Sound & Specs Comparison
Both IEMs are widely regarded in the audiophile community. See how they differ in terms of sub-bass response, upper mids, clarity, and overall tonality. Spider charts and rating breakdowns included.
Facts, details, stuff.
General Info | Cantor | x Crinacle DUSK |
---|---|---|
Brand | AFUL | Moondrop |
Country | Taiwan | China |
IEM Description | The AFUL Cantor combines technical precision with musicality in a hybrid design. Featuring a dynamic driver for powerful bass and multiple balanced armatures for clean mids and sparkly highs, it delivers a spacious soundstage with excellent separation. Tuning leans slightly toward a balanced-bright signature, making it a solid choice for detail lovers who still want some low-end punch. | MoonDrop × Crinacle DUSK is a highly acclaimed hybrid in-ear monitor co-developed with tuning expert Crinacle. It features a precise, neutral-bright tuning with a slight sub-bass lift, offering exceptional clarity, detail retrieval, and tonal balance. Known for its reference-grade performance, the DUSK is often considered one of the best IEMs under $1,000 and a benchmark in the audiophile community. |
Price Level | 500 – 1.000 | 100 – 500 |
Housing & Driver | ||
---|---|---|
Driver Config | Multi-BA | Tribrid |
Driver Types | Balanced Armature | Planar Magnetic Driver + Dynamic Driver + Balanced Armature |
Shell Material | – | Resin |
Cable | 4Braid 5N OFC Cable | – |
Technical | ||
---|---|---|
Freq Range | – | 10Hz- 24kHz |
Impedance (Ω) | 20 | 14.5 |
Sensitivity (dB) | 106 | 119 |
Crossover | RLC Network Electronic Crossover | – |
Platform Info | ||
---|---|---|
Comments | 2 | 1 |
Visit Count | 132 | 103 |
External Reviews | 1 | 1 |
// Nothing to compare yet.
Cantor delivers m tighter sub-bass response, controlling low-end rumble with more precision than x Crinacle DUSK (8.5 vs 5.3). It enhances basslines with overwhelmingly more energy and grip, giving them a livelier feel compared to x Crinacle DUSK (9 vs 5). The bass in It feels a more physical and textured, with improved rumble and body compared to x Crinacle DUSK (8.5 vs 5.3). The lower midrange on It blends a more smoothly into the bass region, avoiding the disconnect found in x Crinacle DUSK (8.5 vs 5.8). It strikes a m better balance between presence and smoothness in the upper mids compared to x Crinacle DUSK (8 vs 6.5). It provides b more refined lower treble, resolving fine detail and air with greater finesse than x Crinacle DUSK (8 vs 7.3). The highest frequencies on x Crinacle DUSK feel a more natural and less rolled-off compared to Cantor (8.8 vs 7.5). The stereo field on Cantor feels a wider and more holographic, whereas x Crinacle DUSK sounds more intimate (8 vs 6.8). It extracts low-level details a more effectively, helping subtle nuances emerge clearer than on x Crinacle DUSK (8.8 vs 7). It separates instruments a more distinctly, helping complex passages remain coherent where x Crinacle DUSK blends them (8.3 vs 7.3). It avoids frequency masking a more successfully, preserving clarity across the spectrum better than x Crinacle DUSK (8 vs 6.3). It adds a more body and density to musical notes, enriching the overall texture compared to x Crinacle DUSK (7.5 vs 6.5). It delivers dynamic shifts with a greater impact, making x Crinacle DUSK sound comparatively tame (8.5 vs 6.8). x Crinacle DUSK renders timbres with a better harmonic balance, preserving the character of instruments more accurately than Cantor (8.5 vs 7.5).
Cantor | x Crinacle DUSK | |
---|---|---|
Sub Bass | 8.5 | 5.3 |
Bass | 9.0 | 5.0 |
Bass Feel | 8.5 | 5.3 |
Lower Mids | 8.5 | 5.8 |
Upper Mids | 8.0 | 6.5 |
Lower Treble | 8.0 | 7.3 |
Upper Treble | 7.5 | 8.8 |
Sound Stage Width | 8.0 | 6.8 |
Detail | 8.8 | 7.0 |
Layering | 8.3 | 7.3 |
Masking | 8.0 | 6.3 |
Note Weight | 7.5 | 6.5 |
Slam | 8.5 | 6.8 |
Sibilance | 8.5 | 8.3 |
Timbre Color | 7.5 | 8.5 |
Tonality | 8.8 | 8.5 |
Texture | 8.0 | 8.3 |
// Nothing to compare yet.