Burson Audio V6 Vivid & V6 Classic comparative review



When I was testing the Burson Fun I quickly realized that it’s among the best sub 500 USD headphone amp I have ever tested. I think Burson Audio really nailed everything about that one, it has power to spare, a strong control over the headphone drivers, it has very low noise with sensitive IEMs and most importantly sounds technical and musical in the same time.

To think that all of that was achieved with two NE5543 op-amps it is almost unbelievable. I say this because NE55xx are really not special at all. I heard them multiple times and spotted them in about every lower tier CD players and DACs but they never really caught my attention. Most of the time they sound dull and muddy, putting a big emphasis on warm notes but really lacking in leading edges of the musical notes.

In its stock form Burson Fun Basic sounds really good but only knowing that it can sound even better than that with a better set of op-amps can really make your nights longer and your sleep time shorter.

Enter Burson Audio own all discrete V6 set of op-amps in Single and Dual variations. It’s V6 because they are already at the 6th revision this time around supporting a wider voltage input and having overall better specs compared to its predecessors.

Burson offers two versions of V6 op-amps: V6 Vivid and V6 Classic (both in single and dual variations).



What is so special about them?

So what exactly was improved compared to older generations, do we really need a new revision?

Almost everything inside was retuned, updated and improved: a new enclosure was used with a good ventilation on top (older generations didn’t have that) to better dissipate heat (my older Matrix HPA-3B cooked op-amps faster than a frying pan!), there is also now a reversed power protection circuit, 0.5% tolerance metal film resistors are now being used and both input and output stages are now using hand matched FET transistors. Quite an upgrade isn’t it?

Burson Audio dedicated much love and passion into making them that they are offering lifetime warranty for every op-amp that leaves the factory, that’s über cool!

Of course, none of the above will matter if V6 will sound bad so let’s make some serious listening sessions and compare both to the NE5543.

Sound impressions

V6 Vivid

V6 Vivids came first, swapping them is actually easier than expected. I used the Burson Fun for the listening tests and comparisons connected to a Matrix X-Sabre PRO DAC fed by a high quality X-SPDIF 2 interface.

I swapped both NE5543 with two single V6 Vivids and started listening to almost anything that came up on the Tidal playlist.

After first few seconds I realized I am dealing with a clearer and a faster sound. I’m more of a rock listener and I always crave for a faster transient response with harder hitting notes and to a clean as possible presentation.

Funny thing is that V6 Vivid sounds exactly like that but let’s go deeper in the rabbit hole. Sennheiser HD660S that I am using right now are not among the fastest headphones and sometimes I really miss my former Audeze LCD-4 for their lightning speed and impact.

With V6 Vivids, HD660S are sounding clearly faster, the edges of the notes are also somehow clearer and sharper, guitar strings have a clearer leading edge and vibrate with more life this time around.

Bass notes not only hitting me harder but they also delve deeper into the mix. Try some Infected Mushroom or Chemical Brothers with a set of V6 Vivids and the smile on your face is guaranteed. Bass lovers will really appreciate what Vivids can deliver. The best part? Bass not only is faster and deeper but it is clearer, easier to spot in small passages and does not overshadow other notes. It’s clear, crisp, fast and deep.

Midrange performance was improved as well but not in such a big way. Overall voices are sounding clearer and more defined. In time I also observed that vibration of the voices is not as long as with NE5543. On a closer inspection I realized NE5543 is making all the voices and string instruments sound longer having a slower decay. Depends on what you like, I’m personally not impressed by longer decays of any musical note (that is one of the reasons I am not a tube guy anymore).

NE5543 most of the time sounds like tube gear that is warm, a little dull, inviting but lacks micro-details, speed and impact.

V6 Vivid is almost like a total opposite of that, think of a vintage car VS a race car.

Other thing that caught my attention at a later stage is depth. To really appreciate depth, I fired some live recordings where it’s easier to spot changes in the soundstage width and depth. To me Vivids sound deeper and an imaginary wall is being hit at a later time compared to NE5543. Soundstage width on the other hand is almost identical between the two. It’s pretty wide and well spread, nothing more, nothing less. In my opinion V6 Vivid has a great depth and a good well spread soundstage (but not the widest).

V6 Classic

Next on the test bench came the V6 Classics. To better evaluate them I listened to full albums on NE5543 first, later on V6 Vivids and latest on V6 Classics.

On the very first listen of a live recording I spotted a wider sound, there is a bigger space between the notes, between the singers and the crowd, it’s like I have an easier task to hear what’s going on and more time to evaluate every note. To me V6 Classics have the widest soundstage of the bunch it is really something special with the right music. V6 Classic has also a somewhat longer decay of notes (vs Vivids) but not too long as it is the case with NE5543.

On faster electronica notes are not sounding hysterical at all, bass notes are not as deep this time around and chest thumping bass is spotted not as often. Bass quantity and quality stays somewhere between V6 Vivid and NE5543. Its very good but not overdone, nor too thin, just the right amount.

Midrange performance is where things are more interesting in my opinion. Voices are literally reaching to your soul and offers more body to the listener, it’s a very life like presentation. There is a bigger presence in this region compared to other op-amps.

In my opinion midrange performance together with a wider stage is where the V6 classic shines and shows all its glory.

Overall V6 Classics have a warmer sound signature but in a good way, by that I mean that treble quality is not affected as is the case on the NE5543.

Speaking about the treble I can say it is mellower compared to V6 Vivid but clearer compared to NE5543. There is no sign of brightness whatsoever, in this regard V6 Classic have a more natural and easy-going presentation. It is quite difficult deciding which one I prefer but I give a slight edge to V6 Vivid just because of an overall clearer presentation and a faster transient response.

NE5543

What can I say, in some devices those can really suck, in other ones they can really shine. They do sound more than good in the Burson Fun in the Basic form, that actually shows how much time Burson invested in making that combination sounding good.

However, Burson Fun together with any of the V6 op-amps is completely in another league. Just few seconds are needed to realize that V6 improve a lot of things, not only the frequency response, much more than that.

Conclusion

If you already own a capable DAC or headphone amp that uses socketed op-amps I would definitely recommend trying out the V6 series of op-amps from Burson. It’s hard going wrong with any of them. If you want deep reaching and hard-hitting bass with an obscene levels of micro-detail and great depth, then V6 Vivid would be your best bet. Do you listen to a lot of classical music, lounge, jazz, smooth and relaxing tunes, love a wide spread soundstage and hate brightness? Then V6 Classic is what will make you smile.

I for one will stick with V6 Vivid and will soon fire another album. Cheers mates!

V6 VIVID

PROS:

• Great kick, speed and impact
• High level of transparency and airiness
• Big sense of power and control
• Deep reaching stage
• Sturdy and quality construction
• Good price for great performance

CONS:

• Treble can be overdone sometimes

V6 CLASSIC
PROS:

• Natural sound with a great flow
• A very airy presentation
• Impressively wide soundstage
• Sturdy and quality construction
• Good price for great performance

CONS:

• Slight sound coloration (Inverted-U frequency response)

Associated Equipment:

• Headphones: Sennheiser HD660S, HD600, Momentum 2, FiiO FA7
• DAC: Matrix X-Sabre PRO with X-SPDIF 2
• Headphone Amplifiers: Burson Fun, HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2
• Speakers: KEF LS50 Wireless

When I was testing out the Burson Play it really opened my mind that good sounding gear should not cost a fortune. I loved everything about the Play… well except the fact that it didn’t have RCA analog inputs, so it could not be used as a stand alone headphone amp to properly evaluate it with a higher quality DAC.

Burson completely solved my concerns with the introduction of the Fun: a simple and elegant desktop headphone amp and pre-amp.

On the plus side it has a higher driving power than Play, it has analog inputs (Duh!) but on the down side the DAC part was completely removed.

As a single solution Play probably is a better choice but for someone that already owns a higher quality DAC, the Burson Fun makes a lot more sense.

Fun along with the Play in my opinion has a very dynamic and mood lifting sound signature that I rarely hear at this price points. That’s due to dual mono Class A headphone and preamp inside. Its symmetrical circuit is powered by four sets of Max Current Power Supplies (MCPS). This power supply is more advanced and far superior to traditional transformers delivering instant, clean, and maximum electric current to the Fun

Is important to know that Fun is using the fully discrete amplification stage found in the 1500 USD Burson Conductor V2! It is basically the same circuitry Burson Audio is refining since 2008 and famed for its incredible micro details and musicality.

I am enjoying the Burson Fun for about one month already and I feel I’m ready to leave my full impressions.



Under the hood

Do not be fooled by its small footprint, Fun as its siblings Play and Bang were designed around the 5.25” PC drive bays, so Burson Fun can be integrated in any tower gaming PC or in regular small, mid tower or full tower cases that have at least one 5.25” drive bay. In this case it can be powered by a single Molex 4 pin cable that goes directly from your PC power supply and you really should not worry about the quality of your power supply because Burson already thought about that in advance and integrated a voltage regulator inside so that your PC’s power supply will have a minimal impact on sound quality.

Fun can also be used as an external device as I was planning to do, being powered by a simple SMPS external power supply.

Besides the usual headphone out, RCA analog input and the RCA preamp output, there is also a 3.5mm (1/8”) Mic input and 3.5 mm (1/8”) Mic output, so gamers and streamers out there can really put those sockets to good use.

Of course the stars of the show are the Burson developed ICs always working in the magical class A circuitry powering the headphone amplifier that are fed by four sets of revolutionary Max Current Power Supplies (MCPS) developed by Burson, the Fun is really one of the most powerful headphone amplifiers in the world.

And I can attest that, if it can easily power a set of Audeze LCD-4 and Sennheiser HD820 with ease, then it can power any headphones in the world.

Compared to Play, Fun has only 2 op-amps in the signal path and both are Single op-amps. Play is using 5 op-amps in the signal path from which 3 are dual op-amps and 2 are single op-amps. If you plan to upgrade the basic version to higher quality op-amps, Fun will cost you much less to upgrade, keep that in mind.

Besides that, lesser op-amps in the signal path will always yield a more transparent and breathing sound, so in advance I already hope that Fun will sound even better than the Play.

The Fun is being sold in 3 variants: the basic one that uses NE5543 op-amps, other two variants are using much more advanced discrete op-amps such as V6 Classic or V6 Vivid.

I have the Basic version, but please don’t worry as in its stock form it already impressed me enough.

Audio

Performance

1. Driving power

When I was testing the Play I was impressed by the output power it was capable of, delivering power even for most power hungry headphones such as Audeze LCD-4. Funny thing is that this little guy (Fun) is even more powerful. Using four sets of MCSPs instead of three sets on Play really made a difference. Especially for higher impedance headphones such as Sennheiser HD820 I was testing it with.

For HD820 Fun will deliver three times the output power compared to the Play.

Connected to a standard 2.2 Volt output DAC I can’t go higher than 50% volume on Fun powering a set of HD820, more than that and I feel that my eardrums will blow!

With lower impedance headphone the difference is not that big, with FiiO FH5 hybrid IEMs power wise both devices are almost identical, however due to lower impedance headphone output on the Fun, I hear a better control over the drivers on Fun compared to Play.



2. Controlling the power

Second thing that struck me is the control and speed Fun is capable of. For example Play in its own right had a remarkable control over the headphone drivers, small or big, headphone transducers always hit hard and fast. With Fun take that up a notch.

Every sound hits harder and faster with clearly a better control over the headphone drivers. As a headphone amp Fun will appease even vast majority of headphone enthusiasts, please take a listen to one if an opportunity will occur.



3. Transparency & Resolution

Third thing that was clearly different compared to Play is the overall clarity and resolution. It is on a higher level on Fun compared to Play, it even rivals my own Headamp Gilmore Lite MK2 in terms of transparency, airiness and resolution and we already know that Headamp is making ones of the most transparent head amps out there.

There is not a big difference in terms of overall clarity and transparency compared to Play but is a very noticeable one. It was very apparent on HD820 and on tiny FH5 hybrids.

4. Noise Floor

I personally don’t use IEMs at home connected to desktop audio gear, I use them exclusively on the go, but to those that use IEMs with desktop gear as well should know that Fun works much better than Play – it has a lower noise floor and hiss is practically non-existent with sensible earphones. There is only a faint hum only on higher volume when music is not playing. Apart from that, to me Fun can be used with BAs or hybrid IEMs no problemo, on the other hand Play was doing just an Ok job with those.

Before going forward just a quick summary: Up until now Fun has more power, better control over the drivers, sounds clearer and more transparent, has a lower noise floor and hiss with sensitive earphones compared to Play! Impressive isn’t it?



5. Transient response

More power and a better transparency will always lead to a better impact and to a faster transient response.

Listening to some local alternative/hardcore metal: Implant Pentru Refuz (IPR for short) it was clear to me that I am dealing with a really fast and agile performance.

Double drums and hi-hats had the right amount of spark and zing. I really liked that the treble was not as bright as it was on older Burson Designs (160D and Conductor V1 I am looking at you!) and in return it sounded as having a better shape/outlines. The hi-hats & cymbals never had an annoying delay but just right amount of presence and decay.

To me treble response is where I see the most improvement over the older Burson designs and a slight improvement even to Play where sometimes it had a little more bite than needed.

6. Frequency Response

The bass and mid frequency response is almost identical to that of Burson Play and other Burson designs. The sound overall has a lot of meat to the bone, sounds full and pleasant to the ear. It’s not warm or dark by any means; I’m calling it class A sound, if you get what I mean.

Trebles are crisp, maybe too sparkly sometimes; with few headphones I really like this effect. It is not overdone even with Sennheiser HD820 but it may be too much with something like a HD800 or Beyers.

I also like that sounds are not lingering too much so overall the sound is going towards great speed and impact and not towards a romantic experience.

If you are enjoying a slightly slower speed & impact and a more rounder & romantic experience I do recommend looking at other amps as Fun will not deliver that.

When I am thinking about Burson Fun I am thinking about big V8 American muscle cars, about spicy food and… roller coasters.



Select Comparisons

Fun vs Play

It is pretty difficult comparing the two since Play doesn’t have a true line-out, using the Pre-out will cause the double amping effect which will raise even more the Total Harmonic Distortion. I used the Matrix X-Sabre Pro to listen to the Fun, it uses a Sabre chipset as the Play does. Later on I also connected the Fun to the Play to see if my impressions will change.

As I was expecting Burson Fun sounds a bit clearer, has a faster transient response and a better control over the headphone drivers.

Power output is also higher, especially for higher impedance headphones. I really enjoyed my time with Fun powering the Senn HD820. HD820 sounded good on Play but great on Fun.

Fun is also a bit more transparent and offers a bit more air between the notes, it seems that less op-amps in the signal path made a big difference.

I also liked more how IEMs performed on the Fun as it had almost no hum or noise with sensitive earphones, Play has a higher noise floor and a higher impedance headphone output that may plague your listening experience with sensitive IEMs.

Fun vs Headamp Gilmore Lite MK2

Both headphone amps are working in Class A circuitry for the best possible sound quality and both have the same footprint and weight. Gilmore Lite MK2 goes for 500 USD and Burson Fun basic goes for 300 USD.

Let me start by saying that the Fun has clearly more power and a better control over the drivers. It can drive a pair of Audeze LCD-4 with headroom to spare, but that can’t be done with the Gilmore Lite.

Gilmore Lite sounds a bit more linear and flat, like disappearing completely from the acoustic chain, it has no coloration and can work with a wider range of headphones. It also has a lower noise floor with sensitive IEMs at a higher volume, at normal volume levels both have the same very low noise floor.

Fun adds a bit of its own flavor into the mix, it surely has a character of its own. For rock and fast electronica Fun will sound as having more energy and joy. Fun by comparison has a slight V shape frequency response boosting the low end and the treble response, not by much but it is sizable.

Fun also has a shorter decay of notes and a bigger impact to the eardrums, in this sense Gilmore Lite is a bit leaner, but that can be a result of a lower power output.

Stage size is bigger on Fun but it is deeper on Gilmore Lite, different strokes for different folks as they say.

On technicalities alone Gilmore Lite Mk2 wins, but on sheer power and enjoyment level Fun is clearly ahead.



Conclusions

When Fun was just introduced I remember seeing the price and specs and was a bit confused to why Fun as just as a headphone amp has the same price as Play (that besides being a headphone amp is a DAC as well). But now I understand why they both share the same price point. Yep, Play has a DAC as a bonus, but Fun is a higher performance headphone amp, there is no doubt about that.

To me Burson Fun is among the best compact sized single ended headphone amps out there regardless of output power or price and that says a lot.

Headbangers and electronica dancers will enjoy it a lot, it has a lot of energy under the hood and power to spare even for the most demanding headphones.

PROS:

• Great kick, speed and impact
• High level of transparency and airiness
• Natural sound with a great flow
• Powerful & potent headphone amp
• Spread soundstage and quite deep as well
• Sturdy and quality construction
• Good price for great performance

CONS:

• Slight sound coloration (V-shape frequency response)

Associated Equipment:

• Headphones: Audeze LCD-4, Sennheiser HD820, 660S, Momentum 2, FiiO FH5
• DAC: Matrix X-Sabre Pro with X-SPDIF 2, Burson Play
• Headphone Amplifiers: Burson Fun, Burson Play, HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2
• Speakers: KEF LS50 Wireless

When I’ve tested the Burson Play around one month ago I was kind of impressed by it’s small footprint yet with a really big and bold sound signature.

I’m really glad that Burson started thinking out of the box this last year and sincerely I dig every new product they released so far such as Play, Fun and Bang.

Small footprint and lower desk space doesn’t mean you’ll get a lower quality sound with boring dynamics.
When I heard the Play it was everything you’d want but not boring at all and I do hope the same can be said about Bang and Fun.
Burson Audio was kind enough to send us the Bang and Fun to test the hell out of them and we did exactly that so at this time my review is concentrated around the Bang power amp that I am enjoying for a week or so.

Bang is quite small, it has the same size as the Play and Fun but when I connected it to my Davis Acoustics Eva speakers I was a bit shocked by how much gain and power it has compared to my upper class Cambridge Audio Azur 851A.

I will test the Bang connected directly to Play and to my digital preamp inside Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro and later will compare it a bit with the Cambridge Audio Azur 851A.



Under the hood

As the manufacturer suggests: “Bang is the smallest dual mono Class AB power amp in the world. Bang’s size is deceiving as Bang packs a jaw – dropping punch!”

I agree and I can attest that, using my Davis Acoustics Eva speakers together with Play and Bang I can’t go higher than 20 volume out of 99! Take into consideration that with my Cambridge Azur 851A I was using 50 out of 100 volume for the same SPL in the same room but with a different source.

Using four sets of Max Current Power Supplies (MCPS) developed by Burson, Bang delivers overwhelming power, speed and details.
Taking into account it’s small size and weight you might think it uses a Class D amplifier stage, but you would be wrong. Bang is using a purist Class AB output stage for an organic, transparent and musical sound.



Bang is quite versatile as well because it has an internal gain buffer stage with selectable impedance levels.
It doesn’t matter if you are using a portable DAP, a desktop DAP or a high performance pre-amp, Bang will work with any of them giving you’re the perfect performance and volume control every time.

Bang’s input buffer stage in basic form is controlled by a single NE5532 op-amp but you can change it to your liking with a better performing op-amp like Burson’s own V6 Vivid Dual or V6 Classic Dual op-amps to squeeze the best of it.
I am using the basic NE5532 version, but don’t worry and in it’s stock form Bang impressed me enough.

It wouldn’t be a Burson device if it would not use highest performance ELNA aluminum electrolytic capacitors and Vishay resistors, we literally see them in every Burson product.

Burson states that Bang has around 40W of power into 4 Ohm load and around 29 W into 8 Ohm loads but after hearing it with my speakers I am thinking they didn’t get the numbers right as it sounds much more powerful than that.

There are two possibilities: It has a higher power output and Burson somehow didn’t measure it right or the second one would be that Cambridge Audio inflated too much their power ratings to have a higher sales numbers on their hands. We will probably never know the truth but I am betting on the second possibility.

I am kicking myself in the nuts of not having at the time of writing a pair of stand-floor speakers as I anticipate Bang would drive those to ear bleeding levels and have some power reserve left.
For my Davis Acoustics Eva, Bang is too much, much more than enough, at 15% volume my desk trembles, at 20% volume my neighbors are knocking on the wall to lower my volume levels, it has gobs of power!

I want to add that for a better impedance matching I used the Burson Cable Pro+ between the Play and Bang to better evaluate its acoustic properties.

Lets go with a Bang shall we?



Audio Performance

As you probably guessed Bang drives my Davis Acoustics Eva with tons of headroom left on the volume dial.
I did test it with Play, Fun and with my digital preamp inside the X-Sabre Pro DAC.
Play + Bang was the easiest setup to play with as you have everything you need for a small yet powerful setup for all your headphones or speaker needs.

I think the preamp section of Burson Play is too powerful as I never got more than 20 on the volume dial.
First thing I noticed is that Bang is free of any noise; even at lowest volumes background is free of any noise or hum.
Secondly after pressing play I’ve heard an easiness of sound that often is heard only in Class A or Class AB amplifiers, but wait Bang is a Class AB design so this makes sense now.

Bang has a really good flow with any type of music, it’s like any music fast or slow, with longer or shorter decays will always sound natural and easy going.
It is a type of sound that you don’t want to analyze but just relax and enjoy for a longer period of time.

Actually this just happened to me, I sit down trying my best critically evaluating the Bang on all its sides, but after few tunes I brought a glass of wine, put my legs on the table, took the keyboard away and just enjoyed the music for the rest of the evening.


The next day I put some Subcarpați – De Dor Și De Bucurie and involuntarily started tapping my feet. This simple yet complex tune has everything from the frequency response point of view.
From lowest sub-bass to the upper treble I didn’t notice any dips or rises in the FR, so I can’t say it lacks or adds anything into the mix.
However I felt a stronger bass response and a hint of naturalness on midrange that again is heard mainly on high quality power amps.

There are few seconds at the start of the tune where sub-bass rumbles a bit longer than normal and I was curios if it will distort, it didn’t, way to go Burson.
Actually sub-bass response is really good, in my opinion it has the right amount of decay and rumble.
Same can the said about the bass response.

Trying the latest Infected Mushroom album, listening to Groove Attack track at the 01:00 minute mark a deep and clear bass response should be heard and with the right gear it really shakes you up.
Bang passed the bass test with flying colors.

Midrange performance is where I think Bang shines the most as it adds just a little character of its own to make it unique sounding.

Yes, that is right, midrange goes a bit upfront compared to the rest of the spectrum. Most of the time the attention will be caught by the musical midrange performance, can’t say I dislike that, but can’t say it’s a linear performance too.



Depending on the taste, if you prefer a slightly musical performance Bang will be to your liking.
My speakers do not have a lot of midrange presence so the Bang actually helped a bit.
Voices and string instruments have just a tiny longer decays than how I would call natural decays, the notes are lingering just a little bit longer than how for example I’ve heard on Play but that is all right.

Bang sounds quite fast, but it’s not reference material for sure in term of speed and impact. My Cambridge Azur 851A sound faster and kicks harder but it’s also 3 times more expensive so it should not be a surprise.

Truth to be told I was immensely enjoying the Bang with everything from fast to slow music. Even if decays are a little bit longer it doesn’t mean sound will be muddy or uncontrolled. With Bang it was quite the opposite.
Bang almost never sounds crowded or muddy.
But possibly more importantly is that it has lots of control over speaker transducers, I never experienced sloppy dynamics or any kind of muddiness.

In this regard Bang stays among the clearer side of power amps I’ve heard in the past.
Treble in my opinion has the right amount of zing and energy. It is never too edgy and abrasive but always just a bit crispy and clear. I would probably want just a tiny bit more energy up top to be called a linear performance.

I think it will work well for bright speakers and with linear ones, with midrange heavy speakers it might be too much, it should be tested in advance for a good match.

Overall I think it matches well with majority of speakers, can't say a lot about the stand-floor speakers, don’t have a pair at this moment but with higher sensitivity ones it should be enough
Soundstage performance is better than expected; especially looking at its size and at those power ratings.

It never sounds tiny or crowded, the stage is medium to large in size and it fills the room quite nicely. I tried my speakers in two rooms, one that has around 13 mp and one that has around 34 mp, in both rooms but especially in the bigger one the sound really opened up and a real sense of scale was heard.

The next day I decided to use the Bang with my reference DAC - Matrix X-Sabre Pro that also has a digital preamp section.

Well the stage opened up even more, sound became not just wider but much more deeper.
I started hearing voices not in front of my speakers but behind them, a weird but interesting effect.
Speed ranked up, impact was better and the FR overall became more liniear.
More details could be picked up and sound became even more controlled, it should not come as a surprise as X-Sabre Pro is much more expensive than the Play Basic.



Comparison with my Cambridge Audio Azur 851A
Burson Bang goes for 500 USD/EUR and Azur 851A for 1500 USD/EUR so it is not a fair comparison at all but an interesting one.

Using the same source (X-Sabre Pro) I finally got a better sense of power and scale with Azur 851A. I had more volume with Azur 851A but not much more as I was expecting. Azur 851A kicked a bit more and sounded more linear.
However Burson Bang sounded more…alive, it has a touch of warmth that could really help in some situations.

What really impressed me is that Bang sounded as clear as the Azur 851A. Not a single micro-detail was missed, not a single note was unheard and for that I think Bang punches way above its weight and price point.


Conclusion
For a simple and elegant desktop solution I can recommend enough the Burson Bang, it is just perfect in a small environment, hell it even worked great in my living room as I didn’t hear any soundstage or scale restrains.
It always sounded big and bolt, it is exactly how Burson gear always sounded.
Having bogs of power, a large soundstage and a natural tone, you really can’t go wrong with the Bang.
Burson again goes with a Bang!

Until next time my friends!

PROS:
- Great sense of scale, wide spread soundstage
- Sounds much bigger and powerful compared to its size
- Pretty linear FR with just a slight midrange emphasis
- Natural tone with a great sound flow
- Quality and minimalist construction
- Very good price/performance ratio
- Works great with Burson Play an Fun

CONS:
- A slight grain on treble
- Sensible to hum/hiss (it had just a tiny bit with Play, but none with X-Sabre Pro)

Equipment used for review purposes:
Speakers: Davis Acoustics Eva, KEF LS50W
Power amp: Burson Bang
Integrated amp: Cambridge Audio Azur 851A
Pre-amps: Burson Fun, Matrix X-Sabre Pro
DACs: Matrix X-Sabre Pro, Burson Play
Cables: Burson Cable Pro+, Kimber PR8, QED Reference

FiiO never ceases to amaze me, few months ago I was testing their new flagship IEM: the F9, a few months later their new F9 PRO flagship and now they done it again with the FH5. I would not be shocked if at this very moment they are already tinkering with a new flagship IEM, FiiO is on fire and I like that.

FH5 sets apart from the other IEMs they done in the past, from the moment you unpack them you start to understand they are surely in the big boy category with this one. Unboxing experience was like a much higher priced IEM, I’m glad they are making time into thinking better ways to carefully pack a premium product.



Package Contents

FH5 comes in a nice and quality packaging that actually surprised me a bit; especially the 11 pairs of ear-tips put in a foam sheet that shows exactly how each category of ear-tips will sound, so you no longer need to guess if this enhances the bass, the voices or the treble.

In total 12 pairs of ear tips are supplied with them, 3 sizes for 4 different categories of ear tips as follows:

Balanced ear tips (standard black silicone ones), Vocal ear tips (transparent with red sound tube), Memory foam ear tips (black foam ones) and the bass ear tips (black silicone with red sound tube).

I do prefer the Memory foam ones as they isolate better and sound most neutral to me with just a slight boost in the lows.

In the package can be also found a big transparent waterproof case and a fabric pouch that I use most of the time when I travel because it’s smaller and easier to carry around.



Technology inside the FH5

As with later FiiO IEMs, FH5 is entirely made by the FiiO engineers that many times already showed us that they can create quality in-ear monitors such as F9, F9 PRO and FH1.

FH5 is again a hybrid design that uses 3 balanced armatures to render mids and treble and a powerful dynamic driver to take care of the bass.

Now here’s the catch: the dynamic driver of FH5 has the same size as the FH1 of 10 mm that was notorious for really good bass response. By Comparison F9 series have a 9.2 mm dynamic driver that did well with bass but not great in some situations.

To make bass even deeper and more controlled besides the big 10 mm drivers they also developed what they are calling S.TURBO technology that mimics the work of a dedicated subwoofer with a turbine inspired design that really makes wonders with the bass.

Three bore design (one bore for bass, one for mids and one for treble) is also a novelty for FiiO that is being used in high-end IEMs around the globe.



The shell on first appearance seems much bigger to house all those larger balanced armature drivers including a bigger dynamic one and the S.Turbo subwoofer and again resembles a custom IEM somehow. The shell is machined entirely with CNC technology from blocks of aluminum giving them a premium feel to the touch and to the eyes.

The cable that is only one in the package is much sturdier and much more resistant than the one found on the F9 series or on FH1. It’s more rigid; it’s thicker and uses high-purity mono-crystalline silver-plated copper (SPC) wire for higher quality signal transfer that minimizes distortion and signal transmission loss for best sound quality possible.

If you already own a DAP that has a balanced output I highly recommend buying a separate cable such as LC-2.5B (2.5 mm balanced) or the LC-4.4B (4.4 mm balanced) to use it with the FH5, it makes a big positive difference compared to the SE connection.



FH5 to this date are the most sensitive IEMs from FiiO, having an impedance of only 19Ω and a whopping sensitivity of 112 dB per 1 mW they can be powered by pretty much everything that has a headphone jack.

However there is another catch: because of their very revealing nature and high sensitivity they are pretty picky of the quality and the noise floor of the source. They can reveal hiss and hum of devices you thought have a crystal clear background. For example they hiss a bit with FiiO’s own X5 MKIII, with Sony NW-WM1Z and they hiss more with a Burson Play and with some other desktop headphone amplifiers, be warned about that.

So my friends, lets get to the most interesting part of the review.



Sound Quality

Well, well, I really was expecting this kind of sound quality from FH5 as they blown me away at the first listen. They are by far the best IEM FiiO designed and can easily outmatch higher priced IEMs from other manufacturers.

They have deep and layered bass, great mids with clear and vibrant voices, a good treble extension and a great separation of the notes portraying an out of head presentation due to well spread soundstage. Did I catch your attention already?

I paired FH5 with FiiO’s latest DAP: the M7 that has a very low noise floor and a very black background without traces of noise. M7 also have a very honest and revealing sound so the match was perfect with FH5 and I can easily describe how FH5 are actually sounding.

At 112dB/mW it was an easy task even for the underpowered M7, so volume was never past 50% almost all the time even on demanding classical pieces.

The bass response reminded me a bit of F5 and FH1, but this time bass is much more controlled, it goes deep, presenting multiple layers of it and it decays in a natural way, not too fast and not too slow.

The bass turbine really wakes up the bass on higher quality electronica.

Daft Punk , Infected Mushroom and The Prodigy was a real treat to listen.



FH5 have a much higher impact and kick into eardrums compared to F9 series and that makes me quite happy of the overall sound signature.

Lower extremities are not cut this time, for example when listening The Prodigy – Invisible Sun there are few bass notes that makes butterflies in my stomach, a thing that never happened with F9 series.

I do find the bass not only deep but also very controlled due to its fast rises in dynamics.

The upper bass notes seems a bit more pronounced than the sub-bas, its especially heard on groovy jazz tracks where double-bass is present.



Transition from bass to midrange is done in a natural way so the flow keeps going without stuttering or dips.

Lower midrange sometimes sounds a bit suppressed by the bass notes, but that is the case only on bassier tracks.

Overall the voices are clear and have the right amount of vibration; violins and guitars have the needed zing and pitch. Most of the time they sound full but on rare occasions few voices do sound like they are sitting further away from the listener, bass comes forward more often. Upper midrange in my opinion does not have this problem.

Treble sounds crispy and can bite sometimes, but it’s not bright at all.

Treble is also airy with lots of air between the notes, cymbals and drums never sound crowded, they always sound like two separate entities.



There might be a slight roll off in the upper treble as it always sounds clear and detailed but never fatiguing which I find to be a bit weird, balanced armatures always sounded a bit fake to me due to sharp trebles but it is not the case with FH5.

There is a good tonal balanced across all frequencies and I think FiiO really nailed this time with FH5.

Due to its fast and airy nature, resolution is at a high level, FH5 do sound detailed with a good extraction of small micro-details.

In this respect there is nothing to reproach about FH5.

Overall the sound is clean, fast, has good extension, hits hard and lifts your mood, what more can you ask for?

Soundstage is good but not great, sincerely it is quite hard to make an in-ear monitor that sounds wide and spread with drivers that are sitting millimeters away from your eardrums. I find the depth to be better than the soundstage. I can easily look deeper into the mix with FH5 however the width and height of the stage is limited and cannot compete with an open-back design for example.

However for an IEM design it is quite impressive as it is.



Comparisons

FH5 vs F9 PRO

FH5 have a much better tonal balance with better rendition of bass notes and midrange. Vocals sound meatier and sweater on FH5. Bass also goes lower and has more layers of it. FH5 is more natural sounding, less harsh; you could call it a meatier sound.

F9 PRO is better in the upper treble where is doesn’t roll off as fast, however for me it becomes a bit fatiguing after some time. FH5 sounds also deeper, portraying a better depth and I can look easier into the mix. With better-layered bass and more presence into midrange and with a higher micro-details extraction the FH5 overall is a better earphone to me.

FH5 vs FH1

Ok, I know this is not a fair comparison as FH1 is much cheaper. Also four drivers VS two drivers is not fair as well.

However the bass response of FH1 almost stands shoulder to shoulder to the one of FH5. FH5 have a better control over the drivers, bass notes on FH1 are looser and sound one-note sometimes, a thing that never happened on FH5.

The overall sound signature is quite similar, but FH5 has a much better treble response and a more textured midrange. Both sound natural and easy on the ear with no listening fatigue at all.

Due to much faster sound on FH5, every vibration of the notes is decaying faster showing a better texture of every note. FH5 is crystal clear; FH1 is a bit muddy in comparison. There is no denying it, FH5 is completely on another league, a much higher one.



Conclusion

Great packaging, lots of accessories inside, great design, great craftsmanship and most importantly a great sound, all those words represent the FiiO’s FH5.

FH5 again raised the bar not only in FiiO’s portfolio but also in affordable high-end IEM market.

Great sound should not cost a fortune and I thank FiiO for that, this is how it should be done.

Competition? For now just watch and learn.

PROS:

• Awesome packaging with a good selection of accessories
• Quality craftsmanship, fit and finish
• Great tonal balance between all the frequencies
• Great depth, good soundstage
• Impressive bass response
• Sweet and natural midrange
• Clear and extended treble without being harsh
• Lots of air between the notes
• Strong kick, impressive speed
• Awesome price for the sound performance we get

CONS:

• Soundstage is a bit limited
• A balanced cable is no longer found in the package

Equipment used for review:

• DAPs: FiiO M7, X5 MKIII, Sony NW-WM1Z
• DACs: Chord Hugo2, Mojo, Matrix X-Sabre Pro + S/PDIF 2, Burson Play, FiiO Q5
• Headphone amplifiers: Headamp Gilmore Lite Mk2, HeadAmp Pico Power, Burson Play, Chord Hugo2, Mojo, FiiO Q5
• Headphones: FiiO FH5, F9 PRO, FH1, Shure SE846, Audeze iSine20, Sennheiser IE80

You know what? I have a soft spot for Burson Audio gear. And that’s because 7 years ago I was publishing my absolutely first review on www.soundnews.ro and that review was for my own Burson HA-160D. I loved that thing very much, it actually kickstarted my career as a reviewer.

Later on I tested and written about their future designs like HA-160DS, Soloist, Timekeeper, about their powerful op-amp testing station Lycan and of course about Conductor. The later one I again purchased and used for the following years and it was my go to audiophile headphone testing machine just before moving into the balanced land with a separate balanced source and amplifier.



My life was easier that time, much easier. I had my 160D and later my Conductor, two pairs of headphones and that was it. Sound was great; life was moving on, no worries about quality RCA cables or other quibbles.

Fortunately Burson Audio was not sleeping all these years and released a plethora of new devices and I really do love their kind of back to the roots vibe, especially their new Burson Play is exactly that: a simple DAC and headphone amp combo. Besides the Play, Fun and Bang were also released; Fun is a dedicated headphone amplifier and Bang is an integrated speaker amplifier. Hopefully I’ll do reviews at least for two of those devices.

For now my review is concentrated around the Play, which I was immensely enjoying for the last 3 weeks or so.

It not only brings back good memories about inception of my career but I actually started to remember the Burson sound signature, if you are wondering if this type of thing really exists in the Burson family.

As it’s name suggests Play have a very joyful and mood lifting sound signature designed not only for audiophiles but this time for gamers as well.

Truth to be told I game myself too when time permits, I’m a Blizzard fan so I play mostly their Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch games.

I will test the Play both as an audiophile hub powering my hungry planar magnetics and as a gaming audio source powering the same headphones.



Under the hood

So what do we have here is a very good build DAC and headphone amp combo plus a dedicated preamp for a power amp.

Please do not be fooled by its small-ish footprint. Actually its shape and design was made around the 5.25” PC drive bays, so Burson Play can be integrated in any tower gaming PC or in regular small, mid tower or full tower cases that have at least one 5.25” drive bay. In this case it can be powered by a single molex 4 pin cable that goes directly from your PC power supply and you really should not worry about the quality of your power supply because Burson already thought about that in advance and integrated a voltage regulator inside so that your PC’s power supply will have a minimal impact on sound quality.

Play can also be used as an external device as I was planning to do, being powered by a simple SMPS external power supply.

Under the hood the DAC chip used is the veteran ESS 9018 capable of decoding PCM material up to 32 bit / 386 kHz and DSD material up to DSD256 (DSD x4).

The USB receiver is a quality XMOS one, gone are the days when I was losing USB connection due to poor USB implementations and drivers. XMOS is much easier to implement and sounds pretty good too, way to go Burson.



Of course the stars of the show are the Burson developed ICs always working in the magical class A circuitry powering the headphone amplifier that are fed by three sets of revolutionary Max Current Power Supplies (MCPS) developed by Burson, the Play is really one of the most powerful headphone amplifiers in the world.

And I can attest that, if it can power a set of Audeze LCD-4 and it did, then it can power any headphone in the world.

Play as again its name suggests is an op-amp rollers dream as you can literally play with a ton of different op-amps and tune it to your liking.

The Play is being sold in 4 variants: the basic one that uses NE5532 op-amps, the one that uses Burson branded V5i op-amps, the one that uses much more advanced discrete op-amps such as V6 Classic or V6 Vivid. The latter two are also offered with a heavy-duty remote control.

I have the basic, skinny, Eastern-Europe friendly Play but please don’t worry, in it’s stock form it already impressed me enough.



Play with me

Lets get to the most interest part shall we.

First and foremost I was a bit in awe that it can properly drive with authority with lots of headroom to spare a pair of Audeze LCD-4 and believe me that is not an easy task.

At around 70-80 volume I can play even jazz and classical pieces with ease, past that and it becomes painful to listen. It surely has enough drive and power reserve for a vast majority of headphones.

I have the latest revision (Rev 2.2) that also works great with IEMs. First revision had few problems with noise and clean background but I can safely say those issues are gone and it works as intended.

My FiiO FH5 hybrid IEMs have a faint, low-pitched hum but only in complete silence, after I press play I cannot hear it anymore. In absolute terms there is a very slight hum but it is not something that should bother an ordinary listener.

Powering the FH5 volume sits between 7 and 12, more than that and it’s painful, again it has a lot of power reserve.

Output impedance is a bit high at 8 Ohms so low and ultra-low impedance headphones will have a looser sound with a weaker control over the drivers.

Other headphones that were tested were Audeze LCD-4Z (the low impedance ones) and Sennheiser HD660S, both performed good with flying colors under all circumstances.



Besides the power output that impressed me, this whole thing as a DAC/Amp works surprisingly well, the sound overall is clean and clear with a wide soundstage, with a great depth and great control over the headphone drivers. I almost forgot how good a small DAC/Amp can sound.

The Burson sound signature is certainly here because not a single hint of shrillness or brightness can be heard. I know there is an ESS Sabre inside it and still it sounds natural, easy on the ear with a good flow and a rich tone to it.

And I am testing the basic version here; I’m already imagining how good the full-fledged V6 Vivid/Classic should sound then.

What also made me happy is the revealing nature and easiness of every song heard on Play. I enjoyed all music genres with no apparent weaknesses whatsoever.

Adam Agee & Jon Sousa – Paddy Fahey’s sounded incredibly natural, very enjoying, every little nuance in the song, like the soft toe tapping that moved so little air was easily heard, the mix of violin and guitar never seemed crowded or muddy. The midrange really shined on this song and I believe the strength of the Play is exactly in the midrange section where it shows lots of textures and meat to the bone.

Lara Ruggels – Snowflake showed lots of depth around all the notes, an evenly spread soundstage and a natural tone to it.

I believe Play have a quite good tonal balance showing not only a meaty and full of substance sound but also subtleties and micro-details hidden in the mix.

The voices and guitars again sounded astonishingly good and there is truly nothing to reproach on this song.



Moving on to something much more energetic like Infected Mushroom – Becoming Insane showed me the real strength of the Play and that is a strong impact into my eardrums and great speed and kick that it is capable of. It never stays out of tempo; it keeps up even with such a fast and crowded track.

Pair the Play with a nice pair of planar magnetic headphones and a headbanging becomes inevitable on electronica.

Layers and sub-layers of bass hit me, what’s why I believe the pace, rhythm and timing are on a high level on the Play.

Although Burson designed the Play mainly for gamers, believe me with music it works really well, better than I anticipated.

Moving on to W.A. Mozart – Serenade No.13 in G Major (Allegro) – showed a wide spread soundstage that I can walk by easily with my imagination, depth was also good, I was easily appreciating the distance between the orchestra and me. Trebles were crisp and biting without bothering me too much, so no harshness whatsoever could be found on all test tracks I tried it with.

Launching Heroes of the Storm and Overwatch and activating the “headphone mode” made me appreciate my games even more because of great localization of my friends and more importantly of my foes. I’m actually lowering volume setting in those games because Play hits really hard on every shot or special effect and it distracts me too much with its strong kick into eardrums.





Comparison with my Gilmore Lite Mk2

Burson Play Basic costs 300 USD and the HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2 goes for 500 USD, also the Gilmore Lite is only a headphone amplifier without a DAC section, so its not a very fair comparison however its an enlightening one showing the true capabilities and nature of the Play.

Both have the same footprint and both are working in Class A circuitry for the best possible sound quality.

Burson Play has a LOT more power, at 70% volume it powers my LCD-4 and that is astonishing, Gilmore Lite goes out of power with LCD-4 and starts clipping and heavily distorting. However when powering very sensitive earphones like my FH5 hybrids, Gilmore Lite is much better having no hiss at all and also presents a better control over the drivers.

For dynamic headphones, Burson will have a stronger kick and a somewhat more natural sound making every track easy to listen with no listening fatigue. Gilmore Lite however is like a magnifying glass showing every good or bad in a recording, it sounds also more linear and kind of boring sometimes and a bit fatiguing due to its very revealing nature.

So in the end it’s a draw, depending on your tastes or mood one is better than another; I like both for what they are. Strictly in terms of SQ, Gilmore Lite is more technical but weaker, Play is more musical and much more powerful. Pick your poison my friends.



Conclusion

To say what I was mighty impressed by the Burson Play would be a great understatement because it showed me that great sounding gear should not cost a fortune and many times it made the rethink my strategy regarding audio gear in general, because of the aberrant prices most of the gear is selling for.

For a simple desktop DAC/Headphone amp used to play music, recording or gaming Burson Play gains my highest recommendation to this date. It is that good and some more.

PROS:

• Great kick, impact and speed on all tunes
• Natural sound with a great flow
• Quite linear with no dips or rises across all frequency response
• Very potent and powerful headphone amp section
• Spread soundstage and quite deep as well
• Quality construction, 3 in 1 device, versatile and easy to use
• Best price to performance ratio I have ever tested in a DAC/Amp

CONS:

• High output impedance is not that great with IEMs and other low impedance headphones
• Slight hum in very sensitive earphones

Equipment used for review purposes:

• Headphones: Audeze LCD-4, LCD-4Z, Sennheiser HD660S, Momentum 2, FiiO FH5
• DAC: Matrix X-Sabre Pro with X-SPDIF 2, Burson Play
• Headphone Amplifiers: HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2, Burson Play
• Speakers: Audio Physic Tempo Plus
• Integrated Amps: Hegel H190, Cambridge Audio Azur 851A

Hi everybody,

Before I start with my actual review I would like to tell you a short story.
A little bit over 11 years ago when I decided to invest in this wonderful hobby, headphone manufacturers but especially headphone amplifier manufacturers could be counted by fingers on a hand.

In top 3 of those manufacturers there is an American company that I mentioned many times in my reviews, and that is HeadAmp Electronics.
My first contact with this company was the moment when I wanted to have the smallest most performing DAC and headphone amplifier, both cramped into a case smaller that a pack of cigarettes and that device became HeadAmp Pico.



Thanks to that device I gave up on my desktop DAC that I was using and to my desktop headphone amplifier, only because with my Grado RS-1i that I was using at that time, the tiny Pico sounded (much) better than those two bigger boxes put together.
There were many times when I would just lift it off the table and just stare at it for minutes in a row, design is simply perfect, it was far beyond what I had seen before!

A couple of years later I decided that I want the best portable headphone amp on the market, I didn’t want it to be only very powerful, capable of driving big and inefficient headphones, but I wanted it also to have a very transparent and revealing nature as possible. So a few months later I became the happy owner of the famous Pico Power.
I still use it today; it’s actually my reference to which I compare any other portable headphone amplifiers that goes through my hands.

No wonder because until this day it has the best measurements ever recorded in the category of portable or desktop headphone amplifiers.
Here it is in a family photo with his younger brother Pico and his bigger brother Gilmore Lite Mk2.



During these years, I have begun to have a tremendous respect for this brand, but also a great deal of confidence in what they do, unfortunately rarely encountered in these lands.
As far as I know, they produce among the best balanced headphone amplifier on the market today: GS-X Mk2 and also the best electrostatic headphone amp available on the market: Blue Hawaii Special Edition (BHSE for short).
Unfortunately, I cannot afford the GS-X Mk2 balanced amplifier, maybe one day I will test it too, who knows?

Today I will test a newly released desktop headphone amplifier, much more accessible than the balanced version and that is the HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2.

Design and specifications

Like the other amplifiers developed by HeadAmp, the quality of the construction is impeccable.
The amp has a small footprint and uses an external regulated power supply to stay away from noise; however there might be a possibility in the future for manufacturer to provide a higher performance dedicated power supply in a matching case.
The best part is that this amplifier is based on the same circuitry found in the legendary GS-X Mk2 (3000 USD). At the input ultra low noise JFETs are used, and at output bipolar transistors that always work in class A!
As you can see it’s a circuit composed entirely of discrete components, there are no op-amps and no capacitors in the signal path (the four ones from the pictures below are filtering the power supply).



An ALPS Blue volume potentiometer of a superior quality was used, often seen in more expensive audio gear.
The amplifier doesn’t offer a gain switch, but sincerely there is no need for one due to a very black background.
The ample power of 1.5 W and low noise levels make it perfect for both the most sensitive IEMs and for power hungry planar-magnetic headphones.
Two RCA analog inputs are provided, an active preamp out on RCA and a 1/4” (6.5mm) headphone output.
It looks very simple and modest but we already know that initial appearance can be deceiving.

Let’s get to the most interesting part.



Unleashing the Beast

Although compact and lightweight, the sound produced by this amplifier is big and bold, very airy and deep, contrary to its size.
How can you describe an audio component that doesn’t have a character, which does not interfere almost at all with the sound, which virtually disappears in front of the listener?

Ladies and Gentleman I think I’m witnessing the purest sound ever coming out of the Sennheiser HD660S, and I’m not just talking about single ended amplifiers, I’m talking about all amplifiers that passed through these hands.
It is very hard to describe an audio component that practically disappears and does not interfere with the audio signal. Purity and transparency are second names of this device.
Listening more and more I realize that I am actually listening to my audio source, my Matrix X-Sabre Pro DAC fed with lossless files and nothing else.

Let’s start from the beginning step by step.



Transparency and resolution

Listening to Elvis Presley – Fever always puts a smile on my face and on Gilmore Lite Mk2 I was stuck in my chair for three minutes paying attention to the air that moved so easily and to those micro-details that sounded so clear and alive.
Transparency is just mind blowing; the capable resolution is also superior.

The very clean performance without any acoustic interventions jumps too much at me, but please do not associate it with a clinical sound, because that’s not the case at all.



Fluidity and acoustic tonality

Often in my favorite songs I’m not looking for the ultimate resolution but for a soft bonding of the notes, that fluidity that gives sound a smooth and tireless presentation that floats lightly to my eardrums.

Take for example the Dave Brubeck quartet – Take Five that sounded not only super resolving but also super liquid.
The technical and full of subtlety presentation has been greatly helped by a good fluidity that binds the notes in a natural and tireless way.
I think it is due to the class A witchcraft which many praise to the skies, otherwise I do not explain the phenomenon.

Continuing with Pink Martini – Simpatique and Radiohead – OKNOTOK gave me the same feeling: a sound that easily breathes and a fluency that brings a touch of naturalness and unsurpassed reality.
The micro-details were so apparent that I’ve heard how the mouths of the artists opened before they sang anything, the purity of the voices being unaltered in any way.


From left to right: Leatherman Wave, Nitecore MH20GT, Gilmore Lite Mk2, Audeze LCD-4

Impact, speed, execution and withdrawal of notes

Thanks to a good transparency and to a sound that easily breathes, each note is no longer impeded by anything in their way to the listener, so the impact of the notes becomes tremendous, hitting hard and heavy.

The Sennheiser HD6XX series, like my HD660S, are not known to have a reference attack or impact, but this amplifier has completely changed my mind about these headphones.
Finally, I hear a serious impact that easily rivals the planar-magnetics performance.
The flashing speed of the notes directly influences the withdrawal of the notes that is as quick as its rise.

Listening to Infected Mushroom – Spitfire I was astonished, immediately after the first minute my ears began waving because of the stunning deep bass, impact and the speed it was capable of.
Without exaggerating, the impact of the little Gilmore Lite Mk2 exceeded any expectations, it surpassed the performance of my own balanced amplifier, I will do a comparison of the two at the end of the article.

Good timing and fast transients have always been part of the company’s DNA, and this little amplifier is demonstrating it again.



Harmonic distortion and background noise level

Besides inefficient headphones, I also used a pair of FiiO F9 PRO in-ears that are extremely efficient but also very demanding when it comes to the output quality of an amplifier.
I’m glad to report that there is no background noise, the background is blacker than the night, and I can easily listen even to balanced armature based IEMs. Just take care of the volume pot as it grows exponentially from 10:00 o’clock upwards.

When I was just unboxing it, I was nervous a bit that it would not be a good match with the ESS 9038 chipset present in my Matrix X-Sabre Pro DAC, but once I pushed play all my fears were gone. The lack of grain on higher notes holds under a strict control the performance of the treble; having the necessary glitter and the total lack of disturbing brightness.

Linear Frequency Response

From the lowest sub-bass to the highest treble no ups can be heard, no downs, no dips or irregularities. Frequency response is linear, unaltered and untouched.

Due to this fact, there is no fierce competition between the notes, all of them will have their moment of glory, neither one will go unnoticed.

Holography, Depth and width of the soundstage

Lack of grain especially on treble as well as a higher level of transparency which the amplifier is capable of lead to a deeper performance in which I can walk imaginary more easily than ever.
Soundstage width is medium to large, but not huge as in the case of balanced amplifiers, or tube based designs. Still, Sennheiser HD660S as well as Audeze LCD-4 sounded wider with much improved depth than usual.

I started my day listening to some Therion – Deggial, an album in which my attention was caught by notes that surrounded my whole body. Vibration of voices heard on multiple tones made me feel goose bumps and I hummed my favorite songs for the rest of the day.



Amplification

If this amplifier managed to drive with authority a pair of LCD-4 then I can say it can drive any other pair of headphones.
HD660S for sure doesn’t need more than this, I can add here the rest of dynamic headphones on the planet, it will be a child’s play for it.

The absolute level of control over the diaphragm is very apparent, especially when I analyze under a magnifying glass a faster and more demanding song.
I’ve heard an absolute control on the LCD-4 as well, but from about 90% volume and up, the amplifier started clipping and losing control.
For such headphones as LCD-4 or HE-6 I still suggest a balanced amplifier with a bigger power reserve, a GS-X Mk2 would be the perfect choice for this task.

I did not hear any hiss on IEM type earphones, I find it very universal. As for what headphones can be used with it, the answer is quite simple: any headphones.



David VS Goliath

I made a single comparison but an important one that was a little painful in my case.

You see, my reference headphone amp that I am using almost the second year is the Audio-GD Master 9: a monster machine literally and figuratively.
It weights 16 kg and it occupies about 1/3 of the work space on my desk, it offers plenty of power for any headphone set, offering single ended as well as balanced outputs – a real tool that helped me testing various headphones but also helped quietly listening to the music.
I considered it very transparent, agile, very sincere in terms of frequency response and also very powerful having just a slight coloration on mids.

I connected the little Gilmore Lite Mk2 to X-Sabre Pro and started comparing both amps on the same LCD-4 and HD660S.

And that my friends was the moment when my jaw hit the floor…

The differences were not huge but Gilmore Lite Mk2 sounded even faster, executing a more impressive attack, hitting harder my eardrums. Bass notes caught a new contour and I felt it pulsating, how layers and sub-layers of bass floated towards me, a feeling that was not so apparent on Master 9. I went to bed thinking I was too tired and that I started dreaming.

The next day armed with more mood and leisure I resumed the comparative test.

This time around I felt that sound becomes deeper and breathes easier on the little amp, again an effect less apparent on Master 9.
More than ever I felt disappointed by the transparency and micro-details extraction that was lacking on my personal amplifier, little David offered a more sincere and unaltered sound.
Instead Gilmore Lite Mk2 lost without the right to appeal when a higher volume was needed, Master-9 offered almost infinite power for any set of headphones and had a better control over the headphone drivers at higher volume.

When I reconnected LCD-4 to the balanced output of the Master-9, audio performance plunged upward dethroning both previous performances on almost any aspect, well…except for that intoxicating transparency and micro-detail extraction that is still superior on Gilmore Lite Mk2.


Gilmore Lite Mk2 VS Audio-GD Master 9

Conclusions

Even I strongly believed that a high-end amplifier with a top audio performance is impossible to achieve at less than $1000.

Nevertheless HeadAmp with its Gilmore Lite Mk2 proved the opposite.

Really a great achievement with the Mk2 that offers a sincere and balanced sound across the board.
We are talking about a truly high-end sound that does not kill your wallet and that can dance with any dynamic headphones. It will dance with majority of planar-magnetics as well, but not so well with inefficient ones.

The amp receives my vote of confidence if you are interested in a single ended amplifier which does not want to add any coloration to your audio performance in any way and disappears as an audio component from the acoustic chain.

There is no point in mentioning the design and the quality of the construction taken to the extreme.
Impressive what was accomplished by a team of just two people, good job my friends!



Pros:

• Excellent acoustic transparency, easy extraction of micro-details
• Linear and untainted frequency response
• Pure and honest audio performance
• Crazy speed and impact
• Plenty of power for easy (IEMs) and harder (planar-magnetics) tasks
• Lack of harmonic distortion, black as the night background
• Great sound fluidity
• Extraordinary price related to impeccable performance
• A jewel like amp, built to high standards

Cons:

• It laughs at most of the single ended headphone amplifiers

Equipment used for review:

HeadAmp Gilmore Lite Mk2, Pico, Pico Power, iFi iPurifier2, Matrix X-Sabre Pro, Audio-GD Master 9, Sennheiser HD660S, Audeze LCD-4, FiiO F9 PRO

Original review posted HERE

Dear friends,

If you wonder why we have done so many reviews of Sennhseiser gear and headphones and never of the legendary HD 600 or HD 650, you have to know that we wonder the same.

All of those who followed the wonderful journey into the world of headphones inevitably bumped into and listened to the Sennheiser HD 600 or HD 650 at least once. They quickly became so popular and widespread that we considered a dedicated review unnecessary.

Sennheiser recently announced the true successor of the HD 6xx line, the new HD660S.

As a sign of repentance, we bring out the fresh review of this new model, and at the end of this article we will compare it with the predecessors HD 600 and HD650, which we’ve been using for many years now.



Built and appearance

The design is very similar to the HD 6xx line. They’re built almost completely from hard matte black plastic that won’t be a fingerprint magnet anymore. The exterior grill is still metal, with an embossed Sennheiser logo on one side.

The earpads are a bit deeper and softer, which allows for longer listening sessions.

Fresh out of the box, the clamping force of the headphones is a bit stronger, but most probably in time it will loosen at the level of the HD 600/HD 650.

What more can I say? We have the same built and design that we are familiar with for more than 26 years.

But why would you want to change something that stood the test of time with ease?

Besides the standard 3m long cable terminated in a 6.35mm jack, there is a 6.35mm to 3.5mm adapter, and an additional balanced cable terminated in a 4.4mm Pentaconn jack which is being used more and more by the leading industry. We’ve already seen this balanced connection on the new Sennheiser HDV 820 and on many of Sony’s gear and headphones. I hope others will adopt this new standard soon.


HD 660S Driver

What is truly new is the driver.

The impedance is lowered to 150 Ohm. Sennheiser are marketing these headphones as compatible with portable devices (smartphones and music players).

Honestly, I can’t imagine a way to get good dynamics or a holographic experience out of a smartphone.

Maybe the halved impedance would lead you to believe that the sensitivity is much better, but you’d be wrong. In reality the headphones are 2dB more efficient that the predecessors, so in real world tests they sound just a little bit louder.

In conclusion, I don’t recommend you to plug them directly into a smartphone, but if you add a portable amplifier to the mix, things will get radically better.


HD 600 driver

Looking through the technical specifications of the high end Sennheiser models, I see an obvious similitude to the HD 700. I even have a theory according to which Sennheiser might have had a HD 700 driver excess stock and “poof!”, the new HD 660S was born. But this is just a theory that I cannot fully prove.

I observed similarities in the dampening material behind the diaphragm and in the metal mesh behind the diaphragm. Its shape also resembles that of the HD 700.

Anyway, what is really important is that sonically HD 660S is quite different from the HD 700, which for me is a good thing.

But now let’s get to the most interesting part.



Sound quality

Well, every morning this week I lifted my mood with the album Cei Ce Ne-au Dat Nume by the Romanian rock band Phoenix.

Electrocord is not Chesky or Reference Recordings, I know, but I consider it a quality recording for 1972, from which nowadays many could learn a thing or two.

From the first notes of Negru Voda – Baladă, even though the song becomes complex very quickly, I was impressed by the precise positioning of each acoustic instrument in a distinct place.

The electric guitar, the bass guitar, the violin and the drums seem not touching each other, they don’t compete for the same space, there isn’t a struggle for which to come forward and which to be left in the background. The headphone never sound hectic or crowded.

When changing the HD 650 with the HD 660S after a non-stop 2 hour listening to the HD 650, I can feel that the veil has lifted, the mid-bass stops rattling and clipping and the harmonic distortion feels lower.

The veil that I was talking about is much more present on the old versions of HD 650 and HD 600. The new HD 650 and HD600 versions are better in the respect. Even though the manufacturer doesn’t acknowledge any changes, the changes are there, the dampening material behind the diaphragm has been modified and the new HD 650 sound cleaner and less distorted.

This problem is no longer present on the HD 660S and this is probably one of the best improvements of the new model.

In any case, if you like a slower smoother presentation, I think you’d better keep the HD 650 because it does this better.



Listening to local rock music, I noticed a much lower mid-bass and voice distortion and a quicker decay of notes, everything seems quicker and instantaneous.

Despite their well known qualities, both HD 650 and HD 600 have never been praised for their quick transients. Their sound is soft and slow, lacking in speed even paired with a fast solid state amplifier.

In this regard, the HD 660S is two levels above.

Only now I can say that HD 660S has enough speed and impact that it can rival the mid-level planar magnetic headphones.

Every cause has an effect, so the quick transients unearth hidden micro-details that the HD 650 is not capable of rendering.

Yes, the HD 660S has more resolution and clarity. It still cannot touch the HD 800 in this regard, but I’m happy that things evolved to this high level for the modest price compared to other models that we’ve reviewed.

Another positive effect is the much more precise timing.

If you carefully listen to fast electronic music on the HD 650 or HD 600, you can hear a micro-echo, like an unpleasant resonance, maybe and effect of the over-damping behind the diaphragm (again just a guess). This effect damages the delimitation of notes and each individual sound end up not being sufficiently well defined.

The HD 660 S have a more precise timing, giving the sensation that musical notes are fuller and more precise, better rounded, with a clear definition.



In the long term this could induce listening fatigue, but even so, the timing is more correct and true to reality.

Listening to the song Strunga from the album Mugur de Fluier, I notice the impressive soundstage that is well expanded in all directions.

I now realize that none of the models in the HD 6xx series, including HD 660 S, offers a convincingly large and expanded enough soundstage. The soundstage is somewhat compact and intimate, but surely not claustrophobic. I would categorize it as a medium-sized soundstage, not too large (like HD 800), but also not so close as to make me feel on the stage with the band.

In this respect, all 3 headphones are almost identical.

The depth of the soundstage is pretty good. With my eyes closed, I can walk myself through the quality recordings. On well recorded material I could never hear the sound becoming too crowded.

Interestingly, despite the fact that I don’t feel the notes flying a few meters from me, I can clearly hear the angle at which they are emitted, a good sign that the holography is in effect.

I want to mention that, from the 3 models, the HD 650 scaled the worst in this regard. I can feel myself distracted by the micro-echo and harmonic distortion in the bass and mid frequencies, and the slight veil over the notes also impairs the listening experience. By comparison, the HD 600 seems to bring a fresh breath of air and doesn’t have as many shortcomings.

Anyway, the superior precision of the HD 660 S is in effect, the model offers the most credible three-dimensional holography of the 3 models.



Frequency response

Even though the majority of the HD 650 users might say that it excels in the bass department, I am of a different opinion.

The mid-bass clearly stands out and always attracts attention on itself, continuously screaming “look a me!”.

But before we deal with the mid-bass, the lower bass is problematic, not only on the entire HD 6xx line, but also on all the open dynamic driver headphones I know.

Listening to Infected Mushroom – Return to the Sauce I can sincerely attest that it’s an extraordinary experience!

The songs Manipulator and Groove Attack put any diaphragm to the test in terms of speed, impact and bass depth.

The HD 660 S vibrates well enough on bass and the mid-bass is prominent, like with it’s predecessors.

The sub-bass though sometimes leaves to be desired. The sensible use of an equalizer can solve the problem, but I don’t recommend adding more than 4-5dB in this area because the driver can start clipping and distorting when the volume is pushed above a certain point.

To make myself fully understood, the headphone doesn’t have a severe sub-bass deficiency, some people categorizing it as bass-heavy, but you cannot understand what real sub-bass is until you give a listen to some well amplified high-end planar magnetic headphones.

I sincerely think this is the biggest drawback of these headphones, maybe the only drawback that caught my attention on the HD 660 S as well as on all other dynamic driver Sennheiser models: the sub-bass starts to distort beyond 95dB of volume. I think this problem is not even present for an untrained ear. My father still claims the HD 650 sounds crystal clear, so it depends on the listener.



The mids, oh, the sweet Sennheiser mids.

Yes, they are still here, they haven’t left. Probably the biggest virtue of these headphones is the very present mids that seem to infuse joy directly into your central nervous system.

There aren’t many headphones in this world that gave me goose bumps when listening to violins. The headphones in the HD 6xx line have always known how to do this. I cannot explain how, but they simply excel on mids and, yes, they highlight them a bit too.

What the heck! Midrange frequencies are 90% of the sounds we hear in our everyday life, so if you cannot render them properly, everything is lost.

The HD 650 and HD 600 have always been categorized as being more musical than the other models and this has been achieved through the good reproduction of the midrange.

The HD 660 S doesn’t stray from this formula.

There is although a little difference, the mids aren’t so forward as with the HD 650. The HD 660S places them only slightly forward, it doesn’t push them that hard, so it sounds more balanced, less melancholic and musical. It’s not a big difference, but is noticeable.

If you like the overly seductive character of the HD 650, maybe you should stick to it, but if you desire a more sincere sound, the HD 660 S does it much better. It doesn’t try to hide anything but also it doesn’t overemphasize anything.

In my opinion, the HD 660 S is the true reference in the HD 6xx line, with the HD 600 coming second and the HD 650 coming last, with a more colored sound.

When it comes to sound density, all 3 models are effortless. The sensation of a meaty sound, full of substance and density is best present on the HD 650 and HD 660 S.

Another cause and effect: the dryness of sound is never present. I detest dry artificial sound and luckily the HD 660 S doesn’t have this symptom.

Listening to Pink Martini and Lorena McKennit it becomes crystal clear that this kind of music was created for the HD 660 S. The warm voice simply touches your soul and the instruments become a game of the imagination.



If you listen to acoustic music, jazz or classical, the HD 660 S becomes an obvious recommendation.

The high frequencies are differently rendered on each of the 3 models.

I think that the HD 660 S handles them the best, followed by the HD 600, with the HD 650 being the last in this respect.

It’s easy to confuse clear and well defined highs with sibilant highs – one of the biggest mistakes that I see coming from some online publications. Some consider the HD 660 S to be sibilant but I tend to differ completely, I consider it having clean highs, without highlighted extremities.

The highs presented themselves clean and airy, with a good balance between technical show-off and naturalness. The highs are somewhere in the middle, not overly natural, but also not overly bright and sibilant.

The HD 600 has less airy and less detailed highs than the HD 660 S, and the HD 650 has the most washed out highs of the 3 models, sometimes the high registers being placed in the background.

As a whole, the frequency response appear to be the most correct and complete on the HD 660 S. Yes, they’re a little more neutral from the midrange upward, but they never sound boring for their price category.

Talking about the price, the HD 660s being a new model, at the beginning of the life cycle, 500 EUR seems to be a reasonable price for what they are. The HD 650 had the same release price. At the moment the HD 650 can be bought for much less than the official original price, but let’s not forget that they’re 14 years old, it’s just normal to be much cheaper now.

If you already have the HD 650 or the HD 600, it’s hard for me to recommend something that is a bit better. You have to give them a listen and decide for yourselves.

If you don’t have any of the HD 6xx series models, then HD 660 S becomes a much easier recommendation. If you want the best model of the HD 6xx line, the HD 660 S is that model. If you’re on a tight budget and you want the best for your buck, then the HD 650 and HD 600 come on top as the best recommendation.



Amplification

Like I told you, the HD 660 S is only 2dB more sensitive than the HD 650 and HD 600, so the halved impedance has very little impact on this.

Maybe Sennheiser would suggest that you can drive this headphone directly out of a smartphone, but I consider it an April’s Fools Day joke. This headphone need the cleanest possible amplification and, of course, a dedicated one. I’ve managed excellent results with an Audio GD Master 9, and also with a HeadAmp Pico Power, and even with the ordinary Pico. The headphone simply comes alive, the dynamics raises your pulse, it’s a completely different story with dedicated amplification.

Out of curiosity, I connected them to a dedicated mid-range DAP, FiiO X3 MKIII, on the single ended 3.5mm and it sounded more than decent. The headphone came alive even on the little X3. The high-end players would surely deliver even more performance.

The myth of amplifying the HD 660 S with a smartphone is now busted!



Comparisons

VS HD 650

The HD 650 loses the tonal balance quickly, overemphasizing the mid-bass and cutting out the high treble. The overly forward mids crowd the soundstage a little bit, the sound becomes a bit claustrophobic, especially on bad mastered music. The HD 650 sounds a bit slower and veiled, the definition of musical notes is less outlined and a micro-echo comes to the mix, together with a bothering distortion.

All of these disadvantages aren’t present on the HD 660 S.

VS HD 600

It’s funny that even if, from my understanding, the HD 660 S is meant to replace the HD 650, the HD 660 S resembles the HD 600 more than the HD 650.

The highs are similar on both models, with the HD 660 S winning in the very high registers, where you can still hear new details out of the background.

The mids again are very similar, with the HD 660 S being a bit cleaner and better defined. I can hear the string vibration and the decay of the vibration more clearly, the HD 600 masking these subtle details.

The bass is a different story. The HD 600 has a weaker bass and the HD 660 S has a deeper and faster bass. The bass is the only area where the harmonic distortion can become a problem, especially if you tweak the EQ too much. The HD 660 S scales much better in this regard, offering a lowered harmonic distortion in this area.



Conclusion

If you liked the HD 650 and the HD 600, it’s impossible not to like the new HD 660 S.

I’ve seen opinions according to which the HD 660 S is inferior to the HD 650 model, but I couldn’t figure out what they are based on.

Maybe if you like a more lazy, relaxed and less dynamic sound with less detail, then yes, the HD 650 can bring exactly this to the table.

The built quality is already well known for 26 years. The matte black color is welcome, as well as the 2 cables in the box. I hope other manufacturers will adopt the new Pentaconn 4.4mm balanced jack. I think this is the future of balanced connection; we’ll live and see.

The official price seems correct, exactly the price of the HD 650 14 years ago. If we factor in for inflation, they can be considered cheap for the current year.

In my opinion, the legend continues with HD 660 S, being a fierce contender in its price category.

Equipment used for review:
Sennheiser HD660S, HD650, HD600, Matrix Audio X-Sabre Pro, iFi iPurifier2, Audio-GD Master 9, Audeze LCD-4, FiiO X3 MKIII, HeadAmp Pico & Pico Power
Original review posted Here