The lighting helps that impression a lot, looks like it is straight silver artfully lit. But yea cyberpunk or Gundam were the first things I thought of.
1 Like
I actually really dislike the looks of the Titan and the Falcon, but the Zen looks beautiful.
3 Likes
I wouldn’t say I like the look of the Titan, but it is an attention grabber. The Zen is classic style refined, but honestly if the Falcon pro ends up good then for looks alone I would probably grab it first before the Zen. I like the shape I also like the subtle detail work around the edge.
2 Likes
The Zen Pro looking to have the same housing that didn’t fit me makes me die a little inside.
I just wanted that sweet, sweet slam without the pain ;_;
Looking forward to impressions of the Falcon Pro tho.
3 Likes
Out of curiosity did you ever try the Tin T2 and did you have a similar issue? Just curious if it is the style or the size.
Or the T4… can’t remember if the T3 was a different style. Tin’s names are simple but they have like 0 consistency in design to naming.
Never had the T2, and the Zen is the only IEM that I have ever had that I couldn’t stand wearing long-term. Which sucks, because I loved the sound. That being said, I seem to be an outlier for fit-issues with the Zen, so I think it’s my specific anatomy more than specific size.
They do the same circular style with a MMCX jack off the side but they are overall smaller in size. They are also a pretty cheap and common IEM so I thought there was a chance you had tried both.
I gotcha. I already had a collection going when the T2 dropped, and the tuning doesn’t really look like my cup of tea so I’ve always passed on them.
The T3 and the Zen have a very different shape. The T3 is more of a bullet style iem.
Yikes! Not what I wanted to see at all. 
4 Likes
I don’t mind less bass as long as it is good bass, but I am liking the look of the 800-2k rise more on the original zen.
2 Likes
Agreed. Those two huge spikes after 10K is extension? Not very “PRO” if you ask me. Huge disappointment. I’d rather have the original with proper contrast between the bass and treble.
Please someone tell me they are resonance peaks or something.
The +10k peaks didn’t make me question anywhere near as much as the precipitous drop off in to the abyss that the original does after 10k. Maybe I am just used to some shenanigans going on in that region for sound stage, resonance peaks, and all the other stuff tuning tries to hide up there.
Interesting I was playing around in precog’s squig and noticed the EST and some of the other DUNU’s do a similar, but maybe not as exaggerated drop in that range… so the original might just be their “house tuning” and the pro might be an experiment.
1 Like
I’m looking forward to seeing more feedback.
The Blessing 2 tuning was almost perfect to my ears. I really like there’s no 200 Hz dip that most Harman tuned IEMs tend to do, which kind of kills the body for a lot of male vocals to me with such leanness and so-so note weight.
My biggest complaint about B2 was its one-note bass and also not the greatest texture. From my reading, ZEN 1 has outstanding bass with excellent physicality, which is exactly what I’ve been looking for and according to Dunu, improved on the Pro.
From dunu on discord:
It will be more expensive than the ZEN, because we couldn’t just change out dampers to get the results shown in the ZEN PRO. The driver is fundamentally still the same, but the diaphragm itself is of a modified alloy composition, and the magnet has some small alterations.
The analogy is like if we took a high performance engine, and played around with the composition and geometry of the cylinder heads, played around with the tolerances between the cylinders and the engine block, and modified both the intake and exhaust manifolds. The result is an engine that behaves, fundamentally, on a similar level, but its response will have a different experience. The torque curve might be flatter, and it might have more peak horsepower, etc.
In headphone terms, perhaps it’s like an HD800S to HD800 analogy, but we feel we’ve made more adjustments than that.
We were fortunate to have the supplier for our diaphragm be very willing to work with us on the minute details, as we were the very first to utilize a Mg-Al alloy dome in a small form factor. They were able to help us shave off weight in a manner that reduced the dome’s moment of inertia, without sacrificing stiffness (in fact it’s higher now) and internal damping characteristics. We’re talking fractions of a gram here. On paper, it looks like it’s barely different, but inside the acoustic system, the changes make a substantial difference. Even for the magnetic flux density, we upped it by 0.013 Tesla. Tiny right? But in conjunction with the modified diaphragm, we were able to pull up that lower midrange. Increased lower midrange is actually what you guys are seeing on the FR — it makes the ‘pinna gain’ look smaller. We could’ve added acoustic output damping to lower the upper midrange and treble, and that would have created a similar effect — on an FR chart, at least. But we chose this method because it maintains the core design principles of our chief engineer.
We’re not claiming ZEN PRO is a night and day difference against the ZEN, nor are we claiming it to be “giant killer” of any sort. But we do feel it’s better than the ZEN in all areas we wished to improve on, and after the blind listening tests, we are even more confident in that feeling.
4 Likes
Looking forward on that Zen Pro, but that graph is not what I was expecting. That extension is yikes
1 Like
Where can I keep an eye out for your review of Iris 2.0? Here or do you publish to a certain website?
Less bass is a bit of a let down but let’s see where the tape mod takes it.
The reviews are on headfi, but he usually shares a link here.
1 Like
Ah thanks… obviously it’s in the title.
Smh my bad!