Ziigaat Lush - Musical and Relaxing

 

4.5⭐️

+ Well-balanced, relaxed meta-style tuning

+ Slight bass boost helps add just enough low-end weight

+ Forward, emotive vocals that are far from shouty

+ Tastefully rolled off top end that's perfect for treble-sensitive listeners

+ A rare combination of warmth, musicality, and engagement that is hard to find

+ Great for all-day, fatigue-free listening

- Tuning may be considered too flat/boring for some

- A little more bass quantity would be welcome

- Not standout in technical performance

- Lackluster accessory package

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 Linsoul in exchange for my impartial and honest review. I recieve no compensation and all thoughts and opinions are my own. A special thanks to Carina for coordinating this unit for review!

Non-affiliate link for those interested:

https://www.linsoul.com/products/ziigaat-lush?

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: 

Ziigaat is a Chinese IEM manufacturer that has released a steady line of products since early 2024. Many of their sets include very similar-looking shells and nearly identical accessories, making them a bit difficult to tell apart at first glance. The Lush is one of their latest creations, and it sports a hybrid driver configuration consisting of a single dynamic and four balanced armature drivers. It comes with a price tag of $180, which puts it a little lower than some of Ziigaat's other newer IEMs. Let's break down the Lush and see how it compares to a few others in the market today.

Build, fit, ergonomics:

The Lush comes in Ziigaat's typical small packaging, which features a nice shot of the faceplate. The unboxing experience is simple and straightforward; it's a bit underwhelming for the price and nothing to write home about. As I said before, the shell of the Lush is very similar to most other Ziigaat models. It features a black resin build with a sparkly faceplate in various colors and the Ziigaat logo. In the case of the Lush, there are two colorway options: silver or a combination of silver and blue. The shells are about average in size and have a semi-custom contoured shape. The insertion depth is also about average, and the metal nozzle measures 6.1 mm at the widest part, where there's a lip to help hold tips in place. The Lush fit my ears well, and I had no issues wearing them for extended periods, but they do exhibit some slight driver flex upon insertion. There's a single vent located on the back of the shell, behind the flat, 2-pin connection, to alleviate pressure buildup. The accessory package is basically identical to other Ziigaat models. Frankly, the stock black cable feels cheap and disappointing, and the case is not much better. They are serviceable enough, but honestly feel like they should accompany a $50 IEM, not one costing three times as much. I switched it out for the XINHS HS68 cable. The Lush also comes with three pairs of silicone tips and one pair of foam tips. The stock tips are fine, but I prefer my Penon Liqueur for a better seal and comfort. Overall, the build quality of the shells is decent, and the design and aesthetic are nice, but Ziigaat really needs to step up its accessory game to stay competitive. Many companies in the market today have much better inclusions at a fraction of the Lush's $180 price tag.

Sound impressions:

I would describe the Lush as having a meta-style tuning with a small sub-bass boost, a somewhat flat midrange with a small upper-mid emphasis, and a controlled, rolled-off treble response. This is not a particularly hard set to drive and works well with a simple dongle, but it can benefit from a little extra power. The note weight is quite good for my taste. It's on the thicker side of average but not too thick or syrupy. The detail retrieval is decent enough for the price, but the tuning is more geared to be musical and less oriented toward critical listening. The soundstage is not particularly expansive and may even lean a bit intimate, but it still has a decent sense of space and is orbital and enveloping. The timbre is not the most organic and natural, but there's a certain sweetness and charm to it that I find almost intoxicating. The imaging is decent left to right, but the distance detection could be better. The dynamics are a little lacking, and this set sounds much better at medium to high volumes. The separation is decent, but there's still a sense of cohesion that I really like, and the layering is also well done. Overall, the Lush has decent enough technicalities, but it's a musicality-first kind of tuning.

The Lush isn't the most source-sensitive set, but there is benefit in finding the right synergy. The iFi GO link Max adds a bit more sub-bass extension and rumble and a little more excitement overall, but it decreases the relaxation factor a bit. The tube mode of the Muse HiFi M5 Ultra adds a nice sense of weight and warmth, but it gets to be a little too thick and syrupy. It fares a bit better in transistor mode, but the best synergy I found is with the iFi GO blu. It offers a slightly more engaging and energetic vocal presentation but still with a bit more weight that is quite enjoyable.

●Lows - In my opinion, one of the keys to getting the meta-tuning right is in the implementation of the bass. Too much will skew the balance towards more of an L-shaped tuning, and too little will lead to an anemic-sounding low end. The bass should be robust and slightly elevated but never detracting from the other frequencies, and in this I think the Lush succeeds very well. There is decent enough sub-bass extension and a complimentary rumble and reverberation without being overdone. The impact is a bit more on the polite side, and it could be a little more tactile, but the decay sounds natural—neither too fast nor too slow. The texture is a little bit on the cleaner side, but not too dry, and the speed is about average. I don't hear a lot of bleed into the midrange, but it's also not the cleanest bass-to-mids transition either, which actually suits me better because there's a nice coherency here. If I could change anything, I'd want a more visceral feeling to things like kick drums. A little more quantity would be nice too, but in this case, I think too much more would be detrimental to the finely tuned balance that it has already achieved. 

●Mids - The Lush has a more relaxed and somewhat flat midrange where vocals aren't necessarily recessed, but may come across a bit restrained. It's almost as if there's a ceiling that they can't quite break through. They are still smooth and emotive but a bit less engaging and energetic than I usually prefer. The good news though is that nothing is overemphasized or unbalanced. There's also a certain degree of warmth and coloration in the midrange that I thoroughly enjoy. Since the pinna gain rise comes later in the midrange, male artists are slightly recessed to my ear compared to their female counterparts. In the lower midrange, instruments have a nice weight to them and a certain intangible quality that is hard to describe. In orchestral arrangements, every instrument from piano and strings to brass and woodwind has an innate sweetness and is simultaneously detailed yet effortlessly smooth. They may not be the most natural-sounding from a purist standpoint, but I personally enjoy this style of presentation more. Vocals also benefit in the same vein but to a lesser degree. Overall, Lush's relaxed midrange style is very nice, and I find that it works really well for some genres, but I understand that it might not be best suited for everyone.

●Highs - When talking about the treble, it's important to remember the Lush is first and foremost a relaxed style tuning, so don't expect a brighter presentation or a sparkly and airy top end. That being said, the Lush's smooth, rolled-off treble is exactly what I like to hear. It still has a hint of sparkle and air to keep it from being too dark or boring, but it definitely won't be enough for treble enthusiasts. The more relaxed level of energy and engagement also matches well to that of the bass and midrange too. Something I really like is how it navigates sibilant-prone tracks with ease. There's never any harshness or troublesome notes. Cymbals, hi-hats, snares, and claps are all well-behaved and refrain from being splashy or overly incisive. The extension is also done well, and it doesn't roll off too early, so I don't feel like I'm missing anything. The best compliment I can give to the Lush's treble is that it's well-balanced and only adds to the enjoyable experience. It never detracts or does anything to single itself out and take attention away from the relaxed tuning as a whole.

Comparisons: Credit to Audio Amigo for the graphs. 

● Kiwi Ears Astral ($300) - The Lush sports a 1DD, 4BA hybdrid configuration against the Astral's 1DD, 6BAs. When it comes to the accessories, both of these sets leave much to be desired. Admittedly, Kiwi Ears did step up their game a bit with the Astral's modular cable, especially compared to the typical Ziigaat inclusion, which feels quite cheap. Neither has a particularly nice carrying case, but I suppose I prefer the Astral's due to it being slightly more pocketable. Both sets come with only three pairs of silicone tips, but the Lush does include one pair of foam as well. Disappointing accessories aside, these two have remarkably similar shell shapes and sizes, nozzle lengths, and overall designs. Both feature resin builds with metal nozzles and a blue sparkly faceplate, although I personally prefer the Lush's aestetic over the Astral's. The fit is about equal, and both are easy to wear for extended periods without fatigue. As for the tuning, the Astral's is meta flavored, but the Lush leans full-on meta with a much flatter frequency response, capped on one end by a smaller bass shelf and a more rolled-off treble on the other. Looking at the graph, it's no surprise that the Astral is the bassier sounding of the two, but it comes with more rumble, reverberation, impact, and a cleaner overall presentation. Even though the Lush has less quantity, it's not devoid of bass. The difference between the two is not huge because the Lush also has less upper midrange and treble emphasis, which helps the overall balance, and the bass is still elevated just enough for my usual preference. In the lower midrange, these two measure almost identically and both lend good weight and representation to instruments, but the Lush is a bit better for me. The upper midrange is where these two differ a bit more. While the Lush does have less emphasized vocals, they still come through very clearly and have more of a relaxed but emotive quality to them. The Astral's upper midrange can come across as a little too clinical-sounding in comparison, but it does have a more energetic presentation. As for the treble, the Lush's rolled-off response is almost perfect for my preferences, and there is not a hint of harshness or sibilance in sight. The Astral will definitely appeal more to treble enthusiasts, though, thanks to its brighter and airier presentation. For me, the Lush gets the top-end balance just right, whereas the Astral has a bit too much air and too little presence region. When it comes to the technicalities, the Astral has the advantage in soundstage depth, detail retrieval, separation, and imaging, whereas the Lush has better timbre, layering, and note weight. In conclusion, while it's true both sets take inspiration from the new meta tuning target, ultimately I prefer the Lush for diving headfirst into it rather than dipping its toe in the proverbial waters. The somewhat warmer and more relaxed presentation of the Lush might not be for everyone, but I'd be lying if I said it doesn't tick a lot of boxes for me. It's just so easy to listen to for hours on end, and I really enjoy getting lost in its innate musicality compared to the Astral's more analytical style. Sure, the Astral's technical performance is impressive, and there are perhaps a few nuanced things that get lost on the Lush, but I will almost always prefer musicality over technicality, and the Astral fails to buck that trend here.

My pick: Lush

● Ziigaat Odyssey ($230) - Here we have another matchup between two hybrids: the 1DD, 3BA configuration of the Odyssey versus the 1DD, 4BA of the Lush. These two models, like most of Ziigaat's newer releases, have nearly identical accessories, shell size, and build quality. In fact, the only distinction between the two is their faceplate designs. The Odyssey features a mix of silver and purple, while the Lush has silver and blue. When it comes to the tuning, the Odyssey is more exciting and U-shaped, while the Lush has a relaxed meta-style tuning. The bass of the Lush is sub-bass focused, while the Odyssey has an extra mid-bass elevation, which makes it a little more balanced in the low end. The Odyssey also has more punch and visceral impact, which lends itself beautifully to rock tracks. It also has a slightly slower decay, allowing the rumble to linger just a little longer. The Lush, on the other hand, is somewhat mid-bass-light for my taste, but it has adequate impact and comes across cleaner to my ear, with a better transition into the midrange as well. Speaking of the midrange, these two measure very similarly, but sound different in-ear due to the variance in bass and treble. The Lush puts a little more focus on vocals, pushing them forward slightly. The mid-bass of the Odyssey warms the midrange noticeably, and vocals are not as forward as I prefer. This mostly affects male artists, but they do have added weight, which is nice. In orchestral arrangements, the Odyssey better represents lower midrange instruments too, but the Lush has a sweeter instrument timbre that is quite endearing. In the treble, the Lush comes across a little more energetic, even though it measures less in overall quantity. I'm usually drawn to the Odyssey's more rolled-off style of treble, but in this case, the Lush sounds more natural to my ears. It has more air and a better balance, which helps instruments sound much more natural. On the Odyssey, cymbal crashes are somewhat muted, and the lack of air is more obvious in direct comparison. As for the technicalities, these two are competitive, but the Odyssey has more depth in the soundstage, better detail retrieval, better dynamics, and more note weight, whereas the Lush offers better layering and separation, as well as a slightly more natural timbre to my ear. In conclusion, this matchup is really interesting for me. If I were to pick one based solely on the graph, I think the Odyssey would be the clear winner, but that's not really what I found when listening to them. The Odyssey is the more dynamic, energetic, and fun of the two. I love the warmth and weight that the mid-bass adds, and the treble is closer to my usual preference; however, the extra mid-bass also recesses vocals just a little too much for me, and the lack of air makes the treble sound somewhat incomplete. The Lush isn't perfect either, but the overall tuning is better balanced for me and makes a better all-rounder for my library. The highlighted vocals and somewhat relaxed sound signature allow me to enjoy this set for hours on end.

My pick: Lush

● AFUL Explorer ($120) - This is yet another hybrid matchup between the 1DD, 2BA of the Explorer against the Lush's 1DD, 4BA configuration. When it comes to the accessories, I think the Explorer has better inclusions across the board. The cable feels nicer, the zipper case feels much more premium, and there are more tip options as well. As far as build quality goes, both have resin shells, but the Lush does have a metal nozzle with a lip which some might prefer over the Explorer's smooth resin nozzle. The shell of the Explorer is quite a bit smaller and does offer a slightly more comfortable fit for me. I also prefer its overall design and aestetics too. When it comes to the sound signature, both have a more relaxed style of tuning, but the Explorer leans almost L-shaped while the Lush is more meta-tuned. The bass is where the Explorer scores a lot of points for me. It has a larger bass shelf, a deeper reaching sub-bass extension, and more impact, slam, and reverberation. The Lush does sound a little cleaner though with a better texture and resolution and a quicker decay, but it's hard not to like the Explorer's more energetic low-end presentation. In the midrange, the vocals on the Lush are a bit more forward, but they actually sound a little more natural on the Explorer. The Lush has a slightly colored, warmer, and more emotive midrange that may not be preferable for some, but I personally favor this style of presentation. The Lush also lends a little more weight to instruments in the lower midrange, and they have a slightly more natural timbre too. The treble of the Explorer is a bit more prominent and energetic than that of the Lush, but I think it's also due to the lack of upper-midrange emphasis. I wouldn't describe either as being bright, but the Lush does have a touch more air. Snares on the Explorer pop a little more, and cymbals can sound slightly splashy with a metallic sheen at times. Also, sibilant-prone tracks behave better on the Lush. As for the technical performance, these two trade blows pretty well, but the Lush has a little more expansive soundstage, more note weight, and slightly better layering, while the Explorer is more dynamic with better separation. For me, this matchup comes down to the treble presentation and overall balance. What I love about the Explorer is the bass shelf and impact and the relaxing tuning style. But what I don't care for is the slightly lacking upper midrange emphasis and the added treble energy, which leads to a less-than-ideal vocal presentation for me. This is where the Lush comes into play. Sure, the bass isn't quite as accentuated as I would like, and it's not as dynamic as the Explorer, but the frequency response is better balanced for my tastes. The Lush's upper midrange emphasis allows vocals to come through more clearly and showcase more heart and soul, which goes a long way for me, plus it handles sibilant-prone tracks with ease. I do think both are still worth keeping in my collection, as the Explorer offers a different enough tuning with its own strengths (rock music in particular), but I think the Lush does a great job of building upon the foundation of what I enjoy about the Explorer and improving it further.

My pick: Lush

● DUNU Kima 2 ($100) - These two don't graph very similarly, but I felt it still warranted a comparison since I consider both to have a more relaxed sound signature. The Kima 2 has only a single DD versus the 1DD, 4BA hybrid configuration of the Lush. As far as accessories go, the DUNU is on another level. The Kima 2 has a nice modular cable, a more premium carrying case, way more tip options, and all for almost half the cost. The build qualities and overall designs are quite different too. The Lush is bigger and sports a more traditional resin build, while the Kima 2 has a heavier and more resilient aluminum shell. When it comes to the fit, the Kima 2 has a shallower insertion, while the Lush's deeper fit is better for me. As for the aesthetics, I do like the Kima 2's combination of brushed aluminum and a simple geometric faceplate, but I slightly prefer the more eye-catching, sparkly design of the Lush. As for the sound signature, the Kima 2 has a more engaging U-shaped tuning with a smaller bass shelf, a bigger midrange dip, and more emphasis on the upper mids/lower treble. The Lush has a meta-style tuning that is bassier but also more relaxed. The bass might actually be where the biggest difference between these two lies. The Lush is more sub-bass oriented while the Kima 2 is more mid-bass focused. The Lush not only has more quantity, but it also has a deeper extension, with better rumble, reverberation, resolution, and texture. The bass of the Kima 2 is a little more impactful, but there's also some bleed into the midrange, and I really find myself missing that sub-bass rumble. Both sets have a different but nice midrange presentations. The Lush having a flatter midrange means there's less variation between the upper and lower portions, which translates to a smooth, emotive, and cohesive presentation, if not slightly subdued. The Kima 2's extra upper midrange emphasis means vocals are a little more forward and engaging, and they take some of the spotlight from the other frequencies. They can also get a touch shouty at higher volumes, and the lower midrange is a bit strange too. It sometimes lends a bit too much weight to instruments and can come across unbalanced, especially in orchestral music. In the treble, I wouldn't consider either set to be bright, but the Kima 2's treble is a little more energetic, and there can be a hint of harshness and sibilance at times. The Lush does roll off a little smoother, and again, it has the better balance to my ear. When it comes to technical performance, neither is really a standout in its tier, but the Lush wins pretty much across the board save for the dynamics. In conclusion, I do enjoy what each set brings to the table, but this matchup ultimately comes down to the bass and overall energy level. The Kima 2's vocal-forward presentation is quite good; however, the Lush is smoother, more laid-back, and simply more enjoyable for me to listen to for long sessions. The sub-bass rumble and extension are more satisfying, the timbre and tonality sweeter, and the treble a bit more balanced for my taste. I can still recommend the Kima 2 for those that prioritize an engaging, midrange-first style of tuning, and I think it's a strong IEM with a fantastic accessory package, but I find the Lush to have the better-balanced tuning, improved technical performance, and a better fit for my ears.

My pick: Lush

In conclusion:

While Ziigaat's IEMs have been hit or miss for me, the Lush is easily my favorite so far and by a pretty wide margin. The relaxed yet engaging tuning is right in my wheelhouse, and the price to performance is more than fair. The bass impact doesn't hit as hard as I'd like, but it still has a decent sub-bass extension and a reserved yet satisfying rumble. The midrange showcases instruments very well, and vocals are well-balanced and emotive. The treble is smoothly rolled off, which I prefer, but it also has a touch of sparkle to add a bit of excitement and clarity. The Lush really is a fantastic pick for those who want to simply put on their favorite tracks and allow the music to fade into the background, and I mean that in the best way possible. It's just so easy to listen to and enjoy all day long without any one frequency band standing out or having tons of detail thrown at you. For me, this style of tuning is best suited for less energetic genres such as acoustic, folk, singer-songwriter, and soft pop/rock, but it's still serviceable as an all-rounder as long as you don't mind a slightly toned-down version of things like rock, pop, and R&B. I will be the first to admit that the Lush's accessories leave a lot to be desired, especially in today's competitive market, and I hope Ziigaat can improve their inclusions with subsequent releases. But even taking the whole package into consideration, I still believe the Lush to be a worthwhile purchase, and I certainly recommend it to those looking for a musical-first style of tuning to listen to for extended periods. I know I'll be reaching for this one anytime I want to relax and ease into my music library.