A re-release done right!

Oh yes, I can finally say that a company has not let down its customers with a re-release. How many times have you seen a manufacturer re-release a popular model and completely ruin it and change it up from the original version? I’ll tell you: too many times. The whole purpose of re-releasing a product is to refresh it, but most importantly, to improve the “bads” and keep the “goods”. As a customer, I do not want a downgrade in quality in a re-release, neither do I want a warm sound signature if the original one had an analytical sound signature (and vice versa). TRI masterfully kept the good's and implemented several changes and improvements. Welcome the i3 Pro!

Unboxing Experience


As someone who greatly appreciates good marketing, all I can say is “My goodness! What an experience”. Hats off to the design team responsible for the packaging. The cover is what made my jaw drop. The design is very minimalist yet very modern and attractive. On the front, there are holographic lines which follow a circular pattern and are slightly dented into the cover’s surface. In the center there is a simple white print of the company’s name [TRI] and the model’s name [i3 Pro]. The background print resembles a purplish galaxy. However, the holographic details truly set this packaging apart. Also, it’s very nice to see that there is no repetition on the sides. The left side of the packaging features a large print of company’s name and logo, while the right side has a print of “Continue classic, beyond classic” in three languages (my guess is that it’s: Chinese, English, Japanese). On the back, there are vague details such as the driver setup, specifications, and company details.

If you thought the goodies stop there, you are mistaken. Once you slide the cover off, you are met with a rubbery matte box. So far, it’s the most pleasant material I have seen being used for a cardboard box. I hope the company keeps using this material in its other models, because it truly gives off premium vibes. In this box you will find all the contents placed inside of a foam insert — something I can say I’m used to.

Formal format of what’s inside:

1x cleaning cloth
4x silicone ear-tips (S/M/L)
5x KBEAR silicone ear-tips (S/SM/M/M/L)
1x 3.5mm cable
1x 3.5mm plug plastic cover
1x leather carrying case

Click to expand...

Silver Surfer is back at it again

It would be a true shame if the i3 Pro didn’t retain the authentic i3 silhouette. Fortunately for everyone, the silhouette is still here. The main changes between the previous i3 and the new i3 Pro are related to the physical size. A 26% reduction in size is the biggest and most obvious change. The purpose of this was to make the IEMs both more comfortable and more lightweight. Besides this, the shells still have the “wavy” design on the faceplate, they are still made of two pieces, and the overall shape is pretty much the same.

Some of the more notable changes that might not be as apparent are: 4 vents, 2-pin connectors, completely different nozzle design, different nozzle grill.

For reference: the original i3 only had a single small vent that was located on the side, and it used MMCX connectors. In my opinion, the switch to 2-pin connectors is a major improvement and step in the right direction. I think we can say that 2-pin connectors are a industry standard. Many people have a collection of 2-pin cables, which means they can finally use them. The nozzle on the original i3 model was both longer and the ear-tips could be placed in two different ways. What made that nozzle special is that it featured a lip in the middle of the nozzle, whereas the new i3 Pro (and many other IEMs) uses a lip at the very tip of the nozzle. The grills differ by design. The original grill featured a slanted oval design, and the new grill features a significantly more dense circular design.

Interestingly enough, while looking through online images of the TRI i3 Pro, I found that many of them featured the old grill… This leaves me to question which grill the IEMs use (there are clearly two different grill versions).

Edit: It turns out that TRI did release a 2-pin version of the i3 at some point in time. However, the original i3 that I posses uses MMCX connectors.

The reduction in size is without a doubt a huge improvement, but I’m uncertain whether I can say the same for the other changes that were implemented. The shorter nozzle that doesn’t give you the flexibility of two different iterations of the ear-tips is a drawback, if you ask me. At first, I experienced driver flex issues. However, that was because I received a prototype pair that had very dense grills. Since the i3 Pro features 4 vents, it made no sense as to why there was driver flex occurring. I haven’t experienced driver flex on the original i3, so it wasn’t logical for the more vented design to introduce driver flex issues. I suspected that the grills were the cause of these issues, and I was right! After I received a pair of grills that are included on the commercially available release, the driver flex issues were gone.



Build Quality & Cable

““Life in plastic, it’s fantastic” is the complete opposite of what the TRI i3 has to offer - not a single plastic piece was used in its construction” — from my original i3 review.

This still holds to be true. The shells are still made of an aluminum alloy (according to the marketing, 7000-series aluminum alloy is used). 7000-series aluminum alloys are used in wing bearings and landing gears, which require the highest strengths and strongest reinforcements. Fun fact: 7000-series aluminum alloys have the highest strengths of all other aluminum alloys. Apple has used it in their watches, phones (e.g. iPhone 6s). TRI actually did reveal that they are using specifically the 7050 aluminum alloy, so there you have it.

In terms of the cable, it’s a 50/50. Don’t get me wrong, the cable itself is amazing, but I just have a thing for the old cable. The positive “50” is that it’s finally a 2-pin cable, while the negative is that it’s not the old cable. The funny thing is that it appears as though even the cable was later changed in the original i3. The cable that I am talking about is the same cable featured in the photos in my i3 review. It was a loosely braided 4-core cable. I liked it both for its pinkish look and its lightweight nature. I’m sure many prefer the new cable (referring to both the new i3 Pro and the newer versions of the original i3), but I personally prefer the old one. On the positive side of things, i3 Pro’s cable features all-metal housings (2-pin connector housings, chin slider, Y-Splitter housing, 3.5mm connector housing).

Comfort

I want to keep this section sweet and short.

Compared to the i3, the i3 Pro has a deeper fit and a more relaxed seal. The original i3 had a shallow fit, but had a very tight seal. Something to take into consideration is the fact that the ear-tips I use on the i3 are considerably larger and longer than the ones I use on the i3 Pro. This has an effect of both the insertion depth and the seal, so, keep this in mind!

Both IEMs are very comfortable and could be worn for hours. Obviously, i3 Pro will be the more logical choice to take if you are going outside, because the weight reduction truly does make a difference.

The change in the nozzle design is also noticeable in the ears. The new i3 Pro disappears in your ears, while the older i3 was always kind of present in your ears. The older i3 also feels heavier (the good kind of “heavy”) in the ears.

Sound Performance​

Lows

The sub-woofer-like quality in the bass region is still here to stay. This is one of the key factors that made me fall in love with the i3. There is a distinct track that truly set the old i3 apart from other IEMs.

Let’s start out with my standard bass quality test tracks: “Hydrogen” by MOON, “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss. Listening to the first track, I noticed that the mid-bass is thick and “heavy”. In other words, a lot of bass quantity. Upon closer listening, I came to the conclusion that the definition suffers a bit, the “cleanliness” isn’t quite there. The fast attack is there, but once the planar-magnetic driver puts out all of that bass, it sticks around for a bit, causing it to have a slower decay.

Sub-bass. Hmm. I absolutely adored the old i3 for its sub-bass capability, and am sure some of you are aware of my admiration of its performance in Arctic Monkeys’ “Do I Wanna Know?”. This is the “one distinct track” that I was referring to in the beginning. i3 Pro carries a similar quantity, but differs in quality. Much like the mid-bass, the i3 Pro is less aggressive and has less “oomph” than its older brother. This was also apparent in Hans Zimmer’s “Why so Serious?”.

These differences in quality and quantity are very subtle. I for sure can see how one may not notice them if they are not performing analytical A/B tests. I had to go back and forth listening to a single element dozens of times to notice these differences. Once you notice them, you can’t really unhear them.

Update: After directly contacting KBEAR, I was informed that TRI i3 Pro is easier to drive than the original i3. However, after closer inspection, I found out that the specifications of these two IEMs are just about identical. Ms. Wendy from KB EAR clarified that i3 Pro should be easier to drive on your phone. With this in mind, I will take this answer as though there is no loudness difference between the two, making my comparison valid.

Mids

I’m tapping my feet because the new i3 Pro is very different in tonality and mid-range compared to the original i3. I did a simple test, having the i3 Pro in my left ear, and the i3 in my right ear. I went through a couple of tracks and noticed the distinct difference in tonality. I noticed that the new i3 Pro sounds much more natural and cleaner in the mid-range.

For example, the guitar in “Do I Wanna Know” by Arctic Monkeys, and the guitar & vocals in “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, are quite different. However, I later noticed that “Do I Wanna Know” has a guitar tonality difference on the left & right sides, making my initial impressions invalid. On the other had, “Soldier of Fortune” has a vocal that’s in the middle, which means that the difference I heard was true. The original i3 has a nasal-like quality in the vocals compared to the clean-sounding vocals in the new i3 Pro. I also noticed that the vocals are muddy compared to the vocals in the i3 Pro, which are not only more natural, but also have more body.



Highs

I came to a similar conclusion here.

Going through my two standard treble testing tracks “Portia” by Miles Davis and “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott, I found that the new i3 Pro has slightly more edge. This is something that people like me will enjoy, but shouldn’t be a turn off for those who enjoyed the old i3. It’s not a drastic difference, but is an audible one. It’s one step closer to having sparkle (a trait I adore, but one that many are scared of).

I don’t wanna ramble for too long, as though I believe I worded my self pretty well in my original i3 review.

The point is that KBEAR listened and introduced more edge in the new i3 Pro. It’s the right move (imo), and makes the whole listening experience more enjoyable.

Soundstage & Imaging

Both of these have great soundstage and imaging, but the older model is better due to the greater shell size. I went back through my original i3 review and relistened some of the tracks I mentioned in the “Soundstage” section, and I have noticed i3 being more “larger-sounding”.

For example, “Dogs” by Pink Floyd, from mark 3:48 - 3:59 — both of these showcase great imaging capabilities, but the original i3 has the drums really rolling around your head. Perhaps, this has to do with its low end, because the drums sound bigger, have a bigger “thump”, and sound more voluminous. Both soundstage and imaging were i3’s pride, making them one of the few IEMs for which the term “holographic” holds true to its meaning.

Conclusion​

I am aware that this review isn’t as thorough as my original i3 review, but I find these two IEMs to share a lot in common. I didn’t want to repeat myself, as though they only delicately differ from each other.

KBEAR didn’t ruin the original sound, but did make slight changes (whether they were intentional or were a result of the physical size change) that separate these from each other. Both the original i3 and the new i3 Pro differ enough from each other to make both worth keeping. This is something that matters in my eyes, because if the new fully replaced the old one, the original buyers might feel disrespected or even unsatisfied owning the original i3.

The original TRI i3, in my opinion, really put the brand on the map. It attracted a lot of attention. I remember when I was very active in the IEM forums on Head-Fi, and I remember seeing the i3 blossom. It started catching people’s attention, and I glad that I was able to be a part of those early stages. I can say that I put a great amount of effort into composing the original i3 review, and I was very happy to see it started getting recognized for the same qualities that I initially mentioned in my review.

The new i3 Pro is more of an “option” for those who either found the original i3 to be too large, too heavy, or not portable enough. It's for people who want to hear a more refined and toned down version of the original i3, but also at a smaller form factor. For those who found the original too bassy, and want to hear more qualities in the mid-range, this release might be worth your time… and wallet

Setup:
DX300 + AMP11 mk1
Gain: Mid
Volume: 43-47

Original i3 review: https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/tri-i3.24171/review/23896/

SIVGA is back with a new entry-level headphone. Welcome Robin (SV021), a brand-new $150 closed-back headphone from the Chinese manufacturer SIVGA.

Unboxing Experience


SV021 comes in a black box that is made of the same material that the Phoenix box is made off. It features a simpler packaging design, without the angled lid and the different color packaging that was featured in the Phoenix.

Once you take the lid off, the contents are pretty standard (referring to SIVGA standards): the headphones are sat in some black foam, and the pouch and the cable are in the middle. There is a cutout in the middle of the foam for the pouch and the cable.

Formal format of what’s inside

1x 3.5mm cable
1x canvas pouch

Click to expand...

Build Quality & Cable

SIVGA still stands for “Wood. Metal. Precision”. As you will find out the further you read into this review, I will often make comparisons between the SV004 and the Phoenix.

SV021 is a considerable step up in build quality over the previous budget models from this company. The quality of the metal is just a whole league above, making it valid to put it in the same bracket with the metals used in the Phoenix, P-II, or Sendy Audio’s newest Peacock. Unlike the metals used in those models, this metal has a gorgeous satin finish. It’s very smooth and premium looking.

Both the ear-pads and the headband are made of very thin pleather. Since I don’t have the SV004 with me anymore, I cannot make a direct comparison of the pleather between the two. All I can say is that I have a reasonable concern of the longevity due to thickness of it.

The cable? It’s actually the same fabric cable that comes with the Phoenix. I’m a braided cable type of guy, but this fabric cable is beyond acceptable. You can actually put it away and it will hold its shape. However, the usual fabric cable problems are still present (e.g. weird twisting loops while the cable is lying down, microphonics). For $150, it’s nice to get a high-quality cable with all-metal housings and stress reliefs.



Design

Visually, these are eye candy. After all, these were my first impressions before I even had them in hand. Something I’d like to clear up straight away is that the design differs between the two available colors. The materials are exactly the same, the silhouette is exactly the same, but the finish of the wood differs (besides the obvious pleather color difference).

The black version features dark wood (think dark walnut) with a silk/satin finish. This finish gives it a truly unique look, making the surface seem as though it has a special rubber finish/coating. The surface of the wood reflects some light, but not in the way that a shiny finish would. There is this “sheen” to it that makes it a silk/satin finish. Regardless, I think it’s important to point out that the wood is not black!

The pleather (headband, ear-pads) is black, with the headband featuring silver stitching (it appears silver in color, but it could be white).

Then come the metal parts. Ughhh… in my opinion the most attractive elements in this headphone. The metal parts are in a gunmetal finish, which also features a silk finish. However, compared to the ear-cups, it reflects much more light, which allows it show off the gorgeous curvature.

The headphone yoke is silky smooth in design, featuring very beautiful & sleek curves.

When it comes to the headband adjustment system, this is a first for me. It functions by having a spring and a small metal ball that makes the clicks audible and tactile, but this ball features no protective/soft coating, resulting in scraping of the metal ridges on the headphone yoke. You can see this mechanism yourself if you unscrew the two screws on the part that features the “L”, “R” labels. It’s interesting that the headphone yoke can be fully removed if you do unscrew this piece. The positive to this is that if someone want to, they can make a custom headband (probably with the help of 3D printing).

Besides these elements, the ear-cup design is fairly simple. It’s not a circular, it’s not oval, it’s the shape of these two combined. Imagine if you had a circle and an oval shape that was overlapping it. This is how I’d describe it. Or, if I was not to complicate it, it’s an egg shape.

The ear-cups feature a flat surface one the upper outer part, and this is also where the “SIVGA” logo is carved out.

Per SIVGA’s Phoenix standards, SV021 also features dual mono 2.5mm connectors. They are located on the underside of the ear-cups, just like in just about every other pair of headphones.

The fatal flaw​

Everything up until to this point has been positive. The build quality is great, the cable is great for the price, the design is very attractive, but there is something that, in my opinion, is a fatal flaw: the lack of horizontal rotation of the ear-cups.

If you ask me, this is a result of lazy engineering and design. When it comes to designing a headphone for the masses (the consumer market), your aim as a designer is for the product to satisfy the greatest number of people. At first, if you don’t think about it at all, having ear-cups fixed at a 90˚ angle sounds like it wouldn’t cause any problems, but when you look at the human face anatomy, you realize that that doesn’t really work.

Don’t get me wrong, we all have different sized ears, faces, heads, etc., but I do have to put an emphasis on this area because I think there is someone out there who might run across the same problem as me and will not be satisfied with his/her purchase.

Where is the problem? So, when you combine flat ear-pads and ear-cups fixed in a 90˚ angle, you get a “404 error”. The ear-pads “float”. In the frontal part (towards the face), the ear-cups lie pretty well against the face, but in the back (towards the back of the head), there is this empty space. This empty space has a negative effect on both the sound performance and isolation. This is not a minimal impact, but quite the opposite — severe.

It negatively effects: sound quality, comfort, isolation.

That’s three great aspects, and all of them could’ve been fixed with a small amount of horizontal “wiggle”, or with angled pads (pads that are tapered towards the front: thicker towards the back, thinner towards the front). No, we don’t need 180˚ of horizontal rotation, but as little as 15˚ of rotation would’ve made a day and night difference.

The Unjustified Solution​

For $150 (MSRP), certain expectations are present, even though they are not necessarily high, they are present.

In the grand scale, 150 bucks isn’t a lot, right? To you, the reader, the answer is probably “No”, but to a young individual who is just starting out in this hobby, that’s “everything” and “a lot”. Many of us “audiophiles” are surrounded by expensive products, making it very easy to overlook the true value of some cheaper products. Whether you are young or old, I, as an author, want to give you an honest review that ensures that you do not waste your money.

The young individual or the individual that doesn’t have a big bank, I write this with you in mind.

People like me and Zeos receive free review samples, once again, making it very easy to overlook the true value of something.

After seeing Zeos’ video of him bending the SV021 in the most extreme angles, I gathered enough confidence to do the same myself. I thought to myself “This is a $150 headphone. If it breaks, it breaks”.

I simply could not write a review with the horizontal rotation problem present. I knew that this headphone is capable of much, much more (because once I physically pressed the ear-cups against my ears, the performance was significantly better).

So... I gave it my all. Twisting the ear-cups and the headband in the most extreme and cringe-worthy angles. Of course, I was twisting the ear-cups outwards, that way they lie on my head at an angle.

Did I achieve my goal? Mostly yes. There is still a small space behind the ear-pads, but I can physically feel the isolation, and can also hear the improvement in the sonic performance — it sounds much like the sonic performance I heard while I was physically holding the ear-cups against my ears.

Is it sound or plausible to expect a person to “maul” their brand-new $150 headphones? NO. That’s a firm “no”. Sure, if you have money to experiment with and these headphones are “just another pair” in your collection, then you probably don’t mind breaking the headband and ordering a replacement one. However, someone just starting out is simply not going to be comfortable (nor should they be!) with bending their headphones just so they can comfortable sit on their head.

The Unfortunate Result of "The Unjustified Solution"​

What I didn't tell you is that after the extreme bending, both headphone yokes were broken. Should an average buyer be expected to literally break their brand-new headphones just so they can listen to them? No. And, SIVGA, do not take this as bashing or a personal attack, but this is just a rational look at a very, very serious issue. If you care about the people who do not get a perfect fit with fixed ear-cups, you should bring back horizontal rotation!

While the yokes did get broken, I am suspecting it's the plastic part that got torn from the excessive outward force I was putting while bending the ear-cups. The headphone yokes themselves are made of metal, but it is probably held in place with some sort of plastic. The broken plastic is visually apparent on the pleather part, where it sticks out and can be felt when moving your finger/hand over it. It didn't pierce through the pleather headband, but the plastic inside got broken without a doubt.



Comfort

After bending the headphones like a maniac, I can finally say that they sit alright on my head —the way that they should’ve sat out of the box.

I’m pretty sure that you are well aware of the extremely soft ear-pads by this point. I’d have to agree with Zeos that these are the softest ear-pads.

This can either be a plus or a minus. The plus is that it’s “formless”. It adapts to your face. The minus is that… it’s “formless”. It compresses by a great amount. I personally learned to love them, but I can imagine that someone with a larger head may be getting a different experience.

Smaller head = less clamp force = less ear-pad compression/deformation

Bigger head = more clamp force = more ear-pad compression/deformation

You could solve this by stretching the headband to your liking… but then again, it’s impractical.

If we are talking about comfort, these are very, very comfortable. I had no hot spots with them and experienced no sweating. The majority of the comfort comes from the combination of the lightweight nature of the SV021 and the thick, soft ear-pads.

For anyone wondering, I experienced no discomfort with over an hour of use.

Sound Performance​

As you will find out, I will make a number of observations and comparisons between the SV021 and the Phoenix. In theory, the two should sound alike due to the mutual driver…

Lows

Phoenix had a truly wonderful low-end response. It was deep, thumpy, and it could growl. SV021 is all that but on steroids. Due to the closed-back design, there is significantly more quantity, but at the cost of quality.

I went through a number of my bass testing tracks and I came to the same conclusion with all of them. Whether it was the introduction in “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys, the sub-bass drop in “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, the bass as a whole in “Lose Yourself to Dance” & “One More Time” by Daft Punk, Phoenix always had more definition and a more refined low-end.

Mids

Comparing the SV021 to the Phoenix is like comparing apples to oranges… or as Gino D’Acampo said “If my grandmother had wheels, she would’ve been a bike”. Of course, I constantly have to make a comparison between the two because they share the same driver, but the sound performance is where the two headphones go their separate ways. We are talking about a $150 headphone and a $255 headphone (currently going for $310 on Aliexpress).

Playing Rainbow’s “Catch The Rainbow” in DSD64 on the DX300 (mid gain, D5 filter; SV021: 60% volume, Phoenix: 50%) through MANGO OS, Phoenix has more neutral and clear mids. This can be easily heard just by focusing on Ronnie James Dio’s vocals. If you are focusing on the mid-rage quality, you will be able to hear that SV021 has more of a tinny quality.

Highs

Same thing here. Highs are brighter and less refined than on the Phoenix.

Once again, I went through some of my go-to testing tracks: “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott, “Portia” by Miles Davis. Like I always say, the first track is only used to listen to the very last portion of the song where Stevie Wonder plays his mouth harmonica. In both of these tracks SV021 proved to be brighter and sharper, whereas Phoenix was more controlled and sustained.

What does this tell you?

It tells you that the $150 SV021 cannot compare to the $255/$300 Phoenix. If you have the money, I’d highly recommend going for the Phoenix, it is “that” much better.

When directly compared to the Phoenix, the SV021 looks bad. So, I decided to compare it to something that is more of a match (in both the closed-back nature and the pad thickness): Dekoni Audio Blue (MSRP $300; can be currently bought for $250 directly from Dekoni Audio; occasionally shows up for $200 on Drop)

Set up:

DAP: iBasso DX300 + AMP11 MK1.1

Dekoni Audio Blue: High gain, 70% volume

SIVGA SV021: Mid gain, 60% volume



Lows

“Do I Wanna Know” by Arctic Monkeys — introduction. SV021 has a stronger impact with more quantity and presence, whereas Blue is more controlled. SV021 has more of a “oomph” due to its deeper sub-bass response.

“Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer — 3:26. Like with the mid-bass, SV021 has a deeper response with more presence. There is more quantity and more volume (not referring to loudness) in the sub-bass.

“Hydrogen” by MOON. SV021 has significantly stronger impact and more “oomph”. It has head-shaking levels of bass quantity. Blue is more controlled and tame — it has better quality (faster attack & decay, snappier response).

If SV021 is a club where you get that head-shaking bass, then Blue is your conventional audiophile headphone with that more refined bass response.

SV021: quantity.
Blue: quality.

Mids

Neither of these two will blow you away in terms of mid-range quality.

SV021 sounds more tinny and aggressive, while Blue sounds more muffled and distant.

Used “Soldier Of Fortune” by Deep Purple for the comparison.

Highs

Listening to “Portia” by Miles Davis and “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott, SV021 comes off as the more forward of the two. It has more aggressive highs, but not by a great amount. Of course, the difference is easily noticeable, but I can say that with the DX300, Blue sounds pretty great in the upper end. The sharp notes still sound sharp on the Blue, but aren’t quite as forward and peaky as on the SV021

Conclusion​

To be honest, I’m highly disappointed with this release. Almost to the point where I’m hurt. Having such a great past experience with both SIVGA and its products, this feels like a major let down.

I think it’s very important for any business to have the ambition and goal of growing. The goal of getting closer to perfection and satisfying its customer base. This was present in what SIVGA did in the past, like the release of thicker pads for the Phoenix, but it feels like there has been a major step back with the SV021.

I don’t know, maybe I’m just being too harsh due to the comparisons and overall experience I got with the SV021. I know Zeos loved them, but then, how many products are there that he didn’t like… Not too many.

So, I’m going to let this section be a dedicated section for my honest feedback.

Having success with a driver in one model doesn’t necessarily mean that you can have a success by transplanting the same driver in a closed-back design.

Also, with Mr. Collin's comments and denial (not enough attention was paid to the negative feedback) of the problems, the marketing felt very, very forced — giving the company a bad look (once again!) and making it seem like it put business in front of customer satisfaction.

If you are not listening to any other headphones, these can be enjoyable, but comparing the SV-21 to other options on the market leaves no space for it.


SIVGA, I still believe in you as a company! Please come back and be more responsible with customer's feedback. The people who are buying your products are your customers, they should be your top priority. If you do not take the necessary steps to take in your customer's feedback and constructive criticism, you will see a lot of your fan-base leaving. You must take care of the people who love & support you.

I typically never write negative reviews because they feel like a waste of time (why put so much energy into something negative?), but since I think your company has the potential to make great products, I wrote this one.

KBEAR is back at it again, but this time with a very bold & strong statement: Aurora. Meet the brand-new single dynamic IEM from the Chinese manufacturer that is best known for its good price-to-performance products. As most of you know KBEAR has two brands: KBEAR, which specializes in budget-friendly products, and TRI, which is the premium sister company of KBEAR.

KBEAR was exclusively manufacturing budget-friendly, <$100 products, but broke that rule with its Believe model which was priced $180. From what it appears, the company is exploring the mid-priced market, as though Aurora is priced at $169.

In my opinion, Aurora is the company’s most complete product to date.


Unboxing Experience


What a presentation! What an experience!

I was absolutely stunned when the package arrived — and keep in mind, I received the TRI i3 Pro recently, which also featured a stunning package. The marketing team definitely knew what they were doing when they designed the packaging for the Aurora.

Aurora comes in a rectangular white box. You probably aren’t imagining anything exciting when you read “a rectangular white box”, but it is the holographic accents that set it apart — much like the accents present in TRI i3 Pro’s packaging. First of all, the box is oriented horizontally, having a large “X-Ray” illustration positioned to the right on the front-facing side. The illustration features the previously-mentioned holographic finish on outline and the “KB EAR” logo. Besides the holographic logo in the bottom-left corner, this is the only visual detail on the box itself. What filled in the emptiness is the slide-on cover that features even more holographic accents.

The cover features the company’s logo in white, while the surrounding area has the same holographic finish as other parts of the packaging. This cover also features the model’s name, driver array, and company name in a holographic finish. Once you flip it to the side, you will find all the company’s contact information. Flip it once more to get to the back side, and here you can read all the specifications (in three languages: Chinese, English, Japanese).

… You’d think that the packaging is over at this point and that you’ll find the average black foam and classic arrangement inside. Nope. Once you finally open up the box, you will be met with a big foam “insert” that features a green aurora, strengthening the model’s name. This foam insert covers the IEMs and the synthetic leather carrying case. What it does not cover is the little white compartment on the side, which once again features the “AURORA” model name in a holographic finish.

The compartment on the side has all the KB EAR ear-tips, while the carrying case houses the cable, a cleaning brush, and 3 pairs of grey ear-tips. Also, not to forget, there is a sneaky little “pouch” on the lid. You will find the cleaning cloth inside this pouch.

Formal format of what’s inside:

1x 3.5mm cable
4x KB EAR ear-tips (S/SM/M/L)
3x grey ear-tips (S/M/L)
1x blue-ish ear-tips
1x cleaning brush
1x cleaning cloth

Click to expand...

Design

If TRON:LEGACY was an IEM, it would be KBEAR's Aurora. I can safely say that, aesthetic-wise, Aurora is the company’s most complete design.

Everything revolves around the blue aesthetic. Blue is the color of this model, and it won’t take you long to notice it.

Let’s start from the shell design. Aurora features the same mirror finish that we have seen in the i3 series. On the face-plate there are chrome blue accents. Both the “KB EAR” typography logo and the outline are in this accent color. Speaking of the face-plate, towards the 2-pin connector area, there is an elevation to the surface. This curvature is beautifully showed off with the chrome paint. This is also the part where the typography logo is printed, so all the attention is lead to this specific part.

On the side, “AURORA” is printed in the same chrome blue color as the rest of the accent elements. It’s also worth noting that the shells are made up of two pieces: the faceplate, the bottom body. On the 2-pin connector side, the faceplate features a small vent.

L/R indicators are etched into the inner side of the bottom body. The bottom body also features a single vent — making Aurora a two-vented IEM.

The nozzles are considerably shorter than the ones featured on TRI models. Something that I am also not used to seeing are the grills. Besides being extremely tight-knit (almost solid in appearance), they are not exposed. The lip of the nozzle grips over the grills, acting almost like a partial enclosure which houses the grills below itself.

So, there are several “loud” blue accents on the IEMs themselves, and that by itself is enough… However, KBEAR decided to go a step further by featuring blue-ish ear-tips and a blue cable. This ladies & gentlemen is the reason why I consider Aurora the most complete design aesthetic-wise.



Build Quality & Cable

If I am not mistaken, Aurora is made of the same aluminum that the i3 series is made of. If that’s the case, the following quote from my i3 Pro review is also valid for this model:

“The shells are still made of an aluminum alloy (according to the marketing, 7000-series aluminum alloy is used). 7000-series aluminum alloys are used in wing bearings and landing gears, which require the highest strengths and strongest reinforcements. Fun fact: 7000-series aluminum alloys have the highest strengths of all other aluminum alloys. Apple has used it in their watches, phones (e.g. iPhone 6s). TRI actually did reveal that they are using specifically the 7050 aluminum alloy, so there you have it.”

The included cable is one of the better cables I’ve come across. If I am not mistaken, it’s a 6-strand silver-plated copper cable. I like cables that are very flexible, not too heavy, well-built, and nice in touch (this is more of a luxury, not a necessity) — and Aurora’s cable certainly has all that. The blue sheathing is made of a softer material than usual, giving the cable a silk-like aesthetic and feel.

i really want to put an emphasis on how well made the cable is. Finally we see all metal housings (3.5mm plug, Y-Splitter, chin slider, 2-pin connectors). Not only that, but there is a functional chin slider, unlike the useless plastic bead chin slider which is loved by the manufacturers, hated by me. I also like how they went for something a little bit more attractive for the 2-pin connector housings. They have this nice form that makes them more interesting. While a subtle detail, it is something that completes the overall aesthetic of this IEM.

The cables flexibility makes it very easy to put away and it holds it shape quite well. The 2-pin connectors slide in effortlessly. I greatly appreciate both of these, because one of the biggest pet peeves of mine is when the cable cannot be rolled up.

Comfort & Fit

I had a positive experience in terms of comfort with just about every IEM from KBEAR/TRI. However, the ones that I’ve spent the most time with are TRI Starshine and TRI i3. Both of these IEMs are very bulky and big, and that’s the same way they feel in the ear.

Aurora is different. This is a much slimmer IEM, making it an ideal daily driver. I have been using the Jade Audio EA3 as a daily driver for over 2 years, and Aurora provides me a similar comfort level. If anything, Aurora has a deeper fit and a tighter seal. However, the relaxed and lightweight feel are the two main reasons why I have not switched out the EA3 as my daily driver. Aurora carries both of these qualities. I love it.

If I was to be nit-picky and put some attention on an imperfection it would be that the ear guides were stiff out of the box. The didn’t have the usual ear shape, but after some careful bending and flexing they adopted it.

Sound Performance​

Lows

I am going to go from 0 to 100 straight away. I think that this is the fastest and cleanest low-end response I’ve heard from an IEM, though it’s worth noting that I don’t have the most experience with IEMs. I’ve only gone through a handful, so take this with a grain of salt. There’s definitely something special going on here, and I like it very much.

Aurora has shown its low-end capabilities in both MOON’s “Hydrogen” and Lee Curtiss’ “Smoking Mirrors”, my two standard testing tracks. The attack & decay are both very responsive and fast. Comparing Aurora to TRI’s new i3 Pro, the bass is better defined on Aurora, but doesn’t go as deep as i3 Pro. The difference is not subtle, it’s very easy to pick up and hear Aurora’s snappier & tighter bass response.

When it comes to sub-bass, TRI i3 Pro has more sub-bass presence and quantity, while Aurora has better quality. Of course, the track that I am using to evaluate sub-bas qualities is Hans Zimmer’s trusty “Why so Serious?” at the 3:27 minute mark. If there is any need to mention it, Aurora is not able to produce the growling rumble in Arctic Monkeys’ “Do I Wanna Know?” like the TRI i3 and i3 Pro are able to.

Something to note is that, while better in quality than the i3 Pro, Aurora is not an IEM that has a balanced low frequency response. I would say it is somewhere between the usual hard V-Shaped response and a balanced response. When I say “balanced”, I am referring to IEMs with a fairly linear frequency response where the bass doesn’t stick out — think HiFiMan IEMs or BQEYZ’s Spring line.

Once I listened to Aurora and compared it to Starshine, it really made me realize how important a dynamic driver is. The quantity, the quality, the snappiness, the speed — all of these qualities come from a dynamic driver. But this is just about where the comparison between Aurora and Starshine ends, as though Aurora is more of a V-Shaped IEM, while Starshine is more of a balanced mid-centric IEM.



Mids

After going back and forth between Aurora and i3 Pro, I made the conclusion that Aurora has a fuller and sharper mid-range. On the other hand, I found that i3 Pro gets the upper hand when it comes to lower mid-range.

Aurora has more edge and is brighter than the i3 Pro — peaky tracks have more edge on Aurora (e.g. “Strange Fruit” by Nina Simone, “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Joan Baez). Which one is better is a matter of preference and taste. I personally like brighter tuning in general, I just like to hear the details in the top end.

Being a V-Shaped headphone, the mid-range lacks clarity and dynamics compared to a mid-centric IEM, and that’s completely normal. Stringed instruments sound fine — not great, not bad. Obviously, I do have some bias towards mid-centric IEMs because that is my personal preference.



Highs

I love Aurora’s top-end. It’s sharp, shimmery, and semi-aggressive, just the way I like it. It’s not shying away from having a treble extension.

In both “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott and “Portia” by Miles Davis — my standard sparkle and treble quality testing tracks — Aurora proved to be a tad bit brighter than the i3 Pro. If I was to describe it in greater detail, i3 Pro has a smoother and a less aggressive treble response, though both of these IEMs reach sparkle levels and are not for people who are looking for a warm IEM.

Soundstage & Imaging

Width-wise, the soundstage is average. I would say it sounds 2cm outside of your head, and this is when playing a very wide track like “Bubbles” by Yosi Horikawa.

Imaging on the other hand is quite accurate, I would say. Even with the limited soundstage, I had no troubles hearing the exact position of every drum hit in Pink Floyd’s “Dogs” at minute mark 3:48.

Conclusion​

At $169, Aurora has a lot to offer. I would say that as a whole it is a truly great package that involved a lot of thought behind it.

KBEAR managed to create a well-tuned V-Shaped IEM that doesn’t break the bank.

With great build quality, great comfort, great design, great cable, great packaging & accessories, there is very little to complain about.

I can easily recommend the Aurora to anyone who is looking for a daily driver with a softer V-Shaped sound signature.

Setup used: iBasso DX300 + AMP11 MK1.1
iBasso DX300 settings: Mid gain, 43 – 47 volume, D5 filter
Used with the stock 3.5mm (SE) cable

TRI is back at it once again. After making a statement with its flagship Starlight, TRI has introduced a new flagship: Starshine. Not only is Starshine the company’s new flagship, but it’s also cheaper than the Starlight model. It comes with a simpler driver-array that is inferior in quantity, but still remains the quality. TRI is on a wild run, they just released their entry-level Aurora and also announced on Facebook that they are going to have more releases by the end of the year. Either way, let’s dig into where the Starshine shines.

Unboxing Experience


If we are talking about the packaging as a whole, it’s average. This is not where the budget went, which is something I’m happy to say. The Starshine’s box comes in a purple-ish cover that revolves around the galaxy theme. The front features the company’s logo, model name, and a message “Shine like stars, providing exquisite sounds”. Once you slide off the cover, you will be met with a much familiar glittery black box, in which you will find all the goodies.

Formal format of what’s in the box:

1x 2.5mm cable
5x ear-tips (L/M/M/SM/S)
3x angled adaptors (2.5mm to 3.5mm, 2.5mm to 3.5mm Pro, 2.5mm to 4.4mm)
1x cleaning cloth
1x carrying case

Click to expand...

Design

Once again, TRI does not disappoint. We have yet to see the KB Ear company to disappoint with their design. From their least priced IEMs, all the way up to their most expensive, the design is always on point. In the case of Starshine, there is a more nature-like theme going on. The shells on their own are some of the most beautiful I have seen. I’m one of those people who is a fan of resin art in IEMs, and this is one great example of how a good design should look like. Each model is unique with its own resin pattern. Speaking of it, it consists of a glittery brown, blue, and white paint mix. What is nice is that the glitter isn’t everywhere, it’s only in certain parts, and this greatly contributes to the eye-candy final finish. I have to say that they heavily remind me of the most gorgeous headphones on the planet — Rosson Audio RAD-0. Besides the resin art, there is a TRI logo on the faceplate in a shiny finish.

TRI is keeping up with the current trends and opted for 2-pin connectors instead of MMCX connectors that were previously used on the TRI i3. Further supporting this statement, the new i3 Pro appears to feature 2-pin connectors. Much like its bigger brother Starlight, Starshine continues the flagship tradition of utilizing electrostatic drivers. It features a quad-driver setup which consists of 2 BA (Knowles 29689 for the mid-range and Knowles 22955 for the low frequency range) + 2 EST (Sonion). For the comparison sake, Starlight featured 1 DD (CNT) + 2 BA + 4 EST (Sonion 2389).

Starhine’s shell features no vent holes, but doesn’t suffer from any driver flex issues. In similar fashion, its nozzle doesn’t have a lip, but also doesn’t have the problem of ear-tips falling off. Speaking of the nozzle, it is of a soft triangular shape with three large holes. Because there is no grill or mesh below the nozzle, you must make sure to take good care of it. The last thing you want is your ear wax to make its way into the drivers… Yikes!



Build Quality & Cable

The material of choice for the shells is resin. More specifically, they are made of imported German resin that has skin-friendly benefits. Though the shells are made of resin, do not mistake them for resin filled shells — which as the name suggests, are filled with resin inside. Starshine has a hollow resin shell that results in a lightweight design without compromising build quality. It should be mentioned that this is not a small IEM, far from it. It’s a very large in size, so I’m suspecting it would be quite a bit heavier if it had a resin filled housing. But then again, it’s about preference. Some prefer their IEMs heavy and solid, others prefer them light. For a daily driver, I prefer the latter.

The cable is slightly different version of KB EAR’s Rhyme model. It is a high purity 8-core copper and silver mix cable. Whereas the original Rhyme has stainless steel housings, Starshine’s cable has chrome housings. If you ask me, it’d be much better off with the original cable. KB Ear is known for amazing cables, so it is kind of disappointing to not see one of them here. I think chrome and shiny surfaces are the last thing you want on something that will constantly be touched… I dearly love my TRI i3’s but they are fingerprint magnets. If I can send a piece of feedback to TRI, let it be in this part of the review. I don’t mind the 8-core cable, it’s light, flexible, and feels nice. However, I think it would’ve been much, much nicer if we saw the more premium models like the Inspiration series or the Grace series. Both of these models feature outstanding housings, but are also considerably more expensive. If there is one place to use your premium cables, it should be in your flagship models, so I’m looking forward to seeing that in the future. Otherwise, the standard KB Ear Rhyme model would’ve been just fine.

While not directed at Starshine specifically, the trend of using those rounded chin sliders (that don’t really do what they are supposed to) needs to stop. Every time I see one of these, I have the temptation to remove them. Hell, I prefer a cable with no chin slider, unless it stays in place and does what it is supposed to. This is definitely nitpicking, but for example, it would’ve been nice having gone with a chin slider like the on the Diamond.

Comfort & Fit

This is the second time that TRI hit the comfort bullseye. The first was with the i3 (the gigantic shiny IEM). Actually, TRI i3 is similar to the Starshine in a couple of different things. The big shell size is one of them. On the other hand, Starshine has improved the overall fit due to the different nozzle shape & angle. It should also be mentioned that both the TRI i3 and the Starshine protrude from the ear. Weight is where these two go their separate ways.

Starshine is a lightweight IEM, also making it a perfect choice for long listening sessions. Due to their large size, they never fully disappear, but they do disappear in the ear. The ergonomic shape contributes to the comfort because there are no pressure points on the pinna. The only reason why it cannot fully disappear is because there is a subtle pressure point on the tragus.

Bringing up the ergonomic shape once again, I can confidently say that the fit & insertion is deeper than on the TRI i3. However, the isolation is more relaxed than on the TRI i3, which provided a vacuum-like seal. I also want to take the opportunity to tell you that due to its vent-less design, if you do insert it deep and get a tight seal, make sure that you slowly take it out of your ears (opening your mouth/jaw helps a lot). If you aggressively remove the IEMs from your ear, you could very easily damage your ears and get an inflammation. How do I know? It happened to me 3 times in the past, and it is no fun.

Taking the size into consideration, I consider Starshine to be a perfect fit for my ear.

Sound Performance​

Lows

Oh my, is it nice to take rest from head-shaking IEMs and headphones. Don’t get me wrong, I adore any head-fi product that is capable of physical sensation of rumble, but sometimes you just want to focus on the mids and take a step back from the lows. This is what Starshine is to me, an IEM with a balanced lower-frequency response.

Starshine basically screams “Bassheads, be gone!”. As someone who primarily enjoys listening to intense vocals and acoustical, I greatly enjoyed the toned down quantity of lows. This is not to say that it lacks in quantity or quality!

Some may think that the attack & decay are slow due to the lack of dynamic drivers, but that’s not the case… at least for the most part. The attack is very fast and snappy, while decay is slightly slower. For example, on my standard test tracks (“Smoking Mirrors” — Lee Curtiss, “Hydrogen” — MOON), Starshine proved that it is capable of fast attack, but also proved its bass depth quality.

What I was not expecting is to hear the subtle rumble in the introduction of “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys. If you have read my past work, you know that the majority of headphones and IEMs cannot pull off the depth of the drum kick. In fact, TRI i3 was the first IEM that I heard was capable of pulling it off.

I found the sub-bass response to be quite similar. If you are looking for the physical sensation of rumble, look elsewhere. Like other IEMs with a balanced lower-frequency response, Starshine is able to produce sub-tones in a manner where they are less audible but can still be felt. In comparison to a similar-sounding IEM — HiFiMan RE-800 Silver — Starshine has less quantity which contributes to an overall more balanced bass response. The tracks I used for sub-bass qualities are “Why So Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, “Theme for The Irishman” by Robbie Robertson, and “Stairway To Heaven” by Led Zeppelin. In the last track there is supposed to be a sub-tone on panned to the right, it should be audible at the very beginning on the song. The sub-tone comes from the reverb of the strings that are panned to the far left, however, on Starshine this frequency wasn’t audible.



Mids

Without surprise, my favorite part about this IEM is its mid-range. I’d call this mid-range heaven, but it’s more widely known as a mid-centric sound signature.

What attracted me the most is the full-body of vocals. Thanks to the warm quality, vocals sound lush and can be enjoyed for long periods of time without any signs of fatigue. I could listen to Sia’s and Rosalía’s discography all day long. If I had to to pick two standout tracks from Sia, they would be “Chandelier (Piano Version)” and “Elastic Heart (Piano Version)”. There are a far too many outstanding and less-known Sia’s tracks that I adore, but there is something unique about these piano versions, a raw quality. However, it should be noted that if you are a lover of edge and aggressive vocals, Starshine will probably not satisfy you and you probably want to look for a set of brighter IEMs — like the TRI Starlight.

But what about strings? Well, they sound like strings… But they are missing some of that depth and “oomph” due to the balanced lower-frequency response, and they are also missing some of that sheen in the upper mid-range due to the present warmth. You win some, you lose some. You can’t have it all. You can’t truly make a warm headphone without the sacrifice of details and edge. Some of the tracks I listened to for the string qualities: “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, “Stairway to Heaven” by Led Zeppelin, “Go Insane” by Lindsey Buckingham, “Chain” by Fleetwood Mac, “End of the Game” (album) by Peter Green, “Beyond the Realms of Death” by Judas Priest, “Song of Bangladesh” by Joan Baez.



Highs

When I was very early into this hobby, I formed a misconception that I am treble sensitive. As I’ve become more experience and have gone through various different headphones and IEMs, I realized that I am a treble lover and more than that, a person who naturally prefers a bright sound signature. The main reason I was mislead to believe that I was treble sensitive is due to the erroneous stereotype that bright means piercing. Not only does bright have “nothing” to do with piercing, but it also has nothing to do with sibilant. Both of these terms refer to bad qualities, whereas bright should be associated with good qualities such as sparkle and sheen.

The main difference between piercing/sibilant qualities and sparkle/sheen is that the first two are unpleasant. The latter two are pleasant, though it depends on personal preference. A headphone that sounds peaky isn’t bright, it’s simply sibilant. Imagine listening to some gorgeous vocals and them sounding shouty. People will often use the term “bright” in all of these cases, but I strongly disagree.

With this being said, I noticed that many consider Starshine to be a bright-sounding IEM. While I agree it possesses sheen (a quality of a bright sound signature), it doesn’t necessarily sound bright to my ears.

As reference tracks for treble qualities, I used “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott, “Portia” by Miles Davis, and “Rocket Man” by Elton John.

In “Stop Trying to Be God” the focus point is Stevie Wonder’s harmonica, which starts right around the 4:44 minute mark and is present till the end of the track. There were sheen qualities present during the peaks, but I don’t think it reaches sparkle levels, which is what makes a headphone/IEM bright in my eyes. It’s a rather smooth bright treble response, never made me squint my eyes or tingle my ears. The same goes for the track “Portia”. Just for clarification purposes, when I say that it doesn’t reach sparkle levels, that should also be a direct indicator that at no point was there the slightest sign of sibilance.

The last track was used because it was referenced by The Headphone List as a track that showcased a [almost] piercing qualities in the hi-hats. Now, I am not mentioning this in a negative way, quite the opposite actually. I value fellow reviewers who take the time to break down a song and the qualities that are present in one. Music references in reviews are a crucial tool that allow both the reader and the listener to use the mentioned reference tracks to listen to the qualities described in the review. For example, when I listening to “Rocket Man”, I couldn’t hear qualities that would be anywhere close to sibilant. Are the hi-hats bright and sharp? Absolutely. However, I don’t think they stick out enough to make them sibilant or in the sparkle range.



Soundstage & Imaging

One of the most prominent characteristics of Starshine is its airy nature. Don’t get me wrong, the soundstage width isn’t the widest out there, but it is above average. What I’m talking about is how “open” these IEMs sounds. The elements in the mix have enough room around them to breathe, allowing you to distinctly tell apart each element in a track. It’s not as though this is audible in few tracks, instead, in just about every track you can hear the airy nature.

Conclusion​

TRI (premium brand of KBEAR) has once again proven that it is capable of manufacturing a product that lives up to its price. While the company made a strong statement of details with its Starlight, Starshine aims to follow the electrostatic route but with a smoother approach.

Though I myself enjoy an even brighter sound signature than the one present in Starshine, I think that its sound signature will satisfy way more people than if TRI went for a brighter approach (like they did for the Starlight).

Besides living up to its price, Starshine is a mid-centric IEM done right. I would heavily recommend these to anyone who is a lover of vocals. They are particularly enjoyable for long listening sessions due to their fatigue-free nature. Whether it’s essy tracks, edgy & aggressive vocals, sharp and bright percussion, Starshine never reaches near sibilance. From my experience, I find the overall upper-end quite smooth and fatigue-free, while the mids incorporate more warmth.

The combination of a balanced low-frequency response, present yet warm mids, and smooth highs is what I believe makes the Starshine a special IEM. It’s certainly a worthy consideration if you are after a mid-centric IEM under $500.

TRI Starshine retails for $499. KeepHiFi's current sale price is $469. You can get it for $422 (10% off) on KeepHiFi's website if you decide to use my code "voja". I am receiving a financial benefit if you decide to use the code. Non-affiliate link: https://keephifi.com/collections/in-ear-earphones/products/tri-starshine-2-electrostatic-drive-2ba-custom-iem

Setup used for testing:
iBasso DX300 + AMP11 MK1
Gain: Mid
Volume: 44 (the loudest I put the volume was 53)
Filter: NOS (D5)

Disclaimer: TRI Starshine has been sent to me free of charge by KeepHiFi. I am being compensated for the publishing of this review to KeepHiFi's website. The review is based on my personal listening experience, it is completely free of any bias from an external force (whether that's online hype, other people's opinion, or the manufacturer itself). I also want to state that I completely based the review on what my ears heard, my experience wasn't affected nor influenced by graphs/measurements. KeepHiFi played no role in the writing of this review (no bias).

I’ve never been a measurement guy, but if there is one time I’d like to put an emphasis on graphs and measurements, it will be now. All credit goes to RikudouGoku, who pointed out the similarity of TRI’s Starshine ($500) and Vision Ears’ Elysium ($3500). From his speculation, the FR of Starshine looks better. Also it’s impossible to overlook the similarity in the driver setup: Starshine (2BA + 2 EST), Elysium (1DD, 1BA, 2EST).

Also, hats off to Crinacle who supplied the graph:

CCZ is a new name on the block. With hundreds and thousands of IEM companies, it’s hard to stand out as a new manufacturer. Let’s see what Plume is all about.

Disclaimer: CCZ Plume was sent to me free of charge by KeepHiFi. I want to clearly state that I am being compensated for the publishing of this review to KeepHiFi's website. I will also financially benefit if you decide to use my discount code. I want to make it clear that I am not obliged to write a positive review, the words below are based on my speculations and my experience with the Plume. What you will not read in this review is me saying something that is not true or something that I found not to be true — that would not only make me a liar, but also be considered illegal in the eyes of the law. Enjoy the review!

Unboxing Experience







Alongside Plume, I also received the TRI Starshine, and I immediately saw some similarities in both the unboxing experience and contents inside. Once you take off the golden cover, you are met with the very same black glittery box that houses the TRI Starshine. Then again, once you open the box, you see the very same ear-tips from the Starshine. So, what’s going on here? To me it appears as though CCZ just bought ear-tips and adaptors from KB Ear. That’s all. KB Ear already has two brands, so I wouldn’t assume that this is their third brand.

Focusing on the experience, it’s pretty straightforward and average. I much prefer higher quality contents over a special unboxing experience. If you think about it, you only unbox your product once, whereas you will be using that product for a long period of time. Which do you prefer, a fabulous unboxing experience or higher quality product & accessories? I appreciate both, but it’s the latter for me.

Formal format of what’s in the box:

5x silicone ear-tips (L/M/M/SM/S)
3x TPZ CCZ-patented ear-tips (S/M/L)
2x adaptors (2.5mm to 3.5mm, 2.5mm to 4.4mm)
1x tailor-made carrying case
1x 2.5mm cable
1x cleaning cloth

Click to expand...

Design

CCZ is going on a quite different design road, opting for loud designs like the one present here, in the Plume model, but also in their Coffee Bean model. Unlike most of todays IEMs which are either made of a single piece or two pieces, Plume is made of three distinct parts: the faceplate lid, the body, and the nozzle. These three sections are visibly separated with seams. The faceplate has the distinct mesh design and the CCZ logo. If you look closely enough, you will be able to see that the mesh actually extends all the way across the faceplate area (it can be seen under the logo cutout).

It couldn’t be more obvious, but let’s address the elephant in the room. Yes, the whole shell has the shiny gold finish. Like I said, it’s a very loud design, and certainly isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. While it is a fingerprint magnet, it’s not as bad as some other shiny finishes I’ve seen.

Plume does feature two vents, one is centered in the nozzle section, while the second one is located on the inner edge of the body section.

As a whole, it’s a large shell, but the majority of the bulk comes from the inner “shark fin”.



Build Quality & Cable

Plume is neither the lightest nor the heaviest IEM I’ve had in my hands. For its size, it’s actually of average weight. The shells are made of some sort of metal which has a golden paint layer over it.

The included cable is a fabric high-purity copper cable in a 2.5mm termination. I first thought that it’s going to be coarse and stiff, but that wasn’t the case. The cable is actually pretty soft and flexible, but still has the common problem of fabric cables where it doesn’t hold its shape when you are trying to put it away. The 0.78mm 2-pin connectors are recessed, allowing a perfect fit on the Plume (because the female 2-pin connectors are raised on its shells). What I did greatly appreciate is the inclusion of the 2.5mm to 3.5mm and 2.5mm to 4.4mm adaptors. That’s nice to see, especially for those who won’t be using the Plume with its standard 2.5mm termination.

The housings on the cable are the now-standard metal/carbon fiber model. Unfortunately, the housing has broke loose when I tried removing the cable. It still stays in place but can rotate in either direction.

Comfort & Fit

Despite the large shell, the Plume is fairly comfortable. I am aware that some people had the problem with the “shark fin” on the inner side of the shell. I first thought that I also had a problem, but later found out that the “shark fin” just slips into my ear. The Plume actually disappeared in my ears, only feeling slight pressure and discomfort after taking it out (this is on the spot where the “shark fin” was resting). However, while I had it in my ear, I had no discomfort issues. I should’ve mentioned by now that I was actually using the stock (patented) ear-tips.

I spent more than an hour with the IEMs in my ears, and didn’t experience any problems.

The Plume is a snug fitting IEM with an average depth (neither too deep nor too shallow) insertion.

Sound Performance​

Lows

By far the most prominent part of the frequency spectrum is the lower area. Not only is it great in quantity but also retains good quality. The bass region is elevated and boosted, the bass impact is hard (hits you like a train!), the attack is fast and snappy, the decay is equally fast. My primary tracks to test the previously mentioned qualities are MOON’s “Hydrogen” and Lee Curtiss’ “Smoking Mirrors”. The first track is really good to test snappiness, attack speed, decay speed, body. The latter track is more useful for listening to the quantity, punchiness, and snappiness. In both of these tracks the Plume proved that though having an elevation in terms of quantity, it doesn’t loose all of the qualities that one might seek from an IEM. Another track I love to play is “Do I Wanna Know?” by Arctic Monkeys. The introduction features a thumping drum kick, and if there is enough of an extension it will sound thick (which it certainly did on this IEM).

Sub-bass? Boy, oh boy. Let’s talk about it. No introduction, let’s just get straight to the performance in my golden testing track — Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?”. Minute mark 3:26, the drop occurs, and there it is, rumble. Not any rumble. Oh no, physical rumble. Yes, you read that correctly, you can feel the physical sensation of rumble inside your ear. There are a few IEMs that can do this, same goes for headphones… though it’s much more uncommon in headphones. I also went through Robbie Robertson’s “Theme for The Irishman”, where it’s clear the Plume was capable to keep up with the depth of the cello’s growling.

Both the mid-bass and the sub-bass benefit from a great extension and boost, but they also possess good qualities.

Mids

I personally expected the mids to be severely recessed, but was surprised to find out that that’s not the case. Of course, they are slightly recessed due to the great low & high extensions. I found them to vary from song to song, somewhere it would be more noticeable, while elsewhere it was completely normal. For example, going through Sia’s catalogue (discography), I found the vocals to be quite full and thick. Play “Chandelier (Piano Version)” or “Elastic Heart (Piano Verson)”, you will notice that not only are the vocals forward but also posses the edge. The vocals also sounded quite present when I was listening to Yao Is Ting’s “Endless Love IV” album.

Where the recession can be more audible is in the hip-hop genre, where it’s common to have quite heavy and booming beats. A track like “Wesley’s Theory” from Kendrick Lamar is a good example. You have roaring bass and fairly non-aggressive vocals. In this particular track you can hear the mid-bass bleed into the vocals.

In terms of strings, the mids lean towards the warmer side. Due to this warmth, sometimes a guitar pluck, let’s say of an acoustical guitar, can sound more electrical than it is supposed to.

Highs

As mentioned earlier, the sound signature of Plume is V-Shaped, meaning that highs are also elevated.

Plume passed my standard treble tracks as bright (Miles Davis — Portia, Travis Scott — Stop Trying to Be God (5:59))

While it is a brighter-sounding IEM, it’s not piercing or unpleasant. Let’s just say it has more edge than an IEM that is warm throughout its entire frequency response.

Soundstage and Imaging

When it comes to width, the soundstage is average in size. This should not be confused with “in-your-heard” sounding, because that’s not what it is. I’d say the width is about a couple of centimeters wide, definitely not airy. Imaging on the other hand is quite good, as the Plume did show to be capable to keep up with the panning drums in “Dogs” by Pink Floyd.

Conclusion​

CCZ is trying hard to make a name of its own, whether it’s the patented ear-tips, a different cable, high-quality accessories, or the drivers, it’s trying to be different. I support this, though I personally would’ve preferred a nicer design — something not as shiny.

What Plume did accomplish is to be a good-sounding IEM. A heavy bass response that digs deep and is capable of the physical sensation of rumble, a slightly recessed mid-range that can somehow sound forward at times, and a brighter treble response. These are the qualities that have been achieved.

If you are a big fan of the electronic genre, something fast-paced and hard-hitting like trance/rave, these are perfect. I can tell you that I heavily enjoyed listening to psytrance with these and can recommend them to others whose main listening genre is electronic. It also sounds wonderful with mainstream, but I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who is specifically into acoustical instruments like guitar — this is due to the tonality. You probably want to go with a neutral sound signature if you primarily listen to classical and acoustic. I also found it to be a good IEM for hip-hop, because in it you have deep & hard-hitting bass, but also bright percussion.

CCZ Plume retails for $239 at KeepHiFi, and is now on a discounted price — $199. Once in stock, you can get 10% off by using (affiliate) VOJA discount code.


Note: I wrote this review based on my experience on iBasso DX300 + AMP11 MK1.
Volume: 33%
Gain: Mid

AUG 23/2021 Update — CCZ permanently discontinued Plume due to the difficult process of manufacturing it and the high failure rate (mine has proved to have no problems). If you have purchased Plume, CCZ is accepting you to the exclusive VIP membership (long-term) and will send you every new future model for free. You can use the code VOJA on any product on KeepHiFi's website and receive a 10% discount.

Founded in 2016, Dongguan Sivga Electronic Technology Co., Ltd. is no stranger to the electronics industry. The people behind the company are Mr. Jian Zhou and Mr. Rongchun Pan. Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot on the internet that can be found about either of them. However, it is known that Mr. Jian Zhou has at least two decades of industry experience. His previous work was done for globally established brands like Sennheiser, Bose, and Sony. When I asked a SIVGA representative to reveal which products Mr. Zhou specifically worked on, I received the following reply:

“We don't want to rely on them to be famous, we have our own brand, which is SIVGA. It can only be said that the products designed by Mr. Zhou Jian are still popular.”

While other companies would be happy to brag about their previous work for large companies, SIVGA is more focused on establishing its company as one of the greats. P-II was released in March 2020.

Unboxing Experience


Much like we’ve seen with the lower-priced Phoenix model, the P-II comes in a nice faux leather carrying case. The case is custom and perfectly houses all the components inside. This is a very nice touch from SIVGA because it ensures that there will be little to no movement in transport. The carrying case is designed to be functional rather than beautiful — which is more logical since the whole purpose of a carrying case is to make sure you can safely transport the headphones in it. Unlike the Phoenix or the Sendy Audio Aiva, P-II's carrying case is wider but thinner, making it easier to put in a backpack or something alike.

The unboxing experience, in my opinion, meets the expectations at this price point.

Formal format of what’s in the box:

1x faux leather carrying case
1x 4.4mm cable
1x 4.4mm to 3.5mm adaptor
1x textile pouch

Click to expand...

Wood. Metal. Precision.

If there was one thing I would take away from SIVGA and say it makes the company stand out on the market, it would be its consistency of superb build quality throughout its whole product line-up. From their cheapest models to their flagship, there is absolutely no use of cheap materials. The company’s now-signature use of metal and wood is what represents the name "SIVGA". However, there is a subtle but noticeable improvement in the quality of materials the higher up you go in its line-up:

Entry-level: SV005, SV006, SV007
Mid-level: Phoenix
Flagship: P-II

The Phoenix features more premium ear-pads, wood, and metal than the entry-level line-up. On the other hand, the P-II only features higher quality wood over the Phoenix.

The P-II being the company’s largest headphone, it comes as no surprise that it’s also the heaviest, weighing in at 420g. There are several factors that contribute to this weight, and size is just one of them. You have to remember that this is a planar-magnetic headphone, which means that it has two pairs of magnets — these magnets are far from being light. Unfortunately, the manufacturer couldn’t supply me with the weight of the drivers because all the P-II models have already been assembled. Something that I was very happy to see is the use of high-quality cabling on the inside of the headphone. How often do people spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on headphone cables but don’t pay attention to the cables inside the headphones? I think we can agree that the answer is a bit too often. P-II’s cables are visible from the outer grill, but also clearly visible when you open the headphones up.

The whole headband structure is made of metal. The frame being made of stainless steel, while the rest is made of aviation aluminum. The ear-cups are made of black walnut wood, while the metal details are made of the same aviation aluminum that is used on the headband.

It looks like SIVGA is stepping up the quality standards with the recent release of the SV021. At least from the pictures, it appears to me that the metal parts are of greater quality than the above-stated entry-level line-up.

What I am trying to say is that this company is pricing its products well. It doesn’t use cheap and bad quality materials on its cheaper line-up of products while making the use of high-quality materials exclusive to its flagship products. I am tired of the hierarchy practice in the headphone market where a company is almost telling the customer they are better off not purchasing their product if they are not going to be spending a pretty penny.



Cable

While it’s not winning any beauty contests, the soft braided 4-core 6N single-crystal copper is fairly well built. If I’m honest, I personally would have liked the cable to be a bit softer and less rigid. The way it is, either the braiding is too tight, or the insulation used is stiffer than usual. My guess is that it’s rather the latter.

SIVGA went with the classic option for the 2.5mm connectors on the headphone-end but didn’t go that route for the connectors on the amp-end. The P-II’s cable is in a 4.4mm termination, which is rather unusual for a stock cable. The Pentaconn (4.4mm) connection is becoming more, and more popular in both the headphone and the amplifier market, almost to the point where it’s the new industry standard. Regardless, SIVGA made sure to include a 4.4mm to 3.5mm adaptor. The last thing you want as a customer of a $400 product is to be searching for an after-market adaptor just to be able to use your headphones with a common source. I also found it very nice that the adaptor is in the same color, material, and design as the headphone cable. Aesthetics approved!

The attention to detail remains the same for the housings on the cable, as they are all made of metal. The Pentaconn’s housing has the company’s name printed on it and has a cross-hatch texture. A spring stress-relief is featured on the plug-end. In similar fashion, the headphone-end housing also features a partial cross-hatch pattern and has “L” and “R” labels printed in white. Actually, all of the housings are the exact same as the ones on the Phoenix’s cable.



Design

Because it’s one of the better-looking headphone silhouettes, I truly believe that this headphone could be turned into a multi-thousand-dollar headphone with the right investments. Of course, these investments would have to be quite large. I can just visualize the ear-cups being made of CNC-milled aluminum, a gorgeous looking satin/matte finish, and resulting in a very fine-looking headphone.

Let’s get back to reality. The ear-cups consist of two parts: the metal ring, and the wooden part. The wood makes the majority of the ear-cups, but on the outer part, there is a metal ring that follows the ear-cup’s shape. For the most part, the ring is flush with the wood, but there are parts where there is an ever so slight overflow that can only be noticed when you run your finger across the edges. On the inner side of the ring is the P-II’s iconic grill. I personally believe it’s the “cloud shape” grill and the contrasting silver plate that make the silhouette recognizable. One interesting detail in the metal plate is that the perforation holes are smaller towards the center, and they increase in size. Design-wise, it looks great, but the real question is whether the variance in the holes’ diameter affects the sonic performance. When it comes to designing driver's surroundings, you want them to be as consistent as possible. Visually-wise, the biggest design flaw, is the black grill that features the company’s logo. Unless you have a symmetrical design, you must make two sets of grills so you get a pleasant-looking design. This principle applies to ear-pads, though they don't suffer from such a design flaw. What SIVGA missed out on the P-II is that they only made one model of the grill, resulting in two grills that have the logo set to the right. Fixing this would take the company to pull back the current batch and manufacture a second model of the grill.

The headband construction consists of: a frame, a center-piece, a yoke, and a headband. The center-piece is the part that has the company’s logo printed in white, it is also the part that is connected to all the headband construction parts. The headband SIVGA opted for the P-II is a self-adjusting suspension system. I personally think this isn’t ideal for a 420g headphone, and I will detail why in the “Comfort & Fit” section. The way a self-adjusting headband works is by having the actual headband (the part that goes on your head) internally attached to two elastic straps, which are further attached to the center-piece. Once you unscrew the two sandwiched metal plates on the headband, you will find the elastic straps that are attached to a plastic piece. The plastic piece is the part that you can see, it is the part that goes into the center-piece. Like the sandwich part on the headband, the center-piece also features two sandwiched metal plates. Once you unscrew them, you will see it is inside here that both the headband frames and the plastic piece are screwed in. Now, the reason why I call this the center-piece is because it connects the headband, the frames, and the ear-cups, making it the part that holds the headphone together. The yokes are labeled for left and right, and are connected to the bottom of the center-piece with a single Philips countersunk screw. The headband construction can certainly sound a bit complicated when described with words, but once you look at the pictures, it shouldn’t be hard to put it all together.

I have to say, this is a very clean-looking headphone. The design team certainly put a good amount of effort into making the design decisions but certainly overlooked some details.

Comfort & Fit

I have a love-hate relationship with the P-II. The main problem is caused by the headband suspension system. Due to its heavy weight, making little movement can easily make the headphones move… which means that you have to be as still as possible. The elastic straps also don’t seem to be strong enough to truly make the headphones hold their position, as though the headphones do sag over time.

The ear-pads on the other hand are good but could’ve been even better. I know damn well that SIVGA is capable of taking things to another level and making the ear-pads more comfortable. Unfortunately, the horizontal diameter is rather small, resulting in an overall tight fit. The situation would be best if SIVGA separately sold a set of premium ear-pads that are made of high-density memory foam.

I didn’t experience any discomfort after long listening sessions, but the headphones never truly disappeared. Once again, you have to remember that this is a heavy headphone.

On a more positive note, the ear-pads are finally of adequate thickness. One of the biggest problems people faced with the Phoenix were the thin ear-pads. This being said, I am very happy to see a thicker set of pads on the P-II.

Sound Performance​

Soundstage and Imaging

While the soundstage is neither the biggest nor the smallest, I find it to be one of the strengths of this headphone. More than that, I find the imaging to be one of the strongest points of this headphone as a whole. I truly believe that both of these aspects are severely underrated. I don’t know what should be expected from the P-II, because while it is an open-back headphone, you have to remember that it has a pretty dense plate covering its driver. At least from the design perspective, something like a HiFiMan Sundara or a Sennheiser HD600 series is much more open. The main reason being the less dense grill and usually a soft material acting as dust protection. In P-II’s case, there is a solid perforated metal plate and a metal grill in addition. However, even with its dense design, it performs as an open-back rather than a semi-open headphone. This is a big accomplishment if you ask me.

I won’t lie, I was already sold when I listened to “Dogs” by Pink Floyd. When it comes to this specific track, it either makes me fall in love with a headphone or it makes me question its imaging capabilities. As usual, the core part in this song that I am referencing are the panning drums at 3:48.

To keep it short and sweet, I found the P-II to sound airy with a decently sized soundstage, and I personally found the imaging & separation to be above average.

Lows​

As you are about to find out, this headphone is quite tricky to amplify. I remember when I first listened to this headphone, and I wasn’t all that impressed. Later, I found out that I was pairing them with amplifiers that weren’t quite giving the needed juice. Perhaps, it is not about juice at all, maybe it’s about tonality. For me, the P-II sounded the best with the iBasso DX300 + AMP12 module. This combination resulted in a somewhat neutral/balanced bass response. Be aware: if you do not amplify these properly, the lower frequencies will sound bloated and muddy-ish.

“Why So Serious?” is a perfect track to test the sub-bass qualities in headphones, and has been my go-to test track for a while. The focus point is right around the 3:27 minute mark, where a drop occurs. Though I couldn’t feel any physical sensation of rumble, the P-II is definitely capable of digging deep. What I love about this particular track is that any imperfections are immediately noticed. Whether it’s sub-bass dominance, distortion, lack of quantity and/or body, etc. — these are all audible on here. The headphones had no problem reproducing the sub-tones, and actually succeeded in producing clean, thick-but-subtle sub-bass. When I say “thick-but-subtle”, I am once again referring to the fact that you will experience no physical sensation of rumble; which is not to say that they are incapable of producing rumble! Play Daft Punk's "Lose Yourself To Dance" and you'll hear the P-II roar (rumble).

The mid-bass, on the other hand, is slightly more pronounced. Listening to “Hydrogen” by MOON, and “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss, I realized that this headphone performs very well within the electronic genre. The qualities that the P-II possesses are: strong impact, fast attack, and decently fast decoy.

If anything, the bass response is one of the stronger points of this headphone. However, it really goes back to my first point about pairing the headphones with a suitable amplifier.

Mids​

Remember how I said I first disliked the P-II? As it turns out, it was because I was listening to them while partially lying against a pillow, causing a severe difference in sonic performance. It’s not the good type that is in question, but a negative, unpleasant one instead. The next day, I proceeded to accidentally listen to them away from the pillow, and I immediately noticed they sounded normal and good. I further confirmed it was the pillow by just putting my hands slightly behind the ear-cups, noticing the immediate difference I mentioned before.

When it comes to strings, you know me — If they don’t sound right, I don’t want ‘em. Listening to classics such as Deep Purple’s “Soldier Of Fortune”, Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven”, Fleetwood Mac’s “The Chain”, and other tracks that include strings, more notably Pink Floyd’s “Hey You”, “Some Other Time” by The Alan Parson Project, “Go Insane” Live 1997 published under Fleetwood Mac, I realized that the P-II performs quite well and doesn’t disappoint. For me, one of the biggest turn-offs is when guitar plucks do not sound right, and when the plucks do not reach me on an emotional level. That’s when I know something isn’t right.

Judging the mid-range on a larger scale, it can be called warm as though it doesn’t have any sharp edges or peaks present, making it a very easy-listening headphone. Additionally, the mid-range is slightly recessed, which makes it even more suitable for long listening sessions.

I will say that the mid-range recession is the most audible in vocals. It depends from song to song, sometimes the vocals sound perfectly fine and enjoyable, other times they have a slight nasal quality to them. My personal speculation goes back to the design of the holes on the silver plates. Since this is an open-back headphone, the surroundings around the driver make a big impact on how the driver sounds; making the perforation holes substantially smaller towards the center, while benefiting the lower frequency response and the lower mid-range, was not a good idea. Of course, if you are willing to invest your time to mod these headphones, you can certainly do so. However, it cannot be expected from an average consumer to risk damaging their $400 headphones.

So, what can be done? The best scenario would be for SIVGA to re-release the P-II and release a V2. I truly believe that this headphone would achieve its full potential if the visually appealing design was removed and replaced with a consistent and appropriate design.

Highs​

The upper range carries on the warmth present in the mid-range. I did my very best trying to find a song where the P-II showed the slightest sign of sharpness, but I did not come across such a track. I went through all of my tracks in my testing library, the tracks I remember from memory include:
Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” (Stevie Wonder’s harmonica around 4:43), Chris Jones’ “Long After You Are Gone” (4:01), Miles Davis’ “Portia”, Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway To Heaven” (7:17), Jeff Healey’s cover “Blue Jean Blues”, and just about every single track mentioned in any of my previous articles.

Tracks that are of essy/peaky nature: Joan Baez’s “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You”, Gloria Gaynor’s “I Will Survive”, Nina Simone’s “Strange Fruit”, Jeff Buckley’s “Forget Her”, Joss Stone’s “The Chokin’ Kind”, Paul Simon’s “Something so Right”

It didn’t matter what track I was listening to, because it was not hard to realize that there was a roll-off in the upper-frequency spectrum, which brings me to the…

Conclusion​

It is no secret that the P-II was made as a warm-sounding headphone. Whenever I hear the description “tubey”, I think of a headphone that has a rich lower frequency presence and a rolled-off high-frequency response. In a sense, it’s like the process of polishing. The shinier you want the finish, the finer you have to polish. What many people forget is that you must remove material in order to achieve that gorgeous, smooth, shiny finish. In similar fashion, to achieve its smooth and laid-back sound signature, the P-II takes away the edge and peaks from the highs. It is a headphone that allows you to enjoy music endlessly. It never gets fatiguing or tiring, but more importantly, it never gets boring.

Seeing the recent release of the Sendy Audio Peacock, the P-II and the Aiva seem to have previewed what was going to be perfected in the now-flagship Peacock. All of the flaws present in the P-II appear to be fixed in the Peacock. There are certain standards to be expected at the $400 price point. This headphone gets a lot of things right, paying attention to the smallest details, but the things it gets wrong could’ve been easily fixed. This is why I strongly believe a re-release should be made. If I was to overlook the design flaw and the headband adjustment system, the headphone on its own would deserve a 5-star rating. Seriously, the build quality, the design, the accessories, it’s all on point. In terms of sound, if the metal plate would’ve been changed into a consistent design, I’m certain it would easily deserve a 5-star rating.

With this being said, these headphones should be a serious consideration for those in the market for a warm open-back under $500. Even better, if you are someone who is not afraid to do some simple DIY mods, it’s even easier to recommend.

Also, I want to say that my rating is based on the $399 MSRP. If you manage to find it on a good discount, go for it.

---

Disassembly guide:​

Disclaimer: This guide serves an educational purpose. You take full responsibility for causing any damage to your headphones! The guide is shown for only one ear-cup.


Step 1: Remove the ear-pads



Step 2: Unscrew the 4 Philips screws — these screws hold the whole driver structure in place



Step 3: Carefully lift the driver and let it rest on the ear-cups (make sure they are lying down flat, so there is no pressure on the actual driver)



Step 4: Unscrew the 5 Torx screws (they are all on the same level, make sure not to unscrew any other screws!)



Step 5: Give yourself a pat on the back. Congratulations! You just let the grill free. To make it easier, you can put the driver back in its place while you flip the headphones over and take out the grill





The grill consists of 3 separate parts: the ring, the grill, and the metal plate. If you want to make your own plate, you can measure the diameter of the largest hole on the plate and ensure that in your plate all the holes are of the same diameter. If you do not want to do this, you can remove the metal plate altogether. However, you must measure the plate's thickness, trace it out, and cut out a piece of material that matches this thickness. If you do not do this, the grill will rattle and will not stay in place. As you can see in the last photo, the plate has a foam layer glued onto it, this is what makes the whole grill stay put. Also, be aware that this will allow more dust and dirt to get inside. The driver does feature a soft mesh on both sides, but be aware of this.

It's fairly easy to disassemble this headphone. When putting it back together, make sure you don't over tighten the 4 Philips screws, because they are the ones determining how much space there is for the ear-pads. That's why I suggest working with one ear-cup at a time. This way you can match the tightness to the "stock" tightness.

Hope this helps anyone who is interested to play around with DIY mods.

While most known for it’s portable audio line-up (DAPs, IEMs, DACs, Amps), Shanling is also a manufacturer of serious pieces of audio gear (desktop DACs, full-sized Amps, CD Players, and also a number of tube audio equipment). Also, many might get tricked into thinking that Shanling is a recently founded company, when in reality it was founded all the way back in 1988.

The UA line-up, consisting of the UA1 and the UA2, was announced in late 2020 and released around the same time. In this article I will be discussing both products and comparing them, addressing their differences and similarities.

Unboxing Experience

UA2:






Both devices share very similar packaging. In fact, the dimensions are the exact same. The visible difference is in the design, or to be more exact, the visual illustrations that are present on the front of the packaging. I must say that the unboxing experience was fairly pleasing and perhaps rewarding. This is mainly because of the flap system and the neatly thought out packaging. The flap system is similar to a wedding ring box or to the famous Pulp Fiction mystery briefcase (crazy reference, but I just cannot forget the fabulous nature of the briefcase when it was opened in the movie).

Once you open the flap, you will be met with hard foam that houses the UA1/UA2 and the USB-C to USB-A adaptor(s). Below the foam, you will find the Quick Start Guide and a Warranty Card. Unlike the UA1, which features a fixed cable, the UA2 has a USB-C to USB-C cable included in the packaging. I also received a USB-C to Lightning cable in a separate metal case.

Overall, a very satisfying experience for a package that only houses a portable AMP/DAC and an adaptor.



Design

While the UA2 is the bigger brother in size, it features a more minimalist design. Unlike the UA1, the body is stadium shaped — the shape and the form factor heavily resembles a slim Bic lighter.

Speaking of the body, both the UA1 and the UA2 share a similar visual design. Both devices feature the company’s logo, device name, bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability, and a Hi-Res logo. However, there are some subtle difference in the arrangement of how these are printed and featured.

The UA1 features the company’s logo centered on the upper part, while on the bottom part the device name (UA1), bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability are left-aligned and printed with the same technique and color as the logo. Also on the bottom part is the Hi-Res logo which is also printed in the same white color as the rest of the visual illustrations.

On the other hand, the UA2 looks cleaner due to its flat surface. On the left side is the print of the company’s logo, in the middle is print of the device name and the bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability. Instead of a print, the UA2 features the famous gold metallic Hi-Res sticker.

And that about sums it up when it comes to visual differences. Obviously, the UA2 has the Balanced 2.5mm output on the front, next to the SE 3.5mm output. Another difference is that the UA2 has a dedicated "Mode" button which specifically allows it to be used on the Nintendo Switch.

There are three main technical differences that make the UA2 superior:
1. 2.5mm balanced output
2. Removable cable
3. Support for portable consoles like the Nintendo Switch

Build Quality

There is not much to say about the build quality except that both the UA1 and the UA2 are made of high-quality aluminum. The build quality is superb and I wouldn’t be concerned to carry either of the devices in my pocket.

The UA1 has a built-in cable, but it matches the cable quality of the separate cable that is included with the UA2. Both the UA1 and the UA2 feature a thick strain relief on either sides of the cable. It is also worth of mentioning that the housings on the cable and the adaptors are made of the same aluminum as their bodies.

Another visual difference is that UA2’s included cable & the USB-A adaptor feature the company logo on the aluminum housing. UA2’s adaptor also has a rounded design of the USB-A adaptor, unlike the rectangular design of UA1’s adaptor.

All in all, the build quality is more than pleasing at either of these price points.



Performance

Before I jump into the sound performance, I want to cover some details regarding the user experience you get from either of these devices. I mainly used both of these on through USB-A adaptor > MacBook Pro (Early 2015). Neither the UA1 nor the UA2 required any drivers. It was a plug & play experience. However, the UA2 is superior to the UA1 because it is immediately recognized by the system, whereas the UA1 requires you to plug in an audio device in its 3.5mm output in order for it to be recognized. If you plan to own only one of these, then it is not a big deal. However, as a reviewer, it is something that got in my way, especially when it came to A/B tests.

Unplugging my headphones from the UA1 and plugging them into the UA2 resulted in no latency. When I switched to the UA2 the audio playback was immediate. However, when doing the opposite, I had to wait for ~4 seconds until the audio playback started playing. This goes back to the fact that UA2 is immediately recognized by the system, while the UA1 probably has the latency because of the time it takes the system to load it up as an output device.

A possible turn-off for some people is that both the UA1 and the UA2 get quite hot, around 40˚C - 55˚C (104˚F - 131˚F). I first thought that this is overheating and that it is an issue. However, when I contacted Shanling, Mr. Frankie reassured me that the high operating temperatures are normal. Either way, this is something everyone should be aware of. I should also clear up that the high temperatures aren’t regular. The heating is irregular.

I am yet to test the UA1 (will update the review once I do so), but the UA2 definitely has some RMI/EFI noise. It can be as mild as some noise and crackling, but can also be extreme, to the point where there are loud pops and crackling. The worst thing that happened to me was when I was biking, the UA2 and the phone were in my front pocket, and the playback suddenly stopped and there were repeating beeping sounds — almost like the sticky notes sound on Windows. Once I took my phone out of my pocket, I found the playback fully stopped, so I had to go back to my music player and press play. I am yet to come across a dongle DAC/Amp combo which doesn't suffer from similar problems. I cannot give suggestions as to how to solve this, but I know that some people who had RMI/EFI noise issues on the EarMen Sparrow, they fixed it by buying a high-quality cable. I should say that I didn't encounter any of these issues when I was using the UA2 on my laptop.

Sound Performance

The table below represents the volume needed to power the following headphones on the same (subjective to my ears) volume level as on the iBasso DX300 digital-audio-player with the stock AMP11 MK1 module. The volume values below are for the UA2. The UA1 is roughly 0.5-1 MacBook volume bars quieter than the UA2, so you can subtract the below-shown values by that amount to get an idea of the volume levels on the UA1.

MacBook has 16 volume bars. When holding alt + shift, you can adjust the volume with micro bars. There are 4 micro adjustments, meaning that, in total, you can adjust the sound with 64 micro bars. When you see 0.5 (e.g. 1.5, 5.5, etc.), it represent 2 micro bars (4 micro bars are equal to 1 bar).

Single-Ended:


Balanced:

The balanced output is roughly 1-2 micro bars louder than the Single-Ended output. I don't recall hearing any noise when using it.

After dozens of A/B tests, I came to several conclusions and findings. One of the good things is that the UA1 and the UA2 sound just about the same, so switching between them should be a smooth experience. However, for some reason, there is a problem when pairing the UA2 with the HiFiMan Deva. The only other time I faced this issue was when pairing the Deva with some of the budget Tempotec amplifiers. The problem occurs in the sub-bass regions, and it is distinct on tracks like Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?” and MOON’s “Hydrogen”. It is also present on just about any track that has a lot of lower frequencies. What happens is that there is a distortion on the right driver on the headphone, this distortion sounds like a rattle — a very unpleasing sound — but the same distortion is not present at extreme volume on the UA1 or other amplifiers. This leaves me at a dead end. It leaver me wondering why it is happening. It is also worth of mentioning that this distortion is not present on other planar-magnetic headphones like the Dekoni Audio Blue or the SIVGA P-II. I want to repeat that this problem only occurs at extreme volumes (>75%) and is only present with the HiFIMan Deva.

Besides this issue, the sound performance on both the UA1 and the UA2 is quite pleasant and free of problems (based on my usage on my laptop).



Conclusion

I think that both the UA1 and UA2 offer an exceptional performance for the price. They are of great value and do their job.

I’m assuming that you want to know whether the UA2 is worth extra $40. To answer this question, you must make some things clear to yourself:

Do you need a balanced output? Do you care about and/or need a removable cable? Do you want a blacker background (lower noise floor)? Do you need the DSD512 and 32bit/768kHz decoding capability as opposed to the inferior DSD256 and 32bit/384kHz on the UA1? Do you need 125mW (3.5mm SE) and 195mW (2.5mm balanced) output power as opposed to UA1’s SE 85mW max. output power?

These are the questions you need to answer to yourself to pick one of these two. Both are excellent, but one is more versatile and powerful than the other.

As humans, we always want more. We want more even when we don’t need it. With this being said, if you are not using power-hungry or high-sensitivity headphones/IEMs, you will be happy with the UA1. However, if you want one or more of the benefits that the UA2 offers, you will not regret paying the extra 40 bucks. The flagship ES9038Q2M is the same DAC chip used in the EarMen’s $250 TR-Amp, which I also loved.

If you are looking for a small DAC/AMP that doesn't break the bank, I can recommend either of these two devices.



Explanation for the rating: I believe that both devices deserve a firm 4.0 rating. Lack of MQA and in-line controls support is not a turn-off for me, but considering that people will most likely use either of these devices on the go, lack of in-line controls negatively affected the rating by 0.5. While the UA1 had the recessed USB-C ports, I had to remove another 0.5 rating points for the UA2, resulting in a final 4.0 rating. The UA1 was also affected by the lack of in-line controls, but I couldn't give it a rating of 4.5 considering it's not compatible with iOS devices.

While most known for it’s portable audio line-up (DAPs, IEMs, DACs, Amps), Shanling is also a manufacturer of serious pieces of audio gear (desktop DACs, full-sized Amps, CD Players, and also a number of tube audio equipment). Also, many might get tricked into thinking that Shanling is a recently founded company, when in reality it was founded all the way back in 1988.

The UA line-up, consisting of the UA1 and the UA2, was announced in late 2020 and released around the same time. In this article I will be discussing both products and comparing them, addressing their differences and similarities.

Unboxing Experience

UA2:






Both devices share very similar packaging. In fact, the dimensions are the exact same. The visible difference is in the design, or to be more exact, the visual illustrations that are present on the front of the packaging. I must say that the unboxing experience was fairly pleasing and perhaps rewarding. This is mainly because of the flap system and the neatly thought out packaging. The flap system is similar to a wedding ring box or to the famous Pulp Fiction mystery briefcase (crazy reference, but I just cannot forget the fabulous nature of the briefcase when it was opened in the movie).

Once you open the flap, you will be met with hard foam that houses the UA1/UA2 and the USB-C to USB-A adaptor(s). Below the foam, you will find the Quick Start Guide and a Warranty Card. Unlike the UA1, which features a fixed cable, the UA2 has a USB-C to USB-C cable included in the packaging. I also received a USB-C to Lightning cable in a separate metal case.

Overall, a very satisfying experience for a package that only houses a portable AMP/DAC and an adaptor.



Design

While the UA2 is the bigger brother in size, it features a more minimalist design. Unlike the UA1, the body is stadium shaped — the shape and the form factor heavily resembles a slim Bic lighter.

Speaking of the body, both the UA1 and the UA2 share a similar visual design. Both devices feature the company’s logo, device name, bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability, and a Hi-Res logo. However, there are some subtle difference in the arrangement of how these are printed and featured.

The UA1 features the company’s logo centered on the upper part, while on the bottom part the device name (UA1), bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability are left-aligned and printed with the same technique and color as the logo. Also on the bottom part is the Hi-Res logo which is also printed in the same white color as the rest of the visual illustrations.

On the other hand, the UA2 looks cleaner due to its flat surface. On the left side is the print of the company’s logo, in the middle is print of the device name and the bit depth/sample rate/DSD decoding capability. Instead of a print, the UA2 features the famous gold metallic Hi-Res sticker.

And that about sums it up when it comes to visual differences. Obviously, the UA2 has the Balanced 2.5mm output on the front, next to the SE 3.5mm output. Another difference is that the UA2 has a dedicated "Mode" button which specifically allows it to be used on the Nintendo Switch.

There are three main technical differences that make the UA2 superior:
1. 2.5mm balanced output
2. Removable cable
3. Support for portable consoles like the Nintendo Switch

Build Quality

There is not much to say about the build quality except that both the UA1 and the UA2 are made of high-quality aluminum. The build quality is superb and I wouldn’t be concerned to carry either of the devices in my pocket.

The UA1 has a built-in cable, but it matches the cable quality of the separate cable that is included with the UA2. Both the UA1 and the UA2 feature a thick strain relief on either sides of the cable. It is also worth of mentioning that the housings on the cable and the adaptors are made of the same aluminum as their bodies.

Another visual difference is that UA2’s included cable & the USB-A adaptor feature the company logo on the aluminum housing. UA2’s adaptor also has a rounded design of the USB-A adaptor, unlike the rectangular design of UA1’s adaptor.

All in all, the build quality is more than pleasing at either of these price points.



Performance

Before I jump into the sound performance, I want to cover some details regarding the user experience you get from either of these devices. I mainly used both of these on through USB-A adaptor > MacBook Pro (Early 2015). Neither the UA1 nor the UA2 required any drivers. It was a plug & play experience. However, the UA2 is superior to the UA1 because it is immediately recognized by the system, whereas the UA1 requires you to plug in an audio device in its 3.5mm output in order for it to be recognized. If you plan to own only one of these, then it is not a big deal. However, as a reviewer, it is something that got in my way, especially when it came to A/B tests.

Unplugging my headphones from the UA1 and plugging them into the UA2 resulted in no latency. When I switched to the UA2 the audio playback was immediate. However, when doing the opposite, I had to wait for ~4 seconds until the audio playback started playing. This goes back to the fact that UA2 is immediately recognized by the system, while the UA1 probably has the latency because of the time it takes the system to load it up as an output device.

A possible turn-off for some people is that both the UA1 and the UA2 get quite hot, around 40˚C - 55˚C (104˚F - 131˚F). I first thought that this is overheating and that it is an issue. However, when I contacted Shanling, Mr. Frankie reassured me that the high operating temperatures are normal. Either way, this is something everyone should be aware of. I should also clear up that the high temperatures aren’t regular. The heating is irregular.

I am yet to test the UA1 (will update the review once I do so), but the UA2 definitely has some RMI/EFI noise. It can be as mild as some noise and crackling, but can also be extreme, to the point where there are loud pops and crackling. The worst thing that happened to me was when I was biking, the UA2 and the phone were in my front pocket, and the playback suddenly stopped and there were repeating beeping sounds — almost like the sticky notes sound on Windows. Once I took my phone out of my pocket, I found the playback fully stopped, so I had to go back to my music player and press play. I am yet to come across a dongle DAC/Amp combo which doesn't suffer from similar problems. I cannot give suggestions as to how to solve this, but I know that some people who had RMI/EFI noise issues on the EarMen Sparrow, they fixed it by buying a high-quality cable. I should say that I didn't encounter any of these issues when I was using the UA2 on my laptop.

Sound Performance

The table below represents the volume needed to power the following headphones on the same (subjective to my ears) volume level as on the iBasso DX300 digital-audio-player with the stock AMP11 MK1 module. The volume values below are for the UA2. The UA1 is roughly 0.5-1 MacBook volume bars quieter than the UA2, so you can subtract the below-shown values by that amount to get an idea of the volume levels on the UA1.

MacBook has 16 volume bars. When holding alt + shift, you can adjust the volume with micro bars. There are 4 micro adjustments, meaning that, in total, you can adjust the sound with 64 micro bars. When you see 0.5 (e.g. 1.5, 5.5, etc.), it represent 2 micro bars (4 micro bars are equal to 1 bar).

Single-Ended:


Balanced:

The balanced output is roughly 1-2 micro bars louder than the Single-Ended output. I don't recall hearing any noise when using it.

After dozens of A/B tests, I came to several conclusions and findings. One of the good things is that the UA1 and the UA2 sound just about the same, so switching between them should be a smooth experience. However, for some reason, there is a problem when pairing the UA2 with the HiFiMan Deva. The only other time I faced this issue was when pairing the Deva with some of the budget Tempotec amplifiers. The problem occurs in the sub-bass regions, and it is distinct on tracks like Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?” and MOON’s “Hydrogen”. It is also present on just about any track that has a lot of lower frequencies. What happens is that there is a distortion on the right driver on the headphone, this distortion sounds like a rattle — a very unpleasing sound — but the same distortion is not present at extreme volume on the UA1 or other amplifiers. This leaves me at a dead end. It leaver me wondering why it is happening. It is also worth of mentioning that this distortion is not present on other planar-magnetic headphones like the Dekoni Audio Blue or the SIVGA P-II. I want to repeat that this problem only occurs at extreme volumes (>75%) and is only present with the HiFIMan Deva.

Besides this issue, the sound performance on both the UA1 and the UA2 is quite pleasant and free of problems (based on my usage on my laptop).



Conclusion

I think that both the UA1 and UA2 offer an exceptional performance for the price. They are of great value and do their job.

I’m assuming that you want to know whether the UA2 is worth extra $40. To answer this question, you must make some things clear to yourself:

Do you need a balanced output? Do you care about and/or need a removable cable? Do you want a blacker background (lower noise floor)? Do you need the DSD512 and 32bit/768kHz decoding capability as opposed to the inferior DSD256 and 32bit/384kHz on the UA1? Do you need 125mW (3.5mm SE) and 195mW (2.5mm balanced) output power as opposed to UA1’s SE 85mW max. output power?

These are the questions you need to answer to yourself to pick one of these two. Both are excellent, but one is more versatile and powerful than the other.

As humans, we always want more. We want more even when we don’t need it. With this being said, if you are not using power-hungry or high-sensitivity headphones/IEMs, you will be happy with the UA1. However, if you want one or more of the benefits that the UA2 offers, you will not regret paying the extra 40 bucks. The flagship ES9038Q2M is the same DAC chip used in the EarMen’s $250 TR-Amp, which I also loved.

If you are looking for a small DAC/AMP that doesn't break the bank, I can recommend either of these two devices.



Explanation for the rating: I believe that both devices deserve a firm 4.0 rating. Lack of MQA and in-line controls support is not a turn-off for me, but considering that people will most likely use either of these devices on the go, lack of in-line controls negatively affected the rating by 0.5. While the UA1 had the recessed USB-C ports, I had to remove another 0.5 rating points for the UA2, resulting in a final 4.0 rating. The UA1 was also affected by the lack of in-line controls, but I couldn't give it a rating of 4.5 considering it's not compatible with iOS devices.

“If you have been around in 2018 and have been following the Chi-Fi scene at the time, then you must’ve heard about BQEYZ. Founded in 2018 and located in Dongguan, China, BQEYZ is a well known manufacturer even though it is only 3 years old. It has made a very strong impression with its budget models like the K1, KB1 and K100. However, it was the Spring 1 that put the company on the map. Outside of being well-known for their budget models, it would go on to catch the interest of the mid-fi IEM market, the Spring 1 was considered by many as the best IEM under $200.” — from my Spring II review (read here)

Unboxing Experience



This is yet another approach BQEYZ has taken in terms of packaging their IEMs. More minimalist than ever, the packaging cover is lavender blue (aka periwinkle) and it’s mostly plain. The front facing side has “Summer” printed in a large font in the middle, while the only other text present on the front is the “BQEYZ” in the top-left corner. On the right side of the cover “Summer” is printed in a large font, while on the left side “BQEYZ” is printed in a smaller font. On the back you can find the technical specifications, contents, and contact information. Once you pull off the cover, you will find the now-familiar black box. However, unlike the Spring series that has a canvas-like texture, Summer’s black box has a cardboard-like texture with glitter to match the IEMs themselves.

When you open the box, you are met with a silver print of “Best Quality Earphone for You”. A friendly welcome note indeed. Inside you will find another cover which has another “Summer” & company name print, and also has left & right IEM labels. Once you take off this cover you can finally see all the contents (or so I thought). In the usual foam housing you can find the Summer IEMs, while in the bottom segment you can find the carrying case with the cable and the cleaning brush. I am used to the Spring metal plate that holds all the ear-tips, and this made me think that BQEYZ forgot to include it. I only later discovered that the ear-tips are hidden below the foam piece that holds the earpieces. No metal plate for ear-tips with the Summer — no big deal.



Design

This where I kind of got disappointed. In theory the Summer should look very nice, but in person I just don’t seem to find the design appealing. I am personally not sold on the glitter implementation in the plastic, it really makes the focus be on the plastic Perhaps this wouldn’t be such a bad idea if the plastic was of a very smooth design, but here you have the ridges on the faceplate (which I am also not a fan of) and have quite aggressive curvature throughout the earpieces. This would’ve looked much better if it was CNC aluminum, otherwise I think that plastic IEMs should stick to smooth design that have as little going on as possible. However, this is just aesthetic-wise, this design doesn’t present any problems in terms of comfort of functionality, it’s just that I do not find it necessarily appealing.

I think that plastic & resin are materials that BQEYZ should definitely explore, but they should be aware of the competition. If their products do not meet the competition, it will just be a waste of budget that could’ve otherwise been directed to the R&D department and the development of metal IEMs — something that BQEYZ proved to be quite good at.

From a technical point of view, many things remained the same: the metal nozzle, the three vented design, and the 0.78mm connector design.

Build Quality & Cable

As previously mentioned, I am not impressed with BQEYZ going with a plastic shell. I love plastic shells, they feel comfortable and do not really bug you with a cold feel. My daily driver for the past year or so has been the Jade Audio EA3, a plastic IEM. The quality of the plastic isn’t bad, it’s probably the glitter and the non-organic design that make it kind of un-appealing to me. I can also say that the seam between the two plastic parts is very noticeable, and that’s something that should be worked on.

However, the biggest problem I have with the Summer is that it went back to the bad old Spring I cable. Don’t get me wrong, the whole cable is great, the anodized aluminum housings on the cable both look & feel great, it's the ear-guides that bother me. They are insanely microphonic and they make this horrible rattling/sizzling noise that is quite bothering. This issue has been fixed in the new Spring II, so it makes me question why BQEYZ didn’t choose to keep that cable with the new Summer.

I hope that BQEYZ notes my feedback and makes a permanent change in the future regarding the cable. Keep the metal housings, keep the cable itself, just change the ear-guides to the Spring II ones.

Comfort & Fit

Here is where it gets good. BQEYZ finally got the fit & comfort aspect right. While at first I was struggling to get a deep and snug fit, as soon as I tried the medium blue tips I got what I wanted. The most prominent difference between the black and the blue ear-tips is that the blue ones have a firmer base and thus hold their shape better when inserted into the ear canal.

I can comfortably get a mid-deep fit that provides excellent isolation. I could enjoy the music and not worry about the environment around me. Even though there are three vent holes, I found there to be little to no sound leakage.

Sound



Lows

Listening back to “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer, my standard sub-bass testing track, I was not disappointed in Summer’s sub-bass capability. I actually find the sub-bass quantity to be just right, it’s neither lacking nor is it excessive. The mid-bass on the other hand has more quantity. The body is thick and has depth to it. Interestingly enough, I found both the attack & decay to be slightly faster and more responsive than on the Spring II. It appears to me that the slam and delivery of the mid-bass is tighter. This was apparent on MOON’s “Hydrogen” and Lewis Curtiss’s “Smoking Mirrors”.

I think that the low frequency response is more pleasant and “fun” (enjoyable to listen to, exciting) than it is on the Spring II. There is definitely more definition and refinement in the lower area in the Summer.

Mids

When directly compared to the Spring II, the overall tonality doesn’t differ by much. The noticeable difference is that the Summer has more oomph in the lower mid-range and is brighter in the upper mid-range. The extra upper mid-range extension is quite audible in instruments such as guitars — especially when the strings are audibly plucked. That edge in the upper end is what gives it such an authentic sound, and for example, in Spring II that extension is not there, it’s a more flat and neutral IEM. I enjoyed listening to strings more on the Summer.

When it comes to vocals, let’s take Queen’s “The Show Must Go On”, the Summer has a much brighter representation compared to Spring II.

Though the excitingness of the Summer is appealing, I have to say that the Spring II holds the crown when it comes to being more accurate and neutral. It truly lets the mid-range shine without the extra extensions and colorations that the Summer has — but this also makes it a more “boring” sounding IEM. In the end it all depends as to how you plan to use the IEM and what you are looking for in terms of sound characteristics.

Highs

Much like the mid-range, the higher frequency range is noticeable brighter than on the Spring II. From percussion, to violins, to guitars, the edge is just brighter, and this is not by a small amount. This is audible in just about every track, but as an example, listen to “Beyond the Realms of Death” by Judas Priest as around the 1:04 minute mark and pay attention to the treble part coming off of the percussion. The Summer is much more brighter than the Spring II.

The extra quantity of highs can also result fatigue if you listen at higher listening levels. This can either be a positive or a negative for you. If you want to continue listening to your music at high listening levels, then it’s a negative, but if you want to push back the listening levels, it’s a positive. For example, the Jade Audio EA3 has been perceived as a bright sounding IEM by many, but it is the exact reason why I love it. I used to listen at very loud listening levels, and the EA3 really helped me protect my ears by literally forcing me to keep the listening levels at moderate listening levels.

Soundstage & Imaging

Perhaps the most outstanding part of this IEM are its soundstage and imaging qualities. When it comes to width, it appears that the soundstage can extend beyond 20cm, which is quite a lot when you think about it. The famous “Bubbles” track by Yosi Horikawa is a perfect example of this. “Hey You” by Pink Floyd is another track where you can feel the space of the soundstage (pay attention to the panning of guitars and percussion).

Imaging is not to be excluded. The accuracy and clarity of where the drums are in Pink Floyd’s “Dogs” at the 3:48 minute mark is a perfect example of where the Summer shines.



Conclusion

Priced at $129, the Summer is a new addition to BQEYZ’s IEM line-up. With its sonic colorations, the sound performance is enjoyable and exciting, but flat and neutral like the Spring II. With a few improvements, BQEYZ can release a flagship resin or plastic shelled IEM, but this is at least a start. I can recommend the Summer to somebody who is looking for an IEM with dominant mid-bass, bright & intimate mids, and a great treble extension. I also highly recommend this to someone who is looking for the previously-mentioned qualities and a spacious soundstage that allows all elements of the mix to breathe.



Notes for BQEYZ:

• Continue using Spring II ear-guides, never use the same ones that are used on Spring I or Summer. Continue using high-quality cables like on all of your IEMs.
  
• Continue using the blue ear-tips that are included with the Summer, because they are some of the best ear-tips I have used. They completely change the comfort of both Summer and Spring models. If these ear-tips were used earlier, the other models would’ve been much more comfortable!
  
• Try to source a higher quality plastic material or even resin. Experiment and make sure the final result is of high quality.

Founded in Shenzen in 2016, Sabaj is a Chinese company that manufactures affordable amplifiers and DACs.

Unboxing Experience


The DA3 features fairly simple and plain packaging. On the front there is the company logo, model name, and Hi-Res logo. On the back you have some contact information and that’s about it.

On the inside it is not much different, you just have the DA3 and the cable.

Simple and straightforward.




Design & Build Quality

The DA3 is constructed of aluminum and has a foam pad on the bottom side. This pad acts as a non-slip surface and allows the DA3 to grip to the surface it is placed on. The overall body slightly tapers down. When looked from profile, you can see it is a very slight upside-down trapezoid. However, when you look at it from a bird-eye perspective, you can also notice that it it also tailors towards the bottom.

The general design is quite minimalist and there isn’t a whole lot going on. The busiest part is the top side. On the upper top side of the DA3 there is a “Sabaj” print. This print isn’t very clean, there is a fade around the letters, which makes it look a bit funny. This “glow” is also present on the “DA3 Audio DAC” print on the bottom-right corner. On the lower part of the top side there is a small OLED screen, and right below it there are three buttons. The left/right buttons are -/+ volume buttons or menu down/up, while the one in the middle changes the display mode (menu).

The first menu will display the sample rate and the volume. On the second menu you can switch between BAL (2.5mm) or UNBAL (3.5mm). On the third menu there are three filters you can choose from: Fast Rolloff, Slow Rolloff, Minimum Phase. And, on the fourth menu you can choose if you want a timer that will turn off the display (5, 10, 15, or 20 seconds), or you can turn off the timer entirely.

And that’s about it.





Technical Details

The DA3 houses two ESS SABRE 9018Q2C DAC/Amp chips.

Dynamic range
125dB
THD
0.0004%
SNR
118dB
Bit depth
16bit, 24bit, 32bit, 1bit
Sampling rate
44.1kHz, 48kHz, 88.2kHz, 96kHz, 176.4kHz, 192kHz, 352.8kHz, 384kHz, 705.6kHz, 768kHz DSD64, DSD128, DSD256, DSD512
Consumption power
0.8W
Output power
Balanced: 32Ohm 111mW, 64Ohm 111mW, 300Ohm 52mW
Output power
Unbalanced: 32Ohm 56mW, 64Ohm 43mW, 300Ohm 13mW
Impedance range
16~300Ohm

Performance​

The overall performance was quite good. It had no issues driving power hungry headphones like the planar-magnetic HifiMan Deva or the Dekoni Audio Blue, but there also was no noise present in more sensitive headphones (iBasso SR2) and IEMs. When comparing it to the EarMen Sparrow (which also has a 3.5mm SE and a 2.5mm BAL output), the DA3 seemed slightly thinner in sound — but note that the Sparrow is also slightly more expensive and thus would make up for the price difference.

I am personally shocked that I didn’t need to increase the volume above 25% on all of my headphones and IEMs. It really makes me wonder which headphone or IEM would be pushing this thing to its limits.

It was only later that I realized that not only can you adjust the volume on the DA3, but also on your laptop/PC. I had it on 100% on my laptop, and then I only adjusted the volume on the DA3 — much like you would do when you connect an AMP to a DAC that has volume control (you set the DAC to the max and increase/decrease the volume on the amplifier).

Pairings (% represents the volume value on the DA3)

Dekoni Audio Blue 25%
SIVGA P-II 20%
Sennheiser HD6XX 23%
Hifiman Deva 21%
Jade Audio EA3 10%

2.5mm Jade Audio EA3 6%



Conclusion

I am happy to say that I was pleasantly surprised by DA3’s performance. I did not expect it to have so much headroom in terms of power, and I definitely did not expect to not encounter any noise at all. It is a perfect budget DAC/Amp for desktop use or portable use. One thing to take into consideration is that it is not designed to be used with smartphones. You should also be careful carrying it around due to its “sharp” edges, you want to make sure it does not damage whatever you are carrying it around in.

This is a great $120 DAC/Amp, at least it proved to be from my personal experience.

Go Big or Go Home!​

If you are unfamiliar with the name “iBasso”, here is an excerpt from my iBasso SR2 review (read here) that vaguely goes into the company’s history:

“In 2006 the company stayed loyal to producing headphone amplifiers, portable amplifiers, and DACs. However, it was 2011 that would become the most important year for iBasso. DX100 would become the product that completely changed iBasso’s future. It was the company’s greatest success and was the greatest accomplishment — making it the world’s first digital audio player that could play DSD while utilizing Android OS. But this wasn’t enough for iBasso, as though the DX100 was also the first true high-resolution (24bit/192kHz) digital audio player. The DX100 was able to accomplish this by successfully bypassing the ASLA driver on Android and using two EX9018 DAC chips. This would go on to be an industry-changing achievement, but also the company’s biggest commercial success.

In the later years, iBasso would go on to release a number of digital audio players. Finally, in 2016 the company would enter the field of earphones. This can be considered the point when iBasso entered the field of Head-Fi. It would only be a year later that it would release their flagship digital audio player, the DX200 — a reference-grade DAP that would be the next big step for the company. The DX200 was released as a 10-year anniversary of the DX100.

Then the year 2018 came — the same year that the SR1 headphone came out. iBasso followed their tradition of being a step ahead of itself, they couldn’t help but utilize some innovative technology (silicone suspension drivers). They would finally follow up with two industry-leading digital audio players in 2019 and 2020 - the DX220 (2019) and DX220 Max (2020). Not only are these two product the flagships, but are also the long-awaited follow up to the previous DX220.”

We’ve finally seen iBasso release the much anticipated DX300 in late 2020. Before I get into the small details, I just want to tell you that this, in my opinion, is the most successful device iBasso ever released. To say that the DX300 is an improvement over the DX220 would be an understatement. This is a whole different league.

The brand-new 300 series feels like a start to something great. A beginning of a new chapter, a new era.



Design & Build Quality

While some have been surprised by the size of the DX300, to me it feels pretty natural. This is probably because I am used to smartphones and am looking at it as a smartphone-like device. From my understanding, this is the closest we have seen a DAP get to a smartphone… and that’s a huge step forward.

iBasso is known to keep the design of their DAPs fairly simple. Never too flashy, always minimalist and elegant. In this case, the body is made of anodized aluminum which both looks great and feels great. As a matter of fact, it matches the anodized aluminum that Apple uses (e.g. on their MacBook series). Though large, it’s quite a sleek DAP — 3mm thinner than the HiBy R8 and the Shanling M8, 1mm thinner than the Fiio M15 and the Lotoo PAW 6000, and 1.2mm thicker than the Astell & Kern SE200. Pretty neat, right?

With either of the colorways (obsidian-black, starry-blue), the color scheme is quite high-contrast. In my hands is the starry-blue version, and the blue on its own looks very unique. It can heavily change its appearance depending on the lighting. For example, it can look like a dark grey, but can also look like a midnight blue. The accent color is gold. The 4.4mm and 3.5mm outputs have gold textured rings around them that match the volume wheel. In my opinion, the contrast is a bit too out there, and perhaps it would’ve been nice to see a silver or a dark grey accent color on the obsidian black version. Color schemes are definitely a field that’s always open for experimentation.

On the top side of the device, you have the coaxial output and the USB-C port, both of which have laser-etched labels below them. The latter is used for charging (supports QC3.0 and PD2.0 quick charging), data transfer (USB 3.1) and can also be used as a USB sound card. On the bottom-side are located the SE (single-ended) 3.5mm and BAL (balanced) 4.4mm and 2.5mm outputs. While there are only three physical outputs, they double as PHONE Out (aka headphone out) and LINE Out. It should be noted that the mentioned outputs are the ones that come with the stock AMP11 card. iBasso’s DAP line-up stands out on the market for its replaceable and exchangeable amp card feature, which in my opinion is one of the most significant features that a DAP can have. Most people are okay with keeping the overall device the same, but they like to play with sound. What’s the only way to achieve that? To change the amplifier. In iBasso’s case, all you need to do is change the amp card. Since iBasso chose to change its amp card design with the DX300, we are yet to see what will be offered in the future.

The right side is where people have split opinions. What am I talking about? The knob. Oh, yes, the volume knob. While it is designed well, I am personally not the biggest fan of it. Though the whole design has a purpose – the ridged design for grip, the indented side for pressing in – the design doesn’t necessarily look attractive. I personally don’t think it fits with the elegant design of the whole DAP. I would’ve much preferred a redesign of the DX220’s robust and uniform wheel. Due to the shiny finish, I found myself leaving fingerprints on the inside of the indented part. Besides the wheel, there are also three media buttons: Play/Pause, and Next and Previous. They are slim in design and have tactile feedback. One thing I noticed is that when the DX300 is slipped into the case, all three buttons can lose the tactile feel, making it very difficult to distinguish whether you have pressed them. It is possible that my [leather] case is not tailored well and is causing this, but I had to push really hard and above the case imprints for the buttons, making it quite inconvenient. Again, in my opinion, I believe that a round design of the buttons (like on the DX220) would’ve been much more appropriate. Slim buttons come in handy for things such as the power button, but for media buttons, a larger surface that is easier to press is much more useful.

On the back, you will find what I consider the most gorgeous part of the DX300 — a curved satin-like glass panel, or as Mr. Paul describes it: “a special type of glass”. Upon taking a closer look, I noticed that beneath the glass panel there is what you call an “engraving texture”. I still don’t understand how every reviewer failed to mention this… perhaps they were too focused on the music? On the upper part of the panel there is a silver iBasso logo, while on the bottom portion of it, you have the model name (DX300) and some text. All of these are in a silver finish. However, here’s where things get interesting. The engraving texture fades to a matte black finish on the lower third of the panel. Without any exaggeration, this is by far the most stunning and gorgeous-looking surface I’ve seen on the back of any device. It is incredibly smooth, which is probably why we haven’t seen it on smartphones. This is why I strongly suggest that you do not use it without a case that will provide you the needed grip. I can say that this is my favorite design element of the DX300.


Display

The DX300 takes the crown with its 6.5” LTPS IPS. If I am not mistaken, it is the largest DAP screen and also the one with the highest resolution (2340x1080) on the market. For example, the Samsung Galaxy Note 20 has a resolution of 2400x1080. The DX300 has a display with 397ppi, while the Note 20 has 393ppi. To give you a better idea about the display size and device dimensions (in millimeters):


It’s safe to say that the Note20 is the closest to the DX300 in terms of vertical length. My phone is the Samsung Galaxy S8, and here is how the the DX300 compares in terms of the bezels:


Should you not forget, the S8 comes with the Edge display. This being said, iBasso went far more than the extra mile to ensure an industry-leading display in the DAP space.

Internal Hardware​

Where do I even begin?



SoC

Holding it all together is the Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 SoC (system on a chip) with 128GB of internal storage, 6GB of LPDDR4X-3733 RAM that operates at a frequency of 1866 MHz, an octa-core processor (four Kryo 260 Silver cores operating at 1.84 GHz and four Kryo 260 Gold cores operating at 2.2 GHz), and an Adreno 512 integrated GPU. That’s a lot of technical details, right?

It has to be said that the DX300 currently has the industry-leading SoC and that no other digital-audio-player can match it. Yes, the HiBy R8 also has the Snapdragon 660, but it neither has 6GB of RAM nor 128GB of internal storage. The above-mentioned specifications are on par with Samsung’s 2018 Galaxy A9, which also has the Snapdragon 660, 6GB of RAM, and 128GB of internal storage.

This is a breakthrough in the DAP space, as though all players — with the exception of the HiBy R8 — come with 4GB or less of LPDD3 RAM, and feature processors that operate at slower clock speeds. iBasso’s “no other SoC in the field of digital audio players can match it!” claim lives to be true. And yes, this means that even the most expensive DAP on the market can’t match the Snapdragon 660 that is in the DX300.

DAC

Featuring four flagship Cirrus Logic CS43198 DAC chips, the iBasso DX300 is the first and only DAP with a quad DAC — with the exclusion of some LG smartphones. Each CS43198 chip has 2 channel outs, hence why iBasso said there is a total of 8 DAC channels. Each of the 8 channels has a low pass filter. The DX300 features double-paralleled DAC chips which allow the DX300 to have a fully balanced output. What does “double-paralleled” mean? The visual below should give you a visual representation of the double-paralleled design. Usually, there is a DAC chip per channel, the DX300 has two chips per channel. In stereo audio, you have two channels: Left (L+, L-) and Right (R+, R-).



L1 = L-, L-
L2 = L+, L+
R1 = R-, R-
R2 = R+, R+

Helps a little? So, you can look at it as though there are 8 channels in total, or as though there are 4 that are in parallel.

Unsatisfied with how the average DAPs don’t prioritize audio playback and instead let the SoC and the OS process multiple tasks at the same time, iBasso implemented a FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) in Master mode. The FPGA works between the Soc and the DAC. It basically requests data from the SoC and then sends that data to the DAC. The FPGA works in Master mode using two Accusilicone Fentosecond oscillators as the clocks while synchronizing all audio clocks. This way any jitter is reduced and minimized in order to achieve the cleanest audio processing.

In terms of supported audio formats, here is what the DX300’s DAC is capable of:
MQA (X8), APE, FLAC, WAV, WMA, AAC, ALAC, AIFF, OGG, MP3, DFF, DSF, DXD
PCM: 384 kHz / 32-Bit, DSD256: 11.2 MHz / 1-Bit

The decoding ability of DSD is lower (DSD256) than the supported DSD512 on the DX220. Also, most of the DAPs in the competing price range of the DX300 support decoding PCM 768kHz/32-Bit, but if I am not mistaken, that would be oversampling. Whether this is important to you or not entirely depends on your needs and average use. Do you listen to your music in these formats or not? If not, then it definitely shouldn’t be a deal-breaker. 384kHz/32-Bit is the highest PCM resolution, everything above is in the oversampling category. The whole format wars have become more and more controversial, especially with the recent MQA backlash, but that’s something that I will not get into. Just enjoy your music, don’t overthink it =)



AMP

The following are the specifications of the stock AMP11 module:

Software & Interface​

iBasso’s dual-boot OS has been getting perfected ever since it was introduced in their DX200. On one end you have an optimized Android 9.0, while on the other end you have the 5th generation of the Linux-based Mango OS.



Android (9.0)

The Android OS is slightly different from the usual Android OS. There are some visual differences and some limitations, but the overall experience will feel homelike if you are coming from an Android smartphone. The only thing that bothered me a lot is that the settings aren’t displayed on the first swipe of the notification bar. This is easily fixable through a software update, and I really hope iBasso proceeds to add it in the right corner like in the usual Android OS. Also, due to the large physical size of the DX300, I find the notification buttons (located on the bottom of the screen) to be too low. I think that the buttons should be moved 0.5-1 cm higher up. This is another thing that can be easily fixed through a software update. Besides these two, the Android system is extremely smooth and fast. I couldn’t find a difference in speed and responsiveness in comparison to my S8. The DAPs are really catching up to the performance of smartphones, aren’t they?

There are quite a lot of Android features. One of the notable ones is the flexible homepage. Once you long press on the homepage, you can change whether you want all the apps displayed on the homepage or whether you want the Android standard app drawer. I cleaned up my homepage and am using the app drawer option. You can also change the icon shape (square, squircle, circle, teardrop). To make it feel more like home, there are also widgets that you can place on the homepage. I used the time widget and the Google search widget.

When you swipe left on the homepage, you access a kind of a shortcut desktop that has the Mango Player on the top and the audio settings on the bottom. This is more or less an audio-focused desktop. Besides in the Mango App, this is the only place in the Android OS where you will find the option to switch the DX300 to the DAC mode. This mode allows you to use the DX300 as a USB DAC.

There are three main audio settings: Digital Filter, Gain, Output. All three can be changed through either the notification bar, the settings menu or the swipe-left menu (accessed from the homepage).

With the new Cirrus Logic DAC, there are 5 digital filters:
D1: Fast Roll-Off
D2: Short Delay, Slow Roll-Off
D3: Short Delay, Fast Roll-Off
D4: Slow Roll-Off
D5: NOS (non-oversampling)

I had mine set to NOS, but you can play around and see if you notice any difference and find what suits you.

The gain options are quite standard. No surprises can be found here. There are three gain modes: Low, Medium, High.

And finally, the output setting. This is the setting that allows you to change how the three physical outputs behave as. You can only change the output through software! There are two options: LO (Line Out) and PO (Phone Out). Make sure not to accidentally set it to LO when you are using your headphones/IEMs on the DX300.

Secret tip: To enter the developer mode, go to Settings > System > About device > Press “Build Number” 7 times. Voile, now you have unlocked developer settings (which you should not mess around with if you do not know exactly what you are doing).

Mango App

The interface of this app is quite simple and minimalist, making it easy to navigate through. On the top-left corner, you can go to a menu in which you can search through your music, or browse your internal/external storage for music. In the top-right corner are located all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Play mode, Equalizer (graphic with visual representation, parametric), L/R balance, Digital Filter, Media Scan, and Advanced. In Advanced you can choose: Unplug Pause, Indicator, USB DAC, Bluetooth DAC, Display settings, Sleep Timer, System Info.

In level with the above-mentioned settings, if playing an album, the track number will be displayed (e.g. “4/10”). Everything below looks exactly the same as in the Mango OS. There is a large track/album cover art, file format, track’s timeline, track info, playback options.

I’d like to mention that both the parametric equalizer and the graphic equalizer are quite refined. With the graphic equalizer, you can adjust 10 frequency bands — 33Hz, 63Hz, 100Hz, 330Hz, 630Hz, 1kHz, 3.3kHz, 6.3kHz, 10kHz, 16kHz — with 24 stops (+12, -12) of which each stop alters +/- 0.5dB. On the other hand, the parametric equalizer is much more capable and allows you to adjust make incredibly precise adjustments. Besides being able to play around with the visual graphic, you can put number values to pinpoint the adjustments. There are a total of 6 filters, each can be turned on/off individually, or all can be turned on at the same time. Each filter comes with 4 options:

Filter Type (8 total): low pass, high pass, band pass, notch, all pass, peaking, low shelf, high shelf
Fc: any value (no decimals) between 33Hz - 16kHz
Gain: +/- 20dB (no decimals)
Q Factor: any value between 0.3 - 20 (infinite amount of decimals supported)

I know that there are a lot of technical terms mentioned here, but they are not rocket science. Visit this link to gain a basic level of understanding of common types of equalizers and filter types: https://iconcollective.edu/types-of-eq/
Or read iBasso's own DX300 manual where its explained how each filter affects the frequency spectrum: https://ibasso.com/uploadfiles/download/DX300userguide.pdf

Mango OS (5th gen, V 1.02.204)

This is iBasso’s pure audio-focused OS. Unlike the Android operating system, here there are no animation or transition effects, which means everything is snappy and instant when it comes to interaction. This even affects the power on/off animation — there is no animation. You enter the Mango OS by holding the volume knob and selecting “Switch to Mango”.

You will notice that the whole OS is visually quite similar to the Mango App, hence why they share the same name. The OS is quite simple. On the very top (where the notification bar would usually be), the volume and two battery percentages are displayed on the right side. Right below, on the left side, there is a “My Music” menu, in which you can browse, well…. your music. You can see what’s currently playing, all your music files, you can browse the DX300’s directory, browse by albums, artists, genre, or playlists. On the right side, you have the settings menu, in which you will find all the audio settings: Gapless, Gain, Output, Play mode, L/R balance, Equalizer (graphic without visual representation), Digital Filter, Advanced, and also the option to switch back to Android. Once you go into Advanced, there are the following options: DAC, Media Scan, Languages, Display, Power Management, System Info, MTP (media transfer protocol). Then you have the large song/album cover art, and below it, you have the file format information. Finally, right below there is the track’s timeline and underneath it you have the track name, artist, and album. In level, on the left side, there is an icon of sound waves. Once you press it, all the track info (artist, album, duration, path, delete) is shown, and you also have the option to add that track to a playlist. Last but not least, on the right side, you can change the playback options.


Note: "Not for Sale" is only displayed on my sample DX300 unit. This area is otherwise plain, unless iBasso personalizes it specifically for you.

Bluetooth & WiFi

The DX220 was the first DAP to support two-way Bluetooth 5.0, which provides native support for LDAC and aptx. The DX300 inherited this feature. When it comes to WiFi, the DX300 is equipped with two antennas (2x2 MIMO), which allows it to support up to two streams of data. It also has the dual-band 2.4Ghz/5Ghz ability. The WiFi standard that is implemented is the 802.11b/g/n/ac. On the other side of things, the fairly up-to-date Bluetooth 5.0 is used.

Besides being a transmitter, the DX300 also acts as a Bluetooth receiver. This allows it to have the Bluetooth DAC function, which basically means that the DAP receives digital data from a source and converts it into analogue electrical signal. However, when using it as a Bluetooth DAC, you are limited to AAC and SBC codecs.

Battery

Something’s got to be powering all this craziness, right? Yup, a patented dual power supply structure. iBasso pursued this innovation in the DAP space because they believe that the usual single battery powering the whole system causes distortion that negatively affects audio quality. To be more specific, the DC from the analog section interferes with the DC from the digital section. This is why the battery design is separated into two sections, one 4000mAh battery for the digital section, and one 2000mAh battery for the analog (AMP) section.

The DX300 has THE SoC, THE DAC, THE amp, THE display, so the battery life must be short, right? Nope. I’m sorry to say, but iBasso simply took care of everything. A lot of thought and hard work was put into this device, and the battery definitely wasn’t something that disappointed. It is marketed that the battery can last up to 15 hours and people have found it to be performing pretty close to this number. However, this is just an average, the battery life will be affected by factors such as screen brightness, volume, which format you are listening to, how power demanding your IEMs/headphones are, etc. Not only do the batteries last long, but they also do not take long to charge — only 2.5 hours. iBasso went the right path (imo) with the dual battery structure and it is something that they should perfect and stick to in future models.

Pairings​

Note: The tables below are highly subjective and had no controlled variables. The volume values (%) are purely based on feel and what volume felt "right". I tried to get each headphone/IEM on what I perceived to be the correct listening level. I did try to get them to a similar level, but without direct comparison between them, the values represent nothing more but a vague numerical representation of how much power is needed to get each headphone/IEM on what I would consider a comfortable listening level.

SE (3.5mm):


Balanced:


I can confidently say that there was no headphone or IEM that made me push the DX300 to the limits. When it comes to sources and amplifiers, I like them to be transparent and I don’t like when they significantly alter the sound. If I prefer any alteration to the sound, it is a slight extension on the bottom and upper frequencies.

It is worthy of noting that you usually want to use the lowest gain setting possible. As the gain is increased, so is the noise. I'd say that you should only increase the gain if you are 75%-90% on your current gain setting. For example, when I was using the Jade Audio EA3 through the balanced output on high gain — which I know is insane since I can listen to them on low gain at 35% — I could absolutely hear the noise floor. This is completely normal, as though the high gain setting is there for power hungry IEMs and headphones, so make sure to use the lowest gain setting!

Conclusion​

Priced at $1249, the more you look into this DAP, the more it fascinates you. It has features that match DAPs that are priced north of $2000. Besides that, it has industry-leading features that even the most expensive DAPs don’t have. After doing some thinking, I think that iBasso introduced a new category of DAPs with the DX300, a category that is more smartphone-like than what we have seen up until now. This includes the large display, slimmer but taller form-factor, an almost edge-to-edge display, fast CPU & RAM, and other specifications that you would seek in a smartphone. Maybe we can call it a "smart digital audio player"? I know that there are people who would like to completely replace their phone with a DAP, but we have yet to see that... it probably requires strict licenses and a lot of legal work, so we might have to wait for quite a while to see that.

When it comes to the sub-$2000 market, I might as well go on to say that the DX300 is the best DAP under 2000 bucks. It has the largest screen with the highest resolution, a flagship quad DAC array, the best CPU in the market, the most RAM in a DAP, the interchangeable AMP module, latest Android software. What else could you ask for at $1200? However, I don’t want you to walk away from this review and thinking that all the competing DAPs are bad. If there is one thing I learned about this hobby, it’s that it is not about technicalities and specifications, though those don’t lie. Once you reach the $1k market, everything from this price point on must have a feature that sets it apart from the rest. Now, depending on what you are looking for, this feature may be more or less important to you. Perhaps you don't care about the CPU, the RAM, the display, and similar specifications. Maybe you care more about extraordinary design or are looking for a smaller form factor. What I’m trying to say is that you must have a clear vision of which features you are looking for and how important they are to you. How much are you willing to pay for those features? These are the things you want to have a straight answer to.

I don’t know, I’ve never been a brand loyal individual, I always look for the best in the specific area that I am looking at. For example, I might have a MacBook laptop, but I have an Android smartphone and a custom desktop PC. I couldn’t care less about a brand name. After my positive experience with the SR2, some may think that I am fanboying the company, but that’s not the case. I did my research, and iBasso always proved to be working on industry-leading products. The company on its own can be seen as rebellious in a way — it’s almost as though they are flipping off the industry and the competition and saying “Level up!”. Pushing boundaries is one thing, but to push boundaries and not overprice your products is something completely different. When it comes to the mentioned specifications, there is no other DAP in this price range that comes close to the DX300. There is no DAP that packs all of these flagship features all-in-one.

I tend to get emotional because I know that there is a team of people behind all this success, behind these industry-leading features, yet so many forget this. There are humans behind all of this. And it’s not as though this is the first time iBasso did something of this nature, it has been doing so since 2011 when the DX100 was launched. I would like to dedicate this segment to thank the engineers, the R&D team, and all others who were involved in the development of this DAP. A lot of dedication and hard work has been put into making this a reality. We are, slowly but surely, catching up with the smartphone world, and it’s because of people like the ones over at iBasso. The DX300 is a huge move forward, a truly significant and important move forward!

Don’t think that your effort is being overlooked, because I know that I am not the only person who appreciates your efforts for the substantial progress of DAPs. Keep working hard and stay being on the edge of the industry.

Thank you for your hard work all these years.

---

Comparison chart:

If you have been around in 2018 and have been following the Chi-Fi scene at the time, then you must’ve heard about BQEYZ. Founded in 2018 and located in Dongguan, China, BQEYZ is a well known manufacturer even though it is only 3 years old. It has made a very strong impression with its budget models like the K1, KB1 and K100. However, it was the Spring 1 that put the company on the map. Outside of being well-known for their budget models, it would go on to catch the interest of the mid-fi IEM market, the Spring 1 was considered by many as the best IEM under $200.

What’s in the box?

This time around, BQYEZ decided to go with a new look. Instead of the classy and elegant packaging of its predecessor, the Spring 2 features a teal/ocean blue wrapper with only the “Spring” in the same cursive font that Spring 1 had, and the number “2” printed in a very large font. The whole design heavily reminded me of the infamous Ari Menthol 10’s (modeled after the Newport Menthol cigarettes). On the back-side you can see the specifications and package contents, and also a small line illustration of the IEMs themselves. Once you slide off the wrapper, you will find the canvas-like box that has all the package contents. If I am not mistaken, this is the same box that was used for the Spring 1. Overall, the packaging is something fresh, nothing to complain about.

Formal format of what’s inside:
1x Spring 1
1x Carrying case
1x Cleaning brush
1x 2.5 mm balanced cable (you can choose the plug when ordering, in my case it is the 2.5 mm version)
1x pair foam ear-tips (inside of a plastic box)
1x S/M/L Reference ear-tips
1x S/M/L Atmosphere ear-tips
1x metal plate that holds the Reference & Atmosphere ear-tips




Design

The already familiar design of the shell doesn’t stray too far away from the original Spring 1, many of the design features were either slightly altered or kept the same. In my opinion, what made the Spring 1 so iconic was the golden chrome ring on the faceplate. Instead of gold, BQEYZ opted for a chrome red accent (black version) and a chrome silver accent (green version). What has also been altered is the curvature of the little tab with the BQEYZ logo on the faceplate — the original design featured a smooth circular shape, while the one on the Spring 2 has somewhat of a flow to it. Besides these two visual changes, there have been made changes made with technical function & purpose. The nozzle angle and design is one of them. The nozzle of the Spring 1 was either a hit or miss, it either fit you really good or it simply didn’t. I believe this is the reason why the company decided to work on improvements. Another element that was altered are the vents. As many of you know, the original Spring 1 featured 3 vents. Well, the new Spring 2 keeps the same two connected vents on the side, but it is the 3rd vent that was placed differently: instead of being closer down to the two connected vents, it has been moved up closer to the nozzle and it has some sort of a cloth covering it.

Besides the above mentioned changes, the left & right labels on the inside part of the shell have been kept the same and the nozzle remained in a gold finish. The non-matching finish of the nozzle is the only visual change that I would suggest to BQEYZ for the future models.

Build quality

If there is something that makes BQEYZ stand out in the market, it is build quality. This company is among very few others that only make their products from metal — not a single IEM shell released by BQEYZ was made out of anything other than CNC machined & anodized aluminum.

Speaking of the shell, as already mentioned, it is made of a two piece 5-axis machined aluminum. Another element that makes BQEYZ authentic is the metal ear-tip holder. The “card” holder is very efficient at saving space, especially when it comes to fitting & carrying all the ear-tips with you.

There isn’t too much more to say, the build quality & construction is simply 10/10.




Cable

One of the most prominent changes in the Spring 2 is the cable. If you had the Spring 1 in hand, chances are that the cable didn’t leave the most positive impression — it was just OK, nothing more, nothing less. Besides the change of appearance, the problem of the microphonic ear-guide is gone and fixed.

However, there is one confusing part about the marketing of the cable: the 224 core claim. I went ahead and directly contacted BQEYZ to clear this up. I ended up being correct: it’s a 4-core single crystal copper cable with 224 strands. This means that there was a misunderstanding within the marketing team and this lead to the 224-core claim. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe this is the same case with the highly-praise FAAEAL Hibiscus cable, which was also marketed to have a 224-core cable. I personally prefer the BQEYZ cable due to the anodized aluminum housings

Each core has 7 “shares” which consist of 8 strands. If I am not mistaken, the strands are 0.06mm in diameter.

Here is an illustration that BQEYZ exclusively sent me:



It comes as no surprise that this is one of the best stock cables in this price range. We are finally starting to see more high-end stock cables in the Chi-Fi market, and it is safe to say that the FAAEAL Hibiscus was one of the earliest to do this at a reasonable price. To me, the flexibility of the cable is one of the most important factors besides things such as comfort & feel. I greatly enjoy a cable that I can easily put away and a cable that holds its shape once I do that. Looks are not all that important to me. However, this is also one of the most good stock looking cables I came across. Good job BQEYZ!

Comfort & fit

I don’t know about you, but the one the I hated the most about the Spring 1 was the fit & comfort. It sounded good but I simply couldn’t use it because of the horrible fit. Actually, the fit was so bad that I ended up getting a really painful ear infection.

Thank God, this is no longer the problem. With the Spring 2, BQEYZ changed the angle of the nozzle and this is a major improvement.

However, just because the new Spring 2 isn’t uncomfortable doesn’t mean it is comfortable. What does the word “comfortable” even mean? I think the definition is subjective, it differs from person to person. For me, comfortable means a tight seal that goes deep into my ear. Spring 2 is a interesting little IEM… it fits shallow, but unlike its predecessor, it doesn’t have a large nozzle that causes irritation to my ear. Besides a shallow fit, the seal is medium (not loose, not tight). The combination of these two leads me to describe the comfort & fit as relaxed.

What you definitely should not expect is great isolation. After all, there are three vents. While definitely a stretch, I do find this experience somewhat alike earbuds, at least the relaxed fit part.

Sound

As of lately, I have found several IEMs that really fit my personal preference, and the Spring 2 was one of the first in this select range. I think that many people know that the KBEAR TRI i3 has been my favorite IEM for a long time, and while the TRI i3 has rumbling bass, thick mids, and sparkly highs, the Spring 2 has a much more balanced sound signature



Lows

I have to say that the lows lean towards the softer side of the spectrum. This is definitely one of the areas that needs to be worked on. In my opinion, it is not so much quantity that needs to be worked on, but rather the quality. More specifically — the speed.

One of the first things that I noticed about the lower-frequency response is that the sub-bass is more dominant compared to the mid-bass. In fact, I think that the sub-bass is well done. Tracks like “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer (3:26), “Wesley’s Theory” by Kendrick Lamar (~1:06) , “Valentine” by Justice, Michael Jackson’s “Smooth Criminal”, really showcase the sub-bass quality & quantity. The depth is there, the rumble is there, and the thickness is there.

However, mid-bass shows some issues that need to be fixed. If fast decay is called “tight”, then the Spring 2 is “loose”. I think that the main issue is with the decay, as it appears that the attack is good. My standard tracks for testing punch & bass speed are “Hydrogen” by MOON and “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss. On both tracks the slow decay is audible, especially in the latter track. I can say that this heavily reminds me of the Dekoni Audio Blue, which also had a looser bass response, but unlike the Blue, the Spring 2 doesn’t as much mid-bass quantity. In other words, the mid-bass lacks definition. This being said, I think that the mid-bass quantity is well-refined, it is the quality that needs to be worked on. What I like about the quantity is that it is balanced and doesn’t overwhelm the mix, it really allows most of the focus to be on the mid and high-range.



Mids

The mid-range is by far the most impressive part about this IEM. It comes as no surprise, because it’s the exact same element that the Spring 1 gained so much respect for.

Something interesting about the mid-range that I still haven’t sat on is whether or not it’s forward. The reason why I am so unsure about it is because I am questioning whether the reduction of the lower frequencies is making the mid-range appear to stand out, or whether it's the highly spacious nature of the Spring 2 that is making it a mid-centric IEM. Either way, the mid-range tonality, texture, and body is what I love this IEM most for.

To get straight to the point, let’s talk about strings. If you know a thing or two about me, you know that timbre and the sound presentation of strings, especially guitars, is a crucial satisfactory field for me. Spring 2 is a big improvement compared to the Spring 1. Besides the fit & comfort issues I had with the Spring 1, the warmer nature of it was something that threw me off. Spring 2 has more more top-end and is brighter — which is something I much prefer over warmth.

All of the following tracks sounded exceptionally good when it comes to the string tonality:

“Babe I’m Gonna Leave You”, “Stairway to Heaven” by Led Zeppelin

“Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple

“Go Insane” (Live 1997), “The Chain” by Fleetwood Mac

“Private Investigations” by Dire Straits

The mid-range benefits from both a great lower mid-range and upper mid-range extension. Even though I personally prefer brighter mid-range and sound signature in general, it is important to say that for somebody it might be too much. From my experience, the mid-range never sounded shouty, piercing, or unpleasant, the upper mid-range extension always contributed positively and was well appreciated.



Highs

This region is definitely one of the first things that made me fall in love with the Spring 2. The combination of a brighter mid-range and a good treble response is what makes this IEM sound complete — or so I thought.

From my speculation, I concluded that the upper-end is rolled off and that there is no sparkle, only sheen. However, I also found percussion to be crisp and snappy. This would make my points sound contradictory, but listen to the following examples:

“Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott (5:20) – at this point Stevie Wonder’s harmonica hits the highest peak note, but it sounds pretty dull as opposed how bright it really should sound

“Portia” by Miles Davis – this is a track where you can really hear the brighter side of the Spring 2, perhaps it is on the edge of sparkle, but it still has a roll-off that keeps it away from being piercing

“Damn Your Eyes” by Etta James – this is one of the examples where percussion is crisp and snappy. Focus on the snare in this track (first audible at 0:46)

“Money for Nothing” by Dire Straits – another example where percussion (snare) is bright and crisp (first audible at 0:49)

While the harmonica in “Stop Trying to Be God” would usually be one the edge of being piercing, on the Spring 2 it’s noticeably rolled-off. However, it is not the bad type of roll-off, it’s just not as bright as some other headphones/IEMs that I listened to. Old recordings still have the edge that they are supposed to have. “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Joan Baez and “Strange Fruit” by Nina Simone still have the sharp prominent peaks — the first tracks has much sharper peaks.

Soundstage & Imaging

Looking back at my time with the Spring 1, I remember that I was not impressed with the soundstage. It was really one of those moments where I questioned my own opinion. I was unsure about it. The reason why is because the online support and praise of the Spring 1. It felt almost as though I was the only one who couldn’t relate to it. However, as time passed, I learned to trust my ears regardless of what people say online.

On the other hand, Spring 2 is a big improvement. When it comes to the soundstage, almost every track sounds open, never boxy. It’s not as though the width is going to blow you away, but it is definitely above average. What is more impressive is the imaging.

The following tracks include one or more elements that showcase the imaging:

“Africa” by Toto

“Dogs” by Pink Floyd (drums at 3:48, 3:56)

“Hey You” by Pink Floyd

“The Chain” by Fleetwood Mac

“La Sagrada La Familia” by The Alan Parsons Project (several elements in the introduction)



Conclusion

That about sums it up. I have to say that I am happy to see that the Spring 2 was an improvement over its predecessor. There are definitely areas that need to be worked on, lower-frequency response is one of them.

What I know for sure is that the vocals are center-stage while other elements are panned outside, this really lets you focus on the vocals. I find this experience similar to the iBasso SR2 (reviewed here).

BQEYZ is really close to delivering a perfect IEM at this price range. I really hope that in the next release the lower-end will be more defined and the upper frequency range will have more edge and sparkle to it.

---

Setup: MacBook Pro (Early 2015) > EarMen Sparrow (2.5mm output) > BQEYZ Spring 2

If you are not familiar with EarMen, you can read the excerpt from my TR-Amp review:
“Whether it’s their genius and sneaky model names, or the devices themselves, EarMen is doing it right, and I love it! There is a great challenge in succeeding when you are a fairly new company to the market — it’s hard to reinvent the wheel. Auris Audio is only 7 years old, it’s a fairly young company, yet they did it their own way and succeeded in doing that. If you are not familiar with Auris Audio, you may be asking “What is Auris Audio and why is it relevant to EarMen?”. First, let’s make this clear: Auris Audio is the parent company which mainly specializes in manufacturing high-fidelity and luxury amplifiers, and EarMen is their sub-brand that focuses on more budget friendly (without the compromise of quality!) portable devices.

The combination of leather & wood has become Auris Audio’s trademark — once you see it, you know it’s Auris. Founded in 2013. by Mr. Milomir Trosic, Auris Audio has achieved major recognition and success, well deserved success and recognition. Both Auris Audio and EarMen focus on producing quality products - they prefer quality over quantity. You will notice that they haven’t just released a large quantity of models, but rather focused on putting out fewer quality product ranges (both EarMen and Auris Audio), and this is something that I respect on a high level. How many times did you come across a company with dozens of different models and product ranges of a relatively similar product? I can tell you that the answer is probably more than necessary. Both Auris Audio and EarMen have focused on using the highest quality components from the best companies - Electro Harmonix, Tung-Sol, JJ Electronic, Sabre, XMOS, Texas Instruments, Cirrus Logic, they have it all. Last but not least, Auris is known for manufacturing, assembling, and designing their products in Europe. Not only that, but all products from Auris Audio are handcrafted.”

Unboxing experience

The Sparrow is packaged inside a large slim box. As usual, EarMen kept it clean and minimalistic. On the front, you will find an illustration of the device itself, while you will find some brief specifications on the back. On the inside, you will find the Sparrow and the two cables nicely placed inside a single piece of foam. Nothing spectacular, but also nothing to complain about.

A fun little easter egg that I found is that the front illustration of the Sparrow is printed in a 1:1 scale, i.e. it matches the real size of the Sparrow.

Formal format of what you get inside the box:

1x Sparrow amplifier
1x USB-C to USB-C cable
1x USB-A to USB-C cable

Click to expand...

Build Quality & Design

The construction of this little guy is fairly simple: the body/frame is made from CNC aluminum, while the front and back panels are made of glass.

The frame is machined from a single block of aluminum. You can see the whole process in this GIF:



The Sparrow is among the smallest portable DAC/AMPs available on the market. It is tiny. To put its size in scale, a 20 cent coin is 22.25mm in diameter, while the Sparrow is 42mm in length – this makes it .50mm smaller than two 20 cent coins. Not only does it fit into a pocket, but it comfortably fits into a watch pocket (that small pocket that can be found on jeans).

From a design perspective, it looks great. I love the combination of the silver lettering, glass panels, the Hi-Res logo on the back, and the LED EarMen logo. Altogether it looks minimalist & elegant. However, there is something that I think is missing: a protective case. The glass panels look great, but since the Sparrow will most likely be carried in pockets, it will get scratched up. One way to avoid that is by offering a protective case as an accessory. Another way is by offering a screen protector.. although it might be more challenging due to the carved nature of the glass. That is just about the only complaint I have in terms of the design, other than that, it is classy.



Technology & functions

If you have taken a look at EarMen’s offerings, then you are probably aware of the TR-Amp — a portable amp that has the power needed to drive full-sized headphones. Well, the Sparrow is essentially a portable Amp/DAC that is aimed towards the IEM market. One of the drawbacks of the TR-Amp is that noise is audible with higher sensitivity IEMs or headphones.

This isn’t the case with the Sparrow. It uses the flagship Sabre ES9281PRO chip from ESS. After inquiring about the specifications, I found out that it has a SNR (signal-to-noise ratio) of 122 dB, a THD + N (total harmonic distortion + noise) of -112 dB, and 124 dB DNR. In comparison, TR-Amp has a SNR of 114 dB and a THD+N of -120 dB.

When it comes to outputs, you have the standard 3.5 mm, and of course, the balanced 2.5 mm. A balanced output is a must, especially when you are making a portable device that is specifically aimed to be used with IEMs. For example, TR-Amp lacks of a 2.5 mm output, but benefits from a 6.3 mm output.

As stated on the EarMen’s product page, all 32bit/384kHz formats are supported (PCM, DoP, DSD64, DSD128 and MQA).


Technical details in a formal format:



Experience

Technical specifications aside, it is performance and user experience that matter the most. I have been personally following the EarMen threads from the very beginning, I was there when the company became a sponsor of Head-Fi. I have been seeing that some people abroad did experience EMI noise. However, for the past 5 months of using the Sparrow, I never encountered that problem. I truly tried to forcefully make the noise appear, but I had no success in that. I went as far to directly put the Sparrow on top of my laptop and phone, but no noise was audible. To give you a better idea of my casual usage, I would usually have my laptop on the bed and the Sparrow would be connected and be placed right besides it. I never took the Sparrow with me outside, so I am not sure whether that would make any difference, but from my casual usage, this problem never came up.

Update: After further experimenting, I was finally able to hear the talked about EMI noise. It was the strongest when the phone was in diract touch with the Sparrow. Since I used the standard TR-Amp cable for the 5 months of usage (the stock one was too short to be used on a laptop while the laptop is placed on your lap), the EMI noise never occured. However, after placing the phone in direct touch with it (with the TR-Amp cable), it was audible, but much quieter than on the stock cables. This makes me question whether the stock cable length is the problem, the shielding, or another factor. As I use the Sparrow with my laptop, this isn't a problem for me (my phone is never close to amps and DACs), but it certainly presents a problem for someobdy who plans to have the Sparrow in the pocket (in direct touch with the phone).

One problem that did occur during my usage period is that the Sparrow’s playback would stop for 1-2 seconds, but this only happened around 3 times. Besides this, I had no problems. I actually still use the Sparrow in my daily setup: Sparrow + iBasso SR2.

Power. At first glance you wouldn’t expect much, but when you pair it with various full-sized cans, you realize that that it is quite capable. The only time I found it lacking in power was when I paired it with planar-magnetic headphones (Dekoni Blue, Hifiman Deva)… but as many of us know, planar-magnetic headphones are very demanding. You can read the full list of earphones/headphones that were used with the Sparrow at the bottom of this review.



Conclusion

I can firmly say that this little device met my expectations and will continue pleasing me after 5 months of usage. The Sparrow costs $199, making it among pricier dongle AMP/DACs. However, based on what people have said (across several different forums), it is superior in performance to its competitors. This is what I believe makes up for the higher than usual price tag. One thing to keep in mind: what this device is trying to achieve is packing industry-leading technology in as little space as possible. With this being said, by no means should it be compared to anything other than devices alike (dongle DAC/AMPs of a similar form factor), DAPs and portable amps that are the size of TR-Amp cannot be compared, they serve a completely different function and form factor.

As I dislike warmth coming out of my source, I have always enjoyed EarMen products for their transparent mid-range and slight emphasis on lower & higher frequencies. The Sparrow is no exception, and this is why it will stay in my rotation.

---

Headphones paired:
Sennheiser HD598
Sennheiser HD6XX
Dekoni Audio Blue
Ollo Audio S4X
Sivga Phoenix
Sivga P-II
iBasso SR2
Hifiman Deva

IEMs paired:
Jade Audio EA3
KBEAR TRI i3
KBEAR Diamond
Fiio FD1
Audiosense AQ3
Hifiman RE600s V2
Hifiman RE800 Silver
BQEYZ Spring 1
BQEYZ Spring 2

Kaldas Research is a fairly new name in the industry, but it's one you should be paying close attention to.

Why? Money.

You see, in the world of business, it's all about money. If you own a business, you invest your time & money, and in return, you gain profit – you get food on the table and make a living out of it. Every business needs to at least return the invested amount of money in order for it to be able to operate. Ideally, you want to gain profit. What you do not want is to lose money, that's when things start going sideways. Just like hungry animals, business owners will do everything to get that food on the table, it doesn't matter how it's done, the goal is simple.

What makes Kaldas Research different is that its main source of income is not from its audio products. Its main business is in contract manufacturing and R&D. Behind the company stands a very young and passionate individual.

Mr. Aumkar, 23 years old, is the owner of Kaldas Research. He founded the company back in 2016. I have to repeat that Kaldas Research was never started as an audio company, but as a business whose profession lies within the field of R&D and contract manufacturing. Some of its partners are Fiat, Gillette, Colgate, and TATA.

So, how did Mr. Aumkar come to manufacture headphones?

It all began when he listened to his uncle's Sennheiser HE-60, also known as "Baby Orpheus". I believe this was his first encounter with Hi-Fi, and it probably sparked his interest in the audiophile world. However, his audiophile journey officially began in 2011 when he bought his first pair of personal headphones, the Sennheiser HD-650, and the rest is history. This would mean that he was only 14 years old at the time - impressive if you ask me.

Mr. Aumkar is more than just the owner of Kaldas Research. Before anything, he is a very humble and passionate man. It takes some true enthusiasm to start a family business at just 19 years old, let alone enter the competitive market of headphones. He produced the first prototype of his headphone [XP1] in mid/late 2018. It wouldn't be until 2019 CanJam SoCal that the RR1 Conquest, the official headphone model, would be released. What makes him different is that he is a true headphone enthusiast, something that is more important to him than business. In his very own words:
"I don't make headphones for a living, I am lucky enough to be in a position to have multiple businesses which prevent me from being pressured to constantly launch new products for quick sales like other manufacturers are. I don't care about sales"

He is clearly somebody who values true worth above business & sales. Integrity. There is a big difference between when you do something to earn money and when you do something with passion and earn money from it. It's the intention that is different. I think all of us (audio enthusiasts) are passionate about the hobby itself, however, very few took it to the level Mr. Aumkar has. He started to seriously invest himself into the headphone world ever since he listened to his uncle's HE60… It was headphone after headphone, the next thing you know, he has a whole collection of vintage, rare, and historically important pairs of headphones. Just judging from his Youtube channel, I was able to conclude that he is the type of person for who only the sky is the limit.

He is an incredibly humble human being. There was more than one occasion where he would be completely transparent about his headphone, and would even recommend other headphones over his own - he always stays honest.

What I want to say is that age doesn't matter. It is just a number. To see what this young man has accomplished with his passion is just beyond words. It's always sad to see a hobby where the older people discriminate and disrespect the younger ones. The worst part is that the older people are usually quite stubborn and just because of their age they refuse to accept that somebody younger is more knowledgeable than them — this can be the case when a younger person corrects them or understands the issue in something that they can't.


Principles

Mr. Aumkar didn't want Kaldas Research to be just another company in the headphone industry, he set very high standards for himself:
1) 100% Manufacturing and R&D to be done in-house
2) Not to outsource drivers from China
3) Approach vertical integration

When asked why it was so important to him to make everything in-house, he answered:
"I don't really have a straight answer to that. Maybe it's just personal. I'm doing this to make me happy – there are very few things that make me happy personally, and making something completely by myself is one of them."

"My inspiration is Horacio Pagani [of Pagani Automobil] and Christian von Koenigsegg [of Koenigsegg Automotive]. All these people, they are also passionate, and they make everything themselves. They don't go to other companies, take the parts, and make a recipe."

With this way of thinking, he really challenged himself to create something different — and in my eyes, he certainly accomplished that… at least if you are looking at it technically; the headphones themselves are 100% manufactured in-house, the only parts that aren't are the ear-pads and the headband.



Design

My first encounter with Kaldas Research dates back to 2019. I vividly remember stumbling upon its website and seeing the RR1 Conquest for the first time. My very first impression was quite interesting, to say the least. I remember having this unusual adrenaline rush and I also felt butterflies in my stomach… Something I would've never thought I'd experience for an audio product. I do know one thing, and it is that I was fascinated with the design aspect of it. There is something in the design itself that left me speechless, it didn't look like any headphone I have ever seen.

Looking back at that moment, I can say with confidence that I tend to get very excited for something new, something never-before-seen. In this case, it was the design.
What was the inspiration behind the design? The luxury automotive industry? Perhaps it was the female figure? Nope. It turns out that there actually was no true inspiration behind the design of the ear-cups, it was the result of pure experimentation in CAD.

"We didn't plan the headphone to look like it does. The RR1 initially wasn't supposed to be electrostatic and had an angled baffle plate system. We worked on this design for many months until we decided to implement an electrostatic driver and had to work around our design to implement the new driver. Then we experimented to accommodate the components like the driver trim housing, connector assembly, and other dust/grill protections."

Besides the ear-cups, there is one distinct design feature on the RR1 Conquest that stands out: the exposed wire. While it is definitely a subtle detail, it's something that Kaldas Research had in mind from the very beginning. Personally, I love it and think that it gives an authentic look to the headphones. There are, however, some who dislike this look, but this is something you can always expect when you are doing something different and new.

Before I cover the headband construction, I would like to shift the focus to a very important problem that Kaldas Research managed to overcome. Electrostatic headphones have always been this unique branch of headphones; they never were quite portable, always required a special amplifier to power them, and if they didn't have a fixed cable, they either had a removable one that was fixed in place with the help of screws (e.g. Dan Clark Audio Voce) or they had unique connectors (e.g. Warwick Acoustics' headphones, Stax SR-Omega, Kingsound headphones). You get the point, you couldn't simply go to the market and buy a "third-party" cable, it had to come from the manufacturer itself. Kaldas Research is the first manufacturer that has made an electrostatic headphone (pure push-pull design) with a fully detachable cable… Well, at least technically it is. Allow me to explain. I consider Kaldas Research to be a company that is in the headphone market, i.e. people know about the company itself. After all, it is a sponsor on Head-Fi. With this being said, I can say that Kaldas Research was the first company on the market to make an electrostatic headphone with a fully detachable cable, but I cannot say that it was the first to do it as a whole. Actually, there is a company that did it a couple of years before Kaldas Research. However, that company is virtually unknown for its electrostatic headphones, so it's safe to say that they are not known in the headphone market. What should this mean? Nothing more than the fact that you can neither say that Kaldas Research was the first nor that it wasn't; it didn't copy the feature from the other company because the Kaldas Research team was unaware of it. It comes down to the situation that two people came up with the same idea at different points in time.

Regardless, I think that featuring mini XLR connectors is a move in the right direction. It is both more durable and more convenient in terms of "third-party" cables. If future electrostatic headphones adopt this, it could become a standard and we could see cables for electrostatic headphones from the existing cable manufacturers.

Let's cover some details.

The headband construction consists of three main parts: the headband, the headband holder, and the headphone yoke. Each of these parts is very raw and exposed. One of the main advantages of this design style is that everything is easily accessible and replaceable. The headband itself is sandwiched between the main piece (the headband holder) and another small aluminum piece. If for whatever reason, you need to replace the headband, you can just unscrew the two screws and put in a new one.
The headband holder consists of a single piece that holds together the whole headband construction, this is why it can be called the main piece. Instead of utilizing a whole height adjustment system on the ear-cups, Kaldas Research implemented a headband sliding system. There are both pros and cons to this design. The pro being that it is highly adjustable and saves up both the material and footprint of the headphone itself. The con is that it is fixed in place and has to be adjusted manually (screwing & unscrewing). It works on a very simple principle: the headband holder has a slot in which a hex screw and another aluminum piece hold down the headband. To avoid scratching the inside of the slot, you will have to carefully adjust the height and fix it in place by tightening the hex screw.
And, finally, the headphone yoke itself. I must say, this is one of my favorite parts of this headphone, and the reason why is not so complicated. Due to the fact that the yoke both follows the figure of the ear-cups and gives them a floating look. I don't think the RR1 Conquest would be RR1 Conquest without either of these design choices. However, the design has its limitations — tilt is one of them. You see, the ear-cup size on this headphone is among the largest I have ever seen. It is very wide and makes achieving great tilt rotation virtually impossible. Mr. Aumkar had to attach the yoke to only one point (the back of the headphone) in order to achieve the look, but this also made the ear-cups vulnerable to scratching. If you rotate the yoke too far out, it will start digging into the ear-cups themselves, but you shouldn't run into this problem if you are careful and if you tighten the ear-cups in place.

I can't lie, from the very first time I saw the RR1 Conquest, I was convinced that it is one of the most unique headphones ever released. Having them in person, I can say that my opinion has not changed. And don't get me wrong, there are a lot of greatly designed headphones on the market, but there really is nothing like the RR1 Conquest. There are a lot of little details that aren't apparent until you really take a closer look: the headband holder is one of them. It actually follows the shape of the yoke, and much like the rest of this headphone, everything follows a specific figure. I also have to say that Mr. Aumkar and his team are very brave for going for such a design for their first headphone model!



Build Quality

The quality standards on this pair of headphones are nothing short of exceptional, and that truly doesn't come off as surprising. Once again, the Kaldas Research team put in some serious thought behind the material choice.

The RR1 Conquest wasn't always manufactured the way it is today. With the complex structure and design of the ear-cups, there were multiple issues that were faced when the headphones were made by 3D printing. For this reason, the manufacturing process was soon carried out by using the plastic molding technique. However, even with this method, there is quite a lot of hand processing that is required to achieve the matte-black finish.

Talking about the finish, the surface of the ear-cups is something different. This is the highest quality plastic that I have seen to date — at least when it comes to the plastic used on headphones. The hand processing obviously paid off because the smoothness of the surface is just out of this world. It feels high-quality, looks high-quality, and is in fact high-quality. You will notice that there are two parts of the ear-cups — both of them are made of the same thermoplastic and have the same finish. One of the problems that occur very often with thermoplastic is that over time it becomes sticky due to polymer degradation. Kaldas Research was aware of this problem and took the necessary precautions to avoid it. Mr. Aumkar assures that the material will never get sticky or rubbery over time, but will be polished (over the span of years of use) due to the oils in our fingers. Keep your hands clean!
Note: It is not recommended to clean the ear-cup surface with anything wet/damp. If any cleaning is necessary, do it with a dry cloth.

The rest of the construction is built to be quite robust. You have the headband that is made of spring steel, the headband holders, and the yokes that are made of anodized machined aluminum. Speaking of spring steel, there was absolutely no ringing present! This is something that has been a problem in some headphones, and I am very glad that it is not the case here.

This is a very well-built headphone, to say the least. I find it interesting that the manufacturer tackled a common problem, yet they didn't address it on the website itself. The company clearly assures longevity, and if anything ever goes wrong, you can count on being taken care of. If looks matter to you, the only thing that you need to keep in mind is to take care of the ear-cups. If you want to be an extremist, you can handle the headphones with gloves on... but that's a bit too much, isn't it?



Cable

I think that at this point everybody knows I am very picky and strict when rubber cables are in question. Sennheiser HD598's cable has been my gold standard since forever. You probably heard me once or twice speaking about how robust and high quality that cable is, and whenever I see a rubber cable, the least I expect from it is to meet the quality of the Sennheiser's cable.

Good news for you, Kaldas Research used a high-quality rubber cable. What a relief. No, it is not a 6N silver cable with crazy technology inside. It's just a cable. A good cable. In terms of available information, it is a 24 AWG, OFC (oxygen-free copper), shielded cable. Since the cable itself features written text on it, I was able to find the exact model. It comes from the German manufacturer Sommer Cable, and it is their 200-0551 model. Surprisingly enough, it is thicker than HD598's cable but feels just about the same in terms of quality. The connector housings are made of the same smooth matte-black plastic that the ear-cups are made of — very lightweight and pleasant to the touch. One the headphone end, you will find mini XLR connectors, while you will find Stax 5-Pin Pro BIAS on the amplifier end.



Comfort & Fit

Is the glass half empty or half full? If there was one area that I would recommend to be improved, it would be this one.

So, here's the thing: I had worn the RR1 for several hours, and although there were minor issues, I cannot say that the headphone is uncomfortable. One of the issues is the thickness of the ear-pads. Due to their extremely thin nature, some people had the problem where the upper part of the ear touches the fabric cover (I'm one of those people). Most of the time I did not feel any discomfort, but sometimes I would experience fatigue, and that's when I would have to move the ear-cups around. If the ear-cups weren't vented, this could have presented a real problem, because you would run the risk of causing condensation within the ear-cups themselves… electrostatic headphones and moisture don't quite get along. Just recently, a number of people reported moisture inside their Apple AirPods Max. This being said, the most ideal solution would be to increase the thickness of the ear-pads — but that completely changes the sound signature. Overall, it is not an easy thing to fix.

Something that personally bothered me is the limited rotation of the ear-cups. Vertical rotation is perfectly fine, but you can damage the ear-cups if you are not careful. What I found to be lacking is the pivot (horizontal rotation). To give you a better idea, I would rather call it wiggle than horizontal rotation. This usually wouldn't be such a big problem, especially to those who have a decent amount of fat on their face, but those with a slimmer face may find it limited.

I didn't find any other issues besides the two mentioned above. As I said before, I had no signs of discomfort even after wearing the headphones for several hours. Something that I did see bothering some people is the material of the ear-pads & the headband. While it would've been nice to see some genuine leather, the used PU leather felt pleasant to the skin and provided a nice seal. No sweating, no hot-spots. And while the headband is quite literally just a strap of artificial leather without any cushioning, it did not hurt my head. As a whole, I'd rate the comfort around 8/10.

Update (2021/01/31): The headband ripped on both sides. I managed to fix it with some superglue and leather scraps. A way to fix this would be to reinforce the headband on the part that is placed in the headband holder, that's the most fragile spot. Using a small piece of ripstop fabric would stop this altogether, so I recommend Kaldas Research looks for a solution.

Sound

If there is one popular opinion about electrostatic headphones that I keep hearing over and over, it is that they lack lower frequencies. And while this does seem to be the case with the majority of electrostatic headphones on the market, RR1 Conquest is an exception. The price may fool you and imply otherwise, but once you hear these in person, you will get what I am talking about.



Lows

As somebody who spends a lot of time on the web and on audiophile forums in general, I am constantly surrounded by opinions about products. Sometimes a person really enjoys a particular product, other times somebody else hates it. Here is a short story I'd like to share.

Many of you already know that Kaldas Research is an official sponsor on Head-Fi. If you have been closely following Kaldas Research, then you are probably aware of the dedicated RR1 Conquest Head-Fi thread. I have been following that thread from the very beginning, and haven't stopped since. From doing so, I was able to form some expectations from this headphone – some liked it, some didn't. So, when my RR1 Conquest arrived and I gave it some listening time, I found myself disagreeing with a particular opinion. I vaguely remember some people or one individual who found these headphones lacking in the lower frequency region or said something along the lines of "the bass cannot be compared to dynamic driver headphones", and I simply couldn't get that around my head once I listened to these in person. Not only do I not find them lacking in bass, but would say that the bass quantity levels are on the same level as on some dynamic headphones — this alone is mind-blowing for an electrostatic headphone! But hey, I am listening to these on an amplifier that is almost 15 times the price of the headphones themselves… so I can't really compare my experience to the one where the headphones were paired up with an entry-level electrostatic amplifier/energizer.

"Psychic" by the American duo DARKSIDE is one of my favorite albums to just let go of everything and relax to, but more than that, it is a great album to listen for low-frequency qualities.

It's hard not to mention "Frank", by the one and only – Amy Winehouse. Explicit lyrics, raw vocals, and thumping lows. That's my cup of tea! In fact, I think that "Frank" doesn't get enough praise and attention, it's always "Back To Black" that steals the spotlight.
"Stronger Than Me", "screw Me Pumps", "Moody's Mood For Love", "October Song", "Amy Amy Amy", and "Outro" ("Brother", "Mr Magic") are the tracks that I found to stand out for their low-frequency presence. The RR1's sound performance in this region is truly exceptional. The depth is there, the punch is there, and the body is there. And when I say "exceptional", I mean exceptional.

What makes this pair of electrostatic headphones special is their ability to capture lower-frequencies, in particular, sub-tones. As I mentioned before, it is widely accepted that electrostatic headphones are not the most capable when it comes to lower-frequencies, let alone sub-frequencies. Let me tell you this: for a $500 electrostatic headphone to be able to produce such clean sub-tones is beyond amazing. To be fair, it is amazing that it is able to produce sub-tones at all.

As I am not trying to be a poet, I will give you some music references¹. Right away, we can talk about "Brother" by Amy Winehouse. While the song is fairly simple-structured and Amy takes it easy with the vocals, the beat is more aggressive. You can listen for the rumble at around the 0:02, 0:08, and 0:14 minute marks. This rumble repeats itself throughout the song, but what I want to focus on is the weight and depth that it holds. It is very audible and clear on the RR1 – no distortion, it is a clean sub-bass tone. What makes this particular part special is that there is a true sub-bass rumble (a sub-tone that you feel).

Another track where the sub-bass performance stands out is "Theme for The Irishman" by Robbie Robertson. It is not only a great composition but also another track that features some beautiful low-frequencies. The part I want to focus on is at the 1:46 minute mark, this is where there is a sub-frequency undertone. Once again, RR1 didn't disappoint and reproduced a clean rumble. There is something gorgeous about the overall tone of the cello at this particular part, give it a listen.

Not to make this any longer, I think it's pretty obvious that this headphone is quite capable. However, as it is an electrostatic headphone, it has its own limitations. So far, there has only been one track where I heard this limitation — "Why so Serious?" by Hans Zimmer. It is my standard testing track for sub-bass. Electrostatic headphones differ quite a lot from dynamic driver headphones, both in sound and in driver design, and there is an explanation behind the limitation that was audible in this track. While dynamic drivers have the benefit of the maximum excursion, electrostatic drivers are much more fragile and do not move a whole lot – to be more specific, they only have around 0.5mm of displacement. This is the reason why most electrostatic headphones struggle with lower frequencies.
Let's get back to the track. As usual, in "Why so Serious?" at 3:26 minute mark, there is a drop and from then on there is only sub-bass present. Instead of a clean sub-bass performance, there was an audible rattle. The reason why this happened is because:
1. the drivers reached their maximum displacement point
2. the small diameter of the electrostatic driver and the fact that the ear-pads are very thin
In other words, extremely low frequencies at a certain SPL level (listening volume/loudness) will cause the headphone driver to bottom out and the result is an audible rattle.

Besides on this one particular track, I've never experienced any rattle/distortion. RR1 has a very clean and deep low-frequency response. The mid-bass remains a truly full-body that has a strong punch & thump.



Mids

Do you remember the moment you fell in love with music? Perhaps it was on a specific audiophile system and you just experienced this close connection with music, this specific happiness? So far, I experienced it two times: when I hooked up my Sennheiser HD 598 to the EarMen TR-Amp (after using the headphones without a dedicated amp/DAC for several years), and with the iBasso SR2 headphones. Well, I am happy to say that I am falling in love with music once again with the RR1 Conquest.

Actually, the very album that became apparent to me was Daft Punk's "Random Access Memories". To be honest, I find it very funny, because there seems to be ever-growing hate for it. There is a set group of people within the audiophile community that shares the same mindset: when an album or a track gains mainstream success, it is automatically dismissed as being good… It's similar to the rejection/discrimination that "Stairway to Heaven" faced.
On the other hand, these are also people who strictly listen to mainstream and limit themselves in that bubble. I don't necessarily support either of these groups, I just urge people to listen to music without putting any labels or limitations on the music itself. But that's just my opinion, I listen to music without a box around it — I don't listen by genres or by streams, I just listen to what my inner self & ears like. At the end of the day, for me, it is all about the love for music.

The guys from Daft Punk are perfectionists, they pay attention to details nobody would notice or hear but them themselves. Not to mention that the best musicians and recording studios were used to make this album. This being said, I think that anyone who actually took the time to look deeper than just the mainstream success would be able to respect their craft.

My love for strings dates back to when I was introduced to Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven" and Deep Purple's "Soldier of Fortune". From that point on, I began forming my personal taste in music, I started listening to music that I enjoy. I guess both of these songs share a similar story and success, but Led Zeppelin released theirs about 3 years earlier.

"Strange Fruit" by Nina Simone is a powerful… it's kind of depreciative to call it just a song. It is much more than that. It is the gruesome reality we live in, and it is still relevant today. A true shame. Besides its lyrical message, let's focus on the vocals. Nina Simone's vocal performance in this particular track is very textured, it's anything but monotone. Throughout the whole track, there is an audible edge to her voice when it accentuates (peaks), but the most prominent one occurs from the 2:23 - 2:34 minute marks. Here are some other tracks that share similar upper mid-range quality:

Jeff Buckley – "Forget Her" (vocals)
Nina Simone – "I Put A Spell On You" (vocals)
Joss Stone – "The Chokin' Kind" (vocals)
Fleet Foxes – "Fool's Errand" (vocal at 1:41)

As I always say, a good headphone should not hide sound qualities that are meant to be there in the first place; if a track is of an essy nature, the headphone should reproduce it — and that's exactly what the RR1 Conquest does.

Vocals aside, when it comes to strings, I look for two main things: the low-end extension and the high-end extension. If either of these is slightly off, a stringed instrument will not sound right. Timbre has a lot to do with this. If you listened to an acoustic guitar or a similar instrument before, you know that it sounds like it is being plucked. Well, this is what I look for in headphones — whether they can make strings sound like strings. "Airy" is another important characteristic of stringed instruments. A headphone that lacks spaciousness will not sound pleasant, and there's nothing that turns me off more than a claustrophobic headphone. Here are some string reference¹ tracks:

Joan Baez – "Diamonds and Rust"
Joan Baez – "Song of Bangladesh"
Pink Floyd – "Goodbye Blue Sky"
Pink Floyd – "Hey You"
Yao Si Ting – "One more time" (to be honest, the whole album Eternal Singing - Endless Love IV is absolutely stunning)
Judas Priest – "Beyond the Realms of Death"
Deep Purple – "Soldier of Fortune"
Roger Waters – "5:11AM (The Moment of Clarity)

RR1 Conquest is a highly dynamic headphone, there's no doubt about that. I think it all comes down to the extremely well-executed airy nature of this headphone. Basically, what I mean by this is that each element in the mix has room to breathe — and this room is also what allows more detail in the music itself. I could completely focus on a single element (such as a vocal) and not feel like another element is getting in its way. A huge canvas allows space for more detail, while a smaller canvas can only hold so much "paint". I like to call this "canvas" depth (not to be confused with the same term that refers to distance!). RR1 has an immersive mid-range presentation that has both a great upper and lower mid-range extension. This combined with the open nature, great depth, and natural tuning is what makes it so good.
Hats off to you, Kaldas Research!



Highs

To top it off (excuse the pun), let's talk about sparkle, shall we? Just like many people say that electrostatic headphones don't have enough bottom-end, they say that electrostats usually have aggressive highs. So, where does this idea come from? I believe it is from poor amplification. However, this is only an assumption, I would have to listen to some widely used electrostatic energizers in order to see if that's the case – or it is the entry-level electrostatic headphones (which I also didn't listen to).

RR1 remains fairly transparent in the treble region. I can confidently say that I did not come across sibilance. As mentioned before, the treble response is very transparent and clean — no distortion is present. Besides the negative stereotypes, it is often talked about how "fast" and clean the high-frequency response is on electrostats, so it comes as no surprise that the RR1 performs well in this region.

Commercially successful and popular among the audiophile community – "Aja" by Steely Dan. You will often see this album pop up in one of those "best audiophile albums" lists, and it's because it is a well-recorded and mastered album. But that's not why I am mentioning it. I actually want to talk specifically about the quality of the percussion that is present throughout the whole album. Much like Daft Punk, Steely Dan used unique recording techniques and obsessed over details, going to similar extents as Daft Punk did with equipment. What I like about the RR1 is how snappy (fast attack and slam) and crisp the percussion sounds. I am sure you are sick and tired of reading audiophile terminology without any explanation or correlation to sound, so let me explain what I mean by "crisp". I consider that term to refer to the specific quality and sound character that percussion has, essentially what makes a percussion instrument sound like a percussion instrument. If you listen for metal percussion instruments such as the cymbals and hi-hats, they should sound steely (excuse the pun once again)… On a serious note, the percussion had the edge and the shine that it was supposed to have, but it was never too aggressive or piercing. Speaking of percussion and aggressiveness, "Stairway to Heaven" by Led Zeppelin is another great example. The most aggressive point is right around the 7:18 minute mark, which also happens to be the climax of the whole track — or as Jimmy Page would describe it: "It's like an orgasm at the end". I have to say that I agree with Plant, that's exactly how it feels like to me. I got a little off track again, didn't I? The referred part (7:18) sounds forward and has that sparkle from all the high-frequency energy.
Here are some other percussion reference¹ tracks that share the crisp quality:

Bill Withers – "Moanin' and Groanin" — tambourine present throughout the whole track has a snappy quality
Dire Straits – "Money for Nothing" (from 1:49 - 3:38) — I talked about this track in the past, it shares the following qualities on the RR1: snappy, clear, crisp
Roger Waters – "4:33AM (Running Shoes)" — although less forward and present, the percussion sounds crisp
DARKSIDE – "Heart" (1:06) — a single snare hit is played, it is very sharp and bright, but you can also hear its delay

Here are some reference¹ tracks that showcase sparkle from guitars:

Fleetwood Mac – "Go Insane - Live 1997" (2:19) — although the whole track features a poppy acoustics guitar, the plucked string at this specific minute mark stood out and was brighter than the rest
Judas Priest – "Beyond the Realms of Death" (4:30 – 4:38) — during this time period, Glenn Tipton's guitar solo sustains a higher-pitched note that sounds smooth and not too forward. You can actually hear the acoustics guitar plucks above Topton's guitar

Finally, for sibilance, there is one track that every headphone in my hands has to pass: "Stop Trying to Be God" by Travis Scott. I still haven't come across another track that holds such a clean high note for the amount of time Stevie Wonder holds it in this track. However, there is one track that shares a very similar sound — "Portia" by Miles Davis. On both of these tracks, there was no distortion, and the peak notes were sharp and bright, but not sibilant, and I should say that the RR1 proved its ability to produce sparkle.



Soundstage & Imaging

I mentioned before that this headphone is very airy. In fact, I consider it the most open headphone currently in my collection.

To start on a lighter note, let's talk about two tracks from Pink Floyd: "Hey You" and "Dogs". In the first track, right around the 1:17 minute mark, the whole song catches momentum. At this part, the drum is slightly off-center to the left side, while the guitar strumming is panned to the far left & right, and the vocal remains dead center — all of this together results in a very spacious-sounding track. The latter song, "Dogs", features two acoustic guitars in the introduction (0:00 – 3:33), one is panned to the close left, while the other one is panned to the far right. However, for me, the standout parts are at the 3:48 & 3:56 minute marks. The first drum part (3:48) includes five distinct drum hits: the first one is at the center, the second is slightly panned to the left, then the one following that one continues to pan farther to the left, and finally, the last two are panned to the right (the first is closer, the second one is farther away). The second drum part (3:56) features six drum hits: the first one is at the center, then the following three each go farther to the right, the fifth hit comes back around to the center, and finally, the sixth hit is panned to the close right. RR1 presents this space very well, with each drum hit being at a very specific position. This is where you are able to hear RR1's pin-point imaging ability.

I think that the airy nature of the RR1 is not coincidental at all. In fact, I firmly believe that there are two factors that greatly contribute to this headphone's airiness:
1. Thin ear-pads
3. Transparent design of the ear-cups

Having the driver closer to the ear not only makes the sound fuller but also expands the soundstage by having the outside of the driver (the other side of the headphone) closer to the ear – I believe that this is what allows the soundstage to be so wide and immense. On the other hand, the "transparent design" of the ear-cups should have an impact on the soundstage. What exactly do I mean by "transparent design"? If you look at the ear-cups on the outer side, you will notice there is no solid grill or anything of that kind, only a protective dust cover (the same goes for the inner side). The design is very naked, and if you are an extremist, you can take off the cloth altogether.

What made the RR1 so enjoyable for me is how layered the music was. This is the room I talked about earlier. You can truly separate out and focus on almost every element in the mix. It doesn't sound like you are listening to headphones. Since vocals are usually placed in the center, you can choose whether you want to listen to the mix as a whole, or whether you want to isolate a single instrument.
Here are some tracks that can be used as a reference¹ for soundstage & imaging:

Yosi Horikawa – "Bubbles" — an outstanding track that showcases the soundstage width. Without exaggerating, I was able to hear at least 30-50 cm outside of the ear-cups at certain points in this track (horizontal soundstage)
Pink Floyd – "Hey You" — acoustical guitar at the beginning placed upright (vertical soundstage)
Daft Punk – "Get Lucky" — the hi-hat sounds as though it is placed above (vertical soundstage)
Pink Floyd – "Dogs of War" — also sounds as if the "growling" is placed behind the ear (depth)
Pink Floyd – "Outside the Wall" — sounds as if the vocal is behind the ear (depth)
The Alan Parsons Project – "La Sa Grada La Familia" (3:28) — from this point on, there appears to be a snare that is placed above. Also, in the introduction, there is a helicopter that too sounds like it is placed above (vertical soundstage)
Rare Bird – "You Went Away" (1:58) — at this part the percussion sounds as though it is coming from the distant upper-right side (vertical soundstage)



Conclusion

Kaldas Research is really doing something different. I am truthfully short of words. A person of just 23 years of age was able to successfully create a headphone that does not copy anything in the existing market. That's not even the most amazing part about it all, I find Mr. Aumkar's approach much more fascinating. Where do I even begin?

When existing owners of the RR1 Conquest started discussing the possibility of an updated model, Mr. Aumkar went on to explain why there will be no "RR2":
"Of course, there will be future products but the RR1 was always made to be a standalone product with no successors."

Following up with:
"New products tank the value of old headphones and make them essentially worthless all while also damaging the brand's value.
Furthermore, I am also against the concept of discounting. No product will ever be discounted under my watch. Discounting is a disrespect to the customers who have paid full price and also shows a company's perception towards their own product."

How brave and mature to think like this at such an early stage as a manufacturer, huh? Just, wow. Talking is one thing, but taking action and keeping your word is on a whole different level. Time will tell whether Mr. Aumkar will choose to maintain this approach in the future. Who knows, maybe his customers will urge him to change it because they want an updated version and would be interested to buy it, or maybe Mr. Aumkar comes up with a solution of his own.

In terms of the product itself – the RR1 – it's a one of a kind headphone design-wise, value & price-wise, and sound-wise. I cannot resist saying that for only 500 bucks, this headphone puts a good number of electrostatic headphones at this price range & above to shame. I am not saying the RR1 is perfect, there are definitely some things that can be improved, but when it comes to the sound performance, I wouldn't change a thing. My favorite part about the RR1 is how open it is. Besides the two factors I mentioned before, I think that the lightweight nature of it plays a major role in the experience as a whole. The RR1 simply offers a true out-of-your-head experience, and it neither sounds nor feels like you are listening to a headphone.

Performance that left me speechless:

Conecerto Italiano – Nisi Dominus: Cum dederit (Salmo 126), RV 608

All I can say is that the RR1 is a serious step forward in my audiophile journey. You can certainly call it budget-friendly, but you cannot call it an entry-level headphone, because it is far from that. Kaldas Research is surely doing something right when the RR1 is getting compared to +$2000 headphones.
Mr. Aumkar is a perfectionist, a true enthusiast, and somebody who is making headphones with pure passion. It's near impossible to truly understand this unless you read his presence online & had the chance to speak directly to him. I know that Mr. Aumkar has always shown his gratitude and respect towards the people of significance in the headphone industry, and I know how much he respects the legends. I am more than happy to say that he is definitely in my book of legends, though he has yet to "prove" himself to the industry and the rest of the world — and I have no doubts that he will accomplish that in no time. He has already been recognized and has received the support of some of the greats in today's industry (Mr. Sankar Thiagasamudram – Founder & CEO of Audeze).

Last but not least, I want to personally thank Mr. Aumkar for having the trust in my vision and in the quality of my work. I would also like to take the time and appreciate how much Mr. Aumkar did for me to make the cooperation go smoothly. He went out of his way to ensure I don't run into problems, and for that, I am very grateful and thankful.

Finally, I want to end this article with a quote that shows how down to earth Mr. Aumkar is:
"After the Beyerdynamic visit, I founded Kaldas Research. Kaldas is named after my Grandfather - Mr. Gokaldas Chandan, a man who started literally from zero to support his family and grew a business from absolutely nothing. Something, I won't ever be. In comparison, my hardships are a joke."

---

Setup:
MacBook Pro (Early 2015) > EarMen TR-Amp > Soltanus Acoustics Fortissimo (direct non-affiliate product page: here)
AC power cable: ViaBlue X-60 (direct non-affiliate product page: here)
Interconnectors: ViaBlue NF-S1 RCA (direct non-affiliate product page: here)
Accessories: ViaBlue TRI (black) spikes used on the amplifier (direct non-affiliate product page: here)

Overkill? Yes. I wanted to see what these headphones are truly capable of. I am very well aware of the fact that the power cable alone costs more than the headphones themselves. Obviously, this is not a setup you would buy if you were to only use the RR1 Conquest, this is a setup that is versatile — it is for somebody who owns several pairs of electrostatic headphones and/or loudspeakers.

Reference¹ — the mentioned reference tracks are carefully chosen by me to make it easier for the reader to understand the referred terms & sound characteristics. By no means did I judge the headphones based on a couple of reference tracks!

After two long years of waiting, iBasso is back with one of the best releases of 2020. The SR2 is finally here.

While iBasso is mainly known for their headphone amplifiers & digital audio players, in October 2018. iBasso released their first headphone model — the SR1. It was definitely not something anybody was expecting, not to mention that it was a fascinating introduction to the headphone market. SR1 was not only a great sounding headphone but one of the most well designed and built headphones on the market. The construction was more like that of a supercar than a headphone. It was a mechanical masterpiece. The SR1 was a limited edition headphone that was released in a batch of 500 units.

To some, the success of the SR1 may come off surprising. I don’t think many are aware that iBasso has been a company that has been in existence since 2006. With almost two decades of experience, it had the correct sources to engineer an outstanding first headphone model. This explains how it was able to both achieve the complexity of the SR1 and successful follow-up with the SR2.

I think that iBasso deserves more coverage and attention, and for that reason, let’s dig a little deeper into the roots of this company.

In 2006 the company stayed loyal to producing headphone amplifiers, portable amplifiers, and DACs. However, it was 2011 that would become the most important year for iBasso. DX100 would become the product that completely changed iBasso’s future. It was the company’s greatest success and was the greatest accomplishment - making it the world’s first digital audio player that could play DSD while utilizing Android OS. But this wasn’t enough for iBasso, as though the DX100 was also the first true high-resolution (24bit/192kHz) digital audio player. The DX100 was able to accomplish this by successfully bypassing the ASLA driver on Android and using two EX9018 DAC chips. This would go on to be an industry-changing achievement, but also the company’s biggest commercial success.

In the later years, iBasso would go on to release a number of digital audio players. Finally, in 2016 the company would enter the field of earphones. This can be considered the point when iBasso entered the field of Head-Fi. It would only be a year later that it would release their flagship digital audio player, the DX200 - a reference-grade DAP that would be the next big step for the company. The DX200 was released as a 10-year anniversary of the DX100.

Then the year 2018 came - the same year that the SR1 headphone came out. iBasso followed their tradition of being a step ahead of itself, they couldn’t help but utilize some innovative technology (silicone suspension drivers). They would finally follow up with two industry-leading digital audio players in 2019 and 2020 - the DX220 (2019) and DX220 Max (2020). Not only are these two product the flagships, but are also the long-awaited follow up to the previous DX220.


While to some completely new and unheard of, a great number of audio enthusiasts have been aware of iBasso for the longest time - mainly because the company has always been ahead of the industry. It's safe to say that iBasso has made quite a few impressive products over the years.



Unboxing experience & presentation

The SR2 is packaged in a large box filled with text - it’s everything but plain. On the front, you will find the graphic of the headphones themselves and some subtle information about what drivers they are using. On the back, there are specifications and the manufacturer’s detailed explanation of what the SR2 has to offer, i.e. what it is marketing them as.

I consider the SR2 to be the perfect headphone package in terms of contents. You get everything that you should expect at this price point: a high-quality cable, a high-quality 6.3 mm adapter, a high-quality carrying case, and even an extra set of ear-pads. I was pleasantly surprised to see the extra set of pads in the package, it’s especially nice since they differ from the stock ones. The stock pads have smaller perforation, while the extra set has larger perforation. This may be helpful to those who prefer the ear-pads to be more breathable, but it’s also something nice to see at this price point. You are covered if you need to replace the stock ear-pads, no need to buy an extra set.

In a formal format, here is what you get in the box:

1x SR2 headphone
1x braided cable (3.5 mm termination)
1x custom machined screw-on 6.3 mm adapter
1x carrying case
1x pair of large(r) perforation ear-pads
1x cable tie

Click to expand...

While the SR2 won’t blow you away with its packaging box, iBasso is otherwise known for its modern approach in presentation. iBasso’s history of thoughtful design behind packaging goes as far back as the DX80 which had the angled box with excellent presentation. Although the SR2 didn’t have anything of that sort (probably because a headphone box is so large, there is no need for it), they still maintained that tradition with the recently released DX200. Whatever product it was, there was always a great presentation, with top-notch accessories - something that iBasso deserves to be well respected for. Just from the company’s history, you can clearly see that it never spared its budget for high-quality accessories and packaging.



Design

After the complex design of the SR1, iBasso opted for a more modern and sleek design for the SR2. To this day, I consider the SR1 to be one of the finest designed and machined headphones. Now, they were considerably bulkier than the SR2, but the complexity and number of parts used is what I loved about it - it reminded me of the complex craftsmanship present in watches and firearms.
I think iBasso reduced the complexity for a reason - was the complexity of SR1 necessary? Apparently not. They proved that with the SR2. Clearly, the "rifle-like" complexity of the headband mechanism wasn’t necessary. They were able to strip it to just a single free-sliding piece. The same goes for the ear cup construction: there are no complex grills, frames, rings, and a lot of screws. It has been reduced to the bare minimum.

The attention to detail is what fascinates me - and it’s not just the case with the SR2, but with iBasso products in general.

Whether it’s the subtle yet attractive branding, the minimal construction of the ear-cups, or the small details like the Torx screws on the sliders - iBasso doesn’t fail to impress with their attention to detail. I think this was more noticeable in the SR1 model.

By far, one of my favorite design elements of this headphone is the cable. Besides the cable itself, I love the 6.3 mm adapter. This is one of the few times that there is a metal housing (for the 3.5 mm plug) that is both lightweight and actually feels like a high-quality metal. Usually, it’s either made out of high-quality metal and is too heavy, or it’s made out of lightweight metal but feels cheap.
But that is not what caught my attention — it’s the click-in screw-on mechanism of the 6.3 mm adapter that I am in love with. The fact that the adapter looks like it’s a part of the 3.5 mm plug’s housing is very sleek and sexy. Mr. Paul had the whole release of the SR2 delayed because he wasn’t satisfied with this 6.3mm adapter, and I am so happy that it turned out well in the end. It was well worth it! That’s what I call dedication and attention to detail. Others will call it insanity... because delaying a release of a headphone just because of an adaptor sounds nuts. It feels analog and manual, just like vinyl players. Yes, you can just open up your online streaming service and press play, it only takes a few seconds to do that - but it’s the mechanical and analog feel of vinyl that is addicting. I consider this little 6.3 mm adapter to give the same type of satisfaction.

Both of the stereo 3.5 mm connectors are color-labeled for the left and the right side - it follows the industry standard, blue is for left, red is for right. However, in iBasso’s picture renders, there were also letter labels - but they did not make it to the final release. I think it would’ve been nicer to see the initially planned “L” and “R” engraved labels. It would further contribute to the sexiness.

As mentioned before, the headband is using a sliding mechanism. You may ask “How does it work?”, and it’s a relatively simple mechanism. The headband is attached to two sliders that hold it on either side, and it can move within the space that is set by the two stoppers. The leather headband is held in place with two Torx screws, one major advantage of this system is that you have the option and flexibility to easily replace the headband if needed. This further adds to the longevity of the headphones, and it’s definitely something to appreciate at this price point.
I also like the fact that iBasso paid attention to the little details like screws.. something that most people won’t even notice. They are in a silver finish to match the color scheme of the headphones, and they are actually the same Torx screws that Apple uses for the MacBook Pro (I have the early 2015 version).

The headphone frame is different than the one of its predecessor - instead of the flat frame, it uses two metal rods. They take up less space and reduce the overall weight.
On the inner side of the yokes, you will find “L” and “R” labels printed in a matching silver finish. The ear-cups are my second favorite design element, and here is why. Not only do I love the material and color choice, but also the laser-etched writing. It’s a subtle yet significant detail.

They have a little bit more than 180˚ of pivot - this allows the headphones to rest flat on the table (or on your neck). There is also more than enough tilt. Overall, you are ensured to get a good fit due to the freedom of movement.

If I were to describe the design of the SR2 in two words, they would be: clean and consistent. Everything follows a very elegant color scheme, but also a material choice. I consider both the SR1 and SR2 a major success in terms of design - though I wouldn’t directly compare the two. Mainly because the SR2 follows a completely new approach to design.



Build quality

If there is something to write home about, it’s the build quality. The SR2’s construction is completely made out of metal, not a single plastic piece used. Now, if you take an average headphone as an example, most of the construction is made out of plastic. I personally don’t have anything against the use of plastic, as long as it’s high quality (like on the Sennheiser HD 598).

Starting from the headband construction itself, it’s clear that iBasso wanted to cut down on the bulk and weight that was present in the previous model. This time around, it consists of just two memory metal rods that hold the whole headband structure together. Due to the slider mechanism for the headband, there are two stoppers (one on either side). They are made out of cast metal and can be adjusted by unscrewing the Torx screws (which I strongly suggest you do if you own the SR2). The sliders that hold the headband in place (with Torx screws) are made out of high strength plastic. They are the only visible part of the headphone that is made out of plastic - and it’s the good type of plastic. I am particularly harsh when it comes to using plastic. My first headphone was the Sennheiser HD 598, and it set a very high standard in terms of plastic quality. If you ever held the HD 598 in person, you know it’s made out of high-quality plastic, that’s what I consider German quality. In the same way, the plastic used for the sliders is plastic of high quality. You know good plastic was used when it takes you some time to realize that it’s even made out of plastic...

The yoke construction (the part that holds the ear-cups) is made out of high-grade aluminum. You have the ability to adjust the rotation smoothness by tightening or loosening the hex screw underneath.

Moving onto the ear-cups themselves, they are made of aluminum. Aluminum is by far one of my favorite materials - it’s durable, doesn’t show fingerprints, isn’t easy to scratch, and looks good. Perfect combo.

The grill is a story of its own. On the outside, it looks like the average metal grill, but once you take a closer look, you realize that there is a smaller grill below it. I think this is one of the things that play a major role in SR2’s sound characteristics. I will further cover and speak upon this grill in the “Isolation” section.

This about covers it in terms of the build quality for the headphone construction. Unfortunately, full metal construction has become a status of luxury, we keep seeing more and more bad built headphones at a high asking price. This being said, I greatly appreciate that iBasso made a well-built headphone for a reasonable price.

The combination of a full metal construction and use of genuine leather is quite rare to come across at this price point, especially at the level that iBasso took it. While the SR2 is made with a minimalist approach, it is definitely utilizing high-quality materials. They didn't cut any corners and made sure everything is well made.



Cable

"Damn, what a cable!" was my very first impression. Before I listened to the headphones themselves, it was the cable that had me impressed. I personally love braided cables, they are a standard in the IEM world but aren't common in the headphone world. Of course, you can always find a 3rd party cable on the market, but my point is that braided cables are a rarity when it comes to stock cables. I prefer braided cables over the majority of other cable types, the flexibility and light-weight nature of them is what is so appealing about them. If you have a permanent setup where the headphone remains plugged in into the source for the majority of time, you don't really have to worry too much about flexibility. However, if you are like me and tend to unplug your headphones and pack them up after each use, flexibility is quite an important factor.

In this case, iBasso used a 4-core litz braided cable. It is a very soft and flexible cable. It never tangles, and I can easily fold it around my hand to store it away. There is nothing I hate more than cables that I cannot store away - this is often the case with fabric braided cables, once you wrap them around your hand and let go... they just explode and make a whole mess. A tangle-free cable is a must-have for me, I always take my headphones on and off, and I constantly move around.

Here is the catch: it's not your average braided cable. This is a custom copper-silver alloy cable. iBasso spent their time to develop a custom mix of high purity OF (oxygen-free) copper and silver. When I asked Mr. Paul to confirm what purity the alloy is, he told me that he can confirm it is of 99.999% purity - he was not able to assure me it is any higher than that because it gets very expensive to assay above that. It should be noted that this is not a silver-plated cable, which is very common but is nowhere near a custom alloy. Silver-plated copper cables have less than 1% of pure silver... which is the reason why they are so common in lower-priced cables. Mr. Paul told me that it took hundreds of hours to get the right proportions of copper & silver, and the same amount of work went into the dielectric used for the isolation.

I love every part of this cable, and it is certainly my current favorite cable. It is flexible, doesn't tangle, holds its form when it's rolled, and it even looks great. It is a fully custom cable that iBasso designed, so you are pretty much getting a custom cable as a stock cable. I love the amount of work that was put into the cable!



Comfort & fit

Pillows. Italy. Zen.

Yes, you read that correctly. These are the words I would use to describe the SR2 in terms of comfort. I wish I could say something negative about the comfort (or any other aspect.. because it seems like iBasso got almost everything right), but I simply cannot deny the fact that the wide Italian leather headband & the soft ear-pads do a wonderful job. Comfort is one of the most important aspects to me, and I always rant about it if it doesn’t meet my standards. There are quite a few special things that SR2 features.

The headband is one of them. It is already rare enough to see a genuine leather headband at this price point, let alone, genuine Italian (Tuscan) leather. iBasso implemented the same headband that was featured on the previous model, the SR1. The leather used is Minerva Box from the tannery Badalassi Carlo. It is regulated by the Genuine Italian Vegetable-Tanned Consortium (Pelle Conciata al Vegetale in Toscana). Seeing a genuine leather headband at this price point is quite a shock, and I think many people will take it for granted. Leather is a material of luxury, but it comes with a pretty price - especially when it's sourced from Tuscany. I think it is greatly overlooked when a manufacturer makes the decision to use high-quality materials, yet not criticized enough when low-quality materials are used. You have to keep in mind that iBasso consciously chose to spend more money on the genuine leather for the headband. It could have used pleather and made a bigger profit, but it didn’t. It’s just something to appreciate.

While the pads are made of pleather, they actually do a surprisingly good job at being comfortable. I believe the thick nature of these pads is the main reason why they are so comfortable. After doing some measuring, I found that the thinnest point is right around 2 cm, while the thickest point is around 3 cm. The pads are tailored horizontally, meaning they are thicker towards the back and narrow down towards the front. This ensures that they lie flat on your ears, and also provide more support behind your ear.

The padding of both the headband and the ear-pads is quite efficient. Obviously, the ear-pads have more padding than the headband. The padding in the leather headband further contributes to the soft leather suede on the underside. On the other hand, the pads feature much thicker cushioning and padding. I believe that memory foam was used for the pads, this would explain why they are so comfy.

The SR2 is definitely one of those headphones that I can wear for hours without any fatigue or discomfort. While SR2 never truly “disappears”, it does not create hotspots or anything alike. The combination of a wide headband and good clamp force results in a secure fit that will ensure that the headphones stay put on your head. I didn’t find myself adjusting the headphones too much - keep in mind that I do not sit back when listening to music, but rather move around, and yes, this includes mild headbanging. I have to say that I was not let down. SR2 features one of the best (if not the best) headbands for the price, has thick and soft ear-pads and stays comfortable for long-listening sessions. What more can I say, it’s a pleasure listening to music without being bothered by the comfort & fit.

Edit (2020/12/16): I have confirmed with both Mr. Paul and Badalassi Carlo (from Pelle al Vegetale) that the leather used on the headband of the SR2 is neither sourced from Italy nor from Badalassi Carlo. The first model (SR1) has used the Minerva Box from Badalassi Carlo (confirmed), however, the SR2 does not. This being said, everything written in the paragraph below is still valid for the headband on the SR1 model.
The fact that the leather does not come from Tuscany does not change my opinion. It is genuine leather of high quality with a rich aroma - it just isn't as prestigious as Tuscan vegetable-tanned leather. I was not able to confirm further details about the leather used (whether it's vegetable-tanned or how the grain is achieved).
The misunderstanding happened because I was told that the leather headband on the SR2 is the same leather headband that was used on the SR1, which isn't the case. As some already know, SR1 was marketed as using the Minerva Box from Badalassi Carlo, hence why I assumed it was the same leather. I am sure it was a result of miscommunication within iBasso's team, but fortunately, we managed to figure everything out. I also want to bring to attention that iBasso never said in its marketing that the SR2 uses Badalassi Carlo's leather - meaning that there was no fake or incorrect marketing from their side.
*Everything in this color marks my initial and original thoughts, I didn't remove these parts because I think Pelle al Vegetale deserves some praise. I did my research and want people to be more aware of who they are. The color indicates that the leather is neither Italian nor coming from Badalassi Carlo.



Pelle Conciata al Vegetale in Toscana

The leather used for the headband had me so intrigued that I decided to do some research of my own. Badalassi Carlo is a tannery that is a member of the Genuine Italian Vegetable-Tanned Consortium (Pelle Conciata al Vegetale in Toscana), only 20 other tanneries share the exclusive membership at the Consortium. The president of the consortium, Simone Remi, is also the owner of the Badalassi Carlo tannery.

Badalassi Carlo has over 40 years of expertise in the production of vegetable-tanned leather. It is considered among the best leather tanneries in the world! When it comes to vegetable-tanned leather, Minerva Box is considered to be the best naturally tumbled vegetable-tanned shoulder on the market. Talk about exclusivity.

Minerva Box is known for its pebble-grain and rich aroma. The pebbled texture is achieved with a process called milling. This process allows the leather to develop its own natural and unique grain. And, of course, the vegetable tanning process - Minerva Box is tanned inside wooden barrels with the help of extracts from bark and trunk, and is greased with animal fats. It is then dyed with aniline, which is transparent. After the tanning process, the leather is dried and polished. Each one of these processes is carried out by trained specialists, each process would be done by the professional for that specific process. It is not a process carried out by one person or machinery - at least that's not the case in Tuscany.

Vegetable tanning has been in practice for over 5,000 years, making it the second oldest leather tanning method in human history. Besides being natural, it requires much more time and expertise than other methods, hence why there are only a few tanneries in the world that truly specialize in the vegetable tanning process. Vegetable-tanned leather doesn't crack or dry out, making it far superior to other leather tanning methods.

Badalassi Carlo's Minerva Box is a vachetta leather, which is the same type of leather used in luxury Louis Vuitton bags. Besides, it is made from the should hide, which is the most valuable part of the animal. The full-grain nature of Minerva Box further adds to its value. Full-grain leather is both the most durable leather type and the most expensive (because it is hard to work with).

This is by far one of the most luxurious leathers used in the headphone market. iBasso somehow managed to use one of the best leathers in the market, and yet not put any emphasis on it in their marketing - which makes me question whether iBasso itself is aware of how fine of a leather it is using. The secret lies in Tuscany. The Tuscan tanning method is considered the best tanning process in the world. The method is a well-kept secret that comes from an ancient tradition of local tanneries in Italy. I am not making any of this up, everything about the leather used in the headband is extraordinary. Imagine using one of the best leathers in the world. How crazy is that?

If you would like to read more about Pelle Conciata al Vegetale in Toscana, you can do so at their official website: https://www.pellealvegetale.it/en/

Genuine Italian Vegetable-Tanned Consortium guarantees that every leather from one of their tanneries meets the highest standards. These standards include the quality of the leather, the manner in which the leather is produced, and even the business side of tanneries. No animals are killed for their skin.
You can read more about the sustainability here: https://www.pellealvegetale.it/en/sustainability/



Sound

Lows

“Had Some Drinks” by Two Feet is a perfect example of deep rumbling bass. Although my musical preference isn’t usually within this space, I listen to sub-bass qualities in this track. Once the drop happens, the impact is hard and it delivers quite the slam. Besides the subtle rumble, the bass is quite full and has both full-body and weight, but it still remains balanced and doesn’t fatigue the ears. Fatigue is usually the result of excessive quantity of bass.

On the other hand, Hans Zimmer’s “Why So Serious?” is a much cleaner and formal track. Unlike Two Feet’s song, for the majority of this track there isn’t much going on - you don’t have instruments and sounds overlapping. Each tone is clean and differs enough from the rest of the mix. In particular, the 3:26 minute mark is where the climax hits the drop and transitions to sub-tones. From that point on, there are pure sub-frequencies. While there is some very subtle percussion in the background, it doesn’t interfere with the sub-bass. This being said, the SR2 performs very well on this track. The sub-bass pulsates rather than rumbles, while the bottom end is deep and has a good amount of weight.

The mid-bass is more refined than the sub-bass, so let’s talk about the bass qualities (impact, punch, speed, definition, body, etc.).

I found SR2 to be really good performing in the mid-bass region, and this is most obvious with electronic music - a genre of music where punch, body, and speed play a major role. Besides listening to countless hours of Daft Punk, Hans Zimmer, Vangelis, and Deadmau5, I went back to my two standard testing tracks; “Hydrogen” by M.O.O.N, and “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss. You may notice that the two tracks are relatively similar, they both share the club-like sound. From both of these tracks, I could conclude that the kick is fast and clean, has full-body, and has a strong punch. “Hydrogen” is the one that has more bottom-end to it, and thus it results to a similar “oomph” that you would hear from a subwoofer, or in this case, in a club. The kick is also tighter and harder hitting than in “Smoking Mirrors”. Speaking of the latter track, while it is relatively simple, the clap and the kick click-in place. What I noticed on some headphones that are struggling with having fast attack and release, is that they tend to let the kick go on for too long, and therefore make the beat to be out of sync. This is something that can be noticed without much thought, and this is mainly due to the fact that your ears recognize when something is not in place - it just doesn’t sound right. This being said, SR2 manages to have both fast attack and release, this means that the bass never sounds boomy or loose, it’s tight and quick.

The bass response of the SR2 was developed in a way that doesn’t overwhelm the mix. With the market being overcrowded with V-shaped headphones that have emphasized lower-frequencies, I am very happy to listen to a headphone that finally breaks away from this “norm”. The SR2 has a very balanced and controlled bass response. While V-shaped headphones usually suffer from boomy and muddy bass (and recessed mids), iBasso SR2 has a very clean and well defined lower-frequency response - the bass is fast/tight, is well defined, and has enough body and weight that it stays away from being bass light. However, I do want to say that the mid-bass has more depth and volume (quantity) than the sub-bass.



Mids

The more time I spend with the SR2, the more I realize how good the mid-range sounds. While I usually use specific testing tracks to listen for certain sound qualities, i.e. critical listening, I otherwise have a different listening preference. Not only that, but the headphones themselves can determine and affect the music I listen to (e.g. I would listen to more electronic music with a V-shaped headphone, and would avoid vocal and instrumental tracks). I won't shine too much light on the testing tracks for this specific reason - I already went through all of my testing tracks within the first couple of days with the SR2, afterwards, I spent my time enjoying music that I personally enjoy.

In Jeff Buckley’s “Forget Her” at mark 3:16, you can hear the edge of “t” in “tears”, and this was also the case for the guitar and other sections of the track. Both “I Will Survive” by Gloria Gaynor, and “Strange Fruit” by Nina Simone, share the same characteristics - the edge is there, the vocals have wide dynamics, and the tracks have life to them. Notably, the latter track is the one that has more noticeable peaks, and you can hear the beautiful texture and grittiness in Nina Simone’s voice. One of the most prominent peaks occurs at the 2:24 minute mark (in “Strange Fruit”). Nina Simone’s cover of “Strange Fruit” is more than a decade older than Gloria Gaynor’s “I Will Survive”, and that is something that can be heard because the peaks are more prominent and there is also audible noise in the recording itself. In terms of guitars, “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple and “Stairway To Heaven” by Led Zeppelin are my choice. Both tracks sounded absolutely gorgeous, the timbre is on point, you can feel the plucks, and they have both the low end and the crisp upper end. It’s safe to say that one of the most enjoyable things to listen to on the SR2 are stringed instruments, and that’s exactly what I have been enjoying the most.

The reason why I do not want to put so much focus on the critical listening tracks is because that is neither how I formed my opinion nor how I judged SR2’s sonic performance. The testing tracks don’t do any justice to the dozens of albums and who knows how many songs that I have listened to. This being said, for the most part, I listened to albums from start to finish, which is my preferred way of listening to music.

The mid-range benefits both from the low-end extension, and the high-end extension. Instruments like the piano, woodwind instruments, and acoustic guitar will benefit from the lower mid-range extension, while most of the stringed instruments, the piano, and synthesizers will benefit from the upper mid-range extension. SR2 is not a warm headphone, it is capable of reaching and producing sparkle, but for the majority of the time doesn’t cross the line of shine. For me, "shine" is an alternative way of saying that there are clarity and a good amount of detail retrieval, but it is a very specific sound characteristic too. In the same way, when I say "sparkle", I am referring to the sound characteristic that is between shine and sibilance. Here is the simplest explanation that will better help you understand what I am talking about:

1. Shine is a sound characteristic of a good amount of clarity and detail retrieval. In this case, a headphone with no shine would be a warm headphone
2. Sparkle is a sound characteristic of a greater amount of clarity and detail retrieval than shine - it is a very hard characteristic to pull off because often times it’s easy to cross the line and go into sibilance. When done correctly, you experience a very satisfying “tingly” feeling in your ear.
3. Sibilance is a sound characteristic of “extreme” clarity and detail retrieval, i.e. the most revealing. This is a known characteristic of an analytical sound signature, and one of its drawbacks is that it easily becomes fatiguing, making it a not so ideal option for long listening sessions.

With all of this being said, the SR2 doesn’t hide the edge where it is meant to be heard - for example, vocals in older recordings tend to have harsh peaks, most often they have exaggerated “s”, “sh”, “p”, and “t” sounds. What a warm headphone can do is significantly roll-off the upper range, and although this does stay far away from sibilance, it can also make the headphone boring and lifeless. This is mainly because the detail is lost - the edge is supposed to be there, that’s the characteristic of some older recordings. Even though this headphone reveals the edge, at no point did I have the need to take them off because of it. I also noticed that I wasn’t the only one to conclude that there is a very slight hint of warmth in the upper range, and this further supports what I said earlier: “it is capable of reaching and producing sparkle, but for the majority of the time doesn’t cross the line of shine”. Even with this slight hint of warmth, I never found it lacking the edge or sparkle.

The most important characteristic of SR2’s mid-range is that it is slightly forward. This results in a richer and more present mid-range. I found this to be a factor that plays the key role in the pleasant listening nature of this headphone, it's what makes it stand out. Of course, vocals benefit from this the most, and it is also the way vocals are in real life. But vocals aren’t the only element benefiting from this, instruments have a fuller body and are richer, which is one of the main reasons why I enjoyed listening to albums from start to finish. To me there’s no doubt that SR2 is a highly addictive headphone, I personally had a hard time taking them off.



Highs

iBasso managed to find a fine balance, SR2 stays far away from being warm but also keeps a safe distance from being too analytical. It successfully retains the edge and clarity of the top-end, which results in a very pleasant and satisfying treble response. However, do not mistake and associate the terms “pleasant” and “satisfying” with warmth (both of the terms are often used to “kindly” imply that a headphone has significant top-end roll-off), because this headphone is well capable of delivering high frequencies.

“Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott is a track where you can listen for sibilance and fatigue. There is only a single element that I am focusing on in this track, and that is Stevie Wonder’s harmonica (from mark 4:43 - 5:43). In particular, at 5:19 there is a very clean high note that is being sustained for around 3 seconds. This is where you can hear the sparkle that SR2 is capable of producing. It makes your ears tingle but doesn’t irritate and make you want to throw the headphones off your head. The nice thing about this part of the track is that there isn’t much going on besides it, so you can entirely focus on that peak note without having other elements interfering with that particular frequency.

In Chris Jones’ “Long After You’re Gone” there is a similar quality of the clean high notes. Steve Baker’s harmonica hits a very high and clean peak at 4:01 and sustains it until the 4:05 minute mark. It is a rather pleasing frequency that makes you squint your eyes (in a good way!) and essentially makes you feel the tingly feeling I mentioned earlier. Both Stevie Wonder’s and Steve Baker’s harmonica performances share the same nature of holding a peak note for a short period of time (3-5 seconds), and neither of them sound like they are lacking nor missing the upper extension.

Now, both of the previously mentioned tracks are very specific because they have an almost isolated peak note, but how does the SR2 bear with "casual" percussion? Pretty well, it’s crisp and moderate. One of the things which I noticed about percussion is that it doesn’t cut through the mix like it would with a V-shaped headphone, it is rather well defined and distinct (without being too forward). We can take Dire Straits’ “Money for Nothing” as an example. It features beautiful snappy percussion, but I believe it’s the combination of the snare drum and hi-hats that sets the overall rhythm. The snare drum has a particularly bright and snappy (fast attack and slam) quality, but it also has an audible decay. If you listen closely, the snare drum first appears around the 1:50 minute mark and it keeps going until 3:38 (when it starts fading away).

Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” features some intense cymbals right around the 7:16 minute mark, and they are present until 7:23. There should be no debate that John Bonham did a phenomenal job at being the drummer for Led Zeppelin, but for me, it is the energy that makes his performance stand out in “Stairway to Heaven”. The qualities that the cymbals have are bright and forward (they are placed more forward in the mix), and SR2 does a great job at transferring the intensity from them!

“Let It Be” cover by Bill Withers is another track where you can hear the crisp tonality. The element that you should listen for are the claps - pay close attention to how snappy they sound and how they click in place.

Just like the other instrument and elements, guitars benefit from the well-refined top-end. One of the performances that I personally enjoyed the most is from the greatly underrated Jeff Healey, a Canadian guitarist, vocalist, and songwriter who was known for his unique style of playing the guitar on his lap. His cover of “Blue Jean Blues”, specifically his live performance from 1989 (9:03 minutes long) is where there are some beautiful high notes, that is to say, if the upper end is refined well, they should sound beautiful instead of piercing. Right around the 4:13 minute mark, some higher notes start appearing, but the sparkle can be heard right around the 4:34 minute mark, and that note is being sustained until ~4:40 minute mark. On the Spotify version (11:39 minutes long), the 1989 live performance also shares some high notes, but this time very clean without anything in the background - from 8:33 - 8:38 the peak note is being sustained, and it has the edge without blowing your ears. Jeff Healey actually developed his unique way of holding a guitar at just 3 years old. He was blind before he was one year old, and it is said that he was gifted a guitar and just wasn't told how to hold it - thus he developed his own technique naturally. The emotion of these two tracks is beyond words, you can just hear the pure emotion coming from a man and a guitar.

Judas Priest’s “Beyond the Realms of Death” shares a similar quality but without as much edge. At the 4:30 mark, a high note is being sustained until the 4:38 minute mark. It has a clean tonality while also sharing the shine quality.

In “Shine On You Crazy Diamond (Parts I-V), one of Pink Floyd’s masterpieces - which also happens to be a track where David Gilmour performs a gorgeous guitar solo - exactly at the 6:07 minute mark there is an audible peak, this peak should have sparkle and also have a very clean tone to it.

What do all of these song references exactly mean? Well, they mean that SR2 is not only a versatile headphone (it performs well across various different genres) but also a headphone with a well-refined treble extension. It is more than just capable of delivering sparkle, the treble response is clean and pleasant to listen to. I enjoyed hours of guitar solos and I wasn’t disappointed. Most importantly, the treble has the quality, it never sounds shouty, sibilant, piercing, or fatiguing, and even though it is both capable of reproducing sparkle and the edge, it never sounds edgy. Vocal tracks of essy nature don’t lose their “essy” quality, but they never sound unpleasant - the peaks are audible and bright, but they never cross to sibilance or cause fatigue. Jeff Buckley’s “Grace” album, Paul Simon’s “Something So Right”, Yao Is Ting’s “Speak Softly Love”, and Joan Baez’s “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” all share the essy nature of vocals and have noticeable peaks, but at no point are they shrill or piercing - they remain the edge but at moderate and listenable levels. The treble response from this headphone was a true match for my personal taste, and I cannot deny that it is one of the reasons why I spent so much time listening to it. A great refined treble response that is neither lacking nor extended to the point where you experience fatigue. What more can I say?



Soundstage and Imaging

At this point, I want to put my two cents regarding the open-back debate. I firmly believe that SR2 is not an open-back headphone, and I will explain why. As mentioned before (in the “build quality” section), SR2 features two grills: the thicker grill on the outside, and a smaller & more dense grill right below it. Not only this, but there also appears to be some type of damping material around the driver. Why am I mentioning this? Well, simply because due to these extra layers, the soundstage will not be as large or as airy as it would be on an open-back pair of headphones. These layers are physical obstacles for the sound to escape, and thus I consider the SR2 a semi-open headphone.

This being said, SR2 does not have the holographic soundstage that you would find on a pair of open-back headphones, and I don’t think it is trying to have it. With the mid-range being slightly forward, the sound presentation is more present, thus narrowing the soundstage in size. I am particularly happy that SR2 does not suffer from a boxy sound presentation, a common drawback that is often resulted from elevating the mid-range. I personally enjoyed the more intimate experience, and I did not find myself considering the soundstage to be narrow. Even though the soundstage isn't large, SR2's ability to portray a sense of space is very good.

The above said was mostly referring to the width, however, I do have a funny story where I noticed SR2’s great ability to present depth, if you were to picture an XYZ coordinate axis, depth would be the “x-axis”. So, here is the story:
I thought I’d take a break from enjoying music by watching a Youtube video from my smartphone, and I plugged the SR2 into the phone, played the video, but something didn’t seem right. I noticed that there was no sound coming from the headphones and my phone was playing from its loudspeakers… or so I thought. So, I plug and unplug the headphone several times, wondering why I cannot hear anything. Well, turns out the SR2 was playing the whole time, but it has such a good ability to present depth that my brain interpreted what it was hearing as though it was coming from the phone (which was placed in front of me), and it was at this moment where I knew that its soundstage extended beyond the usual left & right, i.e. width. This so-called experience was particularly interesting because SR2 was able to convince my brain that the sound was certainly coming from my phone’s speakers. It made me facepalm.. that’s for sure.

Another thing I heard with SR2 is height, which would be the “z-axis”, i.e. interpretation and sense of vertical space. While from my experience the height doesn’t appear to be any higher than somewhere around the eyebrow level, but it is certainly there.

Isolation & sound leakage

Thanks to the mentioned semi-open design, these headphones provide great isolation. In fact, one of my first impressions was being fascinated by the isolation & seal. This is my only headphone of semi-open back nature that provides a vacuum-like seal. What exactly do I mean by “vacuum-like seal”? Have you ever put Active Noise Cancelling headphones on and had that weird feeling when you turn the ANC feature on? That silence? Well, that is the closest feeling I could compare SR2’s seal to. Of course, I am not implying that it blocks anywhere near the noise that ANC headphones do, it’s just that I found them to share that similarity. I strongly believe this is due to the extra layers (grills and acoustic felt/damping layer), but I think it’s the combination of the tight sealing ear-pads and those layers that put it all together. Not only do they do a great job at blocking out noise, but also at keeping noise in, i.e. not leaking a lot of sound.

This brings me onto my next point. I would officially label SR2 as a semi-open headphone purely due to its isolation and minimal sound leakage qualities. Just like some already have noticed, there is surprisingly little sound leakage for an “open-back” headphone (around the time of the release, many people judged SR2 as an open-back headphone due to the fact that the majority of dealers sold it as an open-back).

But wait, how much do they actually leak? Let’s put it like this: when I turned up the volume to around 50% - 65% (on EarMen Sparrow) there was audible leakage, but still very minimal compared to how loud the headphones were playing. I should also note that 50% - 65% are very loud levels on the Sparrow, remember that SR2 is a higher sensitivity headphone, hopefully, this gives you a clearer idea of what I am trying to say. If your concern is waking somebody up at night, I wouldn’t think about it... unless you are in the same room as this person. If you are in your own room, door closed, enjoying music, I highly doubt anybody outside of your room will be able to hear anything. I think you could even pull off listening to them in public transportation or in the office, but only if you listen at quieter volumes. I personally believe that SR2 is quieter than one of those teens’ EarPods in the bus… but that was some time ago, now the majority have switched to AirPods. Regardless, you get the point, for a non-closed-back headphone, they are quite impressive.

It is a similar situation with isolation. As I brought up earlier, the seal is good enough on its own, so even without any music it considerably reduces the outside noise. With music playing, I didn’t hear people talking around me. One thing you should not expect is for SR2 to quite literally act as a closed-back headphone.



So, is SR2 a good headphone?

During the past 3 months, I have done nothing but enjoyed the SR2. Most importantly, I enjoyed music, and because of that, it's much more than just a good headphone.

It is not so often that you come across a headphone that you personally enjoy, a headphone that you forget about and put your focus on the music. This was an exception for me. Let me tell you something, there have been no other headphones that I have been listening to as much as the SR2. I found myself listening to music for three to five hours every day, something which I have never done before. To put this in perspective, I usually listen to maybe an hour of music, two hours max, and that is not every day… I am not the person who can sit in one place for long, but this headphone was is so addictive to listen to, I couldn’t help but enjoy my time with it. This being said, I am not basing my opinion on a short period of time (like many do), but rather on my experience over the course of time that I have used it daily.

In the first week of ownership, I knew that it was a match for me. I played all my testing tracks and that was it, from that point on I just started enjoying listening to music instead of trying to listen to the headphones.

From the way I see it, these headphones meet up all the standards that are present at this price range:
1. Build quality. Check
2. Comfort. Check
3. Carrying case. Check
4. Cable. Check
5. Sound performance. Check

There are a lot of things this headphone deserves to be respected for:
Not only do you have a well-built headphone with full metal construction, but also a high-quality metal construction. The wide Italian leather headband that I would argue is the best headband at this price range (can be even put in the category of the best in the industry). The braided cable made of a custom silver/copper mix (not silver-plated copper!) - which I would also argue is among the best stock cables in general. High-quality pleather ear-pads that stay comfortable for hours. The convenience. By “convenience” I mean the flexible cable that is easy to store away, the easily replaceable nature of the whole headphone, and the flexibility of height thanks to the unscrewable stoppers.... it just doesn’t stop. You get high-quality accessories (carrying case, extra pair of ear-pads, custom-made 6.3 mm adaptor), and fast customer service as a bonus. This is the fewest words I could use to state all the points that this headphone got right.

“But wait, Voja, what are the cons?”. My answer to that would be ‘none’. Being a person who doesn’t support hype, nor someone who starts hype, it took a great amount of courage to put out this statement. When I looked at every part of the SR2, I couldn’t find a single flaw. It simply lives up to every present standard. It does not have a build quality flaw, it does not have a low-quality cable, it does not have comfort issues, it does not have headband discomfort, it does not have adjustability issues, it does not have sound performance issues, and it does not have low-quality accessories. I couldn’t find a single element to complain about.

While I am guilty of personally liking the sound performance of the SR2, I think you cannot say that the above said things are a thing of preference. What makes this headphone such a good product goes beyond its sound performance, it’s the little things that it gets right & doesn’t get wrong. How many times did you come across an amazing sounding headphone but it’s one element that it didn’t get right, or there is something that bothers you? I faced this experience numerous times myself, that’s why I think this headphone deserves respect where it’s due.

Speaking of sound preference and sound quality, these are a perfect match for my ears. I think that it’s pretty obvious that I enjoyed listening to them… I am not hiding that. The way we interpret sound is subjective, but I want to state my standards that this headphone met in terms of sound quality:
Deep bass? Check. Tight punch? Check. Rumble? Check. The performance of the low-end was lacking in neither quality nor quantity.

Full-body mids? Check! Lower & upper extension of mid-range? Check. Timbre? Check. Mids are by far my favorite part of this headphone.

Treble extension? Check. Non-fatiguing treble response? Check. Sparkle (one of the most important ones for me)? Check. Upper-end isn’t warm and rolled off? Check. Just like the other two, it isn’t lacking and is easy on the ears.

Doesn’t sound boxy? Check.

Other factors are subjective to the headphone, as though each headphone has its own characteristics. I certainly do enjoy an airy headphone, but I also enjoy a more present sound representation that isn’t as airy. In a way, SR2 has a unique sound signature. At first glance, you might think they are open-backs, but you put them on your head and realize that is not the case. Imagine if all the headphones sounded the same, that would be pretty boring.. that’s why I think it is so refreshing to hear something that steps out of the box and does a great job at it. Besides, it is a very versatile sounding headphone that sounded great with all the genres that I threw at it. This includes rock, heavy rock, progressive rock, electronic & techno, pop, soul, jazz, hip-hop, r&b, and folk. The genre that I usually don’t listen to (personal preference) is punk, although I do occasionally play a song or two. I also rarely listen to classical music, but I do greatly enjoy it.

It’s not as though I threw a couple of songs from each genre and made this conclusion. Again, my whole experience is based on the 3 months that I have used this headphone daily. From this listening period, I didn’t find it lacking in any frequency range (low-range, mid-range, upper-range).

With this being said, I will firmly say that this is my current favorite music listening headphone. I can also consider it to be among the best headphones released in 2020. It is a successor to its predecessor, iBasso did an amazing job at following up with this model, and I am excited to see what it will release in the future.

I also want to take a moment to speak about a very important subject. I did explain the history of iBasso and everything, but I want to put special focus on how much the company values customer feedback. Some people already know that the iBasso team closely follows all the forum threads, they take notes and fix what they can fix. When Zeos (ZReviews) reviewed the SR1 model, he brought up some problems:
1. The connectors on the headphone end weren’t really good (MMCX)
2. The ear-pads’ seam wasn’t matching, this was because only one model of the ear-pads was made (instead of making an individual one for either side)
Now we have the SR2, and Zeos’ feedback was taken into account and both of these problems were fixed. I cannot stress how important it is for the manufacturer to listen to its most valuable people - the customers themselves. Who else do you need to make happy except the people who actually use your product?

Conclusion​

SR2 is a considerable step forward in my audiophile journey, it is a headphone that proved itself to be an excellent product and a personal favorite. Value-wise these are a no-brainer, worth every penny. I would consider it among the best headphones under 500 euros/dollars. This is a case of a manufacturer who didn’t spare its budget, but also an example of a correctly priced product.

In fact, most of the time I found myself sitting back and enjoying music alongside a glass of wine. That pretty much sums up my experience in one sentence.

I would highly recommend the SR2 to anybody who is looking for a pleasant music listening experience, a headphone that has a more present and intimate presentation, and for somebody who wants a great all-in-one package without any drawbacks. I think that this headphone is much more than a personal match for me, it is a great product that is an example of a product that lives up to its value. I also think that it's a headphone that is well worth adding to your collection, I think it offers a different listening experience than what is currently present on the market... and, besides, you are getting a luxurious package with premium materials.

SR2 lets you fully enjoy music, it doesn’t get any simpler than that. If there is one headphone that I think deserves more attention, it’s this one.

---

Since I did spend a lot of time listening to music, I thought I’d share some albums and tracks that I absolutely adored with the SR2. These have been carefully picked for a reason, I am not just listing random music that I listened to. One of the main reasons that I found myself enjoying this headphone is because of how often I would experience an eargasm. My personal favorite music elements are great vocals, great guitar solos, and gorgeous violin pieces. If a headphone lacks in a specific field (e.g. has recessed mid-range, doesn’t have sparkle, has too much lower end), these will not sound right. If there was one word that I would use to describe SR2’s sound performance, it would definitely be “eargasmic”. A good headphone will be able to evoke emotions from music. I personally chase after the eargasmic feeling, that is the emotion that I look for in music - and a headphone should only act as a tool to achieve it, it should never be the barrier.

My preferred way of listening to music is listening to albums from start to finish, this is the reason there are so many albums in the list below.

Albums:

Amy Winehouse - Frank
The Alan Parsons Project - I Robot
Pink Floyd - The Wall (Disc 2)
Peter Green - The End of the Game
Giorgio Moroder - From Here to Eternity
David Bowie - Blackstar
David Bowie - The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars
Simon Viklund - Payday 2 Remastered (official soundtrack), vol.1
Daft Punk - Tron: Legacy
FKA Twigs - LP1
Steely Dan - Aja
Deep Purple - Stormbringer
Deep Purple - Perfect Strangers
Vangelis - Blade Runner
Darkside - Psychic
Justice - Cross (on digital platforms it’s called “Justice”)
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours
Bill Withers - Just As I Am
Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms
Chris Jones, Steve Baker - Smoke and Noise
Joan Baez - Come from the Shadows

Tracks:

Joe Satriani - Tears in The Rain
Led Zeppelin - Stairway to Heaven
Led Zeppelin - Babe I’m Gonna Leave You
Joan Baez - Babe I’m Gonna Leave You
Joan Baez - Song Of Bangladesh
Deep Purple - Soldier of Fortune
Deep Purple - When A Blind Man Cries
Pink Floyd - The Dogs of War
Pink Floyd - Dogs
Nina Simone - Strange Fruit
Gary Moore - Still Got The Blues
Michael Jackson - Smooth Criminal

---

Update Feb/2022 — thorough pad comparison"​

The Approach

This whole A/B test was made possible with the help of iBasso, who supplied me two identical pairs of the SR2. By this I mean that I have two SR2 headphones with the exact same cables. If it weren’t for these two pairs, I wouldn’t have been able to write a valid A/B comparison due to the great amount of time it takes to swap out the ear-pads. This way I had two pairs of headphones that only had different pads, allowing me to just take one off my head, put the other one on and plug it in.

I personally believe that it’s crucial to have two identical pairs of anything in order to write a valid A/B test… especially when audio is in question. This eliminates the most subjective factor which is audio memory — the time it takes to swap out the pads just presents a major flaw due to the fact that anything said or written based on such an A/B test would be based on the very subjective audio memory. While the test I carried out was also based on my audio memory, it significantly cut down the time needed to be able to swap between the two variants. It took me only a couple of seconds to swap between the two variants, while it would’ve taken a couple minutes (if not more than 10 minutes) to perform a pad swap.

Setup:

iBasso DX300 MAX
Android OS
Ultimate Mode On
Filter D3
Low Gain

SR2 with the balanced 4.4mm iBasso CB17 cable

Stock ear-pads — small perforation vs larger perforation

The difference between these two variations is beyond significant. In terms of sheer loudness difference, I would say that the larger perforation ear-pads are 25%-30%. Besides loudness, the larger perforation ear-pads lose that vacuum-like seal that the stock pads offer. This affects the SR2 in a couple of ways. The first being the isolation, and the second being the airiness. In other words, the larger perforation pads sound more open-back, while the stock pads give more of a closed-back experience.

In terms of sound performance, once again, it comes as no surprise that the two ear-pads significantly differ and affect it. In short: the smaller perforation pads offer a much more intense presentation with softer highs and much deeper lows, while the larger perforation pads offer an open-back-like experience where the highs are more pronounced, the upper mids are sharper, and the lows are more tamed.

Let’s talk about vocals for a second. On the larger perforation ones, they are sharper and more airy, but that might not be what everybody is looking for. From just A/B testing between these two pads, I personally preferred the smaller perforation ones because they have more pleasant-sounding vocals.

As expected, both have their pros and cons. The smaller perforation ear-pads provide the physical sensation of rumble, which is something that the larger perforation pads don’t offer, and this rumble sensation mostly comes from that vacuum-like seal that the larger perforation pads don’t have. The larger perforation pads have more details in the upper range, resulting in crisper and clearer treble tones. The biggest advantage that the larger perforation pads have over the smaller perforation ones is the extra space in the soundstage and overall presentation. Elements have more room to breathe, and thus have better definition and clarity. The smaller perforation pads offer a more intense, cinematic-like experience, and that’s something that not everyone is looking for. Also, that extra oomph and rumble in the lower end on the smaller perforation pads provides a less clear, muddier sound (in comparison to the larger perforation ones), and I think that this alone might be the reason why someone migrates to the larger perforation pads.

As a whole, my preference is the stock pads (smaller perforation) because of the more intense sound presentation, and I’m also a sucker for that vacuum-like seal and physical sensation of rumble. It brings more excitement to the SR2.

I would say that anyone looking for a more balanced and neutral sound signature should go for the larger perforation pads.

Stock small perforation ear-pads vs Dekoni Audio Elite Hybrid Fostex TH / Denon AH ear-pads

The Dekoni Audio pads offer a completely different feel from the stock pads. In terms of its physical characteristics, they are noticeably smaller than the stock pads. This goes for both the inner and outer diameter of the pads, but also for the the thickness and surface area. Though it didn’t appear to be a major difference when measured and A/B compared the pads, on the ears it’s quite significant. The Dekoni pads feel more cozy, which is nothing new for velour.

At first I thought the sound would be louder on the Dekoni pads, but it turned out it’s completely the opposite. The stock pads are considerably louder than the Dekoni pads, which I’m thinking has a lot to do with the materials and the inner diameter of the pads. In terms of the sound, it kind of falls between the stock small perforation and the larger perforation pads. The small perforation pads have a bigger sound in general, and they still have a deeper and more present low end. Even though the Dekoni pads have less presence, they are still capable of that physical sensation of rumble that the stock pads have. Something which I was very surprised by is the loudness. The mids sound better and more refined on the Dekoni pads. Also, I found the timbre and overall tonality to be better on the Dekoni pads. The highs remain at a somewhat same level, no major differences there. If anything, the Dekoni pads are a tad brighter. Now, the most significant difference is the soundstage and imaging. This is where the thinner nature of the Dekoni plays a major role, because this is what’s causing the smaller soundstage and overall even more of a closed-back experience.

I would say that the Dekoni pads might be the most refined out of the three, but am still not 100% sure on that. They are all different, that’s for sure, and this is something that allows you to play around with the pads and find what suits you the most.

I am personally having a hard time choosing between the Dekoni pads and the stock small perforation pads.

The stock pads give you a true grand experience and presentation, very intimate, growling lows, good mids, good highs. The Dekoni pads give you a more tame low end, mids with better tonality and timbre, and good highs.

Conclusion​

To think that a headphone priced below $1k comes with two sets of pads that alter the sound performance this much is unbelievable. It’s beyond fascinating and rare. To even have the option to choose between three sets of ear-pads is a true luxury that only a few headphones have. This being said, I think that anyone with a SR2 has a lot of ways to fine tune its sound performance and is extremely lucky to be an owner of such a headphone. What’s more, if you own iBasso’s DX300, you pretty much have an end game setup. Why do I say this? Taking into consideration of all the amp modules and amp module mods available for the DX300, you can consider the combination of SR2 and DX300 a platform. A true platform which allows for precise fine tuning. This, this is what I consider an end game, because you have options. I think people are really missing out on the SR2, and I think it’s mainly due to its fairly low price. If iBasso were to price it at around $2k, I think it would get the praise it deserves.

Who is Ollo Audio?

Originating from Slovenia, Ollo Audio is a fairly new company in the headphone space. Focusing specifically in the field of professional audio engineering use, Ollo Audio has been manufacturing headphones ever since Ron Gulič - the founder - decided to officially start making headphones under the company name… and let’s say that that was when his wife was disturbed while sleeping. Ollo was founded back in 2015, however, it wasn’t until 2016 that they would create their first ever headphone prototype. Ever since, Rok and his team would go on to release three different headphone models in total - the S4, S4R, and the S4X, but also the product that inspired Rok to start the company - Play2ME, a haptic subwoofer that acted as an extension for the headphones. Play2Me was a product that was aimed to fill in the gap that Rok felt headphones couldn’t - the chest feeling you get from the subwoofers. This product would later be discontinued, although there seems to be an upcoming MKII.

Either way, from what I can see, Ollo Audio seems to be mainly focusing on their headphone line-up, as though they released the claimed “flat out of the box” S4X model - a headphone that is aimed to be used as a reference in the professional space. Ollo Audio listened to the feedback from the existing customers, and they fixed some of the issues that were present in the previous two models. Since the company consists of a small team of just 6 people, I believe they have more time to focus and listen to the feedback. This gives me hope that they will release an even further improved headphone model that is based on the feedback from the S4X. Overall, they are on the right path of figuring it out as a new company to the market.


Unboxing experience

Raw and simple. No fancy presentation or anything like that, it’s quite straight to the point. You are greeted with rather organic packaging, environmentally friendly packaging that is composed of cardboard and paper.

Formal format of what’s inside (excluding papers, manuals, warranty, individual FR graph):

1x S4X headphone
1x Cable
1x Carrying pouch
1x 6.3 mm adapter

Click to expand...

Build quality & design

It’s not so often that you see a wooden studio headphone. Usually when I hear “studio headphone”, I think of old-school Sony’s, or some Beyer’s (Beyerdynamic).

The Ollo S4X seems to be following a very simple design, but when you look into it, it’s clear that many parts were carefully thought out. I personally think that Mr. Rok definitely had longevity in mind when he was designing his headphones. This is simply due to the fact that every part of this headphone is easily replaceable - not only are the spare parts are widely available (you can order them from Ollo’s official website), but they are also quite accessible in terms of pricing. Every part is easily replaceable and can be replaced by the owner (instead of sending the product to the manufacturer’s service). You can replace every part at home, a rather large advantage if you ask me - sound engineers will probably be using this headphone as a tool, and they don’t have time to waste.

The headband construction is relatively minimalistic - it consists of a solid frame, a “bolt”, a headphone yoke (ear-cup holder) that is hidden inside the wooden enclosure, and that’s it.

The frame is made out of stainless spring steel (AISI 301). The nautical leather (faux leather) headband is attached to the frame with the same bolt that holds together the headphone yoke. It has a self-adjusting suspension system - the headband is stitched to an elastic piece (you cannot see it because it is hidden under the faux leather headband piece). Interestingly enough, this suspension system is quite efficient in doing its job, and I believe it’s mainly due to the lightweight (350g) nature of the S4X, but also due to the right clamp force. Now, what I mean by “efficient” is that I can very easily adjust the “size” and it will stay in place, which means that you can very accurately adjust where you want the ear-cups to sit on your head without worrying that the headphones will slide down. I had my doubts at first, but was proved wrong shortly after.

And of course, the ear-cups. Made out of solid wood, the ear-cups are the accent of all Ollo Audio headphones. It’s worth noting that all headphones from Ollo Audio are handcrafted, which explains some rough edges around the hole cutouts on the ear-cups. Thanks to the bolt that holds the yokes, the ear-cups have full 360˚ of pivot (horizontal rotation). Unfortunately the ear-cups do not have any tilt (vertical rotation), and this is something that I would like to see in the future models.


Smell & Wood

I have worked with wooden headphones before, but I have never encountered a headphone like the S4X. They smell like freshly processed wood, and everybody who is familiar with wood knows how lovely that smell is. For some reason, no other wooden headphones had this authentic smell - which I believe is due to the fact that Ollo headphones are handcrafted and are probably freshly made from real wood.

The finish is quite unique and dependent on lighting. While not in direct light, it has an oak finish - picture this as dark chocolate, and while in direct light, it has a gold finish with a gorgeous sheen.

Cable

Perhaps not the best part of the S4X is the cable. There are some good parts about it, and some not so good parts. Let’s start off with the good - the 2.5mm connectors’ housings are made of nice aluminum, while the housing for the 3.5mm jack is made of a different kind of metal (more polished). The jack’s housing also features a screw-on system for the 6.3mm adaptor, and has a spring protector which will keep the cable safe from bending damage.
The bad part starts from the Y-splitter. The Y-splitter itself is made out of rubber, which isn’t a big deal breaker, but the red part of the cable is. It looks much more like a cable you would find on some equipment from a workshop rather than a headphone cable. The braided part of the cable didn’t bother me as much (it’s good thickness and good quality), but I just don’t like the look & the feel of the material. I definitely think Ollo should change out the cable for the next model, perhaps use a full rubber cable instead - but keep the metal housings for the connectors and the jack.
Measuring at around 2 meters, I should mention that it has more than enough length.


Comfort

With a unique combination of custom made ear-pads and a self-adjustable headband, I am surprised to say that these two result to a very comfortable headphone. As mentioned before, the headband has a very good elastic which keeps it in place. The hybrid ear-pads themselves are very comfortable, and the pleather used is of high quality. I’m glad that Ollo Audio decided for a hybrid design, because I cannot imagine how anything other than velvet would’ve felt on this pair.

The fit of the pads is very snug. I personally really like this as though it is a perfect fit for my ears. Very cozy! However, I am certain that people with larger ears will have a semi on-ear fit. This is definitely something to keep in mind.

All of this being said, I experienced no signs of discomfort after wearing the S4X for over 3 hours. This should mean that you can use them for long-listening sessions.



Sound

The whole deal about the S4X is the claimed “flat frequency response” out of the box. Now, the previous models have been marketed similarly, but people found the claim to be incorrect. Unfortunately, this has been assumed for the S4X as well… while nobody actually took the time to take any measurements for the S4X. First of all, there is a great reasoning behind the pricing of this headphone. You are not paying 400 euros for nothing. This time around Ollo Audio entirely lived up to its claim by having a flat frequency response, or as Ollo Audio calls it “brutally honest”.

The Approach

Audiophile headphones can be tested through testing tracks and music, but how do you test how "reference-grade” a headphone is? This is a question I asked myself before writing this review. I wanted to find the answer, so I proceeded to do some researching. After asking some community members we all came down to the conclusion that there is no convenient way to test how “reference-grade” a headphone sounds. To simply put it - there is no “true” answer.
I mentioned audiophile headphones before, so what is an “audiophile headphone”? In short, I believe it is a headphone that is intended to be used for music listening. These headphones are usually colored and have specific sound enhancements. In other words, the headphone has a character and an intentionally colored frequency response.

Let’s go back for a moment, what is “coloration”? The simplest way to put it would be to say that it is a method of altering the sound, it has some sort of enhancement or recession in the frequency spectrum. Coloration is used to satisfy a certain signature, a certain goal and user base - elevating lower frequencies is one of the most common colorations, reducing high frequencies is another. This is not the “pure” form of sound, it has been changed thanks to tuning, this is something that you do not want as a sound engineer, the main reason is because you are not hearing sound in its "true" form. What a professional wants is a tool that they can trust, something that is as free of bias as possible.

Coloration is an alteration of sound, that's one thing - but interpretation is another. Alteration of sound is an option, it is a conscious decision the manufacturer makes to tune a product, however, interpretation is something that depends on the person. If you have been in this hobby for long enough, you should be aware of the fact that we all hear differently, and this is due to interpretation of sound that differs from person to person. Interpretation of sound is dependent on quite a few factors, some of them are: pinna, concha, ear canal - these three variables alone can significantly impact sound. Interpretation and perception are both elements that are individual and personal, this is what makes our ears subjective, and in no way can you change this. You cannot change your ears, you are born with them. I have theorized a “solution” that isn’t quite convenient, I will touch on that later.

Why can’t you test how reference-grade a headphone sounds? First of all, you can test how flat the frequency response is technically, this would be with the help of an ear simulating measurement systems… but a frequency response can only tell so much. Due to the fact that our ear structures are so different from each other, and the fact that we perceive sound differently, to achieve a reference-grade sound signature you would have to do it individually. Why is this? Well, it all has to do with the fact that you do not actually hear the original frequency response. What the person hears is a different and altered frequency response than the “original” one, this is what you call HRTF. This frequency response varies from person to person, and this is why it makes it impossible to make sure that we all hear the same. Remember the three factors I named before? Each one of them affect the sound in a unique way. If you were to take the pinna as an example, can you imagine how much the pinna differs with different ethnic groups? This is the limitation of ear simulating measurement systems, because I am pretty sure manufacturers do not tune their headphones differently in different parts of the world. If you search "ear resonance" in Google, you will be able to find how different parts of our ear and body affect sound. You can see that the pinna slightly boosts frequencies from 2kHz - 5kHz, the concha has a sharp boost of 5kHz frequencies, and the ear canal & eardrum boost the 2.5kHz frequencies. The question is, how much do these ear resonances vary from person to person? If the answer is not by a lot, then it means that we can have a good idea of how a headphone will sound. This is only if we simulate these resonances in the tuning phase (basically what an ear simulator does).

This being said, when I say “you can’t test how reference-grade a headphone sounds”, I am just referring to an approach that could be applied on a commercial level, otherwise it might be achievable with personal calibration of headphones. However, companies like GRAS make measurement systems that mimic the human ear, they are called ear simulators. In theory, if you combine an ear simulator measurement system with a headphone that measures flat on it, you would be able to make a headphone that has a flat frequency response at your ear. It's not just about that, flat frequency response is something that you want from a loudspeaker in an anechoic chamber, but is it something that you want at your eardrum? I'm not sure I can answer that. It all goes back to the question above - if the ear resonances do considerably vary from person to person, in that case it would mean that even the ear simulator measurement system would not be accurate and consistent. It's an endless loop, you can quite literally start questioning everything - do you even want a flat frequency response at the eardrum? We know you want a flat frequency response in an anechoic chamber for loudspeakers, but can you just assume that you want the same for a headphone? I don't know.

In other words, you might bet able to make a headphone “reference-grade” on its own - which means that the headphone is technically-wise “uncolored” and has a flat frequency response - but we have yet to confirm how much ear resonances vary. If they vary a lot, this would mean that you wouldn’t be able to achieve a headphone that sounds flat to the listener without individual calibration/tuning - but you can probably get somewhat close with ear simulator measurement systems.

We can conclude two things from this:
1. A technically flat frequency response could be achievable with the help of an ear simulator measurement system. This would only be the case if the ear resonances don't vary significantly from person to person.
2. You cannot achieve a "true" flat frequency response without tuning the headphone individually for the listener. In other words, to achieve a flat frequency response for your ears, the headphone would have to be calibrated and tuned to your ears. This is something that is subjective, because this frequency response would sound flat only to your ears.

If all of this sounds a bit complicated, it’s because it actually is. Our ears and perception of sound are quite complex. To achieve a flat frequency response that a person actually perceives as a flat frequency response you would have to do various tests, make casts, measurements, etc. You can get a very good understanding of this by watching the following video:



This is a very important video, you have to watch it to get a basic idea of how much our perception of sound alters the original sound.. all because of things such as our ear canals, pinna, and concha. All of the subjects use the exact same headphone (Sennheiser HD600) and listened to the exact same sound (pink noise), but the way they heard this pink sound vastly differed. Hopefully you can translate this to a larger scale and imagine how a frequency response would be altered and could also vastly differ from person to person.

Perhaps it’s easier to picture this if you think of our ears as filters. If a headphone is flat on its own (on a measurement system that is not an ear simulator), it is technically-wise correct, it is indeed flat according to the graph and the microphones, but since our ears are not the measurement microphones, we all hear a different and altered frequency response - our very own frequency response. If different shapes of the ear result to similar ear resonances, then it is crucial to simulate these ear resonances when tuning a headphone. If there is any sort of repeating pattern in our ear resonances, then it is essential to use an ear simulator to get accurate results - tuning a headphone on a measurement system without taking our ears into consideration is useless. The headphones will be listened to by humans, not microphones.

The term "flat" needs to be well defined in order to understand what "flat" means in the headphone world, what it means to have a flat or neutral sounding headphone - this is something that we haven't really done yet. Applying the same principals that are present for loudspeakers may not be the correct approach to tuning of headphones. Once we define this term, we can then go on to try and achieve it in practice.


Does Ollo Audio S4X have a flat frequency response?

Yes. That’s the simple answer.

To me, this is the most important aspect of this headphone, it’s the marketing claim, so it should live up to it. The only thing I can test the S4X for is the flat frequency response, otherwise I would be basing it on my subjective hearing or on other subjective factors. Since this is a headphone that is marketed as a reference-grade headphone, there would be no point in telling you how this headphone sounds to me in terms of music listening, it would hold absolutely no value.

One thing is very clear, and it’s that S4X is aimed to be a tool, not a music listening headphone. Most users use headphones to listen to music, which means that the headphone needs to sound pleasurable to their ears, however, sound engineers are looking for accuracy. They are looking for specific characteristics to help them with making music, hence why I consider a “reference” headphone a tool. To me, a “tool” should be something that you can rely on, and fulfilling that in the headphone space is a highly difficult task. This is not to say that you cannot use the S4X as a music listening headphone.

At first you might think that no professional sound engineer will depend on a set of headphones to mix or master a track (or any other type of sound engineering), and you would be correct for the most part. However, there are exceptions. Not everybody has a studio of their own, not everybody has the budget to use a studio, not everybody has a studio that is close to their home, and not everybody has the perfect environment to make their bedroom or living space a “studio”. This is why Mr. Rok started his company, he was working late at night and his wife wasn’t really happy with that… it was at this moment that Ollo Audio was born. There are many people that face the same problem, especially younger people. You should also know that there are no standards when it comes to sound engineer’s preferences. Some prefer to use one studio monitor, others prefer another, some prefer headphones, some don’t - this just tells you that it all has to do what the engineer is comfortable with, it’s not as though you have the absolute standard studio monitor that is “the one”. Just take a look at 10 highly successful sound engineers and what equipment they use, you will find that it highly differs.

I also want to state something that I think is very important. I cannot put Ollo Audio's statement of "neutral" to the test, and it's simply because we don't have a clear definition of what "neutral" is. If there were to be a definition, it would need to be free of listener's preference bias, because preference is something else. Preference is what you personally like to hear from a headphone, it's not what determines if something sounds like it should sound in its "true form". However, I do know that Ollo Audio used the IEC 60318-1 ear simulator, and I know they tuned it according to the IEC 60318-1 standard. They definitely took into consideration how our ears alter sound (ear resonances), and they tuned the S4X with that in mind.


The Challenge of making a reference-grade headphone

At this point you should be able to see that it is a great challenge to create a reference-grade headphone, or just a headphone on its own. What I have said above is a present problem for all headphones because it is a problem that is caused by our complex ear structure. Currently, all of the headphones on the market are universal - meaning they are not custom-made for your ears. Since our ears are vastly different, without custom-tuning the manufacturer cannot know the frequency response at your eardrum. I like the quote from Ollo Audio - “A true flat is different for every individual”, and this is because a flat in the free field (in this case it’s the space between the headphones and your eardrum) is not flat by the time it reaches your eardrum.
The second largest challenge that is completely impossible to avoid is preference. Each individual has a different personal preference, that is why it is crucial to listen to audio product in-person before buying them. Again, in theory, a reference-grade headphone shouldn't be a headphone that depends on listener's preference.

But how do you even create a reference-grade headphone? What is a reference-grade headphone anyway? This is a hard question to answer, mainly due to the fact that companies have used this term as a marketing strategy to influence studio users to buy their products. If you go on and read the details to these so claimed “reference-grade” headphones, you will find nothing but a bunch of words that hold no value, words that do not explain the technical details as to why this headphone is marketed that way. I like the fact that Ollo Audio put in the effort to actually explain what their headphone is trying to achieve and what they mean by “neutral”. Reference, neutral, uncolored, all these terms are often mixed up.. leaving us to have a lot of different ways of wording something without a clear definition of either of the terms.

After carefully researching the existing “reference” headphones, I came to the conclusion that Ollo Audio S4X is among the few that have a clear aim with a clear (scientific) explanation. I think Ollo has a very good approach to make an “uncolored” headphone that is aimed to be mass produced, aka commercial product. I have my own personal reasoning behind this opinion. I theorized that the ideal concept is to have a flat frequency at the eardrum, this would be the most uncolored headphone - however, as stated by Ollo Audio, this is impossible to achieve because it would require personal calibration and tuning… which you simply cannot do by selling a commercial (universal) product. Basically, if a headphone measured flat, it would not be flat by the time it reached your eardrum, this is the challenge... it brings me back to the ear resonances, because if they do not vastly differ from person to person, then the headphone will sound very similar to everybody, and my statement above would be false. You cannot avoid the ear structure that changes the sound by the time it reaches to your eardrum, but perhaps you can study how our ear structure alters sound and implement those changes to the tuning of a headphone, this would ideally let you at least mimic how it would sound at the eardrum - this is already being done with ear simulators.

After giving it some thought, to have a product that is the closest to being technically flat, it would have to have a flat frequency response before the sound (from the headphones) is distorted and altered by our ears. The reasoning behind this is that each person would get an altered version of this very flat frequency response, the level to which this flat frequency response would get altered would vary from person to person. However, it should be the only way to unbiasedly create an uncolored headphone without individually calibrating it to the users ears - basically every user would hear a “slightly” altered version of the original flat frequency response.
If you were to tune the headphones to any other frequency response, the frequency response that the user would hear could greatly differ, which means that the level of coloration would differ from person to person - this would mean that it wouldn’t be as close to an uncolored frequency response as if it was originally tuned to be flat - or so I thought. The above statement is completely wrong, and it is something that I assumed at the beginning. I should note that in the statement above I was talking about a measurement system that does not mimic our ears. While our ear structure definitely varies from person to person, it (in theory) alters the sound in a similar way. This means that even with different ear anatomy in humans, we can draw an average of how each part of our ear changes sound - it can be observed and averaged, as can be seen in an ear resonances graph. A flat frequency on measurement microphones would be useless because nobody would hear it like that, it would be "uncolored" and flat only for the measurement setup.... and we are humans, not the microphones. That is not how we hear through our ears. What you want to do is implement into the frequency response itself is how our ear changes sound (ear resonances), I believe this is what ear simulators and software do. They mimic the way ear, meaning they try to alter sound in the same way our ears do (e.g. boost in the 3kHz region).

Uncolored is a term that I would associate with a flat frequency response. In theory the aim of a flat frequency response should imply that no frequency response stands out, but the terms like “neutral” and “reference” are much more complex. These two terms are very subjective and weakly defined, it’s not as though you can easily define a truly “neutral” or “reference” headphone. It is much more complicated than a frequency response… which is problematic enough on its own. You would need a very strong and detailed scientific explanation behind these two terms. Since neutrality consists of factors & elements outside of the frequency response (such as soundstage, imaging, probably separation, etc.), factors that you either cannot measure or they are things that are complex to measure, you wouldn’t be able to accurately define these terms on paper.

The Solution and how Ollo Audio approached problem

Now that you are aware of the large challenge of designing a commercial headphone that will be listened to by people with different ear structures, I want to cover Ollo Audio’s approach to “overcoming” this challenge.

Knowing that they cannot design a true flat headphone without personal calibration, they took advantage of the challenge itself. How so? Well, the first step is to acknowledge the problem and study it. By knowing the problem, you can attack it strategically and take advantage of it. Because it affects and alters the sound by the time it reaches our eardrum, the problem in this case is our ear structure.

With a firm base and lots of existing research on this matter, Ollo Audio was able to also use it to develop their headphone around it. Instead of designing a headphone that measures flat on a measurement system, they altered the frequency response of the S4X in a way that a flat response would be altered by our ears.

Here are some of the factors that they looked at:
1. They used the Sennheiser HD600 as a base, which is a very good starting point. It’s a headphone that has been used as in the studio space for quite some time, so at least they could study what the consumers consider as “neutral”.
2. The Harman Curve was also something that the research department from Ollo Audio was studying and taking into consideration.
3. HRTF and how our ear anatomy affects sound

Beyond this, there isn’t much that can be done, perhaps lots of scientific research and studying the existing studies. The best you can do when making a commercial product is to mimic the ear, look at the averages, and implement these factors into the tuning of the headphone itself. That's exactly what Ollo did.


The hard truth

… is that there is no solution that has been found, at least for now. Not only do our ears vary on their on their own, but measurements have their own limitations. Each manufacturer has their own method of measuring, and even if they have the same equipment they will not have the same results. There is no “holy standard” and for this reason sound will continue to be subjective.

This is not something that is specific to this pair of headphones, but all headphones. Each frequency response chart is different, was taken in a different lab, by different people & manufacturer’s. Comparing these charts from different companies is not accurate (especially when you do not know all the details about how they were made, and with what equipment they were made) but at least it might give you a general idea about a product.

The only tool you can trust is your ears, anything beyond that at this point is something that you cannot fully rely on. If it sounds right to you, you will perceive it as right. As life goes on, you will form different sound perceptions, but they will be exclusive to you - it's not something that will sound like that to other people. The anatomy of the ear is complex enough on its own, it alters the sound on its own, however, the neurological side is something that is not often brought into conversation… but if you can imagine how much stuff happens with sound perception on a neurological level, it is something that we have yet to explore and study. The only right and wrong is in your mind, so trust your ears, don’t depend on other people’s opinion.

With speakers the question of how the "neutral" response should look like has been answered (if a speaker measures flat in an anechoic chamber), but the same question remains unanswered for headphones.



Conclusion

After spending weeks researching and reading several studies, I believe Ollo Audio not only lived up to its marketing, but also successfully made a tool for the sound engineers themselves. With limitations from both our ears and measurement equipment, the manufacturer had to be very mindful of how they will make the S4X, this required lots of observing and studying.

This is a statement directly from Mr. Rok:
“As there are so many different standards and approaches in the field of equal loudness contours, we decided to base our product development firmly on the feedback from our customers. We listen and do what we can, to adjust sound, comfort and even the purchase process, to accommodate as many pro audio needs as possible.”

To my ears this proved to be true, as though I found the S4X balanced across all frequencies. From Mr. Rok’s interview, he explained that the S4X is tuning is somewhere between the IEC 60318-1 standard (used by G.R.A.S.) and the Harman Target curves. Since Ollo’s target audience are sound engineers and professional audio industry, they made sure to test their product with them and took their feedback. I think the main reason why they were successful with this headphone is because they neither relied too much on neither measurements nor consumer feedback - they found the perfect balance between the two. They basically combined their own research with feedback from the target consumer market (engineers).

Mr. Rok further explained that the S4X is tuned closer to the IEC 60318-1 than to the Harman Target. This should give you a more direct explanation of tuning nature of this headphone.

All of this being said, I have to say that I believe that this headphone lives up to its asking price. There are a lot of things Ollo Audio provides besides a good headphone - 5-year limited warranty, 1-year of full warranty, widely accessible and affordable spare parts, and the easily replaceable nature of the headphone. These things matter quite a lot to somebody who needs a product that they can rely on, especially for professionals - being able to order spare parts and replace them at home is something that definitely holds high value. And most important of all, they provide a special trust factor. If you are skeptical or just want to try the S4X for yourself, you have a 30 days trial period - on top of that you also have the option to pay in installments (€20 a month for 12 months).

At the end of the day, you have to remember that Ollo Audio is a small company. What makes it a special small company is that it is primarily a direct-to-consumer company. This is important because it lets Ollo Audio use the majority of their budget towards the research department and future product development. It is the factor that is letting Ollo Audio do what they are doing now.

And I want to say that I am highly disappointed in people who continued to compare the S4X to the older models without even trying or measuring the new S4X. While the older models were not perfect, it’s clear that serious improvements have been made with the new X model, making it completely independent of its predecessors. Another thing has greatly disappointed me, is the fact that people who have reviewed this headphone have reviewed it from an audiophile perspective… which virtually holds no value to the target audience that will use this headphone in the professional audio field. I really hope somebody like @Resolve can form a more technical or scientific-based review, because I think that is a crucial approach for a headphone like this (whereas it is not crucial for music oriented headphones that aren’t of such strict technical nature). If there is anybody who should be approaching a review by listening, it’s the sound engineers - the people who these headphones were aimed at.

P.S. Ollo Audio has announced that they are expecting to release a closed back model in 2021, so keep a lookout for that. Mr. Rok said in an interview that he is expecting further improvements in performance.



I want to give special thanks to the people from HiFi Guides and The Headphones Community for helping me out with my research.

Special thanks to MaynardGK (HiFi Guides) and Resolve (The Headphones Community) for leading me to major progress with my research.


If you want to support me, you can order the S4X from here:
https://olloaudio.com/pages/s4x-ref...urce=review&utm_medium=voja&utm_campaign=hifi
Note: I have not received any form of payment from Ollo Audio. I wrote the review beforehand and only after I finished the review did I ask Ollo Audio for a link that can help me out. I have not written the review with the intention to earn any financial benefit from it, I invested my time into making a quality review with an appropriate approach. This being said, Ollo Audio had no influence in my review, I completely independently wrote the review without any form of censorship or restriction from any outside force, including Ollo Audio.

If you have been following the headphone scene back in 2018, then you are probably familiar with the Dekoni Blue. Fostex’s T50RP is probably the most modded headphone model in history, and Dekoni took part of that as well.

Dekoni originally announced their partnership with Fostex back in May, 2018, however, the headphone was actually previewed way back in February. It would go on to gain its biggest audience from Massdrop (now Drop). The Blue has been released at several different price points and variants - since its release, the prices varied from $170 - $300. The original offering at Massdrop (Drop) included a set of extra Elite Velour pads.

However, what makes Dekoni’s Blue model different from the other modded T50RP MK3’s is the fact that it’s an official partnership with Fostex. What this essentially means is that Fostex directly manufactures the Blue model for Dekoni Audio. I believe this is the first and only official partnership that Fostex made for the T50RP MK3 - all the other well known mods were done by the company selling them, this includes: Mr. Speakers’ (Dan Clark Audio) “Mad Dog” and “Alpha Dog”, “Argon” by Mod House, Cascadia Audio’s “Talos”, and Mayflower Electronic’s T50RP mods, and others.



Unboxing experience

The unboxing experience is quite straight to the point - a nicely designed (and matching blue) cardboard box, and headphones wrapped in bubble wrap inside. I would best describe the contents and the whole presentation as minimal - just as you would expect from a Fostex T50RP.

Formal format of what you get inside (this may depend on what variant you are buying, this is the stock one):

1x Dekoni Blue headphone (with Elite Hybrid earpads)
1x 2m cable (6.3mm jack)
1x 3.5mm adaptor

Click to expand...

Build quality

Originally aimed for studio use, the Fostex T50RP was made to be lightweight and durable - something that can be worn without much weight to it, while also withstanding regular wear. Since Dekoni used the T50RP MKIII as its base model, it follows the very same characteristics as the original.

Starting from the top, the headband is made of high quality faux leather. It offers an exceptional amount of padding (I will cover the headband in more detail in the “Comfort” section), and is also stitched along the edges - which will ensure that there is no peeling at the edges.

Moving further down, the headband is screwed in place to a plastic piece, and right below it is another plastic piece that holds the height adjustment sliders. Both of these parts are made of high quality plastic.
Now, you may notice that Dekoni Blue shares many things with the Fostex T50RP MK3, and this is because it uses the T50RP MK3 as its base model excluding the ear-pads, which Dekoni replaced with their high quality Elite Hybrid pads, everything is basically the same.

This means that the Blue features the same metal height adjustment sliders, the same lock-mechanism for the cable connector, and the same exposed braided cables.

Speaking of the cable, it’s my least favorite part. I am personally not very impressed with the quality of it. Unfortunately, it’s no different than many headphone cables today. Anybody who has seen me on forums knows how much I brag about the quality of Sennheiser HD598’s cable. That is mainly because it is what I perceive as the standard of what a rubber cable should feel like.

The stock cable is impossible to store away. I usually tie cables around my hand and push the plug through the center - essentially tying the cable and leaving it as a “circle”. However, this is impossible to do. with the Blue’s stock cable… The cable keeps returning to its original shape and turns into a whole mess. This essentially means that you will have two meters of cable just hanging out there… which isn’t ideal. Another issue that comes with the stubborn nature of this cable is that the connector in the lock mechanism can get pushed up.



Design

Like the name suggests - the Blue’s main design characteristic is the authentic Dekoni blue. This essentially makes it stand out from the original black and orange aesthetic. Dekoni Blue is anything but bland - it features branding on several places. The first thing you will notice is the big “Dekoni” branding on top of the headband - the printing is of high quality and is printed on top of the headband’s faux leather.

While Dekoni didn’t change the Fostex logo on the sides, they did change the printing on the ear-cups and the color of the height adjustment sliders.

It’s no secret that the T50RP has held its authentic design ever since it was first implemented. The 1st generation of the T50 series actually featured a round ear-cup design, and it wouldn’t be until the 2nd generation that Fostex would introduce the now iconic design - round ear-cup base with an elevated square at the back. Ever since the 2nd generation, Fostex has remained the iconic design of the RP-series.

In terms of the actual color-scheme, Fostex only introduced the black and orange color combination with the 3rd generation. Of course, the main cosmetic difference that Dekoni made was the color-scheme. The height adjustment sliders were changed from the original silver finish to a black finish. In similar fashion, instead of the classic “T50RP” label and Fostex’s RP logo on the ear-cups, Dekoni changed it up - it features Dekoni Audio’s logo, large “Blue” label” and a visual of a sound wave.

Dekoni Blue keeps the same good old design with minor aesthetic changes.



Comfort

Comfort being Dekoni’s main focus field, it’s not surprising that it’s one of the main selling points of this headphone.
The headband itself has light cushioning - and this is something that may or may not be a problem. I myself don’t have any problems or discomfort with it, and that’s mainly due to the fact that my hair acts as a cushion between the headband and my head. However, if you are bald, this may be something that can present a problem.

And of course, the highlight of this headphone - the pads. Dekoni Blue has Dekoni’s most premium series - the Elite Hybrid. This series utilizes sheepskin on the outside, velour on the face, and fenestrated (perforated) sheepskin on the inside of the pads. The general ideology of this combination is as follows:
The sheepskin on the outside is mean the provide better isolation and a better lower frequency response. The velour on the face is meant to provide a breathability and comfort, while letting the sound signature to be more open by letting sound travel through it. Finally, the fenestrated sheepskin on the inside is meant to let the sound travel through it and essentially “enter” the ear-pads themselves - this results to a more open sound and also gives better breathability.

To put things into better perspective, let’s talk about how they handle long listening sessions. At no surprise, the Blue didn’t show any signs of discomfort - even after listening sessions that consisted of several albums and multiple hours of music. In fact, it was rather my incapability to stay seated in one place that caused me to take a break and walk around. The ear-pads did not get warm or sweaty, and there also weren’t any hotspots. The velour material is very comfortable and pleasant to the skin - it reminds me of a very soft and cozy sweater. However, Dekoni Blue is not one of those headphones that disappears on your head, you are aware of it at all times.

The clamp force is neither too strong, nor too weak. What is important to me is that the headphone can stay in place while I move around. Generally there are two types of people:
Those who enjoy sitting back in a chair and dissolve in the music, and those who tend to live the music and move around. I am the latter type, I like to move my head and dance around, that’s just how I enjoy music. This being said, I am happy that the clamp force could keep them on my head, and that I didn’t have to lift them up every two minutes.

Dekoni Audio being a company that specializes in producing ear-pads, the comfort aspect is one of the main focus fields. Even if you find yourself unhappy with the headband, the spare parts market for the T50RP is so wide that you will have no problem finding one that will suit you - this basically goes for everything regarding this headphone.

---

History of planar-magnetic headphones & the important role that Fostex played in it

Fostex RP has a very interesting history, and it has a lot to do the technology used. While manufacturers like Audeze and Hifiman were making planar-magnetic (isodynamic/orthodynamic) headphones in high-end market, Fostex focused on producing affordable planar-magnetic headphones - that’s essentially where it found its potential.

Being more curious about the widely unknown history of Fostex’s RP range, I found out that Fostex is given very little credit for its importance in the planar-magnetic field. After some hours of digging into the history of planar-magnetic headphones, I was barely able to source the first ever planar-magnetic headphone. Surprisingly enough, in 1972 Wharfedale produced the world’s first planar-magnetic headphone: the Wharfedale ID1. Who would’ve thought that a manufacturer like Wharfedale, a company that is most well known for their speakers, produced the world’s first planar magnetic set of headphones.

---

After that, I had a difficult time tracking down exactly which models were released between 1972 and later, however, I did find some notable information:

1974/1975 - Fostex launches its T50v0 model - making it the world’s second planar-magnetic headphone. It would only be sold until 1976 - the v0 series is generally less documented. From my research, the only headphone in the v0 series was the T50v0 - making it the first T50 from Fostex.



The T50v0 would lead Fostex to become an OEM for other companies, and produce headphone models that are based off of the T50v0. These models would be:

---

1977 - NAD RP18 (it had two variations of the drivers: mylar diaphragm, and the kapton diaphragm)

---

1977 - Aiwa HP-500

---

70’s - Sansui SS100

---

1974 - Audio Technica launches its first headphone series - the AT-700 series.
*I cannot confirm whether the AT-700 series featured planar-magnetic technology, but I did find information that Audio Technica was among other manufacturers who were involved in the planar magnetic headphone market

---

1975/1976 - Yamaha launches its first planar-magnetic headphone: the HP-1. The HP-1 was designed by the well known Mario Bellini. Yamaha was apparently doing far better than other manufacturers in terms of sales for their orthodynamic headphones. This is mainly due to the fact that they utilized efficient marketing and follow-up series

---

Yamaha followed up with the following models:

1978 - YH-1000

---

1982 - YH-100


Yamaha YH-1 (left), Yamaha YH-100 (middle), Yamaha YH-1000 (right)

---

1985 - YHD-1

---

Mid 70’s - YH1

---

1977 - Fostex launches T10, T20, T30, and the T50 models (v1) - notable feature of the 1st generation were the round ear-cups & ear-pads, and round driver

---

1978 - Bang & Olufsen releases the U70 - designed by B&O’s well famed designer Jacob Jensen

---

1980s - Fostex finally introduces its Regular Phase (RP) technology (v2) - notable feature of the 2nd generation was the change of the ear-cup construction and the headband. This generation introduced the rubber headband and also started featuring the iconic “RP” logo on the ear-cups.

---

2002-2006 - Fostex launches T20RP MK2, T40RP MK2, T50RP - notable feature of the third generation was the change to a square-shaped driver. This would be a significant change, as though it completely changed the sound signature, but also all future models would implement the square-shaped driver. This generation followed the same rubber headband as the previous one.



All of this being said, there’s no doubt that there were several planar-magnetic headphones in the early years. However most of them didn’t see much success - mainly due to the difficult process of manufacturing these headphones, it wasn’t cost efficient for the manufacturers.
This is why Fostex played a major role in the planar magnetic field. Besides Yamaha, it truly brought the planar-magnetic technology to the commercial market. Fostex’s RP series was widely used in studios, that’s how it raised to fame.
You can also notice that most of the early planar-magnetic headphones were produced for a limited time - meaning that many companies decided to leave the field of planar-magnetic headphones.

The most interesting part is that Fostex was founded in 1973, which is only a year or two prior to the release of the T50v0. Nowadays, names like Hifiman and Audeze are the ones that people generally associate with “planar-magnetic”, however those companies were founded more than three decades later - Hifiman in 2003, Audeze in 2008 - making Fostex one of the first companies to seriously step in the planar-magnetic headphone market.

---

Sound

If there is anything that the Dekoni Blue is recognized for, it’s the lower frequency response. While I didn’t have a chance to hear the original Fostex T50RP MK3, I can definitely say that Dekoni’s marketing was pretty accurate - the overall sound signature is leaning toward the warm side of the spectrum.



Lows

One of the biggest misconceptions about the Blue, is that it’s a basshead headphone. I personally wouldn’t agree with this, and it’s definitely something that I saw many people referring to. Let’s go to the roots, what does “basshead” mean? I would consider “basshead” to be a headphone that can deliver sub-bass rumble, has tight punch and powerful impact delivery, and overall have a “controlled” bass.

“Why So Serious?” by Hans Zimmer is one of my standard testing tracks for sub-frequency response and sub-bass rumble. The dark track from Zimmer’s masterpiece score for The Dark Knight has several points where you can hear the deep low frequencies, however, it is around the 3:26 minute mark where there is a drop. During this drop you should be hearing sub-bass rumble pulsating.
While Dekoni Blue is capable of reproducing the sub-frequency tone, it doesn’t rumble.

“Had Some Drinks” by Two Feet is a track where you can clearly test how the headphone holds up with both bass quantity and sub-bass rumble. There is no question about the Blue filling space with sound (quantity), however, it doesn’t rumble. I will later explain why I think this is, and it has much more to do with the technical nature of the T50RP, rather than the sound signature.

M.O.O.N’s eponymous EP is a very enjoyable electronic album. The third track, “Hydrogen”, is the one that puts both the quality and definition to the test. The kick should remain clean and tight - the Blue rather represents it with more quantity and less definition. The kick has more presence and thus isn’t tight, it “takes up” more space in the mix.

In similar fashion, “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss, should remain a clean beat. Although the clap isn’t in sync at all times, there are parts where the clap meets the kick, and this results to a clean uniform impact. However, Blue lets the kick go on even when the clap meets the kick, this is what I would refer to as “slow decay”.

One particular album where I enjoyed this type of bass response is “Music to listen to….” (too long album title) by Bring Me The Horizon.

The low region is definitely different from what I have heard up until this point. It is a bass response that has more presence, but doesn’t have much definition (doesn’t have tight punch and as powerful impact/delivery). The lower frequencies usually fill the mix with bass presence, this “takes up” more space in the mix. Another thing is that the Dekoni Blue definitely doesn’t rumble (unless turnt up to extreme volumes), here is why this is - if you ever saw a T50RP driver, you know that it is square-shaped and not of a very large size. This small sized speaker driver has limited capability to deliver these low frequencies, whereas larger planar-magnetic headphones (Hifiman, Audeze, Rosson Audio, Abyss, etc.) have the advantage of extended lower frequency response.



Mids

The mid-range is best described as warm - the exact quality Dekoni was going for in terms of tonality in this model.
“Forget Her” by Jeff Buckley, a track that is leaning towards the brighter side, is a perfect one to listen for sibilance or piercing peaks. This can particularly be heard when Jeff hits the “s” or “sh” peaks -Blue tames these peaks down and stays far away from sibilance.

I found this also to be the case in the heavy metal genre - a genre that is known for being on the edge and being bright. “Crazy Train” by Ozzie Osbourne, “When a Blind Man Cries” and “Enter Sandman” by Metallica, and multiple songs by AC/DC, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, and Judas Priest, are all examples where this can be heard well. At no point did I encounter the Blue to hint any sign of sparkle, which essentially proves that Dekoni Audio’s description of what they did with the Blue is indeed correct: “The Dekoni Blue is warmer, smoother, and less fatiguing than its predecessor, making for hours of comfortable listening sessions”

I found myself enjoying some female artists such as Nina Simone, Freya Ridings, Demi Lovato, Sia, and even Gloria Gaynor. In particular, “Poison” from Freya Ridings and “Anyone” by Demi Lovato were two songs where I particularly enjoyed the upper mid-range.

“Bohemian Rhapsody” by Queen is a classic. While the overall presentation sounded good with the guitars, drums, and the piano, Freddie’s voice did sound a tad too warm and a bit recessed at the 2:17 minute mark - where Freddie sings “…face the truth”.

“Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple is another favorite of mine. Specifically the guitar introduction -the upper end sounds very nice and pleasant. The guitar plucks at the very beginning have pretty good timbre and tonality, just like a real guitar should sound like - yes, maybe the sparkle isn’t there, but they can very much be felt, which is definitely something I look for.

“Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Led Zeppelin is a highly dynamic and slightly intense track. The guitars here also sound superb - even when the track gets very busy and crowded, the Blue manages to keep up with the guitars. The same goes for Robert Plant’s vocals, but his voice is a little distant in the original recording.

All and all, the Dekoni Blue sounds the best in tracks that aren’t too busy, it is more than capable of keeping up with a very good guitar solo. The warm signature results to a fatigue-free listening experience, but this does take away from the details in the upper mid-range. I mainly found my comfort zone with the Dekoni Blue in modern music, especially mainstream pop and r&b.

---

Highs

The Blue keeps the high-range nice and clear. It keeps a good balance of detail and staying away from sibilance and brightness. As long as you are not listening to older and less mastered tracks, you won’t face any type of piercing or fatigue.

“Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott is my standard testing track for sibilance. While I am not listening to Travis’s vocals, I am listening to Stevie Wonder’s harmonica at the outro of this track. What I always look out for is the clarity and tonality of the peak at 5:59 minute mark. I was very happy to hear that the Blue can deliver a very clean sounding performance and be exactly on the edge of sparkle. The harmonica’s peak note is pretty bearable and gives that satisfying ear feeling that you get from a good treble response.

Even with very harsh and not the most ideally recorded tracks like “Babe I’m Gonna Leave You” by Joan Baez, Blue doesn’t result to fatigue. It’s a particularly easy recording where the peaks are happening quite often, but the Blue tames it down to a level that is listenable and bearable.

Whether it’s modern pop, r&b, or even hip-hop/rap, the percussion always stays crips. In “Montreal” by The Weekend you can hear that the snare sound very clean and has the top-end that it is meant to have - it sounds tight and compliments the rest of the mix. “Still Dre”, “The Next Episode”, and even “Forgot About Dre” all share the same quality. The Blue presents the high-end from the percussion with a clean sound, the snare hits always sound in place and are more forward in the mix.



Conclusion

Dekoni Audio said everything that needed to be said about this headphone: “The Dekoni Blue is a Fun Headphone with a great bass extension and smoothed out high end”. As you can notice, Dekoni was honest with the marketing and didn’t claim any bold or absurd claims.

The true qualities of the Blue lie in its comfort, bass response that fills the mix with its presence, and the fairly pleasant high-range with a roll-off that is caused by the warm sound signature. The Blue is best suited for tracks that aren’t too busy. If the track is too busy, especially if it has a lot of low end, the mix can be overwhelmed with the bass presence, hence why I personally enjoyed less busy tracks. Clean 808s sound very good with the Blue, which is the reason why I preferred to listen to some modern mainstream tracks.

The low end of the Dekoni Blue is heavily focused on quantity - it will fill the mix with the presence of lower frequencies. If I was to describe Blue’s bass response it would be compared to that of a mallet drumstick - gentle and soft without much definition. I always perceive it as soft bass and visualize it as something very fluffy and soft. On the other hand, the opposite of that would be a tighter bass response; and it could be compared to that of a wooden drumstick, which is tight, fast, and sharp. Both of these are quite different, the first one is more relaxing, while the latter is more noticeable & audible.

My main preference in terms of music were clean tracks that didn’t have too much going on. Here are some particular tracks and albums that I greatly enjoyed listening to:

Partynextdoor - Spiteful
Sia - Greatest
The Weeknd - Montreal
Jaden - Syre (album)
Daft Punk - Tron: Legacy (album)
The Weeknd - After Hours (album)
Peter Green - The End of the Game (Expanded) (album)
Kendrick Lamar - good kid, m.A.A.d city (Deluxe)
Joni Mitchell - Blue (album)
Céline Dion - Falling Into You (album)

I can safely say that the Dekoni Blue will be a headphone that I will use for entertainment purposes (movies, games). The Dekoni Blue is a very comfortable headphone with a fun v-shaped sound signature - while I personally am not drawn towards warmth (I prefer the buzz and feel from the high frequencies), it can certainly satisfy somebody who likes a warm sound signature and someone who likes bass presence. I can also see the Dekoni Blue as a headphone that you throw on while you are doing something and not entirely focusing on what you are listening to. Dekoni Blue doesn’t distract with it’s sound signature, and this is the main characteristic of the combination of a warm sound signature and less defined bass region.

Whether it’s their genius and sneaky model names, or the devices themselves, EarMen is doing it right, and I love it! There is a great challenge in succeeding when you are a fairly new company to the market - it’s hard to reinvent the wheel. Auris Audio is only 7 years old, it’s a fairly young company, yet they did it their own way and succeeded in doing that. If you are not familiar with Auris Audio, you may be asking “What is Auris Audio and why is it relevant to EarMen?”. First, let’s make this clear: Auris Audio is the parent company which mainly specializes in manufacturing high-fidelity and luxury amplifiers, and EarMen is their sub-brand that focuses on more budget friendly (without compromising quality!) portable devices.

Auris Audio is globally recognized for their authentic luxury amplifiers. The combination of leather & wood has become Auris Audio’s trademark - once you see it, you know it’s Auris. Founded in 2013. by Mr. Milomir Trosic, Auris Audio has achieved major recognition and success, well deserved success and recognition. Both Auris Audio and EarMen focus on producing quality products - they prefer quality over quantity. You will notice that they haven’t just released a large quantity of models, but rather focused on putting out fewer quality product ranges (both EarMen and Auris Audio), and this is something that I respect on a high level. How many times did you come across a company with dozens of different models and product ranges of a relatively similar product? I can tell you that the answer is probably more than necessary. Both Auris Audio and EarMen have focused on using the highest quality components from the best companies - Electro Harmonix, Tung-Sol, JJ Electronic, Sabre, XMOS, Texas Instruments, Cirrus Logic, they have it all. Last but not least, Auris is known for manufacturing, assembling, and designing their products in Europe - not only that, but all products from Auris Audio are handcrafted.

What an introduction, impressive isn’t it? Let’s take a closer look at what the TR-Amp has to offer.

Those who read my articles will know that I do not speak upon something if I do not hear it. How can I write about something that I cannot hear? Sound is something you hear, so using nice descriptive words without backing them up is pretty pointless - it is not a physical thing, you cannot touch it or see it, therefore you cannot use descriptive words… it’s not quite objective. TR-Amp has become my favorite portable amplifier, and it’s for a reason. This little guy has a lot to offer, he may be small, but many agree that it’s sound performance is outside of it’s physical size - some went as far to say that it is bigger than bigger amps. It’s small, yet robust. Easy to carry around, yet delivering a very mature sound performance.



Unboxing

---

Formal format of what you get

1x TR-Amp
1x USB A to USB C cable (I have the normal cable, some people received the Revox cable - it’s flat and textured)
1x rubber cable holder (features EarMen branding all around)
1x mesh carrying case
1x cable tie

Click to expand...

---

Built like a tank

When you pick the TR-Amp up, you know you are holding a well machined and well-built product. You can clearly see that EarMen built it to last. With an all CNC machined aluminum housing, you can be sure that it can withstand some serious abuse (although you should be responsible and take care of your devices!). I was very pleased to see that there wasn’t a single plastic part used for the construction, it greatly contributes as to why it is so robust and solid. All the ports are secured in place; no rattle, no issues. This is a segment that EarMen nailed, and I hope to see more products like the TR-Amp.

What is worthy of mentioning is that it’s designed, made, and produced in Europe. I can say that this is something you will notice straight away, the precision is there. For such a low priced product, it’s pretty nice to see it being entirely produced in Europe.



Design and features

Minimal. Sharp. Clean. Seriously though, there isn’t much to speak upon - a very well designed product that has a great shape. I am also a big fan of the EarMen logo on the top, I am assuming it was laser etched since I couldn’t damage it even when I purposely scratched it with my fingernails. The volume knob has a gorgeous texture, turns very smoothly, and also locks in place nicely (when you turn it on/off). The 4 legs at the bottom are also something that is a neat touch - I am assuming they are made of some type of rubber, and they help the TR-Amp to stay in place. One thing that I did notice is that the LED lights bleeds through the 3.5mm port (@Aibo also noticed this)

TR-Amp is a little guy, but it uses the highest quality components that contribute to it’s big sound. Utilizing the ES9038Q2M SABRE Reference DAC (known to be the highest performance 32-bit mobile audio DAC) and the Texas Instruments TPA6120 amplifier, it supports 32bit/384kHz PCM, DoP DSD256, Native DSD128 and MQA audio formats -

Formal format:

DSD DSD 128 Native / DSD 256 (DoP)
DXD 384/352.8 kHz
PCM Up to 384 kHz
MQA Rendering Up to 384 kHz

Click to expand...

Specifications:

On the front you will find two outputs: one 3.5 mm and one 6.3 mm. I am very happy to see this combination, although it would be interesting to see a 2.5 mm (balanced) and 6.3 mm together. Luckily my HD 598 has a 6.3 mm jack, and I always pair them up with the TR-Amp. Now what’s special is that you can use both the 3.5 mm & 6.3 mm simultaneously. This can be quite convenient if you have somebody who wants to join your listening session, but also if you are testing two different headphones.


Battery

TR-Amp has a built-in battery which allows it to be used as a portable AMP/DAC. EarMen claims it hold up 10 hours. I myself am not the type of person who measures minutes or the time I spend on listening to music.. I just listen and enjoy music, but you can definitely find that other people did find the TR-Amp lived up to its claims. The 3700 mAh battery allows you to use the TR-Amp on the go - without wasting your devices battery (your laptop’s/phone’s battery). You will notice that on the back there are two USB C ports: one says “DATA”, and the other “CHRG”. As you can guess, you connect it to DATA when you want to use it, and when you want to charge it, hook it up to the CHRG port. EarMen gave me the official statement that you can use the TR-Amp and charge it simultaneously, but you will need an extra cable to do that. I don’t know how safe it is, but I did notice that the TR-Amp would heat up once it is used like this. I don’t know about you, but 10 hours seems to be more than enough time to enjoy music on the go.

Performance

After trying several headphones, earphones, and IEM’s, I can easily say that TR-Amp is a killer performer. While I would avoid pairing it with any planar-magnetic headphones due to their power hungry nature, TR-Amp is a no brainer for dynamic drivers.



Lows

One of the most fascinating things about the TR-Amp is the ability to extend the dynamic range, especially in the lower range. The “no turning point” was when I first paired the Sennheiser HD 598 with the TR-Amp. Without a quality source, the HD 598 sounded very dull.. and it’s nothing new that it has pretty light bass. TR-Amp was able to bring out the life out of it. It sounded like a completely new headphone. All of a sudden I was able to hear the sub-bass notes, and the mid-bass had more weight and definition.

To get a true understanding of what this little guy is capable, I suggest you carefully read my Sennheiser HD 598 review.

Here is a very self explanatory quote from the review - “Not only is there more space for the lower frequencies to breathe and overall have more space for full-body sound, but there is just so much more definition and presence in the lower notes”

This will particularly change the listening experience for those who primarily listen to music where the bass is present (e.g. electronic music). Though I don’t primarily listen to techno or electronic, “Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss was where I first heard the impact TR-Amp makes. It was day and night - the absence of the lower notes without it would make the track feel lifeless.



Mids

Perhaps the most significant region that the TR-Amp has effect on is the mid-range. It’s also one of the more interesting fields - the tonality remains untouched, it’s rather the dynamic range that gets expanded. By this I mean that that both the lower and higher mid-range gets expanded, more frequencies are reproduced. It’s very subtle the way it does this, yet it’s something that you will crave for without it.

The biggest difference is in instruments and vocals. You can imagine how important is to hear the full frequency spectrum of a vocal or an instrument. Something as “subtle” as the absence of the highest/lowest notes can significantly alter the way they sound. Using the Sennheiser cans as my reference again, the way that vocals had sparkle and bottom end extension is something that wasn’t there beforehand. In the same way, instruments like the piano sound better, especially lower and higher notes. Overall, the mid-range is fuller and has the full-body presence.

As you already know, the human voice is a very complex thing - it differs from person to person. It also consists of several different frequencies. Cutting off any of these frequencies will take away from its true tonality. While you can immediately hear the absence of sparkle, you will have a harder time hearing the absence of sub-frequencies from a vocal. It’s definitely easier to notice if a bass guitar doesn’t have enough definition or body, but vocals - not so much. However, once you hear that this subtle frequency is actually there, you will crave for it. What I am trying to say is that once you hear the difference with the TR-Amp (or any other source), you won’t be able to enjoy the music as much without it.



Highs

Those who have read my previous work will know the importance of sparkle to me. I have an emotional connection & response to higher frequency spectrum, particularly the top top-end (aka sparkle). It’s the element that I have a stronger bond than anything else in music. There is something special about the tingly feeling in your ears, especially in the peaks of vocals & instruments.

While some people may enjoy when there is no edge to music, it’s not quite natural to take the edge away where it was meant to be. The mixing & mastering engineers have a particular sound they want to be there, and additionally removing it with coloring just isn’t natural. Whether it’s Freddie Mercury, Gloria Gaynor, Jeff Buckley, or Céline Dion, having the sparkle in vocals is very important.

In particular, acoustic guitars, electronic guitars, and violins are the instruments where sparkle plays a major role in their timbre. “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, “Shine On You Crazy Diamond” by Pink Floyd, and “Stairway To Heaven” by Led Zeppelin are all great examples. Mouth harmonicas are also instruments that need to have sparkle for higher notes - “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott is a perfect example. Stevie Wonder’s harmonica hits the peak several times, and the sparkle of the upper notes should be clean and definitely making your eyes squint when you hear it. It’s safe to say it’s on the edge of being piercing. Removing the upper notes will alternate the authentic sound, especially because it was meant to sound bright.
Any of Jo A Ram’s violin covers will lead you towards the right direction. Her cover of “Still Loving You” is a perfect presentation of both sparkle and talent.

TR-Amp maintains a clean performance. It doesn’t necessarily lean towards the bright side, but it definitely lets the higher notes to be more present - this is something I first heard with the Sennheiser HD 598. It played a major role in listening to vocals.



Soundstage & separation

By now you can see that the TR-Amp makes a big impact by increasing the whole dynamic range. However, I wasn’t expecting the soundstage and separation to improve. Let’s visualize the sound presentation (from headphones) as a box. In a medium sized box you can pack a good amount of information (frequencies and details). If you increase the size of that box, you will have a bigger box. It’s self explanatory, isn’t it? The space for the frequencies is limited to the size of the box. But the question is what you get from the increased size. You can not only pack more frequencies and detail (in other words resolution), but also increase the space between those frequencies in a way that you can distinguish them from each other - essentially, there is more room. The increased space results to higher resolution and better separation. You can conclude that the higher resolution leads to a fuller sound, as though each element has more detail & information.

This is exactly what I experienced when I first paired up my HD 598's with the TR-Amp. More detail, more room, and fuller sound.



Conclusion

At just $249, the TR-Amp is one of the most essential amps I have come across in this price range. It’s pretty much the perfect amp for those who are looking to make their first purchase in portable sources. Like a Swiss Army knife, it does everything - you have a 3.5 mm input, a 6.3 mm input, can use both of the inputs simultaneously, is built like a tank - no need to worry about damaging the chassis, has a long-lasting battery… and can be charged and used simultaneously (if you have an extra cable). I don’t know about you, but I cannot see what else you could be asking for at this price point. Not to mention that you can also use it as a Pre-Amp.

It’s a high-end device at a correct price. Made in Europe, best chips used - I mean, it has everything. This little guy surprised me quite a lot. It’s a no-brainer for those who will be using dynamic headphones (it works wonders with Sennheiser), but I was proven that it can also drive planar mangetics (Hifiman Deva).

I am seriously disappointed to see this product not being discussed enough - it’s safe to say it’s quite underrated. I used it with 5 different headphones: The relatively easy to drive Sennheiser HD 598, the harder to drive Sennheiser x Drop HD6XX, the planar-magnetic Hifiman Deva, the quite sensitive iBasso SR2, and the Sivga Phoenix with a lower impedance. This shows the versatility of the TR-Amp. Although it’s noticeable cheaper than the mentioned headphones, it still doesn’t fail in its performance in any point. While with the HD6XX and the Deva you will be pushing it to the max volumes, at no point does it distort or anything of that kind - it remains a clean and pure sound performance. The only thing that I would pay specific attention to is the sensitivity. More sensitive headphones, like the SR2, will pick up audible noise, so look out for that.
I had an experience with a $50 - $100 cheaper AMP/DAC combos, and they struggled to keep up with all these headphones. I won’t drop any names, but I can say this - the cheaper devices gave a horrific performance with the Hifiman Deva. They distorted the sound so much (particularly lower frequencies) that they sounded like the headphone was blown out. I didn’t face anything of that sort with the TR-Amp, which shows both its quality and versatility.

I follow a very simple yet powerful concept - If I don’t hear it, I don’t write it. Surely the case with the TR-Amp was that it completely blew me away, hence the praise. It packs quite a serious performance in a small package (for a reasonable price). I don’t understand why this device isn’t getting any attention, but I did my job to express my experience with it. Considering the versatility, performance, build quality, and features, I can easily call the TR-Amp an easy recommendation in its price range, but also as my personal favorite. However It’s the expansion of the dynamic range as a whole that had me in love with it. There is nothing more enjoyable than being able to hear more detail to music, more frequencies that you didn’t hear before.

Hopefully you learnt something about EarMen and who they are, but also about why I like the TR-Amp so much. I have to give credit where credit is due.

You are probably familiar with Hifiman, as it is one of the largest manufacturers of orthodynamic (planar-magnetic) headphones. Whether it’s the budget-friendly Sundara, the mid-range Arya, or the flagship Shangri-La, you should have heard about Hifiman by this point.

Hifimans roots go all the way back to 2005, when Dr. Fang Bian opened Head-Direct (Hifiman before the name was changed to “Hifiman”). With over 15 years of existence, Hifiman had more than enough time to play around and see what works, and what doesn’t.

Hifiman managed to put out a great number of products. Some great, some not so much. This being said, let’s see what what they did with the Deva with all those years of experience -


The Deva is the first headphone from Hifiman that supports both Bluetooth and cable connection. The Ananda BT was bluetooth only, which could be unappealing to those who prefer cable connection. Having both Bluetooth and cable connection is the best of both worlds - it provides the freedom to those that prefer cable connection to easily switch to Bluetooth, and vice-versa. I myself find this to be much more convenient, especially because I am not a big Bluetooth fan - I mainly listen to music in my room, so I rarely have the need to go Bluetooth. It’s a nice feature to have, and I’m glad that Hifiman is bringing the flexibility of both Bluetooth and cable to their headphones, there is a lot of potential with this technology. One thing is for sure - this is a step in the right direction.



Unboxing experience

Hifiman is known for going out of their way to bring a great unboxing experience, just like they did with the huge leather box for their RE-600s V2 earphones. However, they decided to keep it minimal with the Deva model. This time around there is no carrying case, just a simple box. This made sense to me, since usually a carrying case indicates that a product is intended for outdoor use, but you at least expect a pouch to protect the headphone from dust. All the contents are seated in the box. On the inside you will find the Deva pushed into a cloth-like material, while all the accessories are on the sides. You get all the necessary cables that you need, and there is also a 6.3 mm adapter.

In formal format, here is what you get:

1x Hifiman Deva
1x 3.5 mm cable (for analog connection)
1x 6.3 mm adapter

1x Bluemini
1x USB-A to USB-C cable (with the Bluemini)

Click to expand...

Build quality

Hifiman is infamous for its build quality, unless we are talking about their higher priced models like the Susvara, HE1000, or Shangri-La. QC (quality-control) has been a large issue for Hifiman in the past. However, it seems like they have been working hard on fixing it, and we hear much less about it nowadays.

While the Deva is a $220 headphone, it could definitely use some higher quality materials for the construction. The leather headband and ear-cups are superb, but the rest of the headphone is questionable - the parts that I hated the most are the plastic pieces on either end of the headband. Don’t get me wrong, the frame that holds the ear-cups is made out of metal, but the quality of these plastic pieces is so low that I was disappointed. I know Hifiman can do a better job, a small thing like this can largely impact on ones experience. Moving on, the grills are made of metal, but the ear-cups are made of plastic. I myself have nothing against plastic, especially when it’s high quality plastic like on the Sennheiser HD 598, but I simply cannot stand cheap plastic (mainly because of how it feels).

Sometimes you have to sacrifice the build quality for sound performance and the cost of manufacturing, but I really want to see Hifiman improve the build quality of their entry-level models. This being said, build quality remains the field for improvement for Hifiman.
Hifiman, I know you can do it!




Design

While we are all used to Hifimans silver and black combo, they decided to step out of their comfort zone and try something different with the Deva. This time around we see a silver finish with tan leather accents. Unlike most of Hifiman’s lineup, the Deva went with a fairly simple construction. Instead of having headband frames with suspension systems, the headband is constructed from a single piece and is padded (very well!). The ear-cups can rotate vertically, but cannot rotate in the same way horizontally. They can pivot very slightly horizontally, and this is due to the ear cup frame being attached loosely to the headband construction. I personally prefer when things aren’t loose, I like smooth rotation, so it would be nice to see that in the next model. This isn’t a problem, it’s just a preference - I can easily adjust the Deva to my head.

You may notice that both the Deva and the 400i (2020 version) feature the same headband construction.

On the bottom side of the left ear-cup you can see a 3.5 mm TRRS socket. It is used both by the Bluemini and the stereo 3.5 mm cable. On the inner side of the headband there is labeling for left & right, this time in a nice and bold font. On either end of the headband there is a plastic piece - on the left it has “Hifiman” written, while on the right one there is “Deva”.

The ear-cups are removable, which means that you can get new ones if you want. They have the industry standard snap-on system. The ear-pads themselves have a fabric material facing you, while the rest of the ear-pad is made of leather.

Simple and minimalist - as headphone as it gets.

Comfort

I don’t have a large head. What a statement to start off, huh? On a serious note, I don’t experience headphones the same way other people do. I don’t get the opportunity to have ear-pads pressed against my head, most of the time they just sit on my ears/head. Due to the extreme light-weight nature of the Deva, I don’t even notice them being on my head (which is a good thing!). They comfortably sit around my ears, and at no point do they come in contact with my ears. The rotation freedom of the ear-cups helps to precisely adjust the fit to your head. The fabric on the ear-pads is very pleasant to the skin, and I can easily see myself using them for hours without any fatigue. Same goes for the headband, very soft due to the padding. Simple and comfortable.


Sound



Lows

There is no doubt that the Deva is capable of digging deep down. It is not just capable of producing sub-frequencies, but also delivering the punch. The only issue that I have come across is that when turned up loud enough (between 3 and 4 o’clock on EarMen TR-Amp) the Deva cannot hold up with the sub-frequencies. It starts to create clicking noises, and I wasn’t willing to take the risk to damage the drivers, so I just turned the volume down. This can also be something to do with the TR-Amp, but I cannot confirm whether it’s the Deva or the amp.

The bass is very much present, I would consider it more balanced than present. It doesn’t overpower the mix or squash any details, it remains well controlled at all times. This is interesting to say, because Deva is quite capable of rumbling when it comes to sub-frequencies - it is not far off from the bass response from the Sivga Phoenix.

The Deva kept up my standard “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer. It rumbled and delivered a clear frequency (while you keep it at moderate levels)

“Smoking Mirrors” by Lee Curtiss was well represented - the bass had good punch and good weight, all while remaining the dynamic feeling of the track.

“Paper Trails” by Darkside remained clean, with the bass not getting in the way of other elements in the mix.

“Hydrogen” by M.O.O.N (M|O|O|N) shows how good the punch is. It was tight and clean.

The more aggressive “Had Some Drinks” by Two Feet is where you can hear both the punch and the rumble from sub-bass. I found that the Deva was able to deliver some serious rumble when I pushed TR-Amp to around 1 o’clock.

Similar to Hans Zimmer’s “Why so Serious?”, “Angel” by Massive Attack is where I listen to presence of the sub-bass. It’s a very dark track, and the sub-frequencies are consistent throughout the track, it’s one consistent “baseline” with a kick happening every now and then. Both the kick and the sub-frequencies are presented well. The kick has a good body to it, while the sub-bass has beyond enough presence.

Overall, I am happy with the bass performance from the Deva’s. You have to keep in mind that these are open-back headphones, and for an open-back headphone the Deva manages to hit some pretty deep notes. I can confidently say that they have above-average bass quantity, and at no point did I find the bass to get muddy or bad sounding - it remained clear with good definition.



Mids

The mids remain sounding pretty natural in terms of tonality. I tend to have short listening sessions at louder volumes. This is mainly the case when I am using headphones, I love to completely feel the music for the short period of time that I am listening to it, of course it’s not advised to do this for longer periods of time (due to the risk of damaging your ears!). I mention this because at times the Deva can sound peaky (when “s” and “t” sounds a bit harsh and forward) - this is a problem you will most likely not face if you are listening to music at moderate levels. It’s mainly the upper mid-range where I found the Deva a bit warm. The lower mid-range was pretty much spot on due to the lower-range response.

I have to say that I particularly enjoyed listening to tracks where guitars are present. “Soldier of Fortune” by Deep Purple, “Stairway to Heaven” by Led Zeppelin, “Dogs” or “Shine On You Crazy Diamond” by Pink Floyd, they all sounded phenomenal. However I did find the higher frequencies to be laid back (more on this in the next section).

While the warmer sound signature is more suitable for fatigue-free listening, my personal preference is to have sparkle and a tad of brightness that creates sparkle.

In terms of sparkle, here are some tracks where I found the absence of it -

Jeff Buckley’s “Forget Her” at mark 3:16, where Jeff’s vocal should have edge to it

“Little Wing” by Stevie Ray Vaughan, at mark 3:18, where the guitar hits some higher frequencies

“Bohemian Rhapsody” by Queen, at mark 2:17, where Freddie Mercury’s voice should sound particularly gritty. It rather sounds flat, taking away the edge from the higher frequency of the vocal.

This can also take away the life from instruments such as violins, Jo A Ram’s cover of “Still Loving You” (originally by Scoripions).

All of this being said, I want to clearly state that it’s only the very top end of the higher frequencies that is rolled off. I would call it the section that is on the edge of bright and piercing, but if incorporated correctly, it will give a satisfying sparkle. This isn’t something easy to engineer, if not done correctly a headphone will sound too bright and unsatisfying, in worst cases fatiguing. The Deva plays it safe by leaning towards a warmer sound signature. This can be very appealing to some, especially those who are looking for a warmer sound signature. Also, if you listen to electronic music a lot, this might be something you would enjoy. At the end of the day I have to step outside of my personal preference and also consider that something I don’t enjoy much is exactly what somebody else will enjoy more.



Highs

While I would consider the Deva to be on the detailed side of the spectrum, I found it lacking sparkle - an element which is crucial to me. The good thing about this is that they aren’t sibilant or piercing in the upper region. The trade-off is that it takes away the experience from some vocals or instruments like violin. I was pleasantly surprised that the Deva was managed to produce a very clear frequency of Stevie Wonder’s harmonica in “Stop Trying to Be God” by Travis Scott (somewhere around the 5 minute mark).

The song selection from above (“Mids” section) states how I feel about this, so I will not repeat myself.

Soundstage

Perhaps the dynamic and airy nature the two standout elements of the Deva. Not only is the sound signature open with a large soundstage, but separation is top-notch. One of the best examples is “Dogs” from Pink Floyd. It’s a fairly dynamic track, having several elements in different positions. However, the most special part (and my favorite too) is the drum that rolls around your head at mark ~3:48 onward. Each drum hit is placed in a different position, but the flow/direction is from left to right.

It’s hard to pinpoint single tracks, because Deva sounded open and airy in all songs that I listened too. It have each element in the mix space to breathe, this allowed high resolution and detailed sound performance. It’s a simple concept - the more space there is, the more data and frequencies there can be. If the sound signature is crowded, many details get lost or overlap each other, this results elements to sound muddy and unclear.

The godfather of mastering dynamic tracks - Yosi Horikawa. Playing “Bubbles” and “Letter” from his 2012 masterpiece EP “Wandering” takes things to another level. In “Bubbles” no details get lost, you can hear each drop & bounce clearly, just like you can hear each re-bounce clearly. I always recommend the track “Letter” - it’s one track that gets the most wow-factor. People get blown away by how open it is, and your headphone needs to be able to represent the space of the track well. The Deva is very well capable of presenting the space, it’s able to capture the handwriting sound from the furthest points, but also capture subtle details such as mechanical winding sound that tends to switch panning from one side to the other.

No matter the track, the Deva was able to capture the tiniest details, even the ones that are hidden in the background. I have to say that this was one thing that had me coming back to the Deva, the dynamic sound characteristic is very pleasing to the ear, and it’s always nice to have a track that can breathe. Each element in the mix can be told apart from the rest, and it has enough room to be filled with the full-body of each element, separation is something that stands out in its performance.



Conclusion

While the Deva didn’t stand out in terms of build quality, it certainly had a good sonic performance. It’s safe to say that it’s much more forgiving on head than in hands. There was a high resolution characteristic to it. It had the depth and quality that you would expect from an audiophile headphone. For just $220, the Deva performed really well. You may have noticed that I didn’t mention the Bluemini that much - the main reason is because I am an analogue guy, I prefer to use my own sources, and of course, I prefer cable connection. If you do go the same route as me (using your own source), be prepared for the power-hungry nature of planar magnetic headphones! Thankfully for me, EarMen TR-Amp did an excellent job delivering clean and clear sound performance (though I should state that TR-Amp wasn’t anywhere near to delivering “ear deafening levels”). For somebody just starting out and getting into this hobby, I don’t think you will go wrong if you start with Deva. Each step into this hobby has it’s pros and cons, it’s about learning and being aware of each one - that’s how you mover forward. I cannot deny that the Deva is capable of producing high-resolution sound at a great budget, especially with the dynamics and clean separation, so give it a listen, see if you like it or not.

It's also a great choice for those who like to have the freedom of Bluetooth, the Bluemini did a great job doing what it's meant to do (both as a source and a Bluetooth module). I am looking forward to what Hifiman will do with this technology, I think it would be interesting to see it with some of their higher-end models.

Sivga is no stranger to make good headphones at a great value, and they did not break that tradition with the brand new Phoenix. With the more-mainstream success of their planar-magnetic P-II, Sivga is surely building a name for themselves. I am really hoping to see this company enter the mainstream market. Being a company that is dedicated to details and high quality products (no matter the budget), it was nice to see that they followed the same fashion with their brand-new product. Metal and wood has been the standard that Sivga has followed even with their lowest priced models, we have only gotten an even better construction this time - with the same construction of the headband as the SendyAudio Aiva.

So far we have only seen entry-level and budget dynamic headphones from Sivga, so I was very curious to see their flagship dynamic headphone. The wooden headphone features a 50mm dynamic driver with a polycarbonate diaphragm and neodymium (Nd-Fe-B) magnet. They have a gorgeous (and brand-new) wood finish, Sivga calls it - the Zebra wood.

I have been looking forward to a new release from Sivga ever since I had a very positive experience with the budget-friendly SV004 headphone - a headphone priced under 100 USD that offered flawless build quality, accessories, and a very mature sound performance for the price. Finally seeing a flagship dynamic model is something which we were all very much looking forward to. I am not disappointed, the anticipation was very much worth it.



Unboxing experience

We are met with a sleek and modernly designed box. The box consists of two parts: the top and bottom. The bottom one features the black portion, and the Zebra wood patterned second portion that is angled. The top part (the lid) is black and also at an angle, when the two parts are put together you get a very nice and sleek looking box. The unboxing itself was rather minimalist - only a headphone case is in the box. In the headphone case you get the Phoenix headphones, a carrying pouch, and a cable with a cable tie. Sivga opted for a more simple and minimalist approach for the Phoenix - no fancy accessories or anything. I actually didn’t mind it, I was rather pleasantly blown-away by the headphones themselves. This field is left open for Sivga to explore - something like an extra rubber cable, or extra pair of ear pads could be included as accessories in the future.

What you get in the box in a formal format:

1x Phoenix headphone
1x 3.5mm cable
1x leather carrying case
1x cable tie

Click to expand...

Wood. Metal. Precision

Wood & metal are Sivga’s trademark - premium materials present in their lowest priced headphones, all the way up to their flagship models.. and even In-Ear Monitors & earphones are constructed from wood. In terms of the headband construction & system, the Phoenix is a step-up from the previous dynamic driver models - a stainless steel construction was implemented for frame (of the headband) combined with a suspension headband system. This frame & headband system may be familiar if you have seen the SendyAudio Aiva, which features the exact same construction. Unlike the SendyAudio Aiva, the Phoenix features a padded headband, much like the one on the Blon B20.

The Zebra wood is a very premium looking finish. The color of the wood doesn’t look anything like in pictures from Sivga, I was much happier with the real color of the wood. Whereas the wood looks yellow-ish and pale on the pictures, the actual finish is a deeper & richer brown - much like a walnut wood finish. You can get a basic idea of how it looks like from my photography. I invest a great amount of time color-grading and perfecting colors in my photography. Due to the complex nature of the wood in the Phoenix, it was a great challenge capturing its qualities, making it the longest review to complete. The angle and lighting can vastly affect the wood appearance, as it can look anything from a pale oak finish, all the way to a walnut finish - which is at the opposite end of the spectrum.

The wooden housing is perfect as usual. The housing and the frame were made with the process of CNC machining. This explains the flawless nature of Sivga's products.

Besides the padded headband, new frame construction, and new ear pads, a more premium design was present. This time around, we see a large grill with slight curvature. Surrounding it is a mirror-like silver ring - the ring is what makes the character of the Phoenix. A very modern and sleek design touch.

Overall, Sivga is moving in the right direction. They are trying new design features, and are still using high quality materials. It will be interesting to see what else they can come up with next. Sivga has not failed or disappointed yet, and that single factor contributes to the professional nature of the company.



Design and design features

We have seen the same concept behind the majority of products from Sivga - wooden housing, and pretty much everything else black. Phoenix followed the same concept when it comes to the color palette, and I love it! It’s consistent and something that Sivga is recognized for. However, unlike the previous dynamic driver models, the Phoenix features two 2.5 mm mono connectors (instead of a single 2.5 mm stereo connector). The cable is braided and consists of a single crystalline copper wire.
I didn’t mind the cable itself, but I would definitely like to see Sivga using high quality rubber cables - like the one Sennheiser HD 598 has (similar cable quality to the one Apple uses for their MacBook chargers).

All the housings on the cable are made out of of metal. This includes: the housing for the 3.5 mm jack, the housing for the Y-splitter, and the housing for the 2.5 mm mono connectors. The 3.5 mm jack is reinforced with a spring, this prevents it from bending damage and similar abuse.

You can get a comfortable fit due to the new headband construction which allows the ear-cups to rotate and pivot slightly . The ear-cups are attached to the stainless steel frame which doesn’t move, so you adjust the height by sliding the headband up & down - the headband is attached to a plastic part on each side. This plastic piece can be moved within the frame thanks to the design of it. I personally prefer when the cups have full 180˚ rotation, but even with the reduced movement I was able to adjust them to my ear and head shape.



Comfort

What seems to be varying in terms of experience with the Phoenix is comfort. People are having mixed experience. I myself prefer earpads that don’t have any tailoring and curvature - just flat earpads that are the same thickness all-around. I prefer even pressure all-around my ear.
Sivga is known for their ergonomic earpads. We have already seen the same earpad concept on the Sivga P-II and SendyAudio Aiva - tailored at the top earpads that feature a velvet material on the part that faces your ears, while . This material is very smooth, in fact it actually feels like leather.

The fit of the Phoenix isn’t perfect. Let's face the truth, it simply isn't. Sometimes I get a good fit, sometimes I don’t - it’s not consistent. That is the problem to me. I myself don’t have particularly large ears, but I found the top of my ear touching the driver portion, and this is what caused fatigue. If I get a good fit this isn’t the case. Mind you, most people are experiencing the pads clipping their ears - something that I experienced on the SV004. I didn’t find this to be a problem on the Phoenix, but if you have larger ears, they will probably be clipped at the bottom and top. The tailoring at the top of the pads and uneven thickness is what causes my ears to touch the driver.

The clamp force of the headphone is pretty strong at first. You can go a few ways about loosening it up - placing the headphone over something wide (and keeping in that position for some hours), or you can physically stretch it. It is made out of stainless steel, so you shouldn’t worry about breaking it… you can get a better idea by watching what Zeos did to his

Earpad systems vary, but most widely used one is where you can simply pull the earpad off. This makes it suitable to use aftermarket earpads, because it just needs to match the dimensions and shape of the earcup. Sivga decided to use a twist-lock mechanism for the earpads, meaning that you will not be able to use after-market earpads (such as Dekoni). The pads are glued to the plastic piece that twists in place. This is why you cannot just buy the widely available after-market replaceable pads... unless somebody finds a way to mod the mechanism. Good news for everybody is that Sivga is going to do some testing and see if they can release some extra pads. Look out for that, make sure to stay up to date!

Driver flex

I would’ve never expected to experience driver flex on an open-back headphone, but here we are.
Attention: I only experienced driver flex when I proceeded to very quickly take the headphones off - with normal usage you will not experience it!
I believe this was caused by the suction created by my ear, especially because it touches the driver. The earpad design seems to be a problem beyond just comfort, that is why I am keeping my eyes open for any mods or pads that will work with the Phoenix.



Sound

I must say, based on what I read on the internet beforehand, I wasn’t expecting a lot from the Phoenix. I am pleased to see that the Phoenix proved the internet wrong. The combination of controlled bass, tight punch, clean mids, and clear yet tame highs are what made the overall performance mature.

Lows

You don’t really expect a very deep and present bottom end in a dynamic open-back headphone, but the Phoenix broke that conception. The bass performance may be the strongest characteristic of these headphones. The bass has a good quantity while not sacrificing the punch & definition.

It’s not always easy to get a full-body bass response with a small dynamic driver.. not to mention that having an open-back design only makes things more difficult. Phoenix managed to overcome this, but there are some trade-offs that I will touch on later.

Playing MOON’s “Hydrogen”, I really questioned myself whether I am listening to an open-back headphone or a closed-back headphone. Those who played Hotline Miami are probably familiar with the games genius overpowering techno soundtrack - I would go as far to call it one of the most intense and powerful soundtracks from a video game. Stephen Gilarde, or better known as MIOIOIN (often stylized as M.O.O.N) is the mastermind behind the track. The Phoenix was able to keep up with the track and was able produce full-body sound, where the bass has a very tight punch and carried the weight & quantity of it. I strongly recommend to anyone to explore M.O.O.N’s music, or even give Hotline Miami a play - it’s full of violence and it’s the definition of badass

Moving on, even in slower and less busy tracks like the “Paper Moon” from Booka Shade, the Phoenix performs very well. The bass-line of the track is well reproduced, the impact of the bass i presented with full-body, while also succeeding to reproduce the definition & presence of it.

The kick in the old-school classic “Gangsta’s Paradise” by Coolio - the kick has very good weight, just like the bass-line. It’ tight, while the bottom end of it can be felt. That's the balance that is often hard to produce, a tight punch and a full-body (weight) of the bass. I have seen many times when there was a tight punch, but the body was lacking, or vice-versa.

Perhaps the more-aggressive “Had Some Drinks” by Two Feet is a better example of what the sub-bass capabilities of the the Phoenix are. The rumble and the body are so well represented that you can feel it - you can feel the vibration of the rumble, much like you would from a sub-woofer. The presentation is very detailed, as though you can hear the release quite clearly.

Going a notch deeper - my standard & favorite track to test the true deep sub-frequencies: “Why so Serious?” by Hans Zimmer. Specifically focusing on mark 3:26 - the sub-bass has full-body sound and it pulsates. It doesn’t rumble like in “Had Some Drinks”, but it definitely has a solid foundation and base to the sound. I am very satisfied as to how it performed with this track!

Overall, the Phoenix doesn’t disappoint in the lower frequency spectrum. It delivers a serious performance with full-body bass, tight punch, and good presence & definition. Considering the size and open-back nature of the Phoenix, I can say I am impressed by what it is truly capable of. Techno, rock, classical, I don’t think you will find it lacking in the bass region in any genre.



Mids

Usually you expect a headphone to sacrifice on the mid-range when it has plenty of bass. Not this time. While the mids appear to be slightly recessed in the mix in some cases, they remain very natural and clean - perhaps leaning towards the warmer side of the spectrum.

The slightly intense “Poison” by Freya Ridings is a good track to see if a headphone is able to keep up with Freya’s vocals. The Phoenix was able to capture her immense vocal range, especially when she hit the peaks. When it comes to vocals, it’s really difficult to transfer ones interpretation of them to another - I myself am heavily drawn towards intense vocals, but it’s cannot be quite explained the same way that the lower & higher frequencies can. When a vocal expands, I get a very particular feeling in my ears, much like the one from goosebumps. I would call this an emotional reaction, and the headphone (or speaker) has to be capable of delivering the frequencies that cause this reaction

A great example of this would be in “I Will Survive (single version)" by Gloria Gaynor. Wow. Heavenly track with an angelic vocal. Her voice hits peaks several times, there is a certain edge when it happens. Give this one a listen, see if you have the same experience.

Pink Floyd’s “Another Brick in the Wall, pt. 2” is a dynamic track where you can notice if the mid range is muddy and lacks in detail. The Phoenix was able to cope with it well - giving each instrument and element in the mix breathe. Everything is in its place and doesn’t sound like one instrument/element interferes with another. Perhaps it would sound better if it was more airy or spacious, but that's one of the characteristics of the Phoenix - it's has a more closed presentation

Whitney Houston’s classic - I Will Always Love You. There isn’t a lot to say, one of the best vocal performances by a female artist. The Phoenix respectfully managed sing along with Whitney. I honestly didn’t notice any drawbacks or unnatural tonality to the track. Once again, everything sounded in place.

And of course, the “Bohemian Rhapsody” by Queen. At mark 2:17 (where Freddie sings “…face the truth” there is a certain amount of grittiness and edge to his vocals. Headphones with a very warm signature will not capture this detail, they will rather make it sound flat and boring.

Overall, the Phoenix keeps the mid-range very clean and present. It’s not forward, but in some cases it can sound recessed. It manages to capture the details in music, and has great resolution. The mid-range was definitely not sacrificed for the bass response. Listening to Freddie Mercury, Pink Floyd, Lana Del Rey, and Sia is an enjoyable experience. The vocals have both the bottom & high end - though the high end seems to be tamed down and this lets you listen to the Phoenix for hours without any fatigue.



Highs

While I am sensitive to piercing treble, those who follow me know that I love sparkle in the upper range. I am glad that Sivga didn’t cross the line between too rolled-off treble and too piercing. I would say it is somewhere in the middle. It doesn’t provide the full crispiness and sparkle of the upper range, but it definitely maintains above-average clarity and treble response. Music without sparkle is boring and flat.. almost lifeless. When it’s there, you just get this feeling in your ears. Almost like an adrenaline rush.

So, how does the Phoenix perform with my standard sibilance and sparkle testing track? Very good! Travis Scott’s “Stop Trying to Be God” is the track I am talking about. Specifically at mark 5:59, where Stevie Wonder’s harmonica hits the peak. At first I found it lacking sparkle, but later on I was satisfied with it’s performance. I definitely got the tingly feeling in my ear, and that is what I define “sparkle” to be. Feeling music is one of the main characteristics that I look for from a device. This is mainly referring to sparkle feeling in music, and it can be present in both vocals and instruments.

Metallica’s cover of the “When a Blind Man Cries” from Deep Purple’s 1972 album “Machine Head” is a more extreme example. It has edge and grittiness, and it would definitely be too much if the treble was any brighter. The Phoenix performed well throughout the whole song - the bass has thump to it, while the vocals and guitar had the edge. It’s definitely a more aggressive song, and it’s intended to sound bright in certain parts of the track. At no point did I feel like it was piercing or sibilant.

For Hip-Hop listeners - the snares are crisp and clear! There are too many songs that I have listened to, so I cannot reference them all. But I remember that the snares were always very clear and present - but not to the point where they are completely cutting through the mix and affecting other elements. Dr. Dre’s “Forgot About Dre”, “Still Dre”, “The Next Episode”, Tupac’s “Ambitionz Az A Ridah”, “Only God Can Judge Me”, “No More Pain” all have the crisp & clear percussion.

Level of clarity varies in importance & significance to different people, but to me it’s one of the most important elements. I love to hear the detail in music, the depth and detail to sound - this is what you would usually identify as resolution, definition, or dynamic range. Music without the edge and sparkle sounds lifeless & boring, the same way that bass without definition or punch does. I like to have an increased dynamic range, not reduced. This being said, I am very happy with the level of clarity that the Phoenix produces. It maintains the clarity without sounding fatiguing and sibilant.

Soundstage

Usually open-back headphones are known for their airy and open sound, but this isn’t the case with the Phoenix. I myself love open and airy sound characteristic, but there is something special about the Phoenix that didn’t bother me. While the soundstage isn’t as wide as you would expect, it’s not narrow. There is a difference between narrow and narrower. Phoenix didn’t sound boxy or crowded in any way, this is the primary reason why I loved it. It definitely differ from the rest of the open-back headphones, and I mean that in a good way. Sometimes you want a more intense and present musical experience, perhaps you are looking for that deep bass, or you want the vocals to be closer to you - whatever it is, I think that the Phoenix sounds good as a whole.



Conclusion

The Phoenix is something fresh and different. I am happy to see a product that stands out from the rest (in a good way!). It doesn’t sound funny in any way. I would also avoid calling it “fun” - that term seems to have more of a negative meaning. Following the success of the P-II, Sivga hasn’t released a bad product yet. Whether it’s the gorgeous sound of guitar in “Little Wing” or “Tin Pan Alley” from Srevie Ray Vaughan, Deep Purple’s “Soldier Of Fortune”; or the subwoofer-like experience in Massive Attack’s “Angel” and Dopplereffekt’s “Superior Race”.. The Phoenix never gets boring and never makes music sound lifeless. A bad headphone would never be able to put out a performance the way the Phoenix did in (e.g.) “Forget Her” by Jeff Buckley at mark 3:16. Capturing Jeff’s top-end and bringing the sparkle out - this isn’t something easy to pull off.

“Dogs” by Pink Floyd is another heavenly track. Just focus at mark 6:16. That pure and clean guitar frequency. If you aren’t squinting your eyes at that point, your headphones are doing something wrong. Or perhaps, at mark 6:07 in “Shine On You Crazy Diamond (Pts. 1-5) - where David Galmour’s magical guitar performance hits a particularly higher note (peak). The sparkle present and the way it hits you is something that only a good pair of headphones can manage to do. Well.. unless you have a personal preference and maybe dislike such experience. I myself cannot imagine listening to music without having some type of emotional reaction that is beyond explainable.

This being said, the Phoenix absolutely crushed my expectation and blew me away. It’s a very mature headphone for the $299 price tag. They are an easy recommendation to those who are looking for a fatigue-free headphone with an immense bass response without the cost of clarity and detail. The bass is balanced in terms of sub-bass to mid-bass - neither overpowers the other. The mid-bass has a tight punch and good delivery, while the sub-bass has a pleasing rumble and body. The mid-range and high-range perform equally as well - though imaging and soundstage don’t compete with other true open-back headphones. I say “true”, because while the Phoenix is open-back, it does have a narrower soundstage (but doesn’t suffer from boxy and unnatural sound). I know that his bad boy is staying with me. It has a fuller sound and is capable of delivering full-body sound reproduction (with great definition and resolution). I am keeping my eyes wide-open for the next release from Sivga, and so should you!

If you are looking for a more intense and present sound signature with the bass performance close to a closed-back headphone without the sacrifice of the mid-range and high-range, you might want to give the Phoenix a listen.