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 — 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.

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.

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.

Even allowing for some recency bias, the Xumee immediately registers as a real find, with a full-bodied, crisp attack, good driving power and notable dynamics and bass impact. It synergized surprisingly well with my new crush, the difficult-to-drive 7Hz Timeless, which sounded louder and more  expansive with the Xumee than they did unamped.

Likewise, the 60 oHm Koss KSC75 took on a palpable physicality with the Xumee, sounding bassier and more like full-sized cans. The Xumee did run out of steam on my 250 ohm Beyer DT 990, which had sufficient volume but sounded wimpy and bloomy at the low end.

On more sensitive (<32 ohm) IEMs, the ($13) Conexant CX31993 sounded more transparent and presented more high end detail, but lacked the energy and low end control of the Xumee, while my current budget fave,  the $23 Meizu Master, matched the Xumee for output power and impact, but sounded a bit coarse in comparison, with a bit of graininess at the high end.  

Moving up the food chain to the $70 Hidisz S3, however, demonstrated the Xumee’s budget roots—while the Xumee played louder and had more low-end presence, the S3 was clearly the more refined, with more lifelike, less artificially bright timbre and a smoother (though still quite detailed) high end. However, the Xumee was a better match for brighter IEMs like the Blon A8 and Whizzer Kylin HD03D than the $75 Audirect Atom 2. So much for price/performace.

While my personal donglequest will undoubtedly continue, I’d venture that among the current flood of barely-distinguishable cheap dacs the Xumee is likely the best.  I’m glad I bought it instead of that fifth of Jim Beam.

On a somewhat related note, I also sampled the surprisingly cheap ($9) Apple USB-C audio adapter, which Jürgen has reviewed favorably here. Simply stated, the Apple does not play well with any Android or Fire devices, producing very low volume and a rolled-off high end.  

The lightning version, OTOH, works perfectly well with my wife’s iPhone, with more than adequate output and a very clean, uncolored presentation. I’m not sure what Apple’s reasoning is here, but if it don’t work it ain’t a bargain.

Non-disclaimer: bought it myself . You find it at amazon.

Contact us!

Xumee

The post Xumee USB-C DAC Dongle Review – A View From The Cheap Seats appeared first on Audio Reviews.

At-a-glance Card

Features and description

Externals

The Go Blu is a minuscle device, approximately the size of a 9V battery but much lighter in weight (just 26g).

It carries an on-off button, an options button, and a volume knob which also has a button as its central part.

Phone outs, and a status LED are on the top side of the device. On the bottom there is the USB-C port, the microphone hole, the power LED, and a futher pin hole for hard reset.

The accessories package is quite limited: GO Blu comes with just a short USB-A/USB-C cable and a soft carry pouch. No USB-C/USB-C cable, let alone Apple cable are included, nor – oddly enough – a shirt clip is bundled inside the box.

Internals

Unlike so many competitive alternatives on the market, GO Blu is not designed around one of those “single chip does it all” items, but is rather a fully articulated dac-amp device, with separate communication, dac and amp sections, just “miniaturised” to fit an extremely small and lightweight footprint.

Connectivity is assigned to Qualcomm’s QCC5100 chip, the latest or one of the latest releases in its class by the wireless techology leader. The DAC section is centered on a 32-bit Cirrus CS43131 chip, sided by a separate hi quality precision clock. The amp section follows a full dual-mono design, and exploits some iFi proprietary technology called “Direct Drive” whereby they avoid using output coupling capacitors to get an even cleaner result on even other conditions.

Input specs are quite limited in terms of accepted formats: just PCM and only until 24bit / 96KHz. No higher res PCM. No native DSD. No MQA. The meta-message by iFi is quite evident here: focus on doing less, at higher quality.

Output specs (find them all here) are quite impressive: up to 5.6V @ 600ohm load on balanced output (half of that on single ended) and a promising 245mW @ 32ohm load on the opposite end (always on BE). Output impedance is below 1 ohm on both ports.

There’s a 6dB gain which is applied “automatically” as volume goes up – read more under Volume Control, here below.

The on-board battery while small features 450mAh capacity, and offered me – based on my typically low-ish playback volume, and always top-rank digital resolution – around 9-10 hours of operation.

Input

GO Blu is mainly conceived as a BT DAC-AMP device, and BT performance is in facts ace both in terms of features and results. The pairing process is straightforward and I had no problem with any of my owned devices (phones, computers).

GO Blu supports BT 5.1, and a whopping array of different codecs including AAC, AptX (Adaptive, HD and Low Latency), LDAC and LHDC/HWA. The LDAC/96 implementation in particular is very solid and – when paired to another known-good-LDAC capable device – I was able to get at least 10 meters away on open path, or 7-8 meters with 2 walls in the middle, with zero dropouts.

The USB-C port on the bottom of GO Blu main body can be also used as a digital input. Again, connectivity proved straightforward both when attached to my PC (directly, and via the Nano iUSB) or to my Android devices – on which I use 3rd party sw players e.g. UAPP and Roon.

Didn’t try Apple ecosystem devices, which are declared as fully supported nonetheless.

Existing connectivity type will take priority: if GO Blu is connected somewhere via BT, a subsequently established USB connection will “not to work” – and similarly, if I have GO Blu on BT pairing mode, but not yet BT-connected to anything, plugging it into a USB data source will kill the BT pairing process, which will not resume for as long as the USB link stays on.

Finally, GO Blu has a very good working microphone on its bottom, which is straightforwardly used for calls and phone assistant interaction. The mic quality is above average at the very least, and Qualcomm’s built-in ANC works a charm: I could use it as an office tool for a while with great satisfaction.

When using GO Blu as a bi-way communication device, short-pressing once on the volume knob’s central button answers the incoming call. Long-pressing ends the call, or activates the phone assistant.

Output

GO Blu comes with two phone output alternatives: a Balanced 4.4mm option and a 3.5mm Single Ended (S-Balanced, actually). The former is by all means the one to go for whenever possible – more on this later.

Neither is configurable as a pure Line Out.

Volume and gain control

The volume knob is apparently well designed and feels solid and precise. iFi is particularly proud on the Swiss tech they added on that, I got no competence to confirm or dismiss but a fact is I couldnt appreciate any audible volume unbalance above 2% or something, and I did witness supersmooth and cracklefree operation for my entire (long!) assessment period.

On the GO Blu iFi chose to integrate gain control within the volume knob excursion – they call it “automatic gain”. In a nutshell, GO Blu is offering low gain until 60% volume level, then it quickly applies a +6dB gain from there on.

In general, I’m not a high gain fan to say the least: the higher the gain, the higher the compression especially on budget (read: sub-multibuck) class devices. High gain to me can and should be used with high impedance loads only, and that’s why I don’t particularly mind having a classical separate “gain switch” for that.

On the other hand I do see the point iFi designers are making on seamlessly integrating gain and volume controls, clinging at non-specialistic users who will simply not want to care on learning why and how they should or should not engage High Gain, and just want a device that “does it right, automatically”.

What makes the equation solve correctly in GO Blu case is that that little device delivers a whopping high level of current already at low volume marks. Which means that most if not all mid & low impedance devices I connected to GO Blu went nicely loud and dynamic (!) already at moderate (way sub 50%) volume levels, thus never needing to engage the High Gain mode. Plugging my HD600 required a deeper volume knob excursion, and -correctly- ended up into +6dB gain territory. Good job!

Other features

Software and Firmware

Like all iFi devices GO Blu allows for easy user-operated firmware flashing. In this specific case, operations can exclusively carried out from an Anroid host though, so be aware!

There’s currently only one GO Blu firmware version available, released last January 2022 – which must be flashed in should the device come with an earlier version as previous one(s) were, frankly, buggy as hell.

On the other hand, iFi offers no host software to remote-control / remote-configure GO Blu. Nothing in the line of what E1DA does for 9038x, or Fiio for BTRx, etc is available. Too bad.

Alternative reconstruction filters

GO Blu firmware includes a sort of “easter-egg”, allowing the user to switch onto an alternative DAC reconstruction filter by following an undocumented button-pressing sequence.

To access such feature one needs to turn on and connect Go Blu (BT or wired, doesn’t matter), then triple-short-press the Power Button. At this point, single short-pressing the Options button (the one below the Volume knob) will toggle between two DAC filter alternatives:

• Minimum phase filter (upper LED turns Purple)
• Standard filter (upper LED turns Green)

The setting is saved, and will resist powering the GO Blu down.

XBASS and XSPACE

On the GO Blu too iFi added two of their most appreciated “extras”, namely XBASS and XSPACE.

Both implemented on the time domain – i.e. on the already calculated analog output coming off the DAC – for superior quality results, XBASS is a bass/sub-bass enhancer, i.e. a filter enhancing all bass frequencies without impacting on the rest of the presentation, while XSPACE is a crossfeed filter, i.e. a system whereby, vulgarly speaking, “a bit” of the left channel sound will be hearable on your right channel too, and viceversa, which brings the headphone/earphone listening experience closer to that of full size speakers of course.

Both are great to have – especially on such a modest budget device – and being a late-50ies / 60ies acoustic jazz lover I’m especially fond of XSPACE, which “magically” compensates on many of those early stereo hard-panned masters with John Coltrane “fully stuck to the left”, for example, making them even more enjoyable.

To activate XBASS and/or XSPACE all it takes is to cycle-press the options button on the right side of the device, just below the volume knob. 1 press = XBASS, 2 presses = XSPACE, 3 presses = both, 4 presses = reset to none. The options led on top, near the 4.4 port, will light of a different color accordingly.

Sound

GO Blu sounds seriously well.

The presentation range is very well extended both down low and up high, notes have very good body accross the board, and a particular mention is deserved by bass being very controlled. Highmids come accross a tad too evident, on the other end. Trebles are way airier than one may expect from such a small – therefore necessarily hw-limited – device. Perhaps most importantly, instrument separation and microdynamics are nothing short of outstanding.

Comparing by memory (I sold my unit quite some months ago) with an overall similar-featured device, GO Blu sounds significantly better than Fiio BTR5 for example : definitely cleaner, more extended, more macro and micro-dynamical.

Comparing instead with a different-featured but similarly priced device by the same manufacturer, GO Blu’s presentation is not the same as Hip-Dac – the latter is warmer down low, and less hot up high – although the “general sound quality” impression I can get from either is definitely on the same league.

As for probably 95% of sub-1K$ devices I auditioned to date, on Go Blu too single-ended output delivers much lesser quality than the balanced option next to it.  Simply put, I would recommend Go Blu for Balanced only – and skip it if your main drivers are all single-ended and you don’t want to (or can!) plan on swapping cables.

Some caveats now.

One: In spite of a quite low output impedance (below 1 ohm), GO Blu’s Balanced output produces significant hiss on very low impedance + high sensitivity loads (Andromeda and such).

Two: GO Blu’s USB connection does and will charge the battery while playing, when connected to a host providing power on the VBUS wire. As a consequence, USB-connecting GO Blu directly to my PC produces audibly worse (closer, more compressed, less dynamical) output compared to connecting it through my Nano iUSB3, or to a battery-powered pure transport (eg a Tempotec V1).

Some educational pairings

Final E3000

I would call this an unreal pair in terms of amping authority, if it weren’t for the fact that E3000’s fixed cabling forces me into the Single Ended option on the GO Blu, and sadly it shows. With that being said, GO Blu’s amping module makes E3000 open up and sing quite well, so much as to make the pair an incredibly good “compromise option” e.g. when adopting GO Blu as a BT device and mid-fi digital sources e.g Spotify or similar.

Final E5000

Not the best pair in the world at all for those but waaaay better than so many alternatives. E5000 is the empyric proof, if one is ever needed, of how vivid current GO Blu outputs already at very low volume positions, making E5000’s bass not “melting” into a too dark presentation as on most other lowcost stuff I heard it on. Very well done here.

Sennheiser HD600

GO Blu drives HD600 with great authority powerwise, even from the single ended out which is the sole I could test as I don’t care putting a balanced cable on my HD600, Groove pair being endgame for those at my place. GO Blu’s “automatic gain” works greatly here.

Considerations & conclusions

The main thing about GO Blu is that, quite simply, it sounds surprisingly good – especially so via its Balanced Ended output, which is the part I would recommend it for anytime really.

This little kid impressed me quite a lot for its very good DAC reconstruction quality, its more than decently clean amping stage, its capacity to drive low impedance and high impedance loads equally well, and the incredible life it delivers to most of my drivers.

Weren’t this enough add supersolid BT 5.1 (!) connectivity, XBASS and (to me, especially) XSPACE, and great performance for office calls, too.

What else can one want? The man on the road would probably, and justly, respond “nothing, just take my money now”.

I’m an old grumpy fellow so I always go around looking for flipsides, and GO Blu does have a few of course too:  Single Ended output quality is rather unimpressive for one; output power although good is not enough for planars and such; Balanced output hisses off on very low impedance loads; well… that’s it really.

Also due to some unwanted external interferences I got in the past months, I took my sweet time assessing this device and I feel I need to particularly thank iFi Audio for the patience they had after supplying my loaner review unit back last december already!

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post iFi GO Blu Review – Sorprendentemente Bene appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Executive Summary

The Burson V6 Classic opamps are a valid alternative to the V6 Vivid opamps for those who prefer a leaner, wider, and better resolving sound. The V6 Classic work particularly well with acoustic pieces and jazz, but also with sources too warm for the V6 Vivid.

Introduction

Burson Audio is a >20-year old innovative company from Australia that produce high-quality DACs and amps. They started their business with opamps and other audio parts before dipping into complete devices.

I have exhaustively analyzed their lowest-priced amp, the Burson Funk, which, in its “Deluxe Package”, comes with a pair of Burson’s flagship V6 Vivid opamps that produce an energetic and dynamic sound. But the company offers another set of flagship opamps separately, the V6 Classic, which generate an alternative sound signature.

Both, V6 Classic and V6 Vivid retailed at $85 per piece/$145 per pair at the time of this review. You can order them from Burson. Both models are based on 12 years of research and carry a life-long warranty. V6 stands for Version 6 (or 6th generation). You can learn about their internals here.

What are Opamps?

Operational amps (“opamps”) are one of the building blocks of analog electronics circuits, used for sound optimization and customization. Opamps fine tune the’s sonic signature and help tailor the sound to the listener’s preference – similar to tubes in tube amps.

Opamps are universally deployable across different amps independent of brand. They are easily plugged into/pulled out of an amp’s logic board.

Caution, “opamp rolling” can be addictive!

Physicals and Installation

In the box are two opamps and two adapters. You don’t need the adapters when plugging the opamps into a Burson amp. If using them with amps of other brands, make sure there is enough space in the enclosure. Considering that most other opamps are these flat spider-like things, the Burson opamps are little skyscrapers.

You install the opamps by opening the enclosure (Allen keys included), align them according to manual, and stick them into the dedicated slots on the logic board. The Burson Funk, for example, has 2 such slots, one for speakers, and the other for headphones.

And if you align the opamps incorrectly, Burson’s unique “reverse voltage protection” prevents them from getting damaged.

The Burson Funk holds two opamps, one for the headphone circuit and the other for the speaker circuit. You can use a different opamp in each signal path. Many users prefer the V6 Classic for headphone use and the V6 Vivid for speakers.

Test Setup

I tested both opamp models, the V6 Classic and the V6 Vivid with the Burson Funk and different headphones/earphones. I used a neutral and a warm source to establish a possible source dependence for the performance of these opamps. After all, you’d expect the warm V6 Classic to pair better with a neutral source and the V6 Vivid to harmonize best with a warm source.

Neutral source setup: Questyle QP1R as DAC via AudioQuest Golden Gate RCA interconnects into Burson Funk amp. Warm source setup: Questyle QP1R as transport via Lifatec USA optical cable into EarMen Tradutto DAC and via AudioQuest Golden Gate RCA interconnects into Burson Funk amp; Sennheiser HD 600 headphones, JVC HA-FDX1 and Final E5000 iems.

Sound

Previously, I had tested the V6 Vivid opamps for my exhaustive Burson Funk review. What became evident to me was how the Burson Funk with the V6 Vivid opamps replaces the neutral signature of the Questyle’s own Class A amp with a slight warmth and an overall subtle tone colour. Sound is quite natural and definitely not digitally artificial.

Replacing the Vivid with the V6 Classic changes the Funk’s sound substantially — similar to exchanging the pickup of a record player or the earpieces on an iem.

To give you the helicopter view: the Classic make the Funk’s sound sound wider, more open, leaner, more neutral, and flatter, but also faster. In contrast, the V6 Vivid create a thicker, bassier/warmer, deeper, more dynamic but also narrower sound.

In detail, the V6 Classic deliver a tighter, faster, more composed bass compared to the V6 Vivid’s thicker, richer, and warmer low end with a better sub-bass extension, which contributes to the V6 Vivid’s deeper soundstage. On the other hand, the V6 Classic’s more forward treble makes for a wider, more open but also flatter stage. Due to the lesser warmth from the bass, the V6 Classic’s mids are leaner, cleaner, and clearer, as opposed to the Vivid’s richer, smoother, softer, and more rounded notes. This results in a better midrange resolution, transparency, and spatial cues in the V6 Classic.

Saxophones, cellos, and vocals sound leaner and “sharper” with the V6 Classic and smoother/richer/thicker with the Vivid. The advantage of the V6 Classic’s leaner presentation is “more space between notes and musicians on stage” and therefore better instrument separation and placement. A symphony orchestra on stage becomes easier congested with the V6 Vivid than with the V6 Classic.

On the other hand, the V6 Vivid have more dynamics and therefore a punchier sound.

V6 Classic: the right Choice for You?

The question is not which opamp is better, but which source and music fits better to which. I find the better resolving, “wider” V6 Classic better suited for acoustic pieces, classical music, and jazz. The more dynamic, punchier Vivid are better working for rock music and electronic…or anything noisy.

But that’s my observation for my combination of neutral source and neutral iems/headphones. If you have a warm source, you may overthicken your music with the Vivid, the same accounts for warm headphones and earphones. So you may have to balance the temperatures of source and headphones/earphones against the choice of opamps.

Concluding Remarks

My analysis shows that the performance of the V6 Classic (and V6 Vivid) opamps are to some extent source and output dependent. Whilst, admittedly, the V6 Vivid is more universally deployable, the V6 Classic caters to the listening to acoustic/classical/jazzy pieces and such who want to cool their coloured source.

In the end, the opamp choice relies on personal preference and savvy aficionados collect them all. Opamp rolling is not any different from tip rolling (and cable rolling) with earphones/headphones, it is just another enjoyable addiction for audio junkies.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The V6 Classic opamps were provided by Burson – and I thank them for that.

Get the Burson opamps HERE.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Burson V6 Classic Opamp Review – Carnegie Hall appeared first on Audio Reviews.

The new version of iFi’s recently discontinued hip-dac, amongst the few low cost mobile dac-amps featured of our Wall of Excellence, is marketed at a very similar price (€ 189,00) compared to its precedessor.

At the end of the day, my opinion about hip-dac2 could be condensed in a simple one-liner: as good as Hip Dac, so very good for this price point, with the addition of a higher MQA reconstruction quality.

As I never published an article about original hip-dac I will take this opportunity to deliver an extended article on the “hip-dac franchise”, so to call it. I will clearly mark the differences between hip-dac2 and hip-dac within the text. Let’s go through it.

At-a-glance Card

Product analysis

Key features and general description

hip-dac2 (like its precedessor hip-dac) is a battery-equipped slim-bodied easily pocketable USB DAC-AMP.

Size-, weight- and shape-wise it’s just wonderful. The full metal shell is sturdy, greatly pocketable, and at the same time superbly stylish from the shape and finishing points of view. It “pairs” very well with an average smartphone when used in conjunction with that.

Sole audio input is the USB data port.  The input connector is the “usual” iFi USB-A recessed male plug. A USB-A(f) to USB-C and a USB-A(f) to USB-A(m) short cables are supplied free. No UBS-A(f) to micro-USB nor USB-A(f) to Apple Lightning are offered in the package.

No coax, optical nor analog input available. hip-dac2 (or hip-dac) can’t be used as a pure amplifier.

Two phone outputs are available: single ended (S-balanced, actually – more on this below) 3.5mm and balanced 4.4 mm.

No line-out analog output is available, which means that hip-dac2 (or hip-dac) can’t be used as a “pure DAC”, plugged into a downstream amp device. It still can be further amplified but the internal amp section will anyhow be involved as a “pre-amp”.

The internal battery cannot be charged via the digital input USB port. A separate charge-only USB-C port is dedicated to charging (a short USB-A to USB-C cable is included in the package). This is good as it cuts on much of the source-incoming noise typically carried by an active VBUS line. On the other hand it means that even when USB-connected to (say) a laptop the hip-dac2 / hip-dac will always only take power from its internal battery, and will eventually run out of juice.

Battery autonomy as always depends on usage (highres files and high volume listening consume more of course) but you can count on some good 6-7 hours of “common spec” listening. A full recharge takes like 3 hours.

When referring to similarly priced portable DAC-AMP devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s power specifications are nominally impressively high vs high impedance loads (6.2V vs 600 ohm, just wow!) and a good step above average vs mid impedance loads (400mW vs 32 ohm).

iFi doesn’t table specs vs low impedance loads (< 16ohm) though, nor hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s output impedance on either of its phone out ports is declared.

Similar to what happens for most if not all of their devices, iFi offers a selection of easily user-installable firmware alternatives for Hip Dac 2 – ultimately yielding into alternative choices in terms of digital reconstruction filters.

Lastly, the device offers a manual High Gain button (labelled “Power Match”) and an XBass+ button. More on these later.

How does it sound: DAC performance

Considering hip-dac2 / hip-dac lack a proper Line Out, DAC performances are only partially assessable as some will be influenced by the integrated amp stage.

It is nevertheless quite evident that hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s voicing is very good when looking at pretty much any other similar portable DAC-AMP on this level of budget. Auditioned from its Balanced output port (more on why later) range is very well extended both towards the bass and the highs. Bass notes are well bodied, not particularly enhanced. Treble is smooth while more than nicely airy, and mids are quite evidently the best developed section.

There’s a quite evident warm tonality – difficult if not impossible to say which section (DAC and/or AMP) contributes to that most. But it’s there. If I have to compare with my experience with other iFi devices offering Line Out options (Nano iDSD Black Label, Micro iDSD Signature) I am ready to bet this is mostly AMP-related but again… it’s a guess.

Good DAC performance doesn’t come by chance. iFi adopts high-standard components even inside their budget products like hip-dac2 / hip-dac, and this is surely one good first step – but this often happens on many chi-fi devices, which on even or very similar “internal stuff list” condition in the end sound apparently much worse. The real key is engineering competence, really – and that can’t be so easily “cloned”.

One aspect: a fundamental requisite to obtain good performances from a DAC device is avoiding interferences on the incoming digital data. Not talking about human-audible interferences, of course. You might want to read this other article of mine to get a flavour of what I’m talking about. As already mentioned above, hip-dac2 / hip-dac don’t take power from the USB data cable, this way apriori cutting a lot in terms of noise “collection”.

Another aspect: unlike the overwhelming majority of the other budget mobile devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac offer an analog volume control, not a digital one. The reason why this is way better for DAC performances is quite technical (check here for a good, reasonabe vulgarly-explained article) but putting it very simply: digital volume controls act upon the digital stream before it reaches the DAC, and deliver a “integral” digital data to the DAC only at their end-scale position (so at “100% volume” position); intermediate volume levels are realized by applying attenuatin to the digital data which de facto corresponds to reducing their digital resolution.

An analog-volume device like hip-dac2 / hip-dac always feeds its DAC chip at full digital resolution, and attenuates the analog output aposteriori only. Why not every device has this ? Quite simply because analogue volume controls are more expensive to implement and more complicated to design

Firmware options

Like most if not all other iFi DAC devices, hip-dac2 / hip-dac can run a range of firmware variants, each offering different features or optimisations. Firmware packages and the apps required to flash them are freely available on iFi’s web site, here.  The flashing process is really easy and straightforward, at least on Windows platform.

The 3 significant versions to choose from for hip-dac2 are:

For the original hip-dac a very similar option is available although it may be interesting to note here that there have been two hip-dac sub-versions, one tagged with serial numbers beginning with 54010 and the other with serial numbers beginning with 54040. The latter generation accepts the same 7-generation firmware packages as hip-dac2 (labelled respectively 7.2, 7.2c and 7.2b), while the former older generation accepts older versions of the same packages ( labelled respectively 5.3, 5.3c and 5.2).

DSD is a very interesting standard but I don’t de facto currently own nor plan to own music files sampled above DSD 256, so the two options which get my attention are 7.3 and 7.3c.

Their fundamental difference is one only but a significant one at that: with 7.3c iFi’s own GTO (Gibbs Transient Optimised) filter replaces Burr Brown’s native reconstruction filters.

I strongly recommend you read iFi’s whitepaper about why and how this may be technically desireable, or not.

The paper focuses on throughly illustrating GTO’s output features while leaving another important aspect in the background: with 7.3c hip-dac2 will systematically upsample all digital input coming from the USB port up to 32 bit / 384KHz resolution prior to feeding the DAC chips. For what I seem to have understood this is fundamentally required for the GTO filter itself to work as intended.

I already experienced iFi’s GTO implementation in conjunction with Micro iDSD Signature and Nano iDSD Black Label. Simply put: on Nano iDSD BL the GTO option “sounds worse” than the native ones – for my tastes at least. Oppositely, GTO performance on Micro iDSD Signature is very significant, offering important analog reconstruction improvements on redbook-standard (16bit / 44.1KHz) tracks compared to the non-GTO firmware option.

Very similar is my experience on hip-dac2 / hip-dac, and this is one of the few notable differences between the two generations.

hip-dac2 GTO implementation (fw 7.3c) offers a very good alternative option compared to non-GTO (fw 7.3).

Oppositely, when I tested this on a first-version (ser# 54010xxxxx) original hip-dac I got a very similar result as the one I got with the Nano iDSD BL: GTO firmware is basically not worth for me. I didn’t have an opportunity to test a latter-generation hip-dac (ser# 54040xxxxx).

MQA

This is quite evidently the most important aspect about which hip-dac2 represents a significant upgrade from hip-dac: MQA reconstruction performance is evidently better.

MQA royalties and consulting fees apart, as one may easily imagine different enabling hardware makes a big difference on such a computing intensive process as MQA unfolding. Newer generation iFi models (hip-dac2, Diablo, ZEN DAC v2 etc) carry a 16 core XMOS chip with a much higher capacity and computing power (2X the clock speed, 4X the internal memory, latest USB standards compliance) so – simply put – it can “do more at the same time” than the predecessor model.

The improvement in the audible result is quite evident, and totally in line with theory. When applied to MQA-authenticated tracks hip-dac2 reconstructs a much airier, defined and detailed sound compared to the job done by hip-dac as mere Renderer on the very same tracks.

On the other hand, though, I think it’s worthwhile here to remember that – like it or not – MQA is not any sort of magical way to make a DAC sound better then it technically could when applied to a non-MQA, full resolution version of the same track.

A very easy comparison example for me is with Apogee Groove. While of course hip-dac2 will reconstruct/reproduce an MQA-master track at a higher level of audible detail and resolution compared to what Groove will do when connected as a non-MQA DAC on the same track, on the other hand Groove’s range extension, dynamic range, bass and treble control stay on a superior level even in such an “handicap-started” race. Even more evident is the DAC reconstruction quality difference of course when applying hip-dac2 to a given MQA-authenticated track, and Groove to a high-res non-MQA version of the very same track.

Long story short, I guess it all boils down to a quite trivial conclusion: MQA is no magic wand, it’s got no “hardware upgrade power”. Of course.

How does it sound: AMP performance

Based on experience I stopped expecting that low budget devices offer similar amping quality results from both their single and balanced ended outputs. It fundamentally never happens.

The fact is that in these cases balanced amping architecture is primarily adopted as an inexpensive, easy-implementable way for many manufacturers to offer a decent or above-decent output quality (cleanness, transparency, dynamic range) off of apriori difficult situations such as small / ultrasmall and low price tier pocketable devices.

Clean amping is mostly dependent on high quality power management, and in a small and/or relatively inexpensive “box” there is little “room” (physical and virtual) to fit appropriate power management circuitry. Clean power is a challange on amps of any size, and a very steep one the smaller the form factor and the budget get.

As size & cost go up it starts to be possible to encounter devices e.g. the Micro iDSD Signature whereon Single Ended and Balanced phone outs present a power difference, but negligible quality differences. Below that size and budget, I just encountered white flys. Groove, to name one, which Single Ended output is a few times over cleaner, more transparent and dynamic-extended than any other Balanced-equipped device below $300 I happened to hear. Another good case is Sony NW-A55. I have a serious hard time naming a third.

From this point of view, hip-dac2 / hip-dac follow the mainstream. Do not expect wonders from their Single Ended outputs, as in facts you won’t get any. The other way around is rather true: hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s Single Ended output is unimpressive – dull, compressed, closed-in. This, in spite of the good deeds of their S-Balanced tech.

Different story for the Balanced Ended 4.4mm output, which comes accross evidently airier, better bilaterally extended, with a very good level of control on bass and smooth trebles, and most of all a quite nice dynamic range and good microdynamic rendering. In a word, the solid impression is that on hip-dac2 / hip-dac BE out is the sole one with enough cleanness and transparency as to offer some justice to the preceding DAC stage.

As I already mentioned above, there’s a distinct warm coloration. Is this coming from the DAC or the AMP? Difficult to determine as hip-dac2 / hip-dac don’t offer a pure Line Out option, and thus a chance to use a third-party amp like it happens on other iFi models like Nano iDSD BL or Micro iDSD Signature is precluded.

A small difference can also be identified between hip-dac2 and hip-dac’s overall output quality, namely the former being a bit more sparkly in the highs, and just a whiff less intimate as far as soundstage goes.

I didn’t mention soundstage yet, which is definitely not a shiny aspect for hip-dac2 nor hip-dac. Quite narrow, really. Is this due to scarce spatial reconstruction skills at the DAC level or due to unclean AMPing? Again, impossible to say due to the lack of a Line Out option – and after all useless to know either, as it’s not something the user can do anything about.

Lastly, I think it’s worth noting that some hiss is picked by very sensitive loads (CA Andromeda, anyone? ). While definitely an imperfection taken per se, I guess it should be conceded to hip-dac2 / hip-dac that it’s a very common one, almost irregardlessly of the device budget.

Extra features

There are two toggle-buttons beside hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s volume knob, named Power Match and XBass.

Power Match is nice attempt at a layman-friendly naming for a Gain switch. Activating Power Match puts hip-dac2 / hip-dac in High Gain mode, which is of course recommended (only) when a low-sensitivity driver is connected. Attention though: on low-sensitivity and low-impedance devices the suggestion is flipped – Low Gain is typically a much better option.

XBass behaves like what an EQ expert would call a low shelf positive filter. By ear it pushes lows up by 2dB-ish from 100Hz down. Might occasionally turn out to be handy to help some bass-shy drivers, or as a compromise to compensate for some drivers requiring a higher level of current delivery than what hip-dac2 / hip-dac can deliver to express their best on their bass lines.

Notable pairings

You find some significant pairing impressions reported in Kazi’s article, which I already mentioned above.

I find myself totally in line with what Kazi wrote when referring to final Sonorous-III and Dunu ZEN / ZEN Pro which I also had a chance to directly test with hip-dac2 and hip-dac. Ditto for my experience with a pair of high-impedance cans, which is HD600 in my case – ultimately showing that hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s nominal 6V @ 600ohm spec is less effective than it may seem when put to the real work.

Let me just add a few other experiences here.

final E3000

Biasing-wise the pair is technically good, insofar as hip-dac2 and hip-dac both definitely deliver enough current to E3000 to open them up properly, keeping their bass transients controlled and delivering a good sense of space. The unavoidable down side is that due to E3000’s fixed cable it’s impossible to exploit hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s best amping output (the Balanced one) so the forced-single-ended pair is bound to unavoidably suffer from some dullness and lack of dynamics.

final E5000

Even when paired on the Balanced output hip-dac2 and hip-dac don’t seem to deliver enough current soon enough to brighten-up E5000’s bass line. The result is an overly thick presentation which is what very commonly one gets on E5000 from budget-tier sources.

Ikko OH-1S and Tanchjim Oxygen

Although different, the two IEMs react very similarly to hip-dac2 / hip-dac pair. Both get turned on very nicely by the balanced output, delivering much of their competence in terms of technicality. Both get “warmed up” by hip-dac2 / hip-dac’s coloration, which may be a welcome variation to many in comparison to their otherwise slightly-bright/neutral tonality. Hip-dac2 pushes both’s highmids up, luckily without passing the glare limit. Nice ones.

final Sonorous-II

Similarly to what happens on Sonorous-III, the pair has lights and shadows. Good is bass (a case where the XBass switch delivers a pleasant alternative at the user’s fingertip), and microdynamics. Less good is high-mids which get a bit too hot.

Shure SRH-1840

This is a really good pair. Power available on Low Gain is already more than enough to make SRH-1840 sing pretty well, and there’s no overdoing on the high-mids. Some treble extension is lacking. General warmth may be considered bearable in this case due to the fundamental pure neutrality of the phones taken on their own. Too bad for the narrow stage, but at this price level I’ve yet to find a better pair for SRH-1840 if I exclude Groove.

Notable comparisons

Again, some notable comparisons are already mentioned on Kazi’s article, which I once again encourage you to read. I do share his opinion about hip-dac2 vs hip-dac entirely.

vs Apogee Groove

The comparison is apriori dishomogeneous as Groove is a high-power-demanding dongle with a unique, not-general-purpose amping architecture while hip-dac2 and hip-dac are designed with full-horizontal applicability in mind. Performance differences found between the two devices should be put in the correct perspective.

That said, Groove’s DAC and AMP refinements, where applicable, are significantly better compared to hip-dac2 / hip-dac.

Hip-dac2’s DAC reconstruction prowess does challenge Groove’s resolving power exclusively when applied to MQA-authenticated tracks. On such very tracks, hip-dac2’s Full Decoder capabilities deliver superior resolution and air, while on the other hand still falling short vs Groove on range extension, bass control and treble vividness. On non-MQA material there’s no game instead.

vs Hidizs S9 Pro

Another dishomogeneous therefore “unfair” comparison, which I’m mentioning basically only due to S9 Pro’s popularity. Similarly to Groove, Hidizs S9 Pro is a battery-less dongle featuring a high host-power demand. Different from Groove, it carries a general-purpose amping architecture free from apriori pairing limitations.

Like hip-dac2 / hip-dac, S9 Pro also comes with dual phone outputs (Single Ended and Balanced Ended), and again similarly in both cases the Single Ended option, well, might also be omitted, for how underwhelming they are compared to their Balanced Ended alternatives.

That said, the sound quality difference between the two devices is nothing short of dramatic. Hip-dac2 / hip-dac are better resolving, have better estension, better dynamics and better features. Last but not least, when connected to a “noisy” host (e.g a laptop) S9 Pro degrades its cleanness and spatial reconstruction performance quite evidently, and benefits of a noise filter adoption (e.g. an iFi iSilencer or an AudioQuest Jitter Bug), while hip-dac2 / hip-dac is much more resilient off the bat.

S9 Pro costs 35% less than hip-dac2, that must be noted, too.

vs iFi Nano iDSD Black Label

Similarly priced and after all not so differently-sized, the two devices do behave similarly.

Overall, hip-dac2 comes out ahead when used as a complete (DAC+AMP) system, even more so if applied to MQA material as Nano iDSD Black label is a mere Renderer not a Full Decoder. On the flip side, Nano iDSD Black Label offers a pure Line Out option which is the big “missing bit” from hip-dac2 / hip-dac, which allows the user to “upgrade” the device with an external amp – possibly a desktop one? – and fully exploit the really nice quality of its internal DAC.

Considerations & conclusions

Hip-dac2 is an outstanding device, quite evidently the best sub-200$ battery powered pocketable DAC-AMP on the market today. It delivers very good DAC reconstruction capabilities, significant amping power, and remarkable cleannes, dynamics and air from its Balanced Ended headphone output.

Compared to its preceding version, hip-dac2 offers MQA Full Decoding which represent a solid further improvement for Tidal fans. Apart from that, its features are identical and its sound quality are so close to the preceding version that a current hip-dac owner may safely hold on to his existing investment in case Tidal Master is not his streaming service of choice.

Disclaimer

As always, a big thank you to iFi for the continued opportunity they offer me to keep assessing their products.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post iFi hip-dac2 Review (2) – Still The Best appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Executive Summary

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

Specifications

Unfold for Full Specifications

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

[collapse]

Technology/Architecture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Physical Things

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

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

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

Functionality and Operation

It does

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

It does not

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

Front Panel

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

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

Back Panel

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

Remote

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

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

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

Sound

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

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

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

w. Headphones

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

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

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

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

Dynamics is naturally dosed, never overwhelming or too polite.

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

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

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

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

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

In summary, none of these DACs sound alike.

w. Stereo System

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bluetooth

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

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

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

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

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

Summary

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

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

Helm Bolt

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

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

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

Shanling UA1

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

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

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

Matching

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

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

Other Quick Comparisons

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

Disclaimer

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

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

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

Cons — Hip-DAC2 can feel unwieldy when paired with large phones
– Narrow staging
– Somewhat colored tonality won’t suit neutrality seekers
– Single-ended output is underwhelming
– A proper line-out would be perfect

INTRODUCTION

iFi Audio hit the homerun with the original Hip-DAC. It had excellent build, the design was unique, and the sound was different to most in the market with a warm, rich tuning that could power most reasonable headphones and IEMs.

The release of the Hip-DAC2 came as a surprise to me as I didn’t think the Hip-DAC was being outperformed by its peers. In fact, the Hip-DAC is still on of the best portable DAC/Amps under $250. On paper it appears that the Hip-DAC2 is mostly geared towards Tidal enthusiasts, having a major improvement in MQA decoding capabilities.

Let’s see if the Hip-DAC2 can prove itself to be just as good as its predecessor.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. iFi Audio was kind enough to send me the Hip-DAC2 as a loaner.

Earphones/Headphones used: Dunu Zen, Dunu Zen Pro, Final FI-BA-SS, Campfire Andromeda 2020, Sennheiser HD650, Sennheiser HD560S, Final Sonorous III.
Firmware versions: 7.30, 7.3b
Price, while reviewed: 190 euros. Can be bought from WOD Audio.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

iFi Audio went for a minimalist package with the Hip-DAC2. You get the essentials: a type-C to USB type-A female cable (for connecting to phones), a USB type-A male to female cable (for connecting with the PC), and a type-C to USB type-A male cable for charging.

There is an optional case that you can buy but it cost 29 euros extra.

BUILD QUALITY

Build quality of the Hip-DAC2 mimics that of the original Hip-DAC and it is excellent. The housing is sandblasted aluminium with a Sunset Orange color scheme (vs Petrol Blue on the original). The volume pot has a silver-gray finish this time around whereas the OG had a golden knob.

There are two buttons on the left side of the volume pot (xBass and PowerMatch respectively) and two headphone outputs on the right side (4.4mm balanced and 3.5mm single-ended). The bottom of the device houses a USB type-A male port for connecting to devices, and a type-C port for charging.

The volume pot also acts as a power button and has two LEDs on both sides to indicate remaining charge (white for >75%, green for >25%, and red for >10% capacity). These LEDs also show the current sample rate and file format. The following image shows all the colors and their corresponding sample rate or format.

Engaging either xBass or PowerMatch lights up the tiny white LEDs underneath the buttons. Overall, excellent build quality with no noticeable room for improvement.
5/5

HANDLING

The Hip-DAC2 is fairly lightweight at 125gm, but due to the 70mm width can be awkward to hold in hand. This becomes more noticeable when you’re stacking the DAC/Amp with a large phone (most modern phones are large anyway). As a result, I preferred to use the Hip-DAC2 with my laptop rather than on-the-go with my phone. Also, the aluminium shell is quite slippery, so not the best experience when using as a portable device.
3.5/5

BATTERY LIFE

Clocking at around 8hrs of playback time, the battery life on the Hip-DAC2 is decent if unremarkable. The 2200mAh battery pack could have been upgraded over the original but that would increase weight and thickness so it’s a compromise iFi has to make. Recharging takes about 3 hours on a typical phone charger.
3.5/5

INTERNAL HARDWARE

iFi Audio are most comfortable with using the BurrBrown chipset and here it appears again. The BB DSD1793 chipset offers native DSD encoding and with the updated XMOS controller can now decode MQA files at a hardware level. This feature, admittedly, is of little use to non-TIdal HiFi users but it doesn’t hurt to have an extra feature.

The potentiometer is fully analog, thus not facing some of the limitations that digital potentiometers may have. However, being analog in nature, it may degrade over time. The Global Master Timing clock has been upgraded here over the original Hip-DAC. The amp sections remains unchanged on paper, with quad JFET OV4627 op-amps (customized for iFi Audio). The amp circuit also uses a dual-mono design for the balanced output.

Other extras include the xBass feature which is an analog EQ and mostly aims to “fix” the sub-bass roll-off issue on open-back headphones. In reality, many open-back headphones suffer from distortion in those regions and applying an EQ might cause further distortion and clipping. The other feature is the PowerMatch button that acts as a gain switch for headphones (iFi advises keeping it off for sensitive IEMs).

Speaking of power outputs, the Hip-DAC2 outputs 0.4W @ 32ohms from the balanced out and 280mW @ 32ohms from the single-ended output (which also supports their proprietary S-balanced tech). The voltage swing can go as high as 6.3Vrms from the balanced out and this comes handy when driving high impedance dynamic driver headphones.

The PCB design is excellent and the components are high quality so I have no qualms about the internals of the Hip-DAC2. I would have loved it even more had it had a true line-out with fixed voltage output. Pairing the Hip-DAC with external amps could make it a great desktop solution. Maybe something for the Hip-DAC3.

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

The general sound of the iFi Hip-DAC2 can be summarized as warm-neutral. It has the characteristic iFi Audio warmth with smooth treble and an engaging midrange. The bass is mostly neutral but can be pushed higher with the xBass switch.

One area where the Hip-DAC2 falls short of its peers is the soundstage width. You won’t have the stage width of some of the ESS chipset-based DACs in the price range. On the plus side, the imaging was precise for the most part, provided you have headphones/IEMs with good imaging. Treble also doesn’t exhibit the rather common “glare” you find in many dongles these days.

One thing to note is that changing the firmware can bring subtle changes to the sound due to changes in reconstruction filter. I used both the default 7.30 firmware and the 7.3b firmware. The former had a more laid-back treble and had a slightly wider stage, while the latter had sharper treble with more up-front upper-mids. Do note that these are subtle changes and won’t drastically alter the sound.

Overall transparency and resolution was good for the price point, though again I could hear some roll-off in the upper-treble frequencies and separation was nothing exceptional. Moreover, the background hiss is noticeable with sensitive IEMs, so if you want a very dark background the Hip-DAC2 will disappoint.

PAIRING NOTES

Sennheiser HD650

The Sennheiser HD650 is one of the few headphones that scale according to the source quality. On paper, the Hip-DAC2 has the required voltage swing to power it, but reality is a mixed bag. The HD650 got loud from the balanced out but lacked the dynamics it can display on a more powerful amp. Separation was not the best either. I would not recommend the Hip-DAC2 for such high impedance dynamic drivers if you want to maximize their potential.

Final Sonorous III

Final Sonorous III is a closed back pair of headphones and are very efficient. Despite the efficiency they are quite transparent to source quality. The Hip-DAC2 drove them excellently with no loss in dynamics and the bass was quite pleasant. The upper-mids had more glare than usual, though, and the treble extension was lacking somewhat. Nonetheless, I would call the Hip-DAC2 a good pairing for efficient dynamic driver headphones.

Hifiman Sundara

On the planar magnetic side, we have the Hifiman Sundara. With a 94dB @ 37ohms efficiency, these are not the easiest headphones to drive. The Hip-DAC2 did get them loud with good enough dynamics. Moreover, the xBass switch was handy to add some slam and physicality to Sundara’s otherwise flat, dry bass. I would call these two a good pairing, though Sundara can do better when paired with high end amps.

Dunu Zen and Dunu Zen Pro

The Dunu Zen and Zen Pro both exhibited hiss from the balanced out of the Hip-DAC. However, the overall sound was quite pleasant. The Hip-DAC2 was not as resolving as the Questyle CMA-400i or Lotoo PAW 6000 with the Dunu Zen and Zen Pro, but none of its $200 peers sound any better with these IEMs so there’s that.

In general, the Hip-DAC2 pairs well with moderately efficient IEMs and some inefficient ones. The warm signature complements somewhat analytical headphones and IEMs. On the other hand, I would not recommend it for power-hungry planar magnetic headphones and IEMs, or very high impedance dynamic driver headphones. Headphones and IEMs with a warm tonality might not be the best pairing as well, e.g. Final E5000.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs iFi Hip-DAC

There is little to externally differentiate between the original Hip-DAC and the Hip-DAC2 other than the different paintjob. In terms of sound, the changes are mostly minor. The Hip-DAC2 has more transparency in the upper-mids (OG Hip-DAC sounded smoothed out in that region) and slightly wider stage. The imaging also seems somewhat more precise though I’m not too convinced about this improvement.

Most noticeable difference will be for those who believe in MQA. I am not an MQA user and these supposed improvements were thus untested. I mostly stuck with DSD and PCM files and for those, the OG iFi Hip-DAC is nearly as good as the newer version.

vs Apogee Groove

Apogee Groove has a very different amp architecture and is not really smartphone-friendly due to its higher power-draw and lack of internal battery. The amp architecture is also very different and has a very high output-impedance that messes with most multi-driver IEMs.

I found the Groove to pair really well with high impedance dynamic driver headphones, esp the HD650 and the likes. Some inefficient single-dynamic IEMs like the Final E5000 also pair excellently with the Groove. Unfortunately, the Groove is abysmal with low-impedance low-sensitivity planar magnetic headphones. They are also not as intuitive to operate as the Hip-DAC and lacks the xBass/PowerMatch features.

Overall, the Hip-DAC2 is more universal whereas the Groove is superb with a select few headphones and IEMs but below-par with the rest.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Holistically, the iFi Hip-DAC2 is a minor improvement over the original. I don’t think existing Hip-DAC owners need to upgrade to the Hip-DAC2 unless they are fully into the Tidal ecosystem and appreciates hardware MQA decoding.

That being said, those who are looking for a battery-powered DAC/Amp for desktop or laptop use and occasional phone pairing, the Hip-DAC2 is pretty much one of the best under $200. The original Hip-DAC is still available at Amazon Germany and costs $20 less, but I think you can just get the newer version since the price increase is marginal.

The Hip-DAC2 remains one of the best portable DAC/Amps under $200 and rightly earns my recommendation for using with desktops and laptops. Sadly, it is still not a good pairing for sensitive IEMs and leaves room for improvement when powering planar magnetic headphones. Something’s gotta give, after all.

MY VERDICT

4/5

A minor upgrade to an otherwise great portable DAC/Amp.

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from WOD Audio.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

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

The post iFi Audio Hip-DAC2 Review (1) – Subtle Improvements appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Introduction

The Apogee Groove is a very good sounding “dongle” DAC/amp that replaces a desktop stack for many. It draws its current from the source device and has a rather high output impedance of 20 ohm (the competition is typically < 1 ohm), which makes it problematic for use with low-impedance iems. The manufacturer does not recommend using it with multidriver iems either.

Whilst the laws of physics appear to limit the Apogee Groove’s use, there are some welcome exceptions to the rule(s)…which will be discussed in the following.

General Considerations

The 1/8 Rule

If you multiply the output impedance of your source by eight, that’s the lowest impedance headphones you should use with that source. For example, the Apogee Groove with its 20 ohm output impedance should be paired with  >160 ohm headphones.

What if the Output Impedance violates the 1/8 Rule? 

There will be variations in the headphone’s frequency response. With some headphones, especially balanced armature or multi driver designs, these variations can be rather extreme. Typical is bloated, boomy bass as the headphone does not get enough power.

Why are BA Drivers problematic (Multis and even single BAs)? 

With some headphones, especially balanced armature or multidriver designs, these variations can be rather extreme. Example: these headphones usually have a rated impedance between 16 and 32 ohm but their actual impedance typically varies greatly with frequency. The 21 ohm Ultimate Ears SuperFi 5, for example, ranges from 10 ohms to 90 ohms. These wide variations frequently interact in unfavourable ways with the output Impedance of the source. 

What about single DD Drivers? 

The impedance variations across the frequency spectrum are not as severe as with BAs…or there is no variation at all.

Apogee Groove only

What is different for the Apogee Groove with single DDs?

The 1/8 rule can be disregarded for single DDs with the Apogee Groove, thanks to Apogee’s special “Constant Current Drive” tech, and not even “in every single pair case”.  The CCD technology compensates for impedance mismatches between source and headphones. Without CCD tech all sub 100 ohm drivers you’d connect would have a very noticeable mid bass bump. Apogee Groove won’t alter FR when driving low impedance loads, or higher impedance ones featuring wild impedance swings.

What is different for the Apogee Groove with BAs and Multidrivers?

We would expect the Groove’s high output impedance to alter the BA’s/multidrivers’ frequency responses.

Apogee themselves advise against the use of multidriver BAs and crossover networks as their “Constant Current Drive” technology may result in uneven frequency response when used with certain models.”

Their impedance mismatch compensation does not work with many multidriver BAs. But why? 

There may be a conflict between crossover filters (using capacitors) and CCD. The technology may work with non-capacitive filters …or some other trick. 

I speculate the the Groove has a better chance of compensating for impedance variations in BAs, if these are not extravagant. Would be interesting to compare the impedance profiles of such BAs that work and some that don’t.

BUT: unless you compare frequency responses measured using Apogee Groove against a low-impedance amp, you don’t know wether your frequency response was skewed, as the deviations may not be that audibly obvious in some cases…considering our generally poor auditory memory and our expectation bias.

Hope this all makes sense to you.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Sources used

Discussion with Alberto and Kazi. Photos by Kazi.

http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/02/headphone-impedance-explained.html

http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/02/headphone-amp-impedance.html

Contact us!

The post The 1/8 Rule And The Apogee Groove – A Tech Discussion appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Interference could be an issue with certain mobile phones or signals; SE output takes such a hit in dynamics and resolution vs balanced that it might be a waste for many users; power consumption via balanced is likely high.

Summary

The EarMen Sparrow is a flexible (balanced or single-ended), powerful USB DAC/amp dongle with great sound quality, being particularly dynamic from its balanced output. However, it can be susceptible to interference when run from a mobile phone.

Sonics and Comparisons

I listened to the EarMen as part of a comparison of a few USB DAC/amp dongles old and new. Listening to all was mainly done with the Drop+JVC HA-FDX1 single dynamic-driver IEMs using the Mee Audio MMCX balanced cable (SPC), with a 2.5 bal. to 3.5 SE adapter where necessary to minimize possible cable differences. Being an Android user, I sent audio (mostly 16/44.1 FLAC files) to the Sparrow with USB Audio Player Pro.

Balanced: From the balanced output, performance is impressive: macrodynamics, note definition & weight, instrument separation, and transient resolution are all excellent, making for a very ‘technical’ package. Tonal balance is good too, no particular part of the range seeming over- or under-emphasized.

While I liked it, the dynamic and fast presentation from the balanced output might become fatiguing after a while with revealing and dynamic transducers like the JVCs and especially with very ‘technical’ multi-balanced-armature IEMs. Matching with smoother ‘phones, or switching to the SE output, might be preferable for long listening sessions.

Single-ended: There’s a notable hit in macrodynamics and low-level resolution from the 3.5mm SE output vs balanced, and note definition, particularly in the bass, is weaker, leading to a much more relaxed presentation.

As mentioned above, depending on the transducers the EarMen Sparrow is paired with, this might not be a bad thing. The contrast however is very pronounced, especially when comparing with others: The Tempotec Sonata BHD, for example – a balanced-only unit – is itself pretty revealing but is notably less dynamic than the Sparrow’s balanced output and notably more dynamic than it’s SE output. And the latter is more relaxed than the single-ended Shanling UA1, and – except notably in the bass – than the single-ended Helm Bolt (which uses the same ES9281Pro SoC as the EarMen Sparrow).

Non-Sound Stuff

Here’s what might be a deal-breaker for some: when playing from the balanced output, the EarMen Sparrow can pick up interference when it’s close to a phone. This has been discussed on internet forums, and EarMen to their credit tried to address it by replacing the original cable with a longer, better shielded one.

I replaced the original with another that was reported to help, the OEAudio OEOTG, which improved the issue but didn’t completely solve it. If you can keep the dongle away from your phone, if you only use it in airplane mode, or if your phone/carrier/local signal doesn’t give you this problem (Jürgen tells me he didn’t experience it with his iPhone SE), great – but it might be a lottery.

For me (Nokia 4.2) it’s much reduced (or absent) from the SE output, but present enough to be annoying at listening levels from balanced when everything’s jumbled together in a pocket.

Minor considerations: unlike with other dongles, sometimes the EarMen Sparrow doesn’t play right away from UAPP when hot-swapped in after another dongle, requiring a re-boot of the player. This doesn’t happen every time, though, and I suspect a recent UAPP update might have cured the problem entirely; I haven’t seen it in the last couple of weeks.

Also, the EarMen Sparrow gets very warm in balanced mode – you can tell it’s putting out some power! This is good, but will come with a pretty high battery drain. Jürgen found the drain when using SE to be in the higher half of his tested units; be aware that balanced use will drain your battery faster still.

More Comparisons & Conclusion

The most obvious comparison among the units I have here – because it’s the only other one with a balanced output – is the dual-CS43131 Tempotec Sonata BHD. Compared to the EarMen Sparrow this has tonal emphasis in the upper mids, a splashier/hashier treble, a more rounded bass, and transients which apart from in the bass are similar in speed to the Sparrow but lesser in weight. However, the Sonata BHD is currently under 1/3 the price of the Sparrow.

The Earstudio HUD100 Mk2 (currently $120), a favorite of Jürgen’s which I haven’t heard, could make for an interesting comparison because although being single-ended, has two outputs, one with high power. Comparisons with other, non-balanced units should be seen in terms of price – and not having heard similarly priced SE units, I can’t usefully comment. 

Overall, I’m impressed with the EarMen Sparrow. The flexibility and differences in sound signature offered by the choice of outputs, and the absolute performance of the balanced output, make it a great contender in the dongle space. The interference issue however, is a serious one.

Contact us!

Disclaimer

This is the same unit reviewed by Jürgen here, which was supplied to him by EarMen upon request.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post EarMen Sparrow Dongle DAC/Amp – Brief Second Opinion appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Executive Summary

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

Specifications

Physical Things

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

Functionality, Operation, Compatibility

The PEE51 does…

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

The PEE51 does not…

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

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

Amplification and Power Consumption

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

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

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

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

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

Sound

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

My impressions are purely based on the “best” set of audio analyzer I own, which is my pair of ears. Before I dive into the US$290 TRI TK-2, a bit of background story. I knew KB EAR /TRI Audio was planning a dongle DAC/Amp device back in Spring 2020. That time their idea was very vague but their owner did ask my opinion on a possible dongle DAC/Amp solution.

At that time, I wasn’t too keen on their proposal since most dongle DACs I have tried are either quite weak or sounded mediocre. The idea of sharing battery power with the source (the phone) is unappealing to me. I told him I will explore his plans further but I didn’t actually do so… At least not until this year when the donglemadness movement exploded.

Few months ago, I saw a series of photos on Weibo showing KB EAR show booth at an audio event in Mainland China. On the table was a portable device with a TRI logo on it. I knew immediately that was it! That’s the DAC/Amp device which KB EAR had been planning all this time.

Today we know this device turned out to be a collaboration between TRI Audio and KAEI. But who is KAEI? This brand is relatively unknown to those of us outside of Mainland China. Also known as 小林KAEI, they started business producing DIY amps before moving to portable DAPs. Today, the company produces a TOTL iOS-based audiophile digital audio player called DAP-3.

Just imagine a souped-up version of iPod with dual ESS Sabre ES9038Pro DACs and a powerful amp section… That’s how I would describe it. This is the first collaboration between the two brands to bring new variety to the already saturated DAC/Amp market. The innards of TRI TK-2 are largely based on the now discontinued KAEI HP-100.Let’s take a look if the TK-2 can live up to the hype to become one of the mainstream products like the Chord Mojo or the iFi Hip-DAC.

DISCLAIMER: The TRI TK-2 was sent to me “partially” free-of-charge (I paid for the FedEx International Priority shipping) as a review unit; however, this won’t affect my overall impressions.

HITS 

Neutral and balance sound signature with a hint of warmth. Pleasant and linear tuning that is neither too harsh nor too smooth. A wide dynamic range that is both accurate and coherent. Good note weight that is engaging and musical. Great extension at both ends of the frequency spectrum. Transients and attacks are fast with good energy and control that is able to handle even the most complex and demanding music tracks. Textured, open and weighty bass notes. Good midrange presence that is neither forward or recess. There is a hint of softness in the midrange texture and quality, giving each note a refined, luscious and sophisticated presentation.

Nonetheless, the sense of clarity in macro and micro details are still very much preserved. Vocal is positioned at the right depth, which is both inviting and pleasing to listen for hours. Treble is neither bright, grainy nor sibilant. Top-end is open, airy, slightly reverberated that really helps to portray a sense of space. As a result, soundstage has good dimensions in both height and depth.

Placement has a reliable distinction between each and every instrument and singer with ambient details such as echoes and sound reverbs, allowing them to excel and shine. Imaging and layering capabilities are exceptional as well. The TK-2 has a sustaining transients and decay that gives a natural and clean timbre to instruments such as acoustic guitar and violin.

Equally-distributed power of 1,250mW@32Ω to all 3.5mm single-ended, 4.4mm and 2.5mm balanced outputs! (a rarity in budget amps) Class AB amplifier able to churn out lots of clean power with minimum distortion.

When the volume knob turns past 60% or at around 2 o’clock, that is where the magic begins. TK-2 emits a soft “click” and kicks into Turbo mode or high gain. In Turbo mode, TK-2 becomes a Class A amplifier that is able to drive planar headphones such as HifiMan Sundara. You can hear the differences not just in volume gain but the richness in tonality immediately.

Supports Line Out (LO) function. Supports both USB Type-C PD (Power Delivery) and QC3.0 fast charging. Recessed volume knob to prevent accidental movement. No low-volume channel imbalance (on my unit), unlike some iFi products. The L-shaped USB Type-C data cable and Apple Lightning adapter are very thoughtful inclusion. Unlike many DAC/Amps today, TK-2 radiates very little heat even in Turbo Mode (Class A). It feels slightly warm to the touch even with more than 2 hours of continuous usage driving the 300Ω Sennheiser HD600 headphone.

MISSES

No MQA support…. (Frankly I don’t care about the format). Look and feel “chonky” due to its 24mm (1-inch) thickness, which makes it less portable than some DAPs or even a phone with dongle. The silver finishing a fingerprint magnet according to feedback (I have the black version).

No Bluetooth or Line In function. No battery power indicator. No bass boost or tonal selection. Clean but not ultra-clean noise floor with sensitive IEMs such as Campfire Andromeda. Average battery life lasted 8 hours powering just IEMs. Volume knob feels loose and sensitive to the slightest touch; just be careful.

Sound-wise, sub-bass doesn’t go as deep as some other portable amps such as Chord Mojo. Treble can sound a tad bit bright on some tracks. Armed with dual ESS Sabre ES9038Q2M DACs, I expected the soundstage, imaging and layering to be even better but hey, I am just nitpicking here. No dedicated phone app to tweak DAC settings and EQ.

Is this thing firmware-upgradeable? (there is no information from KB EAR) To be honest, it is kind of pricey at US$290 when there are much lower-priced DAC/Amp with better features and future-proof firmware support.

CONCLUSION 

The TRI TK-2 is very hard to dislike. It sounds impressively musical, natural, smooth and pleasing to the ears. As a neutral source, TK-2 is able to pair well with any transducer and is ideal for both testing and evaluation. It has more than enough power capable of driving just about every load; from IEMs to headphones.

Technicalities are stellar for the price especially in terms of tonality, transient, dynamics, resolution, soundstage, imaging, instrument separation and layering. However, lack of useful features such as dedicated app support, MQA support, aptX-HD Bluetooth and Line In function, average battery life and questionable firmware upgradeability can be a deal-breaker to some folks, especially when compared to the competitors at similar or lower price range. Nevertheless, TRI Audio and KAEI have done a fantastic job producing this desktop-caliber powerhouse.

Nice “TRI” guys!

Contact us!

All Our 291 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

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

The post TRI TK-2 DAC/Amp Review– NICE “TRI”! appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Intro

The Questyle CMA Twelve (how dare anyone substitute a 12) DAC and Headphone amp combo is a solid hunk of amp with a very premium feel and a 2019 premium-ish price tag at $1499. All sorts of options up and down the scale. In my house the closest competitor is a whooping $200 stack of compact DAC and no frills headphone amp Liquid Spark + JDS Labs Atom.

Questyle has a wonderful track record for art and design however there is some not so happy thoughts on their customer service follow-through. The Questyle CMA Twelve DAC and Amp combo naming celebrates a whooping 12 year history in the headphone world. It’s a wonderful piece of machinery with a few minor near misses.

They claim a patented Current Mode Amplification technology sit inside cuddled up to Class A amplification. Sonically it does everything a premium product should do, powerful amplification, transparent noise-floor, butter smooth presentation with exceptional precision, I think I am in love.

Disclaimer

Let me first thank Audio46 for the opportunity to test this out in my home sanctuary. This is outside of the realm of equipment I usually consider so not a whole lot of equivalent equipment to compare it to. This audition audio tour sponsored on Head-fi set me back $20 in shipping, a small 1 week rental fee, how lovely.

Good Traits

• Solid Construction
• Excellent midnight black noise floor
• Resolution and clarity
• Input voltage for the masses, selectable 110/220V

Opinionated Commentary

There are only minor imperfections on the Questyle CMA Twelve

Low volume channel imbalance. It goes away after a few clicks up from 0 and is present on my normal setup as well. It should not a be a deal breaker, unless it exhibits this at listening level someone would actually use. There is also some electromagnetic feedback static induced into the circuit because it is motorized. Just more analog character charm.

The other strange thing I do not understand is if their claim to fame is the current mode amplifier running in their controlled/auto Class A bias mode, why is it not an option to toggle to headphone amp only mode with input from another DAC on the Questyle CMA Twelve?

A proprietary wireless receiver input that is not standard bluetooth. This is Apple thinking that the consumer will buy into a Questyle Ecosystem.

The last oddity is placement of the gain switches, there are 4 since they are independent for each channel (balanced). They are underneath. I understand from a circuit design perspective they wanted to keep it clean, but from a user experience it’s a tad annoying. If you never plan on using this with highly sensitive IEM’s no worries to be had.

Cosmetic Package

The design of the Questyle CMA Twelve has a geek side something that satisfies the more mature crowd without overly bright flashy displays, but instead goes for an engineer’s idea of a piece of lab testing equipment.

The indicator lights are not overbearing and very sharp looking. The toggle switches feel dainty, but my experience with these in my day job will no doubt prove to last a long time.

Power Consumption Tests

Seems silly to care but climate change anyone? No really my curiosity wanted to know how much extra power is used when switching into high bias setting on the Questyle CMA Twelve.

0.14/0.17A Standard vs High Bias
0.16/0.19A after warmed up
12W/15W Volume/load has no measurable bearing on this as expected for a Class A amp.
14W/16W after warm

Sound

The Bias switch does make a difference, I am glad they allow you to switch it on/off just to see the effect-show and tell. Bass has a little more haptic while the treble portrays everything more dimensionally.

Similar to going from a more dead room to a lively room, extremely subtle but still noticeable. The question is does this add coloring or remove coloring? I cannot answer but I would love to believe it makes it more expansive without coloring.

Testing the DAC output to my JDS Labs Atom, there was also a slight improvement in the separation of instruments, but as expected it is the total combination of the DAC and amplifier that are musical and organic.

The Questyle CMA Twelve treble comes off smoother and yet still more detailed. I found myself missing that extra little seismic information that it extracts when I went back to my Atom. Going from memory, I prefer the Questyle CMA also over the SMSL SH-9 due to the sterile cleanliness and the more analog volume control.

Power output should be plenty to drive almost anything, I don’t have anything besides the Sennheiser HD6XX that really needs the super power, but the Oppo PM-3 and JVC HA-FDX1 also benefited from the extra headroom. I pretty much used it in standard gain mode with everything since it was annoying to flip it over to make changes.

Other Fun Features

I am not really equipped to test these functions out but they are part of the Questyle CMA Twelve package for those interested.

• 4.4mm Pentacom or 4Pin XLR balanced output. I don’t have any cables to utilize.​
• Balanced output into an amplifier as a standalone DAC. I have no 2 channel system that would do it justice.​
• Proprietary 5Ghz wireless receiver input.​
• DSD playback, not my thing​
• Studio output, not a music producer/mastering engineer so no gear.​
• The Remote, probably more useful in DAC only mode. Buttons appear to be fuzz magnets.​
• Optical Digital Input
• SPDIF IN/OUT Composite
• AES/EBU input

Final Remarks

The Questyle CMA Twelve is a wonderfully sounding DAC amp combo that extracts the microdetails, plenty of connection options minus the ability to use it as a headphone amp only being the only drawback. If I had the desire to purchase gear over $300-400, this would be on my short list.

Since this product was released in ?2019 it doesn’t utilize the newest DAC chips or boast over the top SINAD numbers, yet it still sounds more musical and more transparent than my limited sampling. A caveat-I don’t want to pile on, but there have been some past complaints about support, and as you go up in price tiers the support is something you hope to never have to use.

Perhaps they will be more responsive if there is an issue, but this is something to consider with any brand in such a niche market. With that out of the way, overall excellent sounding DAC/Amp combo.

Specifications

DAC+Headphone Amplifier Section

Outputs:
4.4 mm balanced headphone jack
4PIN balanced headphone jack
6.35mm headphone jack

Max Output Power(Po):
247mW @ 300Ω; 900mW @ 32Ω(6.35mm headphone jack)
825mW @ 300Ω; 2W @ 32Ω (balanced headphone jack)

THD + N:
0.00070% @Po=100mW, 300Ω
0.00167% @ Po=50mW, 32Ω

Frequency Response:
DC-20kHz(+0, -0.4dB)@0dBFS, 24Bit, 192kHz
DC-80kHz(+0, -3dB)@0dBFS, 24Bit, 192kHz

SNR: 112dB, non-weighting

DAC+Pre-Amp Output Section

USB Type B Input:
Support 44.1kHz-384kHz/16Bit-32Bit PCM and DSD Native DSD64, DSD128, DSD256, as well as DSD64, DSD128, DSD256 of DoP format
(Note: support Win XP, Vista, Win7, Win8, Win10 and Mac OS)

Digital Input & Output:
SPDIF input and output, Optical input, AES/EBU input
Support 44.1kHz-192kHz/16Bit-24Bit PCM

Pre-Amp & DAC Section:
Balanced XLR x1 pair, unbalanced RCA x1 pair
STANDARD 14dBu: XLR: 5.084V RCA: 2.549V
STUDIO 20dBu: XLR: 8.887V RCA: 4.475V
THD+N@STUDIO 20dBu: XLR: minimum at 0.00085% RCA: minimum at 0.00115%
SNR: XLR:>112dB RCA:> 109dB (non-weighting)
(Note: FIX/ADJ: Fixed Output Mode or Adjustable Output Mode of the pre-amp.)

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Since Audio46 loaned this out, you can check out the QUESTYLE CMA TWELVE at their storefront. No affiliate links, no kickbacks.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

The post Questyle CMA Twelve – Blissfully Biased appeared first on Audio Reviews.