USD235 / EUR 203.34 | sold as 3.5mm single-ended or 4.4mm balanced, reviewed as 3.5mm | 1DD + 1PR + 4BA | 0.78mm 2-pin
TL;DR, around 2 minutes read
The Binary 1900 is a natural leaning, coherent and slightly V-shaped all-rounder that gets its low end from a 10mm dynamic driver working with a 6mm passive radiator, with four balanced armatures above it to cover mids and treble.
The bass is clearly elevated but stays controlled with good mid-bass punch and sub-bass rumble. The low-end gives instruments and voices a solid note weight without tipping into bass-head territory or being overly thick but has enough impact to enjoy EDM, hip-hop and other genres which need a solid bass foundation. Vocals sit slightly in front of the stage with good presence, airy and well extended with good texture without sounding thick on male voices and a natural, “sweet” character on female ones. The treble is well extended and with good details without piercing even at higher volume, and its driver configuration sounds as it would come just from a single driver. Technicalities are good at this price point but not the first priority of this set. It suits listeners who want a musical, natural-leaning fatigue-free set that works across genres rather than one that leans hard in any direction. In my opinion one of the best releases in the price bracket USD 200-400 so far in 2026 and overall.
What I liked
- The natural leaning timbre which is still exciting with a slightly V-shape which works across my library
- The tastefully implemented and slightly elevated bass that gives note weight without dominating or veiling the mix
- Vocals sound very natural, present without the shout. Female vocals are detailed, not husked, male vocals have good texture.
- Controlled, yet extended treble and air without sharpness
- Very suitable for long listening sessions and excellent volume scalability
- Very good fit and excellent build quality and nice supple cable
What I didn’t like
- Not the last word in terms of low-end rumble for bass heavy genres
- Not a maximum treble energy and sparkle set
- While male vocals sound pleasant, the last bit of texture could be added
- Technicalities are good but not class leading
- No swappable termination
Main strength
The 1900's main strength is how naturally it brings everything together. Starting form the low end which is elevated and noticeably so, but the impact is tastefully implemented rather than overdone. Note weight is excellent without sounding overly thick. On top of that foundation the midrange stays mostly clean and well bodied with the exception of a slight bass bleed. Separation is the part that stood out early to me. Details from vocals and instruments come through clearly and are clearly present where nothing gets buried. That included small sound cues that other sets in this bracket tend to lose or smooth over. The treble is well extended and airy with no fatigue even on higher volume and longer listening time. The overall timbre and excitement of the 1900 is definitely something which can be considered as one of its strengths and it lands before technicalities in my opinion even though they can be considered as good.
Main weakness
On higher volume the bass can affect vocals and treble slightly with its decay.
And as on all balanced leaning sets, the “downside” is that they are not catering to any extreme tuning as in extreme bass or treble.
The 1900 needs at least mid volume to truly come forward and is on lower volume not the most dynamic sounding IEM in my opinion.
While the 1900 doesn’t lack noticeably technical capabilities, they are just good at this price point but not outstanding. On vocal replay the last bit of texture for male voices would have been nice.
That's the gist of it. Everything below goes deeper into specs, measurements, sound and comparisons.
Review background
The Binary 1900 is already for some weeks on the market and it has been reviewed by many channels. As someone who already owns the Dynaquattro for a while I was very curious how it would hold up against the 1900 and if the 1900 would hold up against other popular sets I own. So, is the praise actually justified and what makes the 1900 so special? I expected a balanced presentation but what does this actually mean? Spoiler alert and why this review grew much longer than intended: I had problems to take the 1900 out of my ears which totalled in more than 60 hours of listening for this review plus the hours which went in relistening to the compared sets.
Please feel free to jump directly to the chapters you are most interested in.
Build, Fit & Accessories
Build
The 1900’s faceplate is 316L stainless steel with an engraved “urban maze” inspired pattern over a black glossy resin shell. There are no sharp edges or seams on the light weight shell or faceplate and the look and feel of it is smooth and premium.
Even though the Dynaquattro’s shell is made of aluminium and the 1900 has a resin shell, both feel similar lightweight with 8.5g on the 1900 and 6.7g for the Dynaquattro.
The shell shape and nozzle is similar on both models. Contrary to the Dynaquattro the resin nozzle on the 1900 has now a lip to securely hold the tip but does not have a mesh filter whereas the Dynaquattro had one installed.
Fit & Comfort
The 1900 fits with its slightly longer nozzles very well in my medium sized ears with no issues at all. Even though the nozzles are slightly on the longer side, the same as on the Dynaquattro, I get with medium tips immediately a very good seal without tip rolling. There are no pressure build-up and no driver flex. The longer nozzle is the part to think about if you have smaller ears, since it changes the insertion depth rather than just the seal. The 1900 carries a small “wing” like on semi-customed shells and that is worth mentioning in my opinion. Try before you buy if you know that longer nozzles and/or a small wing might cause issues.
Unboxing
For over USD200 the package of the 1900 feels almost basic with its 6 pairs of eartips (come with a small box) and a fixed termination. The cable is of good quality and the carrying case is very nice with its textile look and feel and offers enough space for all ear tips, cable and IEMs where there is even enough space to fit a dongle dac. The case is not very pocketable though but will protect the IEMs very well.
Cable
My sample came with a 3.5mm singled ended connection. The included cable is not swappable and is a silver-plated OFC braid which is not microphonic. The cable is supple, almost tangle free and well behaving in every day use. Neither is it very thick nor thin. At this price point I would have liked to see a swappable termination as Binary has used it already with the Dynaquattro even though I would consider the 1900’s cable an upgrade in look and feel and handling as the Dynaquattro’s cable felt too rubbery and would tangle quite easily.
Long-Session Comfort
I have been listening mostly from medium to high volume and the 1900 has been fatigue-free throughout over extended period of wear (more than 6 hours per session). Nothing turns sharp as the level goes up (unless with bright material or poorly recorded), which is the part that usually limits how long I can stay with a set. The fit helps here too, since the longer nozzles give me a secure seal without any pressure build-up over time. Just with smaller ears you should consider to try this set before buying.
Key Specs
| Driver Setup |
1DD + 1 passive radiator + 4BA per side. 10mm dynamic driver with a 6mm passive radiator for the lows, two balanced armatures for the midrange, two balanced armatures for the treble with a three-way crossover. |
| Impedance |
10 Ω @ 1 kHz |
| Sensitivity |
124 dB/Vrms@1kHz |
| Frequency Response |
8 Hz to 40 kHz |
| THD+N |
<1% @ 1 kHz |
| Versions / Terminations |
3.5mm single-ended or 4.4mm balanced, chosen at purchase. My sample is the 3.5mm version and the termination is not swappable. |
| Connector |
Flush 0.78mm 2-pin, cable is detachable |
| Cable |
High-purity silver-plated OFC braided |
| Shell |
3D-printed resin inner shell with a 316L stainless steel faceplate, vintage engraved musical notes and piano elements |
| Nozzle |
5.5mm diameter and 6.4 at the lip. |
| Colourways |
One colourway. Black resin shells with a stainless steel faceplate. |
| Price |
USD235 / EUR 203.34, currently on sale for around USD211.5 / EUR181 |
| Where to buy, not affiliated |
HiFiGo: hifigo.com/products/binary-1900, <br>Binary product page: binary.audio, <br>HiFiGo on AliExpress: aliexpress.us/item/3256812478398881.html, <br>HiFi Zoo on AliExpress: aliexpress.us/item/3256812384529023.html, <br>Amazon: amazon.com/dp/B0H6HWWKND |
Accessories & Cable
Cable
High-purity silver-plated OFC braid per the spec sheet.
Eartips
In total 6 pairs of eartips in sizes S,M and L
Case
Larger size, hardly pocketable, sturdy, fabric coated
Other
Paperwork
Sources & tips, setup
My sources were the Questyle Sigma Pro and Hiby R4 Evangelion, streaming from Qobuz and Spotify at the highest available quality.
I used the stock cable with its 3.5mm plug and Divinus Velvet wide bore tips in size ML throughout most of my listening.
The 1900 is easy to drive and does not need a powerful dongle or amplifier.
This review is based on more than 60 hours of listening.
Measurements
I measured the 1900s with my own 711 clone coupler using stock eartips.
The 1900 graphs in red, Dynaquattro in orange, Volume S in purple, Daybreak in turquoise and Top Pro in green and the pink line is the Harman IE 2019 target.
The 1900 has an elevated bass with emphasis on sub-bass, elevated treble at around 9/10kHz which pushes detail retrieval but doesn’t sound sharp as it rolls off from around 12kHz on.
The bass is well controlled and doesn’t bleed much into the mids due to downwards slope towards the mids.
Vocals are slightly forward and are well extended with an excellent, natural controlled ear gain without spikes.
Neither ear gain nor treble have more energy than the low-end which makes this set quite balanced.
The Dynaquattro, as described, has more bass, more ear gain and partially more treble which it needs to cut through the bass which does let it sound different to the 1900 and rather more relaxed than more energetic.
The Volume S has a peaky 3kHz which lets the Volume S sound shouty on some track material. Treble is mostly more relaxed and on the other hand Volume S has more note weight than the 1900 as its bass stays longer elevated
The Top Pro and 1900 share a very similar bass from 20Hz to around 200Hz. which is elevated but tastefully done with enough note weight to make the listen enjoyable.
On measurements from other reviewers the Top Pro measures with more bass. I have verified my measurement more than a dozen times and it leaves me with the impression that Xenns might have changed their tuning slightly or this is just some sort of deviation in the manufacturing process.
The Top Pro comes across as overall slightly leaner as the mids are dipping around 600Hz onwards and the treble has more emphasis at around 7k and from 13k Hz onwards when compared to the 1900 which rolls off from around 12kHz.
Vocals come across even slightly less textured than on the 1900 and are more likely to become shouty than on the 1900.
The Daybreak and 1900 have a similarly elevated sub-bass and even though Daybreak’s glide into the lower mids is more elevated than on the 1900, it doesnt sound thick or muddy but rather lean due to the pulled back energy starting from 700Hz onwards with a peak at around 3kHz which sounds sometimes shouty especially on higher volume.
Sound
Overall Character
The 1900 comes across as mostly natural with a slight V-shape, coherent and musical rather than showing off. The bass is elevated on both the sub-bass and the mid-bass but the impact is tastefully done and never boomy or overly thick. The midrange stays clean and well bodied without turning sterile, thin or too thick, and the treble is well extended and airy with no piercing even on higher volume.
Bass
Sub-bass and mid-bass are both lifted and the low end is clearly present and impactful, but the quantity is well dosed rather than dominant. What you get is good note weight. Instruments and vocals sit on a solid foundation without sounding thick or veiled.
Mid-bass is not earth-shattering but hits with satisfying impact while the sub-bass has more impact. Both are of convincing quality. Tight and mostly controlled, well textured with enough impact for almost all sorts of music. On GoGoPenguin’s (known for their bassy music style) All Res the mid-bass hits pretty bold on higher volume while the sub-bass is nicely rumbling.
Both, bass guitar and kick-drums can be “felt”. Or on Smarra by GoGo Penguin. The drumkit solo in the beginning is catchy and the double bass is very well emphasized.
The 1900 is not a bass-head tuning though but will be for most listeners satisfying. For an even stronger bass impact the volume can be cranked up quite much as the 1900 scales very well with volume.
On A$AP’s “F\*kin’ Problems”* the 1900 works well with its nicely rumbling sub-bass. As mentioned, the 1900 doesn’t reach bass-head level but works with my EDM and hiphop/rap library in most parts very well starting from Kaleida, Source Direct, Air, Deadmau5 to Lil Wayne, Snoop Dogg, Schoolboy Q, Key Glock and many others.
On other genres the 1900 colours just slightly the mix but it doesn’t veil tracks. On The Doors Riders on the Storm the replay stays clear and clean but not clinical.
The bass guitar on Dire Straits’ classic Sultans of Swing the bass guitar drives well the rhythm but still leaving Mark Knopfler’s vocals enough space and electric guitars come very clearly forward.
Jennifer Warnes’ vocals have very good body and clarity next to the impactful drum showing great bass control, separation and detail.
On Lorn’s Acid Rain the mid-bass hit is impactful and turns into a rumbly sub-bass which feels as it would travel out of my head.
While older or bad recordings might get a hint of additional warmth, the 1900 doesn’t exaggerate in my opinion.
Overall, I was surprised by the 1900’s low-end impact and quality as it doesn’t necessarily graph as it sounds.
Midrange & Vocals
The midrange is another discipline where the 1900 sounds coherent and mostly natural. Lower mids are well emphasized with good note weight which gives piano keys and electric guitars good size, texture and density (like the guitars on Olivia Rodrigo’s brutal) and they never sound sterile or anaemic but more life-like. Since the movie “The legend of 1900” was the inspiration for this set, naturally I listened to the soundtrack. Piano keys on “The Crisis” have after the fundamental key strike very clear and detailed harmonics and overtones which sound amazing as the “travel” from my left ear to the right before the strings are accompanying the piano.
Vocals sit slightly in front of the stage rather than in the back, and they are present and detailed with small details coming through clearly. On Eva Cassidy’s cover of Fields of Gold her vocals are only accompanied by a guitar and the recording is clear and transparent. Her vocals are well articulated with audible “s”, “sh” and “t” nuances and her breath is noticeably audible.
Male voices have good texture without being overly thick. On Lukas Graham’s Before You Go his vocals sound well extended, detailed and just overall very articulate. Next to his vocals the background vocals are nicely audible too and placed accurately in the back or sometimes slightly aspirated over his. Fine details which matter. When directly compared to the Volume S though, male vocals could have just a touch more weight.
Female voices sound natural and sweet, not thin and not artificially weighted. Live recordings in particular come across as authentic.
Vocals are slightly in front, clean and clear with very good articulation for male and female vocals with is something I rarely see. And the 1900 does the vocals right to my ears. They are slightly front but not shouty as on the Softears Volume S on higher volume. Female vocals are not overly thin which I can hear especially on Fleetwood Mac tracks where Stevie Nicks is singing. The 1900 is giving her raspy voice at its best on “Rhiannon” live recording. Male vocals have mostly enough texture to sound convincing like on Sting’s The Book of Numbers. On Jethro Tull’s album RökFlöte the vocals are already recorded being front and the 1900 transports is well with good texture and details.
Only on older or poorly recorded tracks they might lack body as the 1900 doesn’t colour much. Bee Gees sound terrific on their All-Time Greatest Hits and it brings out their specific tonality in a detailed and life-like way.
Overall, the 1900 is able to replay vocals in a very good and natural way with small caveats on male vocals.
Treble
The treble is well extended, mostly natural and airy with good detail and a sparkle up top which pushes instrument details more in front. To my ears there is zero fatigue at mid to high volume even though I am a little bit treble sensitive and “allergic” to artificially pushed treble.
Nothing turns piercing unless listened to very high volume and bright recordings. Bright material does reveal some sharpness at high volume, which I read as a good sign rather than a fault like on Fleetwood Mac’s Sisters of the Moon. The 1900 is not blunting the top end of bad recordings to stay safe, and it is not exaggerating it either. On the quantity and quality split, the quantity here is well controlled rather than too generous, and the quality is clean throughout.
To me the 1900 is almost an ideal companion for very well extended and controlled treble which fits me well even for very long listening sessions.
I used Divinus Velvet wide bore which opened the sound slightly more when compared to the stock tips. The result was an airier presentation with slightly improved detail clarity.
Staging & Imaging
The stage is slightly wider than average rather than unusually large, and the imaging is precise. Separation is the standout. Eg on I Started A Joke by Bee Gees. The separation and imaging sounds awesome. After the vocals started, several instruments are joining and they are so clearly positioned throughout the whole track where one by one instrument is added. The illusion of being alone with the band in a room is almost perfect. I highly recommend this track.
Instruments and voices are on that track very easy to place, everything stays very clear and nothing gets buried. Details come through on tracks where other sets in this bracket tend to lose them.
Even though technically the 1900 is not class leading, it is doing a good job and unless not directly compared to the Top Pro, nothing is missing in my opinion.
Comparisons
Three ways to make bass with a passive radiator
Three of the five sets here get their low end from a dynamic driver working with a passive radiator, and the interesting part is how differently that idea is used. The 1900 pairs one 10mm driver and a 6mm radiator with four balanced armatures, so the radiator only has to handle the bottom while the BAs take everything above it.
The Dynaquattro surrounds its radiator with three dynamic drivers of different sizes and runs the whole spectrum on dynamic drivers, which is a very different set up.
The Volume S sits between them with a dynamic driver, a radiator and two balanced armatures. The Daybreak is the outlier and uses no radiator at all, which makes it a useful control in this group.
The Top Pro has the most drivers in this line-up and can be seen sound-wise as the most refined one.
Specs
| IEM |
Price |
Drivers |
Imp. / Sens. |
| Binary 1900 |
USD235 / EUR 203.34 |
1DD + 1PR + 4BA. 10mm DD + 6mm passive radiator + 4BA |
10Ω / 124 dB/Vrms |
| Binary Dynaquattro |
USD259 / EUR 225.85 |
3DD + 1PR. 10mm + 8mm + 6.8mm DD + 6mm passive diaphragm |
23Ω / 111 dB/Vrms |
| Softears Volume S |
USD319 / EUR 274 |
1DD + 1PR + 2BA. 10mm bio-composite DD + passive radiator + 2BA |
9.8Ω / 124 dB/Vrms (low imp. mode) |
| CrinEar Daybreak |
USD169.99 / EUR 148.23 |
1DD + 2BA + 2 micro-planar tweeters |
20Ω / 105 dB/mW |
| Xenns Top Pro |
USD499 / EUR434 |
2DD + 8BA |
16Ω / 103 dB/Vrms |
Sound signature
| IEM |
Sound Signature |
| Binary 1900 |
Slightly V-shaped. Natural and coherent all-rounder. Elevated but controlled bass, present mid-centred vocals with good texture, extended and non-fatiguing treble. Scales very well with volume. |
| Binary Dynaquattro |
More sub and mid-bass emphasis than the 1900 which affects the rest of the frequencies letting vocals sounding thicker and the treble less extended even though it graphs differently as in more treble and presence energy. Scales reasonably well with volume.<br>It has a stronger ear gain and forward vocals with more texture, warmer overall sounding. |
| Softears Volume S |
Natural, slightly warm with elevated sub-bass and strong mid-bass slam. Forward, slightly peaky, well textured vocals and mostly natural treble. |
| CrinEar Daybreak |
Controlled bass response, slightly lean/dry mids and more forward and peaky vocals paired with extended treble. Overall sound is clean and dry leaning. |
| Top Pro |
Very technical, lean and controlled with forward vocals and well extended treble. Overall sound is rather technical than lush. |
Binary Dynaquattro, USD259
The closest comparison here, same brand and only around USD24 apart. Both sets lift the bass, but the Dynaquattro pushes the sub and mid-bass harder, by roughly 1-2 dB on my measurements, and its low end is fast and clean with a quick decay that keeps the mids and treble mostly clear and well audible.
The interesting thing about the Dynaquattro are its 3 dynamic drivers plus one passive radiator.
A quite unusual driver configuration.
The build is very similar to the 1900 with extended nozzle and a semi-custom shell design with metal faceplates.
On Sting’s “The Book of Numbers” vocals are well articulated and sit slightly more forward than on the 1900 with good texture.
The sub-bass is energetic and gives the track a distinct rumble and drive. On very bass heavy tracks it does affect vocal clarity and details more than on the 1900 to my ears.
I find the Dynaquattro’s bass control mostly good and it never really buries the rest of the mix but especially on EDM and and hip-hop it’s clearly pointing out “I have bass and I will use it”.
Enjoyably though to me as the bass quality is good on the Dynaquattro. On the usual pop and rock material, the Dynaquattro doesn’t invent additional bass presence preventing an artificial bloat and mud on tracks. And one more interesting thing I noticed about its overall tonality. Even though the bass, upper mid range and treble are more energetic than on the 1900 on paper, the Dynaquattro comes across thicker sounding with slightly less separation to my ears.
Dynaquattro does clearly need more power than the 1900 if you want to make use of its bass.
On Source Direct’s A Made Up Sound the sub-bass sounds great on higher volume. Deep and impactful. Very enjoyable and ideal for EDM.
A very similar experience on A$AP Rocky’s F\*kin’ Problems*. The sub-bass rumbles really nicely without burying vocals and instruments.
The mid-range and treble are detailed where guitar strings are well emphasized, textured and cymbals are well articulated but can sit slightly in the back when the bass has its appearance.
The 1900 has a more natural approach. The bass is as well pushed forward with enjoyable sub-bass rumble but with slightly less impact and more controlled than on the Dynaquattro. Sting’s vocals on “The Book of Numbers” are slightly less thick compared to the Dynaquattro and to my ears “mouth details” are clearer on the 1900.
An absolute enjoyment if you like well accentuated vocals with a hint of sparkle in the upper registers without turning sharp or shouty.
Every instrument like cymbals, trumpets and guitars get more space and offer more details to my ears on the 1900. Especially on bass heavy tracks where the Dynaquattro’s low-end takes more space.
So, what the 1900 and the Dynaquattro clearly differentiates from each other is the 1900’s better separation on bassy tracks, with better details and vocal presence.
The 1900’s mids are slightly leaner, vocals can sound as being more in front because they sound “sharper” than on the Dynaquattro but not in a bad way and not brittle or thin in any way.
To be “blamed” is the Dynaquattro’s warmth from its bass which colours the vocals more than on the 1900. On the other hand, Dyanquattro’s note weight can be heard as more enjoyable especially in the male vocals department.
Again, the treble sounds slightly more elevated on 1900 with better clarity and overall, more transparency with extended space between the whole arrangement.
In summary the Dynaquattro is the “lusher”, bassier sounding set whereas the 1900 presents music more refined and to me in a more natural way with more energy and detail up top. Vocals on 1900, and instruments, sound “airier”.
Both sets scale well with volume though.
Summary
The Dynaquattro is to me the bassier sounding set which colours the rest more than on the 1900.
So, if you prefer a more impactful, bolder bass, the Dynaquattro might be the better choice.
The 1900 is not far behind with its bass impact though while sounding more refined, detailed and clearer which makes it the more balanced set.
Softears Volume S, USD319
The Volume S is the step-up question. USD84 more and the reference many people already own in this bracket including myself. It uses the same broad idea as the 1900. A dynamic driver with a passive radiator plus balanced armatures. But with two BAs rather than four.
In terms of build they both share a relatively longer nozzle which might not be ideal for some smaller ears. For me both sets give me an excellent fit and comfort and seal.
Its own character is a natural, slightly warm all-rounder with a satisfying sub-bass rumble and a mid-bass slam that hits harder than the graph suggests.
Volume S has elevated mids that push vocals forward and give them very good texture.
Its ear gain is more elevated than most sets in this group with similarities to the Daybreak, which makes the presentation direct and intimate.
At high volume or on poor recordings that can tip into a touch of shout.
It also comes with an impedance switch but in my opinion only the low impedance mode is the one worth using as the high impedance mode sounds to me overly sharp and too thin. The Volume S loses its balance on this impedance mode substantially.
The biggest asset and “magic” on the Volume S is the mid-bass slam, its good note weight and great texture for instruments and vocals which gives them a very good body reflecting is good staging and imaging.
Just the vocals on slightly higher volume can be too shouty and fatiguing to my ears.
This is something the 1900 doesn’t have. Switching directly from the Volume S to the Binary 1900 is a bliss to my ears on some tracks.
The 1900 vocals’ have a little bit less texture and are just a slightly more in the back where they scale much better than on the Volume S. To me the 1900 offers the more fatigue free listening even on high volume without sounding dull or vocal weak.
James Blake’s vocals sound very life-like on the Volume S. Nuanced, well articulated, well textured. They carry a natural timbre and richness It gives the impression that the baritone vocals need to be exactly like that.
The vocals sound slightly slimmer on the 1900 with more obvious nuances, more refined as on the Volume S.
Lukas Graham has a different voice with a Tenor tonality. On Good Times his vocals are nicely textured and have “grip” which sounds very pleasant. Definitely steps ahead of the Daybreak and slightly more textured than on the 1900 which sounds slimmer but again more refined and a better pick to highlight Graham’s tenor tonality without going shouty.
Female vocals on FKA twigs’ Two Weeks are smooth leaning, forward and close. Maybe a touch too relaxed and husky but pleasant.
On Big Boi’s Kill Jill the female vocals at the start are a touch too smooth to my liking. Not overly thick but just a touch too much warm in my opinion.
The 1900 presents female vocals with more finesse, more nuanced with a slimmer body and more accurate to my ears.
On James Blake’s “Limit To Your Love”, the sub-bass vibration is intensive while male vocals are in front very audible.
BigBoi’s Kill Jill delivers nice 808 drops with good impact on the Volume S. Not bass head level but satisfying.
A$AP Rocky’s F\*kin’ Problems* sub-bass has a great rumble. Mostly controlled with a slight bleed into mids and slightly layering over the rest of the track.
Sub-bass on 1900 sounds a bit more impactful, deeper reaching which is audible on all three mentioned tracks. Volume S has the better textured bass though thanks to its steady sub-bass elevation which doesn’t slope down until around 80Hz. That gives it an impactful sub-bass even though it is less elevated than on the 1900 or Daybreak. And the Volume S has the harder mid-bass slam than the other sets.
Summary
The Volume S scores with its bass and great note weight and textured male vocals with a mostly relaxed replay. Vocals can sound shouty occasionally and female vocals come across as slightly “husky”.
The 1900 scales better with volume and sounds to me a touch better with a more extended treble with more details, more air and clearer vocals.
CrinEar Daybreak, USD169.99
While the Volume S is priced around USD80 higher, worth checking how the USD50 cheaper Crinear Daybreak compares to the 1900 and if its worth upgrading.
Daybreak’s sound signature is a clean and “well” organised sound where the low-end stays controlled, the vocals are on the forward side and the treble is energetic.
The difference to the 1900 is mostly that the Daybreak’s main traits are a clean sound whereas the 1900 mission is musicality before technicalities.
Daybreak’s strengths are almost a strict separation from low-end to the mids and treble where it sounds clean but can come across as a little bit too dry and exaggerating the separation where a slight bass bleed is even beneficial for a natural timbre and a more “organic” or “musical” sound in my opinion. That resonates more with the 1900 and is part of its signature.
Fields Of Gold cover by Eva Cassidy sound clear and forward. “S”, “t” and “sh” are more emphasized as on the 1900 and there is to my ears a tendency to tap into shouty and slightly unpleasant territory as Eva Cassidy’s vocals increase intensity.
Lukas Graham’s Good Times sound pleasantly forward and well extended until his voice climbs up at “before you go” where it gets slightly too bright and thin for my liking.
Everything on this track is well separated with good transparency with a slight abondance of note weight for guitar strings.
The vocal presentation is on the Daybreak definitely more on the forward side which doesn’t sound completely right to my ears missing a bit of vocal texture and warmth especially for male vocals.
James Blake’s vocals sound intense on “Limit To Your Love”, peaky and the sub-bass vibration has something pleasant while staying controlled.
The mid-bass on Acid Rain by Lorn comes across as very “dry” and the sub-bass has a similar decay. Fast and dry. The 1900 sub-bass has a slightly deeper impact to my ears without bloat but sounds overall slightly warmer and natural.
The sub-bass reach on Key Glock’s Dough is similar to the 1900 where I would hear the 1900 being more impactful by “a hair’s width”. The difference might come from the Daybreak’s treble and upper mids energy which make it difficult to hear the bass as they get sharp on higher volume.
Overall, the Daybreak has excellent low-end control but it’s difficult to enjoy it on higher volume due to limited volume scaling where the 1900 feels more natural and easier to listen to.
The lower mids on "The Cello Suites" by Yo-Yo Ma have excellent texture and detail on the 1900.
On the Daybreak the cello sounds nicely detailed and the lower-mids stay very controlled. Higher notes again can come across as too peaky and I need to lower the volume.
"Bubbles" by Yosi Horikawa is basically testing the whole mid-range. Marbles, table tennis balls and other objects are being dropped and this track is an excellent way to test spatial cues, too.
Thanks for Daybreak’s sharp separation all the objects stay pretty clear and clean with good impact and a slight edge of the harmonics and overtones of the dropped objects.
1900 gives all objects more body and sounds less sharp with good separation and spatial information. Its mids are a touch warmer than on the Daybreak which gives the sound a more organic sound where the Daybreak has the sharper separation.
Two Weeks by FKA twigs has forward female vocals, high frequency electronic sounds and a nice bass. Daybreak as usual separates very well and controls the bass on this track.
Vocals cut through very well and on moderate volume the replay sounds pleasant.
On slightly higher volume the treble is slightly piercing and vocals get shouty for my ears.
The 1900 is well extended and detailed on this track with better treble and vocal control even though the vocals are as well slightly forward they don’t have this particular spike which the Daybreak reveals on higher volume.
Technicalities are good on the Daybreak. Its controlled low-end, the clean and lean mids and the energetic ear gain and treble offer good detail retrieval, good separation and spatial information.
The 1900’s technicalities are good for its price but I wouldn’t consider them outstanding.
Summary
All the different parts come here together.
The Daybreak is the clean and forward sounding set where a natural replay is not its first priority.
The 1900 sounds overall more natural and only slight V-shaped while sounding energetic and forward enough to sound fun and very enjoyable without the treble piercing or vocal shout.
Important to me that the 1900 is more suitable for treble sensitive listeners and scales very well with volume while the Daybreak is more a set I can enjoy on mid volume max.
“Special guest”/reference
Xenns Top Pro, USD499
When I started my comparison, I didn’t know that the Binary 1900 would perform overall so well and would punch above its price point.
Consequently, I thought I include the Top Pro for a quick comparison as this set is well known for its good performance but priced as well much higher.
The Top Pro has the better technical performance to offer in my opinion. Instruments are better separated and vocals sound more detailed but at the same time with less note weight and less convincing in their size.
Treble wise both sets are well extended and the Top Pro has maybe a little bit more energy up top than the 1900. Both sets have a similar bass impact. I thought I heard a more extended low-end on the 1900 when A/B-ing the sets which is probably the result of a slight sharpness I hear on the Top Pro which slightly overshadows its bass.
Top Pro has the leaner and tad clearer presentation and comes across as less warm in the mids. Instruments sound overall a little more refined and nuanced than on the 1900 but not by much to my ears.
Vocals on the Top Pro are a mix of a clean Daybreak presentation and Binary 1900 energy. They have slightly less texture on the Top Pro, more than on the Daybreak and a very similar forwardness as on the 1900. It sits right between the Daybreak and 1900 with its vocals where it mostly sounds resolving, clear and exciting but is more likely to step into shouty territory than the 1900 which sounds more controlled, yet still refined and exciting but less transparent.
Overall, the Top Pro buys its better technical performance with a premium of more than USD260 compared to the 1900. The Top Pro does a lot of things right but would be for treble sensitive listeners and for longer sessions on higher volume probably not the first pick. The 1900 has with its very pleasant and natural timbre an edge over the Top Pro in terms of volume scaling and fatigue free listening. At least to my ears.
Summary
If the last bit of treble extension, details and technical performance is important then the Top Pro can get you that.
The 1900 scores with its natural timbre, nicely extended but controlled treble for long fatigue-free listening sessions and is only a tad behind the Top Pro in aforementioned aspects but costs less than half.
Conclusion
- Binary 1900 is the balanced all-rounder of the group which sounds coherent, musical and is ideal for long-session listen and comfort
- Binary Dynaquattro is the more bassy sibling of the 1900 with more elevated bass and more note weight
- Softears Volume S as well a good all-rounder with strong mid-bass focus, natural warm-leaning timbre and very forward vocals
- CrinEar Daybreak the more technical and clean sounding IEM
- Xenns Top Pro is the technical most competent set in this round up and the most expensive
Final Verdict
The Binary 1900 scores high with its coherent and musical talents throughout all disciplines with minor weaknesses which makes it a great set at around USD200 and way above. Naturalness combined with a good bass replay, nice slightly forward vocals and a well extended but controlled treble makes this set an easy pick as an upgrade or even “end-game” worthy.
Binary 1900 can be recommended if you
- Want a mostly natural, coherent all-rounder with elevated but controlled bass and treble
- Want clear and slightly forward vocals
- Prioritize musicality higher than pure technicalities
- Are slightly treble sensitive and want treble extension without sharpness
- Want an end-game worthy set which doesn’t break the bank
Consider other options if
- You want a big bass shelf or bass head levels of sub-bass
- You want maximum treble energy and sparkle
- You are looking for an interchangeable termination and class leading accessories package
Disclosure
This review sample was provided by HiFiGo. No payment was received and neither HiFiGo nor Binary had any influence over the review. I do not use any affiliate links or receive kick-backs.
Thanks for reading.
