Moondrop Starfield Review
By: Kazi Mahbub
Tags: Review, Tech, Headphones, Moondrop, Starfield

Accessories: The accessory set looks pretty fleshed upon first inspection. You get 6 pairs of eartips of S/M/L sizes, a glitzy cable that apparently has SPC Litz structure, a clamshell carry-case, some spare dust-filters and a tweezer (surprise!) to help you install them. The latter two are practically bonus at this price point so kudos to Moondrop.

However, the stock cable is bad. It has an overall poor in-hand feel and I just never found it comfortable once worn. The overall fit and finish of the cable is also subpar, and this is one of the worse cables I’ve seen bundled with IEMs in this price range.

Then there is the carrying case which is a bit too small for the Moondrop Starfields. The eartips are also mediocre.

3.5/5

Comfort and Isolation: The Moondrop Starfield is heavier than your typical IEM but is mostly comfortable for long listening sessions. The weight can be a bit of a bother if you smaller ear-canals but for most people I think it’ll be fine. With the right eartips and a better cable the fit is seamless with above-average isolation. In stock form — not so much.

4/5

Now, onto the sound.

The Moondrop Starfield is a single Dynamic Driver design with a 10mm diameter Carbon Nanotube (CNT) diaphragm. Moondrop also employs a dual-cavity design here where the driver magnet, voice coil and driver diaphragm are concentrically arranged between two cavities, which basically looks like two end-caps.

The driver structure

CNT drivers have become sort of a popular thing lately, with both the BLON BL-03 and Tin T4 using them (albeit at different price points).

The general sound signature can be described as balanced with rolled-off treble. The Moondrop Starfield mostly follows the Harman curve, so you get a somewhat boosted low-end (though nowhere near basshead level), a nicely balanced midrange with the signature 3KHz peak and then it slowly tapers off in the treble region to avoid any harshness or treble fatigue/sibilance. All nice on paper, but reality can be… strange.

The following impressions were made with the Azla Xelastec eartips, though I did try with Spinfit CP-100 and Final E-type (Black) tips as well. The general signature remained similar, however.

Bass: The lows on the Moondrop Starfield are rather balanced sounding upon first-listen. There’s a slight mid-bass boost to give a sense of warmth and the sub-bass is decently extended with good enough rumble up to 30Hz and slight rumble until 26Hz (after which it rolls off). All fine and dandy in terms of quantity.

And then we get into the quality of the bass response.

The bass has slow decay, which won’t be too much of an issue had it not been the general lack of texture in the bass response. Especially everything between 60–30Hz sounds monotonous. Bass punch is there, but it’s more of a hollow thump and lacks density. Bass notes lose their definition during fast flowing bass sections. Some may call it polite bass but the lack of texture in the bass makes the whole low-end sound lifeless. Snare hits and bass pedals lack their usual authority in many songs, e.g. Billy Talent’s Surrender.

The bass is boring despite not being anemic. It’s a strange sensation, almost as if the bass is muffled at certain frequencies (no, it’s not a sealing or eartip issue, I’ve confirmed with multiple tips).

3/5

Mids: Definitely the best aspect of the Moondrop Starfield and their calling-card. The midrange is really well-tuned, with the vocals being the highlight (both female and male vocals). Lower mids are full enough to give baritone vocals their signature heft without making them sound boxy (check out Ben Howard’s Cloud Nine). Female vocals meanwhile never got shouty and has a particular smoothness to them that is hardly found in the chi-fi land. Vocal articulation is also well portrayed as you can pick up breathing patterns etc. though they are not as evident as certain vocal specialist IEMs (e.g. Final E4000).

The issue with the midrange lies in its general lack of “attack”. Everything sounds dull and blunted. String instruments lack bite as notes are rounded off, as can be heard on The Paper Kite’s Nothing More Than That (the guitar squeaks for example). It’s not evident initially but the more you use them you notice the missing pieces.

There’s no snap, that is.

Sorry.

Tonally and in terms of timbre the midrange is pretty flawless, it’s the other technical aspects where the Moondrop Starfield falls short.

4/5

Treble: And lastly, the treble response aka the highs. The Moondrop Starfield has a rolled off lower treble which helps in avoiding listening fatigue/harshness/sibilance but then you also lose a lot of definition in the upper registers. The downturn from 3KHz onwards is too steep in my opinion. Ironically, it’s not a dark sounding set, rather the abrupt roll-off results in cymbal hits abruptly disappearing into the void. It can give rise to a sensation of “fast transient response” but that’s misleading I’d say.

The lack of air in treble is also another issue. And of course — the overall resolution is poor. It can’t hold a candle to many lower-priced IEMs when it comes to detail retrieval, even at 1/4th the price. I’m not a detail junkie but the Moondrop Starfield is technically outdone by a number of its competition and that’s a shame.

In short: mediocre treble response, nothing to write home about. At least it’s not harsh or sibilant.

3/5

Soundstage: Due to the elevated midrange the soundstage is mostly intimate in terms of width. However, soundstage depth and height is also subpar.

2.5/5

Imaging: Imaging is mostly left-right and while the spatial cues are alright, the instrument placement, separation and layering leaves a lot to be desired. Ordinal imaging (placement of instruments at corner positions) is also non-existent for the most part.

3/5

Bang-for-buck: This is one criteria which confuses me about the Moondrop Starfield. It doesn’t really do anything better than any of its competition, not to my ears. The imaging/soundstage is strictly average, the midrange is great but there are others with similar/better midrange performance, it’s not a detail-retrieval monster, it’s not even especially cheap.

What it does is hit a specific target curve to some degree and that’s that. It’s got the tonality right but everything else is a big question mark.

2.5/5