I am a big fan of dongles as I have a super busy life with work and kids and I am not using proper desktop amps and DACs anymore. I need simple and quick solutions. I was maybe the first adopter that used a dragonfly 1.2 with the first android version that could support usb audio back in 2015 when nobody back then knew and discussed about them.

Also, my needs changed with time as from a speakers user became by necessity a headphone lover. I acquired many headphones throughout all these years but I developed a particular passion for the whole Sennheiser 6 series and I am impressed also with my elex. All these headphones are suffering when they are driven with underpowered sources and shine when they are driven by a good source. Obviously, loudnesses alone is not a criterion to judge a dac/amp. It is surreal how a good headphone like 6XX can be transformed to a legendary one when is driven properly.

With the first generation of dongles you were struggling to really tell the difference by using a dongle or not. The first revolution came with the second generation of dongles like KA3 which started using amps on top of DACs in order to improve the sound. The KA3 was a revelation in an unbelievable price driving some of the 6 series on another level but had two main issues. It was too clinical and bright and had no physical volume buttons to fine tune the loudness, a real issue in my case.

The KA5 was a definite improvement in terms of functionality but not always in terms of sound. It drives wonderfully my 660s that needs a lot of thumb in the bass area but it does not give the kick in the butt that the ess chip inside KA3 gave to the old guard of senns, namely 600,650,6XX and 58X.

When fiio asked for feedback and while everyone asking for the cirrus logic chips I wanted just a good implementation of an ESS chip that will be tamed and not be bright. In the past and in an other thread I asked for a new endgame dongle that will have the following elements:

1) ESS chip but tamed so not to be bright or too clinical.
2) Best value op-amps to imitate desktop amp behaviour as much as possible
3) Physical buttons for fine tuning volume while iPhone volume to be controlled solely by these buttons as ibasso dongles usually do
4) Some re-clocking and cleaning power supply abilities for eliminating jitter and improving sound quality
5) Xmos usb controller (as for example in go bar)
6) Affordable price

It seems that fiio was listening and implemented most if not all of my suggestions and some more:

1) They used 2 flagship ESS chips that have one of the smoothest treble I have heard and not only from an ess chip but from any other dac chips
2) THX amps
3) Physical buttons but I do not believe that the ibasso behaviour is implemented properly yet or if any was intended at all
4) Oscillators, LO filters and some isolation of the boards for clean power supply as much as possible
5) Xmos controller
6) Same price with the KA5 (in the U.K. at least)

On top of that fiio implemented some additional stuff with most notable the idea of a desktop mode:

1) Desktop mode from the main usb-c power supply
2) Desktop mode by using a second usb-c power supply
3) A second usb-c for a using an independent power source

These additions implemented from fiio were first implement in the KA13 but I was not very much interested since I have not seen any upgrade for the op amps there. But when fiio announced the ka17 I immediately asked them for a review unit as I was thrilled to see that they have implemented some of my wishes from my previous posts and survey feedback.

To make the long story short the KA17 delivers in a spectacular way. It is a revolution to the second generation of dongles, like KA3 and KA5, which in turn were a revolution to the dongles before them.

I have tested KA17 with the following headphones:

HD660s2, Elex, HD660s, HD58X and 4XX.

They all sound magnificent scaled up from a dongle like never heard them before. The KA5 in comparison seems to have more bass but this I believe an illusion as the bass is more in comparison to the other frequencies and dominate the sound signature. The treble seems more but is piercing in comparison with the KA17. This is again because the proportions of the ingredients, frequencies in this case, are not balanced fully.

The KA17 has considerably more space, vertical and horizontal, has more spacious and lush mids that extend wonderfully into the space, like a desktop system, and integrates the bass and the treble in a harmonious and proportionate way. Nothing stands out without reason. In the songs that the bass stands out, the bass stands out. It is not everywhere looking to overcompensate for something.

The treble is gloriously so smooth and by the virtue of being smooth you are able to increase the loudness in levels you could not do before. In that way, you increase the information because everything is louder, the mids, the space, the soundstage, the details, the voices and whatever else stands between you and the music.

I tried to A-B test between the KA3, KA5 and KA17 with my 660s2 and finished my comparison after 10 minutes. In desktop mode, there is nothing to compare really. The KA3 challenge the KA5 but both of them they cannot even come close to KA17. Even the numbering is correct although that i am sure was not intended. From level 3 to level 5 and then by virtue of the desktop mode to level 17.

Given all the tricks that are implemented in this dongle is difficult to attribute exactly where all this improvement exactly comes from. But the sound many times reminded me the moment when I have changed to the Burson op-amp for my little bear. The sound has this crispiness which comes usually from a good designed opamp.

These differences are not revealed only for 660s2 but also for all the other headphones. Particularly the 58X was scaled like never before and the difference was apparent by playing movies in Netflix. I never heard 4XX playing music so nice, that was also an unexpected shocking revelation.

However as I heard rumours in the past that similar planars (400se) burned amps like xcan I would be hesitant to rely exclusively to a non-desktop source for driving planars in long listening sessions. I have a feeling no matter the omhs reading that my 4XX headphones need a nuclear reactor next to them to in order to feel happy.

I did not test KA17 with my 6XX and 600 as these are located in the other side of the Europe currently but I have tested them excessively with my Elex and 660s. And while I have not formed a permanent opinion yet I believe that because of the KA17 I can say that the order of happiness for me is: 660s2 > Elex > 660s.

It is the KA17 greatness that reveals and magnifies the subtle but rather important improvement in the quality of s2 against s1 and slots it right above the impressiveness of the Elex.

From the other hand, the KA17 magnifies the spaciousness of the Elex placing it in an other dimension where the soundstage is transformed from a 3D presentation to a holographic 5D one. The sound is enveloping you from any direction in an ethereal and surreal way. I was never paying attention to soundstage as I am keen to musicality first but here is difficult to not take notice. Again the system clearly resembles and imitates, as much as possible, a desktop system as it was the intention in first place.

All in all, in terms of sound quality this is a revolution as it resembles, as much as possible, a desktop system. For serious headphones this is a game changer in the category of dongles and given the price a very potent giant killer.

In terms of functionalities, there are some issues regarding the software as this is not behaving like the KA5 anymore. In the current version the button mutes/unmutes and does not pause/play songs and none of the settings can be manipulated from the fiio app anymore. It is not clear at the moment if this is a bug or a permanent limitation. Instead the app is focused on the eq settings that I am not particularly interested and I did not tested them extensively. It seems that they lower the sound level overall and I do not want them as I am NOT relying in EQ.

There are a bunch of filter options but not my favourite NOS, as this is not offered by ESS, however by changing the filters momentarily I kind of feel the change in the sound briefly maybe because the KA17 is so revealing. But I did not want to do a thorough testing mainly because there 8 filters and so many permutations to testing, comparing also to the filters of the other dongles. With my available free time it would take me around 30 years to finish the review so I have focused in other areas instead.

I tested with 4 different phones and one iPad with the following results:

1) Iphone 15 pro max, Samsung A52s and galaxy note 10 plus - full desktop mode with the main usb c port.
2) iPad Pro 12.9 first generation. No Desktop mode with main port. Desktop mode with the additional port.
3) iPhone pro max 12. It needs two ports to play. Then it plays with both two modes.

The best quality was with an iOS device, using desktop mode with the Apple camera adapter and by using a jitterbug between the main port. The second usb cable was connected to the second port of the KA17 directly and by using Apple Music in lossless mode.

This is probably for many reasons including obviously that Apple Music plays best with Apple devices and with the signal unaltered to the KA17 as ios is designed to behave. I have not heard a lot with the 15 pro Max though because it belongs to my wife. In any case, the future lies with the usb c mode.

Initially, I could not control the volume of the iPhone with the phone buttons but this behaviour miraculously changed at some point. So I am not sure what it was intended here. Still I believe that the best choice is what ibasso implements currently i.e. full control of the volume from the dongle for the ios devices.

The size of KA17 is greater than the size of KA5 and this is to be expected for the additional technology incorporated in such a small device. Initially I prefered the design language of KA3 and KA5 better but after a few days I find the ka17 more beautiful and also this design hide its size very cleverly. In addition, I prefer the back that is aluminium and not glass as I do not see any benefit for the back to be glass. The screen is better and the buttons are more comfortable and the change in volume is much easier due to better buttons and additional space.

The devise gets very hot with the desktop mode as expected and sometimes I am taking it out of the leather case in order to breath and cool. More or less the size is comparable with the go bar and is really a small compromise given the sound quality of this devise. If someone has different needs can try a smaller dongle as they are plenty out there.

I believe that the extra usb port opens new dimensions to this category of usb-c dongle dacs. Given the set up someone can add a battery, an audiophile power supply or some gadgets like ipurifier and jitterbugs to play with. Can preserve the battery of his phone and enjoy for hours in the desktop mode which elevates the sound in another dimension.

I really do not know what I expect to see from a dongle in the future. I am not sure if a knob volume control can implement correctly and practically although some companies already tried that but I believe there will always be an inherent limitation given the size and the shape of a dongle. Position the usb ports to the side maybe and the knob where the main port is now??? I do not know.

Even better op-amps and performance? Fine tuning of technology with Femto clocks and cleaner power supply? No clue.

Small nano-tubes for more organic sound??? Haha no way. Some of that stuff can be emulated from appropriate software I believe. I have converted to DSD on the fly with audirvana in the past and the sound is quite different but still you need a powerful transparent amp to portray the difference.

And although proper desktop amps like Vioelectrics and etc. are not going to be threaten any time soon, the truth of the matter is that further significant improvements from now on, change the map as start to question directly the existence of entire product categories such as transportable dac-amps and daps.

Finally, one can not avoid to mention the most important fact. That all of this goodness comes in an really affordable price tag which is fully respectful for the client. 125£ including the leather case, the same price with my KA5 which did not include a leather case. Of course, fiio dongle prices were always decent KA2, KA3, etc. and I guess it pays for fiio to play the long game as I have all of them. If the price is right I see a reason to have them all.

All in all, this is a revolutionary dongle in a revolutionary price. Moreover, I like fiio's attitude that really listens to customers, make surveys and tries her best to satisfy our demands. I am very happy that a lot of our requests are implemented and implemented correctly. This is a fabulous product that after few minutes of use raise only two main questions:

1) Should you buy the black or the blue version?
2) Should you buy both?

Viva La Revolution!!!

Usually I am not doing reviews except for the products I am interested to buy for myself.

I find the price of go link exceptionally reasonable and normally I would not ask for a review unit but as I could not find one back in Xmas to buy I asked for a review unit to have it as soon as possible. When eventually I found it to buy in Amazon myself ifi have managed to sent me one and thus I have the obligation to do a review now.

I am fan of ifi products I have a few of them and I like the company a lot. I find usually their products to have good synergy with my favourite headphones which the 6## line of sennheisser.

I am also a fan of dongles as I have a super busy life with work and kids and I am not using proper desktop amps and DACs anymore. I need simple and quick solutions. I was one of the first early adopters that used a dragonfly 1.2 with the first android version that could support usb audio back in 2014 or 2015 I think and nobody in forums back then knew and discussed their inherent limitations.

Then the small DACs and Bluetooth amps became a thing like the xDSD, xcan and the rest. These are great and I have reviewed these products in the past in this forum.

As Apple Music made the leap to lossless I found Bluetooth not enough anymore, never being a fan anyway, so the need for a simple and audiophile usb solution is more prominent than ever.

The fashion now is to use usb dongles and they are coming by dozens a day as it seems. From the new generation of usb dongles I bought the KA3 before even ifi presented a product in this category.

It was recommended to me from a great reviewer and friend and I like it very much although some times I find it a bit bright. Then the go bar was presented and I immediately asked one for a review and it was great but I find it expensive for my budget and my purpose as I have budget and simple headphones among them the following:

Meze 99 Neo and Classics,

HD58X, HD6XX, HD660s

4XX and

Koss 30.

I am listening mostly to music with my 58X and just recently bought the 660s. But when I was buying a dongle was to match and drive my 58X mainly.

Because the go bar was a bit expensive for my taste but because I like its smooth presentation I have decided to buy the KA2 as a cheap alternative (have the same brand chip : CS). I thought that the smoothness maybe was originated by the Cirrus Logic chip that both these devices use.

However I was wrong because although KA2 is smoother than KA3 still has this aggressiveness to treble that bothers me from time to time.

Then ifi unexpectedly presented the go link a very cheap alternative to go bar so I immediately jumped to buy it. The ibasso came later as I read again a glorious review and I find the price reasonable too.

Therefore, I will compare the go link among these rivals.

The go link is the smallest of the bunch a little bit larger than an iPhone or android adapter. It has one ESS dac chip and it is s-balanced. It has all the adapters needed in the box. Nothing extra to purchase.

I do not know the technicalities of the s-balanced but if you use a s-balanced adapter with a balanced cable to an unbalanced 3.5 input you listen only from the left side with my other dongles. I tried by mistake and this is what happened. Only in ifi products I can hear from both sides with this specific adapter. And yes in my case with my 58x makes a difference.

I find my 6XX and 58X quite thick and dull with the original cable (not the 660s though) so I found in the past that with both these headphones a nice but cheap aftermarket balanced cable makes a more than noticeable difference. Is great for me to use my 58x without changing the cable. The s-balanced cover almost half the distance between balanced and unbalanced. The balanced output of KA3 and KA2 keep the full advantage of the balanced configuration while DC03 pro has none.

The KA3 can drive the 58x better from the fully balanced output as the sound is amazing and in some genres like AC/DC I even prefer it to the go bar. I believe this is because of the op amps that the KA3 has. I found that in every device like xcan, xDSD and little bear (even rolling op amps there) that use some kind of op amps to make really a difference to headphones like 6##. A different quality level especially for rock songs. But the KA3 and op amps in general consume a lot of energy so is not like an ideal mobile dongle situation. If I have an hour to listen after the kids go to sleep, you put the dongle and enjoy a bit and that is. Also the aggressiveness of the ess chip implemented there does not allow you to listen for many hours.

The KA2 is using less energy has great bass but still is aggressive and is only for balanced headphones.

The ibasso DC03 is a hit and miss story. There where times that I do not notice that is even there (with my android phones) and sometimes is amazing (with my iPhone) where everything is controlled by the volume buttons of the device. Suits well my 660s which I find sometimes very aggressive and very different than both my 58X and 6XX. It has a more smooth and easy going character that suits some situations well but sometimes gets a bit dull.

On the other hand, the go link is the amazing little device that do almost everything great and sometimes do things that they are not expected. It has an ESS chip which is very energetic but never aggressive. Can be organic at times and then punchy some other times.

The biggest surprise for me was last night when I used them with my 6XX and koss 30. Two headphones that have similar tonality according to me.

It could drive adequately the 6XX and in a fun and interesting way (I am not saying that scales them like a 2000 tube amp here…) having not to envy much even from my xdsd!!!

I remember from my xCan review that ifi implementation of ESS chip has tremendous synergy with the 6XX headphone. At least in my case and with an android phone that does not have the iPhone battery limitations. A playmaker is a playmaker but when occasionally can play the number 5 position and win the game then he is simply…Magic!

And just by accident I decided yesterday to try my koss 30 with the go link….What…What…was that??? Almost surreal 59£+27£…What… what combination is that??? The new generation does not know how lucky and privileged is nowadays in audiophile terms. In my days back in university I was paying a fortune for a crappy sounding SONY minidisc with few crappy discs and nowadays … your phone + subscription + 59£ + 27£ or whatever budget headphone you like and you are in heaven. We might have destroyed the planet for them but they are in good hands in audiophile terms…

The biggest negative for me is the absence of an app to control the volume as this is very difficult to fine tune the volume when using streaming services. Although the FiiO have apps that change filters and gain none of them has volume control. Only ibasso is the king here with both the app and the physical buttons.

Another negative for me is the light which is too bright in a dark room. I turn the device opposite to me where in comparison ibasso has a much smoother light.

All the other negatives of the go link they are no negatives really but limitations of the cost bracket and the size of the device. Yes sure I want volume buttons yes sure I want detachable cable yes I want two DACs and two opams but this is not what this device is for.

I have to say though that all the 4 devices mentioned in this review are great and for the price you cannot go wrong whatever device among them you choose. It depends if you want iems, you want balanced, s-balanced low consumption or whatever else. I am happy that I have all of them.

The go link is the most versatile and the absolute no brainer one of the group. And it sounds amazing with an absolutely reasonable battery consumption.

The go link is not a giant killer and it was not designed to be. Is one of the most affordable DAC dongles out there with an amazing true audiophile sound. All the technology for eliminating jitter in the digital time domain is there. You will feel it bit by bit and now only for 59£.

Even the iPhone adapter is there for you not to spend a minute on the internet and keep looking for one or paying money essentially just for shipping. I paid 17£ the previous time for my KA3. Although I have to say that for IOS products nothing is like to connect your DAC with the original Apple usb 3.0 adapter in sound quality wise terms no matter how much inconvenient they are.

All in all, it seems nowadays that…

Money for nothing and DACs for free…

First I feel the need to apologise to ifi audio for the delay of this review. The last 3 years I am awfully busy with one million things and this why I refused in the past to do any more reviews. I thought that I will have some time this summer when my family is away to do a review but nonetheless I was even more busy than ever. However, I asked to do one more review because I am in love with dongles and with the ifi audio sound and simply I could not resist to not listen their new dongle.

I believe that I am one among of the very first early adopters of using dongle dacs with mobile phones. Many years ago I had a google nexus 5 device (2013) and the audio was inferior to my previous iPhone 4s. The first time that google supported audio with an external dac through a software update I went and bought the dragonfly version 2 which was like the king of dongles at that time. Unfortunately, the sound quality was completely underwhelming (and the battery consumption over the roof) and no one was discussing the fine details of using this dongle with android or phones in general. No forums and discussion for that kind of things. I bought also the dacmagic Cambridge Audio small dongle dac with the same results. Later on, two new dragonfly dacs that were specifically made for mobiles and iPhones (black and red) appeared in the market but I was so undesisive choosing between the two that I ended up buying none.

Then, I spend my time with the Xdsd and my favourite Xcan that I forgot my passion with the usb dongles. Although, I truly loved my xCan I never been really in love with Bluetooth audio and it was always for me a compromised relationship which was accepted due to the convenience factor only. Thereafter, I was busy and I did not have time for this hobby anymore I stopped my tidal subscription which I did not use and stay with my Apple Music only for convenience. I experimented briefly with the BTR5 using it as a dongle dac (a mere justification to buy it in very good price) but I was underwhelmed once again (using it as a dongle dac because otherwise is a decent device).

Apple changed the game again with offering lossless with Apple Music and although I have and use an old iPhone 6s Plus (because it has a headphone jack) I wanted again what I really love: a simple good dongle dac for superior usb audio (until according to my wildest predictions Apple returns the headphone jack in one of their premium phones sometime …at the end of this decade…maybe). I did not want to spend a lot of cash since I have no much spare time at all and after the advise of my friend hxos I bought the FiiO KA3.

The KA3 is a very good dac and I believe very underestimated on these forums. It could be a giant killer but unfortunately for me it only could. For my taste it gets bright and very aggressive at some times. It lacks this organic smoothness that I was used from listening my ifi audio DACs especially the Burr brown based ones. It has a bite though that usually sabre DACs have and reminded me an experimental combination that I have used in the past: the dragonfly v1.2 with ipurifier3 (not practical for mobile use but interesting test, see more details in my ipurifier3 review). It suits a lot of music like AC/DC.

Therefore, when ifi audio announced at last a DAC dongle I was ecstatic and begged on my knees for a review sample. I have refused in the past to review even the Diablo due to my limited time but now I was requesting for the go bar review sample because it is a really special device for me. A usb dongle dac from my favourite company. I did not want to review the gold (too much for me, I can never afford to buy) but only the cheaper sibling.

My first impression is that this is a different dna from the burr brown dac. Many may disagree and I do not say this is day and night different but this sound signature is somewhat different from all other ifi audio DACs in the past. I used to use an ifi audio ione (the bargain of the century in audio according to me) with my living room set up so I have listened to the burr brown every day through music and movies. Thus, I can extravagantly say that I know burr brown so well that is running through my veins.

The go bar is not like that. Is still organic and very clean, never aggressive or bright: attributes of ifi audio signature but is not like burr brown exactly. It is even more clean than burr brown. It is the most clean audio I have even heard the most pure of all, the most black background ever. Pure silence. It suits well classical music but it’s suits perfect instrumental and acoustic music that needs a super clean background.

I offered a food analogy in the past characterising the burr brown tasting as grilled fish and the sabre of xcan as a steak. In the same spirit I can say that the go bar is the raw oysters of DACs. It is almost tasteless but the same time so finely delicious and gourmet.

On this context, this super clean background is not utilised when you listen for example live concerts of AC/DC. I mean there is so much noise in the recording by virtue so this blackness and pureness is not needed so much any more. Someone can prefer instead the bite of a more “dirty” DAC (including me). Is a matter of preference of course.

I would say battery consumption is acceptable given that the majority of testing happened with my beloved 58x cans. I am such a fan of sennheiser 6 series and given that it does not make sense for me to buy the 660s right now the 58x play the role of the best proxy. The go bar plays well and drives well both 58x and 6xx but it does not have that special combination with them as the xdsd and particularly xcan used to have. The go bar suits everything well and have no favourite kids.

Although, I was not impressed immediately when I used the go bar with the 58x as I was with the xcan, the fact is that is difficult to go back. Apple Music is nowadays cd quality and above and the limitations of the Bluetooth start to bite. An A to B comparison shows who is the new boss on the block.

I like the design a lot, reminds me the first ifi audio products design language, it hides the size and only by comparison with KA3 you realise the size, is as much as lightweight to be practical and only the lights in the back are tiny especially for someone with presbyopia is a nightmare to understand what is doing what. I would prefer something like dragonfly uses, a bigger light that change too many colours for indicating the bitrate in use. The buttons and the functionalities are superb. No app, no bs straight to the point. The cables are amazing unfortunately you cannot buy them separately.

So what are the disadvantages? For me mainly the price. This is subjective of course because for some people this is no serious money but for me currently is. And this is the reason I would not buy it at this time. I hope, wish and I propose to them to make a cheaper version, throw out the iematch function for people that do not use it. BTW I did not test imatch at all since I have no usage currently but I have reviewed it in the past so if you want my opinion you can see my relevant reviews here in headfi. I have no reason to believe that it will work differently here inside the go bar. I would also recommend ifi to do a dongle if possible with a different dac and experiment also with various op amps combinations. I would like to see not only a cheaper version but also a little more bite and soul for some genres.

In conclusion, I will cut half a star only for the price. It may seems cruel to such a stellar device and some say unfair because is connected to my budgetary limitations but I want to keep this little half star to differentiate somehow from some other ifi audio devices that they are not only stellar but an absolute bargain. As oysters cannot be afford easily from everyone similarly the go bar is NOT an absolute steal as other ifi audio devices at least not for me. Nevertheless, I will be so sad tomorrow when I pack it up and say goodbye, I will definitely miss it…

In this review, I need to divert a bit. This is because ipurifier 3 is a special product; in comparison with a headphone for which we all know its purpose, ipurifier 3 is special product for which we first need to answer if we need a gadget like this at all. So my review will focus more to what a product like this can contribute to the audio chain rather than how compares with other similar products which actually there are not so many available in the market.

So a potential buyer of ipurifier 3 needs to answer two important questions:

1. Bits are bits ? Do any of these devices improve anything or only the pockets of their manufacturers? Given that we take an appropriate answer to this question we can proceed with the question below:
   
   
2. Does this particular device improves anything or is just snake oil? OK All bits are not the same but is this device actually doing something useful or we need something more expensive and exotic?

Let's elaborate more regarding the first question given my personal experience:

Many years ago, at the dawn of this century, I bought my first real budget audiophile system for speakers. The source was a Philips dvd player feeding my marantz home theater amp through a coaxial cable. For my music I used only CDs as nothing else was really available at the time and I was really happy with the result. However, I did not enjoy it as I would like since I needed to change continents for my graduate studies and I could not take this system with me. Many years late, I returned back to Europe and I had to build a system from scratch. The technology radically changed so I wanted to base everything in digital form and internet stream since convenience was the key for me.

My understanding at that time was that bits are bits and as long files are of good quality FLACs and a digital cable connects directly to my home theater AMP/ DAC combo everything should be fine. My system potential is defined by the amp and the speakers. My source was chosen based on convenience reasons. It was a western digital TV (initially the second version). It was a breakthrough device at the time in terms of convenience. A Two terabytes hard drive connected to it full of movies and music was all that was needed. And although the picture quality coming from this machine was astonishing the sound was anything but. I really could not understand the reason at the time. But the WD produced a mediocre sound even from the full FLAC files that was an exact copy of the cd. However, I had no clear explanation why this is happening and how I can fix this mediocre sound without buying a cd player which I really did not want to do. It was like returning back to the stone age in terms of convenience.

Later on, I bought the Marantz 6005pm amp and I had only two choices to connect digital: through optical or coaxial input. I had my TV connected through optical where all the accessories are connected with HDMI. Apple TV, fire stick, wd TV, and the HD recorder. I was only missing the usb audio input. After looking around in 2014, I discovered a device that was discontinued at that year. The NuForce 192kHz/24bit USB converter. It can take the usb signal from the computer and asynchronously convert it to an optical or coaxial signal for my marantz amplifier which has also a DAC from cirrus logic. As it was discontinued I found it for just 50£ in comparison with the original price which I think was 200£. I wanted to give a try for that money in order to be be able to connect my pc to my amp just for fun reasons and play around with various software music players. I was not hoping to improve audio or anything. I just wanted to be able to choose music from laptop for my home system with an acceptable quality. Any option I used until then had mediocre results at best. Airplay through my apple tv, Spotify app through my firestick, Spotify through my WDTV live even a bluedac audiophile Bluetooth adapter everything produced my music in an unassuming way nothing similar with my memories from my cd system ages ago.

It took literally two minutes after connecting my crappy netbook (and later my iPad air) to the NuForce usb adapter and from there to my marantz amplifier to get completely shocked. From the first song the notes went deep, the bits had rhythm everything sounded so involving reminded me the glorious days of my first system based on CDs. Spotify sounded glorious like never before and even my 320 MP3 files through foobar were absolutely mesmerising. I became a usb asynchronous convert and fanatic right there. Still cannot forget this feeling and I will always be a usb audio die hard fan, no matter what, based on that experience only.

So to answer the first question I have to say only this: if all bits are the same then I would use a WDTV and a firestick and nothing ever again. My wife would be much happier and my life much more simple. Nothing can compare to this convenience and even slightly better results would not worth it to spend an extra minute or penny. For better or worse, bits are not all the same, some arrive in right time some are not and this make all the difference in the world. Nowadays, the above conclusion is quite evident, youtube and forums are all well informed about this and nothing is shocking regarding the above conclusion. But it was not always like that. If you search on youtube you will find a lot of professionals that were puzzled back in the day and could not understand why usb audio was sounding so much inferior to the old good CD technology.

As a result, new devices start appearing from some niche audio companies that were reclocking the signal in some kind of asynchronous mode, cleaning the power supply coming through the usb or doing some similar things. Some were very expensive some more reasonably priced. One very reasonable priced device is the audioquest jitterbug of course. It is a passive device, is not recloking anything just passively cleans some noise from the system but at 40£ is a no brainer tweak. I instantly bought it and never regret it but it is one of these improvements that sometimes notice sometimes not. It improved my dragonfly v1.2 a lot but it was nothing comparable with the revolution that the asynchronous NuForce started before.


It was at that time that I was looking to buy a similar device in order to improve things in my audio chain. I was pretty happy with my asynchronous usb solution but as I was coming tired from work I wanted something to work with my other more flexible solutions as I did not wanted to deal always with a cable from my sofa to the amp. And I was spending all my day in front of a PC I just did not want to have to deal with a PC anymore.

I read many reviews about the wyred 4 sound products. They had one recovery solution for usb, another one for spdif and one for Bluetooth. All together around 1000£ and the spdif one almost 400£. This is a lot for money for me especially for a product that I am not sure of how much benefit it can provide. In comparison my marantz amplifier is costing only 300£ and my fabulous tannoy speakers I got them on offer for only 250£ a ridiculous price. It is at that time where I discovered ifi audio for first time with their spdif ipurifier device. Still it was costing half my marantz amplifier but at least it was a price that I could afford. In addition, I liked its form a lot. You could stick it in the coaxial input of the Marantz amp the only problem was that you need to use the included ipower since there is no power passing from the spdif signal. So considering that an ipower is 50£ I could say that the real cost of the spdif ipurifier is around 100£. So the first time I encountered the ipurifier technology was in the spdif form.

I need to emphasize that I experienced firstly this technology in the spdif form because it simply means I experienced this technology in my living room system with my TV. This is s very important point because I know my TV system very good. I spent countless hours watching movies and their associated soundtracks, music and every sound that my TV produces every night. So when I see a big difference I know. I do not need blind tests or anything else. I simply know because I have seen countless movies and spend countless hours on TV on the same system from various sources. It just took few moments to realise the jaw dropping results in one of the x-men movies in the first time. When a movie sounds so much better then you know that this is not a placebo effect because simply you did not have any high expectations for the movies. The sound effects from the movie were simply amazing was like watching 1080p in comparison to SD. Every sound was so much better even the menu clicks from the Amazon firestick. But in order this staggering result to be achieved two preconditions are essential:

1. Your system to havel potential i.e. good speakers and a very good amp
   
   
2. Your system to have unrealised potential i.e. the system not to be fully optimised. No perfect cables, the source to not be perfect and the set up to not be perfectly matched.

The second point simply means that If the system is fully optimised the ipurifier technology (reclocking technology) has nothing to improve. As an analogy imagine a formula 1 car. If the tires are done then the new tyres will make all the difference. But if the car has new tyres nothing is achieved by changing to new set of tyres just for the sake of it. However, the thing with TVs and the optical signal is that is never optimised. Moreover, sources like apple tv and Amazon firestick they are made without any audiophile consideration and any recloking of their audio signal has a detrimental effect. Obviously, you need good speakers and a good amplifier to take advantage of this new reclocked signal. Afterall, a formula one car is a formula one car even if it cannot turn a corner with destroyed tyres.

So actually what we have in the ipurifier marketing terminology is some kind of reclocking technology of the audio signal for the perfect timing that one and zeros arriving to the DAC. There are also some extra stuff like in the spdif version there is some galvanic isolation and in the usb version the cleaning of the noise in the power signal that usually travels through the usb wire. So someone can see the ipurifier terminology as the marketing analogy of the retina moniker found in apple displays. As retina means higher ppi associated with a great display in general, ipurifier means a higher quality audio stream associated with better sound quality.

Therefore, the spdif ipurifier answers the second question in a clear way. This technology, under the appropriate circumstances not only works but also makes miracles. The question then is how much unrealised potential your system has. Actually to me, ipurifier technology is what defines ifi audio in general. Their DACs are amazing but this is partly because all of them use some kind of this technology. In other words, as apple nowadays is using retina displays of various levels in most of its products, ifi audio uses ipurifier (reclocking) technology in most of its DAC products of various levels. So according to them xDSD has ipurifier 1 level technology where ipurifier 3 (surprise surprise) has level 3!

Usb is a bit different story. Many DACs nowadays they are designed properly, have some kind of recloking technology mostly being asynchronous and some even use better power supplies. Moreover, people use audiophile audio streamers that have femto clocks, good power supply and generate low noise while streaming just to keep the audio signal integrity intact. So depending on your system the potential might be already mostly optimised.

For example, currently my living audio chain starts with the ipower providing clean power supply to my usbridge streamer and there through a jitterbug the signal ends up on the fabulous ifi audio ione DAC with ipurifier 1 level technology and then analogue to my amplifier. So the system is pretty much optimised. Ipower provides very clean power supply (for a reasonable priced switching power adapter with high WAF) to usbridge, then usbridge cleans the power even further through some filtering stages and reclocks the signal before sending it to ione for a further reclocking. In addition, ione has the same cleaning power abilities that ipower uses so we have a final power filtering at the end. So to be honest I believed that ipurifier 3 on my chain would be quite an overkill. This is the reason I asked for usb A version as it would be more interesting to see what the ipurifier 3 can do to my dragonfly v1.2 and the xDSD.

Based on the analysis provided above I expected ipurifier 3 to make a difference with my dragonfly but not with my xDSD. I assumed at the time that since xDSD has an ipurifier technology of some sort the results would be not material. I was curious to see however if the dragonfly could play as good as my xDSD thought. This is because to my mind ipurifier technology is one the main things that defines ifi audio as a brand (one other being their infamous burr brown DAC). I attribute much of their DAC success and sound quality on their ipurifier technology.

But unfortunately for most of my testing days I did a mistake. Ipurifier usb A version means a usb A version output. Still has a usb B input. This is because most of the usb audio inputs are of type B and most audiophiles have probably decent usb A to usb B cables. I don't. I have one 3 meters 7£ from Amazon which is quite decent I think and a short one from a 10£ raspberry pi hub which probably is of 10 cents value. As I did not know at the moment where the Amazon cable is located in my house and as it was very long for this particular job I opted and used the very cheap one. I thought at the end that it doesn't really matter. Because I have the ipurifier 3 on the endpoint before the DAC so everything will be corrected/remedied from the ipurifier 3 therefore the quality of the cable does not really matter in this case. I was completely wrong.

So most of my testing compromised because of this mistake. I did not notice any big difference in my main rig by adding ipurifier 3 with this crappy cable. Similarly, I did notice any difference by using ipurifier 3 in combination directly with my xDSD. I noticed thought a difference by using it between my surface book and my dragonfly v1.2. Simply my dragonfly v1.2 started sounding more close to an ifi audio DAC which means much better than before. Also, I tried to use it with my mobile devices both iOS and Android related but I could not. At that point in time I had only the small usb 2.0 adaptor from Apple which cannot simultaneously accept a power supply. The ipurifier 3 is simply drawing too much power for my mobile devices including my android phone. That was a shame because actually I am not using my laptop for music unless I need to test something. It is so much more convenient and less stressful for me to use an iPad air next to my bed connected to a usb DAC so that was a missed opportunity. I wish to have at that time the other adapter from Apple (usb 3.0) that simultaneously accepts power (and by the way sounds much better ) in order to test how ipurifier 3 would act on this chain. But the conclusion is that ipurifier 3 draws some considerable power and therefore suits more desktop setups.


I was ready to pack it up and send it back to ifi audio when I located my Amazon cable and I did some extra last minute testing. I was quite surprised by the results. I did as much testing I could in my limited time and the most surprising result was that it improved considerably the performance of my xDSD.

By using the following chain :

Tidal Masters from Surface book > jitterbug > Amazon usb cable > ipurifier 3 > ifi audio blue usb cable ( or directly to)> xDSD > balanced short cable from ifi (with adapter) > xCan > 6xx balanced or 58x unbalanced

Where I noticed what ipurifier 3 can really do to a good system and more specifically to 6XX. It can really scale them well. According to my opinion, 58X is fast and impressive especially when you hear one or two instruments alone. It is a new generation headphone and bridges some considerable gap to the planars. On the contrary, the 6XX is difficult to drive and its generic black plastic cable makes sound blurry in comparison. But a decent budget priced balanced cable connected to xCan transforms it completely. Ipurifier 3 scales it even further. In direct comparison in this chain 6xx was simply magic. It seemed like an old model but one category above the 58x. The resolution, clarity and detail were on another level. In comparison, when the music involved many instruments and more complex passages 58x could not separated and detailed them so well like the 6xx could. The new drives from 58x are promising and they sound spectacular in many instances but probably 660s is where the comparison should have been made (which is the next headphone in my list and hopefully the last one). By unplugging and plugging ipurifier 3 in the chain was evident how much 6xx is scaled even from a better source. The clarity and musicality that ipurifier 3 was contributed was clear and evident. However, did not make redundant the jitterbug. Jitterbug also played a smaller but still beneficial part. I have not heard a better combination than that as far as headphones is concerned in my life so far. Unfortunately, this is desktop setup that I do not have the time to enjoy at this point in my life. Therefore, I didn't personally buy the ipurifier 3 although I really like it because simply I will not use it enough if at all. xCan is the best and a lot more flexible alternative for me.

The results from the testing in the specific chain mentioned above confused me a bit. This improvement was unexpected to me as I believed that xDSD had similar ipurifier technology. More specifically, ipurifier 3 is improving sound basically due to two main reasons:

1. Receives a degraded digital signal then reclocks it and sends it to the DAC in much better form
   
   
2. Cleans any power that is passing with the audio through the usb cable by providing the opposite electrical noise signal

For the first reason I thought xDSD already reclocks/regenerates the signal as this is inherent technology for any modern ifi audio dac. For the second reason, xDSD is not getting any power through the main usb A input and uses the power from the internal battery instead. Not clear to me if any power is passing this way to the DAC.

So I am not sure if the improvement in audio was because of the first reason or the second or some combination of the two.

For the first reason, ifi audio provided the explanation that xDSD has purifier level 1 technology and thus adding ipurifier 3 it improves the signal further. For the second reason I can only guess that maybe some electrical noise is passing through the usb cable and adding some noise to the audio signal. So maybe, although xDSD is not requesting any power supply through the usb A input there is some dirty power that remains and degrades audio quality.

In any case, I thought that is a controversial result for them as from one point it means that ipurifier 3 is doing really something great even in this case from the other point maybe xDSD should had the same ipurifier technology to begin with. It is not very convenient to have an ipurifier 3 attached to a portable device like xDSD especially in a flat surface. However, as I observed the ipurifier 3 draws some considerable amount of energy. So by including that level of purifying the signal might shorten the battery life to unacceptably low levels. In any case, would be highly advantageous if ipurifier 3 technology could be more energy efficient in future versions if this is ever possible. So one minor criticism that I have is not against ipurifier 3 but against xDSD.

Admittedly, the biggest improvement in sound quality I experienced it was when ipurifier 3 was used with my dragonfly v1.2 in connection to my surface book. Dragonfly is a nice DAC but sometimes you listen a difference sometimes you don't. It is a small enclosure DAC so no much filtering can be made inside. Jitterbug definitely improves its performance for a very modest price. But ipurifier brings it to another level. It simply sounds almost as an ifi audio DAC. Obviously with different character but engaging as any other ifi audio DAC. This is exactly the word that describes for me how a proper cleaned and timed audio signal should sound : ENGAGING. You listen for hours and you do not want the music to stop. The timing of one and zeros make all the difference in the world. Is like looking a retina display after a low resolution one, there is much less fatigue. This is why I am die hard fan of USB audio. If it is properly implemented there is nothing like it with current available technology. People usually claim Bluetooth nowadays offer 98% of the quality of the usb input and I would say maybe but the rest 2% is the topping in the cake that is missing. USB audio CAN BE BETTER than CD probably better than SACD with an unparalleled convenience and fun factor. You can use remote computers sending wireless signal to network adapters, you can upsample to DSD you can do almost anything to the sound. But always at the end you need an ipurifier 3 to make sure that the signal will reach the destination in the best possible form. If I had a Marantz or any amp with a usb port I would definitely buy an ipurifier 3 version USB B and stick it in the back port. Since the usb ipurifier does NOT need any extra power supply this solution is also very elegant. Depending on the system it will produce amazing results but with the Marantz DAC/AMP compo I am almost certain. On the other hand, If you have an extremely expensive system with a new generation DAC which has already a good clock, using super expensive network adapters and super expensive cables then maybe you will not see much of a difference. But then the cost of ipurifier 3 is so negligible in comparison that still worth to try.

In my main system, I did not notice a great difference because is fairly optimised. Paradoxically enough, I noticed that the jitterbug made a lot more positive difference than the ipurifier 3. This is because i used the crappy usb cable (unfortunately, currently I do not remember if I did any testing with the Amazon cable in my main system) and also because ione has some form of ipurifier technology embedded. It also cleans power the same way that ipurifier 3 cleans it. But still the jitterbug made a difference when it was plugged in my usbridge streamer. Especially, the bass which was much more deep and extended. Another conclusion is that nothing is a panacea in the world of USB audio. It is even more paradoxical the fact that I added a second jitterbug between the usbridge and the WiFi adapter (I got this clue from a reader mentioned in darko audio). That made the biggest impact in sound quality on the given system at the given moment. Unfortunately though, in my case, the WiFi adapter stopped to work after 20 minutes and I needed to unplug the jitterbug. I do not have an explanation for this. My guess is that somehow the weight that jitterbug places on the usb port influences this particular connection. Of course, this is the crazy world of computer audio which trial and error rules everything.

Therefore, the real moral of this story is that computer audio(phile) is simply crazy and completely unpredictable. It seems almost a conspiracy theory of companies to make money of selling various tweak solutions and us as hobbyist to spend considerable amounts of time and money. But this is the nature of this hobby. In computer audio everything may matter even the most unexpected things. And nobody really knows at first hand what is the exact reason not because there is no explanation but because there are so many unknown variables. It just needs continuous experimentation, this is the nature of this hobby.

The pc used may matters, the software of the computer may matters the software of the music player may matters what battery the pc is using may matters, what adapter use may matters, the cable may matters and so forth the list is almost endless. However, this does not mean that you need to buy an expensive usb cable but it may simply means that you should not use a crappy generic usb cable of 10 cents. Spending 7£ on a cable might do the trick. So it is by experimentation and some trial and error process with some intelligent intuitive guessing that can give you decent results with a reasonable cost. I have encountered countless examples in my life with the following as the most recent one: I discovered recently that the DAC of my iPhone 6s plus is much better than the the DAC of my iPad AIR (first generation) when obviously I am using the vintage headphone jack on both devices. But when I am switching to the USB input with the same adapter and in combination with my xDSD the iPad air sounds so much better even if the two devices have the same apple software version. Is something in the software version between iPhone or iPad or something in the bigger stronger battery capacity of the iPad, or is it something to do with the greater enclosure or... go figure…

So if a usb ipurifier makes a difference in your system and how exactly much no one knows for sure. It can make a small difference or a huge one all depends on God knows what. It is very probable that it will make a significant one. Probably less difference that what a Spdif ipurifier would have done especially on non-audiophile specced streamers. But the great potential is definitely there. It is quite probable that a gadget like ipurifier 3 will transform your audio chain in a spectacular way based on where you currently stand. And this partially answer the second question main question of this review.

In conclusion we have the following points:

• If bits were simply bits life would have been much simpler but much more boring.
  
  
• Ipurifier 3 seems a step up from previous versions. It is beautiful, well made and provide a big boost in sound quality given the circumstances.
  
  
• It works better with other previous generation old DACs that probably have not any similar technology. For example, dragonflies will fly higher than ever before.
  
  
• It will not probably provide the same game changer difference as the spdif ipurifier simply because systems based on optical/coaxial inputs may have more unrealised potential. In addition, ipurifier usb version does not include any galvanic isolation. It would be great if that could be possible in such a small and reasonably priced device.
  
  
• It draws some considerable power so is not suitable for a mobile setup although the enclosure seems very portable. It would be ideal if it could be powered by a mobile device although probably an unrealistic request.
  
  
• xDSD and future versions should include that level of purifying, is not very convenient to use all these devices together in a portable setup. Should be offered separately for other brands/DACs.
  
  
• It is a bit more expensive than ipurifier 2. 30£ more. Still the best value for money by a big margin is the ifi audio ione DAC. For 200£ it includes a Spdif ipurifier, a Burr Brown high resolution DAC with usb ipurifier technology of some sort (not so good as the spdif input I believe) some cleaning of usb power more or less and a femto clocked Bluetooth signal. Maybe I forget any other benefit at the moment (I do not remember well if it is doing my coffee in the morning) but WOW, WOW, WOW...This is super duper value for money in my book. This is the reason I am giving 4.5 stars to ipurifier 3 because otherwise I need to give 7 stars to ione and I cannot.

All in all, what version of ipurifier technology you would choose in your audio life is not as important as if you just simply choose and use one. Obviously, ipurifier 3 is the latest and the best, the more evolved one, but in any case, for you newcomers, this is the equivalent of the retina displays in the sound world... enjoy without any reservations!

Two years ago I have bought my first two ifi devices. The spdif ipurifier and the first version of the ione. I believe that these two devices are the best value for money that not only ifi audio can produce but also that exists in the budget audiophile world currently. However, both devices are better suited to the hifi speakers world from where I am coming from as a hobbyist.

The arrival of our baby shifted my attention to the headphone space since I cannot use my speakers system anymore. Thus, last year I was looking with much interested two new devices from ifi, the xDSD and xCan which are more suited to headphones and more specifically to portable use, in order to accompany my new set of Meze headphones.



One year ago, by just reading the specs, I felt that there is no contest between xDSD and xCan. I was very underwhelmed by the xCan specs. As ifi audio is associated with the burr brown DAC chip, I felt quite disappointed by the use of a maybe old DAC sabre Chip, probably the same with my dragonfly v1.2. Moreover, there is no usb audio input and no optical input for just only 100£ less than the glorious xDSD. At that time, I thought, if I ever buy one of the two devices there is not even a chance to spare the extra 100£ and not buying the more expensive but so much richer spec xDSD device.



I briefly reviewed the xDSD device as part of the ifi tour and I was stunned by the audio quality. My results are posted in my related review. However, as I am very budget oriented audiophile (oxymoron) and I was really short of cash because of my summer wedding I decided that I will buy it probably at a future date. I bought an es100 instead and even that not in full price but as a part of an Amazon lighting deal. ES100 is a great device and the 72£ I paid is a very reasonable price. At that price, even if you have an xDSD or xCan, you can also afford/buy it and is worth it for different reasons. But if you can afford the xDSD then you are moving to a different league.

As I was trying to recover my wedding expenses and buy the xDSD I received an email from ifi that I was the lucky winner of the xDSD tour. I never won anything in my life in any competition and now I realize that I won this amazing device. Before I won the xDSD, I was enjoying and most often listening my 4XX headphones with es100 which tend to have some amazing synergy together, and with a balanced cable, the es100, surprisingly enough, provide adequate power for the 4XX considering its size and cost. I was also using a little bear with a burson audio opamp which I also reviewed in this site. But as the little bear was not so convenient and as the synergy with these planars was not so good due to some technicalities that really cannot fully understand (initially the power was enough but after some listening there was a drop in power - also I couldn't use the balance cable) I ended up using es100 all the time with my 4XX. I concluded at the time that my 4XX is my endgame.

The transition from es100 to xDSD with 4XX was not having such a dramatic effect. Yes 4XX sounds great with xDSD but the delta is not mind-blowing. But..but...as xDSD raised my 6XX from the dead my endgame was immediately changed. Falling in love with my 6XX and given the infamous scaling capabilities of this headphone, I considered to give a try to the xCan but always having low expectations of buying this device.

As my family was on holidays at that time, enjoying the rare occasion of having some free time home alone, I requested from ifi for review both the ipurifier 3 (review coming soon) and the xCan.

I just need to clarify here that I was in love with my burr brown DAC of my ione, which I love beyond any bound, and I am die hard fan of asynchronous usb. I personally believe that even the best Bluetooth implementation, which coming from ifi probably, is not so close in audiophile satisfaction to USB input. And to make myself clear I do not mean Immediate A/B comparisons between Bluetooth and usb. I also find hard to spot any differences from brief comparisons of the first one two tracks I quickly compare. What I mean is, that in long listening sessions the Bluetooth makes me tired, is like wanting to stop listening music whereas in usb mode I get addicted after listening hours. I found myself many times going tired next day to work because simply I could not stop listening music in proper time the day before. This is where I personally spot the big difference between Bluetooth and asynchronous usb (or even optical with spdif ipurifier). Having said that, and currently having a family and not being able to have these long listening sections anymore, I am listening Bluetooth all the time. If I could use usb input in my work I would do it but as I cannot due to security reasons, Bluetooth is always the unquestionable king of practical convenience (My android phone has a crappy usb bus and I recently bought an iPhone so I could not use usb with my phones as well).

Therefore, the fact that xCan is missing the usb input was more an academic inconvenience than a practical one since xCan somehow, but still cannot understand how, has the same purifier technology with xDSD for reclocking the digital signal. Nevertheless, the old spec sabre DAC was bothering me but as 6XX are power hungry I was looking forward to give a listen.

From the first moment I plugged my 6XX with a balanced cable to the xCan I had a big shock. I forgot about the old DAC sabre chip, the fact that was cheaper than the xDSD or whatever else since simply my 6XX sung like never before. The sound was addicting, the bass plentiful without using any xbass booster (actually never used any xbass with my xCan because I never need it) Defected Radio sounded glorious like never before and I did not stop dancing for a couple of hours. Yes, that's the point you can even dance with these small devices which is difficult with a super duper OTL tube amp.

So far that was explainable as 6XX needs a lot of power so xCan in theory could compensate for any deficiency in comparison to xDSD due to the extra power. But that was only my theory because xCan drove amazingly any other headphone of mine including the very sensitive Meze 99 Classics and Neo. The bass on my beloved classics was still plentiful but better defined, I never heard my classics sung like that. My neo at the time were using the original Meze pads and sounded better than any time before. Currently, I have changed to velour Brainwavz pads and they simply sounds amazingly good punching above their weight.

Wait a moment, this is the same DAC with dragonfly v1.2 and only Bluetooth mode how it is playing so good even with sensitive cans??? The answer is that simply I do not really know. I just have a new theory, that like my speakers system, at the end of the day, the amp is more important than the DAC given the DAC is of a decent level.

As a last effort to avoid buying xCan (and as a cheap excuse obviously) I bought a 58X. I thought because 58X, as it is claimed fiercely in the relevant forums, is not so scalable as the 6XX so then I can use my xDSD with 58X and avoid buying the xCan. However, the same story happened again, the xCan made 58X to sing like nothing before. Although, I still love my 6XX and believe when is scaled properly is one level above 58X I never regret buying 58X. Practically speaking, as an open headphone I am using 58X all the time. Sometimes, I am using xCan + 58X with Bluetooth connection from the Amazon fire stick for watching movies through my TV and even there the cinematic experience with xCan is wow….I remember watching Sally the other time and the sound from the airplane turbines was so shockingly good and realistic. As my spdif ipurifier and iOne taught me in the past, it is sometimes on movies where I also realise the true potential of an audiophile devise.

I am not a professional reviewer but a simple consumer so for me to buy the xCan, without a second thought as I did, while already having the xDSD signals my true opinion for this device. Paradoxically enough, given the underwhelming specs, I prefer xCan to my beloved xDSD!!!

I have some budget iems that I used them with the xCan, without the iematch which I also reviewed in the past, and I think that for sensitive iems without iematch, xDSD is better than xCan. But as currently, I have not any iems that can compete with my headphones, I am leaving this aspect to other reviewers to further explore.

I tried also some combinations having a stack with xDSD and xCan and also by using xCan + xDSD + ipurifier 3 + jitterbug + surface book + tidal masters for academic purposes, since for my usage I believe these combinations are impractical unless you can implement them in your desktop set up. Currently, I cannot implement them, so I did them for fun as my family was away at the moment and probably I can not do them again. Obviously, the stack sounds better than any device alone and the sound from the full combo mentioned above is mesmerising. By using this long chain, I kind of realize that for me 6XX is my endgame under ideal conditions. Ipurifier 3, surprisingly enough, improves considerably the sound quality of the xDSD but I leave the rest for my ipurifier 3 review.

However, I have to do one important point here. The fact that the stack sounds better does not imply immediately to me that the the burr brown DAC is better than the sabre DAC of xCan. I believe that as these are still portable devices with size limitations they kind of working in a modular mode so combined together are performing always better. As xDSD + little bear with v5i + 6xx sound better than xDSD + 6xX alone does not immediately imply that the v5i opamp is better than the xDSD opamp,the same is true for the xDSD + xCan stack. It is possible but it is NOT immediate to me the conclusion that the burr brown is better than this sabre DAC. Obviously, the burr brown is doing high resolution and DSD and other tricks but in the Spotify world the difference is not clear to me. The xCan simply sounds too good given its humble pedigree.

I could probably say that the burr brown is more smooth in comparison with the sabre DAC chip, more delicate and more refined with a lean sound. The sabre is more colourful and more fun with a thicker sound. The burr brown is like a seabass on grill with some olive oil and lemon juice accompanied with white Mediterranean wine whereas this sabre is like a juicy ribeye steak accompanied with red Californian wine.

I like both but is the xCan amp section that gives such a grip that makes xCan so much enjoyable to me under (almost) the same level playing field i.e comparison in Bluetooth mode but balanced cable with xCan and s-balanced with xDSD.

The biggest drawbacks for the xCan are the same with xDSD:

1. Possible drawback: There is no LDAC for both devices and I suspect that as probably the Bluetooth chip does not support it they will never have LDAC support. This can be a big major flaw or a non issue depending on where you stand. If you have a LDAC capable device you simply do not optimise your Bluetooth signal and as these are audiophile devices this simply does not make any sense. But if, like me, you do not have any LDAC or apthd source and you will never have, this is irrelevant, does not make any difference because you will never use these advanced codecs.
   
   
2. These two should have combined and be one device not two. xDSD probably missing the amp section and the balanced input of xCan and the xCan miss the usb input of xDSD. The optical input I really love because it upgrades my TV but I can delegate this functionality to ione. I am not fan of daps so I do not need optical in the go as some people need. But since space is in premium in these devices optical is a sacrifice that is reasonable to me. But USB is quite a miss since somehow this old sabre DAC is not bad at all and could be used with an iPhone for example on the go.
   
   
3. Fingerprint magnet. Why the shiny part still exist I cannot completely understand. I am pretty sure that if they do it in pure matte black with orange logos it will be the prettiest device in the universe but this maybe is the plan for an upgrade and a future black edition.

But xCan has a secret weapon that xDSD does not have. It has balanced and unbalanced inputs. And that is very important because I believe this is what can do this device to be truly upgradable.

You can combine for example an es100 with xCan. Es100 is like a matchbox with negligible weight which can give LDAC, aptx hd or whatever needed and an amazing, I repeat amazing app that probably ifi will never develop. In that case you can have the best of both worlds, a fabulous amp section with a fabulous app and functionalities. Moreover, whatever will be discovered in the future as a format or anything else in a small device like es100 can be passed to xCan so in a sence xCan is always upgradable even if it's software is not and from other manufacturers that can provide other functionalities as well.

In addition, the battery of xCan is very good. I was disappointed by the battery life of idsd nano and underwelmed of xdsd, I am first time really happy from the battery life of an ifi device. I am pretty sure now that because ifi devices using opamps they do sacrifice some battery power in favour of sound quality nevertheless xCan is achieving a great balance between the two.

The opamp signature is clear by comparing both ifi devices to es100 and the little bear. How the strings and voices sound on xCan and xDSD has to do with the opamp signature. Is something that es100 struggling to achieve although as I said is a magnificent device for the money and size.

So given the above analysis I am reaching to a conclusion that is hugely suprinsing to me. I believe that if you cannot afford to buy both then xCan is the better device of the two. If I could only have one I would go for the xCan. However, there is another money conscious alternative. You can buy both xCan and ione. Ione is the best value for money device that exists in this galaxy, maybe in the next one as well, and has all the other goodies of xdsd without the headphone amp. So xCan + ione is 300£ + 200£ = 500£ whereas the xDSD alone is 400£. For one hundred pounds more I can have both of the two worlds, burr brown ione with DSD , MQA, high resolution, optical , usb, etc for my home set up and xCan for the portable headphone setup. And this exactly is what actually I did I paid for my xCan and ione but I was lucky enough to win the xDSD which I still really love but I use xCan all the time.



It is clear that in my review above I used as a point of reference the xDSD. I did this because it is an excellent point of reference. It is highly praised and universally agreed that is an amazing portable device with several industry prizes. So since I am not a professional reviewer, not even a proper amateur reviewer, I cannot compare it with countless DAC devices branded or unbranded that are coming and go every day. I am comparing with an established reference point which any valid inferences can be based on. I am encountering this issue in the ione thread where someone can appear out of nowhere with a new Chinese device that supposedly can sound better. If it sounds better it sounds better, DACs come and go every day if you buy a good product in a good price at some point in time is adequate enough for me. If I pay a reasonable amount, it is fine with me the fact that it will not be probably the best DAC in the world for the next century, I can live with that. As I tend to believe, the reclocking technology, the power supply and the amp section give bigger deltas for the money than the DACs do. Therefore, the fact that I prefer xCan to xDSD put things into a perspective of how the xCan compares with the market in general.

Finally, I conclude this review with a story from my past. I am privileged enough as my parents have a house near a beautiful Mediterranean beach which I believe is somehow underated. I remember one summer, I was swimming there where I met a foreign girl and I was quite astonished when I heard her telling me that last year she had her holidays in exotic Maldives but as she strongly believed…”this place and beach is so beautiful...it is even better than Maldives…”

I am writing this rewiew since ifi have contacted me to review some of their products, a privilege which I find particularly extremely difficult to reject. One of these products is the iematch and subsequently the iematch 2.5.

As all of my reviews are made from the point of view of a simple consumer as such my reviews are quite unconventional which means I do not provide unboxing or nice photos or discussing what the box contains inside. For these, please look on more professional reviews or better on youtube. I provide a different angle from a simple consumer/hobbyist that does this on the side without any monetary interest. Quite the contrary, since I am working in the City my time is limited and extremely valuable. But when I have some time I really enjoying doing this and I can be as objective as possible because my professional life does not depend at all on it.

Therefore, I will do this review in an informal way from the point of view of a simple consumer that offers an honest opinion in order to help other consumers at his level to choose a product and I hope some of you will find this review somewhat useful… and I will write this review while I am listening through my surface book through the ipurifier 3, another ifi audio product that I have currently for a review.

iematch and iematch 2.5 are specialised products and they are not recommended in all cases. There are many good reviews in this review thread that explain in detail in which situations these products are most suitable therefore I will not elaborate extensively here. Put it differently, Iematch and iematch 2.5 in some situations are not recommended at all. For example, if your source (phone, amp, dap whatever) marginally drive your headphones then with iematch the result will be negative instead of positive!!! This is why this should be considered as a special product not a universal solution.

Usually, in audio you have products that make a difference or does not make a difference but not products that they will deteriorate the audio quality outcome. You have 3 possible outcomes according to the circumstance

1. Game changer – dramatic improvement in sound quality (as the first time I used an spdif ipurifier in my home system) where you immediately decide to buy the product, in case you can afford it obviously, without second thinking
2. Positive change but not dramatic, so according to the price of the product you spend some time thinking if you should buy the product but usually if the price is reasonable you buy the product – otherwise you would not be in head-fi reading reviews.
3. Very minor positive difference or no difference at all. In a blind testing would be very difficult to separate the improvement. Now you start thinking for a refund or regretting buying the product.

But with iematch you have also the case that if your set up can marginally provide loud sound then the loudness with iematch will be so low that you really will be disappointed with the result. So first be certain that this is the right product for you because I already said it, this is a specialised product for specific circumstances.

This means that this product has designed for very sensitive headphones/iems where usually an audible hiss is the main problem. So according to your circumstance you can end up in any of the 3 cases discussed above. If you have very sensitive headphones and lot of hiss that makes them unlistenable or unenjoyable then this is a game changer read no further - an impulse buy. But I do not belong to this category yet as I do not have so sensitive iems or so powerful amps. Moreover, there two modes with iematch High and Ultra, I did NOT have a single instance that I could find usable the Ultra option for my set ups meaning obviously that I am not the main target customer for this device.

So for me these products belonged to the other two circumstances most of the time. However, by testing various combinations I found also one two cases where I believe that the iematch could be a game changer for me also as I will discuss below.

First things first, the biggest curiosity I had was how the iematch could improve the sound of my meze 99 through my main marantz amplifier. Meze 99 is a sensitive headphone and as Marantz drives them at near 9 o clock I thought that with iematch Meze will sound better as iematch will force my Marantz to work in a more optimal output region. And yes! it did that but was not such a dramatic difference, lets say what an ipurifier can make to a system with unrealised potential (More to that on my upcoming review of the ipurifier 3).

I have a particular obsession with a particular piece from Vivaldi:

https://tidal.com/track/2400331

Vivaldi: Recitative And Aria From Cantata Rv 679, L2 The Nordic Sound.

I believe that this is a very technical track that exposes the weakness of the headhones and really separate mediocre headphones from the truly great ones. It is the definitive track that will make me choose and keep a headphone or not although later most of the times probably I am going to listen house music from tunein…I know go figure…

But this is my track where I test for the fastest lap and this is where Iematch was tested first with the Meze 99 classics and I can definitely say that it does belong to the second circumstance discussed above. In this case, some additional smoothness and greatness were added but needed an A/B testing to be observable at full extent. Something like “I cannot believe it, it sound even better with it…!!” But iematch cannot transform 99 and make it sound like a hi-end planar which is an unreasonable task anyway. I could compare the improvement in sound quality in what you could experience with the audioquest jitterbug, a very nice refinement for a modest amount.

Then I used it in my mobile situations as follows:

• MotoX style phone directly to Meze 99 Neo, Classics and Meze Classics 12 iem.
• As above and with xDSD (briefly in my testing period)
• MotoX style connected through BT to es100 and then directly to Meze 99 Neo and Meze Classics 12 iem.
• Out of my Little Bear Tube preamplifier B4 with Meze Classics 12 (iem)
• Out of my pad and directly to my phones

And my observations are the following:

• xDSD does not need an iematch. The technology in xDSD makes it irrelevant so save the money and if you can afford buy xDSD directly which I recommend wholeheartedly.
• I did not pay particular attention to little bear except until my review period passed. Only few weeks ago I noticed that my Neo 99 pick a lot of hiss and then I though that the iematch might be also a game changer in this situation. Unfortunately, among so many combinations that I currently have, this passed unnoticed at the time and I lost the opportunity to test it properly. Maybe was the new opamp that I installed at later time but I really do not remember. But as it now stands, I prefer to use only my insensitive HD6XX and HE4XX with the little bear.

From the rest of the cases, except ONE particular case, the iematch sound quality wise, provided a nice refinement with the added benefit of being a very good angle adaptor. The Iematch is very beautiful constructed with great materials and very beautiful. The meze cables have not any angle so they are really cumbersome when you connected them in the phone or my ipad so an adapter like this makes things so much easier. Actually, as my ipad can provide a lot of power to my Meze 99 I noticed a noticeable improvement in this scenario. Providing also a very useful angled version for this situation. So yes, iematch provides a very nice refinement to the sound in a simple scenario like this one.

I hope ifi audio to sell such adaptors like the OTG usb cable in such reasonable prices. I think as xDSD does not need an iematch, someone like me needs such an adapter to match such cables. Actually, all my balanced cables I use right now would benefit from such an adapter.

Last but not least, I left the most important personal experience I have with iematch. Using IEMATCH with my phone, directly or through es100 with listening in poor quality streaming through 128k mp3 with tunein radio. This is where the Game Changer moment with iematch came for me. Obviously, I like over ears headphones a lot but I find iems particularly elegant to use in an professional environment, very mobile and user friendly in summer under hot conditions. I do not own very expensive iems and I am not very expert with iems in general. However, as I received on offer with my Meze 99 classics the Meze 12 classics I can say that the 12 classics is the endgame iem for me at the moment. The Classics 12 is not perfect and it has its moments but when paired well, for my standards sound amazing and with the foam tips supplied it sounds as a nice open headphone. It has a completely different signature from the 99 series. In contrast, here the bass is very good but the treble is the weakest link. It can be piercing some times. With xDSD and Tidal material in Bluetooth mode the 12 Meze iem was a revelation to me. An endgame for office situations. I could not believe the quality I was getting from a budget iem like that sounding like an open headphone. But when my review week was over with the xDSD and I needed to use my ES100 and my phone directly simply I could not listen more than one or two songs with the classics 12 (but to be fair to 12, also in combination with low res material that I am usually listen from tunein). But this exactly where iematch came in rescue and smoothed the treble in such a degree that made these combinations enjoyable and usable again. Clearly, this is the definition of a game changer situation to me. Something that is unusable to be usable. At this point I was thinking ordering the iematch (and the iematch 2.5) for me but as I left for my wedding and my honeymoon in summer I left it for some future time. But now as I am the lucky winner of the xDSD I still postpone this purchase as my listening habits and set ups change so often and much.

Initially, I requested the IEMATCH 2.5 because I am an idiot and at that time I had no experience with balanced cables, I thought 2.5 is the new version of iematch and not the balanced connection size version. When I opened the box I was quite shocked and I could not understand how to use this with my equipment. However, at later stages when I received my balanced cables to use with my es100 I briefly tested the IEMATCH 2.5. My observations mirror the observations I discussed for the original version above. ES100 in balanced mode can provide a lot of power so if you have sensitive iems you can see a benefit with using the iematch 2.5. I have the intuitive feeling that there is an optimal region in every amp, should not be near max or near min if iematch helps you to find that optimal region then the greater the benefit you can extract from you amp.

Finally, the other observation I have to make is that I did also a direct comparison for iematch technology when I tested the black nano, which includes IEMatch inside, and it seemed that most of the time I preferred the iematch input with my first generations budget headphones (i.e. AKGY50 etc.) although one should also note that in mobile applications the benefit of iematch comes with raising battery consumption as you are forced to use higher volumes.

All in all, this is a nice refinement of the sound in many circumstances without asking a fortune, it has the potential to be a game changer in some others but also it can be a completely wrong addition to other ones but this is not the product’s fault.

I conclude by provide further explanation about my rating. This can be a 5 star product potentially under some scenarios but in most of my personal specific cases was not. Also, personally I keep the 5 star recommendation for products that are really exceptional and have shocked me one way or another. The xDSD, the iOne and the ipurifier spdif are products that belong to this category. Also, to give a 4 star to product which is very special and unique is quite unfair too. This product designed for specific cases and is not designed for every possible use and as such in some cases does not make a night and day difference.

Also, there are some great reviews in this thread, far better than mine, please have a look and get more information there.

As for me, I might buy both versions at some point in future but right now my attention has turned to two other ifi audio products that theoretically should have not (because I have the xDSD)…the ipurifier 3 and the xCan…

...Why ifi Why...?

This is a review of the Burson Audio V5i Dual Amp installed to the Little Bear B4 tube hybrid amplifier. I want to thank once again Charles and Burson Audio for giving me this opportunity.

I had for a couple of months the little bear b4 hybrid portable amplifier that I got for 53£. The sound quality was good out of the box but as I know from experience with these Chinese audio equipment that a further investment in components increase the sound quality considerably for a reasonable cost. However, in the little bear b4 you can not change the tubes or buy an audiophile great power supply as it is battery operated only. But you can do a significant change, you can change the heart of the amp which is the opamp.

Therefore, I was looking this forum for advise and solutions since I had not clue about opamps in general. General advice and wisdom was to try the Burson Audio V5i Dual opamp as the best solution available. I was delaying my purchase not because I ever doubted this advise but because I was so much busy with other stuff even in order to devote such little time. Meanwhile, reading extensively the dyi thread for katana I was influenced by the creators of katana for the supposedly sparkos superiority in the world of opamps. But with a brief search on the internet I realized that first the equivalent sparkos opamp is double the price on 80£ approx and considerably more expensive than the little bear and second it seemed naked to me without cover particularly ugly to place under the window of my little bear.

I have decided thus that when I buy an opamp burson audio V5i dual will be my choice. However, as I was extremely busy with the preparations of my wedding reception in another country I had zero desire to spend time and energy for playing with opamps at the current point in time. I said to myself, I will buy the V5i Dual at some point in future when I have more time. But then I received an email from Charles and the Burson Audio team if I want to test the V5i Dual opamp for a review. Although busy, I felt honoured and flattered and could not refuse this fantastic proposal.

Thus, a week later the opamp arrived and I was not fully prepared to change it since I did not have the right tools. Although, it seemed a daunting task for non dyi users like me at the beginning, I can assure you that if someone has the right tools, then to change the opamp in the little bear is very easy. I could order the relevant screw drivers from Amazon but did not have the time to order the specific tool that removes the previous opamp. That was the most difficult part for me, as to remove the previous opamp without the tool is challenging and I might have destroyed mine in the process. But if you have the tool then there is no problem since you can grab it properly and remove it. Installation of the new amp is super easy just place it in the right position. The V5i has the cover with the letters in one orientation so no mistake can be made at this point.

In my case, as I did not have time to wait for the right removal tool from eBay and because I am not competent enough to do it with my hand or a knife, I was a bit brutal for removing my previous opamp. But this the thing: There is no way the dual V5i to depart from my little bear in the foreseeable future.

Sometimes with substantial improvements there is an initial shock. A disbelief. The sound is different, something really changed but you can't realise what is happening. It might be a burn in period or the mental burn in or whatever else. In this case, it took only one day to realise what really happened. The little bear transformed completely from a little bear to a huge polar bear. The same improvement in magnitude that I realized from going from a mediocre budget onkyo AV receiver to my stereo Marantz amp, I realized with this change as well.

I listened for few days with my HD6XX, HE4XX and Meze neo and I was really astonished. The amazing thing is that already I had a great improvement at that time by going balanced from unbalanced with my Radsone audio es100 Bluetooth transmitter because of the more power that the es100 can provide through the balanced connection (do not ask me I do not know why) so the fact that I went back to unbalanced and had such an improvement it was a shock to me.

I used my es100 as bt transmitter and as a DAC to feed the liitle bear b4 amplifier and I connect my headphones to little bear directly with a nessessary adaptor for my balanced cables so to be connected on the unbalanced output of the little bear. If I could use the V5i Dual in a balanced set up with my es100 I suspect that the sound quality would go to stratospheric levels but as far as I know with my set up this is not possible.

Meze 99 are not power hungry headphones so V5i inside the liitle bear is more than enough. HD6XX although a power hungry headphone also is driven adequately from this set up. The HE4XX contrary to the massdrop advertisement is an extremely power hungry headphone considerably more than to the HD6XX due to the planar technology so one V5i Dual inside the little bear maybe is not enough for the optimum result. But this is maybe a limitation of my set up and the low power that the es100 in unbalanced mode can provide. I say that, because I get more drive from es100 alone in balanced mode. If I could use the es100 in balanced mode in this set up the power could be more than enough.

I should point here that any such limitation of my set up does not constitute a criticism of the burson Audio opamp as this opamp was not designed specifically for the little bear b4. It is an opamp developed for various situations and this particular instance might not be the most representative one. For instance, the battery consumption is considerably higher with this opamp but this is a limitation of the little bear as well. In addition, little bear does not work when connected to a power supply directly so there is no possibility to use the v5i in this set up with an audiophile power supply that permanently feeds the amplifier. I suspect that a good power supply feeding V5i would do a crazy combination raising sq in stratospheric levels with the power consumption not be of a problem in such a set up.

Also the fact that katana uses 6 opamps for its DAC section also means that are limitations for using only one opamp. I am not expert at all but I imagine in other solutions more opamps will be needed for the best result.

Burson Audio V5i opamp sounds so good that I am seriously thinking to research other possible set ups so I can use more extensively this opamp for example with Marantz amps.

The obvious limitation of my review is that I am not a professional reviewer and I do not have other opamps to compare. Also, it is extremely difficult to compare different opamps because you cannot change instantly between opamps. Unless you have many little bears with different opamps installed and used them interchangeably any definite conclusions should not be made. However, this is not the purpose of this review. It is an informal review by a simple consumer that is completely unbiased. As such has a different perspective to provide. As a result, although this review should have been a bit difficult to be made at the end was rather easy for me because of the sound quality difference I experienced in my set up.

Maybe I am so impressed because, as I already said, I am not a professional reviewer and I have not expensive gear, I do not have a mojo/poly, Hugo 2 or whatever similar hi end expensive gear. But again, does this really matter for the context of my review???

I had a 53£ equipment and I used a component of around 40£ to improve it. Did the sound improved significantly after all? The answer is YES and in a huge big way! The sound quality I am getting now is unbelievable for the money. For around 100£ you have a great solution and you can add the DAC of your choice. Connect straight from your phone or an inexpensive bt receiver like the es100 or an ifi audio DAC component which I am particularly fond of.

The instruments, the notes the musicality everything has a huge depth, a quality arising from underneath the fundamental instruments that constitute the music of a particular piece. The guitars the violins and the classical music sounds particularly impressive and clear. Clean, analytical but not bright nor harsh. I have the illusion that I am hearing a super expensive audiophile system. Bass, treble and everything between sounds simply better in an elegantly subtle but also impactful way. You do not need a/b with the original little bear opamp to realise the difference, it is just there noticeable immediately from the first note.

More to my personal story, as I left for my wedding reception and my honeymoon I decided to take only with me the es100, the balanced cable and the HE4XX. I listened for a few hours before sleep for some days and I really enjoyed it. I also have chosen all the music for my reception in that way. But then when I returned back home and I used the es100 with my little bear/V5i set up I fell in love with the music even more. Somehow everything worked in my brain even more while I was away so when I returned back the set up with this opamp made more impact to me. A less portable combination for sure but the music quality is astonishing. Having that near the bed before you sleep is great for a small and convenient bedroom set up.

One criticism I could make is that the sound from this opamp seemed to dominate in the little bear a little too much in my initial hearings. Sometimes it gave me the impression more of a pure solid state system than a hybrid tube amplifier. But even that criticism is not fair. The little bear never had for me a dominating tube part like some other tube preamplifiers I have. And the sound now is never harsh is just so much impactful and dominating as you would expect from an audiophile amp like Hegel for example.

In addition, I have not the chance yet to use the V5i with a different DAC. What if I use the ifi audio ione DAC I so much adore later on as my source or the xDSD? As I am really fun of the ifi reclocking/DAC cababilities and the smooth analogue sound it provides only makes me truly wonder where is the true limit with this specific opamp.

In any case, I have the instinctive intuitive feeling that this is an amazing opamp, one of the best of its kind even without a direct comparison with other expensive opamps. Every time, every note I listen with this set up it reminds me the following question:
How much more another device could improve this sound? I would be really amazed if I could do a further leap forward from this point onwards.

Therefore, I can say that it is for me a best value for money solution in my set up for sure. And in different set ups and after further comparisons may also be a potential giant killer. I would not be surprised if in the future I realise that this system is better than more expensive systems.

The Chinese manufacturers should consider seriously selling more expensive versions of the little bear with this opamp installed as a standard. And other more established companies should consider using this opamp in their respective implementations.

Finally, I would like to conclude saying that according to me:
You should not get a V5i to use it inside the little bear. You should get a little bear in order to use the Burson Audio V5i Dual opamp.

There are 3 main reasons for my review:

1. I am posting to fulfil my obligations because it is required as part of the loan review process from Ifi audio.
2. I will do the review in an informal way from the point of view of a simple consumer that offers an honest opinion in order to help other consumers at his level to choose a product and I hope some of you will find this review somewhat useful.
3. More importantly, I hope I will provide useful consumer feedback to Ifiaudio to design new products that fulfil some additional requirements.

In my past review for the Black nano I mentioned among others the following:

1. Not very transportable. I prefer/need so much more the small factor of dragonfly. Alternatively, it needs the Bluetooth functionality to be truly convenient. If IFI manages to do that can make a budget Poly/Mojo killer with the nano form factor.
2. For home set up I definitely prefer ione. It has the same sound quality and offers so much more functionality. The spdif implementation is from another planet and elevates the TV system to extraordinary levels.
3. The battery for me is the big question. Nobody complained so far so maybe is my unit or I was doing something wrong. But 2 hours is two little this is an issue for me
4. It would be nice to have MQA Decoding functionality as well. With UAPP you can have tidal with mobile devices and with Kodi/tidal 2 add on in home without a PC.
5. The sound signature of IFI I believe is one of the best in the market and the one I clearly prefer. Please package this in more devices of different forms.
6. The volume knob is a big plus for me and the strongest advantage against dacs like the mojo. For me it feels like the throttle in a bike. You give more when you need or want and the feeling is amazing. Maybe this is why I had two hours of battery only in my listening sessions. Ifi please NEVER remove the knob from your devices when needed.

So before I discuss how ifi addressed all these issues let me give you more background about me not because this is important but because it provides the context of my review and connects with all the points mentioned above.

At some point, I was looking various reclockers for my TV which was hooked in my amp through spdif. My apple TV, amazon firestick, blueray everything is hooked on my TV. I was looking for the w4s remedy that had raving reviews but it cost 400$ for one spdif input only. It would be nice to have one reclocker for my usb also I thought. I bought the ipurifier instead on 150£ as many people found this better than even remedy.

I was for a big shock. Every input from my TV sounded so much better. A real game changer for me. But before I felt happy for my deal of the century as I thought, just One week later iOne came to the market. SPDIF purifier, ifi asynchronous USB input and ifi DAC at 200£. So remedy + recovery + a version of an ifi DSD DAC in 200£…I could not resist to that deal... no way.

Long story short, I built an excellent speakers system in my living room based on the ifi ione (which for me is the most excellent value for money dac/reclock device in this galaxy and maybe the next one) and using the ifi ipower that comes bundled with my ipurifier. I improved later on with a USBridge dedicated streamer and a tube preamplifier and I could not be happier until I realise that I cannot listen to this system anymore due to the most happy event in my life, my daughters arrival, and that is more than fine with me, however I really craved for some really great sound quality on the go to substitute. I was never a headphone guy and 6 months ago all my headphones were less than 50£. It might sound like a sacrilege to you maybe even an insult but did know what an HD650 was…Could have been a bike from Honda or Kawasaki… I remember I was reading Darko extensively at that time except the headphones reviews. I was skipping those entirely.

I hate the desktop environment for listening music because is not healthy for my back. And in my work the IT is so strict, I was allowed to use a dragonfly some time in the past but not anymore. So if it was not for iOne that I could place in a living room set up I would not know anything for any ifi DAC/amp combo either.

So I requested to be a reviewer for the nano black but I had in the back of my mind that the portability of nano was a deal braker for me. It sounded really good as all ifi devices do with a tempting price but iit had no real use for me and then my nano battery experience was underwhelming at least. Few weeks after my review, one Friday night after work I read the first headphone article from Darko. The B&W PX review where it was implied or my desire made me to think that it was implied that the PX are the KEF LS50 Wireless of the headphone world.

130£ more than nano for better headphones with superb drivers, upsampling DAC, active tailored amplification plus 25 hours of battery it finally made me interested in headphone reviews. The active noise cancelling part was just an extra bonus. I ordered immediately but If these are the LS50W of the headphone world I do not want to have the KEFs at all.

Do not get me wrong, the PX is probably the best headphone for its category and I am thinking seriously to get it as present to my best friend (although I do not know what kind of friend this does makes me) and sounds very well in lower frequencies particularly with EDM. But sorry this treble is not for me…

One esteemed (audiophile) colleague listen in my office my complaints and kindly provided me his PM3 and HD650 to compare. PM3 is a highly technical headphone but my God the iOne and the tubes made these HD650 to sing…after this PX went straight back.

Nevertheless, as ignorant as I am and not knowing at the time that Maxxdrop exist in this world and because I still needed one good closed back phone in a typical head-fi fashion I ended up with 2!...and one IEM from Meze. Those sound great even from a phone but then again IFI came with their new generation of DACs with the new great portable form addressing all the points that were mentioned above and I ask for a review unit.

1. Super portable. Not Radsone ES100 portable but ifi is a different product. Provides this sweet spot combination to be more portable than poly/mojo combo and also solid enough to be competitive to a poly/mojo combo soundwise.
2. For the home set up has the same functionality more or less with iOne. It has also an interesting twist. Although, I thought not having a switch to alternate sources between spdif (TV in my case) and USB (streamer in my case) it is a serious mistake it turn up to work even better in my set up. If you find a way to turn the USB signal off (volumio turn off with my phone) you alternate sources in a second. While I watching TV I could turn Volumio on and listen music from usb between the ads brakes or vise versa. While Listening music if I saw something in TV I could switch sources with my phone and listen something interesting in the TV like having a remote control. This is so cumbersome with the iOne where you need to get up from the sofa every time.
3. Battery life is decent. Not great but decent. 6-8 hours maybe max 9. Nowhere near 25-30 of PX. However, I believe this is not happening because PX has a better bigger battery but because IFI uses some other kind of amplification that needs more power for sound quality reasons. So there is a trade off between sound quality and battery life and I encourage ifi to put priority to sound quality rather than battery life. 6-8 is not great if they can improve on that would be great but without sacrificing any sound quality. Otherwise it is what it is.
4. MQA they explained their choice and for home use, as audirvana comes to windows rendering is enough for me. The MQA stuff is great from ifi like it was in black nano.
5. This already has been adressed. Not only xDSD has Bluetooth functionality but a far better form factor than Nano. As already well spotted by another review is like a package of cigarettes.
6. This is a delicate point. The new rotary has a different feeling for sure. It is not better not worse. It is different. I like both. The old is more analogue, smooth and has a faster response to increase or to decrease volume. The new knob is recessed so not to protrude and more suitable for pocketable use and this is what ifi had in mind I believe. It has also a very nice granular approach. Since I have a little bear tube portable amp I have the old feeling so I like the new one in xDSD for a change and because is suitable for a portable use.

In addition, xDSD improves in the following points:

• Separate usd input for power. That’s a big plus for me and what I always wanted for ione. No electrical pollution in the main USB port which is used for music. Clean power supply from the other port when is used in the “Living Room” mode. Ifi says this is not recommended because of some noice. I am confused as the opposite should be true or at least to be designed like that. In my brief testing I used one ipower supply to my usbridge in order not to pollute the signal, one usb connection from sparky to charge, the other usbridge connection for music. At least as good as battery of xDSD if not even better. But I had the unit for a week, and a week for this sophisticated unit is not enough, as I discovered, for a thorough testing.
• The Bluetooth is miles better than the first version of ione as far range or connection is concerned. Also, in ione when I have the other inputs I can still connect to the Bluetooth of ione. This is undesirable behaviour because why to have a bt signal active inside the dac when I am not using that. As I remember in xDSD this is not happening. In small details like this is where I appreciate the delicacy in the engineering of xDSD even if some of these details might happened by accident…
• This same usb main port exists in black nano but I could not realize the full potential at the moment. The usb port type in xDSD and Nano are brilliant. Now I realized it fully by using my apple and android adapters. Never change that Ifi.
• xBass and 3d. This reminds me the loudness button in my Marantz. Can be a game changer sometimes e.g. late at night with my Dali Zensor 1 speakers or never used like now with my current floorstanders. I did not use them much and actually definitely my Meze does not need the xBass...

Oh yes the sound quality….general impressions:

• Orgasmic sound but depends on the synergy very much. Strangely enough with my chord RCA sounded a bit bright but I was the first in line and this unit was not burned at all since it was new. From memory of my ione the sound I think changed with time but a lot of time around a month playing with my TV many hours.
• This brightness might also be due when battery power is used. My ione is using ipower and this maybe the reason for the difference. If the battery is in sleep mode and the xDSD powered from a clean power supply then this sound signature might be slightly different. Not enough time to check all these details sorry. But with a different RCA (QED) cable I had and used bypassing my tube preamplifier this brightness was gone paradoxically enough. Without tubes more warm sound than with tubes…I know this does not make sense but it did happened…
• As I said in my black nano review the ifi sound signature can be manipulated according to tastes, and this is a big plus in my books.
• Bluetooth sounds amazing enough. No is not like the other 2 inputs but who cares when it sounds so good and in mobile use. I am an USB asynchronous die hard fan but this is the point, xDSD is not xCAN it has both… Or 3… so use whatever you prefer and is convenient to you. But I can say that with my ipad using the usb port the combination is amazing. In addition, There is a lot of marketing by many other companies which I find sometimes misleading. "...our DAC bypass the Bluetooth DAC...blah blah blah" come on guys my bluedac receiver 4 years ago did that. They were shelling Bluetooth receivers with DAC. What the DAC was doing there? At least with ifi things seem more clear and honest. I have an intuitive understanding that the signal is treated mostly at the end of the chain and before conversion utilising existing proprietary technology.

Headphones used:

1. xDSD + Meze NEO: That was the first combination I used with my xDSD in Bluetooth mode in my pocket and I was dancing 3 hours straight over all my living room. This is why xDSD factor form is so amazing. Now this is an extremely good synergy because xDSD extracts every drop from NEO which surprisingly in my case does not cooperate well with my tubes. It seems crazy but my NEO is not in good terms with the little bear and my main system. Maybe the warm character of NEO gets burned by the tubes maybe my combinations who knows but positively surprised. Comparing with the PX, 330£ vs 400£ + 169£ price wise, the latter combination is miles ahead even in EDM music. Somewhere Meze hide a little subwoofer in these headphones but I still trying to find it.
2. xDSD + Meze classics 12 (IEM): Amazing combination again. Tested with Bluetooth only. The weak point of classics 12 is the treble, the exact opposite of the 99 series. From poor quality sources I am getting fatigue from my phone. Little Bear manages to improve that so does xDSD. Tidal plus xDSD plus classics 12 do an amazing sweet combination I can hear for hours. It gives a tube character to classics so xDSD it does the opposite of what it does to NEO. Is like identifying weakness and corrects them. 400£ + 69£ and sounds better than the PX to me. xDSD makes 12 classics sound good like a proper headphone.
3. xDSD + Meze Classics 99 with USB input directly or in line mode in my system: The 99 classics is on different league for me in comparison to NEO. I do not know why exactly, it is a mystery to me such a difference. It sounds great from my phone, from my main system, goes well with my tubes and of course sound even better with xDSD. It scales well with xDSD uniformly, there is no big weakness that xDSD should cover here just a wonderful combination.
4. xDSD + HE4XX: Bluetooth plus asynchronous mode: Yes it can drive the 4xx maybe not as good as a good desktop system but the headphone amp of my Marantz (which otherwise is a fantastic amp) is not anything particular great so it was very close to that although the power was close to the limit for xDSD. xDSD seemed adequate enough and a great sounding combination. Maybe did not extract the full potential of 4XX planars but really I do not know the full potential of 4XX yet.
5. xDSD + HD6XX: I do not know my 6XX coming in 2 week supposedly. That would have been interesting test.

Negatives:

1. LDAC codec. I do not needed at the moment but this can change in any time. Given the Bluetooth sound quality of xDSD and the capabilities of the master clock I am really curious how the sound will be with the more bandwidth of LDAC. A potential game changer and I do not want next year to buy another 400£ portable amp. I think this should be offered as a firmware update even if I have personally to pay for the licence. Ifi says that there were not ready for this cycle but my understanding is if the chip is supporting that codec the rest is taken care from the master clock at the end of the chain but I am not an expert and this is a wild guess.
2. A similar app like the ES100 app. I am not sure how much an effect on sound quality has the app by using some Bluetooth bandwidth. But if not then it is super convenient. To use my phone and control the volume of xDSD remotely (this is where the new rotary knob comes handy). Also to be able to see the codex used on my phone for every device that using Bluetooth at the very moment. This functionality really astonished me in ES100. Battery indication, everything observable from the phone. If a company like radsone would not do it I would say that I am asking too much. But now that I have experienced it I think is doable and reasonable customer demand. I would also be willing to pay for the app.

Future directions:

1. Bluetooth transmitter: Because xDSD is so good and versatile actually we need 2. One can work as an ione where the other as the portable device. If ifi includes a bluetooth transmitter to the device one can act as a transmitter from the TV / streamer to the other on the sofa. An app on the phone can work as remote control. 2 xDSD with LDAC can be a wonderful combination. Ifi audio you can make more money with this.
2. Matte black version. The unit is a kind of black after all but as everyone already notice a shiny collecting device of fingerprints for the police department. The lights are a bit bright for night except the main where the ifi logo is a bit blair and I do not see the reason for that. The clean logo of ifi from ione is so much desirable. Some of the colours can change on ifi logo as the background of the logo to indicate different functions. (This is very minor and maybe not worth the trouble but I am just saying)
3. It needs repair every time you change from Bluetooth to wired mode. It needs a firmware update at some point to iron the Bluetooth bags. But is not so bad the other devices from other brands have bags as well.

Comparisons:

1. vs Little Bear : my little bear has the original opamp is not burned in yet properly as a tube amp and does not have a DAC. I do not want to make any definite conclusion yet and did not compare properly but xDSD sounded better. In any case, they can work together as shown in the picture.
2. vs ES100. I bought ES100 on an impulse because of a lighting amazon deal. It has an astonishingly shockingly good app and is extremely portable and convenient device. It is only 2 days that I got this devise I am not familiar with it and I am not using in balance mode but IMHO no comparison with the xDSD alone. I will try to use it in combination with little bear but at this point I am not sure even if I keep it. This does not mean that ES100 is not great device but after xDSD I cannot really enjoy ES100. On similar spirit, after I tried Lagavulin I cannot really enjoy the taste even of Johnny Black. Or putting in differently...

xDSD is like a package of cigarettes only far more addicting. But it is not like any other brand of cigarettes but only the very special kind as the title of this review clearly suggests. And contrary to smoking, xDSD is good for health since it will offer you countless hours of dancing in and out of the gym…

First of all, I need to apologize to all because I am not a headphone person, I have very budget headphones which I use only out of nessecity and my review will appear so poor in comparison with so many experts in this forum. I am posting in this forum simply because it is required as part of the loan review process. However, I will do the review in an informal way from the point of view of simple consumer that offers an honest opinion in order to help other consumers at his level to choose a product and I hope some of you will find this review somewhat useful. More importantly, I hope I will provide useful consumer feedback to Ifi audio to design new products that fullfil some additional requirements of a silent budget audiophile minority (or maybe a majority...)

To start with, my biggest concern regarding this device is the battery life. I thought that I had a default product since in any of my listening sessions I did not exceeded 2 hours of continuous listening. On my conserns Ifi responded with the following message :


'10 hours playback is possible but on low volume / headphone etc.
Charging time is around 3 hours'

It is true that I was listening on high volume because i liked the combination of using IEMatch and raising the volume a lot (without IEmatch the volume is so loud in lower settings) but I got this response after I returned the unit so simply I do not know if that is the case.
However, 2 hours battery life is a bit of deal breaker for me but I am not sure if this is the result of faulty unit or let's say an "illegitimate" usage from me.

Someone can avoid using the battery for instance if using a desktop or laptop or Network adapter like the raspberry pi or the USBridge. However, you need the battery for a connection with an ios device like the iPad or iPhone and although is not strictly required for practical reasons with an android device too.

I am an extremely happy owner of the ifi ione DAC so in my case I was interested in the mobile abilities of the nano Black. In my home set up the ione DAC is simply a dream so I would only consider to buy the nano for mobile use with my android phone or the iPad trying to reproduce the situation I experience in home for which I will discuss more thoroughly later.

The headphones I used in my testing are the following:

1) AKG Y50 50£
2) soundmagic e10c 40£
3) sennheiser hd 202 25£

All of them I consider them very good for the price but clearly belong in the super budget category and probably they do not do any justice to the quality/power of nano. However, the nano is a relatively affordable dac so this may make sense as well. If I had 1000£ headphone I would consider a lot more expensive dac/amplifiers and not even blink to buy the mojo, maybe the Hugo as well.

To my view the rivals to ifi nano Black are the mojo (because is so hyped and roughly the same footprint) and the audioquest dragonflys third generation.

Both Dragonflys, red or black, have the perfect footprint for me for mobile use and I would definitely have bought one over the two if I had an iPhone instead of my android phone. As it is widely known from forums the android system is not compatible with these DACs and you need the UAPP in order to enjoy the full benefit of these DACs. Unfortunately, it seems that this is the case for the Nano black. Is working great with UAPP but not so well outside the app. I heard some clicks and pops from time to time and although in the beginning I thought is the otg cable responsible now i believe is the android system so screwed for proper usb audio without an appropriate app. Recently, I discovered that I have problems with using my dragonfly even with my UAPP so I couldn't do a comparison between dragonfly and nano on my phone. I can't use it in my iOS devices because v1.2 takes so much power so I did a direct comparison only with my surface book where the nano black smoked in sound quality the dragonfly v1.2. (although to be completely honest the dragonfly was not used for much time at this point) but since I had done similar comparisons in the past between ione and dragonfly I call it a day after a few minutes of comparison. Which brings to my first observation, that in a desktop/laptop situation the nano black is so much better and easily justifies its lager footprint. Usually, in a laptop situation I use the tidal desktop app which I find very powerful with the exclusive mode and the MQA Decoding functionality. After updating the nano firmware the MQA in the latest firmware version the rendering could be used providing a noticeable improvement in MQA tidal master songs. I believe this is the strongest point of the nano black. In a desktop/laptop situation with MQA where it really thrives and has the biggest delta with a non MQA dac. It would be interesting to compare with the red version in an MQA setting but that was not possible in my case.

Because in my home set up ione was so much an improvement and better definitely than any of my previous DACs I am always wishing ifi to bring at least some portion of this sound quality to a dragonfly like form. For people like me with budget headphones that do not require a lot of power convenience is of ultimate importance. Another alternative, is to utilize the nano form factor with the Bluetooth functionality of ione. I am not fun of Bluetooth in home even in the best version available which is the ione implementation. Using usbridge or even raspberry pi provides so much more quality after paying the introductory price(in time) of setting up a system like that.

But on the road where the ambient noise plays an important role and where compromises can be made this can be excellent solution. Even in the nano form you can have nano in one pocket phone in the other and go even in the gym.

On the iPad, nano is good as well but the tidal app does not utilise fully the abilities of this dac. The blue cable provided in the box has excellent sound quality but behaves as a diva. With my iPad most of the times did not work. When it works is very good but only when it works. Maybe loves usb 3 ports more. I have similar experience with the blue usb supplied with my ione.

I used the nano also in my home set up where I did not spend a lot of comparison time between this and the usb input of ione. I took as a given that they sound very similar and this is also confirmed by a brief observation more or less. So I am taking the liberty to comment on the sound quality of the nano dac from my previous experience from the ione and combine my experiences.

My home set up consists of a marantz 6005 pm amplifier (300£) and a tannoy DC6T speakers that I got on offer for 250£ and voted best speakers for few years in the 800-1500£ category by the what hifi magazine. A very budget system again with some potential. However, before using the ifi dac or the ipurifier I was somewhat in disbelief for the ability of these speakers. I thought that maybe the amp was not able to realise the full potential or simply they were overestimated. I had also the belief that all budget DACs sound more or less the same so no further music satisfaction could be achieved until I upgrade my system considerably. That was before ifi arrived in town. First with the ipurifier and then with ione. Immediately, the improvement was substantial the amp and the speakers made an unbelievable combination that defied their price. Further tweaks, like a tube preamplifier, good RCA cables and the USBridge elevated the sound even further. If my speakers on 250£ pounds deserve every single penny the same is true for the ifi products. The ifi DACs transform the sound in two ways. One is through their ipurifier technology and the other through the DAC section.

The sound signature of this dac I believe depends very much on the synergy. In my home set up with the warm marantz, the tube preamplifier section and my RCA cables the sound is warm, dynamic, transparent powerful and full of energy. Another way to put it is that the sound transformed to the equivalent sound of a hifi system that is one price category above without being fatiguing so you can listen for many hours.

However, the ifi dac alone in a different system or the black alone with my headphones had a different behaviour and someone could say that it has neither excess warmness nor brightness. This is a positive for me, because it can be manipulated according to tastes. As such, I was getting more pleasure from my home set up rather than using the nano black with my laptop. Another observation, is that the nano black played better with the power supply taken from an ifi ipower through a usbridge and jitterbug than its internal power from its battery.

This brings me to the following conclusions.

1) An excellent DAC in absolute levels however you need to read other reviews (as I will do) for a comparison with the biggest rivals such as mojo and dragonfly red.

2) Not very transportable. I prefer/need so much more the small factor of dragonfly. Alternatively, it needs the Bluetooth functionality to be truly convenient. If IFI manages to do that can make a budget Poly/Mojo killer with the nano form factor.

3) For home set up I definitely prefer ione. It has the same sound quality and offers so much more functionality. The spdif implementation is from another planet and elevates the TV system to extraordinary levels.

4) The battery for me is the big question. Nobody complained so far so maybe is my unit or I was doing something wrong. But 2 hours is two little this is an issue for me. The point is that it sounds so good that you want to raise the volume, if that deplates the battery excessively what is the point then?

5) It would be nice to have MQA Decoding functionality as well. With UAPP you can have tidal with mobile devices and with Kodi/tidal 2 add on in home without a PC.

6) The sound signature of IFI I believe is one of the best in the market and the one I clearly prefer. Please package this in more devices of different forms.

7) The volume knob is a big plus for me and the strongest advantage against dacs like the mojo. For me it feels like the throttle in a bike. You give more when you need or want and the feeling is amazing. Maybe this is why I had two hours of battery only in my listening sessions. Ifi please NEVER remove the knob from your devices when needed.

Probably, I will not buy this device simply because it does not cover my mobile needs but if it covers your requirements then I really recommend this product. I do not know if it is the best dac under 500£ and how compares with all its rivals but I know that: it sounds really really good in order to write a review 4 hours before new year Eve!

Happy new year everyone!