Short answer: the TRN Azure Dragon. Both are rated 4.0/5 for sound quality (#398 and #432 of 1291 in-ear headphones), and the TRN Azure Dragon costs $210 against $235 for the QoA Matador, so with nothing between them on sound quality, price settles it.
What the QoA Matador does well: A broadly balanced tuning with a preference score of 74 against the Harman target. The catch: Treble about 3 dB below target from 3 to 10 kHz, which can sound dull or veiled next to brighter headphones.
The case for the TRN Azure Dragon: The median of 3 hobbyist measurements gives it a solid Harman preference score of 74 with a 2.16 dB spread, and its mids sit within about 0.9 dB of target, so vocals and instruments sound natural. Watch for: An 8.4 dB peak near 10.9 kHz can make cymbals and sibilance sound sharp.
Buy the TRN Azure Dragon. Both are rated the same for sound quality, and it costs $25 less than the QoA Matador.
Still deciding? The full Headphones rankings cover every ranked option.
A broadly balanced tuning with a preference score of 74 against the Harman target.
e-earphone (JP) eBay
The median of 3 hobbyist measurements gives it a solid Harman preference score of 74 with a 2.16 dB spread, and its mids sit within about 0.9 dB of target, so vocals and instruments sound natural.
Amazon $210.00 eBayPrices on this page were last checked October 16, 2026 at 5:46 PM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Specifications Side By Side
| QoA Matador | TRN Azure Dragon | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $235 | $210.00 |
| Ranked | #432 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones | #398 of 1291 in In-Ear Headphones |
| Form Factor | In-ear | In-ear |
| Back | Closed | Closed |
| Harman Preference Score | 74 (median of 4 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) | 74 (median of 3 squig.link measurements, calibrated to AutoEQ) |
| Deviation From Target | 1.94 dB standard deviation | 2.16 dB standard deviation |
| Tonal Tilt | -0.42 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) | +0.02 (negative is warmer, positive brighter) |
| Sub-bass Extension | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (+0.5 dB at 30 Hz) | Within 6 dB of target down to 20 Hz (-2.9 dB at 30 Hz) |
| Connection | Wired | Wired |
| Driver Type | Hybrid | Planar magnetic |
| Drivers | 1 x dynamic, 2 x balanced armature | 1 x 14.6mm planar magnetic |
| Impedance | - | 32 ohms |
| Sensitivity | - | 108 dB |
| Frequency Response | - | 7Hz - 40kHz (Manufacturer specified) |
| Weight | - | 0 lbs (8.2 g) per earbud |
Frequency Response Compared
Both headphones’ measurements overlaid on the Harman target. Above the target sounds louder in that range, below it quieter. Each curve is the median of several independent measurements, shifted so its 500 Hz to 2 kHz average sits at 0 dB, so only the tuning is compared.
Measurement data: the QoA Matador from aftersound, bassaudio, soundcheck39 and tonedeafmonk; the TRN Azure Dragon from soundcheck39, tonedeafmonk and vsg, all via squig.link.
Related Headphone Comparisons
More worthwhile head-to-heads for TRN Azure Dragon: