Vision Ears 3.2 Review & Ranking
Aggregated Scores from Top Experts & Community
IEMRanking.com
Home
Vision Ears 3.2
Vision Ears 3.2 Average Reviewer Scores
Average Reviewer Score:
4.1Negative
Vision Ears 3.2 Average User Scores
Average User Score: n/a
Based on 0 user reviews
No user reviews yet. Be the first one who writes a review!
Gaming Score & Grade
- The gaming score is prioritizing technical capabilities of the IEM (Separation, Layering, Soundstage) and good value.
Gaming Score
4.1Gaming Grade
C-Vision Ears 3.2 Details
Driver Configuration: n/a
Tuning Type: n/a
Price (Msrp): (disc.)
Support our free service! Buying through our affiliate links costs you nothing extra:
Reviews
Vision Ears 3.2 reviewed by: Precogvision
4.1
Reviewer Score
C-
Tuning
C-
Tech
Warm and quite muffled sounding. Really needs a lot more treble extension. Won't offend at least. Precogvision Youtube Channel
Bass: C-
Mids: C+
Treble: C-
Dynamics: C-
Details: C-
Imaging: C-
Tools
IEM Finder Quiz new
Use this quiz and answer a few questions to get your individual IEM recommendation list
(1/2) How much are you willing to spend on the IEM?
(2/2) Which sound characteristics are particularly important to you?
Vision Ears 3.2 Infos
Average Technical & Tuning Grades
Average Tunign Grade
C-- Significantly flawed tuning. Noticeable frequency imbalances and unnatural timbre distract from music. Lacks versatility across recordings.
Average Technical Grade
C-- Limited resolution; finer nuances are masked. Soundstage feels narrow, and complex passages cause muddiness. Transitions lack finesse.
Bass
C-
Subdued bass response that stays mostly in the background. Lacks energy and impact but maintains basic definition.
Mids
C+
Decent midrange performance - balanced but unremarkable. Adequate clarity for most genres without notable flaws.
Treble
C-
Average treble performance - present but lacking refinement. Some graininess or splashiness affects clarity.
Dynamics
C-
Average dynamics - passable but unexciting. Transients are rounded and micro-dynamics lack refinement.
Details
C-
Average resolution - reveals basic elements but misses subtleties. Satisfactory for casual listening but lacks refinement.
Imaging
C-
Average imaging - reasonable localization but lacks specificity. Instruments have general positions but lack pinpoint accuracy.
Gaming
C-
Minimal environmental definition provides only general audio cues. Suitable for games where positioning isn't critical.
Top alternatives for Vision Ears 3.2
| IEM | Price | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Tigerism Octave | $0 | 6.5 |
| Lime Ears Pneuma | $0 | 6 |
| Sony MDR-EX1000 | $0 | 5.7 |
Write own User-Review for Vision Ears 3.2
Please sign in with google to write User Reviews
IEM Comparison Tool new
Compare two IEMs side by side
Name
VS
Name
Compare Vision Ears 3.2 to popular alternatives
| IEM | alt. Score |
|---|---|
| Vision Ears 3.2 vs. Tigerism Octave | 6.5 |
| Vision Ears 3.2 vs. Lime Ears Pneuma | 6 |
| Vision Ears 3.2 vs. Sony MDR-EX1000 | 5.7 |
User Reviews
Example User
Posted on ...
"This is an example review"
Pros
- Example pro 1
- Example pro 2
Cons
- Example con 1
- Example con 2
No User-Reviews Yet
Be the first to share your experience!