Thanks again. Yes, I know what you mean. I think the T3 was their best design, the T4 was very light and not as substantial. The “BLON” look I am not so fond of, though the T2 plus does it better.
1 Like
Great review @Nimweth and I see we agree on a lot of points. It really did suprise me for under 50€!
@prfallon69, I also liked the looks of the original Tin designs but there is no denying that this shape works better for comfort (at least for me personally). It would have been nice if they had come up with some sort of colour instead of the generic silver but I’m not complaining for the price.
2 Likes
Now that the Moondrop SSR are back in stock again (at least at some places), does anyone know if they have changed at all from the first batch?
1 Like
Discount code for 5GBP on the Tin Hifi T2 plus. From Yinyoo at Amazon.co.uk: NLHQURX4. Product link: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Earphones-Nanotube-Brighter-Detachable-Silver-Plated-Silver/dp/B08BC1ZNPP
2 Likes
I’m a bit late to the party for this one, but the T2 Plus absolutely deserves the time I spent writing this.
Introduction
This is a review of the Tin HiFi T2 Plus. It is a single DD IEM that costs $50-60 (depending on sales) from Linsoul. I received the T2 Plus from Linsoul in exchange for this honest review. I have not been or will be compensated in any other way.
For those new to Tin HiFi (formerly known as Tin Audio), here’s a quick primer. A couple years ago, Tin HiFi released the T2. Relatively unknown at the time, a few people picked it up as yet another ChiFi curiousity thanks to a handful of reviews and a timely Aliexpress spring sale. To their surprise, the Tin T2 was a splendid IEM with a unique neutral tuning rarely seen in the budget realm. Rave reviews soon followed. Spurred by the success of the T2, Tin HiFi capitalized on their newly acquired brand recognition, soon producing well regarded IEMs such as the Tin T3 and T4 but occasionally stumbling with questionable IEMs such as the T2 Pro.
Within the past few years, ChiFi has been undergoing somewhat of a renaissance. Mostly gone are the days of poorly tuned V-shaped monsters from companies like KZ. The budget market is now filled with a wide variety of decently well tuned IEMs to fit any one’s taste. And all of this started with the T2. Perhaps I may be giving the T2 too much credit as it surely isn’t the first hyped up ChiFi IEM. But as far as I can tell, it seems to be the first reference-style tuned IEM that kick-started a entire paradigm shift in the budget market.
As for the T2 Plus, it is Tin HiFi’s latest offering after the release of the Tin T4. But don’t let its name or low price fool you. It doesn’t have too much in common with the original T2 or any of Tin’s other offerings. Priced at $50-60, it competes directly with the Tin T3. So where does it stand?
What’s in the Box?
The box it comes in is reminiscent of the original T2: a simple white box. The inner box opens to reveal the IEMs themselves with a compartment below that holds the MMCX cable, foam tips, and a few pairs of silicon tips. As usual, Tin HiFi is stubbornly sticking to the MMCX standard despite the multitude of issues it has given them in the past. This time however, the cable is quite nice. It’s soft and supple with no cable memory and low level of cable noise. The MMCX connection feels solid and does not swivel freely. It does have included earhooks of the soft molded kind without memory wires. Like the Tin T3’s cable, the T2 Plus’ is one you likely won’t want to replace.
The fit of the T2 Plus is shockingly good. Despite looking like a Blon BL03 ripoff, I was floored at how well it fits me and how comfortable it is. Between its ergonomic shell and a nozzle diameter that’s smaller than the previous T2/T3/T4, I wouldn’t mind if all future Tin HiFi IEMs use the same cable and shell. This is one of the best fitting and comfortable budget IEMs I’ve tried.
Sound
Overall Impressions:
Right from the get-go, the T2 Plus is not the T2. There is too much bass here compared to the relatively bass light T2. The best way to describe it is as a mild V-shape with a bright slant. It has a sizable bass boost that extends into the mids to give it an overall warmish tone. Upper mids aren’t overly blown and transitions nicely into a lively treble. As a whole, its signature has a maintains part of that Tin HiFi reference tuning masked under an elevated low end. For most people, the T2 Plus will have “fun” tuning that works well as a jack-of-all-trades with an overall balanced tone.
Bass:
My biggest (and only) gripe with the T2 Plus is its bass response. It has a reasonable amount of bass to give the T2 Plus low end presence and extends down to about 40 Hz with a minor roll-off at 20 Hz. The T2 Plus maintains this bass response all the way in to the mids, giving it a more mid-bassy signature rather than a sub-bassy one. The problem is that the T2 Plus’ bass response is undefined when it comes to drums. It’s loose, boomy, and weirdly enough… bouncy(?). The kick drum and low toms seem to lack that part of that deep, weighted oomph to them. It’s as if you hear more of the beater head or stick impact and the immediate bounce back of the drum head rather than the full resonance of the drum. It doesn’t have the slam or tightness necessary to convey a sense of authority. Nor does it have much rumble. In this respect, the T2 Plus is unique as I have not heard a bass response like this before. Despite graphing with a sizable bass response, low notes sometimes just does not have as much depth I’d expect. Perhaps it has something to do with the upper harmonics in the treble. I think that perhaps if the T2 Plus had about 2 dB less bass, this effect would be somewhat mitigated or at least, less noticeable. Overall though, this isn’t a deal breaker by any means. Bass presence is clean and notes are well defined in bass guitar or synth lines.
Mids:
I quite like the mids of the T2 Plus. The low mids are slightly warm and bring a touch of richness to a variety of instruments. The upper mids cut cleanly through without ever being harsh. Instruments are realistically presented and balance nicely with each other in the mix. Vocals are neither too forward or recessed, with no preference towards male or female vocals. Typical vocal pitfalls aren’t a problem here; vocals aren’t shrill, shouty, or sibilant. The upper mids may graph odd with its early rise and plateau starting around 1.5 kHz, but there’s nothing odd about the sound. As a whole, the T2 Plus’ mids fall within a Goldilocks zone for me. Everything is about right. Maybe minor tweaks here and there would make them sound phenomenal but I’m happy with what the T2 Plus brings.
Treble:
I really like the treble of the T2 Plus. It’s leans bright with a sustained lower treble presence that continues seamlessly from the upper mids. I particularly like how smooth the T2 Plus’ treble sounds; there are no noticeable peaks or dips that jump out at me. My simple test for treble is how well it can render hats and cymbals and the vast majority of IEMs I’ve tried fail this test. The T2 Plus does not. The notes of the ride cymbal have that clean, delicate, crystalline shimmer to them. Hats have a crisp, lively sound that brightens and adds flavor to music. Crash cymbals have a gracious decay and rarely devolves into a trashy mess. Chime and bell-like instruments are able to cut right through the mix without seeming out of place. Rarely do I enjoy the treble of an IEM this much but the T2 Plus simply does a tremendous job without relying on an overly bright and exaggerated signature. Its presentation by far the best of any budget IEM I’ve heard and I certainly wouldn’t mind it on some of the higher end IEMs I’ve tried.
Presentation:
Soundstage is above average for width, average for depth and height. Imaging is really quite solid with a nuanced spatial distinction. There is a nice sense of space in this IEM that isn’t in-your-face or closed off. I think the former is due to the non-shouty nature of the tuning. The latter is from the rather sizable vent holes that allow the driver to breathe.
Resolution is fantastic for its price. It isn’t as immediately noticeable like on the Tin T4 or the Moondrop Starfield, but follows closely in their footsteps. In the same vein, note separation is quite good and really shines in slower, well recorded songs. Instrument separation is above average with decent layering, taking good advantage of the overall staging.
Comparisons:
Tin T2:
Ah the T2, the IEM that started it all. Unfortunately, over the past couple of years, it hasn’t up to the test of time that well. Tuning wise, it’s still a very unique IEM. Its upper mids combination with the minor lower mids bump is magic. But unless you want that specific tuning, the T2 Plus otherwise beats it handily in technical ability. The treble response on the T2 Plus is notably better as the T2 has a couple of noticeable peaks and dips that manifests on my hats/cymbal test. At $35 vs $50-60, the T2 Plus isn’t exactly in the same price bracket. Nonetheless, I’d get a T2 Plus over the T2 if you don’t have a T2. If you do, I’d save up for a more substantial upgrade.
Tin T3:
In my opinion, the T3 is criminally overlooked. It’s essentially an improved T2 that does not stray from the spirit of original tuning. Here, I prefer much prefer bass of the T3 than in the T2 Plus. The bass of the T3 isn’t anything spectacular but it does have the tightness and slam that the T2 Plus frustratingly lacks. Technical ability wise, the T2 Plus does edge it out, only by a bit less this time around. At about $50-60 for either, it’s honestly a toss-up which you should get. I’m inclined to say the T2 Plus just because the fit is likely to be better for most. And like the T2, the treble response of the T2 Plus is better than the T3.
Tin T4:
And here is the T4, one part of the $100-150 trifecta along with the Moondrop Starfield and the Etymotic ER2. The T4 undoubtedly has better technical ability, especially in resolution and bass response. But the T2 Plus takes the tuning and tone crown. The T4 may come off as too lean for some, with a potentially unforgiving treble. At $50 vs. $110, the T2 Plus is just a better value proposition. Plus, the much improved fit and better cable are just the cherries on top. The T4 still has its place as one of the most technically proficient IEMs at its price point but the T2 Plus is going to be a much safer buy for most. Now, if you’re able to find the T4 on sale for $79, I’d start to lean towards getting the T4.
Should You Buy It?
Yes. If it hasn’t been obvious yet, I really like the T2 Plus. I consider it to be one of the best IEM in the very competitive $50-60 segment despite my reservations about its bass. Sure there are other good IEMs at that price point but if you want a more balanced IEM that still maintains that fun factor, the T2 Plus makes a very compelling argument. And if you really value your treble, well, the T2 Plus may be the only budget IEM worth looking at.
To be honest, I wasn’t thrilled by the T2 Plus when I first listened to it. In the first 10 minutes or so, I was fairly nonplussed (pun intended). Coming from much better, more neutral reference gear that I had, the T2 Plus sounded a little generic. It’s certainly no giant killer. But as I started using it over the next couple of days and realized that it only cost about $50, I quickly became impressed. The price/performance of the T2 Plus is simply stellar. If only the bass response was halfway as good as I’d like it to be. Alas, it seems like despite Tin HiFi’s best efforts, all of their great IEMs seem to all suffer from some minor flaw that keeps them from relative perfection.
6 Likes
Really great review @Fc-Construct. Love your detailed description paired with your easy to understand explanation of this iem. Great comparisons too. Top stuff.
3 Likes
Does anyone here own a set of NiceHCK X49 IEMs?
They’re like some cheap OEM branded IEM that you could get from Aliexpress from a grab bag.
It’s a single BA, bullet style affair that costs $20.
I got a pair in for review and it seems like the ChiFi version of the ultra budget Final E series IEMs.
Tuning feels fairly similar with a modest warm tone to it. It’s not bad really.
But my only question is… why get this instead than the actual Final E IEMs where you get some nice tips to boot.
Just curious if anyone here has a set and why they own it lol
I was not a fan of the X49 during my initial listening. Vocals sounded detached from the rest of the musical presentation.
The KBEAR KB04 is the best budget 1+1 hybrid I’ve heard in its price range by a wide margin. It uses a 10mm PU diaphragm dynamic driver and a balanced armature on each side, and retails for around $25. It released back in March but my review unit was delayed by a few months thanks to COVID-related shipping issues. It has a V-shaped tuning and great technical performance for its price range.
My full review, which includes measurements and comparisons to three other budget 1+1 hybrids, is available on my blog: https://medium.com/bedrock-reviews/kbear-kb04-review-b1edb0419081
1 Like
As always, this review is available in Spanish on YouTube and on my blog (link in my profile).
Review of KZ ZSN Pro X
In the past I purchased the KZ ZSN, the ZSN Pro and when I saw the ZSN Pro X, another 20€ hybrid IEM from KZ, I thought, why not?
I actually enjoyed the original ZSN but found the Pro to be to bright and sibilant, so maybe the Pro X would again be enjoyable?
KZ claim that this IEM is based on the ZSN Pro but with an improved high frequency balanced armature driver and a 10mm low frequency dynamic driver. They say that the “the flexible lows and smooth mids plus the bright highs are perfectly combined by scientific adjustments, giving the human voice richer and clearer details.”
Sounds like the rest of the ZSN marketing to me, so how could I not dig out the older models to compare at the same time?
Presentation…
It must be more than a year since I purchased the ZSN Pro and even longer since I purchased the ZSN but nothing has changed as far as presentation.
In the typical white box from KZ, we get the IEMs, the cable and a selection of tips.
I believe that the tips may be slightly different from the ones included with the older revisions but I can’t confirm as I have all the tips thrown in one big box, making it impossible to be sure which tips came with what.
The cable I got with this version has an inline microphone whereas the previous ones didn’t, so the cable is slightly different, mainly because of the microphone and because it is white (other than that, it is the typical KZ cable). I didn’t plan on using the included cable anyway, so I haven’t tried it.
That’s it as far as contents.
Build and aesthetics…
Again, nothing has changed here. If we look at the photo of all 3 ZSN models in a line, they are pretty much identical except for the colour and the fact that the original ZSN had the lines sunken in rather than protruding as they are on the Pro and Pro X.
The inside of the shell is a transparent resin that is coloured, whereas the back is a metal plate.
All three models use the KZ connector style that sticks out from the shell, I believe they call it type C. So again, no change.
On the resin shell, in the typical style of KZ, there is the name of the model plus a small description underneath. In the case of the ZSN Pro X, it states “New Hybrid Drivers” (the original ZSN said “Balanced Armature” and the ZSN Pro proclaimed “Classic Upgrade”.
As you have probably guessed, the comfort is identical on all three, so if you find one of them comfortable, you will have no issues with any of them.
As far as durability, I haven’t had any issues with any of the KZ models over the past couple of years so I have no reason to think this one will be any different, but I guess only time will tell.
Sound…
As I said at the beginning, I enjoyed the original ZSN. It wasn’t the most detailed of earphones but it’s sound signature was quite pleasant and relaxed without really going overboard in any of the frequencies.
The Pro I didn’t enjoy so much. It was still no better than the original as far as detail and the sound signature changed from relaxed to bright and sibilant, at least with the majority of music.
However, it has been a long time since I listened to either of the ZSN variants, so revisiting them together with the ZSN Pro X has been like trying out 3 new IEMs at the same time. In order to abbreviate which model I am talking about, I will simply refer to them as the OG (the original ZSN), the Pro (the ZSN Pro) and the X (the ZSN Pro X).
Starting off with the bass, the X is a huge step up from either of the previous models and is by no means short on bass.
Extending quite far down into the sub bass regions, it gives the necessary rumble on tracks like “Bury a Friend” and “No Mercy”. It extends far more into these regions than either or the other two versions, and is in fact probably the KZ with most sub bass rumble I have heard so far, maybe only matched by the S2 (the bluetooth IEM I previously reviewed).
In the higher bass frequencies, there is again a lot of presence and plenty of “slam”, for lack of another word to describe it better. In songs with hard hitting kick drums, these are presented in a way that gives you an impression of air hitting the mic. In fact, on many tracks, such as “Royals” by Lorde or “I Fink U Freeky” by Die Antwoord, I found the bass to be overly present and could actually become tiresome when you are not looking for that bass heaviness. In comparison to the T2 plus for example, an IEM that I found to have plenty of bass when needed but absent when not, I find the X to have too much and would actually prefer to remove some of that excessiveness via EQ.
In comparison to the OG or the Pro, the X has much more bass, in all of it’s lower frequencies, and while it can seem very impressive at first, I like it a little more tamed back for the majority of my music preferences and would prefer the quantity found on the OG (I find the Pro to be lacking).
Moving on to the mids, the lower part of the mids does suffer due to the powerful bass. I don’t think that it is recessed in any way, just that it becomes part of the excessive bass that is present on some songs. This makes it difficult to track instruments in the lower mid frequencies, and while it doesn’t get too muddy, it isn’t very clear either. In this regard I would say that both the OG and the Pro behave better in the lower mids, due to there being less bass to bleed into them.
In the higher mid region, the X can go from recessed to rather shouty. In songs that are usually pretty balanced in the bass range, such as “Billie Jean” by Michael Jackson or “Bombtrack” by Rage Against The Machine, vocals can still seem to get lost behind the instruments that sit in the lower regions. However, in songs with powerful vocals, especially female vocals, the IEM can become very shouty and even give the sensation of being overly present and even distorted at times. This is noticeable in parts of songs that are more powerful in certain sections, such as the busy part of “Hello” by Adele or “No One” by Alicia Keys. In fact in songs like these, it is possible to go from recessed to overpowering in just a few bars.
In the higher mids, again the OG and X seem to do a better job of maintaining the calm, however, if I had to choose, I would go with the OG in this range.
Moving up into the higher frequencies, the X is not as sibilant as the Pro, but it is still too sibilant for my preference. The X seems to have a boost slightly lower than the Pro, resulting more in a shouty sound than a sibilant one. Saying that, my typical sibilance test, such as “Hope Is A Dangerous Thing” by Lana Del Rey or “Code Cool” by Patricia Barber are too sibilant for me to enjoy.
There is also a slight metallic ring in the treble which is common on the majority of BA IEMs and I have found in different quantities on all KZ models I have tried. The X doesn’t seem as metallic as the OG or the Pro but it is still there.
As far as speed and detail, the X gives a sense of both when first listening to it, but starts to fall apart on fast and complicated tracks, such as “The Room” by Ostura. I think the range that suffers the least is the bass range, which actually manages to hold itself together pretty well for such a boosted zone. The OG and Pro are no better though and I wouldn’t give any of them high marks in this regard.
The soundstage is pretty much what I have found on most IEMs that I have tried. It is not very wide but is not terrible. In the typical test track which is “Letter” by Yosi Horikawa, the width is not huge but placement is actually pretty decent. I would say that the X does not fall behind the OG or the Pro in this regard.
Conclusions…
I can’t say that I have really enjoyed the third offering in the ZSN line, to be honest, I have found it quite tiring. It is not a bad IEM for it’s price of 20€ and may suit the preferences of those that are looking for a V shaped sound signature, some may find the powerful slam of the bass impressive, however it would not be my personal recommendation over so many other alternatives in similar price ranges.
In comparison to the original ZSN, which is now available for around 10€, I find the OG more relaxed and pleasing for my tastes in music. The X does seem to give a sensation of more detail but that soon gets lost when music gets busy as everything seems to become one big wall of sound.
In comparison to the ZSN Pro, which is now available for less than 7€, I personally wouldn’t choose either. If I had to, then I would choose the X as it is slightly less sibilant and has more bass, but it would be a case of the “least bad” of the two.
It is worth noting that all of the tests above have been made with the large “star” type silicone tips included with the ZSN Pro X. I did swap over to my preferred foam tips and it tamed the bass a little and stopped the voices from getting so lost in the background, although they are still recessed. However, it did not fix the sibilance, nor did it convert the sound signature enough for me to find it pleasing. I would say that the X does improve with foam tips, but still not enough to recommend it over other items at similar prices.
My simple explanation of the ZSN Pro X sound would be… dirty. That probably doesn’t make any sense but that is the impression that it gave me. It is as though all the frequencies of the IEM are competing against each other instead of working with each other.
As far as competing with other sub 50€ contenders, it is way behind. The T2 Plus in comparison seems like a completely different level.
9 Likes
In my experience that’s not rare with cheaper products. Dirty, uneven sound is mainly what drove me to higher priced audio. I have a cheap set of IEMs that I describe as “pinchy” – they have two treble spikes that sound like mosquitoes in the ear.
4 Likes
Great review!! I’m a sucker for nicely designed metal Hybrids, and have heard great things about things. I’ll have to add them to the list of new ones to try!
2 Likes
Looking for recommendations for a decent sub 80 dollar in ear bluetooth buds. The ratings on Amazon are skewed and I’m wary of sending earphones back to them.
Thanks, Dennis
1 Like
This may seem weird, but I highly recommend sticking with a known commodity here: Samsung.
Samsung Galaxy Buds (original) or Galaxy Buds+ are fantastic in ease of use, comfort, and tonality.
If you use apple, then airpod pros, though GBuds+ work with apple now too.
2 Likes
I received the BLON BL-05s for review last week from Sunny of Better Audio US via Amazon.com. Here is my review:
After the major success of the BL-03, BLON followed it with the first iteration of the BL-05 with a “second generation” CNT diaphragm dynamic driver. Possessing a different sound profile from the earlier model, it received a mixed reception. Now we have an updated model, the BL-05s, which features a “Third Generation” dynamic driver and is clothed in a fetching shade of green.
The BL-05s comes packaged in the now-familiar long white box with a clear lid emblazoned with the bizarre BLON acronym, “Belief-Letmusicburn-Oppoty-Nevergiveup”. Inside the IEMs are displayed in a plastic tray above a plain white oblong box containing the cable and accessories.
The contents include:
-
BL-05s IEMs
-
2 pin cable
-
Cloth storage bag
-
2 pairs high profile tips (M, L)
-
3 pairs low profile tips (S, M, L)
-
Information leaflet
The IEMs are made of metal and finished in a bright jade green colour with gold accents. They have a kind of 1950s look and are certainly very striking in appearance. The 2 pin sockets have a narrow rake and there is a small pinhole vent on the underside near the base of the nozzle. Channel identification is provided in the centre of the gold circle in the centre of the faceplate. The medium size of the high profile tips was pre-fitted.
The 2 pin cable is black and consists of a thin 4 core braided material with hooded plastic connectors. The angled 3.5mm plug is also made of black plastic and there is no chin slider. The cable is very prone to tangling.
Testing was done using an Xduoo X20 DAP as the primary source. A CD player and Huawei smartphone were also used. Adequate volume was achieved with all sources with no need for extra amplification. The poor quality stock cable and tips were replaced with a Senlee hybrid cable and JVC Spiral Dot tips. Thus equipped, a comfortable fit and good seal were obtained. A burn-in period of 100 hours was carried out.
First Impressions
Early auditioning revealed a very expansive soundstage with accurate positioning and imaging. The general profile was a mild V or L shape. Bass was deep with a sub-bass emphasis, mids were only slightly recessed with a natural timbre slightly brighter than the '03 and the treble was well-detailed and extended. The BL-05s combined the best features of the '03 and original '05.
Bass
Unlike the BL-03, which has a mid-bass focus, the emphasis was more on the sub-bass which was somewhat elevated above the rest of the range and sometimes became dominant. The transition to the mid-bass and lower mids, however, was even and smooth with no bass bleed.
The introduction to “Skyland” from “Windjana” by the late, great Tony O’Connor begins with bass synths and the sound of thunder. The O5s produced a satisfying rumble here and this generally did not overwhelm the accompanying didgeridoo, guitar and percussion instruments. With all this going on and an expressive woodwind solo on top, the bass retained focus and detail and was nicely balanced with the rest of the production.
The Guildhall String Ensemble’s performance of Albinoni’s Adagio in G minor demonstrated the weighty bass of the BL-05s. The lowest pedal notes of the organ were deep, well-textured and airy, producing a believable atmosphere and forming a perfect foundation for the lead string melody. The bass continuo was also very well handled with an authentic tonality and good separation.
“Harmony of the Spheres” by Neil Ardley is based on the Pythagorean concept that each planet produces a musical tone in its orbit. In “Soft Stillness and the Night” we hear the full harmony with the lowest notes represented by Pluto (248 years orbit) and the highest by Mercury (88 days orbit). The BL-05s managed to reproduce the bass parts very clearly and with impressive extension and depth.
Mids
Like the original BL-03, the new model displayed a natural timbre but sometimes displayed a little extra brightness in the upper range. The lack of bass bleed allowed the mids to breathe, improving the soundstage and generating more midrange detail. The stereo imaging was exceptionally wide and deep.
Reynaldo Hahn’s beautiful “A Chloris” written in 1913 took us back to the baroque era. It was the perfect piece to display the midrange timbre of the BL-05s. As the graceful melody dovetailed with Bach’s bass line, the rich woody tones of Julian Lloyd Webber’s cello blended wonderfully with John Lenehan’s sensitive piano accompaniment. The accurate reproduction of harmonics allowed the character of the cello and the natural decay of the piano notes within a believable acoustic to be fully appreciated.
Wally Badarou (“Kiss of the Spider Woman”) was perhaps the first musician of black heritage to produce a new age album and he succeeded admirably with “Words of a Mountain”. In “Feet of Fouta” he combines a host of percussion sounds with inventive keyboard voicing and a South African style rhythm. Everything hung together perfectly on the BL-05s with imaginative interplay between the various instrumental sounds and the whole effect was very entertaining and foot-tapping.
Vocals also benefited from the transparent midrange delivery and Linda Ronstadt’s “Adios” sounded great. The character and emotion of her exceptionally clear solo vocal was preserved perfectly and, set against the backing vocals and superb arrangement with imaginative key changes, produced a very enjoyable result.
Treble
The high frequencies on the BL-05s were a significant improvement on the previous models, being brighter, more extended and providing more detail than the '03 and addressing the somewhat uneven performance of the '05.
“Reunion” by Richard Burmer from his second album, “Bhakti Point” begins with an arpeggiated rhythm supported by assorted electronic percussion and effects which moved around the stage in a very effective fashion. A simple melody plays over this which is then followed by a more lyrical theme in the climax to the bridge, and accompanied by a staccato Emulator flute sample. The high frequency sounds here were reproduced with extreme clarity and excellent separation and had an attractive crystalline quality.
Michael Giles’s delicate percussion work in “Moonchild” by King Crimson brought the track to life. With a rhythm alternating between left and right and set against trippy-hippy vocals and avant-garde guitar and mellotron, the shimmering metallic cymbal tones in the central instrumental break produced a real psychedelic and hypnotic effect totally redolent of the era.
Chloe Hanslip’s wonderful reading of Jeno Hubay’s Violin Concerto No.2 with the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra was very impressive on the BL-05s. The clear and expressive solo soared above the imaginative scoring to great effect and was perfectly balanced with the accompaniment. The harmonics on the highest notes were nicely portrayed and were testament to the excellent treble extension.
Soundstage
The BL-05s impressed with a wide, deep and spacious stage. Separation and instrumental positioning were notable, with stereo imaging being particularly effective.
The brooding atmosphere in Sibelius’s “The Swan of Tuonela” performed by the Lahti Symphony Orchestra under Osmo Vanska was captured very well with the menacing bass drum rolls at the beginning evoking distant thunder and the beautiful and haunting cor anglais solo clearly presented over the supporting orchestral backing. The dynamic shifts in the climax were very well handled and the orchestra was laid out in a very believable way with a good sense of depth.
The introduction to “High Hopes” from Pink Floyd’s “Division Bell” features distant bells and piano on opposite sides of the image. A bee flies across the stage before a bass guitar comes in followed by Dave Gilmour’s dramatic vocals. All this was presented in a large and spacious acoustic which suited the material perfectly and maintained the feeling of the song.
“Carlsbad” by David Lanz and Paul Speer from the album “Desert Vision” begins with a bass drone courtesy of guest artist Jonn Serrie. Joined by woodwind from Georg Deuter, Lanz’s main piano theme and Speer’s guitar presented a dramatic sound picture of the American South West. Delicate crystalline percussion elements enhanced the production which filled the soundstage from edge to edge with an attractive ambience.
Conclusion
With the BL-05s, BLON have managed to combine the best features of their previous models whilst addressing some of the shortcomings. It is not perfect; the powerful bass occasionally dominates the presentation and there is a slight sharpness in the upper mids and lower treble from time to time but overall, I consider this to be the best model so far from the company. The mid-bass bloat of the BL-03 has gone, and the treble has more detail and extension. Being based on the original BL-05, the awkward fit of the BL-03 is history, but the cable and tips remain so and it is recommended that these be changed for the best result. The somewhat uneven upper register of the BL-05 has been addressed with only the occasional peak showing up.
The design will, no doubt, divide opinion but it is certainly a bold choice and stands out from the crowd. The BL-05s certainly takes its place among the best of the recent batch of single DD models and is in some ways a combination of the Tin T2 plus which is more neutral/bright and the Smabat NCO with its superb breathy bass and natural presentation. Perhaps with their next model the minor issues I encountered could be addressed and we will have the earphone of our “Driams”.
7 Likes
I love how these look. Good to know they make the cut in terms of sound quality, too.
1 Like
Yes, I think they look great too, reminiscent of a 1950’s food mixer! Great colour though!
1 Like
Excellent review @Nimweth. Blon seem to be getting progressively better with every release. Let’s hope that before too long they will nail it. If they can and also upgrade accessories, Cable and Tips, then they may hit a homerun.
1 Like
Here is the second review of the three recent arrivals, the CCA C10 Pro. The unit was supplied for review by Sunny at Better Audio US via Amazon.com.
A Curate’s Egg
CCA’s original C10 was notable in that its profile differed from the traditional V shape, instead offering a more balanced and neutral response. Featuring a 10mm dynamic driver coupled with two 50060 midrange BAs and two 30095 treble units in a three-way arrangement, it sounded very different from the similarly equipped KZ ZS10 Pro.
The new C10 Pro has a 10mm dual magnet DD for the bass, and the BAs used are: one 50060 covering the midrange, a dual BA unit for the mid/high region and one 30095 (placed in the nozzle) for the high frequencies. A four-way crossover system is employed.
The C10 Pro comes presented in the new CCA packaging first seen in the CA16, being a small white rectangular box with a linen finish and a CCA logo in the centre. Inside you will find a slip case containing the documentation under which the IEMs are displayed in a card cut-out. Lifting this out reveals the cable and three spare Starline tips.
The earpieces have a clear smoked resin body through which the components can be seen. The metal faceplate is finished in matt black with gold chevron detailing and closely resembles the KZ ZS10 Pro. There are two pinhole vents on the inner surface. The IEMs are pre-fitted with a pair of medium large bore silicone tips.
The supplied cable is a silver plated type with QDC connectors and a white plastic angled 3.5mm plug. It is a big improvement on former offerings from CCA/KZ, but still lacks a chin slider and could have usefully been furnished with metal fittings.
A burn-in period of 100 hours was carried out with the supplied cable and tips. The seal was very good but there were some sharp edges on the faceplate which occasionally caused discomfort and the earpieces did feel a little bulky. An Xduoo X20 DAP was chosen for appraisal but I found the sound too bright so substituted this with a Sony NWZ-A15 which has a warmer tonality. There was some improvement but the basic high frequency output remained considerably north of neutral.
First Impressions
The C10 Pro displayed a very different profile from its predecessor, in fact, more resembling the C12 than being a follow-up to the original. It was also very different from the recent more neutrally tuned CA16. It had an assertive delivery with solid, clean and fast bass, forward mids and somewhat aggressive high frequencies with an emphasis on the upper mids and lower treble. The overall tonality was cooler than neutral. Unusually, the sound did not change very much during burn-in.
Bass
The bass was fast and accurate with quick decay and good transient attack. It was rather cool in timbre and its focus was between the sub and mid bass region. Detail and resolution were good. This resulted in a punchy and animated presentation.
Franz Waxman’s “Dusk” is a moody piece from the film “Night unto Night”. The orchestral bass drum is very prominent especially at 5:40 when it is played powerfully and the C10 Pro managed to reproduce the clean initial strike and ambient decay very well. There was plenty of weight in the bass and it conveyed the dramatic feeling admirably.
The introduction to “Flame Nebula” from Kevin Kendle’s space music album “Light from Orion” features a prominent sub bass foundation supporting swirling synth figures and a slow lead melody. The C10 Pro produced adequate depth here with very good texture and detail coming through, but I would have liked a little more warmth.
Mids
The mids were very clean and detailed, with a cool timbre and were quite forward in balance. The transient performance was immediate and crisp.
“Theme from the Yellow Book” is a piece for cello and orchestra by Mike Batt from the album “Pieces”. Performed by Julian Lloyd Webber and the LSO, it sounded particularly clear and precise. Indeed, midrange clarity was perhaps the best aspect of the C10 Pro and the “rosin” effect of the bowing was very noticeable. However, the accompanying strings sometimes displayed a “glassy” or thin tonality which was also shared by the woodwind and this detracted from the romantic nature of the piece.
Vangelis’s “Spanish Harbour” from “Oceanic” features a lead synth emulating a Spanish guitar playing rapid sequences of notes and the C10 managed to reproduce each note separately and clearly whilst retaining the essential rhythmic quality. Backed by punchy drums and sparkling percussion, it sounded very exciting but a little “in your face” and did become slightly intense.
Treble
The C10 Pro’s treble was very detailed but also very bright with emphasis in the lower region and smaller peaks higher up. This was exciting, but also fatiguing from time to time. I would consider the placing of the 30095 BA in the nozzle was principally the reason for this.
The sparkling metallic tones of the rhythm guitar in Richard Vimal’s beautiful and haunting “Les Yeux Cadanasses” received a wonderfully clear rendition from the C10 Pro. Overlaid by a lovely minor key lead synth melody, every detail was crisp and well-defined. Although not entirely natural, the extra treble brightness really enhanced the performance.
Eric Whitacre’s “October” in an arrangement for string orchestra once again demonstrated the clarity and detail on offer from the C10 Pro. The violas at the beginning of the piece displayed good projection and the full orchestral climaxes were impressively dramatic. The timbre, however was somewhat brighter than I would have liked and there was an edgy quality on the higher notes. The extreme clarity did diminish the sense of musicality making the presentation more “technical”.
Soundstage
The C10 Pro’s soundstage was average in size. Instruments spread out to around the edge of the head but not beyond. The forward nature of the upper mids was most likely the cause. Depth also was rather lacking with orchestral recordings lacking a sense of distance and resulting in a somewhat flat perspective. The height was around average.
Conclusion
The C10 Pro was a “Curate’s Egg” with some impressive qualities, such as transient attack, detail retrieval and clarity, but it also suffered from too much brightness, an aggressive upper region and a rather condensed soundstage. It sounded exciting with some genres, electronic music especially, but classical music did not fare so well and long-term listening did result in some fatigue. The presentation took on a more technical rather than musical aspect.
If an exciting, enthusiastic sound profile is to your taste the KZ ZS10 Pro will serve you better. It has a similar entertaining sound profile but a warmer, more musical and more “fun” presentation and more expansive staging.
7 Likes