Ziigaat x Fresh Reviews Arete - Vanilla

 3.5⭐️

+ Mild V-shaped tuning makes for a serviceable all-rounder 

+ Elevated bass with a decent rumble and good extension 

+ Clean and clear midrange with emphasis on female vocals 

+ Slowly rolled off treble with good extension and air

+ Technical performance is decent enough 

+ Honestly, it does nothing "wrong" but...

- Neither is it particularly exceptional in one specific area

- Cold and dry vocals are less engaging

- Tuning lacks musicality or a certain "x" factor to help it stand out

- Soundstage a little congested

- Requires tubes (at least for me)

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 loaned to me for review by a friend. I recieve no compensation and all thoughts and opinions are my own. A big thank you to AudioAmigo for the opportunity!

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: 

Chinese audio company Ziigaat has been no stranger to the mid-fi market over the last couple of years. They've had a steady release of products with some notable IEMs, including the Estrella and Odyssey. I got my first taste of Ziigaat when I reviewed their Lush model, which I really enjoyed and gave high marks. For the Arete, Ziigaat paired with YouTuber Fresh Reviews, who focuses more on computer accessories and audio quality as it relates to competitive gaming. The Arete features a hybrid configuration consisting of one dynamic and four balanced armature drivers and a price tag of $249. I'm not anything close to a competitive gamer these days, so let's stick to the music and see what the Arete has to offer.

Build, fit, ergonomics:

The Arete comes in Ziigaat's typical small packaging, featuring a nice shot of the shells on the front. The unboxing experience is simple and straightforward, and it's also somewhat underwhelming for the price. The shell of the Arete is very similar in shape and size to most of Ziigaat's other models. It features a semi-translucent resin build with a sparkly faceplate and the company logo. The Arete comes in three color options to choose from: black shell with a magenta/silver or blue faceplate, and a white shell version with a silver faceplate. The look of the magenta/silver faceplate changes a lot depending on the light, and there is even some yellow in there at certain angles. 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 5.9mm at the widest part, where there is a lip to help hold tips in place. The Arete fits my ears well enough, and I have no issues wearing them for extended periods, but the isolation is less than ideal. There's a single vent located on the back of the shell, behind the flat, two-pin connection, to alleviate pressure buildup. The accessory package is basically identical to other recently released Ziigaat IEMs. Frankly, the cable feels cheap and disappointing, and the case is not much better. They are serviceable enough, but feel more like they should accompany a $40 IEM, not one costing six times as much. I opted to swap out the stock cable for the Trusted 52 4.4mm cable instead. The Arete also comes with a paltry four pairs of tips: three silicone and one foam. The stock tips are just okay, and I preferred the Penon Liquer tips for a better seal and comfort. Overall, the build quality is good, and the design and aesthetic are nice, if not uninspired, but, as I've said before, Ziigaat really needs to start offering better accessories to stay competitive and help elevate its products to the level of others.

Sound impressions:

The Arete has a mild V-shaped tuning with emphasis on the sub-bass and upper midrange with a lightly rolled-off treble response. This is not a particularly hard set to drive and can easily be powered without the need for an amp. The note weight is definitely on the thinner side, though far from the worst I've come across. The detail retrieval is admirable, but it's not a real standout feature from others in its price tier. I will say that the Arete comes across more technically oriented than musical, which I usually don't really prefer. The soundstage, too, is decent enough, but again, not super noteworthy. The timbre is a little on the drier side, which doesn't necessarily sound off, but it's also not the most organic or real to life. The imaging is actually one part of the technicalities that strikes me as being quite well done, but I'm not sure it outperforms other great performers in the same tier. The dynamics are decent, and the tuning does hold up well despite the volume level, so you don't necessarily need to listen at higher volumes like me to enjoy this one. The separation and layering are also done well and help to create a cohesive yet well-defined sound. Overall, I think the Arete performs pretty well, and I don't find it particularly lacking in any one area, but neither does it really stand out to me as being impressive or better than its price would suggest.

In my experience, the Arete is only mildly source-sensitive, except for one instance in particular. Most of my sources showed only minor differences but the effort to find a good synergy was not wasted. The iFi GO link Max helps to play up the Arete's dynamics and sub-bass rumble, but it also doesn't do much for the innate thinness. I consider the BLON V1 to be one of my smoother-sounding DACs, but it honestly doesn't sound much different from the Max other than having a slightly more cohesive sound. The best pairing and most noticeable difference I found was with the Muse HiFi M5 Ultra in tube mode. The tubes bring out a bit more musicality, add more weight and body to the bass response, and also help to ground the treble energy and incisiveness. Seriously, without this particular source, the Arete's score would likely be much lower.

●Lows - Before I get into the bass, I again want to preface that these impressions were made utilizing the M5 Ultra tube amp, which I think is doing a lot to add to my enjoyment of the Arete's low end. The bass is more sub-bass focused over mid-bass, and I'd like a little more of the latter to add a touch of much-needed warmth. The extension can reach quite low when called upon, and the rumble and reverberation are very satisfying, near basshead levels even. There's a decent punch, and the impact is good, but the texture does feel a bit muddy, and it can get bogged down in complex bass-heavy tracks. At least there are no real bleed issues to speak of, and the bass and midrange remain well separated. As far as speed goes, the bass can be a bit sluggish at times. The decay also lingers a touch longer, but I personally prefer it that way. Overall, the bass is easily my favorite part of the Arete's tuning, but it only performs its best with the M5 Ultra. With any other source I tried, the bass sounds much less full or fun and wouldn't be nearly as enjoyable for me.

●Mids - The midrange is a bit of a disappointment for me. The tuning balance of the Arete definitely favors the upper midrange, which leaves the lower mids more recessed. Vocals are on the drier side, have a slight hollowness to them, and are not as forward as I'd like. They do have a certain sense of clarity and crispness though, but the tonality is a bit cold and emotionless, and I find that my favorite vocal performances lack heart and soul. The midrange balance also positions female vocals further forward than their male counterparts, which means the Arete can't do justice to some of my favorite male artists. The instrument balance generally fares a little better, and they tend to have a slightly more natural timbre and tonality, though things like low brass and cello are still underrepresented. Overall, the midrange has a clean sound, but I find it to be too cold, dry, and emotionless. I think a slight lift to the lower mids, an injection of warmth, and a certain level of engagement would go a long way to help me better connect to my music.

●Highs - As a self-confessed treble-sensitive listener, I usually find this section of the tuning to be crucial to whether I can really enjoy an IEM or not. In the case of the Arete, I think the treble is actually pretty well done, if not a touch boring. I don't hear any real glaring faults such as a large imbalance or innate harshness, but it can sound a bit thin and fragile at times. This in and of itself is not a terrible thing, but when combined with the already dry and emotionless midrange, the treble doesn't really do much to help me draw me in. The extension is decently executed, and there is definitely no lack of air or sparkle to detract from the overall balance, though it's not bright or fatiguing either. Cymbals are well-behaved yet clean and crisp, and snare hits have the right amount of energy and snap without being overly sharp. There's also no sibilance to speak of, which is always much appreciated, though some vocal notes can be a touch incisive at higher volumes. Overall, I find that the treble has a nice balance, ample sparkle and energy without fatigue, and just the right amount of air, but the thinner note weight could be better.

Comparisons: Credit to ATech Reviews, Audio Amigo, and Soundcheck for the graphs. 

● A&K x EE NOVUS ($5000) - Here we have the 1DD, 4BA hybrid configuration of the Arete versus the quadbrid configuration of the NOVUS. Since the NOVUS is a tour unit, I can only compare the case and cable, which are both far better on the NOVUS by a wide margin. When it comes to build quality, the Arete features a more standard resin shell while the NOVUS has a larger, more sturdy, yet lightweight aluminum shell. Even though the Arete is smaller and provides a decent fit, I prefer the NOVUS' slightly deeper insertion depth. The Arete has a classic combination of black resin and a sparkly faceplate, but I much prefer the NOVUS' black and gold, premium-looking design. While the price discrepancy between these sets is huge, the tuning philosophies are pretty similar. They both have a V-shaped sound signature, but the NOVUS is better balanced to my ear. Both sets have an elevated bass shelf, but the NOVUS is much better controlled. It also has a lower-reaching extension, cleaner bass-to-mids transition, smoother texture, better resolution, and quicker decay, although it doesn't cut off too early. The bass notes of the Arete actually sound a bit congested and tend to run together on more complex tracks. To be fair, though, the impact is a bit more forceful and visceral on the Arete. The lower aspect of the midrange is better represented on the NOVUS, and the instrument detail and timbre are far superior. Vocals are pushed a bit more forward on the Arete, but they are also positioned a little closer to the head and have a kind of hollow quality or echo on certain tracks. The NOVUS has a truly effortless midrange, and everything sounds incredibly natural and balanced, although I would appreciate vocals being pushed forward just a bit more. In the treble, the NOVUS has a touch more energy and sparkle, better air and extension, and a greater sense of space. This is most noticeable in things like snares and hi-hats, and they sound much more natural and lifelike. They're generally fine on the Arete too but are a little blunted and need more room to breathe. There can be a little harshness on the NOVUS at higher volume levels, which does not happen on the Arete as much. When it comes to technical performance, there is really no contest here, as the NOVUS is better across the board. The most notable improvements are its natural timbre, expansive soundstage, and level of detail and resolution. In conclusion, it's crystal clear that the Arete is outclassed in virtually every aspect, but these two do share a general tuning philosophy. In fact, I would argue that the NOVUS is the ultimate evolution of the Arete and everything it wishes it could be. The NOVUS' sense of balance and refinement are miles ahead, although the Arete does have a tiny bit more "fun factor." Still, I'll make that trade any day.

My pick: NOVUS 

● Elysian Apostle ($1800) - Here we have the Arete's 1DD 4BA hybrid configuration compared against the Apostle's 1DD, 2BA, 2EST tribrid setup. These two actually graph pretty similarly up to about 4 kHz, where they deviate in the treble response. Zingat's accessories are largely the same across most models and are generally disappointing for the price. The Apostle's accessory package is better overall, except perhaps for the case, for those who prefer a zippered one. When it comes to overall design, the Arete has that classic combination of sparkly faceplate and black resin. It's a tried-and-true design but is all too common in the market today. The Apostle is more unique, and its more nuanced aesthetic is my preference between the two. The Arete's resin shell is smaller and lighter, but the Apostle's sturdier metal shell fits me a bit better due to its contoured shape. When it comes to the sound, both have generally V-shaped tunings. Even though the graphs show a very similar bass response, the Apostle most definitely has a bigger and bolder low end. The rumble, reverberation, and extension are all superior on the Apostle. The Arete has a slightly quicker decay and cleaner texture, though it lacks the true subwoofer effect that the Apostle does so well. The midrange of the Arete sounds a little clearer and slightly less recessed than the Apostle. While lower-midrange instruments are a little better represented, the vocals lack emotion and heart, which is another thing the Apostle does very well. However, I find that the Arete's midrange balance fares better with instrumental genres. In the treble, the Arete has more air and better extension, and a little more sparkle. Interestingly, though, snares can sound a bit blunted and cymbals a little splashy. The Apostle's treble has better crispness, more energy, and conveys a certain fun factor missing from the Arete. I also do not find myself missing that little bit of air. In the technicalities, the Apostle is the clear winner in most categories, including soundstage, timbre, note weight, and detail retrieval, but the Arete manages to compete in layering, separation, and imaging. In conclusion, this comparison is a great example of how a graph can't tell the whole story. These two measure pretty similarly, but when performing A/B comparisons, the differences become quite apparent. Honestly, if you sucked out all the emotion and the things that make the Apostle special, the Arete is what you'd be left with. Now that sounds awfully harsh, but don't get me wrong, the Arete is a perfectly fine and capable IEM. It's simply that the Apostle has many special qualities and a certain X factor that doesn't necessarily show up on a graph. The Arete lacks musicality and fails to make me connect to the music in the same way that the Apostle does so effortlessly. People often question why some IEMs are so expensive. Well, for me, it's all about the intangibles—the things that don't show up in measurements and can't fully be explained, but when you hear them for yourself, you understand.

My pick: Apostle

● KBEAR Cepheus ($240) - Here's another matchup between two hybrids with different driver counts: the Arete's 1DD, 4BA versus the 2DD, 6BA in the Cepheus. Both sets have pretty comparable accessories. Neither has a particularly great cable or case so they are both equally disappointing, though the Cepheus does have a few more tip options. The build qualities are also very similar. Both are made of resin but the Cepheus is a little bigger and has a more semi-custom shaped shell. As for fit, they're both comfortable enough for me to wear for extended periods. Design and aesthetics are always subjective, but I slightly prefer the purple shell of the Cepheus because it's a little more standout and unique compared to the Arete's more common black shell and sparkly faceplate combination. These two have some similarities in their tuning, but they do sound quite different in ear. The Cepheus is closer to a V-shaped tuning with rolled-off treble, while the Arete is a little more traditionally U-shaped with better treble extension. The Cepheus's bass has more quantity and sounds fuller, with a deeper rumble and reverberation. The Arete is slightly better balanced between sub- and mid-bass but is still a little mid-bass shy for me. The Cepheus' decay is slower, which I prefer, and it has a slightly better texture, while the Arete's bass is quicker and more resolving. In the midrange, the Cepheus is much more forward, putting vocals front and center, but it's also more deficient in the lower midrange, where some instruments lack weight or representation. The Arete's midrange is a little better balanced, but vocals are still pushed forward, just not quite to the degree that the Cepheus does. The Arete also lacks a little engagement in the midrange and comes across as slightly boring in comparison. The treble is where these two deviate most. The Arete has much more air and better extension, which will be a big improvement for treble aficionados. Cymbals, claps, and snares all sound crisper and more correct. Even though the Cepheus' treble is quite rolled off, I personally prefer it because it ensures there's zero harshness or sibilance. As for technical performance, the Arete has better imaging, detail retrieval, layering, and a slightly wider soundstage, whereas the Cepheus has better dynamics, separation, timbre, note weight, and a deeper soundstage. For me, this matchup essentially comes down to musicality versus a clean and balanced sound. If you're looking for an engaging tuning with emphasis on the sub-bass and upper midrange, the Cepheus is the better choice. However, if you value balance and a cleaner, somewhat more clinical-sounding tuning, even if a little boring, the Arete is the way to go. The Cepheus simply cannot be considered well-balanced due to the mid-bass tuck, recessed lower midrange, and treble air deficiency, but for me, it's definitely the more engaging and emotive of the two. However, when going back and forth, the imbalances of its tuning become even more glaringly obvious, and the Arete clearly makes for the better all-rounder. My choice probably depends on the genre and my mood at the time, but at the time of this writing, I would pick the more musical of the two.

My pick: Cepheus

● Ziigaat Lush ($180) - This contest features two Ziigaat models with the same 1DD 4BA hybrid driver configuration. The accessory packages are basically identical and include the same cable, case, and tips. The shells, too, are almost the same, and I find that both fit comfortable enough for me, but the Arete is slightly smaller in size and has a narrower nozzle. While these two are nearly identical in accessories and build, their tunings are definitely different. The Arete has a mild V-shaped sound signature while the Lush is more meta-tuned with a smoother but less exciting presentation. In the bass, the Arete is definitely the bassier of the two. It's more sub-bass focused and not only has more overall bass quantity but also a deeper extension, increased rumble, cleaner texture, and a slightly longer decay. The Lush is more mid-bass oriented with a more forceful impact, but the lower quantity also allows the midrange to shine more than on the Arete. Speaking of midrange, the Lush has a more emotionally driven vocal presentation and a sense of musicality that I find lacking on the Arete. The Lush also positions vocals a little more forward and slightly closer to the head, but it also has a unique way of envelopment that commands attention. The Arete's midrange is more spacious, but vocals sound a bit further away, and males in particular suffer from being a bit too recessed for me. The lower-midrange is also better represented on the Lush, whereas the Arete's bass kind of overshadows this area. In the treble, the Arete is the brighter of the two with better extension and more air. The Lush rolls off a bit harder, but due to the flatter overall frequency response, it doesn't sound devoid of sparkle or air either. The Arete's treble is more crisp and resolving, but it can have more incidence of harshness and sibilance at higher volumes. As for the technical performance, the Arete has a more expansive soundstage, better separation, and more accurate imaging, whereas the Lush has more note weight, better layering, and a more natural timbre. This matchup comes down to the overall tuning and presentation. If you've read my review for the Lush, you'd know that it's easily my favorite Ziigaat to date, so it was always a high bar for the Arete to face. Unfortunately, I don't think the challenger is quite up to the task, and the Arete falls short due to the lack of musicality. On one hand, the Arete's V-shaped tuning makes for a better all-rounder, but it doesn't have enough special qualities to help set it apart in any meaningful way. For me, the Lush is smooth and soulful, everything I want in a meta-style tuning, and its emotive vocals and sense of engagement make this matchup a very easy choice for me.

My pick: Lush

● Juzear x Z Reviews Defiant ($100) - Here we have yet another hybrid showdown between the Arete's 1DD, 4BA configuration against the 1DD, 3BA of the Defiant. When it comes to the accessories, the Defiant impresses with a better quality (and more colorful) modular cable and a nicer carrying case. It also packs in a few more tip options too. As for the build quality, both have nearly identically shaped and sized resin shells with metal nozzles, though the Arete's is slightly smaller. These two graphs align very closely, and both have V-shaped tunings but with a few variabilities, mostly in their treble responses. The Defiant also comes across as the slightly darker and more engaging of the two, while the Arete sounds a bit more energetic and open. In the bass, the Arete offers a little more quantity as well as a deeper sub-bass extension, bigger rumble, cleaner texture, and better resolution. The Defiant falls a bit short in performance, but the slightly quicker decay is less encumbering to the midrange, which helps vocals stand out a bit more. Speaking of midrange, I think it might be one of the key areas to this matchup. The Defiant pushes vocals just a bit more into the foreground and lends them more weight in the overall balance, which I much prefer. The Arete, though, has a better sense of space and depth in the midrange, even if vocals are less engaging. The treble is another interesting part of the matchup. The Defiant tends to sound a little thinner and airier and can be slightly brittle on certain tracks. The Arete's treble has less of an edge but also slightly better extension, which makes for a more balanced presentation but less excitement. As for the technicalities, the Arete is basically better across the board, notably in the soundstage and detail retrieval, though the Defiant manages to close the gap well for its price. For me, this matchup comes down to the engagement factor, tuning execution, and price. With these two sets graphing so very similarly, you might expect the Defiant to simply be a worse version of the tuning target, but that's not my experience at all. While the Arete has a deeper reaching bass response, a cleaner midrange, and a more extensive treble, it's simply missing the fun factor that the Defiant brings to the table. Now, I won't try to argue that the Defiant's technical performance is just as good as the Arete's, but it's not that far off either. And I'd personally rather listen to a set that pulls me in with a sense of musicality more than one that prioritizes cleanliness and technical performance. Add in the fact that the Defiant has better accessories and is less than half the price of the Arete, and the choice becomes all the clearer.

My pick: Defiant

In conclusion:

Merriam-Webster defines vanilla as "lacking distinction: plain, ordinary, conventional." This more or less sums up the way I feel about the Ziigaat Arete. There is nothing inherently wrong with vanilla (it's one of my favorite ice cream flavors, after all), but anything less than an exceptional or fantastic product is doomed to fall by the wayside very quickly in the current, extremely competitive IEM market. There are simply too many great products out nowadays, with more being released seemingly every week, to justify spending $200+ on something that is just "good" or "fine." Now I know my comparison section features some really unfair matchups that the Arete could never hope to overcome, but I really only included them to draw attention to the tuning similarities and to show the potential that the Arete had. It shares some fundamental DNA with other, much more expensive sets, and with a little tweaking, it could have been a real standout IEM in its price bracket. In my quest to get more comfortable with EQ, I performed a very simple PEQ which you can see in the picture below. The elevated midbass adds a touch of warmth, and the accentuated midrange brings vocals more forward. The reduction at 8 kHz helps control any harshness, too. Adding an impedance adapter to the Arete can also help transform it into more of a bass-focused all-rounder, too, if that's your thing. Unfortunately, Ziigaat's execution of the stock tuning just doesn't do enough to draw me in, and my feelings can be summed up in a few words: completely competent but entirely unexceptional. That being said, I wouldn't pass judgment on anyone for loving the Arete, and it may be better for competitive gaming purposes as Fresh Reviews is more focused on that aspect. I do think it makes for a competent all-rounder, but it's not really something I can vehemently recommend without tubes and EQ. For me, this particular Ziigaat is a case where good enough just isn't quite good enough, and I doubt I'll miss it or give it much thought once it's gone.