Stored Category Comparison

FiiO FX17 vs Letshuoer Cadenza 4

This page compares two published iems profiles using stored summaries, source-attributed scoring, and a single lines-only radar for fast visual difference checks.

Sound Profile Radar

Hover any axis point to see both stored scores for that exact category edge.

FiiO FX17
Letshuoer Cadenza 4

Category Scores

Stored score comparison

Every score is pulled from the stored product intelligence snapshot for this category pair.

AxisFX17Cadenza 4Delta
Bass
8.8
6.9
-1.9
Mids
8.7
8.1
-0.6
Treble
8.9
7
-1.9
Technicalities
9.2
7.5
-1.7
Soundstage
9.1
7
-2.1
Value
7.8
7.2
-0.6

Compare To

Compare this iems against another stored profile.

FiiO FX17 can only be compared against published iems profiles.

Quick Read

FiiO FX17

Approved coverage paints the FX17 as FiiO’s statement tribrid: highly revealing, spacious, and technically ambitious, but still tuned to keep its EST-heavy top end musical rather than sterile. Headfonics praises its transparency, layering, and expansive, tightly focused staging, while broader Headphonesty coverage on the driver-count arms race treats the FX17 as proof that complexity only works when execution stays coherent. Early Reddit discussion echoes the same talking points around grand stage, natural sound, and airy treble. The tradeoff is clear too: it is expensive, physically substantial, and aimed at listeners who want flagship detail and scale more than forgiving warmth.

Letshuoer Cadenza 4

The Cadenza 4 is a $249 quad hybrid: a 10mm dual-chambered beryllium-coated dynamic driver paired with three balanced armatures, one Sonion and two Knowles. The midrange is the centre of gravity. It is described as natural and organic in timbre, articulate, detailed, with vocals placed slightly forward, and one review is titled around the midrange being the defining trait. The physical package draws steady praise too: 3D-printed resin shells with a machined aluminum faceplate are light enough to disappear over long sessions, passive isolation runs from strong to superb once the tips seal, and the bundled 392-strand silver-plated monocrystalline copper cable ships with swappable 2.5mm, 3.5mm and 4.4mm plugs. The disagreements sit around that midrange rather than in it. Bass quality is not in dispute (good definition, texture, clean sub-bass extension, no boom), but mid-bass punch is: one review flags a lack of impact as a con while others hear punch that is simply held in check, and quantity shifts with ear tip choice. Treble is smooth, rounded and non-fatiguing, and the upper treble is repeatedly described as rolled off, yet readings split on whether the top end still comes across as open and airy. Imaging draws opposing verdicts, and stage size is read as either wide and spacious or merely sufficient. The intended audience is not contested: this is not a bass-first or V-shaped set, and listeners chasing slam are pointed elsewhere.

FiiO • IEMs

FiiO FX17

Open page

Approved coverage paints the FX17 as FiiO’s statement tribrid: highly revealing, spacious, and technically ambitious, but still tuned to keep its EST-heavy top end musical rather than sterile. Headfonics praises its transparency, layering, and expansive, tightly focused staging, while broader Headphonesty coverage on the driver-count arms race treats the FX17 as proof that complexity only works when execution stays coherent. Early Reddit discussion echoes the same talking points around grand stage, natural sound, and airy treble. The tradeoff is clear too: it is expensive, physically substantial, and aimed at listeners who want flagship detail and scale more than forgiving warmth.

Strengths

  • Very high detail retrieval with strong coherence for a complex driver count
  • Large, layered soundstage with excellent spatial focus
  • Premium build and accessory package

Weaknesses

  • Flagship pricing places it in a competitive segment
  • Large all-metal shells may not suit every ear
  • No tuning switches for listeners wanting alternate voicings

Letshuoer • IEMs

Letshuoer Cadenza 4

Open page

The Cadenza 4 is a $249 quad hybrid: a 10mm dual-chambered beryllium-coated dynamic driver paired with three balanced armatures, one Sonion and two Knowles. The midrange is the centre of gravity. It is described as natural and organic in timbre, articulate, detailed, with vocals placed slightly forward, and one review is titled around the midrange being the defining trait. The physical package draws steady praise too: 3D-printed resin shells with a machined aluminum faceplate are light enough to disappear over long sessions, passive isolation runs from strong to superb once the tips seal, and the bundled 392-strand silver-plated monocrystalline copper cable ships with swappable 2.5mm, 3.5mm and 4.4mm plugs. The disagreements sit around that midrange rather than in it. Bass quality is not in dispute (good definition, texture, clean sub-bass extension, no boom), but mid-bass punch is: one review flags a lack of impact as a con while others hear punch that is simply held in check, and quantity shifts with ear tip choice. Treble is smooth, rounded and non-fatiguing, and the upper treble is repeatedly described as rolled off, yet readings split on whether the top end still comes across as open and airy. Imaging draws opposing verdicts, and stage size is read as either wide and spacious or merely sufficient. The intended audience is not contested: this is not a bass-first or V-shaped set, and listeners chasing slam are pointed elsewhere.

Strengths

  • Midrange is the standout: natural, organic timbre with articulate, detailed vocals placed slightly forward.
  • Bass is clean and well controlled, with good definition and texture and no boom or bleed into the lower mids.
  • Light 3D-printed resin shells with a machined aluminum faceplate stay comfortable through long sessions.
  • Passive isolation is strong once the tips seal, rated as high as best-in-class in one assessment.
  • The 392-strand silver-plated copper cable carries swappable 2.5mm, 3.5mm and 4.4mm plugs out of the box.
  • Treble is smooth and rounded, with harshness and sibilance kept low and fatigue avoided on long listens.

Weaknesses

  • Mid-bass impact is contested and can read as short on punch; overall bass quantity is lower than many listeners expect.
  • Bass quantity and upper-midrange heat both shift noticeably with ear tip choice, so the set is sensitive to tip rolling.
  • Upper treble is described as rolled off, and one reading finds it short on brilliance, sparkle and air.
  • Imaging draws conflicting verdicts and is rated the weakest of the technical traits in one assessment.
  • The near-neutral tuning gives up the fun factor, which is called out as a con.
  • Lower mids can carry a hint of thinness, leaving some vocals short on weight.