The Ultra Cheap IEM Thread

And they seem to come with the best waifu art ever.

1 Like

Kiwi Ears Cadenza

The Kiwi Ears Cadenza have been sent to me by Linsoul for me to test and to share my opinions in this review. As always with Linsoul, no specific requests have been made and I will do my best, as always, to be as unbiased and sincere as possible.

As always, I have shared a non affiliate link to the Kiwi Ears Cadenza via Linsoul on my blog, you can find the link to my blog at the end of this review.


I ended 2022 on a good note and with the aim of 2023 being a good year, I am going to start it on a good note also.

Over the last 6 months or so, the extreme budget range has seen some very good entries, each one raising the bar just a little bit more than the last. Some had tunings that I preferred more than others but there was no doubt that the ultra cheap IEM world has seen some fierce competition, which is great for those looking for good sound at an even better price.

The last set of IEMs that I reviewed were the Tangzu Wan’er and I said that they were a very good set that raised the, already high, extreme budget bar a little bit more, placing themselves in the top spot for ultra cheap sets together with the 7Hz Salnotes Zero. Well, I’m afraid that their time at the top didn’t last long as the first set I am going to review this year just placed itself firmly at the top, in my personal opinion of course.


The packaging and accessories are nothing special, including just the IEMs, cable and 9 sets of silicone tips (which is actually quite a generous number). The packaging is a simple black box, with the Kiwi Ears logo, that is packed inside a blue sleeve and not much more to really discuss.

If you are looking for an amazing unboxing experience, well, these are nothing special, but does that really matter when we are focusing on the contents and not the container?

Build and aesthetics…

The build is also simple, with plain black shells which I believe are 3D printed, yet the front plate sports a nice design on it. In my case they have a purple swirl with “Kiwi Ears” in gold text and I have to say that I have absolutely no issues with the aesthetics. Ok, I am not saying these are an amazing looking set of IEMs but they do have a nice touch to them and we really can’t ask for more at this price range.

The included cable is not exactly top of the line but it does do its job and the only real reason to swap it out would be for either a balanced connection or for aesthetic reasons. It is thin and comfortable, without me having to suffer it tangling too many times.

I would say that, in general, build quality and aesthetics are more than adequate for the price range and, due to the size and shape, I find them to be comfortable also.

My only real complaint would probably be with the included tips. They are by no means the worst tips I have encountered with IEMs (regardless of the price) but I did find that I preferred the comfort and performance when paired with Moondrop Spring tips. Obviously tips are a very personal thing but in this case, I feel that the swap benefitted the performance of the IEMs and not just the comfort.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)

Now we get to the good part!

As usual, let’s start off with a look at the graph in comparison to my personal preference target.

In the low ranges we can see that they are elevated above my usual target, however, the clarity that these IEMs offer make that a non issue. There is no sensation of bloat nor loss of control, with every note being clean, clear and decisive.

The subbass in my usual “Chameleon” test is a demonstration of how the lower notes can be very present without being intrusive. There is no lack of definition, nor does the rumble interfere with other frequencies. The Cadenza just present the subbass as it should be.

Midbass, which is always more of a worry for me when it is too elevated, is a continuation of the subbass performance. While we can see on the graph that the midbass is elevated, it is again well controlled and never seems to lose control or definition. There is enough warmth to enjoy the bass guitar in older rock recordings, such as “Whole Lotta Love”, yet at the same time, tracks like “Crazy” that can become boomy in these regions do not suffer from that issue.

From impressive bass response in “No Santuary Here” to just the right amount of body in things like “Tears in Heaven”, the Cadenza seem to adapt to the music and never seem to interfere with the timbre of natural instruments nor lack punch with electronic alternatives.

The mids are well balanced, without anything seeming to lack presence and as we move up to the higher part of the mids, the climb is smooth and is almost perfect for my preferences. I find that vocals such as Pentatonix in “Hallelujah” have just enough balance of warmth and presence, without either male or female vocals taking preference.

There is no real harshness, although recordings that are already harsh in their presentation are not tamed, showing no sign of anything being dampened in this regard.

In the higher regions, the extension is good although we do find a couple of little peaks in the treble regions. These are not really irritating but they can sometimes give a slight artificial “airyness” to certain tracks. This is really a minor thing but can be noticed in the higher regions of things like “The Next Episode”.

Sibilance is not exaggerated, with my usual “Code Cool” test placing the vocals just on the verge, noticing the sibilance but without it being uncomfortable. Based on the intro of “Hope is a Dangerous Thing”, I would say that the Cadenza even tame sibilance just slightly.

Details are impressive on the Cadenza, presented in a way that just blends in with the music. They didn’t strike me as detail monsters yet when actually paying attention, they do a very good job and things are just where they should be.

Soundstage is about the average for a set of IEMs but the image placement is good and they use the space to their advantage, seeming to leave space between layers in tracks like “Strange Fruit”.

Isolation is also decent, with most of the frequency ranges falling above average and not really lacking in comparison to other models in any specific range.


Based on the performance we are seeing lately in the budget ranges, I really shouldn’t be surprised that the Cadenza offers the quality of sound that they do, but I still am. It really is crazy how much improvement there has been in the extreme budget section over the past 6 to 12 months.

I honestly feel a little guilty when I say that something is amazing for the price and then in the following review, I say that this is even more amazing, as it feels like I am following the “FOTM” trend. Yet, when the quality is there, it can’t be denied.

If you are looking for something in the ultra cheap bracket, there are some very good options, however, up to now, the Kiwi Ears Cadenza would be my first choice. Now let’s see who is next to take the crown!

As always, this review can also be found in Spanish both on my blog ( and on YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


All of this goodness in the extreme low end raises the question of how do we tier the cost ranges. Recently, I bought several gift pairs of the DUNU Titan S (which Siri insists should be “do new tighten ass”) at the $60 price point.

Is there still a clear demarcation between the under $40 and over $50 price range? What about at the $100 range. Where do we see noticeable increases of performance?


I will simply say that the Dunu Titan S is the absolute peak of “fun/dollar” ratio for me. I love me my Monarch Mk II, my Moondrop Variations, my Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020… But I also love me my Dunu Titan S. S’fun.


As always, there is good and bad in all ranges, yet the % of good in the extreme budget categories has really exploded in recent times.

I wouldn’t say there is a clear demarcation of price but obviously, as price increases, it’s the smaller things that start to appear like slight increases in driver performance, better build qualities, more candy in the boxes etc.

As far as tuning goes, the extreme budget range has got really good and performance is also high. I think that the people who just want to enjoy music and not get involved in the whole equipment side of things and chasing that extra % of perfection, can be very happy with things costing in the lower end of the double digit price range.


Another 3D-printed dynamic driver option at this same price range with twice as many drivers as the Cadenza is the Fanmusic TRUTHEAR x Crinacle Zero. They seem to measure quite well, but are definitely geared towards Crin’s bass preference. This also matches my own preference, thankfully :grinning:


Tin Hifi C2 Mech Warrior

The Tin Hifi C2 Mech Warrior have been sent to me by Linsoul in exchange for the publication of this review. They have not requested anything specific so, as usual, I will aim to be as unbiased and sincere as possible in my review.

As always, a non affiliate link to the C2 Mech Warrior via Linsoul can be found in the version of this review published on my blog (link to my blog at the end of this post).


I actually received 3 sets of Tin Hifi IEMs from Linsoul at the same time, the C2 Mech Warrior, the C3 and the T4 plus. For no real reason, I decided to start with these and move my way up through the numbers.

The C2, which are also called the Mech Warrior (for reasons I am unsure of but I guess it is due to the aesthetics) are another set that enters the extreme budget battle, coming in at around 30€ (at the time of writing this review).

They feature a single dynamic driver which is supposedly a new development from the brand and as far as looks, they certainly break away from the usual Tin Hifi offerings.


The C2 arrive in a small white box with a sketch of a robot on the cover and C2 Mech Warrior written beside it. I really have no idea what a Mech Warrior is but I actually like the fact that it is not the usual anime girl that we find on so many packages.

Inside the box there isn’t a lot but there is enough for us to grab the IEMs and get listening. Apart from the IEMs, we get the cable and 6 sets of silicone tips.

That is it as far as presentation, simple but nothing really to complain about.

Build and aesthetics…

The shells are completely made of 6063 aviation-grade aluminum and opt for a shape that is very reminiscent of some CFA models, or even some of the older KZ models. WHile not completely original, it is a change from the usual Tin offerings and while the shape is a little strange, I actually find them quite comfortable. They are not the most lightweight of IEMs but are nowhere near as heavy as they look.

The included cable is coloured to match the IEMs and while it uses plastic hardware, I can’t bring myself to complain about it at this price range.

In general I would say that the presentation and contents are ok, nothing amazing but certainly acceptable.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)

First let’s take a look at the graph of the C2 in comparison to my usual preference curve.

Starting off with the subbass as always, there is enough rumble for the lowest frequencies to be present, however, I can’t really talk about the subbass without mentioning the midbass at the same time.

The issue I find here is that the midbass is more prominent than the subbass and it is not the most controlled and clean of bass representations. When trying my usual subbass test with “Chameleon”, I found that the midbass took the focus and made itself too much the center of attention. This meant that to actually test the subbass, I found myself needing to resort to isolating the subbass frequencies.

As you all probably know by now (if you don’t, you are about to find out :wink: ), I am not someone who enjoys an overly present midbass. If there is enough subbass to compensate and the midbass is clean and controlled, then I do find myself enjoying it a lot of the time. However, in the case of the C2, it has the midbass presence that causes me fatigue and can actually give me a headache after some time.

This doesn’t mean that it is bad per se, just that it doesn’t work for me personally and I do not enjoy the lower ranges of the C2. For example, the low end of the guitar in “Crazy” becomes far too boomy for my tastes, and while it is compensated by the higher ranges, it doesn’t eliminate that sensation, just tries to mask it.

Once we get out of the lows and into the mid range, things do get better. I find that vocals are decent and nicely defined, yet they can find their lower ranges competing with that lower boominess that can bleed into the lower mids.

The upper midrange has a smooth climb to it, reaching quite a nice level of presence in the upper mids of vocals, yet, the extension of the presence is just a little too much. This doesn’t actually become painful for me in the way a 5kHz peak would, yet it does give vocals, such as Johnny Cash in “Hurt”, the sensation of being too flat and dry in these ranges. It is as though the upper mids are a 2D representation of a 3D image.

As we move into the higher ranges, there are a few peaks that help give the C2 a sensation of being a little more open and detailed, yet, again, they seem to not quite be smoothed out correctly. It doesn’t become harsh, although there is some sibilance introduced in the usual “Code Cool” test, but things are just a little… unnatural.

Details are acceptable, although the “fake details” introduced by those peaks I find actually work against the real details of the driver, so it is difficult to judge. Usually I would focus on the lower mids in these cases, to see what detail retrieval can be found in those ranges, but I find that the excessive mid bass makes that difficult to do.

Soundstage and image placement is nothing extraordinary, it’s not terrible but it is by no means above average in this regard.

Isolation is about on average with just the 3 to 4kHz range being slightly above the majority.


While I can understand others maybe liking the C2, I’m afraid that to me it leaves a lot to be desired.

The midbass is excessive for my tastes, causing me fatigue, and the upper mid range and lower treble seems to be quite unnatural. Again, it is like they are presenting a 2D rendering of a 3D image and it just doesn’t work that well. It’s sort of like a blunt knife, the cutting edge is there but it doesn’t do things like it should.

This may sound a little harsh but with all of the excellent models that occupy this price bracket, I think the C2 falls quite a bit behind.

As always, this is my personal opinion based on my personal tastes, you may love them!

As with all of my reviews, this review can also be found in Spanish both on my blog ( and on YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


Tin Hifi C3

The Tin Hifi C3 were sent to me by in Linsoul in exchange for the publication of this review. The usual disclaimer applies, I have not received any specific comments or requests but it is always good to consider the fact that these IEMs have not actually cost me anything.

You can find a non-affiliate link to the T4 Plus via Linsoul in the version of this review published on my blog (link at the end of this post).


As I mentioned in my review of the C2, Linsoul sent me three sets of Tin Hifi IEMs, the C2, the C3 and the T4 Plus. After deciding, for no specific reason, to follow the number sequence, todays review is of the C3, which is currently available from Linsoul for just under 50€. This places it inside what I consider to be an extreme budget set, however, it is quite a bit more expensive than the C2, which comes in at under 30€.

While I will judge the C3 on its own merits, a few comparisons to the C2 along the way are inevitable.


The packaging of the C3 is almost identical to the C2, just without the robot. A simple square white box that opens to reveal the IEMs sitting in the top half and another smaller box containing the accessories in the bottom.

Inside the accessories box we find the cable and 5 sets of silicone tips. Again, nothing to really praise but nothing to complain about either.

Build and Aesthetics…

The build and aesthetics of the C3 are very different to the little brother, with Tin reverting back to a style that is much more common (for them and others). Using 3D printed resin shells in a much more generic shape, they are much more reminiscent of something like the T3 Plus.

The face plate features the Tin Hifi logo in silver over a carbon fiber weave background, simple but by no means ugly (at least in my eyes).

The more generic shape will mean that it should be quite a comfortable fit for most people and while I didn’t have any issues with the fit of the C2, the C3 shape is probably a safer bet for the majority of users. They are also lightweight and I have to say that I haven’t experienced any discomfort from them even during longer listening sessions.

The included cable is a step up in quality, at least as far as hardware is concerned, opting for metal connectors, splitter and chin slider, which features the Tin logo. I am actually quite fond of the cable. It is not my favourite cable ever but I have absolutely no complaint about the build or ergonomics of either the cable or IEMs.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)

Here is the usual look at the graph, comparing it to both my personal preference curve and the the C2 for reference:

Starting off with the subbass, we can already see that it is quite a bit north of my preferences in this regard, however, I don’t find it too overpowering in this regard. Using the obligatory (for me) test of “Chameleon”, there is a lot of presence in these lower areas and the control is not the best but it is not the worst either. The C3 seems to defend itself fairly well even in the more populated areas of the track and while I do find it to be a little loose when overworked, I have heard much worse in these frequencies.

Moving on to the midbass, we can also see that the presence is very similar (slightly reduced) to the C2 and I complained about the C2 being far too focused on the bass. Well, the C3 is a good example of how the presence of subbass can actually mitigate the issues I have with midbass. Yes, it is still too present for me in the midbass range but as the subbass takes a little more of the spotlight, along with that (ever so slight) reductuction in the higher part of the midbass, I find that it doesn’t cause me the fatigue that the C2 does.

The midbass doesn’t really bleed over into the lower mids and I feel that the performance is similar to the C2 but that, as the focus is shifted away from these specific frequencies, it comes across as being more coherent. One of the main tests that proves this to me is the low end of the guitar in “Crazy” by Daniela Andrade. In the case of the C2, the guitar becomes very boomy, which is part of my fatigue. Yet the C3, while still having a slight bit of boominess, it is far from the point of the C2, making for a much more pleasant low end for me personally.

The center of the mids has a slight dip but nothing really worth noting and as we climb into the higher mids, the presence of vocals and other instruments is quite nicely balanced.

From around 2kHz to 5.5kHz is where I find a huge difference between the C2 and the C3. As I mentioned in the C2 review, I found the presence in this range to extend too far, giving things a sensation of being compressed. With the C3, there is a bit of an extra boost around 4kHz that can make some tracks become a little harsh, yet it rolls off about 1000Hz before the C2, giving things much more life and making them seem much more dynamic in this range.

I know others have really liked the C2 and I understand that we are all different, listening to different music and having different tastes, so I can only speak for myself but I much prefer the upper mids and lower treble on the C3.

Moving up into the higher ranges, things do seem to roll off more than on the C2, while still presenting some peaks that can cause a little imbalance in these areas, yet, as the 2k to 5.5k frequencies are more dynamic to my ears, I find that I actually notice the treble more on the bigger brother.

Detail I would say is similar between the two, which is to say decent. Saying that, due (again) to that lack of “compression” and the reduction of those high peaks to some extent, I find that I can appreciate the details much more on the C3.

Soundstage is around average for a set of IEMs and while the image placement may not be perfect, I do find it to be a step up from the previous model, or at least the way it is presented.

The isolation of the C3 is very good above the 1kHz mark, much better than the C2 and way above average.


The Tin Hifi C3 are a good set of IEMs in my opinion. I don’t think that they are going to break any molds yet the performance is still above average for a budget priced set. In comparison to the C2, I find that they work much better for me in just about every category.

That doesn’t mean that they are better than the C2, as I have seen a lot of love for the C2, it means that they work better for me personally and that I enjoy them much more. I find them more dynamic and that I can appreciate the music much more, both in the low and higher ranges.

As I keep saying in what seems like every review lately, the budget section is full of good choices at the moment and while I don’t think the C3 is to be considered king, it is still a very valid option.

This review can also be found in Spanish both on my blog ( and on YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


Great, in depth review as usual @SenyorC ! I lost 90% of my use case for IEMs with my new job. So I’m not really in the market anymore but always enjoy reading up on what’s new in your reviews.

From the pics… these are really handsome IEMs!!


Great set of reviews, @SenyorC, thanks. I appreciate that you are straight-forward about your preferences. The “ultra cheap” IEM market is rather fascinating now, with a rapid pace of evolution. Sound quality - for the good IEMs - is dramatically improved compared to when I went through my KZ phase 4-5 years ago. Even though I have reference IEMs in my collection, e.g., U12t, I find that I really enjoy listening to the Salnotes Zero, Kiwi Ears Cadenza and a few others in this range for balance. I also find myself being less analytical/critical when listening to the “cheap” IEMs - as long as they are well tuned - which adds to my enjoyment. I am curious to see where the next “breakthrough” comes, better tuning (more collabs or otherwise), better components (via economies of scale?), or some uniqueness (design or technology).


That IEM looks very like the Revonext QT2!

1 Like

Yes it does! And now I’m thinking, I once swore by the QT2 as I thought it was the fun IEM to beat in the $50 segment… How times change!


Yes, that’s right. What happened to Revonext? The QT5 was quite good too, but IEMs like the TRN ST5 typify what is achievable in that price band now.

Truthear Hola Review​


The Truthear Hola is an in-ear monitor (IEM) featuring detachable cables and one 11mm dynamic driver per housing. The Hola retails for $18.99 at ShenzhenAudio. ShenzhenAudio sent me a unit in exchange for my impressions.


I have used the Truthear Hola with the following sources:

  • Qudelix 5K
  • Hidizs S9
  • Truthear Shio
  • Apple Dongle


The Hola comes in a small grey cardboard package with a white slipcover. The slipcover features the anime mascot “Shiroi” on the front face and details the Hola’s technical specifications on the rear face. The rear face of the slipcover also features the Hola’s frequency response graph. The text on the packaging is inconsistent as to whether this set of headphones is named “Hola” or “Halo.” In addition to the IEMs, the Hola includes an Truthear-branded pleather carry pouch with a magnetic closure and a Truthear-branded plastic mounting tray for the included eartip selection. The Hola includes three pairs of generic black silicone eartips (XS, S, M) and four pairs of squat, wide-bore black silicone eartips (XS, S, M, L). In terms of documentation, the Shio comes with a warranty card and an owner’s manual written in Chinese, English, and Japanese. The Shio also includes an illustrated postcard providing key biographical details about Shiroi.


The Truthear Hola features 3D-printed black resin shells with a pseudo-custom fit paired with CNC aluminum faceplates. The faceplates feature a geometric pattern printed in white. Directional indicators are engraved into the shell just below the slightly recessed 2-pin ports. The shells are unmarked otherwise. There is a small circular vent at the base of each nozzle and a larger bean-shaped vent towards the edge of the inner housing body. The nozzles have mesh covers and raised lips with which to secure eartips.

The Hola uses a different cable than the one included with the Truthear Zero and Truthear Hexa. This plain two-strand cable features a double-helix pattern below the Y-split. The wires are wrapped in a shiny black plastic sheath. The 3.5mm jack uses stout rubber hardware in an L-shaped form factor, whereas the Y-split and chin-adjustment choker hardware are made from black anodized aluminum. The Y-split hardware features the text “Truthear Co.” There is substantial strain relief above the 3.5mm jack but none at the Y-split. The cable has pre-formed heat-shrink earguides. The 2-pin connectors are embossed with “L” and “R” indicators. The cable is virtually silent in terms of microphonics, especially when the chin-adjustment choker is used.


The Truthear Hola is intended to be worn cable-up. The earpieces have a shallow insertion depth. The Hola is comfortable but required the use of the largest size of included wide-bore eartips to maintain a secure fit. Isolation is above average. I did not experience driver flex with the Hola.


My measurements of the Truthear Hola can be found on my expanding database:

Truthear Hola — Squiglink by Bedrock Reviews


The Truthear Hola has an overall warm tuning with a neutral midrange and a relaxed treble response. The Hola has a nearly identical tuning to the Moondrop Aria below 1 kHz, with the most noticeable differences between the two appearing in the upper midrange.

The Hola scores well in terms of both sub-bass rumble and mid-bass slam. The Hola’s bass response is also highly textured. Bass resolution and articulation are very good for the price but I do not agree with other reviewers who place the Hola in the same league as the Aria in terms of technical performance. There is still a gulf in technical performance between the Hola and the best IEMs in the $80–100 price bracket, especially with the arrival of the Truthear Hexa to the market.

There is a touch of bloom from the mid-bass into the lower midrange, but not enough that I would consider the Hola to suffer from mid-bass bleed. The effect is mostly positive, in that the Hola has a little extra warmth in the lower midrange. However, I can think of other IEMs around this price, such as the Moondrop Chu, which have greater midrange clarity. Switching back and forth between the two IEMs, I get a distinct feeling that the Hola is over-dampened.

The Hola centers its pinna gain region at 4 kHz, whereas the Aria centers its pinna gain region at roughly 2.5 kHz. I prefer the pinna gain region to be centered right at 3 kHz, so neither approach is ideal for me. With the Hola, male vocals are pressed too far forward for my tastes. On the other hand, I really enjoy the presentation of female vocals on the Hola. Vocal intelligibility is very good for both male and female vocals, though female vocals are slightly clearer. Timbre is very natural.

The Hola has a safe and relaxed treble response with limited sparkle and moderate air. While it may be unreasonable to expect more from a sub-$20 IEM, the subdued treble response hurts the overall listening experience for me. The Hola’s overall resolution is very good for the price point but is edged out in this respect by the Moondrop Chu. Instrument separation and soundstage are both better than what I would expect from an IEM at this price point, but again, I feel the Chu is slightly superior in both respects.


While it is possible to power the Truthear Hola with the Apple dongle, doing so required the volume level on Android devices to be nearly maxed out, at least with Spotify volume normalization set to “Normal.” Depending on your typical listening volume, I would recommend using a different source without the Apple dongle’s limitations if you regularly use an Android device. I did not notice hiss with any of my devices.


The Truthear Hola is a solid contender at the sub-$20 price point. I do think there are real gaps between the Hola, the Moondrop Chu, and the 7Hz Zero with respect to various aspects of technical performance. With that said, while these gaps are concrete, they are small enough that your primary decision point should be based on the subtle differences in tuning between the three. The Hola is the warmest of the three, the Zero the closest to textbook neutrality, and the Chu the brightest. In addition, each present what is ostensibly a Harman-ish midrange in slightly different ways. For those just entering the IEM space, my recommendation would be to purchase all three to better inform your more expensive purchases down the road.

The Truthear Hola can be purchased below:

Truthear HOLA Earphone 11mm High-Performance Dynamic Driver In-ear Mo (


TRN XuanWu

TLDR version on YouTube: TDLR - TRN XuanWu

The TRN XuanWu were sent to me by Linsoul in exchange for the publication of this review. They did not make any specific requests, therefore, I will be as sincere and unbiased as I can, following my usual approach.

You can find a (non-affiliate) link to the TRN XuanWu by visiting the version of this review published on my blog (link at the end of this post).


I have had the XuanWu since sometime around the early part of December. I have actually tested them on a few different occasions, which I will get to in a moment, but haven’t made it to the review part until now.

These are a set of hybrid IEMs, featuring a 10mm planar driver along with a custom BA driver, all for just over 30€ (at the time of this review). I am not sure if this makes them the cheapest set of IEMs with a planar driver but they are certainly well inside the extreme budget category.


Presented in a black box with gold highlights and images of the IEMs on the cover, it opens to reveal the IEMs sitting in the cutouts at the top of the box with a cardboard cover that is removed to reveal the accessories at the bottom.

Other than the IEMs we receive the cable (with recessed two pin style connectors) and 7 sets of silicone eartips, one of which is sort of a mix between regular silicone tips and the spring tips by Moondrop. Apart from that, we get the usual warranty card and paperwork. We really can’t expect much more at this price.

Build and aesthetics…

While the IEMs have some originality to their aesthetics, they are mentioned (in the publicity) as being aluminium face plates, yet these are the most plastic looking (and feeling) aluminium that I have seen. If it wasn’t for the advertising saying otherwise, I would have had no doubt that they are plastic.

That doesn’t mean they are not well built, I don’t see any specific build issues and I don’t have any complaints about them at this price range. I don’t find them to be the most comfortable of IEMs but they are not bad, they just don’t “disappear” like other models do.

Aesthetics are good in my opinion, looking like something that would retail for a higher price point than they do, even if they do look like they are 100% plastic.


I am going to be brief in this review as I really don’t get on well with the sound of the XuanWu. As I said in the intro, I have tried these IEMs on multiple occasions and kept leaving them to come back and try them later, this is mainly because I just do not enjoy them. However, I will share my opinions, even if they are in an abbreviated form.

Here is the graph of the TRN XuanWu in comparison to my usual preference target:

While the graph already points us towards me not enjoying these IEMs, there are actually other sets that have a similar (although not quite as exaggerated) tuning that I enjoy, that is mostly because of the way those (other) sets of IEMs perform.

I find that the XuanWu is not only exaggerated in the bass regions, it can also sound distorted and the IEMs (driver?) struggle to keep up with anything that is over a moderate pace, especially if the music in question is bass heavy. I just feel that low end lacks the speed that we should be able to expect from a planar and at the same time makes bass heavy tracks seem “dirty” in the low end.

At the other end of the spectrum, there is a very uneven high range that tries to counter the boosted low end but only manages to come across as harsh and irritating, to my ears at least. sibilance is very present, as is an upper sheen that is just uncomfortable.

I could continue but to be honest, those two factors just make the IEMs something that I can’t enjoy, I struggle to move my focus away from the bass and treble.


As I said, this is a very brief review as I haven’t really spent too much time with the XuanWu. I have tried on various occasions to use them over a longer period but I just don’t enjoy them and seeing that I have so many things backed up, I would rather move on that spend time going deeper into a set that I clearly do not like.

This does not mean that they won’t be for anyone, as I always say, audio is very subjective and these may be something that fit your tastes perfectly, I just can’t suggest them amongst so many other sets that I enjoy in this price range.

All my reviews are also available in Spanish both on my blog ( and YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


I received the Truthear Hola yesterday and my first impression listening to it is very positive.

I bought it for how inexpensive it was and because I had a fiio utws3 bluetooth adapter that I wanted to put to work again. I was thinking to use it just to listen to podcasts while walking as I never got such a really good sound quality pairing iems with it - I’ve tried it with 64 audio tia noir, letshouer S12, thieaudio monarch mk2 and the discontinued 64 audio U3, the last one is the only that I thought it was ok sounding with it, but all took a sound quality penalty for going bluetooth instead of cable with a good dongle.

The Truthear Hola is quite surprising, I think it sounds even a little better out of the UTWS3 than from moondrop moonriver 2 dongle (including trying it out of the 4.4mm balanced headphone out with the other two cables I use with other iems). And it does sound good either using an android phone as source or an iphone, even though I lightly prefer it out of android, but the gap between the two is smaller than with previous iems I have tested or bluetooth dac/amps.

The sound quality is very good, even if you don’t take the price tag of this iem into the judgment and its limitations for being into the budget category, as not having the ultimate detail, texture, staging, imaging, extension and refinement are not a problem to be reported in a non abtesting listening session. But you can still find some faults in it sometimes and depending on the recording, like a piano treble that is highlighted in a quite annoying way, a tiny and really subtle ticking noise in another album, instruments that feel too laid back in comparison to the rest of the presentation are sometimes big enough to drive your attention to them. None of these were bad enough that I could not have a smile in the face while listening to those songs though. It is not as detailed as the other iems I have, but it is detailed enough and it comes with something that I was missing in all the other: as it does not throw detail into your ears the same way better iems do, I feel it is very good for a non fatigue listening experience. I wrote it this way, because I don’t want to pass an idea that non-fatiguing may be a dull sounding iem, and the word I usually have in mind with non-fatiguing is relaxed, which is not exactly the case, it has enough of energy and live presentation to keep you interested and enjoy the music, maybe natural would be another word, but I also don’t think it would be exact (and it has multiple meaning in the hobby), as I feel its linearity and somewhat neutrality makes me think it to be in the natural sounding category in some sense, but not much what I would think when I read the word natural in a review. It just does it in a way that doesn’t make me tired in a longer listening session, it is not forcing its technicalities into your eardrums, and this associated with a very nice SQ makes a really good iem to have in the collection.

An issue is the fit with the UTWS3, they don’t seem to lock/grip and they can easily separate from each other and fall while handling, but never while in your ears. I will try some 2-pin to two pin adapter to see if gets a safer fit. [edit: while walking it unplugged a couple of times, so I will need to see if the adapter will solve the issue]

It does feel very comfortable in the ears, which is something that I had problems previously, being the discomfort generated by the iem or by the UTWS3, and also has good isolation.

Sound volume on iphone I use it close to 90%, so if you want to listen really loud maybe the UTWS3 is not better (maybe try the 5). Android lets it go higher into volume, but I can notice distortion past some point, it has enough of usable & non distorted volume range for what I usually listen.

So far, I am really happy with it and I do recommend as a pairing with fiio utws3 bluetooth adapter. There are certainly better iems out there, but how they will sound with fiio bluetooth adapter is really unknown, this one I think has something special about it, a good sinergy certainly.


QKZ x HBB Khan

TLDR version on YouTube: TDLR - Ep.163 - QKZ x HBB Khan

The QKZ x HBB Khan were sent to me by Linsoul in exchange for the publication of this review. They did not request anything specific and I will, as always, aim to be as unbiased and sincere as possible.

As usual, you can find a non-affiliate link to the Khan via Linsoul by visiting the version of this review published on my blog, link at the end of this post.


The Khan is another collaboration between HBB (of Bad Guy Good Audio Reviews) and QKZ, however, as we will see, this is a bit of a different approach than previous tunings by HBB. Coming in at around 40€ (at the time of this review), placing them inside the ultra budget category (sub 50€), the Khan feature a 10mm dynamic driver for the bass along with a 7.8mm dynamic driver for the mids and highs.

Aimed at being easily driven by cell phone devices (and other small dongles), the Khan has an impedance of only 10 ohms and a sensitivity of 117dB. This easiness to drive, along with the reduced price, makes them a set that can easily be thrown in a pocket or bag for day to day use.


The QKZ x HBB Khan arrives in a box that is nothing really special, although they have restrained from showing quite as much info and publicity than they did on the previous collaboration, the QKZ x HBB.

Upon opening the box, we find something that is quite unexpected (at least for me), in the form of a large gold coin. One side of the coin shows the HBB logo, while the reverse side shows the QKZ logo. I have no idea what the reason is for including the coin but it certainly makes it a little different as far as unboxing and contents go.

Obviously we also get the IEMs, along with the cable, three sets of silicone tips and a rigid storage/carrying case. The case doesn’t exactly feel like a high quality case, made of fairly indelible plastic, but it is more protection than a simple bag, which is about all we can really expect for the price.

Build and Aesthetics…

The shells are 3D printed and very reminiscent of the QKZ x HBB, featuring the HBB logo in gold on the right IEM and the QKZ on the left, both behind a transparent covering but opting for a grid type design rather than the lightning found on the previous model.

The build doesn’t scream high end but there are no obvious flaws on my set and I have no complaints about the build at this price point.

Comfort is decent although I did find myself opting for larger tips which seat the IEMs slightly further out of my ear canal as I couldn’t get a correct seal sith deeper insertion (at least with the included tips). I did wear them for long periods though and felt no discomfort.

The cable is rather generic and cheap feeling, although the 3.5mm and the splitter are both metal, with a swirl (or spiral) pattern on them. Again, no complaints at this price point.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)

Here is my usual comparison of the Khan against my personal preference target:

Now that is certainly a break from all the similarly tuned sets we have seen recently!

I expected the bass on these to give me fatigue in a very short time, yet, to my surprise, that wasn’t the case. In fact, I found that these IEMs inspired me to listen to more EDM and Hip-Hop than I have listened to in a long time. I have never really been a huge EDM fan (although at the right time and place, I have enjoyed a lot of EDM) but I was heavily involved in the Hip-Hop scene for many years (a story for another day) and while I still listen to HH, it had been quite a while since I spent a long session (actually multiple sessions) listening exclusively to HH. The tuning of these IEMs actually remind me of the tunings I used to go for in car audio many years ago, where people could hear me before seeing me.

Anyway, let’s get on with the review and take a look at them with my usual test tracks and following the usual steps.

Rather than focusing on the subbass, I am going to mention the low end as a whole, due to the way the upper midbass dip interacts with the lower bass regions. This makes for a very present but also very clean low end. “No Sanctuary Here” provides a very impressive low end rumble, making the bass seem as though it is felt although it stays clear.

That dip around 200Hz does disconnect the bass regions from the mids but it doesn’t do so in a way that seems strange. I sometimes get the feeling that on some sets that have a dip in the midbass can make it seem like someone has set the crossovers wrong on a subwoofer+mains set up, yet the Khan doesn’t give me that impression. It does have a negative effect on some tracks that utilize the roll of the midbass into the lower mids, yet works in favour of other tracks that have a larger presence in those deeper bass regions. The same dip also serves to avoid the boominess found in the low end of things like “Crazy”, where the guitar can become overly reverberant in its lower notes.

The midrange does certainly take a step back in comparison to the lows (and highs). I wouldn’t choose these IEMs for a lot of my vocal and instrument based music as I feel that the vocals don’t have as much presence as I would like, yet female vocals do seem to cut through slightly better than male vocals in this regard. With simpler tracks, this doesn’t really come across as an issue but more complex arrangements, such as “Whole Lotta Love”, does seem to overshadow the lyrics to some extent.

The higher midrange is not very present, with the usual climb actually peaking around 3.5kHz to 4kHz, this will accentuate that slight step back in vocals but also keeps things rather smooth.

The higher ranges are actually a lot smoother that I would have expected by looking at the graph. There is a good amount of presence in the high end but is not very “airy”. The sound doesn’t become overly harsh but can seem a little fragile on occasions. Sibilance is in check (as tested with the usual “Code Cool”) but is not subdued, so it will depend on the track.

I can’t say that I find sound stage to be anything above average, as with the vast majority of IEMs to my ears, yet the Khan does a decent job of utilizing that space and keeping things well place, allowing me to identify different layers without too much issue.

Details are not the strongest point of these IEMs, especially those found in the midrange, yet the lower ranges do work well to preserve those that are found in this range. It is not an overly blunted soung in general, in other words, they don’t make you feel like you are missing out on a lot of detail, but they do not stand out either.

Isolation is not actually great in the low end, yet the presence in the same region will mean that you will not notice external noise when listening to music (especially the genres that seem to work best with the Khan). The rest of the frequencies are around average.


The QKZ x HBB Khan are sort of a double edged sword. On one side, it is refreshing to listen to something that is a break away from so many similarly tuned IEMs in this price range, yet on the other side, I find that it restricts the genres that I would actually use these for.

I can’t say I enjoy them with the majority of my acoustic music (which is a lot), yet I do find that I enjoy them for Hip-Hop and EDM. I am not someone who listens to much EDM or Hip-Hop (at least not recently), so that means that, while they did inspire me to spend more time than usual with these genres, I wouldn’t choose to use them on a daily basis.

A large positive is the price, which means that they are not an expensive set to have around for an alternative tuning for those times you do feel like a bit of bass centric music. I also find that they do not fatigue me, due to that dip in the midbass, so I can enjoy them for more than a few tracks (something that was not possible for me with the QKZ x HBB).

If you are someone who listens to a lot of Hip-Hop or EDM, I think that they are well worth trying out for their price tag. Yet if you are looking for a budget set of all-rounders, then I don’t think these fit that bill.

As always, this review is also available in Spanish both on my blog ( and on YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on



TLDR version on YouTube: TDLR - KZ DQS

The DQS have been sent to me directly by KZ. You could say that they were in exchange for this review but in this case, they just said that if I had time and wanted to, that they would appreciate it if I reviewed them.

I have not had any further communication with KZ about these IEMs, so there have been no requests or comments made. I will, as always, do my best to be unbiased and share my honest opinion on these IEMs.

I was going to link to the official page for these IEMs (on my blog), as I usually do in these cases, but I am not quite sure what that link is. The person who reached out to me is from, which is a website that seems to be an official KZ brand web. At the same time, I have previously dealt with, which also seems to be an official KZ brand web. Both webs share the same street address (at least that is what I understand from their contact pages) but have different phone numbers, so I am confused :grin:

However, seeing that the DQS don’t seem to appear on the kzhifi page but do appear on the kz-audio page, I am going to link the latter of the two. I apologize to the person who sent these to me if I am linking the wrong page, please let me know if I am.

You can find the KZ DQS link by visiting this review on my blog (link at the end of this post)

All of the links I share are always non-affiliate but in this case, I am not even sure who I am linking to, so no need to mention that I receive nothing from clicks or purchases made via the above link.


I haven’t really been following KZ lately and although I reviewed the PR1 a few months ago, I really am not up to date on their latest releases. I am sure there have been a few as KZ are usually pretty consistent with new releases and seeing that they reached out to me in late November or early December about the DQS, I am not sure if this is still one of their most recent models or not.

The previous DQ models (DQ6 & DQ6S) that I have tried have been marketed as triple DD’s (emphasis on marketed) yet the DQS is a single dynamic driver. It also uses a semi open shell design and is available, with or without mic, for just over 15€ (at least that is the price on the KZ Official store on Aliexpress which kz-audio sends me to when clicking “buy now”, so I am still just as confused :wink: ).


The DQS arrive in the typical KZ style, a small white box from which a cardboard tray slides out revealing the IEMs beneath a clear plastic cover.

Underneath the top layer, we get the cable, 3 sizes of the “star” style KZ tips and the warranty card.

Nothing different from so many other KZ models we have seen in the past.

Build and aesthetics…

The build also follows the usual KZ style, with shells that resemble the other previous DQ models such as the DQ6 and DQ6s, along with some other models. I have to say that as far as the exterior build is concerned, I have never experienced any issues with KZ IEMs and I have no reason to think these will be any different.

The faceplate is different in aesthetics to previous models, this time with a brass coloured mesh type grill behind the openings in the plastic face plate. This does give them a very open back look. I can’t say if they are actually as open back as they look from the outside, it is difficult to tell from their publicity images and I am not going to take them apart to find out.

In general I don’t have any real issues with the build and aesthetics, they are not something I think looks amazing but they are not boring either. As far as comfort, as with other KZ models that use the same shell shape, I find them to work well for me, even for longer periods.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Spotify, etc.)

As usual, let’s take a look at the graph of the DQS in comparison to my personal preference target.

Starting off at the bottom, we can clearly see that there is a very large boost in the whole bass range, which continues to climb the lower we get. The lower ranges actually remind me a lot of the PR1 that I reviewed not too long ago. In fact, the measurements of both sets is very similar all the way up to around 1kHz.

While this is obviously way above my preferences in the lower ranges, it is actually not as bad as it looks on paper. The subbass, while excessive on tracks like “Chameleon”, is fairly well controlled and it does not take over the whole sound. “Royals” does come across a bit more boomy and “loose”, seeming to place more emphasis on that slight “dirty” rumble that the track has.

The midbass is also fairly well controlled, especially when looking at how much there is. It is not overly bloated and while it does affect the lower mids a little, it doesn’t become an uncontrolled muddy mess. In fact, even “Crazy”, which is a track that soon shows an overly present and boomy midbass (in the form of reverb in the lower guitar notes), is quite listenable on the DQS. I honestly expected the lower end to be far worse than it is and was pleasantly surprised.

Would I pick this tuning in the lower end? Well, no, but I didn’t find myself wanting to get them out as soon as possible either.

The dip in the center of the mids is noticeable when focusing on it but in general it doesn’t stand out as being overly recessed in this area. Some tracks will show this more than others, with specific voices or instruments that have their fundamentals in the 600 to 800Hz range taking a little bit of a step back but it is certainly not something that stands out on all tracks.

The rise into the higher mids is very smooth and is almost perfect, as far as tuning, for my tastes. It works well to bring vocals forwards but is not overly harsh and doesn’t really affect the vocal range dynamics either.

Sibilance is well controlled, with Paul Simon in “Diamonds on the Soles of Her Shoes”, who can be both harsh and sibilant, being fairly well controlled. The typical “Code Cool” shows just a hint of sibilance on some words but not all “S” and “T” like on many other more sibilant models.

The upper treble is where things are not quite up to par in my opinion. There is a noticeable roll off in these upper ranges with a peak to give the IEMs a bit of air and a sensation of more detail. Unfortunately that peak can come across as quite harsh on occasions and make the treble range a little brittle and unforgiving.

Details are not really excellent. They are not terrible but I wouldn’t class them as being a strong point of the DQS. They are acceptable and you don’t feel like half the music is missing but they are not doing to be something to sit down and analyze music with.

Soundstage is rather narrow overall and while the image placement is ok, the narrow soundstage and lack of detail make things like “Bubbles” difficult to appreciate, everything seeming to blend into one rather than specific layers being separated.

Isolation is surprisingly good for a set of semi open IEMs, showing to be above average in the whole frequency range. This is one of the things that leads me to think that they are not as open as the vents would have us think.


I can’t say that the DQS aren’t a good set of IEMs when I consider the fact that they are 15€. They are not my personal taste in tuning and I find that there are other IEMs around a similar price that I would pick over them but that doesn’t detract from what they do offer at this price point.

A set of IEMs that I have recommended a lot in this ultra cheap bracket (15€ or less) are the CCA CRA, also made by KZ. I actually prefer the upper mids tuning on the DQS over the CRA but, as I have mentioned before, I am not a fan of overly boosted low end and the DQS add another few dB to the CRA which are already way above my preferences. However, various people have mentioned that the CRA have received a “silent” revision, so I can’t vouch for how they sound now.

Details and soundstage are not the best, along with that sizzle in the treble range, but seriously, these are standing out due to the amount of good options in the budget range that we have received lately. I am sure that there will be many people out there that love a lot of bass and find the DQS to meet their tastes, offering them a lot of enjoyment for very little money.

As with all my reviews, this review is also available in Spanish on my blog ( and on YouTube (

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


QoA Gimlet

TLDR version on YouTube: TDLR - QoA Gimlet

The QoA Gimlet have been sent to me by Linsoul for me to publish this review. They have not made any requests or comments and I will do my usual best to be as sincere and unbiased as possible.

I will leave a link to the Gimlet via Linsoul on my blog, which you can access by following the link at the end of this post. As always, it is a non affiliate link.


I had never heard of QoA until I received the Gimlet. According to the packaging, QoA stands for Queen of Audio. Doing a quick search on the web with this info led me to the QoA official page which is quite a nice and modern website but is lacking any information about the brand, so I really have no idea how long they have been around. Maybe they have been around for a while and I have just not come across them.

Looking at their page, they have 8 models, with the $59 Gimlet being the most budget orientated (although there are a couple more models at a price that is not much more) and their TOTL IEMs coming in at almost ten times the price.

However, checking out the Linsoul page for these (which is linked on my blog, as mentioned above), they are listed as Kinera QoA Gimlet, so I am guessing that they are a sub brand of Kinera. I am just guessing here as I didn’t do any further investigation, I just got on with the important part (listening to them and putting together this review) but there is no mentione of Kinera anywhere on the packaging or on the QoA website.


I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the presentation of the Gimlet. They are not exactly high end IEMs but the packaging is very clean and professional looking. Inside we get the IEMs, the cable, a very nice storage/transport case and 6 sets of tips in two styles.

Nothing really out of the ordinary but everything is nicely packaged, with branding on the small bags that contain the tips and they actually gave me a first impression of being quality IEMs without even making it as far as build and aesthetics, much less listening to them. I still maintain that packaging and presentation is the least important part but it is still nice to get a good first impression.

Build and aesthetics…

The Gimlet are completely made of metal and use a simple rounded shape, with no sharp edges, that I actually find quite comfortable. They are a little on the heavier side, if you are used to plastic or resin IEMs that is, but I have not found them to be fatiguing at all even after long periods of time.

The set I received are white with a gold round plate that sports the QoA logo. I am not one for gold but I have to say that they look very elegant and with the matching white and gold cable, I would say that they look a lot more expensive than they actually are.

Everything seems to be well built, both on the IEMs and on the cable (which uses gold coloured metal hardware), so I can’t find anything to comlain about at all in this regard.


All tracks mentioned are clickable links that allow you to open the reference track in the streaming service of your choice (YouTube, Tidal, Qobuz, Spotify, etc.)

Let me start off by saying that I really enjoy these IEMs. These are another set that prove that my preference target is really only a reference target, as when things are done properly, I enjoy them even when moving away from my usual preferences. It is also worth noting that I chose the tips with the blueish tint to them.

Here is the graph of the Gimlet in comparison to said target:

I have found that these IEMs work very well for my usual music taste but I will focus, as always, on the test tracks that I use for my reviews and comparisons.

Starting off with the subbass and, of course, “Chameleon” by Trentemoller, there is plenty of that low rumble to do the track justice, without the Gimlet seeming to lose control at all. The same can be said with the subbass in “Royals”, where they stay calm and collected but show that “dirt” that is present in the recording. These may not be for the most hardcore bassheads out there but I really don’t think that the majority of bass lovers would have any issue with the quantity. The quality is also decent. It may not be the most amazing subbass out there but is certainly above the majority of similarly tuned sets in a similar price bracket.

Moving into the midbass and turning to something more EDM, in this case “Sun Is Shining”, I find the bass to be clean and articulate. There is a nice punch to the bass without it becoming muddy or taking over the low end. Focusing on “Crazy”, which I usually use to find out fairly quickly if the low end is too much for me, I found that while it is boosted, it is not annoying. There is a slight hint of the reverb becoming a little too much but the Gimlet don’t seem to lose control of it and they certainly didn’t fatigue me like so many other sets do.

There is a dip in the center of the mids but it is not something that I found to really stand out. It may be more noticeable on instruments that have root notes residing in that area but I certainly didn’t find it affected vocals or acoustic guitars in a negative way. In fact, I found the overall timbre of guitars to be slightly on the war side but very realistic.

As we head to the upper mids, there is a nice presence that brings vocals forward, giving them a bit of a focus but without them becoming overpowering. Using Beth in “Don’t You Worry Child” as a test for harshness, I didn’t find her to become unbearable. She is still quite harsh as her voice is that way in the recording, but I didn’t find it to be overly exaggerated.

In the higher ranges, there is a nice sensation of extension and air, with details seeming realistic and not artificially exaggerated by certain peaks. Sibilance is not overly present either. Using “Code Cool” as my usual test, with my usual unscientific scale of -12 to +12 on Patricia Barbers voice, I would actually place her between a -1 and -2. Paul Simon, in “Diamonds On The Soles Of Her Shoes” can also exhibit sibilance and harshness on many sets of IEMs, yet the Gimlet do keep him in check fairly well.

Details are good and so is soundstage. They are not going to give you the impression of a wide open and huge soundstage, I don’t find that IEMs do that very often, but they are definitely above average in this regard. Image placement is good and so is the spacing between the layers of vocals on “Strange Fruit” by Dominique Fils-Aime. Everything is easily tracked and while I have heard better, I would still say that the Gimlet perform very well in this regard.

Isolation is not the greatest on the Gimlet, being below average across the whole scale. I wouldn’t recommend these IEMs for use in loud environments but they still work very well in offices and places that aren’t too loud.


I have been very impressed with the QoA Gimlet and while they are just over the 50€ I set for the “Ultra Budget” category, I have to say that I think that these are a set that is well worth taking into consideration for those on a tight budget.

They are well built, they look good (to my eyes of course) and above all, they sound good. During the week I have been listening to them, I found that I enjoyed everything that I listened to and actually found myself adding a bunch of music to my “New Discovery” list to revisit at a later date. What more can we ask than to enjoy the music?

As with all of my reviews, this is also available in Spanish both on my blog ( and on YouTube (Acho Reviews - YouTube)

All FR measurements of IEMs can be viewed and compared on

All isolation measurements of IEMs can be found on


Now with the 0.75mm to 0.75mm adapter it is not disconnecting anymore and I am really happy with it soundwise: