[getclikinagas]

 Signature Acoustics O-16 Live Review : ​

Setting the Stage ​

 

---

 

INDEX (Click to jump directly to sections):​  ​ Introduction​ Packaging, Accessories and Comfort​ Sound​ Common sound impressions​ Let’s do something about it/Mods​ Comparisons​ Value and Conclusion​

​ ​

---

 

Introduction:

 

The O16 Live is India based Signature Acoustics' second entry into the IEM world. Their debut IEM, the C-12 Elements, received favorable reviews all around (including ljokerl and ClieOS). I'd like to thank Signature Acoustics for giving me the opportunity to give the O16 live, a full unbiased review.

Sources, music and other misc details relevant to this review can be found in the second post

 

​

​

 

Packaging, Accessories and Comfort :

 
 

1. Right from the high quality cardboard box  to the smell of the quality leather pouch that hits you, the O16 package is a pleasure to unwrap. The barrel shaped IEM is crafted out of metal with a gold-orange ring at the back that holds the largest mesh I have seen in an open back IEM. The strain relief sports a wide base that seems to be steadied within the housing.
2. The cable is the second most interesting feature (after that gigantic mesh). It features tightly twisted cables covered by a shrink wrapped sheath. This design does result in rather alarming shape memory, but almost completely nullifies microphonics (even when worn cable down). The cable sports a minimalistic Y split and is terminated in a nearly 90 3.5mm jack.
3. The tip selection is pretty basic with 3 sets of wide bore and one M set narrow bore (pre-installed). a shirt clip, replacement filters and a leather pouch rounds off the accessory list.
4. The earpieces are light, the nozzles are sufficiently long and can be worn for hours at length without discomfort.

 

Sound :

 

The O16 is a specialist IEM designed to play well with live recordings and vocals. The sound signature delivered by that 8mm driver is only one part of the mix. The open back design aims to complement the sound signature with a spacious soundstage, which should bring those live recordings to life. Let’s see how it got on during my listening tests.

 

1. Overall: the easily driven O16 exhibits a warm neutral if not mid forward signature. Perceived frequency response is not aggressive or peaky. Low end extension is good at normal listening volumes. I noticed a rise from the bass resulting in a mid-bass hump centred around 120Hz. The midrange is linear (except for a slight dip at ~2.4k) and continues into a well behaved treble range. There are a few well controlled peaks at 4.8K, 7.6K and 12K that are way within reason and keep things lively enough. The open back design means it would not isolate well at all, but it was never meant to. And therefore, is not a negative trait.

 

My initial plan was to do an album-wise write-up of my listening impressions. Instead, I will briefly describe the conventional split and round it off in the common sound impressions section.

 

1. Bass: The bass is plenty sufficient for live recordings and does not seem lacking on other music types. It is far from bass head levels as it should be. It manages to stay completely clear from the mids, except for imparting warmth to the vocals. This keeps things natural and as a result is more involving. Cons: The midbass is not very detailed and often loses some finesse. The sub bass while having presence does lacks attack. I talk about this more in the common sound impressions.

 

1. Mids: Midrange is extremely linear and is quite accurate. Both male and female vocals are equally intelligible. The accuracy, linearity, slightly forward and uncoloured nature of the midrange results in a very involving experience, one that is critical for live recordings(but see cons). Analytical listeners might pine for more detail. Cons: On a few tracks, midrange smearing/stretching is evident. Average depth. Extremely dependant on the recording and mastering. (Elaborated in the common impressions section)

 

1. Highs: Very very polite and smooth. Transition from the mid-range is very smooth. If it wasn’t for the controlled peaks at 4.8K, 7.6K and 12K, it would have seemed a little dull. As a result, it manages to bring instruments to life. Detail retrieval is good but not the best.. Cons: Treble may be too smooth for some. Analytical listeners may require more detail. More in the common sound section.

 

Common sound impressions:

 

So how does it all coalesce together into a music experience? Thus far, I’ve steered clear of its party piece, which is the open back design. Evidently, the aim is to supply that much needed air that live recording mandates.

 

While the design does benefit the sound in some obvious ways, it does have its side effects. We’ve established that the sound signature is natural, non-intrusive and smooth. This is mostly down to the driver tuning. The separation, imaging, soundstage, intimacy, I feel, are mainly properties of the housing, damping and internal design. Please not that what I describe next does not apply universally, but is extremely recording/track dependant (some more than the other. Some tracks are unaffected).

 

The soundstage is wide no doubt but it seems to come at a price. The aforementioned cons I feel are due to the extreme open back design. The driver is moving enough air but is unable to generate sufficient pressure to result in a fast impact, before it decays away. Some detail in the bass is lost here and the edges of the bass may seem woolly on some tracks as a result. They absolutely do not interfere in the mids, which would have been an instant downer otherwise.

 

The mids also exhibit some quirks which I am pretty sure is due to venting and resonance caused by the design. This is slightly difficult to explain, so please bear with me.

 

Before I talk about the mids I must, at last, discuss the soundstage. The width is impressive, and is always a little wider than normal.

A wide soundstage, in my mind, is where the instruments and singers are clearly distinguishable and are spread in the sonic space as the track demands. As the soundstage widens the separation increases but the dynamic range, integrity and tightness of the individual components are retained. This is where the O16 takes a slightly different route. It’s analogy time! Please forgive me, but the following is the best way I can convey what I was hearing. Imagine a picture printed on a balloon. Deflated, the picture makes no sense. Inflated halfway you can understand the picture and discern individual components. Three quarters inflated, the picture looks perfectly proportioned and the individual characters in the picture are naturally spaced. As the balloon keeps inflating, what you wish for is the individual characters to maintain their proportion but for the space between them to increase. Instead, even though the overall image is now getting bigger, the individual characters are being stretched and starts to lose its natural feel. This is exactly what happens on certain tracks with the O16, the vocals (and certain instruments) seem to be stretched over the wider than normal soundstage. The treble range is relatively unaffected by the soundstage.

 

A very important point to note is that this is recording specific. Just like how every picture has to be spaced differently to seem natural, each recording carries with it special cues that need to fit within soundstage and not extend beyond. On many of the recordings, the O16 is brilliant at portraying a very natural and wide space that is easy to lose oneself in.

 

Soundstage depth is a very complex phenomenon (that I don’t quite have a grasp on) and is an amalgam of driver tuning, efficiency, housing, damping and who knows what else. The O16 isn’t impressive when it comes to depth perception. It feels just average, and is dwarfed by the width.

 

Let’s do something about it/Mods:

 

I found myself thoroughly enjoying many tracks and instinctively skipping some tracks within the first minute. Identifying a pattern in the nature of the tracks, I deduced that it was related to the open back design and not the tuning. I melted symmetric holes of different sizes into thick double sided tape, and stuck them over the back mesh. Larger sizes seemed to have no effect. A range of smaller sizes worked a lot better.

 

Results: Much to my delight, vocals and bass have now gained control on the troublesome tracks. The soundstage is smaller but are definitely not below average. While a particular size played well on most of my albums, I found that certain sizes brought about the best in different albums.

I thought about it for a while and sketched a mechanical step Iris that can be easily adjusted to different positions. My drawing was shabby, so I found this gif which basically shows what I intended. This way the soundstage width, airiness can be controlled to your taste. And now, it could also be used outside/noisy environments with the iris fully shut. I do not know if there is any other IEM that does this. But, it could be a first and a very nice feature to be able to control intimacy in your music while retaining a smooth warm signature.

 

           ​

 
 
 

Comparisons:

 

 

[size=inherit][/size]​

​ ​

[size=inherit] VSONIC VSD1S:[/size][size=inherit]  [/size]​  ​ [size=inherit] T[/size][size=inherit] he Vsonic is more impactful and heavier through the lower range. Recession in the mids is more apparent next to the O16. The rise through the upper treble and sibilant peaks are absent in the O16. The O16 is more accurate while the VSD1S is more fun. The VSD1S also has a good sense of space which doesn’t feel lacking next to the O16, just narrower.[/size]​

HiFiMAN RE400:  ​  ​ The more expensive RE400 is like a brother from another mother. ​ They share a similar warm slightly mid forward signature. ​ [size=inherit] The bass on the RE400 is faster and carries more detail. The O16 boasts better sub-bass presence but isn’t fast and impactful. [/size]​ [size=inherit] Both are fairly accurate in the mids, but the RE400 pulls ahead in sheer quality, clarity and texture. Both are very smooth through the treble. The RE400 is crisper at times with more micro detail. The RE400 sounds congested next to the O16 but is slightly ahead in terms of layering and depth. Overall the RE400 has more finesse/control and clarity.[/size]​

 

Value and conclusion:

 

I can drone on about the specifics of the sound. What matters is how much bang does it deliver for your buck. The O16 currently retails at a very impressive 65$. For the money, it delivers what it advertises and then some. This sort of uncoloured sound isn’t easily found at this price point. And coupled with the spacious stage it makes for a very sweet deal indeed.

If you are looking to enjoy and lose yourself in live/vocal recordings on a budget

(without getting too analytical), the warm smooth O16 live with its open back design is a no-brainer. (Just bear in mind that not all your music will necessarily shine.)

Did I mention the Early bird price of 30$? Well. yeah

---

Thanks for reading. Let me know if you have any questions. And I'd love to hear your suggestions. Discreet thanks to @james444 for inspiring us to mod when you see potential.

 

[getclikinagas]

Reserved
 
Music/Albums(among others): All lossless, some 24/96

1. Friday Night in San Francisco : 1981 live album by Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin and Paco de Lucía
2. Brave Enough: Live at the Variety Playhouse : Sara Bareilles
3. Unplugged : Eric Clapton
4. ​Bad Self Portraits : Lake Street Dive
5. Classics : She and Him
6. Ella and Louis : Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong, accompanied by the Oscar Peterson Quartet
7. I Can Do Better : Rie fu
8. Shady XV : Eminem
9. Another Bundle of Tantrums : Jasmine Thompson
10. London Grammar : If You Wait
11. C2C Tetra

 
Source:

1. LG G2 + PowerAmp + DVC
2. Sansa Clip Zip + Rockbox
3. Lenovo Yoga 2 Pro
4. Asus Ultrabook S400CA

 
Other comments/Updates:

 

[james444]

Great review @getclikinagas, concise and comprehensive, one of the best I've read in a long time.

 
Lol @ the Iris mod, now that would be a cool feature! (though I think only the first millimeter or so would make a difference).

 

[getclikinagas]

  Great review @getclikinagas, concise and comprehensive, one of the best I've read in a long time.

 
Lol @ the Iris mod, now that would be a cool feature! (though I think only the first millimeter or so would make a difference).

Thank you! It's only my third review and I hope to keep improving throughout my journey.

---

 
Yes. Below a threshold diameter(which was very small to begin with), varying the hole size did result in different effects.
 
My initial idea was to have a way of changing the mesh pore size on-the-fly. But my design idea seemed too complicated.

 

[EISENbricher]

Very good review. Oh and that animated 3d pic was a nice touch.

 

[james444]

  Yes. Below a threshold diameter(which was very small to begin with), varying the hole size did result in different effects.
 
My initial idea was to have a way of changing the mesh pore size on-the-fly. But my design idea seemed too complicated.

 
The bass dials on the Sennheiser IE8/80 and Aurisonics ASG-2 do essentially the same. It seems easier to implement variable air flow with a throttle screw than with an adjustable iris or mesh.

 

[ShreyasMax]

Well written, my friend.
Cheers

 

[gikigill]

The O16 has been in the making for over an year and I managed to listen to one of the earliest prototypes in Kolkata, India while meeting the maker.
 
I straight away commented on how these sounded more like headphones then IEMs.
 
The owner is actually a pilot who now works in audio

 

[Shawn71]

getclikinagas excellent review......nice move by the mfr, offering the open back iem to (serio)us music listeners.......

 

[getclikinagas]

  The O16 has been in the making for over an year and I managed to listen to one of the earliest prototypes in Kolkata, India while meeting the maker.
 
I straight away commented on how these sounded more like headphones then IEMs.
 
The owner is actually a pilot who now works in audio

Interesting. Did the earlier prototypes look or sound any different? 
 
I do hope these become widely available.
 

@getclikinagas excellent review......nice move by the mfr, offering the open back iem to (serio)us music listeners.......

Thanks!
I believe they've sent the O16 to some (serio)U.S. listeners too. So, we should be seeing more impressions and review in the coming months.

 

[gikigill]

  Interesting. Did the earlier prototypes look or sound any different? 
 
I do hope these become widely available.
 
Thanks!
I believe they've sent the O16 to some (serio)U.S. listeners too. So, we should be seeing more impressions and review in the coming months.

The prototype had a copper coloured body and looked like the Monster Turbines. The maker allowed me to photograph him but not the earphones

 
Bass was punchy and sublime while mids were spacious and treble was just right in my opinion. Soundstage and imaging was akin to a headphone than an IEM.
 
The cable was transparent in colour and I was happy to buy them on the spot. I have ordered my pair already.

 

[toxicdrift]

nicee, need to check these out!

 

[peter123]

Looks as if I'll be recieving the O-16 and C-12 pretty soon. Your review have got me really curious about them, great work 

 

[EISENbricher]

Looks as if I'll be recieving the O-16 and C-12 pretty soon. Your review have got me really curious about them, great work 

Wow, looking forward for your take on them. It feels nice to see my country's own earphone brand is producing something.

 

[peter123]

Wow, looking forward for your take on them. It feels nice to see my country's own earphone brand is producing something.

So do I I'm always intrigued by new (relatively) companies entering the iem/headphone market so I'm hoping this will be some nice offerings. The O-16 looks pretty amazing.