Greetings!

Today we're checking out the hip-dac from iFi.

Since 2012 iFi has been delivering a wide variety of hifi products to the audio world from their headquarters in Southport, UK. DACs, amps, DAC/Amps, power purifiers, impedance adapters, speakers, and various other products and devices have come from the brand. I've been lucky enough to review the Pro iCAN, one of their flagship headphone amplifiers, and the iEMatch which enables you to use very sensitive iems with otherwise poorly matched sources. The hip-dac is their newest and most affordable portable headphone amplifier, eschewing the unique candy-bar shape of past devices for a more pocketable and traditional flask-shaped device.

Full disclosure time. The hip-dac first showed up around mid-February of this year and I enjoyed using it extensively over the following month. Unfortunately, before I had a chance to finalize my notes and compare to other devices it developed an issue which required it to be sent back. Yes, a month was not long enough for me. I prefer to use devices extensively before dipping into a review. Anyway, their rep Lawrance was awesome as always and arranged a replacement but there was a mixup and the wrong device was sent back. That was returned and I opted not to request another unit to finish the review. With the whole Coronoavirus thing in full swing and a number of devices in queue for review, I figured with the notes I had there was enough to write a complete review, though one that wouldn't be quite as detailed and in depth as usual. Still enough to get the point across though.

Enough dallying, let's take a quick look at iFi's excellent little audio flask.


What I'm Looking For When it comes to portable amps and DAPs I take a pretty casual approach. If you’re wanting an in-depth look at this thing with measurement graphs going over THD, sinewaves, etc. you’ll want to look elsewhere. All I really care about is how easy is it to use? Is it well built and will it be durable long term? How’s the driving power and overall sound quality? Are the batteries going to run dry part way through a listening session? Is this the kind of device I’m going to take with me everywhere, or it is better suited to listening in the privacy of my home? Let's dive right in and find out what it's like to use the iFi hip-dac.

Using It As a portable DAC the hip-dac is a pretty sweet device to have with you. It's not so huge as to be impossible to carry when strapped to a DAP or phone, though you will need fairly large pockets. The included rubber feet aren't as useful when using it with a phone or DAP since they add a few extra millimetres to the overall thickness, unless you flip the device over but then you risk scratching your source. If you're pairing it with a laptop the grippy feet keep the device stable when setting it on a table or desk. Without the feet it readily slides around and even just the stiffness of the included cables can unsettle things.

When it comes to sound signature I found the hip-dac to have a mostly uncoloured presentation. There is a hint of warmth, but the major characterization to my ears was that it had a slightly lean, very detailed sound to it. Everything sounds very accurate, precise, and well-controlled with notes attacking and decaying quickly. Already lean sounding earphones like the Echobox Finder or Nomad can sound a bit too thin through the hip-dac, especially in the mids where vocals to weight and density, but for thicker and/or more neutral earphones it is a wonderful pairing; ex. Shozy Form 1.4 and ADV Model 3 BA2. Extension at either end doesn't seem to be lacking at all, while texturing throughout is also fantastic. Most importantly, the hip-dac sounds quite refined, especially when compared to more affordable options like the Auglamour GR-1 and Walnut F1. Next to Earmen's TR-Amp I found them equally slick but with slightly different signatures; TR-Amp warmer and more analogue, hip-dac cooler and more analytic.

Bass boost functions are usually little more than a quick distraction from the listening experience for me since they rarely boost areas that end up being beneficial. XBass on the hip-dac ended up being a godsend for a couple different products; TinHifi P1 and Audio AF1120 MKII. Neither of these earphones have a particularly robust low end in stock form. They have decent extension, but the emphasis just isn't there which left me wanting with bass-heavy genres. The hip-dac's XBass feature completely rectified this, adding back the missing low end from these two products. It was especially welcome with the P1 as it rounded out that earphone's bright, analytic sound allowing it to be much more versatile. The P1's planar driver can actually pump out some pretty wicked bass, it just needs a big push to get there.

When it comes to driving power, the hip-dac should be good enough for most anything thrown at it. You've got a standard 3.5mm out and a 4.4mm balanced out, with the PowerMatch gain switch to bump up output if needed. For regular iems I could listen comfortably with nary a twist of the volume knob. With the gain increased the hip-dac could pretty easily get even something as demanding as the Hifiman Susvara up to volume. For more likely candidates, such as a Meze 99 Neo, or Hifiman Sundara, the hip-dac was be a killer pairing providing plenty of volume and satisfying dynamics that really allowed these headphones to flex what they could do.


Build And Battery The hip-dac is well-constructed with all-metal shell using anodized aluminum. The blue paint job and pebbled texturing looks fantastic, should be durable, and gives you something convincing to grip. All the dials and buttons feel solid and stable with smooth operation and definitive clicks when pressed. The volume knob in particular is a standout since it doesn't extend past the edges of the case which means it can be used while the device is laying flat on a surface, and is knurled providing plenty of grip for single finger use. I must note that out of the box there was no low volume imbalance which is quite common for this style of switch. However, after being used for a few days this quirk did rear it's head, though at volumes low enough to avoid affecting the listening experience. Overall fit and finish is quite good, minus one aspect. My only qualm is that the edges of the casing surrounding the plastic from and rear plate is quite rough/sharp. I accidentally sheared off a bit of skin on the back of my hand sticking it in my pocket with the device. If iFi could round off or taper those edges, that would be a welcome change.

On the front of the device front left to right (or right to left if you decide to orient it the other way) you find buttons for Power Match (impedance selector with a cool name) and Xbass and small LEDs for each to indicate when they are one. The volume/power dial is next up surrounded on either side by u-shaped LED lights that highlight the audio format in use.

• Green – 44/48/88/96kHz
• Yellow – 176/192kHz DXD352/384kHz
• Cyan – DSD128/DSD64 2.8/3.1/5.6/6.2MHz
• Blue – DSD256 11.2/12.2MHz
• Magenta – MQA

You also find a 4.4mm balanced out, and a 3.5mm output with iFi's S-Balanced feature. This feature is intended to provide the noise reducing benefits of going balanced, but in a regular 3.5mm jack. Flipping around to the back you've got a female Type-A port on the left and to the right a Type-C port used exclusively for charging, under which sits a teensy led that notifies you of the battery's status.

• White >75%
• Green > 25%
• Red > 10%
• Red (flashing) >/= 10%
• (led also flashes when charging)

The hip-dac is rated for up to 12 hours of use but even at the low volumes at which I listen and with less than demanding products being powered, was getting closer to 10 on most charges. While getting closer to the rated life would be ideal, what I was seeing was enough for regular, daily use and I never found myself wanting for more.


In The Box The hip-dac's packaging is basic and functional, made from somewhat flimsy white cardboard. It does only what a package needs to do without much in the way of frills. On the front is an image of the device with the brand name and model, along with a big Hi-Res sticker. The only embellishments are a neat raised triangular pattern in the top left and bottom right corners. On the left of the box is a profile shot of the hip-dac, while the right poses a few highlight features; Xbass, balanced out, MQA hi-res audio streaming support, and a Burr-Brown chipset. Flipping to the back is a brief product description noting features like a 12 hour battery life, as well as images of the front and back of the device. Beneath those images is a complete specification list. Cutting the security seal and lifting back the top flap reveals a dense cardboard insert, countering the flimsy exterior and protecting the device and accessories within. In all you get:

• iFi hip-dac
• Blue USB-A (female) to USB-A (male)
• Cloth coated USB-A (female) USB-C (male)
• Black USB-A (male) to USB-C (male) [charging cable]
• User guide card
• Four rubber feet (uninstalled)
• Warranty information card

Overall a very good unboxing experience. One area the hip-dap one-ups the competition, like the Radsone HUD100 and Earmen TR-Amp, is in the included cables. Whereas those two devices lack the ability to connect to Type-C output devices out of the box and require adapters, the hip-dac absolutely does. This enables you to use it with the portable devices it was intended to be paired with, right away. Big points earned with that.

Final Thoughts Like the Pro iCAN before it, the hip-dac left a mark on my memory and is something I'll be looking to pick up in the future pending I have the available funds. And that is despite the issues my review sample had. I'm the only one I've read of that experienced a failure, so when it comes to durability I remain hopeful the hip-dac is a reliable device and my experience was a one off.

It's a wonderful device to use thanks to an attractive, easy to use design with features that are not gimmicky. XBass completely revivified the TinHifi P1 by fleshing out the low end. The PowerMatch switch enables the hip-dac to comfortably power headphones that otherwise wouldn't be feasible. You have a ton of support for high quality music files, including DSD and Tidal's MQA format. The battery life is decent, the sound output is clean, and in general there really isn't much to complain about. The hip-dac is a good device that is well worth consideration.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

**If you enjoyed this review, there are tons more to be found over on The Contraptionist.**

Disclaimer Thanks to Lawrance for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing another iFi product, and for arranging a loaner sample for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on just over a month using the hip-dac. They do not represent iFi or any other entity. At the time of writing the hip-dac retailed for around 150 USD: https://ifi-audio.com/products/hip-dac/

Specifications

Greetings!

Today we're checking out the Form 1.1, an affordable hybrid earphone from Shozy.

Last month I reviewed Shozy's newest mid-range offering, the Form 1.4. At 199.00 USD it is a seriously impressive earphone bringing with it a classy, comfortable design and a hybrid driver setup that is bassy without sacrificing the midrange or treble quality or quantity. It has a wonderful sound stage, is strong in terms of its technical ability, and it has good timbre and tonality. To my ears, it makes for one of the most entertaining listens I've heard in a while. The Form 1.1 is clearly cut from the same cloth, which makes sense since it was the 1.1s cloth from which the 1.4 was sliced.

Where the Form 1.4 contains five drivers (1 dynamic, 4 armatures, hence 1.4) the Form 1.1 contains two, an armature and a dynamic with beryllium-coated diaphragms. While the 1.1's shells are a bit small they retain the premium trimmings of the more expensive 1.4; a hand-crafted resin finish, metal nozzles, flush 2-pin ports, and metal surrounds for the vents on the rear. Based on looks alone, this earphone could probably sell for a lot more than the 75 USD asking price without anyone batting an eye. But alas, looks aren't everything and it has to sound good. It is an earphone after all.

Thankfully, the Form 1.1 sounds fantastic. Let's check it out in greater detail.


What I Hear The Form 1.1 is similar to the Form 1.4 in that it is unapologetically bassy, but where that earphone tones down the treble giving it a very smooth, warm and mellow sound, the Form 1.1 leaves the upper end prominent resulting in a very perceptively different experience.

I find the treble in the 1.1 well balanced with a slight skew in emphasis towards the lower treble. Upper treble provides a good shimmer and bite to notes without being overly aggressive, presenting with a quick attack and decay that really dials in a sense of urgency to every note. It has a very high energy feel to it, yet it isn't at all fatiguing unlike other similarly excited earphones. Lower treble is clean and tight and while certainly not a detail monster, clarity remains high and I never got the impression I was missing out on anything. Comparatively, the 1.4 noticeably dials down the upper treble emphasis leaving the entire presentation feeling much warmer and more mid and bass focused, all while managing to retain the air and detail.

Mids out of the Form 1.1 are quite satisfying. While slightly leaner than the Form 1.4, the same natural tonality and timbre is present. Detail is good but nothing you would consider analytic, while clarity is outstanding. Running the 1.1 through some of the same tracks, like Calyx and TeeBee's “Long Gone”, “Ashes” from Céline Dion, and Alicia Keys' “Un-thinkable”, I was hearing the same gruffness, power, and emotional fortitude that made each artists' performance so engaging through the 1.4. The armatures that Shozy have selected and tuned for this latest generation of earphones hit all the right notes when it comes to making something sound accurate, and as a result match up very well with the dynamic driver they are working in tandem with. They really do blend quite seamlessly, at least to my ears.

When it comes to the low end the Form 1.1 delivers a powerhouse performance. Subbass emphasis is dialed down a bit in comparison to the Form 1.4 leaving me missing the extra physical feedback that model provides, but it doesn't take too much away from the overall presentation. It is still nicely detailed and well textured with grungy notes coming across appropriately dirty sounding, but like the 1.4 not so much as to take away from the smoothness on hand. Technically it is quite satisfying as well. Despite the drivers performance being fairly quick and snappy overall, long, slowly decaying notes linger appropriately and sound quite realistic. Given the midbass emphasis present, on particularly midbassy songs the 1.1 can inch towards sounding somewhat bloats, but given the drivers speed any sense of this fades immediately and I never found it bleeding into the lower mids and hindering the presentation.

Sound stage is where the Form 1.1 is decidedly average, and slightly behind the 1.4. The default vocal positioning of the 1.1 is right at the entrance of the ear canal giving it a somewhat intimate feel. Not quite in the head, but not outside of it either. Unlike the Form 1.4, raising the volume on the 1.1 does not improve things and it remains consistently average. Imaging is quite good with very clean channel-to-channel transitions, while layering and separation is good enough to keep even busy, congested tracks from clustering up and smearing together.

Overall I really enjoy the Form 1.1. Not particularly surprising given my thoughts on the Form 1.4. That said, because of how much everyone was saying the two sounded alike, my initial thoughts on the 1.1 were positive but not mind blowing like they were with the 1.4. Don't get me wrong, there are certainly strong similarities in the mids and bass, but the extra treble the 1.1 has led to a vastly difference experience. While it is something I have a hard time putting my finger on, there is something about the way the Form 1.4 reproduces sound that the Form 1.1 just can't replicate. Maybe it's because of all the extra drivers, the slightly larger shell, or something completely different, but something about the presentation of the Form 1.4 is straight up more dynamic and that much more lifelike. That “special something” makes the Form 1.4 clearly superior to me. That said, the 1.1 is still amazing sounding for the price.


Compared To A Peer

FiiO FH1s (69.99 USD): The FH1s is a good sounding set of in ears with an upper midrange that tends to throw its otherwise good balance off kilter. That is quite apparent comparing to the Form 1.1. Treble out of the 1.1 is smoother, leaner, and more controlled but provides less sparkle in the upper ranges. It gives up a little to the FiiO in terms of detail and clarity. The mids are where the 1.1 takes a huge stride forward. The FiiO sounds thin with a tinniness to instruments and especially female vocalists. It's more detailed and crisp, but at the expense of sounding unnatural and being quite fatiguing. These two earphones take a very different approach to the low end. While extension is excellent on each, the Form 1.1 is much bassier overall with a very meaty midbass. The FiiO takes a much lighter approach to the low end with a better mid/subbass balance that makes the excellent extension more apparent. That said, I don't really find it any more impressive when it comes to texture and detail, so which you find better will boil down to preferring either the Form 1.1s bigger more extravagant presentation, or the FiiOs more restrained, mature tuning. Soundstage is where the FiiOs lighter, leaner sound gives it a clear advantage. In comparison the Form 1.1 is notably more intimate with vocals being the biggest differentiation, sounding like they're playing from just inside the ear vs. just outside as heard on the FH1s. Imaging quality on the two is quite comparable, but the FH1s is a bit more competent when it comes to layering and instrument separation thanks to its thinner sound and larger staging.

When it comes to build the FH1s is nicely constructed and looks attractive, but the shell they're using is pretty common and outside of the unique faceplate, isn't anything special. The Form 1.1 easily has a more premium air to it. The cable, as expected, is a step down from the outstanding inclusion FiiO packed in with the FH1s. Sure it lacks the visual flair of the 1.1s cable, but it's not cloth. No kinking, tangle resistant, less noise, it's not going to fray, etc. Both earphones are equally comfortable and stable in the ear, but I feel the Form 1.1 will be the one that has a more universal fit thanks to it's smaller size and lower profile.

KB EAR Diamond (79.99 USD): The Form 1.1 has more upper treble presence with similar lower treble emphasis. The Diamond sounds a little more dry though with instruments displaying a softer attack and slower decay. It's also a step behind in clarity. In the Diamond review I complained about notes sounding almost splashy, something which is again apparent comparing to the 1.1 which has a tighter, cleaner presentation. The 1.1 has more forward mids with a warmer, slightly thicker, more natural tonality. Vocals out of the Diamond, female in particular, have an almost strained quality to them in comparison to the 1.1 which has a more effortless feel to everything. Bass is another area where the 1.1 is a step ahead in my opinion. There is more rumble to low notes and it is more textured through the entire range. The Form 1.1 has a punchier and more prominent midbass presence that fits will in the general tune of the 1.1.

“Wait a second” you might say. “You complained the Diamond was too midbass heavy, yet the Form 1.1 is even more midbassy and that's okay? What gives?”

It's all about context. In the context of the way the Diamond is tuned, to my ears the midbass is too prominent and draws too much attention. In the context of the Form 1.1 it is balanced by more forward mids and additional treble, and in itself is simply more appealing sounding to my ears. While the 1.1 doesn't present with a massive, open soundscape, it's still the more spacious of the two. The default positioning for vocals is actually closer on the 1.1, but everything else spreads further out behind and provides a greater sense of depth and layering. Neither clusters instruments together on busy tracks thankfully. I'd give the nod to the 1.1 for imaging though since channel-to-channel movement is cleaner and more apparent.

Looking at everything else, both are good looking, well-built products. I think the Shozy looks and feels more premium, but I prefer the durability of an all-metal design like you get with the Diamond. Comfort and isolation are also in the Shozy's camp as it's smaller, lighter, and does a better job of filling the ear and keeping unwanted sounds out. The Diamond's cable is light years more appealing though. No cloth, just a good looking, flexible, durable braided cable that feels like a quality piece in the hand and around the ear.


In The Ear The Form 1.1 features organically shaped, 3D printed earpieces. Where the 1.1's big brother the Form 1.4 uses imported stabilized wood face plates that are unique to each earphone, the 1.1 imbues the dense resin coat with reflective materials to create a “cosmic” theme. The protective resin coating is polished by hand bringing further personalization and craftsmanship to the project. Despite the big price difference between the 1.1 and 1.4, the 1.1 looks and feels nearly as premium since it features basically the same build quality, but in a smaller shell. It has the same smoothly integrated 2-pin connectors, metal nozzles, and metal vent hole on the rear face of each ear piece.

While the ear pieces are a work of art, the cable is hit and miss. Mostly miss. Let's start with the good stuff, that being the hardware. The chromed 0.78mm 2-pin plugs look great and sit mostly flush with the body of the earphone. It would be better if they were recessed slightly to add some additional protection against bending, but I'm cool with them as-is. The straight jack feels like a high quality piece with a weighty metal and (faux?) carbon fibre construction. They even laser etched the Shozy brand name onto one of the chrome rings so you won't have to worry about it rubbing off over time. Strain relief is a little stubby, but the rubber used is soft enough to provide adequate protection. Above the y-split is a small metal bead that functions as a chin cinch. It works well despite the weight. The y-split carries on the chrome/carbon fibre aesthetic and looks fantastic, though there is a complete lack of strain relief. Normally this would be a red flag for longevity, but this is a fabric cable and that brings us to the main negative; this is a fabric cable.

I'm biased against them because my experiences have almost exclusively been negative. The Form 1.1's cable embodies pretty much everything I dislike about this style of cable, although, below the y-split its actually not terrible. The weave is loose but because of the way a fabric sheath reacts to twisting, feels sturdy and stable. Its not resistant to tangling though. Above the y-split certainly isn't either. Not only does it tangle with ease, but small kinks develop the moment the cable twists or loops in the wrong direction. You must be very careful when wrapping it up and putting it in the case, and equally cautious when removing it from the case for your next listening session. Do not absentmindedly toss this cable in your pocket unless you want to spend the next 10 days trying to unravel the chaos it will inevitably become. The preformed ear guides are thankfully fine. While they aren't particularly nice looking, they are flexible and do a decent job keeping the cable behind your ear where it should be. Personally, I recommend ditching this cable immediately. It is not worth the hassle.

When it comes to isolation, I found the Form 1.1 just as impressive as the 1.4. With no sound playing and the stock medium tips installed, the clattering of key strokes is reduced to a slight click, nearby voices muffled, and the roar of passing cars dulled. Bring music into the picture and all that is easily drowned out without the need to increase volume to compensate. With foam tips in place, the Form 1.1 would make a half decent set of ear plugs. Those who frequent the transit system or noisy coffee shops (if they return to normal operation in the near future as we are still in lock down from the Covid-19 pandemic right now) will find the Form 1.1 a welcome companion.


In The Box Shozy seems to take the less is more route with their packaging, and that's on display here with the Form 1.1. The exterior box is quite compact with elegant, soft colouring and a very high quality image of the 1.1 on the lid. To the left of this image is the model info, a quick blurb telling you a bit about the earphones, notice that it is a hybrid, and mention that the 2-pin connectors were designed and manufactured by Shozy. Flip to the back to find a specification list, a frequency response graph that is lacking any axis information and as such is of limited value. There is also a more in depth description of the hybrid setup advising what frequencies each driver handles, and some additional bullet-points advising other features. Pulling back the magnetic flap and lifting the lid reveals another cardboard box inside emblazoned with the Shozy logo in silver foil. This box is tough to remove without damaging. Inside is the same awesome hexagonal case that comes with the Form 1.4 and all the accessories. In all you get:

• Shozy Form 1.1 earphones
• 2-pin 0.78mm fabric shielded cable
• Fabric coated carrying case
• Foam tips (s/m/l)
• Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Bi-flange silicone tips (s/m/l)

Checking out the case, the grey fabric you find coating this hexagonal beauty seems to be pretty popular right now. A similar aesthetic can be found on the various cases included with the Astrotec S80 and charge case of the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless. Not only does it look nice, but functionally it's useful too. Dirt and grime is well hidden and it provides plenty of grip in the hand. The Shozy logo printed on top will probably peel off over time, but that's a purely aesthetic change and will not affect functionality.

The included tips are the same as those found with the Shozy & Neo CP, at least in all but colour when looking at the single flange set. Material quality of the silicone tips is outstanding. It is durable and flexible. The large double flange and foam pairs fit me on the CP. While this rings true with the 1.1, you can now rope in the large single flange set thanks to the 1.1's deeper insertion. It would still be wise for Shozy to include a fourth pair of even larger tips, or even something a little more traditional in shape. Many will find themselves resorting to third party tips out of the box to guarantee a reliable seal. I'd love to see Shozy team up with Final Audio and include their E Type tips which pair well with the 1.1.


Final Thoughts Shozy is on a roll with this Form X.X series of earphones. Not only do they look amazing, but they sound fantastic too. For the price the Form 1.1 is a do-it-all earphone that gives off seriously premium vibes visually, while having a smooth, refined, dynamic sound that goes head-to-head with the best in class. Like with the Form 1.4, the 1.1 is just flat out fun to listen to. It is boisterous and lively with good sparkle up top, a thunderous rumble down low, and a tonally correct midrange that is in no way overshadowed or falls behind. Sure, the cable is not great and the included tips aren't going to work for everyone, but those are easily rectified issues, if they even end up being issues for you at all.

Overall I cannot recommend the Form 1.1 enough and highly suggest checking it out if in the market for a bassy earphone under 100 USD.

- B9

**If you enjoyed this review, there are tons more to be found over on The Contraptionist.**

Disclaimer Thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging a sample of the Form 1.1 for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the Form 1.1. They do not represent Shozy, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Form 1.1 retailed for 74.99 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/collections/shozy/products/shozy-form-1-1

Specifications

• Driver: Beryllium coated dynamic driver + balanced armature
• Sensitivity: 100dB/mW
• Impedance: 19ohm @ 1kHz
• Frequency Response: 20Hz-20KHz
• Cable: 0.78mm 2-pin

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, Cozoy Takt C, Earmen TR-Amp, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we're checking out one of FiiO's newest Bluetooth amp modules, the BTR3K.

Along with Type-C dongles and true wireless earphones, wireless amp modules are a segment that seem to have seen a huge surge in popularity the last couple years. Back in 2018 FiiO sent over their very wallet friendly module, the uBTR. I was pleasantly surprised with the quality of sound coming from that sleek, compact device, giving me high hopes that BTR3K would offer up a similar experience in a more technically capable and feature rich device, albeit at a higher but still very affordable price (69.99 USD at the time of writing).

After spending a month (to the day) with the BTR3K, I can say that it has not disappointed. Let's find out why.


Package and Contents The BTR3K arrives in a very cleanly designed package wrapped in a white sleeve. On the front is an image of the device along with the usual branding and model information, along with a wireless Hi-Res Audio logo tucked in the top right hand corner. Beneath everything is a list of supported high quality codecs; aptX HD, LDAC, SBC, AAC. The back of the sleeve contains nothing of note.

Sliding the sheath off the inner plastic tray reveals a multi-tiered experience. The top tier has two layers, the first of which is the BTR3K tucked tightly into a dense foam insert. Clear plastic sheets protect the glass faces that make up the front and rear of the device. Lifting out the foam insert and BTR3K reveals a smaller cardboard box within which you find a manual, warranty card, and lanyard. The bottom tier of this unboxing experience is a larger cardboard box within which you find the rest of the accessories. In all you get:

• BTR3K
• USB-C cable
• Lanyard
• Protective plastic case w/ clip
• Manual
• Warranty card

While in the grand scheme of things this isn't a heap load of extras, it's more than I've received from any other Bluetooth module and that is always appreciated. The clip case is all-plastic so I don't expect it to take more than a couple tumbles, but it should protect the BTR3K and is nicely constructed. I appreciate that FiiO included this in-box versus making it an added cost you have to dole out later should you want the added protection or shirt clip function. It also fits the BTR3K without obscuring any of the controls or making them more difficult to access.

Build and Ergonomics FiiO has taken a page from current smartphone design with the BTR3K, but compressed it down into a compact matchbox sized device. The front and back of the BTR3K are both glass with clean rounded edges. The main body of the device is aluminum, coated in a smooth matte black paint. At the top of the device is the Type-C port for charging, while the opposite end contains the two output options; 3.5mm and 2.5mm balanced. Down the right side from top to bottom is the power button, a pinhole for the microphone, a multifunction button, and a volume/track rocker switch. The construction quality is outstanding with this tiny device feeling solid and premium thanks to the dense, weighty materials used, and fine attention to detail when it comes to fit and finish.

While the buttons are small, they are also very distinct shapes and well-spaced. As a result I rarely found myself pressing something unintended. Most devices roll the power function into the single multifunction button. Separating the two feels quite unusual on a modern device, but I'm fully on board. While uncommon, there were times I held the button too long on other devices (ex. Earstudio ES100, ADV Accessport Air) and shut them down without meaning to. That feels very unlikely to happen with the BTR3K since that function is on a button that will be used rarely. The rest of the controls are intuitive and in line with how you interact with other similar devices. Tap the volume rocker to change volume, hold for two seconds to skip tracks. Tap the multifunction button to play/pause/answer and end calls. Hold it for two seconds to reject an incoming call. There isn't anything unusual here and the learning curve is very quick.

On the front of the device shining through the glass pane is the FiiO logo that lights up various colours when the BTR3K is powered up, advising you which codec is being used.

• Blue – SBC
• AAC – Cyan
• aptX, aptX LL – Purple
• aptX HD – Yellow
• LDAC - White

As someone whose eyes are unable to accurately determine some colours, this feature isn't particularly useful. For nearly everyone else, it should be handy for quickly determining that you're connected with your preferred codec.

Another nice feature is automatic device switching. Once you have connected to both device, if you want to switch from one to the other you simple pause playback on the current device and manually start playback on the second. If something is already playing on the second device, the switch will occur immediately. I tested this with my LG Q70 and ASUS FX53V laptop and it worked as expected, though the switch to the laptop could be a bit slow. I suspect that's down to its older wireless hardware and clunky software.


Bluetooth The BTR3K uses Qualcomm's CSR8675 Bluetooth chip. Some benefits of this are low-power consumption, a 120 MHz DSP, and support for 24-bit transmission and processing among various high quality wireless codecs like SBC, AAC, aptX/X LL/HD, and LDAC.

Connecting the BTR3K with your device is as easy as ever. Press and hold the power button until you hear a pleasing chime, the FiiO logo on the front starts flashing, and the device boots up. On your source, search for available Bluetooth devices and the BTR3K will show up very clearly as “FiiO BTR3K”. Once connected, you're off to the races.

The wireless connection with this device is rock solid. I have yet to experience any stutters or drops in regular use, except when maxing out the range. The cheaper uBTR is slightly better in this regard in that I can go about an extra 10 feet before it drops, but otherwise the BTR3K is excellent and is competitive with everything else I own. I can place my source device in my office and walk anywhere in the apartment, except to the front door. It will happily retain a good connection across three rooms and down a hallway with numerous obstacles in the way. Even when outside in interference rich locations, like the rear entrance to our apartment oddly enough, it holds strong.

USB DAC The BTR3K can be used over Type-C usb as an external DAC (dual AK4376 chipset) for your computer (and probably your phone if you've got the right cable on hand and want to be weird like that). Once the BTR3K is plugged in, turn it on for it to register as an audio output device. Select it and away you go. There is very little fuss and as a nice bonus, you can charge while listening. Sweet.

Noise To test noise from the 3.5mm and 2.5mm balanced outputs I used the Dunu DK-3001 Pro (20ohms, 112dB +/-2). It is fairly average in terms of driving difficulty and sensitivity and has a modular cable system and as such can utilize both outputs. Through the 3.5mm output, noise is nearly inaudible with nothing playing and impossible to hear once you've got music playing. Switching over to the 2.5mm balanced out there is noticeably more noise, but it's still easily masked with music and only audible during very quiet moments otherwise. Tossing on something much more source picky like the Campfire Audio Solaris (10ohms, 115dB) reveals more audible noise through both outputs (Brainwavz Candy Cane 2.5mm balanced cable used here), especially the 2.5mm. Still not terrible by any means but if you're bothered by hiss, even an amount that is barely audible, try to avoid pairing VERY sensitive iems with the BTR3K.

Battery The BTR3 has pretty decent battery life and a pleasantly snappy charge time. At 1.5 hours, you can be up and ready to listen faster than most (2 hours seems to be the standard). The claimed endurance is 11 hours. While I did attempt to properly time and test this, I kept forgetting to check in and always missed the exact time of death. That said, it was somewhere between 10 and 11 hours since the BTR3K has always run dry by the time my 11 hour alarm went off. As long as you're not using it for marathon listening sessions, you should get a few days of listening out of it before needing to top up the battery.

Sound Quality I've really been enjoying the BTR3K's presentation which is very smooth, detailed, and slightly warm. It pretty much takes everything I loved about the uBTR's sound, and makes it cleaner and more capable.

Treble is well extended and if there is any roll off, it's occurring well beyond anything my ears are capable of hearing. As a result of this, testing with bright earphones like the TinHiFi T2 Pro or EarNiNE EN2J results in all the aggression and sharpness being retained. Nothing is being smoothed over and I don't really hear much loss of detail when compared to the BTR3 in DAC mode, or with dedicated DAC dongles like the Cozoy Takt-C. While normally I'd follow this up with something like “given this upper energy retention, it might be best to avoid pairing bright earphones with the BTR3K”, that's not the case here. The BTR3K actually works quite well with bright earphones since the qualities that go along with that style of tune are retained.

The midrange of the BTR3K has a neutral presence in the mix. Notes are well-weighted, fairly dense, and on earphones with a lean presentation, such as FiiO's own FH1s, sound more filled out and complete. Midrange focused earphones like the ADV Model 3 BA2 and EarNiNE EN1J retain the qualities that make those frequencies so attractive. On the EN1J it's the breathy, wispy timbre and on the BA2, the rich vocals that remain just as lush and intimate as they do through most of my wired DACs. Outstanding timbre quality, like that from the thinksound On2 or Shozy Form 1.4, is retained so you don't have to worry about the BTR3K hindering your earphone's accuracy.

Bass out of the BTR3K is awesome. Shozy's Form 1.1 and 1.4 have some of the most addictive bass I've heard recently, and through the BTR3K retain all the head thumping glory that I fell in love with in the first place. All the texture and weight those earphones are capable of reproducing is present, as is the outstanding extension with deep notes providing the visceral rumble I expect. The slight amount of warmth the BTR3K injects into the presentation isn't enough to be a hindrance, unless we're talking something like the Massdrop x Mee Audio Planamic which ends up a little warmer and darker than I like, even if the wicked bass of that model is also going full force through the BTR3K.

When it comes to the sound stage the BTR3K continues with another strong showing. Pair it with something expansive sounding like the Campfire Audio Solaris and you're in for a treat. Staging retains the depth and width such an earphone is known for with imaging quality that is only slightly hindered. I noticed no drop in quality in song layering and instrument separation, even at volumes I'm uncomfortable with. Everything remains well defined and coherent.

Overall I'm pretty floored by the sound quality the BTR3 outputs. It is clean and dynamic with great extension and high definition codecs that can take advantage of a high quality source and top tier headphone. While it's not quite as powerful as the Earstudio ES100, it's better built, more affordable, and if my memory serves me right (the ES100 died a while ago), sounds just as good but with a slightly more coloured sound.


Final Thoughts The BTR3K is the real deal. It's great to look at, even nicer to hold and interact with, is priced VERY competitively, supports hi-res codecs, has standard and balanced outputs with dual AK4377 DACs, can be used as a USB DAC, and has impressive range and wireless stability. The packaging is of good quality and it contains some useful extras like a case/clip and lanyard.

Honestly, the only things I have found to complain about are the tiny bit of hiss present with sensitive earphones, and that the output power of both the standard and balanced outs are not particularly strong. It's definitely enough for the vast majority of products though, and probably anything anyone in this price range is likely looking to carry with them out and about.

If you're in the market for an affordable Bluetooth amp under 100 USD, the BTR3K is absolutely worth checking out to see if it meets your needs. As for me, this is taking up the mantle my ES100 (RIP) held and will be my acting daily driver DAC/amp. Let's see how it holds up long term.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

**If you enjoyed this review, there are tons more to be found over on The Contraptionist.**

Disclaimer A big thanks to Sunny with FiiO for sending over a sample of the BTR3K for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions of the BTR3K and do not represent FiiO or any other entity. At the time of writing the BTR3K is selling for 69.99 USD. You can check it out here: https://www.fiio.com/btr3k

Specifications

Greetings!

Today we're checking out a new budget offering from FiiO, the FH1s.

After building up a great reputation for quality DAPs, DAC/AMPs, and other like devices, FiiO introduced earphones into their lineup and haven't turned back. From their humble beginnings with the EX1 in 2015, basically a Dunu Titan 1 rebrand, FiiO has continued to expand and improve their lineup which now features seven iems (with more on the way), a couple earbuds, and the EH3NC headphones.

The FH1s that we're checking out today is built upon the foundation laid by the original FH1. Gone is the ubiquitous jellybean-shaped shell in favour of a more organic, custom-styled, low-profile design not unlike those recruited by KZ and TFZ for a few of their more popular models (ZS10 Pro, King Pro, etc.). I love this design because the stability and ergonomics are second to none. The 10mm dynamic has also been swapped out in favour of an even larger 13.6mm dynamic with a bio-polymer diaphragm and powerful N50 magnets for improved control and speed. Knowles is still providing the balanced armature (33518) that accompanies the monster dynamic.

Does FiiO's second go at the FH1 formula provide listeners with a compelling reason to drop 69.99 USD? Let's find out.


What I Hear I never had the chance to hear the original FH1 but from what I gather FiiO was looking to address the shortcomings of that model with this revision. What I hear is a reasonably well balanced earphone with a w-shaped signature beset by a prominent upper midrange that skews the tune into being overly bright and quite fatiguing, at least for me. This can be addressed by making adjustments between 1k and 3k using an audiophiles favourite tool; an EQ. I also found that short, wide bore tips like those from JVC mitigated things somewhat for me.

Treble out of the FH1s is for the most part quite pleasant. Extension is great with the presentation having plenty of pizzazz and shimmer up top, and enough lower treble energy to provide gobs of detail without sounding unnecessary or overboosted just for the sake of adding wow factor. As expected from a Knowles driver, attack and decay are both quite quick keeping the FH1s clear and consistent even with busy, congested tracks. While notes are generally well defined, they do edge towards sounding splashy at times so improvements can be made in that area. This region is also not the most natural sounding thanks to a somewhat plasticy edge to everything.

The midrange also suffers from the same issues with timbre thanks to a pretty hefty spike between 1k and 3k. While normally I'm fine with peaks, it seems this one falls into an area I'm particularly sensitive to. This is a first. As a result, the general midrange presentation ends up feeling overly bright and synthetic with the ability to fatigue extremely quickly. Males vocals sound good and fare far better than female which feel quite shouty and sibilant. Way too much sizzle going on here. It's not all bad though. Clarity and note coherence is outstanding with plenty of detail coming through. If you enjoy analyzing the crap out of a tracks midrange, the FH1s is probably the best budget offering I've coming across.

Bass is where I have absolutely no qualms with the FH1s. They picked an excellent driver to handle the low end, and tuned it just right. Extension is top tier and it has no issues digging plenty deep and providing listeners with a warbly, visceral grumble. Mid/subbass balance is quite even, though I wouldn't mind just a hint more midbass to warm things up a bit and help counter that edgy midrange. Texture and detail and quite good. It's not as impressive as some other earphones in its class, but it fits in with the general presentation and takes a step back to let the mid and treble detail shine. For a big driver it's also plenty quick, able to handle rapid transitions and the congested bass lines common to metal tracks with ease.

Sound stage is a another area the FH1s excels in giving off the impression that things are playing just to either side of your head. The emphasized upper ranges ensure there is lots of air for notes to play within, and effects commonly careening off into the distance. This movement is handled smoothly and with nuance, allowing the FH1s to immerse you in tracks that have swirling effects and instruments moving from channel-to-channel. The satisfying depth of the stage permits effective track layering and good instrument separation. Nice sound stage, good technical abilities. Yes please!

Overall I'm of two minds about how the FH1s sounds. On one hand I love the quality bass and raw detail and clarity of the presentation through the mids and treble. On the other hand I find the mids/upper mids to be way too hot and exceptionally fatiguing. If you're not sensitive to that frequency range, you're in for a treat.

Compared To A Peer

Dunu DM-480 (69.00 USD): Treble on the FH1s is better extended with a more even balance between upper and lower regions. The DM-480 in comparison has a more dry feel to it thanks to it's stunted upper treble. The FiiO is brighter and more detailed with improved air between notes and a snappier, faster attack to notes, but at the same time they do not sound quite as well controlled. Both have an elevated upper midrange that keeps the overall presentation somewhat bright. In the case of the FH1s, I find the elevation a bit too much making it quite fatiguing to listen to, even at low volumes. The DM-480 simply comes across somewhat harsh. Foam tips helps smooth out the DM-480's upper mids while shallow wide bore tips have the same effect on the FH1s for me. Not really a fan of the midrange presentation on either model. Bass is where they both shine. The FH1s' larger driver gives off a slower, more visceral experience with better extension compared to the DM-480 which has a tighter, punchier, more textured feel to it. When it comes to sound stage, they have a similar presentation. The FH1s has a more intimate, default vocal presence which usually pulls in the staging, but the additional upper treble helps to add back a bit more air between notes and give it the edge. Technical abilities are also quite comparable. They both image smoothly and accurately with the FH1s' hybrid setup and larger staging giving it's reproduction a slightly more layered and well separated sound. While I find the FH1s the more technically adapt, the enthusiastic upper midrange is a bit much and as a result the DM-480 with it's tighter note presentation ends up being the most pleasing to the ear of the two, at least for me.

In terms of build and comfort these two are mostly a wash for me. The Dunu's tiny shells feel a little more premium thanks to their more organic, 3D printed shape, but the 2-pin system is even less encouraging for long terms use. It's comfortable and isolates better, but I found myself adjusting it more often than the FH1s which rarely required touch ups. FiiO's cable is also more premium feeling and looking thanks to it's twisted design, but, I'm a bit fan of the long term durability of the style of cable Dunu went with. I've got a number of earphones with very similar cables that are many years old and still going strong. As you can see, I'm at odds to which I prefer in this section.

Tinhifi T3 (69.99 USD): Treble on the FH1s is similarly emphasized, extended, and detailed, though the T3 sounds more natural with a more realistic tone and timbre vs. the FH1s' slightly plastic edge. Notes are also better controlled and a little more dense and weight. The FH1s has a more aggressive crack to notes with similarly rapid decay, both of which are presented a little more casually through the T3. The mids of the T3 are notably more balanced and even but not as forward overall. Regardless, the bright, tiring upper mids of the FH1s are nowhere to be found with the T3 again having a more true-to-life presentation thanks to some warmth injected by the midbass region. Speaking of bass, I prefer how it's handled by Tinhifi's hybrid as well. While depth and texture aren't quite a good, nor is it quite as quick, I found it to have a more suitable mid/subbass balance that helps add some warmth and counter the bright, lean, sound that Tin's earphones are known for. The FH1s has a fairly reserved midbass region that does little to soften or counter the brightness which ends up exacerbating what is the problem area to my ears. The T3's sound stage is similarly deep but lacks the width of the FH1s and as such feels a but more confined. This puts it a step behind the FH1s in terms of layering and separation, but I find the T3 to more accurately move sounds channel-to-channel. Overall I much prefer the T3's presentation. While it's technicalities are a subtle step behind FiiO's FH1s, the overall tuning balance and tonality is preferable to my ears, particularly through the midrange.

In terms of build I'm going to have to give it to the T3, comfort to the FH1s. The T3s shells may not be as attractive, nor are they as comfortable and easy to achieve a secure fit, but the machining quality is outstanding for this price point. Also, being entirely aluminum, durability is going to be a bit step up from the FiiOs plastic and metal mix. The MMCX connectors on this Tinhifi model also seem to be holding up extremely well despite numerous cable swaps, mind you, there really is no good reason to change cables. As good as FiiOs cable is, Tin managed to find something even more plush and premium to include with the T3. You can't go wrong with either though.


In The Ear As noted earlier, FiiO has gone with a shell shape that I've seen quite a lot over the last couple years, and that is a good thing. The low profile design conforms to the natural shape of the outer ear providing a stable fit that is only helped further by the use of preformed ear guides. Those who have particularly small ears or outer ears with an unusual shape might have troubles wearing the FH1s, but for the majority they should provide a comfortable wearing experience.

That's helped along by the fact they are so light thanks primarily to the use of plastics for the construction. Fit and finish is excellent with tight seams between the inner half of the shell and face plate. The metal nozzles are glued neatly in place without any excess glue having seeped out. The 2-pin ports are slightly raised and about the only area of concern since I have seen numerous images of this style of port cracking. That said, the raise is fairly conservative with thick sidewalls surrounding the actual ports, so I have faith they'll hold up. One aesthetic touch that FiiO rightly seems proud of is the layered celluloid face plates which are unique from model to model. This is apparently the same material used for guitar picks so durability should be very high.

FiiO always goes the extra yard with their included cables and the FH1s' is no exception. This cable is outstanding for a product under 100 USD, and I'm have been plenty happy to see it included with something notably more expensive. The twisted design is thick but very flexible and not so weighty that it tugs at the earphones while you walk. The 90 degree angled jack in one that FiiO has been using for a while now and has ample strain relief in place to protect the cable. The extension for plug also helps ensure good fitment with a variety of phone and DAP cases. The FiiO branded metal y-split doesn't have any strain relief, but with cables of this style and with splits this compact I've never found it an issue. Sitting just above the y-split is a compact metal chin cinch that moves with just enough resistance to ensure it stays in place while remaining easy to adjust when needed. Leading up to the 2-pin plugs that angle at ~45 degrees are preformed ear guides. Since FiiO went with shrink wrap instead of the hard plastic some manufacturers use, they remain flexible and soft but stiff enough to keep the cable from bouncing out of place. Another nice touch is the redundant left/right markings. On the inside of each plug is a small letter to denote the channel, while on the base of each plug is a coloured pad; red for right, blue for left. It is always nice when companies go out of their way to add various methods of determining channel. Shows an attention to detail that is sometimes lacking in the industry. The only complaint I have is that the plugs sit flush with the raised ports on the earphone instead of wrapping around them like you'll see on similar designs from a few other manufacturers. Leaving this out means the pins are more easily damaged, but treat the product with a modicum of care (ex. use the case and don't simply toss them into a pocket) and you shouldn't have to worry.

Lastly, the FH1s' isolation is not amazing. I'd put it into the “average to slightly below” camp thanks to the reasonably shallow fit that goes along with this shell design, and ample ventilation through a pinhole in front of the driver, and another cleverly hidden behind the 2-pin ports. On the plus side, wind noise is kept to minimum which is cool. They're definitely usable in noisy areas, but you may have to compensate with added volume (less so if you opt for foam tips).


In The Box Even with their inexpensive products, FiiO always puts effort into their packaging. While most could not care less, I do not fall into that camp and always appreciate when a company takes their time to make unboxing their products a positive experience.

With the FH1s you get a fairly large matte black box with a clean image of the FH1s on the front, as well as the prerequisite branding, model info, and Hi-Res Audio logo. Flipping to the back it is oddly barren with only a brief description of the product and a notice that it will likely be upgrade so pictures are for reference only, as well as FiiO's complete name. Grasping the magnetically sealed flap and lifting open the top cover reveals a manual covering two inserts. The top insert contains the earphones on display tucked in a cardboard coated holder, underneath which is the cable neatly wrapped and tied off with a handy Velcro strip. The other insert is a small cardboard box containing the rest of the accessories. In all you get:

• FH1s earphones
• 120-Core high-purity monocrystalline copper cable w/ 2-pin 0.78mm connectors
• HB1 carrying case
• Small bore single flange tips (s/m/l)
• Wide bore single flange tips (s/m/l)
• Memory foam tips (m)
• Velcro cable tie

In all a very satisfying unboxing. The tip selection is good with each style of tips offering a slight variation on the sound signature and use decent quality materials. They're a little stiff in my opinion but still seal well and should be durable in the long run. The HB1 Pelican-style case looks great and has a rubber seal around the base where the lid rests and should offer some water resistance if you're the type to take your earphones out in adverse weather or with you on a camping trip.

Final Thoughts FiiO is very consistent in producing well built, high quality products and the FH1s absolutely displays this. The shells are wonderfully put together with a very cool looking face plate. Comfort are ergonomics are great, the cable is outstanding for the price, and it's all backed by a comprehensive and useful kit of extras. If I were rating this earphone purely on these metrics, it would be a shoo-in for a high recommendation. However, sound also plays arguably the most important roll in an earphone and I found the FH1s to fall a little short.

It certainly has a lot of positives, like its clarity and detail, end-to-end extension, texture, and the speed of the Knowles armature and big old dynamic installed. It's where the midrange general tuning comes in that I have some issues. Bass is fine, but as you head into the mids the upper mid peak results in an unnatural presentation and, at least for me, a very fatiguing sound. The treble is also fairly well emphasized which results in a double dose of brightness. I'd be fine with this if there was more low end warmth to counter, but its just not quite there. At very low volumes or for short, bursty listening sessions at moderate volumes the FH1s was plenty enjoyable, but for any other use case they were simply too fatiguing to use for more than a few minutes at a time. Your experiences may differ and I know there will be many out there that adore this high energy, high detail sound, I just found it a bit overwhelming.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer A huge thanks to Napoller with Hifigo for sending over the FH1s for the purposes of review and trusting me to share my subjective opinions of this product. They do not represent FiiO, Hifigo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the FH1s retailed for 69.99 USD. You can check it out here: https://hifigo.com/products/fiio-fh1s-1baknowles-1dynamic-hybrid-earphone-iem

Specifications

• Driver: Knowles 33518 balanced armature + 13.6mm graphene dynamic driver
• Impedance: 26ohms
• Sensitivity: 106dB
• Frequency response range: 5Hz-40kHz
• Cable: 120-Core high-purity monocrystalline copper cable w/ 2-pin 0.78mm connectors

Gear Used For Testing LG Q70, Earstudio HUD100, Earmen TR-Amp, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings,

If you've been following my content over the years you'll know that Knowledge Zenith (KZ) has played a big part in my journey from total newb to whatever I am now. I was around for their early models like the ANV, Micro Ring, and R3, and saw them finally break into the mainstream to set things alight with affordable hybrid iems like the ZST and ZS5.

You also might have noticed my lack of coverage of their most recent generation of earphones as a result. The reason being? The lack of forward momentum just wasn't there and everything ended up sounding like an iteration, albeit iterations with improvements (some vast), of that original ZST sound. When I was invited to check out the S2 I had to accept. My only experience with Bluetooth gear from KZ was limited to their original 2-pin cable. While I got lucky in that mine still works perfectly and usually spends it's time powering the equally aged Rose Mojito earbuds, KZ's record with wireless products has been a little spotty. I was curious to see if they got it right with the S2, and for the most part, the answer is yes.

Let's take a look at the new true wireless earphone from KZ, and see why this one is a solid budget friendly option in what has quickly become a very crowded market.


What I Hear If you like the KZ “house sound” you should be right at home with the S2 since it brings nothing overly new to the table. That's not a bad thing since I quite like the v-shaped signature Knowledge Zenith has been touting since they started releasing hybrids.

Treble is well-extended and has a distinct brilliance region focus to my ears. This gives the presentation a bright, airy, shimmery feel that is fun and vibrant, if not potentially fatiguing. Treble sensitive listeners need not apply. In the past I've found KZ's with this bias to sound somewhat loose and splashy, so I was pleasantly surprised to find notes tight and well controlled with a reasonably realistic attack and decay. Detail is good, if not slightly exaggerated given the shift in emphasis to the upper treble regions. While still a bit too bright, I'm glad KZ dialed in and cleaned up the output of their 30095 armature for this application. Overall treble quality is quite good for an inexpensive hybrid, and a wireless one at that.

The midrange is recessed and plays second fiddle to the treble and bass regions. While vocals are less prominent than I'd like and somewhat overshadowed by frequencies at the extremities, they still remain clear and coherent with good tonality. Timbre is somewhat light and bright with a hint of plasticity to it, especially noticeable when a drummer taps their stick on the edge of the drum, but not so far off that I found it distracting in any way. Sibilance is present but not extreme and is handled much better than one of KZ's more popular recent models, the ZSN Pro. In general, I found the mids here to be satisfying, I just wish they were either pushed forward a bit more or the other frequencies were dialed back a bit to change the perceived recession.

The bass performance out of this earphone should satisfy a lot of listeners. Extension is quite good with the S2 able to delve out some decent visceral feedback on deep, rumbly notes. Midbass is quick and provides good punch, something that seems to be common to the dual-magnet design KZ has gone with this time around. Notes feel textured and detailed as evident running the S2 with some grimy tracks from Tobacco and The Prodigy, something that can often be an issue with wireless sets. Speed isn't an issue either with quick transitions being handled with tact and grace. Bass isn't often an area where KZ falters, and the performance here is right in line with expectations. Good stuff.

For a truly wireless earphone, I was quite impressed with the sound stage. The S2 feels quite expansive with a wide and deep stage that has sounds transitioning from channel-to-channel quite accurately. Testing it out with gaming I found sounds dead centre to feel a little off, but as soon as they moved to either side the movement was smooth and reliable. I actually wouldn't be entirely opposed to using these for some light, competitive gaming. Laying and separation are also better than average for a TWS, only faltering at high volumes where the staging begins to compress and sounds start to meld into each other and lose definition. I never listen at those volumes though, so while it was never an issue for me beyond the few minute I cranked the volume that loud, you might find it intrusive.

Overall I am quite happy with the sound coming out of the S2. While nothing new and special, this v-shaped signature is smooth and detailed with good staging qualities and deep bass that can really carry a track. It definitely sounds best when paired with the artificial elements inherent to electronic music and most modern pop, but it can still provide a good experience with rock and other genres. It also performs best at moderate to high volumes to avoid hiss which is audible at low volumes, and stage compression which occurs at very high volumes.

Compared To A Peer

SoundPeats Truefree+ (~35 USD): While both have a v-shaped signature, the TrueFree+ is less extreme. The S2's upper treble is more prominent giving it a more shimmery presentation and airier feel. Notes are also more controlled with overall a much higher quality presentation. The Truefree+ sounds somewhat rough and unrefined in comparison. Overall detail and clarity are in the S2's park, despite the exaggerated treble that makes then feel even more detailed than they already are. The Truefree+'s midrange is thicker, more forward, and more natural, but lacks the clarity of the S2. I still prefer the Truefree's presentation regardless since it feels more coherent and better integrated into the overall signature. Bass between the two is quite comparable with similar levels of extension and texturing. The S2's low end is a bit smoother and comes across a little more organic, but doesn't feel quite a quick. Sound stage is where the S2 is much superior providing a significantly wider listening experience. I was quite surprised as this since the Truefree+ was already quite good for a TWS. Even so, the Truefree+ obviously lacks the width and the S2's ability to toss sounds way off into the distance. It also has a more intimate default position for vocalists which tends to have the effect of pulling the stage in further. Imaging I found tighter and more accurate on the Truefree+, but layering and separation in the S2's camp thanks to all that space the music c an play around in. While there are aspects of the Truefree+ I appreciate more, like the mids, I found the S2's sound stage and treble refinement to provide the better listen. That said, the Truefree+ has a cleaner background in places where there is noticeable hiss through the S2, and might be better is you often listen in quiet areas at low volumes.

In terms of comfort and usability, I'm split. The S2 is more ergonomic and provides a more stable fit in my experience, but the Truefree+ has a more common bean shape that has been shown to provide a more universal fit among various ear types. Despite the S2's more form fitting shape, it also doesn't passively isolate quite as well. The Truefree+ also has physical controls vs. the S2's touch-based controls. No surprise, I much prefer the physical controls which are very difficult to activate by accident. Comfort when using them is sacrificed slightly, but it's worth it to avoid the finicky nature of the S2's interface.

Both of these earphones have the same 3.5-4 hours rated battery life. However, battery performance out of the Truefree+ well exceeded my expectations back when I first tested it giving me over 5 hours of listening time. The S2 has been fairly consistent in giving me around 3 hours and 45 minutes of listening time. The Truefree+ has also provided a more stable wireless connection. The S2 suffers from occasional stuttering. At times it almost feels like the two earpieces are quickly re-syncing since volume will drop in the right earpiece, then pick right back up. All of these imperfections pass by in a fraction of a second and honestly do little to hinder the listening experience, but since they're not really present at all on the Truefree+, well, you know which gives the superior performance.

Overall I like the sound of the S2 more, it looks nicer, and fits my ears better, but the Truefree+'s battery life and connection quality are superior. The physical controls are also much nicer to interact with in my opinion. Whatever it is you value most, pick the one that offers that.

Astrotec S80 (89.00 USD): While both earphones have a v-shaped signature, the single beryllium-coated divers of the S80s aren't as skewed and have a warmer, thicker feel top to bottom. Where the S2 skewed balanced towards the upper treble the S80 rolls off and focuses on lower treble. Overall detail is similar but the S2 feels more nuanced on first glance thanks to it's leaner more spacious note presentation. The midrange is dominated by the S80 which is more forward and audible with a more accurate timbre and tone. It does a better job representing a wide variety of vocal styles and artists. Bass on the S80 is a bit more tame compared to the S2 with less low end rumble to it. It is also a bit smoother and less textured with a slower, softer attack. That more relaxed presentation gives note more body though, and things like a slow, chugging guitar riff hit in a way the S2 can't match. The S2's sound stage is notably wider and deeper with more space between notes. Imaging performance is similar off-centre with the S80 showing none of the on centre quirks of the S2, though layering and instrument separation are mostly on par.

When it comes to comfort and usability, the S2 wins hands down. I find the S80's shells somewhat awkward and unstable to wear due to the stubby shape and short nozzle, particularly with the stock tips. Comfortable though. The large touch pad also means I pause my music by accident constantly. That happens with the S2, but not to the same extent. The S2's controls are also much more in line with the rest of the industry using more traditional actions to perform functions. The S80 can control volume though, so while its functions are less intuitive to access, it has more of them.

Battery life out of the S80 is quite a bit better. 6 hours isn't unattainable and you get it from the same 2 hour charge time. The case also adds an extra 25 hours of play time vs. the 14 of the S2's case. When it comes to connection stability, the S80 is more reliable and less prone to the occasional hiccup. The S2 managed to best the S80 with its impressive range though.

Overall I prefer the more natural sound, less skewed sound of the S80. However, the S2's ergonomics, more intuitive control scheme, and seriously good range have me leaning in it's favour simply because it is nicer to wear and use, even if connection stability isn't as reliable. Oh yeah, it also lacks the clean background of the S80, so there's that too.


Tech Inside Depending on what you are connected to, the S2's connection is either quite good or somewhat flaky. Stuttering was fairly common when connected to my ASUS FX53V laptop, especially in the low latency high performance mode. Things were much more stable connected to my various smartphones, like the LG G5, G6, and Q70, regardless of the performance mode. The first few runs though the battery I found that every once in a while the right earpiece would briefly drop in volume, then raise back up to match the left. It felt almost like the two sides were resyncing. This issue hasn't cropped up during the last two complete charges so I'm not overly concerned. Despite the occasional hiccups when paired to my laptop, the S2 has been fairly consistent and never fully disconnected without being prompted to do so. The two sides have also never had any issues connecting to each other. Range was also excellent. Regardless of where the source device was, I could walk around my apartment and the connection would remain strong and clear with no hesitating (beyond the occasional stutters mentioned earlier), regardless of how many walls and rooms were in the way. Pretty impressive for a budget TWS.

Latency is another positive. Even in the low latency mode I find the S2 satisfactory for watching videos. Connected to my LG Q70 there was a very mild desync with voices, but nothing unwatchable. Tossing the S2 into the performance mode lowered latency to the point where any delays weren't audible/visible to me. Connected to my laptop the desync was more prominent and while switching to the high performance mode fixed this, it introduced connection instability. I guess my advice it to ensure you're using the S2 paired when paired to more up-to-date products for the best experience.

Battery life out of the S2 is fine, but nothing spectacular. It is rated for 3.5 to 4 hours. Connected to my LG Q70, I've been seeing around 3 hours and 45 minutes on average, usually at or below 1/3 volume. The S2 gets very loud very quickly, and I listen very quietly for the most part.

In The Ear With the S2, KZ has done a wonderful job translating their recent designs into the TWS world. The shells are very similar in size and shape to the ZS10 Pro in profile, with added depth to enable the necessary electronics to fit inside. While the inner portion of the ZS10 Pro is smooth and featureless, the S2 takes a similar approach to the ZSR with custom-like protrusions that help lock the S2 into your outer ear. This goes a long way towards keeping stable during movement. This design feature is very important in my opinion, because the S2 is fully wireless and does not utilize ear hooks or any other feature with a similar function to keep the product in place. This lightweight, form fitting design has been very comfortable in my time with the S2, and I have no problems wearing it for the entire duration of it's battery life of around 3.5 to 4 hours. I've been averaging around 3 hours and 45 minutes when connected to my LG Q70 with the sound quality preference enabled, and the S2 on its regular latency standard mode. Not amazing battery life, but quite satisfactory for most use cases.

When it comes to build quality, the S2 doesn't look or feel like anything special, but it has proven to be durable. I found out the hard way when the left earpiece slipped out of my fingers and over our balcony on the fourth floor, ricocheting off a second floor balcony on the way down. Evidence of the trip was limited to a couple small scuffs. While tough as nails, the plastic used for the ear pieces has that distinct washed out look and oily feel you commonly get with inexpensive, slippery, glossy plastics. The logo on the face plate is a matte texture, something that would have been nice if carried over to the entire earphone. Regardless, fit and finish is fine, though my set did have a number of scratches on the rear of the right earpiece out of the box. I assume that since this is an early production unit, such mild blemishes will not be an issue on the the eventual retail models. After all, it is still going through an Indigogo funding campaign. Also note that the S2 is rated for IPX5 water resistance. I haven't had the chance to test it yet, but those looking to use these while working out shouldn't have to worry about sweat ruining them.

When it comes to the case, I'm quite pleased. First off, the matte plastics used are nothing special and feel about as basic as it gets, but they managed to keep it relatively compact and slender enough to fit comfortably in most pockets. While the placement of the USB port on the bottom (???) is an odd choice, I think this is appropriately countered by a proper metal hinge, the lack of which I've expressed concern about on numerous models from other brands and at much higher costs. This will certainly give the S2's case a welcome durability advantage over much of the competition. Some other nice touches are the strong magnets that keep the lid shut, as well as hold the earphones in place and the contacts lined up when dropped into their charge ports. Lastly, there is a button on the back that when pressed lights up an LED under the lid advising the approximate charge level of the case.

• Red – 0-30%
• Yellow – 31-70%
• Green – 71-100%

When charging the light remains a solid red, and when fully charged switches to green

Using the device is mostly a solid experience, though as is always the case I find touch controls on such compact devices somewhat finicky. The logo on the face plate is the touch point and quite sensitive. As such the various control options are response, pending you tap the right spot. I found it helpful to grip the tapered front of the earpiece with your thumb and middle finger, leaving your index finger to tap accurately. While you can't control volume, other common functions are present like answering and hanging up calls, and playing/pausing and skipping through music tracks. Oddly, I found the triple press needed to activate the high performance mode the most reliable function. If any of the functions were to be changed, I request the single tap to hang up phone calls. I routinely found myself hanging up on my callers by accident. A single long press would resolve this. For those calls I was able to complete, the call quality was decent. Those on the other end found my voice clear, if not a little quiet. The S2's active noise cancelling feature during phone calls seems to work fairly well.


In The Box The S2 arrives in a bright white lift top box similar in style to other similar products in the same price range. On the lid is an image of the earpieces in a wireframe style art form along with their new brand logo and model name. On the left and right sides is one of KZ's original logos. As a long time fan of the brand, I really appreciate this nod to their history. Flip the box over and you find numerous contact and location options for the brand, as well as an important notice.

“In order to ensure the service life and safety of the equipment, do not use fast charger for charging.”

Lifting off the lid you find the charge case tightly held within a stiff, plastic tray. Lifting the tray out reveals the included accessories, a warranty card, and a surprisingly well-written instruction manual. In all you get:

• S2 earphones
• Charge care
• Silicone ear tips (m x2)
• USB Type C charge cable

In all a very basic unboxing experience. While the included tips are very high quality and extremely comfortable, you only get two pairs and only in one size (not small and medium which I originally thought) which will be an issue for some. Hopefully KZ decides to toss in some of their community named “Starline” tips, or at least multiple sizes of the existing tips, once the S2 is done its Indiegogo campaign and is up for regular retail sale.

Final Thoughts Taken as a complete product, the S2 is a very solid true wireless earphone. My favourite aspect is that KZ managed to cram all the electronics and drivers into a familiar and comfortable design, without much compromise beyond the shell being a little thicker than it would otherwise need to be. If you like the comfort that this style of low profile shell provides and is used by brands such as KZ, FiiO, TFZ, Dunu, and various others, you will feel right at home with the S2.

The sound quality is also quite enjoyable with good end-to-end extension and plenty of detail, pending you enjoy a v-shaped signature and vibrant upper treble. There is some background hiss that requires moderate volumes to cover up, but after a couple minutes I always forgot it was there and it did little to ruin my enjoyment of my music. This isn't the sort of earphone you hook up to your pricey hi-fi setup and analyze the hell out of after all.

Connection stability is decent with minor hiccups here and there, but it's backed by a very strong hold that remains that way over good distances, even with obstacles in the way. I can deal with blips as long as the connection never actually drops, and it hasn't yet. Battery life is pretty average, however, with me seeing around 3 hours and 45 minutes per listening session.

Overall I think KZ has done a good job with the S2. Given the sub-50 USD price tag (even less right now through the Indigogo campaign) you have to keep expectations in check and with that in mind, the S2 is a success.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer: Thank you to Lillian with Linsoul for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the S2, and for arranging a sample for coverage. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions and do not represent Knowledge Zenith or Linsoul. At the time of writing the S2 was going through an Indigogo campaign. You can check it out at the links below.

https://www.linsoul.com/pages/kz-s2

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/kz-s2-next-generation-hybrid-tws-in-ear-monitors#/

Specifications

• Driver: 7mm dual-magnet dynamic + KZ 30095 balanced armature
• Chip: Realtek 8763
• Codec: AAC
• Bluetooth: 5.0
• Range: 15+ meters
• Frequency Response: 10Hz – 20kHz
• Earbud Battery: 40mA
• Case Battery: 500mA
• Charge Times: 2hr earphones / 2hr case
• Battery life: 4hr music (up to 18 with case) / 2hr talk time (up to 12 with case)

Devices Used For Testing LG G5, LG G6, LG Q70, Asus FX53V

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings,

Today we’re tackling another unit in the growing dongle army, this time from Cozoy, the Takt C.

Cozoy was founded in 2014, making a name for themselves through the offering of distinctively designed products with performance that matched their bold look. The Takt lineup has actually been around for a couple years now and was initially composed of the Apple Lightning equipped Takt, and more universal Takt Pro. The Takt C is the newest member of the family, sharing its DNA/specifications with the Takt Pro, but for the Takt C Cozoy replaced the micro-USB port for a fixed Type-C cable. They also priced the Takt C much more competitively at 115 USD versus the 289 USD of the Takt Pro.

I’ve been testing this device for the past few weeks and have some words to share about it. Let’s stop wasting time and dive right in…


Packaging …to the most important part, the packaging!!!! This is everyone’s favourite section and probably the most important part of any review, so I made sure to put it right at the beginning.

The Takt C comes in a bright white, elongated lift top box. On the front is an image of the device with the brand name and some product info, such as support for DSD and that it is for use with USB Type-C devices. On either side of the lid you find the Takt C model name. Flipping to the back you find a paragraph telling you about the device, some bullet points with products highlights, and a simple specifications table. Lifting off the lid reveals the Takt C set tightly within a foam insert and a user manual in the form of a small card (English on one side, Mandarine on the other).

And that’s it. About as basic and straightforward as it gets.

Build and Ergonomics The Takt C is made from AL6063 aircraft-grade aluminum and features the edgy, modern styling we have come to expect from the Cozoy brand. All writing is laser etched into the body of the device so you won’t have to worry about it rubbing off. Extra attention was given to the model name on the back which is highly reflective, looking pretty snazzy when it catches the light. The machining quality is excellent with smooth edges and a neat, uniform finish. All the buttons fit into their respective slots with impressive precision and depress with a satisfying, tactile “snick”. There is no wiggling or slop to worry about. That said, despite having average sized hands, I found the buttons too small, particularly the volume rocker. It is only about 12mm long and 1.5mm wide meaning it is very easy to press both buttons at the same time.

The cable is refreshingly well-relieved for a product of this type, both at the main body of the Takt C and leading to the Type C plug. The cable itself is quite flexible though with a plush feeling sheath that ends up bending sharply and kinking at the strain relief if you let it dangle. This puts extra strain on the Type C plug at the phone as well as the Takt’s cable, so I really don’t expect it to last very long the way most people treat their gear. Less of an issue when paired to a laptop where the Takt C is laying on the table beside it, but when going portable with a phone or DAP I’m not a fan.

Another area of concern is with how hot the Takt C gets. The XDuoo Link and Radsone HUD100 develop some warmth, but nothing quite like the Cozoy. If I opt to avoid the potential cable longevity issues that come with letting it stick out of my pocket, I instead have to deal with a sweaty leg and overly warm phone since it’s now tucked into a confined, insulated area with a miniature heater. Thank goodness the Takt C is aluminum, I can only imagine how warm it would get if made from a material less effective at dispersing heat.

Overall, good looking with a nicely built shell and questionable cable, along with subpar ergonomics and potential heat issues. As something to accommodate a phone or DAP, I can’t help but be disappointed with the way the Takt C handles. Fine for pairing with a laptop or tablet though.

Note: I ran into the occasional glitch where when reducing the volume, the Takt C would randomly crank the volume in the left channel and reduce it in the right to being barely audible. Fixing this required unplugging it and plugging it back in. Not fun when you are someone that typically listens at very low volumes.


Sound Contained within the Takt C is Sabre’s ES9018Q2C DAC. I’m sure that’ll excite someone, but frankly I don’t care what’s inside as long as it doesn’t sound like dirt. Physical shortcomings aside, the Takt C performs well and sounds great, if not a tad cold and clinical at times.

I found end-to-end extension to be excellent. There was no dearth of sub-bass when pairing the Takt C with something like the Shozy Form 1.4 or Campfire Audio Cascade, nor was the excellent treble extension of the TinHifi P1 or Hifiman RE800 Gold restrained.

Texture and clarity were also strengths where notes were very well defined with good space between them. They sounded plenty crisp and retained excellent control. It was so good it actually managed to reign in the mild splashiness heard on something like the KB EAR Diamond, though it won’t fix something as loose as the piezo driver in the NiceHCK NX7. This also lead into great layering and separation qualities which enabled the Takt C to showcase the large sound stages found on products like the TFZ Exclusive 3 and Campfire Audio Andromeda.

Where the Takt C lost me occasionally was in the warmth, or lack thereof, in it’s presentation. It’s general sound is slightly cool and sterile with just a bit of heat being injected into the mids and upper bass. Male vocals are fine but female vocals really benefit and end up sounding like the more natural of the two. Everything else has a somewhat hard, digital edge to it that is great for highlighting detail and other technical aspects.

Overall I find the Takt C a very capable device. It does a great job with detail and clarity, element separation and definition, and with end-to-end extension. It’s just not the most organic and natural sounding device, reproducing music in a somewhat cold, sterile way.

Select Comparisons

XDuoo Link (49.99 USD): The Takt C is a much nicer sounding Type C dongle than the Link in my opinion. It has a more balanced sound with less warmth thanks to the extra midbass the Link adds. That is exaggerated further by less end-to-end extension than the Takt C that draws focus to mid and upper bass regions. The Takt C also provides more texture to your bass making the Link sound smeared in comparison. The Cozoy’s midrange isn’t as smooth or natural, but clarity and detail are superior when compared to the Link. Treble sound superior out of the Takt C as well thanks to a leaner presentation with greater note separation that also happens to broaden and deepen the sound stage. The Link ends up feeling a little compressed in comparison.

Build and usability are where the Link earns its keep compared to the Takt C. The main body of the device is also made from aluminum and while not as stylish, is just as well constructed. The Link’s button are larger and more prominent, especially the volume rocker which is much longer (~19mm) with better differentiated ends. Mispresses on the Link are very rare. The Link’s cable is are superior in my opinion. It is thicker and less flexible, bending evenly and without the questionable kinks the Cozoy produces at the entrance to the strain relief. Lastly, while the Link does get a little warm, it is nowhere near a hot as the Cozoy and as a result isn’t uncomfortable to have sitting in your pocket.

When it comes to features, the two go tit for tat. They provide the same physical controls. They have very comparable specs and offer the same sample rate support. The Link is ever so slightly more power but at the expense of background noise. They are about the same size and weight. I tried to measure approximate power consumption but that went nowhere thanks to my own shortcomings. I don’t think it’s a negative on either though since I never found myself charging source devices more often; ex. once every two days with my LG Q70.

While the Takt C is unquestionably the better sounding device of the two, it is not enough to overcome the price premium (over double), the delicate cable, the poor physical controls, or the intense heat generation, in my opinion. The Link sounds good enough, and is nicer to use. If all you care about is sound quality, then obviously go for the Takt C, but for everyone else the Link at around or under 50 USD is a great buy.

Radsone Earstudio HUD100 (169.99 USD): The Takt-C has the benefit of being half the size and a DAC/amp with volume and basic media controls. Both are very well-built with durable aluminum shells, but the removable cables that come with the HUD100 feel like they were made to a higher standard than the fixed cable of the Takt-C. The fact that they are removable also enables greater versatility and longevity for the HUD100.

The Takt-C provides nowhere near the driving power of the HUD100, unable to push the same high impedance, low sensitivity products as well. As such it is best suited to earphones and portable headphones. While the Takt-C has an impressively black background that matches the HUD100’s standard output (besting the high-output port in noise), the sound quality is a noticeable step up on the HUD100.

The Takt-C keeps up with the HUD100 in terms of clarity and detail with near equal as impressive end-to-end extension, but it sounds somewhat cold, sterile, and artificial after a/b’ing them. The Takt-C also lacks the high-output mode and sound profiles/filters of the HUD100.

In terms of extras the Takt-C includes nothing while the HUD100 gives you multiple cables and a protective case. In my opinion, the 54 USD premium the HUD100 demands (going off the MSRP for each) goes a long way, giving you a slew of useful features and handy accessories. It feels even better knowing that to get a removable cable option with the Takt lineup you need to step up to the also well-reviewed Takt Pro. It is virtually identical to the Takt-C minus the removable cable and a 174 USD price jump to 289 USD.

LG Q70 (565.00 CAD): Since people rarely compare dongles to their smart phone, I figured I’d toss out some fast and loose thoughts. Obviously I’m not going to discussion features and build, etc. since one is a USB accessory and the other a feature rich smartphone.

In terms of signature the two pretty much mirror each other. The Q70 has the same, slightly cold presentation style with some warmth injected via a fairly mild midbass bump. The big difference comes in refinement. Everything sounds a tad rough and almost grainy straight out of the Q70 when compared to the Takt C. Treble isn’t quite a well controlled either, bring with it a bit more splash from the Q70. Bass is pretty even though, with both reproducing deep notes with aplomb.

Driving power is another area the Takt C makes sense. While I don’t find it great with really hard to drive gear, you need less notches on the volume dial to get the Takt C up to volume compared to the Q70. That does bring to mind a minor issue I have with the Cozoy, which is low volume listening. With a lot of my earphones the lowest volume is still a bit too loud when I’m listening in quiet areas. Not a problem for most people.

Is the Takt C worth buying if you’re just going to pair it with a smartphone like the Q70? For most people, probably not. But then again, products like this aren’t for just anybody. If you want to improve the sound out of your smartphone, it’s very likely the Takt C will offer exactly what you need, even if the improvements aren’t stratospheric.


Final Thoughts If you’ve read the review and made it this far, you’ll know why I have mixed feelings about the Takt C. If you just skipped to this section for a basic rundown, well here it is.

On the upside the Takt C is a small, well built device with a great sound signature and a black background that makes pairing it with sensitive earphones a reality. I love how it looks and I enjoy how it sounds. On the downside, the volume rocker is far too small, the device gets uncomfortably hot, and I suspect the somewhat flimsy cable will give out fairly quickly if you’re not careful. While these may sound like minor qualms, I’ve been using the thing nearly everyday for a month and those minor qualms haven’t gotten any less qualmy over time.

From a value proposition it doesn’t make a strong case for me either. The XDuoo Link is less than half the price and sure, it doesn’t sound as good, but it sounds good enough and is much more pleasant to use. The Radsone HUD100 is ~55 USD more than the Cozoy but it sounds better and is a more flexible product due to the twin 3.5mm outputs with differing power outputs. The implementation of a removable cable is also nice, something you have to pay a massive premium for in the Takt lineup. The absence of physical controls on the HUD100 isn’t much of a loss either since most DAPs and phones have external controls located in basically the same spot as you’ll find the Takt when using it; your pocket or that general vicinity. Plus you’ll need to take your source out of your pocket to change tracks with either of these DAC/amps anyway since you don’t get anything more advanced than play/pause (on the Takt and Link, nothing on the HUD100).

Unlike others I don’t put sound on a pedestal so high that it overrides all other flaws. Sound is just one of many aspects that I find important. So while overall I like the Takt C and think it’s a good device, I simply find it a hard sell. Its cons aren’t fully outweighed by its pros. If all you care about is getting the best sound for your dollar and everything else is incidental, then absolutely check it out. You’ll have a great time. If you want more out of your device than that, save a few bucks for a slightly worse sound but a much better user experience with the Link, or spend a bit more for the (imo) far superior HUD100 and its improved sound and plethora of useful features.

Thanks for reading!

– B9

Disclaimer A big thanks to Nappoler with Hifigo for asking if I would be interested in covering the Takt C, and for sending a copy for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on almost a month of use, and do not represent Cozoy, Hifigo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Takt C was retailing for 115 USD but could be picked up on sale for 109.25 USD: https://hifigo.com/products/cozoy-takt-c-portable-headphone-amp-32bit-384khz-dsd-hifi-decoder

Devices Used For Testing Asus FX53V, LG Q70, Shanling M0, Shozy Form 1.4, Tinhfi P1, Hifiman RE800, Hifiman Sundara, Campfire Audio Cascade, KB EAR Diamond, NiceHCK NX7

Specifications
– Advanced Sabre DAC ES9018Q2C
– PCM Decoding up to 32-Bit/384kHz
– Native DSD support up to DSD256-11.2MHz
– 4-Layers reinforced gold-plated PCB
– TCXO Crystal Oscillator
– Output Power: 28mW @ 32 ohms per channel
– USB Type-C Input
– Output Port: 3.5mm TRS Headphone jack
– Cable Length: 10cm
– CNC 6063 Aluminum Alloy Body
– Low Power Consumption Design

Greetings!

Today we're checking out Radsone's newest DAC/amp, the HUD100.

2018 saw the release of the ES100 which was an outstanding Bluetooth receiver that took portable audio forums by storm. It offered up a mind boggling feature list along with sound quality and wireless performance at a price the competition simply couldn't match. From what I've been seeing, they're only now beginning to catch up.

The HUD100 isn't a replacement for the ES100, instead taking on the growing USB dongle DAC/amp segment. With strong specs, outstanding file format support and some handy features like a 2.26 Vrms high power output for demanding headphones, along with three available sound profiles and a very compact footprint, the HUD100 is an intriguing prospect for anyone in the market for a new portable DAC/amp.

Let's take a closer look, shall we?


Packaging and Accessories The HUD100 arrives in a small, grey, lift top box that is all business. On the front is a glossy image of the HUD100 along with the usual branding and model information. Down the left side you find some basic specifications and a list of package contents. On the right you find an explanation of the three in-built sound modes and two power modes, as well as a compatibility list (Android, PC, Mac, iOS). Lifting off the lid you find the unexpectedly tiny HUD100 protected by a flat foam insert. Lift that out and the leatherette travel pouch rests within a cardboard insert. Remove that layer to find two more compact cardboard boxes holding the included Type-C cables. Last of all is a Quick Start Guide. In all you get:

• HUD100
• 1m USD Type-C cable
• 10cm USB Type-C cable
• Leatherette travel pouch
• Quick Start Guide

Overall a very simple and straightforward unboxing experience. The travel pouch is a nice inclusion though I wish it were a bit larger. Part of the HUD100 sticks out the top and will still be subject to scratches if you're not careful. The included cables are 1m and 10cm in length and are welcome additions. It's annoying to be given one or the other, as is usually the case. That said, it would have been even better if Radsone included a Type-C to Type-C cable too. As with the Earmen TR-Amp I recently reviewed, leaving out this cable on a device intended for portable use is a bit of an oversight since you'll need an adapter to connect to most DAPs, Android, or iOS phones. This observation is especially applicable given that the HUD100's diminutive footprint makes it perfect for on the go use.

Build Quality Given the size and price of the HUD100, Radsone would be forgiven for crafting it from plastic. But they didn't. The shell of this tiny (45mm x 32mm x 8mm) device is made from two pieces of aluminum giving it some weight and a feeling of solidity you might not expect from something so compact. On the front you find two 3.5mm jacks placed on either side of a three way toggle switch. The left jack is the standard power output (0.914Vrms) while the right houses the high power output (2.26 Vrms), as denoted by H-P printed next to it. Out back is the Type-C port and a DFU slider switch used exclusively for firmware updates (visit www.radsone.com/hud100). The bottom of the device contains Earstudio branding as well as HUD100 / Hi-Fi USB DAC / Designed by Radsone. The top of the device is completely bare, except for a single teensy LED light that tells you when the device is on and the sample rate being played.

• Green – 44.1kHz
• Navy Blue – 48kHz
• Blue – 88.2kHz/96kHz
• Red – 176.4kHz/192kHz
• Yellow – 352.8kHz/384kHz
• White – DSD64/DSD128

Fit and finish is quite good with all the ports and switches fitting neatly within their applicable cutouts. The base aluminum plate protrudes a fraction of a millimetre and as such isn't completely flush, but the visible seam is tight so you won't have to worry about anything working it's way inside. The toggle switch on the front that enables you to select from one of three sound processing modes moves cleanly into each position. A bit more resistance would have been welcome as it's easy to overshoot the centre notch, but this definitely is not an issue and isn't worth more than a passing mention. The spring-loaded DFU slider in the back feels good and snaps back into the default position smoothly.

Overall a very simple and well-build device, and a notable step up from their previous offering, the ES100. Great job Radsone.


Sound, Power, Select Comparisons The HUD100 provides users with three different sound processing modes, selectable via a small switch on the front of the device. Moving the switch to the left bypasses any processing for an unedited sound. In the middle you find the DCT processing mode intended to provide a more analogue-like sound. To the right is Radsone's own Dynamic processing intended to provide a more powerful yet balanced sound. This is what I think of each.

It is important to note that DCT and Dynamic modes currently work on only PCM 44.1kHz. I'm sure this will be expanded on in the future since Radsone is always updating and improving their gear through firmware updates.

Bypass: I've found the bypass to, unsurprisingly, be the least coloured and most neutral signature of the three available options. Through this filter, the HUD100 sounds the most critical and analytic. Detail is most prominent in this mode and notes slightly leaner and cleaner. This option is the one to choose if you like a neutral source, or if you enjoy applying your own EQ settings. I like to use this setting with analytic earphones like the EarNiNE EN2J and Hifiman HE350, and darker or overly warm products that benefit from being toned down a bit, such as the Massdrop x Mee Audio Planamic and Meze 99 Neo. If comparing to other devices in my inventory, I'd say the iFi hip-dac best matches the bypass setting. I find that device quite neutral and clean with a near clinical level of detail on tap. It is a bit leaner sounding than the Bypass setting on the HUD100, but overall they seem alike to my ears.

DCT: The DCT filter is my personal favorite and is used whenever available (i.e. I just leave the switch in the middle). It brings some warmth back to the presentation and smooths things out. This does negatively affect detail retrieval ever so slightly, but to my ears it's worth it. Compared to the Bypass option, the midrange and low end feel like they been pushed up and filled out. This extra weight helps out the midrange in particular giving vocals more weight and density. Radsone says it evokes the presentation of an analogue system, and to a point I agree. Tube lovers will probably find themselves leaving the HUD100 here. I don't really have a preferred headphone or earphone to use with this setting since I feel it is an excellent all rounder. It is just as nice with the Shozy & Neo CP and it is with the Campfire Audio Solaris. Compared to other devices in my inventory, I'd say it best matches the Earmen TR-Amp which shares a slightly warm, analogue sound signature. That device is quite a bit more powerful though. The power and the inclusion of plenty of additional features come as the expense of size, as the TR-Amp is magnitudes larger and less portable than the HUD100.

Dynamic: This filter makes the most difference to my ears, but not necessarily in a way that matches my personal preferences. This one feels like it's for the Beats crowd, bumping midbass thereby making the presentation more dense overall. It's the most coloured of the three options, losing some of the airiness and clarity found in the Bypass and DCT modes. This one is great for countering overly bright headphones and earphones or propping up those with a particularly weak low end. The TinHifi T2 and P1 come to mind. I don't have any DACs or amps that fully mirror this setting, though the Hifiman Megamini DAP and XDuoo Link come the closest. Both are warmer sounding products with a more reserved detail and clarity presentation, best matched with neutral to bright headphones and earphones.

When it comes to power output, the HUD100 is pretty impressive for such a compact device. The regular output provides more than enough clean power for the vast majority of products, such as the AKG K553 Pro, Moondrop Starfield, Campfire Audio Andromeda, Hifiman Sundara, etc. While the output impedance is not provided, I suspect it is low. The Campfire Audio Solaris is the earphone most subjective to source I've got, even more so than historically picky Andromeda. Through the HUD100 the background is clean and volume across the entire frequency range seems to raise evenly without anything spiking, a problem I occasionally come across with various hybrid earphones. Moving over to the high-power output, I can verify it too provides a clean sound experience, though not quite as clean. There is some hiss to be found if you're pairing it with something that has a high enough sensitivity (most products around or above 100dB I've noticed). It does an amazing job of getting my stubborn old Havi B3 Pro I up to comfortable volumes without pushing the source device handling the volume. It also works well to run various planar headphones, like the Hifiman Sundara, Advanced Alpha v1, and even the Hifiman Susvara (!). It doesn't push the latter with quite the same authority as the TR-Amp. I've found that through either output, there is a ton of headroom for volume increases with anything I tossed at it. This is great because I can keep the output on my device low, thereby draining less battery. Other low volume listeners will likely appreciate this. I can't speak to high volume listeners because I'm not one, and what is uncomfortably high to me may be normal or even a little low for you (as I commonly experience with my wife who likes to blast her tunes).

Value Since cost seems to be a bit of a hot topic with this device, I figured I'd weigh in on the subject. My thought is that the HUD100 isn't a great value, nor is it overpriced. Instead, it's priced appropriately. Why do I say this? Let us look at two generally well-received products that fit into price brackets below and above; the Cozoy Takt-C (115 USD) and Periodic Audio Nickel (299 USD).

The Takt-C has the benefit of being half the size and a DAC/amp with volume and basic media controls. Both are very well-built with durable aluminum shells, but the removable cables that come with the HUD100 feel like they were made to a higher standard than the fixed cable of the Takt-C. The fact that they are removable also enables greater versatility and longevity for the HUD100. The Takt-C provides nowhere near the driving power of the HUD100, unable to push the same high impedance, low sensitivity products as well. As such it is best suited to earphones and portable headphones. While the Takt-C has an impressively black background that matches the HUD100's standard output (besting the high-output port in noise), the sound quality is a noticeable step up on the HUD100. The Takt-C keeps up with the HUD100 in terms of clarity and detail with near equal as impressive end-to-end extension, but it sounds somewhat cold, sterile, and artificial after a/b'ing them. The Takt-C also lacks the high-output mode and sound profiles/filters of the HUD100. In terms of extras the Takt-C includes nothing while the HUD100 gives you multiple cables and a protective case. In my opinion, the 54 USD premium the HUD100 demands (going off the MSRP for each) goes a long way, giving you a slew of useful features and handy accessories. It feels even better knowing that to get a removable cable option with the Takt lineup you need to step up to the also well-reviewed Takt Pro. It is virtually identical to the Takt-C minus the removable cable and a 174 USD price jump to 289 USD. Yeah, the HUD100 is looking real good right now.

I had issues with the Nickel's price when I reviewed it a year ago (almost to the day actually), and that qualm is even more applicable now. While it is plenty powerful and has some cool features, auto power on/off and an insane 30 minute charge time for 8 hours of use being standouts, it felt more like a prototype than a retail ready product. Plus, it failed to provide a good experience with high sensitivity, low impedance products, among other nitpicks. Its faults really stand out when pitting it against the HUD100. The Nickel is twice the size. It has only one output option. It uses a less durable micro-USB port. The Polycarbonate body is tough as nails but fit and finish is subpar and visually, well, it looks like a DIY project. In fairness, the review unit I was sent was b-stock with blemishes you would not find on a standard retail unit, but I've seen plenty of images of ideal units and they are not much nicer. That includes the devices pictured on Periodic Audio's product page. I know it sounds like I'm bashing the Nickel which is not the intent of this section. I really do like it a lot and commonly pair it with my Shanling M0. They are about the same size and strapped together make for a powerful, compact, mobile setup. However, The HUD100 can do pretty much everything the Nickel does, but in a smaller, more attractive, more feature rich package that costs almost half as much. I really see no reason to pick up the perfectly capable Nickel when something like the HUD100 exists.


Final Thoughts The HUD100 is set to shake up the USB dongle segment. It is absurdly small for the feature set, offers flexible power outputs, measures very well for a dongle, supports a wide variety of high quality file formats, and is stuffed with impressive tech. I also love that the cable isn't fixed, and that there are three sound profiles available at the flick of a switch.

While there are some features that would have been nice to see carried over from the ES100, like volume controls and a 2.5mm balanced out, their absence is easily dismissed. Many devices have external volume controls that are easy to access from a pocket, and the high-power output here is just as strong as the balanced out from the ES100. I'd rather use a thicker, more durable 3.5mm jack to get the same power if the option exists, and with the HUD100 it does.

The only real qualm I have, and it is minor, comes down to accessory omissions. You get everything you need to connect direct to a MAC or Windows PC. Connection with an Android device will require buying an OTG adapter, and to iOS devices a USB Camera adapter. Since Type C equipped devices are vastly more common than Apple's proprietary option, tossing in a short Type C to Type C cable to allow pairing with phones and Type C equipped DAPs out of the box would be nice.

Overall though, I really enjoy the HUD100. Setting it up requires no effort, there are no hurdles to jump to start enjoying your music, and pricing is appropriate when comparing to similar products across a variety of price brackets. Radsone is once again entering a popular, ever growing segment and seems to be providing one of the better performance for your dollar options.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer A big thanks to Kyle with Radsone for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the HUD100, and for arranging a sample for testing. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions and do not represent Radsone or any other entity. At the time of writing the HUD100 retailed for 169.99 USD, but was on sale for 135.99 USD. You can check it out here: https://earstudio.store/products/hud100

Edit: They've opened their own store and with it came a price drop for the HUD100! 139 USD instead of 169 USD. Woohoo!! https://earstudio.store

Specifications

Greetings!

Today we're checking out one of Shozy's newest, the Form 1.4.

The Form 1.4 builds on the Form 1.1 released last year (which I'll be reviewing in a couple weeks time), adding an additional three balanced armatures to the hybrid configuration. Inside are five drivers, one dynamic driver and four balanced armatures (hence 1.4), as well as a three-way crossover to keep it all in check. I've really enjoyed a number of past products from the Shozy brand, like the Hibiki (both versions), and Shozy & Neo CP, so my expectations for the Form 1.4 were high. My first listen did not leave me disappointed, nor have my continued experiences with it over the last month.

Let's take a closer look at this new hybrid from Shozy, and find out why it has joined the Moondrop Starfield as one of my favourite products of 2020, thus far.


What I Hear The Form 1.4 is one of those warm, unapologetically bassy earphones that puts a smile on my face the moment music starts piping through them. They sound as good as they look, pending you enjoy plenty of bass and sleek, sexy objects.

Starting off with treble, the Form 1.4 is pretty mellow. Extension is decent, but the lack of major emphasis or significant peaks keeps it from sounding shrill or causing fatigue, even at high volumes. While there are no significant peaks, lower treble does see a lift that gives the Form 1.4 good clarity. This isn't a detail monster by any means and there isn't a ton of upper treble shimmer and sheen, but the information is there and the quality is high, it's just not shoved in your face. I was quite impressed with the 1.4's attack and decay. While the presentation is reasonably tame, these armatures are quick and well controlled and offer a very tight, clean experience. Still, if an analytic sound is what you're after you are better off buying something like the EarNiNE EN2J or TinHiFi P1.

The midrange on this earphone is flat out gorgeous in my opinion. When it comes to vocals in my music, they fall into the “take it or leave it” category. I don't spend a ton of time focusing on lyrics and consider voices just another instrument in the mix. Therefore, when I find myself with an earphone that has me hunting down tracks from artists whose voices I really like, such as Calyx (on Calyx and TeeBee's “Long Gone”), Céline Dion (“Ashes”), and Alicia Keys (“Un-thinkable”), you know it's going to sound pretty awesome. Again, the Form 1.4 isn't hyper detailed in the mids, but it doesn't need to be. Clarity is perfect and unimpeded by the voluminous midbass, and timbre spot on. Nothing sounds plasticy, dry, overly bright, etc. Also, you might rag on me for this given this is a track for one of the largest games in the world, but listen to Awaken (ft. Valerie Broussard) from the League of Legends crew. The emotion and power in Valerie's performance combined with the cinematic track design is phenomenal. I can listen to this over and over and not get tired of it. If you opt to watch through Youtube, the accompanying video is pretty slick too.

On to the bass! The Form 1.4's bread and butter. The tires to your automobile. The one aspect that carries the performance, holds up the rest of the signature, and ties the entire product together. To say the low end on this earphone is engaging would be an understatement. This dynamic driver doesn't hold back. Dillon Francis's “Not Butter” highlights the 1.4's bass perfectly; grungy, highly elevated mid-bass backed by visceral vibrations from some deep subbass. Detail and texture are handled well, being clear and satisfactory, but not overdone. The smooth presentation heard through the mids and treble carries on down here too. Despite the massive waves of bass this driver can output, it somehow manages to remain fairly tight and avoids bloat. Don't get my wrong, you catch whiffs of it every now and then, but the scent passes by so quickly if fades from memory near instantly. Despite most of my favorite earphones being BA-only and fairly light on bass, the presentation here is undeniably intoxicating.

Sound stage is where things pull back a bit and the Form 1.4 is more average. I find it quite wide without a ton of depth, not unlike the 6mm micro-dynamic earphones I love so much. As pointed out by one of my peers, as you increase the volume the staging opens up, gaining back some of that missing depth. However, I also find raising the volume brings the vocals in closer. It's a weird mix of enlarging the overall sound stage while compressing aspects of it at the same time. Given I generally listen at low volumes, my experience with the stage is typically wide and shallow. Imaging is quite accurate with clean channel-to-channel transitions. I don't find it vague in any way, though it doesn't offer up the pinpoint accuracy of something like Brainwavz's B400. Instrument separation is also quite good thanks to all those drivers tucked away inside, but the shallow staging hinders layering somewhat and on extremely busy tracks the Form 1.4 starts to blur fine details. That said, who listens to orchestral music with bass cannons anyway

Overall I absolutely adore the way this product sounds. It is smooth, organic, analogue, realistic, etc. etc. etc. Just toss in a bunch of classy buzzwords, heap some more praise on the pile, then cap things off with two thumbs up and a toothy smile *ding*. This earphone kicks @$$. Oh yeah, and make sure you read the disclaimer. This review is subjective if you hadn't figured that out already. The Form 1.4 doesn't measure perfectly and is objectively just okay. That doesn't matter to me. My interpretation of the Form 1.4's tune is that is was designed to elicit strong emotions from the listener, and I think it succeeds in spades.


Compared to a Peer

BGVP DMS (159.00 USD): Bass out of the 1+6 (one dynamic, six armatures) DMS digs a little deeper with less midbass emphasis and more subbass emphasis. The Form 1.4 sounds notably better controlled though, especially on long, dynamic notes that change pitch and loudness. The Form 1.4 also provides a bit more texture. Heading into the midrange, vocals and instruments are more prominent through the 1.4. It presents itself with a more natural timbre and tone than the DMS, but falls behind in terms of clarity and detail. Treble on the Form 1.4 is more rolled off on top with less upper treble energy. As a result it sounds darker and warmer, with a more confined presentation. The additional lower treble emphasis of the DMS also gives it a detail edge. The DMS has a wider and deeper sound stage but doesn't as precisely image from channel-to-channel. Both separate and layer tracks well, with neither really having an edge to my ears.

Build quality with both earphones is outstanding, but since they take very different approaches it's hard to say which takes the proverbial win. The DMS is painted aluminum with a similar inner shape to the Form 1.4. The face plate incorporates the triple slash BGVP logo into the vent design. It's quite clever and unique, but does not look anywhere near as beautiful as the Form 1.4's hand polished wood. Despite containing two additional drivers (set within a 3D printed sound enclosure) the DMS is smaller and even more ergonomic. Weight between the two is closer than you'd expect given the DMS is metal, but the DMS is, as expected, the heavier of the two. Isolation is clearly better on the Shozy though. Overall, they're both wonderfully constructed with stellar fit and finish. I guess it comes down to things like size, attractiveness, and material durability, as to which you would choose. When it comes to their cables, well, BGVP all the way. It is stiffer and doesn't look anywhere near as nice, but you don't have to worry about it kinking and destroying itself, or tangling at the first opportunity it gets. I'm sure many will prefer the 1.4's cable, but that cloth sheath completely ruins it for me.

When it comes down to it, I don't find the Form 1.4 to perform at a much higher calibre than the DMS, but it engages me in the way the DMS cannot. The Form 1.4 had some additional effort put into it in the form of manual labour and craftsmanship with the hand polished resin coating, and there's the whole wood face plate thing, plus the cable is higher quality (even if I like it less). So, from a construction perspective I think the extra dough required to hop on the Form 1.4 train is warranted.

LZ A5 w/ updated red filter (269.00 USD): The LZ A5 was a hot topic earphone back in 2018. It was a follow up to the phenomenally popular A4. The A5 upped the ante with a higher price tag and driver count to match. They also “borrowed” Honda's flying wing logo. Since the A5 contains the same driver setup as the 1.4, that being a single dynamic and four balanced armatures, it only seems fair to compare. Bass out of the Form 1.4 is bolder and more powerful, though depth feels equally good. Texture and speed are superior on the A5, but the Form 1.4 provides a thumpier, more visceral experience. Mids on the A5 are slightly less forward and not as dense or weighty. Sibilance can also be an issue, something not really present on the Form 1.4. It has the edge in clarity and coherence, but ends up sounding less organic and natural than the Form 1.4, especially when it comes to timbre. The Form 1.4 has a much more relaxed treble region, in particular the brilliance region. Even with the more restrained red filter in place, the A5's treble is quite bright. You get a ton more shimmer and vibrancy from the A5, but also a lot more fatigue. It also doesn't help that decay is slower and notes less controlled than on the Form 1.4. These two earphones are quite comparable through the bass and mids, but the Form 1.4's treble to my ears is leagues ahead in terms of quality. The A5 wins some points back with a larger sound stage and excellent imaging, layering, and separation qualities which are all a step above the Form 1.4.

Build quality goes to the Form 1.4. Don't get me wrong, the A5 is a nicely build earphone but everything about it just feels a little less premium. It doesn't feel as solid and weighty (despite being aluminum) and the stolen, pink Honda logo loses it a lot of points. I also don't like how loose the MMCX connectors are as the earphone can swivel about freely making inserting them a little less easy than it needs to be. The shape is also exceptionally common and is quite similar to the ancient Shure SE846. On the plus side, that does lead to a very comfortable product that has widespread appeal across a variety of ear types. The Form 1.4's larger, thicker, more contoured housings will limit potential users due to size alone. When it comes to the cable, I have to give it to LZ. It too is a cloth cable, but this one is handled better. The sheath is almost twice as thick below the y-split and is very tangle resistant. Even more important is that it is very kink resistant. It remains notably thicker above the y-split, and does a slightly better job of mitigating cable noise. The one critical flaw with LZ's cable that almost had me giving the nod to Shozy is the use of memory wire instead of preformed ear guides. This memory wire is god-awful, BUT, with some coercing can be formed into something livable. For me at least. Some people love memory wire and hate preformed guides. That's something I'll never understand, but alas, to each their own.

While the A5 is the more detailed, resolving earphone, the treble can get out of hand. It also sounds much less natural than the Form 1.4. Shozy for the win.


In The Ear The Form 1.4 features organically shaped, 3D printed earpieces using imported stabilized wood face plates that are unique to each earphone. The protective resin coating is polished by hand bringing further personalization and craftsmanship to the project. I'm strongly reminded of the Limited Edition Kinera IDUN which also utilized 3D printed housings and stabilized wood face plates, and as a result has a similarly unique quality to each model. The Form 1.4 looks and feels just as premium thanks to the more smoothly integrated 2-pin connectors, metal nozzles, and metal vent hole on the rear face of each ear piece. That said, I appreciate Kinera's decision to use a clear resin instead. It allows you to peer inside and appreciate the various components that make it tick. Being able to do the same with the Form 1.4 would have been nice. Regardless, it is a beautifully crafted and constructed earphone that is every bit as premium as something costing twice as much.

While the ear pieces are a work of art, the cable is hit and miss. Mostly miss. Let's start with the good stuff, that being the hardware. The chromed 0.78mm 2-pin plugs look great and sit mostly flush with the body of the earphone. It would be better if they were recessed slightly to add some additional protection against bending, but I'm cool with them as-is. The straight jack feels like a high quality piece with a weighty metal and (faux?) carbon fibre construction. They even laser etched the Shozy brand name onto one of the chrome rings so you won't have to worry about it rubbing off over time. Strain relief is a little stubby, but the rubber used is soft enough to provide adequate protection. Above the y-split is a small metal bead that functions as a chin cinch. It works well despite the weight. The y-split carries on the chrome/carbon fibre aesthetic and looks fantastic, though there is a complete lack of strain relief. Normally this would be a red flag for longevity, but this is a fabric cable and that brings us to the main negative; this is a fabric cable.

I'm biased against them because my experiences have almost exclusively been negative. The Form 1.4's cable embodies pretty much everything I dislike about this style of cable. Below the y-split its actually not terrible though. The weave is loose but because of the way a fabric sheath reacts to twisting, feels sturdy and stable. Its not resistant to tangling though. Above the y-split certainly isn't either. Not only does it tangle with ease, but small kinks develop the moment the cable twists or loops in the wrong direction. You must be very careful when wrapping it up and putting it in the case, and equally cautious when removing it from the case for your next listening session. Do not absentmindedly toss this cable in your pocket unless you want to spend the next 10 days trying to unravel the chaos it will inevitably become. The preformed ear guides are thankfully fine. While they aren't particularly nice looking, they are flexible and do a decent job keeping the cable behind your ear where it should be. Personally, I recommend ditching this cable immediately. It is not worth the hassle.

When it comes to isolation, I found the Form 1.4 quite impressive. With no sound playing and the stock medium tips installed, the clattering of key strokes is reduced to a slight click, nearby voices muffled, and the roar of passing cars dulled. Bring music into the picture and all that is easily drowned out without the need to increase volume to compensate. With foam tips in place, the Form 1.4 isn't a half bad set of ear plugs. Those who frequent the transit system or noisy coffee shops (if those return in the near future given we're in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic at the time of writing) will find the Form 1.4 a welcome companion.


In The Box Since my Form 1.4 did not come with retail packaging, this section will be short and sweet. What it did arrive in was a simple matte black cardboard box with the Shozy logo emblazoned in silver foil on top. This is the same box you find inside the main retail packaging of the Form 1.1, so I assume the 1.4 will ship with something similar. Within this simple encasement you find all the goodies:

• Shozy Form 1.4 earphones
• 2-pin 0.78mm fabric shielded cable
• Fabric coated carrying case
• Foam tips (s/m/l)
• Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Bi-flange silicone tips (s/m/l)

Let's first chat about the case. The grey fabric you find coating this hexagonal beauty seems to be pretty popular right now. A similar aesthetic can be found on the various cases included with the Astrotec S80 and charge case of the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless. Not only does it look nice, but functionally it's useful too. Dirt and grime is well hidden and it provides plenty of grip in the hand. The Shozy logo printed on top of this case will probably peel off in time, but that's not a big deal.

The included tips are the same as those found with the Shozy & Neo CP, at least in all but colour when looking at the single flange set. Material quality of the silicone tips is outstanding. It is durable and flexible. The large double flange and foam pairs fit me on the CP. While this rings true with the 1.4, you can now rope in the large single flange set thanks to the 1.4's deeper insertion. It would still be wise for Shozy to include a fourth pair of even larger tips, or even something a little more traditional in shape. Many will find themselves resorting to third party tips out of the box to guarantee a reliable seal. I'd love to see Shozy team up with Final Audio and include their E Type tips which pair well with the 1.4.

Final Thoughts If you like highly refined earphones with punchy, powerful bass and a glorious midrange, all tucked inside a sexy, comfortable shell, the Form 1.4 is for you. The cable is mediocre, it's not the be-all end-all for measurement freaks, it's not the king of detail and clarity, nor is it highly affordable at 199.00 USD (or about a billion in my local Canuck bucks), so it doesn't have everything going for it. That said, that stuff doesn't really matter when you hear the powerhouse of a performance it is capable of producing.

Audiophiles bow out now, if you even made it this far. This part isn't for you.

The reason I love the Form 1.4 so much is because it is FUN. I don't get lost in the technical aspects of the product since none of that stands out. Instead I get lost in the performance itself. The Form 1.4 is that rare artist that performs purely for the love of it. Not because it makes them money, or because they know they're damn good at it and their ego takes over. It is simply because it makes them happy. The Form 1.4 does that for me. My mood improves and I feel content and relaxed. I'm reminded of why I dug into this hobby in the first place; because I love music and the products that reproduce it. Maybe this earphone will do the same for you too.

Thanks for reading.

- B9

Disclaimer Thanks to Lillian with Linsoul Audio for arranging a sample of the form 1.4 for review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the Form 1.4. They do not represent Shozy, Linsoul, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Form 1.4 retailed for 199.00 USD: https://www.linsoul.com/products/shozy-form-1-4

Specifications

• Driver: 4 balanced armatures, 1 dynamic driver w/ 3-way crossover
• Sensitivity: 102dB
• Impedance: 16ohms
• Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20kHz

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, Cozoy Takt C, Earmen TR-Amp, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we're checking out the TR-Amp from EarMen.

EarMen is a relatively young brand with an established history, coming out the gates as the more affordable arm of the Auris Audio brand. These products have been designed and engineered by Miki Trosic, the founder of Auris Audio, and as such have a strong foundation on which their principles are grown.

EarMen is “...on a quest to deliver the highest quality audio experience while granting you the freedom to enjoy your music without limitations...” with the TR-Amp leading the charge. It achieves this through quality components like the ES9038Q2M SABRE Reference DAC. This chip utilizes ESS's HyperStream© II QUAD DAC with 32-bit audio and Time Domain Jitter Eliminator for plenty of driving power, yet not at the expense of a low noise floor. It supports a wide variety of high quality audio formats, like DSD, DXD, PCM, as well as native MQA delivery for the most discerning of listeners. You can use it as a portable amp/DAC, as a pre-out for a desktop amplifier, and even power up to two headphones at the same time thanks to the dual outputs (1/4” and 3.5mm).

The TR-Amp is an affordable (249 USD), feature and technology rich device with power to spare, doing it all either as a mobile device, or nestled in with the rest of your hifi setup. Let's check it out in greater detail, shall we?


Packaging and Accessories The TR-Amp comes in a fairly standard matte black lift top box. On the top of the lid is a wire frame style image of the device with the brand and model information in the middle. Around the sides the branding and model information is repeated. Flipping the box over you find some specs and heck of a lot of acronyms and logos, such as those for DSD, DXD, PCM, MQA, XMOS, ESS, Texas Instruments, and the obligatory Hi-Res Audio logo. Lifting off the lid the TR-Amp sits comfortably nestled within a foam insert. Lifting them out a secondary box resides underneath which contains the rest of the included items. In all you get:

• TR-Amp
• Remax USB-A to USB-C cable
• Rubber band
• Mesh carrying bag
• Information sheet

Overall a very basic unboxing experience, but with some high quality inclusions. First is the carrying bag. Rarely are these included with a portable amp in my experience. Given the TR-Amp is a little larger than others, it's nice to have something to store it in while not in use to ensure it doesn't get scratched or damaged. The Remax branded USB cable was a surprising inclusion too. Remax made some excellent earphones back in the day (and maybe they still do). It seems they make some gorgeous cables too. It is thick and durable with stylish end caps and feels like something that is going to last a lot longer than the relatively basic cables that most brands include with their products.


Build The TR-Amp is crafted from CNC milled aluminum and comes in either silver, black, or the stunning red you see in this review. Build quality is exceptional with clean edges and minimal gaps between the end plates, main body, and ports, though tolerances could be a tiny bit better. Light from the LED bleeds around the nearby 3.5mm port where there is also a bit of wiggle room. You can see the ports shift when plugging cables in and out. Certainly nothing to be concerned about, but noticeable none-the-less. Neatly engraved logos and markings for the various ports, switches and knobs can be found around the device, with an EarMen logo dominating the top.

On the front of the device from left to right you find a 1/4” single-ended TRS jack, a 3.5mm single-ended TRS jack, a pinhole for the internal LED notification light, and the volume knob. On the back are two Type-C ports set within a glossy black plastic insert (one for charging, one for data transfer), a Pre-Out/Direct DAC toggle switch, and the L/R line out ports. On the bottom you find four clear rubber feet that do a fantastic job at keeping the TR-Amp from scratching your phone, desk surface, etc. and ensure it remains stable and in place during your listening sessions.

Dual Type-C ports is a welcome addition since it enables you to charge while listening. Since the data and charge ports are on separate circuits, you don't have to worry about noise being introduced into the listening chain. Another nice feature are the dual headphone outs that can be used in tandem, so if you're listening along with your significant other or a friend, you don't need to share headphones as long as you've both got a set. Just be sure to bring along a 1/4” to 3.5mm adapter because you'll probably need it, and try to listen with headphones of similar sensitivity. There's only one volume knob after all. The TR-Amp also works as a pre-amp, bypassing the ES9038 DAC thanks to the Pre-Out/Direct toggle switch out back

Battery Performance The TR-Amp's 3,700mA battery is rated for up to 10hours of use. I've been seeing between 8.5 to 9 hours on most runs meaning the TR-Amp is the perfect companion for a solid day at work. I can start listening at the beginning of a shift, and ride it all the way to the end. That said, when the power dies it is very sudden, and if doing so while gaming your computer might trip up and freeze temporarily while shifting over to an alternate output source. At least mine did while I was in the midst of a heated ARAM battle in League of Legends, thereby causing the death of poor Trundle. Rest in peace little buddy. :'(


Sound Quality and Device Pairing The TR-Amp features the highly respected Texas Instruments TPA6120 chip designed around a current-feedback AB amplifier build. Since I'm casual scum when it comes to explaining and/or understanding the tech behind DACs and amps, I'll let EarMen take over in describing why the above matters. This next bit has been borrowed from the TR-Amp's product page.

“Three key features make current-feedback amplifiers outstanding for audio. The first feature is the high slew rate that prevents odd order distortion anomalies. The second feature is current-on-demand at the output that enables the amplifier to respond quickly and linearly when necessary without risk of output distortion. When large amounts of output power are suddenly needed, the amplifier can respond extremely quickly without raising the noise floor of the system and degrading the signal-to-noise ratio. The third feature is the gain-independent frequency response that allows the full bandwidth of the amplifier to be used over a wide range of gain settings.”

What this translates into during my time with this device is that the TR-Amp sounds very clean regardless of the headphone with the only hiss/static present coming from the volume knob itself when making adjustments. That applies even to very sensitive, hiss-prone iems like the Campfire Audio Solaris. The background on this thing is dead silent. It can also drive pretty much anything, including demanding headphones like the Susvara from Hifiman. That behemoth draws distortion out of all but the most powerful of devices, especially at higher volumes and on bassy tracks, yet the TR-Amp takes it on without batting an eye. I don't have an earphone in my collection that even begins to test the TR-Amp's limitations.

The TR-Amp has a slightly coloured signature that adds some warmth and additional low end emphasis to whatever it is you're listening to. While some might scoff at this, I think this sort of tuning makes sense for a device intended to be used in a portable manner. Bass is usually the first thing to suffer when out and about in the real world, so a slight bump to those regions helps counter that. That additional emphasis is minor though, so the TR-Amp is still more than suitable in quiet environments. It works just as well as a compact desktop amp or as a companion for your laptop.

Extension at either end is excellent with no detectable roll off. Notes attack with vigour and decay realistically, so should you pair the TR-Amp with something sluggish or soft, or extra quick and snappy, those qualities are retained. When it comes to staging qualities, the TR-Amp results in some mixed feelings. On one hand, imaging remains sharp and nuanced but with some pairings the sound stage has a habit of shrinking slightly. Track layering and instrument separation remain positives, and I never noticed instruments compressing into each other or fighting for space, at least not with products where this isn't already an issue.

When using the TR-Amp as a pre-amp via the line out ports in the back, the signature is altered into something a little more “hifi”. The added warmth heard while using the headphone ports is gone, replaced by a subtle lift in the mids and treble. This makes the TR-Amp a little sharper and more accurate, and adds is some airiness compared to using the regular headphone ports. I quite like using it in this mode paired to my TEAC HA-501 desktop amp as it compliments that device's smooth, analogue signature.


AKG K553 Pro (32ohm, 114dB): A few short months after getting the Dunu Titan 1 in 2015, the AKG 533 Pro was ordered through then-named Massdrop. It has remained one of my reference headphones ever since thanks to the well-balanced and detailed signature, and a sound stage that defies the closed back nature. Plus, it looks cool as hell. Through the TR-Amp the K553 Pro feels even more balanced thanks to the additional low end power EarMen's device brings to the table. It warms up the signature a bit, improves sub-bass emphasis, and makes the K553 Pro a better all-rounder. The sweet mids remain in place, treble still attacks cleanly and with purpose, and the sound stage is still large and in charge. Wrap the cable up, strap the TR-Amp to the back of your source device, and wander out into the world with one of the the best performance for your dollar portable hi-fi setups out there.


Yamaha YHD-2 (125ohm, 97dB): For a nearly 40-year old headphone, the YHD-2 I picked up for next to nothing at the local Value Village still makes for a satisfying listen. Through the TR-Amp the YHD-2 has a very intimate sound stage, especially when compared to the iFi hip-dac and TEAC HA-501, yet it still does an excellent job of moving sound around this compact space in a manner that feels reasonably natural. Instrument separation and layering somewhat crumble on multi-tiered tracks, but keep things simple and you're in for a good time. These two sound especially satisfying when paired together on synth wave tracks, such as GUNSHIP's “Dark All Day”. The gorgeous mids of that track and the TR-Amp mash together perfectly, backed with some truly visceral texturing in the low end and saxophone. Treble beyond 6k isn't really a thing on the YHD-2, so it sounds about as mellow here as it does through anything else.


Meze 99 Neo (26ohm, 103dB): The 99 Neo is about as warm and mid-bassy as I'd want to get when pairing a headphone with the TR-Amp. Through this device, the 99 Neo's low end is plenty authoritative. Mid-bass puffs its chest with a thumpy, punchy presentation and sub-bass that almost feels like it reverberates around inside the cups. The midrange sees a nice lift compared to other sources in my possession. Since the 99 Neo's mids are warm and lush, this is very welcome. Treble remains mellow and relaxed with tight, clean notes and similar levels of roll off that I'm used to through my TEAC. The 99 Neo's sound stage seems like it opens up quite a bit when paired with the TR-Amp, though imaging, layering and separation aren't enhanced at all and feel a little left behind.


Hifiman Susvara (60ohm, 83dB): The Susvara is a very demanding set of headphones. That said, the TR-Amp is more than up to the challenge. When paired with the Susvara, at high volumes many amps tend to distort on deep bass notes, including my main squeeze the TEAC HA-501. Not an issue with the TR-Amp. The Susvara sounds every bit the top tier headphone it is. Bass is deep and punchy with outstanding control. The midrange is forward and lush with the outstanding timbre I expect. Treble is crisp and tightly controlled. Outstanding clarity and texture is present top to bottom. About the only area that sees any compromise is the sound stage which doesn't feel quite as spacious as it does with other amps, like my desktop TEAC HA-501. The TR-Amp also isn't as smooth and organic sounding as that device either, but the EarMen costs half as much and is a portable device so the compromise seems fair. I'm honestly just impressed it runs the Susvara at all, let alone as well as it does. The TR-Amp will also drive the Susvara to volumes I am not at all comfortable with. Staying within my limits I am unable to hear any distortion or signs of EarMen's budget wonder struggling.


Final Thoughts The TR-Amp gets a pretty easy recommendation from me. The plug and play nature of the design means it is very intuitive and easy to use. It has enough power, and clean power at that, to drive anything tossed at it; headphones, earphones, earbuds, whatever. It does not matter what it is, the TR-Amp can probably run it just fine. It also supports the high end audio formats people demand nowadays, like Tidal's MQA of which the TR-Amp renders natively. While it is a bit of a chunky beast and is probably used best as a small desktop device or as a compliment to your laptop, it's not so heavy and unwieldy to be unusable as a portable DAC/amp strapped to your DAP or phone. Just make sure you've got a spacious pocket available to accommodate it.

The only thing I would like to recommend to EarMen is that they include a short Type-C to Type-C cable in the box. Since this is intended to be used as a portable device, it only accepts input via Type-C, and most modern DAPs/phones are capable of audio output via Type-C USB, not including one of these cables is a missed opportunity. It limits a buyers ability to take advantage of one of the most powerful aspects of the TR-Amp, that being its portability, at least until they go out and source one of those cables themselves.

Overall, the TR-Amp is a very satisfying device. It is affordable, powerful, flexible, and does nothing but enhance your listening experience.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer A big thanks to Miroslav with Auris Audio for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the TR-Amp, and for arranging a sample for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions. They do not represent EarMen, Auris Audio, or any other entity. At the time of writing the TR-Amp retailed for 249.00 USD: https://EarMen-shop.com/products/tr-amp

Specifications

• DAC: ESS Sabre 9038 which supports DSD, DXD, PCM, MQA, and XMOS
• USB Decoder: XMOS
• Audio Formats: DSD 128 native, DSD 256 (DoP), DXD 384/352.8kHz, PCM up to 384kHz, MQA rendering MQB (MQA core)
• Dynamic Range: > 120dB
• Frequency Range: 10Hz – 50kHz
• Battery: 3,700 mAh (during charging use 5v, min 2A adapter)
• Dimensions: 129x66x30 mm / 5.08”x2.6”x1.18”
• Weight: 240g / 0.53lbs

Greetings!

Today we're checking out the VSonic VSD 3P.

VSonic used to be a household name in the forums thanks to legendary models like the GR07. They were one of the earliest major players in the Chinese earphone industry offering killer sound at an affordable price. Along with Fidue, Astrotec, Dunu, Havi and a small handful of other “giant slayers” that have languished over the years, VSonic made a name for the Chinese brands we know and love today. Well, I'm doing a disservice to Dunu and Astrotec. They've made great strides to stay relevant and are still regularly releasing quality products.

The VSD 3P came at a time while VSonic's popularity was waning. Attention for the VSD3, VSD5, and S versions came and went, with the P feeling like a last ditch effort to raise brand awareness. A quick search around the web for the VSD 3P will show that it failed spectacularly because there is next to no coverage or feedback, at least from a primarily English-speaking demographic. And that's really too bad, because while it is far from perfect, the VSD 3P is brimming with style and it still sounds pretty good. I'm glad I found mine and had the chance to revisit this forgotten release, and to share my thoughts on it with you.

So, let's take a look at the VSD 3P and find out why it's worth picking up today, if not only as a collectors piece for die hard VSonic fans, because I highly doubt they'll be around much longer (this model, not the brand itself).


What I Hear VSonic did a solid job with the VSD 3P. Part of that is down to how easy it is to tune with nothing but foams. Full foams make it warm, thick, and reasonably bassy. Donuts balance things out a bit. It still sounds thicker than when running it naked, but not as dense as with full foams. Treble is still energetic and mids remain forward. With no foams at all, it has a very typical earbud sound with a mid and treble focused tune. Bass quantity is mild with early roll off. Since I enjoyed the VSD 3P most with the included donuts installed, the following sound impressions were taken with it in that configuration.

Starting with treble, the VSD 3P has decent extension. It feels like there are small peaks in both presence and brilliance regions giving it some sparkle and good detail, though lower treble feels like it gets more focus. Notes are well controlled and free of splash, though not quite as airy and spacious as I've heard from the competition. Attack and decay are pretty much in line with other ear buds, meaning it's neither super quick or overly slow. It sounds fairly accurate and in line with reality.

The meaty midrange is a standout on this earbud. Vocals have a nice weighty presence to them. Female vocalists are especially nice given they have an intimate presence, warmth, and general sweetness about them. Male vocals are also quite satisfying with a coolness to them that I find most natural. While the midrange is generally fantastic, it can sound a bit too thick at times. Clarity and raw detail are on the weaker side as a result. Timbre is quite good though with instruments sounding as they should for the most part.

The low end is another standout with the VSD 3P providing some of the most visceral bass I've heard from an earbud. It is deep and impactful and does a great job of moving air. You really feel each thud reverberating, especially on sustained notes. It feels even better when a long note switches from channel to channel as you feel it whip across your head. Texture is good but not class leading. Really grungy notes feel a bit smoother than they should, but it's still plenty good enough. I will warn that without foams, notes at a certain frequency (can't measure so I don't know where) can sound hollow.

Sound stage is where the VSSD3P isn't quite as impressive. It is fairly average for an earbud, if not slightly below. Vocals start from a very intimate position with effects and instruments blossoming out behind them. Imaging is quite good though, with channel-to-channel transitions handled accurately. Laying and separation are acceptable, but the VSD 3P's general note density and somewhat confined staging limit what can be done.

Overall I find the VSD 3P to be a good sounding earbud. It's not the best I've heard and far from the worst. It's treble isn't anything memorable, but the lush, meaty mids satisfy. The bass is also quite thumpy and punchy with a quantity you don't often get in headphones of this form factor. The overall fullness of the presentation hurts detail, clarity, and low end texture somewhat, but it's still well within acceptable tolerances. Sound stage is better than you'll get in 95% of iems, but behind your average earbud. Still works though thanks to excellent imaging qualities. It all comes together to provide a very satisfying listen.


Compared To A Peer (volumes matched as best as possible using a Dayton iMM-6 / donut foams on all)

HE 150Pro (29.90 USD): The 150Pro is my favorite earbud for bass. The VSD 3P puts up a good fight but just can't quite match it's impressive competitor. I found the 150Pro to have a better mid/subbass balance putting more emphasis on the lower regions. Extension feels about the same with both buds able to provide a visceral rumble you feel more than hear, just the HE 150Pro just it a hint better. It also does it with more texture, slightly better control, and more kick. I put that down to the use of metal vs. plastic on the VSonic. Mids are where the VSD 3P punches back. Vocals are thicker and more dense with a more intimate, forward presentation. Female vocals in particular sound sweeter and more natural, though I prefer male vocals out of the 150Pro. The 150Pro provides more information regardless of who is singing thanks to the extra detail it puts forward. Timbre out of each is good with the VSonic sounding a hint plasticy and the 150Pro a bit dry. Treble is an interesting one. The VSonic has more prominent peaks in both presence and brilliance regions so it provides a bit more sparkle and brings certain instruments more forward in the mix, but the thickness of the presentation hurts clarity and detail compared to the HE 150Pro. It's upper ranges don't sound as clear and open and a/bing the two make it sound a little stuffy versus the bud from HE. That carries over into the sound stage which is wider and deeper on the 150Pro. Instrument separation and layering is a step back on the VSD 3P too, though I find it imaging is a bit more nuanced. While I really enjoy both, I can't help but like the HE 150Pro more. It really does sound like a headphone crammed into two tiny shells with it's super impressive dynamics and thoughtful tuning balance. The VSonic sounds like a good earbud, just one that's priced a little high for the performance. It also doesn't help that the build quality is a step behind more products at this price point, including the cheaper HE 150Pro.

OURART Ti7 (59.00 USD): I was quite surprised at how similar these two sounded in general tonality, with each excelling in a couple areas over the other. Bass out of the VSonic is deeper and more visceral. The additional texture and punch it provides really makes the Ti7's low end somewhat forgettable, and it's not something you can force into the Ti7 with more dense foam. Mids on the Ti7 on the other hand are nearly as dense and meaty, but with a boost in clarity and detail the VSonic can't match. The same can be said for treble which is similarly balanced with a bit more life in the upper treble. It has additional detail and clarity over the VSonic coming at the expense of note weight, something I will gladly trade. Sound stage is another area the Ti7 excels in. While the default listening position is similarly intimate, effects have more room to play around in with sounds cascading off into the distance. Dense instrumentals sound more layered and better separated out of the Ti7, and imaging is slightly more accurate and nuanced. Overall I think these two perform at a similar level with the Ti7 getting the nod due to the extra technical competence. However, if you want something with a more robust low end it is best to stick with the VSD 3P. Where the Ti7 really earns the extra cost is in it's build which is miles ahead of the VSD 3P.


In The Ear The VSD 3P is an all-plastic affair with an angular design reminiscent of gemstones. The top face plate is molded from a glossy plastic with VSonic neatly printed in fine cursive writing. The rest of each ear piece is matte plastic with L and R markings printed on the underside. Two large bass vents are present behind each driver, protected from dust and dirt by a fine mesh. The shells are extremely lightweight, yet they still feel quite dense and durable, if not a little cheap.

The cable uses a very standard black rubber sheath. While not a prime example of the breed thanks to some pretty invasive noise that works it way up and into your ears, and a complete lack of strain relief, it's not all bad. Tangling isn't really an issue, there's little stickiness so it slides smoothly over your clothes, and a handy dandy chin cinch is present to quell the aforementioned noise. You also get to style on other earbuds thanks to the y-split and 90 degree jack which mimic the design of the earpieces, right down to the cursive VSonic branding molded into the rubber.

I remember back when I first got the VSD 3P that I found it pretty uncomfortable due to the sharp ridges that lined the inner edge of each earpiece. While I certainly notice those edges, especially if I lie on my side while listening to music, it really hasn't been that bad. It's light, sits well in the outer ear, and with foams is very secure. I still think the design of the inner section of the shell should have been rounded off, but at this time it's nothing terrible and worse fitting buds are definitely out there. That said, the potential for discomfort is there so if you typically find earbuds uncomfortable, the VSD 3P will likely be no different.

Overall a stylish earbud with a decent cable and mixed comfort. It could easily be tweaked and improved upon by rounding off the inner portion of the shell to improve comfort, and adding some strain relief for longevity. Time to break out the sandpaper and twist ties!


In The Box Like other VSonic products of the time, the VSD 3P arrives in a stylish but squat package. The “lid” is a clear piece of acrylic showing off the earbuds inset within protective foam on the right, and a cardboard insert on the left. This insert notes the brand and model info, and features a design that mirrors the gem-like motif of the earphones.

If you're not familiar with VSonic but the packaging looks familiar, it's probably because Knowledge Zenith copied it for a few models around the time of the ZS3 and ZST's release. You can still find remnants of VSonic influence in the plug and y-split designs on a few of their cables (ex. ZSN).

On the back of the package is an engineer working on a massive mixer along with various scan codes. Lifting off the acrylic lid via a black VSonic branded ribbon takes with it the foam insert revealing a hidden floor under which you will a find a warranty/specs card and the accessories. In all you get:

• VSD 3P earbuds
• Canvas carrying pouch
• 5x full foams
• 2x donut foams

Overall an easy, stylish unboxing experience. It takes little to no time to get to the earphones, and you get a ton of useful foams. The canvas carrying bag has quite a premium look and feel to it too.

Final Thoughts When I originally bought the VSD 3P, it wasn't because I knew it was an awesome earbud that was going to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum. It was kinda the opposite actually. It was new and there was next to nothing about it to be found anywhere. And that holds true three years later... which probably says a lot unfortunately.

Still, I'm not going to say the VSD 3P is an underrated, overlooked gem of an earbud that everyone needs to run out and buy right now. It absolutely sounds good and the design is pure VSonic, but comfort is hit and miss, the cable lacks relief, and I question long term survival under regular use. However, I will say that if you think it looks cool, the price isn't a hurdle (or you can find it under 25 USD), you want a bud that can be easily tuned with nothing but foams, or maybe you just want to satisfy a years old curiosity, give it a shot. I'm very glad I picked it up three years ago and gave it another chance in 2020. The last couple weeks of using it on the regular has been a joy and I'm going to be rolling it into my “daily” driver lineup because I've been enjoying it that much.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer With the intent to review it, I ordered the VSD 3P from Penon Audio on January 13th, 2017 shortly after it was released for the full retail price of 39.00 USD. I dropped some quick impressions on Head-fi and promptly forgot I owned it. While perusing my collection a couple weeks ago to find something “new” to listen to, I found the VSD 3P tucked away at the bottom of a box. It was still neatly packaged, likely for the photo session that never came.

The thoughts within this review are my own based on time spent listening to these forgotten earbuds. They do not represent VSonic, Penon Audio, or any other entity. At the time of writing the VSD 3P is still retailing for 39.00 USD on Penon Audio where I bought it, but you can find it for a lot less if you snoop around: penonaudio.com/vsonic-vsd3p.html

Specifications

• Driver: 16mm beryllium-coated diaphragm
• Rated Impedance :32ohm+/-15% (@ 1000Hz)
• Sensitivity: 120dB/mW
• Frequency response: 15Hz-22000Hz
• Distortion: <=2% (@ 500Hz-1000Hz）
• Channel difference: <=2dB（@ 500Hz-1000Hz）
• Rated Power: 10mw
• Max. Power: 30mW

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, XDuoo Link, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Shanling M0, Earmen TR-Amp

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we’re checking out the AF1120 MK2 from Audiofly.

Based out of Australia, Audiofly has been in the business of portable audio since 2012. They embrace the concepts of technological innovation, musician empowerment, and quality sound on all levels. They have worked to achieve this through products that cover a wider range of prices and purposes, from affordable Bluetooth to high end studio monitoring. Recently Audiofly revamped their lineup, updating many of their more popular models with MK2 variants, one of which we are checking out today.

The AF1120 MK2 is the flagship of Audiofly’s lineup and is packed with technology. Inside are six balanced armatures in a 2x2x2 configuration with a hybrid 3-way electronic/acoustic crossover keeping everything in check. Updated MMCX connectors round things out. The AF1120 MK2 is a product for professionals who require a clear, neutral sound, and that’s exactly what it delivers in my experience.

Let’s take a closer look, shall we?


What I Hear

The AF1120 MK2 is a very neutral leaning earphone. Treble has a fairly linear presentation without any major peaks in any particular region. The brilliance region is very smooth and somewhat de-emphasized resulting in a mild quantity of shimmer and sparkle. It is non-fatiguing and reasonably low energy, especially compared to your average mainstream hybrid earphone. Despite this dearth of excitement, the upper ranges of the AF1120 MK2 remain relatively airy with plenty of space between notes. The presence region is expertly balanced to give notes stellar transparency and weight without sounding strident or overly aggressive. As a result, clarity is top notch but not pushed to the point of being sharp or overly analytic. It simply sounds realistic.

The AF1120 MK2’s midrange is quite neutral in presence and tone with vocals sounding prominent but not overly forward. Male and female vocals are evenly represented with neither one standing out more than the other. The AF1120 MK2 does a great job with Riya and retaining the natural warmth and intimacy of her presentation, while Calyx’s gruff style is picked up and reproduced perfectly with all texture intact. Notes are weighty and dense yet retain outstanding clarity and coherence. I never found anything blending together or vocals being overshadowed by background instrumentals. Timbre is spot on for the most part with only brighter instruments sounding slightly off and ever so slightly plasticy, likely due to the lack of emphasis in the brilliance region. One instrument that is an absolute standout through the AF1120 MK2 are pianos which feel beefy with perfect attack and decay.

When it comes to the low end the AF1120 MK2 won’t be winning over bassheads anytime soon thanks to a neutral presence. Notes are full and warm, hitting with a hard, snappy decay. I really appreciated this performance with rapid transitions and complicated passages, but it ended up being somewhat underwhelming with deep, sustained notes. The roll off and rapidity of decay being to blame. Another plus is that the presentation is very smooth and refined, but not lacking at all in texture and detail. It’s not in your face, but inserted in a way that feels natural. If you want some more bass out of the AF1120 MK2, you’ll be happy to hear that it takes EQ and bass boost functions very well. Pairing it with the new iFi hip-dac and it’s Xbass function does a killer job of filling out the low end of the AF1120 MK2 improving suitability with bass-driven tracks. All the positive qualities are retained but more voluminous making the AF1120 MK2 even more versatile.

While the AF1120 MK2’s soundstage is fairly average, it’s staging qualities are anything but. Imaging is nuanced with razor sharp and accurate movement from channel-to-channel, with easy to detect, subtle movements. No one is likely to be use this for gaming, but if you do you’ll find them pretty darn amazing. Tracking movement in a game with great sound design (i.e. pretty much anything from Dice) ends up being very natural and organic. Helping this out is how well layered tracks and soundscapes are. The AF1120’s ability to provide a true sense of depth is impressive. Instrument separation is also a highlight thanks to each individual track element being pulled apart and set within it’s own space. As a result vocals are never hindered by bass bleed, cymbals aren’t overpowering and restrictive to other elements, etc. Everything plays together, never fighting for dominance.

Compared To A Peer (Volume matched with Dayton iMM-6)

Fearless S6 Rui (389.00 USD): The S6 Rui has more treble emphasis through the entire range than the AF1120 MK2. This gives it a lighter, airier presentation with additional space between notes, but somewhat artificially bumps it’s relatively impressive detail and clarity as a result. The AF1120 MK2 provides just as much information, but without advertising it. Treble quality is better through the AF1120 MK2 too with cleaner strikes on cymbals and a tighter, more controlled presentation overall. The midrange of the AF1120 MK2 is more linear with a smoother transition from lower to upper regions compared to the S6 Rui which sees a small upper mid bump. As a result, vocals tend to stand out more in the mix through the AF1120 MK2, playing a more even role with the rest of the track. While they’re never hidden on the S6 Rui, they don’t stand out against background instrumentals the same way. Timbre also falls into the AF1120 MK2’s camp which sounds more accurate and natural against the S6 Rui’s brighter, more breathy nature. Bass on the S6 Rui is similarly linear in it’s transition from lower to upper bass, but does a better job bring subbass notes forward. While not as quick, notes out of the S6 Rui are heavier and more impactful. They lack the same texture and clarity, however. Despite the S6 Rui’s extra upper treble emphasis and leaner presentation, the AF1120 MK2 sounds more spacious with the default seating position being just a little further from the ear. Although the S6 Rui is no slouch when it comes to imaging, layering, and instrument separation, the AF1120 MK2 is a notable step up. Sounds transfer from channel-to-channel with greater accuracy and precision, individual instruments feel more defined, and distance is better represented. Sound simple moves in a way that is more dynamic and natural through the AF1120 MK2.

In terms of build, the S6 Rui bats above it’s weight class. The AF1120 MK2 is a quality unit, but the smooth 3D printed acrylic of the Rui looks and feels a step above. No seams, better visibility of the drivers within, and that interesting faceplate all give it an advantage. Comfort is more or less a wash for me as well, despite the bulkier design of the S6 Rui. Isolation is better on the AF1120 MK2 though. The S6 Rui’s 2-pin connectors are a step down from the AF1120 MK2’s MMCX ports given the right earpiece has a tendency to detach unexpectedly. The S6 Rui’s cable is much more impressive looking with it’s thick, 8 strand braid and silver-plated wiring that shines through the clear sheath. The beefy metal hardware looks equally impressive. However impressive Fearless’ cable is visually, the AF1120 MK2’s thinner, lighter, half-cloth offering is straight up more pleasant to actually use. Neither tangles easily, but the Rui’s cable retains some memory of kinks and bends where the AF1120 MK2’s cable recalls none. Summary? I like the S6 Rui’s look and build, they tie on comfort, and as impressive looking as Fearless’ cable is, Audiofly’s is better to use.

As much as I love the S6 Rui, the AF1120 MK2 sonics are a step up. The biggest difference is not the Audiofly’s more balanced tune, or improved technical abilities, but just how much more refined it sounds while pulling off those other improvements. It is that much smoother and better controlled.

Hifiman RE800 Silver (599.00 USD): Where the AF1120 MK2 is a beacon of balance and accuracy, the RE800 is a clarity and detail monster. The RE800 is a fair bit brighter thanks to a notable upper treble peak. This lightens up the note weight compared to the AF1120 MK2 making a/b comparisons between the two quite interesting. Switch from the RE800 to the AF1120 MK2 and the Audiofly sounds thick and slightly muddy in the mids. Acclimatize to the AF1120 MK2 and switch back to the RE800 and the Hifiman sounds lean and tinny with artificial clarity leading the way. They’re more complimentary than not, but I wouldn’t want to own both at the same time because their qualities are so at odds with each other. Trying my best to not be distracted, I find the AF1120 MK2’s midrange more even and natural with a more linear presentation, even though they both seem to have mild bumps somewhere around or at 4k. Bass on the RE800 digs deeper and provides a more visceral experience while managing to output similar texture. It’s certainly a more entertaining, if not less accurate, style of presentation. Sound stage is pretty firmly in the RE800’s hand to my ears. Default positioning moves you further from the ear with sounds easily trailing off into the distance. Imaging accuracy goes to the Audiofly, as does instrument separation, with the RE800’s staging coming across slightly deeper and more multi-layered. Both are fantastic in this category overall.

When it comes to build, I have to give the AF1120 MK2 the edge. Hifiman’s RE800s has tiny metal shells with good fit and finish, but the design is plain and lacks the visual flair of the AF1120 MK2. I want to say the RE800s will have the edge in durability, but it has a fixed cable. While it’s a nice cable with silver-plated strands, the sheath is the bog standard, black rubber that you see at much lower price points. Add to that sub-par strain relief and the AF1120 MK2’s cable is sitting pretty. Comfort is again a bit of a wash. The AF1120 MK2 has better ergonomics and the low profile design gives it a big edge in isolation, but the RE800s’ more traditional barrel-shaped housing allows more wearing flexibility; cable up or cable down, you decide which you prefer. With the AF1120 MK2 it’s cable up only. Summary? The AF1120 MK2 looks and feels like it’s worth much more than the mere 100 USD that separates the two.

This was a weird comparison, and one I’m not planning to revisit. Not just because the AF1120 MK2 is a loaner and by the time you’re reading this I will no longer have it, but because these two earphones are so at odds with each other. If you want a neutral, reference style monitor go for the AF1120 MK2. If you want a detailed, vibrant high energy earphone, the RE800 will do the trick.

Campfire Audio Andromeda (1099.00 USD): The Andromeda is another product I’d consider reference quality, though not necessarily for the same reasons as the AF1120 MK2. Where Audiofly’s tuning is quite neutral and uncoloured, the Andromeda is more energetic and forward in it’s presentation. This is quite noticeable in the midrange where the Andromeda is more dense and aggressive, but falls behind on overall clarity and detail. The AF1120 also sounds slightly more realistic with a warmer, more natural presentation. Treble on the Andromeda is more elevated, particularly in upper treble regions. Cymbals and the like have more shimmer and a stronger attack with detail being pulled forward more. This leaves the AF1120’s upper ranges sounding somewhat dull beside the Andro. Both are equally above average when it comes to control with no splashiness present. Bass on the Andromeda is more forward and powerful with slightly better extension. Texture and detail are similar. Neither are bloated or suffer from midbass bleed. One thing the AF1120 has an advantage in is reception to EQ. If it’s feeling bass light, you can dial more in with great success. With similar adjustments, the AF1120’s armatures can provide a more visceral subbass experience. Sound stage is wider and deeper on the Andromeda, but to my surprise I found the AF1120 did an even better job with other qualities like imaging, layering, and separation. This is an area the Andro excels, yet the AF1120 provides an even more dynamic soundscape. Truly impressive.

The AF1120 MK2 is a good looking, well built earphone with a distinctive design that is pure Audiofly, but it’s hard to compete with the visual force that is Campfire’s iconic shell and impeccable aluminum construction. It’s been copied to death over the last couple years for a reason. The Andromeda fits me just fine and I can wear it for long periods fatigue free, but the AF1120 MK2 with it’s smaller, lighter, and more organic shape fits me even better and has improved isolation to boot. So while the vastly more expensive Andro feels the part, the AF1120 MK2 easily bests it in other ways. They both have great cables but again, the AF1120 MK2’s rubs me the right way just a little bit more, and that comes purely down to handling and memory attributes. The Andro’s braided cable is a bit stiffer, doesn’t react as well to cold weather, and retains a hint of bends and kinks that the AF1120 MK2’s cable shrugs off without a second thought. Summary? The Andromeda’s price tag makes sense, though I still prefer Audiofly’s cable.

This is another case of two earphones being complimentary. If you want a neutral sounding, technical powerhouse the AF1120 does a better job of meeting those needs. If you want a high energy yet equally impressive earphone when it comes to technical ability, the Andromeda is hard to best.


In The Ear With the AF1120 MK2, Audiofly stuck with one of their tried and true shell designs. While reminiscent of the sort of bean-shaped shell popularized by Shure and others, this design is more pepper-shaped with the shell getting wider as it approaches the nozzle. I find this makes it extra stable since what little weight there is distributes perfectly throughout the outer ear. The slender nozzles, only around 3.5mm in diameter, help with comfort too since your chosen tips have more room to compress. If deep insertions are your thing, the slim nozzle helps with that too. Thanks to the low profile, form fitting, sealed shell design, isolation is well above average, as is common for BA-only earphones. The AF1120 MK2 is a joy to use in noisy areas like the local coffee shop or on transit given how much noise is passively blocked (especially with foam tips in place). That said, given the price of this product, it’s probably best to leave it at home and bring something more affordable and less risky.

When it comes to build quality, the AF1120 MK2 is doesn’t do anything too crazy. The plastic shells are put together neatly with good quality materials. There are no misaligned parts or poorly glued sections. The use of clear plastic allows you to peer inside at the six balanced armatures and 3-way electronic crossover with Butterworth filter. The soldering job and general wiring is neat and tidy, as I would expect from something at this price. The MMCX ports are also neatly integrated allowing the cable to sit flush with the housing, limiting it’s ability to spin since there is some friction to prevent it. One aspect of the build that is slightly disappointing is that all writing and branding is printed on the plastic, not molded into it. As a result, I fully expect it to rub off after a while, as is starting to occur on the right ear piece of this tour sample.

The cable is wonderful in my opinion and a highlight of the overall package. What it lacks in flash like those cables from other brands such as Campfire Audio, BGVP, Astrotec, and Shozy, among others, it makes up for in other ways. First is that it is very light and flexible. It doesn’t weigh down the earphone in use which is quite welcome when you are active. The use of flexible, ergonomically curved preformed ear guides helps too since you don’t have to struggle with shaping memory wire every time you go to use the earphone.

Above the y-split the cable is a slender, uber flexible two-strand twist, quite reminiscent of the cable that comes with the EarNiNE EN2J (one of my favs). Below the y-split it transitions into a cloth sheath. Normally I detest cloth cables because they’re noisy, tangle easily, fray after a short time, and develop kinks that almost always lead to breaks where the inner cable spurts out. This one is much, much better than most any other cloth cable I’ve used, and doesn’t feel like it’ll suffer any of those issues anytime soon. I would make improvements in a few areas though.

Strain relief is pretty much nonexistent. It is too short and stiff at the compact 90 degree angled jack and y-split to offer much protection at all. And while I will never scoff at the inclusion of a chin cinch, the use of a small hunk of clear tubing is underwhelming for a $700 earphone. However, this seems to be a common practice with high end earphones. Sure it works well, but it doesn’t flow with the cable design and if you slide it down too far, puts unnecessary strain on the cable at the wide y-split.

Overall I am quite pleased with the fit and cable of the AF1120. The build quality is good too, though I would like to see slightly more premium materials or techniques applied, like the logo being molded into the shell vs. printed on.


In The Box The AF1120 MK2 comes in a moderately sized, somewhat understated matte black box. On the front is a reasonably high quality image of the left earpiece showing off the design and internals. In the top left corner is the model info and notice of the six drivers per side. The top right corner notes the AF1120 MK2 is a part of Audiofly’s Pro Series of monitors. Flipping to the right sleeve you see an image of the earphones and accessories neatly laid out, which the left sleeve repeats the model info. On the rear is a short blurb about the AF1120 MK2 and what’s inside, translated into nine languages. You also find a frequency response graph, specifications, a list of what’s included, some feature bullet points, and an exploded image of the construction of the AF1120 MK2.

Opening the package, a large Pelican style hard case dominates the welcoming party, while the AF1120 MK2 sits patiently above nestled within a dense, protective foam insert. Beneath the hard case you find a brief user guide. In all you get:

• AF1120 MK2 earphones
• Audioflex MMCX cable
• Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Tri-flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Comply foam tips (s/m/l)
• Protective hard case
• Airline adapter
• 3.5mm to 1/4” adapter
• Cleaning tool
• Cable clip

Other brands craft an in-depth, multilayered unboxing experiences for their earphones. That’s cool. It’s visually impressive, engaging for the buyer, and can produce one heck of a first impression. Other brands opt not to do that and let the product speak for itself. With the AF1120 MK2, Audiofly falls into the latter. This is a very simple unboxing experience that enables you to skip the fluff and get to the plethora of included goods nigh immediately. Audiofly is not competing with luxury fashion brands (ignoring some of my chosen comparisons above, lol). This is a professional product with a suitable unboxing.

Final Thoughts It’s not often I get the chance to listen to a reference level earphone, so I’m appreciative that Audiofly agreed to send the AF1120 MK2 my way. Such products really help put the hobby into perspective, from the budget cheapos to other flagship models that aim to be the best of the best. Why is that? It’s because the AF1120 MK2 has a properly neutral, uncompromising tune and as a result can act as a near perfect bassline for which to understand various tuning choices, and to better understand your own personal preferences.

While not necessarily the most exciting listen, the AF1120 MK2 won me over with its balance and technical ability. The midrange is gorgeously lush and realistic, treble detailed and non-fatiguing, and bass technical and flexible. I wish the sound stage was a little larger, subbass dug a little deeper, and their was a bit more life in the upper treble, but I can most definitely live with the existing presentation or make some adjustments with an EQ if I really feel like it. In addition to sounding fantastic, the AF1120 MK2 has a well designed shell that snugs up ergonomically to your ear while also blocking out plenty of exterior noise. At this price I would like to see some nicer materials and molded vs. printed branding on the earpieces. But, as is the build is good enough since it is lightweight, comfortable, and doesn’t present any real red flags. The accessory kit is also outstanding with a beefy, spacious carrying case and many tips of various styles and sizes, among other useful extras.

The AF1120 MK2 is a flagship done right, and while certainly not for the feint of wallet, is more affordable than equivalent products from other makers. So if you’re in the market for a neutral, top-of-the-line earphone, Audiofly has made a strong argument to consider the AF1120 MK2.

Thanks for reading!

– B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Michelle with Audiofly for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing one of their products, and for sending over the AF1120. This earphone was loaned for the purposes of review and has since been returned. All thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions and do not represent Audiofly or any other entity. At the time of writing the AF1120 MK2 retailed for 849.99 AUD: https://audiofly.com/shop/AF1120 MK2-mk2/

Specifications

• Driver: 6 balanced armatures with three-way crossover (dual bass, dual mid, dual high)
• Crossover: Passive 3-way electronic crossover with Butterworth filter
• Acoustic Tuning: Physical 3-way frequency divider
• Impedance: 11Ω
• Sensitivity: 109dB @ 1kHz
• Frequency Response: 15Hz-25,000 Hz
• Cable Length: 1.2m / 47”

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, iFi hip-dac, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Shanling M0

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark’s Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we’re checking out the Model 3 BA2 from ADV.

Four years ago (has it really been that long!!??), ADV released the Model 3, a 6mm micro driver equipped earphone with MMCX removable cables. It had a stylish, low profile shell similar in style to products from Weston and Shure. Depending on which version you ordered (Live or Mobile) it came with either a silver-plated cable, or a standard cable as well as a Bluetooth module. It sounded fantastic in either configuration and didn’t cost all that much coming in under 100 USD.

Enter the Model 3 BA2 which uses the same housing but now in a stylish blue. It swaps out the tiny dynamic for ADV’s proprietary dual armature configuration and ditches the original cables for the uber high quality silver plated cable that came with GT3 and GT3 Superbass. From what I gather based on the marketing info, the BA2 is taking on a more professional, monitor-oriented role compared to the consumer-focused, warmer and bassier sound of the original Model 3. I’m not a drummer, bass player, vocalist, sound engineer, or composer so I can’t attack this review from any of those angles. However, I am an audio enthusiast who has had access to high end stereo equipment since I was a child and have built my own speaker enclosures. I’ve also tested and reviewed literally hundreds of headphones and earphones at this point in my wage-less “career”, and spent time with countless more, so I like to think I know a thing or two about good sound.

Does the Model 3 BA2 offer good sound for it’s 199.99 USD price tag? Let’s find out.


What I Hear The BA2 has a fairly flat, well-balanced sound signature with a prominent, organic midrange that steals the show. Keep in mind that the mids might at first seem veiled. They are notably more lush and thick sounding than what I’m used to. But after just a few tracks with the BA2 the “veil is lifted”, so to speak. This is not an earphone you can just pick up and listen to for a few minutes. You need to give your brain time to adjust to the presentation. Once you do you get a great look at just how full and complete the BA2 can sound. The midrange is where the BA2 shines as a result. It’s presentation is quite linear from lower to upper with no bias towards male or female vocalists. Notes are dense and rife with texture. Timbre is not the most accurate with a somewhat typical, BA-like dryness to it that may turn some off. If you’ve never been a fan of balanced armatures, the BA2 won’t do anything to change your opinion.

Upper ranges on the BA2 are quite relaxed and really the only area where it sounds unbalanced. The brilliance region is relatively under-emphasized. As a result, shimmery, sprinkling effects like the hi-hats on Gramatik’s “Blue Step” lack impact and presence. This also contributes to the BA2’s compact staging and closed in presentation. Lower treble isn’t boosted to compensate which is probably a good thing. As it stands, it’s prominent enough to keep the BA2 from sounding overly dark and gives it good detail and clarity down into the midrange. But again, this is really only after spending some time with the earphone to become accustomed to the tune. On first listen or after trying something with a more vibrant upper range, the BA2 feels slightly cloudy.

The BA2’s low end carries on the fairly linear presentation you hear elsewhere. That said, midbass is perceived as slightly more prominent than other regions thanks to a lack of visceral feedback provided via subbass regions. Thankfully that midbass provides a solid punch with pretty decent control. You don’t have to worry about it sounding bloated or loose, or suffer with bleed into the midrange. Texturing is prominent so while the low end doesn’t carry tracks like bassier, dynamic driver-based cousins, the quality is there. Speed is satisfying as well. While not as quick as the drivers in something like the EarNiNE EN2J, rapidity here is no slouch and the BA2 gives notes a realistic decay that is quite satisfying, especially with drums.

When it comes to sound stage the BA2 is quite intimate thanks to that forward midrange, vocal presence, and lack of upper treble emphasis. Depth is greater than width giving tracks an in-the-head, but well layered feel. Instrument separation is fine, sounding most competent in the midrange and weakest in the treble where it can become mildly congested since there isn’t a lot of air for notes to play around in. Imaging quality is in line with others in the price range with sounds moving cleanly between channels. The BA2 does a good job of keeping the listener immersed within the track.

Overall, I found the BA2 to be a hard one to put my finger on. It is tuned far from the bright and bassy, “consumer friendly” sets I’ve become so accustomed to. As the marketing suggests, it sounds like a musician’s tool and is tuned with a purpose that goes beyond raw entertainment.


Compared To A Peer

BGVP DM6 (199.00 USD): DM6 is the bassier of the two with a heavier, more impactful midbass presence. Subbass extension is similar with the DM6 having a hint more emphasis. The BA2’s midrange is noticeably more forward with vocals carrying more thickness, weight, and density throughout a mix, though at the cost of timbre accuracy which sounds more dry than the DM6. Treble of the DM6 has more presence in the brilliance region aiding in the more airy presentation it provides. Lower treble of the BA2 is more emphasized improving detail and clarity only through the mids while the DM6 retains an edge in the treble. The DM6 has a wider, deeper sound stage but doesn’t move sound from channel-to-channel with the same accuracy as the BA2. It does a slightly better job of layering and separating sounds though.

Build of the DM6’s earpieces is a step up. This is due to their hand built natural and use of high quality acrylics. The lack of seams and general upscale feel to the materials just gives it an air of quality not found in the construction of the BA2. Cables are another story. While the DM6’s cable is clearly a high quality offering, it is much too stiff, sticky, and heavy to be enjoyable to use. The BA2’s cable looks just as good but is thinner and significantly more manageable.

Overall I much prefer the build of the DM6, while the more balanced, thicker sound of the BA2 wins me over, even if I end up missing the DM6’s more satisfying upper treble presence.

Campfire Audio Comet (199 USD): The single-BA Comet has a fair bit more treble presence, upper treble in particular. This gives it more shimmer and sparkle, as well as a more airy, open feel. Lower treble is similar in presence with the BA2 showing off slightly more detail, amidst similar clarity. The BA2’s midrange plays a much larger role in the overall presentation with vocals and instruments in this range coming across much more full, prominent, and closer to the ear. It is a much more intimate presentation than what you find on the Comet. Timbre is in the Comet’s favour thanks to it’s additional warmth. The low end of the BA2 is a bit less linear with more midbass emphasis. Both lose emphasis in subbass regions, with the Comet retaining slightly more presence. BA2’s drivers slam a little harder though, and provide more texture. Sound stage is much wider on the Comet with the BA2 sounding deeper and more well-rounded. Imaging is slightly more nuanced on the Comet while the BA2 does a better job with layering and separation.

In terms of build, Comet gets the nod. Its hand-polished, stainless steel housings exude quality and are immaculately put together. Campfire’s cable is also very nice, though I do prefer ADV’s slightly thicker, more durable feeling inclusion. It’s also better in cool weather than the Comet’s cable which gets pretty stiff. Not great when fit and comfort are far from class leading, unlike the BA2.

Overall I prefer the BA2. The Comet’s tuning is much more successful as a daily driver and I really enjoy how it sounds, but the BA2’s vastly superior comfort and overall fit, along with good sound quality, tip my preference in it’s favour. If the Comet were nicer to wear, I’d be picking it up more often.

NuForce HEM6 (349.00 USD): Both earphones have a fairly flat tuning with slight skews in different directions. Upper treble on the triple-BA HEM6 is more prominent and while neither could be called sparkly, the HEM6 does display more shimmer and shine than the BA2. This also helps give it a more spacious and airy presentation, especially when it comes to sound stage width. The BA2’s notably more forward midrange and additional lower treble emphasis gives it a more intimate presentation. Clarity is slightly improved on the HEM6 while raw detail is about the same. Imaging quality is similarly good while the HEM6 has slightly improved layering and about equal separation. The BA2 has more low end presence in both sub and midbass areas and does a better job with providing some visceral feedback. Neither digs particularly deep which shouldn’t come as a surprise. The BA2’s drivers aren’t quite as quick. Notes have a heavier presence with a longer note decay. When notes do hit the initial attack is more impactful. The BA2 is also more textured and it does a better job with grungy notes. Both earphones have a fairly organic, analogue sound to them with the HEM6’s slightly darker presentation coming across a bit more realistic to my ears.

In terms of build, they’re fairly equal. The HEM6’s plastics feels tougher and more substantial, especially in the similarly slender nozzle. It’s somewhat proprietary 2-pin system is not as versatile as the BA2’s MMCX ports which is a downfall because the stock cables are not fantastic, especially compared to what ADV included with the BA2. Since they both have low profile, bean-shaped housings fit is pretty much identical. Isolation is pretty much the same too.

Choosing the two comes down to preference and price since they both perform a similar function, both physically and auditorily. I found myself gravitating towards the HEM6 while comparing the two because of it’s larger soundstage, slightly improved technical ability, and additional upper treble presence. That said, if I were to buy one or the other the BA2 would get my hard-earned dollar. The HEM6’s improvements over the BA2 are simply too mild to justify an extra 150 USD.


In The Ear The BA2 shares it’s DNA with the regular Model 3, and that’s a good thing. The housings are all plastic yet feel fairly thick and solid. Inside the housing is a diamond-like texture which gives the earphone a stylish aesthetic. Given the BA2 uses a snazzy clear blue plastic this time around, this design motif is highlighted more than it was on the original, clear coloured Model 3. The v-shaped ridge protruding from the outer facing portion of the housing perfectly caressed the tip of your finger allowing for easy insertion into your ear. Often with low profile earphones of this style, I spend a lot of time fiddling around trying to find the perfect seal. The BA2’s long nozzle and tip selection negates this, and I have no issues getting them into position quickly and comfortably. The low weight and ergonomic shape make this something you can wear for long periods without experiencing any discomfort, useful for the target demographic who will likely have them in for hours at a time.

While I haven’t seen anyone having problems with this, it is still worth pointing out that if you’re someone that is careless with your earphones, you might want to reconsider buying the BA2. It features the same slim plastic nozzles found on the regular Model 3. They’re made of fairly thin plastic in the style of Shure’s SE215. Someone that tucks these into their pocket without first depositing them into a case will risk snapping off the nozzle. And if my father-in-law is any indication (I still love you though!) it could also be something to watch out for when changing tips, taking care not to bend the nozzle and snap it off.

The BA2 comes with the same silver-plated copper cable that was shipped with both GT3 models. The clear sheath is extremely dense and tough and shows off the shimmering strands of wire within. The braids are tight and uniform with excellent strain relief everywhere, including both entering the exiting the y-split which is not at all common. The chin cinch slides freely but holds position well and does a great job of minimizing the already limited cable noise. The preformed ear guides are long and flexible, extending well past the bottom of the ear making for a very secure fit. The y-split and compact straight jack are all metal, matching the indestructible build of the ear pieces. This is the sort of cable that other manufacturers would do well to emulate.

When it comes to isolation the BA2 is outstanding. The housings are fully sealed which combined with their ability to fill your outer sear, means little noise leaks through. This is especially true when using the included foam tips. However, even with just the basic stock silicone tips the BA2 is pretty successful as an earplug. With no music playing, the snicking of my keyboard is barely audible and cars driving by my open window sound breeze-like. Taking the BA2 into a more demanding setting like the local coffee shop during rush hour shows the isolation holds up. Yes, you can still hear those around you, but the moment you toss on some music that all pretty much fades away. I can listen to music at my regularly low volumes with the BA2, regardless of my setting.


In The Box ADV is one of those brands that usually sends out their products in a nice package, though one that isn’t overly wasteful. The BA2 is one of those lucky recipients. The exterior cardboard sheath is an attractive sky blue with BA2 plastered in giant letters across the front. Below in tiny lettering is the full model name along with mention that these are “Professional Dual (2) Driver In-Ear Monitors”. Flipping around to the back of the sheath you find tucked away at the bottom a measurement graph and specifications. An image of a drummer jamming out at a concert completely dominates the background. Sliding off the sheath we see a more traditional semi-gloss black box with the ADVANCED logo printed on the front, magnetically sealed shut. Lift the flap and pull back the lid and you’re greeted by the amusingly named Tenacious case. Inside the case is the earphones and all accessories. In all you get:

• Model 3 BA2 earphones
• MMCX silver-plated copper 3.5mm cable
• 3 pairs of blue Fidelity foam tips
• 3 pairs of white Fidelity silicone tips
• Tenacious case
• 1 leather cable tie
• 1 1/4″ adapter

Back to the Tenacious case. This is one of those completely over the top Pelican style cases made from chunky, dense plastics with beefy hinges and a seal all around the rim that makes it impervious to water. Add to that what looks like a very long strap (I don’t dare undo it) and you’ve got a killer kit for carrying around a small dap (ex. Shanling M0) with your earphones. The rest of the accessories are all quality units too. The silicone tips are grippy and flexible, yet feel quite durable. The foam tips compress well and expand slowly enough to get a good seal the first time around, but not so long as to make it feel like they’re holding you back from listening to your music. Overall a very nice unboxing experience.

Final Thoughts The BA2 is an interesting product. I’m glad it’s not being marketed as a consumer-focused earphone that is great for everyone. If it was, I can see ADV having a few unhappy buyers on their hands. It is tuned like a niche product, and if the way it’s being advertised is any indication, it is. It’s being marketed as a tool for musicians with a tuning style that will benefit drummers, bass players, vocalists, and composers. Given the strong midrange performance and satisfying drum reproduction, ADV has done a great job of nailing down something useful for the target demographic and tailoring the BA2 to them. The product page isn’t full of the usual marketing fluff that makes something sound awesome without reflecting what that product is actually like (i.e. your typical reseller page on Amazon, Aliexpress, etc.). What they say is what you get, and it’s seriously refreshing.

That said, as a general listener and consumer of music of varied genres, one that doesn’t use their earphones so much as a tool but instead for entertainment, I genuinely enjoyed my time with the BA2. I in no way fit the model demographic for this earphone either. As someone that likes boosted treble, the BA2 is unquestionably lacking in that area for my tastes, and I’d rather not have to go through a few tracks to become reacquainted with the sound every time I come back to it from a different earphone. However, the strong midrange did a fantastic job of pulling emotion from the artists voices, and the punchy, well-defined bass backed it perfectly. Once I really sat down to understand what ADV was trying to do, it clicked and I found myself liking it more on each listen.

So what it comes down to is this; if don’t make or monitor music, you are unlikely to find a ton of appeal in the BA2. But if you do, this seems like it would be a great option. Small, comfortable, killer mids and quality bass, and relaxed highs so you can work for extended periods without ear fatigue. What it was designed to do, it does very well. I might have to bust out my old laptop containing a copy of FL Studio and revisit some of my old attempts at D’n’B from back in the day.

Thanks for reading!

– B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Hannah with ADV for sending over a sample of the Model 3 BA2 for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening to the BA2 over the last month. They do not represent ADV or any other entity. At the time of writing the BA2 retailed for 199.99 USD: https://www.adv-sound.com/products/model-3-ba2

Specifications

• Driver: Dual (2) balanced armatures
• Impedance: 10 ohm +/- 15%
• Sensitivity: 118dB +/- 3dB @ 1kHz
• Frequency Response: 20Hz – 40kHz
• Rated Input Power: 2mW
• Max Input Power: 3mW

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, XDuoo Link, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, ifi hip dac, Shanling M0

Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark’s Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we're checking out Kinera's entry into the competitive micro-driver segment, the Tyr.

Kinera has been around for quite a while now and is no stranger to the Chinese hifi scene. Unlike a number of other brands, they aren't prone to pumping out release after release, instead taking their time to craft something unique and interesting every time. Maybe not something that appeals to a wide variety of people, but that's where more budget oriented gear like the Sif and Tyr come in.

Like the Sif, the Tyr ditches the ever popular hybrid driver setup for a simpler, more honest single dynamic. In the case of the Tyr, Kinera opted for a tiny 6mm driver. (Read the rest of the paragraph in an obnoxious, stereotypical New Yorker accent) I'm not saying this earphone came about as a result of my feedback. BUT, over a year or so ago they did make a post on their Facebook page asking what the community wanted to see from them in the future. Being I'm a little bit of a micro-dynamic fiend, I planted a seed (pun intended) and suggested one. Whatdayaknow? Now we gots ourselves a Kinera 6mm micro-driver earphone. You're welcome community (End accent).

Was it worth the wait? Is it as awesome as other similarly equipped earphones? Let's find out.


What I Hear The Tyr has a robust low end presence with more emphasis placed on midbass than subbass. Quality is for the most part pretty good, with notes sounding well textured and reasonably punchy. Some bloat is present though, and on particularly low end heavy tracks you might catch some bleed occurring in the lower mids. Subbass extension is good, but like most drivers of this style cannot provide the same level of visceral feedback as a larger driver that moves more air. Decay is realistic with the tiny 6mm driver handling rapid notes effectively. They don't smear into one another and remain distinct.

Mids are slightly recessed overall, with an uptick in emphasis in the upper regions. This leads to some very mild sibilance that I don't think is worth concern. For the most part male and female vocals are represented equally well given the presentation is on the warmer side, and notes are well weighted, if not leaning towards a thinner feel. Timbre is good with instruments sounding close to accurate, if not a touch dry. Vocals and instruments sound crisp and clear with great coherence, except on very bassy tracks where the low end starts to bleed in and soften up the presentation more than is ideal. Other than that, this midrange is quite nice for such an inexpensive earphone.

The Tyr's high end is handled well with more emphasis being placed in the brilliance region. Highs are crisp and sparkly, though a hint loose and lacking control. This becomes an issue on extremely quick passages where note start to blend. Lower treble is less prominent but still emphasized enough to help maintain strong clarity throughout. Notes are well-spaced and reasonably airy keeping the Tyr from sounding congested.

Like most earphones of this style that I've heard, the sound stage is wide but not particularly deep. Sounds transfer from channel to channel accurately and reliably, so I had no complaints using these when playing competitive games online. While track elements are well separated, the somewhat flat and wide stage means layering qualities are acceptable, but far from outstanding.

Overall I find the Kinera Tyr to be a good sounding earphone. I would call the signature either a strong u or mild v-shape, one that will likely appeal to a pretty wide audience. It actually quite reminds me of the KB EAR Diamond, but at a much lower cost, with less bass, and with less technical competency.


Compared To A Peer

Pioneer CH3 (~25.00 USD): The Pioneer comes across a little more balanced and less v-shaped than the Tyr. Upper treble is lacking sparkle in comparison giving the CH3 a more tame presentation, though detail is better thanks to more lower treble emphasis. The CH3's midrange is slightly more forward with male vocals standing out. It is cooler and drier with a similar note weight, though I do find vocals through the Tyr slightly more clear. The Tyr is more prone to sibilance, though I wouldn't say it's an issue with either. Bass on the Tyr is notably more prominent, especially in the midbass which is slightly bloated compared to the CH3. Texture and clarity go to the CH3, while sub-bass extension and emphasis falls squarely in the Tyr's camp. Sound stage is presented similarly with more width than depth though the Kinera's extra upper treble emphasis permits it more space between notes and a greater general airiness. Imaging accuracy is basically the same, nor is there much of a difference in terms of layering and separation quality. Both are perfectly adequate and in line with what I expect from sub-50 USD earphones.

In terms of build, neither is a standout in the segment but I'll have to give the Kinera a clear win. It's cable is thicker, less prone to remember kinks and bends, and the inline mic is of a higher quality. It's design is also more interesting to look at, though the extra teeny CH3 (it only has a 5.5mm driver after all) is even lighter and more comfortable.

Overall I prefer the CH3's more balanced signature, but it falls short when it comes to build quality, the unboxing experience, and quality/quantity of accessories. I'd be happy to spend an extra couple dollars on the Tyr because it feels like it'll last longer, and it comes with higher quality tips as well as a protective case, something the more mainstream CH3 is missing entirely.

Final E2000 (~40.00 USD): The E2000's overall presentation is more linear and even. Upper and lower treble have a similar level of emphasis through the E2000 with notes sounding slightly better controlled and more natural. The midrange of the E2000 has a slightly warmer, thicker tonality with a more natural feel to instruments. The Tyr's upper midrange is more prominent. It isn't as smooth and almost sounds strained or strident at times in comparison. Bass on the E2000 is again smoother with less midbass emphasis. It doesn't provide the same level of impact, though texture and detail are slighter more prominent. Sub-bass on the Tyr stands out more, rolling off on the E2000 before it can give the same level of visceral feedback. The Tyr's soundstage is just a smidge smaller with default staging falling a hint closer to the head. Imaging on the E2000 is a step up with sounds moving more freely and with greater precision. Layering and separation are also lightly improved with the E2000 retaining more clarity on busier tracks and at higher volumes.

In terms of build, the Tyr once again takes it. The E2000 feels more delicate. With it's oddly complex plastic nozzle arrangement, I wouldn't be surprised if it was easier to damage. Their cables are once again quite similar with the E2000's being slightly more plasticy. It gets much stiffer in cold weather, but transmits less noise. It also has a chin cinch which the Tyr could benefit from.

The E2000 remains one of my favourites under 50 USD and the Tyr won't be replacing it. It provides a similar enough experience, however, and for those who just can't stretch their budget to get the E2000, it would be an excellent alternative.


In The Ear The Tyr has a fairly traditional barrel-shaped housing which combined with such a compact driver means it has a very small footprint. The all-metal housings, probably aluminum or an alloy of some sort, are very well constructed. End caps are chrome while the main body is matte black with Kinera neatly printed on each ear piece. Seams between the component parts are present but instead of trying to hide them, Kinera incorporated them into the design by tapering the edges. It was a smart choice that adds additional elements to the overall design and makes them visually intriguing should you decide to take a closer look. Where the cable enters you find a lack of strain relief, however Kinera did add a red ring to ensure you rarely mix up the channels.

The cable is a very standard black rubber affair and is affixed to the ear pieces. No cable rolling with this little guy. I don't think that going to be a huge issue though because it's a decent cable overall. The rubber sheath is flexible, doesn't tangle easily, and isn't sticky allowing it to slide easily over cloth and other materials. Noise transmission is an issue, but that can be addressed by wearing the Tyr over ear instead of cable down, a big plus of going with a barrel-shaped ear piece.

Strain relief is absent at the ear pieces, but can be found at the inline mic, bottom of the y-split, and on the compact straight jack. I would prefer it to be a little longer, but that it's there at all is satisfactory. Hardware like the straight jack and y-split is quite plain looking and won't win any design awards, but everything is metal so it's all good on the durability front. The inline mic is all-metal too, save for a plastic button which responds to presses with a reasonably tactile “snick”. If using the mic for phone calls, I'm sure you'll find the quality acceptable. Voices sound reasonably dense and weighty with good clarity, though background noise isn't blocked out as much as I'd like.

When it comes to comfort, there is little to complain about. The Tyr is small, light, and has a fairly standard nozzle diameter of around 6mm. Most common aftermarket tips will fit it just right, so if the stock kit doesn't do the trick, something else you've used surely will. Since the earphone can be worn cable up or down equally easy, those who prefer one style of the other will have their needs met too. Isolation is pretty average, if not slightly above, for a vented dynamic based earphone. Using them purely as ear plugs exterior noise is dulled with voices remaining coherent, just more quiet than normal. Toss in some music and you'll only need to compensate for outside noise by raising the volume a little bit. Foam tips further help avoid the need to listen at higher than adequate volumes.


In The Box The Tyr follows the Sif's lead when it comes to packaging, arriving in a unique hexagonal package. Things are a little less flamboyant compared to the Sif's take on this box, with the package being mostly black with only a grey flame-looking thing set behind a brand slogan “All You Need Is Tyr”. In addition to this slogan is notification that the Tyr features use of a 6mm micro driver, but micro is spelled incorrectly as “Mirco”. Oops. Flipping the package over you find a list of specifications and product contents, along with social media information.

Lifting off the lid you're greeted by a hexagonal card suggesting you join the Kinera online community, a very simple user guide card, and a circular leatherette carrying pouch. Lifting those items out you find some spare ear tips and the Tyr itself. In all you get:

• Tyr earphones​
• Carrying pouch​
• Final Type E single flange tips (s/m/l)​

You may notice a lack of images of the complete accessory kit. That's because at some point Kinera teamed up with Final Audio to include their awesome Type E tips, something my Tyr sample did not come with. Just know that should you buy this earphone, it comes with a set of ear tips that if bought separately cost around 15 USD, so the value quotient is off the charts here. Another aspect that was unexpectedly handy is that leatherette pouch. It looks nice and feels expensive, but given it's just two strips of material sewn together, I wasn't expecting it to actually have enough space inside to hold much of anything, let alone the Tyr. Well, I was wrong. Three-finger wind the cable and it slips in just fine, and you can even still snap it shut.

Overall a pretty fantastic unboxing experience for such an inexpensive earphone. You get a cool box, some of the best ear tips in the business, and a pouch that is both unique and functional. Great job Kinera!

Final Thoughts Kinera is on their game, and the Tyr is proof of this. It's got a widely appealing tune in a form factor that is suited to a variety of ear sizes, and at a price that most can afford. The packaging and accessory kits are well thought out and have a premium air to them that isn't found in the competition. Value is through the roof too thanks to the inclusion of Final Type E tips.

Some will lament the use of a fixed cable, while others will appreciate that they won't have to worry about losing an ear piece. I found the midbass presence to be a little more than is ideal, and treble control could be somewhat tighter, but overall its audio performance is quite satisfying and well worth a listen.

If you're looking for an inexpensive earphone to take up the mantle of every day carry in your portable audio kit, the Tyr is worth checking out.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Nappoler with HiFiGo for arranging a sample of the Tyr for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening with the Tyr. They do not represent Kinera, HiFiGo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Tyr retailed for 29.99 USD: https://hifigo.com/products/kinera-tyr-dynamic-driver-in-ear-earphones (Edit: Didn't realize the original link had tracking or affiliate info attached. My apologies. Ps. I don't participate in any affiliate programs.)

Specifications

• Driver: 6mm micro dynamic driver​
• Impedance: 16ohms​
• Sensitivity: 105dB +/- 1dB​
• Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20kHz​

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Periodic Audio Nickle, ifi hip dac, Shanling M0

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we're checking out the Kinera Sif, the Yang to Kinera's Yin (SEED).

Back in 2018 Kinera released the SEED (Yin), one of a two part iems series (Yin and Yang). It was a budget friendly hybrid earphone originally intended to be a replacement for the BD005, though they had completely different signatures and seemed to coexist for a while. I liked the SEED for it's detailed, midrange heavy sound and comfortable, attractive shell. It was fairly priced too coming in at a hair under 50 USD. The Sif (Yang) finally came to fruition midway through 2019 as the second half of this earphone duo, and takes on a very different approach to sound reproduction when compared to the SEED. I'd say it's probably the true spiritual successor to the BD005.

Is the Sif a quality addition to Kinera's modern lineup? Let's find out.


What I Hear Lower treble on the Sif seems to take on most of the focus giving it good detail and overall clarity, but also a somewhat dry tonality. Upper treble isn't particularly linear either. It feels like there is a small spike then rapid roll off. As a result, the presentation can be inconsistent. It's not always sparkly, and can sometimes be too sharp. Notes can also be somewhat loose and downright splashy on poor quality files. Decay and attack sound nice though, with instruments being fairly accurately represented. There is also a decent amount of air between notes giving the Sif a spacey feel. While I don't think the treble presentation is terrible, improvements could certainly be made. It gets the job done at least.

The midrange is notably more competent with vocals displaying a realistic amount of warmth and weight. Coherency is fantastic with details and words coming out clearly and with strong definition. The upper mid bump and warmth provided by the Sif's elevated midbass make for a presentation that does an equally good job with both male and female vocals. Female vocals sound especially lush and sweet with just the right amount intimacy, at least based on my preferences. Timbre is occasionally thrown off by that upper treble spike, but for the most part I'm quite pleased with it's accuracy.

I haven't heard a Kinera that does bass quite like the Sif. It is well extended and heavily emphasized giving listeners plenty of feedback on the lowest of notes. It is a little on the slow side though, giving notes a very grumbly, lumpy feel. Kinda cool, but also not ideal for rapid notes which just barely avoid blending together. There is plenty of texture on tap keeping the Sif from sounding one-note. Midbass is the main focus though, and it does have a habit of softening the midrange on particularly bassy tracks. At times it can be a little overwhelming, but then I also prefer a more tame bass response, or sub-bass skew, so this presentation isn't in my wheelhouse anyway. I'm sure most are going to love it.

Soundstage is another area in which the Sif excels. Default staging is just beside the head with effects easily breaking off into the distance. Imaging is nice and clean with smooth channel transitions, layering is fairly average, and instrument separation slightly above. It all comes together to provide a fairly dynamic and expressive soundscape that doesn't smother the track.

Overall I'm quite pleased with the Sif. While treble control could be better, feeding it higher quality tracks goes a long way to cleaning things up. The midrange is fairly natural and coherent but the occasional bites of sibilance will bother some. The bass presentation is quite bold for a Kinera and I think will be the selling point for many. It's not quite going to satisfy a diehard basshead, but everyone else that enjoys an elevated low end should find themselves readily bobbing along to their beats.

Compared to a Peer (volumes matched with Dayton Audio iMM-6)

VJJB N30 (29.59 USD): The N30's dual dynamic setup provides a very different listening experience. Treble is exceptionally mellow with not a lot of sparkle to speak of. In terms of energy, the Sif is much more lively. Still, the N30 manages to retain a sound stage that rivals the Sif in width and depth. I'd give it an edge in layering, say it falls behind in imaging, and separates about the same, if not slightly less effectively than the Sif. The N30's midrange is thicker and warmer with a more linear transition from lower to upper. It's not as detailed nor as clear, but doesn't stray into the Sif's occasional sibilance. Bass on the Sif is much more impressive. It digs deeper, hit harder, has more texture, and provides a more clear, crisp image of each note

In terms of build, the N30 certainly looks awesome with it's shiny blue, almost alien face plates. The ability to peer through the shell into the drivers and complicated looking crossover certainly adds to the appeal as well. The Sif is much nicer to actually wear though, with a more natural shape and ear guides that were formed correctly. While I like the N30's cable, the use of uncommon DC connector plugs limit 3rd party cable options.

The N30 is a solid earphone for the price, but the extra 10 USD you'd put towards the Sif is well worth it.

CCA C10 (41.00 USD): Bass presentation between the two is similar with the five driver, hybrid C10 showing slightly better extension, and the Sif being more linear. The Sif provides more texture while the C10 has a bit more kick behind notes. Due to the Sif's upper mid emphasis, it's presentation is perceived as slightly more forward with increased clarity and detail and a more natural, thicker tone. Timbre is a step behind on the C10 having a more metallic, raspy tinge to it. Treble on the C10 is better extended. Neither has a linear presentation with the C10 showing bias towards lower treble while the Sif's upper treble spike takes precedence. The Sif's upper range presentation is tighter, with notes sounding more controlled. The C10 sounds less wide and more in the head than the Sif with less space between notes. The C10's staging has more depth though, giving it an edge in terms of layering and separation. Imaging is similarly good with notes transitioning between channels with decent accuracy.

In terms of build, the Sif is better looking to my eyes, while the C10 feels much more premium thanks to it;s use of dense acrylics and a heavy metal alloy face plate. Their cables are quite similar with the Sif's being slightly thicker and less tangle prone. The C10 has much better strain relief, however, so I expect it would last longer.

While I enjoy both earphones, the C10 never really won me over. It quickly gets boring, an issue I don't have with the Sif. Plus, the Sif's smaller, lighter shells sit better in the ear during long listening sessions and when I'm out being active.

Kinera SEED (49.99 USD): The SEED gets a lot of hate, and I just don't get it. It has the sort of neutral-bright signature that gets wide acclaim elsewhere. Detail is there, timbre is more accurate than a lot of other budget hybrids, and it looks great. Bass compared to the Sif lacks depth and sub-bass emphasis, but has more punch and a hint more texture. Mids on the Sif are similarly tuned with an upper mid bias. Perception is thicker and warmer due to the extra mid-bass on tap, but falls behind the SEED when it comes to clarity and detail. Treble on the SEED rolls of earlier and is notably less prominent in the brilliance region giving it a more relaxed sound. Lower treble is similarly presentation between the two. It's give the SEED the edge in terms of detail and clarity, but it falls behind in terms of sound stage having a more confined, intimate presentation. Imaging is better on the SEED though with channel-to-channel transition being more crisp and accurate.

In terms of build the two are basically the same, though the Sif gets the edge. The Sif's housings are slightly more refined with neater paint. The MMCX ports are better integrated into the design compared to the SEED's 2-pin setup. The cable on the Sif is thinner and less luxurious (most notably the y-split and plug materials), but it wasn't recalled due to a discolouring issue. I miss the SEED's bead-like chin cinch though. That thing was useful.

While I really enjoy both earphones and will continue to think the SEED is underappreciated, I can't help but surrender to the Sif's superior tuning. It has vastly improved sub-bass performance combined with better upper treble and a thicker more natural, if less textured and detailed, sound.


In The Ear You cannot be blamed for thinking the Sif looks familiar. It's the Yang to the Kinera Seed's Yin after all. The plastic housings have seen some modifications from their time with the Seed, such as the move from piano black to a lovely gloss white. Since the Sif uses a single driver and there is no need for a dual output nozzle, it has been replaced with a more traditional silver nozzle with metal grill. The 2-pin system, for better or worse, has been replaced with MMCX. The plug snap in tightly and while they rotate, there is enough pressure to prevent that from happening freely. Build quality is similar to the Seed with small improvements in the overall finish. The silver paint coating the raised Kinera branding and L/R markings is notably neater on the Sif, a good thing because in white this housing looks even more classy.

The cable has been mostly improved too. It is lighter, more flexible, and has more compact metal hardware. It's all unbranded though, and loses some of the premium air of the SEED's cable. The aggressively shaped preformed ear guides are a little stiffer than I prefer, but they do the job just fine and do not cause any discomfort. The lack of a chin cinch is the only thing missing, and I suppose better strain relief couldn't hurt.

When it comes to comfort the Sif is excellent. The traditional-at-this-point, bean-shaped, low profile design has been tested by time. It conforms wonderfully to the out ear, there are no sharp edges to cause discomfort, and it simply works. The light weight of the mostly plastic design certainly helps as well. Isolation is pretty average, or slightly below. Treating them as ear plugs with the stock tips in place, sound bleeds through pretty easily. There is a small vent on the outside by the Kinera logo, so it makes sense. Compensation for the noise with extra volume when using the Sif in noisy places is something most people will have to do. That or find some third party foam tips which also helps.


In The Box Kinera is no stranger to style. In the past, their products have almost always featured amazing physical designs or unique, eye-catching packaging. The Sif is no exception. Straight up, the hexagonal shape of the box it arrives in is unlike anything I have seen from another brand. Neither is the intriguing smeary wood-grain, oil paint-like texturing that adorns it. Flip the package over and you find a more standard black panel marked with specifications, an image of the earpieces, a content list, and some social media links.

Lifting off the lid reveals a social media card inviting you to join the Kinera community, a user manual about the size and shape of a standard business card, and under those a Sif branded clam shell carrying case inside which you find the Sif and accessories. In all you get:

• Kinera Sif earphones​
• MMCX silver-plated cable​
• Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)​
• Velcro cable tie​

Cool unboxing. Fairly standard but good quality accessories. I'm satisfied.

Final Thoughts Kinera has been playing catch up ever since the H3 was ripped apart by a few key reviewers, at least in the communities I frequent, though it certainly has it's fans (myself included). Despite my positive feelings about the SEED, others didn't quite feel the same way and it too added to the darkness hovering over the brand. While the IDUN started pushing feelings back in the right direction, more was needed.

Kinera's newest budget models like the Sif we reviewed today should go a long way towards quelling naysayers. Like the Tyr, the Sif is a well-tuned earphone that goes punch for punch with other quality examples in the price range. Add to that a comfortable and attractive design, a simple but unique unboxing experience, and a solid accessory kit and the Sif is absolutely worth checking out.

I'm really look forward to seeing what Kinera has in store for us next. Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer Thanks to Nappoler with HiFiGo for arranging a sample of the Sif for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions based on time spent listening with the Sif. They do not represent Kinera, HiFiGo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Sif retailed for 39.99 USD: https://hifigo.com/products/kinera-Sif-iem-dynamic-with-detachable-mmcx-in-ear-monitors-earphones

Specifications

• Driver: 10mm SPM dynamic driver​
• Impedance: 32ohm​
• Sensitivity: 112dB +/- 1dB​
• Frequency Response: 20Hz - 20kHz​

Devices Used For Testing LG Q70, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Periodic Audio Nickle, ifi hip dac, Shanling M0

Some Test Tunes
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings,

Today we're checking out one of Moondrop's more recent releases, the Starfield.

Moondrop is a Chinese company out of Chengdu and has rapidly risen to fame within the audiophile community. They are known for earphones and earbuds that follow the Harman tuning curve, but with a spin here and there to give each product a unique sound, at an affordable price and with stellar build quality and interesting designs. My time with the Starfield has showed these qualities to ring true, and I have been seriously impressed with the performance on tap from a product costing just over 100 USD.

The most apparent change I've noticed as you move up in price is not necessarily the frequency response curve, but overall refinement and technical capability. As earphones get more expensive (and this is not a set rule because there are definitely exceptions) they get smoother and more mature sounding without making sacrifices to achieve those qualities. Imaging, layering, and separation all improve, giving off a more natural presentation. That was something that I adored about the Brainwavz B400, and why it's still one of my favorite iems to this day. It's staging is simply a step above everything else I've heard in the price range, and more in line with the performance you get from much more expensive gear. The same can be said for the Starfield which to me is all the more surprising and impressive because it does it with a single dynamic driver, not four balanced armatures ala. B400.

The Starfield is a fantastic product worth your attention, and this is why.


What I Hear Treble is decently well extended with a comfortable level of upper treble emphasis. Cymbals, chimes, etc. are not overly present giving the Starfield's presentation some sparkle and satisfying air between notes. It manages to be neither tiring nor dull, and for my preferences hits an elusive mark of a near perfect balance of technical competence and entertainment value. Lower treble is slightly elevated giving the Starfield's presentation plenty of detail without being overly analytic. This further feeds in why this earphone is so enjoyable over long term listening sessions. Even at listening volumes I'm not comfortable with, it remains shockingly fatigue free. The 10mm carbon nanotube driver the Starfueld is equipped with is reasonably quick too, with a fairly accurate attack and decay.

The Starfield's midrange is less recessed than other iems that chase the Harman curve, which I was very glad to hear. It's still a u-shaped tune, but not excessively so. Vocals and instruments are well-weighted, leaning ever so slightly towards a lighter style that helps improve clarity. Upper and lower mid balance is very even and linear with neither range showing a significant boost in presence. Upper mids are slightly more prominent, but not enough to warrant more than a passing remark. It doesn't lead to a shouty or overly aggressive presentation whatsoever. Timbre is outstanding and a step above most other products I've heard in recent memory. Picking apart varied instruments in a busy ensemble is fairly effortless with only various multi-driver or mega-buck iems competing. Few single dynamics I've heard sound quite as accurate.

Bass on the Starfield in conservatively elevated with a moderate density and weight. The presentation is quite linear her too, from upper bass to lower where it starts to roll off, thereby reducing emphasis on the lowest of notes. There is still plenty of air being moved though, and the Starfield can certainly satisfy with notes that are meant to be felt more than heard. Mid-bass is reasonably quick and displays a decent level of punch. On occasion it comes across a tad soft and lacking impact. Texture and detail are excellent with grungy bass notes being accurately reproduced. Nothing feels overly smoothed and certainly not one-note. It's a typically dynamic sounding low end.

The Starfield's sound stage is greater in width than depth with the ability to toss effects past the sides of your head and well off into the distance. Imaging is especially impressive and nuanced with fine channel-to-channel movements being exceptionally clear and obvious. Off hand, the only sub-200 USD earphone I can think of that bests it is the Brainwavz B400. The larger than average staging helps give the Starfield a very layered presentation with live recordings displaying clear depth between instruments. It also works well with gaming letting you judge distance fairly accurately in racing and combat titles. Instrument separation is also above average and only at extremely high volumes did I ever find tracks becoming congested or muddied, something that in my experience is fairly common to single dynamic earphones.

To put it simply, the Starfield is easily one of the best sounding single dynamic earphones I've heard, regardless of price. The mildly u-shaped tune gives it impressive versatility across genres while remaining technically impressive in terms of clarity and sound stage. Like my other favorite sub-200 USD earphone, the Brainwavz B400, the Starfield is always entertaining and never fails to put a smile on my face. It's good for long listening sessions, and can even be used to analyze tracks if you want, though there are others that better it in this regard. It has a true jack-of-all-trades tune that doesn't really sacrifice much of anything to get there.


Select Comparisons (volumes matched with Dayton Audio iMM-6)

KB EAR Diamond (79.00 USD): Bass on the Diamond is slower, digs deeper (Starfield seems to roll off slightly), and is more prominent, but the sheer presence of the midbass overwhelm. Bass out of the Diamond lacks the texture and nuance of the Starfield. Starfield also has more punch and authority to notes. The Starfield's midrange is more forward and more even in terms of upper and lower balance so male and female vocals sound more evenly represented. Timbre is similarly good with the Starfield having a very slight edge. Treble out of the Starfield is more detailed and better controlled (i.e splash free) though the brilliance region could use a boost to put it more in line with the Diamond's presentation. The Diamond's sound stage lacks the width of the Starfield's, but isn't too far off in terms of depth. Imaging, layering, and separation are all in Moondrop's backyard though, all of which are some of the best I've experienced in a sub-200 USD earphone.

The Starfield's improved detail and technical ability combined with a more balanced signature (still u-shaped though) has me picking it up over the Diamond every time.

In terms of build, the Starfield has a much neater, more interesting paint job and imo is one of the coolest looking iems around. Fit of the component parts goes to the Diamond though, since seams on the Starfield are much more noticeable. Comfort and isolation are just very slightly better with the Starfield for me, with foam tips making it pretty much a wash. When it comes to the cable, as much as I love the Diamond's I am a huge fan of thin and light braided cables. The Starfield's certainly lacks the durability factor but it stays out of the way and I quite enjoy it. Most will probably prefer the Diamond's cable though.

TinHiFi T4 (79.00-119.00 USD): Bass on the Starfield is a little heavier and warmer with similar extension. The T4 is more textured and faster handling rapid notes even better, but like the Starfield can lack impact at times. The T4's midrange is more forward with more upper mid emphasis. It has a cooler tonality and less accurate timbre as a result. Clarity and detail are similar with the T4 having a very slight edge. While neither earphone adds sibilance to a track, it's more prominent through the T4. Overall a much less forgiving midrange than the Starfields is. Treble out of the T4 is more prominent from lower to upper giving it's presentation extra energy and sparkle. Attack and decay are snappier than they are out of the Starfield giving it a more analytic feel. Sound stage is pretty even between the two with the Starfield's less forward mids giving the impression of a more distant and rounded stage. The T4 can toss effects further away despite a more intimate starting point. Imaging is notably more nuanced out of the Starfield while both provide excellent layering and separation.

I'll give the Starfield a slight edge in overall sound quality due to the T4's mediocre imaging, but otherwise they trade blow for blow and are both outstanding earphones. Go with the T4 if you like a more neutral leaning sound, and the Starfield if you prefer some extra low end and general warmth.

In terms of build, both are great. The T4's design isn't as eye catching but fit and finish is better, and since it features bare metal, you won't have to worry about paint chips as seems to be an issue for some with the Starfield. While I like MMCX connectors, the T4's have too much play and feel nowhere near as secure as the Starfield's excellent recessed 0.78mm 2-pin ports. The Starfield's cable is also nicer. While the T4's cable is thicker and has a nice chin cinch, it's also quite bouncy and sticky. The Starfield's cable is light and lean and rarely gets in the way. Both have well-design preformed ear guides.

Brainwavz B400 (169.50 USD): The quad-armature B400 has been my sub-200 USD benchmark for a couple years now, and while the Starfield doesn't quite unseat it, the fact they're even being compared should give you an idea of how much I respect the Starfield and its performance.

When it comes to bass, performance is unexpectedly close but favours the Starfield with it's dynamic drivers. Notes hit with greater impact and it moves more air thank to improved extension and more sub-bass presence. They start the process of rolling off around the same time though. In favour of the B400 is texture and speed. The B400's midrange is notably more forward and intimate with more detail and similar clarity. Vocals have a bit more meat to them which really benefits female voices. Timbre on the B400 is great, but the Starfield sounds just a bit more natural, most noticeable to me with pianos. Treble on both earphones is quite relaxed with the B400 sounding more lively in the upper treble region. Once again, detail and clarity reside in the B400's camp, but the differences are fairly minor. While the B400's sound stage is clearly the smaller and more intimate of the two, its multi-driver setup gives it a clear edge in layering and separation. Imaging on both is also well above-average in my opinion, with the B400 giving listeners even more precise movement and depth to it's presentation.

I absolutely adore both of these products and could easily live with either as my only earphone. They're that good. In the Starfield's favour, its more relaxed mid-range and deeper bass gives it a more chill vibe, whereas the more mid-forward B400 demands your attention. I still favour the B400's presentation, but I'd be 100% content with either. Given the price difference and the B400's sub-par build quality, that is a win for the Starfield.

In terms of build, no contest. The Starfield's painted steel shells are miles ahead of the B400's 3D-printed shells in everything but comfort and isolation. Moondrop also equipped the Starfield with a nicer cable, though one that likely won't be quite as durable as the more heavy duty one that Brainwavz provides.

In The Ear The Starfield is a gorgeous looking earphone with an organic, low profile design. Fit of the component parts is good, but there is a prominent seam circling the base of the face plate that may or may not bother some. The ports for the removable cable are recessed a couple millimetres into the housing offering a snug fit for the plugs and enhanced protection from accidents and careless owners that shove the earphone in their pocket. Unlike most other products in the Moondrop range, the Starfield is painted an eye-catching metallic blue with the Starfield name on the right earpiece, and a compass on the left. Personally, I think they're one of the best looking products on the market and are oozing style. It's certainly a breath of fresh air from the bare metal, or chrome, or black earphones that are oh so common. Keep in mind though that this paint job doesn't seem to be the most durable thing in the world with numerous examples of them being chipped floating around the web. As long as you're not slinging the Starfield around your neck when not in use, letting the earpieces clack together while you walk, or stuffing them in your pocket without first being set within the case or some other protective carrying device, you should be okay.

The cable Moondrop includes with the Starfield is going to be a divisive one in my opinion. There are those that like a thin, lightweight cable, of which the Starfield's is. Strain relief is good at the 90 degree angled jack, but lacking entirely at the chunky metal y-split. Leading up to the earphones are preformed ear guides which again, some like, some detest. The plugs themselves continue the lightweight theme and are small and unobtrusive. For me personally, I love this cable. The blue colouring matches the rest of the product, the low mass keeps it from tugging at your ears when running or doing anything more vigorous than a walk, and it doesn't seem to catch on your environment often. It's like a slightly beefier, cheaper feeling version of the EarNiNE EN2J's cable. On the other hand, the braid kinda loose (though not as bad as the TinHifi P1's), and the lack of strain relief at the y-split is somewhat concerning for overall longevity. For something that is as nice to actually use as this cable is, I can accept the negatives in place, even if they don't have to be there.

So the Starfield is pretty well built, looks good, and the cable is decent. How is it to actually wear? For me, fantastic! Despite the weight of the dense metal shells, the Starfield's ergonomics are outstanding. The low profile design keeps weight distribution fairly even around your outer ear, and while it has a fairly shallow fit, there is never the feeling of a compromised seal. Isolation unfortunately is not amazing. I don't find this entirely surprising given the shallow fit and twin vents on the inside of each earpiece. Of course, foam tips help mitigate this sound leak somewhat, but not enough to make the Starfield an ideal pick for routine use in noisy areas like a coffee shop or on transit.


In The Box Moondrop equipped the Starfield with some classy packaging. The outer sleeve is beautifully designed with a number of neat touches. The brand is known for prominently featuring Anime girls on their boxes, and while one appears here she is merely a silhouette set against a starry night sky. In the sky is the Starfield name and the statement “Listen to the Sound of Stars”, surrounded by two lines that mimic the upper and lower edges of the left earpiece. This sort of attention to detail goes a long way in setting Moondrop apart from the competition in my eyes, as I'm someone that truly appreciates when a brand puts effort into their packaging. Out back of the sleeve is an image of the Starfield's right earpiece, but deconstructed to show off the component parts. Slipping off the sleeve reveals a blue box printed with the Moondrop logo in silver foil lettering. The speckled texturing of the box reminds me of what Campfire Audio does with their cardboard, though here it is much more subtle.

Removing the lid you find the blue specking continues. The top half of the interior is dominated by a cardboard covered foam insert in which the Starfield's earpieces are set. Starfield in silver foil lettering resides just below the earphones. Lifting out this insert reveals a covered compartment where some extra accessories along with the manual, contact info, and QA cards are stored. Backing up a bit, the rest of the package contains a compact clam shell case in which the rest of the accessories can be found. In all you get:

• Starfield earphones
• 0.78mm 2-pin 24AWG Litz 4N OFC 1.2M cable
• Carrying case
• Tweezers
• 3 spare pairs of metal nozzle filters
• Single flange silicone tips (s/m/l x2)

This is a very simple but enriching unboxing experience. Outside of the sleeve being tough to remove initially, the rest of the experience is fuss free. The design is attractive and well thought out, as is the accessory kit. The clam shell case is smaller in circumference than most, but has enough depth to comfortably hold the earphones and spare tips while still fitting in most pockets. It has a pleasing texture too thanks to the grippy, knobbled surface. The tweezers and spare filters are something you usually only get with vastly more expensive products and were a welcome surprise. Lastly, the included tips are top quality and use a grippy, soft silicone that reliably seals and causes zero discomfort. Some more tip variety would have been welcome though.

Final Thoughts It continues to be an amazing time for fans of portable audio. It's hard to find a bad sounding earphone. Everything from super cheap budget gear to high end earphones is usually at the very least competent, if not very good. Unfortunately, that also means that it takes something seriously impressive to stand out. The Starfield is one of those rare products.

The Starfield pops visually. It performs at a level that was unimaginable for a product around 100 USD a few years back. The build quality is good. The packaging is nice. The accessory kit isn't full of cheap, throwaway extras, like a case that you can pick up on Aliexpress for 50 cents. The overall presentation and performance is a step above most of the competition. Moondrop aimed high with the Starfield, and absolutely nailed it. If you're looking to buy an earphone for under 200 USD right now, take a long hard look at the Starfield. I have a feeling this one is going to remain a strong contender for quite a while.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Nappoler with Hifigo.com for arranging a sample of the Starfield for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions and are not representative of Moondrop, Hifigo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Starfield retailed for 109.00 USD: https://hifigo.com/products/moondrop-starfield-carbon-nanotube-diaphragm-dynamic-earphone / www.aliexpress.com/item/4000644906074.html

Specifications

• Driver: 10mm Carbon Nanotube dual cavity dynamic driver with Japanese Daikoku CCAW voice coils
• Impedance: 32Ω±15% (@1khz)
• Sensitivity: 122dB/Vrms(@1khz)
• Frequency Response: 10Hz-36,000 Hz
• Cable: 0.78mm 2-pin 24AWG Litz 4N OFC 1.2M

Devices Used For Testing LG G6, LG Q70, XDuoo Link, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Periodic Audio Nickle, Shanling M0, Hifiman MegaMini

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings,

Today we're checking out the XQ-50, an affordable Bluetooth 5.0, aptX equipped receiver from xDuoo.

xDuoo is a brand full of variety, from dacs to amps to earphones, and Bluetooth receivers like the XQ-50. While in the past xDuoo has mostly disappointed me, the last couple products I've checked out have been winners, and the XQ-50 is no exception.

Let's take a closer look, shall we?


What I Hear While it somewhat defeats the point of a wireless receiver, the majority of my testing was completed with headphones simply to make it as easy as possible to hear what the XQ-50 is bringing to the table. During testing, the XQ-50 was paired with my LG Q70 over Bluetooth using the aptX codec to ensure the best possible quality (out of the supported codecs of course). The XQ-50 was then connected to my TEAC HA-501 desktop amp via the Aux out ports. The LG Q70 was also connected to the HA-501 via a standard 3.5mm aux cable. This setup allowed me to switch between wired and wireless outputs within seconds. Lastly, my Asus FX53V acted as a source to test the XQ-50's USB DAC functionality. The Hifiman Sundara with it's wonderfully balanced planar sound acted as my primary musical conduit, though other products found their way into the rotation; Campfire Audio Cascade, Brainwavz Alara, Fearless S6 Rui, Moondrop Starfield, and various others. I also spent some time listening with the XQ-50 connected to my old Creative 2.1 system using an AUX to 3.5mm adapter.

Listening over Bluetooth, I was pleased with what the XQ-50 was producing. It didn't do much to colour the sound, and sounded fairly neutral across the board with a mild lower treble lift. Extension was good, but with the usual rolloff at either end that isn't anything unexpected. Only when performing frequency sweeps and comparing to wired use was it noticeable. During regular listening it never cropped up as an issue. Flipping back and forth between output through the Q70's 3.5mm jack and Bluetooth, there were definitely differences. Nothing so vastly significant so as to seem like you're listening to two different products though. The most immediately noticeable difference was that over Bluetooth, sound was less organic and a bit more sharp. It sounded akin to the visual difference between heavily processed, artificially sharpened smartphone photos versus softer, more realistic DSLR photos. Detail and coherence is there and quite prominent, but dig a little deeper and it's the facade begins to falter. Fine details sounded slightly muddied over Bluetooth when compared to the same passages wired. Bass wasn't quite as textured but retained the slam and speed you would expect. Everything was just a little worse, but still sounded great.

When using the XQ-50 in USB DAC mode, I was less impressed. In this mode the signature was less balanced with enhanced mid-bass and more treble presence. While detail and clarity seemed slightly better when compared to Bluetooth mode, treble wasn't as smooth or well controlled and came across a hint splashy. The sound stage also felt reduced and less spacious. Bass had more impact though, and sub-bass presence was also enhanced letting my Sundara's move more air. On one hand, the more v-shaped presentation was extra expressive and with the right set of headphones more fun, but on the other it simply didn't sound as accurate or clean as wireless did. Hard to believe I'm saying this, but I'd only use the USB DAC mode as backup and would stick to Bluetooth as the best way to make use of the XQ-50's quality sound.


Tech Inside As discovered earlier, in addition to the Bluetooth functionality, the XQ-50 can act as a USB DAC for your PC. Sabre's well-regarded ES9018K2M chip handles this. Accessing this feature is as simple as you expect. Connect the USB cable, turn on the XQ-50, and select it as the playback device. Yup. Easy peasy.

The Bluetooth connection is nearly as easy to set up with the XQ-50 going into pairing mode the moment it is turned on, as denoted by the flashing LED under the ST label. To connect, just turn on your source device's Bluetooth feature and locate the XQ-50. You can't miss it because it is very clearly labelled “xDuoo XQ-50” in the device list. Once selected, the two devices will connect and the ST light will stop flashing and glow solid blue.

Connection stability over wireless is exceptional. I'm used to portable gear which nearly always hiccups every once in a while. Early onset connection degradation is pretty common once you start introducing obstacles. While the XQ-50 is rated to the standard 33ft/10m range, this is flat out wrong. I can place it in my office and it will retain a stable connection no matter where in the apartment I go. The includes out the front door which is around 50 feet from my work desk and involves going down a hallway, around a corner, through the living room, down another hallway, around another corner, and down yet another hallway. That leaves numerous walls, furniture, rooms, doors, and whatever else in the way, yet the connection never once falters.


Construction Quality The XQ-50's case is shielded aluminum which when combined with the external, high-gain antenna helps ensure a connection free from disruption. Fit and finish of the case is good, but it's far from sleek and nothing to write home about. The front and rear plates are about a millimetre larger all around than they need to be, with prominent hex screws holding them in place. All writing seems to be laser etched which is excellent for longevity. You won't have to worry about any labels rubbing off as your XQ-50 ages.

On the front is the multi-function button that serves to turn the device on and off, as well as pause and play music when connected via Bluetooth. The button feels nice to press with an audible click announcing every depression. To the right are two small holes containing LEDs. The one labelled ST handles notifications for pairing and power, while the HD light advises when you are connected via aptX. Out back are a number of ports and plugs including red and white aux-out ports, coaxial and optical out ports, and a Type-C plug used for both power and the USB DAC functionality. Each port is neatly lined up with the cutouts in the rear aluminum plate. Everything feels rock solid with zero play or looseness.

Overall the XQ-50, while looking very plain, is quite well constructed. The only thing missing is some rubber feet to keep it firmly in place. Maybe some additional weight too. The XQ-50 is quite light and even after installing third party rubber feet, has a tendency to slide out of place due to the weight of the attached wires.


In The Box The XQ-50's packaging is simple and straightforward. The outer sleeve is bright white with an image of the device on the front, along with rainbow coloured xDuoo branding along the top. On the back of the sleeve is a specification list along with what I assume is a blurb about the device. None of it is in English so I'm not sure what it says. There is also some contact info for xDuoo in the bottom left corner. Sliding off the sleeve reveals a plain cardboard box with the xDuoo logo on top.

Opening the front flap and flipping back the lid, inside you find a warranty card, manual (which includes a decent English translation for mono-lingual fools like myself), the device, it's removable antenna, and a Type-C USB cable tucked securely inside a foam insert. And that's it. About as basic an unboxing as it gets. It would have been nice if a power brick was included. Not a huge loss though since most cell phone power bricks meet the 5V/1A requirement, and most people will have at least one kicking around. Plus, it works fine powered by the USB ports on a laptop or desktop computer.


Final Thoughts If you didn't gather it from all of the above, I quite like the XQ-50. Sure it looks plain and unassuming, and the lack of rubber feet and weight to keep it stable amidst the rest of your stereo equipment is annoying, but the audio performance is great in Bluetooth mode (less so in USB DAC mode), it's easy to set up, it's inexpensive, and the wireless range is both insanely good and very stable. I don't really know what else to say. It does what it is supposed to do, and it does it well. That's another win for xDuoo in my books.

Thanks for reading!

- B9

Disclaimer Thanks to Steve with Xtenik for arranging a sample of the XQ-50 for the purposes of review. The thoughts here are my subjective opinions based on use of the XQ-50 over nearly two months. They do not represent Xtenik or xDuoo. At the time of writing the XQ-50 could be picked up for 58.00 USD; https://www.xtenik.com/product/xDuoo-xq-50/

Specifications

Bluetooth Version: 5.0 (Qualcomm QCC3008 Bluetooth chip)
Transmission Distance: about 10m
THD+N (COAXIAL): 0.00087%
Output Level (Optical): 0.5VP-P
Output level (AUX OUT): 2.5V
Support Format: SBC, AAC, aptX
Optical: 0.00087%
THD+N (AUX OUT): 0.07%
Output Level (COAXIAL): 0.5VP-P
Power Input: DC5V/1A
DAC: ESS Sabre ES9018K2M DAC

Greetings!

Today we're checking out one of Dunu's most recent releases, the DM-480.

Dunu is far from new to the audio world, having been an OEM/ODM prior to firing up their own earphone brand in 2006. Around the time I was jumping feet first into the hobby, they were delivering some pretty groundbreaking products like the Titan 1, 3, 5, and the DN-2000. The Titan 1 started my love affair with the brand and it still finds its way into my listening rotation today. It was also my first real step up from the hyper budget gear I spent most of my time with, and remains one of my favorite purchases to this day. The Titan 3 remains “the one that got away”. The pair that was sent over as part of a review tour in 2015 holds a special place in my history with iems, and probably helped to define my personal preferences.

The DM-480 is a completely different beast than the Titan models I love so much, but that's not a bad thing. Let's look at why the DM-480 is deserving of your attention.


What I Hear Bass on the DM-480 was a bit hit and miss for me at first; another reason to roll with foam tips. After posting some comments in the Head-fi forums about sub-bass roll off, Dunu PM'd me and reminded that the shell is fully sealed which can lead to pressure build up and a change in sound perception. Made sense given my observations were not lining up with the majority, nor their measurements. I suspect that for the first couple weeks of testing this is likely what I was experiencing. Initial thoughts were that the issue was simply volume; i.e. the DM-480 needed lots of it (80+dB) to “wake up” the low end. Turned out I was getting too good of a seal causing pressure build up and the resultant low end roll off. I didn't think anything of it because normally it is quite obvious and uncomfortable, particularly when removing the iem, plus I've listened to other iems using the same or very similar shells and this was never an issue. It never crossed my mind that this could be the problem. However, per Dunu's suggestion I pulled out some foam tips and they immediately resolved this issue.

Note that I always test with foam tips, though usually later in my test cycle. I would have figured this out on my own, but thankfully Dunu accelerated the process for me. Bass does indeed dig deep and has plenty of sub-bass presence. Not quite sub woofer-like, but still very deep. In addition, these dual dynamics display excellent texture and control with a reasonably linear move from sub to mid to upper bass. Mid-bass is lean and not particularly prominent, falling into the “just right” category for my listening preferences. It is punchy and quick with no bleed into the mids.

The DM-480's midrange is lean which isn't going to satisfy certain listeners. Detail is prominent with little warmth. The somewhat cool, dry presentation benefits male vocals greatly while female vocals come across more sterile than I prefer. While the midrange is quite linear from lower to middle, upper mids are peaked resulting in sibilant aspects of tracks standing out. On the plus side, sibilance isn't deposited into areas where it doesn't already exist. When it comes to timbre, the DM-480 isn't particularly accurate with instruments commonly sounding dry and on the artificial side. For the most part it's accurate enough to avoid being a distraction, but in the end it seems to work best with mainly electronic works.

Moving into the upper ranges, lower treble is elevated and somewhat harsh with silicone tips that use a stiffer material. I highly recommend buying some foam tips which really smooth out the DM-480's presentation, or silicone tips that use a softer material (Spinfit, Final E-Type, JVC wide bore, Sony hybrid, etc.). In general the DM-480's presentation is detailed with good control and only a hint of splashiness present. Upper treble is de-emphasized and continues that somewhat dry presentation heard in the mids, yet the DM-480 retains a satisfying amount of air and space between instruments and notes. I never found the presentation congested. Notes also hit with aggression and decay quickly resulting in a rapid, agile presentation.

When it comes to sound stage the DM-480 is pretty good. It does a nice job placing sounds just around your head space and occasionally fooled me into thinking there was someone calling for me, or at least in direct vicinity. Imaging is quite good with sound moving accurately from channel to channel, while layering and separation are also up to snuff. The DM-480 was a nice companion for gaming since I could easily track opponents as they moved around me.

Despite my initial misgiving with the low end, I was enjoying the DM-480. Fixing the low end issues only served to improve impressions further. This style of bass-focused, u-shaped tuning is technically competent and plenty entertaining, though the somewhat dry, lean note weight through the mids and treble might be a turn off for some.


Compared to a Peer

Shozy Hibiki Mk.2 (65.00 USD): The single dynamic Hibiki Mk.2 (just Hibiki from here on in) has a low end that competes well with the DM-480 in terms of performance and presentation, but falls a little short. Sub-bass extends nearly as well but doesn't have quite the presence of the Dunu. Notes hit with a little less urgency and linger a bit longer. Texture and detail are also just a half-step behind. The Hibiki isn't quite as linear with the midbass seeing a more aggressive lift giving it a thicker, warmer sound. This weightier presentation carries through into the mids, to their benefit. As a result the Hibiki's mids hold a similar emphasis (without the upper mid peak), but carry more presence thanks to the additional weight and warmth. This gives it an edge in female vocals, while I still prefer male vocals out of the DM-480. Timbre goes to the Hibiki which, while not perfect, is closer to accurate. Where the Dunu is somewhat dry and artificial, the Hibiki is a bit warm and plasticy. When it comes to treble the Hibiki has a more linear presentation with a similar upper treble roll off. Lower treble could use a hint more presence in my opinion, and as a result means the Hibiki falls behind in terms of raw detail. Sound stage is also slightly smaller in both width and depth, but they're both plenty capable of tossing sounds well off into the distance. Imaging performance is similarly good, with the Dunu shining a little brighter in terms of layering and separation, probably due to its leaner, lighter presentation.

These two definitely compete with their u-shaped signatures. The DM-480 is technically the more impressive model, though I find myself enjoying the Hibiki a little more because of the extra midrange note weight and more linear treble presentation. Tuning preference plays a big part when choosing between these two.

In terms of build the Hibiki is good, but the Dunu is better. Smaller, more ergonomic shells with notably improved fit and finish (see Hibiki face plates peeling off). I'll give the Hibiki's cable a win though. Ports on the Hibiki are recessed offering more protection from abuse. The sheath is a little stiffer, possibly thanks to the braided design, but it also seems to hold up better in cooler weather. No cable noise either. The inline mic will be a turn off for some though.

Tin HiFi T3 (69.99 USD): The hybrid T3 follows TinHifi's typical tuning of neutral-bright meaning when comparing low end quantity, the DM-480 is clearly the more bassy of the two. While the T3's extension is great for a T Series model, it falls short of the DM-480 and is incapable of providing the same level of physical feedback. Mid-bass quantity is actually quite similar though, with the DM-480 having a hint more texture and slightly better control, while the T3 provides a bit more kick. Mids on the T3 are notably more forward and similarly weighted, but with a better balance of upper and lower presence. As such, performances from any gender are represented more equally. While the T3 doesn't add sibilance to tracks in my experience, unlike the DM-480, it's also a lot less forgiving of existing sibilance and low quality or poorly mastered tracks. Where you can get away with mediocre files sounding good out of the DM-480, you'll want to avoid them with the T3. Part of that is the treble which is notably more extended on the T3. The brilliance region is rolled off on the DM-480, while there is a peak on the T3. I find this helps provide a larger sound stage and improve actual clarity over the DM-480, though treble sensitive users will certainly find the DM-480's presentation more to their liking. In addition to having a larger sound stage, the T3's imaging, layering, and separation are all improved over the DM-480.

These two are more complimentary than competition given they cater to very different audiences. If you enjoy a robust low end with thumping bass, you'll definitely prefer the DM-480. If you like to listen critically and prefer accuracy over entertainment, get the T3.

In terms of build, both are wonderfully constructed. The aluminum shells of the T3 do not fit nor isolate as well as the DM-480's 3D-printed shells, but they get the edge in terms of durability. The T3's cable is much flashier and more impressive with it's thick braids and attention grabbing gold and while colour scheme, though there is something satisfying in the DM-480's more simple, straightforward cable.

KB EAR Diamond (79.00 USD): Starting with the low end, the single dynamic Diamond is warmer and bassier with notably more mid-bass presence and similar sub-bass depth and grunt. This gives it a thicker, heavier sound, with a slower response to quick basslines. The DM-480's bass is more textured and detailed. DM-480's mids are notably more forward (upper particularly), more lean and cold, and to my ears better suited to male vocalists. Upper mids are more boosted and display mild sibilance which is not present in the Diamond. Diamond's timbre is more accurate with the DM-480 sounding somewhat metallic and artificial in comparison. DM-480 has more lower treble presence giving it a more detailed presentation, but the lack of upper treble just adds to the somewhat dry presentation. The Diamond has more upper treble presence and sparkle. Despite this, it doesn't do anything to reduce the sound stage edge of the DM-480 which sounds wider and deeper with added space between notes and instruments. Imaging is equally pleasing on them both, with the DM-480 having a negligible edge in in terms of layering and separation.

The DM-480 is more balanced and technically impressive, but gives up timbre quality and realism to the Diamond. These two qualities, in addition to a complete lack of sibilance, means the Diamond gets my vote.

In terms of build and comfort, the DM-480 is smaller, lighter, isolates better, is more comfortable, and has better fit and finish. Both look fantastic. The Diamond's cable is certainly the more premium of the two, however, and the two-pin setup KB EAR went with provides better protection from bends.


In The Ear The DM-480 is Dunu's first 3D-printed earphone, and they did a fantastic job selecting their shell. The printing quality easily rivals my benchmark, the FiiO FA1, in that you'd never know it was 3D-printed unless you were told. There are none of the usual tell-tale signs of the printing process and as such the housing is smooth and blemish free. The metal nozzles feel very securely attached and not like a weak point, while the abalone-like face plates are smoothly integrated. My only complaint about the build is the lack of support for the 2-pin connectors. Much like TFZ's usual implementation, the plug sitting flush with the receptacle is the only protection it gets from bends. As such, these are not an iem I feel comfortable tossing into a pocket without first being placed inside their protective case.

The cable is very similar to one of my old favorites (see Penon BS1 Experience and AKAudio Light T2), but not quite as plush, and more subject to stiffening in cold weather. Still, it looks great with its silver sheen shining through the clear sheath. It doesn't pack the same sort of wow factor as the multi-strand offerings you commonly see from other brands, like the cable included with the TinHiFi T3, but that's okay. This cable is lighter and arguably more comfortable, the metal hardware looks good (but with minimal strain relief) and shouldn't break, and you even get a chin cinch. This last feature is wonderful to have because some cable noise is present, and the cinch goes a long way to mitigating it. Overall and fairly standard cable, but one that is quite pleasant to use. Two thumbs up.

Wearing the DM-480 is a pleasure thanks to the ergonomic design, small size, and light weight. The custom-like shell is very similar to those we saw cropping up a few years ago with products like the Kinera H3, but is much smaller and more compact meaning this shell is compatible with a much wider variety of ear sizes and shapes. Keep in mind the shell is sealed though, so pressure build up is a risk. Sometimes it's uncomfortable, and sometimes it can effect the sound negatively (as I experienced). On the plus side, a sealed, highly ergonomic shell means isolation is excellent, well above average for your typical dynamic only earphone. These were a joy to use in noisy places like my local coffee shop, and would be a great companion for those who routinely find themselves in areas of high noise pollution.


In The Box As a packaging aficionado I've always appreciated Dunu's premium materials and the unboxing experience that went along with their products. While the DM-480's packaging is more befitting of the price tag, it still scratches my unboxing itch thanks to a simple, fuss-free disassembly experience.

On the front of the exterior sheath you see the DM-480 earpieces in both orange and black colour options. Potential buyers are also given a glimpse at the 2-pin system. Off to the side, somewhat hidden by bokeh, are the metal plug and y-split. Flip to the back and there are two paragraphs that tell you about the driver technology and manufacturing process for the 3D-printed earpieces, measurements highlighting the linear bass and mid-range response benefits of the “dual-push” dual dynamic setup, as well as a list of specs. Outside of the box being a little on the large side, this seems like a very retail-ready package since it does a great job of showing off and telling you about the product inside.

Slipping off the sheath you find yourself starting at a fairly standard matte black box with Dunu printed in silver foil being the only other item of note. Lifting off the lid reveals the two earpieces set within a large foam pad. Lift that out and you find a very high quality, Dunu-branded carrying case set within even more foam. Inside the case are the rest of the accessories. In all you get:

• DM-480 earphones
• 0.78mm 2-pin silver-plated OFC cable
• Clam shell carrying case
• White single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Blue single flange silicone tips (s/m/l)
• Shift clip

Overall this is a nice accessory kit. The carrying case is compact but spacious enough inside to comfortably hold the earphones and spare tips. It is also made from premium looking and feeling materials. The included tips are very comfortable, especially the blue set. They seal well and are quite durable as I found out with the red version I got with my Titan 1 back in the day. The only thing missing is a set of foam tips, a bummer of an omission given Dunu's partnership with Comply, and with how well foam tips pair with the DM-480.

When it comes to the packaging, it does seem a bit wasteful. It could easily be about half the size and still get the job done. Knowledge Zenith did the same thing in 2018 with packaging for their AS10 and BA10 models; that being, they provide them in largely oversized packaging. With the later AS06 the packaging was identical, save for being just over half the size. Dunu could likely do the same down the road for the DM-480. Still, the materials Dunu used are recyclable so this is more of an observation than a complaint.

Final Thoughts Despite a rocky beginning, the DM-480 wormed it's way into my psyche and grew into a pretty kick arse little earphone. They've got a comfortable, ergonomic, highly isolating shell utilizing a common 0.78mm 2-pin system to satisfy cable rollers, a quality accessory kit, and a well-tuned sound with some impressive bass. I remiss the omission of foam tips which help counter potential issues caused by the sealed shell, and the upper treble is a bit dull for my preferences, but when those are someone's only major complaints, that's a pretty big win for a product that runs you only 70 bucks.

Thanks for reading and thanks to Dunu for the chance to check out the DM-480.

- B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Vivian with Dunu for reaching out to see if I would be interested in reviewing the DM-480, and for arranging a sample for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my own subjective opinions and do not represent Dunu or any other entity. At the time of writing the DM-480 was retailing for 69 USD: https://www.dunu-topsound.com/dm-480 / https://www.aliexpress.com/store/5001057

Specifications

• Driver: 8mm, titanium-coated, isobaric dual-dynamic
• Impedance: 20ohms
• Sensitivity: 105 +/- 2dB @1kHz
• Frequency Response: 5Hz – 40kHz
• THD: <0.5% @ 1kHz

Devices Used For Testing LG G6, LG Q70, XDuoo Link, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Periodic Audio Nickle, Shanling M0, Hifiman MegaMini

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings,

Today we're checking out the Diamond from KBEAR.

KBEAR is fairly new to the scene but has already established themselves as a major player in the crowded sea of Chinese brands that have swarmed the market in recent years. Competitive pricing, quality designs, and reliable tuning are the name of the game for this brand with most of their releases being well-received within the community. The Diamond is somewhat unique in that it's tuning was the result of feedback from a prominent tuner of products from TRN, as well as a reviewer/tuner/enthusiast from within the Head-fi community. This last point is exactly why I was interested in checking out the Diamond, and asked the KBEAR rep Wendy for the opportunity to review it.

So, how is the Diamond? If you're reading this on Head-fi, you'll already have an idea from the score and Pros/Cons sections. If reading elsewhere, continue on.


What I Hear Single dynamic earphones were common in the budget realms a few years ago. Like, really common. Anything else was cause for chatter because it was new and interesting, be that a dual dynamic, single armature, or hybrid. While there are still plenty of single dynamics out there and that various prices that retain an engaging sound with various genres, like the JVC HA-FXH30, Hifiman RE2000, CA Atlas, Dunu Titan 1, Hypersense HEX02, and pretty much anything from TFZ, they're not as common as they once were. That seems to be changing with single dynamics making a comeback, and the Diamond is a very competent one.

Treble is rolled off with a small lower treble peak making it easy to listen to over long periods and fairly detailed. However, I found minute details somewhat smoothed over. While I found the Diamond lacking energy and presence in the brilliance region at first, upon comparing with others, it was less a case of a lack of presence, and more a case of the exuberant mid-bass pulling attention. This makes it feel as if the Diamond lacks upper treble counter, leaving the presentation somewhat dull. Another side effect is staging feeling somewhat small and confined. Control is also somewhat lacking leaving effects and instruments sounding slightly loose and splashy. On the plus side, notes hit with a snappy attack, decaying realistically. I'm really not a fan of the Diamond's treble presentation, even if it isn't bad.

The midrange is well weighted with an appropriate thickness, and to my ears finds a nice balance of warmth and clarity. Timbre is mostly accurate, though instruments take on a slightly lighter sound than they should to my ear. Better than most in the price range either way. Male and female vocals are both well represented. Male vocals have more presence despite losing coherence on extremely bassy tracks, while female vocals show more warmth and in my opinion sound more pleasing, more consistently. I am quite impressed with the complete lack of sibilance. Even tracks like Aesop Rock's “Blood Sandwich” and The Crystal Method's “Grace (feat LeAnn Rimes)”, are almost free of it, despite it being prominent in the recordings. I've also seen the word “shouty” being tossed around to describe the Diamond's mids. To that I say, what the fudge? To each their own I guess...

Bass is a very prominent aspect of the Diamond's sound. There is lots of mid-bass with excellent sub-bass extension and presence. Texture is good and notes are well controlled, if not a touch slow on decay. I'm really not hearing the super quick driver others have described. Despite the average perception of speed, consecutive, rapid bass notes are not muddied and remain well defined. Mid-bass basically carries every track due to it's prominence. It's nearly always present and underpins whatever is going on with it's rumbly, sub-woofer-like presentation. Cool, but it does over-stay it's welcome at times.

As noted earlier, the Diamond sounds small and confined. Sounds rarely breach the edge of your head space. Counter to early impressions where I tested only with music, imaging is above-average with sounds transferring channel to channel with a pleasing level of precision. I've really been enjoying the Diamond with gaming as a result. Big bass and good imaging is a nice combo. Layering and separation are also good too, though I'm hearing more width than depth which means the Diamond can handle truly chaotic tracks, just not as well as some others.

Overall, the Diamond is a quality sounding earphone. For my tastes I would like less mid-bass, but as is the Diamond makes for a good listen. This tuning works better outdoors and in noisy environments than in quiet areas ripe for critical listening. Makes sense given it is a budget friendly iem with a v-shaped tune for the masses, and not a top of the line, open-back, neutrally tuned headphone. Good stuff.


Compared to a Peer (volumes matched with Dayton Audio iMM-6)

Dunu DM-480 (69 USD): Starting with the low end, the Diamond is warmer and bassier with notably more mid-bass presence and similar sub-bass depth and grunt. This gives it a thicker, heavier sound, with a slower response to quick basslines. The DM-480's bass is more textured and detailed. DM-480's mids are notably more forward (upper particularly), more lean and cold, and to my ears better suited to male vocalists. Upper mids are more boosted and display mild sibilance which is not present in the Diamond. Diamond's timbre is more accurate with the DM-480 sounding somewhat metallic and artificial in comparison. DM-480 has more lower treble presence giving it a more detailed presentation, but the lack of upper treble just adds to the somewhat dry presentation. The Diamond has more upper treble presence and sparkle. Despite this, it doesn't do anything to reduce the sound stage edge of the DM-480 which sounds wider and deeper with added space between notes and instruments. Imaging is equally pleasing on them both, with the DM-480 having a negligible edge in in terms of layering and separation.

The DM-480 is more balanced and technically impressive, but gives up timbre quality and realism to the Diamond. These two qualities, in addition to a complete lack of sibilance, means the Diamond gets my vote.

In terms of build and comfort, the DM-480 is smaller, lighter, isolates better, is more comfortable, and has better fit and finish. Both look fantastic. The Diamond's cable is certainly the more premium of the two, however, and the two-pin setup KB EAR went with provides better protection from bends.

TinHifi T4 (79-119 USD): Bass out of the T4 is notably less prominent, but slightly more impressive in my opinion. Like the Diamond it hits low notes with ease, but holds back the mid-bass and dials up the texture and speed. The T4's driver gives off the impression of being exceptionally light and nimble, and feels like it runs circles around the Diamond when it comes to complex passages. That said, I can see the more weighty, thumpy presentation of the Diamond finding more fans because it's a straight up more fun way to tune a low end. The T4's mids are smoother and more refined. Upper and lower balance is improved benefiting both male and female vocals. Clarity is also a step up. Lastly, in my opinion, timbre also sounds more natural out of the T4. I was very surprised to find the T4 had less upper treble energy than the Diamond, with lower treble being similarly emphasized. Normally that would put the Diamond right into my preference crosshairs, but the midbass ends up being too distracting. The T4 also has better note control and is free of the slight splashiness present in the Diamond. Lastly, sound stage sits firmly in the T4's favour with it being much more spacious all around. However, it has vague imaging with limited channel to channel differentiation that doesn't hold a candle to the Diamond. Layering and separation are more in line though.

The T4 is definitely my preferred listen of the two thanks to it's more balanced tune and all the extra detail it provides. Can't help but be disappointed by the imaging though which the Diamond does much, much better.

In terms of build, the T4 is smaller, lighter, doesn't isolate as well, is less comfortable, and has better fit and finish. I think the Diamond has a more appealing design though, and feels like the more premium product. A big part of that is the cable. The T4's cable sucks. It is sticky, bouncy, and the loose braid is sloppy and gives the impression of cost cutting. Very similar to the P1's cable, but worse due to the stickiness. Bleh...

Moondrop Starfield (109 USD): I don't think there is much point in comparing these two because to my ears one clearly stands above the other, but people keep doing it so I'll toss my hat into the ring as well.

Bass on the Diamond is slower, digs deeper (Starfield seems to roll off slighly), and is more prominent, but the sheer presence of the midbass overwhelm. Bass out of the Diamond lacks the texture and nuance of the Starfield. Starfield also has more punch and authority to notes. The Starfield's midrange is more forward and more even in terms of upper and lower balance so male and female vocals sound more evenly represented. Timbre is similarly good with the Starfield having a very slight edge. Treble out of the Starfield is more detailed and better controlled (i.e splash free) though the brilliance region could use a boost to put it more in line with the Diamond's presentation. The Diamond's sound stage lacks the width of the Starfield's, but isn't too far off in terms of depth. Imaging, layering, and separation are all in Moondrop's backyard though, all of which are some of the best I've experienced in a sub-200 USD earphone.

The Starfield's improved detail and technical ability combined with a more balanced signature (still u-shaped though) has me picking it up over the Diamond every time, and listening for much longer periods.

In terms of build, the Starfield has a much neater, more interesting paint job and imo is one of the coolest looking iems around. Fit of the component parts goes to the Diamond though, since seams on the Starfield are much more noticeable. Comfort and isolation are just very slightly better with the Starfield for me, with foam tips making it pretty much a wash. When it comes to the cable, as much as I love the Diamond's I am a huge fan of thin and light braided cables. The Starfield's certainly lacks the durability factor but it stays out of the way and I quite enjoy it. Most will probably prefer the Diamond's cable though.


In The Ear The Diamond looks and feels like a premium earphone thanks to it's weighty metal shells with gold accented nozzles, carbon fibre face plates, and an appropriately meaty braided, silver-plated copper cable.

When it comes to build quality, the Diamond is good, and more or less on par with what I have come to expect from metal shelled earphones above 50 USD. Fit and finish of the component parts is satisfactory with tight seams, a coherent design, and a snug 2-pin port that provides a secure fit for the cable, though there are a few details that were overlooked. First is that the carbon fibre face plate cutouts do not fully fill the spaces they're nestled into, so if you look closely there are gaps. You can't feel them thanks to the thick clear coat applied over top, and unless you're looking for them it's unlikely anyone will notice, but they're visible none-the-less. Second is that the paint job around the front edge contains small wrinkles on both ear pieces. Maybe dust got caught underneath. Maybe it's just a poorly applied paint job. Whatever it is, it takes away from the visual appeal somewhat. The metal nozzle is a fairly standard size at 6mm in diameter with a prominent lip. If tip rolling is your jam, you'll feel right at home with the Diamond.

At least the Diamond is very comfortable, more so than I was expecting. When the first few images of the Diamond showed up, I was immediately reminded of the KZ AS06 and AS10 with their half-moon shape which borrowed heavily from 64Audio's designs. KB EARS take certainly looked impressive thanks to a classy colour choice and the carbon fibre face place. In terms of fit, the AS06 and AS10 were fine, but the large size made them somewhat ungainly for those with small ears. I was afraid the Diamond would be the same. Thankfully not the case. It is notably smaller and with a nozzle angle that sits more naturally in the ear. The only thing holding the Diamond back is it's weight which leaves it feeling unsuitable for heavy activity. I found the weight pulling the Diamond out of place when jogging.

Isolation is above average in my experience, at least when compared to other single dynamic earphones. With the stock silicone tips (either style), I had no issues listening at my typically low volumes in noisy areas, like the local coffee shop during peak hours. Tossing on foams tips only made it better. I'd have no issues recommending these for someone who spends a lot of time on their local transit system.


In The Box KB EAR has done a great job with the Diamond's packaging, coming up with something that looks and feels somewhat premium, isn't overly wasteful, and that does a great job showing off the product the moment you get the lid off.

The box is covered in a textured, matte black material that contrasts nicely with the gold KB EAR branding and logo on the lid. On the sides you find KB EAR's website, and on the back a sticker containing the model information. It's all very simple and subtle, and looks fantastic. Slide the lid off and you find the earpieces, two sets of foams tips, and a smaller cardboard box holding the carrying case, all set within a cardboard coated plastic tray. Simple but effective, as it shows off the product well. Within the carrying case are the rest of the accessories. In all you get:

• Diamond earphones
• Braided, silver-plated copper 0.75mm 2-pin cable
• Faux-leather carrying case
• 2x foam tips
• Black single flange silicone tips (M x2 / L)
• Red-cored single flange silicone tips (S/M/L)
• Velcro cable tie

Overall a satisfactory accessory kit and a wonderful unboxing experience. Some will complain the money that went towards the case could have been better used elsewhere, but for me the inclusion of a nice case is a win. I will say the tips are redundant. The red-cored set uses a mildly stiffer silicone with dimensions nearly identical to the black tips, and in my experience provides a listening experience with negligible differences. Maybe it was an error, but the Diamond I was sent came with two sets of medium black tips, no small. The black tips are the recommended set according to the tuners, meaning anyone that needs small tips will have to settle with a “lesser” experience as provided by the red-cored tips.

Final Thoughts KB EAR has done a great job with the Diamond. It is tuned with a widely appealing v-shaped sound that for the most part provides a quality experience. Mid-bass is much too abundant for my tastes and the sound stage too confined, but those qualities end up being not as bad as they might sound at first. Material quality is excellent and while small details needed some attending to on my sample (crinkled paint for example), I have no doubt this earphone will take some abuse and last a long time. Part of that is because of the beefy, well-matched cable. In terms of extras, I like the quality case and included tips, but the red-cored set could easily be swapped out for something different (bi-flange maybe?). They provide an experience very similar to the tuners' recommended set (black, single flange) and come across redundant.

Overall a very nice earphone and a great value at 79 USD. These are a crowd pleaser for sure.

- B9Scrambler

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Wendy from KB EAR for sending over a sample of the Diamond for the purposes of review. The thoughts within this review are my subjective opinions based on time spent using the Diamond. They don't represent KB EAR or any other entity. At the time of writing the Diamond retailed for 79.00 USD: www.aliexpress.com/item/4000571010605.html

Specifications

• Driver: 8.5mm dynamic with DLC coating
• Impedance: 16 ohms
• Sensitivity: 102dB
• Frequency Response: 20Hz-20KHz

Devices Used For Testing LG G6, LG Q70, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501, Periodic Audio Nickle, Shanling M0, Hifiman MegaMini

I found the Diamond easy to drive. No amping necessary. It doesn't seem to scale much either. Performance is good out of the box as long as you've got a competent source. Recommended to avoid pairing it with warm sounding devices as they may overexaggerate the Diamond's already boosted midbass.

Some Test Tunes

Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams

Greetings!

Today we're checking out the Link from xDuoo, a type-C USB amp/dac intended for use with mobile devices and PCs

As the number of phones with headphone jacks decrease, the options to replace it increase. Dongles are an unfortunate way of life for many consumers in this harsh, modern climate, but we'll get by. Products like the Link help ease the pain. However, in the past easing pain was not necessarily something xDuoo did for me.

Don't get me wrong, things started off great with the the X3 and it's wonky button layout that worked wonderfully for my left-handed self. The limited time I spent with a friend's X2 showed it to be a pretty darn capable little player too. Then came along the Nano D3 which ruined a perfectly good relationship. Sluggish software and a cheap housing (metal or not, it flexed harder than a small, shivering mongrel trying to prove he's a big, bad dog) mixed with sub-par sound, all topped off with a firmware update that killed the screen. Nope, the D3 was a piece of dung patty. Then came the “portable turntable” X10TII. Neat product, pointless existence. Anything it did a DAP could do just as well, but with more functionality and in some cases, within a more compact shell. I passed my review sample onto someone else for coverage since I couldn't be bothered to waste any more time with it. The Link on the other hand has proven to be a wonderful addition to Xduoo's lineup.


Packaging Any positive experience starts with a good first impression; the packaging! The Link arrives in a fairly unique box, highly elongated with a vibrant orange and pale, matte black colour scheme. On the front you find the xDuoo logo and model info, while out back are some retail-ready stickers and contact information for the brand. Tugging on the ribbon protruding out the top of the box, a inner tray slides out revealing a tri-folded product information card and the Link nestled in a glued down, cardboard-coated foam insert. And that's it. No other extras or accessories.

Build Tipping over the tray, the Link falls out of the insert and into your hand where you find it is very well constructed. On the usb-C end you find a single piece of neatly formed, black painted aluminum wrapped around a chunky piece of plastic that houses the Type-C port and cable entry. The orange cable is extremely thick with a dense rubber sheath. It doesn't bend easily. Good because there isn't any strain relief. On the control side of things you have another chunky plastic section wrapped around the cable. The rest of the body is aluminum composed of two pieces, clamped together with a prominent but uniform seam.

On the face of the Link is a bright orange metal button that handles play and pause functions, while a metal rocker switch handles volume control. These buttons feel fantastic and give off a very notable 'click' when pressed. They are the sort of buttons you find yourself pressing absentmindedly because the visceral feedback is so addictive. This also means they're easy to find and I never had any problems with mispresses, even when I wasn't looking at the device. Everything has a very distinct feel to it. A pin hole can also be found above (or below?) the rocker switch within which you find a bright orange LED that lights up when the Link is being powered. Last but not least is the 3.5mm port tucked into the end cap. While fairly long at around 6”, the Link remains reasonably light (13g) and since it's also not very thick, isn't all that intrusive when plugged into your phone, DAC, or laptop.

Overall the Link feels pretty darn solid since it is made from almost exclusively metal, with the selected plastics being very dense and chunky. In additional to looking nice and feeling good in the hand, I suspect that the choice to make an aluminum shell had a practical side to it as well. After only a few minutes of use, the Link gets quite warm and that heat needs to be dispersed. Aluminum makes for a great heat sink. This warmth is never enough to be worrisome or uncomfortable, but it is certainly enough to be noticeable.


Sound Warmth is something that can be said about the sound quality too, but we'll get to that in a second. Know that the Link is my first modern product of this type. I also have the Creative Soundblaster Recon 3D usb DAC/AMP, but that thing is a dinosaur compared to the Link and is in no way comparable. Usb 2.0, cheap plastic construction, and enough hiss to make Channel 3 sound good (a reference for the older readers). It's beyond obsolete. As such, I'll make reference to other products I use in conjunction with the Link with some descriptions of what I hear and how it works with various headphones and earphones.

So, as mentioned the Link adds some warmth to whatever it is you happen to be listening to. This device does not provide the sort of untainted, completely uncoloured experience you'll get with something like the Radsone ES100 in usb DAC mode. It ends up being quite similar to the Shanling M0 in usb DAC mode, with a smooth, creamy presentation that adds some mid-bass and general low end umph to your beats. Outside of that, the Link does a fantastic job of avoiding altering the signature of whatever it is you're listening to. Micro-detail is retained meaning the EarNiNE EN2J maintains it's crazy detail monster character. Earphones that tend to emphasis mids and treble more so than bass end up being a good pairing, like the Hifiman RE400 and Tinhifi T2. The Link's extra low end fills out the somewhat lacking bass of those models. Products that are quite dark and/or overly bassy, such as the Brainwavz M100 or Massdrop x MeeAudio Planamic are not an ideal pairing for the Link since it exacerbates their main qualities in a negative way. Products with a capacious sound stage, like the Fearless S6 Rui and Campfire Audio Cascade, maintain this quality. Compared to my typical test phones, the LG G5 and LG G6, the Link's thicker, warmer sound leaves the LG models feeling a tad light and weedy. The Link also offers better dynamics making for a more engaging listen than anything the G5 or G6 can output.

In terms of pushing power, there wasn't anything I used with the Link that left me unsatisfied. The planar Hifiman Sundara was easily driven to comfortable volumes with plenty of headroom remaining, as was a notoriously difficult to drive earphone, the Havi B3 Pro I. Another earphone that I like to use for testing is the Nuforce HEM6 because it only sounds good at high volumes, and the Link did a great job getting it to where it needed to be to come alive. Hard to drive gear isn't an issue, but sensitive iems are. Products like the Campfire Audio Andromeda and Astrotec Delphinus 5 are more or less unusable with the Link because even at the lowest possible volume, they are unbearably loud. On the plus side, unlike other products that suffer the same fate with sensitive gear (ex. Walnut F1), the noise floor on the Link remains fairly clean with very little background hiss present.


Final Thoughts The Link is small and unobtrusive enough to have it with me at all times without it being an inconvenience. The build quality is fantastic thanks to a mostly metal construction. The buttons are distinct from each other and provide excellent visceral feedback when depressed. Output volume is more than enough for me and the vast majority of earphones and headphones I run, but it's not a true replacement for the volume and overall audio performance you're going to get from a dedicated desktop or portable amp. Regardless, the sound the Link outputs is engaging and dynamic with a low noise floor that only gets in the way with overly sensitive earphones/headphones. It also adds additional warmth to the music, so products that are already warm or dark sounding from the outset are not an ideal pairing.

Overall I am quite pleased with the performance of the Link and have rolled it into my EDC rotation. It saves me the need to carry a dedicated amp to stack with my phone or DAC, unless of course I'm in that rare mood where I want the absolute best sound quality on the move. In that case, in comes the much more expensive Period Audio Nickle or bulky but cheap and powerful Walnut F1, pending I'm not running overly sensitive headphones.

If you've been looking to pick up a DAC/amp dongle to pair with your phone or laptop, the Link seems like a safe choice.

Thanks for reading!

- B9Scrambler

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Nappoler with Hifigo for arranging a sample of the Link for review. The thoughts here are my own subjective opinions based on almost a month of use. They do not represent Hifigo, Xduoo, or any other entity. At the time of writing the Link was retailing for 51.99 USD but was on sale for 49.99 USD: https://hifigo.com/products/xduoo-link-hd-digital-amp-dac-type-c-to-3-5mm-decoding-hi-res-adapter

Specifications

• Output power: 32mW @ 32ohms
• Frequency response: 20Hz~20KHz (+/-0.5dB)
• THD+N: 0.0018% @ 1KHz
• S/N: 115dB
• Crosstalk: >/= 77dB
• Support sampling frequency:16-32Bit/44.1KHz-384KHz, DSD64-256
• DAC chip: ESS9118EC
• Output interface: Type-C
• Output port: 3.5mm jack
• Size:60x13x7.2mm
• Cable length: 90mm
• Weight: 13g

Greetings!

Today we're checking out an older release from Hifiman, the RE600s.

While this brand is probably still best known for their planar headphones, their iem lineup has received it's fair share of accolades over the years. The RE600s is one of them, though it has largely become overlooked in what is a shockingly fast moving industry. New releases are forgotten within the month, and older gems might as well not exist given how little attention they get. When the updated RE600s was released in 2017, it was already far from being a new product (original released in 2013), it just so happened to have been updated and revised with a better cable and more common 3.5mm jack. In 2020, reviewing such a product might seem like an especially weird choice. Surely tech has moved on and the RE600s is completely irrelevant? While there is one aspect in particular where the RE600s could and should have been improved upon by now, it's guts still out compete many of it's modern counterparts and it remains a very competitive earphone.

Let's take a closer look.


What I Hear The RE600s is one of the few iems that I would say aims for a neutral signature. The extremities are lightly elevated keeping the RE600s from sounding sterile and lifeless, broadening it's appeal to my ears. This is one that can satisfy pretty much everyone. My first listen brought to mind the RE600s's little brother, the RE400, but with a dose of refinement and some tweaks that make it the standout of the two (as it should be given the chasm in price).

Treble out of the RE600s is fairly well balanced between upper and lower regions. Lower treble gives the signature plenty of detail without crossing into analytic territory, while upper treble is boosted just enough to give instruments some shimmer and sparkle. The best part is that, while raised above neutral, the RE600s' upper regions remain smooth and impressively fatigue free. Notes are well controlled and absent of splashiness. Dynamics are great too with notes having plenty of depth, snap, and attack to them. There is very little to criticize here. “Some Skunk Funk” from The Brecker Brothers has a tendency to become grating through earphones with less refined treble, but here through the RE600s you get the detail and energy without the pain.

Bass is much the same, though I can guarantee there will be many that feel quantity is greatly lacking. Basshead earphones the RE600s is not. That said, even as someone that thoroughly enjoys bassy iems, I had no problems enjoying myself with the quantity of bass on hand from the RE600s. It was enough to satisfy on everything but dedicated bass tracks. Mid-bass is lean but notes hit with authority and texturing is phenomenal. There is no sense of bloat, nor is the midrange affected in any way. Subbass extension is great with the RE600s pretty easily replicating deep rumbly notes that you feel more than hear, like the opening of Kavinski's “Solli”. Just don't expect them to rattle your eardrums because the quantity needed for that simply isn't there.

In the mids is where the RE600s really shines. With a near perfect balance and zero sibilance (that wasn't already there in the recording), all vocalists I've tried from Yazmin Lacey to Corey Taylor sound absolutely stunning. They come across textured and natural, shining among the instruments and effects present throughout the rest of the track. This extends to instrumentation too where timbre is pretty much spot on, matching benchmarks like the venerable JVC HA-FXT90. About all I can fault the RE600s for here, and this could also be a plus given personal preference, is that intense micro-details picked up by analytic earphones, such as the EarNiNE EN2J, are smoothed over slightly. It's still a very detailed presentation, just not one that can be used to truly pick apart and dissect a track in a way that some others do better. I'm going to use a term I know the community loves; musical. The RE600s' midrange is musical and engaging, not sterile and analytic.

The RE600s' balanced presentation is set within a fairly average sized sound stage, but one that is very well rounded and even. Effects will dance off into the distance at times, but for the most part music plays within the realm of just past the confines of your head. This isn't a bad thing because stereo imaging is top tier and extremely accurate in the way sound is placed, and sweeps from channel to channel. Layering and separation are very good too, among the better single dynamics I've heard, but falling short of multi-driver setups like my benchmark in this price range, the Brainwavz B400.

Overall I can't help but love the way the RE600s sounds. The balance of treble, mids, and bass is just right. Timbre is natural and engaging. The somewhat intimate sound stage works well with the technical performance. It all rolls together to create a cohesive experience that few earphones in this price range provide.


Compared To A Peer (volumes matched with Dayton iMM-6)

Not going to go over build in these comparisons since the RE600s is pretty far behind the competition in this regard. They're also ahead of the rest in terms of comfort and ergonomics, so that'll be skipped too. Sound only this time around.

BGVP DM6 (199.00 USD): The DM6's penta-armature setup provides a very different listening experience than the RE600s' single 8.5mm dynamic driver. Where the Hifiman is balanced and even from top to bottom, the DM6 is bassier and more aggressive. The DM6's low end and mid-range are thicker and more weighty compared to the RE600s but sub-bass rolls off earlier, or at least it feels like it since low notes lack the visceral feel of the RE600s' dynamic driver. Treble is similar in emphasis through the presence region with the RE600s holding strong into the brilliance region where the DM6 loses emphasis. This results in the RE600s having a more sparkly, airy top end. That said, the DM6 has a larger sound stage all around, especially width, though it's imaging lacks the razor sharp precision of Hifiman's single driver. Layering is quite similar between the two with the DM6 showing slightly improved instrument separation when tracks gets overly convoluted. Timbre out of the RE600 is more accurate, especially on brighter instruments and effects where the DM6 comes across somewhat artificial and metallic. Both earphones display snappy attack and decay characteristics with the RE600s' bass being more nimble, textured, and articulate.

While the DM6 provides some serious “wow factor” on first listen, this quickly wears off and the RE600s' more mature and balanced tuning wins me over.

TFZ Secret Garden HD (199.00 USD): Like the RE600s, the Secret Garden HD (SG from here on out) features a single dynamic driver setup, though one considerably larger at 12mm vs. the Hifiman's 8.5mm. It too is coated with a dense material. Where Hifiman chose titanium, TFZ went with graphene. So what does this do for the listening experience? I don't know, but they're both good, but also quite different. While I'd still say the SG has a well-balanced tune (esp. for a TFZ), the RE600s is notably more so. The SG's lower treble is significantly more emphasized making the SG the more detailed and analytic earphone, but this combined with an upper midrange bump results in sibilance not present in the RE600s. The SG's midrange is leaner and colder sounding which to my ears makes it best suited to male vocals, while the RE600s handles all genders wonderfully. The low end of the TFZ is more abundant in both upper and low bass, with sub-bass presence being much more prominent. Personally, this is right up my alley and as such I find the TFZ's bass much more engaging, especially since it gives up little to nothing in terms of texture and control. Sound stage falls into TFZs's camp with the SG sounding wider and deeper. It can toss sounds well off into the distance in a way the RE600s simply cannot. In Hifiman's corner is imaging accuracy which the SG cannot touch. The RE600s also replicates tracks in a more layered and nuanced way, with instruments retaining greater separation during congested moments. The biggest gulf between these two is when it comes to timbre. TFZ does a good job in the bass and and lower mids, but as frequencies rise it sounds less and less natural, unlike the RE600s which simply sounds “right” top to bottom.

Like the DM6, the TFZ provides plenty of “wow factor” on first listen, but unlike the DM6 it sticks around. Despite enjoying the SG's bass more, the RE600s' technical prowess and more realistic and consistent presentation means it fairly easily takes the win.

Campfire Audio Comet (199.00 USD): The Comet is Campfire Audio's most affordable earphone at the moment, but they didn't cut corners to achieve this. This is evident in the outstanding build quality and the impressive sound coming from the single full-range armatures installed in each earpiece. Next to the RE600s, the Comet provides listeners with a warmer sound signature. The presentation is more silky and smooth, with additional mid-bass presence that gives the Comet a heavier sound, thicker midrange, countered by some shimmery treble energy. While upper treble on the Comet does roll off somewhat early thanks to the limitations of it's single armature, it's more emphasized than the lower treble. This gives it a bit more sparkle than the RE600s, but it's resolution suffers in the process and it lacks the micro detail of Hifiman's 8.5mm dynamic. This reduced texture and detail is present through the entire frequency range. On the plus side, I find it makes the Comet easier to listen to for VERY long periods, though neither is particularly fatiguing to my ears. The Comet has a wider but somewhat flat and generally confined stage. Imaging is tighter and slightly more accurate on the RE600s, whereas imaging and instrument separation is clearly in the RE600s' corner. When it comes to speed, notes through the Comet's armatures hit with less rapidity and decay slower. Bass notes tend to linger which I appreciate, which feeds into the smooth, somewhat mellow experience the Comet exudes.

Since these two takes such different approaches to replicating sound, I'm having a hard time saying which I enjoy more. I appreciate the RE600s' accuracy and technical competence which are clearly superior, but at the same time the Comet's warmer, more mellow presentation is so very pleasing to the ear. I guess I'll have to give them a tie and say they are complimentary. If you want a more neutral, accurate experience, go for the RE600s. If you want a bassier, more relaxing experience, go for the Comet.

In The Ear The RE600s shares a shell with it's more budget friendly sibling, the RE400, but there are some notable improvements. Where the RE400 is bare aluminum, the RE600s is finished in a glossy piano black that makes it look and feel more premium. This also helps with scratch resistance. The cable is similar to the one on the RE400 but has been beefed up a bit, especially below the y-split where the cloth section is much thicker. Doesn't help much though, as the sheath quality is still well below average. The rubber sheath above the y-split is very stiff and plasticy and in cold weather loses most flexibility while the cloth cable below the y-split is prone to kinking and tangling as it wraps up upon itself. To put it simply, the cable feels cheap and unbefitting of the RE600s, let alone any iem above 10 USD for that matter. At least strain relief at the earpieces and straight jack is good, though it's missing at the y-split, a common failure point with iems. On the plus side, Hifiman was thoughtful enough to include a chin cinch, but it's shape doesn't flow with the design of the y-split so it comes across as an afterthought. Still, I'd much rather have it than not and it works well, so thanks Hifiman for including it. Despite the mediocre cable, fit and finish is good. The individual pieces that make up the earphones are put together neatly without any gaps or misalignment, the cable feels securely attached, and the nozzle filters are stuck in evenly.

The RE600s is extremely comfortable thanks to their compact size, light weight, and traditional iem fit. The nozzle is quite average in circumference (6mm) with a prominent lip so there is a good chance you can equip your favourite tips and they'll fit just fine. Another plus of the RE600s' somewhat standard barrel shape is that you can wear it equally well cable down, or with it wrapped up and over your ear. The only thing that might be a problem is that stiff rubber sheath which can be noisy and has a tendency to pop back up over the ear when you tilt your head or bend over.

Isolation is about average for a vented earphone, if not slightly below. Without music playing, I can easily follow conversations around me, catch the 'snick snick' of keyboards clacking away in the distance when in the office, and hear cars passing by. With music playing, all of this is dulled notably, but still prominent enough to require an increase in volume to counteract it. Adding foam tips certainly helps so be sure to pick up a set if you plan on listening in consistently noisy areas.


In The Box The RE600s' packaging is easily some of the most premium I've come across, if not the most premium. Instead of a traditional cardboard box slathered in branding, model info, and featured bullet points, you get this beautiful leatherette and aluminum box. The design is split into two sections separated by a band of aluminum printed with the model information, the only place where it can be found. The top section contains the earphones fitted with a set of bi-flange tips, nestled into a felt coated foam insert. The bottom section contains another foam insert which contains six pairs of tips and a cable wrap that I initially confused for an eraser. Seriously, it looks and feels like an eraser. Weird, but nothing wrong with the inclusion of a dual purpose item, am I right? The rest of the accessories include a clam shell carrying case, four extra pairs of tips, and five extra pairs of nozzle filters. These extras are simply tossed in the packaging the main case ships with and were clearly not intended to be included originally. Still, who is going to complain about extra stuff? In all you get:

• RE600s earphones
• Clam shell carrying case
• 3x Bi-flange tips (small)
• 2x Bi-flange tips (large)
• 6x Mono-flange tips (varying sizes and styles)
• Filters (5 pairs)
• Earphone Carry Pouch
• Cable wrap

Overall this is a wonderful unboxing experience. It really makes you feel like you're getting something special. I'm sure some will complain that the money could be better spent elsewhere, and they're not wrong *cough* cable *cough*, but I'm not one of them. Add to that a ton of extra tips, and there is sure to be something for everyone here. No need to jack up the cost of your new purchase with extra accessories that should have been there in the first place, something Hifiman almost always gets right.

Final Thoughts The RE600 is an earphone I was excited to hear for the longest time with that excitement waning only when I bought the RE400. It took me a long time to warm up to the RE400, with it finding a place in my listening rotation only once I had tried nearly every tip in my collection, settling on some obscure single flange set that came with who knows what iem. Given the community comparisons between the RE400 and RE600 over the years, I was expecting to have much the same experience with the RE600s. Thankfully that was not the case. While the two are certainly similar, the RE600s' additional low end and reduced upper treble meant it was more immediately enjoyable out of the box, with that pleasure only increasing the more I used them.

The RE600s is a legendary earphone, and for good reason. Its sound signature is neutral without being boring. It is technically competent without being overly analytic. It can hit deep bass notes without sounding overly bassy. It has a midrange that is accurate and balanced. It has the imaging, layering, and separation chops necessary to provide a killer staging experience, despite not sounding particular vast and spacious. The only thing I can fault this earphone for is the cable.

As has been pointed out countless times over the years, it is terrible. If Hifiman updated the RE600s with a removable cable, similar to what they did with the RE800, without increasing the price, I bet it would see a revival among the community. The audio climate has changed drastically since the RE600 was first released, and while it is still plenty competitive from an auditory perspective, the RE600 falls far behind when it comes to how it is constructed. One change could fix everything though. Come on Hifiman! Give the RE600s the love it deserves.

Thanks for reading.

- B9

*If you enjoyed this review, visit The Contraptionist for more just like it.*

Disclaimer Thanks to Hifiman for arranging a sample of the RE600s for the purposes of review. The subjective impressions within this review are based on time spent listening to the RE600s over the course of a month. The RE600s normally retails for 199.00 USD but at the time of writing was on sale for 74.90 USD: https://www.hifiman.com/products/detail/144

Specifications

• Frequency Response : 15Hz-22KHz
• Sensitivity : 102dB
• Impedance : 16 Ohms
• Weight : 13.7g (0.48 Oz)
• Plug : 3.5mm
• Driver: 8.5mm with titanium coated diaphragm

Devices Used For Testing Shanling M0, XDuoo Link, LG G6, Asus FX53V, TEAC HA-501

Some Test Material
Supertramp – Crime of the Century
Slipknot – Vol 3 (The Subliminal Verses)
Daft Punk – Random Access Memories
Aesop Rock – The Impossible Kid
King Crimson – Lark's Tongues in Aspic
King Crimson – Starless and Bible Black
Infected Mushroom – Legend of the Black Shawarma
The Prodigy – The Day is My Enemy
Steely Dan – The Royal Scam
Porcupine Tree – Stupid Dreams