Legacy 2

So I actually kinda bought a ton of IEMs to answer this question too. I was trying to find something that works for voiceover, for mixing, for critical editing, and for checking how mics sound in reviews. If I had to choose under $300, here’s my categories: * Mixing: Neutral enough to translate well on different setups (HD6xx, speakers, etc.) * Critical editing: Can it expose bad audio or does it hide flaws? * Monitoring: How good it is for hearing your own voice accurately. * Enjoyment: Just how fun it is to listen to. Letshouer Galileo Mixing: Excellent Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent (voice literally sounds just like me when monitoring) Enjoyment: Low Moondrop Blessing 2 / Blessing 3 Mixing: Excellent Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Low (pretty harsh, basically MDR-7506s in IEM form) Zigaat Lush Mixing: Excellent Critical Editing: Below average unless you crank the volume on sibilant spots Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Good

Etymotic ER2XR / ER4XR Mixing: Below average (soundstage is too 2D) Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Okay Crinacle Daybreak (surprisingly) Mixing: Depends—more “Meta” neutral than Etymotic-style Critical Editing: Excellent (picks up sibilance like crazy, great for catching issues) Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: High Xuan NV (big surprise) Mixing: No, too much bass Critical Editing: Excellent (vocals are super accurate for both male and female) Monitoring: Iffy—low impedance can be weird with interfaces like the MOTU M2 Enjoyment: High Thieaudio Legacy 2 Mixing: Excellent Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Decent Cadenza 4 Mixing: Excellent Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Excellent Orchestra Lite Mixing: Excellent (surprisingly neutral—not bright like Blessing 2/3, not warm like Dusk or Lush) Critical Editing: Excellent Monitoring: Excellent Enjoyment: Excellent Basically the Studio4 but more revealing with sibilance instead of smoothing it out. Hexa I don’t really recommend it—too many fit issues and inconsistent impressions. If you do try it, use wide-bore tips (not narrow). Video explaining why: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x-T8el9fbs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x-T8el9fbs) Hope this helps.

Going to use a grading system: A, B, C, D, F like in school A means excellent B is good C is average D is bad F is absolute fail **Mixing:** Going to avoid using the word "neutral" because then every mofo comes in the thread saying, what's neutral. Let's use the word "even-keeled'. Good iems for mixing are generally more even-keeled. If it has way too much bass you'll thin out your mix. If it's way too trebly and bright and shouty you're going to overcompensate. Ideally you want something more even-keeled. **Enjoyability:** Subjective. But how enjoyable it is **Critical Editing:** This isn't the same as mixing. But it means will it let you know if you have shit audio. If I listen to Kanye's sibilant ass tracks does he sound sibilant on them? If I listen to Lana White Dress is she sibilant on it? She better be. If I watch a DMS video from 6 years ago, does he sound sibilant on it? He better. Because he does. This is important because you need to evaluate your audio and the iem lets you know your audio is shit before thousands of people hear it. Etymotic ERXR Enjoyability: C to B to A. Pretty good, depending on who you ask Critical editing: A+. Very good at letting you know areas of trouble in your audio Mixing: D. Poor soundstage Truthear Hexa Enjoyability: D. I hate it Critical editing: A+ with wide bore tips Mixing: C. Imo actually a bit thin on lowend. You'll overcompensate. Also the soundstage on Hexa is kinda eh ngl. Salnotes Zero Original Enjoyability: C. I think it's ok. Or mid. Critical editing: B. Honestly pretty good at letting you know egregious areas. The version 1 is less forgiving with sibilance than 2, so it's better for critical editing. Zero 2 blunts the sibilance out (better for enjoyers; bad for audio engineers) Mixing: A. pretty neutral imo Softears Studio 4 Enjoyability: A to A+. Very enjoyable IEM Critical editing: D. Ironically. It smooths out all sibilance so you won't know sibilance is there. This is why it's so beautiful sounding. Mixing: A+. Very neutral. I'd even say probably my closest definition of neutral Moondrop Blessing 2 Enjoyability: D (harsh, shouty, bright, sibilant). Same with Blessing 3. Critical Editing: A. These are very picky with harshness in vocals. I genuinely think these are the Sony MDR 7506 in iem form. Mixing: A Zigaat Lush Enjoyability: B to A Critical Editing: C You won't really find problem areas of sibilance. You really really really have to crank it to hear it. Mixing: A. Pretty even-keeled. Kiwi Ears Orchestra Lite: Enjoyability: B to C Critical Editing: A. Excellent at picking out flaws. Mixing: A+. Excellent at telling you the whole picture. Excellent for mixing. Very very even-keeled.

Letshouer Cadenza 4 Enjoyability: A to A+ Critical Editing: B to A Mixing: A. While a bit U-shaped it's not egregious. It's enough to make decisions. Sennheiser IE200 Enjoyability: B to A Critical Editing: D to F (rounds out a lot of sibilance imo, which is actually a good thing for enjoyers). Mixing: B. Kind of shocking but while people call this v-shaped this is actually not as v-shaped imo. If you monitor yourself using these iems it'll sound exactly like you down to the microphone. Most other v-shaped iems don't do that. Crinacle Daybreak Enjoyability: B to A- Critical Editing: A (rofl. It's funny because it genuinely is good at picking out bad audio. If it sounds harsh it's because the original track is harsh) Mixing: B (This is more of a "Meta" tuned iem. But imo just enough where it sounds true) Crinacle Dusk Enjoyability: B to A+ (depending on who you ask) Critical Editing: C on Analogue. F on DSP. It rolls out sibilance by quite a large margin. Mixing: A on analogue mode. Honestly pretty neutral. almost HD600ish. But about a C on DSP mode. Tanchjim Origin Enjoyability: C to A (depending on who you ask) Critical editing: A (it'll definitely let you know spicy regions Mixing: A. A bit bright-slanted but definitely capable for mixing. Theioaudio Legacy 2: Enjoyability: C Critical editing: A+ Mixing: A+ Xuan NV (honorable mention) Enjoyability: A Critical editing: B Mixing: D (too bassy imo) I mention these because imo these are the Audio Technica M50x of iems but the size of 2 quarters. They basically give you accurate vocals down to the tee but thumpy bass. The vocals are very accurate on these. Not good for mixing though. Dunu Titan S (original) Enjoyability: C Critical editing: D (the treble is rounded out quite a bit) mixing: A (these are my imo pretty close to neutral)

PART 1: I'm coming back to your post now 22 days later. Because I wanted to answer this question. So think of this as a better update/answer than what I gave you. From a point of simplification, there's monitoring (this means when you use a microphone your voice sounds pretty close to you). There's critical voiceover editing (this means you wear headphones you can accurately detect problems with your audio, ie sibilance, plosives, phasing issues, etc) Then there's mixing. mixing means you are generally trying to make everything comprehensive and cohesive and sounds good on many mediums, ie iphones, speakers, car speakers, cans, openbacks, everything basically. Here's my thoughts: The Tanchjim Origin/Tanchim Fission are good at all 3. The Westone Mach60s (bought recently) excel at all 3. To elaborate, when I use any microphone it sounds exactly like me. When I watch microphone reviews by Podcastage, Boothjunkie, Curtis Judd, not only does it sounds like them to the dot but it sounds exactly individually how that mic sounds on them. When I listen to male singers, they sound correct. When I listen to female singers they sound correct. But it also does a great job of pointing out flaws in audio, ie I can hear everything. But also these have a ton of soundstage. The Beyerdynamic DT70IE (bought recently) excel at all 3. Though I'd give the edge to the Mach60s. Vocally it's pretty on point, with my voice and others. I noticed a voiceactor on Youtube mentioning the same thing. Just be sure to use the silicone eartips and toss the sponge ones (those suck). The Shure SE846 (bought recently) can do all 3. However I used the blue filters (neutral) along with the the black adapter from the AZLA SednaEarfit Crystal Standard which allows you to use all eartips, ie Dunu S&S. It veers warmer than the Mach60s but it's still pretty on point. It reminds me a lot of my JBL 305 speakers on my desk. The Moondrop Blessing 2/Blessing 3/Cadenza 4 excel at all 3. I map these all the same. While not exactly the same they're pretty much in the same camp. If you own 1, you don't need the other. The Softears Studio4 is good at only 2. Monitoring and mixing. But it isn't good for critical editing for voiceover. This is because it tends to round out sibilance and round out flaws in audio. So you need to cross-check it with something like a Moondrop Blessing 2 or a Thieoaudio Legacy 2. The Etymotic ER2XR is only good at voiceover editing and monitoring. But because of its poor soundstage it's not good for mixing. The Crinacle Dusk is good for monitoring. Good for mixing. But not suitable for critical voiceover editing. You won't know you have sibilance and problems in your audio. It even smooths out DMS's old sibilant headphone videos. ie I use his old videos as a reference for detecting horrible sibilance. The Dunu Titan S (original) are good for monitoring and mixing (it's relatively neutral). But not good for critical editing. It completely smooths out harsh sibilance on female vocals. Wouldn't count on these. The Salnotes Zero (original) are surprisingly good for $20. They are perfectly fine for monitoring. They also give you a general sense of the landscape and can be used for mixing. I thought it was a meme when I saw a ton of audio engineers mentioning the Salnotes Zero (original) for mixing. It also is good with critical editing (but nowhere near as reliable) as other options but it'll definitely point out egregious areas with your audio. Not bad for $20. I'd still strongly recommend going with the Fission (with S nozzle) which almost the same as the Tanchim Origin for a good price.

PART 2: (CONTINUED) Thieoaudio Legacy 2 are good at all 3. Excellent for monitoring. Though when I hear through with my microphone it's my voice but with about 10-15% of the lowend removed from my voice. These imo are the true "Baby Blessing 2" and imo are far more effective and reliable than the Hexa. These also are fantastic for pointing at flaws in your audio, ie issues like sibilance, clipping, plosives, boxiness, phasing, muffled audio, etc. Zigaat Lush (recently bought) is fine for monitoring. But I'm not entirely sure how it would translate to mixing and critical editing. It tends to relax a bit of the highs a bit too much imo. However, the Lush sounds substantially better when paired with the Moondrop Spring tips. Truthear Hexa - I'm going to list these as unreliable (for me). They've steered me so wrong so many times. Not that it won't for you. But I can't recommend them. Also the Hexa is the most divisive IEM. Just read this thread. No one agrees on how it sounds. Watch and read everywhere. No one knows what it sounds like. You got people saying it has a ton of bass. No bass. Little bass. Peaky. Harsh. Smooth. No one knows. You have me saying it's anemic in bass. Who's right? Who's wrong. Imo these are fine for monitoring and mixing. Not for critical editing. Purely anecdotal. But they have steered me wrong.

Thieaudio Legacy 2. Bear in mind that there's barely any accepted definition of neutral in headphones, and even less so in IEMs because the sound varies from person to person based on ear anatomy. Most of the bass-boosted new-meta IEMs released so far (KE4 and so on) sound either muddy or veiled to a lot of people, including the Truthear Pure which is more of a warm, down-tilted tuning, but some would also consider it neutral. The Legacy 2 is a bit older so doesn't follow that style of tuning, but it's not quite Harman either (which some consider v-shaped or u-shaped), it's closer to what most people subjectively say is quite neutral (mostly) and unlike the Hexa which has no bass, the L2 has slightly boosted sub-bass. The Simgot EM6L is also within the bounds of what some would call neutral, but it's bassier than the L2 and maybe a mild v-shape. Another neutral-ish option is the Dunu Titan S, which is a bit warmer and more vocal-forward. There's also the Aful Explorer which is quite L-shaped so I wouldn't really call it neutral, but it might fall within what you're actually looking for. It has more of a bass boost, but it's quite clean bass that doesn't muddying up everything else. But I do find vocals on it sound a bit recessed.

The Truthear Hexa is arguably the most neutral IEM, but it's a bit lacking in bass and the treble can be a bit peaky. I personally prefer the Thieaudio Legacy 2 as a neutral reference, with a slight sub-bass boost. The sound reminds me of the HD600 but with full bass extension (it's not quite as warmed-up as the HD650, but it has sub-bass instead). The downside compared to the Hexa is the upper treble rolls off a bit, so it may not be ideal if you need to pick out a lot of details in the high frequencies, but I find it sounds more natural. You probably won't get a closed-back that sounds as good as an IEM, unless you go up to something like the DCA E3, which I haven't heard, but a lot of people say it's the best (and perhaps only) neutral-sounding closed-back. You'd need to ask in /r/headphonesadvice about closed-backs.

Neither. What you want is something neutral-ish like the Hexa, but the weak bass on the Hexa is going to be terrible for EDM. Look at the Thieaudio Legacy 2 instead. Fairly neutral but with a slight sub-bass boost. Also happens to have exceptional imaging, which the Hexa does not. I haven't heard the Pure yet, but [opinions are quite mixed](/r/iems/comments/1lmledy/first_truthear_pure_review_is_out/). If you want something neutral-ish for music production then I think the Pure is going to be too warm-tilted. If you use it for mixing, everything is going to come out too bright (although ideally you should use studio monitors for mixing anyway, or at least have some other way to check your mix).

Dunu Titan S (slightly warmer & more vocal-forward) or Thieaudio Legacy 2 (more of a reference-neutral). The Legacy 2 is maybe more suited to pro work as it can be a bit less forgiving about badly mastered tracks, but it's still a good IEM for listening to music, as long as you're not regularly listening to absolutely awful mixes. It has particularly good soundstage and imaging for the price. The Hexa gets recommended a lot, but I'm not a big fan because it has peaky treble, bad imaging, weak and flabby bass, and the fit is uncomfortable for a lot of people (including me), because of its large nozzles. There aren't really any other flat neutral options in that price range, but if you want a slightly brighter neutral then the Moondrop LAN is pretty good, as long as it hasn't sold out (it's been discontinued but the LAN 2 REF is even more bright and not as neutral). The Aria 2 isn't really neutral, it's more of a warm-leaning mild v-shape, but it's not some crazy Beats By Dre style of tuning or anything. It's probably close enough to neutral for most people and a good all-rounder (at least as far as I know as it's the only one I haven't heard, but I've heard what it's very frequently compared to). And of these will run just fine on the Apple dongle, even the EU one.

There's quite a broad range. For example: * Aful MagicOne - pretty, but not overdone * Ikko OH10 - good looking, nature-based & reserved * 7Hz Timeless, Timeless AE, Simgot EA500 - minimalist * Tin C2, Dunu Titan S (black/red version), Truthear Hexa/Pure - industrial There's a whole load in the middle that are just random swirly colours which has become the default low-effort design. Something like the Thieaudio Legacy 2 does that well IMO because its just one colour with a bit of texture, not all the colours, all at once. If you want a plain black cable, look at the KBear ST12. There's lots of options out there. I notice the stock cables often don't match the IEMs very well, and intentionally or not, this most likely helps sell a lot of aftermarket cables.

Interesting point. There were some comments on this review & general confusion about the way it graphs: [SoftEars Studio 2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJoBPuaj9U8). SoftEars generally know what they're doing and apparently tuned this based on feedback from musicians; mainly singers. It's supposed to be for live monitoring vocals, but the FR graph (and listening impressions) suggest that it would be terrible for that. One idea is that it's partly to compensate for the occlusion effect, where your own voice sounds weird because you have IEMs blocking your ears. That's a good point about high frequency noise in un-mastered recordings, especially if you're not low-pass filtering at 20kHz. Most IEMs start to roll off around 15kHz anyway, so it's not really a problem, but some of them intentionally have a frequency response past 20kHz, which could potentially lead to hearing damage from sounds you can't hear (they can still damage the ear). Some IEMs are tuned with an elevation in the "air" frequencies (above 10kHz or thereabouts) in order to sound artificially more resolving, but there are also plenty of audiophile IEMs that aren't tuned that way. One I recommend a lot as a neutral reference is the Thieaudio Legacy 2. It's very comfortable and a has generally neutral response, natural timbre, with a slight bass boost & some vocal-forwardness. One of the things I normally say is a slight negative, but you've indicated could actually be a positive, is that it has quite a bit of treble roll-off. Here's a graph: https://squig.link/?share=Super_22_Target,Harman_Adjusted_Target,ThieAudio_Legacy_2 There is a peak around 16kHz but that's probably mostly a coupler resonance, so it's not really there. The main roll-off starts around 10kHz and it has almost no response at 20kHz. That's not a £20 set though, but it's still under £100. Another one I normally don't recommend is the Kinera Wyvern Abyss, which is about £20 but often goes on sale closer to £10-12 (on Aliexpress anyway, it's a bit more on Amazon). [FR graph](https://squig.link/?share=Harman_Adjusted_Target,Kinera_Wyvern_Abyss). That peak at 8kHz is *definitely* a coupler resonance - that's present on all IEM graphs made with this type of rig. It has a big dip in the treble, starting to roll off around 4kHz. It can make things like cymbals quite hard to hear. But if you're mainly concerned with say, guitar & vocals, you're not going to care about that anyway. That dip in the treble is the only thing wrong with it: it's very comfortable and well built, plus it looks quite good as well.

I'd also call the Hola warm, or warm-neutral anyway. My point was that on the 5128 it follows the JM-1 target more closely than either the Pure or the Hexa, so is therefore "the most neutral" (even though it clearly isn't flat neutral). Supposedly the bass is a lot more accurate on the 5128 and it's been said that this explains "BA bass" where the measured level was much higher (on 711) than the perceived level. I've started looking at the 5128 to check where the bass level falls, but 711 to try to understand the actual tonal balance. The Hola improves a lot with the right tips btw, the stock ones aren't very good. I personally find Tang Sancai (balanced) works best, but they may not work the same for everyone. It goes from an OK budget set to a *really good* 1DD, just with a very relaxed tuning. They really tuned it to the driver, so where it lacks treble incisiveness, it doesn't matter, because that tuning doesn't require it. The QKZ HBB is very similar, in fact it sounds a lot like the Hola, just with a lot more bass. I really don't like the Gate at all. The treble just sounds gritty and knocks the timbre out. For that sort of mild v-shape, I'd much rather listen to the Chu 2. For a brighter take on that 1DD modified Harman, I find the EPZ Q1 Pro to be quite good. I personally had to so some tip-rolling to get rid of a resonance peak in the treble, but I've since asked a couple of people I recommended it to (with that caveat) and they didn't have the same problem, so I think that's just an interaction with my ear canal. For a reference neutral tuning, I like the Thieaudio Legacy 2 more than the Hexa. Similar mids (the L2 is just a touch more vocal-forward), but it has a sub-bass boost, so it's still fairly neutral but you can actually hear bass. The treble is slightly rolled-off, but less peaky and more natural sounding (just less airy). I haven't heard the Yume, but the Legacy 2 and Yume have nearly identical graphs.

The ones I would consider to be some version of neutral are the Hexa, the Dunu Titan S and the Thieaudio Legacy 2. Apparently the Pure is more of a warm-neutral than the Hexa, but about half of reviewers found it sounded muddy, so I'd hesitate to put it in the same category. It seems to be very hearing-dependent though so you might like those, but if you really liked the Hexa then possibly not. I haven't heard it myself yet. I would say the Legacy 2 is more accurate and more neutral than the Hexa, but the only disadvantage it has is that the Hexa has a bit more treble extension. My Legacy 2 extends up to about 14kHz, which is fine for general music listening but there might be some instances where you need to hear higher frequencies than that, such as mixing, which is one of the use-cases where the Legacy 2 excels, unless you need to hear higher frequencies than that. Still, even though the Hexa has more treble extension, it has much worse treble *quality* than the Legacy 2, as the Hexa is quite peaky and that can exaggerate channel imbalances too. Imaging on my Hexa is really bad, with instruments appearing to wander around the stage, because those treble peaks are in slightly different places on each side. The L2 is much more solid in that regard and also has a much more natural soundstage (the Hexa is weirdly narrow to me). Also when I say the Legacy 2 is more accurate than the Hexa, that means it won't hide issues in a bad mix to the same extent that the Hexa will. So if the mix is sibilant, it'll sound sibilant on the Legacy 2, whereas the Hexa will hide that and smooth over issues more. So some may find the Hexa is more pleasant to listen to, not because it's more neutral, but because it's suppressing some of the potentially problematic frequencies in the 3-6kHz region. This makes the Legacy 2 a better choice if you need a neutral reference for mixing etc., but possibly worse for music listening (personally I prefer it to the Hexa so YMMV). I would put the Titan S ahead of of the Hexa as well. It's got a slightly more warm tilt compared to the L2 and more vocal-forwardness that, unlike a lot of Harman-like "vocal forward" IEMs isn't limited to only female vocals. It's arguably a bit less neutral, but it's coloured in a good way, and it's a subtle A-shape rather than the usual v-shape. The treble on the Titan S can be slightly grainy at times, but it's only noticeable occasionally. That's really the only thing that holds it back from sounding like a $150 IEM instead of a $50 one. It probably has the best build quality of the 3 too, although the Legacy 2 is the most comfortable, stable and lightweight. I would say bass on the Titan S is a lot better than on the Hexa. It doesn't have significantly more (maybe just a touch more), but it's more impactful, without getting outside the bounds of still being at a neutral level.

There isn't an equivalent benchmark IEM, probably because everyone hears IEMs a bit differently so there's never going to be the same level of agreement (maybe it'll happen but it's unlikely). In terms of sounding like the HD600, the closest I've heard is the Thieaudio Legacy 2, which is like an HD600 if it had sub-bass.

Simgot EA1000, mostly. The tonal balance isn't quite neutral though, it has a slight cool tilt to the midrange that I sometimes notice. Some would call them bright, but they don't really sound bright to me, so much as very unforgiving about bright-mastered tracks. For the most part they just sound correct, as long as the track is well mastered. I think someone who indexes specifically for vocal timbre, might be more bothered by that cool tilt than I am, especially where it's noticeable on male vocals. But I tend to index for things like complex tracks with lots of instruments, being able to still pick them all out, and each of them still having realistic timbre, so across the whole frequency range. I would say the Thieaudio Legacy 2 sounds the more neutral to me tonally, which can be better at times, because sometimes that cool tilt won't sound as natural. But most of the time, the EA1000 is the one that makes things, especially live recordings, sound more like they're actually real, rather than like I'm listening through transducers. The L2 is good but it doesn't quite have that effect. I was listening to the Truthear Pure recently and while it's fairly neutral across a lot of the FR (except the midbass/low mids), I would not say it sounds natural at all. It's far too warm, so it's very obvious you're listening through a device of some sort, that's colouring the sound. I have the Hexa as well and it just sounds pretty wonky, mainly because the treble is so peaky, which causes things like instruments wandering around on the stage. And also the lack of bass. There's one thing that the EA1000 does that I have not yet found any other headphone or IEM that can match, which is how realistically it renders drums, especially kick drums. I'm not sure what it is, but I have a theory it's because the passive radiator simulates the time-domain response of speakers in a room (which would add natural room reverb, that IEMs normally don't do, because they are supposed to be minimum phase). The closest I've heard is the Hifiman Edition XS, which can reproduce most of the decay in the sub-bass, but it doesn't have the same initial transient kick. Real drums at a live gig are really fucking loud. They should sound loud. For the most part, in recordings, they don't, but on the EA1000, they do. But not in a bloated, distorted, beats-by-dre sort of way. In a way that that just makes drums sound like real drums.

There isn't one exactly (it's sort of the holy grail of IEMs), but the Truthear Pure has a lot of similarities although without EQ it's much bassier - and not just HD650+sub-bass. Also I believe the SoftEars Volume S has a lot of similarities as well (with more comfortable shells), but I haven't heard that one yet. For HD600+sub-bass, I describe the Thieaudio Legacy 2 that way a lot - it's a bit more vocal-forward where it's right on the edge of being a bit shouty, but not quite over the line. Otherwise very neutral, exactly like the HD600 (the 650 is warmer and more relaxed - and IMO more neutral than the 600, although that may be a controversial thing to say). It's more neutral than the Pure without EQ I would say, but the Pure is a better IEM if you EQ it, because the L2 treble doesn't extend past about 14kHz (which is fine for general music listening since there's normally very little information that high anyway, but it's not great for monitoring etc.). Apparently the SeeAudio Yume (the original version) is tuned a lot like the Legacy 2 and maybe even a bit better, but I haven't heard that one myself and I'm not sure if they still sell it. The CrinEar Reference may be worth a look too, but "neutral" in IEMs doesn't really exist because of HRTF differences between people, so it's debatable if the Reference really is a reference like the HD650 is or not. Reviews of it are a bit mixed, but reviews of the Pure are very mixed as well. Both are tuned to JM-1, but the Reference hits the target a bit better. If you want to understand that and why it is/isn't neutral, see [Joel's video about](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZoKPtzjdtQ). Funnily enough more or less within the same week of the Reference coming out, the Headphone Show has stopped using JM-1 as their reference target because of research they've been doing lately (albeit the changes are small). So I don't expect the Reference will have anything like the longevity of the HD650, as too many people find it sounds not-quite-neutral. There's actually no evidence that JM-1 sounds perceptually neutral to anyone (it's based on mathematical model) - whereas the HD600/650 tunings were based on actual listening tests (and over-ears don't have the same problems of bypassing the pinna). A lot of people describe the Daybreak as very neutral even though it's technically U-shaped, and seems to be more enjoyable to listen to, to more people. I haven't heard the Reference yet, but IMO the Pure has a fairly enjoyable stock tuning, so it's probably more like the HD650, in that the HD650 is a very enjoyable headphone to listen to, even if it's not perfect. So it's unclear if the price difference is worth it, even if you're looking for a neutral reference, since the best way to achieve that is with EQ anyway. Bit if you want the general "vibe" of the HD650 the Pure is probably the one you want. The biggest downside of the Pure for me was comfort, but it's much better than the Hexa (which IMO is extremely overrated) so depending on your ears you may have no issues with it. It's no cheaper to buy anywhere other than Amazon though, so it makes sense to make use of their free returns policy. The Prisma Lumen is also tuned like this and seems to sound more perceptually correct to more people than the Reference, but it's in a whole other price bracket at around $1300.

I watched about 8 or 9 reviews back to back, as they all released at once due to the embargo. As a result they all blend together a bit, so I'm not going to be able to point you at specific ones, as there's a good chance I might misattribute something. If you pay close attention though, a lot of them call out minor issues, especially with the treble, which Precog just calls out more explicitly. In fact I'll probably go back and re-watch most of them later, with Precog's review in mind (and I'd recommend others start with his review *because* it's more explicit about what he doesn't like). Super Review said similar things, in different words. If you watch/read enough reviews, you start reading between the lines a bit more, as there's always a stronger positive bias in reviews (unless it's Dracomies). The reviews are overall positive, but the conclusions are mostly some variant of "this is very good for what it's trying to achieve, but it's not for me". Which if reviewers were more honest about just giving their own impressions than trying to guess what other people will think, would likely push the overall scores down a bit further. The big exception to that is Resolve who seems to genuinely really like it more than any other IEM. But Resolve is a bit of an outlier when it comes to IEM reviews, because he always gets length-mode issues. I don't mean that reviews were mixed in the sense that there were loads of outright negative ones - just that there are enough flaws that I don't see the Reference holding up as a benchmark IEM in 12-24 months' time, let alone 30-ish years like the HD6x0 series has. I'll be curious to see what people do think of the Reference in 12 months after the hype dies down, and when there are inevitably a lot more things on the market aiming for JM-1 without the excessive bass that a lot of the early new meta IEMs (like the KE4) had, which makes them sound veiled. And don't get me wrong, I agree with their overall sentiment that it's something that should exist and is almost certainly going to be good for the IEM market in general. I haven't heard it, so I can't comment on whether it's something I personally would buy or like, but as a *reference* I'd probably just pick up the Pure and EQ it. Especially given the Reference shells are apparently quite large, so it likely doesn't address the comfort issues the Pure has (and it hasn't knocked the Volume S off the top of my want-to-try list). I can be a bit more scientific when it comes to mixed reviews of the Pure, because they came out over a longer period and I kept a [running tally](/r/iems/comments/1lmledy/first_truthear_pure_review_is_out/) of them at the time. Having now heard the Pure myself, I can see where the "mud" accusations come from, although I'd personally call it a mild bass bleed rather than mud, and it's quite easy to fix with EQ. And it seems the adjustments the Reference needs are likely in the treble (hard) whereas the Pure mostly just needs a slight reduction around 200Hz (easy). Also the thing that worries me a bit about the Reference from a purely objective standpoint is that the treble seems to fall off a cliff at around 16kHz. I can hear up to about 17.5kHz so while I don't need extension all the way to 20kHz, for critical tasks I would want at least 18kHz without roll-off. This is actually the main reason I want to find a good upgrade from the Legacy 2, which stops at 14kHz (and no the Hexa isn't it). On that metric the Daybreak actually does a bit better. And the roll-off is so steep on the Reference that it probably can't be EQ'd back up, whereas the Daybreak can always be EQ'd down. Even the HD650 which is not known for its treble extension, doesn't start to roll off until about 18kHz, especially with fresh pads. > there are a ton of HD650/600 haters Yes, but also no. There are serious criticisms like the lack of bass extension and the issues with pad wear. Some people legitimately prefer other things, mostly for those reasons. And for certain tasks like mixing, a planar+EQ is going to outperform them. Then there are some deeply unserious criticisms that are mostly not in good faith, mostly from the same kind of people who say power cables affect sound quality. Outside of that, it's very clearly a benchmark headphone and recognised as such by the vast majority of people. The situation with IEMs bypassing the pinna is very different. It's not clear if there will ever be an HD650 of IEMs, unless it's something that's specifically designed to be easy to EQ, and EQ is accepted as part of the equation. In many ways the Dusk tried to do that, but it was let down by a very poor quality DAC implementation in the cable, and the stock tuning was different enough from the default DSP that it's not much good for use with analogue gear. I also think the Dusk was trying to use DSP to *fix* the analogue tuning, as opposed to aiming for a neutral baseline tuning with DSP purely for HRTF correction. Speaking of analogue gear, it's likely that the Reference *is* the most neutral IEM on the market currently if EQ isn't an option (or maybe the Lumen). Although it's also likely that if you have the opportunity to listen to a bunch of different things, that something might match your own HRTF a bit better through random chance, and hence end up sounding more neutral. JM-1 is just an average, so in theory it's going to sound too bright to 50% and too dark to the other 50%. There's not a lot that can be done about that, but it's worth keeping in mind that there's actually no evidence JM-1 sounds perceptually neutral to anyone. And the history of ergonomics research suggests that averages do not work. The HD6x0 wasn't tuned to a DF target in the same way that IEMs are currently tuned, it was tuned to "loudness diffuse field" which is based on [actual listener tests](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE1AIbetvDs). It would be interesting if someone tried to apply that methodology to tuning an IEM, and if the result ends up sounding more neutral to more people, or if it just results in a wide spread that ends up back at JM-1 anyway, once you try to average the results - I suspect it would need iterative testing to avoid that. Harman IE, for all the issues people have with it, was actually based on listener preference research. The Harman MoA 2025 target looks quite different to JM-1 and actually if you compare the complaints people have about the Reference with that target, it looks like it might address them. I don't know much about that target though (I don't have an AES membership and haven't read all the research, so I'm not 100% sure what it's based on). And I don't think anything is actually tuned to it, yet. But that's another possible *new new meta*, that might end up being closer to true neutral, for more people.

> Actually I'm kinda hoping once all is said n done with the reference we start to see companies attempt IEMs with preference bounds in mind and create something more diverse. Yes actually it would be nice if someone tried to use tuning nozzles or switches in a less gimmicky way, so they maybe represent 2 or 3 HRTF targets, instead of one. But give us one tuning per IEM, don't use a switch for "normal" vs "basshead" - just pick one flavour per IEM and design everything else around that. And much of the rest of the future of IEM design should be about reducing ear canal resonances that aren't part of the unblocked HRTF. The interesting thing about tuning nozzles is that almost all of them affect the eargain region & treble where HRTF effects are present, but in almost 100% of cases that I can think of, reviewers universally prefer the same one and the rest are just junk, rather that falling into clusters of preference based on their HRTFs. The only exception I can think of is the Simgot ET142, where they simply provide multiple tunings that are all potentially good (for the same listener). I find that interesting because it shows that while we *know* HRTF effects 100% definitely affect preferences, they don't affect preferences for tuning nozzles in the way they are designed currently. Presumably this is because one follows a somewhat HRTF-like curve and the rest of the IEM is tuned around that one, while the others just add random frequencies well outside anyone's preference bounds. > a single target is just not ideal for listener preferences. While this is almost certainly true, what's missing is a solution. One thing that would be interesting is instead of a single median HRTF like JM-1, come up with clustered averages instead, so the result is 2 or 3 different targets which could then be used as the targets for tuning-switch modes. The result is then a lot more like a height adjustment on a chair than giving everyone PEQ and telling them to just build their own chair from scratch.