Project Metavs.SLIIVO SL224
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 | Project Meta | SLIIVO SL224 |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | CrinEar | Myer Audio |
| 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 | – | – |
| Cable | – | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | – |
| Impedance (Ω) | – | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | – | – |
| Crossover | – | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 0 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 96 | 10 |
| External Reviews | 1 | 0 |
Meta Ratings
The structural integrity of Project Meta is barely more convincing, delivering a sense of refinement and premium craftsmanship that SLIIVO SL224 struggles to match. Compared to SLIIVO SL224, It’s cable exhibits markedly smoother handling, with fewer instances of memory or stiffness. From the case design to ear tip variety, It provides a noticeably more thoughtful unboxing experience.
| Project Meta | SLIIVO SL224 | |
|---|---|---|
| Sound | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| Comfort Fit | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| Build Quality | 6.5 | 6.0 |
| Stock Cable | 6.5 | 5.0 |
| Accessories | 6.0 | 5.0 |
Sound Characteristics
Low-frequency extension on Project Meta feels a more natural and authoritative, while SLIIVO SL224 lacks some reach (6 vs 5.5). SLIIVO SL224 achieves n better warmth and coherence in the lower mids, bringing more realism to guitars and cellos (7.5 vs 6.5). Upper mids are m more resolving and expressive on It, revealing emotion and articulation better than Project Meta (7.5 vs 5.5). It extends a further into the upper treble, adding air and openness that Project Meta lacks (7.5 vs 6.5). It creates a n wider soundstage, giving instruments more space and a better sense of placement than Project Meta (7 vs 6). The retrieval of faint audio cues on It is a more convincing, while Project Meta tends to gloss over them (7 vs 6). Project Meta organizes musical elements b better across depth, enhancing spatial realism over SLIIVO SL224 (6.5 vs 6). SLIIVO SL224 keeps competing frequencies under control m more effectively, reducing sonic congestion compared to Project Meta (7 vs 5.5). Notes on It feel a more grounded and weighty, whereas Project Meta can sound thin or hollow (7 vs 6). Percussion and quick attacks feel e more physical and punchy on It, adding excitement over Project Meta (7 vs 6). It controls harsh sibilant peaks m more effectively, making vocals smoother than on Project Meta (8 vs 6.5). The tone quality of It feels a more organic and true-to-source than the slightly artificial flavor of Project Meta (6.5 vs 6). The overall tonality of It is a more balanced and cohesive, offering a sound signature that feels better tuned than Project Meta (6.5 vs 6). Subtle ridges and granularity are conveyed m more clearly on It, adding life that Project Meta doesn’t quite match (7 vs 5.5).
| Project Meta | SLIIVO SL224 | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 6.0 | 5.5 |
| Bass | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Bass Feel | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| Lower Mids | 6.5 | 7.5 |
| Upper Mids | 5.5 | 7.5 |
| Lower Treble | 7.5 | 7.5 |
| Upper Treble | 6.5 | 7.5 |
| Sound Stage Width | 6.0 | 7.0 |
| Detail | 6.0 | 7.0 |
| Layering | 6.5 | 6.0 |
| Masking | 5.5 | 7.0 |
| Note Weight | 6.0 | 7.0 |
| Slam | 6.0 | 7.0 |
| Sibilance | 6.5 | 8.0 |
| Timbre Color | 6.0 | 6.5 |
| Tonality | 6.0 | 6.5 |
| Texture | 5.5 | 7.0 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.