AVG. Rating
5.7
IEM AIEM B
VS
AVG. Rating
7.0

Daybreakvs.Variations

Sound & Specs Comparison

Change Focus:

26%
Daybreak
Absolute Score: 60.0%
74%
Variations
Absolute Score: 71.4%

Total categories compared: 29

Winner:Variations

( leads by 119.0% in direct comparison by points delta )

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 InfoDaybreakVariations
BrandCrinEarMoondrop
CountryChina
IEM DescriptionMoondrop Variations is a hybrid in-ear monitor combining electrostatic, balanced armature, and dynamic drivers for a precise and immersive listening experience. Known for its balanced, reference-style tuning with tight bass, clean mids, and extended treble, it’s a favorite among audiophiles who crave clarity and technical performance. Ideal for detail lovers and those seeking a high-fidelity sound signature.
Price Level100 – 500500 – 1.000
Housing & Driver
Driver ConfigTribrid
Driver TypesDynamic Driver + Balanced Armature + Electrostatic
Shell MaterialFully Filled Resin, Aluminium NozzleCopper
Cable
Technical
Freq Range9-40,000 Hz
Impedance (Ω)
Sensitivity (dB)
Crossover
Platform Info
Comments01
Visit Count13581
External Reviews03

Meta Ratings

For comfort fit, Variations performs softly better (7 vs 6.5). From the connector housings to the shell seams, Daybreak demonstrates faintly tighter tolerances and higher production standards.

Sound
Comfort Fit
Build Quality
Stock Cable
Accessories
DaybreakVariations
Sound
6.5
6.5
Comfort Fit
6.5
7.0
Build Quality
7.0
6.5
Stock Cable
5.5
Accessories
6.0
6.0

Sound Characteristics

Low-frequency extension on Variations feels a more natural and authoritative, while Daybreak lacks some reach (6.5 vs 5.5). The low-end on It is b more controlled and rhythmic, offering better definition than Daybreak (6.5 vs 6). The bass in It feels a more physical and textured, with improved rumble and body compared to Daybreak (8.5 vs 6). It achieves m better warmth and coherence in the lower mids, bringing more realism to guitars and cellos (7.5 vs 6). It strikes a a better balance between presence and smoothness in the upper mids compared to Daybreak (8 vs 6.5). The treble on It is a more nuanced and refined, especially when it comes to cymbals and ambient elements (7.5 vs 6.5). The highest frequencies on It feel a more natural and less rolled-off compared to Daybreak (8 vs 7). The stereo field on It feels a wider and more holographic, whereas Daybreak sounds more intimate (7.5 vs 6). With s higher resolution, It allows finer textures and room ambiance to shine more than Daybreak (8 vs 6). Track elements feel a more isolated and clean on It, offering clearer focus than Daybreak (7 vs 6.5). Instruments remain intelligible on It even during busy sections, showing b better handling of masking than Daybreak (7 vs 6.5). Notes on It feel m more grounded and weighty, whereas Daybreak can sound thin or hollow (8 vs 6). It delivers dynamic shifts with c greater impact, making Daybreak sound comparatively tame (8.5 vs 5.5). It handles sibilant sounds m more gently, with fewer peaks and less sharpness than Daybreak (9 vs 6). It renders timbres with a better harmonic balance, preserving the character of instruments more accurately than Daybreak (7.5 vs 5). Across the frequency range, It stays m more consistent in tonal balance, resulting in a smoother listen than Daybreak (7 vs 5.5). Subtle ridges and granularity are conveyed m more clearly on It, adding life that Daybreak doesn’t quite match (7.5 vs 5).

DaybreakVariations
Sub Bass
5.5
6.5
Bass
6.0
6.5
Bass Feel
6.0
8.5
Lower Mids
6.0
7.5
Upper Mids
6.5
8.0
Lower Treble
6.5
7.5
Upper Treble
7.0
8.0
Sound Stage Width
6.0
7.5
Detail
6.0
8.0
Layering
6.5
7.0
Masking
6.5
7.0
Note Weight
6.0
8.0
Slam
5.5
8.5
Sibilance
6.0
9.0
Timbre Color
5.0
7.5
Tonality
5.5
7.0
Texture
5.0
7.5

Tonal Signature

// Nothing to compare yet.