Cons — Buttons on the front haven’t got the best feedback
– Amp section is underwhelming
– Noisy output from headphone out with sensitive IEMs/Headphones (might be fixed via FW upgrade)

INTRODUCTION

iFi Audio is on a roll lately with new releases.

First there is the Zen stack. The Hip DAC soon followed, and then came the iDSD Signature. The release of the Neo iDSD, however, was quite sudden as it’s been a while since iFi has released a desktop all-in-one solution.

Nonetheless, iFi refreshing their lineup is definitely a welcome move as they’ve been lacking options in certain price-points. The Neo iDSD aims to fill in the sub-$1000 bracket, and with a list price of 750 euro is definitely targeted towards premium buyers. This market segment is a very competitive one as products both below and above the price range can serve as quite viable options. The Neo iDSD ain’t short of tricks up its sleeve though to stand out.

A lot of ground to cover, let’s get right into it.

This review originally appeared on my blog.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Karina Dearman of iFi Audio was kind enough to send the iFi Neo iDSD as part of the head-fi review tour. Disclaimer.

Headphones/IEMs used: Sennheiser HD650, Final Sonorous III/E5000, Hifiman Ananda, Dunu Studio SA6/Zen
Price, while reviewed: 750 euros. Can be purchased from Amazon DE.

iFi Neo iDSD: PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

You get quite a few things in the Neo iDSD package. Alongside the usual RCA-to-RCA interconnect and a short USB 3.0 cable you also get a handy remote control (runs on cell battery), an antenna to improve BT reception, a metal stand where you can mount the Neo iDSD in vertical position, a 3.5–to-6.35mm converter, some spare rubber feet, and finally the iPower adapter. It’s definitely a complete accessory package but I have an issue with the super-short USB cable. The RCA-cable is short as well but I usually go for aftermarket RCA cables so that’s not an issue (and most buyers in this range will likely get a third-party one too). The USB 3.0 cable, however, is too short for desktop users. I wish iFi improves this part of the package in future products, esp at mid/upper-mid level pricing.
4/5

BUILD QUALITY

The iFi Audio Neo iDSD looks quite unique and the design is a welcome departure from the boring rectangular boxes you see literally everywhere nowadays. The silver-colored chassis is made out of sandblasted aluminium. There is a solid heft to the unit despite its diminutive size. Speaking of dimensions, the Neo iDSD is on the smaller side vs other DAC/Amps in this price bracket, esp if you orient it vertically. Yes, the Neo iDSD supports both horizontal and vertical orientation and I went with the latter which not only makes it look sleek but also saves desk space.

The front of the unit has the OLED display up-top which is a Silentline OLED, i.e. it doesn’t add any noise to the signal path and shows the current input signal type, sampling rate, volume, and selected input. The display also orients itself accordingly based on the orientation of the unit courtesy of a built-in accelerometer. At the bottom you’ll find the input selector along with the power button, followed by the 4.4mm pentaconn balanced out and the 6.35mm single-ended out. Sandwiched between the display and the buttons are the volume knob (also acts as a navigation wheel incl. push function and has nice tactile bumps when in operation) and a white, diffused LED strip to indicate that the unit is powered up.

Oh, I almost forgot the Hi-Res sticker. Very important.

The back of the unit is where things get more interesting. Everything is labeled already (as you can see in the picture) but just to reiterate: the output can be either RCA-in or two 3-pin XLRs. Also at the very top you can see the antenna screw-in point to improve reception of BT signal. Other than the front and back, the sides of the unit are bereft of any controls or ports. All in all the build quality is excellent. I do have one nitpick: the power/input selector buttons are a bit wobbly. Minor nitpick though. Also ignore the scratch on the display on my unit, that’s how the tour unit arrived and brand new units should be spotless.
5/5

OPERATION

The Neo iDSD can be operated using the supplied remote or the buttons on the front panel. The operation using the buttons is a bit different so it’s best if you check out iFi’s tutorial videos:

Also note that to switch between fixed and variable line-out mode you’d need to restart the DAC while holding down the volume wheel. Weird, I know.

TECH INSIDE

As usual, the specs first:

The iFi Neo iDSD uses a Burr-Brown chip as per tradition. The BT5.0 is one of the highlights of the product and has LDAC support. iFi also uses a new proprietary PureWave topology where they go for a dual-mono setup with shorter signal paths than their previous designs. The default firmware is GTO-enabled by default and iFi also ditched the xBass/3D analog circuits. I am a bit bummed at the omission of the xBass but Neo iDSD aims to be a purist design and those analog DSP effects are anything but purist.

The internal components are all high quality as expected. TDK/Murata caps, FET-based switching to mute those annoying “pops” you encounter on some DAC/Amps, and native MQA full-rendering support. I confirmed the latter by setting up Tidal on Windows in exclusive mode and playing MQA Master files, which were seamlessly handled by the Neo iDSD (indicated by displaying MQA in the OLED display). At this juncture I should mention that it’s advised to install the iFi Neo iDSD driver package if you’re on Windows (Mac version coming soon). You can get it here.

The Bluetooth also works really well. I transmitted music from my Sony Walkman NW-A55 via LDAC without much fuss. iFi has really nailed BT support on this device.

SOUND

AMP PERFORMANCE

The amp section on the Neo iDSD is disappointing from my experience, sadly. The single-ended out is too underpowered and the balanced out, while powerful enough to drive the Sennheiser HD650 and the likes, lack the dynamism you get when these headphones are properly driven. iFi’s own budget Zen Can has far superior amplification for such headphones and when using the Zen Can as an amp with the Neo iDSD the lack of drive on the Neo iDSD is painfully obvious.

Another issue is the noise you get with sensitive IEMs. I’m not entirely sure if this is unit specific or a firmware issue (iFi did issue a FW upgrade to solve this issue but it didn’t improve things on my unit) but a few other reviewers have also experienced it (e.g. Currawong) so I’d advise against driving sensitive IEMs out of the Neo iDSD.

When connected to high impedance/less sensitive headphones/IEMs the output is clean and exhibits a nice smoothness. Things can get too smooth at times if you’ve connected the Neo iDSD to a warm headphone but overall it’s an enjoyable listen, provided that you use something that’s not sensitive to background hiss.
3/5

DAC PERFORMANCE

The iFi Neo iDSD is 50% DAC and 50% Amp on paper, but for my use case — it’s 100% a DAC and a darn good one at that. Heck, it is one of the best DACs out there in the price-bracket, period (more on this in the comparison section). There is no GTO filter here so I was curious how it might sound and as it turns out — the rendition is wonderful. Dynamics are spot on, the soundstage has great depth (albeit less impressive height and width). The best part was the midrange rendition: smooth without losing details and very engaging presentation. The treble isn’t on your face either but has good amount of sparkle and air. Please note that these impressions were made by using Cayin iHA-6 as an amp and then connecting the HD650/Sonorous III. The Neo iDSD was also set up in balanced configuration via the two 3-pin XLR cables.

One area where the Neo iDSD might not suite everyone as a DAC is soundstage width. It’s one of the regions where it falls a bit short. Another area would be the bass, which has great texture but lacks the meatiness some might prefer. For a more balanced, engaging presentation the Neo iDSD does really well, however.
4.5/5

PAIRINGS

I mainly used two amps with the Neo iDSD: the iFi Zen Can and the Cayin iHA-6. The former is a relatively budget offering and provides an upgrade over the built-in amp of the Neo iDSD IMO, esp when powered with iPower X. The Cayin iHA-6, however, took things to the next level. Exceptional layering, stage depth and micro-detail retrieval coupled with great dynamics. Given the ~$1300 price tag for both of these devices combined, I’d say you’re getting comparable performance to other DAC/Amp setups in a similar price-point, though this particular pairing is mostly suited for full-size headphones rather than IEMs (iHA-6 is too powerful for most IEMs due to 7W @ 32ohms rating from the balanced out). For general all-purpose use I think something like the Topping stack (A90/D90) will be more versatile, or perhaps pairing the A90 with the Neo iDSD.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Questyle CMA-400i ($800): The Questyle CMA-400i is my daily driver DAC/Amp and shares some similarities with the Neo iDSD. Both got fully balanced architecture, both can be mounted vertically (though the CMA-400i stand is very difficult to find), offers no analog input (to use as an amp alone) and both are using relatively older chipsets without any selectable reconstruction filter options unlike the latest DAC/Amps out there.

The similarities end there though. The CMA-400i is much larger and weighs substantially more, has 2.5mm and 4-pin XLR balanced out unlike the 4.4mm one on the Neo iDSD, and has no display/remote option.

In terms of sound, unlike the Neo iDSD the CMA-400i has a very clean output. Unfortunately selecting the gain mode is cumbersome (you need to push 4 DIP switches at the bottom of the unit to switch gain) but even at high gain sensitive IEMs don’t exhibit as much hiss as the Neo iDSD (and in low gain it’s basically silent). The sonic differences are also quite noticeable. The CMA-400i goes for an airy presentation and displays a high amount of detail. In fact, resolved detail is higher on the CMA-400i than on the Neo iDSD. Depending on headphone though this can get a bit overboard, but I personally like it for my use-case (most of my headphones are warm-ish). Neo iDSD plays it safe on that regard. Both got exemplary stage depth though Neo iDSD edges out the CMA-400i on that regard. CMA-400i hits back with better stage width/height and more impactful bass rendition. Also if you want native MQA the Questyle can’t help you.

As a DAC, the CMA-400i is close to the Neo iDSD, with personal preferences splitting the difference. As an amp though the CMA-400i is clearly better and is more versatile for headphones and IEMs due to less background hiss and better drive (Questyle’s Current Mode Amp is truly exceptional in this regard).

vs Topping D90 ($750): The Topping D90 costs as much as the Neo iDSD but since I’m mostly using the Neo iDSD as a DAC I thought this is an apt comparison. In terms of features the D90 is clearly superior to the A90 with the highest-rated AKM flagship chipset and a very sophisticated UI that allows you to modify the sound in a number of ways. I do prefer the Neo iDSD’s minimalist approach in this regard but those who love to tinker might veer towards the Topping D90.

In terms of sound, the D90 is basically details galore. The stage is much wider and taller, though depth seemed similar. Mids are a bit pushed back on the Topping D90 at the expense of bass and treble presence. In terms of dynamics, I prefer the Neo iDSD though, as the Topping can feel a bit dull and uninspiring. In fact I enjoy listening to the Neo iDSD more than the D90 despite the latter having superior resolution and wider staging.

If you want a more neutral, almost boring presentation I think the D90 can serve you well and provide you with a feature set longer than the constitution. If you want a more engaging presentation though the Neo iDSD is the one I’d recommend.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The iFi Audio Neo iDSD is a far better DAC than an amp, basically that’s my takeaway after using it for over a month. The amp section leaves a lot to be desired from an all-in-one perspective but the DAC section is excellent and will give even dedicated DACs in this price bracket a run for the money. The BT support is seamless, it looks sleek, and I just love the vertical stand option. iFi broke the mould of making boring rectangular DAC/Amps and offered purist design which I definitely appreciate, though those looking for all the bells and whistles like selectable reconstruction filters or PEQ might have to look elsewhere.

If only the amp was less noisy in the output and had better drive for higher impedance/low-sensitivity cans I could see this one as an endgame DAC/Amp solution for many. Sadly, it’s a bit away from that crown. Perhaps the next one might break through the barrier.

MY VERDICT

4/5

Recommended (for use as a pure DAC, amp section might disappoint)

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Karina Dearman of iFi Audio was kind enough to send the iFi Neo iDSD as part of the head-fi review tour.

Get it from Amazon US/Amazon DE

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post iFi Audio Neo iDSD Review – Breaking The Mould appeared first on Audio Reviews.

With this question I approached an ifi nano iDSD BL USB DAC-AMP, and this article is about how it went for me.

Input

nano iDSD BL is a USB DAC-AMP, and more precisely USB is its sole input. No SPDIF digital input option, nor analogue inputs or any kind by that matter (aka: the device can’t be used as a mere amp).

Like all USB DAC-AMPs it can be plugged onto just about any USB-capable source such as a PC a Laptop a phone or a tablet, and it will be “seen” as an audio card. Full Windows 10 support requires a driver, which is freely downloadable from ifi’s site.

Nano iDSD BL’s USB 2.0 digital input connector is quite uncommon: it’s actually a USB A male installed in a recess of the chassis’ back panel. Due to that, the cable to connect to the nano iDSD BL needs to have a Female (!) USB A termination on the device end, in lieu of the usual Male one.

A few USB OTG cables with different terminations are bundled within the package. (Ah by the way… if you don’t know what OTG technically means, read here. You might discover why that otherwise good cable of yours refuses to work with your phone…)

• USB-A Female to USB3.0-A Male, 1m long, usually good to connect to a PC
• USB-A Female to USB-C Male, 15cm long, good to connect to a PC or a phone or other transports
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female, 15cm long
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female adapter (same as above, but no short cable in the middle)

No Apple cable is supplied – Lightning or 30-pin – so that’ll have to be purchased separately if needed. Neither is a micro-USB adapter (or cable) supplied, useful to hook onto non last-gen phones and tablets.

Boring cabling apart, something of paramount importance is behind the USB input port: nano iDSD BL incorporates most of the features offered by ifi iPurifier3, the company’s standalone USB “cleanser” which takes care of reclocking, rebalancing and regenerating the USB signal on the fly.

Especially when connecting to noisy hosts like a PC or a Laptop the sound quality improvement is totally apparent and, at least in my experience, the sole reason not to employ an iPurifier3, a galvanic separator, and a cleaner power supply on the input gates of a good DAC is their relatively high cost – which indeed in the case of a budget DAC can easily exceed its price… even a few times over.

According to nano iDSD BL literature and some answers I got from their tech people, the device includes the same REBalancer as the original iPurifier, together with some additional USB buffering circuitry (market-named “Zero Jitter”) which pursues the same ends of the REClocking part inside iPurifier3. Considering an iPurifier3 is separately sold for € 130+, including many of its functionalities inside the nano iDSD BL (€ 230-ish) is a great value proposition.

Outputs

On the output side, nano iDSD BL has 3 ports: two 3.5mm females are on the front panel, one labelled “Direct” the other “iEMatch”, and the third one – on the back panel – is a 3.5mm Line Out.

The font panel “Direct” port unassumingly presents itself like just any single-ended analogue output port, and indeed it does work as such when you plug a 3.5mm single-ended terminated IEM or Headphone cable on it.

Direct output specs are quite interesting:

• Output impedance is nicely lower than 1 Ω
• Supported load impedances range from 15 Ω to a whopping 600 Ω – an uncommonly extended range on this price bracket, especially on the high end.
• Output power is not bad: 20mW (> 3.5V) @ 600 Ω load, 285mW (> 2.9V) @ 30 Ω load and 200mW (> 1.7V) @ 15 Ω Load.
• The declared system dynamic range is > 109dB (@3V) and THD+N is listed as <0.005% (-86dB).

While both latest values are not particularly impressive, they are definitely in-line with the product price bracket and it’s also worth noting that thanks to the above-mentioned built-in “purification” features nano iDSD BL will do its job on an “apriori less noisy” digital signal. This made me expect better results than what printed numbers say and as I’ll report later I was kinda right.

Two very important additional things are now to be noted about output.

First: the iEMatch port.

Inside nano iDSD BL ifi put a modified iEMatch circuit, offering non user-selectable -16dB attenuation and 4Ω output impedance. Is it as effective as the standalone version? Let’s see:

1. As for reducing noise floor (hiss) audibility on extra sensitive IEMs the benefit is entirely there: -16dB is quite bearable attenuation vs nano iDSD BL’s max power so yes it’s well calibrated, it works big time. Indeed, I just recently used it to tame hiss from possibly the “hissiest” IEM I ever auditioned: TRN BA8 – which I wrote about here.
2. As for maximising resolution connected with digital-domain volume control : no, you don’t get that from nano iDSD BL’s iEMatch port… for the simple reason that nano iDSD BL already has analogue volume control (a feature normally implemented on higher tier models). iEMatch can’t “fix” what is not broke in the first place
3. As, finally, for impedance matching… well, I have my doubts here. 4Ω output impedance is… if you ask me not low at all when it comes to managing extra-low (<16Ω) impedance IEMs, and anyhow it’s more than 4 times higher than the Direct port’s own impedance, declared at <1Ω. Penon Sphere (6 Ω) does in fact sound more open, un-veiled and simply “better” on the Direct port vs. on the iEMatch port.

Synthetically: nano iDSD BL’s “iEMatch output port” is nice to have, although just for reducing / removing hiss from too-sensitive IEMs.

Second: S-Balanced wiring.

Many non-entry-level budget-tier balanced-scheme source devices offer both headphone output options, via two separate ports: one for balance-ended cables, the other for single-ended cables.

Ifi adopted a smart in-between option called “S-Balanced” (short for “Single-ended compatible Balanced”). Refer to their own whitepaper for a nice technical description. It is included in ifi Pro iCAN, xCAN, xDSD and nano iDSD BL.

As a consequence, instead of the usual dual separated output ports on the chassis, a cabling scheme is put in place behind the 3.5mm phone port on nano iDSD BL :

• When plugging 3.5mm TRS plugs – aka the ordinary 3.5 male connectors found at the end of 99.9% budget fixed-cable IEMs, and modular single-ended cables alike – the port delivers “normal” single-ended output. All single ended drivers on the market will seemlessly work in there. In addition to that, thanks to how internal cabling is designed, they will also get 50% reduced crosstalk – for free.
• When plugging 3.5mm TRRS plugs, aka “Hifiman 3.5mm standard” (see here) – the port delivers full “balanced-ended” output to balanced-cabled drivers, resulting in quite apparently cleaner and more dynamic sound.
  3.5mm TRRS termination is very uncommon on today’s balanced IEMs and Headphones, so I needed to procure myself an adapter to exploit that (and you won’t be lucky enough to already have one in your drawer either, I’m afraid).

This is nice as it delivers full balanced-ended quality, and even improves single-ended quality a little bit, while keeping full backwards compatibility, all without requiring further faceplate space for an extra female connector.

Add that such dual-standard “trick” is applied both behind the Direct and the iEMatch port, too !

On the flip side, I find it odd that no 3.5 TRRS adapter is included inside nano iDSD BL’s box. Ok maybe I shouldn’t expect one to be bundled for free, but why none is available as an orderable SKU# from ifi ?

Other features

Nano iDSD BL supports a wide range of digital input formats and moreover resolutions: DSD up to 256, PCM up to 384KHz and – drumroll here – MQA up to 192KHz.

I’m not at all interested into MQA so I’m not going to assess that – and even if I did I would have zero comparative experience to rely on.

On the back panel a small switch also allows the user to choose between two filters labelled “Listen” and “Measure”. The Listen option enables a Minimum Phase bezier filter, while the Measure option switches to a Linear Phase Transient-Aligned filter.

The topic may become too technical but let me try to simplify: a Minimum Phase filter makes sound “behave” more closely to our human auditory system – which is incapable of perceiving vibrations before an impulse, and tends to like when those following it over time are smoother – and is therefore by many called “more musical”. A Linear Phase filter yields a little bit edgier notes, which is indeed preferred by a population of listeners, but most of all comes handy when submitting the device to sampling and measuring, hence its given label name (“Measure”).

One more very important note is deserved about available firmware versions and their differences.

When I acquired it, my nano iDSD BL unit carried the latest available fw, version 5.3c. I looked into possible firmware variations and I found something quite interesting, as follows:

As you can read on ifi’s PDF paper linked above, Gibb’s Transient Optimised (GTO) filter is supposed to be an upgrade to the previous Minimum Phase Filter. There’s much more to it, read the paper

Long story short again: by downgrading from 5.3c to 5.3, thus going back to the “original” Minimum and Linear Phase filters and their upsampling algorithms I perceive a distinct sound output improvement! May be a matter of tastes of course, or maybe related to the GTO upsampling being less refined (yet) than its predecessors. Be as it may, to me it sounds better, and I settled to 5.3.

Lastly, the form factor is not “ultrasmall” nor “ultrathin” but it stays very easily transportable, and pocketable – at least in terms of coat pockets. With a little intention it can be “paired” with another device, also exploiting the 2 rubber bands found in the box. Weight is also quite light (139g) and the 1200mAh battery offers up to 10h of theoretical life, which I could test down to 7-8hrs max which is good in its class.

How does it sound…

After all these structural descriptions it’s finally time to go back to the prologue and assess how this light (also quite money-wise) device performs in terms of sound output.

…as a DAC-AMP ?

Much like in virtually all other cases I encountered, true-balanced output is better than single ended on nano iDSD BL too. Once the 3.5 trrs adapter riddle gets sorted, using nano iDSD BL’s true-balanced features is a strong recommendation: soundstage, imaging and most of all dynamics get significantly better.

Even on its balanced Direct output nano iDSD BL’s general tonality is warm, and timbre is dark-ish. Bass is well bodied in positive, yet relatively slow in negative, this predominantly resulting in some bleeding into the mids. Trebles lack some sparkle, not a masterpiece but better than the bass. Range extension is by-laterally, deifinitely on par with devices on this price bracket at least as far as my experience goes. Soundstage and imaging are on the average mark for the price.

…as a DAC, with another AMP ?

Nano iDSD BL’s Line Out port offers surprising better quality.

Plugging the amazing little amp that I use as my “hyperportable transparency reference” (iBasso T3) in, nano iDSD BL’s sound presentation changes dramatically: “darkness” goes away and the general timbre becomes definitely neutral, tonality keeps a modest, possibly welcome warmth, treble suddenly becomes airy and unoffensively sparkly. Clarity goes up 2 notches, soundstage gets airier, separation gets much better too. By the way: T3 is single-ended only!

So putting it simply: nano iDSD BL internal amp does not seem to offer justice to the quality of its dac, which in facts seems capable to kick much above its weight.

…(unfairly) compared to the Mojo ?

I started the day asking myself if this device could hold a candle to Mojo sound-wise though. How about that? Simply put: as a standalone unit the answer is “not by a mile”, while as a DAC to be complemented by a decent (or even good, why not) external amp the score changes quite a bit.

Compared to nano iDSD BL’s Direct full-balanced output Mojo’s output wins hands down an all counts: bilateral extension, bass and treble control, clarity, soundstage, imaging. It simply partakes to a higher class, full stop.

Escaping from nano iDSD BL’s internal amp via the LO port, and adopting an even inexpensive amp as the above mentioned iBasso T3, the gap reduces big time. Mojo still wins by definition, extension and its outstanding (unique in its bracket, possibly) capacity to manage background voices with incredible clarity, but the timbres and tonalities become at least comparable, in the same ballpark so to say.

…or vs to other “more in-line” alternatives ?

Ok nano iDSD BL is not a Mojo. Where does it stand then ?

Let’s run another head to head comparison: Fiio BTR5 DAC/AMP.

The two devices are apriori not really equivalent in terms of intended use, and features: BTR5 is indeed marketed as a BT DAC-AMP for IEMs mainly, with some complimentary USB connectivity but that’s all, nano iDSD BL as an easily portable USB device supporting MQA, higher DSD and PCM resolutions, and high impedance cans. Still, BTR5 gained vast market appreciation in terms of high-sound-quality-for-its-price, and being its price roughly 40% less than nano iDSD BL’s I’m stimulated to compare the two, using BTR5 as a USB device in this case of course.

Compared to nano iDSD BL, BTR5 bass is less bodied (but also less bleeding), mids and highmids come up much less controlled, grainy, and raising volume makes them edge quite quickly. Stage on BTR5 is evidently narrower, imaging is more congested, instruments come accross less defined and separated. BTR5’s dynamics, while not bad per se, are also a notch below nano iDSD BL’s.

Such comparison refers to both devices’ balanced outputs by the way, using a pair of TIN T4 as IEMs.

Let me try another comparison I have at easy hand: my ol’ Fiio X3 mk-III.

I find it interesting as a comparison as I’ll be using X3 as a standalone device, not connected to my PC and therefore apriori unaffected by USB noise. As X3’s balanced output is – as an exception to what commonly happens – not really better then its single ended one, I’ll run this comparison on both devices’ single ended channels for a change. I’ll use a pair of final E1000 as supremely neutral drivers.

X3 comes out as a further bit warmer (nano iDSD BL’s SE already being such), and its trebles are even less extended – which on the up side makes it nigh-impossible to make X3 go edgy let alone screamy. X3’s soundstage is also a bit less extended, imaging is on par. Simply put: the two devices’ single ended phone out are definitely comparable in terms of overall quality.

Now let’s compare the two devices’ Line Outs – always with the help of my iBasso T3.

X3’s tonality stays almost unmodified, trebles become just a little bit edgier but it’s a nuance; soundstage, imaging and separation get better.

On the other hand, as previously noted, nano iDSD BL gets much better when its LO is exploited: bass is cleaner and faster, bleeding is very modest, treble still unextended but much airier, detailed and engaging, soundstage and separation get 2 notches up.

Winding down

Alas!… ifi nano iDSD BL does not sound on par with Mojo, costing 2.5X more. Is it really a problem? Of course not.

Its phone output quality, especially on the full-balanced side, is in line with its price bracket, and offers the significant extra advantage of the built-in iEMatch circuitry proving decisive to cope with extrasensitive IEMs hiss, paired with direct support – and enough muscle power – for 600 Ohm headphone on the opposite end.

Its DAC – taken alone – is more than good, I’d call it outstanding actually. Its reconstruction quality is not so easy to find at this price in a semi-pocketable device. Those – like me – who want to pull the max out of nano iDSD BL in terms of sound quality will pair it with a portable amp, and will get a very significant device for a quite affordable overall price.

At-a-glance card

A final, quick PS: the unit I am talking about is my own property, it has not been provided as a review unit.

Contact us!

The post iFi Audio nano iDSD BL – A nano Mojo? appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Pros — Generally solid build quality
– Numerous input/output options cover most use cases (balanced/single-ended)
– More than enough output power for most headphones
– XBass and 3D effects are well-implemented

Cons — Design can be polarizing, buttons have poor feedback and rattles
– Stock power supply may not be iPower in some regions (reportedly)
– Not the best matching for sensitive IEMs

INTRODUCTION

“Can it power the Sennheiser HD650 to its full potential?”

This is the most common question I’ve been asked whenever there’s a talk about any good budget amp. Fortunately, nowadays there are numerous good offerings around the $100 mark that will power the HD650 and other such demanding cans with supreme authority. Yes, you can always try to get the last bit of performance out of these evergreen Sennheisers but diminishing returns quickly set in. 

iFi Audio is a UK-based manufacturers focusing primarily on DAC and Amps in various form-factors. A few of their products have received critical acclaim, especially the iDSD Black Label and the Pro iCan/xCan flagship amp/DAC duo. 

The iFi Zen Can is part of the recently released Zen stack and is meant to be paired with the iFi Zen DAC. Both the DAC and amp have practically the same chassis and looks rather retro when stacked. You can of course choose a DAC of your own preference and at times get even better performance (more on this below). Nonetheless, the iFi Zen Can aims to be the de-facto solution to powering high impedance full-size cans. Let’s see how well it fares against the stiff competition. 

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier.

Headphones/IEMs used: Sennheiser HD650, Final Sonorous III/E5000, Hifiman Ananda, Dunu Studio SA6

Price, while reviewed: 170 euros.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

IN THE BOX…

The iFi Zen Can comes with a pair of RCA-cables to use as analog interconnect (rather short, may require upgrading), a 3.5-to-6.35mm adapter, and a power supply. In some regions you get the iPower bundled in the box whereas in others (e.g. Singapore from what I hear) you get a generic adapter. I will highly recommend getting a good quality power adapter (if you don’t get the iPower in the bundle) since the generic adapter is very prone to mains noise and EMI and will generate a lot of background hiss/whine. 

The cost cutting becomes rather evident in the accessory set but I guess that’s expected at this price-point.
3.5/5

APPEARANCE, HAPTIC, AND BUILD QUALITY

The iFi Zen Can feels positively dense in hand with its sandblasted Aluminium finish (gray). There are four rubber feet at the bottom of the unit to ensure stability when put on the desk. The general shape is quite curious and deviates from the boring box-shaped DAC/Amps out there. It’s a bit of retro look and while I myself find it nice some have reported their displeasure at the asymmetric design. It looks better in person than in the photos so there’s that. The overall profile is rather compact and should fit even small desk setups.

The back of the unit (from the left) houses the 4.4mm balanced input, 3.5mm single-ended input, and RCA analog inputs. Then we find the balanced output (line-out) and finally the 5V DC power port. 

The front of the iFi Zen Can has the headphone outputs (6.35mm unbalanced, 4.4mm balanced/pentaconn). From the left, we find the power button, the input selector (RCA, unbalanced 3.5mm, balanced 4.4mm), the gain control (0/+6/+12/+18dB), the volume wheel, and the XBass/3D mode selector (toggles between XBass on/3D on/both on/both off). 

The volume wheel is very smooth and has beveled edges around it for easier grip. I wish it had a bit more tension but that’s a minor nitpick. My major gripe lies with the rattling buttons on the front panels themselves. They rattle every time you move around the unit and feels rather cheap/finicky when toggling them. The buttons themselves are aluminium (or so it appears) so this seems to be a curious design choice. If I had to change one thing about the Zen Can’s build — it would be these buttons. Other than that this rather budget amp has covered practically every input/output most users will ever need (barring XLR but I don’t expect that in such a budget device).
4.5/5

TECH INSIDE

Let’s get the specs out of the way first:

For more info, you can check the Zen Can product page.

The internals of the Zen Can is its most interesting aspect IMO. iFi has apparently trickled down the amplifier circuit from their flagship Pro iCan to the Zen Can, albeit in a smaller package (and with lower output power). Then again, 1.6Watts of output power (@ 32 ohms) from the single-ended out is no joke. The balanced circuit is a dual-mono configuration and when paired with the balanced out from a DAC you shall get a fully balanced configuration (unlike certain THX amps). 

The amplifier operates in discrete class-A (no A/B switching here) and employs a FET input (high input impedance, low output impedance) to improve distortion/SNR figures. Frankly, the THD% at 0.007 is not class-leading by any means. However, amps are more than measurements (for me at least) and better measuring amps at times can sound lifeless and sterile. Just listen to one of them THX amps and you’ll know what I mean. 

There’s enough voltage swing in the Zen Can to power amp picky headphones like the HD650 and the HD800. The former works well with >5V voltage swing and the Zen Can definitely exceeds that even in lower gain levels.

As for the rest of the features, we got two iFi signature “circuits” inside: the XBass and 3D circuits, both of which are analogue signal processing circuits. XBass adds a sizeable bass-boost throughout the entire bass-range (from upper-bass to sub-bass). Fortunately, it’s not a bass-shelf (where all bass frequencies are similarly boosted) rather a gradual rise from 300Hz downwards. The sub-bass regions get a major lift by ~7/8dB and can solve some of the bass issues in open-back headphones, esp the likes of HD650. It’s definitely not for everyone though and not every headphone will react the same. HD650 for example has high distortion in the sub-bass region and in some bass-heavy tracks you’ll hear the driver cranking under pressure. It’s always good to have the option though and in many times I found myself keeping the bass boost on. 

The 3D effect is a bit more subtle yet noticeable. The stage seems to get wider and deeper while lower-treble gains more presence. I personally didn’t like this effect as it made the midrange thinner than I prefer. For gaming this might come in handy though and again — it’s better to have this option than not. 

As an aside, the internal components all seem to be of high quality so long-term durability should be quite good. 

SOUND

The Zen Can has a warm-neutral sound overall. It’s pretty transparent to the source in fact and won’t color the music in any destructive manner. The treble is a bit less clinical than certain THX amps but that’s about it (can be a good thing if you don’t like treble glare). The gain levels up to +12dB is very usable. The +18dB gain can vastly increase grain and his s so I tended to not use that mode and frankly +12dB gain is more than enough for my use-cases and powered all my headphones to deafening levels. 

The staging isn’t as wide or deep as the THX amps or some higher-tier class-A designs but at this price range I don’t expect that either. Dynamics are mostly good with headphones but no so much with IEMs (more on this later). Overall resolution is what you’d expect — as good as the source itself (audibly transparent to the source). The biggest issue lies with the PSU for me as with the generic (non iPower) PSUs in some regions you will get audible hiss and a reduction in dynamic range/staging. Switching to iPower X ($100) will fix that but that investment takes it into another price category. 

Qualms with PSU aside, for the price the Zen Can drives headphones as well as any other amps in this range. The 3D and XBass effects can be very fun to use and definitely adds to the overall package. 
4.25/5

PAIRINGS

I’ve found the Zen Can to pair the best with the HD650. In fact, I suspect the Zen Can was created specifically to match with the HD650/6XX/600 and the likes. The dynamics were spot-on, with the bass boost you could hear some decent sub-bass rumble and the stage depth was better than most amps in this range. If you plan to get the Sennheiser HD6XX or any other 6 series Sennheiser headphones, this is the amp to get for ~$200, period. Planars also fared well and for the likes of Sundara/Ananda this can be a great amp.

However, IEMs were a different story altogether. They got loud to dangerous levels but the overall presentation lacked dynamics and fell flat. In fact some IEMs like the Final E5000 (requires a good amp to shine) were muddy, bloated mess on the Zen Can despite being properly driven on paper. Same applied to some multi-BA IEMs. In general I don’t think the Zen Can is a good match for IEMs, then again the name itself has “Can” in it so there’s that.

Overall, for high impedance full-size cans the Zen Can is a great match. For IEMs — not so much. For IEMs though I’d not recommend such a behemoth for the most part and a simple DAC dongle will serve you well. For those who need best of both, however, this might fall short. 
4/5

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Topping L30 ($150): This particular amp used to be the darling amp of the budget conscious. Incredible measurement figures, vanishingly low THD, tons of drive and best of all — could power IEMs and full-size headphones just as well. Too bad that they started to explode. Well, not all of them, more like a few of them, but it’s more than enough to raise concerns and this potential hazard alone dismisses Topping as a competition. I put this here mostly to warn people and until Topping proves that they have put more than enough safety measures in their amp I won’t recommend Topping products to anyone.

vs JDS Atom amp ($100): The Atom amp is even more neutral and that could be a good or a bad thing. It doesn’t have as much raw power as the Zen Can but from my experience it drives IEMs better than the Zen Can and also has less issues with mains noise. It does lack balanced out so there’s that and the overall build is a step down from the Zen Can esp the volume pot. Still, a very good choice for most budget buyers and can be a good alternative to Zen Can albeit without the bass/3D effects and a more clinical presentation.

vs SMSL SP200 ($270): Ah, the magical THX amp circuit that makes everything sound awesome. Not really. The SP200 is one of the least dynamic and most anemic sounding amps that I’ve ever encountered in this range. This thing is practically lifeless and sounds very dis-engaging (if that’s the correct term). The XLR inputs and such are nice touches but the way it presents sound is not my cup of tea. If you like a very sterile presentation you may give this a shot but I’d recommend not being swept up by “THX *random three digit numbers*” marketing jargon and actually listen to them before making a decision. Needless to say — I prefer the Zen Can much more, even with IEMs. 

vs iFi Neo iDSD ($700): David vs Goliath, or so they say. I’ll be blunt: I prefer the Zen Can’s output (for using with the HD650) more than the Neo iDSD’s headphone output (balanced). With IEMs I do prefer the Neo iDSD but the Zen Can pairs so well with the HD650 that even iFi’s far higher tier offering doesn’t sound as nice or engaging, IMHO. The XBass effect is also absent from the Neo iDSD which is a slight letdown. Nonetheless, Neo iDSD review is coming soon and while it generally trounces over the Zen Can with most headphones and IEMs, the HD650 is the one headphone that sounds better on the Zen Can than on the Neo iDSD.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The iFi Zen Can is the best amp under $200 for the Sennheiser HD6XX/650/600. That’s basically my takeaway after testing this amp for 2+ months. For similar high impedance dynamic drivers and low sensitivity planars — the Zen Can is is very capable indeed. IEMs and very sensitive headphones are where it falls somewhat short.

The design can be questionable and the power adapter situation is a bit strange (though most regions get the iPower X but still something you should discuss with the dealer beforehand). For 170 euros though, there really aren’t any deal-breaking issues here for the most part as long as powering full-size headphones is your concern.

These don’t explode and kill your headphones in the process *cough* L30 *cough* and of course — sounds great with high impedance cans with ample headroom/drive. I recommend the Zen Can for such use cases, and highly recommend it if you own the classic Sennheisers and want an amp in a budget that can do justice to it. 

MY VERDICT

Overall Rating: 4.25/5

Recommended (for powering high impedance headphones and planars)

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Lawrence Lee of iFi was kind enough to send the iFi Zen Can as review loaner.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

PHOTOGRAPHY

The post iFi Audio Zen Can Amplifier Full Review – Ticking the right Boxes appeared first on Audio Reviews.