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

Executive Summary

Introduction

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

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

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

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

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

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

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

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

Tonality and Technicalities

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

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

Grey “normal” Filters

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

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

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

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

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

Red “neutral” Filters

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

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

Blue “bassy” Filters

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Gallery

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

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

Executive Summary

Introduction

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

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

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

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

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

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

Tonality and Technicalities

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

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

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

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

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

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

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

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.

Cons — Rose-gold accents on the Hidizs MM2 cable might be a turn off
– Lower-midrange recession
– Upper-midrange sounds strained on treble and neutral filters
– Steep treble roll-off post 7kHz.
– Needs to be priced lower to be competitive

INTRODUCTION

Before proceeding with the review, I should clarity that this review is an extension of Jürgen’s take on the Hidizs MM2. As such, I’ll just breeze through the usual build quality/packaging sections and go straight for the sound analysis.

Hidizs’s latest IEM release are the MM2 and they feature a hybrid setup with 10.2mm dynamic driver for bass and mids + 6mm magnetostatic driver for the treble. This combo is often seen on more budget-tier IEMs so Hidizs need to differentiate their product somehow. Turns out, they opted for a tuning system based on removable screws on the back of the IEMs.

Let’s see if the tuning system alone is enough to make the Hidizs Mermaid MM2 an worthy contender in the <USD $100 IEMs space.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Hidizs sent the MM2 for evaluation.

Sources used: Lotoo PAW 6000, Sony NW-A55
Price, while reviewed: $80. Can be bought from Hidizs’ Official Website.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

ACCESSORIES

Both the stock cable and the carrying case deserve a mention here, since they are some of the best you can find in the packaging of IEMs under USD $100. The stock cable is supple, doesn’t tangle easily, and looks great. The carrying case is somewhat over-engineered yet maintains a muted outlook. Rather unexpected for a pair of budget IEMs.

BUILD QUALITY, FIT, COMFORT

I agree with Jürgen regarding the build quality, fit, and comfort. His review also went through the mechanism of the tuning filters (which are rear-mounted instead of being front-mounted) so check that one out for further details.

I should note that I prefer the rear-mounted filter system as opposed to nozzle or tip mounted ones since they are more cumbersome to swap. Also it’s need stating that the passive noise isolation is below average, as the rear-vents allow noise inside. No driver-flex was noticed which is a plus.

HIDIZS MERMAID MM2 TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

The general sound signature of the MM2 can be described as variations of “V-shaped” tuning with varying degrees of bass and lower-treble depending upon the choice of rear-filter.

I think the bass response is the star of the show here with punchy mid-bass and good amount of rumble in the sub-bass region. The slam is also above-average so these drivers are moving good amount of air.

The issue arises in the lower-mids region where, with the stock and bass filter mids sound too recessed, resulting in distant male vocals, snare hits etc. The aggressive pinna gain around 2.5kHz compounds this further with high-pitched or soaring vocals sounding strained, as can be heard on Alexisonfire’s This Could Be Anywhere in the World. The male vocals do gain a bit of thickness with the bass filter but then again the large amount of mid-bass drowns out the subtle articulations of voice, resulting in a lack of resolution.

Treble peaks around 4kHz and then goes for a steep decline from 7kHz onward. This robs off the airiness of cymbals and hi-hats, resulting in a muted presentation devoid of shimmer and resonances. The magnetostatic driver is supposedly aiding the treble response and whereas some magnetostatic timbre can be heard, the sheer extension is lacking. Treble overall is not bad, it is just unremarkable.

What is remarkable though is the staging performance of the Hidizs MM2. Stage is wide, with instruments often being placed outside your ears in binaural tracks, e.g. Amber Rubarth’s Strive. Stage depth also seems above-average though that is mostly attributable to the lower-mids recession. Imaging was above-average though lacked the precision of some of their peers. Instrument separation is above average but is often let down by the overshadowing bass.

Jürgen mentioned the timbre to be somewhat plasticky and unnatural. I wouldn’t call the timbre plasticky myself but it definitely lacks some of the richness one would expect from a natural-sounding setup.

SELECT COMPARISONS

vs Dunu Titan S

Dunu’s budget model of the refreshed Titan series have 11mm dynamic drivers with LCP diaphragm. Dunu went for a more neutral-bright tuning with the Titan S and the driver is also faster than the MM2 during transients. Due to the upper-mid and treble focus, the bass on the Titan S doesn’t have as much authority as the MM2 bass.

One area where the Titan S surpasses the MM2 is sheer resolution, with the Titan S being more revealing of mastering flaws and also having better imaging. Staging is not as wide and tall as the MM2, however, neither is the macrodynamic punch as evident.

Given the similar price, the Titan S offer great value for those who are after a neutral-ish pair of IEMs. The Hidizs MM2 will cater more to those who prefer a mainstream or V-shaped tuning, or those who find the Titan S to be overly bright.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The IEM market is the most ruthless in the under USD $100 segment as new models pop up almost daily. Hidizs MM2 stand out with great accessories and a filter-system that is quite unique, while offering various levels of bass.

Unfortunately, the mids and treble frequencies are somewhat off in terms of tuning and that mars the experience. The treble roll-off hurts the sense of resolution the most, something one would expect from IEMs at this range.

I do think the Hidizs MM2 would offer better value had they been priced somewhat lower, and just like Jürgen I’d also assume $20 -30 lower retail price based on sound alone. The accessories are quality however, so maybe you are paying the extra for those goodies.

MY VERDICT

3.25/5

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from Hidizs Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Hidizs MM2 Review (2) – Yet Another Budget Contender appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Timbre not the most organic; large shells; rose gold not for everyone.

Executive Summary

The Hidizs MM2 is a well resolving iem that let’s you adjust the sonic signature with three screw-in outer vents. Another novelty is a magneto-static driver for the treble.

Introduction

Hidizs are a Chinese company that came on strong recently with their dongles and digital analog players. We analyzed their popular S3 Pro and S9 Pro DAC/Amps and their very good AP80 and AP80 Pro X players. As it looks, the company has a bit of catching up to do when it comes to earphones. Their MS1 Rainbow model received a mixed reception from Durwood and Loomis.

Hidizs’ latest MME iem implements a few semi-novel ideas, “self tuning” and a magneto-static driver for the uppermost frequencies.

Earphone tuning, the practice of generating a specific frequency response, has become an important marketing tool. YouTube/blog influencers lately picked up on it, projecting their personal preferences in the shape of “target graphs” onto the consumer – which provides a new revenue stream for them and the companies alike.

The consumer also benefits – from the lack of unpleasant surprises: no more “screamers” with icepick signatures in the mail anymore means much less risk of losing our money. On the downside, the consumer has to cope with silly avatars of the “celebrity tuners” on the shells – and an extra royalty to them.

So, why not do it yourself? There are several methods to tune your earphone according to your taste. First, the old “taping vents and nozzle methods”, as described in many of our reviews and also explicitly in our blog. This is referred to as “reversible modding“, which is based on simple physical principles. It is called “reversible”, as you can easily bring the iem back to its original state without any damage done to it.

But there are more convenient methods. For example, the Anew X-One comes with tuning modules that are being plugged into the faceplate. These look like little opamps and probably alter the earphone’s impedance. JVC’s HA-FDX1 deploy exchangeable nozzles containing different filters that change the midrange frequencies but keep the low end consistent. BQEYZ use a different method in their Autumn iem in that the user can change the width of the inner vent with magnetic pucks.

Hidizs have yet another approach to user tuning in their $79 MM2 by providing screw-in outer vents that change both lower and midrange frequencies. For the case you are confused now: the physics of “venting” is explained in our article. Let’s see how well it works for the MM2.

Specifications Hidiz MM2

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, cable, 2 sets of silicone earpieces (wide-bores and narrow-bores), 3 sets of tuning valves (bass, normal, treble), carrying case, and the paperwork.

Each screw-on tuning valve represents an outer vent. The included tuning vents therefore differ in opening diameter: the bigger the “hole” the more bass is produced.

The earpieces are very light and somewhat bulky…you see a lot of space inside them. But maybe these large “resonance chambers” are needed for the sound signature. They fit well, are comfortable, and don’t seal very well for my ears. Their lightweight comes in handy.

The cable is excellent: pliable, light, and it has no microphonics. Just the rose gold colour mix (and maybe the handbag-like carrying case) may not hit everybody’s taste. Both sets of eartips fit me well but I prefer the wide-bores.

Tonality and Technicalities

Equipment used: MacBook Air | Earstudio HUD 100 (low gain) with AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ | stock bass filters | stock wide-bores.

Since Hidizs give you the option to perform your own tuning with the included screw-in filters, I started tinkering with them…and finally decided on the bass vents as the created the “most substantial” sound experience for me with a great vocals reproduction.

In the big picture, the Hidizs MM2 is all in one: a neutral sounding iem (normal filters), a warm one (bass filters), and a screamer (treble filters ).

In my favourite “bass” configuration, the MM2 deliver a “fun” signature with some surprisingly good sonic characteristics.

Bassy filters means serious bass, without being too serious. Focus is on sub-bass. It digs deep, very deep – and with some energy. Mid bass slam has still good impact. This makes the low end a bit blunt and less tight than I want in some tracks. I don’t think the bass is overdone, though. All in good doses. It’s fun tuning after all.

The transition to the midrange works rather well. I would not call it bleed but the bass re-inforces the vocals in the lower midrange department quite efficiently. Although recessed, female and male voices are not lean or thin but have some nice richness and creaminess. They are not your stale black coffee but more a mocha latte with 2% milk. Notes are surprisingly well rounded. The MM2 beats a notorious weakness of budget iems in this department. And, although there is enough energy in the vocals, there is no shoutiness.

Treble is well resolving. Cymbals are very crisp, clear, and well carved out, but also a bit robotic, which is an artifact of this kind of driver. And since the treble sits a bit back, the cymbals are frequently covered up to some extent. I take it the magneto-static drivers are connected and working (as opposed to some of the competition’s).

Stage is no the widest but has good height and decent depth (with the bassy filters). Resolution, separation, and layering are astonishingly good. But…the timbre…is somewhat plasticky and could be more organic. Once I got used to it is as fine. That’s the biggest concern I have about this earphone – and I’d take $20 off for that.

And if you want to know how the MME compares to its peers, you find it in Kazi’s review.

Concluding Remarks

So why not tune yourself? By screwing in tuning filters you also screw the noisy YouTubers…that bad pun may be allowed. Hidizs have done a decent job with the MM2 and the tuning filters, which can be helpful particularly for newbies who want to learn different sonic signatures. Nevertheless, the MM2 could be $20 cheaper imo. But, maybe Hidizs let you tune your own price, too…see included coupons.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Hidizs MM2 Review (1) – Screw The Tuners appeared first on Audio Reviews.

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

Executive Summary

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

Planar Magnetic Drivers – What do We expect?

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

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

LETSHUOER S12 Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

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

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

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

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

Sonic Characterization of the 7Hz Timeless

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LETSHUOER S12 Tonality and Technicalities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LETSHUOER S12 Driver = 7Hz Timeless Driver?

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

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

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

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

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

More LETSHUOER S12 Comparisons

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

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

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

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

All Our 302 Earphone and Earbud Reviews (with Links)

Disclaimer

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

Get the Shuoer S12 from letsshuoer.net

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

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

Executive Summary

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

Specifications

Unfold for Full Specifications

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

[collapse]

Technology/Architecture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Physical Things

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

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

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

Functionality and Operation

It does

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

It does not

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

Front Panel

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

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

Back Panel

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

Remote

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

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

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

Sound

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

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

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

w. Headphones

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

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

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

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

Dynamics is naturally dosed, never overwhelming or too polite.

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

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

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

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

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

In summary, none of these DACs sound alike.

w. Stereo System

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bluetooth

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

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

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

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

Concluding Remarks

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

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

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

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

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

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

Gallery

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

• Small and light, good build.
• 3 modes for more versatility – music, gaming and movie modes.
• Innovative detachable magnetic cable system.
• Plug and playable, compatible with desktops/laptops, apple and android phones (there is an option to get Lightning versus USB C connectors).
• Very low output impedance, suitable for low impedance IEMs. No hiss.
• Neutralish, with a slight bass boost to add some fun.
• Volume controller.

Cons

• Gets slightly warm.
• Volume may jump when switching between modes – best to mute device/lower volume first.

Executive Summary

The IKKO Zerda ITM01 is a swiss army knife of the budget dongle DAC/AMP arena. It has a music, gaming and movie mode, making it quite versatile. It also has volume controls and boasts a very innovative magnetic cable system. There is good power on tap, yet this set can still drive low impedance type IEMs because of its low output impedance.

Specifications

• DAC uses ESS’s high-performance ESS9298 chip
• PCM supports up to 16Bit/384kHz
• DSD supports up to DoP128
• Adopts ikko’s custom anti-interference magnet thread connection method
• SNR: 118dB@32Ω (A-weight)
• Frequency response range: 20Hz-40kHz (-0.5dB)
• Output impedance: <0.8Ω
• Adaptation impedance: adaptive 16ohm – 600ohm
• Output level: 2V @ 32Ω (125mW @ 32Ω)
• Distortion: < 0.001%
• Decoding ability: Simulation (multiple sound optimizations)
• Size: 58x22x11mm
• Output: 3.5 mm
• Tested at $59 USD

Accessories

• 1x Ikko ITM01 Dongle
• 1x USB A cable
• 1x Type C or lightning cable (you can choose either option at order).

The USB A cable is very long, so no worries of a too short cable limiting your usage. In fact I found it too long and dangly, and had to tie up the cable when using it with my laptop. This cable is cloth braided and there is an included faux leather strap to tie the USB A cable.

A second cable is included, this is either a Lightning or USB Type C connector, depending on which one you choose at ordering. Well that depends if you are of the Apple or Android persuasion, but this cable is very much shorter.

These 2 included cables feature a very nifty and innovative magnetic connector to attach the cable to the DAC/AMP device. The magnetic end of the cable locks on easily and can be used in either direction; this may lessen wear and tear for frequent cable changing.

Contrary to the impressions that a magnetic connector can cause an easy dislodgement of the cable from the DAC/AMP, it is actually not easy to remove this magnetic clamp once the cable is inside, and I had no issues with dislodging the cable on the go.

This cable is unfortunately proprietary. I do appreciate that this DAC/AMP dongle’s cable is detachable, as a non-detachable one may be a point of failure down the line. In this current year of 2021, it is really not excusable to have a non-detachable cable for these dongles (unless we are talking about an ultra-budget set), as a non-detachable cable is one awkward yank away from being a white elephant.

Build

The ITM01 is made of plastic, but is sturdy yet light. As mentioned above, the detachable cable definitely should prolong its lifespan.

Measuring in at 58 x 22 x 11 mm, this set can easily fit into a jeans pocket on the go.

This set has a 3.5 mm output (single ended) and has no balanced option.

Functionality

The IKKO Zerda ITM01 is a plug and play set, and is compatible with desktops/laptops, apple and android phones (depending on the cable type you order), without any need to install drivers.

Disclaimer: I am not an Apple fanboy and do not own any Apple products, so I opted for the USB C version and tested this set on Android phones and a Windows laptop. Please check with others who have bought the Lightning version if they have any issues with Apple products.

The volume buttons work as advertised on the IKKO Zerda ITM01, they can be pressed down with a satisfactory click. I appreciate that the volume steps in the ITM01 are quite fine, unlike the Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, which have huge volume levels in between each volume step.

Pressing the middle button once (short press) pauses or starts the music. This middle button also controls the mode if pressed for 3 seconds: music (yellow LED), movie (blue LED) and game mode (purple LED).

Technical Aspects

The IKKO Zerda ITM01 can support PCM up to 16Bit/384kHz and DSD up to DoP128.

I did not note any RF interference when putting the IKKO Zerda ITM01 through its paces. Neither did I hear any hiss nor clicking with changing tracks midway. There is a bit of a clicking noise however, when changing modes.

On the music mode (yellow LED), the IKKO Zerda ITM01 essentially is neutralish with a slight bass boost. This keeps it from sounding sterile and adds a little bit of fun to the equation. The background is pitch dark with highly sensitive IEMs.

In fact with the advertised <0.8Ω output impedance, this set is perfect for multi driver low impedance IEMs (rule of eights in audiophile teachings). I’ve tried some 9ish ohm low output impedance sets like the Audiosense T800 and TRI Starsea on this DAC/AMP without any issues.

With very high impedance earbuds and cans eg ~ 300 ohms, the IKKO Zerda ITM01 faired well and could drive such gear adequately. When paired with some power hungry IEMs, eg KBEAR BElieve/Final E3000 (low sensitivity) and TRI I3 (planar tribid), these all sounded good, with a lot more headroom to spare.

On the movie mode (blue LED), the soundstage was compressed a tinge, with a boost in the upper mids region, giving more clarity to voices. This gave a spherical blob of soundstage with the head as the reference point, and there was some loss in instrument separation.

I didn’t get a “surround sound” vibe with this mode though. The volume cap is also much higher here than on the music mode, and the volume levels may jump from the music mode when playing an equivalent track (so beware).

On the gaming mode (purple LED), the soundstage became unnaturally wide (it may not be suited for music listening as such), but this might aid in placement of gun shots and footsteps, especially for FPS players. Instrument separation does take a hit compared to the music mode.

Likewise, the volume cap here is also much more than on the music mode, and the volume can also jump suddenly compared to the music mode, while on the same test track.

Hence, when changing modes to the gaming/movie mode, as they have a different volume level/cap, my advise is to mute the volume of your device and put the source (eg phone/laptop) volume to zero, and slowly increase incrementally, in case of any sudden jumps in volume between the modes.

The IKKO Zerda ITM01 does get a bit warm with prolonged usage, but I’ve definitely had other dongle DAC/AMPs that go much hotter.

Comparisons

Compared to the Tempotec Sonata HD Pro, the ITM01 has about comparable sound quality, but the ITM01 is more fun sounding in view of a bass boost, compared to the rather neutral Sonata HD Pro; the Sonata HD Pro can sound a bit more boring as such.

The Sonata HD Pro also has weaker driving power, and can’t drive some more demanding gear, eg 300 ohm cans. Having said that, there are some mods (eg BHD firmware mod, or using a 3.5 mm to 3.5 mm adapter) to get the Sonata HD Pro to output more juice, but the volume steps on the Sonata HD Pro are also bigger, so fine tuning volume levels on the Sonata HD Pro isn’t as reliable.

Compared to the E1DA 9038D, the ITM01 has poorer soundstage and technicalities, but that is not surprising considering the E1DA 9038D is around double the price (the 9038D is not better by twice for sure).

Driving power on both sets are good for a single-ended dongle, but the E1DA 9038D drains more battery and gets noticeably warmer. The E1DA 9038D is also very neutral and may sound more boring and analytical than the ITM01.

Conclusions

The IKKO Zerda ITM01 is a swiss army knife of the budget dongle DAC/AMP arena. It has a music, gaming and movie mode, making it quite versatile. It also has volume controls and boasts a very innovative magnetic cable system. There is good power on tap, yet this set can still drive low impedance type IEMs because of its low output impedance.

This DAC/AMP dongle (on the music mode) features a neutral signature with some slight bass boost to add a bit of fun to the music. Soundwise, the ITM01 definitely holds its own at the budget segment, and at $59 USD, has really quite good price to performance ratio. Recommended!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

I would like to thank Rebecca from IKKO for providing this review unit. It can be purchased here: https://www.ikkoaudio.com/products/ikko-zerda-itm01-portable-audio-dac-detachable-magnetic-cable-adapter

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post IKKO Zerda ITM01 Review (1) – Swiss Army Knife appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Cons — Results may vary.

Executive Summary

The JitterBug FMJ (“Full Metal Jacket”) is a small USB-noise filter. It is the better shielded version of the original 2016 device and improves sound quality in most (but not all) situations.

Introduction

Do you know which class of insects the jitterbug belongs to? No? Well, none at all as the jitterbug is a generic term to describe swing dancing, as featured in the 1939 movie “The Wizard of Oz“.

In USB-Audio, “jitter” refers to time delays in the signal that causes packet errors, which degrade sound quality. Solution is that the DAC reclocks the incoming USB signal...to eliminate these time delays.

Unfortunately, the JitterBug FMJ (and its predecessor JitterBug) does NOT reclock (and therefore not remove jitter) as it is a merely passive device that does not draw electric current (it does not remove bugs either). JitterBug designer Gordon Rankin was a consultant to AudioQuest and did not name the device. This name choice has caused a lot of discussions in the past.

I purchased the original JitterBug upon its release in 2016 together with the DragonFly Black 1.5. At the time, I ran the original Schiit Fulla with my MacBook Air – the JitterBug lowered the noise floor and improved the sonic image.

USB Noise

So what is behind the JitterBug idea? It is noise filtering. Goal is to preserve the signal (and therefore sound quality) along the lines.

Noise in computer’s VBUS and data line causes sound deterioration. Three kinds of noise exist, “Electromagentic Interference” (EMI), “Radio-Frequency Interference” (RFI), and switching noise which is usually high frequency (500Khz -> 2Ghz). They may contribute considerable pollution on the signal path and may increase jitter and packet errors. Running both lines through a single USB cable can cause additional interference and exacerbate the issue (so it is best to separate the two).

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

AC noise is typically audible as added brightness to the music, glare that rides on the sound. The image lacks body and appears somewhat flat. This noise needs to be filtered out. Jitter causes distortion and packet errors that, in the worst case, may be audible as chopped up sound, like a tonearm jumping on the vinyl record.

Many dacs can be powered by the connected computer, but some also have a dedicated power input. This separation of power line and data line eliminates possible interference inside the USB cable now assigned to data flow only.

The remaining data noise is either little relevant and/or can be more easily filtered out, for example with an AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ or the iFi Nano iUSB3.0.

But, for the JitterBug FMJ to make an audible difference requires a “clean” power supply. A “dirty” power source would possibly mask the JitterBug’s positive effects on the data line.

If the dac is powered by the computer such as an AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt or Red, the JitterBug FMJ has to tackle both tasks, which is not optimal.

A similar situation arises when the DragonFly/JitterBug FMJ combination is connected to a phone. A phone has a lot more EMI as the components are cramped much tighter into a small enclosure compared to a computer. Turning the WiFi and phone functions off will already likely improve sound quality.

The AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt has JitterBug functionality integrated in its circuit and it was believed that adding an additional JitterBug FMJ would compromise the audio signal. Latest considerations suggest that adding a JitterBug FMJ may actually be beneficial in some combinations. You may want to play with them in all combinations.

What this tells us is that the JitterBug FMJ is not a device that works black and white on the push of a button. It requires some TLC and is therefore not for everyone, favouring the experimentally inclined.

What does the JitterBug FMJ do?

JitterBug designer Gordon Rankin wrote me:

a) It realigns and removes noise from the D+/D- line, so the receiving side sees a much cleaner and more refined data stream.

b) It removes high-frequency noise from the VBUS/GND power supply. Any endpoint, be it a DAC or whatever, already has a low-frequency filter. Those are huge in size, and what really affects a DAC chip’s linearity is high-frequency noise — not low.

c) I put the JitterBug at the host side because I want all that EMI/RFI and other pollution that the computer is spitting out to stay there and not get to the endpoint.

The FMJ furthers (c) into making that work.

Differential noises on a data stream can cause error in reception of fans positive and negative pulses. Reducing or eliminating these by the JitterBug FMJ’s circuitry produces a cleaner differential signal, which in turn avoids catastrophic data-level events that looks like jitter to an analyzer.

What is new in JitterBug FMJ?

The original JitterBug circuitry has not changed but shielding against external noise was added for more efficiency (“Full Metal Jacket”). And AudioQuest added an integrated carbon-loaded USB plug to further protect against external noise. Old and new JitterBug models can be used in combination.

My sonic Impressions

I tested the JitterBug FMJ with dongles (source-operated thumbdrive-sized DAC/amps connected to my iPhone SE,1st gen.), numerous iems, and my MacBook Air, between March and September. The logic behind my setups was the small form factor dongles and JitterBug FMJ – and therefore portability – have in common.

I did not experiment with desktop stacks as there are bulkier, more thorough, and (much) more expensive options that address additional USB issues.

The JitterBug FMJ worked well with most dongles in my testing. It added body/depth and rounded the top end off. The difference is obvious and skeptics should at least acknowledge that the device changes the sound.

The DragonFly Red shows great synergy with the JitterBug FMJ. Without it, the stage is much shallower and the top end is more aggressive. There is less note weight and the sound is leaner. Plugging the FMJ in adds body and depth, and it adds sweetness to the top end so that the sound is less bright. This also reduces the widescreen effect, which is very much outweighed by the benefits.

The JitterBug FMJ also works well with the Earstudio HUD 100, EarMen Eagle, Hidizs S9 Pro, Shanling UA2, and Apogee Groove – and the basic tenor remains the same: reducing brightness and adding body and refinement to the presentation. Without it, the presentation is shallower and edgier.

The FMJ did not do much to the shrillness of the Shanling UA1, which points to this device’s design issue: the glare may be unrelated to noise and may be caused by lack of the device’s digital filtering.

What also did not work for me is getting improvement from a 2nd JitterBug FMJ plugged into the other USB port of my MacBook Air. Maybe, my SSD and the rather modest computer design render a 2nd device superfluous. But I wonder whether it worked if I had an old-fashioned spinning hard drive.

Why does JitterBug FMJ not work for you?

The JitterBug FMJ may not improve sound with a dac/amp with an independent power supply that introduces its own noise. A cleaned-up USB signal competes with the power-supply pollution – which may neutralize the gains.

There may be no benefit when additional interference is introduced from nearby electrical components.

Or the device has such filtering circuitry already built in, such as the ifi Audio Nano BL DAC/amp. And since the Nano can be battery operated, the power is rather a priori.

Or the audio quality is poor to begin with. Or, the JitterBug FMJ works but we do not register the improvement, be it because of our generally poor auditory memory (mine is particularly bad) or out of prejudice.

Experiment for Yourself

The DragonFly Cobalt has some of JitterBug’s filtering technology built in. Until recently, AudioQuest had advised against using both together in series as it could have unpredictable results.

But some users find that JitterBug FMJ and Cobalt used in series creates an improvement in performance.

I tested with my iPhone SE (first gen.), and after endless A/B-ing, if there was a difference, it was insignificant to my ears. And I can report the same for repeating the experiment with my MacBook Air. But there were also no adverse effects. The JitterBug FMJ made a huge difference with the DragonFly Red, in comparison.

Up to you to find out for yourself whether it works with your devices.

Concluding Remarks

JittterBug FMJ removes EMI, RFI, and switching noises – which helps maintain better low level detail because the DAC chip can reproduce information better. It does not remove audio bandwidth noise as that is better left to the DAC.

JitterBug FMJ is not the perfect solution but a handy and affordable one. It does not work black and white on the push of a button as it deals with issues adherent to the specific devices it is paired with.

It is also no miraculous sound enhancer as it does not add to the signal, it just helps minimizing its degradation.

As a net result, it improved sound quality in most of my applications to the point I don’t want to miss it. You can read co-blogger’s KopiOkaya’s take on the JitterBug FMJ here.

I have had lots of fun using and experimenting with JitterBugs since 2016.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Two JitterBugs FMJ were provided for my testing by AudioQuest – and I thank them for that. You find the product page here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Gallery

The post AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ Review – Quiet Riot? appeared first on Audio Reviews.

Not only in absolute terms – it is nothing short of an absolutely out-dash-standing device – but in relative ones too: it taught me personally so much for such a low price and effort that even when I outgrow it I will forever stay in debt of a smile and a hug.

And times for back-condescending reminiscence are not even on the horizon at the moment. For the simple reason that I reckon it will take quite some more time for me to have the budget – which I would assess in approximately 1K€ – to invest in a real stack upgrade, vs yet another step in the sidegrade carousel which is what Groove teleported me out of really.

A quick TOC before we start, for those who wouldn’t bother reading “all” my bla-bla (yeah, you’re forgiven):

What’s that?

Apogee Groove is a USB DAC-AMP device.

I’m pretty sure a wide portion of the budget audiophile community have never heard about this, in spite of it being on the market since 2015. Chances are many have never heard of Apogee Electronics Corp. in the first place, indeed.

Apogee is a US-based professional audio equipment designer and manufacturer in business since 1985. They earned their glory (and money) from audio professionals thanks to their patents and products: initially analog filters which would retrofit Sony and other high-end analog devices significantly upgrading their quality, later followed by breakthrough-innovative Digital Audio interfaces. Their target market is musicians, producers, and sound engineers – it’s therefore quite normal their brand is totally off the usual chifi marketing hype circus.

Groove is Apogee’s “entry level” portable DAC-AMP aimed at providing audio pros with an easy-going tool they can carry with them and plug onto their laptops while on the go, delivering a quality which needs to be in-line with Apogee’s higher-end equiment the same customer is supposed to regularly use in their studio. E.g. Apogee Symphony, to name something.

I’m not here for marketing but I find this storytelling video from Apogee’s web site explains superclearly what their intendend positioning is about Groove. (TL;DW: “[Dad, an affirmed musician,] is listening to super-high quality stuff all day every day […] so I bring the Groove, plug it into the laptop, and it feels and sounds as if it was in the studio”)

Getting closer to the actual device: no internal battery, Apogee Groove needs to be connected to a USB host (a PC for example) to even turn on. The USB channel is its only input – both for power and digital data.

“Cmon, cut it. It’s just a dongle!”

Yes and no. Structurally it’s a dongle yes. But it’s bigger, heavier and most of all it absorbs 340mA from the host, which is a lot. It’s therefore technically possible but practically unviable to use a phone, or a tablet, or even a lower end DAP as an easy host / transport. For on-the-go usage a Laptop is reasonably required, or some DIY creativity with a nice battery bank and a tool like iFi iDefender+. But let’s not deviate – for the sake of this article let’s say this is a “hi-power demanding dongle”.

It’s got a single output: 3.5mm single ended phone out. It supports PCM up to 24 bit / 192 KHz, and does not support DSD, nor MQA. Specifications are available here. Some numbers might seem odd at first glance.

“LOL! No MQA, no balanced output. My dongle’s specs are 3 times better, and I can use it for hours on my phone !…”

… Keep reading

As a DAC: just phenomenal

Die-hard measurement freaks may want to take a look here. No, it’s no ASR.

The reconstruction filter is very good, but by far the most important of all those graphs is the frequency response one, which is wonderfuly linear well into the 60KHz range, and that’s why when playing FLACs sampled at 96KHz Apogee Groove delivers clarity and space reconstruction audibly even superior to what it delivers from 44.1KHz data – where performance is nonetheless already a full pair of steps above the usual budget suspects.

Compared to Groove, some other systems (often coming with the not too secondary “feature” of a 10X price tag…) may arguably be even more precisely optimised for 44.1KHz data, but their response drops dramatically rapidly immediately after 20KHz (e.g., Hugo).

Enough graphs. Let’s audition.

Starting from the most evident part: Apogee Groove draws on space in a totally stunning way. Yes, already at 44.1KHz – and even more mesmerisingly at higher sampling rates.

Never heard something like that before, and I yet have to hear anything really similar let alone better. Spatial reconstruction is nothing less than phenomenal out of the box, and that, and imaging, are easily better than what I can hear from Chord Mojo, iFi nano iDSD BL, iFi Micro iDSD Signature, as well as Questyle QP1R, Lotoo Paw 6000 and Gold Touch – when considering their DAC performances. Groove is really one class above. At least one.

Apogee Groove’s DAC also delivers high end detail, texture, openness and intonation. All other DACs I heard as of yet barred none offer a paler representation of instrument textures. Some may have a blacker background (e.g. Micro iDSD Sig), or can offer higher sharpness on high end details (e.g. Mojo), but most if not all the alternatives I heard are fundamentally duller (in comparison) and/or smear on detail and/or miss out on that unique, incredibly well calibrated “suspense factor” Groove puts in transients.

Summarising: Apogee Groove delivers a totally unique dimensional feel to the sonic images. It’s technical, but musical. Controlled, but emotional.

Compared to mid-tier competition Apogee Groove’s DAC wins easy, and big. By just casually plugging it in and listening the difference it totally obvious.

Its DAC tuning quality taken per se is actually at an even higher level than its price would suggest when compared to professional tier alternatives, but in that case Apogee Groove’s small physical size starts to represent an issue as it makes it technically impossible to pack high level of power filtering inside, or a separate, cleaner powering line, like it can be found on superior systems (Holo May, Schiit Yggdrasil…).

The little kid can be belped a bit though, and per my experience it’s big time worth doing it, as its performances furtherly improve and significantly so:

• privilege a Linux distro + a technical, lightweight music player, or an Android box + UAPP, over a generic Windows or Mac system;
• filter out and/or divert the VBUS power line into a cleaner source;
• manage grounding issues and rebalance DC;
• reclock / regen the USB signal;
• etc

On my #1 desktop stack Apogee Groove is USB-connected to the laptop host and powered via an iFi Nano iUSB3.0 (my take on that here) + an Uptone USPCB. The difference vs plugging directly onto the host is totally evident: voicing is furtherly open, detailed, imaged. I’ll soon finalise my switch from the laptop onto a Linux based box to furtherly improve the upstream quality (iUSB3 is a nice filter, but it’s always better having less dirt to filter out in the first place isn’t it).

Surely, additional infrastructural elements as a better PS, some competent USB reclocker etc will add to the total cost. Again, if the comparison reference is mainstream chifi DAC or DAC-AMP none of that is needed: Apogee Groove will run circles around those “as-is”. Integrating Apogee Groove with additional infrastructural elements serves the purpose of making it “clinge to” much upper-tier (i.e. way more expensive alternatives).

As an AMP: here’s where it gets tricky

First time I plugged my E4000 into Groove I had a sort of jaw-dropping reaction. That was unlike any other source I ever tried. Most of this was surely coming from Groove’s DAC capacities, but how much did the AMP part contribute on that?

What I did was of course trying to plug all amps I had, or I could get (on loaner for reviews, from friends… I won’t make a list here) downstream and try and find differences. Basically: not a single sub 200$ amplifier I tried on there made Groove’s native output into E4000 better. Most of them (as a matter of facts: all of them except just one) reduced dynamics, made stage smaller or flatter, or compressed the range – read: they are less clean.

My amp sensei taught me that “amps don’t add to dacs – they can only take away, if they are not clean enough”.

The key amp job is leaving a DAC’s voice unmodified while properly feeding the load the odd way it sometimes requires – otherwise it will be the load i.e. the headphone/IEM to ruin the DAC’s work in its turn.

My first E4000-based test was simply telling me that Groove’s built-in amp stage is (sometimes dramatically) cleaner than all external amps I have at hand, while at the same time capable enough to optimally bias its transducers.

Why did this happen? And will this be “always” the case?

Apogee Groove’s amp stage uses a current gain IC in its main circuit and according to Apogee the whole amp shapes the current waveform, aiming at keeping that stable, unlike what traditional amps do, which is shaping the voltage waveform instead.

They call it Constant Current Drive^tm technology, and – to paraphrase Steve Jobs – “boy did they patent it !”. They are not even keen on talking or explaining its details – it’s indeed “not so clear” how exactly Apogee Groove does what it actually does.

Be as it may, Groove’s output promises to sound very coherent in virtually all supported situations, no matter how “restless” the load impedance is.

Another quite surprising feature is Apogee Groove’s uncommonly high output impedance: 20 Ohm.

Such is welcome of course when plugging high impedance cans, while it is in general a serious hurdle when pairing lower impedance earphones or IEMs, which would “sound bad” in such situation. Groove offers you to forget the “8X impedance rule”.

Summarising: Apogee Groove won’t incur into FR-skewing effect when driving low impedance loads, or higher impedance ones featuring wild impedance swings (HD800, anyone?).

“Wow. So… Groove is the ultimate amp, all good, all fantastic?”

No. Groove’s amp stage has two quite significant limitations, and a third partial one.

First: depending on load requirements Apogee Groove may, and will, lack power.

Apogee Groove takes power from the USB2 line (supports USB3 if need be), and more precisely absorbs a maximum of 340mA from there, while on the output side it delivers 40mW and a bit more than 5V (!!) into 600 Ohm.

With that, beasts like HD800 (300 Ohm 102 dB), or HD650 (300 Ohm, 103 dB) will be perfectly supported as they welcome / require as high voltage as possible – and 5V starts to be “a pretty bit” – but absorb very little current, and Apogee Groove’s unique capability to cope with wide load impedance swings does the rest.

On the flip side, Groove falls short when paired with the like of Shure SRH1540. That’s because relatively low impedance & low sensitivity headphones require little voltage but a lot of current, and Groove simply won’t have enough (like all of its direct competitors by the way, but that’s another story).

Second: Apogee Groove won’t support all crossover setups.

In Apogee’s own words: “Apogee does not recommend the Apogee Groove for use with multi-driver balanced armature in-ear monitors. Due to the design of the balanced armature drivers and crossover networks used in this type of headphone, the Groove’s Constant Current Drive amplifier technology may result in uneven frequency response when used with certain models.”

Apogee Groove’s very technology aimed at automatically compensating for impedance mismatches and misalignments is at the origin of this (a crossover filter is working on capacitive components!…).

No harm to the circuits will happen when trying, they will just sound “bad”, not coherent. Shuoer Tape, Oriveti OH500 are examples.

Luckily, not all multidriver IEMs include filters: final B1 and B3 for example do not – and in facts are perfectly supported by Apogee Groove, as the disclaimer does not even apply to them in the first place really.

And even more luckily, to my direct experience a few crossover-equipped multidrivers do nonetheless work properly even on Apogee Groove’s unique amp stage: Ikko OH10, KBear Lark, Intime Sora 2 are all examples of this.

However the main message stands: for multidriver IEMs we can’t rely on Groove’s internal amp stage. Apogee told us crystal clear their technology doesn’t take responsibility for this.

The main way around the issue in employing a separate downstream amplifier of course. Again, be ready to spend some money for it to avoid depleting on other aspects of the output.

What also in some case works is adding an impedance adapter on Groove’s output. I am not 100% sure as to “why” exactly this works but it does. I suspect in such case Groove “sees” a stable full-resistive load, and does not engage in trying to compensate impedance variations.

Third and last: odd limitations on some (few) specific drivers.

Groove’s technology allowing for “8X rule disregard” does work like magic… almost always.

To just toss some examples, I auditioned final E3000, A3000 and E4000, or Tanchjim Oxygen on “quite a few” (!) sources.

If I consider mobile / transportable devices (DAPs, DAC/AMPs), Apogee Groove beats them all on DAC performance grounds, and is the best overall source (i.e., including the AMP stage) with the sole possible exception of Lotoo Paw Gold Touch (but it’s debateable, really). Which is twice as suriprising if I consider Groove’s native output impedance. Virtually impossible is also to find a better alternative looking amongst desktop class devices, but that’s logical as those are primarily designed for overears – typically requiring optimal voltage vs current modulation.

On the other hand, drivers like Koss KPH30i (60 Ohm 101 dB) paired to Apogee Groove present a very modest yet audible mid-bass bump – typical of an impedance mismatch situation. And in facts applying an impedance adapter (e.g. an iFi iEMatch, or equivalent) solves the problem.

Why exactly Apogee Groove can “perfectly manage” even lower impedance drivers, and doesn’t entirely support KPH30i is frankly still obscure to me. May be some specialty on KPH30i tuning? Difficult for me to say.

I might mention another “imperfect support” example, which is final E5000. But my extended experience with those taught me it’s them to be enigmatic. It’s simply not honest to take them as a benchmark for a source “normality” – if something, the other way around indeed!

At-a-glance Card

Conclusion

Besides simply “sounding incredibly better” than anything I had tried before, from the day I got it Apogee Groove has been extremely educational for me as it represented my affordable opportunity to hear and understand superior-tier sound quality.

There’s no going back for me: lower quality reconstruction filters, lack of spatial depth, and fuzzy or at best approximate imaging and layering are something I just don’t have a single reason to bear anymore.

As I tried to describe, there ain’t such thing as a Graal. Apogee Groove, too, has its limits. No direct DSD support is one, and USB2 (24 bit 192 KHz) maximum PCM resolution is another. It also lacks MQA support but that’s never been nor will be any of my concern. Also, the need to “help out” its built-in amp stage to cope with some specific loads turned out to be less of an issue for me than it appeared initially (ymmv).

Anyhow, Groove is so good that not only I adopted it as my core infrastructure on both my home stacks (yes, I bought a second unit after the first) but I even started modulating the rest of my gear relative to it, instead of the other way around. This is fundamentally due to budget restrictions: an headphone amplifier which is “clean enough” to hold true to Groove’s output, while offering appropriate power modulation for this or that driver which is not perfectly biased by Groove directly is no toy.

So I started to reason as follows: does a driver I like work perfectly on Groove? Does it even scale up with Groove? It’s a keeper! Does it not? Better be a really outstanding piece of gear! E.g.: SRH1540 – those are so good as to justify an adequate amp stage just for them, even if it’ll end up costing no way less than 350$ (eyeing a Jotunheim 2 as a minimum acceptable quality stadard at the moment).

That’s what I mean for “game change”: Apogee Groove flipped my perspective.

This is actually a general concept indeed, and a general recommendation. Who is keen on getting the best sound quality into his ears often gives priority to drivers (headphones / IEMs – it seems logical as they are the bits producing the actual sound, right?), then AMPs (as they are those supposed to “feed” the drivers well), keeping DACs last, and not even considering where does digital music come from (the player, a.k.a. “transport”).

The above paradigm is totally wrong. DAC first. Always. The DAC is the voice. Amping me as I sing totally off-key is pointless believe me. Same with a crappy DAC. Get a good DAC. The best your budget can buy. At the same time, make sure the DAC isn’t sent too much crap (i.e. spend money on the transport). Only then you are ready to define your budget for an AMP, and finally you will know which drivers you can choose.

I didn’t mention Groove’s price. Guess. Then open the last spoiler.

Even factoring the extra cost in for an iEMatch to keep at hand and use for this or that odd-behaving IEM – which I learnt is needed with just about any desktop-class amp anyway – I solidly put Groove’s price in no-brainer territory for the quality it delivers.

Final disclaimer: My Groove devices are my own property since day one, have not been supplied as loaners or any other sampling form.

This article also appears on my personal audio site, here.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

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

The post Apogee Groove Review – Changing The Budget Game For Good (since 2015) appeared first on Audio Reviews.