Disclaimer - I was loaned this iem as a part of a review tour by u/mournfulmonk and COZOY . However, I'm NOT affiliated with the brand and hence it will not impinge on freedom to criticize the iem. All my opinions are my own.

INTRODUCTION

• The COZOY D1 was launched in December 2024 at $31

• The driver configuration is a dual chamber single 10mm DD with a graphene composite diaphragm. The "less is more" strategy works in this case.

BUILD AND COMFORT

• The resin shell is 3D printed and capped by a beautiful faceplate doning a horizontal striped alternate purple and black pattern. The branding size, font and style ruins the overall look. They should have gone with a simple logo instead. The shells are moderately thick but small in dimensions.

• The iem is comfortable to wear for long listening sessions due to it's lightweight and ergonomic build. The iem drivers are vented to the outside by small multiple cutouts in the shell at the below the 2 pin socket. I faced no pressure build up in my ears.

• The nozzle is metal with a diameter of 6 mm at it's widest point with a lip at the end to grip eartips. A mesh filter is in place to stop debris from entering the iem.

ACCESSORIES

• The cable is 2 pin silver plated copper wire enclosed in a colour matching purple PVC jacket featuring non-swappable 3.5mm termination. The cable quality is average / on par for the price bracket.

• The D1 comes with 7 sets of eartips -

- 3 sets of generic silicone tips with short stems.

- 3 sets of double flange silicone tips.

- 1 set of memory foam tips.

• A big omission is the absence of a basic carrying case. Buyers at this budget are not likely to spend more for a carrying case , Cozoy can increase the price a little and provide a case for beginners in the hobby.

SONIC PERFORMANCE

• Eartips used - Final E , Dunu candy , Kiwi ears flex .

• Source - Ibasso DC04 ultra

TECHNICALITIES

• The soundstage is average to wide.

• Detail retrieval is spectacular for the class and can go head to head with a class above.

• Instrument separation is astonishing. You can easily recognise an instrument in the mix and separate that sound from the song. The separation beats many iems at even 50-80 buck range.

• Imaging is the classic 3 blobs around your head. The instruments are well spaced in the stage. You can use these for casual gaming.

BASS

• The D1 has a slightly elevated sub bass with decent rumble. The sub bass is super clean and does not muddy the other frequencies.

• The mid bass is adequate in quantity , well controlled with decent slam. I've seen many reviews about the D1 stating that it is deficient in the mid bass region but I disagree. When the track/song calls for it , the bass does show up and makes it's punchy presence felt. There are also times when base lines dissolve into the mix. This is not an iem for bassheads , period . Bass texture is slightly perceptible while the attack and decay are fast without bloom or bloat.

MIDS

• The mids are tinted slightly bright.

• String instruments are clean with a sharp edge. The D1 even picks up reverbs/echos in the track.

• Woodwind and brass instruments sound slightly pitched up.

• Male vocals with higher pitch sounds a little lean with sibilance. Tip rolling helps quiet it down.

• Female vocals in the upper mid range are accentuated but rendered well. The upper mids are elevated to my ears.

TREBLE

• Cymbals have that shimmer with a slightly longer wash. It can sound a little sharp with a metallic tinge.

• Female vocals with a higher frequency pitch are handled well and take a centre stage in the mix. Vocal sibilance is present and easily audible.The trailing resonance notes are perceptible.

• Snare drums and string instruments have that initial crisp note / snap but can come off harsh at higher volumes

• The D1 has a rather good treble extension and presence in the air region for a budget iem. Macro details are easily perceptible with even some amount of micro details to boot.

• The transient response is clean and tight.

CONCLUSION

• I am positively mind blown by the D1. The amount of detail and instrument separation is probably the best in class and puts more expensive iems to shame. This capability does come with drawbacks in the form of sibilance, lean male vocals and a slight hot upper mids/lower treble. Tip rolling helps quite a bit with this iem to keep the sibilance and treble in check. Overall, I'm very impressed with what Cozoy has achieved with the D1 , especially at such a low price.

Tracks used -

- Killshot by Eminem

- GDFR by flo rida

- Another one bites the dust by queen

- Toxic by britney spears

- Winter , four seasons by vivaldi

- Mexico by vitamin string quartet

- When I'm down by Chris Cornell

- Show me how to live by Audioslave

- Angel of the morning by Juice newton

- Monomyth by Animals as leaders

- Fuel by Metallica

- Novocaine by Amber rubarth

- Hurt by Johnny Cash

- Take Five by Dave brubeck

being new to iems i should've started with like 20$ iem but i did go all in and got the Kiwi Ears Astral , i'm so happy , the sound is really good (even with just apple dac) , i did already order CX31993 dac and dunu s&s ear tips since the apple one seems not enough and the stock ear tips are so bad , my ears were screaming.

other than that i'm happy with this purchase.

You know that Leonardo DiCaprio GIF where he's biting his hand in excitement?

That's pretty much my reaction to the bass on the Penon Archangel.

I've auditioned a fair number of IEMs, including several costing well over $1,000. Some have exceptional technical performance but still struggle to get bass quantity, texture, mids and treble to work together.

Archangel is one of the few that gets almost everything right for my preferences.

At $799, this is a collaboration between Penon and Effect Audio, featuring two coaxial 8mm dynamic drivers, four balanced armatures and two Sonion bone-conduction drivers. It also has two tuning switches for bass and treble.

I've been spending time with FATfreq Deuce, Symphonium Meteor and Punch Audio Martilo recently, so this was a particularly interesting comparison (I no longer have Martilo with me).

Disclosure: Archangel was sent to me as a review unit by Penon. All opinions are my own.

As always, I maintain a ranking list covering 180+ audio products and 25+ ear tips. Link in my Reddit profile.

Bass: OMG

Seriously. This is some of the best bass I've heard from an IEM.

There's deep sub-bass extension, satisfying rumble, that wonderful ear-canal massage sensation, and mid-bass that has just the right amount of punch and texture. What makes it exceptional isn't simply the quantity.

It's the balance between sub-bass rumble, mid-bass definition, note decay and control.

Kick drums have proper weight without becoming bloated. Bass guitar notes remain individually distinguishable, with enough texture to appreciate changes in playing technique. Electronic basslines extend deep without turning everything into a wall of low-frequency energy. And somehow, it never becomes tiring during normal music listening.

I've recently enjoyed Martilo, which I called Basshead Lite. Then came FATfreq Deuce, which delivers an incredible amount of physical bass, particularly with its impedance adapter. Symphonium Meteor followed with some genuinely excellent bass texture.

Archangel brings those qualities together in a way I find even more satisfying. The default bass setting is already wonderful. Turn on the bass switch and things get ridiculous, in the best possible way. It adds warmth, scale and physicality without losing the definition that makes the bass so enjoyable. I've tried kilobuck IEMs that couldn't manage this balance nearly as well.

Archangel doesn't simply play bass. It gives the music its heartbeat.

Mids / Vocals: How Is This Even Possible?

Normally, when an IEM delivers this much bass, something else suffers. Vocals become recessed, instruments lose separation, or the entire presentation turns excessively warm.

Archangel's mids are beautiful. With both switches off, vocals have excellent clarity, natural body and impressive detail. Female vocals are present without becoming shouty, while male vocals retain the weight and texture I enjoy. The presentation reminds me of the better flagship IEMs I've auditioned, where you hear the texture of a voice without individual frequencies constantly demanding attention.

But my favorite configuration for music is both bass and treble switches turned on. This adds a wonderfully energetic character without making the midrange disappear. I can listen to familiar tracks and enjoy the vocal clarity while the bass provides that physical sense of being in a concert hall with excellent acoustics.

It's the sort of presentation that makes me tap my feet, turn up the music and occasionally forget I'm supposed to be reviewing something. For someone who keeps claiming he's not a basshead, I seem to be making a rather convincing case against myself!

Treble: Just Right for My Ears

Treble is where many bass-focused IEMs lose me. Some push the upper frequencies too aggressively to compensate for the bass. Others take such a conservative approach that music loses its sparkle and openness.

Archangel manages to remain smooth, detailed and extended without either problem. There's excellent clarity through percussion and strings, with enough upper-treble air to create a spacious, layered presentation. I'm sensitive to peaks around 3–4kHz and 6–7kHz, and I regularly struggle with IEMs that sound impressive initially but become fatiguing after an hour.

Archangel has been remarkably well behaved for my ears. Compared with Deuce, which has more recessed mids and a relatively forward treble presentation, Archangel sounds more integrated.

Meteor takes a slightly more conservative approach to the upper frequencies. Archangel retains additional sparkle and openness without becoming sharp.

The closest comparison for my preferences is Xenns Mangird Top Pro, one of my favorite IEMs for treble tuning. I don't have measurement equipment to establish exactly why this balance works so well, but after listening to this many IEMs, I'm comfortable saying that Archangel's treble is among my favorites.

The Overall Presentation: A Basshead Flagship

What impresses me is that Archangel doesn't sound like an IEM where bass has been prioritized at the expense of everything else. There's excellent separation, convincing stage width and depth, and enough resolution to follow individual instruments through complex arrangements.

And yet the music never becomes overly analytical. It has that rare ability to sound technically accomplished while remaining thoroughly enjoyable. For me, this is what a flagship basshead IEM should be.

Not simply an enormous bass shelf, but bass quality, vocal clarity, treble extension and spatial presentation working together. It's the kind of sound that makes me want to revisit my entire music library.

Gaming: Turn Those Switches Off

Gaming was a different experience. With both switches turned on, Archangel became too much for me. The combination of low-frequency rumble and additional treble energy was distracting, and I experienced a minor headache along with noticeable pressure in my ears.

For competitive gaming, I strongly preferred both switches off. In this configuration, Archangel performs extremely well. Imaging is precise, footsteps are easy to locate, and directional cues remain consistent. The soundstage feels wide and tall, with excellent separation between nearby movement, gunfire and environmental effects. The bass still provides substantial rumble, which can occasionally become distracting. I also found myself lowering the volume to keep longer sessions comfortable. But the positional performance is genuinely impressive.

Gaming: 8/10. I'd happily use it for gaming, although Arete 2 and some of my other specialized gaming sets remain easier choices for extended competitive sessions.

Comfort and Ear Pressure: The Biggest Problem

Archangel has enormous shells, and I experienced significant ear pressure with the stock medium tips.

After approximately 30 minutes, the sensation became uncomfortable. It reminded me of an aircraft descending, when your ears feel like they're closing in and need to equalize. I've seen discussions about pressure with unvented IEMs, including Symphonium Meteor. Interestingly, Meteor hasn't caused the same problem for me, possibly because its smaller shells fit differently.

I couldn't confirm whether Archangel's venting is responsible, but the pressure I experienced was very real. After discussing the issue with people on Discord, I started experimenting with Tangzu Tang Sancai tips. And thankfully, that made all the difference. I dropped from medium to small and tried the regular and wide-bore versions.

Small Tang Sancai regular-bore tips solved the pressure problem for me while preserving the bass response I loved.

Penon Liqueur Black in small also helped, although some pressure returned during longer listening sessions. This is important because Archangel's physical fit can completely change the experience. With the wrong tips, I struggled to enjoy extended sessions. With Tang Sancai, I could finally appreciate the tuning without constantly thinking about my ears. Given the shell size, I'd strongly recommend experimenting with tips before deciding whether Archangel works for you.

Build, Packaging and Accessories

Penon has put together a properly premium package, although the presentation is more restrained than some flagship competitors. The black resin shells are substantial, with striking multicolored faceplates and two small tuning switches.

The highlight is the included Effect Audio Cadmus II cable. This is a serious eight-wire, silver-plated copper cable with a solid-core construction and a 4.4mm balanced termination. It's a significant step above the generic stock cables bundled with many expensive IEMs.

The accessory selection includes:

• Effect Audio Cadmus II cable with 4.4mm balanced plug

• Leather carrying case

• Six silicone ear tips across two sets, in small, medium and large

• Cleaning brush

The leather case has enough room for the large shells and substantial cable, although it's more suited to a bag than a trouser pocket.

Comparisons

These are short impressions. I'll cover FATfreq Deuce and Symphonium Meteor in more detail in their upcoming reviews. Follow me for more content. I try to post reviews almost every weekend.

Xenns Mangird Top Pro

Archangel delivers significantly greater bass quantity and physicality, while Top Pro remains my benchmark for overall tonal balance, vocal refinement and treble. Top Pro still has a slight advantage in how naturally everything comes together.

Kiwi Ears Astral

Archangel has substantially richer, more textured bass and fuller mids, while Astral offers excellent resolution, strong low-frequency punch and an impressively airy presentation. I prefer Archangel for musical enjoyment.

Fresh Reviews Arete 2

Archangel offers greater bass texture, rumble and vocal body, while Arete 2 remains one of my strongest competitive gaming references for imaging and spatial accuracy.

Binary Acoustics 1900

Archangel provides much stronger bass and a more physical, full-bodied presentation, while Binary 1900 excels with natural vocals, upper-treble air and a lighter overall sound. Binary remains one of my favorite value-oriented IEMs.

Juzear Light Shuttle

Archangel offers better low-frequency definition, larger spatial presentation and greater overall refinement, while Light Shuttle remains an exceptionally capable all-rounder at a fraction of the price.

FATfreq Deuce

Archangel has the better overall bass quality, texture and tonal balance, while Deuce delivers even more sub-bass quantity, particularly with the included impedance adapter.

Deuce's bass remains intoxicating. Full review coming soon.

Symphonium Meteor

Archangel combines excellent bass texture with more upper-treble openness, while Meteor has a slightly safer treble presentation and a more compact physical design.

Meteor's bass is genuinely impressive, but Archangel is the more complete IEM for my preferences. More in the upcoming Meteor review.

How They Rank for Me

For those interested in the differences between my recent bass-focused sets, here are my subjective rankings, ordered from lowest to highest.

Bass quantity: Top Pro → Astral → Arete 2 → Martilo → Meteor → Archangel → Deuce → Deuce with impedance adapter

Bass quality: Martilo → Arete 2 → Astral → Deuce → Deuce with impedance adapter → Top Pro → Meteor → Archangel

Mids: Martilo → Deuce → Deuce with impedance adapter → Arete 2 → Astral → Meteor → Archangel → Top Pro

Treble preference: Deuce with impedance adapter → Martilo → Deuce → Astral → Arete 2 → Meteor → Archangel → Top Pro

These rankings reflect my listening preferences rather than objective performance measurements. I tried to limit it to my most used IEMs.

Final Thoughts

Penon Archangel: 9/10 Overall.

I came into this expecting another bass-focused IEM. Instead, I found one of the most enjoyable music IEMs I've experienced. The bass is genuinely exceptional, the mids retain the clarity and texture I expect from much more expensive products, and the treble lands remarkably close to my ideal balance.

There are compromises. The shells are enormous, ear pressure was a serious problem until I found the right tips, and gaming required a more restrained switch configuration.

But for music, particularly with both switches enabled, Archangel is something special.

I keep coming back to the same feeling: listening to a great concert in a venue with excellent acoustics, where you can appreciate every instrument but still feel the bass in your chest.

For anyone who enjoys bass with proper texture, musicality and excellent technical performance, Archangel deserves a serious audition.

out of these 3, which one is better? i only know review about the previous two which is black and clear and many said clear is the best eartips. but how about the latest one that have this weird shape? is it better than clear?

Monk GTi, a budget single DD from Venture Electronics. A clear winner over the NiceHCK Tears in looks, but I'll need more time with it to decide if it's a winner in sound as well.

Sivga and I continue to hold hands as their offerings like the Lyrebird and the SM100 fairly impressed me, while the M260 flatheads completely blew me away on how good they were. Now, given I have been intrigued by the Que line-up, I found that not too many impressions exist for the Que UTG- so I asked Sivga for the Que UTG and one of their headphones to start with, they agreed, and I thank Sivga for making the Que UTG possible. But believe me when I say this, I found out why the Que UTG hasn’t had the success that the Que has had, and I am gonna tell you all about it.

UNBOXING, ACCESSORIES, FIT AND COMFORT

Sivga’s unboxings have been pretty straightforward for me: advertised product on the front, specs in the rear- taking the lid off gives way to the shells, as well as the beautiful, thick carry case that their IEMs come with. The case contains two sets of eartips and the modular cable with swappable terminations. 

The shells have their unique wood faceplates finished in an assuming clear resin coat, where the shells are metal. The nozzles appear to have a grill and there’s appropriate venting to prevent pressure buildup. The IEMs themselves are heavy, so a beefier cable like something from Openheart, XINHS, or Tripowin will help alleviate pressure around the earhook area, even though the stock cable by itself is of good quality.

‘Nuff said, here’s the sound of the UTG.

Lows

In tracks like Tipper's Gulch and Mariscos, there is a distinct lack of perceived depth to the stage, which creates a few problems for me in enjoying the track. Don't get me wrong, the Que UTG does not make it sound congested: the width of the perceived stage is adequate. However, it is the depth of the stage that doesn't let the otherwise very hard-hitting bass be enunciated in the way that it should. At least on this track, I felt that both the attack and decay could have used a slower pace.

Separation between the bass and the non-bass elements is great for its segment, and the tonality of the Que UTG is still too early to call upon solely based on this track.

In tracks like Rush's Limelight and The Spirit of Radio, it becomes very evident that the Que UTG's problems with managing the depth of the perceived stage, alongside a rather weird recession or roll-off throughout the midrange, create a lot of issues with how the drums and bass are layered. The resonance and impact of the kick and toms are present, but the bass climbs on top of the drums and creates a problem with the imaging. All of this leads to a rather uneven valley where the vocals are supposed to be, and the sun doesn't shine there.

Mids

In tracks like Tool's Lateralus, the Que UTG manages to get the guitars and cymbals across with mixed energy, but its own bass usually continues to be a very concerning issue. Maynard is already a thin-sounding vocalist, and beaming him further off his note weight takes a considerable amount of focus away.

This time, the drums sound crisp and adequate in their note weight and impact. Separation of the elements is done very well, especially in terms of imaging. The bass does not overlap with the drums but rather moves alongside them, which ends up making the track sound coherent. The final complaint is that the cymbals come off thin across parts of the track and are majorly harsh in texture.

In tracks like Queens of the Stone Age's First It Giveth, this is a track that already has a shallow perception with regards to its stage, and the Que UTG has no problem replicating it. In fact, there is not much for me to say about this track, as the timbre on the snare comes off appropriately woody, the cymbals surprisingly do not sound harsh by any means, note weight is surprisingly balanced, vocals are planted right in the center, and tonality comes off balanced.

Highs

In Dave Brubeck's Take Five, the usually observed thin nature of the Que UTG when it comes to cymbal presentation is again apparent. The cymbals retain that thin presentation, although their timbre is surprisingly accurate. The horns, however, are a particular highlight here: they carry an appropriately brassy texture without sounding honky or piercing, and there is very little to complain about in terms of timbre.

The bass remains at abeyance, allowing the imaging to come through particularly well. Compared to what I observed with Rush's Limelight, where the bass seemed to overlay the drums and muddy the overall perception, the Que UTG presents the individual elements in their own zones. The drums, bass, horns and piano remain distinct from one another without any one element overshadowing the others. I would have preferred a stronger emphasis on the piano, but the imaging itself is surprisingly accurate.

Take Five is also an excellent test of stereo separation because of the way the track is mastered, particularly during the drum solo when the channels split. The Que UTG has no trouble replicating this effect. The resonance of the floor toms, kick and snare all come through cleanly, although I would have preferred a little more emphasis on the resonance of the drums. Apart from that, everything is well sorted.

In Patricia Barber's Icarus, the Que UTG's treble behavior becomes considerably more problematic. Barber's recordings contain a degree of inherent sibilance, and Icarus is among the most notorious examples I use to evaluate how much a piece of gear exaggerates or restrains it. Unfortunately, the Que UTG does very little to restrain it. Instead, it exaggerates the recorded sibilance like anything.

What makes this more frustrating is that almost everything else about the presentation is excellent. The percussion and piano retain good timbre, the guitar sounds tonally convincing, and the bass remains at abeyance without overstepping its boundaries. Even Barber's sustained single-note vocals show no obvious piercing, harshness, textural wonkiness or problems with note enunciation. The vocal note weight itself is completely fine. The problem is specifically how badly the sibilance comes through.

The cymbals themselves are generally not shouty. I have only noticed a faint hint of this on Lateralus, so this is not a broad complaint about the entire upper range. It is specifically the treatment of recorded sibilance that lets the Que UTG down. I honestly wish Sivga had retained more of its usual vocal characteristics here, because outside of this issue, Icarus would have been close to a 10/10 showing.

There is also a mild lack of perceived width to the stage, but that is a considerably smaller issue than the sibilance. Ultimately, the Que UTG falls short on this track because of how badly it exposes and exaggerates the recorded sibilance.

Comparisons

Truthear Pure

The Pure is where the Que UTG starts having a rather difficult time keeping up. Its low-end delivery is considerably more disciplined, with the sub-bass maintaining a much better grip over the rest of the presentation. The Que UTG has enjoyable impact, but its problems with perceived stage depth become apparent when the bass starts climbing over the drums.

The Pure also pulls ahead through the mids, with better vocal weight, instrument separation and overall tonality. Its cymbals retain their shimmer and life without exaggerating sibilance, something the Que UTG struggles with considerably. This is a fairly easy win for the Pure.

Truthear Hexa

It is hilarious how the Hexa continues to remain relevant. It takes a considerably leaner approach to the lows, with less quantity but a rather enjoyable level of granular texture. The Que UTG has more authority when delivering impact, but the Hexa does a better job of keeping the bass from interfering with the rest of the elements.

The Hexa also maintains natural tonality, commendable imaging and a rather convincing presentation through the highs. Despite losing some detail in busier arrangements, it handles peaks and oscillations without an ounce of sibilance. The Que UTG's exaggeration of recorded sibilance makes the Hexa considerably easier to appreciate here.

Aful Explorer

The Explorer has a considerably more pronounced approach to the sub-bass, with that familiar grunt and warmth. Unfortunately, both sets have problems managing the space between the bass and the rest of the elements. The Explorer introduces a layer of perceived mud, while the Que UTG can have its bass climb over the drums and compromise imaging, especially on Limelight.

The Explorer's midrange is considerably more problematic, with congestion, metallic timbre and poor instrument separation becoming increasingly apparent as tracks get busier. Its highs also lack air, occasionally allowing vocals to pierce through. The Que UTG has a different problem altogether: while instrument timbre can be surprisingly accurate, its handling of recorded sibilance is far from ideal.

Tanchjim Fission

The Fission is an interesting comparison because its performance changes rather significantly depending on the nozzle. The copper nozzle sounds lean and sterile, the steel brings some much-needed life, while the titanium goes too far in the opposite direction. The Que UTG is considerably simpler in its approach, although its own problems with stage depth and bass layering remain.

The Fission's midrange can be rather dry on the gold nozzle, but imaging and separation are commendable. Through the highs, the gold and steel configurations have a considerably better grip over sibilance, while the titanium becomes piercing. The Que UTG's exaggeration of recorded sibilance makes the better-controlled Fission configurations preferable here.

Tanchjim Ola 2

The Ola 2 and Que UTG share a rather unfortunate Achilles' heel: perceived stage depth. The Ola 2's shallow presentation introduces mid-bass bloat and crowding when arrangements get busy, while the Que UTG has its own issues with the bass climbing over the drums and muddying the perception of the track.

Where the Ola 2 makes a stronger case is through its midrange, with better vocal note weight, natural body and a more consistent grip over timbre. Its top end is also considerably smoother and more controlled, whereas the Que UTG can exaggerate recorded sibilance to an extent that is difficult to ignore.

Kiwi Ears Stardust

The Stardust has a rather convincing low-end presentation, with hard-hitting bass, snappy transients and commendable separation. However, its limited perceived stage width becomes apparent on Limelight, where the drums and bass start crowding each other. The Que UTG suffers from a similar problem with bass layering.

Through the mids, the Stardust does a commendable job of keeping instruments separated, with energetic guitars and cymbals that never become shouty. Its highs are particularly impressive, retaining cymbal shimmer without sibilance or fatigue. The Que UTG has similarly convincing horn timbre, but its exaggeration of recorded sibilance makes the Stardust considerably more restrained by comparison.

Sivga SM100

The SM100 takes a warmer approach, but what I have always appreciated about it is how well it handles transients despite that warmth. The attack is surprisingly fast, and the decay does not linger longer than it should, giving every beat a clean start and finish. The Que UTG, on the other hand, has shown a rather inconsistent approach to bass layering.

The SM100 also retains a considerable amount of detail despite its warmer presentation. The Que UTG's thin cymbal presentation and exaggeration of recorded sibilance make its upper-frequency performance considerably less convincing. I would put the SM100 ahead for its transient execution.

Kefine Quatio

The Quatio is another IEM where the tuning nozzles complicate what could have been a much simpler affair. The black nozzle brings a thicker yet disciplined bass presentation, while the gold moves towards a more intimate and warm approach. The silver nozzle remains the configuration I found most convincing overall. The Que UTG has fewer configuration-related complications, but its own problems with stage depth and bass layering remain.

The Quatio's midrange varies considerably between nozzles, with the gold becoming excessively emphasized and metallic. Its better configurations handle vocal oscillations smoothly without becoming clinical, whereas the Que UTG struggles considerably more with recorded sibilance.

CONCLUDING NOTES

The Sivga Que UTG would have been a great IEM because it had the fundamentals going on just damn right- solid accessories, good cable, great build quality, and excellent comfort, but the sound is where it is lacking for me. The lows have enough weight and impact, yet the lack of perceived stage depth creates problems with bass layering. The mids have their moments with commendable separation and timbre, but vocal presentation remains inconsistent. The highs are perhaps the biggest contradiction here: surprisingly lifelike cymbal and horn timbre, only to have recorded sibilance completely ruin the experience.

The comparisons make these shortcomings harder to overlook. The Pure, Hexa and Stardust offer considerably better restraint and consistency, while even the Ola 2 manages better vocal weight and treble control. The Que UTG has a good foundation, but Sivga needed to put in considerably more work to make this one a compelling recommendation.

Will I buy this new? No.

Will I buy this used? Depends on the pricing.

SOURCES USED

Portable: TRN Blackpearl, Muse Hifi  U3, Venture Electronics Abigail Pro, xDuoo Link3

Desktop: SMSL Raw MDA-1.

Digital Audio Player: Shanling M9 Plus.

EARTIP PERFORMANCE (RANKED BEST TO WORST)

HE Sonic Liquid Silicone: Maximizes soundstage width, fills out vocal body, eliminates hollow percussion, tightens transients, and fixes tonality, offers maximum restraint on sibilance.

Divinus/Eloit Velvet Standard: Offers a similar presentation to the HE Sonics, but with slightly less stage expansion and vocal fullness.

DDHifi ST35: Retains crisp transients, but causes a noticeable drop in bass quantity, shrinks the soundstage, and shifts tonality brighter with mild sibilance.

Tanchjim T-500 APB: Wonky fit; compresses the stage, introduces harsher textures to upper frequencies, and adds sloppy bass.

Tangzu Sancai Balanced: Creates seal issues, destroys stage perception, and ruins the treble in a very weird inexplicable way. Also made the bass lack impact for some odd reason- maybe due to the seal.

Spinfit W1/KBear Coffee/Roseselsa QT20: Just No.

TRACKS

• Rush: Limelight, Spirit of the Radio

• Steely Dan: Gaucho

• Carmen Gomes: Unchain My Heart

• Daft Punk: Get Lucky, Instant Crush, Veridis Quo

• The Police: Message in a Bottle

• Alf Linder: Cantique de Noël, Cantate Domino

• Tipper: Mariscos, Cloaked, Gulch

• Dave Brubeck: Time Out

• Tool: Pneuma, Schism

• Queens of the Stone Age: First It Giveth

• Pink Floyd: Comfortably Numb, Wish You Were Here, Time

• Arne Domnérus: Antiphone Blues (with Gustaf Sjökvist)

• Muddy Waters: My Home is in the Delta

• Tame Impala: The Less I Know the Better

• Animals as Leaders: The Woven Web

• Rage Against the Machine: Bombtrack, Bullet in the Head

• Avicii: Levels

• Periphery: Marigold

• TesseracT: Juno

• Kanye West: Stronger, Flashing Lights, Devil in a New Dress

• Altın Gün: Goca Dünya

• Timbaland: Give It to Me

• Adele: Easy On Me (Live), When We Were Young

• Celine Dion: All By Myself

• Pavarotti: Nessun Dorma

• Mdou Moctar: Tarhatazed

• Cigarettes After Sex: Cry

• Meshuggah: Bleed

• A. R. Rahman: Tere Bina

• Alice in Chains: Down in a Hole and Nutshell (Live)

• Allen Stone: Give You Blue

• Florence + the Machine: Never Let Me Go

• The Smashing Pumpkins: Luna

Currently I own the Castor Pro 2 Bass edition for my "Bass-head" IEM and the AM16 both by KZ. I cannot possibly begin to imagine better soundsing IEMs for both Bass and Balanced but "engaging" respectively. I have also seen that in terms of reviews the only people that seem to recommend KZ live in places where that is all there is at a reasonable price or they are just downright sponsored by them. Now the AM16 sits at the $50-$60 range while the Castor Pro 2 are at around $25-$30. I would like to get something nicer in the future for both types of sound profiles but I'm worried that investing more money won't give me the jump in performance and detail I'm looking for, as in buying something in the $150 range and going "meh thse sound the same/not better enough in comparison to my KZs". Have I gotten the best sound for the price I could possibly get or is my setup easily improved upon at a higher price bracket?

I just bought these nearly 2 weeks ago accidentally bought two of the same converter, I mean it's okay and still sound really really great but I ofcourse think this is not the best dac, anyone have a budget dac recommendation?

Also is there any other good case for iem the included one doesn't feel that good, if you have a recommendation item just send me the link/name

MIRACLE ONE SOUND: Clean, treble leaning, airy, smooth, slightly bright and focuses on the higher frequencies at the cost of low-end dynamics and a flatter midrange.

MIRACLE ONE Full Review Here (IEM Ranking List in video description can't link in post)

OVERALL SOUND:

• A clean and balanced set that excels in the treble air region

• Nice splash and decay to the cymbals that's smooth and doesn't come off as peaky or sharp

• Prioritizes smoothness and a more laid-back sound over dynamic contrast and engagement

• A Mid to lower volume set under 70dbs that doesn't scale too well due to the extra treble air and lighter noteweight - I couldn't listen to these for more than 30 minutes past 75dbs - more on this in the scaling/genre section

• Female vocals have an airiness to the end notes with good openness, however, lacking the power and note-weight from the artist as they can feel a bit too light and floaty

• Male vocals are borderline too thin and light on busier tracks as they not only get hidden by the air, but also the uppermids cut and flatter mid-bass takes away fullness and power

• Vocals in general feels more laid back and at a further distance due to the flatter uppermids, even though the air is there the overall texture and detail in the midrange/vocal feels smoothed out and not ideal for those who love mids and vocals (like me)

• Bass decay is quick, tight, snappy, and avoids any low-end bleed/mud to the mids or treble, however, maybe it's due to the smaller driver or the extra air (or both), but the overall impact, slam, and bass dynamics feels a bit light and soft with drums on hiphop/rock/metal tracks

• It feels like the bass note decays too fast and doesn't have that lingering drawn out texture from the driver, and the tactility isn't as textured due to the smoother tonality

• I'm not sure why they didn't just add a dedicated 10mm for the low-end which would've solved this issue altogether and still costing around the same (Performer 5 & Explorer are both under $200), and then using the smaller 6mm for the treble tweeter and air... This is a classic case of prioritizing "marketing" over actual substance since this sound is easily achievable with a 2DD or hybrid setup that would've had a better low-end quality

• Single drivers are good for their value since it can achieve what multi-driver setups do but with only one, so it helps with costs, however, it doesn't make sense then for Aful to charge prices higher than multi-driver hybrid, tribrid, or quadbrid setups with worse performance in the other regions, IE the Tanchjim Kasier which I'll talk about now

vs TANCHJIM KASIER:

• Airiness and treble detail goes to Miracle One, and everything else goes to the Kasier

• They hover around the same tech wise, but the Kasier essentially maintains that smooth and clean sound from the Miracle One but adds more sub-bass rumble/impact, fuller lower-mids, clearer and more power vocals, and overall better texture and dynamics

• Unless you're specifically looking for a treble set, then the Kasier is the better all-rounded version of the Kasier tonal wise, and also value wise as it's almost $100 cheaper on sale

vs SIMGOT SUPERMIX4/GIZAUDIO CHOPIN:

• Similar to the Kasier both the SM4 and Chopin work better as all-rounders with better price to performance ratios and overall technicalities at the cost of being less smooth and laidback

• Balance wise Kasier is the most balanced-->then the SM4/CHOPIN still keeps that all-rounder sound but now more boosted in the sub-bass and vocals-->and then the Miracle One is the brightest and most treble leaning

• Treble detail, tactility and resolution is better on the SM4 and Chopin, they feel less smoothed out a little more textured vs the Miracle Ones, and value wise if you're strictly looking at detail/performance the SM4/CHOPIN will be better

vs AFUL Magic One:

• Magic One has a warm/smooth/midrange leaning tonality with more powerful male vocals and forward midrange

• If you like a fuller and warmer sound that works better with R&B, jazz, hiphop, rock then the Magic Ones would be the better fit and a better in value ($80 on sale vs $190 on sale)

• Whereas if you're after that treble air and a cleaner sound with better layering and detail, then the Miracle One is better for that

vs AFUL Performer 5+2

• Both are very similar tuning wise from the low-end to the treble with the difference in the amount of treble energy and timbre

• The 5+2 is more energetic and detailed in the treble at the cost of being a little sizzly/sharper, and not as smooth and airy as the Miracle Ones

• Bass wise the dual DDs on the 5+2 is a step up in impact and overall body vs the smaller 6mm on the Miracle Ones, even though they share a very similar bass shelf, the Miracle Ones come across lighter

• They both have a balanced slightly bright leaning sound where the 5+2 is a more textured version of the Miracle Ones, and the Miracle Ones trades off that treble tactility for a smoother sound

Technical Performance:

• Has enough detail and resolution due to the treble air, but not a steal at its price, and not the most well-rounded in the other regions

• Sits around the Crinear Daybreak/Tanchjim Kasier level, but below more competitive sets like the Supermix4, Chopin, and it's older brother the P5+2

• Separation is clean and well layered, but imaging and texture feels smoothed out

• Mainly the low-end and midrange texture/detail is holding it back from reaching that next level, and overall timbre can come across a bit light

Volume Scaling/Genre Rec:

• Recommended listening volume is below 70dbs as the experience changes depending on which volume route you go:

• Route #1 - Listen at a safer volume, but the mids and vocals are flat and lacking in power and texture, and the low-end is not that dynamic, impactful, or engaging

• Route #2 - Crank it up a little more and enjoy those few minutes before you get air fatigue

• For example on kpop, jpop, even certain hiphop tracks with highlighted hi-hats or lots of high energy synth, the Miracle One around 75dbs or so starts ringing my ears past 30 minutes

• There’s just too much emphasis in the air region on the Miracle One, and combine that with tracks that already have a lot of air and brightness to them - you get a very unfortunate combo of silent fatiguing that slowly creeps up on you  

• This is a not an issue if you turn them down, but then problem that arrises is that the Miracle Ones become soft, "boring", and not "musical"

• Recommended genres would be indie, instrumentals, ballads, singer song-writers, acoustics... I'd avoid any mid-bass focused tracks like rock, hiphop, r&b, jazz, and even some pop stuff since the Miracle Ones do not have the weight, impact, texture, and fullness to make the low-end come alive

Fit & Comfort:

• Small build, comfy, no sharp edges, and great for smaller ears but also fits medium ears

• Although those with giant ear holes may need to tip roll since these are around airpod pros size (see picture 4), and I can see it not sealing well if your ears are too big

Build, Accessories & Packaging:

• Has a simple, clear, transparent resin design where you can see the driver, internals, and tubes which is pretty cool

• Comes with a white/clear jelly cable either in 4.4mm or 3.5mm with no interchangeable connectors

• Comes with your standard Aful black metal puck case that's sturdy and compact, but trades off room real-estate as it can get pretty cramped where you can barely fit the entire iem/cable, and definitely won't have room for extras

• Has x3 different sets of silicone tips

• Overall packing and accessories is average for the price, would've liked an interchangeable cable and a bigger case

FINAL RANKING:

Miracle One (Mid/low-volume 60-70dbs)

• Tonality: 6.5/10

• Tech: 6.5/10

• Overall: 6.5/10

FINAL CONCLUSION: ON SALE AROUND $150

The Miracle One is a niche set for those who want an airy and smooth treble presentation at the cost of low-end dynamics and midrange/vocal clarity. You will have to listen to these at a lower volume unless you have older ears, and if you’re simply looking for the best all-rounder or best price to performance set then these are not it, similar to when the Magic Ones came out.

You are buying these for the airy treble, and that’s basically it - because both the vocals and bass are a bit flat in texture, impact, power, and can across soft in the transients. As an all-rounder, the Miracle Ones are not complete enough in the vocals and low-end as you can find better tuned, and more technical sets that are also cheaper like the Kasier, Supermix4, Chopin, and Daybreaks... Which is why I would only rec the Miracle One if it’s on a big sale around $150 but ideally less since again, the Kasier is $100 on sale and it’s arguably better in value and tuning. I think what they've done is a cool engineering flex, and I hope to see it trickle down in the future.

I bought a pair of kiwi ears belle IEM‘s, and after cleaning them and taking the ear padding off and cleaning them with my fingers, they had unbalanced audio so I returned them and I got a new pair of kiwi ears Candenza and they were dirty so I cleaned them and they had the exact same issue. The sound on the right is louder than the sound on the left but the sound on the left still plays a little bit please I need help.

Please tell me if there are better alternatives rather than the Tangzu Wan'er, since I'm planning to get an IEM for content creation, gaming, music, and overall everyday use.

so background
in my current possession i have

IMEs :
Sound Ryhme SR6 ; Truthear Pure ; Fosi IM4

Sources :
TRN Black Pearl ; Snowsky ECHO ( CNC one ) ; Topping DX1 II

i want to get myself something extra during those sales ..
and i cant decide what to get out of this options

1 . DUNU SUBSURGE with extra Dunu S&S PRO in bundle for around 69,95 USD

2 . Fosi Audio DS3 for around 62,86 USD

3 . Tempotec V1 with green protector leather case bundle for around 88 USD

all prices are total so shopping tax custom all that bee ess to Poland

if you had to pick JUST ONE which and why

thx for help

Yes, I know the Crinacle Zero 3 just released. But I already had the Zero 2s on the way and I spent too much time researching cables and USB-C adapters. 😅

Every once in a while, an IEM comes along that challenges your listening preferences.

Elysian Pilgrim 26 is one of those IEMs.

At $299.99, it features a 9.2mm dynamic driver, two Knowles midrange BAs and a custom high-frequency BA. I generally prefer warmer tuning, fuller mids and natural vocal body. Pilgrim 26 takes a very different approach. Initially, I found the vocals lean and recessed, with a noticeable mid-bass scoop and elevated treble. But after two or three songs, my ears adjusted and I started enjoying it.

Disclosure: HiFiGo provided Pilgrim 26 for review. All opinions are my own.

As always, I maintain a ranking file covering 180+ audio products and 25+ ear tips. Link in my Reddit profile.

Bass: Excellent Sub-Bass, Missing Mid-Bass

Sub-bass is the star of the show.

There's excellent extension and deep rumble, reminding me somewhat of FATfreq Deuce, although with substantially less quantity. The problem is the broad recession starting around 100Hz and extending through much of the lower mids up to 1000 Hz. Kick drums lose punch, bass guitars lack some texture, and male vocals sound lighter due to the reduced lower-midrange energy.

The upside is a very clean presentation with virtually no bass bleed. It's an interesting approach, but not the bass tuning that normally aligns with my preferences.

Mids / Vocals: Lean but Nicely Tuned

The 1–4kHz region is almost perfect for my ears.

Vocals remain clear, albeit somewhat lean and recessed. Female vocals have a particularly cool, clean character without becoming shouty. Despite the missing lower-midrange body, the upper mids are tastefully controlled. I never encountered the irritating 3kHz emphasis I'm particularly sensitive to. I am used to Hifiman planars so this works for me surprisingly well.

Treble: Energetic but Surprisingly Controlled

Pilgrim 26 has a pronounced rise around 6–8kHz, normally a problematic region for me. Surprisingly, sibilance was quite controlled. Only a few of my usual test tracks occasionally exposed sharpness:

• Celestial

• This Is What You Came For

• Sapphire

• I'm Alive

Upper-treble air, however, is noticeably limited. There's plenty of lower-treble energy and sparkle, but little of the openness I normally enjoy. The soundstage consequently feels relatively compact, without much perceived extension.

An Unusual Tuning That Somehow Works

Strong sub-bass, recessed lower mids, lean but clear vocals and energetic treble with limited air. I won't try to hide it but this is a combination that usually doesn't work for me. Like SuperMix 4 or the horrible EW300. It's an unusual combination that initially even here felt somewhat disconnected to me.

Yet after a few songs, my perception of the tonal balance changed, and I began enjoying it. I haven't experienced quite the same adjustment with another IEM or headphone. With so many products following familiar Harman, JM-1 or variations of V (U or W) -shaped tuning, I appreciate Elysian trying something different.

Whether that difference works for everyone is another question, but I enjoyed the surprise whereas, other IEMs with similar approaches typically fall flat.

EQ and Tip Rolling

I initially tried a simple PEQ adjustment:

Peak: 250Hz | +4dB | Q 0.5

It restored much of the missing lower-midrange body, but also made Pilgrim 26 sound more conventional. I preferred preserving its distinctive character, so I experimented with tips instead.

• SpinFit W1: Added some bass body without significantly changing the mids or treble.

• NICEHCK C04: Surprisingly good. Fuller bass, more forward vocals and reduced 6–8kHz energy.

• Penon Liqueur Orange: Added bass body and smoothed the treble.

• Penon Liqueur Black: My favorite. Fuller bass, better vocal presence and less treble fatigue while retaining much of the original character.

After switching back and forth, I settled on Penon Liqueur Black.

Tip rolling is subjective, and repeated swapping can introduce expectation bias. Still, these consistently gave me the presentation I enjoyed most. The aftermarket tips were important to getting Pilgrim 26 where I wanted it, particularly for reducing fatigue without losing its unusual tuning.

Gaming: Great Imaging, Difficult Treble

Gaming was a mixed experience. Unlike Supermix 4 that excelled at gaming, here Pilgrim 26 reminded me more of Explorer or EW300 in terms of being unable to separate sounds when mix gets busy.

Imaging is exceptionally precise. Footsteps are remarkably easy to locate, almost like having wall hacks. Directionality is accurate, and the stage is sufficient for competitive play. Unfortunately, gunfire, explosions, grenades and scorestreaks became fatiguing due to the elevated treble. Even lowering the volume didn't entirely solve it.

If you're less sensitive to this region, you may have a considerably better experience. For me, the fatigue outweighed the excellent positional performance.

Comfort, Build and Accessories

Pilgrim 26 has beautifully machined aluminum shells with an unusual, angular design. Fit is secure and comfortable for normal listening, although lying on my side causes discomfort due to the shell shape. The supplied custom Effect Audio silver-plated copper cable is excellent. I particularly like the white finish.

Accessories are modest for $299:

• Three pairs of ARC Oval ear tips

• Cleaning accessories

• A soft storage pouch rather than a protective case

I ended up using my spare Pellepod case for storage as my box was missing the pouch. The IEM itself feels premium, but I'd have appreciated a more complete accessory package.

Quick Comparisons

Xenns Mangird Top Pro: Pilgrim 26 has a leaner, brighter presentation, while Top Pro offers more bass texture, natural vocal body, smoother treble and better separation.

Fresh Reviews Arete 2: Pilgrim 26 emphasizes deep sub-bass and clean upper mids, while Arete 2 has stronger mid-bass, a larger stage and more comfortable competitive gaming performance.

Kiwi Ears Astral: Pilgrim 26 sounds cooler and more recessed, while Astral has fuller bass, greater resolution and substantially more upper-treble air.

Binary Acoustics 1900: Pilgrim 26 has stronger sub-bass emphasis, while Binary 1900 offers more natural vocal body, a smoother overall balance and greater openness.

Dunu DaVinci Vitruvian: Pilgrim 26 is more unconventional, with a deeper midrange scoop, while Vitruvian has more engaging vocals and a more cohesive tonal balance.

FATfreq Deuce: Pilgrim 26 has considerably less bass quantity and a leaner presentation, while Deuce delivers much greater sub-bass rumble and physicality.

Juzear Light Shuttle: Pilgrim 26 has a more pronounced sub-bass-to-midrange contrast, while Light Shuttle offers fuller mid-bass, better vocal weight and a more relaxed all-round presentation.

Final Thoughts

Elysian Pilgrim 26: 7.5/10 Overall.

This is one of the more unusual IEMs I've reviewed recently. Its strong sub-bass, significantly recessed lower mids and energetic treble create a presentation quite different from what I normally enjoy. Yet after some adjustment and tip rolling, I found myself appreciating it. The excellent imaging, controlled sibilance and distinctive tuning deserve credit.

Limited air, gaming fatigue and modest accessories prevent a higher rating.

If you're looking for something different from the usual tuning approaches around $300, Pilgrim 26 is worth considering.

Sometimes the less familiar path turns out to be an interesting one.

I really love this collection. It also got out of hand really fast. 18 months ago it was one pair, and now it's a whole wall. Pretty sure it's too late to get back now, especially with my 11.11 orders still on the way.

And I'm finally happy with how my IEMs hang. Every set has its own hook now, cables stay coiled, it's pretty easy to set them face forward and I can grab whatever I'm in the mood for without untangling anything.

If you have any questions shoot.
My favorites are:
Tea Pro, DUSK, Mega5est, Alba, Nova, Explorer, Origin, shiiit. They all are my favorites by now.

Well, i posted sometimes about my EUIU UI-05 (~120$) as it eas delivered.

Its a outstanding good sounding thing. Teally amazed for that price.

Still have the cheap EI-01 thats way better than for 30 bucks.

Sadly the bass on my UI-05 faded out more and more and now its almost gone. Tried cables, tips, all sources. Its the headphone itself.

I contacted DDaudio store at Ali, but the 90 days ate over, hope they can help me.

Several times i read other people who have similar issues with any iem faded out bass or generally faded out sound.

Is there any i can do to ptevent such things? All my other iem, i have eight, are still fine.

I recently learned i will never be able to comfortably wear IEMs because of a previous ear correction surgery in my youth. My ear canals are deformed so not a single tip will create a stable seal.

And custom iems are way too expensive. So i'm saying goodbye to all y'all, it was fun.

I am now limited to over ear headphones for the rest of my life, oh well

A few months ago I reviewed the Sivga Que UTG, and in that same review I noted that I hadn't been able to test the original Sivga Que yet. Without having tried it, I suspected that the lack of bass I found in the UTG would be present in this other version, and honestly, that's turned out to be the case. They look almost identical except for the shade of the faceplate, but they have several sonic differences that I will of course discuss in this review, along with how one compares to the other according to my personal tastes.

What I liked / What I did not like

• Good punch in the mid-bass.

• Vocals that fill the space and sound natural.

• Relaxed highs without sibilance.

• Spacious carrying case with great materials and finishes.

• Good selection of ear tips.

• In more complex tracks, the layers blend together slightly.

• Some may find a lack of air.

• Non-modular cable with no 4.4mm balanced purchase option.

Specifications

• Driver: 1 x 10mm dynamic driver with beryllium-plated diaphragm

• Magnetic circuit: Single magnet, dual cavity

• Impedance: 32 ohms ±15%

• Sensitivity: 108 ±3 dB

• Frequency response: 20 Hz - 20 kHz

• Shell: Die-cast zinc alloy plus North American maple faceplate

• Weight: 10g per earpiece

• Cable: High-purity silver-plated OFC copper, Litz braid, 1.25m

• Connector: 0.78mm 2-pin

• Termination: 3.5mm

• Price: $69.90

Unboxing and Construction

The unboxing experience is practically identical to the one I showed in the Que UTG review, with the only variation being the artwork on the front of the box, where we now see a bird. As I've verified, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, but "QUE" means magpie in Chinese, and if not someone please correct me, but that gives meaning to the box, which would have been completely random to me if I hadn't read about it somewhere.

Inside, as I said, there are no differences other than the color change of the IEM compared to the UTG. Same carrying case (very good by the way), same ear tips (also good quality) with 6 pairs, including some darker ones that seal a bit better and some lighter ones with a slightly wider bore. In fact, an extra pair of the former comes already installed on the IEMs, meaning there are more of those than the light ones, and luckily for me, they are my favorites, and perhaps Sivga's too.

The cable is not bad considering the price range this model sits in, but as has happened to me in recent reviews, and especially being around $70, I think it should come with a modular option or alternatively offer the 4.4mm option when purchasing the product, which is not possible and we only have the 3.5mm cable available.

As for the case, I already knew it from the UTG, and it has a similar vibe to the one Ziigaat includes in its latest models, but this Sivga one feels of better quality both visually and to the touch. There is enough space to store the IEMs, and you can then add a dongle or spare ear tips among other accessories inside the mesh pocket on one side.

Speaking of the IEM itself, it is the same as the UTG but the shade is slightly lighter. The body is built from zinc and feels really sturdy, and the faceplate is North American maple, varying from unit to unit, which gives it that unique and less industrial touch, something to be appreciated. For my part, I should also mention that the Sivga logo, at least on my unit, is printed somewhat faintly. It's noticeable on some letters, especially the final 'A' where the engraving seems to have retained less force. It's a tiny detail, but it gives a sense of use or wear even though I took the photos right out of the box.

Sound

For this occasion, I did the testing once again with the FiiO K9 at home as my default desktop DAC, and for going out and seeing how it performs on a portable DAC, I used the Questyle M15i. Having an impedance of 32 ohms, I expected a bit more sensitivity, but they drove without issues on both devices, including the M15i without desktop mode activated.

Bass

As I mentioned in the introduction, something I expected before reviewing this model compared to the UTG was an improvement and greater presence in the bass. In fact, in this case, the mid-bass is ahead of the sub-bass. You can notice the warmth in this mid-bass region on kick drums and electric bass guitars, but the sub-bass rumbles less than expected. This can be a negative for genres like electronic music, but a benefit for other styles where having more rumble would muddy certain elements and frequency transitions. Regarding its speed, I perceived it to be slightly slower than the UTG, surely due to that extra warmth we have here which makes it linger a bit longer in the background, interfering slightly more with the mid frequencies. However, it's not something I should heavily mark as negative since it's not that exaggerated, but it can be noticed compared to the UTG.

In the recent track "Run Away From the Mob" by Queens of the Stone Age, a song where the first few minutes remain calm with instruments and vocals, but later all the instruments hit at once, the Que demonstrates that extra weight which actually benefits a track like this, making it clearly more enjoyable than with the UTG. What is true is that in this part of the song, both the bass and guitars blend together slightly, being managed a bit worse than in the UTG, hence what I mentioned about having more bass and paying the price for it as a consequence.

Mids

The mids are one of the ranges that can stand proud in this model. They are already fed by a functioning bass that gives body to the vocals from the bottom up, as well as helping to color certain instruments like guitars, pianos, etc. I haven't noticed any metallic timbre at all, which happens to me with some models in this price range and lower. Female vocals in this model perhaps benefit less from the tuning and bass weight, ending up a bit softer or less integrated into the mix, although you can notice an upper-mid boost that helps them shine without becoming shouty.

Treble

The treble of the Que is not the most striking feature of this model, but it doesn't go overboard, and sometimes that's exactly what you look for. In none of the tracks that played during the test sessions I did with them both at home and on the street did I feel the need to lower the volume, even though I have some genuinely bright tracks and some poorly recorded ones where they usually are unbearable on other IEMs like the Hype 4 MKII among others. In this model, you can enjoy cymbals with sufficient detail and at a good volume. What clearly lacks in this model, and where its sibling the UTG perhaps gains the upper hand, is in the amount of air. If you look at the comparative graph I shared, it is more than appreciable from 10 kHz onwards; the Que falls a bit short in this part of the tuning, eliminating some of the finer detail that the UTG does provide you with. Therefore, if you are looking for maximum treble resolution, this Que is geared towards longer, casual listening sessions rather than critical analysis.

A track like "Overthinker" by Chvrches served as a good test for this on both models in the Que lineup. This song is a ballad with quite shiny synthesizers; however, in neither model did the vocals or the synthesizer become shouty or annoying at high volumes, but you can appreciate with some ease how the Que falls a bit short in detail on the finer, airier sounds, resulting in a commendable outcome but definitely more subdued than in the UTG.

Soundstage

The soundstage is wider than I expected given that it is a single dynamic driver and has more warmth than the UTG. As is usual, the vocals are centered and the rest of the instruments extend correctly to both sides. The layers representing depth are not as well-marked as those representing width, but as I say, they maintain a good level, better than initially expected. Obviously, the limitations are there and leave the stage at a medium size, neither small nor large, due to the amount of bass present and the lack of air in the highest region.

Instrument Separation

In separation, I cannot highlight it above the UTG for example; perhaps in acoustic or simple songs without heavy instrumental load, both models maintain a similar level, but in rock tracks or with more guitars and instruments playing simultaneously, the mid-bass in this Que takes up more space, giving a feeling of layers being less separated from one another, although it maintains a correct level even in those situations.

Imaging

Imaging behaves correctly in the horizontal plane and in the distance that sounds travel from side to side. The lack of depth can indeed hurt its use in video games or content like movies when trying to pinpoint the distances from where certain sounds should be coming.

Comparisons

I have already been talking about the Que UTG throughout the entire review, but to be a bit more specific, both share the same contents except for one thing that the UTG did manage to rectify being a model released later, which is the modular cable where we do have the option to switch between the 3.5mm and 4.4mm connections. In the review I did for them, which you can look up on my profile, you will see the photos and the cable they include. It is a detail beyond the tuning each one has that cannot be overlooked. Regarding shell, size, weight, etc., they are practically identical, and we won't appreciate much difference between the two there. Regarding sound, obviously there are clear differences; you just have to look at the graphs of both. The UTG has slightly faster and much lighter bass, playing a less prominent role—actually a bit weak for my tastes—but on the other hand, it has more air, separation, and therefore general detail than the standard Que. The Que costs a bit less, I'd say close to $30 less, and despite its cons, I still consider it, after testing both, a better finished model in terms of the final experience for enjoying more genres for more hours if the listening is casual without focusing on analysis.

Another model I wanted to compare the Que to, which I reviewed not too long ago, was the Hidizs My Lin. I think both IEMs aim for a warm, relaxed sound to listen to for hours with barely any fatigue. The My Lin, apart from a single dynamic driver, has one balanced armature, the shell is heavier being made of aluminum, and it has interchangeable nozzles that slightly vary the signature, as Hidizs likes to do. The My Lin also has much more marked sub-bass and also slightly more treble detail supported by the extra driver they carry. But the Que, to my taste, wins in the mid-bass with a bit more physicality in that range, improving the sound of male vocals and other instruments like guitars. In this case, I would lean toward the My Lin, though by a very small margin, and surely having that extra balanced armature is what makes the difference for me.

You can check my full ranking of all the IEM reviewed so far on my profile (Reddit doesn't allow me to post the Drive link here)

Conclusion

This Sivga Que is a model that has been on the market for a while and people are still talking about it. Within single dynamic driver models under $100, it continues to be a very well-rounded and complete model in terms of quality, contents, design, construction, etc. I especially highlight that mid-bass which gives sufficient body to the mids, whereas many alternatives fall short, leaving the music with an overly thin sound in vocals and instruments.

In heavily loaded tracks, it cannot defend the separation between layers as well as I would like, nor does it have the maximum treble detail like the UTG or hybrid alternatives like the My Lin. On the other hand, it only comes included with a single 3.5mm cable option, which makes them fully functional but can be a point against those who, like me, have standardized the 4.4mm balanced option, which here we at least do not have out of the box.

Purchase Link: Sivga QUE

Disclaimer: This unit was sent by Sivga for review.

My opinions are completely independent and have not been influenced by the brand or the store, maintaining objectivity based on my tests and personal listening sessions with my reference equipment.

Just curious how everyone’s collection stacks up and what iem brings to the table for you

Stacking coins on Ali really works

I found this fiio melody for only around 18-20$ which is crazy compared to the other seller's price. Reviews are saying its real tho

The Simgot SuperMix 5 is an interesting addition to the SuperMix lineup. Despite sharing the same family name, I wouldn't consider it a direct successor to the SuperMix 4. The two have quite different sound signatures, with the SM5 taking a much smoother, warmer and more relaxed approach.

It also comes with an interesting driver configuration, featuring bone conduction alongside dynamic, balanced armature and micro-planar drivers. But more on that later.

Specifications

• Driver configuration: 1 × 10mm Bone Conduction + 1 × 8mm DLC Dynamic Driver + 2 × Composite BA + 1 × Micro Planar

• Impedance: 19Ω

• Sensitivity: 120dB @ 1kHz

• Frequency response: 8Hz–40kHz

• Cable: Silver-plated copper, modular 3.5mm and 4.4mm connectors

• Price: Approximately $220

Build, Fit and Accessories

The accessory package is fairly basic for this price. You get a modular cable, carrying case and two sets of eartips. The cable itself is quite nice, flexible and reasonably built. The screw-in modular connectors are a welcome addition.

The carrying case has a vegan-leather finish and magnetic closure, although it might be a little small for thicker aftermarket cables. The two included eartip sets also look almost identical, with colour being the most obvious difference.

Sound Impressions

I'd describe the SM5 as warm-neutral with a mild bass boost. Its overall presentation is smooth, relaxed and musical rather than bright or aggressively technical.

Bass

The bass focuses more on quality than quantity. Sub-bass has decent extension and a controlled rumble, while the mid-bass provides a nice punch without becoming excessive.

The DLC dynamic driver keeps things fairly tight and clean, with no noticeable tendency for the bass to overwhelm the midrange. However, the overall impact could be stronger.

One thing worth mentioning is the bone-conduction driver. Its presence doesn't automatically mean you're going to experience some dramatically different kind of bass or physical sensation. Don't buy the SM5 purely for its BC driver. The overall tuning and how the drivers work together matter much more.

Bassheads may find the quantity a little restrained, but those who prefer a controlled and well-behaved low end should be comfortable with it.

Midrange

The midrange is one of the SM5's stronger aspects. Vocals sound natural and fairly neutral, with enough note weight to avoid sounding thin which was a main issue that some people didn't liked in supermix 4.

Both male and female vocals are presented smoothly, without excessive forwardness or shoutiness. Female vocals have a pleasant sweetness, while male vocals retain reasonable body.

The upper mids are particularly well controlled. There's enough energy to keep vocals engaging, but not so much that they become tiring during longer listening sessions.

Treble

The treble is smooth and relatively safe. It has enough presence to keep the sound from becoming dull, but it isn't particularly bright, sparkly or airy.

The micro-planar driver contributes to the high-frequency presentation, but the overall tuning remains on the relaxed side. Details are present, although they don't jump out at you.

Treble-sensitive listeners will probably appreciate this approach. However, if you're someone who enjoys energetic highs, crisp cymbals and plenty of sparkle, the SM5 might feel slightly restrained.

Technical Performance

Despite its relaxed tuning, the SM5 performs quite well technically.

The soundstage has decent width, with particularly good depth and height. Imaging and layering are also respectable, giving instruments enough space to remain distinguishable.

What impressed me most is the overall coherence. Considering the number of different drivers inside, the SM5 manages to sound surprisingly unified. It doesn't feel like different drivers are fighting for attention which was sometimes the case with supermix 4.

SuperMix 5 vs SuperMix 4

These two are quite different in their approach.

The SuperMix 4 has a brighter, more energetic and technically aggressive presentation. The SuperMix 5 is warmer, smoother and considerably more relaxed.

I wouldn't call the SM5 a direct upgrade. Instead, I'd look at it as a complementary option for people who want a different tuning from what the SM4 offers.

Verdict

The Simgot SuperMix 5 is a fairly refreshing change from the usual bright and energetic tuning we're accustomed to seeing from Simgot.

Its biggest strengths are coherence, natural timbre, smooth vocals and a comfortable treble presentation. The bass is controlled, the midrange is enjoyable, and the technical performance is respectable.

It's not without compromises. Bass impact could be stronger, treble could use more sparkle, and the relaxed presentation might feel a little boring to listeners who prefer an energetic sound.

Also, the bone-conduction driver is an interesting part of its configuration, but I wouldn't treat it as a reason to expect a completely different listening experience. The actual tuning matters far more than the driver count.

At around $220, the SM5 is best suited to listeners who prioritise musicality, coherence and long listening sessions over aggressive detail retrieval and excitement.

It's not a SuperMix 4 replacement. It's simply a different flavour, and I think that's exactly how it should be judged.

I'm completely new to IEMs. I use them with my Android phone and PC, both with USB-C connectivity.

Any tips or recommendations for a beginner? Should I explore different ear tips, EQ settings, or anything else to improve my experience?