64 Audio Volür Review: A Nio Evolution?


In the in-ear monitor (IEM) world, 64 Audio is one of the longest standing players in the high end space. A rare brand that equally services both professional musicians and audiophiles, 64 Audio’s products are unique in featuring innovations developed in-house over the years, such as their tia, APEX, and LID technologies that all play a key role in what makes up a 64 Audio IEM.

Thanks to Headphones.com I’ve had a chance to review my way through (almost) the entire line-up that 64 Audio offers, culminating in a buyer’s guide here. In that time, they released two new models: the $1,100 U4s and $2,500 Volür. The latter of which will be the topic of review today.

The Volür was built to be the successor to the original Nio, except at about a $800 increase in MSRP. That’s quite a lot, especially when the U4s is now my standard recommendation at the ~$1,000 mark, even over the Nio. Does the Volür deliver a performance worthy of a higher price tag?

Source(s) Used: Ferrum ERCO Balanced DAC & Headphone Amp and Apple USB-C dongle

The 64 Audio Volür was sent to me by Headphones.com on loan for this review.

What we like

  • Excellent bass performance
  • Great fit
  • Good technical ability

What we don’t like

  • Large upper treble peak may be an issue
  • Pricey

What’s in the Box?

The Volür comes with an expanded set of 64 Audio accessories. The standard goodies are:

  1. Two different sets of silicon and one set of foam tips S/M/L sizes all held in a fancy circular tip holder. I’m not a fan of any of the stock tips so I’ve opted to use AZLA Sedna’s instead.
  2. A circular leather carrying case (with some 64 Audio stickers)
  3. 8-core braided 2-pin cable with pre-molded earhooks. It’s a lot better than the old stock 64 Audio cables.
  4. The mX, m15, and M20 APEX modules. These modules both adjust how much bass you have and alleviates pressure build-up in ear.

And now, you also get:

  • A set of SpinFits tips
  • The new m12 APEX bass tuning module
  • It’s this m12 module that’s the most interesting and relevant inclusion to the Volür. According to their website, it’s only included for a limited time but I question the truth behind that. Methinks it’s a marketing ploy. At any rate, the new m12 APEX is meant to be a Goldilocks option between the m15 and mX modules. Fittingly enough, the m12 is itself gold. 

    As for the Volür itself, it has a similar ergonomic metal shell as all the other 64 Audio IEMs. That is to say, quite comfortable to my ears and doesn’t build up pressure thanks to the APEX modules. You can also get a pretty deep fit with their nozzles given the generous length. As you can see from the pictures, the fancy new addition in the Volür is this deep purple abalone faceplate. This is an homage to the Nio which sports a very similar looking design except blue.

    Finally, I’ll note that the Volür is a 10-driver hybrid, using eight balanced armatures (BAs) and two 9 mm dynamic drivers (DDs). The dynamic drivers are arranged in what 64 Audio calls a True Isobaric configuration which is supposed to “deliver unprecedented low-frequency capability”. As usual, driver set-ups are not indicative of sound quality. What matters is their actual sound.

    Sound and Frequency Response

    The sonic presentation of the Volür will change depending on the APEX module used. In order of decreasing amount of bass: m20 > m15 > m12 > mX. Here are the frequency response graphs for the m15 module on the B&K 5128.


    It’s still early days as we roll-out this visualization of IEMs so if you’re unfamiliar with how to read this, here’s a quick primer:

    1. This graph is calibrated to the diffuse field (DF) head-related transfer function (HRTF) of the B&K 5128. Thus, a completely flat line is equal to DF HRTF. This is what a flat speaker in a fully reflective room will sound like at the eardrum. The DF HRTF is less a "reference" curve and more the necessary anatomical baseline compensation needed for headphones.
    2. Research on listening preferences show that people on average tend to prefer an approximate 10 dB downward tilt from bass to treble in both headphones and in speakers. We’ve visualized that here as a DF + 10 dB slope (see point 3).
    3. The visualized preference bounds (grey bands) are a more complete picture of that listening preference research beyond the DF + 10 dB slope. They show the limits of how much deviation/tonal color a headphone could have that people still found acceptable without it starting to be perceived as imbalances. This is a better visualization than using a target curve as listening preferences naturally fall within a range instead of a singular line.
    4. Note that some of this is theoretical: we had to adapt principles from headphones to IEMs as a result.

    And here is the raw graph on a GRAS system to compare the difference in the bass for all the APEX modules if you want a more familiar representation. I’ll also attach the raw B&K 5128 graph in the Appendix.

    We can see that the difference in bass for the m15 and m20 modules is quite small, maybe about 1 dB at 20 Hz. The m12 module, true to its word, is an in-between to the m15 and mX modules. And the mX essentially provides a flat bass.

    When I first heard the Volür, I used the m12 module as I thought it’d be the obvious choice given that it’s the fancy new module debuting with the Volür. Turns out, that was a mistake. It’s not that the m12 is bad. It’s just that it doesn’t quite capture what the Volür is all about - bass. So I promptly switched over the m20 module. The overall tonality can thus be described as bassy with a big upper treble peak. It’s similar to a U-shape but not quite.


    The bass is the obvious standout performer of the Volür. It has a superb sense of heft and weight while maintaining great control and tactility that never gets muddy. Notes land with aplomb. It definitely leans boomy rather than punchy thanks to lengthened decay. Altogether, the Volür delivers a large sounding sustained low-end presence that’s excellent in both classical instruments like the double bass or in modern genres with electronic beats. One thing to note though is that it has less bass contrast due to the sloping into the lower mids. Thus if you’re looking for distinctly segmented bass notes, the Volür isn’t quite it.


    Given the bass tuning and how it transitions into the lower mids, you might expect the Volür to be rather thick and warm. And while it certainly has a good helping of warmth, the sizable upper mids in that 2 - 4 kHz region counterbalances the warmth. Vocals are well positioned in the mix, neither shouty nor recessed. Vocal tone has a slight off-ness at first listen due to the centering of the pinna around 2 kHz rather than 3 kHz. But spend some time listening to it and that off-ness mostly fades as you get accustomed to the tuning (AKA brain burn-in).

    As for the other instruments, they have a tasteful vividness thanks to the coloration in the lower mids and the 4.5 kHz peak helps notes pop with definition. Stringed instruments, be it acoustic or electric, are especially engaging. I’d like to say that I don’t really have any complaints with timbre except…


    That big treble peak in the graph is real. This is a consequence of the tia driver technology that 64 Audio likes to use and can be pretty hit and miss on in terms of how well it’s controlled. As we can see, it’s not exactly the best on the Volür. To be fair, while the B&K 5128 system is much more accurate than the old GRAS rigs we’re used to, we still have to take it with a grain of salt. Doing a sine sweep by ear, I found that there was only one wide-ish peak around 12 - 14 kHz instead of a consistent airiness all the way up to highest octaves. For reference I can still hear up to around 18.5 kHz.

    So how does this peak translate to the listening experience? It’s a constant emphasis on certain notes and it throws off the timbre of a number of instruments. For example, the thin raking of the pick against the strings on an acoustic guitar sometimes overpowers the rich tone of the strum. Or with vocals, there’s a shimmery sibilant sheen. It’s not painfully sharp but it’s a definite edginess to the voice, particularly for female vocals. And with hats and cymbals, it’s less of a clean, crisp attack and more of a clicky or tizzy body past the transients. I expect this peak to be a dealbreaker for a lot of people. It might just be a little too grating.

    While the unevenness of the treble can warp the naturality of many notes, not every instrument is equally affected and some might even be enhanced. For example, crystalline or bell-like tones have amazing clarity. In addition, your experience will be affected by the tips you use. I tried on a set of Divinus Audio Velvets and it did wonders to shape the upper treble just enough to mask some of that timbral awkwardness.


    The technical ability of the Volür is quite good but isn’t quite to the level I expected. Stage width is excellent but there’s little height and only a touch of depth. Imaging and layering is very good - nuanced and coherent across the soundstage. But its resolution is one clear step below 64 Audio’s universally acclaimed U12t and marginally better than the U4s. While the bass definition and control makes it less smeary than the U4s, it just doesn’t quite have the raw ability to highlight hidden notes in the way the U12t does. Where the Volür stands confidently is in its bass macrodynamics. I was once almost tempted to turn down the volume at times after getting caught off-guard when a track transformed from a quiet ballad into a heavy hitting passage.


    64 Audio U12t, Trio, U4s, and Nio

    In my mind, if you’re looking at a 64 Audio product there are three you should consider: the U12t, the U4s, and Trio.

    U12t: This is 64 Audio’s best performing product. Though some may criticize it for being boring or safe in its tuning, very few would deny its technical performance. Except for the bass volume and dynamics, it’s easily on par or better than the Volür in every aspect.

    Trio: The Trio is a very lively and energetic IEM. While I don’t recommend it as a first choice as it deviates a bit too much from normalcy, it’s one I’ll always ask someone to at least try if they have a chance. They might just fall in love. In a sense, the Volür carries some of the same lively spirit as the Trio but is significantly less colored.

    U4s: This is my first recommendation for any IEM around the $1,000 mark. Not that it’s necessarily the best, but because it strikes a great balance between performance and a fun, bassy tuning that’s going to be plenty enjoyable for the majority of people. In my eyes, the U4s has supplanted the Nio in offering a very similar, if not better, experience for a much cheaper price.

    And that’s the same predicament the Volür finds itself in. While the Volür does improve upon the U4s and Nio’s bass, it’s not a dramatic difference. Yes, there’s more control. It’s more dynamic. There’s more depth. But the U4s/Nio weren’t particularly lacking in those departments already. The Volür costs more than 2.5x the U4s for these advancements. The other big question mark is the tuning. Both U4s and Nio are arguably better tuned than the Volür as they lack that big upper treble peak. The only caveat here is if you enjoy this sort of U-shaped tuning.

    Sennheiser IE900

    The Sennheiser IE900 is conservatively a top 3 IEM in bass performance for me. It’s the bar to clear. Compared to the Volür, the IE900’s bass is more textured. It’s grittier. It’s this rawness that draws me to the IE900. The Volür is a little smoothed over. Dynamically, both are about on par with one another in terms of weight and impact. The IE900 is a tad cleaner in the transients and has more of that contrast I mentioned while the Volür’s tuning extends warmth into the lower mids.

    I still prefer the IE900’s bass but as a whole package, the Volür has a couple of major upsides. The first is the midrange - the Volür is better tuned in the upper mids than the IE900 and presents a less nasally vocal tone. The second is in the ergonomics - the Volür’s standard 64 Audio shell is just more comfortable.

    Once again however, it’s the treble and price that drag the Volür down. The IE900’s treble itself is no slouch. There’s spice to it. But it’s a controlled mid-treble energy rather than a potentially grating upper treble peak. As such, I’d consider the IE900 to be a true U-shaped IEM rather than the Volür. As for the price, well. The Volür demands an additional $1,000 for its services.

    Should You Buy It?

    Maybe. If you’re value sensitive, I can’t justify the Volür over the U4s or some of the other options around the $1,500 mark. But if your wallet is a little bulkier, the Volür is a very reasonable choice for those who already love the 64 Audio sound and want to further push the boundaries in their IEM’s bass. Or y’know, if you really love purple.


    Raw frequency response graph of the 64 Audio Volür measured using the B&K 5128 system.

    This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://headphones.com/blogs/reviews/64-audio-volur-review

    I can’t take this review very seriously as you use the m20 module. The m20 module is kind of basshead level, for fun, not to judge the Volür by. There’s a reason why the IEM ships with the M15 in it. I’m not sure why you went with the m20 but you can’t review this IEM with that module. I don’t think this review really holds much water with that in mind.

    It comes with a bunch of modules, and he tested it with them, not just the M20. While I personally think the M12 is the most appropriate, he felt it made more sense to focus it on the bass. This doesn’t invalidate anything, and you can even see it graphed with the other modules as well.


    This is amusing. The way the review is worded, he performed the sound analysis with the m20 module. Again, this is completely silly. Basically every other review of the Volur did it right, it’s pretty safe knowledge that the m20 is for a total basshead presentation. There is a reason they ship with the m15 module, as the IEM’s are perfectly capable of producing great bass, they don’t need a basshead module to do so. They are meant to be listened to with the m15. So because this guy chose the extreme end of the module collection, his review is to be taken with a grain of salt. The majority isn’t always right, but pretty much every other review got it right. Also, he points out he can hear high treble. So what, I can hear 18khz and I don’t find the Volur treble offensive at all. So can others. This review was done improperly with the wrong module AND the reviewer failed to take in his own subjective sensitivity to treble. As any other reviewer would put it, ‘I may be sensitive to treble but I can see to others this being fine’ - not, I can hear to 18khz thus anybody else who can this will be hot.

    Poor review.

    1 Like

    It’s actually outside the preference bounds for most people in the upper treble. So it’s a fair critique to identify. But additionally, read what he wrote about the modules again - he didn’t like it with the M12 since he likes more bass. He preferred it with the M20, but he also showed how each module changes the sound.

    Got to say this is one of my favorite IEM’S I own but I agree with a lot of what the review says. You don’t have to agree with a review as it is that ‘ONE’ persons personal thoughts/experience.

    Bit rude to say it is ‘Poor Review’.


    So a couple things I would like to point out:

    1. The m12 module (assuming you mean m12, not m15) originally shipped with the U4s so it’s not necessarily something that was meant specifically for the Volur. I had forgotten it was included with the U4s when I first put up the review since they don’t ship with it anymore, my apologies. I’ve fixed the article since.

    2. The Volur is meant to be the successor to the Nio AKA a “Nio 2”. Every review of the original Nio uses either the m15 or m20 module (which only have about a 1 dB difference in subbass). Hence I’m using the m20 here. 64 Audio touts it as a basshead IEM. It makes sense to review it as a basshead IEM.

    3. If I reviewed the Volur solely with the m12 module, this review would’ve been more negative. The addition of bass presence is important to balance out the upper mids and upper treble.

    4. I’d consider myself to be one of the most treble tolerant reviewers around. A lot of my prefered IEMs are quite bright e.g. the Thieaudio Monarch MkIII, Symphonium Helios, or Sennheiser IE 900. I like headphones like the HiFiMan Arya and HD800S. The difference is that the Volur is not what I would traditionally call “bright”. It’s peaky. In some of the 64 Audio IEMs, the implementation of the tia drivers is fairly refined e.g. the U12t and U4s. In others, like the Volur or U18s, it’s raw. It comes off as overly exaggerated as if you took an upper treble EQ filter and cranked it up to max and breaks instrument timbre.

    5. The reason I talk about the treble being a point of contention is because there are a lot of people where it’s a problem. It’s the number one complaint I see when people talk about headphones/IEMs, that the treble is too fatiguing. It’s actually the opposite here - I didn’t say “I may be sensitive to treble but I can see to others this being fine” because in general, I can live with the Volur’s treble. It’s others that are probably not fine. I only mention hearing up to 18 kHz to give context for the sine sweep.

    6. I’m glad you don’t find the Volur’s treble offensive. Genuinely. Enjoy it, it’s a good IEM. It’s an important point to remember in reviews that it all really depends on what music you listen to. There are many tracks where it isn’t an issue for me. There are many that it is. To points 4 and 5, I’m considering a wider audience where it might be a problem so I have to mention it. If I don’t mention it, people will get upset and accuse me of shilling the Volur despite an “obvious flaw” to sell units for Headphones.com.

    It’s fine if you disagree with my thoughts. We’re all different and that’s what makes the hobby interesting. But I think you’ve misunderstood where I’m coming from with this review. I strive to be fair to every product. If it has good, I’ll talk about the good. If it has bad, I’ll talk about the bad. I believe that’s what I’ve done here.


    Have seen you use as the source Ferrum Erco for this review.

    I am currently using Ferrum Wandla as the DAC and The Hypsos+Oor to run IEM’s (just started taking IEM’S more seriously) and noticed I get a bit of noise. When I use the Wandla to Topping A70pro I get no noise.
    Also if I use Holo Audio Spring 3+Bliss I get no noise.

    I think this may be due to using the Hypsos for the Oor but need to try this using the stock power cable for the Oor that I am sure I never had one.

    @GoldenSound may be able to answer my question.

    1 Like

    Yea the ERCO has a bit of floor noise for sure. I’ve noticed it on most of the IEMs I put on them. Thankfully, I find it to non-annoying (unlike some other source gear I’ve tried) and quite low level. Pretty much can’t hear it second I play music.

    1 Like

    I was under the impression that noise I can hear is bad and will affect the sound quality of the iems/headphones.

    Got to admit the Volur does sound slammier on the Oor amp than the topping. As Jim Carrey once said
    ‘’ I LIKE IT A LOT’’

    I Find the Volur fits my tuning prefence a lot more than most ‘‘Harman’’ tuned Iems and I really enjoy how fun it sound and it puts a smile on my face.

    Loving all your reviews by the way. Keep up the good work.


    I enjoyed your review, particularly because I own a Nio (which I use with a M15 module) and I was curious about the Volur. I only use iems for “fun” listening when I’m out and about, as I’d rather use headphones at home, so I absolutely love the more flavorful sound the Nio has. Even thought the Volur wasn’t for you, I appreciate all the comparisons you made, which made it easier for me to figure out if the Volur might be for me.

    Do you list your test tracks anywhere? I think that would provide some added context to your reviews. I like the fact that @SenyorC always lists what he’s listening to in his reviews, because I can try them myself, and see if I hear what he’s hearing on my chain.


    Yea for sure. I’ve gone back and forth myself on whether I should include the music I listen to in my reviews. @SenyorC’s reviews have a very nice structure the way he does it. I think in the end though, I generally don’t because while I have a few songs I start with, I end up just setting my entire library on shuffle and listen to it over the course of a week or two so everything kinda blends and I get an “overall feel” rather than pointing out specifics in set tracks that might not be a problem overall. That’s just kinda my reviewing philosophy I guess.

    At any rate though, here’s what I generally go for with music:

    1. Rock/alt-rock makes up like 45% of my library. It’s from this genre why a lot of my reviews talk about the performance of the drums, hats/cymbals, and guitars. Something like Anberlin - A Whisper & A Clamor, Attalus - Sirens, or Switchfoot - The Sound (John M. Perkins’ Blues).

    2. “Church music”, maybe around 15%. I used to play keys and do live sound mixing for church bands for years before COVID so it’s been a part of my rotation. Something like Phil Wickham - Doxology//Amen or Hillsong UNITED - Even When It Hurts. This last song in particular has a very sharp, sibilant ~5.5 kHz peak with the vocalist that shows up multiple times.

    3. Instrumentals/soundtracks, about another 10%. Again, it’s more rock/prog-rock inspired stuff like Toe - C or Sawano Hiroyuki - EMA but there’s some jazzier things like DJ Okawari - Perfect Blue.

    4. J-pop, about 20% in a similar vein to @Precogvision. Miki Matsubara - Stay With Me, IU - Sogyeokdong (technically K-pop), and Yoasobi - Racing into the Night. This sort of music tends to be brighter and shoutier but can be more mellow-y like Eiichi Ohtaki - Velvet Motel.

    And there’s a smattering of other genres here and there like a bit of metal, a bit of hip-hop, Americana, etc. As mentioned, I usually start with a couple to get a quick impression or check if there’s an issue like sibilance or how well it handles messy rock songs before branching out to the rest of my library. What might be an issue with some of these starting test tracks may just be an edge case with a particular song.


    I know the m12 module was originally shipped with the U4s, not just from reading, but also because I owned them. I did not imply that the m12 module was specifically made for the Volur. Just to clear that up.

    Yes the Volur is advertised as being inspired by an evolution of the Nio. Your mistake is considering it the Nio2. Every other review of the Volur generally uses the m15 module, the one it ships with installed, you are the only reviewer who went with the m20 as the ‘intended’ sound. Again the majority isn’t always right, but in this case, the majority is correct. To me, the usage of the m20 module as where you drew your sound impressions from, was a mistake.

    I completely disagree the Volur is marketed as a basshead IEM. FatFreq IEM’s are, and some Empire Ears, and one can argue that the Nio was definitely marketed for some people who call themselves bassheads, as the marketing literally mentioned for bass players and drummers. But certainly not the Volur. And pretty much every other review notes this - this is just really good present bass, some of the best quality bass you can get, but not really what most of us consider ‘basshead’ levels.

    The Volur is advertised as super high quality bass. In the head-fi community we differentiate between basshead bass, and just really high quality and present bass. FatFreq are advertising to bassheads, the Volur is not. Having excellently textured and quality bass, which is what the Volur is advertised with, is certainly not basshead marketing. I think this might be your biggest mis-step here.

    I never said you should have reviewed the Volur with just the m12 module, and in fact said multiple times it should be reviewed with the m15 which it came with installed. But the mX and m20 modules are both generally seen as the extremes of the four modules - the m20 generally providing bass leaning towards basshead levels, and the mx trying to ‘neuter’ the good bass characteristics. I still stand by reviewing these with the m20 module as your primary focus for sound impressions, unlike any other major review, was just an honest mistake.

    I do know treble can be a point of contention and I am not saying to not point it out that it bothered you. But the way you did I felt was unfair. You said you can hear treble up to Xkhz and then said it was too much. But that is simply not the case. Just because one can hear treble up to Xkhz means nothing, UNLESS you are sensitive to it. There was another review of the Volur where that was mentioned, but they kind of clarified it with their subjective experience with treble. Also, while yes, some people have said they are sensitive to the upper treble in the Volur, it is definitely a minority compared to those who say they aren’t - at least from the many hours of reading I have spent on 64Audio IEM’s especially the Volur recently. It was the way you said it, not that you pointed it out that is where I took issue.

    Yes the Volur is advertised as being inspired by an evolution of the Nio. Your mistake is considering it the Nio2.

    This is an odd complaint to me. Reading through 64 Audio’s website, there’s mentions of the Volur starting off as a “Nio 2” and becoming a “new creation” because of some driver changes with their True Isobaric configuration. But it doesn’t actually explain why it’s not a Nio 2. Vague statements like “We improved the quality of the bass and treble!” don’t mean anything. Of course they had to change something to justify a whole new product and charging $1,000 more.

    Either way, this is frankly speaking just a question of semantics. I’m providing context for readers that the Volur is a “Nio 2” but if you read the review, I don’t ever reference the Nio after the introduction except in the comparison section. You can delete the word Nio from my article and it doesn’t actually change anything.

    In the head-fi community we differentiate between basshead bass, and just really high quality and present bass. FatFreq are advertising to bassheads, the Volur is not. Having excellently textured and quality bass, which is what the Volur is advertised with, is certainly not basshead marketing.

    I almost fully agree but I think there’s a nuance here - there’s good basshead bass and bad basshead bass. To be good, you need to both have quantity and quality. Bad only needs quantity. 64 Audio’s website for the Volur speaks to both quality and quantity.

    it should be reviewed with the m15 which it came with installed.

    Alright, my bad. I assumed you meant m12, not m15, given that the difference between the m15 and m20 modules is only about 1 - 1.5 dB at 20 Hz. My question is - how do you think it would have changed my opinion of the Volur to make it a more fair review? I speak positively of the Volur’s bass. My complaint is with the treble which the modules do not affect. I’m a little puzzled why you believe the m15 module would change my opinion of the Volur or significantly improves the review.

    But the way you did I felt was unfair. You said you can hear treble up to Xkhz and then said it was too much. But that is simply not the case. Just because one can hear treble up to Xkhz means nothing, UNLESS you are sensitive to it.

    I think this is a misunderstanding or you missed the prior sentence. Here’s the exact wording from my review again:

    “Doing a sine sweep by ear, I found that there was only one wide-ish peak around 12 - 14 kHz instead of a consistent airiness all the way up to highest octaves. For reference I can still hear up to around 18.5 kHz. … So how does this peak translate to the listening experience?”

    I’m not saying that because I can hear up to 18.5 kHz that the treble is bad. I’m saying that (in contrast to the frequency response graph) I hear a wide peak around 12 - 14 kHz. And then I go on to describe what I hear as the result of the big peak. The 18.5 kHz comment is there to mean that, to my ear, there aren’t peaks at e.g. 16, 17, or 18 kHz. This is important in the context of the frequency response graph because we do see another large peak at around 16 - 18 kHz and I’m trying to say that no, it’s not actually there. I’m actually fighting the case that people shouldn’t worry about the treble in the graph, which should be taken with a grain of salt to begin with.

    Also, while yes, some people have said they are sensitive to the upper treble in the Volur, it is definitely a minority compared to those who say they aren’t - at least from the many hours of reading I have spent on 64Audio IEM’s especially the Volur recently.

    Whether or not it’s a minority, it’s my role to report on my experience. As mentioned, I’m quite tolerant of treble and I can listen to the Volur for hours on end. But being tolerant of treble doesn’t mean I don’t subjectively hear a timbral imbalance in the Volur from the treble which is my primary complaint. I even say that the Volur “isn’t painfully sharp”. You can disagree with me if this timbral imbalance actually exists but that doesn’t change my experience.


    As a certain Youtuber would say… “Theeeeeeeeeese!”

    These are the two most important words that we many times forget when reading a review. We can disagree with a review in comparison to our own experience, I do regularly, but that does not mean the review is wrong, just that it doesn’t relate to our own experience.

    We can certainly say that a graph is wrong, that it has been measured in an incorrect way leading to an incorrect objective outcome, but the rest of a review is just a subjective opinion.


    I feel like we should just say “Theeeeese” for random things we encounter in our lives. I think I’ll start doing it now.

    1 Like

    Did I read correctly that the IE900’s bass is just as impactful as the Volür? I was expecting the Volür to be a bass monster and the IE900 to be tame in comparison. So purely looking at bass, would the IE900 satisfy a die-hard basshead as well as the Volür?

    I am a impact/slam/bass head addict. :sunglasses:

    I can’t directly compare the Volur to the IE900 but I can against the IE600 that is one of my favourite IEM’S for its slam/impact.

    I would say if the IE600 is a 8 out of 10 for bass slam the Volur would be a slightly better 9 out of 10.

    Must admit that extra point in the sense of punch/slam on the Volur may be due to the anti shout tuning of the Volur making me turn up volume slightly louder and impart giving the extra sense of bass slam/impact.

    Bass quantity is pretty much the same BUT the quality of bass in the Volur is better. More detailed and textured.

    I think were the Volur clearly wins out for me is in the feeling of separation and imaging and for me it does not require any EQ for me to enjoy. The boost in the air region spike does not bother me and I enjoy it.

    The IE600 needs EQ for me, as the treble spike around 8k to 9k is a to much. I EQ this out and it sounds great. I think the IE 900 has a similar issue in the treble and also a big scoop/dip in the mids that the IE600 does not.

    I Sometimes add a bit of a boost in the sub bass region on both iems as like I said this is what I enjoy the most. Mid bass amount in both is perfect for my taste.

    If your searching for the best slam/impact in a IEM the IE600 is excellent at this and is waaaaayyyy cheaper than the Volur and I find them both super comfortable mainly due to size and weight there both very good in this regard my only complaint about the IE600 is the connectors as these can give issues. I am on my second pair as the first two were replace under warranty due to connectors not making good enough contact and I use them at home and very careful with them.
    This issue seems to have plagued a few owners as per forums online.

    Other than that can highly recommend either set.

    Hope this helps.


    @Essentials hits it on the head on a number of points. I find the IE 900 to have more bass than expected, on par or even more than the Volur because of how mild its upper mids are so you turn up the volume a little more. He’s right that the IE 600’s bass is not as good quality as the Volur - there’s a bit less depth and it’s more smoothed over. And if you have issues with the treble, both the IE 600 and IE 900 won’t do it for you.

    But if we’re just talking about pure bass quality, I have to go with the IE 900. Something about it just scratches almost every itch I have. The word “impact” means something a little different for each person but IMO the IE 900’s bass is more raw than the Volur’s. The only complaint I have is that its leading edge isn’t quite as sharp or explosive as I’d like. But it’s subbass heft and sense of decay is second to none.

    You can read my IE 900 review here cause I go into it with a lot of detail. Including some of the issues with these IEMs that @Essentials pointed out like its ergonomics… Sennheiser IE 900 Review: This is the Bass I've Been Looking For! – Headphones.com

    1 Like