Introduction

Contrary to the cheap jokes, AFUL is a brand that makes good IEMs. Their rise in the hobby is an interesting one. AFUL has come into prominence in the past couple of years thanks to the release of a number of thoughtfully designed IEMs that were worthy of attention. But having now built their brand, AFUL faces the challenge that plagues every brand: How do you consistently release new products and stay relevant?

I don’t have an answer to that question, but I do have their newest IEM - the $390 AFUL Performer 8S. It’s a sequel to the popular Performer 8 (or P8 as it’s commonly known). I’ll preface this review by saying that I’ve never formally reviewed an AFUL IEM before and only ever briefly heard a few of their products at local meet-ups. So forgive the lack of any comparisons to other AFUL IEMs. 

Source(s) Used: Ferrum ERCO, Apple USB-C dongle, FiiO Q7

What in the Box?

Beyond the standard set of accessories you can see in the photos, the driver configuration of the Performer 8S is probably the most interesting part of this IEM. It uses a 1 DD+ 6 BA + 1 Passive Radiator + 1 Micro Planar design. It’s not a set-up you see every day.

Comfort wise, this IEM is mediocre. The resin shells have a generic ergonomic shape common to many modern IEMs. The shell is bulky though, and you do feel that bulk once it’s sitting in your ears. The nozzle diameter is 5.7 mm though, so that’s good. The nozzle is also fairly long at 5.2 mm meaning that this IEM is meant for a deeper fit. This allows the Performer 8S to have a consistent and stable fit, but it also means you feel the bulk of the IEM pressing against your ears as it sits deeply into the ear canal. And it would be nice if there was a lip on the nozzle. I do like the stock cable - it’s ergonomic with no cable noise or memory. It’s just a tad heavy. 

One last thing to note is that this IEM is quite sensitive to noisy sources. 

Sound - Objective

Here’s the frequency response graph of the AFUL Performer 8S calibrated to the population average DF HRTF. As a reminder, the preference bounds are depicted in the grey region. In extremely simplified terms, if the frequency response is within the bounds, it’s likely to sound balanced. And that means it’s most likely to be preferred by the average person - hence the name, preference bounds. That said, 1) You are not an average person; and 2) There’s no reason why you can’t enjoy multiple types of tunings. It’s a question of probability.

The graph here is quite unique. There’s a W-shaped curve when calibrated to the population average DF HRTF. It starts with a generous bass boost of about 10 dB before an odd hump in the mids at 800 Hz to start the upper mids. The lower treble is soft before elevating once again in the mid and upper treble.

Here is the raw graph which is a different visualization of the same dataset.

The raw measurements give us a different perspective. Here, you might be able to interpret it as a vocally relaxed IEM with that subdued 3 kHz. The pinna gain starting at 800 Hz doesn’t seem quite so odd with this visualization. Of course, what the graph shows and we interpret that sound are two separate things. 

I’ll admit that I did NOT expect the Performer 8S to graph like this. My first impressions of this IEM would be that it’s a warm-bright tonality. Certainly not neutral or reference tuned by any means, but arguably still somewhat balanced in a way if you use a generous interpretation of the preference bounds given that most of the Performer 8S’ frequency response is within the grey region. Or rather, I should say that while it is W-shaped, the bass and treble aren’t overly done. 

Note: These measurements were taken on a clone IEC-711 coupler. They are less accurate than the industry standard B&K 5128 and the treble response in particular must be taken with a grain of salt. Do not cross compare with other measurements.

Sound - Subjective

Bass

Like many IEMs with this sort of bass elevation, there is a noticeable bass shelf to ensure bass notes aren’t missed. It’s just shy of being excessive. The bass character on this IEM focuses on that transition between the subbass and midbass, around that 80 Hz region. There is a quick boominess where you get a satisfying sense of depth and weight from the kick and floor toms, but decay is short and notes never linger. That deep, foundational subbass body and rumble are superficially present. Note definition is good and there is a bit of initial punchiness, but that immediately gives way to the proceeding boom. 

Overall, the bass on the AFUL Performer 8S is adequate. It’s not particularly lacking in any one dimension, but neither does it excel anywhere. That sub-mid bass weight and boominess is actually quite nice if the recording can take advantage of it, but it feels a bit one-noted and textureless. 

Mids

For how strangely it may graph, I can’t say I’m particularly offended by it. It’s not honky or nasally. Yet, I also wouldn’t call it rich or lush. Maybe bodied is the right word. One way to think of this is that instead of a big bass shelf with a weird 800 Hz hump, it’s alternatively a gradual slope with a dip at 400 - 500 Hz for clarity to balance out the lack of 3 kHz in the upper mids. 

Speaking of which then, the important quality of the Performer 8S’ midrange is its pulled-back upper mids. It’s not buried as vocals and midrange focused instruments like strings still easily cut through the mix. It just doesn’t have that strong upper mids focus of many “new meta” styled IEMs. The elevation at 800 Hz creates a timbral color while the recession at 3 kHz mutes the edge and bite of familiar instruments such as pianos, violins, and electric guitars. Together, they create an almost soft mellowness to the midrange instruments. If you don’t have a strong preference for “neutral” or you can get over the initial coloration of the midrange, the Performer 8S does provide a fairly musical experience.

Treble

The treble of the Performer 8S is shimmery but not sharp. It’s like a soft touch in the transients, likely due to the relatively subdued lower treble relative to the mid-treble presence. It gives notes a good sense of brilliance without being harsh or affecting the timbre too much. The upper treble peak is noticeable but not overly peaky. It adds an extra bit of air and shimmer at the very top end. It can warp the timbre of the hats and cymbals where the notes ring out, but it’s not a major complaint. I wouldn’t call the treble sparkly however. It doesn’t have the crispness to give notes that edge to truly sparkle. On the whole, I do like the Performer 8S’ treble. It’s fairly inoffensive without being deadened. 

Presentation

The staging of this IEM is alright. It doesn’t feel totally in-your-head, but it doesn’t seem to try and spread the image out to the periphery of the soundstage. Instruments have a bit of an atmospheric feel where they aren’t pinpoint precise but rather blurred around the edges. Stage depth and layering is fairly good, especially for slower recordings. Resolution and detail retrieval are satisfactory. 

Where I see this IEM fitting best is for a casual, almost background listening as you get around your day-to-day. Be it on the bus, in the grocery shop, at your desk while working on an essay. It’s not an IEM that commands attention nor does it deliver those moments of magic. But it is a good IEM for just listening to tunes. 

Comparison to the CrinEar Daybreak

The $169 CrinEar Daybreak is an IEM that’s one of the closest renditions of a neutral, reference-tuned midrange we have in the IEM market today, but with some bass and treble emphasis to taste. For those looking outside of neutral, look elsewhere. That said, the Daybreak remains a great comparison point to understand what you’re getting into with an IEM sporting a less-than-neutral midrange like the AFUL Performer 8S.

For me, the biggest difference in the mids is the sense of body. The Performer 8S fills out the midrange with a body that glues different instruments together. Yet, it also makes the mids sound almost stuffy, especially when compared to the Daybreak’s neutral pinna with that 3 kHz focus. But likewise, the Daybreak’s upper mids can arguably make lead instruments feel isolated, disjointed from the backing instruments. 

As usual, I need to stress that this sort of comparison needs to be done side-by-side - it’s hard to have a strong preference in isolation unless you’re very experienced. The Daybreak’s midrange will likely be preferred by more people thanks to its better sense of clarity, but as always, preference is a highly individual thing. 

For the bass and treble, it’s a bit of a toss-up whether you’ll prefer the Daybreak’s or Performer 8S’. The Daybreak’s bass notes are tighter with a deeper weight and firmer impact. There’s better punch and definition as well as a greater subbass focus. But you do lose some of that satisfying boominess. As for the treble, while the Daybreak has a somewhat elevated upper treble like the Performer 8S, it’s more of a broadband elevation in comparison, so it’s less peaky sounding. The Performer 8S isn’t that bad to begin with, but with the Daybreak, you definitely hear how it’s a little more spread out and less exaggerated on certain notes. However, the Daybreak is noticeably crisper and sharper while the Performer 8S’ treble notes blend into the track a little better. 

Finally, when it comes to perceived technical ability, the Daybreak is a bit better for clarity thanks to its tuning, and this extends to its imaging. The imaging is more distinct, with a bit of a W-shape where center, left, and right are clearly defined with a bit of a “hole” at the center-left and center-right. The Performer 8S is more evenly spread across the stereo image which is something I prefer. 

Should You Buy It?

Maybe. Honestly, this is not a bad IEM. It is a product that some will like, maybe even love, but not one that strongly differentiates itself from anything else. That might sound vague, but that’s what the state of the IEM market is, and what this IEM represents. I will give it props for eschewing the “new meta” tuning that’s been all the rage these days and presumably going for what its designers thought sounded good. And credit where it is due - it does sound pretty good. 

At $390, it’s priced a bit too high against the competition. The Performer 8S is worth trying if you ever get the chance. Maybe its tuning will speak to you as a daily driver. But don’t feel as if this is a must have. There are a lot of IEMs nowadays. Don’t drive yourself crazy chasing after all of them trying to find the perfect one.