$200 IEM Matchup

Audio: Listen to this article.

In my previous IEM review, I looked at five budget ($50 or less) IEMs. I followed that up with a Club TBVO post that added a sixth IEM to that roundup. The resounding winner across those six $50-ish IEMs was the Kiwi Cadenza, which costs a scant $35 USD MSRP (Amazon, Linsoul). A logical follow-up question to that budget IEM review is, “At what price point does one begin to see an improvement beyond what the Cadenza can provide?”

This review of two critically acclaimed of two $200-ish IEMs — the Moondrop Kato and the 7Hz Timeless — is an attempt to provide a partial answer to that question. The Kato retails for $190 USD (Amazon, Linsoul), while the 7Hz Timeless sells at $220 USD at most outlets (Amazon, Linsoul) and $204 from Drop.

Moondrop Kato

Founded in 2015 and based in Chengdu, China, Moondrop has produced a catalog of IEMs ranging in price from $20 to $1,000. According to the company, “MOONDROP has become a by word for superb performance and unique design. The company’s products are sold in more than 30 provinces and regions in China, and through trade channels in North America, Europe and other countries. The award-winning MOONDROP brand is especially popular in South Korea, Japan and other Asian regions.” While most company descriptions employ at least a little hyperbole, there’s no doubt that Moondrop has placed itself firmly on the audiophile map with numerous well-reviewed IEMs and accessories.

The Kato has been one of Moondrop’s most lauded IEMs since its introduction a year ago. The Kato features a single 10mm “ULT (Ultra-Linear Technology) super-linear dynamic driver.” This dual-magnet driver is “equipped with a self-designed high-performance DLC [diamond-like carbon] composite diaphragm” billed for its “high rigidity, high damping coefficient, and light weight.” Moondrop also has paid close attention to the Kato’s acoustic cavity, which the company says is “calculated based on the characteristics of the driver, with the help of the volume and structure simulated by FEA finite element simulation.” The housing of the Kato is MIM (metal-injection molding) stainless steel. According to Moondrop, “the inner surface of MIM process is a fine irregular surface, which has a positive effect on the suppression of standing waves.” If this isn’t enough information about the Kato’s design, Moondrop provides much more on its website, which is among the most detailed of any IEM company I’ve encountered.

The Kato is spec’d at a 32-ohm impedance and a 123 dB sensitivity. The company also boasts that its THD across the spectrum is less than .15% and mostly second-order.

Physically, the Kato’s steel body is striking. While I purchased mine when the mirrored silver finish was the only one available, I personally find the powdered matte grey to be the best-looking option. The Kato looks and feels like a premium IEM. Perhaps the only downside of the Kato’s all-metal design is the weight. However, while the Kato’s above average on that count, I never found that to impact comfort, at least partly because the curvature of the inner side of the Kato’s housing allows it to sit snugly against my ear. But if you’re someone who values a light IEM above all else, then the Kato might not be for you. Impressively for this price point, the Kato comes with a removable metal nozzle. Actually, the Kato includes two types of nozzles (steel and brass), and two of each are in the package. Some reviewers say that material impacts the sound. I’m not so sure, but regardless it’s nice to have options. The nozzle terminates in a metal mesh “brand-new improved third-generation patented anti-blocking filter,” which Moondrop says not only prevents earwax blockages but also “is more conducive to the middle high frequency sound than the previous generation.” The connector for the Kato is the rectangular recessed two-pin type, which I’ve found to be the most durable though it can (sometimes) make finding compatible aftermarket cables a little harder compare to flush-mount two-pin connectors.

When it comes to packaging and accessories, the difference between a $200-ish IEM like the Kato and the $50-ish IEMs covered in the previous review is notable. Whereas most IEMs at that lower price point come in a flimsy box with no case, a so-so cable, and unimpressive tips, the Kato ships in a large and sturdy box that contains a bevy of extras. While I can’t say I’m a fan of Moondrop’s manga cartoon packaging, once one slips off this cover, the actual box is almost luxurious for the price point. Two magnetic flaps open to reveal a sturdy three-compartment package. One compartment holds the actual IEMs in molded slots, while the other two contain the case, cable, tips, and documentation. The Kato comes with a semi-ridged, faux-leather messenger-style case with a magnetic flip-top. While I wouldn’t want to put the Kato through any torture tests in this case, it’s certainly enough for most everyday use. The Kato also comes with a small microfiber bag for extra protection against scratches. The Kato’s cable is, according to Moondrop, “a high-purity copper thick silver-plated cable with a 4-core star stranded structure.” My only minor criticism of this cable is that the plastic coating feels a little below the quality of the cable itself. However, the coating does a great job at resisting microphonics, which is ultimately much more important than any tactile gripes.

The real highlight of the Kato package is the include Spring Tips. I’m embarrassed to admit that when I first got the Kato, I completely overlooked the tips, assuming erroneously that they were the usual generic silicone fare. Boy was I wrong. Moondrop has clearly put a lot of effort into making quality tips that bring the best out of the Kato (and, in my experience, many other IEMs). According to Moondrop, the Spring Tips have an “acoustic waveguide structure verified by FEA finite element simulation technology,” which “greatly reduces the resonance of mid-treble sound waves” resulting in “a smoothened treble frequency response with lowered burr and sharp sounds making it more natural while maintaining high-res extensions.” Structurally, the Spring Tips “have a radial double support structure to avoid the collapse of tips and prevent bass leakage to other frequencies.” While anyone could throw some cheap tips into a box and make extravagant claims, the Spring Tips are genuinely unique. They have an internal ribbing that seems to provide more structure than most silicone tips without sacrificing comfort. The nozzle on the Spring Tips also seem to be particularly springy and resilient, reducing the possibility of a deformation that will block part of the opening and impact the sound. On the other side, the rubber banding at the base of the silicone sleeve does a fantastic job of gripping the nozzle without movement. Texturally, the Spring Tips come pretty close to the Goldilocks zone of silicone tips. They’re a bit tackier than the smooth Spinfit tips and quite a bit less sticky than the very tacky SednaEarfit XELASTEC tips, both of which work well for their particular applications. The Kato comes with three pairs (small, medium, and large) of these superb Spring Tips, as well as three pairs of above-average memory foam tips, all housed in a hard plastic snap case.

7Hz Timeless

I reviewed one of the 7Hz brand’s $20 IEMs in my Club TBVO, and as I noted in that review, there’s not much information online about this China-based company. So, whereas Moondrop provides plenty of design details and measurements on its site, we’re left with the basic product info provided to retailers when it comes to the Timeless.

It’s safe to say that the Timeless is the IEM that put 7Hz on most audiophiles’ radar. It’s been widely reviewed and almost universally praised. Building off this success, 7Hz has released several Timeless spinoff IEMs with slightly different styling or tuning, but it’s safe to say that the original 7Hz remains the most beloved of the bunch. Unlike the Kato’s dynamic driver configuration, the Timeless sports a 14.2 mm planar driver, which the company says “provide[s] fast response, excellent dynamic range and frequency characteristics.”

The Timeless is spec’d at a 15-ohm impedance and a 104 dB sensitivity, as well .2% THD.

The body of the Timeless is CNC-machined aluminum. Its face is flat, with radiating ridges that somewhat resemble ripples in water. The nozzle of the Timeless is part of its one-piece body, and it terminates in a silver grille similar to the one used in the previously reviewed Salnotes Zero. The Timeless’s biggest physical pro is its incredibly light weight. Its biggest con is that the combination of its only modestly contoured body and short nozzle means that that Timeless fits shallow in the ear unless one inserts it far enough that the housing rubs against the outer ear. Ultimately, this proved to be a significant impediment to the Timeless’s comfort for me, but obviously everyone’s ears are different. The connector on the Timeless is of the MMCX variety. This connector is nice because it allows for some swivel. However, some users argue that it’s less durable than the more common two-pin connector. For my part, I’ve been using the Timeless for months without issue, but I also keep the cord attached, which reduces wear and tear on the connectors.

The Timeless’s packaging is considerably less sturdy and elaborate than the Kato’s, falling more in line with the $50 IEMs covered in my previous review. However, the Timeless includes a very nice cable and perhaps the best case I’ve seen at this price point. According to 7Hz, the cable’s “inner core adopts single crystal copper and silver-plated single crystal copper while the outer layer adopts silver foil.” Overall, the cable feels premium and, like the Kato’s cable, doesn’t seem conducive to microphonics. The case is a magnetic flip-top aluminum box lined with microfiber. While people hoping to slip their IEMs into a pocket might prefer the Kato’s case, those looking for superior protection would undoubtedly choose the Timeless’s. In terms of tips, 7Hz unfortunately went for quantity over quality. The Timeless comes with a whopping 12 pairs of tips, ranging from underwhelming to average. I’d easily trade the lot for one pair of the Spring Tips. Finally, the Timeless also includes two replacements for the aforementioned nozzle grilles.

Measurements

Measurements of these IEMs can be found elsewhere — such as Crinacle, Procogvision, and various Squiglink users — and potential buyers are always encouraged to consult multiple data points rather than trusting any one measurement. However, I wanted to present my own comparative measurements.

These measurements were taken with my MiniDSP EARS fixture. I calibrated my EARS with an IEM-adjusted version of Marv from SBAF’s compensation curve, where a perceptually flat frequency response is represented by a flat line. It’s also worth noting that because the EARS don’t have a properly modeled ear canal, doing IEM measurements with it can be tricky. My strategy was to try to get a consistent insertion depth across all of the IEMs and to take repeated measurements until the results were repeatable and presented each IEM in the most favorable light.

With that said, here are the results:

I’ve included the Kato (red) and Timeless (purple) alongside the winner from my $50 IEM roundup, the Kiwi Cadenza (grey), all normalized to 500 Hz. All three show a peak near 11 kHz, but I believe this is mostly a resonance in the EARS fixture. So the important deviations are below that. Most obviously, the Timeless has much more bass than the other two IEMs. The Kato has the least. However, the Kato’s bass response should be taken with at least a small grain of salt. The EARS fixture works best using foam tips. However, Moondrop’s Spring Tips seem to subjectively provide more bass, and the company’s measurements back this up. From the 750 Hz to the 7.5 kHz region, the Kato and Timeless track each other fairly closely, with the Cadenza coming in slightly below both.

As with my previous review, I used pink noise to measure the output of each IEM against a baseline in order to provide me with data for proper level-matching during my subjective evaluation. With the Cadenza set at the EARS’ recommended 84 dB, the Kato comes in at one dB more sensitive (85 dB), while the Timeless is 3.5 dB less sensitive (80.5 dB). In other words, the Timeless is the hardest to drive of these three IEMs, which is to be expected given its advertised 105dB sensitivity.

Subjective Impressions

Comparing these IEMs proved to a challenge, given their substantially different sensitivities and low-end responses. Subjectively, a 3.5 dB increase in volume for the Timeless seemed to be far too much, likely due to its relatively V-shaped frequency response. The Kato, for its part, sounded a bit harder to drive than its pink noise calibration suggested. In order to account for this, I did several passes on each audition track, with the initial passes strictly following the pink noise calibration and the next one allowing for a small window of additional volume adjustment to make the IEMs sound subjectively similar in output.

Making matters even more complicated, the order I evaluated these IEMs impacted my initial evaluation of each’s frequency response (though not each’s technical abilities). This effect was especially pronounced the longer I evaluated each, since our ears and brain tend to acclimate to a particular transducer over time. For that reason, I focused on short segments of each song and varied my listening order. My ultimate evaluations were confirmed by longer individual listening sessions with each IEM on a wide variety of material.

The written comparisons below incorporate notes from the short-segment level-matched analyses, the short-segment analyses where I allowed myself to match the levels more subjectively, and longer-length listening. When in doubt, I went with my impressions from the short-segment level-matched listening. Particularly when combined with varying the order in which I auditioned the IEMs in the short-segment listening, my impressions tended to moderate and become more nuanced when incorporating all three types of listening. For example, switching from the Kato to the Timeless in the level-matched listening often yielded a “yikes” reaction, since the Timeless sounded subjectively so much louder than the Kato, with much higher bass and treble peaks. But when allowing myself to back off the volume a bit, I was able to enjoy the Timeless more. On the other hand, starting with the Timeless then switching to one of the other IEMs initially made the latter sound lifeless due to the former’s low sensitivity and V-shaped “hi-fi” tuning.

Finally, in order to makes these comparisons as consistent as possible, I used the Spring Tips on each IEM. The Spring Tips seemed to provide a little more bass response when used on the Cadenza and Kato but didn’t have this effect on the Timeless. This jibes with my experience that tip choice tends to have a bigger impact on dynamic drivers than other kinds.

I began my analysis with “America” from the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab's CD of Simon & Garfunkel’s Bookends, the track that was used in my previous IEM review. As I wrote then, “A good transducer should be able to separate the mix’s interwoven elements — such as the duo’s layered harmonies — without making the dramatic percussion too boomy or Simon’s somewhat sibilant vocals too harsh.” Beginning with the Timeless, I noted an excessive amount of sibilance on Simon’s vocal. The “sit as” line, for example, proved to be excruciating. Switching to the Kato, I jotted in my notes, “Sibilance under control! Simon’s voice restored!” The Cadenza, for its part, seemed a little more veiled in the treble than either the Timeless or Kato. Despite this, its presentation of Simon’s lead vocal was a little more grating than the Kato’s, though still smoother than the Timeless’s. Directing my ear to Hal Blaine’s drumkit, I detected the same exaggerated mid-treble on the Timeless that makes Simon’s voice so grating. Cymbal hits are reduced to somewhat amorphous tings, ticks, and splashes. The Kato, in contrast, provides a thrillingly realistic reproduction of these metals, as well as a great sense of the sound of the drum booth. At the other end of the frequency spectrum, Joe Osborn’s bass sounded bloated through the Timeless. I also experienced what sounded to me like a subtle lack of sync between the initial transient attack of Osborn’s bass and the low-end response. The same subjective time misalignment could be detected on Blaine’s kick. While subtle, it reminded me of a subwoofer that’s slightly out of sync with the speakers. Through the Kato, Osbourn’s bass was much more articulate. It had less body than through the Timeless, but also much less bloat and proper time alignment. The Cadenza fell somewhere between the two in both bass response and articulation but leaned more towards the Kato on both. As for staging and separation, the Kato trounced its competitors. It projects a wide soundstage that places sounds just in front of the listener. This made it easy to separate instruments and to disentangle Garfunkel’s backing vocals from Simon’s lead, not to mention the various vocal overdubs from one another. In comparison, the Timeless’s soundstage is much narrower and more cramped. It places sounds much more “in the head” than the Kato does, with a U-shaped wraparound effect. This provides an immersive experience in some ways, but at the expense of the ability to clearly separate all of the mix’s elements. Garfunkel’s backing vocals, for example, were just plain harder to hear through the Timeless compared to the Kato. The Cadenza stages much more like the Kato, but its ability to separate elements like Garfunkel’s voice falls a bit closer to the Timeless’s than the Kato’s. Finally, I took a good listen to how the shaker in the right channel sounded during the song’s crescendo and fadeout. Through the Timeless, the shaker just sounded off. It became a flat, sharp, amorphous “shhhh.” Through the Kato it was remarkably three-dimensional and tonally accurate. As I wrote in my notes, “Perfect shaker on fade-out!” The Cadenza couldn’t match the Kato’s resolution, but its rendering was much more tonally accurate than the Timeless’s.

For the next test track, I picked Carole King’s “It’s Too Late,” from the 2013 MFSL SACD of her legendary 1971 Tapestry album*. This time, I started with the Cadenza. Charlie Larkey’s nimble bass in the left channel was rendered with good string noise and crispness to the initial attack and enough body to be impactful. The kick from Joel O'Brien’s kit, mixed off to the right, has nice depth and realism and plenty of thump. Moving on the Kato, Larkey’s bass has a bit less heft, but even more texture, especially when it comes to string articulation. At what the EARS suggest is the level-matched volume, the bass is simply overwhelming through the Timeless. The same is true with the treble. As I wrote in my notes, “Once you bring it to equivalent level, the Timeless becomes egregiously boomy on the low end and bright and brassy on the high end.” Indeed, with its V-shape, the Timeless can almost sound like a vintage stereo receiver with its “loudness” contour adjustment switch turned on. Backing off the volume, the Timeless’s low-end isn’t quite as egregious, though it still retains the flaws I encountered when listening to “America.” Focusing on the King’s voice, the Cadenza places it front-and-center with decent dimensionality, though perhaps a touch muffled. The Kato portrays her lead vocal a little deeper, with more throat/mouth delivery and better nuance and detail. The Timeless places King’s voice closest of the three and accentuates and focuses much more on mouth sounds than either the Cadenza or Kato. On this track, it doesn’t quite tip into grating territory, but it still doesn’t sound right to my ears. The snare and cymbals on O’Brien’s kit sound worst through the Timeless and best through the Kato, with the Cadenza falling in between. They have a balanced tonality through the Cadenza. The cymbals don’t sound like an amorphous “shhh,” and the snare has a good balance of body and wires. The Kato takes these characteristics and add an extra dollop of lifelike detail. Even though on paper the Kato is brighter than the Cadenza, I again found that the Cadenza’s high-end edged into grating territory more often than the Kato’s, which tends to sound smooth even when it’s obviously brighter. Similar to what I heard on “America,” the Timeless just couldn’t nail O’Brien’s kit. Of three three IEMs under review, it (mis)construed the snare into a bright amorphous thwack and the cymbals into a fairly indistinct “shhh.” Turning to staging and resolution, the Cadenza did a solid job of separating King’s vocal overdubs, as well as the hard-panned interlocking piano and guitar lines that enter near the 1:30 mark. The Kato, though, did this all even better. I was amazed by the degree of textural and tonal clues delivered by the Kato, which made it much easier to discern separate elements in the mix, especially when combined with the Kato’s wide soundstage. Listening to the same short segments over and over while rotating through the IEMs, I was struck by how I was able to hear small details through the Kato, such as a backing vocal overdub buried deep in the right channel that I’d missed through the other IEMs. Perhaps the most impressive part of the Kato, though, is how it conveyed the mid-track guitar and soprano sax solos from Danny Kortchmar and Curtis Amy, respectively. Aside from O’Brien’s kit, the Timeless fared better in terms of detail and texture on most instruments than it did on “America.” However, some other elements still sounded a bit off, such as Amy’s soprano sax, which clearly bore the effects of the Timeless’s scooped mids and peaky treble. This treble peak also seemed to make the tape hiss on the recording more noticeable than through the other two IEMs. Finally, the combination of Timeless’s treble balance and narrow, wraparound stage placed O’Brien’s rim click right in your ear, giving the effect of being there next to him in the studio, rather than listening to the mix in the control room. It’s an exciting presentation, but I’m not sure it’s the most accurate.

* Tapestry is absolutely earmarked for a future The Best Version Of… As such, I definitely won’t claim that the MFSL SACD is the best digital mastering of this release, only that it’s definitely good enough for this gear evaluation. While I have you reading this footnote, if you love Tapestry (and a bunch of other great 1971 albums), you have to watch this Apple TV+ series.

Moving through the decades, I next selected “Red Rain” from Peter Gabriel’s 1986 classic, So. Following my conclusion in my TBVO article on So, I used the superb 24/48 download included with the 25th anniversary box set of the album. Beginning with the Timeless, I liked the authority of Tony Levin’s bass. However, the avalanche of percussion from Jerry Marotta’s kit, Stewart Copeland’s hi-hat, and Chris Hughes’s Linn drum machine comes across as far too tinny, and the individual elements lack distinguishing characteristics. As I wrote in my notes, “The percussion is lots of amorphous electronic swishes.” A bit of this characteristic still comes through on the Cadenza, but the budget IEM moves things in the right direction. The Kato, though, really delivers. Again, despite being the brightest-leaning IEM among the three, the percussion avalanche is actually more well-rounded and realistic without veering into edginess. Focusing on Gabriel’s lead vocal, the Timeless again inserts sibilance where I haven’t heard it before, such as on the line “single sound.” The Kato, yet again, does the best job of conveying the details in Gabriel’s voice without much sibilance, while the Cadenza falls somewhere in between the two. The Cadenza is undeniably the darkest of the three IEMs, but its treble isn’t quite as smooth as the Kato’s. The Timeless’s narrow, inside-the-head staging makes it harder to distinguish individual elements in the complex mix, particularly when combined with the Timeless’s heavy low end. When Levin’s superb double-tracked bass lines, panned hard left and hard right, enter the mix, they’ve got plenty of sub-bass but not much mid-bass and their overall resolution in terms of string articulation is mediocre. Through the Cadenza, this bass solo is more well-balanced but the string noise gets a bit lost due to the Cadenza’s comparatively rolled-off treble. As usual, the Kato does best here. Not only is Levin’s double-tracked bass detailed and tonally accurate — albeit lacking the Timeless’s sub-bass energy — but the entire mix also just sounds more open through the Kato.

The final audition track in this IEM showdown is “King of the Jailhouse” from Aimee Mann’s 2006 album, The Forgotten Arm. This is one of those seemingly effortlessly brilliant songs that populate every project of Mann’s. Besides being beautifully composed, I love the arrangement and engineering decisions on this track. The instruments are all panned far left and right, leaving tons of room for Mann’s vocal in the center, which is treated with a touch of stereo of reverb. The coolest part of this mixing decision, though, is that the feed from Paul Bryan’s bass is mixed far left, while a mic mixed far right captures the acoustic string noise from his bass. It’s just one of those little audio “Easter eggs” that makes this such a cool track. As the track progresses, the arrangement and mix becomes more elaborate, with additional guitar, keyboard, and vocal overdubs building to a crescendo before a final resigned denouement. Beginning with the Cadenza, I noted that the buried mellotron mixed to the left in the intro comes across clearly. Mann’s voice sits front-and-center with good realism, no sibilance, and nice reverb. The snare mixed far right is well-balanced, though the aforementioned bass string noise isn’t quite as evident as I’m used to through the best transducers. The Timeless’s tonal balance tends to push the mellotron deeper into the mix. Mann’s lead vocal has a little less nuance than through the Cadenza. It’s more mouth-y and sibilant. Victor Indrizzo’s snare is turned more of a non-descript thwack and lacks the body heard through the Cadenza. I also again experienced the weird slightly out-of-sync effect when it came to matching the initial transient attack of Indrizzo’s kick drum with the resulting thump. Turning to the treble, in my notes I wrote “the cymbals are a tinny mess.” The string noise from Bryan’s bass is more apparent than through the Cadenza, but still feels a bit low-fi. Finally, as the song builds to the crescendo, the Timeless’s bass-heavy tonality and narrow staging tends to turn the nuanced mix into a jumble. The Kato fixes these issues. Mann’s voice is by far the most realistic, and it’s possible to separate all of the individual pieces of the mix, even as additional guitars, keyboards, and vocal overdubs are added. The Kato, in short, does this remarkable track justice.

If you’ve read this far, you probably know what my conclusion is. The $190 Kato is head-and-shoulders better than either the $35 Cadenza or the $220 Timeless, with one important proviso that I’ll get to in a second. Meanwhile, the Timeless falls behind the Cadenza, despite being six times the price.

Notably, this conclusion is somewhat different from the speculative, informal comparison I included at the end of my sub-$50 IEM roundup. In that review, I wrote, “The Kato’s tuning is very close to the Cadenza’s, but I’m not sure that it resolves much better than the Cadenza. The Timeless definitely resolves better the Cadenza, but its tuning isn’t quite as good.” While my impressions of each IEM’s tuning was accurate, my evaluation of their technicalities was far off. How did I get things so wrong?

First, this shows the importance of repeated level-matched listening with short segments of songs. Since the Kato and Timeless weren’t part of the formal sub-$50 IEM evaluation, I was basing my comparison on longer, more informal listening. In less critical listening, the Timeless’s showroom-style V-shaped tuning tends to give the impression of lots of raw detail, whereas upon closer inspection a lot of crucial microdetail is lacking. I also listen to the Timeless at a lower level than other IEMs, which had the effect of obscuring just how exaggerated its bass and treble peaks are.

Second — and this is the proviso mentioned above — up until I wrote this review, I was listening to the Kato using Tin’s $9 memory foam tips, which I usually find present IEMs accurately. As noted above, I didn’t really pay attention to Moondrop’s claim that the Kato is designed to be used with their Spring Tips and that those tips actually substantially alter the Kato’s sound. I assumed that was marketing fluff. But it’s not. Without the Spring Tips, the Kato is a solid, if slightly bass-light IEM. With the Spring tips, the Kato’s low end is much more impactful. Even more crucially, the Spring Tips seem to allow the Kato’s driver’s technical prowess to shine through, whereas it seemed to get a little muffled by the foam tips I was using. Listening to the Kato with foam tips, then switching to the Spring Tips, then switching back, the difference was striking.

If one’s willing to use the Spring Tips, the Kato is a great buy at $190. Indeed, the Kato in this setup reminds me a lot of the best Focal headphones, like the Clear, but for a fraction of the price. While the Cadenza remains an exceptional IEM for a scant $35, the sound of the Kato is dramatically better, and the Kato comes with a much better set of accessories. However, if you’re someone who’s averse to silicone tips, I don’t think the upgrade from the Cadenza to the Kato is worth it. The Timeless, for its part, just doesn’t seem competitive for $220. Fans of a Hartman Curve-meets-Beats V-shaped tuning might like it, and it does have that initial “wow” factor. But critical evaluation reveals it to be a fairly mediocre performer for the price.

About the Author

Josh Mound has been an audiophile since age 14, when his father played Spirit's "Natures Way" through his Boston Acoustics floorstanders and told Josh to listen closely. Since then, Josh has listened to lots of music, owned lots of gear, and done lots of book learnin'. He's written about music for publications like Filter and Under the Radar and about politics for publications like New Republic, Jacobin, and Dissent. Josh is currently a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Virginia, where he teaches classes on modern U.S. politics and the history of popular music. He lives in Charlottesville, Virginia, with his wife and two cats.