From me, Phil!
10 Likes
Aful Performer 5 Impressions
Configuration: 1DD/4BA
Price: $220
Unit provided for review by HifiGo: Pre-Order AFUL Performer5 1DD + 4BA IEMs — HiFiGo
The Performer 5 is more or less another rendition of the popular, neutral with sub-bass boost type of tuning that has taken over the market.
On first listen, I find the Performer 5’s bass response to be somewhat odd. And not necessarily in a good way: I could really mistake it for being closer to the better end of BA bass. Bass transients have a rounded edge to them, and they sound more “pillowy” than they do sharp or incisive. This isn’t outright bad - rather, I’d argue it’s more different than anything - but there’s a general sense of the Performer 5’s DD being pushed beyond its capabilities on quicker bass lines; they smear more than I’d expect. In tandem with the more plastic-y, smooth timbre, the Performer 5’s bass comes across about equally perplexing as it does unsatisfying.
The midrange of the Performer 5 begs less questions at least. It generally sounds correct with a slight tilt towards warmth by virtue of a more reserved pinna compensation region. Again, however, qualms arise moving into the Performer 5’s treble. Perceptively, it is heavily lower-treble oriented; it is just too clacky, too sharp for me at times on certain percussive hits.
Oddly enough, a good reason for this eludes my analysis of the Performer 5’s frequency response. I can only surmise that dampening at the usual ~8kHz resonance frequency increases perception of the 5-6kHz region. But having heard the 7th Acoustics Supernova - which graphs very similarly in these regions - I can say that the two IEMs sound dramatically different in A/B comparison.
Technicalities on the Performer 5 are a case of “good but not great”. On first listen, I placed it, blind, about what it retails for. I think the resolution of the Performer 5 would be enough to impress most listeners coming from ~$100 sets; at the same time, it would not be something that grabs my attention as someone who regularly daily drives much more expensive sets. The imaging and dynamics of the Performer 5 are fairly average in my book. It also has some timbral issues stemming from the lack of texture in the bass juxtaposed to the more gritty lower-treble, but these are nitpicks that I could level at most budget hybrid IEMs.
As for whether I’d recommend the Performer 5, I’d give it a cautious recommendation. I can’t say I like it very much in terms of my personal preferences: it’s hard to knock the feeling that it’s lacking both some inspiration and refinement. But from a more objective lens, there aren’t many good hybrids at $220, especially not with this type of more “balanced” tuning (the SeeAudio Yume Midnight comes to mind, but I hold both IEMs to be around the same level), so I suppose that the Performer 5 gets a pass for now.
6 Likes
TruthEars Hola Impressions
Price: $18
Configuration: 1DD
Unit kindly provided for review by Shenzhen Audio: https://shenzhenaudio.com/collections/vendors?q=truthear
10 minutes of listening:
-
sub-bass emphasis, about 8dB, with a smooth push into 250Hz
-
more relaxed 3kHz? pinna notch, certainly less than the Moondrop single-DD sets, a bit odd sounding and recessed from 1-3kHz to the way the pinna gain rises
-
slightly recessed 5kHz and mid-treble, then with a peak somewhere in the upper-treble possibly around 13kHz, mostly rolled-off after this point
Frequency response:
Another “let’s see how cheap but inoffensive we can make this sound” IEM…what fun.
A lot of the issues with the Hola are simply a product of it being too inoffensive. The generous bass boost, which would be desirable in isolation, becomes the Hola’s Achille’s Heel due to the more relaxed upper-midrange and treble regions. Perhaps this would appeal to listeners who want a more muted and bass-heavy signature. But it’s neither what I would qualify as a good rendition of L-shaped tuning, nor is it what I would qualify as a good balanced tuning. In essence, the Hola sounds slow, blunted, slightly more than what it costs, and generally plain boring.
The Hola almost perfectly illustrates my qualms with what the bottom of the market has become. If you’re new to the hobby or looking for a pair of IEMs on a very tight budget, then this is a set you should possibly consider - alongside a slew of other options like the 7Hz Zero, CCA CRA/CRA+, and Moondrop Chu. But if you’re already in the hobby with a set of more expensive wired IEMs, or just a normal consumer with a pair of decent TWS like the Apple AirPods Pro or Samsung Galaxy Buds, then this probably isn’t worth your time.
Bias Score: 4/10
4 Likes
ThieAudio Prestige Impressions
Price: $1300
Configuration: 1DD/4BA/4EST
Unit kindly provided for review by Linsoul: https://www.linsoul.com/products/thieaudio-prestige
The bass response of the Prestige is mostly just palatable. It has a really good-looking bass curve on paper, but subjectively, it’s less satisfying than I’d expect. It has stereotypical dynamic driver attack transients; that is to say, a more explosive, sharp leading edge to bass notes. Simultaneously, I struggle to find words to describe other aspects of the Prestige’s bass transients. It almost sounds overly dry and hollow, lacking in the thickness and generous decay that I associate with good dynamic driver implementations.
The Prestige’s midrange shares a fair amount of DNA with the ThieAudio Monarch MKII, which is a good thing given that the midrange was the Monarch MKII’s standout. Comparatively, I would say that the Prestige’s midrange is generally slightly more reserved, especially in the female vocal presence regions, but not necessarily thicker overall. Simultaneously, it doesn’t have the trailing grain - what some listeners will perceive as texture - that the Monarch MKII’s midrange has. A lot of this comes down to these two IEMs’ respective treble responses wherein the Prestige’s is much more emphasized in the upper-treble. In any case, this is a fairly “correct” sounding midrange that appeals to my sensibilities as someone who prefers a more muted upper-midrange. The biggest criticism I would point out is a minor lack of body from ~1-2kHz which - to my ears at least - makes male vocals sound somewhat odd on the Prestige, especially in conjunction with the lack of texture.
Moving on to less green pastures, the treble response of the Prestige is interesting, as it shares a lot of similarities to the ThieAudio Oracle MKII. This is in the sense that it has fantastic extension (well up to the limits of my hearing and even par with something like the Elysian Annihilator), but it simply doesn’t sound correct. The Prestige, then, has a number of upper-treble peaks which beget a bright and almost puffy quality to a lot of instruments. Frankly, it’s fatiguing at even my quieter listening volumes and the kicker is that the Prestige’s treble doesn’t sound particularly detailed. Ostensibly, this is a product of masking from the sheer quantity of upper-treble and it being outside the normal, or what I’d consider tasteful, parameters of my HRTF. On the topic of masking, I suspect that the excessive upper-treble presence also contributes to the Prestige’s unsatisfactory bass decay.
Technicalities on the Prestige are just decent, especially for its price point. To me at least, the detail on it sounds forced. This is in the sense that it has very little texture to any parts of its presentation, and its timbre sounds highly unnatural. Some listeners might find the heavy upper-treble to be a boon to a sense of detail, though. Generally, the imaging of the Prestige again falls into the bucket of just alright. It sounds very wide to me, but I would not consider its layering ability - the distinction between individual instruments and their position on the stage - to be noteworthy. As most would know, my listening discography leans brighter, and I find it difficult to track between instruments on certain tracks due to how bright the Prestige’s treble leans.
Ultimately, the Prestige is primarily interesting - and not in a good way - in the sense that it illustrates the importance of fine-tuning treble response. I wish more time had been taken to refine its EST implementation because I do think there is some potential to the way the ESTs have been implemented on it. For now though, I’m left to ponder where the Prestige falls in today’s market. It’s not better than the Monarch MKII (at least I don’t think so) and it’s certainly not better than the Helios which absolutely runs circles around it in the treble tuning department to my ears.
Bias Score: 6/10
All critical listening done off of my DX300 and iPhone 13 Mini with the stock cable and stock tips.
5 Likes
I like the 7z Timeless: Decent bass, and quite light. For the price, a good performer. I find I prefer IEMs that are light in my ears.
My U12Ts are technically better, but much heavier with their 12 BA drivers.
2 Likes
Sennheiser IE200 Impressions
Price: $150
Configuration: 1DD
The single-DD market is dominated by a very specific type of sound signature that falls along the lines of the Harman in-ear target with some extra warmth. It’s a simple, tried-and-true formula that caters to a majority of listeners which is why so many companies try to emulate it.
But Sennheiser has always had other ideas about how to tune their IEMs. Most of their past IEMs would be best described as “colored”, a description often realized through a recessed upper-midrange region and copious amounts of mid-treble. In the past, this has made them polarizing listens; I was a fan of Sennheiser’s IE900 but knew that it would not be for everyone. Beginning with the IE600, however, Sennheiser took a dramatic shift to tuning their IEMs.
The IE200 seems to embody a lot of what Sennheiser has learned from the IE600. The most impressive part about the IE200 would no doubt be its treble response. Single-DDs are often synonymous with poor treble extension. Of course, there are some recent outliers, like the CCA CRA+, but these would best be described as more uncontrolled in the upper-treble and artificial sounding. Sennheiser’s own IE900 is possibly one of the best examples of a “controlled” treble response wherein it makes use of resonance chambers in the shell to tastefully fine-tune the mid-treble while maintaining extension. The IE200 doesn’t quite measure up to the IE900 in this regard - it lacks some intensity at 5kHz to the initial crack of snares, and it’s a little more splashy - but it comes pretty close for being a fraction of the cost. It also does away with some of the treble glare that I found harsh on the IE600.
Other aspects of the IE200’s tuning are less praiseworthy, but quite reasonable for $150. The bass shelf of the IE200 is sharply sub-bass focused for a clean response. I do find it somewhat dry-sounding; most of this sentiment would be baked into the elevated treble response which neuters overall perception of bass decay. The midrange of the IE200 is somewhat unique amongst most single-DDs in that it does indeed sport a more relaxed 3-4kHz region in typical Sennheiser fashion. However, it is not done egregiously, and I almost find myself wishing there was either 1) more warmth in the lower-mids or 2) more recession from 3-4kHz to counteract the IE200’s treble emphasis. As it stands, the IE200 can surprisingly come across somewhat thin-sounding in the midrange.
Technicalities on the IE200 are impressive. The more reserved presence region and excellent treble extension encourages listeners to listen more closely to vocals, for which trailing note edges are easily picked-up on. The IE200, irrespective of its price, is easily in the running for being one of the more detailed sounding single-DDs I’ve heard. Comparatively, imaging is mostly average wherein the soundstage of the IE200 does not expand outside the shells despite relatively good distinction between individual instruments.
The IE200 is neither a slap in the face to the existing landscape of sub-$200 single-DDs, nor does it entirely put Sennheiser back in the good graces of IEM enthusiasts. However, it does offer a flavor of tuning that you won’t find at a cheaper price, and I think it’s well-worth a listen if you’re looking for a break from the increasingly homogenous budget market.
8 Likes
Thank you for this review. I’m curious how the IE200 compares in tuning with Sennheiser’s tuning in the Pro series like the IE 40 PRO.
3 Likes
Thanks for the review Precog. As a fan of the IE600, I’m certainly interested in hearing the 200.
From the measurements anyway, very different
3 Likes