EarAcoustic STA Pro Max - Color Me Impressed

 4⭐️ 

+ Musical and colored W-shaped tuning

+ Bass shelf adds a nice sense of warmth and fullness

+ Smooth, emotive vocal presentation 

+ Treble peaks add a sense of clarity

+ Great for low volume listening 

+ Nice accessory package for the price

+ Unique design and comfortable fit

- Mid-bass presentation might be a little too cumbersome for certain genres

- Treble can be a little harsh and fatuiging at higher volumes

- Slightly unnatural timbre and tonality 

- Technical performance could be better

- Very confusing model names

thaslaya's star rating system:

☆☆☆☆☆ - Fantastic!

☆☆☆☆ - Recommended

☆☆☆ - There are buyers but not for me

☆☆ - Can't see the appeal

☆ - Product is a failure

Disclaimer: 

This product was provided to me by EarAcoustic in exchange for my impartial and honest review. I recieve no compensation and all thoughts and opinions are my own.

Non-affiliate link for those interested:

https://www.linsoul.com/products/earacoustic-audio-sta-pro-series?variant=46436800823513

Gear used: 

●Samsung Galaxy s25 Ultra

●HiBy R3 II

●Various DAC/amps

Source:

●Listening was done using Amazon Music HD/Ultra HD and local FLAC files. 

Introduction: 

EarAcoustic Audio looks like a new company based in China, but they are actually a rebrand of TFZ. They recently released twelve new IEM models under their new company banner, which range in price from $40 to $430. It's quite unusual to release so many products at once and with a very similar naming convention. The STA line consists of the STA Pro, STA Pro Ultra, and STA Pro Max, with the Max being the top model. All three feature the same dual dynamic driver configuration but with different diaphragm materials, resulting in unique tunings. However, there is also a STA High-End line with two additional models, as well as the SPA and SPA High-End lines which includes seven more models. Each boasts a unique tuning, making it difficult to distinguish between them, even for reviewers. The STA Pro Max, priced at $80, is the model I received for evaluation. This model features a premium LCP diaphragm for the 10 mm dynamic driver and a titanium-plated diaphragm for the 6 mm dynamic driver. Let's break down this EarAcoustic release and see how it stacks up in today's market.

Build, fit, ergonomics:

The STA Pro Max comes packaged in a medium-sized silver cube and has a decent unboxing experience for the price. According to EarAcoustic, the STA series of IEMs are designed as year-of-the-snake limited-edition products. All of their models feature a depiction of a snake on the left faceplate and the EarAcoustic logo on the right. The Pro Max also has a mixture of white, blue, and gold swirls on its faceplate, which helps distinguish it from other models. The shells are about average in size and are made of resin with a very shiny zinc alloy plating, which makes them fairly lightweight. They feel sturdy enough but also a bit on the cheaper side, and I would personally like to see a more solid build quality, though it's fine for the price. The contoured shape of the shells and average insertion depth ensure a comfortable fit. The nozzles measure 5.8 mm at the widest part, which helps hold tips in place. Due to the combination of size, weight, insertion depth, and nozzle size, I think the Pro Max should fit comfortably for most without issue. There are three vents located on the shell for pressure relief: one on the faceplate and two on the inside facing the concha. The 3.5mm terminated stock cable is pretty decent. It's made of a combination of OFC and silver-plated OFC, has a nice weave, and is fairly pliable. My one complaint is that the coating feels rubbery and has a slight memory. It's still a serviceable cable, but I switched it out for the NiceHCK SnowAg cable. There are six pairs of silicone tips included in the box, three with a standard bore and three with a wide bore. I do like the standard bore tips, and they provide a decent fit, but I ultimately preferred to use the DUNU Candy tips. The zippered case is very interesting. It's made of a shiny silver faux leather material, features the company logo on top, and is small enough to be pocketed, but it does feel somewhat cheap. The only other accessory of note is a faux leather cable tie, which I always appreciate.

Sound impressions:

I would describe the overall tuning as W-shaped, with a decent bass shelf, an upper-midrange emphasis, and a few treble peaks that keep things lively. Initially, when I looked at the graph, the 8kHz peak scared me a bit, but when I got them in my ears, I was pleasantly surprised to find they aren't nearly as bright as I had feared. I think the elevated bass is doing a lot of work here to tame that treble, and it also has a colored tonality and musical style that is quite enjoyable. The note weight is on the thicker side of average, which I prefer. The Pro Max is easy enough to drive from a simple dongle and doesn't really require amplification. The detail retrieval is about what I would expect in this price range—not terrible, but not really competitive with the tier above. The soundstage is decent, though it could use more depth. It's not claustrophobic, but it does present a little more intimately, like a small venue instead of a large concert hall. The timbre has a slightly artificial tinge and is not the most natural-sounding to my ear. The imaging has good left-to-right accuracy but struggles with depth. The dynamics are decent, and the tuning holds up well despite volume-level changes. Actually, this set is still quite good at lower volume levels, where others tend to fall flat. The separation and layering could use some improvement. It's not the worst I've heard, but it falters on more complex tracks, where notes tend to run together. Overall, nothing about the Pro Max's technical performance is absolutely standout, but neither is it necessarily deficient in any specific area. It's generally good across the board and adequate for the price.

When it comes to synergies, the Pro Max is definitely source sensitive. With the Muse HiFi M5 Ultra in tube mode, the note weight becomes a bit too syrupy, although the added warmth is nice. The iFi GO Link Max improves bass extension, but I found it a bit too energetic. The Letshuoer DT03 manages to preserve the crispness of the treble while bringing down the incisiveness, but it also lessens the bass rumble, which I don't prefer. The best synergy I found is the HiBy FC4, which helps keep the bass and treble extension intact while smoothing some of the bothersome notes just enough to make it more tolerable for me.

●Lows - First things first, this is not a clean and polite bass response. It's elevated, mid-bass heavy, and a bit muddy and woolly, but boy, does it have character. The mid-bass adds a certain degree of warmth and body that I like, and though it could use a little more sub-bass, the extension is decent enough. The texture is admittedly a bit wet and sometimes muddy, but I don't mind it too much. The impact is just a hair on the softer side, and the bass attack lacks a little slam, but notes are still well-punctuated. As for the reverberation, it's not the most rumbly bass response, but it tends to behave well and doesn't overstay its welcome. The decay is about average and has what I consider to be a typical DD response. It's not particularly quick or fast, but neither is it overly sluggish. Double kick drums do seem to run together slightly in complicated tracks, so the resolution could be better. There's also some bleed into the midrange, but it's not the most egregious and more or less expected due to the bigger mid-bass presence. Overall, there's something about the Pro Max's warm and colored bass response that I enjoy, but admittedly, its performance leaves something to be desired.

●Mids - The midrange has a nice smoothness and a fun coloration, especially with vocals, which are fairly prominent in the mix but not too forward. They do have a slightly weird presentation, however, almost as if there is a slight veil covering them. They do sound a little restrained, but the trade-off is that they're never shouty or shrill and have a very musical and emotive quality. Both male and female artists are equally well-represented, and neither overshadows the other. The midrange also has a nice sense of spaciousness, but it lacks depth and can sound slightly flat at times. A few other issues include the mid-bass bleed and a somewhat unnatural vocal and instrument timbre, particularly strings and woodwinds. Flutes and clarinets lack a sense of airiness and breathiness, and violins lack that typical sheen or shimmer I'm used to hearing. Instruments in the lower midrange also lack a little body and note weight. Overall, the entire midrange takes a small step back to allow the prominent bass and sparkly treble room to shine, but there is still enough emphasis here for me to enjoy. I do like the colored and smooth vocal presentation but wish it were a bit more forward and that the timbre were more organic.

●Highs - While the Pro Max's treble is not quite my typical preference, it does have a way of drawing me in. There is a good amount of sparkle and a nice crispness to notes that treble enthusiasts should enjoy. The amount of air is sufficient, but it could be further extended. I think the treble performs much better at lower volume levels where it is well controlled. Turning down the volume eliminates any harshness or peakiness, but the crispness remains intact. I am usually a higher-volume listener, but this is a set I don't mind turning the volume down, and I don't feel like I am missing much. At higher volumes, it can become peaky and harsh, specifically with "s" and "sh" sounds on sibilant-prone tracks. Cymbals can sound a bit splashy at times, and snares and claps can become overly incisive and sharp. Overall, the treble is well-positioned to counteract and cut through the large bass shelf, and it has plenty of sparkle for those who want it; however, my preference for slightly darker treble has me wishing it were toned down just a little so that I could enjoy it more at higher volumes.

Comparisons: Credit to Paul Wasabi for the graphs.

● Jomo Nautilus ($800) - This is an interesting matchup between the Nautilus's tribrid configuration (1DD, 2BCD, 1 planar) versus just the dual DD in the STA Pro Max. While these two are also quite far apart in price, they do generally have pretty similar tunings. The STA has great accessories for the price, but the Nautilus' cable and case are a tier above, which should come as no surprise. The Nautilus' build quality is much sturdier and it both looks and feels much more premium. The STA is much lighter and honestly feels a little cheap. The Nautilus has a more eye-catching design, and I do prefer it, but some may find it too ostentatious. The fit, though, is actually a little better for me on the STA due to the nozzle length and angle. When it comes to tuning, both have a V-shaped sound signature, but the STA is a more intimate and warm version, while the Nautilus is more energetic with an added bit of magic thanks to the BCDs. In the bass, both sets have relatively similar quantity, but the STA is a bit more mid-bass focused, while the Nautilus is sub-bass focused. The STA exhibits a little more rumble and bass impact and also has a slower decay, while the Nautilus is more resolving with a cleaner texture. The Nautilus' midrange is better balanced, and the transition from bass to midrange is cleaner. The vocals are a bit more forward, and the more expansive stage really helps the entire midrange spread out and sound more natural and less encumbered by the bass. The STA is a bit darker in comparison but also more colored, which I do like. As for the treble, the Nautilus conveys more energy, air, and sparkle. The STA still has a good amount of sparkle for me, and the entire treble is more controlled with fewer bothersome notes even at higher volume levels; however, the lack of air is apparent, and I would like more extension. When it comes to the technicalities, the Nautilus is the clear winner, and it is not close (nor should it be considering the price difference). The most notable are the Nautilus' detail retrieval, timbre, and expansive soundstage. I do believe that the STA performs really well in its price tier, though, and it has a sweetness, musicality, and warmth to it that I thoroughly enjoy. In the end, I believe that the tunings are close enough that the Nautilus can be considered the clear evolutionary path of the STA. The STA is a little more musical and intimate-sounding of the two, but what the Nautilus lacks in musicality, it more than makes up for in technical ability. It is so much more resolving and energetic, with a bigger soundstage, more natural timbre, and an added amount of air that really helps improve the balance and avoid a darker tilt like the STA has. If you are thinking of picking up the Nautilus, I would suggest giving the much cheaper STA Pro Max a try to see if you enjoy the overall tuning but would like the energy and technical prowess elevated further. 

My pick: Nautilus

● Intuaura Splendor II ($260) - Here is a battle between the single dynamic driver of the Splendor against dual dynamic drivers in the STA Pro Max. Both offer pretty decent accessories, but I have to give the nod to the Splendor, which it should get anyway, considering the price. The Splendor has a very soft and pliable cable with a tight weave, which I prefer over the Pro Max's simpler cable. The cases are also quite different. The Splendor's case is a little larger and less pocketable, but it offers better protection, and the design is more neutral. The tip selection is pretty much even, but the Splendor also includes a cleaning cloth, replaceable filters, an IEM pouch, and a USB-C DAC that offers a built-in DSP tuning option. The build quality of the two is pretty comparable. The Splendor features a more traditional, full resin shell, while the Pro Max has a zinc-plated resin shell. The Splendor is a bit bigger and lighter, but the Pro Max offers a slightly better fit due to the nozzle's angle, although both are easy for me to wear for long periods. Regarding the design, I prefer the Splendor's black resin combined with purple and gold swirls on the faceplate, but some may be more drawn to the Pro Max's shiny silver shell. For this comparison, I utilized the analog tuning of the Splendor, which is more V-shaped with a rolled-off treble compared to the Pro Max's more W-shaped frequency response. The Pro Max has a slightly quicker bass with a bigger impact and a faster decay. The rumble of the bass is about even between the two but the slower decay and longer lasting reverberation of the Splendor sound a little more natural to me. The Pro Max offers slightly better sub-bass extension but the Splendor has better resolution and texture and a fullness that I prefer. In the midrange, vocals are a little more energetic on the Pro Max but they are more emotive and have more heart on the Splendor. There's also a spaciousness and depth in the Splendor's midrange that is missing on the Pro Max. In the lower midrange, the Splendor has better instrument representation and a cleaner bass to mids transition. As for the treble, these two take different approaches. The Pro Max has better air, extension, and sparkle, with an overall brighter tilt, but there are more troublesome notes to my ear. The Splendor concentrates more on the presence and mid-treble regions, which adds a moderate sense of excitement but without the airier and sometimes thinner quality of the Pro Max. This rolled off style of tuning is my preference although treble enthusiasts will likely prefer the Pro Max. In terms of technical performance, the Splendor offers better detail retrieval, imaging, dynamics, a larger soundstage, and a thicker note weight, while the Pro Max provides better separation, layering, and a slightly sweeter timbre. This matchup isn't as close as I would have thought it would be. The Splendor has a certain smoothness, depth, and maturity in its tuning that I find missing on the Pro Max. When performing A/B comparisons, it feels a bit like unlocking a new level of audio quality and performance going from the Pro Max to the Splendor. This is somewhat expected considering the price difference, but it's a bigger gap than I expected. The Splendor simply has better-executed tuning and stronger technical performance, making it the more enjoyable of the two for me. 

My pick: Splendor II 

● FAAEAL Tulip (<$100) - This matchup pits the dual DD configuration of the STA Pro Max against a single DD in the Tulip. Both sets have decent accessories for the price. The Tulip's carrying case is much bigger, but it has great build quality and includes a built-in tip holder. The Pro Max's smaller case offers slightly less protection, but it is much more pocketable. I personally prefer the Tulip's thicker and more pliable cable, but the Pro Max's is softer and lighter-weight. The tip selection is basically the same, although the Tulip includes one extra pair. Regarding build quality, the Tulip's shell is made of aluminum, while the Pro Max's is zinc-plated resin. The Tulip is heavier, smaller, sturdier, and feels more premium; however, the Pro Max's shell is better contoured and offers a more comfortable fit for me. Design is always subjective, and these two are very different. While the Pro Max has a nice resin faceplate featuring a mixture of blue, silver, and gold, the Tulip's design is quite unique and eye-catching. It looks and feels like a much more premium product to me. Both sets have what I would consider a more energetic style of tuning. The Tulip is V-shaped, while the Pro Max is more W-shaped. In the bass, the Tulip has more rumble and deeper sub-bass, whereas the Pro Max has a more balanced bass response with added mid-bass weight and warmth. The Tulip has slightly better bass resolution, texture, and more impact, while the Pro Max has more body and a fuller-sounding low end, but also some notable bass bleed. In the midrange, vocals are slightly more forward, clear, and better separated on the Tulip, but they are more emotive on the Pro Max, which I prefer. The lower midranges of both are recessed, which is not surprising considering their tuning profiles, but the Pro Max does lend a little more weight to instruments here. In the treble, the Tulip is leaner and a little brighter, but it has more air and space around things like cymbal crashes and snares. The treble of the Pro Max can be a touch more incisive at times, especially with "s" and "sh" notes, but it's also the more energetic and engaging of the two, which I prefer. When it comes to technical performance, the Tulip offers better separation, layering, and detail retrieval, while the Pro Max has better imaging, dynamics, note weight, a slightly more natural timbre, and a more expansive soundstage. While neither set has my ideal tuning, one is simply more enjoyable. The STA Pro Max is more musical, with a hint of warmth, a sense of fullness, and an engagement factor that I prefer. The Tulip does have a more unique design, better build quality, and may be the clearer and cleaner-sounding of the two, but I will take musical over technical almost every time.

My pick: STA Pro Max

● Simgot EW300 ($70 Standard Edition) - The EW300 utilizes a tribrid driver configuration featuring 1 DD, 1 planar, and 1 PZT, compared to the STA Pro Max's dual DD configuration. Both have comparable accessory packages. I personally prefer the thicker softer cable of the Pro Max to the thin EW300 cable. The silver case of the Pro Max has a more eye-catching design but the EW300's case offers better protection. Both sets come with the same number of tips of similar quality. The EW300 also includes two sets of interchangeable nozzles, adding tuning variety. The zinc-plated resin shells of the STA Pro Max are larger and slightly lighter, offering a better fit for my ears. The smaller, solid metal shells of the EW300 have a sturdier build quality. I like the colored faceplate aesthetic of the Pro Max a little better, but the ♡ and X design of the EW300 are fun, too. If this were the black-shelled HBB or DSP version of the EW300 instead of the standard shiny silver version, I would probably prefer it over the Pro Max. For this comparison, I utilized the silver nozzles on the EW300. The Pro Max has a W-shaped tuning style, while the EW300 is more U-shaped. The bass of the EW300 is more sub-bass focused, with slightly better resolution, deeper extension, and a cleaner texture. The Pro Max's bass sounds a little muddier in comparison, but it has more warmth from the added mid-bass, a fuller sound, a superior rumble with slower decay, and a more impactful and better-articulated attack. The transition into the lower midrange is cleaner on the EW300, and instruments are less encumbered by the bass; however, the Pro Max gives them more heft and weight, especially in orchestral arrangements. The EW300's upper midrange sounds much cleaner, and vocals are featured more prominently, but they lack a little musicality. The Pro Max does not push vocals as far forward as I prefer, but they are more emotive and engaging. The treble of these two sets graphs similarly but sounds quite different in-ear. The Pro Max is definitely brighter and more energetic, and it also has a few more troublesome notes which can be a little fatiguing at higher volumes. The top end of the EW300 is much more to my liking. It sounds slightly cleaner and a bit more relaxed, though still with enough sparkle for most. Cymbals, in particular, sound more natural, and snares and claps are less incisive, though the Pro Max does offer a little more crispness and air. In the technicalities, the EW300 has slightly better separation, layering, and a more natural timbre, whereas the Pro Max offers more note weight and better dynamics. The imaging, detail retrieval, and soundstage are pretty comparable between the two. This is a difficult matchup for me because these two have similar tuning philosophies, but with their own strengths and weaknesses. The EW300 is a bit more relaxed and has a great balance across the frequency response, with no one area really dominating the others. The Pro Max is more engaging and musical, but the prominent midbass and peakier treble will not be to everyone's liking. Personally, I am torn because part of me likes the more relaxed style of the EW300, while the other is drawn to the Pro Max's musicality and more colored sound signature. This one might be considered a toss-up depending on the day and genre of choice, but for now, at the time of this review, I will pick the more engaging of the two.

My pick: STA Pro Max

In conclusion:

EarAcoustic seems to have come out of nowhere and released twelve different IEMs all at once. While the naming convention can be hard to decipher, I do at least find the STA Pro Max to be worth consideration. This model offers both a sense of warmth and clarity that I'm a bit surprised to find at this price point. The W-shaped, mid-bass heavy tuning may not be for everyone, but I quite enjoy it. The low end is full and musical, the vocal presentation is forward enough to cut through the bass shelf and shine, and the treble peaks keep things interesting without exuding sibilance or harshness. I find that it pairs well with pop and classic rock but not the best suited for metal, acoustic, or instrumental genres. With a comfortable fit, impressive packaging and accessories, and a unique and fun tuning, I think the STA Pro Max is a solid contender in today's market. Sure, the technical performance could be improved, and the design and build quality are a bit subjective, but for $80, I think there's plenty here to enjoy. It feels to me like the STA Pro Max aims for a much higher-end style of tuning, and if the resolution and detail retrieval were better, it just might get closer to hitting that target. Despite its valiant efforts, though, it does fall short, but I still believe it's a great budget-tier option. While their naming scheme might be downright confusing, EarAcoustic has proven, at least with the STA Pro Max, that they know how to offer a competitive budget IEM in today's crowded market. Let's just hope their following releases include fewer models and the names become a bit more conventional.