Cons — Can’t find any.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Jason Wang has been an audiophile since middle school. In university, he invented current mode amplification (CMA). CMA devices are characterized by their crisp and transparent sound. It became his ambition to produce audio products with the best possible sound quality. But nothing can remain the best forever, so we should always keep questioning for better. He made this his lifestyle. Jason combined his two principles to form the company Questyle in 2012. Got it?

Questyle had a huge impact with their first digital analog player QP1R back in 2016. Three of us have purchased one – and it remains our reference to this day. Their flagship dap QPM made it onto our Wall of Excellence as true endgame. And the CMA Twelve DAC/amp also collected very good marks from our team.

The company recently also followed the trend of battery-less dongle DAC/amps. Such dongles are marketed to people who want to play music in high quality on their phones, and who don’t want to have a second device in their pocket.

The current market is flooded with dongles – we covered a few – and it appears to be increasingly difficult for a new release to stick out. The 2021 M12 was Questyle’s first effort in this field. Our two guys in Europe were not…too impressed. That’s probably because of their expectations of the crisp Questyle sound, which the M12 did not deliver. It was unusually warm and soft to their ears.

Spoiler alert, the M15 returns to the strictly neutral sound Questyle made its name with. There are a few more things to say, for example how they did it…let’s start with the physicals.

Specifications

Physicals

In the box are:

• 1 * M15
• 1 * USB-A to USB Type-C cable,
• 1 * Type-C to Type-C cable
• 1 * Instruction manual
• 1 * Warranty card

The body is made of metal with a glass cover on top so that one can see the internals at any time. Sturdy, robust…as good as it gets.

Technology

The Questyle M15 incorporates the ES9281Pro SoC (System on Chip) that comprises an all-in-one DAC and headphone amplifier, which delivers a prefabricated sound so that all such devices sound similar. STOP! This is not the case with the M15.

Questyle engineers have enhanced the output signal by adding two Current Mode Amplification (CMA) SiPs (“System in Package”: each with two independent amplification circuits) to achieve the Questyle sound, which is characterized by ultra low distortion, a very low noise floor and very low output impedance of around 1 ohm. This low-voltage configuration is further meant to minimize power consumption, beneficial for mobile use.

The reason why Questyle did not bypass the SoC’s amp altogether is because that’s virtually impossible. And the reason why they didn’t use a pure DAC chip such as the ES9038 is size – it is simply too big. The ES9281Pro chip also features a USB module. Therefore, size and performance dictated the choice of chip.

The M15 offers both balanced (4.4 mm) and single-ended (3.5 mm) circuits.

Functionality and Operation

What it does

• Works plug and play with Windows, Linux, and OSX computers and Android/iOS devices.
• Plays music though single- ended (3.5 mm) and a more powerful balanced (4.4 mm) circuits.
• Supports almost all music streaming platforms worldwide, including Apple Music, Tidal, QQ Music, among others.
• Fully supports and decodes ALAC, FLAC, MQA, and other lossless formats.
• Features two data status indicators that will illuminate one of the following colors: green (sample rate is 48kHz or less), red (hi-res lossless playback: PCM 88.2kHz~384 kHz, or DSD64~DSD256), magenta (final unfold of an MQA Core stream).

What it does not

• Has no on-board control.
• Needs a lightning adapter to be used with iPhone.

The Questyle M15 does not have an on/off switch. It draws current from the host device and switches itself on, when a headphone of earphone is plugged into one of its two sockets.

Amplification and Power Consumption

The manufacturer’s amplification data are rather cryptic so that I put the Questyle M15 to a practical test. The problem is that balanced cables for full-sized, power hungry cans are hard to come by – to take advantage of the M15’s 4.4 mm balanced circuit, which is much beefier than the single-ended circuit (a generally valid statement).

Running the 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 on the (weaker) single-ended output – to my surprise – did not only provide enough power, it also maintained the zing, bite, and clarity experienced with easier to drive earphones.

Then I ordered a balanced cable for the balanced circuit – which worked even better. The M15 has enough power to adequately drive a 300 ohm headphone.

Questyle claims that the M15 has an ultra-low power consumption (which, of course, is relative to performance). I did a quick test with the FNIRSI-FNB48 voltmeter. The M15’s single-ended circuit has about twice the power drain of the “frugal” AudioQuest DragonFly Red, and approximately one third more than the DragonFly Cobalt. Both are designed for low power drain, which comes with compromises in performance.

The Questyle M15 has, however, a much smaller current drain than the much less powerful Hidizs S9 Pro. And it works with iPhone that limited power draw to 100 mA, which shuts out similar dongles such as the Astell & Kern PEE51.

I’d say the M15 is very current efficient, but you’d still better have a decent phone battery.

Sound

The Questyle M15 has a sonic signature owners of Questyle equipment love: essentially neutral with great extension at both ends, unparalleled resolution, clarity, transparency, and crisp dynamics – and all that without ever being strident or aggressive, sterile or analytical (Topping comes to mind as the opposite). Almost like a little class-A amp in your pocket. If you have listened to the QP1R dap or the CMA 12 DAC/amp, you will know what I am talking about.

Spatial reconstruction is excellent in both single-ended and balanced circuits. No compromise has been made for the single-ended circuit, the only difference between the two is power. This is in contrast to some other models that sacrifice headroom in their single-ended circuit such as the EarMen Sparrow.

And that’s all you have to know.

Questyle M15 compared

Questyle had released the $150 M12 a year earlier. In contrast, it features only a 3.5 mm single-ended circuit, and, most importantly, it has a different sound: softer and warmer than the M15 or QP1R dap…which did not quite delight Alberto at the time. The M15 also has a gain switch for driving a larger variety of headphones.

Apogee Groove: is much more powerful, way higher current drain, a very high output impedance of 20 ohm, and it does not run with most phones, not at all with iPhones. Its use with hybrid iems is not recommended by the manufacturer. Sonically, the Groove is more coloured and it drives headphones without the need of balanced cables. The Groove offers the best spatial reconstruction of all dongles I have tested but is limited to single dynamic driver earphones and headphones.

With the Sennheiser HD 600, the Groove delivers more dynamics and a deeper stage than the M15. The differences are, however, not substantial. In summary, the Groove excels in it specialized applicability, but the M15 is more universally deployable.

AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt is smaller and thus handier on the go, has USB filtering included and sounds a bit smoother and a tad warmer. It has similar imaging and spatial reconstruction qualities. It is less powerful – at a lower power consumption, and therefore more limited in its application. The evaluation of sonic differences relies on personal taste but are on par in terms of overall quality. Both offer stellar sound.

Practical Aspects

Questyle and similar dap manufacturers offer dongle DAC/amps to cover the phone/table/notebook market. A dap has principally a cleaner data and power source than a phone or a computer, as it is designed for playing music only. Computer and phone feature other clocked internals that introduce contaminations (“noise”) to the sound. So you are always better off with a dap, sonically – any USB DAC/amp (“dongle”) is a compromise.

When it comes to dongles, the user has to pick their poison: low current draw (= low power = battery preservation) vs. high power (= better sound quality = battery hog). Both are mutually exclusive.

You obviously need a powerful dongle to operate full-sized cans. Devices optimized for low current draw such as the AudioQuest DragonFlys will be easy on your phone’s battery however not do a satisfactory job on demanding headphones. Clipping will occur which will first be noticed when the bass is getting muddy.

Battery hogs such as Hidizs S9 Pro will do a better job on such headphones but empty your phone in no time. The Apogee Groove will not run with most phones at all. Powerful AND low battery drain does not exist!

There is a fundamental lack of technical understanding by some testers who run full-sized, insensitive cans on battery-preserving dongles, then rate them lowly. This misuse conveys the wrong information on the quality of such devices and distorts the playing field.

Therefore, if you have an old phone, a DragonFly type dongle may be right for you. If you want to run full-sized headphones from your computer, you may favour the Apogee Groove type. The Questyle M15 strikes a good balance between powerful output and current drain. However, despite its advanced power management, it is not a miracle power saver. In the end, you have to factor your intended usage into your buying decision.

Concluding Remarks

The very versatile Questyle M15 dongle is as good as it gets in its category. It is for listeners with very high standards. I will use this one for future iem testing…and submit it for approval to be attached to our Wall of Excellence.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

I received the unit from Questyle Engineering for my analysis. I thank them for that as well as for responsive in answering my questions. You can purchase the M15 at the Questyle Shop.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Questyle M15 Review – Stellar By Starlight appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Piercing upper midrange needs modification, stock tips useless, ordinary sound (the thumpy bass kills the fun); unimaginative design; pointless tuning filters (only one yields an acceptable sound); not sure whether they are their money’s worth.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Shenzhen company NiceHCK has accompanied this blog before it even existed. Loomis and I first discussed their iems over on Head-Fi – we both treasured the legendary $12 NiceHCK Bro model. One enthusiastic Head-Fier compared the NiceHCK N3 with the Campfire Andromeda (nah…), but Loomis nevertheless added it to his 2019 favourites.

NiceHCK have made themselves a name mainly with budget earbuds and quality earphone cables in all price categories. Their earphones, on the other hand, have been hit and miss, mainly because of poor tuning, but most of them have at least been interesting.

Their recent two midprice models are still in their catalogue at the time of this review: the $119 NX7 Mk3 with 4 BA + 2 DD + 1 piezo with exchangeable screw-on tuning nozzles (and exchangeable faceplates) and the $239 Lofty with their Beryllium-coated dynamic driver. The first had a piezo working against the other drivers and the second was overly ordinarily U-shaped for its price tag.

Their latest NiceHCK M5 sport 4 BA + 1 DD and 3 exchangeable tuning valves, which are actually back vents. We’ve seen this recently in the Hidizs MM2.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces with three tuning vents (grey:balanced/red: mid-treble/blue: basshead), screwdriver (!!!), 2 sets of eartips (S/M/L), silver-plated high-purity copper cable, a pleather storage case, and the paperwork.

The shells consist of 3D printed German resin shells with aluminum alloy faceplates added. They are small and ergonomic, with good fit and comfort. Nevertheless is the design somewhat boring and home made to me. Isolation depends on eartips used. It is mediocre with the SpinFit CP145.

The included monster screwdriver is somewhat comical and you have to have a quiet hand not to scratch the faceplates during vent change.

Tonality and Technicalities

The NiceHCK M5 offers 3 different sonic signatures, depending on tuning filter used: super bassy, warm-bright, and neutral-bright. The blue bassy filter yields a horribly vulgar sound and is largely omitted here. The grey “normal” filter creates an ordinary middle-of-the-road sound, and the red “treble” filter introduces harshness by the dialled down bass.

None of these signatures is tolerable to me without further modification: I taped 90% of the nozzle mesh off with 3M micropore tape, as so often with Shenzhen earphones in the past. This reduces the over-energized upper midrange, it rounds the sharp edges to some extent and adds volume to the midrange. Without, the midrange is breathy, thin, and strident.

Grey “normal” Filters

This yields a middle-of-the road sound that could not be more unexciting to the educated ear. Bass is very well extended but thumpy and somewhat fuzzy. It lacks definition and finesse. A bass we know from cheap iems. The thick bass dominates the whole presentation. Wonder what dynamic driver there’s in it.

The bass bleeds into the lower midrange, which is attenuated by the upper midrange energy. The micropore tape does a good job in removing midrange harshness. The M5 sounds smoother in the lower midrange than the modded Rose Qt-9 mk2s, though voices are honky and boxed in.

Lower treble is rolling off in panic and gets re-energized at around 9 kHz. This moves higher notes back and adds some tizziness…

The soundstage is relatively narrow but has good depth. Timbre is just ordinary and a turnoff for the educated listener – particularly at this price. The M5 sounds…cheap.

The other technicalities are ok. Midrange resolution is good, midrange note definition is good, too. Note weight is lean in the midrange. Spatial cues is decent as long as there is not much bass in the music.

Red “neutral” Filters

Reduces bass quantity without improving bass quality. This moves the midrange forward and adds harshness to the image while removing warmth – it becomes overpixelated, like an early-generation digital photo. Notes are very edgy. Bass is now thumpy in the background and anemic, vocals are strident, despite the micropore tape.

But midrange clarity, articulation, and transparency are greatly improved in my perception (but in my perception only), stage widens but becomes shallower. Still, bass and midrange don’t fit together. My ears can handle this sharpness only for a few minutes.

Blue “bassy” Filters

Horribly overdone thumpy bass. Just like your steak dinner drowned in barbecue sauce. Vulgar!

Concluding Remarks

The NiceHCK M5 are no outright bad earphones. They are pleasing to the lesser educated ear and therefore may be a good choice for the novice with well-filled pockets. But the over-energetic upper mids require user modding with micropore tape, and the stock tips are useless.

Of the exchangeable tuning filters, the “normal” ones creates an ordinary sound and the red ones with reduced bass a harsh sound. And the humongous screwdriver for installing them is outright ridiculous.

In summary, the M5 sound “middle of the road” (a rather narrow road that is) but don’t do anything above average nor do they look or feel special. The M5 cannot compete with their peers such as Moondrop KATO. Their tuning, particularly in the midrange, is yesteryear.

I don’t think NiceHCK understand how to market the capitalist part of the world. Just sticking some drivers into a shell while ignoring the competition is not good enough. The M5 are simply nothing special, they lack finesse, are uninspiring, and they are not competitive at $179.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Gallery

The post NiceHCK M5 Review – Ordinary Life appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Steep app learning curve to take advantage of all features; no storage bag; buttons could be marked better.

Executive Summary

Introduction

I have yet to find another company that has so much customer satisfaction and loyalty as Qudelix. Long before I even thought about the Qudelix-5K , happy customers were all over me inquiring whether I had checked out this device.

And once I finally “gave in” to peer pressure, I learnt that there is probably hardly another company with so much pride in their products, so much detail in optimizing functionality and documentation thereof, and such a responsive and enthusiastic customer service. And yes, I needed their customer service as I didn’t know much about Bluetooth at the time – now I know everything…almost.

Qudelix are an audio-system engineering company that develop and produce affordable high-end audio in the Republic of Korea – which is a high-cost market. It is therefore astonishing that they can offer their gear at attractive prices. They offer the 5K USB DAC, the QX-over earphones to go with the 5K, and the T71 gaming USB DAC.

Key Specifications

Physicals

The environmentally sustainable packaging – a plain cardboard box (dimensions 91 x 55 x 55 mm; QX-Over comes in a box of the same dimensions) – contains the quickstart user manual. In the box are the 5K and two 120 mm cables (USB-C to USB-A and USB-C to USB-C).

The actual Qudelix-5K itself a rectangular plastic box with a metal shirt clip at approximately the size/dimensions of a 9V battery…(52.8 x 26.7 x 15.6 mm including clip – at a weight of 25 g). The enclosure hosts two double multi-function buttons, a USB-C port, and two headphone sockets (3.5 mm single ended and 2.5 mm balanced.

Technology

ES9219C Headphone SoC

The Qudelix-5K DAC/amp deploys a ES9219C Headphone system on chip or “SoC“ [see also ESS specs sheet]. Earlier versions of the 5K hosted the ES9018p SoC until it was discontinued by ESS Technology. Qudelix prefer to refer to the SoC as IC (integrated circuit).

SoC means that the ES90219C is a closed system that incorporates the DAC and headphone amp on the same chip. The sound is therefore pretty much prefabricated and devices with this SoC all sound rather similar. This is in contrast to individual DAC chips (on other devices), which do not tell you anything about sound as it mostly depends on the custom-designed output stages. Qudelix’s added software aims to access all features of the ES90219C.

Bluetooth 5.0

The Qualcomm QCC5124 SoC used is an energy-efficient Bluetooth DAC/amp that supports all the latest audio codecs including the Sony LDAC topping the data transmission rates. The codecs deployed has to match the one used by the source device. The QCC5124 SoC can process both Bluetooth and USB signals. When the Qudelix app is enabled (see below) iOS devices and 5K pair automatically.

In summary, we have two independent SoCs, the QCC5124 and the ES9219C. The incoming Bluetooth signal is decoded but bypasses the Qualcomm’s DAC – and outputs it to the higher-quality external ESS9219C DAC/amp.

Functionality and Operation

Overview

What the 5K does:

• works as wireless receiver supporting all the latest Bluetooth codecs
• as USB DAC/amp, the 5K supports 96 kHz/24 bit USB audio streaming, works with Windows, Mac OS, and Linux – and connects via USB-C to android phones
• functionality and sound can be highly customized via a phone/tablet app or Google Chrome extension
• plays hi res music from my Sony dap via LDAC
• can simultaneously be charged and streamed to from computer while being controlled from phone via Bluetooth
• Bluetooth connects automatically to iPhone (when app is connected)
• sound can be adapted to personal taste with 8 DAC filters
• features graphic and parametric equalizers, including presets for many of the most widespread models
• offers powerful output with two gain levels (1 Vrms and 2 Vrms)
• features a built-in high-sensitivity microphone for phone calls
• automatic firmware update

What it does not:

• decode MQA
• have a display
• come with a protective case

Buttons & App/Chrome Browser Extension

The Qudelix-5K has a two multifunction double-buttons (red and blue if illuminated) that control Bluetooth connectivity, onboard volume, and song transport (start/stop/back/forth). They are not marked (one of them has a ridge for touch recognition…but you have to remember which one it is…it is the blue one).

There is also a free mobile app (Android/iOS) and a Google Chrome browser extension for remotely monitoring and adjusting/changing performance/parameters. Both have the same functionalities. The Qudelix mobile app works over Bluetooth link only. The Qudelix PC Chrome app works over USB link only.

In detail, you can monitor device and system internals such as the kind of connection, Firmware, even warranty. You can power the device off, pair with peripherals, do resets, access the user manual, and get in contact with customer support and the Qudelix discussion forum.

You can monitor the battery including all stats and set charge levels as well as power modes. You can even set the button functionalities including turning on and off the button’s LEDs and enable multi-point pairing if desired. The charger function can be turned off in the app, which is necessary for USB operation with iPhone – as Apple only allows 100 mA current draw (but why would you want to do that?).

You can prioritize USB vs. Bluetooth, further monitor input parameters (bit rate, sample rate, RMS levels etc.), the active Bluetooth codecs/USB DAC functions, and set the microphone functionality. You can adjust volume on both host device and 5K.

And you can adjust the DAC/amp bit selecting output power (1 or 2 VRMS) and output quality (Standard/Performance) as a way to manage battery consumption. You can set the output mode to auto, balanced, single ended (unbalanced), or QX-over (the proprietary iems). You can even swap L and R channels…handy, when testing earphone balance.

Finally, the ESS9219C SoC lets you choose between 8 digital filters (best start with “minimum phase fast/small rolloff”). The QX-over has its own extra tweakability in the app.

Last but not least, there is a choice of parametric and graphic 10-band equalizers with 10 programmable presets. The app also provides access to a user-maintained public database with auto eq presets for all popular earphone models…hundreds of choices.

In summary, the app is a nerd’s paradise. You find a complete operational overview here.

Power Consumption/Battery Life

The Qudelix-5K hosts a 500 mAh lithium polymer battery. At a rate of 200 mAh, it is fully charged in 2.5 hrs. The battery discharge time varies with codec, sample rate, power profile, output mode as well as earphone/headphone sensitivity and output volume level.

Depending on combinations of these factors, battery life is between 6 and 18 hours. Check here for a detailed breakdown.

Amplification

Single-ended and balanced outputs features 80 mW and 240 mW per channel, respectively. Each of the circuits has two modes (or gains). Single ended features 1V_RMS mode for “normal” iems around 32 ohm. 2_VRMS mode drives low-sensitivity iems and headphones.

The balanced circuit offers more powerful 2V_RMS and 4V_RMS modes. All these modes are user selectable.

Full-sized headphones obviously prefer the more powerful balanced circuit, however, balanced cables for them are hard to find – and if so, they are not swappable between headphones, as there is no connection standard. Paradoxically, cables of easier-to-drive iems adhere to two standards (MMCX and 0.78 mm, 2 pin) and balanced cables are readily and cheaply available for them.

In real life, the 5K’s single ended circuit drives my 150 ohm Sennheiser HD 25 with ease, but the 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 bring it close to its knees. The balance circuit played any iem thrown at it – and more.

Wrong world!

Sound

The Qudelix-5K is primarily designed as a Bluetooth receiver for on the go. Hence functionality is above audiophile fine tuning. The ES9219C SoC with DAC and amp delivers a prefabricated sonic signature as it is impossible to manipulate the amp part other than through unleashing the functionality via custom software. Therefore, all devices with this SoC will sound similar.

That said the Qudelix-5K features a neutral sound with a tad of warmth added. The big difference between USB and Bluetooth sound is that Bluetooth sacrifices some dynamics and depth.

Extension is decent at both ends, there is nothing scratchy or strident, note weight is very good, note definition is ok. My overall impression is…middle of the road…not the most audiophile but more than workable – and enjoyable. Imaging, resolution, clarity, staging are all good and even great for the price. Headroom with the balanced circuit is excellent.

Considering the ambient sounds one is exposed to on the road, the 5K’s musical presentation is more than adequate and actually quite delightful – even more so when combined with the functionality.

So what do you get in a $250 DAC/amp such as the Questyle M15? First, no Bluetooth…but better midrange clarity, more “zing”, more intimacy, better note definition, a better organized stage…and a bigger battery drain on your phone.

Both kinds of devices clearly serve different purposes. One for the soft sofa at home and the other for the hard seat on the bus.

QX-Over Earphones

The $29 QX-Over earphones are another one of Qudelix’s technical specialties – they only fit the 5K and T71. The iems feature two 8 mm dynamic drivers and utilize the 5K’s active crossover as part of its 4-channel DAC/amp and DSP for optimal sound quality.

The QX-Over therefore features a double plug that is inserted simultaneously into the 2.5 mm and 3.5 mm sockets. Using the stock tips is required to unleash the intended sound signature.

The QX-Over have a safe, V-shaped, slightly warm tuning with a huge headroom and great staging (obviously the result of the proprietary crossover technology). Again, no audiophile delicatesse, but a decent burger fare: an unpretentious souped-up mainstream iem that is optimized for the 5K.

They have tight enough bass with a good sub-bass extension generating a healthy rumble. Vocals are not too recessed, they are a bit on the lean side but still have enough body. There can be the occasional shoutiness. Treble extension is not the greatest and high notes can be a bit subtle.

The OX-Over are quite quirky in terms of dynamics and clarity is also good. Seriously, although quite middle-of-the-road, the QX-Over completely do the job outside of the house (in…errmm..the middle of the road). Even inside: I danced around my kitchen with them while unloading the dishwasher. I definitely recommend this experience as an add-one to the 5K.

Comparison to FiiO BTR5

The $129 FiiO BTR5 features the same ES919C SoC as the 5K, and both presumably sound very similar. Qudelix released a comparison pdf (that is in need of minor updating).

The main differences between the two devices, apart from price, are weight (BTR is much heavier), battery life (5K much better), native resolution (BTR up to 32 bit/384 kHz), and app/Chrome extension (5K much more customizable). Qudelix 5K has a resolution of up to 24 bit/96 kHz (just like the AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt), which covers 95% of all audio files).

Another huge difference is the customer support. FiiO have never replied to any message of us at audioreviews.org authors whereas Qudelix have a short turnaround time with dedicated support.

Concluding Remarks

The Qudelix-5K is probably one of the most mature products on the market and bears zero risk to the buyer. No wonder it enjoys an excellent customer satisfaction.

One of my personal highlights is that it turned my Sony NW-A55 dap into a balanced player.

Apart from great sound and functionality, the free tweaking/monitoring app is a great teaching medium. Sure, the 5K can’t compete with $300 competitors, but it is still good enough to be used even with premium earphones – and it is simply perfect for use on the road.

Oh, and I highly recommend ordering the QX-Over earphones as add-on.

I am going to recommend the Qudelix-5K for induction to our Wall of Excellence.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The Qudelix-5K was provided by the company for review upon my request – and the QX-Over showed up as a surprise. And I thank them for that as well as for answering all my questions patiently and in every detail.

You can get the 5K and QX-Over from amazon and directly from Qudelix Store.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Qudelix-5K Bluetooth DAC/amp With QX-Over Earphones Review – Highest Pragmatism appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Deserves a tad more upper midrange and treble extension for a wider stage and more sparkle; not the fastest driver; limited applicability of third-party eartips.

Executive Summary

Introduction

IKKO is a Chinese manufacturer that has initially delighted us with their very few however innovative <$200 earphones (and accessories). Their first iem, the IKKO OH1 stood out by its metallic, unconventional shells with a great haptic. The “masterfully jazzy” well-dosed V-shaped IKKO OH10 made it onto our Wall of Excellence. They excel by their superb imaging and staging – and offer a sniff into the premium segment at a mid-tier price.

The – in contrast to the OH10 – brighter tuned IKKO OH1S is a highly underrated marvel, possibly because many influencers had their listening experience guided by the frequency response graph. The OH2 is physically very similar to the OH2. It appears that IKKO wants to appease those customers with there OH2 who found the OH1S too spicy. Will it work?

IKKO are currently expanding their product range into dongles such as the IKKO Zerda ITM01, microphones (for YouTubers), small speakers, and other desktop accessories.

Specifications

:

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, the cable, a set of IKKO I-Planet foam tips, a set of oval silicone tips, a storage wallet, an IKKO pin, an MMCX tool for safely disconnecting cable and earpieces, and the paperwork.

Just like the OH1S, IKKO OH2’s shells are premium built with mostly aluminum alloy and some resin, and they feature one of the companyʼs trademarks: oval nozzles, which help forming any eartip into the cross-sectional shape of your ear canals.

The shells are rather small and light compared to the OH10, they look and feel great, sit firmly in my ears and are very comfortable. The small size of the earpieces is certainly a huge asset. Isolation is not the greatest for me.

I find the haptic and ergonomics premium: 10/10.

I really like the included cable (same as with OH1S): spindly, wiry, light. Coated with hard pvc, it has the right stiffness for me and is not rubbery at all. Great in the days where cables are increasingly becoming ropes pulling our ears down. Less is more, also in this case.

Tonality and Technicalities

IKKO have tuned the OH2 differently from their other popular models. It is not V-shaped like the OH10 – and it is not as treble extended as the OH1S, although both share the relatively flat frequency response up to 1.5 kHz. As in so many cases, the OH2’s frequency response graph is literally misleading as it leads speculations into the wrong direction.

From a helicopter perspective, the IKKO OH2 is somewhat dry and slightly warm sounding iem. For me, the included IKKO I-Planet foam tips worked best. But foams in combination with my ears always generate a rather dry bass.

And it is rather dry indeed. Sub-bass extension is good, there is plenty of rumble down there, and there is no boomy mid-bass peak. Nevertheless could the bass be tighter – and it probably is with a different tips/ears combination. I’d call the bass typical for mid-price single dynamic-driver iems, but nothing special. It is certainly not the fastest around and can be somewhat blunt in some recordings.

The vocals have very good weight and decent definition, they are not set back, which is an asset at this price tag. There is a small congestion from the hesitant upper midrange (pinna gain is <10 dB) which compresses male and female voices a bit. A tad more energy at around 2 kHz would make them wider and airier. Higher piano and violin notes lack sparkle.

The top rolloff starts already in the upper midrange but becomes dramatic at above 5 kHz. Treble extension is audibly lacking and compromises stage width and overall sparkle/air.

And whilst stage is narrow, it has a good height and depth. Imaging and spatial cues are good and resolution, separation, and layering are average. The OH2’s biggest sonic assets are its note weight and its very natural timbre.

IKKO OH2 Compared

The $79 Hidizs MM2 with their exchangeable out vents are more versatile and may have slightly better imaging and staging (more headroom), but I find the OH2 have a better organic reproduction , note weight, and cohesion. Instant wow effect vs. slowly growing likability! I also prefer the OH2’s smaller earpieces for their small design and premium haptic whereas the light yet bulky MM2 shells are reminiscent of the budget KZ fare. I’d say the OH2 appeal more to the older, mature crowd (like me) and the MM2 preferably to teenagers.

The $79 Moondrop Aria, viewed as the dynamic-driver standard below $100, is much faster, brighter, and leaner than the OH2. It is technically cleaner with a better defined low end, a better extended treble, and more width. But it also has an upper midrange glare that may be unpleasant for some. The OH2 is less analytical, warmer, deeper, but also thicker in its performance, it has more “soul” and is more engaging to me. The Moondrop may be the “better” earphone, but the OH2 is more enjoyable to me.

The main question may be how the OH2 compares to the $159 IKKO OH1S? Well the OH1S may be brighter but they benefit from their treble extension, which results in a wider stage and better imaging. They provide more headroom. They also have better note definition and resolution. I’d say the price difference is justified – and I, quite frankly, prefer the OH1S as they are the better iem.

Concluding Remarks

IKKO iems are totally underrated in the internet’s echo chambers that cultivate herd mentality pushing überhyped yet short-lived products to promote compulsive buying habits. IKKO iems have a long shelf live for a reason.

The IKKO OH2 are the mellow alternative to all these brightish <$100 earphones such as the Moondrop Aria. They impress by their haptic and accessories, which are essentially identical to the OH1S at twice the price. They further have a decent tonality with an intimate midrange and an organic timbre.

The OH2 will appeal to the more mature budget “audiophile”, who cares about substance rather than gimmicks.

To give you my personal perspective: I really like the OH2 a lot – and not only for their sound but also for their handling (the importance of which for daily use is typically undervalued in reviews). But then again, I could say the same about the OH1S and OH10.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post IKKO OH2 Review – A Purist’s Daydream appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Relatively high impedance…benefits from amplification.

Executive Summary

Introduction

BQEYZ made themselves a name back in 2018 with one of the first neutrally tuned budget iems, the $30 2DD +2BA BQEYZ KC2, at a time when budget meant V-shaped. The KC2 is still available and has a dedicated following.

The company continued a class higher with the $139 1DD +1BA +1 EST BQEYZ Spring 1, which had wonderful vocals but a somewhat pillowy bass. The subsequent 1DD +1BA +1 EST $169 BQEYZ Spring 2 improved the bass somewhat. All of the above were metal built.

The subsequent $129 1DD +1BA +1EST BQEYZ Summer deviated with its translucent resin shells and finally featured the desired punchy bass.

We have collectively analyzed all of the above to the hilt, including Durwood’s study of the effect of nozzle mesh on the Spring 1’s frequency response.

The latest BQEYZ model is named “Autumn” after the third season of the year, hence “Tre Stagioni” (three seasons). With their BQEYZ Autumn, the company reverts to metal shells being essentially identical in shape to the Summer’s.

New is the driver configuration which is a single DD. BQEYZ also offer maximum sonic flexibility by including three sets of magnetic tuning vents at the font of the shells. Each of these pucks constitutes a different front vent with its very own bass response.

It is an interesting approach contrary to the JVC FDX1, the perceived bass response of which is dosed by screw-on nozzles containing different filters. Although these alter the JVC’s upper midrange response, the effect is only heard at the low end, as the human ear registers the whole frequency spectrum in context.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the 2 earpieces, the cable, 3 pairs of tuning pucks in a holder, the magnetic tuner pole, 2 sets of eartips (S/M/L), a brush, and a carrying case. The three tuning pucks (“bass”, “normal”, “treble”) are actually the inner earphone vents (also called front vents). They come in different openings: the smaller the bassier. We describe the relevant physical principles in this article.

The metal pucks are inserted and removed with the included magnetic pole. This takes as long as a tire change during a Formula 1 race. The magnetic fit guarantees minimal wear and tear even when swapped frequently. Very handy.

The earpieces are made of CNC machined metal and are built very well. The overall haptic of shells and cable is great. BQEYZ have addressed the criticism of the BQEYZ Summer’s resin shells.

Fit and comfort are very good, isolation is rather poor for my ears. The cable has silver-coated copper and high-purity copper strands. It is loosely braided with minimal contact area between the strands for minimum interference. I find the cable rather pliable and light – it has no microphonics.

2 sets of eartips (S/M/L) are included, one wide bore and the other narrow bore. Note that the nozzle diameter exceeds the usual 4.5 mm so that many third-party eartips will not fit. You may try the SpinFit CP500 or any Azla SednaEarfit models if going for third-party tips.

Tonality and Technicalities

A universally valid assessment of the BQEYZ Autumn is difficult as tonality and technicalities depend on the interplay of several factors: magnetic tuning puck + eartips + source (in any combination). This versatility allows to you pretty much to create your own favourite sound.

Considering its 46 Ω impedance, the Autumn benefits from amplification, although it works surprisingly well with my iPhone SE (1st gen.). For example, the powerful Apogee Groove produces a much cleaner and better defined image than the weaker AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt.

Using the JitterBug FMJ with the Apogee Groove makes quite a difference in that it ads definition to the image. The difference is actually considerable.

With the wide-bore stock tips, the “bass” vents generate more…yes…bass…which drowns the vocals out somewhat — and the “normal” vents bring voices more into the foreground without sacrificing bass impact. But this latter combination may be bassier than the combination of “bass” vents and JVC Spiral Dots.

I played with the stock eartips but got the best results with the JVC Spiral Dots that disperse some of the mid-bass and produce the tightest possible low end. Bass generally digs deep but the vocals move into the foreground with the JVCs. Signature becomes brighter but notes also cleaner and more articulate.

I also experimented with the vents, and the normal ones yielded the best result (in combination with the Spiral Dots). The bass vents “overthicken” the low end, move the vocals back and therefore remove intimacy and detail.

My favourite combination therefore is the normal vents with the JVC Spiral Dots.

So, how does the BQEYZ Autumn sound, actually (with “normal” puck and Spiral Dots)? It has the classic slightly warm single-dynamic driver sound with a rather crisp attack adding some edge.

The low end is on the tight side, it is well extended and remains focused to the lowest frequencies. There is no mid-bass hump as emphasis is on the lower frequencies, just above sub-bass. Drum kicks in the mid bass are not as pronounced as they could be but they are nevertheless hard as a rock – and dry.

Lower midrange is standalone without bass bleed. Male and female voices are somewhat recessed, of medium note weight, energetic, and natural. There is no shoutiness but we are getting there, although that 5 kHz peak is not irritating to my ears.

Midrange temperature is a bit cooler than in the bass region but still not quite neutral. Midrange resolution is very good, everything clean and clear there. Note definition is very good.

Lower treble rolls of substantially. Cymbals are a bit back and don’t have the best definition – but they are still ok. Resolution is better in the midrange than in the treble region.

Stage is average in width, height and depth. Spatial cues is very good. Attack is sharp and crisp without being aggressive. The dynamic driver is rather nimble. Stage positioning and separation are also good. Timbre is good.

I am a bit short in my sonic description as it mostly applies to this very particular setup.

BQEYZ Autumn compared

The dynamic-driver competition in the $200 region is tight. The Tanchjim Oxygen (which I don’t know) and the JVC HA-FDX1 are standard staples on our Wall of Excellence (also count the 1+1 IKKO OH10 in). The Moondrop KATO is arguably the company’s best dynamic-driver offer.

To disappoint you, it is impossible to tell which is the best of the lot as they are very close in terms of (sound) quality. But they differ quite a bit in ergonomics.

For example, the IKKO OH10 is very heavy in one’s ear, and so – but to a lesser extent – is the KATO. The Oxygen have short nozzles that may not fit everyone and the JVCs have a weird shape altogether that may not be the most comfortable for many either. In this respect, I prefer the Autumn’s compact shells.

But what I can say is that the Autumn sound more refined than the brighter $139 BQEYZ Summer, particularly in the midrange. The JVCs are not as crisp as the Autumn, they are smoother, dampened, with more rounded notes – but not as deep. The Autumn are rougher around the edges, more dynamic/energetic, and they have more midrange body and a much better sub-bass extension.

The Moondrop KATO are brighter than the Autumn (in my setup), with a wider but shallower stage. They have a smoother bass and vocals are not quite as intimate. They also have more sparkle with more air in the midrange. And they are more prone to shoutiness. How graphs can deceive us. Voices are a bit thicker and more rounded in the KATO. Treble resolution is similar between the two.

As I tend to say (well I stole it from Alberto): pick your poison!

Concluding Remarks

The BQEYZ Autumn are well built and good sounding single-dynamic driver earphones that fit their price category well – and that can prevail against their tough competition.

Whilst it is difficult to rank the large crowd of $200 single-dynamic drivers, the Autumn stick out in two aspects: comfort/fit and sonic versatility through the included tuning front vents. They are, in my opinion, the best offering in BQEYZ’s 3 season series.

Tre stagioni? Quattro stagioni! Now we are ready for “inverno”. No, that’s not what you think*…learn Italian…

Until next time…keep on listening!

*Italian: winter

The post BQEYZ Autumn Review (1) – Tre Stagioni appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — V-shape; heavy earpieces, shoddy cable.

Executive Summary

Introduction

The OH10 “Obsidian” has been hanging on our Wall of Excellence for a while, mainly triggered by Alberto, who had written a glowing review. He characterizes the OH10 sensibly and exhaustively so that there is not much room for things to add.

I have tested the OH10 for 1/2 year with endless source combinations.

IKKO is a company that has excelled through excellent builds and a rather small quality rooster of iems (and lately other products), each of which has had a rather long shelf live. The company obviously designs sustainable quality, which is not easy to find in the Shenzhen environment.

The OKKO OH1, their first offering, may have been a bit bright for my taste, but it stuck out from the field because of its sturdy metal build and the unusual shape of their earpieces. It was recently superseded by the smaller OH1S, which is highly underrated because of anti-hype by the usual YouTube screamers. The OH10 was introduced between the two models. It has been on the market for a while, and it is still as relevant as on its first day.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

Please relieve me for once from describing the photo showing the content. Yes, the cable is crap and I use Final E tips.

The metal earpieces are super heavy and relatively big – and probably more suited for home use, but their haptic is great. The nozzles are long enough. Fit is good, comfort depends on how much I move, and isolation is average.

Tonality and Technicalities

I was for the longest time in the belief the OH10 featured a crisp single dynamic driver…but it is rather a 1+1 (dynamic driver and balanced armature driver) constellation…which speaks for its cohesion. Both drivers obviously harmonize well with each other.

To give you the helicopter perspective: the OH10 excels by its fantastic bass slam and its excellent imaging. The price paid is recessed vocals and treble extension.

OK, ’nuff said already. Now you know what Alberto and I think of the OH10.

Co-blogger Kazi gave his snappy account on Facebook:

• Unique shell design and very dense shell material. 
• Too heavy for some, myself included. I find them to weigh down on my ears after a while.
• Isolation is lacking.
• Sub-bass is excellent. Punchy, agile, with good amount of rumble.
• Mid-bass is slightly thinner than expected but got good texture. 
• Vocals are recessed. Not gonna set the world alight with midrange performance.
• Upper-midrange can feel peaky at times. I found them to be too up-front on some hard rock tracks. 
• Treble is inoffensive, decent amount of sparkle but lacks the extension and air of upper-tier stuff. 
• Good staging, not as wide or deep as E5000 but fairly balanced across all three axes. 
• Imaging is decent, did not stand out to be as much as, say, the Falcon Pro. 

IKKO OH10 Compared

People keep asking for comparisons with the IKKO OH1S “Gems”, which is redundant as both sound totally different. The OH1S is more forward and brighter, and one cannot replace the other. That’s why companies run different models simultaneously…duh!

More interesting appears to be a comparison between the OH10 and the Unique Melody 3DT with its three dynamic drivers. As you can see, both have largely overlapping frequency responses. But I have to disappoint you again as both iems sound completely different. The UM 3DT is much more analytical and less engaging than the OH10.

But what this tells us the limitations of frequency response graphs for characterizing the sound of iems.

Concluding Remarks

The IKKO OH10 gives $$$ conscious audio enthusiasts access to premium quality at a mid-tear price. With its excellent imaging, it plays in the league with the big, expensive boys…not on top, but well above the bottom.

What you sacrifice is comfort through the large and heavy earpieces and some vocals intimacy through the V-shape. But the OH10 does full justice to high-quality sources way above a phone.

It is for good reason a standard staple on our Wall of Excellence…and will remain there for a long time…and im my collection. Kudos to IKKO for demonstrating sustainability in the short-lived world of Shenzhen consumerism.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 316 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The Ikko Gems OH1S were provided by Ikko for my review and I thank them for that. I also thank Alberto and Kazi for discussion.

Get the Ikko Gems OH1s from ikkoaudio.com

Gallery

The post IKKO OH10 Review (2) – On Our Wall Of Excellence appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Strangely implemented EST causes narrow soundstage; deserves more accessories.

Executive Summary

The LETSHUOER EJ07M is a very enjoyable neutrally-tuned vivid performer with an added bass boost.

Introduction

LETSHUOER are a Shenzhen company specializing in OEM. They are having a current hit with the $149 planar magnetic LETSHUOERS12. The LETSHUOER EJ07M are the company’s current flagship iem and improved version of their very first iem, the $850 EJ07.

Whilst I am always critical with newcomers skipping elementary school and taking shortcuts, the EJ07M is a good pair. I found it first non descript, but it slowly grew on me. And it grew quite big. It is an earphone more on the lean side without being sterile.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box is…actually not much for an iem of this price: the earpieces, an occ copper cable, 2 sets of silicone eartips (S/M/L), a little box with foams, a cleaning brush, a metal case, and the paper work. Just like the S12, the EJ07M features rather small earpieces, which provide for a good and comfortable fit (for me). They are made of aviation aluminum alloy with fancy, one-of-a-kind faceplates. The company claims they block up to 26 dB of ambient noise. Their low impedance makes them easily drivable.

I found the earpieces’s haptic and form factor great, but the isolation was only soso for me. The cable’s wire structure may be of great purity/quality, there is no microphonics, however the overall jewellery effect is rather small.

LETSHUOER’s translucent standard stock tips worked well for me.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: Sony NW-A55; Macbook Air + AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt or Earstudio HUD100 (high gain); white stock tips.

The EJ07M is tuned in a gentle U-shape, with a bottom-end emphasis on sub-bass, a moderate pinna gain, and an early treble rolloff. It is essentially neutral with a sub-bass boost. The graph resembles “the personal target curve of the season” of many reviewers (we at www.audioreviews.org don’t have such a thing), which excludes disturbing peaks and other unpleasant surprises. Its presentation is on the lean but never analytical side.

Sub-bass extension is decent (and the rumble can be a bit fuzzy), mid-bass is focused/, slightly lean with a crisp attack and fast decay, much faster than expected from a single-dynamic driver. It has a good kick and tactility. There is no mid-bass hump that pounds unpleasantly against my eardrums.

Transition to the neutral lower midrange is smooth and without bleed because the low-end boost is so far below that it does not affect vocals and instruments (crisp piano), which have very concise note definition and energy. They are not overly rich but never thin and also not recessed (vocals can be intimate), and the corners can be somewhat sharp. The midrange is very clean and clear and there is no shoutiness (although we are getting close). All this makes for great speech intelligibility.

Treble rolloff starting at 4 kHz narrows the soundstage and limits sheen. This is surprising as you would expect outstanding extension from an electrostatic driver, as perfectly demonstrated in the Vision Ears Elysium, for example. High notes are very subtle and back. A very sparse use of the EST.

Soundstage has good depth but the aforementioned limited width. Dynamics is very good, there is plenty of impact in the attack. The music is more moving back and forth than sideways. Spatial cues is very good. Lean notes make for lots of space between instruments on a crowded stage and great midrange clarity. Transients are generally fast, particularly at the recessed top end. Resolution is very good!

In summary, the “edgy” EJ07M is well rounded (sic!) and does nothing wrong.

LETSHUOER EJ07M Compared

The $150 magnetic planar LETSHUOER S12 iem plays bassier, has a wider but shallower stage, a tad warmer, and therefore less neutral. The EJ07M offers better vocals rendering, better (micro-) dynamics, and similar resolution.

The more organic $600 single DD Oriolus Isabellae plays thicker, richer, softer, and more relaxed, lagging behind in resolution and crispness and energy in favour of timbre and a soothing temperature.

Compared to the warmer, bassier $699 Dunu Zen single DD, the EJ07M lacks depth and body and plays swifter and more brittle. The Zen has a pronounced upper midrange glare and an earlier treble rolloff.

Concluding Remarks

The LETSHUOER EJ07M excels by doing well in all departments, though not achieving the highest possible score in each of them. It delivers a swift, neutral sound with a boosted sub-bass and technicalities in line with its peers. Nevertheless is its main competition internal, as the excellent $150 LETSHUOER S12 is not far behind in most aspects.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 316 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The EJ07M were provided by LETSHUOER and I thank them for that.

Get the LETSHUOER EJ07M from letshuoer.net.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post LETSHUOER EJ07M Tribrid Review – Dreimal Gut appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Strong tip and source dependence; fixed cable.

Executive Summary

The Whizzer BS1 is a warm sounding iem of interesting design and haptic that, when sourced right, provides for a relaxed and resolving natural listening experience.

Introduction

Whizzer is a Shenzhen company, established in 2016, that focuses on high-quality budget to mid-tier earphones with appealing industrial designs. Apart from sound quality, they emphasize aesthetics, as seen, for example, in their Whizzer Kylin HE01 with its traditional jewelry appeal, or their minimalistic Whizzer Kylin HE03AL. Most recently, our own Durwood tackled the new Whizzer Kylin HE03D.

The new <$30 Whizzer BS1 is a “paygrade” below the above, but nevertheless features innovative optical and mechanical designs.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the iems, 2 sets of silicone eartips (wide/narrow bores), shirt clip, storage case and paperwork. The shape of the earpieces and the fixed textile cables are reminiscent of early Xiaomi iems.

The light earpieces are different from the mainstream in terms of shape with the angled short nozzles and their relative soft feeling between the fingers. Because of the short nozzles, I need long stemmed eartips. The stock ones don’t fit my ears. You have to insert the earpieces deeply to get optimal sound, though isolation remains mediocre (for my ears).

Careful, nozzle angle and shortness may not work for everybody’s ears.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: Sony NW-A55, iPhone SE (1st gen.); MacBook Air + AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt; SpinFit CP145; Azla SednaEarfit Light (long stemmed)…stock tips were too small for me.

It takes some TLC and time to unleash Whizzer BS1’s sonic qualities. And if done right, they sound amazing considering their price: warm and lush with great timbre and resolution. But it takes a warm source and the right eartips, in my case the DragonFly Cobalt and the SpinFit CP145. The “colder” Sony NW-A55 or iPhone SE in combination with the long-stemmed Azla SednaEarfit Light sounded harsh and unpleasant.

The eartips alone make a huge difference: the Azlas have better low-end rumble but also bring out that pinna gain more, which is fatiguing to my ears after a while. The SpinFits narrow the stage somewhat and clip the sub-bass slightly, but also add some smoothness to the mids.

For this earphone, you can for once, forget about the graph as it does not reflect the above characteristics and differences. Whilst the graph bears a strong resemblance to the Moondrop SSR’s, the latter is way more aggressive sounding.

The problem is that my characterization of the BS1 is in most aspects only valid for this particular setup, so please read more reviews to get the complete picture.

Sourced by MacBook Air + DragonFly Cobalt with SpinFit CP145 eartips, and a very deep insertion depth (!!!), I recorded an excellent spatial cues and a wide and tall stage with reasonable depth. The sound is slightly on the warm side, at a pleasant “temperature”.

Vocals are intimate and somewhat in the foreground without being piercing (as said, this was a different story with my iPhone SE). Note weight and note definition are both surprisingly good and enjoyable. Voices sound natural and relaxed. The upper midrange is dialed back which contributes to the more relaxed vocals and a lack of shoutiness.

This lower midrange is underlain by a clean, well layered, warm bass that can be adjusted with eartips. The Azlas produced a bit more sub-bass rumble whereas the SpinFit CP145 a more focused mid bass with still enough sub-bass extension. Speed is typical of a dynamic driver. Slam is well-dosed but not overbearing. I find the low end very composed and out of the way of the midrange – as it should be.

Treble is a bit subdued. High notes are migrating in the background but the good treble resolution makes up for it. There is no grain up there, all relaxed. What’s strange is that I don’t register that early drop-off shown in the graph. Sure, there is no overbearing 4 kHz energy but high piano notes sound well extended and sparkly.

Apart from the staging, resolution is astonshingly good across the frequency spectrum and so are layering and separation. I find my way across the stage quite well in the BS1. Transient as nimble and timbre is natural.

Concluding Remarks

The Whizzer BS1 is a different beast in that it is open back. If sourced properly, it is a very good iem that excels by its organic timbre and its surprisingly good resolution, separation, and layering.

On top of its sound qualities, it features a very unusual and interesting design. Kudos for Whizzer for having deviated once again from the same old same old the market offers.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Gallery

The post Whizzer BS1 Review – Art Nouveau appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Lean and somewhat bright in the vocals department; top-end transients a bit fast.

Executive Summary

The LETSHUOER S12 is a well executed planar magnetic iem with all the traits adherent to this technology (low distortion, tight bass response, easy to drive, better sense of imaging, deeper stage, great bass extension).

Introduction

Planar magnetic headphones are popular because of their characteristic sound, but they have been traditionally overpriced and underperforming. They have therefore largely enjoyed a life in the shade.

That until a YouTuber started a hype putting the $220 7Hz Timeless ahead of its $1000 siblings, which attracted the attention of bargain hunters. Whilst this was a bit of a deception (the “other” $200 competition was not mentioned), it started a vivid and fruitful discussion all over the forums.

LETSHUOER (formerly known as Shuoer), a company from Shenzhen, China, jumped quickly on that bandwagon and released their S12 at $50-70 lower than the Timeless. They are mainly an OEM manufacturer who came on the scene with their ambitious $850 EJ07 that received a rather lukewarm reception by analysts (it was updated to the much improved EJ07M, which I am currently analyzing). LETSHUOER also did not impress with their budget fare such as the Shuoer Tape.

To take it away, the LETSHUOER S12 is a very good iem and a keeper for me. But can it prevail against the pricier 7Hz Timeless? You may be surprised…

Planar Magnetic Drivers – What do We expect?

The main purpose of a planar magnetic driver was to optimize bass response. In the earlier days, planar magnetic headphones reached down to 20 Hz whereas dynamic drivers only to 50 Hz. On the other hand, a dynamic driver has more punch and slam.

This has changed as slam in the planar magnetics has improved. Further advantages of planar magnetic drivers are: low distortion, tight bass response, easy to drive, better sense of imaging, deeper stage, and great bass extension.

LETSHUOER S12 Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a silver-plated monocrystalline copper cable, 2 sets of LETSHUOER’s standard eartips (S/M/L), a container with foams, a much too small carrying case, and the usual paperwork.

The earpieces are of CNC machined aluminium, their build is rock solid. And they are relatively small, a characteristic also of the EJ07M. Small usually means comfortable, and that’s certainly the case here. Fit is also good for me – much better than the 7Hz Timeless with their larger “footprint”. The translucent stock eartips work well for me, but the seal is average for me (but also better than the Timeless).

The cable is somewhat unusual as it has a rather thick PVC coating, reminiscent of my mum’s clothlines. Well, it is not quite as thick but has a comparable tension/stiffness – and that without being heavy. It is funky to me, I quite like it. And it shows minimal microphonics when wiggled. The storage case is small so that I have not yet tried to squeeze the assembly into it.

In summary, the overall haptic is great and everything works right out of the box.

Sonic Characterization of the 7Hz Timeless

Equipment used: MacBook Air, Khadas Tone2 Pro/4.4 mm BAL & 3.5 mm SE or Earstudio HUD 100/high gain + JitterBug FMJ + ifi Audio iPower X; 4.4 mm stock cable with or without Cayin 4.4 mm to 3.5 mm adapter; Shuoer S12 stock eartips (translucent ones…the loaner came without eartips).

The 7Hz Timeless has been discussed in all details by the usual protagonists, including our own. Find the reviews of Alberto here and Durwood there, and Kazi’s elsewhere. And I have the Timeless on private loan while writing this.

The big schtick in the discussion, as mentioned before, is that planar magnetic iems have been underperforming and overpriced in the past and the 7Hz Timeless constitutes a much better value. At $220, a sweet spot for many, it has to prevail against an army of other models crammed in there. And, to give it away, I think the price is adequate but not sensationally low.

The 7Hz Timeless is all about bass. While it still lacks slam for many (a feature of planar magnetics) there is much bass. The extension is great, but mid-bass can be a bit much for me. It is soft, fuzzy, and occasionally boomy, and pounds mercilessly against my eardrums. I find this overwhelming and tiresome, but that’s subjective. Many may actually like that. For my personal taste, the midbass lacks composure, tightness, and spice.

Replacing the Shuoer S12’s stock ears tips with the JVC Spiral Dots took mitigated the “problem” to some extent, but did not entirely eliminate it.

Mid-bass appears to be up front on the soundstage in some tracks and covers up the whole image like a curtain, which makes for a shallow stage. And it provides for a very abrupt transition into the lower midrange up to bright, female voices. The lower midrange is naturally rather lean (another feature of planar magnetics) and vocals can be partially masked by the bass. Because of the lean and bright nature of the midrange, there can be shoutiness in some tracks.

But even in bass-less tracks vocals lack body and richness although they are articulate, very well sculptured, and natural. There is some brightness in female vocals, but they are “more lean than bright”. There is very good midrange clarity. All of these appear to be the result of the planar magnetic driver’s low distortion.

Treble is another mixed bag. Extension is great, treble resolution is good, upper transients are fast to oversharpened (“tizziness”), there is good air but also the occasional metallic sheen to it.

Technicalities are great. Timbre is ok, resolution and separation are good. Please check the big body of reviews for further details.

LETSHUOER S12 Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: Questyle QP1R on med. gain, Sony NW-A55; MacBook Air with Apogee Groove, AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, Khadas Tone2 Pro/4.4 mm BAL & 3.5 mm SE or Earstudio HUD 100/high gain + JitterBug FMJ + ifi Audio iPower X; stock cable or CEMA 6N OCC + OCC silver-plated 2.5 mm balance cable with or without the ddHiFi DJ44A adapter; stock eartips (translucent ones).

The LETSHUOER S12 carries most of the characteristics expected from a planar magnetic driver: low distortion resoling in good clarity, tight bass, deep bass extension, easy to drive, good staging…but, but but…

The S12’s bass is tight while digging deep. Midbass is well composed and focused, notes are not as rounded and soft (as in the Timeless), there is a crisp attack…and that’s the biggest different to the Timeless. A smaller but better focused kick.

This may have a few reasons, for example, the different housing shapes and the Timeless’ bigger contact area inside the concha (“bigger in-ear resonance”) and also the S12’s relatively higher frequency response above 2 kHz (which itself may be related to the housings).

The S12’s better mid-bass composure may trigger a chain effect in that the midrange is not masked and therefore clearer. Its transition from bass to lower midrange is much smoother compared the abrupt change in the Timeless…which results in a much more cohesive, balanced sound…which is the dealmaker/breaker for me.

Female voice remain articulate and lean, but are more forward and intimate, and a tad brighter, livelier, and spicier than in the Timeless. Vocals have a perceived higher energy in the S12, which plays them softer and therefore with lesser note definition. They are more prone to sibilance and shoutiness with unfavourable sources in the S12, but this has not been a problem for me.

Treble is also a mixed bad with the S12. Whilst extension and resolution are great, the transients are a bit fast up there and occasionally also yield that metallic sheen (“tizziness”) as in the Timeless.

As to technicalities. Staging is rather average, but tall, and reasonably deep (much deeper than in the Timeless). I find the staging adequate. Timbre is ok but benefits from a warm source such as the DragonFly Cobalt or Apogee Groove. Separation and instrument placement are ok. Resolution is absolutely superb and dwarves the Timeless’.

The Timeless, overall, sound a bit darker and less dynamic, more laid back but less composed than the more forward S12, which runs more into danger of being shouty. S12’s attack is crisper, Timeless have the softer transients. Note weight in the midrange is about even and could be better in both models.

When compared to a photo, the Timeless is more blurred and the S12 is sharper…but some may find the S12 overpixelated.

In summary, the S12 has the better composed bass, crisper attack, deeper stage, and better resolution than the Timeless. Everything is tighter in the S2. Compared to a car’s suspension, the Timeless is a comfortable SUV and the S12 is a sporty BMW.

In the end, it comes down to personal taste: pick your poison!

LETSHUOER S12 Driver = 7Hz Timeless Driver?

There are voices that speculate that both models have the same planar magnetic driver. After all, both models graph identically up to 2 kHz, and the differences above are just minor variations, possibly caused by the different housings. And some of the sonically perceived differences can be the product of the interactions between housings and our conchas.

We have also insider information that points to this as well as indirect evidence from upper harmonics measurements. Apparently, this OEM driver has been catching dust on the market for quite some time.

LETSHUOER, upon my request, are evasive and dwell on numbers: the Timeless has a 14.2 mm, the S12 a 14.8 mm driver – so they are different. Or one is a variation of the other? Stop, it all depends how (accurately) you measure them (e.g. front, back…).

The question is why nobody wants to admit to it? The answer is easy: to keep peaceful coexistence of companies as one could sue the other for “copycatting”. This could be a huge issue if one company’s model costs $$ and the competitor’s model (with the same driver) costs $$$$. Examples exist but are not widely publicized to protect the lucrative “kilobuck” markets.

So, unless somebody has cracked both models open, the driver question will be shrouded in mystery. At least for you :).

More LETSHUOER S12 Comparisons

We are in for some surprises. The S12 killed my beloved Final E5000 with my Questyle QP1R reference dap in these aspects: staging, transparency, really good transients, and upper extension. I hope I just had a bad morning when testing these two. The Final has a narrower stage lesser upper extension, less clarity…but more bass quantity.

The KBEAR TRI I3 Pro Pro is less cohesive than the S12 with a narrower stage, lesser resolution, and less midrange clarity. The I3 Pro is less balanced. Resolution is much better in the S12, which also has the crisper attack with more pizazz.

The Moondrop KATO offers a narrower stage because of early treble rolloff. It is slimmer in the bass and the upper midrange but still comes across as not less shouty. It also lacks richness in the lower midrange, a full orchestra’s crescendo comes across as somewhat lean in comparison. The S12 excels in resolution. It is much more bass dominated without overbearing midbass. Higher notes in horn sections as not as incisive as in the Kato, which is a bit scratchy in the upper mids in comparison.

The $600 LETSHUOER EJ07M shows better carved out vocals, is less bassy, has a narrower and deeper soundstage, better dynamics, and better resolution. Its presentation is lean(er) but never on the analytical side.

Concluding Remarks

I absolutely love the LETSHUOER S12. It is reasonably priced and I have yet to find a competitor in this price category that sounds as good. I also prefer the LETSHUOER S12 over the Timeless for five main reasons: better fit, tighter bass, deeper stage, better resolution, and a lower price.

LETSHUOER, ey! Never judge a book by its covers.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 302 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The LETSHUOER S12 was sent to me unsolicited by the company. The 7Hz Timeless wass on private loan from Super Best Audio Friend Rockwell. A huge thanks to both. At the time of publication, this S12 specimen was on a “West of Centre” Canadian tour to Rockwell and co-blogger Biodegraded. You may find their impressions over at SBAF.

Get the Shuoer S12 from letsshuoer.net

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post LETSHUOER S12 Review – Compared to 7Hz Timeless appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — No pre-amp function/headphone jack; 4.4 balanced output is currently still a rare standard.

Executive Summary

The EarMen Tradutto is a natural, quasi-neutral sounding DAC that distinguishes itself from the competition through its minimalistic, artsy design and streamlined functionality. It works with headphone amps and stereo systems alike. A DAC for the demanding purist.

Introduction

Traduttore is Italian for “translator”. Tradutto is obviously a play on this as a digital analog converter translates zeros and ones into sound. And that’s what this $799 unit does: it is a DAC without a (headphone) amp. Its job is to create a quality audio signal that is then amplified by another device.

Across the Adriatic sea from Italy is Serbia, home of EarMen’s production facilities. From here you get “Made in Europe”. The company itself is registered in Chicago, IL. It was established in 2019 as a spinoff of Serbian premium manufacturer Auris Audio.

So far, EarMen have focused on few products of high quality. Their TR-amp is a great $250 portable, battery-operated DAC/amp that does justice to even to 300 ohm cans such as the Sennheiser HD 600. Their $200 Sparrow dongle features two circuits, of which the balanced produces the largest soundstage of my test population. Both devices are currently on our very own Wall of Excellence.

The Tradutto is EarMen’s first true “desktop size” device, although its use is not limited to workspaces and personal stereo, but it can also be deployed with a full size stereo system.

Specifications

Unfold for Full Specifications

Inputs	BlueTooth QCC5124	Bluetooth 5.1 ( AAC, SBC, aptX, aptX HD, aptX LL )
	USB
	TOSLINK	S/PDIF optical
	Coax	S/PDIF
Outputs	RCA (SE output)	output impedance = 300 Ω
	Balanced 4.4mm	output impedance = 600 Ω
Audio Formats	PCM	up to 768kHz
	DSD	DoP64, DoP128, DoP256, native DSD512
	DXD	up to 768kHz
	MQA	OFS (MQB/MQA Core), MQA,  MQA Studio
	Bluetooth	44.1kHz – 192kHz/16bit – 24bit
Single-end output
	USB input	S/PDIF input/BT
Output Level	2Vrms 0dBFS	2Vrms 0dBFS
THD+N	0.0003%	0.0003%
SNR	>116dB	>116dB
	A-Weighted	A-Weighted
Freq. Response	±0.014dB	±0.006dB
Fully Balanced Output
	USB input	S/PDIF input/BT
Output Level	4Vrms 0dBFS	4Vrms 0dBFS
THD+N	0.0003%	0.0003%
SNR	>120B	>122dB
	A-Weighted	A-Weighted
Freq. Response	±0.03dB	±0.003dB
Dimension LxHxW	150x30x150 mm	5,9″x1,18″x5,9″
Weight	550 gr	1,21lbs

[collapse]

Technology/Architecture

The Tradutto hosts the XMOS 16-core receiver chip and the ES9038Q2M DAC chip. The XMOS 16-core  (XU216) is one of the standards in premium DACs for processing the data received by the USB/S/coaxial inputs. It handles MQA decoding in the Tradutto, for example.

Similarly, the ES9038Q2M is a proven DAC chip that processes digital audio files up to 32bit/768kHz or DSD512.  You can find this chip across the board, from the $2150 Burson Conductor 3 (contains two of them), through the $300 DragonFly Cobalt and $200 Khadas T2 Pro, to the $80 Shanling UA2. EarMen’s own $250 TR-Amp also features this chip.

The (Un)Importance of the DAC chip: None of these “ES9038Q2M” devices sound alike (I have not auditioned the Burson). Against the echo chamber of “experts”, a DAC chip alone does not create a characteristic sound but is mainly responsible for the handling of audio formats. As Paul McGowan of PS Audio told me “The way a DAC sounds has everything to do with its output stage and little to do with its DAC chip”. Because of this general misconception, and to protect themselves from misinformation, many manufacturers do not disclose the DAC chip used at all (e.g. Sony). Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio adds the other factors that create the sound: power, filters, analog design, digital design, software etc. In order to compare DAC chips, everything else has to be identical, as for example in iPods Classic that featured either Wolfson or Cirrus chips.

Tradutto’s sound and sound quality are actually determined by the DAC’s analog part, which is the result of a combination of parts and engineering.

After filtering the signal’s jagged edges coming out of the DAC (chip), the output analog stage performs several duties, for example, amplifying, additional filtering, removing distortions and residual DC, buffering, and providing balanced and single-ended outputs.

The Tradutto’s analog output stage feature German WIMA quality capacitors “for high-end audio applications” to minimize THD, audio electrolytes in combination with American MELF low noise resistors, and SoundPlus OPA1642 operational amplifiers (“op-amps”) by Texas Instruments.

But even more important than the parts is the engineering. EarMen claim to have minimized jitter (“packet errors”) through the separation of DAC and analog part by the power supply. The printed circuit board is gold plated for optimal contacts. And the solid metal chassis minimizes external interference.

The Tradutto incorporates the Bluetooth QCC5124 SoC (“System on Chip”) for wireless listening – that follows the Bluetooth 5.1 standard.

Last but not least, the Tradutto features a fully balanced circuit, which will work with your balanced amplifier.

Physical Things

In the box is way more than stated in the manual. Apart from the DAC, remote control, power supply with adapters for worldwide mains access, Bluetooth antenna, and user manual, further included are a USB cable, a mesh bag for the power supply, and a microfibre cloth.

The Tradutto is a very compact but rather heavy device in its sturdy aluminum enclosure. The combination of relatively tall feet and the clean, square shape with sharp corners give it a minimalistic elegance with Italian design charisma.

The designers clearly had optical and haptical appeal in mind down to the smallest detail, which includes the font selected for the name on the front. The Tradutto therefore does not only address our ears, but also our eyes (and fingers)…and therefore all senses.

Functionality and Operation

It does

• create a full, rich, dynamic, natural sound
• connect to balanced and single-ended amplifier circuits
• accepts a variety of sources per Bluetooth (phone, dap), USB (computer), and coaxial/optical (CD player)
• come with a nifty rechargeable remote

It does not

• amplify
• work as pre-amp
• feature selectable filters

Front Panel

The minimalistic design is complemented by very clean operational elements on the front panel: 4 buttons with an audible, rugged quality mechanism and an unobtrusive OLED display that gives you bit/kHz numbers for the USB connection, and “COAX”, “TOS”, or “BT” for the other input options.

No dial knob, no “dancing” colour graphs, no selectable filters — form clearly follows function. The Tradutto is designed to work, to translate zeros and ones into the best possible, natural sound. No amplification, no headphone jack. That’s it.

Back Panel

The rear panel features all inputs/outputs (from L to R): 12 V SMPS power supply, Bluetooth antenna, optical, and S/PDIF in, and RCA and 4.4 cm balanced out. 4.4 cm balanced is not the most common standard but it saves space compared to an XLR socket. A 12 V SMPS power supply is included.

Remote

The Tradutto’s front panel’s four buttons are mirrored on the included remote.

The remote is made of metal, has a great haptic, and its buttons have the quality spring mechanism experienced at the front panel.

It charges through any 5V power supply/computer socket through its USB-C socket. Charger and cable are not included.

Sound

One thing I am horrified of in DACs/amps is sonic sterility. I am a child of the pre-digital era going back to the late 1970s, and – with earphones – sacrifice detail resolution for organic sound.

One of the biggest shortcomings of low-quality DACs is a lack of realism and depth of stage, but added sharpness, and a thin, distant midrange. After all, both a $4000 or a $100 DAC do one thing, and one thing only: create sound (quality), that then needs to be amplified. A wow effect does rarely indicate quality: it is the long-term enjoyment that counts.

I tested the Tradutto with headphones in a desktop setting, and also with speakers on my big stereo system. I could not test the 4.4 mm balanced owing to lack of a balanced amplifier.

w. Headphones

Equipment used: Macbook Air (WiFi off, battery operated) with different USB cables (stock, Belkin Gold, AudioQuest Forest), Questyle QP1R with Lifatec USA optical cable, iPhone SE (1st gen.); AudioQuest Golden Gate RCA interconnects; Burson Funk amp; Sennheiser HD 600 headphones.

It is very difficult to isolate the sound of a single stereo component in a chain so that I arrived at my description through comparison with other DACs.

My general impression is that the Tradutto plays very natural, very maturely, never analytical, never lean, never sharp or aggressive. It has natural dynamics and is well composed across the frequency spectrum.

Bass is tight, lower midrange is rich and full, there is no upper midrange glare, and cymbals at the top decay naturally and are well resolving. Soundstage is wide with great spatial cues.

Dynamics is naturally dosed, never overwhelming or too polite.

When substituting the Macbook/Tradutto source/DAC with the portable Questyle QP1R DAP (its built-in DAC is believed to rival $500-700 desktop DACs), there was quite a sonic difference: the Macbook/Tradutto combo had better dynamics, clarity, and extension.

Substituting the Tradutto with other ES9038Q2M chip devices removed any doubt on the general misconception of the role of a DAC chip for sound.

The $250 EarMen TR-amp (as DAC) sounds slightly warmer than the Tradutto and it lacks the upper extension — but it can compete with the amount of bass. It does not rival the Tradutto’s soundstage, clarity, separation, and detail resolution. But it never sounded sharp or digital, harsh or lean. The Tradutto sounded livelier, better extended, with better defined notes. TR-amp is thinner and less dynamic/energetic.

The Khadas Tone2 Pro sounds flat with an attenuated midrange. It lacks depth in comparison to the other two devices. Voices sound lean and distant, which adds a component of air and a good stage width. But it lacks richness and body.

AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt without dedicated line-out needs more of the Burson’s amping power than the other DACs (I only set its output volume to 80% to avoid distortion). It lacks a bit in dynamics but sounds rather organic and natural – and surprisingly full and rich. The Tradutto has more bite, it plays bigger and clearer…

In summary, none of these DACs sound alike.

w. Stereo System

Equipment used: Marantz SA8005 SACD player with Cirrus CS4398 DAC; Blue Jeans coax cable, Sys Concept 1300 strand optical cable, AudioQuest Evergreen RCA connectors; Luxman L-410 stereo amplifier; Heybrook HB1 speakers & Sennheiser HD 600 headphones.

Using CDs as source, I could easily A/B between the SA8005’s integrated Cirrus 4398 DAC and the Tradutto, and also A/B between the Tradutto’s coax and optical inputs.

The Marantz ($1400 CAD in 2014) is known for its smooth, rich, clean, well balanced tone quality and its natural reproduction. It has a sweet treble but lacks a bit of sparkle. Its integrated DAC is at about the same price level as the Tradutto as the basic version of this player was $550 CAD at the time.

When switching between Marantz and Tradutto (coax), the difference is…essentially zero at casual listening…and therefore ignorable for everyday use. But when spending some time and using my analytical ear, the Marantz is a tad bassier and warmer with a lesser controlled, fuzzier low end. This results in a narrower stage and less lower midrange separation and resolution.

The Tradutto has the tighter, faster low end and better note definition up to the lower midrange. It also plays a tad warmer than neutral (but less so than the Marantz) – which appears to be EarMen’s house sound (also found in TR-amp, Sparrow, and Eagle).

Towards the top of the spectrum Tradutto (coax) has a slightly better extension and both offer natural decay of high notes e.g. cymbals. And that’s where mediocre DACs fail — they sound articial.

Both Tradutto and Marantz have no attenuation in the midrange, no lean vocals, they are rich and lush. Vocals are better aligned in 3D space in the Tradutto, which also has the wider stage.

When switching from coax to optical, there is a difference in that the TOSLINK produces slightly slower transients compared to coax. The notes are more rounded and the sonic image is a tad smoother – also compared to the Cirrus DAC. Again, the differences are small.

Overall, the Tradutto is slightly better composed across the frequency spectrum than the Marantz — which plays essentially no role for my system for everyday use.

I re-produced the results with the Sennheiser HD 600 plugged into the Luxman amp.

What we learn is that the Tradutto sounds natural and not analytical or aggressive or lean. It does its job very well.

Bluetooth

The Qualcomm SoC delivers pretty much a prefab standard sound in a black “box” where the engineer cannot optimize the sound.

I A/B-ed Bluetooth vs. coax with two iPhones (same music), one hardwired into the Marantz, the other wireless per Bluetooth.

Bluetooth plays quieter, it looses some richness and intimacy, and is edgier, but it is still decent, and more than good enough for casual listening.

Connection was great, I walked around the 1000 sq ft floor of my house (with the iPhone) and never had any problems.

Concluding Remarks

After 2 months of testing, I conclude that the EarMen Tradutto does what it is supposed to do: generate an analog audio signal of the highest quality. And it promptly delivers. It is sonically marginally ahead of my high-end Marantz SA8005 SACD player and beats all other ES9038Q2M devices I compared it to by a mile.

Apart from its sonic capabilities, the Tradutto is aesthetically pleasing (“Italian design”) and handles well, with high-quality button mechanisms and a rechargeable remote.

The Tradutto is a mature product with Auris Audio’s experience behind it. It is small enough to fit on your desk/stereo system, easy to operate, and it sounds great. What else do we want?

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The EarMen Tradutto was supplied by EarMen for my review and I thank them for that. You can purchase it at the EarMen Shop. I thank Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio and Paul McGowan of PS Audio for discussion.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post EarMen Tradutto DAC Review – It’s Only Natural appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — None.

Executive Summary

The ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 are digital cables that are well conducting, well insulated, built rugged and priced right. And they add optical appeal to our devices.

Introduction

ddHiFi have been favourites of our blog for quite some time. They produce very well designed, functional AND optically appealing audio accessories and even earphones.

I have tested their TC25i and TC28i adapters, their Carrying Case C-2020 as well as their Janus E2020A and Janus E2020B earphones. And I purchased a few of their audio adapters. For their accessories, the whole company is attached to our Wall of Excellence.

In this article, I am analyzing the MFi06 and TC03, two USB cables in the broadest sense. Both have a USB-C connector on one and, the MFi06 has a lightning plug on the other, and the TC03 a micro USB plug.

And all USB cables are equal, right? Zeros and ones transfer the sound, the stock cable is as good as the snake oil ones at $$$.

Erm, stop. Not always. The signal carried by the cable is not only zeros and ones (which are actually transmitted as voltage fluctuations), there may be some noise riding along the lines that affects sound quality. Two kinds of noise exist, “Electromagentic Interference” (EMI) and “Radio-Frequency Interference” (RFI).

If the data line is not effectively shielded, nearby electrical components (e.g., switching power supplies, other fluctuating electrical/magnetic fields from computer circuitry) can contribute to EMI that might pollute the USB data.”

Running power and data lines (from a phone or computer) through a single USB cable can cause additional interference and exacerbate the issue. Decrapifiers such as the AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ act as filters to reduce such pollution, but a “good” USB cable adds to this effect, too.

“Good” does not refer to the wire (that’s where the snake oil is) but to the insulation of the power and data lines against each other. In other words, a quality cable does not add anything, it makes sure that nothing is taken away from the signal quality.

A well-known example of the positive effects of insulation is the EarMen Sparrow dongle, that, when operated with a phone, can show strong interference in the shape of intermittent buzzing and clicking (subsides when switching the phone function off). The culprit is the stock cable, and a good third-party cable strongly reduces (but might not completely eliminate) the problem.

One measure of the shielding effectiveness of different cables, the resistance of shield terminations, was investigated in this thread.

Good-quality, well-shielded USB cables do not have to be expensive. USB audio pioneer Gordon Rankin reported very poor $$$ USB cables to me. It is all about the cable’s design, not the price.

ddHiFi are a company that offer a large range of imaginative, well designed, and well built accessories….and even a couple of earphones.

Physical Things

Both cables are 8 cm long. Wire material is high-purity silver-plated OCC copper.

Four strands of separately insulated wire serve as conductor. The inner insulation is teflon. The outer insulation is thermoplastic polyurethane imported from Germany. The aluminum alloy connector are cased in stainless steel to minimize external interference.

Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) is any of a class of polyurethane plastics with many properties, including elasticity, transparency, and resistance to oil, grease, and abrasion. Technically, they are thermoplastic elastomers consisting of linear segmented block copolymers composed of hard and soft segments.

As it appears, these cables are technically sound. They feature good conductors and sufficient internal and external insulation. Sonically, they are indistinguishable from the OEOTG cable and one other brand of which I could not identify (see photo at the bottom of this article).

Haptically, the MFi06 and TC03 are vastly superior over the typical stock cables and the Apple Camera Adapter. The connectors feel rugged, the cable is flexible and the shiny, pearly white TPU is dirt and grease resistant.

And, let’s face it, these cables also add a jewelry effect to our gear. Yep, they don’t just feel good between the fingers, they also look good.

All good so far, only one worry remains: the MFi06’s battery consumption.

MFi06’s Battery Consumption

The MFi06’s lightning connector features a decoding chip which draws current from the phone. The question is how much it contributes to the phone’s battery drain.

I measured battery consumption of different dongles (AudioQuest DragonFly Red, Shanling UA2 single ended, Hidisz S9 Pro single ended) with the Apple Camera Adapter vs. the MFi06. I then repeated these tests with two other Lightning to USB-C cables (OEOTG and an unknown brand) for comparison purposes. All tests were performed under identical conditions. The absolute values are meaningless, what is important are the relative values.

.

Results:

1) The Apple Camera Adapter has by far the lowest power consumption.

2) In my 3 h tests, the 3rd-party MFi chip in the ddHiFi MFi06 cable consumed between 130 and 220 mAh (23%-36%) more (for my specific test parameters) than the one in the Apple Camera Adapter.

3) All three tested 3rd-party cables appear to have the same MFi chip (approx. same battery consumption with Shanling UA2).

4) Battery consumption of the ddHiFi MFi06 cable varies vastly between dongles. It is much lower for the DragonFly Red that consumes by far the least battery with the Apple Camera Adapter.

In summary, the MFi06’s power consumption is acceptable for today’s ever increasing phone battery capacities.

Concluding Remarks

The ddHiFi TC03 and MFi cables do what they are supposed to do: they work as promised while adding appeal to our devices. And they don’t break our piggy banks.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

THE MFi06 and TC03 cables were supplied by the ddHiFi for my review – and I thank them for that.

Get them from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

Gallery

The post ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 Digital Cables Review – Unplugged appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Summary

These two single-chip dongles (Bolt: ESS9281 Pro, UA1: ESS9218 Pro) are superficially similar but quite different sounding. The Bolt can be summarized as clean and midrange-focused, the UA1 as bass- and upper-mid-emphasized (more “Harman”). Which is preferred will depend on the transducers they’re paired with as well as the tastes (and budget) of the listener.

For this comparison I listened with JVC HA-FDX1 single DD & Ultimate Ears UE900S quad BA earphones to 16/44.1 FLAC files played via USB Audio Player Pro from a Nokia 4.2 Android phone. The Bolt is currently $110, the UA1 $45. For details on physical things, specs, etc., see Jürgen’s individual reviews here and here.

Helm Bolt

In summary, the Bolt’s tonal/timbral package is warm in the bass and more clean & precise in the upper mids & treble. With some material, these contrasting characters make it seem a bit disconnected top to bottom. While having good weight in the bass, bass & sub-bass can come across as a bit boomy, un-defined (one-note) & soft, particularly with the source-picky JVC HA-FDX1. 

With the UE900S, though, the tendency for softness in the bass goes away and the rounder character benefits the otherwise lean BA bass notes. Treble is extended but not overemphasized; ‘sweet’ would be the old-school audiophool term. The clean nature of the mids and highs gives a very good sense of instrument separation and imaging. 

Overall I found the Bolt to be very good with UE900S – they sound ‘cleaner’ than from other SE dongles I’ve tried them with and the tonal balance benefits their lean-in-the-bass, low-in-the-upper mids, tizzy-up-top character.

Shanling UA1

First impression of the UA1 is of good top-to-bottom integration and good resolution, with dynamics that are more consistent in character across the range. The top end is well defined but well controlled, not splashy. There’s good bass: with HA-FDX1, sub-bass definition & extension are certainly there, both better than with the Bolt.

However, the UA1’s upper mids are a bit nasal/honky/shouty, particularly with the FDX1s which are a bit elevated there. With those ‘phones the UA1 is more balanced at the extremes than the Helm, but a bit tonally and timbrally off in the mids.

With the UE900S, the bass remains good but the upper mids & treble come off as overexaggerated, sibilant and a bit hashy compared to the Bolt. Cable games might help this, but I’m not optimistic.

Matching

Comparing these two dongles with these two earphones shows the importance of synergy: the Helm is a much better driver for the UE900S than the UA1 is. The sweeter treble of the Helm helps balance the 900s’ overdone highs, and although the 900s’ dipped upper mids would ostensibly seem a better fit with the UA1’s tendency for shoutiness, they actually seem cleaner and better balanced there with the Bolt. The Bolt’s softer, rounder bass isn’t a problem, as it makes the 900s sound a bit more natural. With the FDX1s, however, the Bolt gives a very soft sub-bass compared to the UA1. Conversely, while the bass of the UA1 matches the FDX1s better, its Harmanish tonality does their upper mids no favours.

It’s tempting to attribute differences in the bass, in particular, to differences in output power.  According to Audio Science Review’s measurements, the Bolt clips at 60 mW into 32 Ohms and about 56 mW into 16 Ohms (HA-FDX1 impedance). Shanling specifies the UA1’s power output as 80 mW into 32 Ohms. The difference between the two dongles isn’t large and I doubt it tells the whole story, because the DragonFly Black is very anemic at 18 mW into 32 Ohms yet the HA-FDX1s don’t lose the definition in the sub-bass when fed from the Black to the extent that they do from the Bolt (warmth of the Black’s signature aside). I conclude that with these dongles, transducer synergy is ‘a thing’.

Other Quick Comparisons

Audioquest Dragonfly Black: pleasant warm emphasis (more than the Bolt), but everything softened and resolution lost (blurred, even a bit scratchy or fuzzy in the highs) compared to the Bolt and UA1. Would view as smooth if not by comparison. Smooth (but not soft) in the bass & lower mids; relaxing with the FDX1s.

Apple dongle: softer than DragonFly Black throughout, not as warm though.

EarMen Sparrow single-ended output: Bolt has better macrodynamics, more and cleaner treble, and is more resolving. UA1 has better note definition (resolution). Sparrow balanced output bests both in dynamics & resolution.

Ifi iDSD Nano BL SE (unfair comparison because: not a dongle, battery powered, 200 mW @ 16 Ohms, significantly more expensive; but included here for completeness because I compared it): darker tonal balance, timbre across the range more integrated, balance between dynamic swings & transient speed more even (maybe a little on the slow side compared to the ESS sound, but to me more natural because of that; organic). S-Balanced is a notable step up over SE in ‘cleanliness’.

Conclusion

It was interesting to hear such different sonic characters from these superficially similar dongles. I hesitate to recommend one over the other as transducer synergy, based on my admittedly limited trials, seems to be important. In general terms, I’d suggest that the Shanling UA1 might be the better match if you have ‘phones that are known to be demanding in the bass; and the Helm Bolt might be the better if you have ‘phones you find at the edge of your tolerance in the upper mids.

Disclaimer

These two dongles were sent to Jürgen for review by Helm Audio and Shanling, who we thank for the opportunity to hear them.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

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

The post Helm Bolt vs Shanling UA1 USB Dongle DAC/Amps Review – Freedom of Choice appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Gear of the Year: 2021 marks the blog’s third year and the second with 8 contributors. We collectively published almost 200 articles, mainly product reviews, but also technical information. Apart from receiving review units from manufacturers and sellers, we also purchased a lot…and we borrowed from audiophile friends and colleagues.

We are a heterogeneous bunch not pressed into templates by commercialism. Each of us enjoys maximum freedom. None of us gets paid. And it is this variety that makes this blog interesting. Two of us, Baskingshark and Kazi, have been drafted to also write for Headphonesty, which gives them more exposure and also access to very interesting gear.

We are currently experimenting with generic advertisements to recover our operating cost (Paypal does not work at all)…any money raised will go back into the blog. We remain non commercial.

Our main focus has traditionally been on earphones – we have reviewed almost 300 – but particularly DACs and amps also caught our attention this year.

As at the end of the previous years, we list our our personal favourites of 2021 – the portable audio we personally enjoyed most. There are no rules, we just tell you what we like. After all, the gear we use most is our best. And we attached some of this gear to our newly created Wall of Excellence, which averages all our opinions.

Enjoy this read and we wish you a happy and successful 2023!

We thank

Most of our reviews would have not been possible without our 2021 cooperating partners. We thank:

ADV, Allo, Apos Audio, Astell & Kern, AudioQuest, Azla, Blon, BQEYZ, Burson Audio, Campfire Audio, Cayin, CCA, Dekoni, Dunu, ddHiFi, EarMen, Easy Earphones, Fiil, Helm Audio, Hidizs, HifiGo, ifi Audio, IKKO Audio, KBEAR/TRI Audio, Keephifi, Khadas, Knowledge Zenith, Meze, Moondrop, Musicteck, NiceHCK, OneOdio, Penon Official Store, Pergear, Sennheiser, Shanling, Shenzhenaudio, Smabat, Snake Oil Sound, SpinFit, Tempotec, Tin Hifi, TRN Official Store, Unique Melody, Venture Electronics, Whizzer Official Store, Yaotiger Hifi Audio Store. Don’tkillusifweforgotyoujustsendusanotandwefixit. 

For the companies: you can check for your products/yourself in the search field on the right-hand side.

We also thank the private sources that supplied us with loaners.

And here we go…that’s what we enjoyed in 2021…

Alberto Pittaluga…Bologna, ITALY

I’ve come accross quite a few interesting pieces of gear in 2021, mixed / hidden amongst piles of shameful crap. Nothing new, is it ? I’ll try to make a succint list of the most significant stuff I auditioned here. Most of these devices are also now part of my operative audio gear.

IEMS

Dunu ZEN (discountinued, was $ 699,00) : beyond spectacular microdynamics, resolution, layering and technicalities in general. A masterpiece.

iBasso IT07 ($899) : the sole real “direct upgrade” to Ikko OH10 I encountered as of yet. Same presentation, twice the refinement, at more than four times the price.

Oriolus Isabellae ($ 599) : somewhat “more V-shaped” alternative to Zen, delivering very similar technical prowess.

Ikko OH1S ($143) : a potential new join into the our World of Excellence roster as a sub-200$ allrounder

Headphones

Final Sonorous-II  (€ 300) : arguably by far the best neutral-tuned closebacks in their price category, staging and imaging easily compete with many lower tier openback alternatives.

Sennheiser HD600 (€ 310) : not a novelty for anybody but me, I’m sure. Quite simply: I got my first HD600 pair in 2021 and that’s why I’m listing it here. I presume no one needs a description. Do you?

Earbuds

Rose Mojito ($259) : superbly neutral-tuned high end earbuds with strong bilateral extention, beyond spectacular mids and vivid, refined highs in a fully holographic stage, with plenty of resolution and dynamics.

K’s Earphone Bell-LBS (€ 59,25) : mid centric buds delivering superbly organic vocals – both male and female – and very good trebles

K’s Earphone K300 (€ 28,59) : unreal sub-bass extension for an earbud, they deliver a very nice V shaped presentation while drawing an incredibly sizeable 3D stage. Presentation remembers a bit Ikko OH10, but in earbud form.

DAC/AMPs

Ifi Micro iDSD Signature (€ 749) : top sub-$1K mobile dac-amp. Very high quality DAC reconstruction paired with superbly transparent amping stage with power to spare for the most demanding planars and power deflation options to optimise low impedance IEM biasing. Truly a full step ahead of the competitors’ pack.

DAPs

Cowon Plenue 2 MK-I (€ 835) : hopped on this recently when I found a impossible to turndown openbox deal. Starting from my direct experience proving that there’s pretty much no game between proprietary-OS DAPs vs commercial-OS (read Android) DAPs, the former being in by far better position to achieve superior output sound quality, Plenue 2 represents a great companion to my QP1R offering a different / alternative optimal pairing opportunity for a few of my preferred IEM drivers.

DAC/AMP Dongles

This year’s experience proved to me that exclusively higher-tier (and price) dongles are able to deliver sound qualities worth the comparison with battery-equipped alternatives. Simply put: pretty much nothing until an Apogee Groove ($200) is really worth the price difference compared to the super-cheap Apple Dongle ($9), and even on the Groove some caveats apply (power needs, amp stage competibility).  That said, I really had pick one device “in the midfield” I’d pick the :

Questyle M12 ($139,99): while still not worth an inclusion on our Wall of Excellence, yet M12 runs circles around pretty much all similar or lower priced competitors I assessed in terms of extension, note weight, clarity and technicalities.

Biodegraded…Vancouver, CANADA

Doesn’t have anything to report this year.

Durwood…Chicago, USA

Shozy Form 1.4 has still been my go to earphone due to it’s warm inviting nature, great technical abilities and it feels great in my ears.

7Hz Timeless is another good buy late in the year for me, it’s a little more sub-bass plus analytical counterpart to the Shozy that has nudged the BQEYZ Spring 2 out of the way. A more detailed review is coming.

I rediscovered the Senfer UES for a quick throw around set, was hoping the Senfer DT9 was a slight improvement, but alas the Senfer UES sticks around instead. Sony MH755 is also perfect for quick on the go usage where I don’t need the universal fit in-ears.

Tempotec impressed me enough to consider the Sonata E35 for when good phone DAP’s are finally dead. Other than that, dongles are not my thing, and I have issues with some of Sony’s GUI decisions on the NW-A55 mainly related to playlist creation and long text support.

Lastly, the Questyle CMA Twelve would be an awesome DAC/amp combo to have, but my needs are more mobile. Perhaps when life slows down, but there are other bucket list items such as the Burson Playmate 2, RebelAmp, the Ruebert Neve RNHP, or RME ADI-2 that look interesting as well. Maybe someone will loan me one in 2022?

Jürgen Kraus…Calgary, CANADA

Earphones have traditionally been our main trade and there’s not many that stuck with me this year. First and foremost, I was impressed by the immersive and engaging sound of the single DD Dunu Zen that further excel in microdynamics. They are still very popular within our team.

Moondrop finally got it right with their tuning in the smooth and very pleasant sounding Moondrop KATO single dynamic driver. This model is generally well received. The JVC HA-FDX1 are still my standard iems for equipment testing, and an honourable mention goes to the Unique Melody 3DT for the clean implementation of 3 (!) dynamic drivers.

Another iem that fascinated me is the Japanese Final E5000. On the market since 2018, and very source demanding, this iem can produce a bass texture beyond belief. I have become a bit of a Final fanboy, as their products are unpretentious and natural sounding…and they fit my ears very well. I also purchased the Final E1000, E3000, and A3000…which get a lot of usage. No surprise that our Wall of Excellence is decorated like a Christmas tree by quite a few of these Japanese earphones and headphones.

Expanding my horizon into other devices, the Sony NW-A55 is a user-friendly digital audio player with great sonic characteristics and signature-altering 3rd party firmware options. But, most of all, it updates its music library within a minute or two. For the ultimate portable enjoyment, I discovered the Questyle QP1R dap...sounds simply amazing with the Final E5000. Found the dap on Canuck Audio Mart.

Dongles, battery-less headphone DAC/amps that turn any cheap phone into a decent music player, were big in 2021. Around since 2016, the market caught on to these devices. But out of the mass of dongles tested, the 2019 AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt was the most musical to my ears. I also like the AudioQuest DragonFly Red and the EarMen Eagle (replacing the EarMen Sparrow which I sent to Biodegraded). For earphone testing (and bigger cans), I still use the excellent Earstudio HUD100.

For my full-sized headphone needs with my notebook, I discovered the powerful Apogee Groove, a current-hungry dongle DAC/amp that has been around since 2015. I am even portable around the house. As to headphones themselves, I am still happy with the Sennheiser HD 600 and HD 25, but also with the Koss Porta Pro.

For my desktop setup, I identified the EarMen Tradutto as being a fantastic DAC in combination with the Burson Funk amp. Currently testing the Tradutto with my big stereo system.

In summary, I learnt a lot in 2021…

My Take Home this Year

• The latest is barely the greatest…many old brooms get better into the corners
• Influencers are not always right (…to say it nicely)
• Measurements are overrated
• Timbre (degree of naturalness of sound) is underrated
• Source is super important and also underrated
• Group pressure through hype may become a sobering experience
• That groomed YouTube stuff is boring

Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir…Munich, GERMANY

This year was very educational for me when it came to audiophilia. I got the chance to try out truly summit-fi setups and realized how good a system can sound. This also resulted in a sense of yearning where you keep comparing the gears you own with the ones you cannot own, at least not yet. Nonetheless, without further ado.

Headphones: The one headphone that has stuck with me throughout the year is the Hifiman Susvara. They won’t flatter anyone with the build quality but when paired with the right amp they sound astonishing. One of the most natural sounding headphones out there with exceptional timbre. A must listen.

Honorable mention goes to the Final D8000. Supreme bass that’s pretty much unmatched. On the budget side, I really liked the Final Sonorous-III. They are underrated and under-appreciated.

IEMs: When it comes to in-ear monitors, I have a hard time picking any single one of them as all of them fall short in one area or another. Nonetheless, the one IEM I’ve used the most throughout the year is the Dunu Zen. There is something truly addicting about their sound that makes me come back to them time and again.

However, the Zen is not the best IEM that I have heard throughout the year. That would probably be the Sony IER-Z1R or the 64Audio U12t. In the relatively budget realm, the 7Hz Timeless took me by surprise with their planar speed and excellent bass slam.

Source: Instead of going with separate sections for amps, DACs and such, I will just consolidate them into one.

Best desktop amp I’ve tried: Accuphase E380. One of those rare speaker amps that sound great with headphones.

Best portable amp I’ve tried: Cayin C9. It is the only review loaner in the past year that I have wanted to buy with my own money. I probably will, soon, budget permitting.

Best DAP: Lotoo PAW 6000, even though it can’t power difficult loads.

Best dongle: L&P W2. The only dongle that I found to be good enough to replace some DAPs.

Best DAC: Holo May L2. The price is extremely high but so is the sound quality. Exceptionally natural and neutral tuning. Another must listen.

And that’s a wrap. Have a great Christmas, and see you on the other side!

KopiOkaya…SINGAPORE

Too many lists…I focus on eartips…

Best EARTIPS of 2021

Most versatile eartips: SpinFit CP-100+
Best budget eartips: Audiosense S400
Best eartips for bass: FAudio “Instrument” Premium Silicone Earphone Tips
Best eartips for vocal: Azla SednaEarFit Crystal (Standard)
Best eartips for treble: BGVP S01
Best eartips for soundstage: Whizzer Easytips SS20
Most comfortable eartips: EarrBond New Hybrid Design

Loomis Johnson…Chicago, USA

Gear of the Year (and other Favorite Things)

SMSL SU-9 DAC/Preamp—one of those pieces that makes you seriously question why anyone would spend more. A seriously good DAC which is even better as digital preamp.

Hidisz S3 Pro DAC/Dongle—lacks the juice to power challenging loads, but has an uncanny knack for enlivening and improving more efficient phones. Very refined, with impeccable bass control.

Cambridge Melomania TWS—ancient by TWS standards, and its rivals have more features and tech, but this may still be the best-sounding TWS you can buy.

Shozy Rouge IEM—like a really hot girl you get smitten by the beauty before you even delve into the substance. Properly driven, however, these sound just as good as they look, with estimable staging and clarity.

The Beatles, “Get Back” Documentary—as probably the only person on earth who hasn’t seen Lord of the Rings I was gobsmacked by how brilliant this film looked and sounded. The real surprise for me, however, was how natural  a musician John was—unburdened by technique, but soulful and  exploratory.  Poor George invokes your pity—a good writer forced to compete with two great ones– while Ringo wins the award for Best Attitude.

Bob Dylan, “Desolation Row”—I always found the lyrics impenetrable and a bit sophomoric, but the Spanish-influenced lead guitar part is incredible, with scarcely a phrase repeated throughout the full 11 minutes. I’d always assumed it was Mike Bloomfield, but it’s actually the harmonica virtuoso Charlie McCoy, who also plays the trumpet part of “Rainy Day Women”.

Reds, Pinks and Purples, “Uncommon Weather” In hope of finding something genuinely fresh I dutifully listened to the most-touted 2021 releases before fixating on this one, which (predictably) sounds exactly like 80s Flying Nun and Sarah bands.

And This Was The Previous Year:

The post Gear Of The Year 2021 – Our Personal Favourites appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Sound could be more organic; relatively high output impedance; high battery drain, does not work with iOS devices; fixed cable; no basic accessories (e.g. USB-C to USB-A adapter).

Executive Summary

The Astell & Kern PEE51 is a dual-chip dongle dac that excels through its articulation, but its high current drain limits its portability.

Introduction

Ever since Gordon Rankin invented the phone-compatible dongle dac back in 2016 that turned even the cheapest phone into a decent digital audio player, many companies have jumped onto this bandwagon. Rankin’s original idea was a small device in the shape of a USB thumb drive without its own battery that was powered by its source, be it a phone or a computer.

The benefit was obviously both improved sound quality and increased output power. Downside of these early dongles was lack of compatibility with current-hungry, low-impedance headphones/earphones.

In recent years, phones as well as their batteries have grown in size and capacity so that most newer “dongles” draw more current, which works better with low-sensitivity iems and “bigger” headphones. This also benefits computer users, who are more concerned with amplification power than battery drain.

A big problem remains, however, in that Apple limits their devices’ current draw to 100 mA to protect battery life, which creates an incompatibility with many modern dongles.

Astell & Kern, a renowned Korean manufacturer of premium digital analog players, address music lovers with their PEE51 dongle that do not wish to carry a second device (a “dap”) in their pocket. And they decided on a technology that relies on high current draw, which does not work with Apple devices.

Specifications

Physical Things

In the box is just the dongle. Its housing and that of the the USB-C connector are made of solid metal. The braided, silver-plated, copper-shielded cable is fixed and can therefore not be exchanged/replaced. The overall haptic is very robust. The dac features a dual chipset for improved separation and crosstalk. What is not included is an adapter for connecting to a standard USB-A socket.

Functionality, Operation, Compatibility

The PEE51 does…

• work with Windows/Mac computers or Android sources with computer and Android phone
• consume a lot of battery

The PEE51 does not…

• contain a battery and draws its current from the source
• contain onboard controls…is operated from the source
• work with iOS devices
• connect to the standard USB USB-A socket (needs adapter)
• work well with 300 ohm headphones
• work well with sensitive earphones <16 ohm

The Astell & Kern PEE51 is operated from the source. A white LED on top of the case near the 3.5 mm headphone socket indicates its activity. The dongle is compatible with Windows and Mac computers, and most Android devices, but not with iOS devices. You find compatibility details on the product page.

Amplification and Power Consumption

As explained above, there are principally two end members of dongles. Such that draw little current and such that draw…erm…much. Both have their pros and cons. Little draw means limited power and sound quality but battery preservation. Good for the road. The AudioQuest DragonFlys are classic examples.

If output power has highest priority for you, go for the “battery hogs”. Better for home, ok with big Android-phone batteries. I had addressed the issue in this tech article. The Astell & Kern belongs principally to this group as it draws >100 mA. This explains the PEE51’s incompatiliby with iPhones and iPads.

But not all of the PEE551’s current goes into perceived amplification power. The 2 Vrms output power (without load) is rather average in this dongle class. Adding the relatively large output impedance of 2 ohm (the competition is <1 ohm) and the necessity to power a dual chipset make the PEE51 play quieter than other 2 Vrms dongles in my testing. It also experienced its limit when driving the 300 ohm Sennheiser headphones. It principally worked but lacked the “bite” of more powerful devices such as the Apogee Groove.

The 2 ohm output impedance may add hiss to iems with an impedance below 16 ohm (“1/8 rule”).

1/8 Rule: output impedance should not exceed 1/8th of the nominal impedance of the headphones.

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air + Sennheiser HD 600 | JVC HA-FDX1 | Final Audio E3000

The Astell & Kern PEE51 is a near-neutral, marginally warm dongle. It is fairly linear with a minimally boosted and rather dry and crisp bass. Midrange is clear and transparent. Vocals have a crisp attack without sharpness or grain, and they are a bit back. With the problematic HD 600, it lacks treble extension.

What makes the PEE51 stick out of the broad body of midprice dongles is its good articulation and note definition, which carries the handwriting of the dual chipset (that should improve separation and crosstalk).

The stage as a decent depth but only average width. I find the PEE51 deserves a bit more air and more ease, it always appears to work hard. Timbre is acceptable but not as organic as the DragonFly Cobalt’s (at twice the price). I also have to run the PEE51 at rather high volumes compared to the other dongles used.

Since any battery-less dongle is of limited sound quality, and considering the market being flooded with $100-200 devices, the PEE51 is sonically best characterized through comparisons with the competition.

Spoiler alert: these differences are only nuances. These dongles are rather close together.

The $129 EarMen Eagle sounds warmer through more bass, and more organic, and has a flatter and wider image. It has more air but lags in midrange articulation. Vocals are more intimate in the Eagle and it plays louder.

The $100 Earstudio HUD 100 MkII on high gain works much better with the Sennheiser HD 600. It has way more power and pizazz, and offers a bigger headroom. With iems on low gain, the HUD100 shows a different face as it does not have the PEE51’s crispness in the attack – and also not its depth. But it also plays louder.

The $104 Hidizs S9 Pro similar in neutrality to the PEE51, but is fuzzier in the bass and and not as resolving in the midrange. It offers a second, balanced, more powerful circuit (which I did not test in this comparison).

In terms of applicability, the HUD 100 is the most versatile as it works with all devices and even 300 ohm headphones well. The Eagle has the smallest power draw and therefore works best with iOS devices. The S9 Pro works will all, although it has a very high power draw – and is technically the worst imo. The Astell & Kern PEE51 is the technically best but has limited applications. Pick your poison.

Concluding Remarks

The Astell & Kern PEE51 is a quality dongle from a well respected manufacturer. It fits value wise and performance wise into the broad body of midprice dongles. Since none of these is perfect and suited for all applications, the listener has the torment of choice, which one to pick.

The PEE51 is optimized for hi res listening best with an android phone (with a huge battery) or a computer.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

This loaner of the Astell & Kern PEE51 was provided by the company – and had been returned at the time of publication of this article.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Astell & Kern PEE51 USB-C Dual DAC Cable Review – Articulation appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Elevated upper midrange may require micropore tape, not the greatest bass extension, a bit analytical; short nozzles/potential fit issue, mediocre cable.

Executive Summary

The Unique Melody 3DT is a gently U-shaped, marginally warm-bright sounding triple-DD earphone of excellent articulation that will appeal to most of us.

Introduction

Unique Melody from Guandong Province of China have been around since 2007. In these almost 15 years, they have built a reputation of designing audio products of the highest quality. This is my first encounter with the brand. And since I am a dynamic-driver aficionado, the 3DT with its three independent dynamic drivers is a most interesting model for me to analyze.

Yep, the Unique Melody 3DT is innovative in that its largest (!) 10 mm CNT (carbon nanotube) driver is responsible for the treble and mids, and their two smaller 7 mm compound drivers are covering the low end. The idea behind the tri-dynamic design is minimizing distortion. And it works as we will see.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the retail box are:

• Unique Melody x Dignis case x1
• Unique Melody 3DT x1
• 2-pin 0.78mm silver cable x1
• Warranty card x1
• Ear tips x8
• Unique Melody-branded cleaning cloth x1

The shells are 3D printed and their outer material is “stablized wood”, a mixture of soft, porous wood and resin, which results in a dense, impervious material. Each of the shells is unique in appearance and therefore has a custom look.

The shells are bulbous and somewhat big but also light, very similar to the Shozy 1.4’s. They are therefore rather comfortable – and insulation is excellent. I did not find them to be fingerprint magnets so that the included cleaning cloth is a bonus.

The nozzles are found being too short by some, which can provide fit problems. This is easily fixed by replacing the short-stemmed stock tips with long-stemmed ones (Azla SednaEarfit Light, long stemmed, worked well for me). Unique Melody could have included a long-stemmed set at this price.

The cable…well…it works well, has no microphonics and there is nothing really wrong with it…in fact, it is almost identical to the one that comes with the $600 Sennheiser IE 500 PRO. But it is tightly braided with a rather hard-shell material so that is appears somewhat brittle. It is certainly not the most pliable one. And it tangles easily.

The zippered storage case is pure luxury. Very nice.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: Questyle QP1R; Sony NW-A55; MacBook Air & AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt/Astell & Kern PEE51; Azla SednaEarfit Light silicone eartips (long stemmed).

TL;DR: The 3DT’s overall signature is “well timbred”, marginally warm with a bright tilt, wrapped into a gentle U with slightly recessed vocals, and an overall excellent articulation and technical capabilities. All three drivers are rather nimble. Overall presentation is cohesive.

The low end is rather speedy for a dynamic-driver iem. The two 7 mm drivers create a controlled, well-textured bass that does not reach down as deep as some wished. This results in a subtle rumble at the bottom. A thumpy mid-bass hump is avoided – something my ears would not appreciated anyway. There is enough punch for me, decay is rather quick for a dynamic driver. I’d call the low end well dosed, articulate, and it does not smear upwards into the midrange.

This articulation continues into the midrange and treble. Vocals are a bit recessed and neither thick or thin but somewhere in between. They are well defined and sculptured and NOT aggressive, although they receive some energy from a boosted upper midrange. This elevation introduces some brightness to the overall warm signature. A mod is offered in the next chapter to mitigate this.

Treble extension and resolution are very good. There is great definition and body at the top end. The highest piano and violin notes are hit with accuracy, and cymbals sound rock solid. There is no sibilance.

Soundstage is rather wide and not so deep (but deep enough), and may not be the tallest. But it makes for good spatial cues. Note definition is great, note weight is intermediate. Timbre is excellent and layering and separation are good. The image could have some more air, however.

If I had a personal criticism it would be the driver speed pushing the signature towards analytical – it could be a tad more engaging. The three drivers interact flawlessly without an transition creating a coherent image.

Unique Melody 3DT modded

The 3DT’s 3-5 kHz area range may be a bit “spicy” for sensitive ears (but only a bit). Taping the nozzle screens off with surgical 3M micropore tape (don’t use Johnson & Johnson) removes some energy from this area without altering the bottom end. It also does not affect technicalities such as resolution and staging negatively.

The resulting frequency response is much more palatable to most ears and should have been implemented by the manufacturer. We have offered this technique for many earphone models and even dedicated an article to it. This mod is cheap, easy to do, and fully reversible.

Unique Melody 3DT Compared

I compare the Unique Melody 3DT to two single dynamic drivers, the $250 JVC HA-FDX1 and the $190 Moondrop KATO. The JVCs come sonically close to the 3DT but are a tad behind with a narrower stage, less clarity in the lower midrange, and not as tight a bass. The 3DT are slightly punchier with better spatial cues. These differences are, however, relatively small.

The Moondrop KATO are “fatter” and warmer sounding than the first two, which stems from their comparatively looser bass and a richer lower midrange. Vocals in the KATO sound fuller and more analog, but at the expense of note definition and midrange clarity. The 3DT sound more analytical and technical compared to the more relaxed and “casual” sounding KATO. An analogy would be a BMW M3 sportscar with a tight suspension vs. a Jeep Cherokee.

Concluding Remarks

The Unique Melody 3DT is a most interesting, innovate triple dynamic driver design packed in 3D-printed “stabilized wood” shells, with an articulate, organic sonic signature that will appeal to most listeners. It has no deal-breaking weaknesses and, unsurprisingly, comes with the recommendation of some audio forums.

As the company’s first offering to my ears, and considering their good reputation, my high expectations were met in full. The 3DT is one of these rare “Can’t-Go-Wrong” products. Very enjoyable.

Note: when I started this review, the Unique Melody 3DT was priced at $350, but the price had dropped to a rather competitive $259 at the time of publication.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The Unique Melody 3DT was kindly provided by the manufacturer through MusikTeck – and I thank them for that.

Get the Unique Melody 3DT from MusicTeck

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

The post Unique Melody 3DT Review – Très Bon appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Poor tuning leads to bright, harsh sound with thin note weight.

Executive Summary

The Tin Hifi T2 EVO is a mistuned evolution of the Tinaudio T2 that lacks in tonality but convinces in technicalities.

Introduction

Tin Hifi (then Tinaudio) appeared as a sensation on the scene in 2018. Their $50 T2 was a neutrally tuned iem built like a tank, a rarity within the sea of V-shaped tunings. Aficionados embraced it, vulgarists taped the front vent off to increase bass…shame on those :).

The company changed their name to Tin Hifi and continued releasing iems which were hit and miss…I remember a whole army of reviewers publishing their thoughts of a new release simultaneously upon the distributor’s command. These days are over, as a single YouTuber has a much bigger outreach.

To our all surprise, the T2 EVO shares design and build with the original T2, which gives you that retro feeling. Different are the driver, the smiley on the faceplate, and the shiny finish, as well as the cable’s metal strain relief. But the haptic remains essentially the same. 

Earpieces’ red-blue colour coding at the connector is reversed compared to the original T2 because T2 EVO is meant to be worn over-ear only (the EVO’s stock cable features earhooks).

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

Just like the original T2, the T2 EVO’s accessories are spartan: storage sack, cable, two sets of the same silicone earpieces, a pair of foams, paperwork, and the earpieces. The shiny metal earpieces are as good as it gets in terms of build and haptic.

The connectors remains MMCX despite huge quality issues with Tin Hifi’s original T2 and also their T4. But, I noticed that these MMCX connectors sit VERY snug, so that I don’t expect any problems.

Fit is now exclusively over-ear as the stock cable features memory wire. Fit is good, comfort is ok, isolation is average. The stock tips were too small for me, SpinFit CP145 worked well. Owing to the low sensitivity, the T2 EVO loves amplification.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: Mabook Air + DragonFly Red/Earstudio Hud100 + JitterBug FMJ; SpinFit CP145 eartips.

TL;DR: the Tin Hifi T2 EVO is a technically competent neutralish earphone that falls completely short on its poor tuning which introduces a brightness too hot for most.

Boy, this earphone could be good. Really good. It has all the ingredients. Unfortunately, the company refuses to tune properly. A frequency response graph peaking between 4 and 5 kHz (in the human ear’s most sensitive area) and that shark fin at 15 kHz indicate an impending disaster.

What the upper midrange boost mainly does is adding midrange clarity. As an unwelcome side effect, it sharpens and attenuates vocals, which have a good note definition, but they are just too thin and sibilant. That’s where the original T2 are much better.

Bass in the EVO is reasonably tight but somewhat blunt (results vary with tips). Extension is good, but kick could be harder, culprit is lack of mid bass peak/the linear tuning. I’d call the low end rather ordinary but it is at least not overwhelming. Its bluntness removes some sparkle.

Vocals, although lean are rather realistically reproduced with reasonable intimacy. Midrange resolution is good as the lack of body leaves “a lot of space between notes”.

Treble rolloff starts in the upper midrange already, but it is revived by a shark fin peak at 15 kHz, which introduces fake resolution and clarity, air, and pain in the ears of younger listeners. Cymbals sound splashy.

Soundstage is not the widest or deepest (deep enough), but it is refreshingly tall. Timbre is very good, too.

Separation and layering are actually decent whilst dynamics is not the greatest. This iem could be very good wasn’t it for the tuning.

Tin Hifi T2 EVO modded

Covering the 90% of the screens with micropore tape reduces the glare and increases the perceived mid bass (by reducing the upper midrange). This also enriches male voices to some extent, but not enough to call it a perfect fix. As a downside, the bass becomes slower and boomier but staging improves. The micropore mod certainly improves things but still does not make you run to the store and buy the EVO.

Tin Hifi T2 EVO vs Tinaudio T2

The original Tinaudio T2 is easier to drive, it has a very similar basic signature, it is slightly less bassy and the vocals come out better. The T2 EVO is not a progress, tonally, but it is in terms of technicalities. The EVO offers wider staging, a more articulate note definition, it sounds sleeker whereas the original T2 is technically less refined but has better air.

Concluding Remarks

Tin Hifi got it totally wrong with the T2 EVO. Instead of presenting a true update of the classic T2, they bodged it by delivering an overcooked tuning that will be hurting the eardrums of most. Another lost opportunity. If you need to get a Tin Hifi budget earphone, stick to the decent T2 Plus. Or get an original T2 second hand, it is worth it.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 284 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

The Tin Hifi T2 EVO was supplied unsolicited by NiceHCK and I thank them for that.

Get the Tin Hifi T2 EVO from NiceHCK Audio Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Tin Hifi T2 EVO Review – Tape Me appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Upper-midrange glare.

Executive Summary

The Shanling UA1 is a well-built and organic sounding budget dongle that could be a bit tamer at the top end.

Introduction

I recently analyzed the Shanling UA2, a rich and warm sounding dongle-shaped DAC/amp that features single-ended and balanced outputs – possibly the best of its kind below $100.

The company had slit the the $45 UA1 as an encore in that package, which was Shanling’s first foray into the world of small DAC/amps. It joins an army of sub-$50 dongles that presently crowd the market – but with a distinct difference: Shanling is a brand name that is also established in the premium segment.

Let’s find out whether “noblesse obliges” also works for the budget domain.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

The box’s content is spartan: device, USB-C to USB-A adapter, and a manual. The enclosure is made of anodized aluminum, and the 3.5 mm headphone socket is reinforced with a gold-plated metal rim. There is a tiny LED status light by the socket. The haptic of the enclosure is top notch.

The fixed cable is made of high purity copper with cotton shielding against outside interference. The strain reliefs appear to be sturdy but a detachable cable would have been favourable.

Functionality and Operation

The Shanling UA1 is another entirely source operated/powered DAC/amp. It works plug’n’play with mobile devices and Mac OS, but requires a driver for Windows.

It is powered and operated from the source device and decodes Hi Res up to 32 bit/384 kHz and DSD 256. I have not found MQA decoding capability in the documentation.

Amplification and Power Consumption

I my 3h battery drain test of several dongles, the Dragonfly Black and Red had the lowest consumption on my iPhone 5S, the Shanling UA1 consumed about a third more, which placed it in the midfield. But it could have done far worse than that….see the detailed results. I would call the UA1’s battery consumption ok but not outstanding.

Power Consumption Test: Parameters and Raw Results

I tested the power consumption of several portable headphone amps connected to my iPhone 5S. The conditions were as identical as possible: 3 h test, volume calibrated to 85 dB  ± 0.5 dB white noise with Dayton microphone, no sim card, BT off, no other apps open; network on, 32 ohm Blon BL-03 iem, Genesis’s Supper’s Ready (from the Seconds Out album) played in an endless loop.

The iPhone’s battery was fully charged at the start of the test and the remaining charge was measured thereafter. The result is shown in the table below. Since the tests were performed at different times and considering the ongoing battery deterioration, the results have to be seen with a grain of salt.

[collapse]

Sound

Equipment used: Macbook Air/iPhone SE first generation; Sennheiser HD 600 & HD 25; Sennheiser IE 400 PRO, JVC HA-FDX1, TRI I3 Pro.

The Shanling UA1 features the ESS ES9218P (dac + amp), a “System-on-Chip” (SoC) that leaves the audio engineer little room for tweaking, it comes down to mainly filtering. This means devices with this SoC will actually sound alike or very close.

The UA1 is close to neutral, but has a faint tone colour with a slightly boosted bass, but also with an elevated upper midrange/lower treble, which adds some grain to the top end top-end that can be fatiguing to some in the long run – and that’s the UA1’s only downside. There is a companion app for Android phones that allows filtering which may mitigate the issue, but it does not work with a computer or iPhone.

Presentation is leaner compared to a $100+ dongle, but not in a bad way. Staging is fine. Midrange is clear and clean, and resolution is pretty good. Nothing sterile or analytical. I also did not record any hiss.

It drives my 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 with some pain but any iems, including the power-hungry planar-magnetic TRI I3 Pro earphones with ease.

The $99 Helm Bolt and Shanling UA1have a very similar general sound signature (and even a very similar build; the Bolt decodes MQA, the Shanling does not). The Bolt has less bass, which is a tad tighter and cleaner, it sounds more open and the vocals are more up front because of it, and it is a bit more dynamic. The UA1 has more low-end rumble whereas the Bolt is more composed and “sweeter” at the top end. These differences are not earth shattering but the Bolt appears o be better balanced by more sophisticated filtering.

When going up the ladder, the $85 Shanling UA2 has a richer, bassier sound, better staging, better 3D rendering, more punch, and the corners are smoother.

Concluding Remarks

At $45, the Shanling UA1 is an impressive performer with a warm-bright, organic signature, good staging, dynamics, and resolution that does justice even to $200-300 iems (I have not tested any higher-priced ones as I don’t have any). The only polarizing feature may be its hot upper midrange/lower treble glare, other than that it plays one league higher than its price and comes close to the $99 Helm Bolt that shows a few better rounded corners. However, the Shanling’s lively top end will bring some life to iems with an early treble rolloff.

I am a particular fan of the great haptic and build of Shanling’s UA1 (and also the UA2) that compare even to the most expensive models.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The Shanling UA1 was included with the UA2 and ME80 in a review package from the manufacturer. I thank them for that. I sent the UA1 to Biodegraded for a second opinion.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Shanling UA1 Review – Prefab Sprout appeared first on Audio Reviews.

21-11-21 Jürgen

Our Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/audioreviews finally cleared 9,800 members. It was established on 1 Jan 2020 and its growth has been stalling lately. Will we have 10,000 members by Christmas?

21-11-19 Jürgen

More drama ahead? I published me take on the $5 VE Monk Pro earbud. They finally got the impedance down from 64 ohm to 32 ohm to present a truly “portable” earbud. I think my writeup is reasonably entertaining.

21-11-19 Jürgen

We have been playing with Google Adsense in order to try out whether Google prefers their clients in their listings. We put the settings on “autopilot”…after 203 days, this angry guys showed up. Sign of things to come? We’ll monitor this.

21-11-17 Jürgen

This “drama” over this Facebook post generated quite some outrage. What some people did not understand was that I don’t see a relationship between the hype and the quality of this iem. If you read between the lines, you’ll see my subtle criticism of peer pressure and compulsive buying triggered by pied pipers. 8000 views: goal achieved :).

21-11-17 Jürgen

Durwood posts his review of the $1500 Questyle CMA Twelve DAC/amp combo…endgame for many.

21-11-15 Jürgen

Loomis publishes his Sennheiser CX 400BT review.

21-11-13 Jürgen

Baskingshark’s IKKO Zerda ITM1 review now published. I see some KZ reviews being presently worked on. In the immediate line-up are a Sennheiser TWS and a premium Questyle amp.

21-11-13 Kazi

Received the Fearless Barcelona recently for review. It is the cheapest Fearless IEM till now and the design belies the price tag. I love how they’ve designed the face-plate here.

Sadly, they sound horrible. Not recommended at all. Too much bass, highly recessed mids, zero treble extension. Get something else this holiday.

21-11-12 Alberto

Yesterday I received my new/old Cowon Plenue 2 and of course the very first impression is imprinted over my experience with QP1R. At first listen the P2 on its balanced output is quite nice, nicely extended and with a very good note weight. While less clean / revealing / detailed compared to the QP1R (whose single ended output is a quite good proof of why balanced is more a marketing name for decent quality output than anything else) on the other hand it offers a huge host of sound finetuning options, commencing from selectable reconstruction filters, to a very good “tweakable” graphical EQ module (not a true PEQ but close) and some further DSPs. Connectivity options are null / nil / zero – like QP1R. There’s not even BT – and that’s perfectly fine

21-11-12 Jürgen

Singles day is over…as the name implies, I didn’t buy a single thing. Our blog stats are surprising: 70% of our traffic stems from Google searches, and only 15% from Facebook. It is therefore not worth posting across FB groups…which is uncool anyway.

21-11-11 Jürgen

Today is 11/11 Asian Singles day. Not many exciting deals as far as I can see…but our blog experiences lots of views. In the meantime we published reviews of the FIIL CC2 and Oneodio Pro C reviews.

21-11-07 Jürgen

Burson Funk review out now. A fantastic headphone amp it is.

21-11-04 Jürgen

Working on the Burson Funk amp to hit the weekend deadline. Fantastic, powerful amp that works for headphones and speakers alike.

21-11-03 Jürgen

Published the Tin Hifi T2 EVO review. Kazi and I ordered a Final A3000 as found on our Wall of Excellence.

21-11-02 Jürgen

Re-dressed the blog’s right sidebar and added useful information. Meet your 8 authors, Wall of Excellence etc. Just look to the right.

21-11-01 Jürgen

Alberto’s iBasso IT04 review published. 283 iem reviews altogether now. Solved a caching problem, which affected our Google indexing. Thanks to the support of rankmath.com SEO plugin.

21-10-31 Jürgen

Finally got the Shanling UA1 review published. It is currently in Biodegraded’s hands for a 2nd review. Will have to finish the NiceHCK T2 EVO next week, and work on the Astell & Kern PEE51 dongle.

21-10-30 Alberto

Got my Hip Dac 2 review loaner unit in yesterday. First thing I noticed it came equipped with firmware 7.3 installed. The odd part is that on IFI’s website the 7.3 firmware is not listed under Hip Dac 2’s eligible downloads. Which means I could not recupe any “release info” about what’s different in 7.3 vs 7.2

While I was there, I also checked under Micro iDSD Signature’s section, and apparently firmware version 7.x has been removed from there too. Odd, at least. I put a question into IFI to get more info.

21-10-29 Jürgen

Published my Venture Electronics BIE Pro review on the blog. Submitted link to VE Clan Facebook group, where it got stuck in censorship, but was eventually posted after approval. That was only intermittent, I think I was tacitly expelled from that group after mentioning censorship. Be prepared that VE Clan Facebook group is manipulative as it presents cherry-picked information.

On another note, Loomis Johnson submitted his review of the Sennheiser CX-400BT True Wireless Earphones for publication.

21-10-28 Kazi

Received KZ ZEX. Their naming convention is making me go bad. Graphed it and labeled the graph wrong because these names all sound similar (ZAX/ZEX/ZSX). Either way, not too impressed with the sound. Kinda peaky in the mid-treble. Graphs show that as well.

21-10-27 Jürgen

Behind with some reviews, e.g. Unique Melody 3DT and Tin Hifi T2 Evo.

21-10-26 Jürgen

Blog received a few more tweaks, including a new site map.

21-10-25 Jürgen’s 10 Day Roundup

In the last 2 weeks, we published reviews of 2 totally underrated Final Audio headphones (Sonorous II+III) including some update earpads.

We identified some good TWS iems for the office in the Elevoc Clear.

We further think the Moondrop Kato is a winner (but need a second set for our European crew).

And we had a couple of second opinions of the GeekWold GK10, Tforce Yuan Li, SeeAudio Bravery, and Tanchjim Tanya.

We currently offer 281 earphone reviews.

21-10-25 Kazi

Received the iFi Hip DAC2 today, and the copper colorway will surely steal some glances. The sound isn’t changed much from the original Hip DAC (if at all) but it didn’t need to since the OG was one of the best DAC/Amps out there under $200. Full review in the works.

21-10-25 Jürgen

Worked on search engine optimization “SEO” all weekend after some trouble with Google. Also subscribed to webmaster tools of Bing and Yandex search engines. You can analyze the SEO of your own site here: https://rankmath.com/tools/seo-analyzer/

21-10-24 Kazi

Slow weekend, nice weather. Went out mostly to enjoy the fall colors. Also did some random photoshoot for the upcoming reviews. Also received the VE Monk SM recently. Not a fan. Shrill, sharp sound and technicalities are middling even for the $20 price bracket. At least it looks and feels nice in hand.

In other news, A&K released the SR25 mk. 2. Not a fan of the design at all. The tilted makes no usability sense. Also it’s basically the original SR25 with just a 4.4mm jack added. Meh.

21-10-23 Jürgen

Our blog has currently problems with Google indexing. I re-created the sitemaps. It would help if you linked to it from your site. Thanks.

21-10-23 Jürgen

The ongoing power crisis in China has led to increased operating costs as well as to price hikes of raw materials. Expect delays and price increases for your Christmas shopping.

Have not heard of 11/11 deals this year…strange.

21-10-22 Jürgen

Coming next on the blog (tonight my time) is Baskingshark’s review of the SeeAudio Bravery. We have a few more ready ones such as a tech article on “System on Chip” (SoC), that is dac and amp on the same chip. Another tech post will be an elaboration on the 1/8 rule on the example of the Apogee Groove.

Alberto will be offering reviews of the iBasso IT04, the Kinera Leyding earphone cable, and the Tanchjim Tanya in the very near future. These are ready. He is still working on a couple of Fearless models among others.

Also almost ready to go are reviews of the Shanling UA1 dongle, the VE Bonus Pro iem, and the VE Monk Go.

21-10-21 Biodegraded

Behind in evaluating various dongles sent by Jürgen for second opinions: Helm Bolt, Shanling UA 1, Earmen Sparrow, Tempotec Sonata BHD. So far, I’m surprised by the contrast between the Bolt and UA 1 (both use the same ESS DAC/Amp chip but yes, they sound a lot different) and by the bal vs SE contrast from the Sparrow. Comparisons will be made to the Audioquest DragonFly Black and ifi nano iDSD Black Label.

I’m also considering a winter project building this Pass Labs class A solid-state headphone amp to complement my tube hybrid and little USB- or battery-powered desktop/portable things. Much swearing will no doubt ensue. Right now though, have to clean the scratchies from the volume pot of an integrated amp that needs to be moved on.

2021-10-21 Kazi

Have had quite a hectic October, so couldn’t manage to publish anything. However, look forward to the “Review Extravaganza” over the coming two weeks or so. At least four articles are in the works and shall be published withing quick succession including:

• FIIL CC2 (a pretty good TWS)
• Moondrop Quarks
• Campfire Audio Holocene
• Campfire Audio Honeydew
• Final A4000
• Shanling Q1
• Cayin Fantasy

And just to close out, one of the photos I shot today (I think it came out pretty good). See you on the other side.

2021-10-21 Jürgen

Sitting currently on review units of Burson Funk amp and two Allo power supplies that may take some time. Almost ready is a review of the Unique Melody 3DT iem whereas the IKKO OH10 still needs some work. Overdue are reviews of several VE Electronics items as well as some ddHiFi accessories.

That famous Hidizs S9 Pro Copper edition dongle (limited to 500 copies) has been on its way from Calgary to Bologna for a good week now. Let’s see how fast Air Mail is.

Currently looking for a second Moondrop Kato review unit for our European chapter. After all, a single opinion is not sufficient for an item to qualify for our Wall of Excellence.

2021-10-21 Jürgen

This page was established to report our progress (but also some observations and opinions) within audioreviews.org. All our authors with WordPress accounts have access.

2021-10-20 Jürgen

Android Brick alas audioreviews.news is using our good name to attract traffic to his fake reviews. This may be legally correct but it is not ethical. He was shamed and left our Facebook group.

Beware of imitations!

This is https://www.audioreviews.org/news/

No marketing!

No sugarcoating!

Just genuine analyses!

The post Our News appeared first on Audio Reviews.