Comparisons
Lamentably, I no longer have Aroma Audio Jewel on hand for a direct, in-depth comparison, and I do not trust my memory enough to try and wing it. But I do wish give a brief, shallow comparison, with the strong disclaimer I am basing this on memory, and not A/B switches during a single session. So take this for whatever its worth.
Jewel is warmer than Fei Wan, with fuller mid-bass and richer tone.
FW is clearer, with more treble presence. The highs have more brightness.
Vocals had a kind of veil on Jewel, and FW does not.
Neither IEM pushed detail and resolution to the front, but Jewel was especially laidback.
I won’t pretend to know which has the bigger soundstage. They’re both large, but without having Jewel here, I can’t say who wins.
That’s as far as I want to go, on mere memory.
Empire Ears Odin ($3,399):
Odin cares far less about balance. These IEMs care about one thing and one thing only; wowing you with world class technical prowess. They are detail monsters, super clear and transparent, and tend to make all other IEMs sound veiled in comparison. Including Fei Wan. While utterly amazing, such tuning comes at a cost. Odin is not as euphonic, rich, or organic. In other words, they’re not as musical.
Odin’s treble is unquestionably the star, here. Utilizing electrostats, and tuned for air and extension, Odin is brighter, more open, and far more revealing. FW comes across darker, slower, and less distinct. Highly complex passages are no issue whatsoever for Odin. And while FW is quite capable, itself, it simply cannot keep up. If I’m listening to violins, flutes, and other higher frequency acoustic instruments, I’m choosing Odin, without a second’s hesitation.
Fei Wan’s highs are thicker and sweeter. They are far less prone to fatiguing on aggressive Pop and Rock. Odin is ethereal, wispy, and on some brighter tracks, harsh. For most of the music I listen to, Odin’s treble is simply gorgeous. But there’s no doubt FW is the more forgiving, making it the better all-arounder.
Odin’s vocals are larger and closer to the listener, with superior clarity and transparency, and texturing which pops in a marvelous, hyper-real fashion. Quite impressive. Fei Wan renders much the same detail, but in a less aggressive, more hazy manner. It comes off more natural, though the vocals are farther back, with a hint of lushness. In place of lushness, Odin delivers rawness.
For your mid-range instruments, like cellos, pianos, and acoustic guitars, I easily prefer Fei Wan. While Odin gives you the more transparent experience, FW delivers the emotion. Odin is less warm, rich, and full-sounding, which is super important for these instruments. It’s that lower-mids, upper-bass region where Odin runs a little lean. This aids in cleanliness, but diminishes how emotionally impactful, say, a cello can be. I really need that lower-mid bloom to be properly moved and feel the goose bumps.
On the other hand, electric guitars and drums, are markedly more visceral with Odin, which has an altogether faster, more aggressive demeanor. Bright, splashy Rock can become fatiguing on Odin, but when it’s not, it’s in a league of its own.
The bass on both IEMs are fantastic in their own ways. Odin has a great amount of sub-bass, and a bit of mid-bass, though very little upper bass. Whereas FW is well endowed through the whole region. Both IEMs utilize their own duel dynamic driver setups for the low-end and are capable of deep rumbling and satisfying slam. Odin has a quicker, more agile quality, with the most revealing bass I’ve yet heard, where I feel I get a real sense of the shape and dimensions of the instrument. FW is more straightforward and fun sounding. It has that richer upper bass that fills your head, without muddying the image.
Soundstage goes to Odin. FW is big, Odin is bigger; wider, taller, and portrays depth better. Image positioning is excellent on both, but Odin separates the elements cleaner, making the image substantially more crisp and distinct. This ties into resolution, on which Odin dominates all contenders. Fei Wan does very well with detail retrieval, but Odin’s tuning brings those details out with vivacious spectacle.
For those who want to rock hard, FW is the better choice. For those who derive pleasure from analyzing the recording, Odin can’t be beat.
Empire Ears Legend X ($2,299):
Fei Wan and Legend X share so much in common. They are both clear, liquid-sounding IEMs, with a touch of warmth, ample richness, and sweetly tuned, thick highs with no real sparkle. LX has more bass, and FW has more treble, but depending on what you’re listening to, they can sound super alike.
The treble is more similar than it is different. FW is slightly brighter, infusing the atmosphere with more air. It’s subtle, but noticeable. Both IEM’s have thick, almost gooey treble notes, which extend far, but definitely have a less than true-to-life tone. That’s not to say they aren’t both very enjoyable. Syrupy treble can be sincerely pleasant and non-fatiguing for all-day listening. If I had to choose between treble which felt like warm honey in my ears, or cold steel, I know what I’m choosing 10 out of 10 times.
FW is only a little less thick, a little less syrupy, and a little brighter. But it definitely sits in the same genre of treble tuning as LX.
Legend X’s mid-range is a little warmer, with vocals which are smaller, farther back on the stage, and lacking the same level of clarity Fei Wan exhibits. LX’s mids are still highly detailed, with greater weight and density, but there does seem to be a kind of veil over them, compared to FW’s more naked, transparent sound.
Instruments, again, have more vibrancy with Fei Wan, but they sound richer and more emotional with LX. This comes back to the issue of balance. FW strikes a better balance, where it’s just emotional enough to satisfy you, but doesn’t want to sacrifice clarity and transient speed by pushing it further, which LX does, probably to its detriment. You can hear this in electric guitars, where FW does the better job with attack, distortion, and crunch. LX does a fine job of this, as well. But FW is clearly better.
Coming as a surprise to no one, Legend X has greater bass quantity. I mean, it’s kind of their thing, isn’t it? Both IEMs have elevated lows, but LX is a few steps higher. These are legitimately for bass heads who also demand good technical performance. Fei Wan is simply too balanced to compete here, despite having a similar 2X DD setup dedicated to the woofer.
LX has more sub and mid bass, creating splendidly full-sounded instruments. Fei Wan does great with bass guitars, but those instruments which resonate slightly higher up the frequency range, like Cellos, don’t quite move you to the same degree. LX reaches deep into you, inspiring all the emotion a cello is meant to.
I wish I could say Fei Wan beats Legend X in the quality of its bass, but honestly, they’re basically the same. Which speaks very highly of Fei Wan, as Legend X’s lows are, well, legendary. They’re textured, well extended, and of course, impactful</em! Fei Wan is all of this, as well. In the years I’ve owned Legend X, I’ve never once felt I could do with a bit more low-end. In the short period I’ve been listening to Fei Wan, I can’t say the same. However, it’s more than enough to get the job done. You just won’t be wowed like with LX. Everything’s a tradeoff. The soundstage between these two are pretty close, but Fei Wan seems to edge out LX in width and height, and just about match LX in depth. Imaging and separation also goes to Fei Wan. LX is quite good, especially when they’re spread far off to the left and right. But if you have a clump of opera singers all in front of you, Fei Wan does a finer job of separating and placing them. Detail retrieval and resolution are, yet again, very similar, and it’s likely only thanks to Fei Wan’s tuning that it pulls slightly ahead. A little extra in the presence region, and altogether more treble, highlights what’s already there. I feel Legend X has more or less the same resolution, but it’s less apparent.
Campfire Audio Bonneville ($1399):
Bonneville may take a little time to adapt to, but once you do, these weird things have real magic up their sleeves.
They are far darker and warmer than Fei Wan, thanks to a subdued treble region and heavier bass. They will surprise you, however. The treble is actually well-extended and airy, just pulled back in the mix. But you aren’t missing any of the upper frequencies. This allows Bonneville to deliver much the same information as Fei Wan, yet sound very different doing it. Fei Wan’s highs are brighter, cleaner, and sharper. Bonneville’s are warm and thick. Neither of them comes off harsh or strident, and I never noticed any sibilants.
Bonneville has a definite veil over the mids. Hell, it has a veil over the entire stage. The rolled off treble casts a pall over everything. On the positive side, midrange instruments have more body and harmonic overtones with Bonneville. Fei Wan is clearer and more transparent. Bonneville’s vocals are farther back, but don’t sound small, thanks to everything being oversized on the stage. At first listen, you’ll think Bonnville’s midrange is wooly and devoid of detail, but I’ve found it to be remarkably textured, once you adjust to the darkness. I do feel Fei Wan is more detailed and textured, but Bonneville is nipping at its heels, just with a very different presentation.
For bass, there’s no competition. Campfire has a monster on its hands, with Bonneville. It’s utilizing a proprietary duel-magnet 10mm dynamic driver, which not only makes it significantly more efficient than Fei Wan, but also delivers a savage, high quality low-end, with more rumble and greater impact. Somehow, Fei Wan’s 2x coupled 9.2mm setup can’t quite keep up. Part of it is tuning, I’m sure, but it wouldn’t shock me if a large part is technology. Bass-heavy tracks sound correct on Bonneville, with more rounded and complete lows. As good as Fei Wan sounds in the bass region, and it sounds VERY good, it feels like something is missing.
Believe it or not, Bonneville also has the larger soundstage, mocking the notion a dark signature must equal closed-in presentation. Fei Wan is no slouch here, but Bonneville is truly extraordinary. Not only is it wide as all hell, but its super tall and very deep. It’s one of the most holographic IEMs I’ve heard. Again, Fei Wan is excellent here, competing well against most other top-shelf offerings. It just can’t match Bonneville. Where it does pull ahead is in resolution, detail and transparency. Fei Wan is a little better in resolution and detail, but it’s significantly more transparent, piercing the veil and sounding more natural and lifelike.
FATfrequency Maestro SE ($1,974):
The Maestro SE is a beautifully tuned and well-balanced IEM, much like Fei Wan. I would call it neutral-bright, with more emphasis on the high-end than the mids or lows. But it’s delicately done, so you don’t lose all warmth or naturalness. However, it does have a leaner, more airy sound than FW.
Overall, their handling of treble is pretty similar, yet I favor Maestro over FW, and not by a small amount. It possesses freer, more ethereal highs. FW is thicker and a hint darker. Maybe it’s the electrostats, or just the tuning, but Maestro has the more natural, uncolored presentation. They’re both thoroughly detailed up top, though Maestro is even more so.
Female vocals are super close, with FW just barely sounding a little warmer. For male vocals there is a larger disparity. Especially the lower voices, like David Draiman’s Disturbed cover of Sound of Silence. In the first two verses, David uses a deep, baritone register, and Fei Wan conveys this gloriously, properly full and resonant. Maestro comes off significantly thinner.
This is heard also with the instruments. The intro piano work is so much richer and deeper on Fei Wan. As is all the later instrumentation. Maestro is more like EE Odin here, tuned far more in favor of clarity than musicality, but without the god-tier resolution and detail. Whereas FW shows itself again to be king of balance.
When focusing on bass-heavy tracks, like BLACK SABBATH by Black Sabbath, we can see exactly why the midrange is skewed the way it is. Maestro has a reasonable amount of sub-bass, but very, very little mid or upper bass. It’s quite anemic in the range where warmth and note weight exists. Fei Wan, while also favoring sub-bass, has ample enough mid-bass to deliver a compelling, musical experience. It does not feel thin, or hollow here. Indeed, it feels complete. Maestro is missing a vital hunk of the frequency spectrum. Still, the sub-bass is elevated sufficiently for decent impact and dynamics, and you can have a good time on bass-heavy tracks.
Both IEM’s have a relatively grand soundstage. Maestro may be a little wider and taller, but Fei Wan is deeper. Imaging, separation, and hologrophy are about equal. On some tracks I’d give the win to FW, on others, to Maestro. So I’d say it’s more or less a wash. The same for detail and resolution. Maestro’s superior treble does give it a bit of an edge, as it brings out the details better. Yet both IEMs deliver the goods here, rendering complex passages and subtle elements rather well, though neither IEM is class-leading. Unlike EE Odin, which puts them all to shame.
Another thing of note is Maestro is considerably harder to drive, requiring much more of the volume wheel.
