Daybreakvs.Project Meta
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 | Daybreak | Project Meta |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | CrinEar | CrinEar |
| Country | – | – |
| IEM Description | – | A debut IEM by Crinacle's CrinEar: a compact, full-aluminum flagship tuned to a “tilted Diffuse Field + bass boost” curve. Delivers vibrant mids, warm sub-bass, and clear treble—crafted for musical accuracy and comfort. |
| Price Level | 100 – 500 | 100 – 500 |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | – | – |
| Driver Types | – | – |
| Shell Material | Fully Filled Resin, Aluminium Nozzle | – |
| Cable | – | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | – |
| Impedance (Ω) | – | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | – | – |
| Crossover | – | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 0 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 133 | 96 |
| External Reviews | 0 | 1 |
Meta Ratings
In terms of overall sound impression, Project Meta slightly edges out Daybreak. It presents music with barely greater accuracy, air, and stereo separation (7 vs 6.5). Even under close inspection, Daybreak maintains a faintly cleaner, more seamless design — whereas Project Meta occasionally reveals minor imperfections.
| Daybreak | Project Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| Sound | 6.5 | 7.0 |
| Comfort Fit | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| Build Quality | 7.0 | 6.5 |
| Stock Cable | – | 6.5 |
| Accessories | 6.0 | 6.0 |
Sound Characteristics
Low-frequency extension on Project Meta feels a more natural and authoritative, while Daybreak lacks some reach (6 vs 5.5). It adds a more body and slam to bass hits, which makes it feel more physical than Daybreak (6.5 vs 6). The lower midrange on It blends a more smoothly into the bass region, avoiding the disconnect found in Daybreak (6.5 vs 6). Upper mids are a more resolving and expressive on Daybreak, revealing emotion and articulation better than Project Meta (6.5 vs 5.5). Project Meta offers a greater shimmer and nuance in the lower treble, revealing micro-details that Daybreak misses (7.5 vs 6.5). Daybreak extends a further into the upper treble, adding air and openness that Project Meta lacks (7 vs 6.5). Instruments remain intelligible on It even during busy sections, showing a better handling of masking than Project Meta (6.5 vs 5.5). Project Meta hits with a more authority during transients, creating a more explosive effect than Daybreak (6 vs 5.5). Listeners may experience a fewer sharp edges in 'S' and 'T' sounds with It, whereas Daybreak can get fatiguing (6.5 vs 6). It presents instrument timbre with a more natural coloration, giving a realistic tone that Daybreak lacks (6 vs 5). The overall tonality of It is a more balanced and cohesive, offering a sound signature that feels better tuned than Daybreak (6 vs 5.5). It renders texture b more precisely, making instrument surfaces and vocal grain more palpable than Daybreak (5.5 vs 5).
| Daybreak | Project Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 5.5 | 6.0 |
| Bass | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Bass Feel | 6.0 | 6.5 |
| Lower Mids | 6.0 | 6.5 |
| Upper Mids | 6.5 | 5.5 |
| Lower Treble | 6.5 | 7.5 |
| Upper Treble | 7.0 | 6.5 |
| Sound Stage Width | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Detail | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Layering | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| Masking | 6.5 | 5.5 |
| Note Weight | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Slam | 5.5 | 6.0 |
| Sibilance | 6.0 | 6.5 |
| Timbre Color | 5.0 | 6.0 |
| Tonality | 5.5 | 6.0 |
| Texture | 5.0 | 5.5 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.