longer than the Pyco, can enter a couple of centimeters further into the ear canal. The cables, however, being non-detachable, are the weakest links to the design, again. The rubbery cables are quite thick, but are jumpy and retain some annoying memory. These aren't built for rough use.. The mic + one button remote is installed in a bulky hard plastic capsule, not the most convenient or visually pleasing, but very functional. We see strain reliefs at the 3.5mm connector and at the housings, but miss them near the Y Splitter and the remote. The 3.5 mm jack is a sturdy metal L-type connector which looks great. They employ the same connector in all their In-ear models. For the price they could have deployed a detachable cable, and this section would have got them a 5 on 5. Nevertheless, they get a 3 for the sturdy aluminium housings and thick cables.



Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience is grand. Inside, we get more than we could ask for.
A hard leather case which is bigger and more aesthetically pleasing than Pyco’s case. Inside we also have a nice synthetic place holder for the earphone housings. This can also be removed easily if not desired. Excellent case.
Tips. Wow, we get a lot of tips. We get two sizes of Comply Tx-tips (with ear-wax guard this time), two sizes of conical tips, and 3 sizes of redular-styled tips. You can use these tips with you Etymotic earphones as well, if you are going for a shallow fit there.
We also get one Flight adapter and one OMTP adapter

5/5 because we couldn’t ask for more even at the selling price.



Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Isolation is great, slightly better than the Pyco due to deeper insertion. The 3mm nozzles penetrate into the canal and secure a good seal maximizing isolation. It’s as much as you can get with a shallow insertion. Sound leakage is minimal to nil on normal listening levels.

Fit – 5/5
Fit is simple, and excellent. A no nonsense approach here. Even a first time IEM user will have no trouble getting a good fit with these. Over-the-ear is possible, but i prefer straight-down with these as the wires aren't very flexible.

Microphonics – 3/5
Same wires as Pyco, not terrible, but very present if you let the wires bounce against you.

Drivability – Very easy to drive. With my smartphone, HTC 10, I haven’t had the need to push more than 60% of the volume.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I’m using the provided Comply eartips with the Pycos as they add nice body and weight to the high frequency notes which i find preferable. With the stock regular-type silicon tips the highs come across as sightly thinner, but are sharper as well.




Sound Signature–
The general signature is neutral, with a tint of warmth in the bottom half of the spectrum. Extremely detailed sound, made to stand alongside Etymotic, with the intention to win. The warm tint saves the Tio from sounding overly bright like ER4, and make for a much enjoying listen. It’s like Ultrasone took the ER4 driver and decided to make them musical instead of going the analytical route. Very mid-centric tuning without sacrificing bass and treble energy. Listening to Tio is nothing short of blissful.

Soundstage:
There is nothing very exceptional about the soundstage. Similar to Etys in width, with a little added height and depth aided by the impactful bottom half. One can also notice superior layering as the details keep on giving.

Bass:
The bass is tight and taut, as can be expected from a BA driver. Very linear throughout the bottom, with a very gentle roll-down in the sub-bass range, below 50hz maybe. The upper-bass and mid-bass are very slightly pronounced to give that warmth and weight to music. The notes strike with authority and carry so much weight that cannot go unnoticed. That said, electronic music enthusiasts would miss the dynamic sub-bass impact and, they would also welcome a little lump in the mid bass quantity. Still, they would be able to hear the bass detail and it is produced with great quality, albeit with softer sub-bass impact.

Mids:
Mids are stunning. These mids are to die for. Very forward, magical and seriously good. Can i throw in more adjectives here? Mesmerising mids, these will immediately attract you tremendously. The vocals are supreme, every little detail comes through with utmost clarity, and they come with that warmth, and sound very soulful. Every guitar note hangs in there, and the strike lands with impact, carrying the weight of the note delivering it completely to the listener’s ear. Transient harmonics here are guaranteed to give you eargasms. I can go on like this for a whole page. Simply put, these are one of the best mids ever presented, in my humble experience. Super detailed with that additionally warmth generally missing with the BA drivers. They also have that little bite, to the guitars for instance, which carries a sharp edge at the extremes. If you can call it a downside, the Tios demand your attention and present an intense listening experience which one cannot call relaxing.

Treble:
The treble is greatly extended and you can hear the drivers penetrating the highs even more than the Etymotics. It still avoids being outright harsh and metallic sounding, and even works it’s way around sibilance tactfully, but longer listening will prove to be fatiguing for those sensitive to the high range greater than 10Khz. Cymbals and crashes strike with the right timbre, and the chimes echo with a shimmery presence. The don’t come across as thin sounding which is awesome. They also don’t come across as airy seeing that they stick closer to the neutral line along with the rest of the spectrum. Treble heads would totally dig these earphones. Personally, i would have preferred this range slightly smoother. Alas, to get this i would have to start tuning my own drivers.

Comparisons



Round 1 – Ultrasone Tio vs Ortofon E-Q5 (discontinued)
Ortofon E-Q5 is a very highly acclaimed single BA unit which leans towards musicality rather than presenting details in music. A very technically sound and one of the warm(er) sounding BA IEMs which is slightly brighter than Final Heaven IV, for instance.

Switching from E-Q5 to Tio, we could directly see that both of them have similar of warmth in the music. Vocals in E-Q5 sounds (very slightly) warmer than the (very slightly) drier presentation in the Tios. The Tio is able to present more details in the mids, and the highs are also a bit pronounced with the Tio. The E-Q5 goes for a smoother overall presentation. There is also more punch and impact in the bass with the Tios and the acoustic guitar notes carry a little more weight in the Tios. Both have great timbre all around, and are a pleasure to listen to.

Technically, the Tio comes out on top although the Ortofon is not very far behind. A point to note is that the E-Q5 were considerably cheaper than the Tio when they in production.

Round 2 – Ultrasone Tio vs Zero Audio Doppio (120-200 USD)
In this round, the Tio faces a tougher opponent, Zero Audio Doppio, armed with 2 BA drivers. The Doppios also have a warm tint to their bottom end, and are very heavily detail oriented. It would be a great feat to beat them at detail retrieval. Let’s see how this goes.

The dual BA unit of the Doppio has a wider and taller soundstage and sound more fun than the neutral sounding Tio. Details pop with the Doppios, which is presented in a relatively more subtle and serious manner in the Tios. There is a certain mid bass hump in the Doppio which account for a more dynamic sound, but the more linear bass of the Tio sounds more tight and reaches deeper than the Doppio. Tio is superior in localisation and instrument positioning whereas with the Doppio the center is not very grounded – Pin-point positioning is kind of slightly lacking with the Doppios.

Doppio is more fun and exciting, but the Tio trumps them with a much more linear presentation and better instrument separation.

Round 3 – Ultrasone Tio vs Etymotic ER4XR (~350 USD)
Saving the best for last. This is like a boss fight and i’ve never been more excited for a comparison before. Same price range, both are single BA tuned towards neutrality. The ER4XR has a little bass bump in the nether end to avoid sounding too clinical. Let’s get to it.

After switching back and forth multiple times, i think i’m ready to write my observations. Both of them have similar signature, no doubt about this. Soundstage is the same, so is drivability. The small differences among them, to my hearing, is in the mid-bass and lower-bass quantity, and a lesser pronounced treble hump in the upper mids, but this makes for significant difference in the overall presentation. Basically the Tio has the same frequency curve as Ety, with slight, maybe 1 dB, mid bass presence and around 4-5 db decrease in the hump. This gives the Etys a brighter presentation vs a natural and intimate presentation with the Tio. The Tio has a touch more mid bass which colours the mids with a very slight warm tint that can be noticed in the transient echoes. The voices have a little more warmth compared to the ER4XR, where it is slightly drier. The ER4XR has a deeper digging sub-bass, below 50, probably +2 dB, which presents more rumble characteristics to the user, while the Tio has a +2 dB in the mid-bass which gives good weight and intimacy to music. Sub-bass rumble is softer in the Tio. Apparent detail retrieval, upon scrutiny, will go in favour of the ER4XRs. Tio had to trade this for the musical warmth in their mids. Please note that these differences are really negligible and in a blind test i wouldn’t be surprised if i mistake one for the other.

We can call no winners here. The match is a tie. If you want deeper sub-bass with drier vocals and analytical capability, go for the ER4XR. If you want a little warmth and soul and intimacy, and don’t prefer boomy sub-bass, the Tio would be the better option to enjoy music. Even if you listen to too much dance music, the Tio can keep you entertained more than the ER4XR.

Please note that the Tio was made in 2012, 6 years ago, when the competition was the original ER4 with it’s anaemic bass. The ER4XR was introduced last year with its MMCX design, and this definitely challenges the Tio today for the money’s worth.

ER4XR has detachable cables, but sounds best with a really deep seal, which may not be the most comfortable choice for many.
The Tio, on the other hand, has non-detachable cables, but has a mic to take calls (which is incredible for an audiophile phone), and works fine with a shallow and comfortable fit.

Overall Sound rating of Ultrasone Tio: 9.2/10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Positioning/Localisation 5/5
Details 4.5/5
Timbre 5/5



Conclusion –
Ultrasone Tio, even today after 6 years since it’s creation, stands alongside Etymotics as one of the best earphones made with a single BA. I can easily say that no other earphone offers such clarity and precision with such an easy and comfortable fit for the asking price. I haven't heard this level of vocal intimacy from another BA driver. It sounds like 400 bucks. If only Ultrasone decides to upgrade these earphones to come with detachable MMCX cables, one would think twice before getting an Etymotic, and would go for the Tio since it’s more practical and musical. Plus, you can answer a phone call with an audiophile grade earphone! It’s amazing how they created this wonder 6 years earlier and a pity that they don’t upgrade this model to make them time-proof.

Simple Man’s review – Ultrasone Pyco (USD 120 – 170)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: Φ6.5mm Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 16 Ohms; Sensitivity: 98dB/mW
Weight: 6g
Cable: 1.2m; non-detachable, with in-line 1-button microphone
Shell: Aluminium Shell
Nozzle: 3mm (like Etys)
Release: 2013

Preamble on Ultrasone:
Ultrasone is one of the top German headphone companies that are notorious for making super expensive over-the-ear headphones. Their creative output with over-the-ear headphones is prolific. Between the years 2012-2014, the company condescended to produce a line of in-ears, to fulfil user demands, which can be bought even today. Their prices haven’t come down over time, unfortunately. I really love how they only made 4 in-ears till date: one single Dynamic, one single BA, and two hybrid configurations with 1 dynamic and 1 BA each, aimed for the audiophile and the monitoring user respectively. It makes me think that they got exactly what they aimed for, and are really content with their in-ear line-up, which is a really ballsy stance in this highly competitive game. I love them for this, and yet, i think it would do them good to re-design their Pyco and Tio to enable detachable cables, and maybe bring the price down to competitive levels.

Let’s take a look at their Single Dynamic Driver offering: Ultrasone Pyco.

Build – 3/5
Decent build. The aluminium earphone housings are super light and feel durable. The form factor is perfect for both straight-down and over-the-ear ways of wearing. The cables, however, being non-detachable, are the weakest links to the design. The rubbery cables are quite thick, thankfully, but are jumpy and retain some memory which can be annoying. I wouldn’t confidently say that these could take a beating. The mic + one button remote is installed in a bulky hard plastic capsule, not the most convenient or visually pleasing, but very functional. We see strain reliefs at the 3.5mm connector and at the housings, but miss them near the Y Splitter and the remote. The 3.5 mm jack is a very strong metal L-type connector which looks great. They employ the same connector in all their In-ear models. For the price they could have deployed a detachable cable, and this section would have got them a 5 on 5. Nevertheless, they get a 3 for the sturdy aluminium housings and thick cables.



Accessories – 5/5
Inside the box we get more than we could ask for.
A small hard-case with a cool Ultrasone logo, which fits the Pyco like a glove leaving no extra room inside. The springly cables jump up and occupy all the space they can get inside this box.
Tips. Wow, we get a lot of tips. We get two sizes of Comply T-tips (without ear-wax guard), two sizes of conical tips, and 3 sizes of regular-styled tips. You can use these tips with you Etymotic earphones as well, if you are going for a shallow fit there.
We also get one Flight adapter and one OMTP adapter. 5/5 because we couldn’t ask for more even at the selling price.



Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Isolation is great! The 3mm nozzles penetrate into the canal and secure a good seal maximizing isolation. It’s as much as you can get with a shallow insertion. A tiny bore near the cable connector leaks a little bit of sound, bit i would say it’s very minimal at reasonable listening levels. Not a point of concern for workplace usage.

Fit – 4/5
Fit is simple, and excellent. A no nonsense approach here. Even a first time IEM user will have no trouble getting a good fit with these. Over-the-ear is possible, but i prefer straight-down with these.

Microphonics – 3/5
It is noticeable if you’re walking about without a jacket on top that can stop the wires from bouncing around.

Drivability – I would say these hit the safe spot in drivability. They are not the easiest to drive (like Acoustune HS1004 for example), nor are they hard in the least bit. Off a smartphone, 50-60% will get you to ideal listening levels.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I’m using the provided Comply eartips with the Pycos as they add body and weight to the high frequency notes which i find preferable. With the stock regular-type silicon tips the highs come across as sightly thinner with a good amount of shimmer as well. This comes down to your ultimate preference. The Complys get so comfy in the ear and the fit is also preferable.




Sound –
The general signature is balanced, i would say, with a perfect balance of bass, mids and treble, like a wavy W-shaped signature with slopes not-so-steep. Music sounds nice and full, like the way it is supposed to sound, and I can’t directly fault any particular aspect of the signature itself. The general signature is very similar to the house flagship IEM IQ. You can get a little taste of the TOTL model in these.

Soundstage:
We can say the Pycos have decent width with added height to the soundstage. I wouldn’t say these have the widest soundstage, but they aren’t narrow or constricted in any way. They have a good spread depending on the music itself. The soundstage also flaunts good depth where you can perceive some layers if you observe carefully. The impactful bass helps to add these layers by not interfering with the rest of the spectrum. The vocals always manage to come out on top which is very satisfying to hear. They are more intimate sounding phones and play a little closer to the listener. It's nicely done and sounds very mature and enjoyable.

Bass:
The bass is very nicely boosted without a perceivable mid-bass hump. It’s very impactful and has great quantity. No one would call this neutral or anywhere near. The bass is more tight than it is boomy. Equally quick as it is in impact. You can’t put your finger and say the mid bass is bloated due to it’s snappy attack. It’s very nicely done, and i would say it will satisfy any commercial user as well as a discerning audiophile. Perfect in the mix for all type of music.

Mids:
The punchy bass adds enough warmth to the vocals. Both the males and the females sing well through these earphones and they come out as intended by the mixer. Somehow the warmth seems to affect only the voices, leaving the instruments in the mids untouched. It nicely avoids sounding euphonic or overly thick. Still, the voices carry the soul necessary to warm your heart. So, the mids come across as clear and detailed, carrying an authentic timbre to boot. They also retain good space around each note. Very nicely tuned is all i can say.

Treble:
The treble is emphasised only so much to balance out the bass quantity. It has enough sparkle and shimmer, and very cunningly avoids sibilance as well. The Complys might even keep those treble sensitive folks satisfied, depending on their tolerance level. The treble range extends very well to all practical purposes, are very detailed – as much as a dynamic driver can get without sounding harsh or annoying.

Instrument positioning, separation, et al
These earphones deserve a special note for their positioning and separation capabilities. All the instruments hold their spot in the soundstage like their life depends on it. They don’t waver much from their centre, and also reserve a small area around them to maintain enough privacy without getting clinical. I think with the Pycos the Ultrasones nailed the exact middle path where the audiophile and a commercial listener would meet. They do nothing wrong, but, on the flipside, they would leave a polarised listener wanting a bit more from the earphones depending on their inclination.

Comparisons



Round 1 – Ultrasone Pyco vs Sennheiser IE 40 Pro (99 USD)
To make it spicy, let’s start with a comparison with one that is probably Ultrasone’s great German rival, Sennheiser. Being the only Sennheiser in my possession we have to live with this. Sennheisers are considerably cheaper than the Pyco, but they have the cutting edge technology in there releasing barely weeks ago vs the Pyco that was tuned with stuff available in hand at 2013. Being single dynamics i think this is a fair match. Let’s get to it.

Switching from Pyco to Sennheiser, i could perceive immediately that the Pyco is a touch darker and intimate than the Senns, and comes across as very slightly warm. The male vocals sound thicker with more body compared to the Sennheisers. The Sennheiser, in comparison, have slightly recessed mids and present a U shaped signature. The IE 40 Pro spreads the music nicely in a lateral manner and avoids sounding too intimate and cluttered, whereas the Pyco is little more up front and gets closer to the listener. The Pycos have a more rounded soundstage with better depth. The Sennheisers dig deeper into the sub-bass regions and the bass presence is better with the Senns. The Pyco goes for greater impact quantity with decent quality, still delivering a quicker attack than Sennheisers. In bass, especially sub-bass, heavy passages the Senns let the mids take a back-seat. The Senns also have a slight edge with presenting micro details due to it’s treble emphasis on the other side, which aids the user to pick out certain nuances in the music. There’s more space between instruments in the Senns, whereas Pyco has stronger instrument positioning in it’s layers.

The Pyco is the more balanced player of the two and shows composure even in overwhelming circumstances. The IE 40 Pro are better for monitoring purposes as intended.

Sennheisers are cheaper; have proprietary detachable cables; are made for over the ear wearing style. Pycos are more expensive; have an integrated mic for answering calls; can be worn over-ear or straight down.

Round 2 – Ultrasone Pyco vs Acoustune HS1004 (200 USD)
We see the Germans playing at a similar level. Let’s now see how the Pyco stands against a new Japanese maker with their powerful Reverb Dynamic driver.

Switching from Acoustunes to Pyco, i immediately miss the bass reverb of the HS1004. HS1004 digs deeper and sounds very dynamic .We sense a lot of movement and feel the bass with the reverb driver. Pyco, in contrast presents a tighter bass which is equally punchy, minus the reverb. The soundstage of the Acoustunes are quite massive and expand in all directions. The expansive soundstage of the HS1004 also helps to accomodate more information and detail and makes them very apparent. The HS1004 gives us the instant wow-effect with it’s reverberating bass and a grandiose stage. The Pyco stands its ground with better definition and presenting everything rather perfectly in it’s own simple stage. I think it comes down to preference, and calling a winner is impossible between these without personal biases influencing the decision.

Acoustunes come with non-detachable cables with no intergrated mic; over-ear and straight-down wear possible. Pycos give us an intergrated mic with the same wearing options.

Round 3 – Ultrasone Pyco vs Donguri Syou Kurenai (~250 USD)
Let’s see if the TTR Donguri Syou Kurenai can win the Pyco. Syou Kurenai is the one from Donguri series that is closest to Pyco‘s signature.

Switching from Pyco to Syou Kurenai, it is very apparent that the mids, and upper mids are brought forward in the mix with the Donguri whereas it is more balanced in the Pyco. The Donguris, as a result, come across as brighter than the Pyco, which never gets splashy. This helps the Donguris to flash more details up front to the listener which makes the music more exciting. Their bass impact and delivery is very similar. Vocals are forward and female vocals soar higher in the Donguri. Treble extension seems similar, with the Donguri scoring points with more shimmer.

For my preferences, the Donguri takes the cake with its upper-mids tilted signature. Those preferring a more balanced signature would find Pycos doing the things correctly.

Round 4 – Ultrasone Pyco vs Ultrasone Tio (~350 USD)
It‘s all in the family this time. Let‘s see how much ahead the Tio is in comparison to it‘s smaller brother. To get to Tio one must shell out twice the money. Tio is also a single BA unit. Completely unfair comarison, but this is to let you know what is down the road.

Switching from Pyco to Tio is mindblowing, to say the least. The clarity that the BA delivers along with its warm tint is breathtaking. Every detail is so clear with the Tio, it‘s quite unbelievable immediately after the switch. The timbre, positioning, vocals, simply everthing is much more resolved and clearer. In comparison the Pycos are underwhelming, and the price gap seems justifiable. The bass impact with the Pycos are a little ahead and the sub bass rumble shows a little easily, but even here the bass definition of the Tios are spot on and come across as better, arguably. The soundstage is pretty similar in height and width, but Tio has noticeable better layering and positioning.

Pyco can be awfully proud of its brother and show all the due respect.

Overall Sound rating of Ultrasone Pyco: 8.9/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 4/5
Positioning/localisation 5/5
Details 4/5
Timbre 4.5/5



Conclusion –
For an earphone tuned 5 years ago, the Pyco still stands tall and shows enough grit when competing with today‘s IEMs. Ultrasone‘s only single dynamic driver is an IEM that does not do a single thing wrong and walks the middle path like an enlightened one. The safe tuning will not overly excite anyone, but everyone, in my opinion, should take notes from the Pyco on how to tune a balanced signature right. For a 100 Euros with detachable cables, these will get five stars and would sell like hot-cakes.

Simple Man’s review – Sennheiser IE 40 Pro (~100 USD)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: 10mm “broadband transducer” Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 20 Ohms; Sensitivity: 115dB/mW
Weight: 18g
Cable: 1.3m; proprietary detachable cable (they call this stage-proof cable with break-proof connection)
Note: The IE 40 Pro cables cannot be used with the higher models IE 400 Pro and IE 500 Pro.
Shell: Hard Plastic Shell
Nozzle: ~5mm
Release year: September, 2018



Build – 5/5
These earphones are beautiful to behold. The housings are made of hard plastic which is unbreakable for all practical purposes. The cables are really thick, supple, flexible, feel good to touch, and are detachable. They come of rather easily with a slight pull and can be as easily fastened. They hold secure and I don’t see them coming off on their own. Being meant for on-stage PROfessionals, these can’t be worn straight-down and must go around the ear. The thick memory guides also feel good over the ear and are very comfortable, albeit slightly shorter in length. The nozzles are stuffed with foam which act as filter instead of traditional filters stuck to the nozzle openings. The Y splitter is compact and houses a neck cinch as well. The cable ends in a nice L-shaped 3.5mm connector with solid strain relief there. Anywhere the wire comes protrudes, there is a small strain relief placed. Excellent quality all around. Extreme attention to detail. Can I give a 6 here?

Accessories – 5/5
The unboxing experience is premium. It feels like a treat to open these. The IEMs are seated majestically between cozy cushion cavities. Excellent presentation.
A small soft leather pouch is provided which is just enough to hold these earphones. They could have been slightly bigger. Squeezing the earphones in the pouch might take a few seconds.
Tips. 3 sizes silicon ear tips provided, plus we also get one pair of medium foam tips, non-comply which rebounds very fast. All the eartips also have some foam fillings that act as additional wax guard.
Plus we also get a cleaning tool.



Fit – 5/5
Fit is excellent. Over ear universal fit can’t get better than this. The slim housing sits very comfortably and seamlessly in the ear concha. Sleeping with this won’t be a problem at all.

Isolation and leakage – 3.5/5
Sound Attenuation is rated at <26dB, and they are OK with music ON. Perfect for indoor use, however, if you are talking a walk outside, outside noise tends to creep in letting you know of your surroundings. The earphones even allow you to have a conversation without taking them off when no music is playing, as would be preferrable for on-stage musicians to get together for a small chat between tracks. Sound leakage is very minimal at normal listening levels and shouldn’t bother a loved one trying to sleep.

Microphonics – 3.5/5
Present, only if you can manage to rock the wires. Being not very light, it does a good job of staying in place during minimal activity.

Drivability – Easy to drive with a smartphone. With my HTC10s i need only 40-50%, being a low-volume listener

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I’m using the stock tips, which have some foam filter in it. These tips are right in between Final E tips and JVC spirals in terms of bore width. I think the stock tips works as good as any.




Sound –
The general signature balanced, tending towards a (not steep) U-shaped presentation nudging emphasis on extremes of the spectrum, with a bass boost and a little peak for the cymbals at around 6-7Khz (thereabouts). The overall output is very musical and enjoyable without going overboard in any direction. The intention seems to be to sound correct rather than exciting, which is a very commendable way to go.



Soundstage:
Being created for the Pros, especially on-stage musicians, the IE 40 Pro presents music in an impressively wide stage stretching from left to right, displaying decent height as well. The left right separation is considerably wide, significantly more than your average IEM in this price range, it’s really impressive. In this wide stage, all the instruments are positioned laterally, which helps to focus easily on one band of the spectrum. You will hear the band playing at a short distance away from you, as opposed to intimate sounding.

Bass:
Sennheiser IE40 Pro has a very authoritative bass. It gives good impact quantity, and also provides a satisfying rumble wherever applicable. It is not bass-heavy per se, in fact a bass-head would find them lacking here, but the sub bass is boosted a bit above mid bass. A little mid-bass tightness would have made the bass even greater in quality. As a result these would not be remembered for it’s speed. However, they’re no slouch as well and one would be hard pressed to call them bloated. Being slightly U shaped, they don’t shy away from throwing the bass when the record demands, like with EDM, dance, etc. Bass guitars deliver good impact, and display good definition as well. The bass delivered is also quite detailed, and they do this without sacrificing much quantity. The broadband drivers appear to deliver this with surprising ease and effortlessness. It has a certain refreshing quality to it.

Mids:
The mids are slightly pulled back in the soundstage, and this gives a perceived depth to the soundstage. With busy and exciting music with bigger bass and treble, the U shaped signature shows itself obviously. However, they retain a certain airy quality to them and are able to present a lot of detail easily. In bass heavy music, the bass shoulders the mids and comes to play up front. However, the mids retain their intelligibility and play faithfully at a deeper level in the soundstage. The wide soundstage really plays in favour of the signature. With a smaller soundstage this would have sounded messy with the bass walking all over the mids, overlapping and what-not. The width accomodates everything rather nicely. The mids also retain some warmth from the bass which help to carry a realistic tonality and authentic timbre.

Treble:
The treble splashes atop and paints the IE 40 Pro bright. If they were laidback these would have been warm sounding earphones. The hi-hats and cymbals strike with shimmery presence and help to add a little height to the soundstage. Not overly so, but still a little to not appear so 2 dimensional. I wouldn’t call the highs airy as they do carry some weight, which brings them down to stage level and lets them hang in there. This affects the positioning of the sound as they gather a certain smearing effect. The cymbal crash hits and kind of spreads a little in the soundstage, lingering for an extra couple of milliseconds. It is quite apparent initially and gets a little better with burn-in. However, separation is impressive aided by the wide soundstage, and the treble also comes across as detailed for a dynamic driver.

Comparisons

Round 1 – Sennheiser IE 40 Pro vs Advanced Model 3 (~79 USD)
A warm-up round for the Senns. Comparing these as they have a similar structures, and are priced not very far apart. Will also help to give you an idea of where both these earphones stand. The Model 3 from Advanced, reviewed extensively here, have a very commercial sound to them, have a signature close to V shaped with a bump in the vocal range. They are pretty decent IEMs.

Comparing side by side, we can see that the Model 3 suffers from a narrower soundstage although they have better height. Model 3 comes across as warmer sounding, and many of the details that the Senns easily present to the listener are muffled in the constricted puddle that is presented by Model 3. Intelligibility and instrument definition is lacking in Model 3 in comparison. The mid bass has a more noticeable hump in Model 3. The treble of the Model 3 is similarly enhanced, but presented well and stands alongside the bass comfortably. Model 3 lacks the splashy attitude of the Sennheisers and their shimmery presentation. The mids are also better with the Sennheisers in terms of detail retrieval and cleaner presentation. The one place where the Model 3 scores some points is with male vocals where they come more up front and intimate to the listener and have greater body.

A walk in the park for the Senns this round, which is no surprise considering the cheaper price.

Round 2 – Sennheiser IE 40 Pro vs Audio Technica ATH E40 (~99 USD)
This is the most important competition for the Sennheisers, if they beat them, then they would take the cake for the best sub 100 monitoring earphones in my book. It’s a tough one, but let’s see how this goes.

A-B ing these and watching them trade blows one after another was really interesting. I would really like to read different people's opinion comparing the two.

Before we get to the sound, a word about the build and comfort. The Sennheisers are significantly more comfortable on the ear and are super easy to wear and start listening to music. Switching to the ATH E40 took me some fiddling around to get the fit right every time, whereas when i move to the Senns it takes about 3 seconds to push play. Wearing comfort and ease of use go to Sennheisers with no contest.

Now for the sound.

They are tuned differently, which makes my job harder. Looking at the soundstage and presentation, we can see that the ATH E40 have a more rounded soundstage in comparison, ATH E40 has greater height and almost equal width (slightly lesser) comparitively. ATH has a more intimate presentation and the mids are considerably forward. So, everything is up-front and makes for a more immersive listening experience. Vocals are louder, and guitars sound more authoritative with the ATH E40s. The bass is very tastefully tuned in the ATH E40, with slightly extended sub-bass and a mid-bass that is slightly behind the sub. This gives a greater impact and they also come across as tighter than the Sennheisers. Ath E40 also has a thicker presentation whereas the Senns comes across as airy and have a lighter feel to the music.

The Sennheiser IE 40 Pro, on the other hand, has a wide soundstage with lesser height. In my opinion they work better for monitoring. Instrument separation is better in the Sennheisers as there is more lateral clarity in the Senns. The vocals sits slightly behind, and don’t try to grab the attention of the listener. The chimes and the hi-hats are sharper in the Sennheisers compared to the thicker presentation of the ATH E40. The sub-bass is lesser than the ATH E40 in terms of impact, but the bass in general have good presence in the Sennheisers. The mid-bass plays a prominent role in the Sennheisers’ bass department. The IE40 Pro comes across as the cleaner IEM of the two due to its leaner presentation and lesser intimate nature.

A tough call, if you want more mids in the music and prefer a lush(er) and intimate presentation, then ATH E40 would better suit your taste for musical enjoyment. The Sennheiser IE 40 Pro would suit you better if you want better instrument separation and prefer a leaner presentation of music. Fit and comfort goes to Sennheisers without doubt. Did they beat the renowned ATH E40 ? That depends on your priorities.


Round 3 – Sennheiser IE 40 Pro Vs Ultrasone Pyco (120 to 170 USD)
Two top German brands fight it out this round. The Pyco is Ultrasone’s dynamic driver IEM released back in 2013, priced significantly higher than the new IE 40 Pro. Let’s get to it.

Switching from Pyco to Sennheiser, i could perceive immediately that the Pyco is a touch darker and intimate than the Senns, and comes across as very slightly warm. The male vocals sound thicker with more body compared to the Sennheisers. The Sennheiser, in comparison, have slightly recessed mids and present a U shaped signature. The IE 40 Pro spreads the music nicely in a lateral manner and avoids sounding too intimate and cluttered, whereas the Pyco is little more up front and gets closer to the listener. The Pycos have a more rounded soundstage with better depth. The Sennheisers dig deeper into the sub-bass regions and the bass presence is better with the Senns. The Pyco goes for greater impact quantity with decent quality, still delivering a quicker attack than Sennheisers. In bass, especially sub-bass, heavy passages the Senns let the mids take a back-seat. The Senns also have a slight edge with presenting micro details and its wide stage aids the user to pick out certain nuances in the music. There’s more space between instruments in the Senns and comes across as cleaner, whereas Pyco has stronger instrument positioning in it’s layers. Pyco sounds like the ATH E40 with a smaller overall soundstage size.

Intimate vs distanced presentation. Pyco is more mid forward. Otherwise both stand shoulder to shoulder and present music in a balanced manner.

Round 4 – Sennheiser IE 40 Pro vs Final Heaven IV (~130 USD)
Ok, this round let’s try to make it harder for the Sennheisers. Final Heaven IV sports a tastefully tuned BA that are super detailed and also carry some warmth to the tuning. I didn’t choose the E4000 here since they are very mid focused and super-lush, and these would make a better comparison.

The Heavens are very appropriately named, they sound like it. The BA drivers extract more micro details than the broadband transducer employed by the Sennheiser IE 40 Pro. The vocals have a special thick quality to them in the Heavens that can’t be beat really, and the IE 40 Pro plays the vocals a little deeper in the soundstage and lack the thickness of the Heaven IV presentation. Bass is more apparent with the Sennheisers and they also go deeper into the sub-bass range compared to the lighter impact produced by the BA driver. The heaven IV also has a more tighter bass presentation which serves mainly to add body to the mids. Bass definition is better in the Senns which is served with extra meat. Again, the Heaven IV goes for a more intimate presentation where the Sennheisers are comfortable with a slightly distanced representation. The IE 40 Pro has more shimmer to their treble but lacks the definition and timbre of the BA driver.

It’s really impressive that the Sennheisers can stand it’s ground alongside the acclaimed Final Heaven IV. This is no small feat.

Overall Sound rating of Sennheiser IE 40 Pro: 8.9/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4.5/5
Instrument Separation 4.5/5
Positioning/localisation 4/5
Details 4/5
Timbre 4/5



Conclusion –
Sennheiser got everything right with their new model IE 40 Pro. The unboxing experience, arrangement, build, comfort, ergonomics, aethetics, everything screams meticulous attention to detail with an unwavering focus on comfort and quality. They feel great and sound great, and present music in a monitoresque manner where the music plays out at a certain distance from the listeners head. The wide soundstage accomodates all the musical nuances graciously with enough room to spare, and they do it effortlessly. In my opinion, they serve the intended purpose and are rightly priced.

Simple Man’s review – Acoustune HS1004 (~200 USD incl. Import to EU)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Product Specs :
Driver: Φ10mm Single Dynamic Driver
Impedance: 16 Ohms; Sensitivity: 110dB/mW
Weight: 10g (guess)
Cable: Non-detachable, 1.2 m (4-core)
Shell: 100% aluminium CNC milling
Nozzle: ~4.5mm
Release: 2016




Myrinx Driver
Acoustune uses a “Myrinx Diaphragm” for their driver as opposed to conventional dynamic drivers.
Myrinx, if you google, redirects to Tympanic membrane. It is the membrane that coats the ear drum. Acoustune is using this material (synthetic, of course, not extracted from human ear-drum), they call this medical-grade material, to coat their dynamic drivers. Their whole driver setup is called Acoustune Integrated Acoustic Management System, or in other words, proprietary, Myrinx Driver Technology.

The driver used in HS1004 is also called Riba-budoraiba - in japanese accent for Reverb Driver

Build – 4/5
The aluminium earphone housings are super light and feel durable. The braided cloth-sheathed cable are super light, thick, and are hardly affected by gravity when you wear them. A small hard-plastic, or hard silicon, column connects the wires to the housing. This is slightly flexible and can move a bit. A little rough application, a sudden pull or a press here, can definitely break this joint. This, and the lack of MMCX are the weakest links in the design, and considerable wear can potentially break the earphones. Deploying MMCX would have also increased weight and affected the aesthetic appeal of the product. The cable leads to the 3.5mm jack at a 45 degree angle, which is not totally annoying, for a change. A trusty metal mesh in the nozzles protect the drivers from dust and a practical neck cinch completes the no-frills design. Removing a point for the lack of replaceable cables.



Accessories – 4/5
The unboxing is a very simple yet presented tastefully.We get,
-a practical Acoustune carrying case, nothing fancy but gets the job done.
-three different types of silicon tips (three sizes each). It’s good for tips inventory.
-a couple of fat ear guides for around-the-ear wear, which i don’t use.

One point off, because the ear-tips, all of them, are quite crappy for the HS1004. I do use one of the wide bore tips for my CKR100 now though.



Isolation & Sound leakage – 2.5/5
Isolation is very mediocre. They don’t particularly isolate outside noise even while playing music. A noisy metro or public-transport can creep some sound in to remind you of your surroundings. But they’re not as bad as the EX800, for instance. You wouldn’t be bothered by the wind if you choose to take them out for a walk. Leakage isn’t very bothersome at acceptable listening levels.

Fit – 4/5
Believe it or not, i actually bought these earphones assuming the fit would be so super-perfect with the entire housing comfortably seated in my ear, giving me a perfect seal, where i can lay about on my sides and what-not. Alas, i was kinda disappointed to find that it wasn’t how it imagined it to be.

Going for a wear-them-how-you-like approach, around-the-ear and straight-down, they had to place the protruding nozzle right in the centre of the circle. For an easy entry in the ear this must be placed a little away from the center, as you typically see with semi closed designs. And the outer plate of the housings, having a slightly larger radius, have to push the Tragus (the little triangular lobe of the ear near the face) out a little bit to rest in the ear. It’s not very uncomfortable, but if you aren’t used to this design it might be a bit of a bother in the beginning. I don’t feel this anymore after several months of use, and now I feel it’s quite comfortable. All this here just so you know. A little penalty in this section for deceiving me.

Microphonics – 3/5
It’s not great, not bad. I wear them around the ear and don’t have complaints.

Drivability – With it’s high sensitivity, they are among the easiest-to-drive IEM that i have in my collection. Once i had a mild head-ache and still wanted to listen to some music. With the lowest possible volume in my HTC10 i found the Acoustunes to be too loud and couldn’t listen to them. Final E5000 came to the rescue then.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Eartips: I have not rolled so many eartips for any earphones as i had done for the Acoustune HS1004.
Sprial dots made it too boomy, Spinfits made the housings protrude a bit to the outside, making them a little uncomfortable. Then I settled for Final E tips, Medium-Small, for a while. But something was still missing, at some times. Finally, I moved to ATH tips. The ATH tips have short stems and also make the bass tight, preserving the bass reverb yet, not making it too flabby. I find these to best suit the Acoustune HS1004s. ATH for bass, Final for warm mids, SpinFits for nice balance with cleaner highs.



Sound –
The general signature is leaning towards a V-shaped curve with a bump in the mids for vocals. They don’t sound like your typical fun V-shaped signature with head-banging sub-bass and gawdy highs. In short, they don’t sound like commercial trash (no offense, just my opinion). They have gone for a very unique presentation, which comes across as coloured (somewhat Audio-technica like). Let’s take a closer look at the spectrum.

Soundstage:
If you pop these in and start your music, you will instantly be confronted with a big, tall and wide soundstage. The mids are playing deeper in the sound field, behind the reverberating bass, peeking above the bass band. The treble spashes on the top right and top left giving an impressive height to the entire soundstage. Overall, it is nicely rounded with even width and height, measured with big numbers.

Bass:
As advertised, the Reverb Drivers produce a reverberating bass. Juicy, comes to mind when i look for a word to describe it. You can actually feel the drivers vibrating when those bass tones are invoked. It’s like hearing those big floor speakers with huge drivers that visibly vibrates with every beat. And the decay here is lingering to a satisfied length of time for you to appreciate the reverb qualities of the driver. Yet, i will still say they are quite fast. Not the fastest, like BA drivers, or the fastest dynamic driver bass in the world, Adagio V (harsh highs), but fast enough. They don’t skip a beat, but speed is not their forte.

If you are used to neutral or BA-like sound, you will be a little overwhelmed, like i was to some extent, in the beginning with the, can i say, larger than life presentation. But believe me when i say, it will have you coming back for more, like it had me. Once you warm up to the signature, and accept the driver’s nature, you will start to appreciate it. You will notice that the bass never gets boomy, has a satisfying impact and still has great definition at the same time. Somewhat, very much (?), like the Sony EX800’s bass.

Mids:
The bass reverb adds warmth to the mids, the added warmth adds soul to the vocals. They are perceived as playing deeper in the soundstage, slightly recessed in comparison to the bass and treble. That little bump in the response curve helps the mids to stay in presence and hold its ground. The guitars strings, and any other instrument here as well, reverberate with these drivers. Mids are detailed and they retain good amount of space for each instrument. The surrounding space is filled with dying echoes of the each note played. The decay lingers for an extra moment until the next note comes rushing in to claim its spot in the composition. It gives an impression of the drivers being, let’s just say, not-fast. But this adds a certain flavour and colour that is rarely seen elsewhere.

The mids reverb and echo with a certain brassy, or metallic, colour, if you can colour the echoes from a huge gong-strike in a Royal Throne Room. This peculiar decay quality is what colours the signature in my opinion.

Treble:
The treble is airy, shimmery, shiny, sparkly and, smooth. Even though the treble is brought forward in the mix it shows no sign of sibilance because of lack of spikes in this region. This makes for a smooth and fun listening experience. They play high and wide, and display great resolution as well. Maybe it lacks the micro-detailing compared to detail-oriented BA drivers, but for a dynamic they are super detailed. Here again you notice tasteful transience, and that slight lingering detail which hangs in the air for a moment after a chime or a cymbal hit.

Comparisons

Round 1 – HS1004 vs JVC FXT90
First of all, let’s see where it stands against the classic FXT90, my gateway drug into this addictive hobby, also V shaped with bumped mids.

Listening to FXT90 after a long time now. My goodness, these sound awesome, still!! They are so fun and really excites the heck out of me. Almost forgot about these gems. Sigh, alright, let’s get on with the comparison now..

Listening to a fun EDM track, the FXT90 really drops the sub-bass and has your head bobbing to the beats. Bass has a big, heavy impact. Has good rumble, very slightly boomy, done well though. Tight and authoritative, does not come across as flabby. Vocals really pop out clearly, they bumped the right spot in the mids. Highs splash about with good resolution and clarity. My god, this is a fun IEM.

Switching to Acoustune HS1004 with the same song. Wow. The soundstage just opens up in a big way. Everything sounds more refined and defined. The reverb really kicks in, and there is magical transients all over the place. Where the FXT90 sounds boosted, here it is delicately delivered with more subtle clarity. Micro-details pop up very obviously with the HS1004. For a moment, i thought this could be challenging, but, no, it was a walk in the park for Acoustunes.

FYI, we just compared a 80 dollar IEM with 200 dollar IEM.

Round 2 – HS1004 vs MEE Pinnacle PX
The HS1004 meets an old audiophile favourite from China this round, Pinnacle PX (Massdrop version of P1)

The Pinnacles were just an OK IEM for me. Even though i was initially impressed with its clarity and resolution, they never got much ear-time from me. Not my kind of sound, really. Although my massdrop version was around 110 USD, I’m still comparing these to give you an idea about the Acoustune sound.

Listening to Tool this time, a progressive rock track, PX first. Volume about 70% in my HTC10.
Bass is quite tame with the Pinnacle lacking impact with the bass drum. Vocals show good presence, and the highs are shimmery and spikey. Pinnacle hits a little closer to sibilance, but delivers good clarity in the treble region.

Switching to Acoustune HS1004 at 40% volume to get the same output:
Soundstage is bigger, more space around instruments, displaying better height and width and depth. Bass reverb is perfect, and the bass drum delivers the intended impact. Perfectly done. Vocals fall back into the depth in comparison. It’s apparent when A-B-ing. But, as the song progresses i feel the mids play out well in Acoustunes as well. Highs are very smooth, displaying no spikes, and lacking no detail at the same time.

Pinnacle sounds cluttered in comparison, lacking breathing space around instruments. The larger soundstage, reverb bass, and smoother detailed highs makes the HS1004 a winner again. The Acoustunes are a band apart.

Round 3 – HS1004 vs Donguri Syou Kurenai
Similar price and signature, in fact i paid some 30 USD extra to ship the Donguris. Syou Kurenai is the Donguri that has the more dynamic – fun sound, with a bigger bass impact than all the Donguri lower models. Let’s see how they stack up.

Switching back and forth with more than one song, i must say these 2 are tuned quite similarly. Both are fun to listen to. The high mids are accented in the Donguris. The upper mid presence, the little chimes and snares there are more showy as a result and pop up front and tease the listener. Whereas the Acoustunes with this bass reverb and transient echoes are mesmerising in another dynamic way. The highs of Donguri are a little more sculpted compared to the smooth treble of the Acoustunes. Treble definition seems better in Donguri Vs the more resolving treble of the Acoustunes (does that even make sense??) The soundstage of the Acoustunes are larger in comparison, creates more room to immerse the user.

I can’t confidently call a winner in this round. Bass and soundstage goes to Acoustunes. Mids/Upper mids to Donguris. I have a soft corner for the Donguris, anyway.

Round 4 – HS1004 vs Sony EX800ST
Saving the best for last. Same price point with these two. Acoustunes’ bass kept reminding me of the Sonys. I’m really excited and looking forward to this direct comparison. Let’s get to it.

After multiple different tracks of A-B-ing, i report the following:
The Sonys, as intended, lean towards a monitoresque presentation. The micro-details and clarity are clearly better than the Acoustunes. The mids are placed in the perfect position, and the upper-mids as well are brought to the front, in comparison to the slightly recessed vocal range and upper mid section of the Acoustunes. The bass however has more reverb and authority in the Acoustunes delivering better impact. Un-modded, as mine are, the EX800s bass impact is slightly lesser than the Acoustunes. The Sony’s bass also “reverbs”, only with lesser impact. Also, Acoustune’s driver with its slower decay and lingering echoes probably is the reason for lesser perceived clarity. Treble in the Sonys are slightly thinner to achieve greater detail. This is sacrificed in the Acoustunes in favour of heavier, longer-lasting, notes.

The soundstage of the Sonys are very wide stretching from far left to the far right, with a lot of space in between the instruments. But it doesn’t have any height to speak of. All the instruments are lined up in a single row from outside your left ear - through the inside of your brain - to outside the right ear with the Sonys. The Acoustunes have almost the same width (a few centimetres lesser), but has obviously greater height in its soundstage which give a more 3-D presentation. The players are all around your head, and the reverb gives a good depth of field as well.

At the end of this round, i must give the award to the Sonys for their amazing clarity and clean presentation, it’s quite magical. It’s a pity they don’t isolate and are totally useless for outdoors.

I’m impressed with the Acoustunes for putting up a great fight with the already much lauded Sonys. Not many IEMs can actually do this, let alone the 200 dollar price mark. Not really sure if the Sony EX800 can be convincingly beat at any level.

Overall Sound rating of Acoustune HS1004: 9.0/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 5/5
Instrument Separation 4.5/5
Details 4/5
Timbre 4.5/5



Conclusion –
Acoustune has tuned a wonder with their Myrinx Reverb Driver. The pulsating, detailed sound that the HS1004 delivers with their massive soundstage must be heard to be believed. Their musical tuning works great for all genres, and you can just pick them up with no second thought and enjoy your playlist. Rest assured. Although i wish it were priced a little lower, I must admit they sound great for the price, and offer something no one else does. Therefore, five stars.

Simple Man’s review – Co-Donguri Brass $34 (co-Donguri Shizuku $38)
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my smartphone using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



About the manufacturer, and a little ramble about my relationship with their creations:

TTR, Tune & Tone Root, corporation is the name of this company, nick-named “Surround”. A Japanese earphones manufacturer closely associated to Ocharaku, the even more popular earphone manufacturer started by Makoto Yamagishi in 2010 – Designer and maker of the famous Sony EX 1000 / 800ST series, a cult classic in audiophile circles. TTR borrows the patented Tornado Equalizer from Ocharaku, and it also employs the same basic housing design used in Ocharaku’s Donguri Keyaki series.

It was love at first “sight” when i first bought and listened to the original co-Donguri Shizuku (the predecessor of the co-Donguri Brass). Although the Shizuku is now discontinued as per the official site, we can still buy it from Amazon Japan or cdjapan until stocks last.

The mesmerizing highs (that bell-like clarity) in the presence region totally entranced me, and i couldn’t stop myself from buying all of the TTR models, namely, co-Donguri, Raku, Syou Kurenai, Chonmage 3, and i even went on to buy the Ocharaku Keyaki Ti Plus, and the FLAT4-NAMI. These earphones essentially made me spend more than 1000 dollars on earphones all within a couple of months. I wanted them all! The co-Donguri is how i went on to appreciate treble, and almost became a treble junkie, until the Final E series dragged me down from hot highs to show me that there is more to music and that there is magic in in the warm lows as well.

And here, with the co-Donguri Brass they have now employed Final’s eartips to replace the spin-fits that was the default earlier. This in my opinion is a great move, and suits the earphones and the sound signature much better than the spin-fits.

Embracing the best of both worlds, Ocharaku's patented Tornado Turbo Circuit and Final's eartips, (both best worlds are in Japan by the way), the TTR strives to give us the best musical experience. I salute to them!

Now, since i didn’t do a full review on the original co-Donguri Shizuku, i take this opportunity to do a kind of a side review for it. Wherever applicable, i will drop notes on how the Brass stands up to Shizuku, and how the Shizuku differs from the Brass. Where there are no extra notes in italics, there we have no difference between the two.

Product Specs:
Driver: 10mm dynamic, with Tornado equalizer
Frequency response: 5 Hz- 40KHz
Impedance: 18 Ohms
Sensitivity: 106 dB/mW
Mass: 22g (vs 16g Shizuku)
Cable: 1.2 m (3.9') OFC Ritz [4 core] non-detachable cable with 3.5mm L-type connector (vs non OFC specified cable in Shizuku)



Build – 5/5
The IEM housings, being made of brass, are quite weighty, especially when compared to Shizuku which were rather light. Once seated in the ears, you don’t feel the weight anyway. The build per se is top notch. To handle the extra weight they’ve added a cable that is slightly (very,very slightly) thicker than the older model, which is really thoughtful. They look great and feel solid. Unless you decide to use these IEMs as a nunchuks, i think these can be useful in the absence of one, i don’t see the wires giving away with any normal use. I could have subtracted 0.5 due to the extra weight, but, considering the price and the slightly thicker cables i chose not to punish them for this. (The Shizuku will not suffer this criticism due to lighter weight). The L-shaped connectors are great, Y-splitters are awesome, and the neck cinch seals the deal leaving nothing wanting with the earphones. The co-Donguri brass comes in punchy colours and are aesthetically more pleasing compared to the colour choices of Shizuku. Those who prefer a balanced output also are served for 10 extra bucks, they have both the 2.5mm and the 4.4mm connector versions, which is cool. (The Shizuku comes only with a 3.5mm connector)



Accessories – 3/5
Bare minimum. No carry case, small and large eartips, Final E type (Spinfits for Shizuku), in the box. That’s it. A cheap box would have got them 5 points for the price.

Isolation & Sound leakage – 4/5
Isolation is quite good for an IEM with a tiny vent on the outside. The Final E type tips are perfect for these, and i use them now also for the Shizuku, as well as the other Donguris and Ocharakus.

Eartips, a small comparison: Spin-fits vs Final E type:
Both of them bend inside the ear to align with the ear canal. The spin-fits bend at a greater angle compared to the Final E type. The Spin-fits, however, at certain positions create a little hollow in the ear resulting in seal issues, which can nevertheless be rectified by re-positioning the tips. The Final tips don’t suffer from this malady and this aspect is what makes them better, IMO. On the other hand, the Spin-fits can enter the canals a little deeper due to their longer stem. So, they still got that going in its favour.

Microphonics – 4/5
I wear them over the ear, and this way it’s a 4/5. Straight down i’d give it a 3/5.

Fit – 5/5
Both ways possible, and fit is secure, and easy to acheive. Full score.

Drivability – Very easy to drive, gets very loud with 60% volume in my HTC 10. I don’t think anyone with any source will have trouble driving these.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s and some classical music. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Sound –
I’ll simply call these earphones “Brass” and it’s predecessor “Shizuku” for convenience’ sake. And I’d like to mention here that i firmly believe the drivers inside the earphones are the same, with no difference in tuning, whatsoever. The differences noticed are due to the different metals used in the housings (light Aluminium vs heavier Brass). Again, this is my belief not based on facts. Maybe, just maybe, they have tuned the highs slightly, but i doubt it. A casual listener would be hard pressed to admit to any sonic differences between them with a short listen. That said, there is slight difference that we can clearly perceive in each segment of the sound spectrum, and all together makes up for a considerably different sound presentation. The difference is not day and night, it would be different times in the day.



Bass:
The bass on the Brass is authoritative. It digs deep and does not have any noticeable mid bass hump at all. It’s feet are firmly grounded in the sense that the bass is tight with less decay. It seems that the bass in the Brass has slightly more definition and weight also. It’s not at all boomy and extremely well behaved. Bass nicely done. The Shizuku on the other hand does not dig as deep, or we can say it flaunts a little bump, a luscious mid-bass hump, which is more appealing than the sub-bass presence. It also has a slightly slower decay which helps in timbre of certain natural instruments in the bass area. The slight mid-bass hump also helps the mids by adding a little bit of warmth.

That said, neither of these earphones will satisfy bass-heads. It’s not made for them.

Mids:
Brass nicely decided to lose the little mid-bass hump that the Shizuku had. It sounds like a good move and i thought so as well. When listening to the Shizuku i always wondered how it would sound if they lost that little sexy hump. I don’t wonder anymore.

So, losing this little hump took away certain other things as well. As i mentioned, it took away the little warmth that Shizuku added to its mids. As a result, the mids sound a bit clinical. Vocals sound dry. First time i heard what dry vocals really meant. Vocals, especially male, sounded a bit as if the singers throat was parched dry and he badly needed a glass of water. They get that raspy quality to the voice which can be sexy sometimes. It’s good in a sense that you can catch more details in the voice, but i think the lack of warmth makes it a little less musical. Those leaning towards “analytical” would surely appreciate the mids presented by the Brass. The upper mids, the region where female vocals and high bows of violin lies, are also a little straightened out in the Brass. The Shizuku also had a little bump here to accent the high-mids. This gave the Shizuku that magical mesmerising bell-like sound which is always mentioned in any impression of the co-Donguri. The Brass also has this bell-like quality to it, but the notes are a little heavier in this case, and it does not float up to magical altitudes like it does in the Shizuku. The Brass plays a bell like “Ding” where the Shizuku goes “Ting”. Heavier notes vs lighter notes, only slightly but you can hear the difference. This also works a little in favour of Shizuku when it comes to instrument separation. The notes being slightly thinner have slightly more room for themselves. When it comes to details (micro), however, the Brass has a slight edge. And this edge is sharp. This takes us into the domain of Treble.

Treble:
The Brass presents more micro details, easily perceived, as it’s signature appears more linear. The Shizuku, when you move past the high mids, has a certain drop in the sibilance region of lower treble which makes them sound more musical and easy to the ears, also sacrificing some micro details in this area. Nothing alarming, but you can hear it in comparing the two. This also aids in the perception of better instrument separation with the Shizuku. The Brass, being more linear, shows some details close to sibilance region more than the Shizuku. So, you notice a bunch of details floating around the treble instruments flirting with sibilance. I say flirting because it is in fact pleasurable to some extent, and not repelling or annoying. But it is, nonetheless, better if not present, atleast for me. I also think the high treble is also more present in the Brass compared to the Shizuku. The Brass does not shy away from presenting high frequencies as recorded, where the Shizuku takes a slightly more forgiving approach.

Needless to say both the earphones are slightly tilted towards the upper-mids and treble.

Soundstage: Both the earphones have a very decent soundstage, with decent width and height. The Shizuku sounds slightly more airy compared to the Brass. They both have a nice round soundstage, which means not super wide, but with equal height as width. This is applicable for the entire Donguri line-up. They all have good height and good width, and they are all very satisfying in their presentation. There is not much to say about the depth of the sound stage.

Separation: The instrument separation is very good as it is with the Brass. Only it falls a couple of inches shorter than the high bar that Shizuku set already. Brass, going for a linear approach went for more micro details at the expense of instrument definition and separation.

To sum up the differences between the Shizuku and the Brass, I would say that the Shizuku is a 9 AM feeling on a nice summer day. It’s nice and super clear and you feel great to be out and about. The Brass is high noon on the same day. It’s extremely clear where a shadow isn’t cast to obscure the details. One might even break a sweat if one ventures a walk outside at this time of day. But hey, sweat isn’t bad now, is it?



I choose not to do further detailed comparisons with other brands because these are very unique. I’ve listened to a number of earphones and i can confidently say that the Donguri (the entire line-up) is like no other. No one goes for this tuning. Even FLAT4, with is great wide soundstage, is very different compared to this presentation. For example, a cymbal crash in the Audio Technica E40 or the Sony EX800 will hit at the right extreme of the soundscape. The same crash in the Donguris will play almost at the top of your head, close to the center of the soundstage, very slightly to the right. The presentation is very unique indeed, i believe it’s the shape of the housing.

However, i’ll do a quick compare of all the Donguris from Surround in the following manner:



Bright > Raku > Brass > Shizuku > Syou Kurenai > Slightly warm
Bass: Syou Kurenai > Brass > Shizuku > Raku
Treble: Raku > Brass >= Syou Kurenai > Shizuku
Detail: Syou Kurenai > Raku = Brass > Shizuku
Clarity/definition: Syou Kurenai > Shizuku >=Raku > Brass
Separation: Syou Kurenai > Raku > Shizuku > Brass
Soundstage width: Raku > Syou Kurenai = Brass = Shizuku
Timbre: Shizuku > Syou Kurenai > Raku > Brass
Vocals: Shizuku > Syou Kurenai > Raku > Brass

Just to put things in perspective.
Brass = $34; Shizuku = $38; Raku = $100; Syou Kurenai= $230

Overall Sound rating of Co-Donguri Brass: 9.0/10
Vocals 4/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 4/5
Detail 4.5/5 (up by 0.5)
Timbre 4.5/5

For me, the predecessor, Shizuku, will score a 5/5 on all those points above, except details maybe.

Conclusion –
The Co-Donguri Brass is another incredible offering by TTR Surround. Amazing sound at an unbeatable price. The Brass possesses a very balanced signature which presents music in a cold and dry manner. It brings the micro-details to the forefront to satisfy the analytical listener who wishes for a dynamic sound. Even though i feel the older Shizuku suits my tastes better, i really commend TTR Surround for striving towards improvement and perfection. This constant experimentation is the key to success, and this is what keeps us audiophiles forever addicted to this dear hobby of ours. 5 stars for TTR Surround!

Simple Man’s review – Final E4000 (~150 USD incl. import);
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.



Product Specs :
Driver: 6.4mmΦ dynamic driver
Impedance: 15 Ohms; Sensitivity: 97dB
Weight: 18g
Cable: MMCX connectors, 1.2 m, OFC cable - black

Build – 4.5/5
Great build quality, super light. The E4000s employ machined black aluminium housings that are very rigid. The cord is of good thickness, not overly thick, still you feel secure with them. The wires are very flexible and feel nice to touch. Not at all springy, they conform nicely to any position you set them to. The MMCX connectors also colour coded with Red with Black to indicate Right and Left respectively. The theme here is black, with black aluminium housings and black cord. The Y splitter is a small cylindrical hard rubber chunk, and so are the MMCX connector housings at the end of the cable. They are closed back unlike the little brother E2000. They have a nice black neck cinch as well. No worries here., minus 0.5 because the E5000 is much more solid and pretty.



I forgot to mention about the nozzles. Both E5000 and E4000, although housed in stainless steel and aluminium respectively, have hard black plastic nozzles. Since the nozzles aren’t long and protruding, breaking them while tip-rolling is not a point of concern. Still, it’s worth mentioning that they aren’t all metal. They also have a nice white filter to stop dirt from entering the earphones.

If you’ve already checked out my E5000 review, you can skip all the bits below and jump straight to Sound. Only point is difference compared to E5000 would be with wearing comfort where the E4000 is more comfortable due to lighter weight.



Accessories – 5/5
Ditto E5000.
Silicon Carrying case: We get a very premium and stylish silicon carrying case that looks great, feels great, and they don’t occupy a lot of space either. They have an unconventional design. It looks like a hollow black bowl of rubber, on the outside we have the Final logo, on the bottom is the flap to open and secure the case, three protruding tabs help to keep them fastened. It has an interesting locking mechanism as well that avoids a zipper. The case is so small that it can hold just one unit comfortably.
Karabinger: The case also has this facility to deploy a coupling link, which is part of the accessories, so we can fasten them to our belt loops to carry the earphones around. This is pretty cool and can save a pocket when you are out and about.
Silicon tips: 5 sizes of tips, with the stems having grooves or stripes which have tight clamping force. The grooves enable flexibility to adapt and angle into the ear canals a bit. These tip stems are also colour coded to indicate L/R, and different sizes.
Ear hooks: They also provide a super slim set of black ear hooks (E5000 has transparent ones) that are flexible and are extremely comfortable as well.

So much thought an effort has been put into each component to satisfy the spending customer.

Isolation & Sound leakage – 3.5/5
Ditto E5000.
Isolation is left wanting a little. Not as bad as open/semi open earphones, but you can hear speeding cars even with the music on. Sound leakage is not a point of concern even in quiet environments

Fit – 5/5
Fit is easy and comfortable. The lighter housing (compared to E5000) only adds to the comfort and ease of use. Around-the-ear and conventional straight-down wear is compatible.

Microphonics – 4/5
Ditto E5000.
Wearing them around-the-ear eliminates touch noise, more so with the ear hooks. Straight down, it is quite present.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

From Final’s site regarding the tuning of E4000/5000:
We’ve carried out the sound design of this product based on the latest acoustic engineering and psychological research results. Using the usual method of sound creation whereby high frequencies are given a sharp peak and certain high frequencies are emphasized, you’re given to feel vivid sound when you first listen, but because of this peak, the anteroposterior ranges are masked and hard to hear. With the E series, making the arc of the frequency response smooth overall ensured that no bands were masked, and we achieved high resolution. Compared to E3000/E2000, a purer, subtler sound is achieved.

*To heighten the resolution across all ranges, acoustic pressure has been lowered. When you listen, the sound appears laid-back; turning the volume up gradually while assimilating this subtlety affords the user a comfortable listening experience. This product is one whose merits become more apparent the longer you use it.

And, it is interesting to know that Final considers that E5000 is a direct upgrade to E3000, and E4000 is a direct upgrade to E2000.

Sweet-Spot:
Final suggests to gradually turn up the volume and find the sweet spot where we can say that the highs are lows are in line with one another. This sweet spot for me lies between 30 to 50% volume in HTC 10 depending on the track. This is where they sound sublime. The 4000 is easier to drive than the 5000 and accordingly the sweet spot comes a couple of notches below in the volume bar. The E4000 and 5000 are especially made for you listen in the sweet spot. Any more volume, the earphones will not sound as good, and the E4000s will lose some of it’s magic. Once you find this sweet spot, run a few songs and let your brain accustom to the signature. Coming from bright earphones and monitorersque signature, I needed quite a bit of brain burn-in.

Tips: I tried different tips, but I settled back to the stock tips. They work just fine.

Sound –

The E4000 really sounds smooth and in-offensive, yet detailed and lush. The highs are airy, yet not overly done, like those flashy IEMs in the market today. None of the IEMs in the E series come across as flashy, but the E4000 and 2000 have more airiness to them than the cousins. It strikes the perfect balance. If you don’t like overly lush presentation with supreme warmth, the E4000 is for you.



Let’s have a deeper look.

Bass:
The bass is creamy. The sub-bass lies slightly behind the mid-bass in impact. You will feel the sub-bass, softly. The mid-bass hump is not introduced in the wrong place. This is more tastefully positioned in the lower side of the mid-bass. Therefore, they behave very well and do not interfere with mids like some other IEMs with an abominable hump do. The bass isn’t super tight, like the 5000, and presenting the bass texture is not in the topmost of its priorities. That said, this isn’t a bass shy earphone by any means, only, they are not the main players here. The bass is like the Rook providing solid support to the King’s castle. Which brings us to His Majesty

Mids:
If all earphones did mids so perfectly, Final wouldn’t have gone for this. They have nailed it. Mids are transparent and notes are perfectly presented. The aren’t thick, they aren’t thin, go figure. All the instruments have some air around them. The timbre is top-notch.

Without the Queen the King’s castle will soon crumble. The queen of the mids, vocals, is presented in all her glory here. The presentation of vocals here rival Piano Forte II, which is my gold-standard for vocal presentation. Maybe, they are even better. It’s hard to tell. The vocals just pop slightly above the rest of the instruments in the mids. They are treated like a queen and presented like one. If you listen to any song with vocals with these E4000s, the vocal element of the song will be the one captivating you most. It would sound like all the other elements of the song work together to lift and position the vocals in its sanctum sactorum.

Treble:
The treble is smooth and they extend well. The treble is on the same level as the bass on impact and presence. The are airy, and play at a good height in the soundstage. I wouldn’t say they are super detailed, but every instrument is clearly presented to you, in a very smooth manner. The cymbals and hi-hats decay very tastefully, and I might even go so far to say they add a nice splash to the highs. The treble can be likened to the Bishop on the chess board, cutting across like hot knife through butter.

Soundstage:
The soundstage is wide and have very good height, taller than E5000. It also displays good depth of field, but not so much as the 5000 clearly. Instrument positioning is very decent, and each sound owns some air around them to make their position clear.

Comparisons

Final E4000 (~$150) vs Final E2000 (~$40)
Let’s first see how much of an upgrade the 4000 is from its little brother the E2000.



If earphones like humans can grow up, E2000 will grow up to be the E4000. I’m not joking. Switching from 2000 to 4000, I find everything sounds better and more refined. It’s basically the same signature with better clarity, better instrument separation, better definition, deeper and tighter bass. Vocals are also better. If you love the E2000, you must totally save up and buy the E4000.

Final E5000 (~$300) vs Final E4000 (~$150)
Let’s see how the E5000 stands alongside the E4000, it’s cousin.



Mids is the King in E4000, and Bass is King in the E5000. Vocals is the queen in E4000, Subtle Detail is queen in the E5000.



The E5000 bass hit harder and goes deeper, and is more authoritative. There is this great amount of lushness and warmth that is considerably tamed in the 4000. As a result, switching from E5000 to E4000, the mids appear forwarded. Mids come across as more transparent and vocals are more present in the E4000. In E5000, the mids are lush, warmer, also you can perceive better tightness and micro-definition in the E5000. Instrument separation is better in E5000 as a result. Details are subtler in E5000. Vocals are forwarded and sound mesmerising in the E4000s. They float to the top and tease you plenty. Like I said in the E5000 comparison, If you love mids and vocals, E4000 is the best of the bunch. If you want the best of definition and the deepest sub bass impact, then E5000 will not dissapoint.

More comparisons


Flare Audio R2A (~$150 – extinct) vs Final E4000 (~$150)
The Final E series, upon first listening, immediately reminded me of the R2A. They also have a very warm tuning with lush mids and nice vocals. Let’s see how they compare.

The bass goes deeper in the E4000 and has tighter and better control, and a very slightly bigger impact. Bass is slightly muddy in comparison in the R2As. The treble is more pronounced in the R2A and chimes and hi-hats have a sharper, harsher, quality to them as opposed to the smoothness of the 4000. The amount of warmth is very similar. The E4000 shows more depth than the R2A. Vocals are clearer and better in the 4000 as well. Trumpets and horns sound a little thicker (better?) in the R2A for some reason. Instrument separation is on a level. They are more similar than different, and the differences mentioned are slight in quantity (except treble). R2A can be called the brother that strayed from the E series family and went rogue.

Final E4000 (~$150) vs Final Audio Design Heaven IV (~$140)
This is just a reference comparison.

The difference is BA vs Dynamic. The Final is much brighter in comparison, with forward and brighter highs, greater on-your-face detail presentation. The Heaven IV is in no way harsh, but the 4000 is much smoother is comparison. The bass is better and digs deeper in the 4000 as well. Instrument separation is perceived better in Heaven IV vs the subtler presentation in the 4000. Clarity and definition is on the level, I would say. Maybe a slight edge to the BA driver. E4000 is more organic. Heaven IV comes across as analytical and boring in comparison (can you believe that?)

Final E4000 (~$150) vs ATH CKR100 (~$400)
ATH CKR100 was my most favourite IEM before I had the E series in my possession. Now, I don’t know if I like E series better or not. Anyway, this is an interesting comparison with E4000, so let’s get to it.

The CKR100 is also a lush earphone that has forward mids and good presence in the highs as well. In terms of warmth, they are very close in quantity. Bass quality is stellar as well, with the CKR100 reaching deeper, but the overall bass quantity is higher in E4000. The bass is “correctly” done with the CKR100. Vocals are also great in both, I would be hard pressed to admit a winner here. The highs being more present, displays more clarity and better definition in the CKR100. Every instrument is very clearly portrayed in the CKR100. The smoothness of the 4000 somewhat presents all this in a subtler fashion, but this works in favour towards the E4000 as it adds that little magic (with prolonged listening) that comes with smoother highs. CKR100 is a more rounded earphone that appeals to your brain, whereas the E4000 with its smoothness speaks to your heart directly.

If you can own only 4 IEMs in total, I would say you must have the following:
1. E5000 (for warm, lush, subtle, creamy goodness with an extra helping of bass)
2. E4000 (smooth and subtle highs with forward mids, and goddess-like vocals)
3. ATH CKR100 (best overall signature, “well-rounded” is what comes to mind)
4. Etymotic ER4XR (Analytical monitor– just to know what is hidden out there)

Overall Sound rating of Final E4000: 9.1/10
Vocals 5/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Details 4/5
Timbre 5/5

Conclusion –
The E4000s deliver one of the best mids created in IEMs where the vocals “speak” more than they sing. The smoothened highs and warm lows only add to the magic of the mids. Presents a very organic sound nailing the timbre right. Nuanced delivery of details is the name of the game. For the price, it’s really a no brainer if your priority is to enjoy music in a laid-back manner. Five stars because priced right.

Simple Man’s review – Final E5000 (~299 USD incl. import);
This is called simple man’s review because they are based on the sound of these earphones directly from my mobile phone (HTC 10), using 320 Kbps mp3 tracks. No expensive gears nor lossless tracks,no EQ, and all that hi-fi stuff.

Final Like Facebook dropped the “the”, Final dropped the “Audio Design”. I really appreciate this move and it sounds much cooler this way. The logo as well.

Product Specs :
Driver: 6.4mmΦ dynamic driver
Impedance: 14 Ohms; Sensitivity: 93dB
Weight: 24g
Cable: MMCX connectors, 1.2 m OFC silver coated cable



Build – 5/5
Stellar build quality. Virtually unbreakable. Narrow and small cylindrical stainless steel house the driver. The twisted white wires are covered in a protective sheath which are transparent and feel good to the touch. Cylindrical Stainless Steel (CSS) is the theme: with CSS housings for MMCX connectors, CSS Y splitters and CSS L shaped housing for the 3.5mm jack as well which has great strain relief. The MMCX connectors also colour coded with Red with Black to indicate Right and Left respectively. They are closed back unlike the little brother E3000. The entire unit with the white cord is a feast to the eyes. They look impeccable.

Accessories – 5/5
Silicon Carrying case: We get a very premium and stylish silicon carrying case that looks great, feels great, and they don’t occupy a lot of space either. They have an unconventional design. It looks like a hollow black bowl of rubber, on the outside we have the Final logo, on the bottom is the flap to open and secure the case, three protruding tabs help to keep them fastened. It has an interesting locking mechanism as well that avoids a zipper. The case is so small that it can hold just one unit comfortably.
Karabinger: The case also has this facility to deploy a coupling link, which is part of the accessories, so we can fasten them to our belt loops to carry the earphones around. This is pretty cool and can save a pant pocket when you are out and about.
Silicon tips: 5 sizes of tips, with the stems having grooves or stripes which have tight clamping force. The grooves enable flexibility to adapt and angle into the ear canals a bit. These tip stems are also colour coded to indicate L/R, and different sizes.
Ear hooks: They also provide a super slim set of transparent ear hooks that are flexible and are extremely comfortable as well.

So much thought an effort has been put into each component to satisfy the spending customer. This feels like five-star treatment and I feel royale.






Isolation & Sound leakage – 3.5/5
Isolation is left wanting a little. Not as bad as open/semi open earphones, but you can hear speeding cars even with the music on. Sound leakage is not a point of concern even in quiet environments

Fit – 5/5
Fit is easy and comfortable. Around-the-ear and conventional straight-down wear is compatible.

Microphonics – 3/5
Wearing them around-the-ear eliminates touch noise, more so with the ear hooks. Straight down, it is quite present.

Before we get to the sound:
You must know that i don’t listen to trance, EDM, or bassy stuff, no metal stuff, so, take my opinion about the extremes of the sound spectrum, and speed,etc., with a grain of salt, as they are just based on the kind of music I listen to- namely Jazz, blues, some progressive rock from the 70s/80s. However, to give a fair review, i include some of my favourite Daft Punk, Tool, NIN, and some Pop songs among my test tracks.

Before we get to the sound, let’s look at Final’s statement about their tuning:
This is applicable to both E4000 and 5000:
“We’ve carried out the sound design of this product based on the latest acoustic engineering and psychological research results. Using the usual method of sound creation whereby high frequencies are given a sharp peak and certain high frequencies are emphasized, you’re given to feel vivid sound when you first listen, but because of this peak, the anteroposterior ranges are masked and hard to hear. With the E series, making the arc of the frequency response smooth overall ensured that no bands were masked, and we achieved high resolution. Compared to E3000/E2000, a purer, subtler sound is achieved.

*To heighten the resolution across all ranges, acoustic pressure has been lowered. When you listen, the sound appears laid-back; turning the volume up gradually while assimilating this subtlety affords the user a comfortable listening experience. This product is one whose merits become more apparent the longer you use it.”

Final says that E5000 is an upgrade of E3000; while E4000 is an upgrade of E2000.

Before the actual sound, let me brief you on my immediate impressions and experience:

Let me start by saying that these earphones are tuned like no other.

Upon my first listen, I noticed that the bass was really overwhelming, making the sound signature really warm, even dark. I generally tend to prefer brighter phones rather than warmer ones. I was initially taken aback by this pervading warmth and lushness in the sound signature. It reminded me of the FX1100 that I owned some time back, only with greater bass that envelops the entire soundstage, with tamed highs. I’ve never heard something like this. But then, I took some time to understand what their tuning philosophy is, and I went back to the site to check out what they have to say (Posted above). They say that the signature is tuned to be smooth and laid-back. They say that any peak in the highs are attenuated to present a smooth frequency response. In all the measurement graphs that you generally see, you would notice a number of peaks and valleys after 1KHz or 2 Hhz up until 10 or 16 KHz. Here, Final has basically introduced zero peaks in the measured response. Imagine a straight line from 20 to 20 Khz in the measured frequency response (not perceived). That’s what they have aimed for with the E series. They suggest to gradually turn up the volume and find the sweet spot where we can say that the highs are lows are in line with one another. This sweet spot for me lies between 30 to 50% volume in HTC 10 depending on the track. This is where I can see the magic unfold. Any more volume, the earphones will not sound good and you will just sink into a pool of lushness. Once you find this sweet spot, run a few songs and let your brain accustom to the signature. Coming from bright earphones and monitorersque signature, I needed quite a bit of brain burn-in.

Tips: I tried different tips, but I settled back to the stock tips. They work just fine.
UPDATE: SPINFITS, using spin-fits brings a little brightness into the mix, making them the ideal tips for Final E5000. Stock tips are second best although it is a bit warmer than SpinFits.

Sound—
This is how I felt while listening to music with the E5000.

Imagine sitting in the open spacious bath with steam all around, in the garden of Aphrodite. You tilt your head backwards and relax. A couple of the most luscious, beautiful, Greek muses, Erato and Euterpe, come beside you, one on each side with a silver spoon in their hand, no, let’s make that Stainless Steel spoons. In their spoons is honey- not the gooey kind, but less viscous and fluid. They heat the honey to a lukewarm temperature, a very soothing temperature. Together, at the same time, they pour this honey into your ears, slowly. It’s the sweetest honey in all the worlds. The warmth just comforts your soul. The honey keeps flowing, wave after wave, into your ears. You forget who you are, where you are, what you are doing. The song comes to an end. You remove the earbuds and just sit there with your dropped jaw refusing to shut your open mouth. You can’t remember what song was just playing or how many songs played through.

Please don’t pour honey into your ears for any reason. The above description is not to be taken literally.



Bass:
In the sweet spot, the E5000s bass is spectacular. It goes really deep, and gives you all the rumble that is there in the recording. The dynamic driver really pumps the bass. It is a warm earphone, and the bass is very authoritative. That said, the bass is tight, and has great definition. You can make out every note from that bassline, and that very clearly. They very much play in their position and do not bleed anywhere else. Remember, we’re always in the sweet spot where the volume is rather low. So, this won’t go rattling your brain. Here, you will just hear tight authoritative notes positioned perfectly. There is enough sub-bass here to satisfy hardcore bassheads, but to enjoy the rest of the spectrum they must keep the slam low. Those that love lush signatures will totally dig this signature. This kind of visceral bass is much suited for jazz or classical music where timbre of the cello or the double bass reverbs to extreme satisfaction. Electronic bass can easily go overboard and colour the signature dark. Sweet spot is the key.

Mids:
The juicy bass also makes the mids very lush and creamy. With all that bass quantity, I still don’t see it disturbing the stuff going on in the mids. This is because of the layering. The mids play in their own zone and can be heard clearly alongside the bass instruments. The mids just borrow the lush quality from this bass which adds to the timbre. Every instrument sounds real, better than real, in fact. The vocals are so sublime, and full of soul. They add an earthy feel to the voice. You can hear every breath taken. Both male and female vocals are presented very gracefully. Everything sounds so smooth, nothing jumps out, and they all hold strictly their position. The mids are also very detailed and a painted in a very subtle, at the same time vivid, manner. The decay is perfect and it’s just a pleasure to listen to.

Treble:
In the sweet spot, the treble is very clear and any sound in this spectrum is presented in a magical way. There is absolutely no noise to be noticed. Not a single spot taints that black canvas of the soundstage. Every chime, every bell, rings clearly and disappears into the blackness that it came from. Every sound in this region is a stroke of colour in that black stage. The micro-details, as well, are presented in the same subtle, yet vivid, manner. But to enjoy all this you are restrained to your sweet spot. If you increase the volume, the bass will take over and the sublime presentation is tainted. The instrument positioning is stellar. The more I listen to, I more I feel that the treble and the micro-details are very sharply presented, and I find them lacking in no way. To feel this, you need to spend some time with these earphones and burn your brain to the signature.

Soundstage is as wide as you get from a closed IEM. Good depth of field is displayed. Very 3 dimensional and dynamic soundstage. The soundstage can present classical music and complex passages very well due to it's great layering capabilities.

Comparisons
Let’s do some very brief comparisons to get to know the flagship of the Final E series better.

Comparing these to any other earphones is a challenge per se. The E5000 sounds so smooth that I find it hard to match the sounds with the other earphone. I generally settle for the sweet spot of Earphone B vs sweet spot of E5000.



Final E5000 vs Final Audio Design Heaven IV
First, let’s compare this with one of the Heaven series BA earaphones. It would have been much interesting with Heaven VI, but unfortunately I own only the Heaven IV. This should do, anyway.

Switching from E5000 to Heaven IV, you will notice that the Heaven IV is far brighter in comparison. Remember, Heaven IV is actually one of the warmer BA earphones in the market. The bass of the Heaven IV is so low it appears anaemic and lacking in comparison. The E5000s bass hits harder and goes deeper, and are very tight. This paints a far darker picture overall with the E5000. The details in music are very apparent with the BA driver of Heaven IV. The E5000 presents all the details in a very subtle and delicate manner. Every detail is hidden in the soundstage and delicately presented amid the lush music. The cymbals and hi-hats are way in the background in the E5000 vs very present and on top with the Heaven IV.

Final E5000 vs Piano Forte II
Another one from final, the piano forte is also known to have a non-conventional tuning.
Again, I got only the basic offering from this series. So, let’s check them out.

PF II also comes across as brighter in comparison. PFII, it must be noted is an open earbud type phone with no sub-bass impact whatsoever. However, they have one of the best vocals I’ve hear to-date and have a wide soundstage, very out of the head. The hi-hats in the PF II are again up high and details are presented fairly up front. E5000s are again dark in comparison, and everything is so smooth, subtle and tight. Everything you heard with PFII is also present here, but are very delicately presented.

Final E5000 vs ATH CKR100
Again, similar difference. Smooth and warm vs brighter with spiked highs. CKR100 has it’s upper mids pushed up to the front as well. E5000s dig deeper and is tighter. Subtle presentation vs forward presentation.

Final E5000 vs Donguri Syou Kurenai vs Sony EX800
Similar again, E5000 is super warm, deeper bass, subtle and smooth presentation. Donguri and EX800 are brighter incomparison, have very present highs with great up-front clarity. EX800 is warmer than the Donguri, but brighter compared to E5000. EX800 has a very wide soundstage as well.

To put things into perspective, imagine a scenery. Sun rises at 6 AM. FAD IV, shows you how it looks at 9 AM when the sun has risen and it’s nice and bright. Etymotics would be noon. Sony and Donguri give you the picture when it’s around 2 PM. Piano forte shows the same picture when it is 4 PM. And the E5000 will be the picture when it is 6:30 PM, sun sets at 6 PM. (edited the timings)

Please note that A-B comparisons have really no meaning because of the super smooth response of E5000. This essentially demands one to be psychologically tuned to the tuning of the earphones. Meaning, listening a while and easing into the signature. Still, this is done here just to give you an idea about the tuning.

Another one earphone that I have which possesses a similar dark signature is the Flare Audio R2A. But I will reserve this comparison only for E4000 since they fall in the same price category. This will be up in the next few days.

Let’s do some essential comparisons within the E series.



Final E3000 vs Final E5000
Final E5000 is the direct upgrade to Final E3000. Final says compared to the E3000 “a purer and subtler sound is achieved” in the E5000. Let’s see how they compare side by side.

The E5000 digs deeper into the sub-bass region in comparison, and rumbles more readily. The E3000 has authoritative bass as well, but isn’t so deep and also isn’t so tight as the E5000. The E3000 also has a little more presence in the treble, whereas the E5000 is much, much smoother. Although subtle, clarity is better with the E5000. Only, noticing it is not so easy in comparison. Instrument positioning is also better and more localised in the E5000. For those who already own the E3000, if you prefer better definition and more sub-bass rumble at the cost of smoother treble, you can go for the upgrade. E5000 is also a touch warmer due to the smoothed higher registers.

Final E5000 vs Final E4000
Let’s see how the E5000 stands alongside the E4000, it’s cousin.



E4000s bass is tighter than the E3000, but the sub bass impact and quantity is lower than the E5000. E5000 goes much deeper and has significantly greater rumble. The mids appear forwarded in the E4000, mids and vocals, as a result, are more transparent and present in the E4000. In E5000, the mids appear subdued in comparison, slightly warmer, also you can perceive better tightness and micro-definition in the E5000. Instrument separation is better in E5000 as a result. Details are subtler in E5000. Vocals are forwarded and sound mesmerising in the E4000s. They float to the top and tease you plenty. If you love mids and vocals, E4000 is the best of the bunch. If you want the best of definition and the deepest sub bass impact, and you are OK with some extra warmth, then E5000 will give you no regrets.

How many times have I used the word “tight” to describe the E5000s sound? I’ve never felt this tightness, precision, and thick note presentation in another IEM, and this can be felt throughout the frequency spectrum. I see this as the defining quality of the IEM. This quality is exactly why I keep coming back to the E5000, in spite of its warm and relaxed presentation. I can’t get this anywhere else.

Overall Sound rating of Final E5000: 9.1/10
Vocals 4.5/5
Soundstage 4/5
Instrument Separation 5/5
Details 4/5
Timbre 4.5/5

Conclusion –
Final really opened new doors of perception for me with this tuning. With this “Less is More” approach towards the high frequencies. I never knew that music could be so relaxing and still have such great clarity. I never thought I’d write a positive review for a warm sounding IEM. I would definitely suggest all audiophiles to give the E series a chance. They aren’t asking half a grand for this beauty. It’s perfectly priced. You’re not going to get in-your-face details, you’re not going to get splashy highs showing off extreme clarity, playing with sibilance. But if you give these a chance you will be rewarded with a sublime musical experience with subtle, magical, highs that will fill you with great pleasure.