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.

The DC-05 also claims “Time Domain Jitter Eliminator and HyperStream III Architecture” to reduce signal noise and distortion, and I did find it to be extremely quiet and hiss-free. Finally, and most critically, it has substantially above-average driving power and pairs much better with planars and lower-efficiency IEMs than its cheaper rivals. It does run warm, but doesn’t seem to be a battery hog.

Said driving power really defines the DC-05’s sonic character—it has a rich, slightly warm tone which deepens the low end and makes drums and percussion sound larger-than-life, all of which has the effect of enlivening poorer recordings and lower-quality files.

High end is a bit smoothed over and some high-level details are missing; on better recordings, the DC-05 can sound a bit blunt, albeit never shrill or peaky.  The dirt-cheap Conexant CX31993 actually sounds more transparent and less colored than the DC-05, but significantly trails the DC-05’s dynamic slam and bass control.

Fairly compared to a price peer like the ($70) Hidisz S-3 (which on its own terms is quite energetic and bassy), the DC-05 sounds deeper, louder and fuller, while the more analog-sounding S-3 is truer-to-source and presents more high-end resolution.  The S-3 also places more air between instruments. I preferred the brawnier DC-05 for rock and the more nuanced S-3 for jazz and acoustic fare.

Moving up the foodchain to the $110 Cozoy Takt-C gives you a more neutral presentation, with much less bass boost and more treble detail, although the DC-05 worked better and sounded less reserved and more impactful with less efficient (>150 Ohm) buds and cans.

Ultimately, I probably wouldn’t be content with the DC-05 as my only dongle, as less adrenalized pieces pair better with certain sources and genres. That said, it is a step up from entry-level and the point at which diminishing returns starts to kick in. Recommended.

Non-disclaimer: bought it myself

Specifications iBasso DC-05

Contact us!

The post iBasso DC-05 DAC/Amp Review – Something Wicked This Way Comes 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.

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Transports: Samsung smartphone and tablet, two different Windows 10 laptops, Sony NW-A55 DAP – Stock silicon eartips – 16/24bit-44.1/192KHz tracks

Physicals

Build

Sirius Pro TWS’ carry & battery recharge case is very, very nice design-wise, both in terms of aesthetics and of phyisical conception. The shell is fully metallic, with a sort of “unlockable cage” on the upper side safely keeping the buds down in their recharge position. The design follows a very well calibrated cyberpunk style, clearly clinging at such theme lovers but staying a small but decisive step “not too far” on that path, resulting in an item that can still stafely be taken out during an informal business meeting for example.

The metal case is complemented by fancy LED lighting – up to the user selecting their color by cycle-clicking on a button at the bottom, or disabling (!) them – and it’s very uncommon “open-body” shape indeed doubles as a bottlecap opener. Again: strong styles aesthetics design involved, but always with an eye at not really “overexceeding”, the result being still possibly compatible with the taste of an old somewhat conservative old european sole like myself for example. YMMV, needless to say.

I couldn’t devine what material are Sirius Pro TWS’ bud housings themselves made of – the manufacturer talks about zinc-alloy. Whatever, they are apparently very solid, and IPX5 certified which means they can bear moderate watering (like rain, or of course sweat) – no submersion or big water splashes tho so remember that when going to the beach or so.

Sliding the buds out of the battery case gets some… creativity, at least the first times you try. Their backsides are conic shaped and short, and they are almost impossible to safely grab with a fingertip pinch to pull them out both due to their shape & size and to the magnetic force applied between them and the case. The trick at least for me is to start pinching on the case (!) right below where the buds start emerging from it, and pull up while letting fingertips slide on the structure: this way they come out easilly and aergonomically as (I suppose) intended.

Access to the battery case is regulated by a metal “gate” which besides being aestheticall in-line with the overall style also serves the function of keeping the two buds safely into their case when pocketing them, and last but not least ensuring their bottomside contacts do fully match those on the receptacles, to initiate recharging when the buds are homed.

Fit

Sirius Pro TWS bud shells are very reasonably lightweight and their shape is quite anatomical. They fit easily into my ears but be warned: they need to be orientated the “right” way. Simply put, you have to make sure the “octopus legs” are pointing towards your lobe, and this for two reasons: one to get the best fit of course and two to avoid the mic hole being occluded. This is also properly mentioned on the manual (RTFM, FFS! )

Nozzles are oval shaped (à la Ikko OH1S, to give an idea) so are the bundled eartips. I must say this is one of those rare occasions where stock tips are perfect for the job. Caveat: it may be not so simple finding third party spares.

Comfort

Once properly fitted I found Sirius Pro TWS very comfy, also for prolonged usage timeframes – both listening and/or office calls. I presume this is another achievement coming from all the industrial design attention which was obviously applied to this project and product.

Tapping once on more on the housings allows the user to issue the usual commands e.g. track fwd, track backwards, play, pause, answer call, reject call, etc. Tunneling voice commands to Android assistant is also supported.

Connectivity and battery

Sirius Pro TWS support Bluetooth 5.2, but sadly only SBC and AAC codecs. No aptX, no LDAC. So forget hi-res audio in the first place with them, although as I will report more below that’s not their worse audio drawback.

Pairing with all the transports I tried them with was straightforward, no annoying bad surprises. Long-clicking the button at the bottom of the batterycase resets all BT pairing by the way.

The buds themselves turn ON when take off the battery case, and OFF when put back in. After pairing the two to a given source, they can be used together or one at a time as preferred – just leaving one of the two inside the case.

The battery-case on its turn has a USB-C port for recharging of course.

The small batteries inside the buds offer up to 4 hours of operation time, and the case can fully recharge them for 3 times, up to a theoretical autonomy of 16 hours. But : earbuds take 1.5/2h to recharge ! So if you imagine to use them continually until they are fully discharged you will have to bear a quite sizeable downtime every 3.5/4h. In more practical terms you can expect to use Sirius Pro TWS for more than a full working day (including even long commuting time) for calls, and for listening to music during free time, as long as you take them off into their case for a while every now and then to restore some juice up.

Sound analysis

As all TWS earphones/headphones, Sirius Pro of course carry their own small DAC-AMP which is in charge of analog reconstruction starting from the digital stream received via BT. Barred a few very high end (and expensive) cases, the overwhelming majority of budget-priced TWS drivers carry quite basic-quality DAC-AMP circuitry, from which of course we can’t reasonably expect top sonic results.

Sirius Pro TWS are no exception. Simply put, they offer some pleasant music rendering experience when evaluated under “non-audiophile” standards, while – like most of their peers – they fall way behind critical listening / audiophile quality standards offered by even more modestly priced wired options.

Sirius Pro TWS also carry some DSP capabilities offering the user 3 pre-set audio modes – Music, Gaming and Movie – each offering a different overall presentation which the user can switch onto on the fly by simply tapping on the buds’ housings.

Music Mode

Music Mode is probably the zero-DSP mode, i.e. the situation where I am direct listening to the unaltered Sirius Pro DAC voicing.

Tonality on Music Mode is V shaped, on a warm, dark-ish timbre.

Bass range is moderately extended, sub bass is hinted but does not deliver proper rumble. Midbass is pushed up, and too much proactive for acoustic music where it comes accross almost booming. May be liked by EDM and other non-acoustic music lovers.

Mids are evidently recessed and seriously overshadowed by the midbass. Highmids are also quite timid so even on female vocal prominent tracks the ryhtm section steals the scene to the leader. Trebles are inoffensive and unshrilling, at least that, but (quite coherently with the rest of the presentation) they clearly lack air thereby not succeeding in properly “counterbalancing” the overall experience.

Technicalities are very basic. Soundstage is intimate, with just a bit of depth. Imaging is hampered by the midbass. Microdynamics are nowhere near audiophile ballparks.

Gaming Mode

Gaming mode evidently expands the soundstage, a distributes imaging better on the X axis at least.

Midbass gets less invasive which makes at least female vocals come up more natural.

Movie Mode

Movie mode delivers a stage similar to the gaming one, and stretches (so to say) bass similarly too, so midbass is also less invasive, which is good of course.

The less good part is that mids are pushed forward and end up quite artificial from the sound fidelity perspective. Good for watching movies (as intended!), not for listening to folk singers nor jazz or most pop stuff of course.

Latency

Latency is very modest, and simply put it does not get in the way any seriously when watching movies. And that’s good.

While gaming… well, it depends on gaming levels. I expect an hardcore FPS gamer to underline the ever so slight delay Sirius Pro TWS deliver, but then again that individual would probably not choose a similar pair of TWS buds for his most engaging plays anyway.

Calls

I could quite successfully use Sirius Pro TWS for business calls, and I was very positively surprised by that.

As previously mentioned, it’s crucial to appropriately orientate the housings into the ears to get the best fit and properly expose the mic’s hole (again: RTFM). When that is taken care of, mic quality and Environment Noise Cancellation (ENC) is above decent at the very least – not comparable with professional vertical products of course, but way beyond usable.

On calls I ended up preferring Sirius Pro TWS on Gaming mode in terms of vocal quality.

Specifications (declared)

Considerations & conclusions

TWS earphones are no doubt a huge technical challenge in terms of achieving true audiophile results, comparable with wired alternatives.

Firstly, there ain’t such thing as “lossless BT communication” so that is an apriori negative bias no matter what technology or competence goes into the buds themselves.

Even more importantly, by definition TWS earphones must carry their own DAC-AMP. Think to how much did you spend for your DAC and your AMP, and/or for your DAP, add the cost of your preferred IEMs, then compare that with the budget you are investing into a pair of TWS IEMs : this will give you a rough measure of the expectations you may reasonably set in terms of output quality from TWS buds.

Indeed, it’s even worse than that: earbuds are small. The smaller the size, the more complicated (and sometimes impossible) it is to fit truly high quality DAC and especially AMP technology in.

With all the above in mind, looking at their asked price Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS are a wonderful piece of industrial design in terms of construction, ergonomics, features set and not least aesthetics (although carrying a definitely sided style at that). On the flip side they evidently lag behind in terms of pure hires sound reproduction quality – which I quite simply rate “no audiophile grade” – and make themselves more appreciated as a multipurpose music, office calls, gaming, movie watching audio gadget instead.

The Sirius Pro TWS set I assessed have been provided free of charge by Gravastar Europe, to whom my thanks goes for the consideration and the trust. They can be purchased from Gravastar web site, here. 16% off with discount code AUDIOREVIEWS.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Gravastar Sirius Pro TWS Review – Wonderfully Industrial appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Lacks macrodynamic punch and sub-bass rumble
– Notes sound smoothed over at times
– Lower-mids are somewhat recessed
– Imaging is hazy

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Elle Zhou of BQEYZ was kind enough to send me the review sample.
Sources used: Sony NW-A55, Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $200. Can be bought from HiFiGo

INTRODUCTION

The folks at BQEYZ are best known for their hybrid and multi-driver efforts. Their popular models such as the Summer or Spring had DD + BA + Piezo configuration. In fact, BQEYZ is one of the few manufacturers who still use Piezo drivers and has extensive know-how about this driver type.

The Autumn, being a single-dynamic offering, mark a shift in BQEYZ’s approach. Simplifying the driver count allows for easier tuning but also makes maintaining technicalities a challenge.

Do the BQEYZ Autumn pass the hurdle, or do they fall by the wayside? We’ll find out in the following.

PHYSICALS

Accessories

The BQEYZ Autumn come with 6 pairs of eartips, a 4-core silver + copper mixed cable, and the proprietary tuning magnets along side a tool to remove the magnets. A carrying case is also included which gets the job done without being flashy.

Build

General fit and finish are excellent here, with the BQEYZ Autumn having a polished aluminum shell. The shell is a two-piece design with the seam between the pieces barely noticed.

There are three vents on the inner-side of the IEMs. The nozzle is also metal. Lastly, BQEYZ has opted for 0.78mm 2-pin recessed connectors, which I personally prefer over flush or raised connectors.

Comfort and isolation

Comfort is very good but isolation is lacking due to the vents placed on the inner side of the earpiece.

Internals

BQEYZ went for a 13mm single dynamic driver here, with not much being told about the diaphragm material. Elle Zhou confirmed that they are using a 6 micro-meter ultra-thin PEN diaphragm.

The driver is housed in a dual-cavity structure which is becoming pretty standard lately.

BQYEZ Autumn Sound Analysis

Listening setup: BQEYZ Autumn with normal filter + stock cable + Radius Deep-Mount tips + Sony NW-A55

The BQEYZ Autumn have a slightly V-shaped tuning with emphasis around mid-bass and lower-treble. What makes them stand out is how relaxing the signature is, as the transients are rounded and leading edge of notes are softened out.

Bass here is mostly characterized by the mid-bass bloom that adds some extra decay to bass notes. Snare hits also get extra thickness and body as a result. This tuning works well for moderately paced tracks but leaves you wanting in fast metal tracks.

Sub-bass rumble is lacking, so sudden bass drops lack the physicality you expect. Macrodynamic punch is lacking as well, so the BQEYZ Autumn isn’t really suited for portraying the energy in tracks.

Mids are fairly well tuned. Lower mids are recessed but doesn’t sound drowned out. The recession gives a sensation of laid-back vocals that is devoid of shout or shrillness. If you don’t mind midrange recession, the Autumn won’t be disappointing. However, for those seeking more forward or energetic vocals – this ain’t it.

Then comes the treble, and here we have perhaps the only tonal oddity of the Autumn. The 5kHz peak is quite prominent and makes leading edge of cymbal hits sound a bit brittle. This presence region emphasis is needed to keep the Autumn from sounding overly dark but this also leads to over-crispness at times.

Upper-treble is well extended with resonances being heard well until 15kHz. The airiness is kept in check though so it doesn’t lead to fatigue.

Before getting into technicalities, let’s talk about the filters. The filters only increase or decrease the amount of bass but due to how we perceive sound, this change in bass markedly alters the presentation.

The normal filter is the one I found the most balanced, with the bass filter making things too bassy and the treble filter making the 5kHz peak even more prominent.

When it comes to staging, I found the stage width to be quite good. Everything is well separated, and the Autumn don’t sound cramped. However, stage depth is limited.

Imaging is also average with positional cues often being hazy. The saving grace here is the reproduction of microdynamics that allows you to delineate between instruments playing at differing volumes.

Finally, resolved detail is above average for a single dynamic IEM but the Autumn will be bested by a number of multi-BA or hybrid offerings in this range.

Compared to Final E4000

Final E4000 have been one of my default recommendations for a single dynamic driver IEM under USD $200.

In terms of build, the Final are no slouch with a similarly solid aluminium shell. Final went for a barrel shape and mmcx connectors but both IEMs are at equal playing field here.

Comfort and Isolation wise I think E4000 wins as they block more noise than the Autumn. Accessories are about par on both.

As for the sound, E4000 have a similarly bass-boosted, warm tuning but Final has even less emphasis in lower treble. This results in a tad darker tuning than the Autumn. Another noticeable change is the staging and imaging where the E4000 sound more expansive and accurate respectively.

Resolved detail is a bit better on the Autumn due to better upper treble extension. Macrodynamic punch is better on the E4000 meanwhile. Mids are also more engaging on the Final IEMs.

One advantage of the BQEYZ Autumn is the filter system that isn’t available on the E4000 at all. So if you want to change the tuning on the fly the Autumn will be better suited. E4000 are also more difficult to power, requiring better amping.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

BQEYZ have tuned the Autumn fairly well. They didn’t just try to copy-paste an existing target curve and instead went for their own flavor of sound which is rarer to see these days. I do wish that the Autumn were a bit better in terms of technicalities, esp the imaging department. BQEYZ’s previous offerings were better in this regard so this one is a backward step. 

Other than that, the Autumn are a solid pair of single dynamic IEMs, and on sale price they warrant a closer look.

MY VERDICT

4/5

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from HiFiGo

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post BQEYZ Autumn Review (2) – Incremental Improvements appeared first on Audio Reviews.

In a sort of Nigel Tufnel/David St. Hubbins fire/ice schism my learned colleagues Alberto and Durwood have offered completely different takes on the 7Hz Timeless, with Alberto finding them lacking microdetail and unrefined in the treble, while Durwood praised their transparency and resolution.

I lean closer to Durwood on this one—with sufficient power, they epitomize the best qualities of planars—speedy transients, tight (if lean-textured) bass, energetic big-sounding midrange and highly resolving high end which captures the little nuances of acoustic guitars as well as anything I’ve heard at this price point.

I do agree with Alberto that some midbass oomph is missing and that they’re prone to a slight shoutiness/steeliness on some higher frequencies—saxes and female vox can occasionally sound overbright.

The 7Hz Timeless are also a poor match for mobile phones or less powerful sources. However, feed ‘em right and they are damn good and well worth the $200.

Disclaimer 7Hz Timeless

Borrowed form Durwood.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

Headphone Reviews

The post 7Hz Timeless Review (3) – A Planar for the People 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.

Had a great first day at the High-End Munich 2022. Met up with a lot of people, especially Vitalie Sandu of SoundNews.net. Couldn’t meet Resolve and Cameron because it was almost afternoon by the time I got there and I had to talk with some people quickly.

Tried the Kann Alpha Max, proper upgrade over OG Kann Alpha. The OS is still sluggish but the mids on these are noticeably more organic. Has the same bass punch and crystalline treble as the original so I think this is a good upgrade.

Then met the awesome people at Final Audio, and tried their latest TWS which I forgot the model number of (will take note tomorrow). They also had Stax SR-X9000 which is a phenomenal headphone. The driver is a thing of beauty, just check the picture.

Spirit Torino from Italy had the Mistral which sounds “grand” for a wireless headphone. Will check it out even further tomorrow. On the DAC side, DCS Bartok Rossini is a good one that I tried today but yeah well it didn’t sound like something exorbitantly exceptional. Need a closer listen tomorrow (today I listened the Meze Elite and DCA Ether 2 on them).

Spirit Torino also had the craziest headphones I’ve seen till now: Spirit Torino Valkyria. Costs $12K, made to order, Titanium housings, weighs like 800gms or so, and of course the cable is fixed. There are also some ruby-like materials inside and a carbon-fiber driver housing because why not.

As for the sound: these slam like a freight-train. One of the most energetic headphones I’ve heard, even though there was no sibilance or harshness upon initial listen. Also they have a very “grand” sense of stage height, though stage depth and width didn’t seem as impressive as the Stax X9000 or the good ol’ HD800S.

Also tried Campfire Audio’s new flagship, the triple-dynamic one. It has very good bass and an energetic signature. Gotta listen again tomorrow to form longer impressions. Mr. Ken Ball was also very welcoming and we had a good chat about the pricing of this, which is more about the exclusivity than sheer performance over the Solaris 2020.

Met with the legend Mr. Axel Grell himself (he came up with the legendary Sennheiser HD-series models as well as the Sennheiser HE-1). 

Had a really nice discussion with him regarding his tuning philosophy and how he looks at the recent trend of “target-hitting” headphones and earphones. Needless to say, he’s one of the coolest guys around.

Also had the chance to try out the Heavys headphones, that are marketed towards metal-heads. I have pre-ordered one already so couldn’t help trying the current prototype out. In terms of sound, the tuning is nearly finalized. I offered some feedback regarding certain design decisions as they wanted to hear my thoughts. Let’s see how the final unit turns out.

As for the sound of the Heavys, they were quite coherent for multi-driver headphones. Upper-mids are not drowned out at all, distortion guitars are put forward. Vocals also come through well. Cymbals are present without being sharp or spiky. Decent separation in fast section, with double pedals being separated from snare hits.

Surprise of the High-End Munich show for me was the Meze 109 Pro (I think that’s the model number). They are still in prototype stage but if the final thing sounds even slightly better than this one, well, we got a potential winner.

I asked the Meze Audio reps about some technical details and they’ve shared some information. So far, it’s using a 50mm bio-cellulose dynamic driver. The driver housing is also encased in a Beryllium-plated metal that probably does something, did not get into those details since I was running short of time.

As for the sound, it’s got really nice bass with rich texturing and excellent layering. The mids were warm and smooth but didn’t lack detail. Staging was impressive with surprisingly good depth and height.

Couldn’t test these further but knowing that the pricing will be under $1000, I am really excited to try them out once they hit the market. Planned release: Q3 2022. Looking forward to these.

The Stax SR-X9000 are stupendously good. One of the best headphones out there, without a doubt. They have incredibly lifelike stage depth that rivals that of Susvara. In terms of bass and raw resolution, I think they are better than the Susvara, with the SR-X9000 having a bit more snap in the treble. Susvara still has that romantic smoothness, but the Stax are just as good, in a different way.

I also met up with iFi Audio reps, courtesy of WODAudio where Werner was very welcoming and we had a great discussion about headphones and gear in general. I listened to the new iFi Pro iDSD and Pro iCAN stack, paired with the ZMF Atrium. Needless to say, this was an excellent setup and I look forward to reviewing the iFi Pro stack in the near future.

High End Munich 2022 – Photographic Impressions

The post HIGH END Munich 2022 Audio Show Impressions appeared first on Audio Reviews.

INTRO

For those not familiar with the Drop Grell TWS1X, Grell was founded by one of Sennheiser’s top designers Axel Grell so there are high expectations from those aware of the association. For the rest they might be unaware of the wonderful products Sennheiser has created throughout the years.

If you peruse their about page it reads just like any other direct to consumer breakout brand forked out of a legendary following, promises of high quality parts, cutting edge tech, but with a direct to consumer pricing model.

Ever been in one of those relationships that you do not know how to describe and default to the cliche- It’s complicated? That is how I feel about the Drop Grell TWS1X. The sound is another wonderfully tuned Harman profile with lower bass boost absent of midrange bleed, a mild treble plateau that gradually fades with good technical abilities and features that sport a working ANC feature set.

Disclaimer: Thanks go out to Drop sending a free pair and for trusting me to review these as a first time product for Audioreviews. I hope they are not too let down by my critique, but we also need to be honest to readers-no sides taken. Price as tested $200. Tested with Firmware version 2.8.0

GOOD TRAITS

• Harman Sound Profile
• Small Wireless Charging case, also USB-C
• Case Charge level indicator
• Transparency Mode
• ANC/NAR mode works well
• IPX4 Splash Proof

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

• Manual not descriptive enough a quick start guide with universal pictures, but no manual to describe the features or SoundID.
• Fast Battery drain during storage
• Fitment-short nozzle stem
• Awkward pairing issues, sometimes only one connects if you put the wrong side in first.
• Storage orientation is opposite (Left earpiece on the right, Right earpiece on the left)

MODES

There are essentially 4 modes of operation

1. Normal (Transparency Off, ANC Off)
2. Transparency On
3. ANC ON
4. ANC ON + NAR ON

ANC, NAR and Transparent modes are not explained in the manual other than how to switch them on/off
Transparent is fairly obvious for an experienced user, but not a novice.
ANC=Automatic Noise Cancellation
NAR=Noise Annoyance Reduction (Not much information on what this does)
Switching between the modes is weird. Sometimes it says ANC on/off, other times it says NAR on/off with a 1 sec hold.
Pop noise when turning ANC mode ON.

COMFORT / CONTROLS

I don’t own a lot of wireless IEM’s because I have trouble keeping them in place. My only other pair is the wonderfully fabulous Sony WF-1000XM3, but even those I struggle with to keep them in place. I prefer something that locks in place in my ears.

So this is a bias I have and wanted to point out the Drop Grell TWS1X does not make this better. The stems are short, the ear wings don’t seem to help, and therefore I had to resort to using foam eartips which was still not enough to keep them in place if in moving around situations.

The controls on the Drop Grell TWS1X are divided amongst both sides so that volume (right side) and track changes (left side) are not confused with each other. In addition to that, Play/Pause on the right, and ANC/Transparency single taps are on the left. Upon inserting them into your ears, there is not much area to grip and I found myself cycling through modes as I inserted them or activating Google Search.

The responsiveness of the touch sensor was about equivalent to the Sony WF-1000XM3, however there were times I wish they would pause sooner. I had seen discussion that there is some delay to prevent unwanted commands from occurring.

Note: Firmware updates for the Drop Grell TWS1X are done through the SoundID app, which also allows a user to apply a personal EQ to earphones in their database, which is quite large. It appears to be similar to an app called Neutralizer. The SoundID app is a Sonarworks product, and not specific to the Drop Grell TWS1X.

PACKAGE CONTENTS

• Charging case with Wireless Charging
• USB-A to USB-C charging cable
• 3 pairs of silicone eartips (S, M, L)
• 2 pairs of foam eartips (M, L)
• 3 pairs of wingtips (various fits)

SOUND

Ok having moved past the hiccups with operation, the sound of the Drop Grell TWS1X is quite enjoyable. With modern music the bass blooms in the bottom end, yet I sense some compression action occurring most likely from the built in amplifier. With music that does not utilize the lower octaves, it comes of sounding balanced and tighter.

Activating the ANC mode adds even more echoing bass boost which again is fairly typical of ANC earphones that are designed to cancel out constant noise signals typically centered throughout the bass region and lower midrange.

Airplanes, public transport and lawn mowers are typical good uses. Since the boost is focused purely towards the bottom octaves, they avoid bleeding into the lower midrange.

Midrange is set forward, with a very intimate dry sound. Treble has good presence keeping things lively and delicate at the same time. Peaks and such are well controlled, for me the treble is the star of the tuning.

If I had to nitpick perhaps it could use a sprinkle of more airiness. Strings, flutes and cymbals are very natural sounding. If ANC is active and the NAR is turned on, I pick up some boost in the treble as well but it could all depend on what the ANC is trying to cancel out too. The NAR is sort of a mystery.

TECHNICALITIES

Timbre is fairly close to natural, the Drop Grell TWS1X favors width over depth, imaging is excellent and spacing is clearly delineated. Height information is mostly maintained on a level plane, with average lift. Volume is limited on these, occasionally I would catch them quickly ramping the volume down when activating the ANC as if they could play louder if allowed.

Transparency mode is useful in an office setting, or possibly in an active usage scenario, however as mentioned before I could not get them to stay in place with even a simple walking exercise.

The microphones are very sensitive so they pick up wind noise and whispers sound unsettling loud. You could potentially ASMR yourself using the transparency mode. I would like to see if this could be simmered down with future firmware updates maybe?

COMPARISON

Sony WF-1000XM3 (Discontinued street prices $50-150)

While both the Drop Grell TWS1X and the Sony WF-1000XM3 both utilize apps to control and EQ, the Sony requires the app to control the earphone settings. There is no way to access some of the features without the app.

The Drop Grell TWS1X on the other hand allows you to cycle through the different listening modes on the earphones themselves. The WF-1000XM3 is fully customize-able for the transparency mode though.

The Drop Grell TWS1X sounds more balanced than the V signature of the WF-1000XM3. Mids sound recessed on the Sony after listening to the Grell. The Grell also has a more rounded treble that allows many instruments to shine as opposed to the one note treble feel of the Sony.

The Drop Grell TWS1X has wireless charging while the Sony does not (winner TWS1X), but then fails on battery drain just from sitting around (winner 1000XM3). This seems like a toss up, except its more of a nuisance to grab a pair of dead earphones then be inconvenienced by having to plug them in to charge.

There is one final thing to note, when I bought my Sony I did some research that technically the battery can be replaced if you are handy. I don’t know if the Drop Grell TWS1X battery can be accessed without destroying the earphones. I might just be a nerd in this regard to worry about such silly things, but something to think about in our throw away society.

COMPLETION

Most of my concerns (and others) for the Drop Grell TWS1X appear to be the user experience, so if you can overlook the functionality quirks they are a wonderfully sounding set with nice features comparable to the Sony WF-1000XM3.

I know they are trying real hard to work through peoples’ concerns on head-fi and Drop so that is a glass half full half empty scenario. They are receptive to solving people problems, but it would be nice if there were no bugginess in the first place, I am referring to the single side pairing conundrum.

My two biggest gotchas are fitment and battery drain. Nothing more frustrating than having to charge them once a week even if not using them. However my biggest disappointment is that I cannot use them in more active situations.

This is the most frustrating part for me because the sound tuning is excellent and the ANC passed my lawn mower test. So if you plan to use them in a stationary situation that requires ANC or even just wireless usage, and don’t care much about the battery drain these are a wonderful set of wireless ANC IEMS.

SPECIFICATIONS

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it direct from DROP.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post Drop Grell TWS1X Review – Ambition Meet Frustration appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Build appears a bit flimsy; no dead cats for the lavalier mics included.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Vlogging, live streaming, and virtual meetings are becoming increasingly important. When two people are looking into the same camera, a microphone for each is needed. The Maono WM820 offers this functionality. The set features two clip-on transmitters with built-in microphone and a receiver connected to your computer, phone, or other broadcasting device.

The clip-ons also offer the option to connect an included lavalier microphone for improved sound quality or simply for convenience – as well as a headset for real-time monitoring. The transmission range of the sound is up to 50 m, but in any case can one move around the house safely without losing contact to the receiver.

The WM820 set looks awfully close to the Røde GO II set, but at less than half the price, appealing to the cost-conscious consumer.

Maono is a high-tech company that produces affordable microphones, audio interfaces, headphones, and other audio accessories. They preferably sell directly to consumers to keep their prices reasonable.

I am a big fan of good sounding microphones and have certain expectations. Spoiler alert, the WM820-A2 deliver, albeit they cannot be compared to radio-station microphones, just to state the obvious.

Specifications

Physicals

The WM820 set comes with all necessary accessories other than OTG adapters for phones. For example, you have to buy an Apple Audio Adapter for use with iPhone.

In the box…is a lot: 2 transmitters, 1 receiver, a charging cable with three USB-C connectors for simultaneous charging of all three units, a 3.5mm TRS Cable (for cameras), a 3.5mm TRRS Cable (for phones), 2 lavalier microphones, 3 dead cats for the transmitters, and the paperwork. And all that comes in a big pouch.

The receiver and the two transmitters feel a bit light and the plastic a bit flimsy, and I would not want to drop them onto a concrete sidewalk (to be fair, the same accounts for my iPhone). But being heavier would make them more difficult to wear around one’s collar. The pouch smells a bit like petroleum and the lavaliers and the other accessories are sturdy.

Functionality and Operation

The principal idea is to assign a “talking head” to each of the two transmitters, and to connect the receiver to a DSLR, smartphone/tablet, or computer so that the two people can have a recorded or streamed conversation with the outside world.

There is a 3.5 mm output jack on the Maono WM820’s receiver for this purpose. The transmitter features a 3.5 mm jack for connecting an external lavalier microphone (which bypasses the internal mic) as well as a 3.5 mm headphone jack for real-time monitoring.

Both receiver and transmitters feature three buttons on the side with various functionality. First, apart from ON/OFF, for Bluetooth pairing by simply holding button combinations down on both. Pairing has a memory: once done, you will not have to do it again. The receiver buttons allow to adjust the 22 dB gain in 2 dB steps of the incoming signal as monitored through a connected headset (also works for the mics).

Transmitters and receivers features a couple of LEDs on their front top, one as battery-level indicator and the other for Bluetooth connection status.

The set can be used indoors and outdoors. The receiver fits any standard camera shoe or phone rig as you see below. The company claims a 6 h battery life, which is more than sufficient. The build-in 350 mAh batteries are charged with a standard 5V USB charger (not included, but any phone charger or computer port will work). Charging time is 2 hours.

The microphones built into the transmitters follow a polar pattern and are (to some extent) omnidirectional with noise cancelling technology. Transmission distance is given as 50 m without physical obstruction such as walls. I tested this in the following video.

Sound Quality

When it comes to spoken word and speech intelligibility, I am fuzzy. First, I love talk radio and own several old-fashioned FM radios. Second, one of my first cousins and one of my nieces are voice actors. When listening to the “big” radio sound, you hear differences depending on the microphones used.

There is always a competition of richness against clarity, and the question is how well extended a voice is towards the top and bottom of the frequency spectrum. A microphone with little upper extension makes the voice sound boxed in and blunt, one without lower extension makes one sound tinny and analytical.

My wife and I tested the transmitters with both the built-in microphone and the added lavalier. According to specs, the lavaliers should yield a richer sound, but listen yourself to the sound of the video below.

So, what do you think? I did not change the default gain or process the sound. You get the raw data, just like somebody in a live stream or zoom call. I find the sound strikes the right balance between richness and clarity. And since you can attach any microphone to the transmitter you want, I also tried my Sony ECM-CS3, which sounded clearer, but also sterile and analytical. The Manao delivers the more natural sound with a bit or warmth added.

Concluding Remarks

The Maono WM820 is a well working and good sounding set…though I see a bit of “copycatting” as it comes optically very close to the Røde GO II (at more than twice the price). It may be a functional lower-priced alternative to the hobbyist like me, but the build is too light for professional use.

And since the company is big on influencers and affiliate programs, a built-in disclaimer: I/we don’t participate in any of that as we are not salesmen on a commission but product analysts. I just tested the set – and without any humour.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Disclaimer

The WM820 was provided unsolicited by Maono and I thank them for that.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Gallery

The post 2-Person Wireless Mic MAONO WM820 Review – Talking Heads appeared first on Audio Reviews.

At-a-glance Card

Features and description

Externals

IKKO ITM01 is more or less the size of 2 AA batteries, a bit thinner than those, and much lighter in weight. It’s actually small and lightweight enough not to represent a significant burden to a smartphone once connected to its USB-C port.

The chassis is plastic, and its black satin finish is quite prone to scrathes, besides feeling not particularly resistant vs possible traumatic compressions or such. Still, perfectly adequate to normal daily use including quick pocketing/unpocketing during communing etc.

Internals

IKKO declares that ITM01 is developed around an ESS custom chip codenamed ESS9298 featuring low noise and high current output. I couldn’t find better specifications by searching on Esstech websites or around, sadly.

Face value specs are interesting, as the chip can accept out to 32bit / 384KHz PCM and up to DSD 128. No MQA support is offered though.

Output power is declared at 2V (125mW) @ 32 Ohm load, but with the big (positive) caveat represented by an adaptive gain to properly support more demanding loads – more on this later.

Input

Only digital input over USB is allowed into ITM01, with the specialty represented by a priorietary magnetic cable connector.

Unlike most competitors, the USB connector on IKKO ITM01 main body follows a special design encompassing a magnetized connector offering very quick disconnection capabilities while keeping extremely firm and solid connectivity while the plug is in place.

Among the advantages of the proprietary magnetic connectors is system resilience in case someone inadvertedly pulls the earphone cable: the magnetic plug will be “weak enough” in such case as to get disconnected rapidly, avoiding mechanical stress on other parts of the line.

IKKO ITM01 ships equipped with 2 replaceable short cables, one ending in a USB-A plug, the other in a USB-C plug. An Apple Lightning plug option is also available and can be separately purchased.

Output

The sole output port available on ITM01 is a 3.5mm single ended audio connector – with a quite uncommon specialty though: it fully supports microphones built into the connected drivers.

Which means that with ITM01 one can seamlessly switch from music listening to handling calls exactly like I would with a mic-equipped earphone directly connected to the phone. Or, that one can keep their mic-equipped headphone connected to IT01 and go from watching a movie to playing a game including audio chat.

Volume and gain control

ITM01 has hardware volume buttons on its main body, which are correctly liaised with system volume controls both on Windows and Android hosts: actionating upon the hw buttons host volume control moves up and down smoothly and without the need for any driver to be installed.

ITM01 also comes with a load sensing system, which switches to high gain mode when higher impedance drivers are connected. The threshold is not documented, based on my empirical essays I would say it’s around 32 ohm.

Other features

Tuning presets

ITM01 comes equipped with 3 “preset tunings”. Each “tuning” modifies the sound presentation, offering a different impact to the user.

The user can quickly select and cycle-through them by long-pressing the central button on the main device body. When each tuning is selected, a led on the chassis side will light of a different colour:

• Music (Yellow led)
• Movie (Blue led)
• Game (Purple led)

More on them below.

Ikko ITM01 Zerda Sound

Let me start by considering the “Music” (Yellow led) tuning preset.

One good thing that’s immediately noticed when using ITM01 is the significant power this unassuming thingie is able to feed into so many different drivers I could pair to it.

ITM01 delivers a lot of current into low impedance, low sensitivity loads (E3000, E5000 & such). And, it also drives HD600 or SRH1540 with authority in terms of powering, most certainly thanks to the selfswitching gain following the internal impedance adapting tech.

With that said, sound quality is in line with the device cost (50 bucks) so don’t expect big wonders: DAC reconstruction, while surely better than my phone or my PC’s built-in systems, is not particularly extended nor resolving, generally quite neutral with some bass accent.

The amping module lacks in dynamic range and most of all transparency. In addition to the general low budget situation, ITM01’s adaptive-gain capabilties present their bill here.

The situation with amping gets a bit better when ITM01 is connected via an appropriate USB conditioner (eg my Nano iUSB2), or to a less-noisy host, e.g. a battery based transport. But even with that, “pure” sound quality is not the reason why one would want an ITM01 in its pockets.

Switching to Movie mode (Blue led) the most evident change is in mid frequencies which are pushed significantly forward, both in terms of power and imaging. The soundstage gets narrower horizontally, but deeper, definitely more intimate. Imaging gets also trickier due to a sort of “central panning” switch.

Game mode (Purple led) can be seen as the opposite of Movie mode in a sense: instead of shrinking and concentrating the scene towards the center, and the mid frequencies, Game mode sorts of “furtherly distributes” the instruments along the horizontal axis, presenting a wider but almost totally flat soundstage. This is good while gaming to facilitate on steps / noises / events positioning although definitely not organic when it comes to music.

An important caveat: mode switching is not totally seamless nor totally instanteneous. In particular, volume jumps may happen between one and the next mode so it’s recommended to pause playback before switching.

Considerations & conclusions

At the end of the day everyting is relative in life.

On one hand I could say that IKKO ITM01 does not shine in tems of audiophile finesse. On the other hand, though, all better devices I heard cost at least twice as much.

IKKO ITM01 offers some very nice, and even unique features which make it worth considering as a very inexpensive, general-purpose, entry-level dac-amp dongle for music listening, gaming and even office communication support.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Ikko ITM01 Zerda Review (2) – Second Opinion appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Hard to drive with a phone (very low sensitivity); no bass or sub-bass; no slam; sounds tinny with some tracks; bulky plug in the way of many phone cases.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Koss is a reputable American company with over 60 years of experience that advertise with the slogan: “Hearing is Believing”. Founder John Koss invented the stereo headphone back in 1958. Over the years, Koss have introduced a few perennial favourites such as the 1984 Porta Pro or the 2004 KSC75, which are not only still in production, but they are also still very popular even with demanding audio enthusiasts.

Let’s not forget the 2017 KPH30i, which are sonically a tad behind the Portas/KSC75, but ergonomically ahead of them. We have evaluated these models in the context of the Yaxi earpads. For completeness, Koss also introduced a number of stinkers such as the “Plug”, which plugged my ear canals with undifferentiated noise.

The KPH7 were introduced in 2013, but it is not listed anywhere in Koss’s history. They are small on-ear headphones aiming for the super-budget crowd. Looking similar to the proven Porta Pros and KPH30i, the question is whether they are similarly good performers.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box is…hold it…the KPH7 don’t come in a box but in one of these weird see-through thingies you have to cut it out of while ruining your scissors…urghhh…these eco pigs are called “blisters”. And, what you get when the removal operation was successful is…the KPH7 without anything else. What do you expect for $5.49 USD?

Build quality is good. The KPH7 sit on ear, which means they leak music to bystanders. The headband is small and tight and the clamp pressure may not provide the biggest comfort for big heads. Cable and plug are somewhat generic but sturdy. The bulky plug may be in the way of many phone cases.

Tonality and Technicalities

The KPH7’s signature is warm-neutral with the opposite of a bass boost. What? Yes, there is virtually no bass or sub-bass….confirming the frequency range given in the specs: the doors are shut below 80 Hz. To add insult to injury, the very low sensitivity of 91 dB makes these very hard to use with a normal phone. Additional amplification would be beneficial.

What’s left of the bass is quite tight, but any drum kit sounds as if somebody tortured the bottoms of plastic buckets with sticks. There is no rumble at all and no slam or impact either. Nobody at home down there.

This lack of support leaves vocals freestanding, marginally warm, always lean, sometimes tinny, but also provides a lot of space for them: spatial reconstruction is not bad at all. Whilst note weight is not great, note definition is also decent: piano keys, for example, are naturally reproduced. Timbre is as good as in the Porta Pros/KSC75.

Treble, yes, cymbals can be found…somewhere…thin, hesitant, like needles and they sound rather robotic.

Another issue derived from the “basslessness” is the aforementioned lack of kick…the KPH7 are not dynamic at all. Stage is a complete mess as musicians are all over the place. And so is resolution.

To bring this into context, when listening to Paolo Conte’s song “Canneloni”, a lively and bassy piece with a deep voice, the tomato sauce was entirely missing from the meal. Both bassline and voice sounded anemic. A rather bland, dry lunch.

Concluding Remarks

The Koss KPH7 are in now way competition to the KSC75 or Porta Pros. Although they offer decent spatial reconstruction, they lack bass and spice. But a real miss is their very poor sensitivity that makes them hard to drive with a phone. Why would one get extra amplification for a $5.49 headphone?

In summary, the KPH7, if used for music, are more for chilling than anything. They are probably best suited for podcasts and other spoken word performances. As in most cases, you get what you pay for.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Co-blogger Biodegraded bought these for me. Thank you very much.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

The post Koss KPH7 Review – Kinder Surprise appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Lean notes, lacks kick, shouty and unbalanced; springy cable.

Executive Summary

Introduction

Tripowin is one of Linsoul’s in-house companies. It was established in 2019 – and we rarely had the pleasure to test their products. Linsoul, of course, is a major Shenzen audiogear retailer.

The Léa is a single dynamic-driver earphone aiming to the super-budget crowd whose goal it is to find a cheap iem that punches well “above its weight”. I personally have yet to find such a model, let’s see whether the Léa can convince us.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the two earpieces, one set of eartips (S/M/L/), a pair of clip-on earhooks, and a cable. The shells ae built very well, the silicone eartips work for my ears, the cable is springy, rubbery, and tangles easily, but it does the job. Everything works out of the box.

Comfort and fit are good for my ears, isolation is average. The Leá are easy to drive with a phone.

Tonality and Technicalities

Leá’s signature is warm-neutral, organic, but notes are lean. It is unbalanced to my ears with lack of bass dynamics and too much of an edge in the mids.

Bass is exceptionally tight and clean right down to the lowest frequencies, although it does not reach very deep into the sub-bass. Slam is lacking. The low end lacks bite and is too polite.

This politeness is turned into the opposite in the midrange. Vocals are lean, and pointy, though overall still reasonably organic. They are attenuated by an over-energized upper midrange and lack weight, though note definition is ok. Call it shouty, there is too much harshness and some body lacking in the mids for my gusto.

The midrange is simply a too edgy and lean. When turning the volume up to reach satisfaction in terms of vocals body, all I get is bleeding eardrums. It is like the torture of Sisyphus as the desired result is never achieved. At low to moderate volumes, the midrange is fine, though.

Treble rolls off way to early. Cymbals are frequently buried and lack substance. They are clean but lack weight.

Stage is relatively narrow and has decent depth and height. Imaging, instrument placement, and separation are surprisingly good. So are clarity and resolution. But bass kick is lacking, painted over and taken hostage by the strident, over-energized mids, which knocks the whole experience out of balance.

In comparison, the $20 Astrotec Vesna sound fuller, wider, and smoother — just way more cohesive. Notes are also much better rounded in the Vesna.

Concluding Remarks

The Leá turn out to be too aggressive in the midrange and too dull at the bottom end for my ears. Some smoothness in the midrange is urgently needed. Technicalities are surprisingly good. They are average iems for listening at low to intermediate volumes in their price category. Build and haptic of the earpieces are excellent, though.

In summary, Leá offers nothing new, sonically. Another one for the lowest drawer in my desk.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Tripowin Leá Review – Sisyphus Revisited appeared first on Audio Reviews.

So the Mifo would really have to sound good to justify the tariff, in which regard the Mifo are decidedly a mixed bag. Signature is generally mid-centric, with limited extension at both extremes (there’s some subbass thump, but midbass is conspicuously lacking in depth and quantity), with a narrow stage that tends to place the performers towards the center. Timbre is slightly anemic but quite accurate—guitars and voices are well-articulated and there’s no high-end sharpness or glare.

But (and this is a big but), the output on the Mifo is wholly inadequate—you need to max out the volume to get any sort of presence, and even then these lack snap and energy. Much cheaper buds like Lypertek Tevi or Soundpeats H1 sound a little more processed, but are otherwise more impactful, louder and far more engaging, while a comparably-priced mainstream piece like the Galaxy Buds isn’t necessarily better tonally, but has much better bass quality, much more high end detail and far superior UI.

TBH, I don’t get who Mifo is targeting with the S—they’re too pricey for kids, too feature-less for technophiles and, despite the pleasing tonality, are neither tuned for consumers nor for audiophiles. It does seem that Mifo’s prior releases have garnered some praise, and I’d hope that future iterations enhance the bass, widen the soundstage and, above all, crank up the volume. For now, though, these are a hard pass.

Disclaimer: sent free for review purposes by Mifo.

Product Page: Mifo S

Contact us!

Bluetooth & TWS

Mifo S

The post Mifo S TWS Earbuds Review – A Mofo from Mifo? appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Supplied Spring tips are not the best match for CHU as they attenuate treble
– Mids can sound shouty at times
– Technicalities expose the cheap price tag
– Shell paint is prone to chipping off

INTRODUCTION

Moondrop’s last budget offering, the Quarks, left me unimpressed. The only thing those had going for them: price-tag. The neutral-ish tuning was too dry-sounding and the cheap build did not inspire confidence for long-term use.

Enter Moondrop CHU, their latest budget offering. Priced slightly higher than the Quarks, the CHU have far better build and accessories. The tuning, at least on paper (i.e. graph), looks closer to Moondrop’s VDSF target.

All good news so far, but how do they perform in real life? Let’s delve deeper.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Hifigo was kind enough to send me the CHU for evaluation.

Sources used: Questyle CMA-400i
Price, while reviewed: $20. Can be bought from HiFiGo.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

The CHU come in a rather fancy packaging with Moondrop’s signature anime-artwork on top. Fortunately the fanciness do not stop there, as these come with Moondrop’s Spring tips bundled. These tips cost more than half the price of the CHU if purchased separately, so the value proposition is high here.

There are a pair of ear-hooks which add extra strain relief to the cable while helping in over-ear fit. You also get a carrying pouch inside but it’s rather horrible. It offers no protection and is made of a paper-like material that I don’t think will last long. Something’s gotta give, I guess.

BUILD QUALITY

The metal shell of the CHU is exquisitely machined. The fit and finish here is as good as the more expensive Aria. In fact, the CHU have similarly “baked” paintjob on the shell, and similar golden design accents. The two vents on the inner-side of the IEMs also have similar position, with one being placed near the nozzle and another slightly higher up in the shell.

The biggest point of contention for many would be the fixed cable. The good news here is that the cable has ample strain reliefs near the jack and shell, and the sheathing is not too stiff. As a result, you won’t get many kinks and untangling the cable won’t be too difficult. If used carefully, I expect the CHU to last a while.

My only gripe would be the lack of strain relief near the Y-split. A cost-cutting measure perhaps that could be avoided. Another issue which is sort of Moondrop specific: the paint job. These tend to wear and chip-off over time.

COMFORT, ISOLATION, AND FIT

The CHU are very comfortable once worn. Isolation is fairly good, though you’ll need foam tips for best isolation. Do note that the supplied Spring tips are smaller than usual sizes, so you’ll have to choose “L” size if you usually use “M” size on other tips, e.g. Spinfits.

SOURCE AND EARTIPS

For this review, I mostly used the Questyle CMA-400i which is extremely overkill for such easy-to-drive (18 ohms, 104 dB/mW) IEMs.

As for eartips, this is where we run into some strangeness. As the supplied tips (and being fairly expensive), the Spring tips should be absolutely perfect for CHU. However, that’s not the case. The Spring tips attenuate the entire treble region noticeably, resulting in a smoother but less dynamic presentation.

As a result, for this review I chose the Spinfit CP-100+ tips. Even with the added cost of third-party tips I think the CHU are great value, so this small addition won’t change my final rating much.

MOONDROP CHU DRIVER SETUP

Moondrop has used a 10mm Nano-crystal coating composite Titanium-Coated Diaphragm in the CHU. In plain terms, there is a PET driver with perhaps a thin coating of Titanium. Overall, nothing spectacular and expected for the price-tag.

The acoustic chamber design is more interesting as the CHU use a similar system to Aria with two front-facing vents that equalize both the front and back-side air-pressure. As a result, driver control is easier to ascertain.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

Moondrop CHU have a “sub-bass-boosted neutral” tuning. Moondrop calls it their VDSF target and higher-tier IEMs like the Blessing2 and Aria have similar target response.

Having the same graph does not mean that the CHU sounds the same as Blessing2 or the Aria. There are noticeable differences in the technicalities and presentation that set these three IEMs apart.

In terms of bass response, the CHU do reach as low as 30Hz, but the rumble is faint. Bass lacks physicality and doesn’t have the mid-bass punch or sub-bass slam you get from better drivers. Mid-bass notes are not the most textured, but CHU do a better job here than many of their peers. Bass speed is average, but again – not expecting miracles here.

The one thing that I like about the bass is that it doesn’t bleed into the mids. Even then, in tracks with a lot of bass undertones you will miss a lot of the notes. The driver is just not capable enough for that kind of workload.

Speaking of the mids, the lower-mids could do with a bit of body as I think baritone vocals lack some of their signature heft. This is somewhat compounded by the nearly 10dB of rise to the upper-mids. Fortunately, the rise is not too drastic and only in certain songs do you hear hint of shoutiness, e.g. Colbie Caillat’s Magic. Nonetheless, the lower-mids never get the heft and weight I would consider “ideal”, so there’s that. Easily fixed with slight EQ though.

The treble response will probably divide the audiences. Those who prefer a bit more presence-region “bite” will be disappointed as the Spring tips smooth those out. This hampers resonances and upper-harmonic, and most noticeably kills the dynamics. The fix is simple: use other tips like Final E-type or Spinfit CP-100+. The graph shows how the Spring tips reduce the frequencies between 4-8kHz by 3dB or so. Upper-treble is also hurt but those measurements aren’t reliable.

General resolution is middling in the grand scheme of things, but for $20 only very few IEMs can claim better performance, and those who actually resolve more have other tonal oddities. Soundstage has decent height but lacks the width and depth of higher-tier IEMs. Imaging is mostly left and right but I don’t want to nitpick here because, again, price.

Dynamics is another area where CHU can perform better even for the asking price. With the changed tips, I find them to have better macrodynamic punch than stock form but the microdynamics are mostly average. Overall, technically the CHU fail to impress as much as they do with their tuning.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Moondrop Quarks

The Quarks are inferior in every single aspect. I can’t find a single area where they excel over the CHU, sadly.

vs Final E1000

I consider the Final E1000 more of a CHU competitor than anything else under $50. They have a similarly neutral-ish tuning and come bundled with the excellent E-type tips.

The bass on the E1000 roll-off earlier than CHU but has better mid-bass texture. Midrange is where Final knocks it off the park with the E1000 having a neutral-yet-engaging tuning without a hint of dryness. Lower-mids have adequate weight and upper-mids are smooth, articulate, and devoid of shout or shrill.

Treble also has slightly more energy and cymbal hits are easier to identify on the E1000. They also have some stage depth and slightly better imaging. However, the E1000 have availability issues and the price is at times higher than the suggested $25.

Depending on availability and price, I would pick the E1000 over the CHU if they cost less than $30. Other than that, with an increased budget, I’ll probably go for the Final E3000 or BLON BL-05S, provided an adequate source is present. However both of those IEMs cost more than twice the price of CHU so there is that consideration.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The TL;DR version of this review would be: “I recommend the CHU if you only have $20 to spend and are willing to shell out for a pair of third-party tips, or like the sound with stock tips”.

The CHU have familiar failings of the budget realm, namely a lack of technical chops especially in perceived stage and imaging, and Moondrop’s VDSF target does not really fit well if the driver is not fast or resolving enough.

However, looking at the competition with their bass or treble-heavy offerings, CHU are pretty much uncontested in the under $20 price-bracket, and deserves the recommendation.

MY VERDICT

4/5

Good tuning meets average technicalities, and the end-product is more than decent.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from HiFiGo and official Moondrop Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Moondrop CHU Review (1) – A Budget Benchmark 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.

Originally priced at a substancially higher level compared to the regular version – which still retails for $249,00 – such Anniversary model is now discontinued. Externally identical except for the finish – available either in silver or gold variant – internal specs are very similar between the regular and Anniversary models.

A friend lent me his personally owned Anniversary Edition Groove recently for me to try it it parallel vs my “regular” Groove(s) and spot any possible audible difference.

Differences on paper

Firstly, please refer to my other article about Groove for a general and quite indepth description of the product, its specs and performances – which I wont report here as it wuold be redudant and tedious.

Looking at official Apogee information, the sole published differences between original Groove and Anniversary Edition Groove are the following:

Everything else, including input power requirements and output power delivery are declared unchanged.

Differences in my ears

Quite simply, I plugged both devices for as much as possible “in parallel” on my existing infrastructure and I auditioned a few key tracks, using some neutral-ish and most of all well-known (by me) drivers such as Tanchjim Oxygen on the low(ish) impedance front, and Sennheiser HD600 on the opposite end.

Long story short: there is some sound difference, yes. But a very modest one at that.

Anniversary Edition does sound marginally cleaner – spatial reconstruction is a little yet audible bit furtherly airy – and modestly more effortless, furtherly uncompressed – microdynamics are maybe a 5% better.

Apart from that, the two devices behave identically in terms of pairing capabilities (and limitations), output power levels and such.

Worth noting I guess that as always all the above is exclusively consequence of direct subjective audition, I conduceted no “measurements”.

Considerations & conclusions

As a known Groove fanboi of course I’m gelous of the Anniversary unit I got as a kind loan, and I’m of course returning now.

On the other hand, performance differences are indeed marginal and in pure honesty I would not say that the Anniversary Edition is an upgrade to die for vs the original Groove. Nice to have, especially if a good condition preloved unit can be found for a good price around, but that’s it.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Apogee Groove Anniversary Edition Review appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Granted, there’s some evidence of cost cutting—no balanced outs, and the front panel switches and volume knob on the headphone amp seem a bit flimsy, but work as intended. Little of this would, of course, matter unless the SU-6/SH-6 sounded good, but fortunately they do.

As a headphone amp, the SH-6 isn’t a powerhouse (it hits its limits with my  250 ohm Beyers), but immediately impresses with its low end impact and control—slightly boomy IEMs like the Moondrop Kanas Pro  sound tighter, while more balanced pieces like the Whizzer Kylin HE03D or the 7Hz Timeless show palpably more low end depth and presence.

Other than juicing up the bass, the SH-6 is quite neutral in tone—neither bright nor warm–and added very little coloration across the spectrum. Compared to my trusty (tube) Aune T1 MK2, the SH-6 played louder, had the more expansive soundstage and presented a lot more high end detail; the Aune had the more analog, organic timbre, with the SH-6 sounding a bit leaner and more processed, albeit more resolving.

My ($150)  Project Head Box S2 actually was a close match tonally for the SH-6, with a comparable level of high-end detail, but lacked the bass thwack and speed  of the SH-6.

Moving to the headphone section of the pricier Chord Mojo gets you a richer, fuller-bodied sound, with noticeably better loud/soft dynamics and a wider stage. However I actually thought the bass on the SH-6 was crisper and extended deeper than the Mojo’s, which sounded smoother and not as sculpted.

The SH-6 likewise functions very serviceably as a digital preamp, again maintaining its neutral tone and tight bottom end, although careful pairing with sources/speakers is necessary, as the SH-6, in high-gain mode, can get a tad shrill with higher output devices or very sensitive speakers. 

The SU-6 DAC was initially the more intriguing of the pair, largely because of its lineage from the genuinely great ($450) SU-9, with which it shares a variant of the ES9038 chip. While I usually avoid measurements and graphs (which often skew my impressions on how a piece actually sounds), I cheated on this one and checked out Audioscience Review, which showed extremely good measured performance, including very high SINAD. In fact, the SU-6 was dead quiet, with no audible distortion.

As a standalone DAC (decoupled from the SH-6), the SU-6 sounded slightly bright, with a taut note texture and mostly balanced throughout the spectrum, with an etched, slightly sharp-sounding high end which can sound a little intense on amplified instruments (note that the adjustable digital filters have a small but audible effect on mitigating the intensity).

Microdetails are very present (you can clearly hear the difference between 32/768 files and lower rez stuff), though Bluetooth streaming sounded like typical Bluetooth—compressed and somewhat rolled off at the high end.

Paired with the SH-6, the SU-6 takes on the bassy-but-not-bloated character of the amp, while retaining its slight harshness at the highest frequencies. It’s a good combo nonetheless, with a high level of resolution and good PRAT. The 3x pricier SH-9/SU-9 combo, at least from memory, is more powerful and refined at the high-end, though the qualitative differences are incremental. 

Most of the other reviews I’ve read have labelled the SH-6/SU-6 a good “beginner setup”, and like anything else you can certainly spend more and get better. Frankly, unless you’re driving 600 oHm planars I wouldn’t feel a lot of compulsion to upgrade from this little stack—it does many things well and its bass quality trumps a lot of pricier pieces. Bargain.

Disclaimer

This stack was sent to me by SHENZHENAUDIO for review purposes and I thank them for that. It will go to Durwood for a 2nd opinion.

SMSL SU-6 DAC: tested at $169.99. Get it from SHENZHENAUDIO.

SMSL SH-6 amp: tested a $119.99. Get it from SHENZHENAUDIO.

Contact us!

SMSL SU-6 and SMSL SH-6

The post SMSL SU-6 DAC and SH-6 Headphone Amplifier/Preamp Review (1) – Bargain… appeared first on Audio Reviews.