I fully agree: cheap ingredients and too many of them…don’t harmonize. The marketing is too fast. Get a Sennheiser single DD, worth its money.
Less is more!
1 Like
It’s no surprise my favorite IEM right now is the Kanas Pro - a single DD. My other favorite is the ME1, which is a single planar. The multi-BA at budget prices are good but many have inherent cross-over flaws.
3 Likes
The latest speculation is the NiceHCK F3…one can order it for $179 but not even proper photos exist yet. I tweaked the aspect ratio of the published graph…and will run away as fast as I can.
Most of us have heard of the Senfer DT6, an earphone that deploys a DD, a BA, and a piezoelectric tweeter. The resulting sound is close to neutral, with a really good midrange…all that at 20 bucks. Where it may lack for some is the timbre: an orchestra may sound a bit artificial.
Apparently, the much more expensive NiceHCK N3 uses the same tweeter, but I would call that model work in progress.
1 Like
I recently received the Revonext QT5 and was very impressed. Here’s my review:
The Revonext QT5 is the latest model from the company that brought us the QT2, a triple driver IEM (2DD + 1BA) which gained a good following among earphone enthusiasts. The QT5 is a dual-drive hybrid, (1DD+1BA). No specifications were available regarding the dynamic driver diameter or diaphragm material, nor was there any information on the type of balanced armature used.
The QT5 comes attractively boxed with a picture of the earphones on the cover. Some specifications are printed on the bottom of the box. The earphones are presented in a foam section with the cables pre-fitted and three sets of medium-bore tips are provided, with the medium size already fitted to the IEMs. There is also an instruction leaflet and a warranty card.
The earpieces are finished in an attractive metallic copper. The rear of the capsule has a silver-coloured horizontal bar and a large circular vent in the centre. The channel identification is punched into the surface. The overall impression is of an industrial or “steampunk” appearance, which I found attractive. The inner surface of the earpieces is gently contoured to fit against the ear and there is a small pinhole vent at the base of the nozzle. The Revonext logo and model number “QT5” are engraved on the underside of the earpieces.
The detachable 2-pin cable is a 4-core braided type in a copper colour which matches the colour of the earpices. It is quite supple and fits round the ear very comfortably. There is a small chin slider and a right angled 3.5mm plug.
The earphones were left burning in for 72 hours before testing and included tracks of white and pink noise, glide tones and other audio conditioning tracks. After this I used a Hifi Walker H2 DAP via line out with a Topping NX1a amplifier for evaluation. The supplied cable and tips proved very comfortable and provided a secure fit and seal with excellent isolation.
I was immediately struck by the natural and open sound and a wide, expansive soundstage. The tuning was very well-judged, being neutral but still retaining impact. The tonality of the dynamic driver was similar to that of the balanced armature, resulting in a seamless transition from bass to treble, which gave the impression of listening to a single full-range driver. Considering the quoted impedance of 16 ohms, I was surprised to find that I needed to increase the volume considerably on my amplifier to achieve an appropriate volume level. These earphones appear to be quite power-hungry.
Bass
I found the bass on the QT5 to be generally linear in nature with good extension. There was plenty of texture and resolution on offer and there was little or no bass bleed which resulted in a clean and natural presentation, with everything in its proper place. Sub-bass was present but not dominant, and only present when actually there on the recording. The title track from Meg Bowles’s “Evensong” displayed this perfectly with a satisfying rumble where necessary and plenty of texture which is so essential in this genre of music. The bass created a perfect foundation for the accompanying atmospheric synth washes and electronic effects. “In Church” from Novak’s “Slovak Suite” performed by the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic conducted by Libor Pesek features a prominent part for pipe organ and the QT5s did not disappoint, with a healthy depth and power on display, a natural reproduction of the organ registration and an excellent sense of the hall ambience.
Mids
The midrange was clear and open with a clarity and resolution unexpected at this price level. The beautiful “Ave Maria” by Ludomir Rozicki performed by the Polish National Orchestra is a concertante piece for cello and orchestra. The solo instrument displayed a satisfying woody timbre with a good portrayal of “rosin” in the bowing, all contained within a natural acoustic, accompanied by a panoramic spread of the orchestra. “After the Goldrush” is an a cappella piece by Prelude. The multi-tracked vocals were clear and well-articulated. Clearly-defined breath and lip sounds added to the realism and the spacious effect of the studio reverb was easy to discern. The densely-scored “Impression Nocturna” by Andres Gaos showcased the QT5’s ability to separate the character of the various string instruments. The beautiful harmonic changes were wonderfully presented.
Treble
The treble on the QT5 was well-extended and detailed with a natural, airy quality. Robert Carty is an American electronic music artist. “Beautiful Attractor” from his album ”In Neptune’s Wake” features a wealth of electronic effects in the high frequencies. These were superbly reproduced and surrounded my head in a huge three-dimensional space. The impressive stereo imaging in this piece was also notable. The “Canon in D Major” by Pachelbel performed by the J.F. Paillard Orchestra is a well-known baroque piece. The stately pace of this recording was enhanced by the delicate harpsichord continuo and the violins in the high register were a pleasure to hear, with their playing full of verve and energy and a realistic, natural string tone.
Soundstage
The soundstage of the QT5 was perhaps their best feature. From the very first notes I was impressed by the stereo imaging, spacious presentation and the sheer size of the sound field presented to me. The reproduction of recorded ambience and studio reverb were excellent and I had a real sense of “being there”, especially in classical recordings, which is very laudable considering the price of these IEMs. “Benedictus” from “The Armed Man” by Karl Jenkins is an expansive choral work and the vocal parts were wonderfully displayed with good separation and a wide and spacious acoustic set against an impressive orchestral accompaniment. The guitars, bass and drums in “Tequila Sunrise” by The Eagles were placed clearly and precisely in the stereo image providing a perfect backdrop for Glenn Frey’s vocals which had plenty of character and it was possible to hear all the features of the production.
These QT5s produce a performance unexpected in their price range and the reproduction approaches that of some more complex designs. They have a lively, dynamic and colourful presentation whilst still retaining a neutral sound signature. Unlike many more affordable dual-driver hybrids, they are not V-shaped in the KZ style (e.g. ZST, ES3 and ZS4).
The sound resembles that of the CCA C10 but with better extension in the treble, and is also smilar to the Artiste DC1 (1DD + piezo tweeter) but with a better-controlled bass.
To sum up, the bass is linear and extended, the midrange slightly forward and the treble clean and clear with few unwanted artefacts. This all-round competence suits many genres of music. Because of the excellent fit, seal and isolation and smooth open quality of the sound it is possible to listen for long periods without fatigue. A definite five stars for me!
I would like to thank Sunny from Better Audio US for providing this review sample.
Product link:
2 Likes
They have a bit of a Steampunk vibe going on.
Well, I skipped March in my 1x set of IEM a month rythym but I just got a great deal (I think) on the ZSN pro (12€) so that will be a belated March.
For April, which is nearly over, I keep reading glowing reviews for the DT6 but each time I look at them they remind me of a set of cheap IEMs I have in a drawer somewhere that I absolutely hate!
(I still want to pick up a set of Kanas Pro but I don’t consider those part of my cheap set a month).
This is a really good one:
3 Likes
Thanks, you did pique my interest in these with your review, however, the reference to their similarity with stage monitoring is what had me hesitant. I spend a lot of time with stage monitors, where clarity is a must, but I would not choose a stage monitor set up to listen to music. I had sort of put these on the list as possible candidates for IEM while performing rather than relaxing.
1 Like
Just out of curiousity, I am wondering how “Ultra Cheap” or “Cheap” is defined here?
Obviously the term is dependent upon each person and what they feel is cheap, I also feel that the longer you have spent in the headphone world, the higher your price brackets are (I certainly feel that prices I am considering mine are growing constantly!).
For example, coming from a country where over 50% of the population earns under 1000€ a month and based on my limited experience but many hours of searching, my guess would be <50€ as ultra-cheap, <100€ cheap, <500€ mid-priced, <1000€ high-priced and >1000€ expensive.
So, without factoring in “value for money” (which is obviously independent to price brackets themselves), am I way out with my calculations here?
What would you feel is the price point of those definitions??
(For simplicity, let’s just keep 1€ = $1)
I consider this category under 75 or under 50
3 Likes
Just got the KZ ZS10 Pro in for review. It’s actually not a bad sounding IEM! I found the ZSN Pro too bright, but this one is just slightly less bright from initial hearing impressions. Then measured it afterward and seems to go with my hearing.
Here’s my quick and dirty measurements with ZSN Pro and ZS10 Pro
5 Likes
With the use of an Amazon gift card, I now have the IE 40 Pro also. In clear, because there is no purple. The Amazon gift card process was not pleasant, as scratch off took off the entire code.
At first listen, they seemed to have a lot of high frequency - not screechy bothersome high frequency, but very clear cymbal, triangle, etc. Bass is very solidly there, but not overemphasized. I’m trying to burn them in some.
They are a bit different. The single-driver sound is coherent. Good on acoustic, piano, orchestral. Nice clear voices. I’ve only had them for a day or so, but I do think I like them. Will post more eventually.
The foam tips are by far the best for me.
1 Like
KZ ZS10 Pro and KZ ZSN Pro REVIEW
This short review will cover two of the latest In-Ear Monitors from Knowledge Zenith: The ZSN Pro and the ZS10 Pro. They both were released last month at around the same time and share so many similarities, I won’t bother making separate reviews.
The ZSN Pro is a dual driver – Single Balanced Armature and Single Dynamic Driver, while the ZS10 Pro is a five-driver setup with 4 Bas and 1 DD. Both are updated models from the previous ones released last year. I never had a chance to listen or review the ZS10, but I did really enjoy the ZSN as a budget pick with it’s neutral-ish sound signature that was only $20.
So what’s new?
Well, first off, the shell design on both is slightly changed. They both feature faceplates on their respective shells that are quite similar. The ZS10 shell faceplate actually looks like the ZSN original but in a reflective chrome color, while the ZSN Pro’s chevron marks are lifted off the faceplate, as opposed to the cut-out look on the ZS10 Pro.
The accessories package is the same as before with the newer 2-pin cable and attachment style.
The major difference, of course, is the sound tuning.
For me, these sound almost identical except one thing: the ZSN Pro is brighter and I don’t really recommend it. The ZS10, however, is tuned to have less treble and that makes it more listenable.
In general, both IEMs have similar bass and mid performance, and are improvements in that regard over the original ZSN. The bass is slightly elevated making the overall sound profile a tad warmer, and the mids are not as recessed as before. The upper-mids, which boosted on the ZSN original, has been tamed down, and the lower treble is more even on both IEMs. The ZSN Pro, again, has more treble in the middle to upper portions of the treble region, making them pretty bright.
If you’ve listened to the T2 Pro and the T2, the ZSN Pro is similar to that tuning, albeit slightly warmer. The ZS10 Pro is closer to the T3, but tamer in the upper-mids and treble. Detail retrieval on the T3 seemed better, from memory, but that could also be due to the boosted treble.
Quick Conclusions
Again, this is just a quick review, as I do have large queue I am working through and I’d like to spend more time on other headphone reviews in the future. The ZS10 Pro is worth consideration. I would skip the ZSN Pro altogether, as I prefer the ZS10 Pro more and the ZSN more as well – along with a host of other budget IEMs like the Tin Audio T2, Final Audio E2000, and others.
I’d like to thank Lillian for Linsoul for providing the KZ ZS10 Pro for review. I personally purchased the disappointing ZSN Pro myself from their Amazon storefront at LSR-Direct. They are also located at http://www.Linsoul.com if you are interested in either of these two IEMs.
4 Likes
Just wondering if anyone has advice on next cheap IEM (or earbuds).
My only previous experience with IEM was a Shure E4C years ago. Pretty good sound, but only got good seals with the foam tips which were uncomfortable for long periods.
Recently bought a cheap Philips IEM that was surprisingly decent for the price ($10). Then also got some earbuds (MS16 - nice soundstage but gets muddled, RY4S - nice tuning, good for the price).
Looking at my next pair, probably IEM but open to earbuds.
Final Audio E2000 or E3000
KZ ZSN or KZ ZSA (comfort, sound)
Senfer DT6
Anyone can compare those? Also would like a comfortable earbud for sleeping - seen various reviews but haven’t found anything definitive.
1 Like
Hi and welcome @hap8hap. Nice to see you’ve got the first post out of the way. There are some really knowledgeable guys here who know lots about the lower cost iems. They will be able to give you some great advice. Nice to meet you.
1 Like
welcome @hap8hap
1 Like
Welcome @hap8hap!
Guessing by the Final Audio models you mention, I am thinking that you want to spend up to around $50?
In that price range I really think the Tin Audio T2 is worth considering, I really like the sound of it personally.
I wouldn’t consider the T2 comfortable for sleeping though (although everyone is different). For me personally, I still find the KZ ATE very comfortable and it is very cheap also, maybe not the best SQ but I doubt you are focused on detailed listening while sleeping 
2 Likes
Thanks all!
Yeah, I would say $50 is my upper limit, although I’ll probably buy something around $20 first to get a little more educated on what I like. I’ve been pretty impressed with the RY4S, MS16, etc - and those are super cheap, especially compared to Shure.
I also looked at the T2 - another one on my list, but seemed between the ZSN and Final Audio in price.
Is the ATE more comfortable than the ZSN? From pics it does look smaller.
Seems like there are so many good options now.