Softears Studio4 In-Ear Monitors

[VSG]

Softears makes a grand debut on TechPowerUp with its Studio4 in-ear monitors. Designed for studio/stage use, the Studio4 has a cult following from audiophiles too who find its reference sound signature working as a good all-rounder with various music genres, while also offering a good balance of accuracy and engagement alike.

Show full review

 

[Scrizz]

Now I'm interested in finding out what their latest offering can do.

 

[10tothemin9volts]

Is there really a reason for any IEM to cost more than a 2-digit number (unless ofc if the outer-shell contains materials, which would superficially increase the price)? I have the Truthear x Crinacle Zero IEM (TPU review), am very happy with them and a scientific review praises them. How does one define/measure scientifially "Imaging", "texture", "soundstage" and "instrument separation" (just to name a few "buzzwords") and would anyone bet his live on being able to tell the difference between 50, 200, 450, 1000 and 4000 bucks IEMs and even if one can, does it really mean the 4000 bucks one sound more correct?

 

[VSG]

Is there really a reason for any IEM to cost more than a 2-digit number (unless ofc if the outer-shell contains materials, which would superficially increase the price)? I have the Truthear x Crinacle Zero IEM (TPU review), am very happy with them and a scientific review praises them. How does one define/measure scientifially "Imaging", "texture", "soundstage" and "instrument separation" (just to name a few "buzzwords") and would anyone bet his live on being able to tell the difference between 50, 200, 450, 1000 and 4000 bucks IEMs and even if one can, does it really mean the 4000 bucks one sound more correct?

Ahh yes, the scientific review where if a frequency response doesn't match a preference target (emphasis on preference), it gets dinged. Too bad people like different things in life. Ditto why subjective parameters such as the "buzzwords" mentioned to add a mix of objectivity and my subjective experience.

Now I'm interested in finding out what their latest offering can do.

I have it here, CES got in the way but soon enough.

 

[Nathaaab]

Is there really a reason for any IEM to cost more than a 2-digit number (unless ofc if the outer-shell contains materials, which would superficially increase the price)? I have the Truthear x Crinacle Zero IEM (TPU review), am very happy with them and a scientific review praises them. How does one define/measure scientifially "Imaging", "texture", "soundstage" and "instrument separation" (just to name a few "buzzwords") and would anyone bet his live on being able to tell the difference between 50, 200, 450, 1000 and 4000 bucks IEMs and even if one can, does it really mean the 4000 bucks one sound more correct?

Prettier face plates

Edit : You can hear quite a bit of difference on more expensive IEMs with better drivers, but some super expensive sets are also often overhyped pretty bad

 

[VSG]

Prettier face plates

Edit : You can hear quite a bit of difference on more expensive IEMs with better drivers, but some super expensive sets are also often overhyped pretty bad

Basically this.

 

[SOAREVERSOR]

Is there really a reason for any IEM to cost more than a 2-digit number (unless ofc if the outer-shell contains materials, which would superficially increase the price)? I have the Truthear x Crinacle Zero IEM (TPU review), am very happy with them and a scientific review praises them. How does one define/measure scientifially "Imaging", "texture", "soundstage" and "instrument separation" (just to name a few "buzzwords") and would anyone bet his live on being able to tell the difference between 50, 200, 450, 1000 and 4000 bucks IEMs and even if one can, does it really mean the 4000 bucks one sound more correct?

I can tell real fast and the Truthear X Crinacle Zero while great for the money gets slaughtered once you hit the 300 price point and it's glaringly obvious.

General rule is returns over the 1000 buck range are diminish. Also that anything using dynamic, e stat, planar, or some funky proprietary tech is trying to color the sound.

Where the Softears work and the Truhear X Crinical fail is BA vs dynamic drivers. Dynamcs suck. They are subwoofers, at best.

I've given this lecture before but here we go.

Soundstage: is the forward and back of thing as well as left and right. It is instantly identifiable with a very good source recording if the singer is moving around a stage. It's with and depth.
Imaging: the exact location of what is making noise.

And on and on. All these things have agreed upon meanings but the trap is you need a high quality original source, what matters matters depending on what you like (a rock stage is not as intimate as jazz), and you need a high quality audio chain through it all. If these are not true it's all nonsense. And with the advent of digital audio players, smart phones, wireless headphones, and bluetooth the entire chain has failed. So there is no point in selling high quality audio sources.

I'm down for 4BA and the custom faceplate looks pretty!

 

[10tothemin9volts]

Ahh yes, the scientific review where if a frequency response doesn't match a preference target (emphasis on preference), it gets dinged. Too bad people like different things in life. [..]

That would make them simply match a different preference target to the much more expensive ones you have reviewed, but not necessarily worse then. Thanks for confirming.

Prettier face plates

Edit : You can hear quite a bit of difference on more expensive IEMs with better drivers, but some super expensive sets are also often overhyped pretty bad

"Difference" doesn't mean it's more correct, just a different target? But can one measure it and provide measured data in the review where one can compare the numbers (e.g. for the words: soundstage, imaging, texture, instrument separation, ?)?

[..]

If I search for "4BA iem", the first result is a 50 bucks 4BA iem (same star rating as the Truthear)..good to know that at least the price is ok and no scammery is going on.

If I search for "BA vs dynamic drivers", I get this displayed:

BAs also offer more clarity in that regard. However, they deliver more on treble. Dynamics, on the other hand, while lacking in pristine detail, they present a “warmer” and more coherent tone with better bass reach.

But ty, I may research this further.

---

To quote the Specification on the Introduction review page:

Four-strand cable with oxygen-free copper conductor

Dave from EEVBlog, or any (electronics) engineer would laugh his ass off the oxygen-free copper advertising, and/or say: "Unbelievable.." (?). ChatGPT says it's "Potentially Misleading:", "Durability: [..] isn't a major concern." and Gemini says it's "Marketing Hype:" and "Theoretical Conductivity: In theory..it's practically irrelevant in audio applications.".

5 Hz–40 kHz

That's nice, but aren't humans only capable of hearing 20-20000 Hz (maybe a few Hz lower (as I just tested, but barely), but with everything going on, one is not going to notice it?) (and btw: 16-bit/44.1kHz is all you need)? These specs may again increase the price artificially.

---

I know this can be an endless discussion and we are off-topic. @VSG Maybe you can write an article (if there isn't already one), on which of the review graphs would/can match closest to the these, or other, words: soundstage, imaging, texture, instrument separation, ...

 

[bug]

Ahh yes, the scientific review where if a frequency response doesn't match a preference target (emphasis on preference), it gets dinged. Too bad people like different things in life. Ditto why subjective parameters such as the "buzzwords" mentioned to add a mix of objectivity and my subjective experience.

Tbh, for video there's the CIE diagram that tells "this green must go here, that blue goes over there" and so on. From there on, everyone is free to skew colors/brightness however they want. I can understand why people get confused audio is held to entirely different standards.

 

[VSG]

That would make them simply match a different preference target to the much more expensive ones you have reviewed, but not necessarily worse then. Thanks for confirming.


"Difference" doesn't mean it's more correct, just a different target? But can one measure it and provide measured data in the review where one can compare the numbers (e.g. for the words: soundstage, imaging, texture, instrument separation, ?)?


If I search for "4BA iem", the first result is a 50 bucks 4BA iem (same star rating as the Truthear)..good to know that at least the price is ok and no scammery is going on.

If I search for "BA vs dynamic drivers", I get this displayed:

But ty, I may research this further.

---

To quote the Specification on the Introduction review page:

Dave from EEVBlog, or any (electronics) engineer would laugh his ass off the oxygen-free copper advertising, and/or say: "Unbelievable.." (?). ChatGPT says it's "Potentially Misleading:", "Durability: [..] isn't a major concern." and Gemini says it's "Marketing Hype:" and "Theoretical Conductivity: In theory..it's practically irrelevant in audio applications.".


That's nice, but aren't humans only capable of hearing 20-20000 Hz (maybe a few Hz lower (as I just tested, but barely), but with everything going on, one is not going to notice it?) (and btw: 16-bit/44.1kHz is all you need)? These specs may again increase the price artificially.

---

I know this can be an endless discussion and we are off-topic. @VSG Maybe you can write an article (if there isn't already one), on which of the review graphs would/can match closest to the these, or other, words: soundstage, imaging, texture, instrument separation, ...

There's a good article here: https://headphones.com/blogs/features/soundstage-is-much-more-complicated-than-you-think