Twistura Beta - Those in Glass Houses

 3⭐️

+ Clean, analytical, and well-separated mid-centric style tuning

+ Snappy and capable low end that's well-balanced between sub-bass and mid-bass

+ Vocals and instruments take center stage

+ Decent treble presence with a controlled, rolled-off response

+ Detail retrieval, dynamics, and separation are solid

+ Impressive accessory package 

- Not a particularly well-balanced tuning; more of a specialist

- Tuning nozzles don't offer enough variety

- Vocals tend to be shouty at higher volumes

- Thin note weight and artificial timbre

- Somewhat narrow soundstage compared to the height

- Understated monochromatic design doesn't really do it for me; would like a pop of color to better match the purple case

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 Twistura in exchange for my impartial and honest review. I receive no compensation, and all thoughts and opinions are my own.

Non-affiliated link for those interested:

https://twistura.com/products/beta-flagship-11mm-glass-diaphragm-dynamic-wired-earphone

Gear used: 

●Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra

●HiBy R4

●Various DAC/amps

Source:

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

Introduction: 

Twistura is a Chinese IEM manufacturer and a relative newcomer to the market. The company was founded in 2024 and doesn't have as much familiarity or brand recognition as other Chi-fi companies. Some may know them for their budget-friendly offerings, such as the Woodnote and D-Major, but today we will look at their most recent release. The Beta utilizes a single 11mm dynamic driver with a glass diaphragm and also features three interchangeable tuning nozzles. The Beta is priced at $119 and can be purchased directly through Twistura, as well as other worldwide retailers including Linsoul and HiFiGO. Let's break down this newest single DD from Twistura and see how it fares.

Build, fit, ergonomics:

The Beta has a nice unboxing experience. It's not especially glamorous or anything, but the presentation and design of the packaging go beyond what I'd expect for the $120 price tag. The cover of the sleeve features a nice, minimalistic shot of the IEMs themselves, and the back has a graph that displays the frequency responses of the three tuning nozzles. The shells are silver in color and made of a sturdy, CNC-machined aluminum alloy. They are about average in size and have a nice little weight to them. The design is a little industrial, and the faceplate features raised lines branching out from a small, black circle. This little circle actually features the Twistura logo on it, but it's small and very hard to make out. In fact, if it weren't for the box art, I'm not sure I would know the logo was there. As stated earlier, the Beta includes three tuning nozzles: the standard silver, vocal-enhanced gold, and the instrumental black. There's a metal holder that the nozzles can be screwed into for safekeeping, and all the nozzles measure 6.2 mm at the widest point of the lip. The insertion depth is about average, but I did struggle to find a comfortable fit long-term due to the nozzle angle. There are two vents to alleviate pressure: one on the side that faces the concha of the ear and the other in front of the slightly recessed 2-pin connection. The Beta comes with a nice oxygen-free copper cable. It's modular with a screw-on locking mechanism and includes both 3.5mm and 4.4mm terminations. I really like the thickness and pliability of the cable, but the coating feels a little rubbery, and I'm not sure I love the copper color for the silver shells. There are three small plastic cases inside the box that hold nine pairs of silicone tips. The little cases are different from others I've come across, and they don't quite hold the tips as securely as I'd like, but I suppose they serve their storage purpose well enough. The variety in tips is quite nice, as all three variations are distinct from one another. One has a wide bore, another is narrow and more rigid, and the third has an average-sized bore with a stickier texture. I tried all three varieties, but I found the best fit and seal with my own JVC Spiral Dot tips. When I first saw the case during the unboxing, I was a little surprised. It's a very bold purple color, which doesn't match the aesthetic of anything else in the box, so I thought it might have been included by mistake. But despite the eye-catching color, it's a really fantastic case. It's hard-shelled with a magnetic closure and offers great protection. The textured yet smooth faux leather surface and the velvet lining are much nicer than what I've seen on cases that come with IEMs far beyond the Beta's price. One very minor complaint I have is that the IEMs and cable take up most of the room inside the case, leaving very little space for additional accessories. Overall, though, this latest offering from Twistura has a very solid build quality and accessory package. I'd even say it's better than many sets I've seen at three or four times the price.

Sound impressions:

In my experience, there are two types of IEMs with interchangeable tuning nozzles. The first is one in which each nozzle offers a unique and enjoyable sound signature. The second is one in which each tuning is only slightly different from the others, and once I find which one suits my preferences, the other nozzles remain in the box. The Beta falls into the second category, and of the three options available, I much prefer the standard silver tuning nozzle. The rest of this review will be made utilizing this tuning option, but I will add some brief impressions of the other two in the comparisons section below. Looking at the graph, the Beta appears to have a midrange-focused tuning, and while that's true to an extent, I find the bass response to be a little heavier-handed than the measurement shows. So I'd say the Beta sounds a bit more V-shaped in ear than the graph would lead you to believe. As with most budget single DD sets, this one is not particularly difficult to drive and can get to high volumes with just a simple dongle. The note weight is definitely on the thinner side for me. Notes don't really feel particularly grounded or visceral, but are lighter and a little fleeting. The detail retrieval is admirable, though not quite class-leading, even in the budget tier. The soundstage feels taller and deeper than it is wide, which leads to a slightly strange and imbalanced presentation. Unfortunately, the timbre isn't that great either. It has a certain artificiality to it and just sounds off to my ear. The imaging also has some issues too. Left-to-right accuracy is good, but the positioning is a little hard to pinpoint, and distance detection is even worse. The dynamics are good, not great. I wouldn't necessarily say it underperforms, especially considering the price, but it could definitely be further improved. The separation is actually quite good, especially for a single DD, and the layering has a nice cohesiveness that single-driver IEMs do so well. Overall, the Beta's technical performance leaves something to be desired. The layering and separation are actually quite solid, and the detail retrieval and dynamics are good, but the timbre, imaging, soundstage, and note weight feel underwhelming. Also, it doesn't have the innate musicality that might help to make up for the deficits in technical prowess.

In an attempt to stay budget-conscious, I limited myself to sources that were close in cost to that of the Beta itself. So even if it synergized best with the $600 Questyle Sigma (don't worry, it didn't), I couldn't really justify having to spend nearly six times the cost of the IEM on the best-paired source. Luckily, I've no shortage of budget DAC amps to try. First of all, let me say I didn't find the Beta to be a particularly source-sensitive set, so changes were pretty subtle. The iFi Go Link Max draws out a little more dynamics and brings a certain energy and engagement, but the upper mids become a bit thinner, which isn't ideal for me. The BLON V1 has a smoother presentation and adds a little weight to the midrange, but it tends to roll off the bass extension a bit more than I'd like. The source that I felt synergized the best is the EPZ TP35. Like the V1, it helps add some smoothness and note weight, but it also manages to slightly boost the bass while keeping the extension intact.

●Lows - The Beta's bass is the biggest surprise for me. I wouldn't say it's inherently elevated, but it does cut through the accentuated upper midrange enough to carve out its own space on most tracks. It's a bit more sub-bass focused, with decent extension and a cleaner presentation. The bass has a snappy and quick delivery, and also a fast recovery with good, if not a bit subdued, impact. One of the best characteristics is its lovely bouncy and spring-like quality, which makes it very nimble and agile. Bass notes are delivered emphatically, and the attack is solid, yet the driver recovers quickly and can handle complex tracks with ease. The texture is in a good spot—not overly dry, but not wet or muddy either. It also has just the right amount of rumble for a non-basshead style tuning. The bass is well separated from the midrange, and the decay is a touch on the quicker side, but not by much. Overall, the bass is really the highlight of this set for me. My biggest issue is there's just not enough of it, but the quality is more important than the quantity, and the Beta has it where it counts.

●Mids - The upper midrange is definitely the focus of the Beta's tuning, if there was ever any doubt looking at the graph. Vocals are present, forward, and well-separated, though they can be shouty and piercing at higher volumes. They also lack a bit of weight, a certain engagement factor, and the colder tonality is far from my usual preference. Unfortunately, the midrange balance is way off. The lower mids sound sucked out and recessed, causing instruments to be underrepresented and hollow. Also, I take issue with the timbre of both vocals and instruments. My favorite singers don't quite sound like themselves—they come across as artificial and have an overproduced kind of presentation. Stringed instruments like guitars and violins also sound a little unnatural, though only slightly. Another issue I have is the lack of depth and spatial field throughout the midrange. It feels quite flat and two-dimensional, which makes the choice to push the upper mids so far forward even more bizarre. Overall, the Beta presents a clean, forward, and fairly detailed midrange, but it comes at the expense of balance. The lower mids are overshadowed by the quite elevated upper portion, and the colder and somewhat analytical style doesn't really help me connect with my favorite tracks either. The timbre and tonality sound off, and there's a distinct lack of space, depth, and naturalness that I prefer.

●Highs - Based on the graph, the treble seems to be well-tuned for my preferences, but it can be a bit deceptive. It does come across a little on the brighter side due to the lower treble focus, though it's not fatiguing or harsh. The extension is commendable, but the air is lacking, leading to an unbalanced and somewhat incomplete presentation. Snares and claps tend to sound blunted and hollow, while cymbals typically fare better. The texture is a little brittle and fragile, which also makes instruments here sound less than natural. Overall, the treble is fine, if not a little underwhelming. I wouldn't necessarily say it's particularly energetic, but it's also not boring or dull. There are really no sibilance issues, which is a plus, but certain vocal notes can be bothersome at higher volumes. For treble-sensitive folks like myself, there's not much to worry about, but the lack of air, brittle texture, and brighter tilt in the lower treble don't really appeal to me either.

Comparisons: Credit to Audio Amigo, Super Reviews, and Tone Deaf Monk for the graphs. Also, a special thank you to Omar for measuring this particular unit and many others in the comparison section for me. Be sure to check out his awesome YouTube channel. ¡Mi amigo Omar es el mejor!

● Intuaura Splendor II (using the included USB-C DAC) ($260) - Here we have two single DD IEMs that utilize different diaphragm materials: glass for the Beta and a composite alloy coating for the Splendor. As far as accessories go, the Beta offers more tip options, a modular cable, and a premium-feeling case. The Splendor, though, has a more supple cable, a larger zipper-style case, and a USB-C DAC that offers a different tuning option. To be fair, the Beta has three tuning nozzles, but they don't alter the frequency response as much as the Splendor's DSP DAC. When it comes to build quality and design, these two are nearly polar opposites. The Beta features a solid metal shell and a somewhat simpler, subdued aesthetic, while the Splendor's shells are completely resin with an eye-catching purple, silver, and gold faceplate, which I like more. Moving on to the tuning, these two actually have very similar U-shaped sound signatures when utilizing the Splendor's DAC. In the bass, the Beta hits a little harder, sounds a little fuller, and has a certain bounciness with a quicker decay. It's also slightly more sub-bass oriented, whereas the Splendor has a bit more mid-bass and a better balance across the entire bass shelf. The Beta has a slightly cleaner, better-separated, and well-manicured presentation, but the Splendor is the more natural-sounding of the two, thanks in part to its less dry texture and slower decay. The midrange is where the Splendor really starts to pull ahead. It has a less emphasized upper midrange boost and a somewhat flatter lower midrange, which leads to superior balance. The Beta can come across as shouty in comparison, and the thinner vocal presentation doesn't do it any favors. Essentially, the Splendor's vocals are smoother, less accentuated, and better balanced, but the Beta is more forward and isolated from the rest of the tuning for those who want it. In the treble, the Splendor has more emphasis on air and extension, making for a more complete-sounding top end. It's noticeably brighter, crisper, and more sparkly too, but also not as inherently thin as the Beta. Admittedly, the Beta's rolled-off response is a closer match to my preferences, but there's just not enough here to counteract the midrange boost. Also, it has a somewhat blunted quality with rounded edges on certain notes that comes across as unnatural. When it comes to technicalities, it's not a surprise that the Splendor performs better in most categories, though the Beta holds up decently well in dynamics and separation. For me, this one ultimately comes down to the overall tuning balance, especially the midrange. The Splendor's toned-down mids and more emphasized treble air and extension make for a more competent tuning profile, and the quality of nearly everything is better across the board. The one area where the Beta holds its own is the bass, in which the clean and bouncy presentation is quite endearing, but it's not nearly enough to sway me. Keep in mind that utilizing the USB-C DAC with the Splendor is not my preferred way to enjoy this set, but even when using this "worse" tuning option, the Splendor easily beats the Beta.

My pick: Splendor II

● Canpur Silver Flash ($130) - I would be remiss if I didn't include a comparison against the current darling single DD in the budget sector. The Flash uses a PU+PET composite diaphragm versus the glass of the Beta. When it comes to accessories, the Beta has far and away better inclusions, such as a nicer modular cable, a great carrying case, and more tip options, though the Flash does come with a USB-C dongle for ease of use. The build quality and designs are quite similar, as both feature metal shells and a simpler aesthetic, but the Flash offers a vastly better fit for me personally. Moving on to the sound signature, these two don't graph super close, but both sets do have a fairly V-shaped tuning. However, the Beta is more mid-centric, and the Flash has a larger bass shelf. Starting with the low end, the Flash not only has more quantity but also a more satisfying rumble, impact, and extension. The Beta isn't bass-light, but it does sound a little cleaner due to the quicker attack and shorter decay. I would say the Beta's bass is more complementary to the overall tuning, whereas the bass of the Flash takes on a central role. In the midrange, the differences become even more apparent. The Beta's tuning pushes the upper mids further forward, which helps showcase vocals, but it's overtuned for my taste. It can become shouty at higher volumes, whereas the Flash is much more balanced, and still, the vocals are clear, concise, and stand out through the increased bass shelf. But even more noticeable is the Flash's sense of space, depth, and naturalness in the midrange, which the Beta can't match. The treble responses aren't all that different, but the Flash is a little airier and crisper. There can be a touch of thinness and irritability on certain notes, but the Beta is not without its issues either. The Beta's treble texture is a little brittle and unnatural, which can be distracting on some tracks, but it's more steeply rolled off and the safer choice for treble-sensitive listeners. When it comes to the technicalities, the Flash outperforms the Beta across the board, most notably in the soundstage, timbre, and dynamics. For me, this matchup hinges on the tuning balance and technical performance. The Flash's sound signature is much more balanced, the technicalities impress, and the fit and build quality are excellent. The only real advantage the Beta holds is in its accessory package, and even though its bass is quite good, the mid-centric focus is just too prominent for me. When it comes down to it, the Silver Flash simply executes at a much higher level, and I think it's well worth the extra $10.

My pick: Silver Flash

● Sound Rhyme SP01 ($90) - Here's another contest between single DDs, but the SP01 has a DLC composite diaphragm versus the glass of the Beta. When it comes to accessories, the Beta wins handily. It has a better and modular cable, more tip options, and a nicer case. Interestingly enough, both sets also have three pairs of tuning nozzles, though the SP01 offers more variability in the sound signatures. For the purpose of keeping things simple, I'll only be comparing the silver nozzle of the Beta against the clear nozzle of the SP01. These two also have similar aluminum shells, but the SP01 is somewhat square-shaped while the Beta is much larger and more traditionally shaped, with a deeper insertion that I prefer. Design-wise, the Beta is more monochromatic and understated, while the SP01 has a colorful blue faceplate. As for the sound, these two have similar tuning targets, but the SP01 is more V-shaped and somewhat relaxed compared to the Beta's more energetic, midrange-focused tuning. In the bass, the SP01 definitely has more quantity, though the quality is a small step down. The Beta has a cleaner texture, better resolution, and a springy quality that I really like, but it's also more sub-bass focused and lacks a bit of mid-bass thump. The SP01 has more mid-bass, which leads to better balance. The extension reaches deeper, and notes are more impactful, with a slightly slower decay. The midrange responses manage to sound pretty similar. Both sets have an innate thinness and a shouty character that I don't really vibe with, but the SP01 is a bit less egregious. The biggest difference comes in the lower midrange where the SP01 better represents instruments. Moving on to the treble, the SP01 comes across as a little brighter and sharper, while the Beta rolls off a bit more steeply. The Beta is also thinner with a cleaner presentation, more detail, and a crisper texture, but the SP01 is a little smoother with a touch more air. Regarding technical performance, the Beta has better separation, detail retrieval, dynamics, and a wider soundstage, while the SP01 has better timbre, layering, note weight, and imaging. Unsurprisingly, this contest mostly boils down to the bass response. The SP01 has been one of my go-to recommendations under $100 for beginners in the hobby and for anyone wanting tuning nozzles that showcase distinctly different tunings. It also helps that all three nozzles present completely viable tunings on their own, and none of them are too close to one another, as is the case with the Beta. I will admit that the SP01's Clear nozzle is my least favorite of the three, but even its weakest tuning manages to compete well against the Beta, though it is a close battle. The Beta may have slightly better quality bass, but the SP01's elevated shelf helps to make up for some of its other deficiencies, like the thin note weight and shouty vocals. If I were judging this contest using only the Clear nozzle, this one might be a tie, but the SP01's other tuning options are even better, so I'll go ahead and award it the win.

My pick: SP01 

●Sivga Que UTG ($90) - This is an interesting matchup since both are equipped with a single DD utilizing a glass diaphragm. The accessory packages are pretty comparable. Both include nice modular cables, but the Sivga's is a little softer and more pliable, while the Twistura has more tips and a thicker cable. The UTG comes with a really nice brown leather zipper case, but the Beta's purple case is also really good. The build qualities of the shells are also similar. Both have solid metal shells, but the UTG is a little smaller and feels a little more premium. I also prefer its wooden faceplate design to the simpler-looking Beta. Unfortunately, neither set offers top-tier comfort for me, but I will say the Beta is slightly more comfortable. For what it's worth, the UTG is also the harder set to drive. Moving on to the sound, both have somewhat V-shaped tunings and reserve most of the focus for the upper half of the frequency response, but they still measure and sound quite different. In the bass, neither set has a big lift in the low end, but the Beta emphasizes the sub-bass more, while the UTG has more mid-bass presence and focus. The Beta has better extension, rumble, a quicker attack, and a drier texture. It's also better separated from the lower midrange. The UTG, though, has a touch more body, impact, fullness, and a slower, more natural decay. In the midrange, the Beta's earlier pinna gain rise pushes vocals more forward and positions them prominently in the tuning, but the balance is way off, and they can get shouty at high volumes. The UTG actually has better balance across the midrange, though it's still far from what I would consider "balanced." It also has more weight, which grounds vocals, and the lower midrange is better represented. The treble is definitely where these two deviate the most. The Beta rolls off more sharply, while the UTG is brighter with added air and extension. The Beta also has a blunted quality in the treble, whereas the UTG is much sharper and more detailed. There's also an innate thinness, but it's not the most egregious. Honestly, neither treble presentation really appeals to me personally, but the Beta offers an easier listening experience. The UTG, though, would likely be the choice of treble enthusiasts, and while I definitely don't fall into that camp, I can appreciate its clean and articulate nature and improved balance. When it comes to technical performance, the UTG actually sounds like the more capable IEM. It has improved detail retrieval, imaging, timbre, note weight, and a wider soundstage, whereas the Beta has better separation and layering. This matchup is an interesting one. Going in, I would have thought the Beta would be the clear winner since it graphs much better to my eyes, but the ears don't lie. I like the Beta's emphasized sub-bass, deeper extension, and bigger rumble, but the lower midrange is underutilized, and the upper mids feel a little too thin and artificial. Vocals have more weight and naturalness on the UTG, and although the Beta's treble is more agreeable, I find myself drawn to the UTG's airier and more detailed presentation. For me, the Sivga's graph looks downright bad on paper, but you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, or more accurately, a tuning by some squiggles on a screen. There's just something about the overall balance that hits my ear better, and the improved technicalities don't hurt either. If I'm being honest, neither of these sets gets my proverbial motor running, but in a matchup between two glass diaphragm drivers, I have to go with the more natural-sounding of the two.

My pick: Que UTG

● Melody Wings Jupiter ($80) - Surprise, surprise, here's yet another single DD comparison. This one pits the Jupiter's titanium plated dynamic driver against the glass diaphragm of the Beta. Starting with the accessories, the Beta has a much better unboxing experience as well as nicer accessories across the board. The Beta has a nicer modular cable, more tip options, and a more premium-feeling case. The Jupiter is a little Spartan-esque with just a USB-C terminated cable, a few sets of tips, and a zippered case. The Beta also offers multiple tuning options via the replaceable nozzles, though the actual variety they offer is up for debate. The build qualities are quite different too. The Beta features a full metal shell while the Jupiter has a smaller profile and a resin build with a metal nozzle. Fit-wise, both are comfortable enough for me, but the Jupiter does sit a little more securely. As far as the tuning goes, the Beta is more U-shaped with an accentuated upper midrange, while the Jupiter is more V-shaped with extra bass and treble emphasis. Starting at the low end, the Jupiter definitely has more bass quantity but also a better sense of body and fullness. It has more rumble, reverberation, and a deeper-reaching extension, but the Beta has an overall cleaner presentation, aided by a slightly quicker decay, a faster attack, and improved separation. The way my ear interprets it is that the Beta's bass is more complementary to the midrange and treble, whereas the Jupiter's presents more of a statement piece in its own tuning. In the mids, the Beta has an earlier pinna gain and more upper midrange emphasis, which pushes vocals to the forefront. They have a clean and clear quality but are also a little dry and cold. The Jupiter's midrange isn't as forward or energetic, and it also has a warmer quality that helps vocals sound a bit more natural. My main issue with it, though, is the later pinna gain doesn't really help accentuate male vocals, and they sound more recessed than their female counterparts. As far as instrumentation goes, the Beta lends more weight to lower-registered instruments, and the entire midrange is better separated from the bass, too, whereas the Jupiter's bass sort of encumbers the lower midrange. The treble is interesting because the graph would lead you to believe that the Beta is quite a bit darker, but in-ear that's not really my experience. The Jupiter has a bit more sparkle and is just a touch more energetic, but the Beta is cleaner and more detailed with a comparable level of air and extension, though to be fair, both are a little lacking in that department. Also, claps and snares tend to be a bit more muted on the Beta and a touch crisper on the Jupiter, but the latter does have a pervasive thinness in the treble that can be distracting on some tracks. Honestly, neither of these two has a particularly great treble response for my taste. When it comes to technical performance, the Beta has better detail retrieval, separation, and imaging, while the Jupiter has better note weight, soundstage, layering, and timbre. For me, this one ultimately comes down to the overall tuning. The Beta's midrange focus isn't inherently a bad thing, but its execution leaves something to be desired. Sure, the bass is of decent quality and the rolled-off treble helps keep sibilance at bay, but the entire tuning balance just feels off. The Jupiter has a larger bass shelf with more body and fullness, as well as a smoother and more natural-sounding vocal presentation that I enjoy. The Beta has better accessories and a sturdier build quality, but the Jupiter's fit is much more comfortable for my ears, and I'll take a wider soundstage, improved layering, and a more natural timbre every time.

My pick: Jupiter

●Moondrop May ($75) - Unlike the other IEMs in this comparison section, the May is a hybrid, featuring both one DD and one planar driver versus the single DD of the Beta. It also comes with a DSP cable that offers various tuning options through Moondrop's companion app. For this matchup, though, I'll be using the analog tuning via a standard 3.5mm termination, as it's both the closest in measurement to the Beta and my preferred sound signature with this set. Starting with the accessories, the Beta includes more tip options and a better modular cable, but both sets include nice, albeit different, types of cases. While the Beta has three sets of tuning nozzles, the May actually offers more variability via EQ through its DSP cable. The build quality and designs also differ. The Beta has a larger, more durable solid aluminum shell, whereas the May uses a combination of a resin body and a metal faceplate. The Beta's aesthetic is a little simpler and more industrial-looking, but I personally prefer the May's black and silver color combination. The May also has a shorter nozzle, which I typically shy away from, but it actually offers a more comfortable fit than the Beta. When it comes to the sound signature, both are V-shaped in nature and measure quite similarly outside of the sub-bass and upper treble. Starting with the bass, the May has more sub-bass quantity and deeper extension. It also has a little more rumble and a slightly slower decay. The Beta is bubblier and bouncier, with a quicker attack and a cleaner presentation. I think the midrange is key in this matchup. The Beta may showcase better separation, but it lacks a level of musicality, naturalness, and engagement that the May does well. The Beta comes across as shouty and thin, while the May is grounded and better balanced. It also has a small lower-midrange lift, which helps instruments come forward more without interfering with vocals. The trend continues in the treble, where the May manages to have a similar frequency response to the Beta without inherent issues like thinness and sharpness. The May also offers a bit more air, which addresses another of my complaints about the Beta. I would say the Beta has a slightly crisper texture, but it comes at the cost of balance. In the technicalities department, these two compete pretty well. The May showcases better timbre, imaging, and note weight, while the Beta has better separation and detail retrieval. This matchup really comes down to whether you prefer musicality and balance versus cleanliness and detail. The Beta may be a touch sharper, more concise, and better separated, but the overall balance is far from ideal, and it simply lacks musicality. The May basically executes a very similar tuning target in a much more cohesive, natural, and enjoyable way. The Beta may have a more solid build quality and better accessories, but for me, this contest isn't even close. The May sounds far better. Full stop.

My pick: May

● Standard (silver) nozzle versus the Vocal Enhanced (gold) and Instrumental (black) nozzles - The title should be pretty self-explanatory, but I wanted to go ahead and add a small section discussing the differences in the tuning nozzles, which happen to be very minor. As the graph shows, not much changes here outside a narrow range of frequencies in the upper-midrange and lower treble. I really dislike it when companies go through the trouble of producing multiple tuning nozzles only to offer such minimal changes that there's little to no reason to switch once you find your personal preference. I'd much rather have vastly different tunings so as to offer more variability. The way I hear the standard nozzle in relation to the other two pretty much boils down to exactly what you see on the graph. The gold Vocal Enhanced nozzle offers a bit more energy in the upper-mids, making female vocals more prominent in the mix. It also becomes a bit much at times and pushes the prominently mid-centric tuning even further, betraying the already questionable balance of the standard nozzle. I might recommend the gold nozzle for fans of that "female poison" style of vocal response, though I'm personally not drawn to this type of tuning. It's not only the vocals that are impacted, though. Cymbals and snares tend to sound thinner, splashier, and more artificial. I will say stringed instruments and piano are also slightly more prominent, which can be a good thing with certain genres of music. The black Instrumental nozzle takes all of these effects a step further, and I generally wouldn't recommend this tuning option outside of classical or orchestral arrangements, where it does have its merits, however minor. Instruments are pushed a bit further forward than with the Vocal nozzle, and detail and separation are on full display, but anything with female vocals tends to come across as too thin and shouty for my taste.

In conclusion:

I hadn't had the opportunity to try a Twistura IEM before this review, so I was excited to get my hands on the Beta and get a feel for what the company has to offer. Let me start with some positive takeaways. The Beta has solid build quality, a nice unboxing experience, and a great accessory package. The CNC-machined aluminum alloy shells look and feel nice, and the three nozzles add some small tuning variety. Sadly, the sound signatures aren't all that different, so I'm not sure how much actual appeal they hold. The Beta's standard silver nozzle will probably be the preffered tuning for most. The bass is tastefully elevated and the quality is great. The midrange is forward and clean, and the treble is detailed and non-fatiguing. I think the Beta works well enough for folk, singer-songwriter, and classical genres—basically anything that makes for easy listening. Pop and rock music are generally fine too, but the colder tonality and imbalanced midrange make it harder for me to enjoy some of my favorite tracks. Unfortunately, there's a right way to execute a mid-centric tuning that allows vocals and instruments to shine without coming across as imbalanced or sterile, and I think the Beta misses the mark. As evidenced in the comparisons section, there are several other IEMs I would choose over the Beta. I will award this one a three-star rating, as there are likely some out there who will enjoy it, but it's just not for me. While I was hoping for a better first impression from Twistura, I still think the company has something to build on. The shells have great build quality, and the accessories are impressive for the price, but the tuning needs some refinement, and I wish the nozzles offered a wider variety of sound signatures.