Foam tips on the Timeless create some really deep bass. However I went back to no-name silicon tips because the Timeless sounds too bassy for my taste.
2 Likes
Hi there,
I just receive the infamous 7Hz, was curious to see what was all that noise around it, so here we are (seems to be a 2nd gen).
Paired with a Btr5 2021 MQA and a 16cores silver plated 2.5 balanced.
Here the 3 audio iâve used quickly to test them, high/mid/bass/speed, and oh boyâŠcareful with your volume.
Starts at 1min :slightly
And finally
I have to say for the price, itâs quite an offer for sure, i understand the hype now. I still have to pass a bit more time with it and go through my test list.
5 Likes
What cable is that in your pics?
I must be one of the only few that donât really like it that much.
I understand it is hyper resolving, I get it is tuned well, I know such planar quality is hard to achieve in an iem. I see all these qualities. I canât say itâs a bad set: it is clearly not.
The thing is⊠It doesnât engage me as the others do. I have audiosense dt300, aria, Mele, heart mirror. They all make me wanna listen to my music. The timeless doesnât. I canât find what is wrong with this set for me, but I just donât feel engaged.
3 Likes
For me, while the tuning is decent it sound too closed in and a tad aggressive. Basically thereâs emphasis around 2k and more than ideal mid-bass.
Itâs actually very close to Moondrop Starfield tuning wise but I prefer Starfield when it comes to default sound.
EQ opens Timeless up. You can just pull down 165hz Q0.5 and that should already help or go full in and EQ to match Harman Target.
Now, it is very resolving and the way it produces sound is very free of distortion (in a sense different elements in busy music tend to coexist without messing with each other which ends up sounding congested like is the case with Starfield) but the default tuning actually makes it less impressive than it has potential to be whereas with Starfield the difference is fairly subtle.
2 Likes
Donât worry 'bout it⊠itâs not just tastes that are different, but ear anatomy as well. Probably everyone has your exact same experience with a different IEM set. Knowing what you donât want in an IEM has itâs worth.
2 Likes
Finally. Some good EQ. I googled for oratory1990s EQ settings. I found them right here. So far I love how they sound. Crinacleâs EQ sounds very sibilant to my ears. This one is much better.
3 Likes
I get it, I passed mine on fairly quickly.
1 Like
interesting I got rid of Mele and Teaâs when I got my timeless lol
everyoneâs tastes are different
4 Likes
Nothing wrongs with you donât liking a product. IMO finding a set that makes you happy while listening is the most important thing in this hobby. As said by @lilhm, best advice is to learn from this so you can better decide your next purchase. 
1 Like
Thatâs indeed what bothers me the most: I donât manage to put my finger on what this set does wrong for me.
At first I thought the instruments were too thin: I felt they were just points in the soundstage. Changing tips helped with that, but didnât really changed the engagement thing much. The HE400i is my favourite headphone (although my hd6xx is grooving on me, despite its lack of stage and imaging), so I donât think planar timbre is the culprit.
Maybe itâs the weird stage? I donât recognize that âall instruments begging a glassâ thing when I test for it, but it could be the reason I donât feel immersed, too distant from the music?
I know there is too much bass for my taste, too (the aria is the nearest of my preferences on the subject) , but the bass seems too thin at the same time. But given the variety of bass delivery I have in my current sets(goes from Mele to SSR via kbear ks1 and kz zex pro), could it be considered a suspect?
I donât know⊠Yet⊠I guess that ironically the timeless, because I like it the least, is the set I should spend the most time with, to try and experiment EQ/tips/songs and get what it lacks. It could be a great way to refine my tastes, yes
But I am capable of doing that? I guess I can only answer that question if I try.
1 Like
That is weird, usually when I donât like a set I can name a reason, or five.
I was going to guess timber until you said that. The HE400se is what got me jump on the Timeless, they were my first magnetic planar, and I loved the sound and speed. It is odd that my first planar was just the end of the summer, and the S12 will be my third.
I am starting to wonder if you are correct that is a staging and imaging thing. I love the sound, but while there are lots of places for instruments, there are not many distances on the sound stage. If you hear them as too far away, that could be very unengaging. I hear them all as being pretty close, but with very little difference, so I perceive it as a narrow stage, but still good imaging in that space.
1 Like
That could be it: the lack of Distance differences⊠I donât have access to my set right now, but Iâll keep all that in mind when I listen to it again.
Thank you all for the feedback 
3 Likes
I know where youâre coming from, but like some said it already, taste, anatomy and all makes it a very subjective matter as you certainly already know. The higher âlevelâ you were fortunate to listen the harder it is to come back to something else and if you do, it becomes an âanalytic gameâ, where you overthink things when youâre just supposed to enjoy the music, a curse of some sort. Just use what makes you happy.
For me thatâs simple, i have 3 songs that can make me cry but only if the hardware is competent, when testing some new stuff if the hardware gets in the way and failed to make me, i just put it in the bin whatever the price of the device (i sell it right away, because iâm sure itâs not for me).
4 Likes
Where can I find Crinacleâs EQ? Iâm pleased with mine, but Iâd like to compare it with his.
The frequency response graphs describe this as a bassy headphone but I just canât manage to make them sound bassy enough without EQ, regardless of what tips Iâm using. Any ideas?
No such thing as âCrinacleâs EQâ.
Unless you mean EQ that corrects Timeless for his IEF Neutral Target in which case you have to do that yourself and itâs not very difficult.
But you want more bass, yes? Which bass exactly: Sub? Mid? IEF EQ make these have even less so if you donât have enough bass you either donât have good seal or you are the living definition of âbass headâ.
Timeless has a very significant bass boost but also elevated mid-bass which makes them sound a bit thick.
1 Like
Here the FixedBand EQ from Crinacle results (AutoEQ harman_in-ear_2019v2)
Preamp: -4.9 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 31 Hz Gain -2.0 dB Q 1.41
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 62 Hz Gain -2.6 dB Q 1.41
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 125 Hz Gain -3.0 dB Q 1.41
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 250 Hz Gain -2.2 dB Q 1.41
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 500 Hz Gain 0.6 dB Q 1.41
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1000 Hz Gain 1.2 dB Q 1.41
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2000 Hz Gain -3.1 dB Q 1.41
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 4000 Hz Gain 4.7 dB Q 1.41
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8000 Hz Gain 3.6 dB Q 1.41
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 16000 Hz Gain -6.6 dB Q 1.41
Here is the parametricEQ
Preamp: -6.1 dB
Filter 1: ON PK Fc 83 Hz Gain -3.7 dB Q 0.35
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 4242 Hz Gain 3.3 dB Q 2.56
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 6077 Hz Gain 4.9 dB Q 2.31
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 8280 Hz Gain 2.4 dB Q 1.62
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 19879 Hz Gain -6.2 dB Q 0.24
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 239 Hz Gain -0.8 dB Q 1.52
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 911 Hz Gain 1.9 dB Q 0.78
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 1336 Hz Gain -1.4 dB Q 1.98
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 2063 Hz Gain -2.2 dB Q 1.38
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 3180 Hz Gain 2.0 dB Q 4.42
1 Like
Thanks for the response but ignore my previous comment. It wasnât the tips, the seal, nor am I a basshead, quite the contrary, I prefer dead neutral tuning to anything else. So, apparently my current source (an ibasso dc-03) broke and now lower frequencies are lacking regardless of which headphones I plug in.
I was afraid that something is wrong with my Timeless, but theyâre bassy and sweet on all my other sources. Phew.
3 Likes
Good to hear.
Timeless = tip dependentâŠget that sortedâŠadd hybrid tubes = 
stupid fun set for my library for the 
1 Like