thatcarolguy

thatcarolguy t1_j0gbdv8 wrote

No contest for me at least. Zero has a big 11k spike for me that completely kills the timbre. Quarks has smooth treble and the upper treble is somewhat subdued. If it just had a little more from about 9-14k without any peaks it would be perfect the way my Dusk is after applying EQ but as-is without EQ (user applied EQ at least) it may be the best sounding audio device I have heard yet.

3

thatcarolguy t1_iyds6cg wrote

Go to EQ. Then if it is inconvenient to use EQ all the time or you don't want to for any reason then you will know where to go.

Also you could try listening to some frequency sweeps and see if you get any big treble peaks in your ears. These can be hard to EQ perfectly and if you have them you might be better off finding a set that doesn't produce them as much.

This is seriously important. No matter what the price range, whether an IEM works with your ears to produce a smooth response is far more important than what any reviewer says or the set's reputation for "technicalities". Most people seem to think the Aria is better than the Chu but for me the Chu is very good and the Aria is the worst thing I have ever heard.

But how to find the one that sounds best to you? Well that's hard. You can start by looking through various reviewer's databases and notice how they show different peaks at different magnitudes. If one reviewer's measurement of an IEM that you own shows treble spikes that correspond with what you hear in your ears then that might be an indication that that particular's measurements are more relevant to you than others'.

For example, I don't find Crinacle's measurements useful to me at all. Many of his measurements do not show treble spikes that I hear and that other reviewers' measurements pick up on. I particularly like Precogvision's measurement database. Most of his measurement's show nasty treble spikes above 10k but notably the Blessing 2: Dusk did not and most other measurements showed it as smooth as well so I bought that one and lo and behold, it sounds good to me. It has no flaws that I can't improve with EQ so it is total endgame for me.

5

thatcarolguy t1_ixmdng8 wrote

True. I do think the air can be EQd (Or DSPd) but the amount required would vary per listener and the most important thing is not having huge spikes. For me the Dusk is the only IEM I have heard s o far where the air frequencies can be boosted and cut at will without worrying about any spikes above 10k.

−1

thatcarolguy t1_iutu1g7 wrote

To me it sounds like you need to play around with EQ to figure out what you like instead of buying IEMs blind to basically do the same thing.

Then once you find what EQ makes the b2 even better you can try for an IEM that has that signature or if possible in your use case, just enjoy your perfectly EQd b2.

5

thatcarolguy t1_iu08e8k wrote

Yes and yes but it is still highly individual. Chu has less bass and mud which can be seen as an upgrade or downgrade but most importantly it has a smoother and better treble timbre in my my ears (CRA has a moderate 10k spike, nothing crazy)

But keep in mind that a lot of people don't complain about these treble spikes at all so they might not be getting them like I do or they might be getting them in different places at different magnitudes, or they may be getting them and just complain about treble timbre instead.

For example some have said the Chu has a slight metallic timbre. I can see what they mean I guess (I notice a slight 12k spike though nothing dealbreaking) but it still has a smoother and more natural treble timbre than any other budget IEM I've tried.

And yeah, a lot of people have complained about the Chu breaking. I have had no problem but I am also very careful to keep my ears clean so nothing can clog the filters. What I would recommend is just get the Chu anyway unless wasting $20 would really put you out in your financial situation or if you have a moral problem supporting a company with questionable QC.

1