Chu 2vs.May
Sound & Specs Comparison
Information
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.
Objective Comparison
Facts, details, stuff.
| General Info | Chu 2 | May |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | Moondrop | Moondrop |
| Country | China | China |
| IEM Description | – | – |
| Price Level | < 100 | < 100 |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | – | Hybrid |
| Driver Types | – | – |
| Shell Material | – | – |
| Cable | – | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | – |
| Impedance (Ω) | – | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | – | – |
| Crossover | – | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 0 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 41 | 36 |
| External Reviews | 0 | 0 |
Meta Ratings
In terms of overall sound impression, May notably outshines Chu 2. It presents music with evidently greater accuracy, air, and stereo separation (7 vs 5.8). For comfort fit, It performs markedly better (10 vs 7.8). The structural integrity of It is readably more convincing, delivering a sense of refinement and premium craftsmanship that Chu 2 struggles to match. The included cable with It shows immensely better strain relief and physical resilience. Compared to Chu 2, the overall accessory offering from It is decisively more aligned with the expectations of discerning audiophiles.
| Chu 2 | May | |
|---|---|---|
| Sound | 5.8 | 7.0 |
| Comfort Fit | 7.8 | 10.0 |
| Build Quality | 7.8 | 9.0 |
| Stock Cable | 6.0 | 10.0 |
| Accessories | 5.0 | 9.0 |
Sound Characteristics
Low-frequency extension on May feels n more natural and authoritative, while Chu 2 lacks some reach (5.5 vs 2.5). The low-end on It is n more controlled and rhythmic, offering better definition than Chu 2 (8 vs 4.5). It adds overwhelmingly more body and slam to bass hits, which makes it feel more physical than Chu 2 (10 vs 3). It renders lower mids s more naturally, giving male vocals and instruments a fuller tone than Chu 2 (8 vs 6.5).
| Chu 2 | May | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 2.5 | 5.5 |
| Bass | 4.5 | 8.0 |
| Bass Feel | 3.0 | 10.0 |
| Lower Mids | 6.5 | 8.0 |
| Upper Mids | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| Lower Treble | 8.0 | – |
| Upper Treble | 8.0 | – |
| Sound Stage Width | – | – |
| Detail | – | – |
| Layering | – | – |
| Masking | – | – |
| Note Weight | – | – |
| Slam | – | – |
| Sibilance | – | – |
| Timbre Color | – | – |
| Tonality | – | – |
| Texture | – | – |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.