Reviews by Brooko

For larger views of any of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

[size=24.57px]INTRODUCTION[/size]

I was first introduced to RHA (or Reid Heath Acoustics) during a review tour for the RHA T10i, and later the RHA T20. I was very impressed with the build and fit on both earphones, but less impressed with the T10i signature (too bassy IMO), and pleasantly surprised with their T20 – which I still regard as a very good earphone in its price range. So when their new CL range was announced late in 2016, I was very keen to review, and especially so when there had been a little bit of controversy around early impressions of their earphones. Call me nosy – but when this happens, I just really need to get a listen. I also wanted to measure the CL range, as its easier to really discover truth when you can compare what you hear with what you are able to measure. So join me in a small voyage of discovery as we put the CL750 through its paces.

ABOUT RHA
Reid Heath Acoustics (RHA) is a Scottish based headphone company. Their core values (from their on-line presence) are described as follows:
“We stand for true-to-life audio reproduction and lasting quality. With these values at our core, we work to deliver the most accurate, comfortable and unobtrusive listening experience possible. Every RHA product combines high quality materials, precision engineering and our fundamental commitment to design.”

Their current product catalogues ranges from the budget oriented MA350 (~ USD 30) to the current flagship CL1 (~ USD 450). The CL750 sits at $140 – which is in a nicely mid-tier pricing bracket.

In the last couple of weeks I have spent as much time as possible listening to the CL750, CL1 and also their L1 DAC/amp. Sadly I don't have a chance to directly compare to the original T10i or T20 (they were part of a tour), but toward the end of the review I have compared the CL750 to some other IEMs in similar price brackets.

In the time I've spent with the CL750, I’d estimate that I’ve logged around 20 hours actual listening time.
RHA on Facebook
RHA Website

DISCLAIMER
I was provided the RHA CL750 (as part of a tour) from RHA. I am in no way affiliated with RHA - and this review is my subjective opinion of the CL750. The tour unit was returned at completion of the review. I'd like to especially thank Iain and Niketa for their brilliant communication and allowing me to be part of this.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'. (or a base-line for interpreting my thoughts and bias)

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review - I used the RHA CL750 mostly with my iPhone SE as transport to RHA's L1 DAC/amp but also from most other sources I had at my disposal – including my trusty X3ii/E17K combo. I'm a little on the fence with the CL750 and amplification at this stage. At 150 ohms and 89 dB sensitivity, it really will need extra amplification (especially with weaker sources), however even my iPhone SE at 60% volume was able to drive them fairly respectably – more on that later. In the time I have spent with the CL750, I have noticed no change to the overall sonic presentation (burn-in), but am aware that I am becoming more used to the signature as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES


Outer box front	Outer box rear	Outer box profile

The RHA CL750 arrived in a reasonably large, but attractive black retail box measuring 143 x 200 x 74mm. There is a lot of information on the packaging (which is IMO very well laid out) – including:

Front face = picture of the CL750, Sony Hi-Res logo, and instruction that an amplifier would be required (nice touch)
Rear = information on design, materials and frequency
Sides = information on warranty (3 year!) and contents
Bottom = CL750 specifications

Opening the bottom flap allows you to slide out the internal tray which reveals the CL750 nestled in its foam cut-out. Below this are compartments for carry case, tips, tray, manual, and for the cable to sit.


Inner case + first look at the CL750	Compartments under the tray	Manual and warranty

The carry case is a largish padded zippered case measuring approximately 130mm x 85mm x 25-30mm (at its deepest point & depending what you include when packed) – so while it’s not pants pocket friendly, it does pocket very well inside a light jacket. It is well padded, with generous inner pockets and a mesh/canvas-like outer covering. The case is large enough to hold the tips in their steel display tray.

The tip selection is generous, and along with the storage tray includes 2 pairs of dual flange silicone, 6 pairs of single flange silicone, and 3 pairs of Comply Tsx-200 foam tips. The mounting tray is stainless steel and from past experience, works really well as a storage medium. There is also a small plastic shirt clip. As I was first recipient on tour, I've shown pictures of both how the tips come, and how they are mounted on the tray. Fellow members in the tour – feel free to use these photos if you wish.


Carry case and tips (how they arrive to buyers)	The carry case	Tips installed in included tray

The manual is multilingual, very informative and includes a frequency graph (which incidentally corresponds very closely with my own – nice to know my rig is recording things nicely).

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From RHA)

	RHA CL750
Cost	USD 139.95 (RHA website)
Type	Single dynamic inner ear monitor
Driver Type	Ultra wide band ceramic (CL) transducer
Frequency Range	16Hz – 45 kHz
Impedance	150 ohms
Sensitivity	89 dB
Jack	3.5mm gold plated - straight
Cable	1.35m fixed OFC with TPE outer coating
Weight	35g
IEM shell	Stainless steel

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference. I will note that my graphs pretty much very reflect similar measurements shown by RHA.


Default frequency and channel matching	RHA's graph from the manual

What I’m hearing from the CL750:

Quite natural sounding mid-bass with a slight hump, and pretty good extension (some natural roll-off into sub-bass). Quite good extension to sub-bass though.
Relatively flattish lower mid-range, maybe the slightest recession or distance in vocals, but it is minor, and adds to the impression of staging size
Upper mid-range has a slow rise in the presence area (2 kHz) and gives a clear and clean vocal presence.
There is quite a sharp and clear lower treble which may be too hot for some (it borders on being too sharp for me – there is a definite emphasis between 5-7 kHz, so if you are sensitive to brightness, could be problematic
Upper treble extension is very good
Overall it is a V/U shaped monitor with a bight upper end, but because the bass is well defined and tuned, there is a nicely cohesive sense of balance. It is about as hot in the lower treble as I'd want to go though (any more would cause me issues, and I generally like a slightly brighter signature).

One thing to note is the almost perfect matching of left and right channels. You really don't get much better than this – bravo RHA.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN

External
The RHA CL750 has a two piece injection moulded stainless steel body which is circular in shape, with a nozzle which is centered, and rises to a peak (basically I'd call the IEM “volcano” shaped for want of a better descriptor). It measures 14mm in diameter and 16mm from the rear casing to the nozzle tip. The right outer face has the letters RHA nicely engraved, while the left has the model number CL750. There is a single port/vent for the dynamic driver at the bottom edge of each ear-piece. The surfaces are all nicely rounded with no apparent sharp edges when worn.


Inner face, nozzle and dynamic driver vent	Rounded edges and a generous lip	Solid construction - an RHA hallmark

The nozzle proper is only 3-4mm in length, but in reality because of the shape of the housing extends closer to 8-9mm. It measures just over 5mm in diameter and takes a standard Comply Tx200 tip. There is a generous and well designed lip which securely holds the ear-tips.

The ear guides are permanently attached to the housing with excellent strain relief. The are preformed – basically to hang loosely over your ear when worn, and are very comfortable and natural to use.

The cable
The cable is permanently fixed to the CL750 (which I really don't mind at this price point). It is OFC and consists of twisted pairs from earpiece to y-split, which are then combined to larger twisted pairs between y-split and jack. The twisted pairs are covered with a TPE outer coating, and the whole cable is very flexible, and only slightly microphonic when worn over ear. The slight noise disappears entirely when cinched. The Y split location is very low on my chest (only about 2 inches above my belly-button) – which feels strange, and I would have listed as a con if not for the excellent inclusion of a very good slide-able cinch to keep everything in place. The y-split is made of stainless and has the serial number engraved in it, as well Lewis Heath's (RHA’s Product Director) signature. It is light enough not to notice, but heavy enough to keep the ear-loops nicely in place.


Pre-moulded cable guides	Y-split and cinch	3.5mm jack

The cable terminates in a straight 3.5mm gold plated jack. The casing is stainless steel and it has a premium look and feel. The jack has a screw in section at the base – allowing an adaptor to be applied (although one is not included). This extra spacing also makes the plug smart-phone case friendly (if your device has sufficient power).

All points of the cable have excellent strain relief. Overall the cable has excellent build quality throughout, and I couldn't really see the need for swapping it with anything else – at this price point anyway.

Internals
The review wouldn't be complete without mentioning what RHA has achieved with the internals of the CL750. To start with, the choice of the stainless steel body – both material and shape – was to transfer the sound waves directly from driver to ear (completely in phase) with no distortion at any volume. The use of the stainless steel rather than thermoplastic is mainly to reduce internal resonance – but also gives other benefits such as durability and longevity.

When RHA were developing the dynamic driver for pairing with the ceramic plate on the CL1, they found that by adding a second layer to the diaphragm, they could alter both the bass and mid-range / lower treble frequencies. This addition became the CL1. But the omission of the extra layer (unaltered driver) cost less, was sonically very good, and very clean – so this became the basis of the CL750. The driver has a high impedance because of the high flux density of the voice coil array (which is just a mere six microns) – and it is this which allows the very high precision, detail and accuracy.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. I initially tried the included large silicone tips, and I was unable to maintain a constant seal. I then switched to the included Comply Tsx200s and got an immediate seal and fantastic comfort and isolation.


Included silicone single and double flange	Spiral dots and Sony Isolation/Trinity Kombi	SpinFit and Ostry tuning tips

The CL750 also fits Ostry tuning tips, Spin-fits, Spiral Dots and Sony Isolation / Trinity Kombi tips perfectly. Whilst I stuck with the Comply for this review – I did find that the other fore-mentioned tips all gave reasonably good seals.

Although RHA do not use an angled nozzle, I personally find the overall fit to be fantastic. Comfort for me is excellent – the CL750 is one of those designs which simply disappear when worn. They sit well within my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are extremely easy to sleep in.


Included Tsx200	Definitely my preferred choice for fit and comfort	Fit and comfort is excellent

Isolation with the CL750 is better than average for me (not quite near Shure’s or Alclair’s almost perfect isolation – but very effective), and they would be good enough for public transport (despite the vent).

There has been no driver flex present.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the RHA CL750. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X5ii + A5 as source, and the included Comply tips. The reason I chose to go with the X5ii + A5 combo was merely to ensure that there was more than enough power on tap for the CL750.

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the A5 was around 9 o'clock on the pot (using low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Frequency Relativity

Sub-bass – pretty well extended, with only minor roll-off (very good in fact for a dynamic driver) and there is a little rumble present, but it is not over done at all. Sub-bass shows a peak to the curve at around 50 Hz and is very slightly raised compared to mid-bass, but the overall bass presentation would be the best I have heard from RHA so far.
Mid-bass – on par compared to sub-bass (graph shows slightly less mid-bass than sub-bass, but it sounds extremely natural). So it is in effect a very gentle mid-bass bump, but also very evenly distributed. The result is a very natural sounding bass response – and indeed sounds more natural than the CL1 to me. There is no noticeable bleed into the mid-range. Both mid and sub-bass are elevated compared to lower mid-range.
Lower mid-range – recessed compared to bass and very recessed compared to upper mid-range and lower treble. Its not all bad though – just a little distant – and I've found myself upping the volume with some tracks (which brings some issues with lower treble). Because of the elevated lower treble, and recessed lower mid-range, I have found that male vocals can sound a little thin. My go-to Pearl Jam – lacked body on the vocals.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, and it is slow rise from lower mid-range to the first peak at about 3.5 kHz. The result is a clean and clear vocal range, with good presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals. The upper mid-range on the CL750 is one of the best qualities of this IEM. The upper mid-range would be perfectly balanced with the mid-bass if the peaks had been slightly lower, and if the lower treble had less presence.
Lower treble – elevated (quite a bit). There is a peak at between 5-6 kHz, and it is considerably higher than the upper-mid peak. Then there is a drop to more manageable levels with another small peak at 9-10 kHz. The problem with the lower treble is the size of the peaks +15 dB above the recessed mid-range at 1 kHz. So while you do get a lot of clarity, there is also a sharpness / sizzle which seems to be always present. For me, even tracks like Pearl Jams “Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town” becomes slightly sibilant (and it is not a sibilant track). The other thing which disappears is cymbal decay – its there, but lost in the sizzle of the cymbal hit. Its a shame really as in trying for extreme clarity in this region, they've lost their overall sense of balance.
Upper treble – nicely extended with good air. A lot is lost though in the intensity of the lower treble.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Good with micro detail, and able to resolve most finer details well.
Cymbal hits have good presence, but decay is lost due to intensity of the lower treble peak at 5-6 kHz.
A very clean and clear monitor with good resolution but overall portrayal is unnaturally on the bright side.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Extremely precise directional queues, and just on the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so good sense of width and depth.
Spherically presented stage – with very good presentation of both width and depth
Compelling sense of immersion with the applause section of “Dante's Prayer” - but it did sound unnaturally hot compared to what I am used to. I then went to try “Let it Rain”, but the sibilance (it is normally present in the track anyway) was heightened to a point which made it unlistenable for any length of time. This could be solved by EQ.

Strengths

Very good overall bass response and one of the most balanced releases from RHA I've heard - in respect to overall bass and mid-range.
Quiet good overall with male vocals, better with female vocals
Good with dynamic music – and able to show wonderful contrast between bass and upper mid-range (e.g. Cello and Violin). Cello sounded utterly believable with the CL750.
Very good with acoustic music and gives strings good sense of realism and tone when plucked, and nice edge to electric guitar when strummed.
Very good with female vocals, lending a slight air of euphony and sweetness.

Weaknesses

Lower treble is over-done relative to the rest of the frequency range. Anyone with a sensitivity toward brightness, or a preference to a richer mellower tonality should avoid.
Vocal fundamentals can tend to sound a little recessed
Not good at high volumes – lower treble gets pretty unpleasant. This is not helped by the vocal recession (which actually prompts trying to turn the CL750 up)

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The CL750 with its lower sensitivity and higher impedance really needs to be amplified. But it can sound pretty good straight from a smart-phone of DAP as long as they aren't power limited. From my iPhone SE with general pop/rock songs, around 50-60% volume was sufficient to get to a pretty good listening level.

With the X3ii I needed 60-70/120 (low gain) depending on the track, and it was similar on the X5ii. The X5iii was around 55-65. So while amplification is recommended, if you have a DAP or source which is powerful enough, you should net some pretty good results. To be honest I didn't notice a lot of difference between the different amplified and unamplified sources I tried – mainly tonality with the amp sections. One of my favourite combos was the IMS HVA and iPhone SE as transport. The other was the X3ii and E17K – see below for reasons.

EQUALISATION
You've probably already guessed at what I think needs changing on the CL750. Yep – tame those treble peaks and it should be a very nice sounding IEM. For starters, I went with the very basic – used my iPhone SE by itself, and engaged the treble reduction. Some immediate relief, but it also curbed some of the mid-range, so not the ideal.

Up next was the iPhone SE as transport, and RHA's own L1. Take the treble down to -3, and the CL750 became a very good sounding IEM with the glare greatly reduced. Next I used my go-to, the X3ii and E17K – and this time simply engaging -4 treble (the E17K was on 24/60 volume). The result was (to my ears) absolutely sublime – and if this was the default signature, I'd even consider buying a CL750. Really stunning. Finally with the new X5iii, using EQ I dropped the 8 kHz and 4 kHz sliders down – again a big difference for the better – although I think that overall the best difference was with the X3ii and E17K combo.

COMPARISONS
Normally I like to try and compare the reviewed IEM with something in its own price bracket – but because the CL750 was pretty polarising with its treble, this time I've gone with a bit of a range. With the comparisons, I first volume matched with a 1 kHz test tone and SPL meter. I had a fast switch set-up in place with a splitter and volume attenuator for the volume matching. This section is very subjective, as it is sighted, the change between IEMs took about 5-10 seconds, and I knew exactly which one I was listening to. But it is my honest thoughts on where the CL750 sits for my own personal tastes. Source used was the E17K / X3ii combo – with no EQ.

CL750 ($140) vs Dunu Titan 5 ($140)


RHA CL750 vs DUNU Titan 5	Frequency chart comparison

Both have similarly good build, fit, accessories, and as you can see both are practically same price. Personally I like the overall fit and comfort of the CL750 just a little more. The Titan 5 has removable cables – but they are proprietary, so I don't regard that as necessarily a gain. The CL750 is of course much harder to drive – the Titan 5 is easily driven out of practically any device.

Sonically both are on the V shaped side of neutral with beautiful sounding bass, an elevated upper mid-range, and elevated peak in the lower treble. Where they differ though is the extent of that upper treble peak. Personally I find the Titan 5 to be easier to listen to out of the box – although with EQ, the CL750 is possibly the better sounding IEM as far as ultimate resolution goes.

CL750 ($140) vs MEE P1 ($200)


RHA CL750 vs MEE P1	Frequency chart comparison

I chose this comparison – simply because the price is not too dissimilar, and they do share some commonalities. They both have excellent build, fit and comfort, although this time the MEE P1 this time does have the better cabling and overall accessories.

Both have similar bass, and bass to mid-range ratios, but again the difference is in the upper mid-range and lower treble. Where the P1 has exceptional balance in these areas, the CL750 is emphasised – giving it the over brightness and heat which has the potential to become an issue with many recordings. The P1 has very good extension through to the early upper treble, but does not over-emphasise it. Overall the P1 is a better IEM (as it should be) and for default sonic signature pulls ahead by quite a margin.

CL750 ($140) vs CL1 Ceramic ($450)


RHA CL750 vs RHA CL1	Frequency chart comparison

I won't go into a lot of detail with this comparison. Both are from RHA, and although the CL1 is their flagship, there are a number of areas which I consider the CL750 to be the better earphone. Build is very good on both – but I must confess that I'm not a fan of the proprietary MMCX cable connection system (more on that in the CL1 review). Otherwise, the CL1 has the ceramic casing, the additional driver membrane layer, and the more ergonomic fit – but they mean nothing if the overall experience is not enhanced by the use of these.

Tonally, while both are V shaped, the CL1 is more so – exhibiting too much sub- bass and way too much lower treble to be enjoyable without a heavy dose of EQ (and definitely not for a flagship). The CL1 is too hot and makes practically every track I've listened to sibilant and harsh to the point of removing enjoyment. Next to the CL1, the CL750 is a blindingly good bargain.

CL750 ($140) vs Rhapsodio RTi1 ($600-800)


RHA CL750 vs Rhapsodio RTi1	Frequency chart comparison

This one is here simply to show the strengths of the CL750, and also because at first listen, I was immediately reminded of the RTi1. Both have very good build. The RTi1 has the better cabling system. Both are comfortable – but I'd actually take the overall fit of the CL750 over the RTi1 – for me personally it fits better.

Sonically the two are very similar. Both with EQ sound amazing. The difference of course is that after EQ there is still a large price difference. Anyone enjoying the Rhapsodio RTi1 should consider taking the CL750 for a spin. They are similar enough on sonic ability (CL750 has a bit more extension) – but the price difference shows just how well the CL750 is capable of performing.

RHA CL750 - SUMMARY

I love it when you see companies pushing the boundaries. Sometimes they get it spectacularly right, sometimes spectacularly wrong, and sometimes they have almost everything right – so that their next release will be the perfect one. Ultimately I think RHA are definitely on the right track with the CL750 – they have almost everything right, but have a bit of a speed-bump with the final tuning (my personal view).

As far as build quality goes – it is top notch. No flaws or obvious design faults. Fit and comfort both excellent. RHA really knows how to ace this area of design. Accessories are great – especially in this price range.

Sonically the CL750 has the basis of an excellently tuned IEM. There is very good and very well balanced bass response – which would be ideally matched to the mid-range if the upper mid-range was reduced a bit, and the lower treble reduced by more. With EQ (toning down the upper end) it is a truly fantastic IEM, and if RHA release a mark ii – I hope that they take this critique on board, as at this point (with a tuning change) it would be an easy 5 star recommendation.

Normally this would be a 3.5 star rating – but considering overall build, price-point, and the fact that it really does sound brilliant after EQ, I would still recommend it, and it gets a 4 (80%) from me. However the recommendation is for people who like a brighter tonality, and who are not treble sensitive.

Once again thanks to RHA for including me as part of the tour.

FINAL THOUGHTS
I was trying to (throughout the whole review) think of what the CL750 reminded me of. It clicked this afternoon. I owned (and loved) a pair of modified Grado SR325i (wood cups, bass hole adjusted, changed cable and head-band). For a long time they were my pride and joy – my hobby. Tyll measured a pair of 325s and graphed their frequency response. Ignore the compensated response and just look at the raw (grey data). Note the similarities. For any Grado 325 lovers out there – this is what the CL750 sounds like – just with better extension. Thought it might be interesting.

[size=inherit][/size]
My old Grado 325is after modification	Tyll's 325i graph - not similarity in the raw data	The CL750 with my iPhone and IMS HVA

In my experience - IEMs don't generally "burn in". I've measured many IEMs when they come brand new, and then remeasure again months later. There are no drastic changes, and most are so close you are talking fractions of dB difference which are likely to be slightly different seating on the coupler. What I think most people experience can be attributed to different tips, different insertion depths, and different volumes when they are making comparisons. And the big one is that you get used to the sound over time, and your brain will automatically compensate. So no - I don't think these are going to magically change - but your impression of them could.

Agree with Brooko. Most "burn-in" is attributable to your brain adjusting and acclimating to a new sound signature. Try listening to a new set of phones for a while until they "burn in", then switch to another for a period of time. If you then go back to the first one you'll find that their sound signature reverted to the pre-burn-in sound until your brain re-acclimates.

Ok thanks Brooko, thanks for your reply. =) Cheers.

For larger views of any of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I think most people will have heard about Earsonics at some stage. My first experience of their gear was years ago – when someone loaned me their SM3 for a couple of weeks. This was in my very early years, and before I'd really started reviewing. At the time I think I had my SE535 LE or SE425 as my main in-ears, and already I'd discovered that I liked a more balanced, but slightly brighter signature. And the SM3 to me were very smooth and slightly dark. They were pretty good – but not my “cup of tea”. I read a lot of popular reviews on them – and soon decided that perhaps Earsonics just simply wasn't my type of house sound. Jumping to early conclusions can be pretty stupid – and I'm pleased to say that my latest experience with Earsonics products couldn't be more different than my earlier one.

And a quick plug here for both Nic (you know him as flinkenick) and also Max Capgras from Earsonics for making this all possible. Nic sent Earsonics my details, and I was extremely surprised when Max contacted me and asked if I'd like to review their ES2 and ES3 IEMs. I'm so glad he did too – because I really LOVE both IEMs. Read on to discover why my early impressions of Earsonics from all those years ago have been literally turned on their head.

ABOUT EARSONICS
Earsonics was formed in 2004, and are located in France. From their own website, they describe themselves as:
French designer and manufacturer of a range of in-ear-monitors tailored and universal for musicians, sound engineers and audiophiles demanding.

And they further expand by saying:
Provide quality, high fidelity audio listening. Respecting the spectral balance and musicality.
Musical sound around listening ..

I know that their earliest commercial model seems to be the original SM line, and includes the SM2, SM3, SM64. From there they have branched out into both custom monitors and also universals including EM32 / EM6 / EM4 / EM3-PRO / EM2-PRO / EM2-iFI, S-EM9 / Velvet / S-EM6, and the new ES2 / ES3. They also have two amplifiers – the AMP911 and AMP912.

But perhaps the quote that gives you the best idea of what Earsonics is all about comes from their CEO (Franck Lopez)

In a field dictated by the data sheet and the race for pure performance, we ended up forgetting the essential - what drives you to start a desire to acquire the best, for the sole purpose of creating this emotion that overwhelms you and makes you forget everything else.
Our headphones are developed in this direction, create EMOTION ...

I can definitely relate to this thinking.
Earsonics website
Earsonics on Facebook

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with the Earsonics ES2 free of charge for the purposes of reviewing for Head-Fi. Earsonics does not expect the earphones back, so I acknowledge that they are freely given and I thank them for the opportunity. I am not otherwise affiliated with Earsonics in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from my contributions, and this is my subjective opinion of the ES2.

Some may note the similarity between my ES2 and ES3 reviews. A lot of information on the company, the accessories and the build has been repeated – and it is because they are very similar/same. I did go through my normal full review cycle though – as I always do.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the bulk of this review - I mainly used the ES2 straight from the headphone-out socket of my FiiO X3ii + E17K, and also used (at different times) my iPhone SE, and a variety of the other DAPs I have around me (including the FiiO X7, L&P L3 and HifiMan SuperMini). Although I tested them with an amplifier, I do not think they benefit from additional amplification (I use mine mainly for consistency when reviewing and also to extend battery life on the X3ii). In the time I have spent with the ES2, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the ES2 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The ES2 arrived in black box and lid with a silver sleeve. The outer sleeve simply has the ES2 logo, the company name and a small “Made in France” text and logo on the front. On the rear is a little technical info regarding the ES2 (and some of this might be slightly incorrect, as it refers to 3 drivers), and also the website address. The packaging measures 120 x 170 x 40 mm.

Removing the sleeve reveals a sturdy plain back box and lid – with the Earsonics (ES) logo on top. Removing the lid exposes the ES2 nestled safely in a foam cut-out, the Earsonics carry pouch, and (inside the pouch) the accessory pack.


Outer retail cover - front	Outer retail cover - rear	Sleeve and inner box

The accessories include:

2 pairs of Comply tips (small and large)
2 pairs of grey silicone dual flange tips
2 pairs of black silicone tips (one pair large single flange and one pair small dual flange)
1 cleaning brush and loop tool
Information card (in French)


First look at the ES2	The full package	Tips and cleaning tool

The pouch is a flat clamshell which seems to be made out of a double weave canvas type material with a more rigid inner layer sown between the two outer layers. It has a zip around the three sides, measures approx 90 x 70 x 30mm, and is semi-rigid enough to provide protection while still being very pocketable. I really like this case for use on-the-go.


The Earsonics carry case	Easy fitting	And very compact

All in all a reasonable overall package which should tick most people's boxes.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Earsonics)
I've listed both the ES2 and ES3 specs as no doubt people will be looking for comparative information.

	ES2	ES3
Cost	USD 299 ?	(USD 399) Amazon
Type	Dual Balanced Armature IEM	Triple Balanced Armature IEM
Frequency Range	10 Hz – 20 Khz	10 Hz – 20 Khz
Impedance	26.5 ohm	31.5 ohm
Sensitivity	119 dB @ 1kHz 1mW	116 dB @ 1kHz 1mW
Crossovers	2 way passive	3 way
Cable	130 cm copper core with twisted TPU sheath	120 cm copper core with twisted TPU sheath
Connectors	Standard 2 pin	Standard 2 pin
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, right angled	3.5mm gold plated, right angled
Weight	17g with incl cable and Comply large tips	19g with incl cable and Comply large tips
IEM Shell	Plastic 2 piece	Plastic 2 piece

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference.

What I’m hearing from the ES2:

Very natural sounding mid-bass with a slight hump, and pretty good extension (some natural roll-off into sub-bass).
Relatively flattish lower mid-range, maybe the slightest recession or distance in vocals, but it is minor, and adds to the impression of staging size
Upper mid-range has an excellent (and very cohesive) rise in the presence area (2 kHz) and gives a very clear and clean vocal presence.
There are minor peaks at 4 kHz and 7 kHz but they are lower/similar to the 2 kHz peak so the overall impression is one of smoothness – but they still bring out good detail and overall clarity.
Overall it is an extremely well balanced monitor with just a hint of smoothness, but because the bass is so well balanced, they don't appear overly warm or dark.

One thing to note is the almost perfect matching of left and right channels. You really don't get much better than this – bravo Earsonics.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
External
The ES2 has an interesting twist on a traditional ergonomic type design. It consists of a two piece hard plastic shell which has an odd shaped seam, but joins naturally into a smooth half “D” shape through the use of two micro Phillips head screws. All corners are nicely smooth, and the ES2 fits my ears wonderfully with no sharp or protruding points. They measure approx 20mm in length at their widest point and 16mm tall, with a depth of about 12mm. The nozzle is approx 6mm in length, 4mm in width, is located at the upper front of each ear pieces and is nicely angled to fit naturally with your ear canals. The nozzles are lipless and designed to fit T100 Comply foams (which means the Shure Olives are also a good – albeit somewhat tight – fit).


From the front	From the rear	Sideways from the rear

The external face is again smooth and nicely rounded. On the right hand earpiece are the letter ES and on the left is the number 2. At the top center (part of the outer face assembly) is the standard 2 pin connector socket. This is a standard flat socket – so there will be after-market cable options for those who prefer cable changes.


Closer look at the notch	Smooth underside with angled nozzles	Socket and 2 pin connector

The most striking thing about the ES series is the notch in the outer face, directly opposite the nozzle, and it actually looks almost like a piece has been taken out – until you notice the smooth curves and realise it is intentional. I was puzzled why the would do it until I noticed how well they fit. The notch has been designed to fit your Tragus, and it works extremely well. Brilliant design, and one of the reasons why this universal is so comfortable to wear.


With tips on - internal view	External view	And side view

There are otherwise no external markings or brands, and of course no vents because it is wholly a multi-BA configuration.

The cable
The cable is 1.2m in length and consists of a copper core and TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) sheath. The use of TPU makes a lot of sense due to its high elasticity, high shear strength, and resistance to oil and grease. The connectors are clearly marked left (blue) and right (red) with dots on the connector housings. From the connectors is a 60mm formable ear guide which I have found really easy to use.


The cable - nicely flexible	Y split and cinch	Right angled jack (smartphone case friendly)

The y-split is plastic with excellent strain relief, and there is a clear plastic tube for a chin slider/cinch – which again works very well. The jack is right angled, 3.mm and gold plated – again with excellent strain relief and also smart-phone friendly.

The cable itself is a twisted pair above the y-split and twisted triple below it. It is extremely supple, and while there are some microphonics, use of the cinch and cable management under clothing eliminates this to a negligible level.

Internals
For those who like to know about the internals, the ES2 employs 2 BA drivers (1 x low and 1 x high) and uses a 2-way crossover with impedance corrector. The BA's are proprietary Earsonics drivers.

One other hidden feature of the ES2 is utilisation of shorter acoustic tubes, and also implementation of an internal diffractive acoustic chamber – which Earsonics says helps add to the overall cohesion between drivers, and also a more believable sound-stage.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the build – it seems sturdy, light weight, and above all built for comfort.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well and shallow fitting IEMs can be problematic. The ES2 is a relatively shallow fitting IEM – but because it naturally fits Shure's Olive foam tips – I can get a perfect seal every time by using the large.


Stock silicone dual flange and included large Comply tips	Trinity Kombi/Sony Isolation and Spinfits	My favourite Shure Olives

Earsonics does include their own silicone tips - which are quite rubbery – but also gave me an excellent seal, and were (surprisingly for me) very comfortable as well (dual flange). Because of the thinner width of the nozzles, and lack of any type of lip – many of my other tips simply would not stay on. However both Spinfits and also hybrid tips (Sony Isolation or Trinity Kombi) also worked well. For me though, the Shure Olives are very comfortable and get a great seal every time.

Isolation with the ES2 will depend on the seal you achieve and type of tip (possibly also the insertion depth you can achieve). With the Shure Olives, isolation was really good, and I couldn't really hear the car while I was out and about with them. With music playing, isolation is great, and I'd have no problems using these in public transport.

In the photo above note how the notch from the ES2 perfectly fits with the ear's Tragus

Comfort for me is excellent – the ES2s are another of those designs which simply disappear when worn. In fact these rate up there with the most comfortable IEMs I've tried. They sit well within my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are extremely easy to sleep in. I have woken up more than a few times after a full night's sleep with the ES2 still intact.

So the ES2 has a great build, and is extremely comfortable to wear. How do they sound?

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Earsonics ES2. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, and Shure Olive tips.


Great with the X3ii and E17K	Also brilliant with the X7	But equally good with my iPhone SE

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 14-15/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – well extended and there is a little rumble present, but it is not over done at all. The low bass sounds very natural, and it takes a more traditional overall signature that the ES3 in that it is slightly rolled off Bass takes a back-seat to the mid-range, and sub-bass is slightly rolled off compared to mid-bass. The surprising thing though is the overall extension – the measurements show sub-bass at 20 Hz on equal footing with the mid-range. This is indeed a beautiful tuning.
Mid-bass – slightly elevated compared to sub-bass, and exhibits a gentle mid-bass bump, but also relatively evenly distributed. The result is a very natural sounding bass response – and indeed sounds more natural than the ES3 to me. There is no noticeable bleed into the mid-range. It is not an overly warm or rich bass – but rather a quick, and well textured mid-bass. Slightly elevated compared to lower mid-range, and almost perfectly balanced with the upper mid-range.
Lower mid-range – just the tiniest bit recessed compared to both bass and upper mid-range, but sounds extremely well balanced throughout, and the last thing you would call the ES2 is U or V shaped. There is very good texture with deeper male vocals, and the clarity on the mid-range overall is stunning. I always use Pearl Jam as my go to for texture in the lower bass – and the ES2 delivers beautifully.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but it is an even rise from lower mid-range to the first peak at about 2 kHz, then a dip and smaller rise toward 4 kHz. The result is an incredibly clean and clear vocal range, with good presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals – but without over-doing it and making the entire signature too lean or dry. The upper mid-range on the ES2 is (like the ES3) one of the best qualities of this IEM. The nice thing about the ES2 (IMO) is that the upper mid-range is perfectly balanced with the mid-bass, and this combined is what really resonates with me. If anything the peak at 2 kHz could afford to be about 2 dB lower to be perfect, but that is really being picky.
Lower treble – there is a small peak at around 7 kHz, but it is actually lower than the upper-mid peak, and once again virtually perfectly balanced with the mid-bass. It hasn't even come close to triggering any signs of harshness or brittleness, and is significantly lower than the peak on the ES3. There is some roll-off immediately after this peak, and then another peak in the upper treble. Cymbals sit back a little more in the mix, but there is reasonable decay, and while there is plenty of detail – it is much smoother than the brighter and more etched ES3. There is the tiniest bit of truncation with the cymbal decay – but I haven't noticed it detract from my listening at all.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Very good with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well. Smoother than the ES3, and detail (while still there) is perhaps softened a little, or is not as spotlit as the ES3.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have good presence, but (depending on the recording) sometimes the decay after the initial crash can be truncated slightly
An very clean and clear monitor with good resolution portrayed reasonably naturally.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Really good directional queues, and just outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so good sense of width and depth. To me the sense of stage on the ES2 is actually better than on the ES3.
Spherically presented stage – with great presentation of both width and depth
Compelling sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”. I loved the presentation of both. Amanda Marshall was sublime with the ES2.

Strengths

Wonderful sense of overall balance with all parts of the frequency in almost perfect harmony.
Extremely good with both male and female vocals
Good with dynamic music – and able to show wonderful contrast between bass and upper mid-range (eg Cello and Violin). Cello sounded utterly believable with the ES2 – fantastic tuning.
Brilliant with acoustic music and gives strings good sense of realism and tone when plucked, and nice edge to electric guitar when strummed. Again the sense of overall balance and naturalness is key to this.
Wonderful with female vocals, lending a slight air of euphony and sweetness – without over doing it.
Genre master for lovers of a balanced signature – I enjoyed it with every genre I tested – even with electronic and the little hip-hop and trip-hop I have.
Because of the balance – you can listen to the ES2 with a little more volume (if that is your preference). However for the low level listeners, there is enough upper mid-range and mid-bass for you to drop the volume without feeling you are missing anything.

Weaknesses

The only weakness I can really find is that the peak at 2 kHz can sometimes be a little sharp with the wrong recording. With well recorded music though – absolutely no issue.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The ES2 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone SE, or any of the FiiO DAPs. I'm at my usual 65-75dB listening level (with typical pop/rock songs) on the SE at a volume level of around 20%, or on the E17K around 14-15/60 on low gain. I did try amping with the E17K, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement. I also paired the ES2 with the IMS Hybrid Valve DAC/Amp combined with my iPhone as transport, and actually preferred the more linear E17K on this occasion. From my tests, the ES2 neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification.

EQUALISATION
Tonally there is virtually nothing I would be inclined to change with the ES2 – but I did want to play around slightly with the upper mid-range, and particularly with the small peak at 2 kHz. Using the E17K wasn't going to cut the mustard, as this needed more of a scalpel adjustment than a broad one. So using the Equaliser app on my iPhone I dropped the 2 kHz peak around 3 dB so it more closely mimicked the ES3's curve, and this to me made the signature completely perfect. This is simply a matter of preference though – but its nice to know that the ES2 responded so well. While I was at it – I also tried lifting the sub-bass, and also the upper treble. Those wouldn't be my preferences but both again made changes to the ES2 which some may find preferable. The good news is that the ES2 is very responsive to EQ. Its one of the reasons I like a reasonably well balanced earphone – they respond well to everything!

COMPARISONS
This time the comparison was easy to pick. As a reviewer you want to show something in the same price range, and also show something with similar capabilities. Fortunately I have two ideal earphones (the Jays q-Jays, and Alclair Curve) which are both in a comparable price range, and also dual BA earphones. I also compared the ES2 and ES3 as a final match up.

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the ES2 had the Shure Olive tips and no EQ was used. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

ES2 (~$299) vs Alclair Curve (~ $249)


Frequency comparison	Earsonics ES2 vs Alclair Curve

Honours are reasonably even on build quality, accessories, and comfort. Both are extremely light weight and despite the hard plastic housings, look built to last. Overall comfort might go slightly toward the Curve – but it's just the unique shape – they fit like customs. Neither is a slouch in the comfort stakes. Isolation is slightly better on the Curve but it is marginal. Both cables are replaceable and actually look identical (same OEM supplier?).

Sonically the two are more alike than different, with the Curve having a slightly more V shape (a little more bass) and definitely a more lower treble. The transition from lower mids to upper mids does sound a little more natural on the Curve to me, but at the same time, the ES2 is a little smoother overall in the upper frequencies (more air and slightly more heat with the Curve). Its really hard to pick a preferences with these two. Both are excellent examples of how good a dual BA can be. For overall tonality I think I slightly prefer the ES2 – but its close.

ES2 (~$299) vs Jays q-Jays (~ $299)


Frequency comparison	Earsonics ES2 vs Jays q-Jays

Build and accessories go to the diminutive q-Jays – with their aluminium alloy build, and excellent carry case. But for all that, the ES2 build and accessory package is also excellent. Comfort could go either way – the q-Jays are so tiny they just disappear – but the last few weeks have shown me that the ES2 is also one of the most comfortable I've tried. Isolation is similar – the q-Jays does allow you to go deeper with insertion though. Both cables are replaceable and good quality, but I do prefer the 2-pin system of the ES2 though.

Sonically the two are again similar overall – but the q-Jays are actually noticeably more linear. Where the ES2 has the mid-range bumped, the q-Jays have a much flatter curve and more emphasis at the 7 kHz bump which both share in the lower treble. This is quite a hard one because I use the q-Jays a lot, so I am more used to their signature and its one I fell in love with the first time I heard them. For me personally I still like the overall natural tonality of the q-Jays a little more. But where some will find the Jays mid-range a little subdued ( I think its perfect – and balances the bass nicely), and the overall tonality thicker – the ES2 gives a little more clarity and forward mid-range. I could really live with either and both have amazing strengths. Going back and forth, I've had more of a chance to appreciate both over the last month. They compliment each other nicely.

ES2 (~$299) vs ES3 (~ $399)


Frequency comparison	Earsonics ES2 vs ES3

As I alluded to in my ES3 review, this is the one I didn't expect. Before Max sent me both, I'd read a couple of impressions from different reviewers, and the consensus had been that the ES2 was a lot darker, warmer, and the ES3 was clearly superior. And even when both pairs arrived, I spent the first two weeks with the ES3, and didn't even open the ES2 until I had the ES3's signature pretty much dialled in. I wasn't expecting the reaction I had.

But lets clear the other attributes first. In terms of overall package, they are identical – build, fit etc. Internally there are the obvious 2 vs 3 drivers, but they share the internal diffractive acoustic chamber.

Sonically the ES2 has a traditional mid-bass hump (including reasonable sub-bass extension), but doesn't have the sub-bass bump, or the extension at 7 kHz (down by about 4-5 dB at this frequency). It does have slightly more presence at 2 kHz – so at first listen it definitely appears to have smaller overall staging, and of course it is warmer and doesn't have the apparent resolution/detail of its higher spec'd sibling. But when you really critically listen, you realise the resolution is all there – it's just not highlighted to the same extent. The ES2 is smoother, warmer, and definitely not as bright. But its also a lot more natural sounding while still delivering a great deal of detail. And while it may be less linear compared to the ES3 – I'd argue that the ES2 is more naturally balanced. I have a definite preference here. The ES3 is a great triple BA earphone – but I think the true star in this family is ultimately the ES2 (for my preferences anyway).

EARSONICS ES2 - SUMMARY

As you can probably guess, I'm pretty smitten with the Earsonics ES2. It has a very good build, wonderful fit/comfort, and excellent isolation. It also has a very good accessory package including a case which I personally find ideal for day to day use. The cable is really good also, and being standard two pin, is ideal for those who do use after-market cables.

Sonically the ES2 has a more traditional signature – with a nicely crafted mid-bass bump which brings a natural bass texture and tonality which is exceptional with all genres I tested. Mid-range and treble are nicely balanced with the bass to give great clarity without being over etched of peaky. Extension is very good.

I've seen others describe the ES2 as a warmer, darker monitor, and I'm afraid I can't really agree. To me the ES2 is quite natural with an upper mid-range which is a little forward. There is some bass warmth there – but it is by no means dark.

The ES2 is a fantastic IEM, and a genuine all-rounder. It should definitely be on everyone's short list if you're shopping for a monitor at around the $300 mark, and value balance, clarity and a little mid-range emphasis.

Overall – given the complete package, its an easy 4 star recommendation.

My thanks once again to Max for the chance to be able to review the ES2.

great review Brooko! thank you!

Awesome review as always. Made me think twice about BA based iems. Really nice work, thank you so much!

Thanks gents. I've heard a lot of dual BAs now which I would rate extremely highly - including Savant, Curve, q-Jays, CA Nova and now the Earsonics ES2. A dual tuned well takes a heck of a lot of beating - especially when taking price into account.

For larger views of any of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

Boy 2016 has been one heck of a year. My work has snowballed, and unfortunately my review queue has at times built up – as I've struggled to make the available time. But the manufacturers that work with me (supplying review samples) have been very understanding and very patient. But I've also been fortunate to review some great gear – and some of it has come out of the blue too. When I reviewed the HD800S I wasn't expecting to go out and buy one after I sent the review sample back – but it quickly became apparent it was to be my end-game.

This review is a touch of deja-vu in that respect. I wasn't expecting to find something close to my portable end-game. But I have. And it couldn't have been more surprising.

Step back about two months ago – and George from Gear-Best contacted me asking if I'd like to try another headphone. The one he suggested was by a company I've never heard of (Fiil), and I only agreed to try it because he recommended it – and because it had both Blue-tooth and noise cancellation. I figured I could compare it to my QC25 at least. Fast forward to today – and this particular headphone currently gets more use than my IEMs when I'm out and about. It has quite literally changed the way I listen to music.

ABOUT GEARBEST
If you haven't heard of GearBest it might be time you looked at them. They are (at the time of writing) a Head-Fi Sponsor, and are essentially an on-line electronics seller. The company was founded in 2013 and specialise in anything electronic – including a growing range of earphones and headphones.

George is their Marketing Manager and approached me about reviewing some of their products earlier this year. GearBest seems to be steadily growing their product range – and in amongst many of the budget offerings, I'm starting to see some higher end gear.

GearBest have very good service, and in my time dealing with them (both as a Moderator and also a reviewer), I can vouch for the very ethical way GearBest approaches business.

GearBest link to Fiil Diva

ABOUT FiiL
This is a company I'd never heard of before now, and I have to really thank George for making me aware of them. Fiil are an audio design company based in Beijing, China – established in 2015, so they are relatively new. Their product range seems to consist so far of variations around 3 base models – the Diva (wireless blue-tooth on-ear portables), the Bestie (IEM), and the Carat Pro (wireless sports earphone which features an exercise monitor and inbuilt player).

For these types of introductions I normally let companies like Fiil do the talking from their website introductions -

“Our core team members include popular rock music artist Wang Feng and experts from top-notched companies like Huawei, Plantronics, Lenovo, BMW, etc. We are committed to making fairly priced, fashionably designed, and most importantly, superiorly sounded products that could accommodate to every subtle circumstance, and fulfil every unsatisfied need.”

I don't know enough about the company yet – but one thing I can confirm is that they have a good grasp on the four main features of a great portable headphone – audio quality, comfort, style and portability. What makes things even more interesting is that they are taking a very professional approach to tuning. Borrowed from their website - photos of their measuring and testing in their own anechoic chamber!

You can learn more about Fiil at their website

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the bulk of this review - I mainly used the Fiil Diva via Blue-tooth connection with my iPhone ES or iPad Mini – but also with a variety of other sources – including FiiO's X7 and X1ii (both wirelessly) and other DAPs using the wired connection. I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the ES3 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES


Fiil Diva retail box	Sleeve front	Sleeve rear

The Fiil Diva arrived in a 210 x 180 x 110mm white box (with outer sleeve) – very simply adorned by by a graphic representation of the Dive headphones, the catch phrase “Diva – Fiil Me Now” and the Sony Hi-res Audio logo. Aside from this there is a QR code and website address. Removing the outer sleeve reveals a similar white box and lid, which when opened reveals the carry case – then under this, the manual and also two boxes for the charging cable and also the headphone cable for wired use.


Inner box	The carry case	Manual, charging cable and headphone cable

The carry case is reasonably compact, although a little deep (~190 x 150 x 75mm), with a hard exterior and moulded interior which seems to give pretty good protection. The charging cable is a pretty standard USB to micro USB cable – and most of my DAP charging cables will also fit and charge the Diva. The Diva package also includes an optional wired connection for audio. This cable is no flimsy afterthought either. It is an approx 1.25m cable with quality jacks and decent sheathing.


Manual and cables	Carry case and Diva	Compact and offering good protection

The manual is clearly written, easy to follow and has decent illustrations.

First impressions – very good.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Fiil)

Current RRP price	$199 (GearBest website)
Type	Closed on-ear dynamic Blue-tooth headset
Driver	Dynamic, 32mm
Frequency Range	15 Hz–22 Khz (Blue-tooth), 10-40 kHz (wired)
Weight	215g
Sensitivity	110 dB / 1 kHz
Impedance	320 ohms at 1 kHz
Measured distortion	< 0.5% @ 100dB SPL, 1 kHz
Cable	Optional – 1.25m, straight. 3.5mm gold plated jacks
Microphone	Wireless – Included in head-set
Battery Life	Up to 33 hours (tested at med volume by Fiil)
Standby time	Up to 48 days
Charge Time	~ 2.5 hours
Blue-tooth Spec	Version 4.1 with aptX support
Blue-tooth Range	Up to 100m (Fiil claim)
Supported Blue-tooth	HSP, HFP, A2DP, AVRCP

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN


Headband padding	Headband width	Sturdy metal connectors

The Diva is a compact sized on ear (supra-aural) headphone which feels light and super comfortable when worn. Starting with the headband, it consists of a 30cm long, 2.5cm wide, shaped band. Each end has very strong metal sections which house the extenders, and between them is a padded section for the top of your head. This is covered in extremely soft p-leather, and I find it incredibly comfortable. Inside the headband (guessing here) is spring steel which allows the headband to be bent out. It seems to be very strong.

The metal ends of the headband which house the extenders are clearly labelled L and R on the inside, but you’ll never forget which cup is the right side anyway, as it is the one that houses the controls. The extenders themselves and have firm but smooth action. They extend a further 3 cm each side, and should suit those with larger heads. I’m a reasonably big guy, and I have them comfortable settled at just over 1.5cm each side. The extenders are hinged, and allow each earpiece to fold into the headband for compact storage.


Very sturdy extenders	The protein elather pads	Internal swivel mechanism - 360 deg adjustment

The connection to the ear-cups appears to be metal, and allows full rotation around all axes. Everything feels amazingly solid, and best of all, it is easy to get a perfect fit because the Diva has such a full range of rotation/motion.

The ear-cups themselves are circular, approx. 6.5cm in diameter, and just on 3cm deep (pads slightly compressed). This makes them nicely low profile. All of the controls and connections are on the right hand side cup. This includes:

The micro USB charging port
The headphone cable socket
The controls for ANC (options to be explained shortly)
The on/off switch – which also is used for pairing and for play/pause.
The exterior surface of the cup has tracking controls


On head-set controls	Connected Bluetooth with iPhone	Wired connection and cable

The pads are p-leather, and exquisitely soft. They are supra-aural with outer measurements of 7 cm diameter, and inner measurements of 3.5cm diameter and the actual pads are just 2cm deep. The driver is covered with a cloth dust cover. Unfortunately the pads do not appear to be easily replaceable.

I’ll cover the controls shortly – but I can say these are pretty easy to get used to, and appear to be reasonably robust and well-built.

COMFORT / ISOLATION
In the past I've owned a few supra-aural earphones – including 3 sets of Grado (MS1i, SR325i custom, and RS1), Beyer T51P, MOE, and the XTZ Divine. With each, I've experienced varying degrees of comfort – but ultimately I've always had the burning pressure sensation within an hour or so – and ultimately its why I've never had an on-ear portable I really liked. That has changed with the Fiil Diva.

Once the headband and ear-pieces have been adjusted to allow a reasonable seal, they are fantastic. Over time (maybe an hour of listening) I can feel them – but its just a feeling that I know I have something on my ears. It's not discomfort, or pain. Are they as comfortable as a decent circumaural? No. But are they OK for several hours use? Yes – for me anyway. I've used them for as long as 3 hours – with no actual discomfort. What helps is the really soft p-leather combined with the equally soft memory foam, and the ability to fully rotate the earpieces to match your own physiology. And this goes for the headband too – supremely comfortable.

As far as isolation goes, they are average to above average. They isolate passively pretty well with little leakage. I can still hear a little bit of ambient sound around me though – but this is negated to a high degree when you engage the active noise cancelling (ANC).

HEADSET / COMMUNICATIONS
I’ve used the Fiil for a couple of test calls – to my wife – who said that she found my voice to be relatively clear in a quiet environment but the microphone seemed to pick up a lot of ambient noise if I was anywhere noisy. Accepting and rejecting calls is facilitated by a single button on the head-set, sot here is not too much to learn. Pressing and holding this button allows me to bring up the voice recognition system. Interestingly – pressing and holding does not start Siri, but rather their own Baidu search function (which is next to useless for me). The Baidu system works around searching on-line for music and playing it (Spotify etc). I just want to use it for my own library, and the Baidu default won't seem to do that. So far I haven't been able to work out how to get it to default to Siri's voice commands – which do work pretty well. Its a minor annoyance – but I don't usually use it anyway (for calls or searching my phone's library). Calls are OK at a pinch – but I'd personally prefer a wired connection which would allow me to bring a microphone closer to my mouth.

FEATURES AND CONTROL SUMMARY
This is one of the strongest feature sets I've come across in a wireless headphone. The basics are available via the on ear-piece controls, but they also extend to full control over the ANC. This can then be further enhanced by use of the iOS or Android app.

Software
The Diva features include:

3 pre-set EQ's (base / mids / treble)
MAF (my audio filter) = presets and options for noise adjustment
3D sound – spacialisation dsp settings
Battery indicator

The preset EQ system is pretty rudimentary, but does allow 3 choices and there is a subtle change in overall signature. This can be quite handy when switching to ANC (the bass does get a little enhanced automatically), and you can then switch up the treble to counteract the change. This is only available with the app.

[size=inherit][/size]
Fiil options screen	Fiil Diva battery status screen	Fiil Diva profile screen	Fiil Diva EQ screen

The MAF is the best part of the feature set, and is available direct from the head-set (app not required). Options are:

ANC noise reduction mode
Monitor mode
Open mode
Windy mode

The ANC noise reduction isn't quite up to Bose standard, but it is about 80%+ there, and works brilliantly in the likes of a car, or even walking down the street. I've used it in aircraft, and its pretty good – but if I was long-haul, I'd still take my QC25. Effectively takes out a lot of low level noise. The trade off (as is with most ANC) is the subtle increase in bass warmth – but its not oppressive, and I really don't mind the change – given the benefits of added isolation.

[size=inherit][/size]
MAF (my audio filter) selection	MAF main screen	Windy Modoe selected (brilliant for walking)	3D sound options

Monitor mode is pretty much ANC but allows the you to hear others talking – useful if you are in an office environment, and need to be aware of someone talking to you. There isn't a lot of change sonically with the monitor mode setting – slightly on the bassy side.

Open mode is what it says. It allows you to fully hear the environment around you. With this mode, there is slightly less bass.

Windy mode is my favourite. If I'm out walking, and there is any wind noise, you just flick the switch and wind noise gone. I don't know how they've done this – but it works brilliantly. Tonally windy mode is essentially the same as ANC mode.


In app manual	In app manual	In app settings screen	In app FAQ screen

The 3D sound is interesting. Its a bit like 3D spacialisation DSPs you get on a computer trying to recreate being in different sized room setting (off, living room, theatre, hall). While it does work – it also sounds kind of artificial to me – so I pretty much always keep this setting to off (too much reverb otherwise). Some may really like it – but I see this more as gimmick than really useful.

The battery indicator is on the app – and lets you know approx how many hours of play-time and standby time you have.

Controls
The on-off button also doubles as pairing, and is the button used for pause/play. It's easy to locate and use.

Next to this is a slider + push button which basically controls the MAF (ANC options). Again – well implemented and easy to use. Single push = on/off. Slide up or down to engage the different MAF modes. Double click to toggle windy mode on or off. Simple!

The other controls are on the outer face of the right ear-cup and they are slide/touch controls. Touch the centre top and it is volume up. Touch the centre volume and it is volume down. Slide from centre back to centre forward and it advances one track. Reverse and it goes back. Apparently you can also slide top to bottom to smoothly control volume – but it doesn't seem to work on this unit, and for me is not necessary (I use the single tap top or bottom). The controls are easy to locate, easy to use, and brilliant for on the go.

Pairing
Pairing is simple. Put your phone in pairing mode, press and hold the on/off button until the ear-cup LED flashes. At this point it should show up on your device, and pairing is simply a matter of choosing the Diva. Once the pairing is successful, every time you turn the Diva on, it automatically tries to pair with the last device. You can pair with two devices simultaneously.

Voice Feedback
As part of the controls set – when you engage features, the head-set tells you what you are doing and also advises battery status (when you first start up, plus also if you double click the on/off button).

Motion Sensor
This is one I didn't expect, and for the most part (for me) works pretty well. The headset features a pressure sensor, so it knows when its being worn. Once you're connected and playing,if you remove the headset (ie take the pressure off the pads), the Diva pauses your player, turns off any ANC, and enters power savings mode. Really smart technology, and extremely useful.

So the controls are simple, practical, and work pretty much perfectly.

BLUETOOTH PERFORMANCE / BATTERY LIFE
The Blue-tooth performance on the Diva, like the XTC Divine and Ausdom M05 I previously reviewed, is exceptional. The only dropouts I’ve experienced so far have been when I've either exceeded the wireless range, or been in extremely volatile wireless areas prone to interference. If anything I'd say the Diva has even better and more stable connectivity than anything else I've tried.

As far as range goes – Fiil advertise up to 100m, which personally I doubt (and wonder if its a typo). But I can get 20m of solid connection through two solid walls – and that to me is pretty impressive. When connecting to my X7, the Diva showed as using the AptX codec. X7 connection was very solid and the pairing was very good. X1ii was OK - but could glitch out from time to time. This is more an X1ii issue than a Diil Diva issue. Connection with the iPhone has been amazingly solid since I've had them together.


Performance with X7 was good (but app did not work)	Performance with X1ii was OK - but spotty Bluetooth

So what about battery life? I’ve tried more than a few times to measure it, and I'm pretty sure Fiil's claims are not excessive. I’ve flattened my iPhone battery before I've come to the end of the Diva's battery life, and unfortunately I simply don't have the time to perform a proper test. But I only charge them once every three days or so – but I charge my iPhone every day. The battery life on the Diva is impressive.

Recharge time seems to be around 2-2.5 hours, depending on the power source (mine were wall-wart based).

WIRED OPERATION
If you ever did run out of battery, you have the option of using the wired connection. The interesting thing here is that when using the cable, the Fiil automatically disables blue-tooth, but if the unit is switched on, you still have use of the MAF features. You can also use the Diva completely turned off, and it sounds pretty darn good. You lose the various DSP features – but I have no complaints. Crystal clear audio. And its nice to know that in the unlikely event you are ever caught short – you still have great audio available.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Fiil Diva. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). The testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was all done with my iPhone SE via Blue-tooth using the Fiil music app, active noise cancelling, and no EQ (ie balanced mode).

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – good extension, with perceptible rumble. Sub-bass is lower than mid-bass in quantity, but still sufficient to be there without overpowering.
Mid-bass – Definite hump, there is a lot of impact, and I would say the mid-bass is elevated compared to both sub-bass and also lower mid-range. But there is very little bleed into mid-range frequencies. Definitely a bit of warmth here though.
Lower mid-range – slightly recessed compared to both mid-bass and upper mid-range, but there is still a lot of clarity, and I've been surprised how good male vocals sound with the Diva.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but it is a slow rise from lower mid-range, and I would say it peaks at around 4 kHz. The result is an incredibly clean and clear vocal range, with good presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals – but without over-doing it and making the entire signature too lean or dry. The upper mid-range on the Diva is (for me) one of the best qualities of this headphone.
Lower treble – recessed compared to upper mid-range, but there is still enough presence to capture both cymbal fundamentals and harmonics. Extension seems to be reasonable – but I wouldn't call it wonderfully extended. Overall the treble area is smooth but has enough detail to be clear and clean.
Upper treble – personally I don't hear a lot of extension beyond 10 kHz, but then again, I never really notice it any more – there is little useful information above 10 kHz as far as fundamentals go – virtually all harmonics.
Overall Signature – smooth, warm, lush – but with good clarity and a surprising amount of overall detail. A little on the V shaped side (mid-bass and upper mid-range).

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Very good with enough micro detail to appeal to detail lovers, but not spotlit if you are treble sensitive.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have good presence and sense of decay. They are slightly back in the mix though
An clean and clear monitor with good resolution – but which can be overpowered at times if the track has very prominent bass.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Reasonable directional queues (not super precise, but generally pretty clear), and inside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so average width and depth
Spherically presented (if slightly small) stage – with equal emphasis on width and depth. Definitely not one dimensional
Very good sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”.

Strengths

Easy to listen to tonality with good clarity
Very good with both male and female vocals, but better overall with female IMO
Female vocals have an air of euphony and sweetness – without over doing it. Genre master for lovers of a warmer and slightly V-shaped signature – I enjoy it with pretty much all types or genres of music.

Weaknesses

Bass is warmer than neutral. This can be changed if its not to your liking by use of either the app's EQ, or setting a base EQ with whatever music software you have engaged.
Reasonably small sound-stage, and bass can be a little woolly and loose at times – again easily solved with EQ.

COMPARISONS
This was an easier choice this time – as the two main features of the Diva (wireless portability and ANC) pretty much leaned toward comparisons with the XTZ Divine and the Bose QC25.

Comparisons were done using the default setting for each headphone, and my iPhone ES for both. I volume matched to the best of my ability with an SPL meter and test tones, but it is never easy getting it 100% precise with on-ear headphones, and especially not with ANC engaged.

Fiil Diva $199 vs XTZ Divine $179

Both are very compact and portable. Build quality is overall similar, but the Fiil ultimately has a sturdier overall build (more metal, less plastic). Fit and comfort both go to the Diva – mainly due to the softer pads and better cup rotation. I personally find the control set on the Diva to be slightly easier to use and more intuitive. In terms of feature set – both are brilliant. The Divine concentrates more on EQ presets (which are very good), and ultimately I'd give it the nod for overall SQ with more balance and clarity. But the Fiil still delivers very good SQ, and it of course has the added features of ANC, better battery life, and features which work better for ultimate portability. Both are incredible performers (really incredible) – but ultimately for truly portable use – the Diva gives me better isolation, more comfort, and better life. My 13 yo daughter uses the Divine pretty much every day, and after trying the Diva, she really wants one. That should be a good indicator.

Fiil Diva $199 vs QC25 $299

Both again are very portable and very compact. Again I’d give the Diva the edge on pure build quality (metal vs plastic), but the QC25 definitely goes ahead on comfort (over-ear vs on-ear). Both have increased bass response with ANC active, and it is centered around the mid-bass. I rate both both pretty well on sonics (for portable use) – with both having a slightly V shaped but warmish and smooth signature. The QC25's noise cancellation is class leading, and it does pip the Diva here – but the Diva is of course wireless, and has the additional software modes. Thankfully I don't need to make a choice here – and for me the QC25 suits a different purpose (long haul air travel), while the Diva will remain as my portable of choice for the foreseeable future.

FIIL DIVA – SUMMARY

First up I want to take the chance to again thank George from GearBest for giving me the chance to review these. I honestly wasn't expecting these to be as good as they are. And its really blown me away how much my listening habits have changed in the time I've had them. Basically the Diva's accompany me everywhere during my work day. I use them on my way to work, at work, and after work. I use them walking at nights (when time allows). They are simply easier to pick up and head out the door with – and the blue-tooth connection, and ease of use with my phone has been brilliant. Yes – If I want to settle in and do some serious listening, I'll revert to my HD800S, or my U6 – but for absolute head-time, the Diva gets more hours.

The Fiil Diva is a well built portable which has very good design and (for an on-ear) surprising comfort. But it is also wireless (Blue-tooth), and the overall stability and connectivity with my iPhone SE has been mighty impressive. But wait – that’s not all (I sound like a TV advertiser). The Fiil also has ANC (which is very effective, and a software suite which is both well designed and very practical.

Sonically the Diva is on the warm side, but still very clear, and ultimately just easy to listen to.

Best of all though – the Diva is under $200. Yep – you heard me right – the normal RRP is only $199.

So do I recommend it? Unquestionably! In fact I'm likely to buy one of these myself – simply to stop my daughter grabbing this pair. The Diva would be one of my finds of the year – and easily is among the best portables (for overall package) I've found.

The Fiil Diva can be purchased direct from GearBest by following this link.

Use coupon code: LHWF to directly reduce $40 for FIIL DIVA&FIIL DIVA PRO at Gearbest

They are amazing. I've had the chance to review the Diva PRO's which have similar sound quality. These headphones have been my go to's for everywhere. It's sound quality, Comfort, portability, wireless freedom, well, you name it.

I know what you mean - easily the best portable I've experienced. I am more impressed with them every time I use them.

For larger (1200x800) images, simply click any photo

INTRODUCTION

I think most people will have heard about Earsonics at some stage. My first experience of their gear was years ago – when someone loaned me their SM3 for a couple of weeks. This was in my very early years, and before I'd really started reviewing. At the time I think I had my SE535 LE or SE425 as my main in-ears, and already I'd discovered that I liked a more balanced, but slightly brighter signature. And the SM3 to me were very smooth and pretty dark. They were good – but not my “cup of tea”. I read a lot of popular reviews on them – and soon decided that perhaps Earsonics just simply wasn't my type of house sound. Jumping to early conclusions can be pretty stupid – and I'm pleased to say that my latest experience with Earsonics products couldn't be more different than my earlier one.

And a quick plug here for both Nic (you know him as flinkenick) and also Max Capgras from Earsonics for making this all possible. Nic sent Earsonics my details, and I was extremely surprised when Max contacted me and asked if I'd like to review their ES2 and ES3 IEMs. I'm so glad he did too – because I really LOVE both IEMs. Read on to discover why my early impressions of Earsonics from all those years ago have been literally turned on their head.

ABOUT EARSONICS
Earsonics was formed in 2004, and are located in France. From their own website, they describe themselves as:
French designer and manufacturer of a range of in-ear-monitors tailored and universal for musicians, sound engineers and audiophiles demanding.

And they further expand by saying:
Provide quality, high fidelity audio listening. Respecting the spectral balance and musicality.
Musical sound around listening ..

I know that their earliest commercial model seems to be the original SM line, and includes the SM2, SM3, SM64. From there they have branched out into both custom monitors and also universals including EM32 / EM6 / EM4 / EM3-PRO / EM2-PRO / EM2-iFI, S-EM9 / Velvet / S-EM6, and the new ES2 / ES3. They also have two amplifiers – the AMP911 and AMP912.

But perhaps the quote that gives you the best idea of what Earsonics is all about comes from their CEO (Franck Lopez)
In a field dictated by the data sheet and the race for pure performance, we ended up forgetting the essential - what drives you to start a desire to acquire the best, for the sole purpose of creating this emotion that overwhelms you and makes you forget everything else.
Our headphones are developed in this direction, create EMOTION ...

I can definitely relate to this thinking.

You can find Earsonics on the web : Earsonics website or Earsonics on Facebook

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with the Earsonics ES3 free of charge for the purposes of reviewing for Head-Fi. Earsonics does not expect the earphones back, so I acknowledge that they are freely given and I thank them for the opportunity. I am not otherwise affiliated with Earsonics in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from my contributions, and this is my subjective opinion of the ES3.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the bulk of this review - I mainly used the ES3 straight from the headphone-out socket of my FiiO X3ii + E17K, and also used (at different times) my iPhone SE, and a variety of the other DAPs I have around me (including the FiiO X7, L&P L3 and HifiMan SuperMini). Although I tested them with an amplifier, I do not think they benefit from additional amplification (I use mine mainly for consistency when reviewing and also to extend battery life on the X3ii). In the time I have spent with the ES3, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the ES3 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The ES3 arrived in black box and lid with a silver sleeve. The outer sleeve simply has the ES3 logo, the company name and a small “Made in France” text and logo on the front. On the rear is a little technical info regarding the ES3 and also the website address. The packaging measures 120 x 170 x 40 mm.


Retail outer box - front face	Retail outer box - rear face	Internal box + first view of the ES3

Removing the sleeve reveals a sturdy plain back box and lid – with the Earsonics (ES) logo on top. Removing the lid exposes the ES3 nestled safely in a foam cut-out, the Earsonics carry pouch, and (inside the pouch) the accessory pack.

The accessories include:

2 pairs of Comply tips (small and large)
2 pairs of grey silicone dual flange tips
2 pairs of black silicone tips (one pair large single flange and one pair small dual flange)
1 cleaning brush and loop tool
Information card (in French)


Full accessory package	ES3 in the extremely good carry case	Tips and cleaning tool

The pouch is a flat clamshell which seems to be made out of a double weave canvas type material with a more rigid inner layer sown between the two outer layers. It has a zip around the three sides, measures approx 90 x 70 x 30mm, and is semi-rigid enough to provide protection while still being very pocketable. I really like this case for use on-the-go.

All in all a reasonable overall package which should tick most people's boxes.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Earsonics)
I've listed both the ES2 and ES3 specs as no doubt people will be looking for comparative information.

	ES2	ES3
Cost	~ USD TBA	USD 399 Amazon
Type	Dual Balanced Armature IEM	Triple Balanced Armature IEM
Frequency Range	10 Hz – 20 Khz	10 Hz – 20 Khz
Impedance	26.5 ohm	31.5 ohm
Sensitivity	119 dB @ 1kHz 1mW	116 dB @ 1kHz 1mW
Crossovers	2 way passive	3 way
Cable	130 cm copper core with twisted TPU sheath	120 cm copper core with twisted TPU sheath
Connectors	Standard 2 pin	Standard 2 pin
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, right angled	3.5mm gold plated, right angled
Weight	17g with incl cable and Comply large tips	19g with incl cable and Comply large tips
IEM Shell	Plastic 2 piece	Plastic 2 piece

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference.

What I’m hearing from the ES3:

Very linear and quick bass with some added oomph in the sub-bass region
Mid bass is very flat, which does add to the impression of a quick, and lean monitor
Very flat lower mid-range, with no perceived recession or distance in vocals
Upper mid-range has an excellent (and very cohesive) rise in the presence area (toward 2 kHz) and gives a very clear and clean vocal presence.
There is a minor peak at 4 kHz and a sharper one at 7 kHz. For those who are sensitive to lower treble at 7kHz it may get a little sharp. This is an area of the frequency band which has never concerned me, but for others I know it can be problematic.
Overall it is monitor with pretty good overall balance with just a hint of a U shaped tuning (sub bass and lower treble emphasis.

One final note - the channel matching is superb - among the best I've seen from any manufacturer!

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
External
The ES3 has an interesting twist on a traditional ergonomic type design. It consists of a two piece hard plastic shell which has an odd shaped seam, but joins naturally into a smooth half “D” shape through the use of two micro Phillips head screws. All corners are nicely smooth, and the ES 3 fits my ears wonderfully with no sharp or protruding points. They measure approx 20mm in length at their widest point and 16mm tall, with a depth of about 12mm. The nozzle is approx 6mm in length, 4mm in width, is located at the upper front of each ear pieces and is nicely angled to fit naturally with your ear canals. The nozzles are lipless and designed to fit T100 Comply foams (which means the Shure Olives are also a good – albeit somewhat tight – fit).


External face	View from the front	Internal face (the holes are screw holes)

The external face is again smooth and nicely rounded. On the right hand earpiece are the letter ES and on the left is the number 3. At the top center (part of the outer face assembly) is the standard 2 pin connector socket. This is a standard flat socket – so there will after-market cable options for those who prefer cable changes.

The most striking thing about the ES series is the notch in the outer face, directly opposite the nozzle, and it actually looks almost like a piece has been taken out – until you notice the smooth curves and realise it is intentional. I was puzzled why the would do it until I noticed how well they fit. The notch has been designed to fit your Tragus, and it works extremely well. Brilliant design, and one of the reasons why this universal is so comfortable to wear.


View from the rear	The "notch" - brilliant design!	2 pin connection system

There are otherwise no external markings or brands, and of course no vents because it is wholly a multi-BA configuration.

The cable
The cable is 1.2m in length and consists of a copper core and TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) sheath. The use of TPU makes a lot of sense due to its high elasticity, high shear strength, and resistance to oil and grease. The connectors are clearly marked left (blue) and right (red) with dots on the connector housings. From the connectors is a 60mm formable ear guide which I have found really easy to use.


The cable	Y-split & cinch	90 deg jack

The y-split is plastic with excellent strain relief, and there is a clear plastic tube for a chin slider/cinch – which again works very well. The jack is right angled, 3.mm and gold plated – again with excellent strain relief and also smart-phone friendly.

The cable itself is a twisted pair above the y-split and twisted triple below it. It is extremely supple, and while there are some microphonics, use of the cinch and cable management under clothing eliminates this to a negligible level.

Internals
For those who like to know about the internals, the ES3 employs 3 BA drivers (usual bass, mid-range and treble drivers) and uses a 3-way crossover with impedance corrector. The BA's are proprietary Earsonics drivers.

One other hidden feature of the ES3 is utilisation of shorter acoustic tubes, and also implementation of an internal diffractive acoustic chamber – which Earsonics says helps add to the overall cohesion between drivers, and also a more believable sound-stage.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the build – it seems sturdy, light weight, and above all built for comfort.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well and shallow fitting IEMs can be problematic. The ES3 is a relatively shallow fitting IEM – but because it naturally fits Shure's Olive foam tips – I can get a perfect seal every time by using the large.


Default bi-flange & T100	Aftermarket Trinity Kombi & Spinfit tips	My preferred large Shure Olives

Earsonics does include their own silicone tips - which are quite rubbery – but also gave me an excellent seal, and were (surprisingly for me) very comfortable as well (dual flange). Because of the thinner width of the nozzles, and lack of any type of lip – many of my other tips simply would not stay on. However both Spinfits and also hybrid tips (Sony Isolation or Trinity Kombi) also worked well. For me though, the Shure Olives are very comfortable and get a great seal every time.

Isolation with the ES3 will depend on the seal you achieve and type of tip (possibly also the insertion depth you can achieve). With the Shure Olives, isolation was really good, and I couldn't really hear the keyboard while I was doing the final edits. With music playing, isolation is great, and I'd have no problems using these in public transport.

In the photo above note how the notch from the ES3 perfectly fits with the ear's Tragus

Comfort for me is excellent – the ES3s are another of those designs which simply disappear when worn. In fact these rate up there with the most comfortable IEMs I've tried. They sit well within my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are extremely easy to sleep in.

So the ES3 has a great build, and is extremely comfortable to wear. How do they sound?

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Earsonics ES3. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, and Shure Olive tips.

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 16-17/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL (A-weighted) of around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – well extended and there is enough rumble there to know you're covering the sub-bass nicely, but it is not the star of the show, and its not over-powering. Its an interesting signature because the sub-bass is elevated compared to the mid-bass.
Mid-bass – really linear, and if anything slightly recessed compared to sub-bass and upper mid-range. This makes for an interesting combination – because the overall signature still has enough warmth from the sub-bass, but doesn't have the traditional thump that usually comes from a slight mid-bass bump. Because of this sum tracks which are normally dark and broody (Lanegan's “Bleeding Muddy Waters”) are lacking a little – but the sub-bass still makes it enjoyable overall. Speed of the bass is very good, and of course there is no bleed at all because of the linear nature.
Lower mid-range – again very linear – perfectly balanced with the mid-bass and has great cohesion with the upper mid-range. Male vocals still have good texture and there is a lot of clarity.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but it is a slow rise from lower mid-range to the first small peak at about 2 kHz, then a dip and similar rise toward 4 kHz. The result is an incredibly clean and clear vocal range, with good presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals – but without over-doing it and making the entire signature too lean or dry. The upper mid-range on the ES3 is (for me) one of the best qualities of this IEM.
Lower treble – there is a definite peak at around 6-7 kHz, so if you're sensitive to this area, it might pay to be cautious with the ES3. I'm not – so this tuning is generally good for me. There is some roll-off immediately after this peak, so you have a lot of clarity and definition without any real harshness or brittleness. One of my tests for lower treble is to listen to the natural decay of cymbal hits and see if it is overly truncated. highlighted or sounds natural. The treble decay seems to extend quite nicely and detail lovers will really enjoy this I think.
Upper treble – there is extension beyond 10 kHz. To be honest, I never really notice it any more – there is little useful information above 10 kHz as far as fundamentals go – virtually wall harmonics. But lovers of air will enjoy it.
Overall Signature – this is a hard one for me to classify. It's not a natural presentation – but it is relatively linear. For those who really like a clean and clear signature – which is relatively well balanced overall, and has great extension at both ends – then the ES3 will be right up your alley. But the overall signature tends to be on the slightly brighter and overly clean side of things – mainly because there is no mid-bass hump = which generally sounds more natural if its in the right proportions.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Excellent with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have good presence and really nice sense of decay
An extremely clean and clear monitor with good resolution – if at times a little spotlit.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Extremely good directional queues, and just at (and sometimes outside) the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so average to good width and depth
Spherically presented stage – with slightly more emphasis on width than depth, but definitely not one dimensional
Good immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain” - although does not sound as natural as it should (more etched or emphasised than natural). A genuine sense of space was apparent with both.

Strengths

For those who like a linear (but brighter) signature, you will love the ES3. I find them to have a pretty good sense of overall balance with a leaning toward brightness.
The ES3's overall clarity without being harsh or too dry (at lower volumes) is one of its best points
Very good with both male and female vocals, but better overall with female IMO
Excellent if you are a low volume listener – great detail and overall sense of balance. The more you turn them up though – they can get a little strident for me.
Extremely good with female vocals, lending an air of euphony and sweetness – without over doing it. Sarah Jarosz (my latest “obsession”) sounds incredible.
Genre master for lovers of a balanced to bright signature – I enjoyed it with almost all genres tested – from classical, jazz and blues to light electronic, grunge and pop. See below for the genres it was a little weak on.

Weaknesses

Although I really like the extension in the bass and find it quite balanced/linear, lovers of more bass or an overall warmer /thicker tonality would be best to be cautious. I found some hip-hop, electronic and trance just needed a little more impact (mid rather than sub-bass). And depending on your tastes for Rock – again some may find the bass response lacking.
While the ES3 sounds fantastic at lower volume levels (still very clear), some may find them a little bright or harsh if you listen at the higher end of the volume spectrum

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The ES3 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone ES, or any of the FiiO DAPs. I'm at my usual 65-75dB listening level (with typical pop/rock songs) on the iPhone ES at a volume level of around 25-30%, or on the E17K around 16-17/60 on low gain. I did try amping with the E17K, FiiO's new A5, and also the IMS HVA, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement through the application of additional power.

What I did notice with the IMS Hybrid Valve Amp combined with my iPhone as transport (so using the DAC and amp section of the HVA), was the slight valve warmth (2^nd order harmonics) did tend to complement the ES3. From my tests, the ES3 neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification, but you might want to try it for tonality reasons. One of the other DAC/amps I tried combined with the iPhone ES was FiiO's Q1, to try the bass boost, and that was a really nice combo for when I wanted a bit more thump.

EQUALISATION
This is the one area where I'd imagine that occasionally people who love the ES3's overall tonality may probably want to slightly adjust the mid-bass response. For this – because all I wanted was a gradual rise in the mid-bass, I first used the tone controls on the E17K. I dialled in +4 bass and went back to some of my test tracks. It was good – but the E17K had also lifted the sub-bass further.

So I switched to the iPhone ES and using the Equaliser app I applied a gentle mid-bass hump centered between 200-500 hz. For me personally it created a much more natural overall sound – but I also have to admit that being able to rapidly switch between the default iOS music app and the Equaliser app rapidly, and I can fully appreciate how good the original tuning is as well. In fact the more I switched, and the more I got used to the default signature – the more I was growing to appreciate it. Linear, yes – natural, no – enjoyable, definitely.

COMPARISONS
This is always a hard one for a reviewer to pick. You want to show something in the same price range, and also show something with similar capabilities. Unfortunately I don't have a lot in the same price bracket – so for this exercise I chose to use a cheaper dual driver (Jays q-Jays at $299), a triple hybrid (DUNU DN-2000J at $285)) quad hybrid (DUNU DN-2002 at $379), and the only other triple BA I have (PAI Audio MR3 at a surprising $200). I'll then round it out with a brief comparison with the ES3's junior sibling – the ES2

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the ES3 had the Shure Olive tips and no EQ was used. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

ES3 (~$399) vs Jays q-Jays (~ $299)


ES3 vs qJays	Frequency graph comparison

Build and accessories go to the diminutive q-Jays – with their aluminium alloy build, and excellent carry case. But for all that, the ES3 build and accessory package is also excellent. Comfort could go either way – the q-Jays are so tiny they just disappear – but the last few weeks have shown me that the ES3 is also one of the most comfortable I've tried. Isolation is similar – the q-Jays does allow you to go deeper with insertion though. Both cables are replaceable and good quality, but I do prefer the 2-pin system of the ES3 though.

Sonically the two are very close with similar signatures. The q-Jays sound a little more natural and a little smoother overall. They don't have the low bass impact of the ES3, but do have a little more body and warmth through the mid-bass and lower mid-range. The ES3 is a little colder and cleaner. This is a tough one – because I love the q-Jays signature – have done since I bought them. Ultimately my preference would be for the cheaper q-Jays here – but would imagine that many would prefer the ES3. It all comes down to minor changes in presentation.

ES3 (~$399) vs Dunu DN-2000J (~ $285)


ES3 vs DN-2000J	Frequency graph comparison

Both are triple drivers, but where the ES3 is totally BA, the 2000J is a hybrid. Build quality is very good on both, but the ES3 eases ahead with its replaceable cables. Accessories go to the 2000J (Dunu always seem to put together an amazing package), but the ES3 is very much superior on fit and comfort. ES3 also takes the lead with isolation.

Sonically (again) the two are more alike than different. The ES3's sub-bass is again stronger, while it's mid-bass is weaker. Both have a rise in the presence area (2kHz+) as well as a significant peak at 6-7 kHz. Both have amazing clarity and resolution. But going back and forth again, the 2000J simply sounds more natural – while the ES3 simply has a little missing in comparison (in that lower mid-range and mid-bass). Again for my personal preference the 2000J has the more natural overall tonality (although both definitely tend toward the brighter, colder side of the spectrum)

ES3 (~$399) vs Dunu DN-20002 (~ $379)


ES3 vs DN-2002	Frequency graph comparison

This time the ES3 is up against a quad hybrid which I reviewed earlier this year. Build quality is good on both – the DUNU has better materials, but poorer design (fit and comfort). The ES3 definitely takes the honours on fit, comfort – and also isolation. Cable quality is very good on both, and both are replaceable.

Sonically we're seeing a similar thing. Both are relatively linear with a rise into upper mid-range, peaks in lower treble (DN2002 is at the more benign 9kHz mark). The differences are again in the sub-bass and mid-bass. ES3 is stronger in sub, and leaner in the mid-bass. The main difference again is that the 2002 appears thicker, and smoother – where the ES3 is leaner, drier, but also cleaner. Although I do like the 2002, this is one of those occasions where the ES3 signature just gels a little more overall – and combined with the superior comfort, takes the nod for me personally.

ES3 (~$399) vs Pai Audio MR3 (~ $199)


ES3 vs MR3	Frequency graph comparison

Now the ES3 is up against another triple BA which I reviewed recently. The Pai Audio MR3 is in a different price bracket – but I was impressed with its performance within that price bracket when I reviewed it earlier. This time the ES3 is clear winner for build quality and accessories (as you would expect), and the cable is definitely superior on the Earsonics unit as well. Comfort, fit and isolation is excellent on both.

Sonically the two are similar but again there is the difference in sub-bass vs mid-bass, but also this time the MR3 has even more emphasis in upper mids and lower treble. They both share a peak at 7kHz, but where the ES3's is etched, the MR3 just takes it a little too far. If I had my wish, I'd love to hear a combination of the MR3's signature below 1 kHz with the ES3's signature above 1 kHz. Overall preference for me is the ES3 – BUT, if you are prepared to EQ the upper end of the MR3's signature back by 3-4 dB you go get one heck of a triple driver for an unbelievably good price.

ES3 (~$399) vs ES2 (~ $315? - needs clarification from Max)


ES3 vs ES2	Frequency graph comparison

This is the one I didn't expect. Before Max sent me both, I'd read a couple of impressions from different reviewers, and the consensus had been that the ES2 was a lot darker, warmer, and the ES3 was clearly superior. And even when both pairs arrived, I spent the first two weeks with the ES3, and didn't even open the ES2 until I had the ES3's signature pretty much dialled in. I wasn't expecting the reaction I had.

But lets clear the other attributes first. In terms of overall package, they are identical – build, fit etc. Internally there are the obvious 2 vs 3 drivers, but they share the internal diffractive acoustic chamber.

Sonically the ES2 has a traditional mid-bass hump (including reasonable sub-bass extension), but doesn't have the sub-bass bump, or the extension at 7 kHz (down by about 4-5 dB at this frequency). It does have slightly more presence at 2 kHz – so at first listen it definitely appears to have smaller overall staging, and of course it is warmer and doesn't have the apparent resolution/detail of its higher spec'd sibling. But when you really critically listen, you realise the resolution is all there – it's just not highlighted to the same extent. The ES2 is smoother, warmer, and definitely not as bright. But its also a lot more natural sounding while still delivering a great deal of detail. And while it may be less linear compared to the ES3 – I'd argue that the ES2 is more balanced.

As you can probably guess – I have a definite preference here. The ES3 is a great triple BA earphone – but I think the true star in this family is ultimately the ES2 (for my preferences anyway).

EARSONICS ES3 - SUMMARY

Anyone reading through the review so far could be excused thinking that at the $399 level the ES3 is good but has been eclipsed by similar IEMs at a lower price range – but nothing could be further from the truth.

The ES3 has a very good build, wonderful fit/comfort, and excellent isolation. It also has a very good accessory package including a case which I personally find ideal for day to day use. The cable is really good also, and being standard two pin, is ideal for those who do use after-market cables.

Sonically the ES3 has a rather unique signature which is essentially very linear/flat from around 200 Hz through to 1 kHz, but with a bump in the sub-bass and in the upper mids and lower treble. Extension is great at both ends of the spectrum, and the level of detail and clarity is very good. That comes at a little cost though. While the ES3 could be classified as being both linear, and fairly neutral through most of the spectrum, the missing (and more natural) mid-bass bump does mean the overall signature tends to be on the lean and dry side – and there is a cooler than warmer tonality overall.

The ES3 is a great IEM though with a lot of good going for it, and for low volume listening it is brilliant (I love it for late at night).

Personally I'd prefer a little more mid-bass, but that is simply my own preference at play – and I can hardly mark Earsonics down for it. Overall – given the complete package, its an easy 4 star recommendation. A little on the pricey side – but in this case you do get what you are paying for.

My thanks once again to Max for the chance to be able to review the ES3.

Yep typo - thanks. Fixed. I definitely wouldn't call it a warm earphone. The coolness comes from the upper mid-range and lower treble emphasis in combination with the very linear mid-bass. The result (when compared to many other earphones I own or have experience with) is a somewhat clean, lean and cool sound.

It's not warm but neutral with a musical sound signature, I'd say it's very slightly on the warm side due to sub-bass boost. But yes, it's not warm in the sense that it doesn't have boosted mid-bass and lower treble.

I guess we'll have to differ in the way we hear them. And to me - while they may have boosted sub-bass - they are not even close to warm. At least not compared to the many earphones I have experience with. And whilst I agree with the comment that they are relatively neutral (as in flat) - most earphones I would describe as "musical" also exhibit a natural tonality (ie a slight mid-bass hump). To me the ES2 is the far more natural sounding and musical IEM of the two.

I guess I'll look forward to your review and your own take on them. My observations are definitely backed up by the measured frequency response.

For larger (1200x800) images, simply click any photo

INTRODUCTION

Ahhh – the portable amplifier – one of the audio enthusiast's more misunderstood tools / assets. For the beginner, there is the promise of the fabled increase in clarity, details, sound-stage! Once you've been around the traps a while, you learn that careful volume matching takes a lot of these perceived gains away, and you learn that what you thought you were hearing was more than likely the amplified headphone playing slightly louder.

So with today's headphones (especially for portable listening) becoming easier to drive, and people wanting less bulk with their sources (and indeed the sources becoming more powerful), is there any real use for a portable amplifier any more?

I'll try to answer some of these questions from an objective point of view, while walking you through a look at the FiiO A5 amplifier. We'll look at how it performs, and why you might consider one – and what gains you can expect.

ABOUT FIIO
By now, most Head-Fi members should know about the FiiO Electronics Company. If you don’t, here’s a very short summary.

FiiO was first founded in 2007. Their first offerings were some extremely low cost portable amplifiers – which were sometimes critiqued by some seasoned Head-Fiers as being low budget “toys”. But FiiO has spent a lot of time with the community here, and continued to listen to their potential buyers, adopt our ideas, and grow their product range. Today, their range includes DAPs, portable amps, portable dac/amps, desktop dac/amps, earphones, cables and other accessories.

FiiO’s products have followed a very simple formula since 2007 – affordable, stylish, well built, functional, measuring well, and most importantly sounding good.

DISCLAIMER
The FiiO A5 amplifier was provided to me gratis as a review sample. I have made it clear to FiiO in the past that I did regard any product they sent me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. I have purchased quite a few FiiO DAPs and amps over the last 5 years. Recently FiiO informed me that everything they send to me now is a review sample and they will not accept further payment. So I acknowledge now that the A5 I have is supplied and gifted completely free of any charge or obligation. I thank FiiO for their generosity. As a side note – I would have gladly purchased the A5 from FiiO – read on to find out why.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.
(This is to give any readers a baseline for interpreting the review).

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone SE) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD800S, HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

For the actual listening part of this review I used the FiiO A5 mainly with my X5ii DAP. Observations about the A5 are based on the last four weeks use. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

FURTHER NOTES

Volume matching was done with a calibrated SPL meter and test tones (1 kHz) when required for comparison.
In the past I have tried to measure distortion using a relatively cheap Startech USB sound-card (which measures pretty well – 0.012% THD and 0.024% THD+ using loop-back). I have stopped trying to do this simply because FiiO's measurements (and I do trust them) are lower than my sound-card is capable of measuring.
Frequency response is measured with the same sound-card and a licensed copy of the ARTA measuring suite. The sound-card has a calibration adjustment applied – so that it measures dead flat from 20 Hz to 20 kHz.

WHAT I LOOK FOR (NOW) IN A PORTABLE AMP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I would now look for in a portable amp. This is useful to remember when looking at my reasoning for scoring later in the review.

Genuine portability
Good battery life
Clean, neutral signature
Easy to use
Low output impedance
Reasonable output power – should be able to drive IEMs and earphones up to 300 ohms
Good gain control
Value for money

PORTABLE AMPS I’VE OWNED OR CURRENTLY OWN
GoVibe Porta Tube, Headstage Arrow 12HE 4G, Beyerdynamic A200p, FiiO E7, E11, E11K (A3), E17K, Q1, VE Runabout. IMS Hybrid Valve Amp

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES


Front of the retail box	Rear of the retail box	Inner box

The A5 arrived in FiiO’s newer style retail packaging – a black outer sleeve with a white main panel and photo of the A5 on the front. The front panel also bears Sony's “Hi-Res Audio” badge. On the rear is a list of features and QR codes. The outer box/sleeve measures 108 x 166 x 52mm.


First glimpse of the A5	Inner packaging / location of accessories	Full package contents

Opening the outer retail sleeve reveals a matt black inner box and lid. This contains a foam cut-out (securely holding the A5), and a secondary envelope and also compartment for the accessories. The accessories include:

4 FiiO brand rubber stacking bands
1 x 3.5-3.5 mm micro cable
A USB to mini-USB recharging cable
2 silicone stacking pads
1 x cloth carry case/pouch
Warranty and quick start guide


Charging cable and interconnect	Stacking accessories (pads and bands)	Included soft case

The entire package is very practical, covering everything you initially need for the A5. Materials are all good quality. I'd like to make mention of the short interconnect which is ideal for a stacking situation – and also the silicone stacking pads which are ideal for protecting metal surfaces without adding bulk.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The table below lists most of the relevant specifications for the A5. I have also included specs for the original E12 and E12A as a comparison

	FiiO A5	FiiO E12A	FiiO E12
Price	~ USD 125.00-130.00	~ USD 125.00-130.00	~ USD 125.00-130.00
Dimensions	124 x 65.5 x 14.5mm	124 x 65.5 x 14.5mm	124 x 65.5 x 14.5mm
Weight	168g	166g	159g
Amplifier chipset	Muses02 + LME49600	Muses02 + LME49600	LME49710 & LME49600
Output power (16 ohm)		420 mW (THD+N <1%)	600 mW (THD+N <1%)
Output power (32 ohm)	800mW (THD+N <1%)		880mW (THD+N <1%)
Output power (300 ohm)	150 mW (THD+N <1%)		190 mW (THD+N <1%)
SNR	≥115dB (A-weighted)	≥115dB (A-weighted)	≥110dB (A-weighted)
Output impedance	＜0.3 Ω	＜0.3 Ω	＜0.3 Ω
Crosstalk	≥ 75 dB (1 kHz)	≥ 85 dB (1 kHz)	≥ 65 dB (1 kHz)
THD+N	< 0.002％ (1 kHz)	< 0.003％ (1 kHz)	< 0.003％ (1 kHz)
Peak output voltage	14.96 Vp-p	10.3 Vp-p	15 Vp-p
Max output current	250 mA	＞113.3 mA	＞170 mA
Battery size	880 mAh	1500 mAh	880 mAh
Battery life / Chg time	≥13 h // <3 h	≥20 h // <3 h	≥12 h // <2 h

You'll note a mix in the above specs of the original E12's power, and the E12A's finesse. According to FiiO, they've been able to lower THD by almost 1/3 of the original very quiet E12A, whilst delivering almost the same power as the original E12. So the A5 has a total gain close the the E12, but better channel balance, lower noise floor, and overall a purer, cleaner sound.

BUILD / DESIGN

External
The A5 is rectangular shaped with bevelled edges all around, and dimensions of 124 x 65.5 x 14.5mm. The main body is a solid machined block of aluminium, with a top and bottom plate to hold the internals. The finish on the aluminium is a very fine sand blast followed by anodising, and the resultant finish is very clean and smooth.


Top of the A5	Bottom of the A5	USB port and bass boost

At the top are the 3.5mm line-in and headphone out sockets, and FiiO has elected to replace the usual copper socket rings with stainless steel – for better durability, and an added bonus is that it is more aesthetically pleasing. Next to this is the high/low gain switch and then the Alps potentiometer – which has also had a makeover to be more stylish and eye-catching. The action on the pot is very smooth, and I've noticed no channel imbalance even at very low levels.


Line in, headphone out, gain and volume pot	Vol pot is excellent & casine is nicely rounded	Charging and in-use LEDs

On the front face next to the sockets are two small LEDs. One is lit when the A5 is operating, and the second one is lit when charging. The nice thing about the charging light is that it actually also shows what speed its charging at. The faster it's blinking – the quicker it is charging. On the opposite side is a small reset hole. At the side is the bass boost switch (+5dB at x) and micro USB charging port. I'll show the effects of both the gain and bass boost (and my thoughts on both) later in the review.


Size comparison - X5ii	Size comparison - X7	Size comparison L&P L3

Everything about the A5 is extremely well made, and probably the only critique I would have is a gentle one. The low profile slide switch for the bass boost is (IMO) better implemented than the more prominent “flick” switch for the gain. It just seems a little out of place having two styles of switch – and I'd prefer the bass boost style (consistency and less likely to mistakenly toggle)

Internal
I was originally going to open the A5 up and give you a look at the internals – but whilst I could remove the bottom plate, I had no way of sliding the internals out of the shell without knowing the layout. Fortunately FiiO included a photo on their website – so I've used this to illustrate the layout.

Half of the internal space is taken up with the 880 mAh 3S battery, and this uses some pretty smart technology. It will automatically detect the charging rate of your power supply (be it standard USB from a PC, wall-wart, or storage cell), and adjust the rate accordingly for maximum efficiency. I have a battery pack with a 5V 2.1a output, and from flat, the A5 was charged fully in well under 3 hours – not bad considering the up to 13 hours available life.


FiiO's internal photos	FiiO's internal photos

At the heart of the A5's amplification circuit is the MUSES02 + LME49600 op-amp combination which was so successful with the E12A. Other changes FiiO has made include the application of high precision metal film resistors, and the removal of coupling capacitors in the power supply. So what does this mean – in comparison to the E12A? Well for a start FiiO have been able to increase the voltage output (peak is now ~15 Vp-p up from 10.3), and double the max current output (250 mA up from 113 mA), but most importantly they have been able to achieve this extra power with much lower noise output – effectively returning twice as much power with the same or lower noise readings than the original E12A. This is quite a feat.

GAIN & BOOST
The A5 boasts two toggle features – the first being a high and low gain switch, and the second being a bass boost. The gain switch does exactly what it says, and lifts the volume by 14 dB under loop-back (no load). The gain is extremely even across the board – and is only adding true volume gain. As I'll allude to shortly – because the A5 is already extremely powerful (without the gain) – I do think FiiO maybe missed out on an opportunity here. If they actually had a negative gain option, it would be better for more sensitive IEMs. The issue at the moment is there is just too much volume available for some IEMs, and unless you are driving extremely demanding headphones, the high gain option isn't really going to be used.


Gain and bass boost - measured	Closer look at the bass boost

The A5 also comes with a bass boost, and the implementation very much reminds me of the bass boost from their E17K. Instead of targeting a narrow band boost, it actually starts a very shallow rise from around 2 kHz and peaks at just under 7 dB around 60 kHz. So this is essentially a sub-bass boost with some effect in the mid-bass, but majority in sub-bass. Engaging it with a reference headphone like the HD600 really helps give some punch and lower end warmth, and with the Beyer T1 it is amazing how it really transforms the overall signature (if this was the base signature for the T1 with bass boost on, I possibly would not have bought the HD800S – yes its that good).

BATTERY LIFE
FiiO rates the play time on a full charge at around 13 hours, and recharge time at around 2.5-4 hours (depending on your charger). I've tested it a few times so far, and that range of numbers seems to be pretty accurate, with playtime depending on the load you're driving at the time. What I really like about the A5 though – and I'm considering leaving it permanently attached to the X5ii – is that using it with the X3ii or X5ii line-out extends battery life on both FiiOs by at least 5 or so hours. So if I was going to be on a long haul, or somewhere I simply needed extra life with my DAP, the FiiO A5 would definitely be coming with me.

REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE & SONICS (SUBJECTIVE)
As usual I’m going to preface this section with my thoughts on reviewing amplifiers. You'll note I don't break this section into bass, mids, treble, and I don't really discuss things like sound-stage or imaging. As you've seen from the graphs, the A5 is extremely linear – it is measuring beautifully flat from 20Hz – 20 kHz. The very slight drop in the sub-bass (about 0.2 dB) at 20 Hz is of course completely inaudible, and if anything I suspect it is my sound-card. So how could I comment on parts of the spectrum if they aren't changed. What you'll hear with the A5 – is simply the signature of the source and the headphones you are using.

Likewise with imaging and sound-stage – there is no cross-feed, so no affect – its just not valid to discuss it as a topic.

What I will say is that the A5 is one of the most linear amplifiers I've heard – a true wire with gain – adding nothing, taking away nothing. Couple that with extremely low noise (the background is beautifully black), and you simply get the music. If you've paired a good source and you're using a good recording, the music will shine. The A5 just gets out of the way. It is what every amp should be.
So how about performance with some real headphones?

Full sized
May as well start with the 600 ohm Beyerdynamic T1. The T1 isn't really a hard to load to drive despite its 600ohm impedance – and the A5 handles it easily. The pot on the A5 goes from about 9 o'clock through to 7 o'clock (it's unmarked – so I have to use this descriptor). On low gain at around 1pm (so about 40% of the pot), I'm at my normal listening level (around 65-75 dB). Pushing the pot to 3 o'clock, and suddenly we're at 80 dB+ and its really too loud. So in real world terms the A5 has oodles of power on tap.


Great with the T1 (+ bass boost)	And the HD800S with no boost	And very good with the HD600 too

But how does the T1 perform? It actually performs pretty well – maybe not quite the amount of bottom end that is exhibited when used with a tube amp like the VE Enterprise, but the T1 sounds truly great. Full bodied, great transients, great tonality. The one thing I can do with the A5 I can't with the Enterprise though is engage that bass boost – and with it the T1 really does hum.

The other two headphones I checked out – again going back and forth between the X5ii + A5 vs the iFi iDSD and Enterprise (same tracks and volume matched) – were Sennheisers HD600 and HD800S. Again (like the T1), the A5 had no issue driving either headphone, and essentially got out of the way – and became a window to the music. With higher impedance headphones the A5 simply shines.

IEMs
I thought in advance that this could be a very different situation – and likely to be one of too much power on tap. I started with the MEE P1 which definitely need amping (50 ohm impedance and 96 dB sensitivity), and at just under 12 o'clock on the pot, the P1 was perfectly driven. Again the A5 just gets out of the way – and there is no doubt I'm simply hearing the P1's default signature – and its really good.

So how about something more sensitive? Time to try the Earsonics ES3 (32 ohm, 116 dB sensitivity). This time I have the pot right down to about 11 o'clock – and once again I'm pleasantly surprised by how really good the A5 sounds with this IEM (or more particularly how it “doesn't sound”). The background is pitch black, and the ES3 simply shines.


Driving the MEE P1	And the Earsonics ES3	My 64Audio U6 (ADEL) with 75 ohm adaptor

I had the Campfire Andromeda when the A5 arrived (it was due to be returned), so I took the opportunity to try it as well. I was more concerned about hiss and noise floor. Naturally I couldn't hear any – the one advantage of having tinnitus I guess – it masks hiss. But I once again had my daughter Emma (who has amazing 13yo hearing – and listens so quiet that I can barely hear her perfect volume level) to try and see what she could hear. We used the Andromeda with nothing playing and simply raised the volume on the pot. Hiss was faintly audible to her at around 1/3 on the pot, but below that it was dead quiet (low gain). As you've seen above, at 1/3 volume with the Andromeda you'd be blowing your ears to bits with real music (hiss would be the least of your problems) – so the A5 is very, very quiet.

The only issue with the Andromeda was that for my ideal volume – I was very close to the bottom of the pot – and that is the one area I think FiiO could have improved. For the vast majority of IEMs and definitely for most headphones, the A5 is ideal – but for really sensitive IEMs – it may just be a little too much power, and not enough room at the bottom end of the pot. An option for a negative gain would be really handy

Special note (my U6):
So what about my favourite IEM – 64Audio's U6 with ADEL module? Anyone who's followed my journey with 64Audio's U6 (and U10) will know that IMO both simply shine with a higher impedance output – they were initially tuned by 64Audio with higher impedance stage wireless output packs in mind. So with the U6 I often use a 75 ohm buffer impedance jack. This of course makes the A5 a brilliant partner. I can listen around 60-65 dB (I always listen lower with the ADEL module), and on the pot I'm at around 12 o'clock. Another great pairing.

Low noise
I thought I'd finish this section with a couple of graphs – this time trying to measure any distortion. My USB sound-card measures (on loop-back) THD at around 0.011%-0.013% and THD+N at 0.019%-0.020% at pretty much -100 dB if I measure it on loop-back. Its simply not quiet enough to really measure these amps – but its an interesting exercise to perform. So I ran the A5, measuring at 1 kHz and using two different signal – one at 300 Hz and the other at 2 kHz. Both times I was simply recording the USB card's output – the A5 was too quiet to even show up. And the sound-card’s distortion at it's current measurement is beyond real-world audible limits. So I can confirm, the A5 is extremely quiet – even when being pushed at close to full volume.


300 Hz tone - THD measurements	2 kHz tone - THD measurements

FiiO states measured THD+N at 0.002% on their lab equipment, and I have no reason at all to doubt this figure. The floor is definitely not audible at normal listening levels.

COMPARISONS (SUBJECTIVE)
This was a difficult one – how do you compare amp only, when I don't have a lot of portable amps – either in this power bracket, or even in this price bracket?

Because I don’t have a lot of other straight amplifiers at my disposal, I simply used what I had available. So in the end I chose to compare with FiiO's own E17K, the IMS Portable Valve Amp, and my iDSD (even though all 3 are DAC/amp combos). For the comparison I used my X5ii as source, and merely went line-out in each case to the individual amps. I used the X5ii as it's been the main source I've used throughout the review.

[size=inherit][/size]
A5 vs E17K	A5 vs IMS HVA	A5 vs iFi iDSD

FiiO A5 (USD $130) vs FiiO E17K (USD $100)
Both have very good build and are genuinely portable – the E17K being considerably smaller, lighter. Both have a very neutral signature – essentially wire with gain. Using with the X5ii and volume matched – I really wouldn't be able to tell the difference if blind swapping. In terms of power, the A5's 800 mW output into 32 ohm compared to the E17Ks 200 mW is significant, and the A5 also has almost double the peak voltage output capability. Of course the E17K has a very competent DAC, and also the tone controls (which I love). But for those making a choice and considering both – it comes down to what you are endeavouring to drive. If your aim is to be able to drive higher impedance, or lower sensitivity headphones – then the A5 is the obvious choice. If you're strictly powering IEMs, then the E17K is probably the smarter choice (plus you get the benefits of other features).

FiiO A5 (USD $130) vs IMS Portable Valve Amp (~USD $270 / amp only is ~ $179)
The IMS PVA is actually manufactured here in NZ, and I had the chance to get involved with Martin (the creator) during their KS campaign. The PVA is again smaller in size, and slightly lighter. In terms of signature, the PVA definitely has some warmth to it, while the A5 again simply lets the tonality of the X5ii come through. The A5 has a cleaner background (less noise), and is simpler to use (the PVA does have some issues with overall gain – you can overdrive the valves into distortion with a higher input fixed voltage). Power output is massively in favour of the A5 (800 mW vs 87 mW into 32 ohms). If you're a valve lover, and don't mind the quirkiness of the HVA (with the FiiO DAPs you can lower the line-out volume, and with an iPhone there are no issues), then the HVA is a nice option to have. But for versatility, use with a variety of sources and headphones, and of course the price – the A5 is a clear winner here. I still like both though.

FiiO A5 (USD $130) vs iFi iDSD (USD $449)
The iDSD by now needs no introduction. I haven't reviewed mine yet – but it is my single most used piece of audio equipment. I don't use it portably – mine stays as my main desktop DAC and amp.

Physically the iDSD is heavier and significantly larger. People do use them portably – but for me it is simply impractically large. The iDSD does have a slightly warm tonality, and this was apparent when comparing to the A5. Its not massively coloured – but the difference is noticeable. In terms of power the iDSD wins but its not as large a difference as I expected. In normal mode on the iDSD you can push 950 mW into 32 ohm – but of course you can almost double this using the Turbo mode (effectively a gain switch). But peak voltage (even in Turbo mode) is 8V (about 16 Vp-p) so surprisingly the A5 comes really close – quite a feat for a $130 amplifier.

Of course the real differences are in the versatility of the iDSD (excellent DAC, 3D mode, multiple gain/power settings, ability to be used as a pre-amp etc. But again – if all you need is a portable amplifier to be connected to a competent source, and need strong and clean power output – the A5 is very difficult to go past. The comparison itself is unfair because the two are chalk and cheese – but hopefully it might give anyone with knowledge of the iDSD an idea of how good the power output is on the more diminutive A5.

FiiO A5 VALUE & CONCLUSION

I’ve now had the A5 for a month, and I'm not really the type to use a portable amp a lot unless I'm really driving high impedance or low sensitivity loads. But I have to admit, it has been great using this combination (X5ii and A5) – so great in fact that I'm thinking of getting some 3M dual lock and semi-permanently melding the two. But I'm getting ahead of myself

The FiiO A5 brings together an impeccable build, good form factor, battery life, and above all a very neutral signature. The utilisation of the bass boost is (IMO) pretty nicely done. But one of the most impressive things about the A5 is sheer amount of power available, and when combined with an extremely low noise/distortion floor – you have an ideal combination for both full sized headphones and easier to drive IEMs or earphones. My one wish would be a negative gain switchable option – just to give a little more play on the pot if using more sensitive IEMs.

When you factor in the unbelievably low $130 RRP, I struggle to think of an amp offering the performance of the A5 for the same or similar price. And when you combine the features fr the price – the A5 gets my unconditional thumbs up and recommendation.

When I look back at my original list of requirements, it has ticked very box – with maybe the exception of the “good gain control”. Its not that its bad – with most head and earphones it is more than adequate – its simply not perfect (yet).

All in all, I would recommend the A5 to both audio starters and the more experienced without question. For what it delivers, it is incredible value for money. 4.5 stars from me.

Thanks once again to FiiO for allowing me the opportunity to review your products.


X5ii with the A5	Size comparison with the E17K	Size comparison with the IMS HVA


Comparative stack size X5ii/A5 vs X3ii/E17K	Comparative stack size X5ii/A5 vs X3ii/E17K	Comparative stack size X5ii/A5 vs X3ii/E17K

@Brooko

Thanks @Brooko for the review, simple and easy to absorb. I pulled plug on A5 myself after reading your review. A noob question how does Balanced of a player works with an A5. one needs a 3.5mm Pin?

Its not a balanced amp - so you'd need to be feeding a single-ended analogue stream to it.

NIce review. The battery is not user replaceable without soldering, as far as I know, no one sells the battery. After 2 or 3 years of use when the battery loses its capacity, you'll end up with an unusable amp. I can't understand why fiio did that... For this reason, it's a no go for me.

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

A fair bit of this review may borrow sections from my U6 review. The reason for this is that a lot of the prelim stuff is the same. I can assure anyone reading though, that I went through exactly the same comprehensive testing procedures I always do.

The U10 was very generously provided by 64Audio so that I could do a follow up review and comparison to my U6 (which I bought and paid for as part of the original Kickstarter). And I'd just like to thank Vitaliy and his team from 64Audio for giving me this opportunity. I'd always questioned from the first time I heard the U6 – whether I should have spent a little extra on the U10, and if I had missed out on the fabled “audio nirvana” because I didn't have the funds at the time. Thankfully I've now answered that question for myself, and I am indebted to 64Audio for giving me this chance.

I want to cover a few things before we get to the review proper, so please bear with me.

Most of the history/preamble section is to do with the reasons why I first looked into 64Audio and Asius. I've spoilered it so that those who've already read it in my U6 review don't need to go there again. There is some personal background in there, and the answer to the “why” I bought the U6 – if you haven't read it, it should give you some real insight behind my purchasing decisions which is very pertinent to the U10 also.
As many people will realise by now, 64Audio and Asius have decided to part ways. I want to make it clear that I am simply a neutral observer, and I'm not taking any “sides”. I've spent some time with Vitaliy and his team (including an RMA – we'll discuss in the “service” section), and I've spent a few hours with Stephen and Steve from Asius – including being involved in a Spree video-cast. Both companies have my admiration for what they can do with these tiny audio devices. Vitaliy's tuning is magical (especially once you learn a few secret tweaks), and Stephen's technology with Asius has actually changed my “audio life” - and I'm sure it will have a marked effect on preserving my hearing. I wish the collaboration had continued – sadly it didn't – but life goes on. The important thing is that I wish them both well in future endeavours.
My comments in relation to the Apex modules vs Adel modules are my own personal experience, and are 100% honest. I want to stress this – because if the results had been reversed, I would have reported that. In this review (and for any others I write), it is far more important to me to write my actual experiences.

History / Preamble

As a bit of a preamble, I had an accident with my hearing about 17 years ago. I'd always had pretty good hearing, and even back then I wouldn't classify myself as a loud volume listener. My wife and I were invited to a Jimmy Barnes concert in a closed indoor venue. I'm not a fan, but it was my wife's employer so I was obliged to go. The venue had a low ceiling. Jimmy sang (screamed – told you I'm not a fan) at full volume, and there was nowhere to escape. After two hours it was finally over, and when we got outside I found that I couldn't hear anything but ringing for two days. I knew I had done some damage – I didn't know how much.

Fast forward to today – I am 49, I have permanent tinnitus, and basically nothing left above about 14-15 kHz. The worst thing for me has been the constant ringing. You learn to live with it, but I would give anything to be able to hear pure silence again. Anyway – I've learned to drop my listening volume even lower and nowadays an average between 65-75 dB is pretty common for me when listening to music

Discovering 64 & Adel

So with that out of the way, lets take a step back in time again, this time to October 2014. I'd posted 38 reviews on head-Fi, and was still finding my straps as a reviewer. I owned some pretty good triple hybrid IEMs, but nothing I would call “flagship”. For reference I had my full sized T1 and HD600. But I was still looking for that certain IEM which could stop me looking to upgrade.

And then I was alerted to the 1964 and Adel collaboration for multi-BA earphones on Kickstarter, and the by-line “World’s 1st Earphones that save your hearing & your music!”. I duly started researching the technology, it looked pretty sound, and so I ponied up USD 480 + freight for the U6 – drawn to the idea of the balanced signature. It was more than I'd ever paid for an earphone – but given my love for music, I simply couldn't pass up the opportunity of something that could safeguard the hearing I have left for the future.

The benefits of being a reviewer – intro to Steve and Stephen
It was soon afterwards that my friend Alex (Twister6) put me in touch with Steve (who you guys know as Canyon Runner), and this eventually led to being able to talk one-on-one with Stephen Ambrose. This of course led to getting to trial the MAMs, measuring them, and also having in depth discussions with both Steve and Stephen and understand the technology better.

And here we are today – with me reviewing the 64Audio Adel U10 (a review sample – not my personal pair this time), and hopefully giving you some insight into how they sound.

ABOUT 1964 EARS / 64Audio
1964 Ears was started by Vitaliy Belonozhko, a sound engineer who has been working with musicians and production companies in the Northwest for more than a decade. Not long into his career he discovered the advantages of IEMs over traditional floor "wedges”. After trying out a few brands it was apparent to him that a better and a more affordable solution to in-ear monitoring was needed, and 1964 Ears was formed in 2009.

Why “1964”? Because to Vitaliy that was a breakthrough year – both in terms of some landmarks occurring in music (Stones, Beach Boys, Dylan), but also because it was the birth of the first In-Ear Monitor by Stephen Ambrose. Since then Vitaliy and his team have been producing, refining, and developing both custom and universal monitors for both musicians in the industry and also for ordinary consumers. Recently 1964 Ears was shortened to the now familiar 64Audio we see today.

I pulled the next bit straight form the website, and I think it sums up 64Audio quite nicely:

Everything about that special year (1964) was life changing, and it left an indelible mark on everyone who lived it or later learned of it. 64Audio’s sole focus is making that same mark when it comes to personal audio. It was Syd Moore who once said, “disregard for the past will never do us any good. Without it we cannot know truly who we are”.

We know who we are.

ABOUT ASIUS TECHNOLOGY / STEPHEN AMBROSE
Fifty years ago, Stephen Ambrose invented the world's first wireless In-Ear Monitor technology (IEMs). Already a professional musician at age 12, he began modifying swimmer's earplugs with tiny speakers and clay and completed his first In-Ear Monitor in 1965. This was the first time full spectrum high fidelity sound was delivered within a fully sealed ear canal by an In-Ear Monitor. Touring for decades with hundreds of performers including Stevie Wonder, Simon & Garfunkel, Diana Ross, Rush, Steve Miller, Kiss and many others, Stephen was able to perfect and commercialize his IEM designs and was the sole provider of in-ear monitors to the professional market for well over a decade.

Greatly concerned over the increased risk of hearing loss due to the use of personal listening devices, Stephen began extensive research with grants from the NSF and NIH and pioneered new scientific discovery into hearing loss (specifically from the use of IEMs). To solve the problem, he invented and patented a revolutionary “second eardrum" called the Ambrose Diaphonic Ear Lens (ADEL™) which absorbs harmful in-ear pressures.

In early 2014, Asius and 1964 EARS, joined to design and manufacturer the 1964ADEL line of earphones.

A NOTE ON SERVICE – 64AUDIO AND ASIUS
One of the things I've learned with audio, and especially since becoming more popular with my reviews, has been that manufacturers make mistakes, components are not always perfect, and no matter how good a company is, products can have defects. The measure of the company is how they deal with those situations. I want to mention this specifically so I can give you a feel for my own experiences with both 64Audio and Asius.

When I ordered the U6, I realised there would be a wait, and because I was travelling to the US, I tried to arrange with 64Audio to pick up my U6 from friends in the US. Unfortunately I missed the window for the delivery, but 64Audio made sure they arrived, and my colleagues forwarded them to me. When it came to the case (being sent later) – it was lost in transit, so I exchanged a couple of emails with Alex at 64Audio, they checked the situation out, and we arranged a replacement. At around the same time I had a cable fault with one of the connectors, sent them a photo, and they arranged immediate replacement. I actually sent the faulty cable back so they could check it out – but I wasn't obliged to do this. 64Audio were impeccable in their communication, they arranged the replacements, and at no stage did they make onerous demands. They simply wanted to make sure that I was happy with the product – and I am. That is great service. In addition, a few months ago I had a driver die in the U6. The RMA was completely painless, fantastic communication throughout, and the result (repaired U6) was great. 64Audio (in my experience) are very good with customer service.

I could also say the same about Steve and Stephen at Asius. With the first trial MAM unit, when testing I over-rotated the dial and broke one of the modules. No recriminations, they just wanted to know how it happened (so they could correct it for subsequent models), and they wanted to get me replacements as soon as possible so that my experience with them was up to my (and their) expectations. I also wanted to know more about the tech, so they've made themselves available, taken their time to listen, explain, and gone out of their way to ensure the explanations are being understood. Since then I've skyped them a couple of times, and assisted with a Spree-cast.

Both companies are passionate about what they are doing, but more importantly they care about their customers. And that to me is both reassuring and very refreshing.

DISCLAIMER
The 64Audio Adel U10 I am reviewing today is a loaner provided by 64Audio for the purposes of review. Following the review I will (with genuine regret but profound thanks) ship them back to 64Audio. I have no other affiliation with either 64Audio or Asius other than being an owner of their products (U6 and various Asius Adel modules). There is no financial incentive in writing this review.

The 64Audio U10 I am reviewing today can be currently purchased from 64Audio's website for USD 1399.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

I've now had the 64Audio U10 for around a month, and in the time I've had it, I've used it with practically all the sources at my disposal – including FiiO's X3ii, X5ii, X7 (AM1, AM2, AM2A, AM3 & AM5), L&P's LP5, L5 Pro and L3, my iPhone 5S, and also most of my portable and desktop sources. In the time I've had the U10, the only changes I've observed have been adjusting to the different modules, use of impedance adaptors, and also slowly becoming more used to the U10's default signature. I've noticed no “burn-in”, and testing with different amplifiers has not revealed any marked sonic improvements when blind tested (the U10 is relatively low impedance and high sensitivity, and IMO requires no further amping with a decent source).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
When the U10 arrived, being a demo unit, it was just with the custom 64Audio Adel series 3D printed hard case. Rather than give an incomplete picture of the accessories you'll receive, I've simply taken some of the photos from my U6 as I know the accessories are practically the same.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The custom 3D printed case	Airtight pressure valve	Fully packed

The default package you'll get is:

The U10
New 64Audio 3D printed case
1.2m detachable cable
Comply ear-tips in S, M, L
Cleaning tool
Dehumidifier (for the case)
Apex auto module (likely to be the M20)

Normally if I'm given a case the size of the 64Audio 3D printed case, I'd never use it – too big to carry around. But I use my own 64Audio case all the time despite it's size. The case is totally 3D printed and measures a fairly hefty 115 x 70 x 35mm (excluding clasp and hinge). It's more like a smallish pelican case. It has the 64Audio logo embossed on the top. It is very hard, very solid plastic, and should do an extremely good job of protecting your investment.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Posts can store tips as well as hold the cable	Securely wound cable	Tongue and groove for airtight seal

Inside (top cover) is a place to hold two extra sets of modules, a shirt clip, and cleaning tool. The moulds don't currently fit the Apex models which are slightly narrower – but I'm assuming they'll fix these pretty soon. The module holders are brilliant if you're using the Adel modules though. I now have the MAM, B1, S1 and G1 modules, so I have a place for 1 set (fitted) and two spares. There is also a soft piece of foam strategically placed on the top lid to fit over the compartment holding the U10.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Module holder + shirt clip and cleaning brush	Inner IEM compartment & dehumidifier	Accessories (from my U6 review)

The bottom section has a split compartment to house both ear-pieces. Each of these has a slit (for the cable). Inside is actually a rubber holder to ensure there are no hard edges putting pressure on the IEMs. The cables then run to a split T pole arrangement so that you can wind the cable around. Situated around the pole are 4 raised slots for the 3.5mm jack. So no matter how you end up winding, you have a handy slot to inset the jack, and secure the cable. The whole set-up takes very little time to pack or unpack, is very protective, and just really well thought out. The icing on the top is in the clasp itself, and also in the case (its not evident until you actually look closely). The top cover has a small ridge around the rim. The bottom of the case has a small recess/groove. When the case is closed, it is essentially air-proof/moisture proof. To assist with the pressure of opening or closing, the clasp houses a small pressure manual valve. It opens when the clasp is pulled open, and engages when it is snapped shut. Really clever.

I could not ask for much more regarding the included accessories. Some may miss a 3.5-6.3mm adaptor or an airline adaptor – but most of us already have spares – so I don't regard this as an oversight at all.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From 64Audio's website)

I’ve listed the main specifications for the 64Audio U10 below, and also (for comparison) my own U6.

Model	64 Audio U10	64 Audio U6
Approx Cost	USD 1399	USD 899
Type	10 x balanced armature driver IEM	6 x balanced armature driver IEM
Driver configuration	2 x low, 4 x mid, 4 x high	2 x low, 2 x mid, 2 x high
Crossover	3-way passive	3-way passive
Freq Range	10 Hz – 20 kHz	10 Hz – 20 kHz
Impedance	18 ohm	22 ohm
Sensitivity	115 dB SPL @ 1mW	115 dB SPL @ 1mW
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, right angled	3.5mm gold plated, right angled
Cable	1.2m, removable (2 pin)	1.2m, removable (2 pin)
Weight	18g incl cable and tips	18g incl cable and tips
Isolation	-20 dB with Apex M20	-18 db (with S1), -10 db (with B1)
IEM Shell	Hypo-allergenic hard acrylic	Hypo-allergenic hard acrylic
Body shape / fit	Ergonomic, cable over ear	Ergonomic, cable over ear

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget. If you compare to older measurements I've taken (in older reviews), please take into account that my new calibration is different (much more accurate).

In the graph below – you’ll see the frequency plot for the base sound of the U10 with the Apex module. Later in the review I'll also show measurements taken with other modules.

What I’m hearing (subjective) – noted before I ever had these on the measurement bench.

Pretty good bass response – elevated compared to mid-range and pretty well extended. The bass is quick and well textured.
Very clean and relatively coherent mid-range which to me slightly favours the lower mids, and is a bit gentle in the upper mid-range around the presence area (2-3 kHz) which I am particularly sensitive to. So for me this flattens the transition between lower and upper mid-range, and female vocalists lose a bit of euphony. Has a tendency to sound flat to me. Note – this can be corrected via pairing with a higher impedance source (or use of an impedance adaptor) – we'll cover this later.
Reasonably extended but quite smooth lower treble which falls short of excessive sibilance (for me) yet remains detailed with some air for clarity. Lower treble tends to sound a little rolled off compared to 64Audio's U6.

BUILD & DESIGN
Similar to when I first saw the 64Audio Adel U6, I'm surprised (incredulous actually) that the U10 isn't a lot bigger. Ten drivers into a tiny shell, and managing to keep the housing both ergonomic and comfortable to wear – 64Audio has done a wonderful job here. The earphone casing might look shiny and a bit plasticy, but the shell is actually a hypo-allergenic hard acrylic. I've now had the U6 for almost a year with zero issues with the shell, so the U10 should stand up as well. The U6 measures 22mm across, is 18mm tall (from the cable exit to bottom of the shell), and approx 9mm deep (main housing). The shell itself is seamless, and there are no ports. The inner face is smooth and rounded and extremely comfortable to wear, with no sharp edges or protrusion.

		[size=inherit][/size]
External face	Side on and good view of nozzle	Internal view

The nozzle protrudes from the inner face by 14-15mm, and is angled upward. The actual nozzle piece itself is 9mm, has a very slightly raised ridge for tip retention (no real lip), is quad bore and is approx. 5mm in diameter. Normally I'd be pretty grumpy not having a lip – but because of the generous length, and the slight ridge, I've had no issues with my preferred tips coming off.

The outside face is smooth and flat, and very simply printed with “10” on the right earpiece and “64 Audio” on the left I nicely contrasting white print. At the forward apex of the front face, directly opposite the nozzle, is the hole for the Adel or Apex modules. This is 6mm in diameter, and if you blow through it (with no module), you can clearly feel your breath on the other side – it essentially opens a hollow conduit from the outer face to inner face.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Socket and 2 pin connector	M20 Apex module	U10 (L), U6 (R)

At the top of the body is the 2 pin socket for the removable cable. On the U10, the cable is not recessed, but the connection seems pretty sturdy to me. The cable is 1.2m long, has approx 6cm of memory wire, and consists of two sets of twisted pairs (one from each earpiece), which stay separate from earpiece to jack through the entire cable length. This is perfect for anyone wanting to re-terminate to balanced. The Y-split is just simple heat-shrink (with a clear piece of plastic above it for a cinch), and below it the two twisted pairs join to become a twisted sprung quad cable. The jack is gold plated, right angled, and has excellent strain relief.

I cannot fault a single part of the build or design at this point – it really is pretty impeccable.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
The shells are very smooth, beautifully rounded, and basically disappear for me when worn. What is better is the extra length of the nozzle and also the angle because it means I can get a more secure seal, and with a wide variety of tips.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Sirius vs U10 vs U6 vs Andromeda	With tips on	Side view

So far, I've been able to fit and use successfully – the default Comply tips, Spin-Fits, Sony Isolation tips, and even Shures standard tips (takes some stretching but they do work). Ostry tips fit fairly shallow, and with no lip come off easily, as do Spiral Dots. There should be enough options to suit everyone, just know that without a lip on the nozzle, if you have a shallow fitting tip, it may become lodged in your ear.

Worn over ear the U10 sits well inside my outer ear, so lying down and listening is never an issue, and I’ve been able to sleep with them intact. Cable noise worn over ear is very slightly microphonic if the cable is worn loose, but cinched or tucked under clothes it is amazingly silent.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Shure Olives and Comply T400	Spin Fit and Trinity Kombi	Very ergonomic fit

Isolation is advertised as -20 dB for the Apex M20 module. I was asked to do a test (by PM) with my U6 involving listening with the S1 module with 80 dB background noise – so I simulated it with a youtube video and my monitors measuring room noise at an average of 80dB. I repeated this test with the U10 and similar to the U6 you could pretty clearly still hear the ambient noise (dulled but still present). Playing music and the background noise becomes a much quieter hum. I probably still wouldn't use these for air travel – but they provide enough isolation for use in a semi-noisy environment (and no issues with office etc).

So for me anyway – fit and comfort are pretty close to perfection again. Isolation will depend on tips, seal and which module is being used.

THE MODULES (APEX AND ADEL)
The new Apex M20 module is both similar and quite different to the S1 it was modelled on. Externally it is within 1mm of the same height, and very slightly smaller in diameter (less than 1mm total). If fits nicely into the U10 socket – but definitely not with as much “grip” as the Adel modules – it is secure though (the two rubber rings ensure this). The other major external difference is that the vent is no longer on the top but inside a small groove on the side. This change cuts down on the wind noise quite a bit and is a great bit of innovation if you're wearing them outside. Good job 64Audio. Internally they are extremely different. Where Asius uses the patented Adel (Ambrose Diaphonic Ear Lens) inside their modules, which acts as a pressure valve to absorb the dangerous pneumatic pressures, the Apex module uses a multi-cell thermoplastic alastomer (TPE) which acts as a damper – and it is that combined with the vent which allows them to “mitigate pneumatic pressure”. Unfortunately my own real world testing shows that for me it does not work as well as the Asius modules in terms of relief of my tinnitus, or other associated hearing fatigue indicators. More on that shortly.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Apex M20, Adel S1, Adel B1, Adel G1 and Adel MAM	Internal view	M20 is very different

THE ADEL TECH (in layman’s terms – from my U6 review)
I thought I’d attempt to explain very briefly my understanding of the ADEL tech, and what it is supposed to do. I’ll also explain how it has changed the way I listen.

When we use an inner ear monitor, we do things that are very different from listening to open headphones or speakers. Firstly we close and seal the canals, and Stephen’s research has indicated that this leads to a couple of issues. By sealing the ear canals, we actually turn our heads into a big amplifier. If this sounds weird, try doing any exercise (to get your heart beating), and then plug your ears, listen and then unplug your ears again. Yep – you’ve just amplified things enough to hear your internal body functions. On top of that, when we seal the ears, and play sound directly into them, Stephen has been able to deduce (in frequency vs phase tests) that not only are the sound waves amplified, but we also create pneumatic pressure. Our ears have an inbuilt defence mechanism called the acoustic reflex which works really well to dampen loud sounds so that we don’t feel the full force. But typically what has been happening is that in listening to IEMs, we are triggering that acoustic reflex early, which is dampening the sound, so we turn the volume up, which further triggers the acoustic reflex – and the cycle continues until the reflex is overwhelmed, and we are putting sound waves at dangerous levels into our inner ears, and hearing damage ensues. The other side effect of dampening the sound is that when the mechanism is triggered, our ear drums are pulled tauter, and results in degradation of sound.

So can this be fixed? Enter the ADEL technology. What ADEL does is provide a membrane which absorbs some pneumatic pressures so that the acoustic reflex is not triggered too early. As a result we get to a safe listening level at far lower volumes. And without the damping effect, the sound should also be much cleaner, and more like listening to open cans or speakers. A side note though – if you listen loud, ADEL will not be able to stop you damaging your hearing. Some user sensibility is essential.

But let’s take a look at my own situation. I use IEMs a lot. I also suffer from permanent tinnitus. I’ve trained myself to listen to music a lot quieter over the last 10 years or so – and my average listening level (depending on environment) would be around the 65-75 dB mark. Even though I do listen relatively quietly, I have noticed that wearing IEMs for a long time still tends to irritate my tinnitus (causes it to flare up or intensify), and I’ve always worried that I may be causing further damage.

Since getting the ADEL modules and U6, I’ve noticed that my measured listening level is more in the 65-70 dB level with the U6, than in the 70-75 dB. And when I volume match at my normal listening levels, and then listen at the same dB level – the U6 tends to sound slightly louder to me. The other thing I’ve noticed is that with the U6 I am often lowering the volume rather than raising it. With my other IEMs, it is often the other way around. I've also noticed that my tinnitus stays a lot better behaved – even after extended use. I know a lot of things can affect it – but I do believe the U6 with ADEL technology is helping.

For me the differences aren’t huge (in SPL) but at low listening levels, the U6 simply sounds clearer. I know this is anecdotal, but it is genuinely what I am noticing. Your own mileage may vary. For resource to look further into ADEL, I recommend the following:

Asius website : https://asiustechnologies.com/tech
Recent spreecast : http://www.spreecast.com/events/n64-audio-adel-discussion--2
Kickstarter website : https://www.kickstarter.com/project...gy-that-saves-your-hearing-and-yo/description

Again – I have no affiliation with Asius, and can only tell you what I am experiencing.

THE DIFFERENCE
I'm trying to lose some weight (Brooko has got pudgy again). So recently I've been doing more walking, and this usually means 1-2 hour walks daily (depending on available time). The nice thing about both Apex and Adel is that the venting allows the earphones to be a lot more open – so you don't get a lot of bone conduction (ie that pounding sound when you are walking/jogging). Again – when you fully seal your ears, your head acts as an amplifier – so you hear a lot more internally. Both the U10 with Apex and U6 with Adel are a lot easier on your ears when exercising. But using the U10 for the last few weeks, I started to notice when I was walking, that after an hour my tinnitus would start to flare up (the ringing gets louder). I also noticed that I had more of a tendency to turn the U10 up with Apex – which I know is a sign that the acoustic reflex is being triggered. The last sign was after the exercise when sometimes it would sound as though an ear was partially blocked (basically it feels like occlusion). I know this to be a sign of my ear fatiguing. After a while it goes away.

So I used the U6 for the next couple of days and the effects mentioned disappeared. Went back to the U10 with Apex, and the symptoms returned again. Finally I went with U10 and B1 module, and symptoms gone.

I really like the design of the Apex module, I really like the tuning – but as a tinnitus sufferer, and with the main reason for buying my U6 being the acoustic and health benefits, I'm afraid I'm going to just have to say that after my experience I'll be sticking with the Adel modules. I'll be interested to see if anyone experiences the same things I have.

MODULES AND MEASUREMENTS
This will be quite a big section – and sorry for all the graphs – but there is no other way to do it. What I'm aiming to do here is to give you measurements of the U10 and also the U6 with different modules, and show you the differences. I'm not going to cover the MAM this time – if you'd like to see what it does, I'd suggest reading my original U6 review.

Impedance Adaptors
One of the things which has been revealed relatively recently is that some of the 64Audio IEMs were tuned with a source with a relatively high (up to 20 ohm) output impedance. This of course is because many of them were designed as stage monitors, and the wireless packs tend to have higher OI. Of course this doesn't help many of us with extremely low impedance sources – and by using these, we're actually not hearing the true tuning. With lower impedance, we're generally getting a tilt upward in the bass, and downward in the upper mid-range. This makes some of the IEMs both warmer and smoother (which explains a lot with me trying to EQ the U6 originally). One of the ways you can correct the frequency response is by using an impedance adaptor. I will (in the following graphs) show the effects of increasing impedance – and if you want a bit less bass and a little more brightness, how it can be achieved with an adaptor.

My measurement set-up
I use a Vibro Veritas coupler, cheapish Startech sound-card (which works pretty well for measuring IEMs), FiiO E11K amplifier (clean, linear, and with a < 0.2 ohm output impedance). The IEMs were measured with Crystal foam tips (they give me really consistent measurements which can be repeated and are consistent even months later). Software used is the ARTA measurement system

Thanks to Ken Ball (ALO Audio / Campfire Audio) I've been able to get his full measurements of a pair of Novas which I was then able to measure myself. His system uses two separate BK measurement systems (with ear simulators) which measure to an IEC 711 standard. I've used his profiles to build a calibration curve so that mine now mimics the IEC 711 standard. It won't be 100% accurate but will be miles more accurate than the original Veritas recordings were (the calibration solves the issues with readings above 4 kHz).

What I've measured

I've remeasured the U6, measured the U10, and compared the two
Measurements were with the Adel B1, and G1, and the new Apex M20 modules
I also repeated the measurements - but using a 75 ohm impedance plug to look at the frequency changes as described by Chris and Videl from 64Audio.
I chose not to include the S1 modules, as mine are measuring very close to the B1, and I suspect they may have undergone some change over time. This does not worry me – as its like having a spare set of B1's (which are my go to modules most of the time)
With the MAM – I only chose to show it measured closed as my particular MAM shows a plot almost exactly the same as the Apex M20.

U6 Graphs

U6 with all filters - interestingly, the Apex M20 has the most bass, and very closely mimics a closed MAM. The new G1 very closely mimics a fully open MAM.

Here is the U6 with B1 module (dark blue), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower light blue line). The green line is volume matched (18 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (again lowers the bass, and gives a small bump to the mid-range)

Here is the U6 with new Asius G1 module (red), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower pink line). The green line is volume matched (18 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (again lowers the bass, and gives an extra bump to the mid-range)

And here is the U6 with new Apex M20 module (orange), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower pink line). The green line is volume matched (18 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (once again lowers the bass, and gives an extra bump to the mid-range)

U10 Graphs

U10 with all filters - interestingly, the Apex M20 has the most bass, and very closely mimics a closed MAM. The new G1 very closely mimics a fully open MAM.

Here is the U10 with B1 module (dark blue), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower light blue line). The green line is volume matched (19 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (again lowers the bass, and gives a small bump to the mid-range)

Here is the U10 with new Asius G1 module (red), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower pink line). The green line is volume matched (19 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (again lowers the bass, and gives an extra bump to the mid-range)

And here is the U10 with new Apex M20 module (orange), and then the same module with a 75 ohm impedance adaptor (lower pink line). The green line is volume matched (19 dB volume added) so you can see the effect of the adaptor (once again lowers the bass, and gives an extra bump to the mid-range)

And here is the Apex M20 vs my MAM fully closed.

My personal pick of the modules which best suit me for tuning alone would be the Apex M20 + impedance adaptor for the U10, and Adel B1 + impedance adaptor for the U6.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the 64Audio U10. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii and E17K, and large Comply T400 tips. For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 15-16/60 on low gain which was giving me an average SPL of around 70 dB (mostly 65-75 dB) and peaks at around 75-80dB (A weighted measurements from my SPL meter).

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

First Impressions
After spending a lot of time with the U6, I was expecting a bit more upper end (lower treble) energy, and maybe a bump in the upper-mids with the additional mid and high drivers of the U10. It was an area I initially thought the U6 lacked (before I got the MAMs and started playing with impedance). What surprised me was that comparatively the U10 (with the Apex M20) actually sounded a little warmer (dare I say darker) than the U6, and the lower treble response was more subdued and smoothed. It was pretty well extended – but it just wasn't what I was expecting. Over time I've come to recognise its strengths (especially once you introduce adaptors).

Relativities

Sub-bass – very well extended and there is good rumble there (which highlights the impressive extension), but bass is (IMO) too far elevated above the mid-range with the Apex M20 – and when you combine that with quite a flat mid-range things just tend to sound a little overly warm. Sub-bass is essentially flat compared to mid-bass – which then slopes down to the lower mids.
Mid-bass – elevated compared to mid-range, and has a traditional hump – but then remains extended through to sub-bass. Slight bleed into the mid-range, and because the mid-range is so flat, the mid and sub-bass can both dominate.
Lower mid-range – has very good body and is good with male vocals. But with any bass dominant music, vocals can sound just a little muffled or lost.
Upper mid-range – quite flat compared to lower-mids and only with a very slight peak at 3-4 kHz. I have to admit I was expecting a little more in this area, and if using the U10 without any added impedance, female vocalists can tend to sound emotionless. Not my favourite mid-range tuning.
Lower treble – extends well but at the same time is quite flat compared to the mid-range and actually recessed compared to the bass. Detail is definitely there – but can be softened or overly smoothed – especially compared to an earphone like the Andromeda – or even the U6. In it's default tuning (no adaptor), cymbals can lose their decay – especially if there is a lot of bass present (eg bass guitar)

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Good with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well – but I would have liked something with more lower treble emphasis
Cymbal hits are good but can be somewhat muted or smoothed. Decay can be covered if bass is dominant.
For a monitor where the tuning was meant to be at the brighter or clearer end of the spectrum, I was disappointed

Sound-stage, Imaging

Extremely good directional queues, and just outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so above average width and depth
Spherically presented stage – without uneven emphasis on width or depth. One of the better portrayals of sound-stage I've heard with an IEM. Note here – when used with the Adel modules the impression of width and depth is enhanced
Good sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”.

Strengths (with added impedance)

Can be tuned with different modules and also with the use of higher source impedance. When using an impedance adaptor with the U10 they really come to life.
Very good sense of space and nicely open portrayal.
Generally good with most genres – and able to handle male and female vocals equally well.
Fantastic sense of layering – instruments occupy their own space when the adaptor is used. This is one area the U10 manages to best the U6.

Weaknesses

Without the adaptor (increased impedance) the U10 can sound very flat and slightly lifeless
Treble extension (to me) is overshadowed by the bass, and is not quite emphasised enough
Apex M20 modules are tuned really well – but give up a little openness

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The U10 is not a hard load to drive, and amping hasn't shown me that I'm missing anything. With my iPhone 5S I only need around 30-35% volume for my listening level. The interesting thing here is that I can add the 75 ohm impedance adaptor and still use my iPhone 5S (this time at about 55-60% volume). I did test the U10 with the IMS HVA – but found it overly warm. Probably the best amp for my use was the E17K – and this was mostly so I could use the tone controls (bass down, treble up) – even a 2dB shift each way was enough to greatly improve the U10 to my tastes.


FiiO Q1, A3, IMS HVA and FiiO E17K	X5ii, L3, iPhone 5S and X7

As far as different sources go – the U10 sounds pretty good with everything I tried, although I have to admit a particular fondness for the L&P L3 with jazz EQ setting. Its another setting which really brings them to life.

COMPARISONS
This was a relatively easy one to arrange this time – as I happened to have the Campfire Andromeda with me – so I could compare the two. I also pitted the U10 up against the U6 and also Fidue's Sirius. As always, this part is completely subjective – and as such my comparisons may not necessarily reflect anything except my own particular bias and physical traits.

U10 vs Fidue Sirius
Both IEMs are multi-driver – with the U10 being 10 BA and the Sirius a 5 driver hybrid. Both have extremely good overall build quality – but the Sirius pulls ahead on overall build with it's metal parts, high quality (but bulky) cable, and a pretty good accessory range. For me personally, the U10 wins fit and comfort. The Sirius has sharp edges on top, and I have big ears so the shells sit inside my outer airs. The U10 I can wear for hours.


U10 vs Sirius	Comparative frequency chart

Sonically they are very different with the U10 being somewhat warm, flat and smooth, where the Sirius having more of a V shape. You'll note on the graph that Sirius has two lines, but I think the truth lies somewhere in between – this is because the Sirius has an internal bass port, so bass response could differ depending one ear anatomy and fit. The Sirius is also very upper mid-centric, and has quite recessed lower mid-range, so whilst female vocals in particular sound quite ethereal, male vocals can tend to be a little unnaturally thin and distant. This is quite a hard one to call for me – because the Sirius is definitely clearer and cleaner – but also definitely more coloured. With the use of EQ and/or adjusting impedance, my preference would be the U10, but without it, I might just prefer the Sirius a little more.

U10 vs U6
As you can guess, build, accessories, fit and comfort are all evenly matched. So this comes down to sonic signature. And for my personal tastes, the U6 just does almost everything better than the U10.

[size=inherit][/size]
U10 vs U6	Comparative frequency chart

I find with the U6 that I can just use the impedance adaptor and the sonic signature is practically perfect. With the U10, I can EQ it to get closer to my ideal signature – but ultimately I think its the very smooth treble which I just find hard to live with. Introducing the Adel modules to the U10 can help – and I actually enjoyed the MAMs quite a bit with the U10 – but whenever I switch from the U10 to the U6, there is simply the feeling of “ahhhhh – that is what was missing”. Its the lower treble elevation as well as extension. The one thing the U10 does better (and its noticeable) is the sense of depth or layering – I guess this is Vitaliy's work with the extra drivers. If I could get the U6 tuning with the U10 sense of separation and space – it would be a formidable combo. At least my question has been answered though. I am not missing anything by not going to the U10. For my tastes, the U6 is the sweet-spot.

U10 vs Andromeda
Finally the U10 is up against Campfires 5 driver Andromeda. In this match up, the Andromeda wins on overall build quality (although both are very well made). You can't go past the quality cable and metal build of the Andromeda. For fit and comfort its a close thing – but the U10 gets the slight nod. And of course the U10 has the ability to switch out modules for tuning tweaks.


U10 vs Andromeda	Comparative frequency chart

But sonically the Andromeda has a tuning practically identical to the U6, and as I explained above it's signature suits me to the ground. Where the U10 feels it missing some clarity, and can be too warm or too smooth, the Andromeda is simply beautifully clean and clear. For a choice between the two, I would take the Andromeda – but ultimately if the choice was widened, I'd simply take the U6 with Adel modules, and have the best of all three (and also the cheapest!).

64AUDIO U10 – SUMMARY

Sorry for the long review – the U10 (because of the tech) needs to be explained fully, and there simply is now way of taking short-cuts.

The U10 by itself is a very good IEM with an excellent acrylic build, small form factor (for the number of drivers) and good accessory package. Fit is excellent and with the longer nozzle I have no issues getting a great seal, and with very good comfort as well. It has a very flat mid-range with decent extension at both ends, but too much bass and too little treble presence for my personal tastes. I'd like a bit more top end, and a slightly better transition between lower and upper mids.

The one area which brings improvement is using a higher impedance source, or an impedance adaptor. I'm still scratching my head as to why 64Audio released the U series this way – but I guess a lot of this can be attributed to their main business being stage monitors. Anyway – it's worth getting a cheap adaptor – especially if you're like me and find them overly warm and a little on the smooth side.

The new Apex M20 module is tuned and built really well – but unfortunately in my case I'm not getting the benefits of Adel - which helps reduce fatigue (my tinnitus is much better behaved), and allows me to listen at lower volumes without compromising music quality.

For anyone who likes a warmer and smoother presentation but with very good extension – then the U10 should definitely be on your list to try. Its a great IEM – but for my personal tastes the U6 has the better tuning.

UPDATE : I've revised these up 1/2 a point from my original scoring as over time I've come to appreciate their tuning more and more. 64Audio left these with me for comparative purposes and they really do have a signature which grows on you over time. Particularly with the G1 module, I find these thoroughly enjoyable - and although expensive they do justify their price (enough that I'm considering buying this pair!)

FINAL THANKS
I'd just like to take the opportunity to mention and Vitaliy, Alex and everyone at 64Audio. Thank you for the exemplary service, and allowing me the pleasure of the experience of your product. Absolutely no regrets with the U6, and very appreciative of the chance to compare the U10.

@Brooko

Great review @Brooko, was contemplating on saving up to this pair, as opposed to my 1st choice U12, but price forbidden ATM. that was why i lowered my wish to this. I'll pass and look further. thanks...

Actually I'm going to rewrite this at some stage. Its amazing what time (and listening to less coloured headpphones, speakers and IEMs) does. These have become one of my favourite IEMs over time.

U10 with m20 balanced driven from hiby r6 with 10 ohms output impedance is outstanding. One of the most interesting pairings I've ever heard. Sure the bass rolls off a bit. But the upper mids come out and the lower treble has a thicker more realistic presentation. Clarity pops and the sibilance region is elevated though not to the point of creating any nasty peaks. This pairing rides that fine line that many engineers aim their tuning efforts towards.

For larger images - please click individual photos

INTRODUCTION

This was the 2^nd round of the HifiMan review tour of the two new DAPs in their portfolio. I posted the review of the SuperMini earlier this week – and it proved to be reasonable value with a balanced output, excellent power, small form factor, easy to use UI, and 15 hour real time battery life. Combine it with the excellent IEMs bundled, and you effectively have a pair of IEMs worth $150-200 and a DAP worth $200-$250 – which made the package overall a good value proposition. And this was particularly so if you were looking for a synergistic total package.

This time we're looking at the sibling – which is effectively one tier down. And at $249 and without the IEMs being included, I kind of expected it to struggle just a little against the more expensive (but better value) package deal. But I went into the test with an open mind – and there are some things I like about the MegaMini. Read on to get my thoughts on how the MegaMini performs, and how its value stands up against similar peers.

ABOUT HIFIMAN
HifiMan Audio was founded in late 2005 by Dr Fang Bian when he was resident in New York. He started Head-Direct, and in 2007 began use of the HifiMan brand. They started initially with in-ear earphones, branched out into building hi-res portable players, and this was followed by planar magnetic headphones. As the business grew, so did the need to expand, so in 2010 Dr Bian started two small factories in China, and moved the HQ to Tianjin China in 2011. They are now a well recognised brand globally – particularly in the field of portable or personal audio products.

I found most of these short facts from a couple of interviews with Dr Bian posted on line, and among the interviews were a couple of direct quotes which I found fascinating and illuminating:

I started listening to a lot of music when I was in high school. I used a Walkman and Discman all the time because I had nothing else available to me. They were designed more for convenience than great sound. I wanted both- convenience and great sound so that set the stage for my dream to build the best sounding personal audio products.

Starting with me, everyone is passionate about what we are doing at HiFiMAN. We may not always do everything perfectly from the beginning but we try hard to get it right in the end and our track record is pretty good. Most of all, I want our customers to know how much we appreciate them. Their support and feedback is invaluable.

DISCLAIMER
I was provided the HifiMan MegaMini as a review sample and it will be returned once the review is completed. There is no financial incentive from HifiMan in writing this review. I am in no way affiliated with HifiMan - and this review is my honest opinion of the MegaMini. I would like to thank them for making this opportunity available though.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review, I have used the HifiMan MegaMini with a wide variety of headphones including both sensitive and harder to drive IEMs, portable headphones (HD630VB), full sized headphones (HD600 and HD800S), and also the balanced IEMs which were included with the SuperMini.

WHAT I LOOK FOR IN A DAP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I really look for in a new DAP.

Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
Good build quality
Reasonable battery life
Easy to use interface
Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping.
Value for money
Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256)

At the completion of the review I’ll refer back to this list and see how the SuperMini performed. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The MegaMini arrived in an all white retail box and lid. It (like the SuperMini packaging) is minimal, clean and stylish. The box measures 160 x 100 x 40mm. The lid is simply adorned with the HifiMan logo and name in an orange/gold colour.


Outer retail box	First glimpse at the MegaMini

Removing the lid reveals the silver MegaMini safely nestled in a foam cut-out. You see 4 main buttons on the front face, otherwise at first glance it looks pretty similar to the SuperMini. Removing the foam cut-out reveals a warranty card (which also has links to the downloadable manual – http://down.hifiman.com/MegaMini/manual.pdf). Missing this time is the spare screen protector.


Inner compartment	Full accessory package

Underneath this is one final compartment which houses a USB to micro-USB cable. To be honest, this package for a $250 DAP is pretty minimal.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The tables below list most of the relevant specifications. I have (as a comparison) also listed specifications from FiiO's X3ii and X5ii, which straddle the MegaMini in it's price bracket. I have also asked Ryne at HifiMan for further specifications, however have not received a reply at this time. Many critical specifications are unfortunately not stated by HifiMan.

	FiiO X3ii	HifiMan MegaMini	FiiO X5ii
Approx cost	~ USD 170	~ USD 250	~ USD 300
Dimensions	~ 96 x 57 x 16mm	~ 43 x 100 x 9.0mm	~ 109 x 64 x 15mm
Weight	135g	69g	165g
Lossless PCM support	APE, FLAC, WAV, ALAC	WAV, APE, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC	APE, FLAC, WAV, ALAC
Lossy support	MP3, OGG, AAC, WMA	MP3, OGG, AAC, WMA	MP3, OGG, AAC, WMA
Highest lossless res	192 kHz, 24 bits	192 kHz, 24 bits	192 kHz, 24 bits
DSD/DSF/DFF support	Yes – converted to PCM	Yes– Native up to DSD64	Yes – Native up to DSD64
Play time / Battery Life	~ 10 hours	~ 15 hours (real test – 9 hours)	~ 10 hours
DAC chip used	CS4398	Not stated	PCM1792A
Main amp chip	OPA1642+LMH6643	Not stated	OPA1612+BUF634
S/N (H/O)	113 dB (A-Weight)	Not stated	114 dB (A-Weight)
THD+N (H/O)	< 0.003%	< 0.08%	< 0.001%
Output into 16 ohm	>224 mW	Not stated	>436 mW
Output into 32 ohm	>200 mW	54 mW (1.4V @ 36ohm)	>255 mW
Output into 300 ohm	>24 mW	Not stated	>27 mW
Max output voltage	＞7.2 Vp-p	Not stated	＞8.2 Vp-p
Balanced Out	None	None	None
Impedance (H/O)	< 0.2 ohm	Not stated	< 0.2 ohm
Line Out	Yes, shared with digital out	No	Yes, shared with digital out
Digital Out	Yes – 3.5mm to coax	No	Yes – 3.5mm to coax
External storage	1 x Micro sdxc up to 256Gb?	1 x Micro sdxc up to 256Gb	2 x Micro sdxc up to 512Gb?
Internal memory	None	None	None
Screen	2in colour TFT 320x240px	2” OLED (~30x45mm)	IPS 400x360
Shell / Casing	Aluminium alloy – gun metal	Aluminium alloy	Aluminium alloy – gun metal
Bundled earphones	No	No	No

Feature support

	FiiO X3ii	HifiMan MegaMini	FiiO X5ii
Equaliser	Yes, 10 band adjustable + presets	None	Yes, 10 band adjustable + presets
Use as external DAC	Yes up to 192/24	No	Yes up to 192/24
Use as digital transport	Yes 3.5mm SPDIF out	No	Yes 3.5mm SPDIF out
Adjustable gain	Yes 2.6 dB L, 8.6 db H	No	Yes 2.6 dB L, 8.6 db H
Adjustable DAC filter	Yes – high / low	No	Yes – high / low
Replay gain support	Yes	No	Yes
Gapless support	Yes	No	Yes
Balance control	Yes	No	Yes
Tagged browsing	Yes	Yes	Yes
Explorer/folder browsing	Yes	Yes	Yes
Searchable library	Yes	No	Yes
Playlist support	Internal and External	Internal	Internal and External

I’ll also look further at features as we continue with the review.

BUILD / DESIGN
The build on the MegaMini really is very good. Just like the SuperMini, it is tiny compared to a lot of my other DAPs – about the same height (100mm), but super thin (just 9mm) and only 43mm wide – so perfect for slipping into a pocket, or simply holding in the palm of your hand. And at a mere 69g, the MegaMini is brilliant to have for on the go.


Left hand side view	Bottom view and ports

From what I understand, the MegaMini casing is CNC'd from a single block of aluminium alloy. It appears to be two piece – a frame (the sides) including a short plate on the front face, and a full length rear plate. The body is practically seamless though. One thing I noticed immediately after using the SuperMini earlier in the week is that the MegaMini's corners are sharper – where the Super's are more rounded. Anyway – the Super feels slightly nicer to hold overall.

The front face top section is dominated by the 2 inch OLED screen, and underneath this resides 4 clickable buttons. These are (left to right) : a back or return button, back, forward, and play/pause/select. The buttons are easy to locate and navigate, and the click is firm and reassuring. The build appears to be good quality overall.


Right hand side (reset pinhole and on/off button)	Rear panel

On the left hand side edge are 2 buttons toward the top – volume up and volume down. On the right hand side edge at the top is the power button (or screen on/off). On the right edge toward the bottom is a reset pinhole. At the bottom from left to right is the 3.5mm single-ended socket, the micro SDXC socket (up to 256 Gb) and micro-USB port for charging and data transmission (loading onto the micro SDXC). The rear of the casing simply has the HifiMan logo and some compliance information.


Main buttons	Screen next to SuperMini

The screen is appears to be OLED, colour this time, and is both very clear and also reasonably easy to see in direct sunlight. It has good contrast, and viewing angles are almost 180 deg. The actual screen content is minimalist but effective – we'll go into this shortly. From an overall build and aesthetic standpoint, the MegaMini is well built and apart from the slightly sharp edges, a really nicely sized ultra-portable DAP.

DESIGN – INTERNALS
I will add to this section at a later time if I am able to. What we do know is that the MegaMini uses a combined DAC and amp in a single chip. Unfortunately the rest of the actual specifications are pretty much unknown. They've advised a power output of 54 mW @ 1.4V into a 36 ohm load and THD of 0.08%, but there is no mention of specs like SNR or even output impedance (although thatonenoob did measure and the OI appears to be around 1 ohm).

I have requested information from HifiMan on a variety of internal information and specifications including the DAC chip used, OP amps, specs like output impedance and more information on power output. Unfortunately so far I have not been able to ascertain any of this information and to date HifiMan's engineers have politely declined, citing proprietary discretion (which I can understand). I will say that it is disappointing that necessary specs like output impedance aren't stated – and also highlight again that other Companies (FiiO, and even L&P) have been far more forth-coming with their specifications.

UI (USER INTERFACE) / USABILITY
Please note that this is with the released firmware UI2016-09-22V005Beta.

Like with the SuperMini I'm going to choose my words very carefully here – because I don't want to give the wrong impression. The UI on the MegaMini is minimalist, but functional, and easy to navigate. I'm someone who has come from early audiophile DAPs like the HSA V3 Anniversary Edition, and experienced a lot of FiiO's transitions from early betas to more advanced UIs, so I tend to be a little more tolerant of minimalist designs than most.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Main menu 1st page	Now playing screen	Hold the play button accesses the play mode option

When first switching on the SuperMini, you are greeted by a HifiMan splash screen, and then simple hierarchical and quite simple menu system. There is a top status bar, and no matter where you are, this will always display the current volume level and also the battery status. The menu has the following options:

now playing
file explorer
artist (ex tags)
albums (ex tags)
genre (ex tags)
favourite (I'll run through this shortly)
all songs
settings


Using the folder mode - and my usual organisation	Alpha range to Artist	Artist to Album

The now playing screen takes you to the main screen when a track is playing. The first change you'll note (from the SuperMini) is that there is small album art included this time. The top status bar now shows track number and total tracks, and the play settings (repeat on or off, and also the play-through method / shuffle etc)

Below this is the main screen with file name, artist, and album name. Below this is the album art. There is a scrubbing or track position indicator, and a time played for the current track. Slightly above this is the file format and bit-rate for the track. Whilst in this screen you can press and hold the play/pause button for 3s, and when released it allows you to quickly access the play mode (turn shuffle or repeat on) – a nice touch. So minimal but functional.


Tagged library - Artist	Tagged library - Album	Tagged library - Genre

The file explorer is simply that – a means of accessing files, and has become my preferred method of playing full albums. My recommendation here (if you have a larger library) is to arrange in hierarchical folders – I use:
/A-C/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/D-F/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/G-I/artist names/ albums/ tracks
etc
This is a pretty simple way of getting to a preferred artist and album in as few clicks as possible.

Using the tagged library (artists/albums/genre) is very simple, but everything is in a longer list. Fortunately pressing and holding the up or down button allows rapid scrolling (although it is not as snappy as the SuperMini) – so this does help navigation. But it is laborious for a larger library. There is a slight delay from selection of song to it playing. One thing to note is that you can't add a track or album to favourites from the explorer or now playing screen – it must be done from within the artist, album, genre, or all songs (tagged) lists. Personally I think it would have been handy to have this function available from now playing also. Pressing and holding the play/pause/select button from any of these lists allows an option to add to favourites.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Tagged library - All Songs	2nd part of main menu	Adding a track to favourites

The favourites menu allows access to the files you've tagged as favourites. Unfortunately they go in the order you've tagged them and there doesn't seem to be any way to manipulate the files other than removing them (done by pushing the select button when in the favourites men). There is also no option for multiple lists. You have the one favourites list, and that is it. If you're methodical and don't mind spending time setting it up – it can be pretty handy. But for those who use play-lists a lot – the implementation here is likely to drive you mad.

The all songs menu allows you to access every song (through the tagged library) and displays them via file name (alpha numeric). This is the easy way to shuffle your whole library. Put it on random/shuffle hit play and press next. The only issue with this of course is that there is no replay gain, so you'll need to be adjusting volume often.

	[size=inherit][/size]
Settings Menu - part 1	Settings Menu - part 2

The settings menu allows you to access:

System version
Repeat and shuffle settings
The back-light (how long it is on)
Auto power off (and this is what it says – its basically an off-timer)
Screen lock switch (on or off)
Language
Update database
Full reset
Format the micro AD

Updating the database (with approx 6500 aac256 tracks) takes about 4 minutes, so its not super quick – but once the database is up to date, overall the UI is not too bad to navigate.

FORMAT SUPPORT
HifiMan list the supported formats as (see below image):
Lossy – MP3, WMA, OGG and AAC
Lossless – WAV, APE, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC and DSD64
I tested all of the listed formats except for WMA and had no issues with playback apart from OGG files and 24/96 WAV (wasn't recognised). Basically I started with Bob Dylan's album Infidels – I have a copy in 24/96. I didn't buy it for the hi-res, but rather for the mastering. I then proceeded to use dbpoweramp to transcode each track in succession to:
MP3 V0, Ogg -q1, WAV 24/96, APE 24/96, FLAC 24/96, AIFF 24/96, FLAC 24/192 + I added a DSF file from Quires and Cloud to test the DSD.

Everything played without a hitch (and sounded good too) apart from the Ogg and the WAV file. Thinking I'd made a mistake with the encoding, I recoded and tried again (no dice). So I tried the micro SD card with my FiiO X3ii – immediate success with Ogg and also WAV. So I'd list the Ogg support as “questionable” - it wasn't working for me. Everything else was as advertised, and the AIFF support was actually better at 24bit rather than 16bit. Not sure what was happening with WAV playback – especially when AIFF worked with no hitch.

POWER OUTPUT
HifiMan publishes the output power at up to 54 mW (1.4V @ 36 ohms) – so it's clear that this power output should be targeted more toward IEMs than full sized headphones. It does have the 32 volume steps though so it was a good chance to test real-world how that power translated into actual performance with a wide variety of headphones and earphones.

Full headphones
For this part of the exercise I used my full sized headphones, SPL meter position inside the cushions adjacent to my ear, and the track “Joker man”. The SPL meter was set to measure A-weighted, and my aim was to try and match as closely as possible my desired peak listening level at around 75dB. Results listed below. Each time the SPL meter was reset, and peak SPL recorded:
HD630VB => volume 17/32 = 75.2 dB
HD600 =>volume 25/32 = 75.7 dB
HD800S =>volume 25/32 = 75.4 dB

		[size=inherit][/size]
MegaMini with HD630VB = very good	MegaMini with HD600 = good to very good	MegaMini with HD800 = good

All 3 headphones sounded pretty good with the MegaMini and I have to admit I was scratching my head a bit as the stated power output didn't seem consistent with what I was hearing (had HifiMan understated the power output?). Anyway I carried on listening to the HD800S for a while afterwards and have to admit that the combo was pretty darn good (but then again the recording is truly excellent).

IEMs and Ear-buds
For the next series of tests I simply repeated the same IEM's I originally used with the SuperMini. For this test I used the included RE600 variant, the Campfire Andromeda (super sensitive), the MEE P1 (harder to drive), and the VE Zen2 320 ohm ear-buds.

Again I used my trusty SPL meter, “I and I” from the Infidels album, and recorded the following results (once again the dB figures are volume peaks from the same portion of music).
HFM RE600 => volume 13/32 = 75.2 dB
Campfire Andromeda => volume 6/32 = 77.9 dB
MEE P1 Pinnacle => volume 18/32 = 75.1 dB
(With the MEE P1 and the MegaMini at full blast – 32/32 volume with that track will produce peaks of an ear shattering 99.6 dB – so the available power is quite a bit more than I was expecting)

With the Zen2, like the full sized headphones, I simply wanted to get to a comfortable listening level, then measure the comparative output. At a volume of 20-21/32 it was pretty close to my normal listening level (peaks of around 75-78dB, but averaging around 70 dB). And in particular with the Zen2, it was clearly obvious that the MegaMini was driving these 320 ohm earphones particularly well. A really good combo.

With all of the earphones tested, the MegaMini went beyond my expectations – and I wish there was more data available for its output (into different loads). You can see from the results above that there seems to be enough output to satisfactorily drive most earphones, and quite a few headphones. The headphones were calibrated to my own volume listening preferences which I know may well be lower than a lot of members here listen at. So take that into account if you prefer to listen at a relatively loud level.

I got my daughter (Emma) to test the Andromeda with the MegaMini. I know its really sensitive, and suspected there would be some hissing. I of course would miss this because quite simply my tinnitus masks it. But Emma has excellent hearing (she listens at levels which I can get no enjoyment at – too quiet), and she said that the Campfire Andromeda hiss was noticeable from a very low (1/32) – and still audible at her normal listening volume 3-4/32. So for people with sensitive hearing who own the Andromeda – not the best pairing.

Will you need a separate amp for the MegaMini? Pretty much “no” in my opinion – and it doesn't have a dedicated line-out anyway.

OTHER ERRATA

Updating database – 6500 aac256 tracks – approx 4 minutes
Battery life – I tested this with the RE600 IEMs (from the HifiMan SuperMini package), Pearl Jam's album Rearview Mirror in aac256 on continuous loop, and for the majority of the time the screen off (turned on periodically for a few seconds simply to check progress). The battery lasted 9 hours and 16 minutes until full shut-down which is far less than the claimed 15 hours. So like the SuperMini, I can only guess that their stated battery life in in “idle” - with nothing playing in. As it is 9 hours is not bad for such a tiny DAP, but I found some of their campaign messages (what can you do in 15 hours – fly from Shanghai to NY) a little misleading – as it implies you can have 15 hours play time which is clearly not the case.
There is no shut-down after inactivity. The screen will switch off but the MegaMini remains on. This is something to consider if you are the forgetful type, as in idle, you will use battery life.
Disconnecting the headphones from the socket does not stop the MegaMini playing. I've forgotten this a few times (the FiiO devices I have automatically stop playing, and will go to sleep if left for a while) – and the resultant flat battery if left for a while has been a little annoying.

SONICS
So lets talk about how the MegaMini sounds.

Some of you may find this section a little limited, so I’ll give you some insight into the way I’ve changed my opinion on how to describe the sound with any competently made DAC, DAP or amplifier. The problem with trying to break the sonics down to bass, mids and treble is that DAP / DAC / amp is designed (or should be designed) to be essentially flat across the frequency spectrum. If it has enhanced bass, then isn’t it adding colouration that should come from the headphones or EQ or recording? Likewise, I won’t comment on sound-stage, as this is primarily a by-product of the actual recording, or the transducers you’re using.

So how do I go about describing it? Well I can’t measure it this time (I’d need to be able to isolate the signal from the MegaMini, and it can't be used as a stand alone DAC, nor as a pass through amplifier). I’m pretty confident the MegaMini will be very linear in its measurements, so you’ll be left listening to the recording pure and simple (and isn’t that what we all want?). To my ears it doesn't sound if any frequency is being bumped or is recessed anyway.

So instead, I’ll just say that I really enjoy the sound so far from the MegaMini, and give you my (very) subjective impressions of the MegaMini compared to my other DAPs. But if I was to give a one line sentence on the overall sound characteristic, I would say that the MegaMini is very similar to the SuperMini in overall tonality – so again quite linear with maybe the tiniest tilt toward warmth (or in audiophile terms – musicality). There is definitely a nice depth to the sonic signature with the right earphones.

With each of these comparisons, I used a 1 kHz test tone to exactly match volume, and used the VE Zen2 320 ohm ear-buds to directly compare to other DAPs in a similar price range. I used the Zen2 simply because I was really enjoying them during the power tests and wanted to continue the listening experience.

Warning – very subjective impressions ahead.

MegaMini vs SuperMini
The two have very similar build and dimensions with the MegaMini being slightly smaller at 100 x 42 x8.5mm. Button layout is slightly different with the Mega having 4 buttons on the face and 3 on the sides compared to the Super's 3 on the face and 4 on the side (the return button being the point of difference). The Super does have a longer real-world battery life (~15 hours vs ~9 hours), and is also slightly more powerful (although not as much as I expected) – and of course the Super has balanced which yields even higher power output.


MegaMini vs SuperMini	MegaMini vs SuperMini

I really think I’d struggle to tell these two apart in a completely blind test. Tonally they are extremely similar, and during the course of the A/B the only feeling I got was that there was slightly more depth or separation to the Super. But this could have simply been the very slight difference in volume (0.2dB), and also natural expectation bias in a sighted test. If I was to choose one purely based on what I'm hearing, I would lean toward the Super. From a recommendation POV, it would come down to what you need. If you value the balanced option, and need a little more power, plus if the included IEMs have value for you – then the choice is an easy one (the Super). If you are simply looking for a great small form factor DAP, don't need balanced, and already have your preferred IEMs, then from a value standpoint the Mega is probably the better option. Looking at value on a whole – the Super would appear to give more bang for your buck.

MegaMini vs FiiO X3ii
The X3ii is bigger and heavier being more around twice the weight and twice the mass/size. Battery life is actually in favour of the X3ii which will generally give me ~10 hours even with the Zen2. It would be difficult to talk about power output – as the X3ii has full specifications released for differing loads while the Mega only has output for a 36 ohm load listed. With the Zen2, 20/32 on the Mega is ~ 75/120 on the X3ii, so on a pure volume to available volume ratio they are practically identical. I'd suggest their total power output may be very similar under load – however with the X3ii you do have added gain options which cannot be under estimated. Where the X3ii kills the MegaMini is on its feature set, and also price. At about 2/3 of the cost, you also get true gapless playback, replay gain, searchable database, external play-lists, user configurable equaliser and use as a DAC.


MegaMini vs X3ii	MegaMini vs X3ii

Sonically I'm finding very little difference between the X3ii and MegaMini during fast switching. They both have very similar overall tonality – and this is one test where I'd suggest I again would have issues telling the two apart if it was a blind test. One thing that is true though is that there is less hiss with the Andromeda (using the X3ii). Both players are brilliant with the Zen2 – and I'd take either one for a long term listening test.

So the choices this time are really on size (MegaMini) vs the extra features and slightly longer extra battery life of the X3ii. When you factor in cost – the X3ii is simply the better option IMO.

MegaMini vs FiiO X5ii
The X5ii is much bigger and heavier being more than twice the weight and twice the size. Battery life is again in favour of the X5ii (~9 hours vs ~10 hours). Again it would be difficult to talk about power output – as the X5ii has full specifications released for differing loads while the Mega only has output for a 36 ohm load listed. With the Zen2, 20/32 on the Mega is ~ 70/120 on the X5ii, so on a pure volume to available volume ratio they are close to identical (but in favour of X5ii). Where the X5ii is different is the additional output of its extra gain stage which does deliver higher voltage and current. What the X5ii loses on portability (size), it more than makes for on features – including gapless playback, replay gain, searchable database, external play-lists, user configurable equaliser and use as a DAC.


MegaMini vs X5ii	MegaMini vs X5ii

Sonically, although both are close, I'm finding the X5ii is perhaps slightly cleaner in its output, and there is a little more definition or separation. The differences are tiny and could be more imagined than real. Again they both have very familiar overall tonality. Again both players are sublime with the VE Zen2.

So like with the X3ii, the choices this time are on the smaller size of the MegaMini vs the additional power, slightly more refinement, and abundance of features of the X5ii (as well as double the potential storage space). For a mere $50 more – again to me the X5ii simply presents a better value proposition.

CONCLUSION / SUMMARY HIFIMAN MEGAMINI

It's been an interesting 10 days since the Mega and Super Mini players arrived. And I've been suitably impressed with the SuperMini – from both a performance and value performance. With the cheaper MegaMini – while I think it is overall a really nice sounding player – IMO it will struggle as a value proposition at its price of $249.

What you will get is a great footprint (ultra-portable), really good SQ, good power output for its size, and an easy to use simple UI experience.

Like the SuperMini, what it lacks is features – and for many these will be deal breakers. No gap-less. No EQ. No DAC mode. No replay-gain. No searchable database. Limited play-list support. And the unfortunate thing is that this time it doesn't have the bundled IEMs, or the balanced output, to help level the overall value. For $249 there are simply better options out there which sound just as good, but give you much better value overall.

So would I recommend the MegaMini? – well this time, not really. Despite it being a great sounding DAP, I simply think its over-priced. If the Mega was listed at $150, and maybe $200 at the high end, it would at least stand a bit of a chance. I still regard it as a very good DAP, and it sounds really good too. If you value ultra-portability over everything else, its definitely worth a look.

The review sets will both be returned to HifiMan and I am going to miss them both. My thanks to Dr Bian, Peter Hoagland and Ryne from HifiMan for their assistance and for giving me the opportunity.

AND WHAT ABOUT MY CHECKLIST
Back at the start I listed what I looked for in a new DAP. So how did the MegaMini go?

Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
Definitely has very good SQ – tick.
Good build quality
Extremely good build quality - definite tick.
Reasonable battery life
If I'm looking at usable battery life, and considering the overall feature set – then unfortunately this one is not quite ticked for me. Close though.
Easy to use interface
Definitely a tick – it may be short on features, but the design of the UI is really good.
Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping.
Definite tick with the headphones I have.
Value for money
Sadly no – there are better options out there, and I personally don't see $249 value subjectively
Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256)
Another tick I tested most formats, but most of my listening is usually AAC256, and I had my entire library at my disposal with a 64 Gb card.

I would be curious what DAPs you feel are easier to recommend at the price of the MegaMini. Thanks for the review.

Well for a start - the FiiO X3ii - which is why I compared it in the review. To be honest, I'd imagine the MegaMini to be on par with original FiiO X1. The Mega has a bit more power and slightly better SQ. The X1 has the better features. The X3ii kills it - not even close.

My thoughts too. The Supermini can still hold its own against the X3ii with its feature set and alternative sound sig...but the Megamini can't.

For larger views of any of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

Firstly I'd like to acknowledge Head-fier d marc0 (Mark) and also Ken Ball from ALO/Campfire for making this review possible. The opportunity to hear and review an IEM which may not have been available otherwise to me is very much appreciated.

So far I've heard Campfire's Lyra, Orion, Jupiter (I chose not to review the Jupiter as I had issues with it's sonic signature and my own particular physiology / bias / sensitivity – which would have made any review overly skewed), and Nova. The one which intrigued me the most in the Campfire line-up thought was the Andromeda (their flagship). I'd heard prototypes of the Andromeda, and hoped to hear and review a final version at some stage. That time has now come, and I'm very grateful for the opportunity.

Unfortunately for this review – I've only been able to use these for a little over a week – so please take this into account. These are shorter term impressions.

ABOUT CAMPFIRE AUDIO
Campfire Audio is a partner company or off-shoot to ALO Audio, and is run by ALO's CEO and founder Ken Ball, and a small team of like-minded enthusiasts and engineers. Ken of course is the CEO and founder of ALO Audio (2006) and ALO is very well known for creating high quality audio components – including cables, amplifiers and all manner of other audio equipment. Ken founded Campfire Audio in 2015 – with a vision of creating extremely high quality earphones with excellence in design, materials and of course sound quality.

DISCLAIMER
The Campfire Audio Andromeda was provided to me for review as part of a tour. I get to use it for about 7-10 days then it goes to the next tour recipient. I am not affiliated to Campfire or ALO Audio in any way, and this is my subjective opinion of the Andromeda.

The Campfire Audio Andromeda can be sourced directly from Campfire Audio for USD 1099

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

Over the last week I’ve used the Andromeda paired with most of the sources I have at my disposal – from my iPhone to the L3 and X7. But for the review I’ve used mainly my X3ii + E17K, and also the X7 and L3. In the time I’ve been using the Andromeda, I haven’t noticed any sonic change. And although I used the Andromeda coupled with several different amplifiers, they are easily driven, and will pair nicely with most sources straight from the headphone out (some may want to use an amp though for sensitivity/impedance corrections).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

		[size=inherit][/size]
Distinctive Andromeda outer box	Inside the flap - the CA Andromeda leather case	Hidden lower compartment

The Andromeda's arrived to me in their distinctive 122 x 83 x55 mm hinged lid retail printed cardboard box. The background is a silver on dark blue “night sky” illustration, with a distinctive green sticker on the top and front face. The sticker has the characteristic CA swirl, the model (Andromeda), picture of the monitors and some information on Campfire Audio,a nd the primary features of the Andromeda (“high fidelity in ear monitors / five drivers + machined alumnium housing).

Opening the lid reveals the Campfire Audio carry case – which this time is real leather, is very sturdy, but more “jacket or bag pocketable” than trousers. It measures approx. 75 x 115 x 45 mm. The case is zipped on 3 sides, and when opened reveals a soft wool interior which will definitely protect and preserve your IEMs. With the outside being genuine leather, it is quite strong, and also pretty rigid.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Lower compartment opened	All accessories	The manual

Under the case will be a hidden compartment which reveals the accessories. These include:

S/M/L silicone tips
S/M/L generic foam tips (Crystal foam type)
S/M/L genuine Comply T400 tips
A cleaning brush / wax remover
A Campfire Audio logo clothing button / pin
Campfire’s foldout user manual (incl care instructions and warranty info)

		[size=inherit][/size]
Tips, cleaning tool and pin/badge	3 sided zipped leather case	Protective wool inner environment

You really won’t need any more than what is included, as the cinch on the cable negates the need for a shirt clip. And while I note the omission of an airline adapter or 3.5-6.3 mm adapter, really speaking – how many of us actually use these (plus they are easy to pick up for a very small outlay).

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
I’ve listed below the main specifications for the Campfire Andromeda.

Current Retail	$1099 (Campfire Website)
Type	Five Balanced Armature drivers
Driver Configuration	Dual low, single mid, dual high frequency
Other Acoustic Feature	Tuned Acoustic Expansion Chamber
Freq Range	10 Hz – 28 kHz
Impedance	12.8 ohm (@ 1kHz)
Sensitivity	115 dB SPL /mW @ 1 kHz
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, 90 deg
Cable	1.2m, removable (MMCX) – silver plated copper (ALO Litz Cable)
Weight	26g including cable and tips
IEM Shell	CNC aluminium, then zirconium blasted and anodised
Body shape / fit	Ergonomic, cable over ear

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken had graciously provided me with measurement data for the same set of CA Novas in a previous review, and I used this to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators in a configuration I can only dream about and envy him for). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the 711 standard on my budget. Ken's own reference measurements on far better equipment will be a lot more accurate than mine – but because I use my own kit in later comparisons, I will use my own.

MY GRAPH

KENS GRAPH

What I’m hearing (subjective).

Linear bass response with a very natural sounding slight rise, excellent bass extension, and more importantly no bleed into mid-range
Very clean and coherent mid-range with a relatively small dip in the fundamental range (around the 1 kHz), and then subsequent rise in the presence area (from 1-2 kHz with a very small peak in the 2 kHz range) – which gives female vocals a lift in the presence or overtone area, yet sounds very natural.
Well extended and detailed lower treble which does not exhibit excessive sibilance (for me) and remains extremely detailed with great extension and more than sufficient air for clarity.
Overall I’d say that the Andromeda is one of the most well well balanced monitors I've tried. Vocals are in perfect harmony with bass and treble, and Campfire have achieved an exceptional mix of natural tonality and clarity.

The channel matching on this pair of Andromedas is exceptional (and some of the differences shown in my measurements are likely to be minor differences in seating each ear piece). They are practically identical. When Ken says his team hand-pick and match the drivers, it isn’t just “marketing speak”.

BUILD & DESIGN
External

		[size=inherit][/size]
External face - beautifully machined	Rear side view - perfect upward angle on the nozzles	Front face and nozzle bores

I really enjoy a simple, clean design. The Andromedas share a very similar design to similar earphones in the Campfire range – especially the likes of the Orion and Nova. Campfire uses a fully machined aluminium enclosure. Each shell is taken from a solid block of aircraft grade aluminium and then each small batch is CNC machined and finished – with the process talking around 9 hours. After that they are zirconium blasted to achieve a very smooth finish, which also helps to more effectively hold the colour during anodisation.

		[size=inherit][/size]
From the top and looking at the sockets	Internal face - edges have been rounded slightly	Beryllium MMCX connectors

Physically each shell measures approximately 21mm in length, 16 mm in height and has a depth of approx. 19mm (including the nozzle). The nozzle itself is angled slightly forward and slightly up, extends approx. 6-7mm from the main body, and has an external diameter of 6mm. The nozzle has three distinctive bores. The main body shape is very ergonomic, and the Andromeda is designed to be used with the cable over ear. The IEM shell is 3 pieces in total – nozzle, shell and back plate – with the plate secured by 3 small torx screws. There are L/R marking on the inside of both ear pieces and the Campfire logo is also discretely engraved on the outer face. The finish is what I would call a forest or emerald green, the entire shell is precision cut – and these look quite simply very beautiful and very fresh (they appeal to my subjective tastes anyway).

		[size=inherit][/size]
The gorgeous and very flexible litz cable	Formable cable ear loops	Very supply and largely noise free litz cable

At the top of the shell is a beryllium coated MMCX connector, and when used with the supplied silver plated copper ALO Litz cable, the connection is made with a reassuring click. The cables do rotate in their sockets, but the connection itself seems to be very robust. Unfortunately this is one of those things that only time can be the judge of – but the craftsmanship and material used seem to indicate longevity (to me anyway).

		[size=inherit][/size]
3.5mm gold plated right angled jack	Y split and cinch	Formable loops are very good

As I mentioned, the cable is ALO’s new “Litz”. It utilises individually enameled strands of high purity sliver-plated copper wire, which are then combined into 4 separate conductors, which are in turn encased in a durable medical grade PVC outer jacket. The cable is extremely flexible and light-weight, has stunningly low microphonics (practically non-existent), and virtually no annoying memory issues. The male MMCX connector is again beryllium coated, fits very snugly, and has either a blue or red dot on the connector to indicate L/R. There is a 80mm length of memory wire for over-ear wear, and I’ve found this very malleable, but also holds its shape very well. The cable is approximately 1.2m long, and consists of two twisted pairs above the Y split which continue as a twisted quad right through to the jack. The Y split is small and light and houses an in-built cinch which works really well (easy to move yet holds its position well when cinched). The jack is 3.5mm, right angled, and has clear rubber housing. Strain relief is excellent. The jack will also fit my iPhone 5S with case in place, although YMMV as the diameter of the rubber base is around 6mm. I like this cable so much, I am genuinely tempted to purchase it separately for some of my other MMCX based IEMs.

Internal
Internally the Andromeda uses a new and unique approach to its tuning, and which Ken regards as being the secret behind the lower and upper treble extension. For a starter the Andromeda uses a combination of 5 BAs to achieve its overall signature, and these are arranged with a dual BA for the lows, single BA for the mids and dual BA for the highs. Rather than using a traditional acoustic tube and damper solution for the high frequency drives, Campfire have implemented a Tuned Acoustic Expansion Chamber (or TAEC system). The 3-D printed chamber allows internal acoustic tuning without the compression associated with dampers – which Ken says results in high frequencies which are very open sounding and extended. My own hearing tops out at around 14 kHz nowadays so I'm probably a poor judge of the upper frequencies, but I can confirm that the Andromedas do sound quite open open and have great upper end clarity.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
Fit
Fit for me is fantastic – the shells are very ergonomic in shape, and this includes the angle of the nozzles and also the placement of the cable exits. The shells (when fitted) do not extend outside my outer ear (they are more flat or in-line with it), and I have no issues lying down with the Andromeda. The memory wire is also really well implemented here so that snugging the wires properly is easy. The fit is relatively shallow, so for me I need to resort to my larger tips. If it was possible to extend the nozzle length by a couple of mm, it would really help the overall fit I think.

Comfort

This leads me to comfort and just as with the Nova I'm in two minds about this. I was mildly critical of the internally angled design utilised in Campfire's Orion, Jupiter, and Nova. My ears are soft, smooth, and have a lot of curved surfaces. I’d bet yours do to. The interior of the Andromeda shell has a series of angular edges. I first noted this with the Jupiter, and it continued with the Orion and now the Nova. The Lyra lacked these edges and was extremely comfortable for me. I'm not sure with the Andromeda whether it's me getting used to the fit, or maybe its the Zirconium blasting procedure, but the Andromeda is definitely more comfortable for me this time, and although it doesn't quite “disappear" during wearing like some of my other monitors – it seems to be an improvement over earlier models to the point it has become more of a non-issue.

Isolation

As far as isolation goes, it will be tip dependent. For me, using large Shure Olives tips, the isolation is excellent – at least as good as using my q-Jays (deep insertion and wonderful isolaters), and I would use the Andromeda without question on long haul air travel.

Tip Choices
Those who’ve read my reviews will know that I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. This is often even more of an issue with shallow fitting IEMs. I tried my usual selection of silicones and found varying degrees of success. Tip matching will always be personal preference – but here are some of the tips which fit pretty well.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Included Comply Tx400 and Crystal foam	SpinFits and Ostry tuning tips	Spiral Dots and Trinity Kombi tips

Sony Isolation / Trinity Kombi tips – great isolation and seal and probably my second choice behind the Shures
Crystal foams / Comply foams – great isolation and seal.
Spin-fits – extra length allowed me to use a looser fit while maintaining seal, but isolation was not as good as other options.
Ostry tuning tips – good seal and isolation.
Spiral Dots -very good seal, and did help to provide a little more upper end emphasis.
Large Shure Olives. You need to stretch the core to get them on, but they are perfect for me for shallow fitting IEMs. Perfect isolation, longevity with continual use, comfort and allowance of a looser fit in ear all adds up to a perfect tip choice. YMMV.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Campfire Audio Andromeda. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii and E17K and large Shure Olive tips. For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 11-13/60 on low gain which was giving me an average SPL of around 70 dB (mostly 65-75 dB) and peaks at around 75-80dB (A weighted measurements from my SPL meter).

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

First Impressions
Unlike many of my reviews (where I try to avoid preconceptions by not reading anyone else's work), I'd already seen many other opinions on the Andromeda before I tried them, and I have to admit I was reasonably sceptical with some of the superlatives being written about them. I know how products tend to be hyped beyond reality, and to be honest, I was expecting a slightly different signature to what I first heard. For me, from the very first listen it wasn't a wow!, but rather an appreciation of how well tuned they were. The balance is really good. That appreciation has slowly grown over the last week and for me personally, that usually signifies that long-term (for my tastes) these would become exceptional monitors. Usually if I get a wow from the start, this fades eventually and I am left with a sound sig which I quickly tire of. The Andromeda is one of those IEMs which (for me anyway) I could happily ditch most of the other IEMs I have, and become more of an audio monogamist. It just does practically everything right. The more I listen, the more my appreciation grows.

Relativities

Sub-bass – very well extended and there is a decent amount of rumble there (which shows the impressive extension), but bass is not the overall star of the show. Bass is beautifully balanced with the mid-range (bass might be slightly elevated in comparison), and sub-bass is essentially flat compared to mid-bass
Mid-bass – very slightly elevated compared to mid-range, but generally reasonably flat (frequency wise). No noticeable bleed into the mid-range, and definitely enough impact to sound natural. A beautifully balanced mix of warmth and speed which is rare in a BA set-up. Very good sense of texture too.
Lower mid-range – very slightly recessed compared to mid-bass, but sounds completely natural with this tuning. The last thing you would call the Andromeda is U or V shaped. There is wonderful texture with deeper male vocals (Pearl Jam is wonderful – Eddie's vocals stunning), and the clarity on the mid-range overall is exceptional.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but it is a slow rise from lower mid-range to the first small peak at about 2 kHz. The result is an incredibly clean and clear vocal range, with enough presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals – but without over-doing it and making the entire signature too lean or dry. The upper mid-range on the Andromeda is (for me) one of the best qualities of this IEM and strikes a wonderful balance between sweetness and air and remaining natural (uncoloured).
Lower treble – there is a definite peak at around 7 kHz, so if you're sensitive to this area, it might pay to be cautious with the Andromeda. I'm not – so this tuning is very good for me. Ken's more accurate graphs show a similar peak at 9 kHz. There is some roll-off immediately after this peak, so you have a lot of clarity and definition without any real harshness or brittleness. One of my tests for lower treble is to listen to the natural decay of cymbal hits and see if it is overly truncated. highlighted or sounds natural. For me the treble decay with the Andromeda just sounds unbelievably natural – it extends and tapers off exactly the way a cymbal does in real life. Magical! There is some sibilance in tracks like “Let It Rain” (Amanda Marshall), but the sibilance is in the recording and the Andromeda is merely revealing what is in the recording, neither enhancing or masking it. The treble tuning for me is one of the best parts of the Andromeda – and especially when you combine it with the mid-range

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Excellent with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well without spotlighting or over-emphasising.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have excellent presence, and decay is very naturally portrayed
An extremely clean and clear monitor with good resolution portrayed very naturally.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Extremely good directional queues, and just outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so above average width and depth
Spherically presented stage – without uneven emphasis on width or depth. One of the better portrayals of sound-stage I've heard with an IEM
Compelling sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”. A genuine sense of space was apparent with both.
I had read about the Andromeda's stage being “massive”, and “cavernous”. I want to make it clear that in my testing neither statement is true. The Andromeda portrays a stage to me that is better than most IEM's I've heard (64Audio's Adel series is an obvious exception). The sense of space is impressive in that it is expansive for an IEM, but I would suggest any claims of rivalling full sized headphones in this regards may be a little overstated (at least for the open headphones I have).

Strengths

Balance, balance, balance – this is how a reference monitor should sound. KB nailed it.
Clarity without being overly bright
Excellent with both male and female vocals
Fantastic with dynamic music – and able to show very good contrast between bass and upper mid-range (eg Cello and Violin)
Fantastic with acoustic music and gives strings good sense of realism and tone when plucked, and nice edge to electric guitar when strummed.
Very good with female vocals, lending enough euphony and sweetness to be a real joy to listen to – but without over doing it. Sarah Jarosz (my latest “obsession”) sounded incredible. A sonic signature I could listen to for hours.
Genre master for lovers of a balanced signature – I enjoyed it with all genres tested – from classical, jazz and blues to electronic, grunge and pop.

Weaknesses

I have to confess that sonically I can't find a weakness so far. The Andromeda is one of the best tuned monitors I've ever heard

Summary
It was while I was listening to the Andromeda this afternoon and putting the finishing touches to the review that I twigged what it reminded me of sonically. It has the same type of balance as the HD800S – just without the very expansive sound stage, and without the extreme clarity the HD800S somehow provides. But the sense of overall balance and tonality is very similar. And that small statement there should be an indicator of how I feel about the signature of the Andromeda.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
As I alluded to earlier, the Andromeda is easily driven out of a smartphone or DAP, and on my iPhone 5S I’m sitting around 20% for my normal listening level (65-75 dB).

I also volume matched and compared X3ii vs X3ii + E17K, and there was no discernible audible difference in dynamic presentation – so I think it is pretty safe to say that extra amping won’t be necessary. Based on the specs alone (12.8 ohm and 115dB SPL), straight out of the headphone-out of most sources should be more than enough. My favourite source was probably L&P's L3 – there is a somehow effortless presentation with it which I find absolutely captivating. And this may have something to do with overall sensitivity and hiss.

Because of the high sensitivity of the Andromeda I thought it best to also test for hiss or noise. With my tinnitus, I can't hear any hiss (it is essentially masked by my tinnitus) so I employed the super sensitive hearing of my 13 year old daughter. Emma was able to hear hiss on practically every device I tested – depending on volume. It was louder on the X3ii and even on the E17K (which surprised me), but much quieter (still present) on the X5ii, X7 (AM3) and L3. On all of these DAPs when music was playing (at Emma's normal very quiet listening level – which is about 55-60 dB), the hissing disappeared (masked by the music). She agreed with me that she thought the L3 (and for her also the X7) was her pick for pairings.

		[size=inherit][/size]
X3ii + E17K, X5ii, X7 and L3	Balanced tests with L3 and HFM SuperMini (ALO Tinsel cable)	Trinity's Bluetooth adaptor and an iPhone 5S

And one thing while we're talking about pairings - I very much enjoyed the Andromedas paired wire-lessly with my iPhone 5S using Trinity's new Bluetooth adaptor. Simple to use, sounded fantastic, very portable. It really was a breath of fresh air.

RESPONSE TO EQ?
Sorry – I didn't go there. There is simply no need. The Andromeda does not need tinkering with, and anything I did with EQ would be spoiling the default signature.

COMPARISONS
Andromeda is a top tier monitor, and fortunately for this exercise I had what I consider to be other top tier BA based (or hybrid) monitors available which are in similar price range. So for this exercise I chose to compare the 5 driver Campfire Andromeda ($1099) with the Fidue Sirius 5 driver hybrid ($899), 64Audio U6 6 driver BA ($899), and the 64Audio U10 10 driver BA ($1399).

As always, the IEMs were compared after volume matching (SPL meter and test tones), but the comparisons are completely subjective. For these tests I again used the X3ii and E17K – simply because it is easier to volume match with this combo (and because for me, any possible hiss issue inaudible/inconsequential anyway).

For anyone who may look at past reviews of the IEMs I'm comparing here, and notice the graphs are different – this is simply because of the use of the new IEC 711 compensation.

Andromeda $1099 vs Fidue Sirius $899


Andromeda and Sirius	Frequency comparison

Both IEMs are 5 driver – with the Andromeda being all BA and the Sirius a 5 driver hybrid. Both have extremely good build quality – metal parts, quality cables, and good accessories. For me personally, the Andromeda wins slightly on fit and comfort. The Sirius has sharp edges on top, and I have big ears so the shells sit inside my outer airs. I can get both Andromeda and Sirius fitting with reasonable comfort, but both require adjustment to get right

Sonically they are very different with the Andromeda being very balanced across the frequency spectrum, and the Sirius having more of a V shape. You'll note on the graph that Sirius has two lines, but I think the truth lies somewhere in between – this is because the Sirius has an internal bass port, so bass response could differ depending one ear anatomy and fit. The Sirius is also very upper mid-centric, and has quite recessed lower mid-range, so whilst female vocals in particular sound quite ethereal, male vocals can tend to be a little unnaturally thin and distant. Andromeda has better lower treble extension and this hows particularly in cymbal decay. My preference would be Andromeda for the more natural sonic signature and better overall tonality – but both are very good earphones.

Andromeda $1099 vs 64Audio U6 $899


Andromeda and 64Audio Adel U6	Frequency comparison

This time it is an all BA match-up. The 5 driver Andromeda vs the 6 driver U6 with Adel modules. For this comparison I've used the U6 with the B1 Adel module, and shown graphs with and without an impedance adaptor. You will note the overall similarity of the graphs. But lets start first with build etc. The Andromeda slips ahead with build and also quality of the cable. Both are similar on the accessory front – the U6's custom case is brilliant, especially for protection and storage of accessories (including modules). With the U6 you also get the Adel system (read my review) which has had a profoundly positive effect on my listening experience + it is also tunable. Comfort goes to the U6 – with its rounded internal edges.

Sonically the two are extremely similar. Both have brilliant balance throughout the spectrum, both have very similar overall bass response and the biggest difference isn't actually in the frequency response or tonality – but in the sound stage. With the Adel modules, the projection of space is simply larger (at the cost of some isolation). I'm afraid this is one where (for me) the U6 pulls ahead. And it is simply the Adel modules vs the TAEC system. If I didn't already have the U6, and someone offered me the Andromeda instead (as my only IEM) I certainly wouldn't be disappointed. Both are simply exceptional IEMs.

Andromeda $1099 vs 64Audio U10.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Andromeda and 64Audio U10	Frequency comparison (U10 with Adel modules)	Frequency comparison (U10 with Apex M20 module)

Finally the Andromeda is up against the much more expensive U10 (10 driver BA), and as with the U6, the Andromeda wins on overall build quality, whilst the U10 nudges ahead on fit and comfort.

Again the U10 has the Adel modules, and again it has advantage in staging and tuning options – but the one thing the U10 can't quite get with the Adel modules (although it is closer with the M20 and the inclusion of an impedance adaptor), is the overall balance that the Andromeda has. And it's the cohesion in the mid-range coupled with the extension and tonality in the treble. The Andromeda is just better tuned to my ears – and I know this is personal preference – but it simply sounds better. The U10 might win with slightly better instrument separation – but overall I'd take the the Andromeda and spend the difference on music

CAMPFIRE AUDIO ANDROMEDA – SUMMARY

I went into this review somewhat sceptical about the high praises – perhaps knowing it was a well tuned IEM, but expecting that there may have been some hype as well. I leave a week later, grateful for the experience with the Andromeda, and now fully appreciating what a wonderful IEM this is.

The Andromeda is an incredibly well built 5 x BA IEM, with a very good ergonomic fit, and also one of the best quality cables I've come across. The cable retails on ALO’s site for $149 if sold separately – so you're getting some very good value there too.

The comfort with the Andromeda is better than with previous Campfire IEMs – perhaps due to the zirconium blasting/smoothing process, and maybe because I now use tips which also help my own anatomy better. Anyway – the comfort isn't perfect (nnd I know you can improve this further Ken), but it is much better for me now, and I thank you for the changes made.

Sonically the Andromeda is simply incredibly balanced and strikes a wonderful mix of naturalness and linearity, clarity and smoothness, detail and musicality. The bass is nicely extended, and beautifully balanced with the mid-range. The mid-range has enough lower-mid recession to maintain distance and sense of space but without losing the richness and fullness of vocal fundamentals, and the upper mid-range is brilliantly cohesive without being over done. The extension on the treble is the crowning jewel of the Andromeda though. And how Ken has managed to deliver the detail while maintaining realism is simply an example of masterful tuning.

At a current RRP of USD 1099, the Andromeda is not cheap, but the overall package is worth it simply because it is true flagship quality.

Again I should make mention of the dedication and service of the Campfire Audio team. In my dealing to date, I have been very impressed by their willingness to take critique on board, and above all to constructively engage with their market audience, and ultimately improve the final product.

So would I buy these, and would I recommend them to others? I absolutely recommend them – but I ultimately won't be getting a pair. I already have most of what the Andromeda delivers in my U6, and the one thing it has made me appreciate more is the sonic ability of both IEMs. The Andromeda (for my tastes) is almost perfect.

Once again I’d like to thank Ken and Mark for making this opportunity available. I owe you gentlemen a debt of gratitude – and especially Ken for his generous help with my measurement set-up.

brooko...kudos on another good review...have you ever compared it to the UERR?
and are the details etc much more present than the 'great bang for buck' FLC 8S

@Jalo

@Jalo - I appreciate the feedback. If Ken has the Vega touring and I get the chance I'll probably review it. Haven't heard the U12 - but sounds like you'd appreciate the U6 more. When I was first "honing my skills" with reviewing - I used this a lot : http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
For me : Sub bass = 0-60 Hz, mid-bass = 60-250 Hz, lower mids = 250 Hz - 1kHz, upper mids = 1 kHz to ~5 kHz, lower treble = 5kHz to 10 kHz, upper treble = 10 kHz +

@canali

@canali - sorry, haven't heard the UERR. Maybe ask Alex (Twister6)? The extension on Androeda, and overall balance and presentation of detail is (to me) much better on the Andromeda.

For larger images - please click individual photos

INTRODUCTION

One of the benefits in being a regular reviewer of audio gear is that I've had the chance to try a lot of different gear. It doesn't stop me using my own gear – in fact far from it. Most of the gear I use regularly are the products I own (rather than the review samples), and in the DAP world, I still get most of my day-to-day audio use out of my iPhone 5S, and FiiO X3ii (mostly with E17K riding shotgun).

I own the FiioX1, X5, X3ii, and have access to review samples for the X5ii, X7, L&P LP5, L5 Pro and L3. I’ve used them all (a lot) over the last couple of years.

One of the things I've watched from the sidelines is HifiMan's range of DAPs. They've been out of my price range, and I don't solicit review samples (unless companies advertise on Head-Fi looking for reviewers), so I've missed out on reviewing their products so far. Then earlier in September HifiMan advertised for reviewers of their new MegaMini and SuperMini DAPs. So this time I posted in the thread and was lucky enough to snag a review position.

ABOUT HIFIMAN
HifiMan Audio was founded in late 2005 by Dr Fang Bian when he was resident in New York. He started Head-Direct, and in 2007 began use of the HifiMan brand. They started initially with in-ear earphones, branched out into building hi-res portable players, and this was followed by planar magnetic headphones. As the business grew, so did the need to expand, so in 2010 Dr Bian started two small factories in China, and moved the HQ to Tianjin China in 2011. They are now a well recognised brand globally – particularly in the field of portable or personal audio products.

I found most of these short facts from a couple of interviews with Dr Bian posted on line, and among the interviews were a couple of direct quotes which I found fascinating and illuminating:

I started listening to a lot of music when I was in high school. I used a Walkman and Discman all the time because I had nothing else available to me. They were designed more for convenience than great sound. I wanted both- convenience and great sound so that set the stage for my dream to build the best sounding personal audio products.

Starting with me, everyone is passionate about what we are doing at HiFiMAN. We may not always do everything perfectly from the beginning but we try hard to get it right in the end and our track record is pretty good. Most of all, I want our customers to know how much we appreciate them. Their support and feedback is invaluable.

DISCLAIMER
I was provided the HifiMan SuperMini as a review sample and it will be returned once the review is completed. There is no financial incentive from HifiMan in writing this review. I am in no way affiliated with HifiMan - and this review is my honest opinion of the SuperMini. I would like to thank them for making this opportunity available though.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review, I have used the HifiMan SuperMini with a wide variety of headphones including both sensitive and harder to drive IEMs, portable headphones (HD630VB), full sized headphones (HD600 and HD800S), and of course the included balanced IEMs included with the SuperMini.

WHAT I LOOK FOR IN A DAP
I thought I’d list (before I start with the review) what I really look for in a new DAP.

Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
Good build quality
Reasonable battery life
Easy to use interface
Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping.
Value for money
Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256)

At the completion of the review I’ll refer back to this list and see how the SuperMini performed.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The SuperMini arrived in a smart black retail box and lid with minimal white detailing. I really like it – minimal, clean and stylish. The box measures 160 x 100 x 40mm. The lid is simply adorned with the HifiMan logo and name.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Retail box	Under the cover and first glimpse of the SuperMini	Bottom compartment

Removing the lid reveals the “stealth” black SuperMini safely nestled in a foam cut-out. There are no markings on the surface – it just looks simple, elegant, and kind of cool. Removing the foam cut-out reveals a warranty card (which also has links to the downloadable manual) and a spare screen protector.

Underneath this is one final compartment which houses the included IEMs (which look suspiciously similar to RE600s), a USB to micro-USB cable, and a small bag with a pair of dual flange and single flange ear-tips, and some replaceable wax guards for the RE600 (not sure if it is the RE600 – but appears to be, or at least a tweaked version of it). One small note – I did see other review samples with more tips and a shirt clip. In my box was just the two tip choices, wax guards, but no shirt clip or other tips.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Accessories in bottom section	Full accessory package	RE600 Variant

The overall package pretty much includes everything you would need – and the addition of the balanced IEMs is a really nice touch.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The tables below list most of the relevant specifications. I have (as a comparison) also listed specifications from FiiO's (X5ii) and also the L&P L3, which both sit in a very close price bracket to the SuperMini.

I have also asked Ryne at HifiMan for further specifications, however have not received a reply at this time. Critical specifications such as output impedance are unfortunately not stated by HifiMan.

Specifications

	HifiMan SuperMini	L&P L3	Fiio X5ii
Approx cost	~ USD 399	~ USD 399	~ USD 299
Dimensions	~ 45 x 104 x 8.5mm	~ 60 x 114 x 15.2mm	~ 109 x 64 x 15mm
Weight	70g	165g	165g
Lossless PCM support	WAV, APE, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC	WAV,FLAC, ALAC	APE, FLAC, WAV, ALAC
Lossy support	MP3, OGG, AAC, WMA	MP3, OGG, AAC	MP3, OGG, AAC, WMA
Highest lossless res	192 kHz, 24 bits	768 kHz, 32 bits	192 kHz, 24 bits
DSD/DSF/DFF support	Yes	Yes – Native	Yes – Native up to DSD64
Play time / Battery Life	~ 22 hours (~15 hrs actual)	~ 10 hours	~ 10 hours
DAC chip used	Not stated	Dual CS4398	PCM1792A
Main amp chip	Not stated	1812A	OPA1612+BUF634
S/N (H/O)	102 +/- 3dB	116 dB	114 dB (A-Weight)
THD+N (H/O)	<0.04%	<0.0017%	< 0.001%
Output into 16 ohm	Not stated	Not stated	>436 mW
Output into 32 ohm	320 mW (balanced)	Not stated	>255 mW
Output into 300 ohm	Not stated	Not stated	>27 mW
Max output voltage	＞4.2 Vp-p	1.2V SE, 2.4V bal (3.4/6.8 Vp-p)	＞8.2 Vp-p
Balanced Out	Yes 3.5mm	Yes 2.5mm	None
Impedance (H/O)	Not stated	Not stated	< 0.2 ohm
Line Out	No	Yes, shared with digital out	Yes, shared with digital out
Digital Out	No	Yes – 3.5mm to coax	Yes – 3.5mm to coax
External storage	1 x Micro sdxc up to 256Gb	1 x Micro sdxc up to 128Gb	1 x Micro sdxc up to 512Gb?
Internal memory	None	16Gb	None
Screen	2” OLED (~30x45mm)	OGS 480x320 touch screen	IPS 400x360
Shell / Casing	Aluminium alloy	Aluminium-magnesium alloy	Aluminium alloy – gun metal
Bundled earphones	Yes (RE600? - value RRP $200)	No	No

Feature support

	HifiMan SuperMini	L&P L3	Fiio X5ii
Equaliser	None	6 presets	Yes, 10 band adjustable + presets
Use as external DAC	No	Yes up to 16/44.1	Yes up to 192/24
Use as digital transport	No	Yes 3.5mm SPDIF out	Yes 3.5mm SPDIF out
Adjustable gain	No	No	Yes 2.6 dB L, 8.6 db H
Adjustable DAC filter	No	Yes – high / low	Yes – high / low
Replay gain support	No	No	Yes
Gapless support	No	No	Yes
Balance control	No	No	Yes
Tagged browsing	Yes	Yes	Yes
Explorer/folder browsing	Yes	Yes	Yes
Searchable library	No	No	Yes
Playlist support	Internal	No	Internal and External

I’ll also look further at features as we continue with the review.

BUILD / DESIGN
The build on the SuperMini really is excellent. For a start it is tiny compared to a lot of my other DAPs – about the same height (104mm), but super thin (just 8.5mm) and only 45mm wide – so perfect for slipping into a pocket, or simply holding in the palm of your hand. And at a mere 70g, the SuperMini is simply a joy to have for on the go.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Left hand side of the SuperMini	Bottom headphone ports, sdxc slot and USB port	Right hand side and side buttons

From what I understand, the SuperMini casing is CNC'd from a single block of aluminium alloy. It appears to be three piece – a frame (the sides) and then a short plate on the front face, and a full length rear plate. The body is practically seamless though. The front top section is dominated by the 2 inch OLED screen, and underneath this resides 3 clickable buttons. The buttons are easy to locate and navigate, and the click is firm and reassuring. It screams quality.

On the right hand side edge are 3 button sections. The top has a volume up and volume down button. Toward the middle is the back button. And at the bottom is the power button. Just below this is a reset pinhole.

At the bottom is the 3.5mm balanced out socket, a 3.5mm standard SE out socket, the micro SDXC socket (up to 256 Gb) and at the right hand edge is the micro-USB port for charging and data transmission (loading the micro SDXC).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Profile view - showing front face buttons	Rear of the casing	Tiny SuperMini vs FiiO X5ii

The rear of the casing simply has the HifiMan logo and some compliance information.

The screen is OLED, mono-chrome, and both very clear and also reasonably easy to see in direct sunlight. It has great contrast, and viewing angles are almost 180 deg. The actual screen content is very minimalist – we'll go into this shortly.

From an overall build and aesthetic standpoint, I absolutely love this little device. I'm very much into simple, clean, minimal designs, and this does really tick all of my boxes.

DESIGN – INTERNALS
I will add to this section at a later time if I am able to. What we do know is that the SuperMini uses a combined DAC and amp in a single chip, and as it has balanced operation, there will be at least two of them. This is bolstered by 2 sets of 4 OP amps to bring full output power in balanced mode up to 4.2 Vp-p and 320 mW into a 32 ohm load.

I have requested information from HifiMan on a variety of internal information and specifications including the DAC chip used, OP amps, specs like output impedance and more information on power output. Unfortunately so far I have not been able to ascertain any of this information and to date HifiMan's engineers have politely declined, citing proprietary discretion (which I can understand). I will say that it is disappointing that necessary specs like output impedance aren't stated – and also highlight again that other Companies (FiiO, and even L&P) have been far more forth-coming with their specifications.

UI (USER INTERFACE) / USABILITY
Please note that this is with the released firmware UI2016-09-22V015Beta.

I'm going to choose my words very carefully here – because I don't want to give the wrong impression. The UI on the SuperMini is minimalist, but functional, and easy to navigate. I'm someone who has come from early audiophile DAPs like the HSA V3 Anniversary Edition, and experienced a lot of FiiO's transitions from early betas to more advanced UIs, so I tend to be a little more tolerant of minimalist designs than most.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Main menu	Now playing	Play settings

When first switching on the SuperMini, you are greeted by a HifiMan splash screen, and then simple hierarchical and quite simple menu system. There is a top status bar, and no matter where you are, this will always display the current volume level and also the battery status. The menu has the following options:

now playing
file explorer
artist (ex tags)
albums (ex tags)
genre (ex tags)
favourite (I'll run through this shortly)
all songs
settings

The now playing screen takes you to the main screen when a track is playing. The first thing you'll note is that there is no album art. The top status bar now shows track number and total tracks, and the play settings (repeat on or off, and also the play-through method / shuffle etc)

		[size=inherit][/size]
Artist menu - tagged library	Albums listed under artist	All songs for complete library shuffle

Below this is the main screen with track number, file name, artist and album. There is a scrubbing or track position indicator, and a time played for the current track. Below this is the file format and bit-rate for the track. And at the bottom are indicators for the 3 front buttons (left = previous track or scrub back, center = play or pause, and right = next track or scrub forward). Whilst in this screen you can press and hold the center button for 3s, and hen released it allows you to quickly access the pay mode (turn shuffle or repeat on) – a nice touch. So minimal but functional.

The file explorer is simply that – a means of accessing files, and has become my preferred method of playing full albums. My recommendation here (if you have a larger library) is to arrange in hierarchical folders – I use:
/A-C/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/D-F/artist names/ albums/ tracks
/G-I/artist names/ albums/ tracks
etc
This is a pretty simple way of getting to a preferred artist and album in as few clicks as possible.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Smart hierarchy in folder view - alpha .....	Leads To Artist	And then Album

Using the tagged library (artists/albums/genre) is very simple, but everything is in a longer list. Fortunately pressing and holding the up or down button allows rapid scrolling – so this does help navigation. But it is laborious for a larger library – although I have to admit the UI itself is nice and snappy with virtually no lag. There is a slight delay from selection of song to it playing, but actual scrolling the library itself is very good. One thing to note is that you can't add a track or album to favourites from the explorer or now playing screen – it must be done from within the artist, album, genre, or all songs (tagged) lists. Personally I think it would have been handy to have this function available form now playing also. Pressing and holding the center button from any of these lists allows an option to add to favourites.

The favourites menu allows access to the files you've tagged as favourites. Unfortunately they go in the order you've tagged them and there doesn't seem to be any way to manipulate the files other than removing them (done by pushing the center button when in the favourites men). There is also no option for multiple lists. You have the one favourites list, and that is it. If you're methodical and don't mind spending time setting it up – it can be pretty handy. But for those who use play-lists a lot – the implementation here is likely to drive you mad.


First page of the settings menu	Second page of settings	Adding songs to favourites

The all songs menu allows you to access every song (through the tagged library) and displays them via file name (alpha numeric). This is the easy way to shuffle your whole library. Put it on random/shuffle hit play and press next. The only issue with this of course is that there is no replay gain, so you'll need to be adjusting volume often.

The settings menu allows you to access:

System version
Repeat and shuffle settings
The back-light (how long it is on)
Auto power off (and this is what it says – its basically an off-timer)
Screen lock switch (on or off)
Language
Update database
Full rest
Format the micro AD

Updating the database (with approx 6500 aac256 tracks) takes about 4 minutes, so its not super quick – but once the database is up to date, overall the UI is pretty snappy.

FORMAT SUPPORT
HifiMan list the supported formats as:
Lossy – MP3, WMA, OGG and AAC
Lossless – WAV, APE, FLAC, AIFF, ALAC and DSD64
I tested all of the listed formats except for WMA and had no issues with playback apart from OGG files. Basically I started with Bob Dylan's album Infidels – I have a copy in 24/96. I didn't buy it for the hi-res, but rather for the mastering. I then proceeded to use dbpoweramp to transcode each track in succession to:
MP3 V0, Ogg -q1, WAV 24/96, APE 24/96, FLAC 24/96, AIFF 24/96, FLAC 24/192 + I added a DSF file from Quires and Cloud to test the DSD. Everything played without a hitch (and sounded good too) apart from the Ogg file. Thinking I'd made a mistake with the encoding, I recoded and tried again (no dice). So I tried the micro AD card with my cheap FiiO original X1 – immediate success with Ogg. So I'd list the Ogg support as “questionable” - it wasn't working for me. Everything else was as advertised, and the AIFF support was actually better at 24bit rather than 16bit.

POWER OUTPUT
HifiMan publishes the output power (balanced) at up to 320 mW, and with 32 volume steps it was a good chance to test real-world how that power translated into actual performance with a wide variety of headphones and earphones.

Full headphones
For this part of the exercise I used the ordinary single ended output with my full sized headphones, SPL meter position inside the cushions adjacent to my ear, and the track “Joker man”. The SPL meter was set to measure A-weighted, and my aim was to try and match as closely as possible my desired peak listening level at around 75dB. Results listed below. Each time the SPL meter was reset, and peak SPL recorded:
HD630VB => volume 17/32 = 75.0 dB
HD600 =>volume 23/32 = 75.6 dB (22/32 was 74.2 dB)
HD800S =>volume 23/32 = 75.9 dB (22/32 was 73.5 dB)

		[size=inherit][/size]
HD630VB is pretty easy to drive	HD600 requires power and SuperMini performs brilliantly	Surprisingly good performance with the HD800S

My original pick of these 3 headphones with the SuperMini was the HD600 – it really did combine well, great SQ and plenty of head room. The funny thing is that the longer I listened to the HD800S, the first up feeling of a little too much warmth was replaced with absolute delight with the overall pairing.

IEMs and Ear-buds
The next series of tests allowed me to compare the balanced and single-ended output, as I have balanced cabled and adaptors. So for this test I used the included RE600 variant, the Campfire Andromeda (super sensitive), the MEE P1 (harder to drive), and the VE Zen2 320 ohm ear-buds.

Again I used my trusty SPL meter, “I and I” from the Infidels album, and recorded the following results – balanced where possible (once again the dB figures are volume peaks from the same portion of music).
HFM RE600 => volume 10/32 balanced = 75.9 dB
HFM RE600 => volume 12/32 single ended = 76.4 dB
Campfire Andromeda => volume 6/32 balanced = 76.9 dB
Campfire Andromeda => volume 7/32 single ended = 76.7 dB
MEE P1 Pinnacle => volume 14/32 balanced = 75.1 dB
MEE P1 Pinnacle => volume 17/32 single ended = 75.9 dB

With the Zen2, like the full sized headphones, I simply had to test the single ended output (my pair is not balanced). At a volume of 16-17/32 it was pretty close to my normal listening level (peaks of around 75-78dB, but averaging around 70 dB).

With all of the earphones tested, the SuperMini lived up to its reputation – it really is a little powerhouse. You an see from the results above that there seems to be enough output to satisfactorily drive most earphones. Of all the earphones I tested with the SuperMini, my personal favourites would be the RE600 (more on that later) and the Zen2.

I got my wife to test the Andromeda. I know its really sensitive, and suspected there may be some hissing. I of course would miss this because quite simply my tinnitus masks it. But my lovely wife has excellent hearing, and she said that the Campfire Andromeda hiss was noticeable from a very low (1/32) – and still audible at Tania's normal listening volume 5/32. So for people with sensitive hearing who own the Andromeda – not the best pairing.

Will you need a separate amp for the SuperMini? Definitely not in my opinion.

INCLUDED EARPHONES
I'll cover this now because in my time with the SuperMini, the inclusion of the IEMs – which aren't named, but which I'm going to call RE600s – really help with the overall value of the SuperMini package.

The IEMs are tiny, just 16mm from nozzle tip to rear of the IEM and less than 10mm at their widest point. The nozzle itself is 4-5mm in length has a great lip (so works well with many tip choices), and the nozzle is 6mm in diameter. It is protected with a wax guard, and there are replacements included. The housing is metal (aluminium alloy?). I'm using T400 Comply tips, and they fit perfectly. There is a very small vent or port visible next to the cable exit, so I'm betting the IEM is a dynamic micro driver. In terms of weight, they are a mere 15g, and that includes tips (in my Case large Comply T400).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Rear of the IEMs - very similar build to RE600	Front view	Comparison in size to Andromeda

The cable exit has a sturdy semi-rigid relief which is clearly marked R or L. On the left hand relief there is a raised bump so you can also tell non-sighted (great job HifiMan). The cable is 1.3m long, and being balanced, must be 4 core. The outer jacket is quite satiny, and I'm thinking is some kind of PFE related jacket. If worn over ear, it has extremely low micro-phonics. The Y-split is a semi-rigid rubber and does have a very good cinch. There is very good strain relief at the 4 pole 3.5mm balanced jack, which is right angled, gold plated, and case friendly (if you have a balanced DAP with an outer case). Interestingly enough, I can use the IEM with a lot of my other unbalanced DAPs – as long as they are not designed to be compatible with 4 pole mic enabled earphones. So it doesn't work with my iPhone, or most of my FiiO's, but does with the L&P DAPs and both the MegaMini and SuperMini. Adding an amp to the FiiO's and it works perfectly.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Y-split and cinch	4 pole balanced right angled jack	Works with the E17K as SE, but not with the FiiO

So sturdy build and low micro-phonics, what about fit, comfort and isolation? For me they simply disappear into my ears, and that means superb comfort. I can (and have) slept with them intact, and can easily lie on my side. Isolation will depend on tip and seal, but for me with Comply T400 they are above average for a vented dynamic, and I'd have no issues with most public transport.

Well – how do they sound? My graph of the frequency response and channel matching (which is fantastic) is below. My measuring system is a hobbyist system and is generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Channel matching and frequency response	With Comply T400 tips	Superb IEMs

What I'm hearing is pretty well extended bass, but perfectly matched with a quite forward and beautifully lush mid-range (one of the best I've heard on any IEM period for my tastes). The mid-bass is very slightly humped, and this means they sound very natural rather than coloured. There is the slightest recession in lower mid-range, but again this sounds completely natural and in line with the bass response. There is a very clear climb from lower-mids to upper-mids centered at 2kHz, and this brings a lot of coherency and a particular sweetness to female vocals, so in that sense it is coloured – but for my tastes, it is in a good way. Lower treble is reasonably well extended, and there is very good detail and also realistic decay portrayed in instruments like cymbals.

Clarity is really good – especially in the mid-range and lower treble, but its not an overly bright IEM – more one that is just extremely well balanced. Sound-stage is intimate rather than expansive, but it is circular giving good impression of both width and depth) and imaging is very good within the sound scape projected.

This is really subjective – but if you were to put this IEM in a fancy ergonomic casing, with a nice braided cable, and told me it is an $800 IEM, I would simply nod my head. Slightly coloured in the upper mid-range – yes. One of the best IEM's I've heard in terms of overall tonality for my personal tastes – definitely.

OTHER ERATA

Updating database – 6500 aac256 tracks – approx 4 minutes
Battery life – I haven't been able to time a full charge and full discharge yet, and the 7 day testing time encompassing both Super and Mini unfortunately means some short cuts have to be taken. This is a guess based on the last few days use – and I'll try and refine if I get a chance – but I'd suggest that charging time is around 3 hours from empty (depending on your charging output source). The stated 22 hours from HiFiMan would be based on relatively low single-ended power output, and the screen off most f the time (ie ideal conditions). With my day to day usage – mostly with the RE600 (sometimes the Andromeda, and also the U10), I've been taking a fully charged unit to work, and with on and off usage during the day and evening still had power remaining the next day. So for normal usage I'd say expect (single-ended) around 16 hours or so continuous. EDIT : Had a chance to do a battery test. aac256, using included IEMs through balanced socket on volume 7/32. Continuous play, with screen off most of the time gets 14hr and 40 minutes. Well under HFMs stated 22 hours - which I can now only conclude is the battery time if player sits in idle mode (no play time).
There is no shut-down after inactivity. The screen will switch off but the SuperMini remains on. This is something to consider if you are the forgetful type, as in idle, you will use battery life.

SONICS
This review is getting on and we haven't yet talked about how the SuperMini sounds.

Some of you may find this section a little limited, so I’ll give you some insight into the way I’ve changed my opinion on how to describe the sound with any competently made DAC, DAP or amplifier. The problem with trying to break the sonics down to bass, mids and treble is that DAP / DAC / amp is designed (or should be designed) to be essentially flat across the frequency spectrum. If it has enhanced bass, then isn’t it adding colouration that should come from the headphones or EQ or recording? Likewise, I won’t comment on sound-stage, as this is primarily a by-product of the actual recording, or the transducers you’re using.

So how do I go about describing it? Well I can’t measure it this time (I’d need to be able to isolate the signal from the SuperMini, and it can't be used as a stand alone DAC, nor as a pass through amplifier). I’m pretty confident the SuperMini will be very linear in its measurements, so you’ll be left listening to the recording pure and simple (and isn’t that what we all want?). Edit – thatonenoob has measured it via RMAA (view the info here - http://www.head-fi.org/products/hifiman-supermini-high-res-portable-player/reviews/17055) – and it is indeed pretty linear, with some slight roll off in the higher frequencies under load – however this is very small, and in the fundamental primary audio range (50Hz – 10kHz) is is essentially very flat.

So instead, I’ll just say that I really love the sound so far from the SuperMini, and give you my (very) subjective impressions of the Supermini compared to my other DAPs. But if I was to give a one line sentence on the overall sound characteristic, I would say “linear with a slight tendency toward warmth” I think in audiophile terms – this might be construed as being “musical”.

With each of these comparisons, I used a 1 kHz test tone to exactly match volume, and used the included RE600? IEMs to directly compare to other DAPs in a similar price range. Where there were balanced options, I also compared those. The adaptors I used were a set supplied to me by Venture Electronics for use with their ear-buds.

Warning – very subjective impressions ahead.

SuperMini vs MegaMini
The two have very similar build and dimensions with the MegaMini being slightly smaller at 100 x 42 x8.5mm. Button layout is slightly different with the Mega having 4 buttons on the face and 3 on the sides compared to the Super's 3 on the face and 4 on the side (the return button being the point of difference). The Super does have a longer stated battery life (~22 hours vs ~15 hours) Edit : real battery life is ~14-15 hours vs approx 9 hours, and is also slightly more powerful – out of both single-ended and of course the Super has balanced which yields even higher power output. With the RE600 I used for testing, 10/32 on the Super yielded 79.1 dB while 11/32 on on the Mega was 79.3. The quick A/B was made on both single ended ports.

I really think I’d struggle to tell these two apart in a completely blind test. Tonally they are extremely similar, and during the course of the A/B the only feeling I got was that there was slightly more depth or separation to the Super. But this could have simply been the very slight difference in volume (0.2dB), and also natural expectation bias in a sighted test. If I was to choose one purely based on what I'm hearing, I would lean toward the Super. From a recommendation POV, it would come down to what you need. If you value the balanced option, and need a little more power, plus if the included IEMs have value for you – then the choice is an easy one (the Super). If you are simply looking for a great small form factor DAP, don't need balanced, and already have your preferred IEMs, then from a value standpoint the Mega is probably the better option.

SuperMini vs FiiO X5ii
The X5ii is much bigger and heavier being more than twice the weight and twice the size. Battery life is in favour of the Super (in real terms ~15 hours vs ~10 hours). It would be difficult to talk about power output – as the X5ii has full specifications released for differing loads while the Super only has balanced output at full power listed. With the included RE600 IEMs, 10/32 on the Super is ~ 35/120 on the X5ii, so I'd suggest their total power output may be very similar. What the X5ii loses on portability and battery, it more than makes for on features – including gapless playback, replay gain, searchable database, external play-lists, user configurable equaliser and use as a DAC. The Super of course comes with the RE600 bundled.

Sonically again I'm finding very little difference between the X5ii and SuperMini during fast switching. They both have very familiar overall tonality – and this is one test where I can guarantee blind I simply wouldn't be able to tell the two apart. I will add here too that both players are simply sublime with the RE600 – it was tempting may times during the testing to simply stop and listen to the music regardless of which player was operating at the time.

So the choices this time are on the overall package of the SuperMini (being player plus IEMs) vs the feature set of the X5ii. If we were comparing the players alone, the X5ii would win hands down (feature-set), but as a bundle I find the SuperMini to be compelling value. In this comparison it depends on what you're looking for.

SuperMini vs Luxury & Precision L3
Again the Super is dwarfed by the bigger L3, and again the L3 is more than twice the weight and size. The L3 doesn't list any power specs, but if the matching with the SPL meter is any indication then single ended 10/32 with the Super vs 27/60 for the L3, and a similar ratio with the balanced – the Super is the more powerful of the two DAPs. Battery life again favours the SuperMini (~15 vs ~10-11 hours). Both GUI (touch-screen on the L3) and feature set (DAC function, preset EQ, analogue pot among a few) go with the L3 – although it would be fair to say that the L3 sits a little behind the X5ii in terms of features.

Sonically whilst the two are close, this time there are faint tonal differences. The Super is very slightly warmer or fuller than the L3 – it is very slight though. Again both sound excellent with the RE600. Its hard to pinpoint which I like more as both are really nicely detailed, and have wonderful clarity and depth of sound.

Once again the value question will be one of an integrated package vs the stand-alone player, and once again it depends where your priorities. They both have similar quality of SQ. The L3 is far better in terms of features and GUI. But the Super has the extra battery life, the extra portability, and of course the bundled IEMs (plus the extra power)

CONCLUSION / SUMMARY HIFIMAN SUPERMINI

When I saw the SuperMini, started playing with it for the first day, and putting it through its paces, I have to admit I was looking at it and thinking to myself – great form factor, great power, great battery life, great SQ – but $400? This initial impression started changing from day 2, and I've done a 180 deg change the longer I've had it in my possession.

What the SuperMini brings to the table is a wonderful form factor, good battery life (especially for the power output), a simple but usable GUI, and really good power output for its diminutive size. If someone had shown me the SuperMini and said it could drive the HD800S passably well and the HD600 exceptionally well – I'd have simply scoffed at them. Seeing (and hearing) is believing.

What it lacks is features – and for many these will be deal breakers. No gap-less. No EQ. No DAC mode. No replay-gain. No searchable database. Limited play-list support.

But what it has (if you're looking at real value and the full package) is the included IEMs (RE600 variant). This is subjective, but I do think the only way to correctly evaluate the “package” is to recognise that you are getting a really excellent sounding $200-250 ultra-portable DAP, and exceptional $150-200 pair of IEMs. That would put the total value of the package at the target $400 mark.

So would I recommend this player/IEM bundle? – well it depends on what you're looking for. If you're looking for a fully featured DAP – then no, there are better options, and I don’t think you are HifiMan's target market for this device. If you are looking for a wonderful sounding no frills portable package – then yes, definitely yes, resoundingly yes.

I'll have to return this set in a few more days (after I write up the MegaMini), and already I'm having withdrawal symptoms – and its for both components in the package. I will genuinely miss both. For simple use (album at a time, or whole collection on shuffle), for my regular walks there is really not a better DAP for portability. If I had the money I'd offer to buy this unit right now – but sadly my recent purchase of the HD800S means I must pass – until maybe a future date. Happy wife = happy life is my motto for now. Those who are married will fully understand this. Tania knows my passion for audio – and I understand her sensibility in budgeting. But there will be a time in the future when I will likely purchase this package. For truly portable use – its fantastic.

FINAL THANKS
My apologies for the length of the review. My thanks also to Dr Bian, Peter Hoagland and Ryne from HifiMan for their assistance for giving me the opportunity. I will genuinely miss this unit when I send it away next week.

AND WHAT ABOUT MY CHECKLIST
Back at the start I listed what I looked for in a new DAP. So how did the SuperMini go?

Clean, neutral signature – but with body (not thin)
Definitely ticked this box - a pure joy to listen to music with the SuperMini – and especially when you include the RE600.

Good build quality : Extremely good build quality - definite tick.
Reasonable battery life : Again tick - although at ~ 15 hours under conditions where screen is not in use, it falls well short of the claimed 22 hours.
Easy to use interface : Definitely a tick – it may be short on features, but the design of the UI is really good.
Able to drive both low impedance and (within reason) higher impedance cans without additional amping : Definite tick with the headphones I have.
Value for money : Like I said – this depends if you are solely evaluating the DAP or the entire package, and will depend on what your own “deal breakers” are. For me the answer is a yes.
Enough storage to hold either my favourite albums in red-book, or my whole library in a reasonably high resolution lossy format (for me – aac256) : Another tick I tested most formats, but most of my listening is usually AAC256, and I had my entire library at my disposal with a 64 Gb card.

Great review. Thank you for your effort.

Could you possibly point me in the direction of the adaptor that i would need to connect my Pinnacle P1s to the balanced out?

Thank you.

Rx

You'd need a balanced cable - not just an adaptor. Something like this:
http://penonaudio.com/FIDUE-A83-2.5-3.5mm-MMCX-Cable

Yes, that makes sense. Thank you. Rx

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

[size=24.57px]INTRODUCTION[/size]

TFZ is another Chinese earphone manufacturer/brand which I had no knowledge of until this year. Then Amy from Penon Audio reached out to me to ask if I'd be interested in reviewing TFZ's 1,3 and 5 series IEMs. I quickly jumped on-line to do some research on the TFZ series, and was impressed by the shell shaping, and also a little concerned over the comments about their bass heavy signature. I expressed those concerns to Amy, and she suggested that I still review them, so a couple of weeks later (in July), I received TFZ's 1,3 and 5 series monitors and managed to spend some with the 5 series while I was travelling toward the end of July, and again over the last week or so in September.

ABOUT TFZ
Shenzhen Zither Chinese Year Industrial Com. Ltd was founded in Shenzhen China in 2015. The information on the company is a little sparse, but from what I've been able to ascertain so far, the company specialises in audio products (mainly IEMs). The philosophy behind the company is that good sound can also be trendy / visually beautiful / exciting.

TFZ focuses on exquisite fashion lifestyle products, and continue to pursue the perfect combination of excellent design and top performance to create a new brand spirit, designed for digital life enthusiasts bring top audio-visual enjoyment.

TFZ focuses on the products which manifest exquisite and fashionable lifestyle and consistently pursues for perfect combination of superb design and top-notch performance.

Their main product line seems to revolve around the TFZ1, 3 ,5 (and soon be released 7) series family, and can be visually enhanced by applying faceplate decorations. The latest releases also (apparently the “s” series) feature the use of an upgraded silver cable, and slightly different tuning. The model I’m reviewing today is the TFZ Series 5 (original).

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with the TFZ Series 5 by Penon Audio free of charge for the purposes of reviewing for Head-Fi. Penon Audio and TFZ do not expect the earphones back, so I acknowledge that they are freely given and I thank them for the opportunity. I am not otherwise affiliated with either Penon Audio or TFZ in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from my contributions, and this is my subjective opinion of the TFZ Series 5.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review - I mainly used the TFZ Series 5 straight from the headphone-out socket of my FiiO X3ii + E17K, and also used (at different times) my iPhone 5S, and a variety of the other DAPs I have around me. Although I tested them with an amplifier, I do not think they benefit from additional amplification (I use mine mainly for consistency when reviewing and also to extend battery life on the X3ii). In the time I have spent with the Series 5, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the TFZ S5 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES


Front of retail box	Rear of retail box

The TFZ Series 5 arrived in a large (for an IEM) black matt box and lid measuring 160 x 220 x 35mm. The front of the box features the TFZ logo, the model number in large silver print, and the website in smaller print (www.tfzither.com). The rear of the box features a small sticker on the back with a picture of the Series 5, and a bar-code and manufacturer information.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Inside the box	The manual	Specs inside the manual

Opening the box is quite interesting as you are first greeted with a matt black card, with silver print, and the statement:
TFZ Make every song ambilight – beautiful like the stars
Under this card is a multi-page booklet in Chinese and English which contains tips for use , maintenance and safety, as well as specifications, a little about the company philosophy, the Series 1/3/5/7 product range, and some contact information.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Under the manual	Tips and cable revealed	Warranty, sticker and cloth bag

Under this booklet is a plastic moulded tray containing the series 5 monitor, an envelope containing stickers and a warranty card, and some tips, ear guides, a small black velvety cloth draw string bag, and a shirt clip. The tips include 3 pairs of generic single flange silicone tips, one pair dual flange silicone tips and one pair of medium Crystal foam tips. The drawstring pouch measures 80 x 110mm, is easy to pocket, and although it won't give a lot of protection to the series 5, will help keep the cable tidy. It is a bit of a lint magnet though (sorry about the photos).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Close up of the fae plate stickers	The carry bag is unfortunately a lint magnet	Tips, ear-hooks and clip

The package overall is OK for the price, and my one wish as far as accessories go would be to swap the cloth bag out for a generic carry case (these simply give more protection).

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From TFZ)
I have also included the specs for the TFZ series 1 and 3 series for comparison. Also note that as the original TFZ series are not readily available now, I have quoted prices for all 3 models based on the “S” series with silver cable.

	TFZ Series 1	TFZ Series 3	TFZ Series 5
Cost (Penon Audio)	USD 42.90	USD 54.90	USD 82.90
Type	Single Dynamic IEM	Single Dynamic IEM	Single Dynamic IEM
Driver type	12.5 mm Titanium N50	12.5 mm Titanium N50	12.5 mm Titanium N50
Frequency Range	18 Hz – 22 Khz	8 Hz – 24 Khz	6 Hz – 30 Khz
Impedance	12 ohm	12 ohm	12 ohm
Sensitivity	103 dB @ 1kHz 1mW	107 dB @ 1kHz 1mW	105 dB @ 1kHz 1mW
Cable (original)	120 cm copper with TPU sheath	120 cm copper with TPU sheath	120 cm copper with TPU sheath
Cable (upgraded model)	120 cm SPC	120 cm SPC	120 cm SPC
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, straight	3.5mm gold plated, straight	3.5mm gold plated, straight
Weight	Approx 18g with tips	Approx 18g with tips	Approx 18g with tips
IEM Shell	Matt TPU with Alu face plate	Matt TPU with Alu face plate	Matt TPU with Alu face plate

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.


Frequency response and channel matching	CSD waterfall graph

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference. As these are all part of a series, I have also included comparisons of the 1 and 3 series.

What I’m hearing from the TFZ Series 5:

Elevated sub-bass with a lot of slam, and tends to be the most dominant part of the audio spectrum – peaking in the 40-60 Hz range.
Elevated mid-bass, a little less than sub-bass, but still dominant, and tending toward a warm signature
Recessed lower mid-range giving the impression of distance with vocals, and often overshadowed (there is some bleed) with more bass dominant music.
Rise through the upper mid-range peaking at around 2 kHz then gradually dropping away. This gives a nice sense of presence to vocals (particularly female), but is sometime affected by bass bleed.
Lower treble is reasonably subdued with only one major peak at around 9 kHz. For my tastes I am hearing only small amounts of sibilance
Overall it is a V shaped monitor which is bass emphasised but also possesses a relatively clean and clear mid-range.

I included the CSD also, and you will see evidence of some bass bleed into the mid-range frequencies but very little sign of any ringing.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
External

		[size=inherit][/size]
External face plates	Side and angled view of external plates	Internal surfaces - very nicely rounded

The TFZ Series 5 reminds me somewhat of a a small (but deep) custom monitor. The body is a triangular wedge shape of what seems top be a soft matte TPU (a good choice for material as it is supposed to be resistant to oil or grease). The ear piece is two separate pieces (main body and exterior aluminium faceplate), but the seam is well matched and although easy to see, fits nice and flush. At its widest point, the Series 5 measures 22mm across, and 25mm tall. It has a depth of approximately 15mm to the beginning of the nozzle flare, and the nozzle adds another 8mm or so on the angle.

The body is very cleverly shaped (similar to the PaiAudio MR3 I reviewed recently) so that the main part sits inside the cavity of your external ear between Antihelix and Tragus, with the thin arm or point of the triangle notching naturally into your Intertragic Incisure. On the internal side, all surfaces are very nicely rounded for the natural curves of your ear. The nozzle is a little over 8mm long from the flare (so it is quite short) and angled up. The nozzle diameter is around 5mm and it is covered with a mesh. There is a narrow lip, which can have some issues retaining tips (more on that later).

There is a circular shape on the external plate, and it appears to be more decorative than anything. At the rear of the left earpiece the website is printed in small but easy to read silver print. On the right ear piece in the same spot is the model number (Series 5 In-Ear Monitor). Adjacent to this and fitting in the groove between plate and body is a rear vent for the dynamic driver. There is also another vent which sits adjacent to the nozzle.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Nozzle and ergonomic shaping	Weak spot - the cable exit	Second vent is just above the "IE" (hard to see)

At the top rear is the cable exit, and it consists of a flexible rubber mount through which the cable passes. This is one part of the IEM I would be concerned with (longevity) over time, as if there is any pressure on it, there can be signs of “lifting” off the body of the IEM. If TFZ were looking at adding value, I'd suggest adding a little to the price and converting to a 2 pin removable.

The cable
The cable is 1.2m in length and consists of a copper core and TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) sheath. The use of TPU makes a lot of sense due to its high elasticity, high shear strength, and resistance to oil and grease. Although the cable itself is reasonably thin between y-split and sheath, you should still get reasonable life due to the nature of the TPU tensile strength. There are no preformed loops or memory wire, but TFZ do include a pair of ear-hooks as an option to keep the cable in place.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Jack	Y-split and cinch	Cable exit

With the cable over ear, the y-split hangs around half way down my sternum, and consists of a lightweight rubber/TPU mould, but has a very good detachable cinch (or cable slider) for securing the cable more tightly if required. The jack is gold plated, straight, relatively short, and has good relief. There is a brass coloured ring at the rear, and for a relativity budget priced earphone, looks pretty up-market. The jack body is around 8mm in diameter, so may not be case friendly for all smart-phones, but it does fit my iPhone case like a glove (perfect size).

Internals
The TFZ Series 5 uses a single 12.5mm titanium driver designated N50. The driver uses a 5 micron titanium diaphragm for increased clarity and fidelity. The driver is housed in a dual internal acoustic chamber set-up to further enhance the audio signature.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well and shallow fitting IEMs can be problematic. I first tried the large silicone tips supplied, and the seal was surprisingly perfect fright from the start. The shape suited my ears perfectly. I next tried the dual flange and had similar success, but the included Crystal foams (while they gave me good comfort and a good seal) had a tendency to slide off the nozzles when extracting from my ears – simply because the nozzle lip is not pronounced enough.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Default silicone and Crystal foam	Ostry tuning tips and Spin-Fits	Shure Olives and Spiral Dots

I then proceeded to test some of my after-market tips and had good success with Ostry tuning tips, Comply T400, Spin-Fits, and even Spiral Dots. My tip of choice though was the large Trinity Kombi tips (equivalent to Sony Isolation tips), and I used these for most of the review. I'd still suggest TFZ look at slightly increasing the lip on the Series1,3,5 – but the good news is that most of the trips I tried fit pretty well – and that includes the stock silicone tips.

Isolation with the Series will depend on the seal you achieve and possibly also the insertion depth. With the Kombi tips, isolation was really good for a dynamic, and I could only just hear the keyboard while I was doing the final edits (no music). With music playing, isolation is very good, and I even had no problems using these on a long haul flight (although I later switched to my QC25 during that flight).

		[size=inherit][/size]
My favourite - Trinity Kombi tips	Earhooks worn	And without the earguides

Comfort for me is excellent – the TFZ are another of those designs which simply disappear when worn, much like the Pai Audio MR3. These would rate up there along side the Alclair Curve and Pai MR3 as being one of the best fitting and most comfortable IEMs I've worn. They sit well flush with my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are easy to sleep in.

So the TFZ Series looks good, has a pretty nice build (with a question mark over the cable coupling to the shell), and is comfortable to wear. How do they sound?

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the TFZ Series 5. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, and Trinity Kombi tips.

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 16-18/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – well extended but quite emphasised. There is a lot of impact, and when sub-bass hits (Lorde's “Royals”) there is a lot of rumble,and it does tend to dominate and over-power the mid-range.
Mid-bass – elevated, but mainly in the 60-150 Hz range, and then slopes downward until it reaches the lower mids. Again some bleed is noticeable into the mid-range with bass dominated tracks. Elevated (very) compared to the mid-range and quite a warm signature overall.
Lower mid-range – very recessed compared to bass and upper mid-range. The nadir of the recession occurs between 500 and 1000 Hz (heart of vocal fundamentals) so relative to bass and upper mid-range there is some distance on vocals, and some will have a tendency to turn the volume on this IEM up a little, especially with Rock based and male vocal dominated tracks.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, and it is quite a rapid rise (10 dB) between 1 and 2 kHz. Despite the sharp rise, the vocals still sound relatively focussed and cohesive, but the TFZ definitely sound better with female vocals (to me) than for male vocals. I think this particular emphasis on upper mid-range is where TFZ get their clarity, and this is particularly evident if you EQ the bass back a little.
Lower treble – recessed a little compared to the upper mid-range, but with enough in this area to convey reasonable detail. There is a sharper peak at around 9 kHz but so far I haven't found it overly excessive. The lower treble is more smooth than overly bright, and some detail can be lost due to the extra warmth/bass. Cymbals tended to be masked a little by instruments like bass guitar, and the natural decay of cymbal hits was lost which was a shame.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Has the ability to reveal reasonable detail, although I wouldn't call it the most resolving earphone. Unfortunately bass dominance tends to obscure finer details.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have some presence, but (depending on the recording) the decay after the initial crash is often truncated (this may be more to do with masking than anything else)
Although there is reasonable clarity with guitar and female vocals, I would not call detail or overall clarity a strong point of the TFZ Series 5 with its default tuning

Sound-stage, Imaging

Directional queues are reasonable but can be muddied a little depending on the recording. The binaural track Tundra actually showed reasonable sense of space (this could be the recessed lower mid-range at play), and was just outside the periphery of my head space – so reasonably good sense of width, although depth was a little flat.
Oval presentation of sound-stage – with more emphasis on width than depth, but definitely not entirely one dimensional
Reasonable sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”. Enough sense of space to bring a little realism, but still felt a little flat with some of my live tracks.

Strengths

The series 5 has a very good upper mid-range which goes particularly well with female vocals, giving a nice sense of euphony or sweetness
Smooth treble which conveys reasonable detail (depending on the genre)
Good with very dynamic music – and able to show very good contrast between bass and upper mid-range (eg Cello and Violin)
Really good with acoustic music and anything where bass does not dominate the recording. Eagles live version of Hotel California was really good to listen to (the intro), however even this track I would have dialled the bass back a little (too much impact from the kick drum).
Lovers of a lot of warmth or bass impact will really like the bass emphasis – and the Series 5 did sound quite good with some female vocal oriented Trance tracks, and with some Hip-hop.

Weaknesses

The bass is just too dominant for this to be the “more detailed” of the TFZ Series, and I constantly found myself taking breaks during the review – simply because there is too much thump there.
Bass (because of the dominance) tends to bleed through the mid-range if the track is even the slightest bit bass heavy
Recession in the lower-mids can tend to make some tracks sound muffled and distant. So my preferred lower volume listening can suffer as a result. The problem is that if you increase the volume to adjust for this deficiency, you get even more bass.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The TFZ Series 5 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone 5S, or any of the FiiO DAPs. I'm at my usual 65-75dB listening level (with typical pop/rock songs) on the iP5S at a volume level of around 25-30%, or on the E17K around 16-18/60 on low gain. I did try amping with the E17K, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement. I briefly tried the IMS Hybrid Valve Amp and the pairing simply wasn't to my taste (too dark). From my tests, the TFZ Series 5 neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification, however use of the E17K allows for other tweaks which we'll discuss in the equalisation section.

EQUALISATION

[size=inherit][/size]
I used the TFZ Series 5 with many sources including the X1ii	X7, L3, and X3ii - with E17K (which leads to EQ)	Before and after EQ

It was almost a relief to reach this section, and finally be able to correct the deficiencies in the TFZ Series 5's tuning. I took the E17K and simply dropped the bass (using the tone controls) by -6, and then to further balance things, dropped the treble by -2 as well. This brought a lot more balance into the overall signature, and finally I was able to hear (with a lot of clarity) what the dynamic driver is actually capable of. I went back to some of the tracks I'd used earlier and now cymbal detail (including natural decay) was able to be heard clearly. This adjusted signature is one I'd encourage TFZ to maybe consider developing, as for me is is a lot better than the default, and one I would both recommend and indeed spend some of my own money on. I've included a graph of the frequency response before and after the adjustment.

COMPARISONS
For the TFZ Series 5 it was time to go back to a non-EQ'd setting and compare against other IEMs in a similar price bracket or with similar capabilities. First up is a small comparison of the other IEMs in the TFZ line-up. Then I chose to compare Trinity's Hyperion and Vyrus (both with a fun V shaped sound), and also the S0, and S5 from Brainwavz.

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the Series 5 had the Trinity Kombi tips and no EQ was used. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

TFZ Series 5 ($83) vs TFZ Series 3 ($55) vs TFZ Series 1 ($43)


TFZ Series 5, Series 1 and Series 3	Frequency response comparison

Essentially, the build quality, accessory range, cable, and practically everything else is the same. The Series 1 has a fully hard plastic housing while the Series 3 and Series 5 both have the matte soft black TPU. The Series1 is also marginally thinner in the breadth of the body. Sonically, all 3 are extremely close to the same signature (you can see this on the graphs). The Series I has marginally more bass, and marginally less upper mid-range, and also doesn't seem to have quite the overall depth in sound as the Series 3 or 5. The Series 3 & 5 practically sound identical (very minor variations), and wearing one earpiece from each via a splitter through the same source actually sounds practically like a matched pair. My advice – for the extra $12 for the matt finish and faux carbon plate exterior, as well as the slightly better sense of depth (maybe the Series 1 doesn't have the dual acoustic chambers?), then the best buy here is the Series 3.

TFZ Series 5 ($83) vs Trinity Hyperion (~$45)


TFZ Series 5 and Trinity Hyperion	Frequency response comparison

Although I show the Hyperion Goldies in the picture (my wife's limited edition pair), the sound signature is essentially the same as the standard Hyperion. As far as build goes, durability is likely shared. The Hyperion has metal build, but the TPU on the Series 5 should be extremely long wearing. I very much prefer the Trinity braided cable though. Accessories are close but the Trinity IEMs have a better case and bigger selection of tips. Fit and comfort are similar – the TFZ Series 5 is more ergonomic, the Hyperion is smaller. My personal preference for fit though would be the TFZ S5 in this instance. Sonically the two are similar but slightly different. The TFZ S5 has more bass impact, and does sound a little warmer. The Hyperion is comparatively a little leaner, a little clearer, and airier – especially in the upper mid-range and lower treble. For my personal tastes, the TFZ S5 does sound a little more natural – especially if you don't mind EQing. For me personally I'd take the TFZ S3 over the Hyperion (the cost difference is negligible), but the TFZ S5 is simply a leap too far in cost.

TFZ Series 5 ($83) vs Trinity Vyrus (~ $75)


TFZ Series 5 and Trinity Vyrus	Frequency response comparison

With this comparison I used the gold damped filters on the Vyrus. Like the Hyperion, the Vyrus has the metal build vs TPU, and this time you get replaceable cables (2), and also the choice of 7 filters to tailor the sound to your liking. So the Vyrus wins on accessories – and the two draw on fit and comfort (again the TFZ S5 is more ergonomic while the Vyrus is smaller). Sonically the two are similar – but the Virus skips ahead where it counts. First there is more balance – with bass being comparatively a lot lower on the Vyrus. The mid-ranges are actually really close with the Vyrus being a little more vivid (and maybe a little more coloured), but it is a colouration I enjoy. When you factor in the configurability of the Vyrus, and consider that they are essentially the same price – unfortunately the TFZ Series 5 doesn't stand a chance in this match up. The TFZ Series 3 might have a fighting chance if you don't mind EQ.

TFZ Series 5 ($83) vs Brainwavz S0 (~ $45)


TFZ Series 5 and Brainwavz S0	Frequency response comparison

I chose the S0 mainly because I don't have a lot of IEMs in this particular price range, and also because of its proximity to the Series 3 pricing. Build quality is shared here (metal vs TPU), and the Brainwavz S0 definitely wins on accessories (better case and more tip options). Fit and comfort go to the TFZ Series 5 – being a lot better fit due to superior ergonomics. Sonically both are V or U shaped, with emphasis on bass and upper mid-range. For me, the TFZ Series 5 sounds more natural, and the mid-range sounds both cleaner and clearer overall. Bass is similar with Series 5 having more slam, and the S0 having more thump. I'd probably take the Series 5 over the S0 purely on sonics – but if you were putting the Series 3 up against it – then there is no contest. For me the TFZ Series 3 would be the better choice (ergonomically and sonically).

TFZ Series 5 ($83) vs Brainwavz S5 (~ $99)


TFZ Series 5 and Brainwavz S5	Frequency response comparison

This time the Series 5 is up against the Brainwavz S5 in a very similar (actually slightly more expensive bracket). As per the past comparisons, build quality is again shared (metal vs TPU), and the Brainwavz S5 wins on accessories. Fit and comfort go to the TFZ Series 5 – being a lot better fit due to superior ergonomics (this despite the S5 being better than the S0 in this regard). Sonically both are V or U shaped, with emphasis on bass and upper mid-range, but this time S5 has more of a pronounced V with bigger bass and both upper mid-range and lower treble. The resultant signature is a combination of warmth, but also a lean vocal range, and extra heat in lower treble energy. Comparatively (again), the TFZ Series 5 sounds more natural, and the mid-range sounds again cleaner and clearer overall. Bass is similar with both having a sub-bass emphasis, but the S5 simply has more than the TFZ Series 5. In this comparison, I would definitely take the TFZ over the Brainwavz and again if I was putting the Series 3 up against the Brainwavz S5, it would win for me in a land-slide

TFZ SERIES 5 - SUMMARY

The TFZ Series 5 is an interesting earphone, and has been a difficult one to grade. The positives would include overall build quality, really great ergonomics, extremely comfortable fit, and a reasonable sound signature which becomes a very good sound signature if you are prepared to EQ some of the bass away.

But the pros must be balanced by the cons, and these include the lack of a suitable (more durable) carry case, the overall dominance of the bass (tuning), and really the value they offer. For $80 you really should expect more, and because there is so little difference between the Series 3 and Series 5, IMO the Series 3 is where you should be looking.

IMO the Series5 does provide the basis of a good package, but there is better out there – including TFZ's own Series 3. 3 stars from me – good but not great.

My thanks once again to Amy and the team at Penon Audio for the chance to be able to review the TFZ Series 5.

Sure, if you listen to a lot of edm/hip hop, they will be hard to beat at the price... But if youre more versatile with the genres you can do better.

Hi Brooko, great detailed review.

Would you say these are some of the hardest hitting earphones in the bass department compared to other earphones you've heard if it was EQ'd with a bass boost?

I'm probably the wrong one to ask - as I don't particularly like too much bass. I'll be shipping these to HBB hopefully next week so he can evaluate them. He's the expert in this field and will probably be able to give you a better answer.

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I didn't really know about PaiAudio at all until very recently when I was approached by Alex Fan from Pai about reviewing a couple of their in-ear monitors. I hadn't heard a lot about Pai, but I remembered reading one of HiFi Chris's reviews earlier, and thinking at the time that the overall shape looked pretty interesting. Alex later informed me that Penon Audio had suggested she get in touch with me, so thank you to both Alex and Penon for reaching out. Alex asked me what I'd like to review, so I told her my preferences and asked her to pick something she thought would be appropriate. She obviously knows her product range pretty well – and thus I was introduced to Pai Audio's triple BA MR3.

ABOUT PAI AUDIO
PaiAudio was formed in September 2014, and has a workforce of 16 people currently. They are small but dynamic and growing. Their catalogue at the time of writing consists of 6 earphone products – 1 earbud, 1 dynamic driver IEM, and 4 different BA based IEMs (ranging from single to quad BA). Within these categories are options for personalisation with colour and style. In their own words, PaiAudio specialise in the manufacturing of high-end earphones, and their small team has assembled some top designers from their national audio field for research and development.

They are based in Shenzhen China, and have a growing on-line presence including a website, Twitter feed and Facebook presence. When I asked Alex for a little more information she actually sent a catalogue which included independent audits of their facilities, and even photos of their facilities and testing equipment. Its really nice to see a relatively new company going about things with a great deal of focus on getting everything right from the outset, and not cutting any corners on QC and follow up testing.

We have gained a great amount of recognition in digital, computer and earphone field since our 3.14 series products were launched. The company's business concept is "Top quality exchange for best reputation", the concept follows our faith "Customers' need comes first" when we provide clients with excellent products and after-sale service.

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with the PaiAudio MR3 free of charge for the purposes of reviewing for Head-Fi. PaiAudio does not expect the earphones back, so I acknowledge that they are freely given and I thank them for the opportunity. I am not otherwise affiliated with PaiAudio in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from my contributions, and this is my subjective opinion of the MR3.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5, L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Sennheiser HD800S, Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review - I mainly used the MR3 straight from the headphone-out socket of my FiiO X3ii + E17K, and also used (at different times) my iPhone 5S, and a variety of the other DAPs I have around me. Although I tested them with an amplifier, I do not think they benefit from additional amplification (I use mine mainly for consistency when reviewing and also to extend battery life on the X3ii). In the time I have spent with the MR3, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the MR3 as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The MR3 arrived in a small black book style box with a matt black retail outer sleeve. The sleeve has the “pi” symbol in silver on the front, accompanied by a simple slogan “3.14 Audio – mastering quality sound IEM”. 3.14 of course represents the mathematical constant of pi. The rear of the sleeve is similarly sparse. The dimensions of the sleeve/box are 90 x 145 x 53mm.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Front of the retail box	Rear of the retail box	Outer sleeve and inner book style box

Removing the sleeve reveals the book style inner box which has the lid or flap held closed by two magnets. Opening this cover unveils the MR3 safely nestled in a simple foam top layer with appropriate cut-outs for each ear piece. Under this foam layer is a quite nicely built velvet pouch (83 x 130mm – so it is relatively long/large),a small bag with a set of 3 silicone tips in S, M, L (includes the pair on the MR3) and a short clip. There is also a fold out owner's manual.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The "book style" box	First look at the MR3	Full package including accessories

So overall a pretty sparse accessory package, and I do wonder if PaiAudio could improve their offering a little more with some more tip options and perhaps a semi-rigid carry case which is more protective and pocket-able. I do like the velvet pouch though, and I'm pretty sure it will spend a lot of time protecting one of my portable amps as it is going to be almost the perfect size.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The velvet pouch (left) vs a more sensible carry case (right)	Velvet pouch perfect for other devices though!	Tip selection and shirt clip

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From PaiAudio)

	MR3
Cost	USD 199 at PaiAudio e-bay store
Type	Triple Balanced Armature IEM
Frequency Range	20 Hz – 20 Khz
Impedance	32 ohm
Sensitivity	120 dB @ 1kHz 1mW
Cable	120 cm copper core with TPU sheath
Connectors	MMCX
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, right angled
Weight	Approx 20g with included cable (and Shure Olive tips)
IEM Shell	Polished transluscent Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference.

Because I hear so many claims of burn-in, where possible I take a measurement of the IEM straight OOTB and then another one when I'm actually reviewing (some weeks or months later). There can sometimes be slight differences due to variations in coupler seating (usually in the very high frequencies) – but it should give an overview as to whether the frequency response has changed after many hours. Since I started doing this, I am yet to find an IEM with any appreciable change. Claims of night and day differences or even noticeable differences attributed to burn in with this IEM are (IMO) pure fantasy. As you can see by the second graph, any changes would be inaudible.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Frequency response and channel matching	CSD plot	Burn in comparison/test

What I’m hearing from the MR3:

Quite flat bass with a very natural tonality, and good extension.
Reasonably flat lower mid-range, maybe the slightest recession or distance in vocals, but it is minor, and adds to the impression of staging size
Upper mid-range has an excellent (and very cohesive) slow rise in the presence area and gives a very clear and clean vocal presence.
There are peaks at 4 kHz and 7 kHz which lean toward a bright and clear signature
Overall it is a reasonably balanced monitor with some emphasis on the lower treble which gives it a very clean and clear, and slightly bright signature.

I included the CSD also, and you will see evidence of some extremely mild ringing at ~4 and ~7 kHz, but little bass bleed into the mid-range frequencies and overall a very clean plot.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
External

		[size=inherit][/size]
The MR3 and cable	External or exterior face	Internal facing / contouring

The MR3 reminds me somewhat of a a small custom monitor. The body is a half shell shape of what looks like clear plastic, but (which I later found out from Alex) is actually polished translucent PVC. The ear piece is two separate pieces (main body and exterior faceplate), but the seam is well matched and very hard to distinguish. At its widest point, the MR3 measures 26mm across, and 15mm tall. It has a depth of approximately 14mm to the beginning of the nozzle flare, and the nozzle adds another 6mm or so on the angle.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Nozzle height and lip	Nozzle angle (up and back)	Nozzle diameter and mesh

The body is very cleverly shaped so that the main part sits inside the cavity of your external ear between Antihelix and Tragus, with the thin arm or point notching naturally into your Intertragic incisure. On the internal side, all surfaces are very cleverly rounded and designed to follow the natural curves of your ear. The nozzle is a little over 6mm long from the flare (so it is quite short) and angled up, but also slightly backward. The nozzle diameter is around 6mm and it is covered with a fine mesh. There is a narrow lip, which does have some issues retaining tips (more on that later).

		[size=inherit][/size]
MMXC socket - it seems to be a good one	Socket and male MMCX connector	Mated connector

As I mentioned before the shells are a translucent PVC, and have an almost glassy / smoky look about them. The MR3 comes in 4 optional colours – blue, orange, burgundy, and brown. Mine are the brown, and looking closely inside you can just make out the layout of the 3 BA drives and see the crossover board. There are otherwise no external markings or brands, and of course no vents because it is wholly a multi-BA configuration.

At the top rear is the MMCX socket and so far I have to give PaiAudio some real credit with this socket because it is very tight, and the connections are made with a very satisfying click. The connectors are designed to swivel 360 deg.

The cable
The cable is 1.2m in length and consists of a copper core and TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) sheath. The use of TPU makes a lot of sense due to its high elasticity, high shear strength, and resistance to oil and grease. The male MMCX connectors are (so far) very good and click reassuringly into place with no signs of looseness. They would be one of the better standard MMCX connections I've seen so far.

From the connector there is a 7cm sheathed natural loop which is essentially preformed to hang over your ear. It works pretty well. The y-split is a small piece of rubber and hangs mid-sternum. The jack is small, smart-phone case friendly, right angled, gold-plated and 3.5mm.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Connector and pre-curved ear guide	Y-split (no cinch)	Right angled jack

The cable seems to be very strong – but I have a few concerns (and to be honest, it'll be one of the things I will change with this pair after I finish the review).

There is no sign of strain relief at jack, y-split or MMCX connector. This could very well be because of the strength of the cable sheathing – but for piece of mind, I'd personally like to see some strain relief.
The cable retains a lot of memory. It kinks, it's difficult to wind, and when wound won't hold its shape, and it does tangle (simply because it doesn't coil tidily)
There is no cinch, and for a light weight cable, it is sorely needed

For my tastes I will be using either a Trinity braided cable, or possibly even one of the cables off my P1.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Cable memory - pretty messy	Carefully coiled and placed - Trinity vs Pai vs ALO Tinsel	Close up showing some of the internals

Internals
For those who like to know about the internals, Alex tells me that the three balanced armature drivers used are a combination of Knowles and Sonion BA – with an ED29689 Knowles high frequency, and Sonion 33AE011 dual driver for mid and low ranges. The 3 drivers are controlled via dual crossovers.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the build (the cable being the exception – and I guess that is personal preference).

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well and shallow fitting IEMs can be problematic. I first tried the large silicones supplied, and neither sealed particularly well. Next I tried the Ostry tuning tips and the right ear fit well, but the left was again problematic. And when I did get a seal, if the seal was a little too good (creating a vacuum), the tips would slide off the narrow lip. Spin-Fits fared a little better but Sony Isolation (or Trinity Kombis) suffered the same fate. Comply T400s fit really well, but Crystal foams would slide off. In the end I had to stretch a pair of Shure Olives (they are my go-tos with shallow fitting IEMs nowadays, and got a really good seal in both ears, and the Olives stayed intact. This is something PaiAudio may like to address at some stage though – when using a high gloss plastic/PVC, you really need a more pronounced lip for tip retention.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Stock silicone (left) and Ostry tuning (right)	Spin-Fit (left) and Sony Isolation (right)	Shure Olive (left) and Crystal foam (right)

Isolation with the MR3 will depend on the seal you achieve and possibly also the insertion depth. With the Shure Olives, isolation was really good, and I couldn't really hear the keyboard while I was doing the final edits. With music playing, isolation is great, and I'd have no problems using these in public transport.

Comfort for me is excellent – the MR3s are another of those designs which simply disappear when worn. In fact these rate up there with the Alclair Curve as being one of the best fitting and most comfortable IEMs I've ever worn. They sit well within my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are extremely easy to sleep in.


Shure Olives have a narrow stem - but with perseverance can be stretched	Supremely comfortable and an exquisite fit

So the MR3 looks good, has a pretty nice build (with a couple of caveats), and is comfortable to wear. How do they sound?

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the PaiAudio MR3. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, and Shure Olive tips.

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 15-16/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-75 dB. Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – surprisingly well extended and there is even the tiniest bit of rumble there, but it is not the star of the show. Bass takes a back-seat to the mid-range, and sub-bass is slightly rolled off compared to mid-bass
Mid-bass – very slightly elevated compared to sub-bass, but generally reasonably flat (frequency wise). No noticeable bleed into the mid-range, and almost enough impact to sound natural. Not a warm or rich bass – but rather a quick, and well textured mid-bass. Balanced compared to lower mid-range
Lower mid-range – might be the tiniest bit recessed compared to both bass and upper mid-range, but sounds extremely well balanced throughout, and the last thing you would call the MR3 is U or V shaped. There is very good texture with deeper male vocals, and the clarity on the mid-range overall is stunning.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but it is a slow rise from lower mid-range to the first small peak at about 2 kHz, then a dip and sharper rise toward 4 kHz. The result is an incredibly clean and clear vocal range, with good presence to lend a sense of euphony to female vocals – but without over-doing it and making the entire signature too lean or dry. The upper mid-range on the MR3 is (for me) one of the best qualities of this IEM. Brilliant!
Lower treble – there is a definite peak at around 6-7 kHz, so if you're sensitive to this area, it might pay to be cautious with the MR3. I'm not – so this tuning is generally good for me. There is some roll-off immediately after this peak, so you have a lot of clarity and definition without any real harshness or brittleness. One of my tests for lower treble is to listen to the natural decay of cymbal hits and see if it is overly truncated. highlighted or sounds natural. For me the treble decay might be very slightly truncated, but there is enough there to still sound pretty natural. Purists might like a little more – but I find the tuning very good. There might just be a question that the peak at 6-7 kHz could use some softening (more on that later).

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Excellent with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well without spotlighting or over-emphasising.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have good presence, but (depending on the recording) sometimes the decay after the initial crash can be truncated slightly
An extremely clean and clear monitor with good resolution portrayed reasonably naturally.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Extremely good directional queues, and just at the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so average width and depth
Spherically presented stage – with slightly more emphasis on width than depth, but definitely not one dimensional
Compelling sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”. A genuine sense of space was apparent with both.

Strengths

For those who like a more balanced (but brighter) signature, you will love the MR3. I find them to have a great sense of overall balance with a slight leaning toward brightness.
The MR3's overall clarity without being harsh or too dry is one of its best points
Very good with both male and female vocals
Good with dynamic music – and able to show very good contrast between bass and upper mid-range (eg Cello and Violin)
Fantastic with acoustic music and gives strings good sense of realism and tone when plucked, and nice edge to electric guitar when strummed.
Extremely good with female vocals, lending a slight air of euphony and sweetness – without over doing it. Sarah Jarosz (my latest “obsession”) sounded incredible.
Genre master for lovers of a balanced to bright signature – I enjoyed it with almost all genres tested – from classical, jazz and blues to light electronic, grunge and pop. See below for the genres it was a little weak on.

Weaknesses

Although I really like the bass and find it quite balanced, lovers of more bass would be best to be cautious. I found some hip-hop, electronic and trance just needed a little more impact. And depending on your tastes for Rock – again some may find the bass response lacking.
While the MR3 sounds fantastic at lower volume levels (still very clear), some may find them a little bright if you listen at the higher end of the volume spectrum

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The MR3 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone 5S, or any of the FiiO DAPs. I'm at my usual 65-75dB listening level (with typical pop/rock songs) on the iP5S at a volume level of around 25%, or on the E17K around 15-16/60 on low gain. I did try amping with the E17K, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement. I also used the IMS Hybrid Valve Amp combined with my iPhone as transport, and the combination of the IMS DAC and slight valve warmth is one I could listen to for hours. From my tests, the MR3 neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification, but you might want to try it for tonality reasons. One of the DAC/amps I tried combined with the iP5S was FiiO's Q1, mainly to try the bass boost, and that was a really nice combo for when I wanted a bit more thump.

EQUALISATION
This is the one area where I'd imagine that occasionally people who love the MR3's overall tonality will probably want to (for specific music) adjust the bass response. For this – because all I wanted was a gradual rise in both mid and sub-bass, I used the tone controls on the E17K. I dialled in +4 bass and went back to some Trance tracks I'd played earlier. The response was excellent, and gave some excellent impact, and a little warmth to the signature. Its nice to know the MR3 responds well to a bit of bass boost or EQ, and it just adds to the feel that the MR3 really can be a complete all-rounder. Below is the graph where I compared the frequency response original vs +4 bass and -4 treble on the E17K.

COMPARISONS
This is always a hard one to pick. As a reviewer you want to show something in the same price range, and also show something with similar capabilities.

For the MR3 I chose to compare two IEMs in the $200 category (the Trinity Sabre and MEE P1), two more expensive BA based option – the Alclair Curve at $249 and Jays q-Jays at $299, and a triple hybrid – the DUNU DN-2000J at $278.

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the MR3 had the Shure Olive tips and no EQ was used. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

MR3 (~$199) vs MEE P1 (~ $199)


MR3 vs MEE P1	Frequency response graph

Build quality goes to the MEE P1 (the metal vs PVC and inclusion of better cables) by a reasonable margin. Fit and comfort are very good on both but if anything the MR3 is slightly more comfortable than the P1 (but it is very close). As far as accessories go, it isn't close – the P1 has a wonderful overall total package and the MR3 unfortunately is very sparse in comparison. Sonically both are excellent, but very different. The P1 comparatively are a lot warmer, have a lot more body to the vocals, but sound more detailed, and not as clear. There is the stronger bass, and the feel of more recession in the lower mid-range. The MR3 are comparatively a lot leaner, vocals are cleaner, give the sensation of being closer, and there is more lower treble energy (brightness). Because they are so different, it is quite hard to compare, and I had to spend a lot of time becoming accustomed to each. Both tend to sound natural in their own way once my ears adjusted. For my individual preference sonically, I would probably take the MR3 (especially if I EQ in just a little more bass warmth). But as far as overall packages go – the P1 gives a little more value.

MR3 (~$199) vs Trinity Atlas (~ $218)


MR3 vs Trinity Atlas	Frequency response graph

Build quality goes to the Atlas (metal shell vs PVC and inclusion of better cables). Fit and comfort are again very good on both but again the MR3 is slightly more comfortable than the Atlas (but it is very close). Again with accessories the Atlas has the MR3 beat by a comfortable margin. Sonically both are quite different again. The Atlas comparatively is quite V shaped (this was with the gun-metal filter) with a lot of sub-bass, comparatively recessed lower mid-range, and quite vivid upper mid-range. The Atlas is very clear, but can suffer from bass bleed depending on the filter used. After having the Atlas in my ears for a while, the MR3 sounded very anaemic – but this changed when I switched again (with the Atlas sounding boomy and over done). They simply are really different. The MR3 has more balance, but definitely is very bass light comparatively. My personal preference here is for the MR3's balance – but I can't deny how fun the Atlas can be with the right music and appropriate filter.

MR3 (~$199) vs Alclair Curve2 (~ $249)


MR3 vs Alclair Curve	Frequency response graph

Build quality is shared here, although the Curve has the much better cable. Fit and comfort are excellent on both and is really to close to call. Accessories this time are a lot closer (both packages are on the sparse side) but the Curve edges marginally ahead with use of foam tips and the clamshell case. Sonically this time the two are a lot closer, and the main difference is in the better bass presence of the Curve. In fact this time with the one-on-one comparison, the Curve is the earphone with the slightly better sense of overall balance, and it is this bass response which I really am starting to think the MR3 might be missing. Both still retain very good clarity. The MR3 in this comparison still sounds really good, very clear, very clean – its just the comparative differences in bass making the MR3 seem a lot brighter than it appears when worn by itself for a while. My preference here is ultimately for the dual BA Alclair Curve – but I'm really appreciating the strengths of the MR3.

MR3 (~$199) vs Jays q-Jays (~ $299)


MR3 vs Jays q-Jays	Frequency response graph

Build, accessories and even comfort go to the diminutive q-Jays. When worn you forget that they are there. I have not had a more comfortable pair of IEMs – and the MR3 (while excellent) still can't dethrone the king. Once again the q-Jays cable is far superior. Sonically these two are a lot closer. Bass response on both is very similar, and the tonality overall is similar with the main difference being the MR3 sounding comparatively slightly brighter and a little more vivid through the upper mid-range, while the q-Jays are just a little more balanced overall. Clarity is excellent on both, and the fact that the MR3 is not embarrassed by going toe to toe with the q-Jays says a lot about the tuning. If I were to pick for my tastes though, I would choose the q-Jays for the overall package – but the MR3 would make an excellent substitute for someone whose budget tops out a little short of the q-Jays level.

MR3 (~$199) vs DN-2000J (~ $278)


MR3 vs DUNU DN-2000J	Frequency response graph

This is the one I was looking forward to because I thought they would sound quite similar. But lets start with build and accessories - which the 2000J takes the points for quite comfortably. On fit, the MR3 comes out clear winner – and this time with the cable, although the 2000J has a good cable, it is fixed (so can't be replaced) – which makes the comparison a draw so far. Sonically the two are quite close with very similar bass levels although the 2000J does hit the tiniest bit harder (the titanium dynamic driver at play). The 2000J has slightly fuller upper mids, and is as bright, but less “peaky” than the MR3 – and this is the first time I've really noticed any unevenness in the MR3's lower treble. This shows how important it is to run a variety of comparisons and tests to get as much data as possible. The DN-2000J can still be a bit piercing with cymbal hits at times, but for my personal tastes it is an earphone I still love. The MR3 and DN-2000J share a lot of similar traits, but once again the MR3 just sounds that little bit leaner overall.

SOURCES


Some sources used in testing - X5ii, X3ii and L&P L3	Effect of a 75ohm impedance adaptor

As I alluded to earlier, the MR3 doesn't need amping, and behaved extremely well with all of my sources. But I was aware with it utilising a triple BA and two way cross-over that it could be sensitive to changes in impedance. So I put it back on the measuring bench and this time ran a comparative measurement using DUNU's 75 ohm adaptor. As suspected there was a frequency change with the bass lowering a little, but also the lower treble coming back a little. I actually quite liked this change – and it was soon afterwards that I went back to the EQ again and this time elected to increase the bass by again but also reduce the treble slightly too (this time without the impedance adaptor). I've included this graph also, and it is amazing how much this changes the signature again. Anyway – if you are using a high Z source, I'd suggest trying a little bass boost with it, and you may be pleasantly surprised with the combo. Alternatively if you have an E17K try just either adjusting the bass slightly, or alternatively reducing the treble a bit (-2 or -4 is all you'll need).

PaiAudio MR3 - SUMMARY

Anyone reading through the review so far could be excused thinking that at the $200 level the MR3 is good but has been eclipsed by similar IEMs in its price range – but nothing could be further from the truth.

The MR3 has a very good build, a wonderful fit, and terrific isolation. Its overall package could be be enhanced by a rethink of the accessory package, and also inclusion of a better braided cable. PaiAudio may end up giving up a little strength for aesthetics and manageability, but IMO it would be worth it. Something similar to Trinity's braided cables would be a good place to start.

Sonically the MR3 has reasonable balance throughout the spectrum, but with a leaner bass line and peakier upper treble that delivers a lean, clean and clear signature which tends toward the brighter side of neutral. When listened to in isolation (no comparisons) I found it excellent for my personal tastes with fantastic detail and very good for low volume listening. When compared to some of my other IEMs the comparative brightness in the lower treble is highlighted and because of this it tends to also draw attention to the lean (but well extended bass). By applying a little EQ (lifting the bass and dropping the treble slightly, or alternatively keeping the bass where it is and dropping the lower treble a little), the resultant signature is excellent, and one I would happily consider paying for and adding to my collection. Overall the MR3 will appeal to lovers of a leaner, cleaner brighter signature – but those who like the bass more robust, or like a warmer signature, should perhaps avoid.

To me the MR3 is definitely worth its asking price, and PaiAudio can be justifiably proud of their tuning. If I was to recommend anything to them it would be to think about using a damper to slightly tone down those lower treble peaks, just to bring the whole tonality closer to neutral.

My only deductions are for the minor issues with build/cables, and the rather sparse comparative overall package. It is an easy recommendation for anyone who really enjoys a leaner signature, and again, well worth its asking price. 4 stars from me.

My thanks once again to Alex for the chance to be able to review the MR3.

Wow! Really impressive review Sir!

Thanks - they are a really impressive earphone Alex. PaiAudio should be very proud of what they have achieved with these.

fantastic review, nicely balanced between subjective listening and measurements. thanks for setting a good standard.

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I can remember when I first joined Head-Fi, I started with some pretty cheap gear, and I remember looking at the signatures of some of the long-time posters, and marvelling at some of the gear they had available to them. Over the next few years, I bought, sold, and slowly worked my way through a lot of former flagships in order to find out what sort of signature moved me.

In that time, I got to hear and own the AKG K701/702, DT880, RS1, SRH1840, HD700 and HD600. Then things changed when I bought the Beyerdynamic T1, and all of a sudden it was time to thin down the number of headphones I owned, and concentrate on what I really liked. From that point – most of my listening was with either the T1 or HD600. This was mostly thanks to Head-Fi friendship with a fellow NZer (Rizki – I still owe you), when I finally got to hear the legendary HD800 and also AKG's new K812, and compare them with my set-up at the time. For anyone wanting to read about my findings then – try here and here.

After spending some good quality time with both headphones, I ended up keeping the T1 and HD600, and although I knew one day I'd probably end up with an HD800 – I really didn't feel the need to move onward and upward at the time. In fact this year, the T1 has had very little head time, and it has predominantly the HD600 which has stolen all my leisure listening time. The HD600 remains for me the one headphone I've consistently gone back to, and that never ceases to wow me. It has also slowly become my main headphone by default. Until now that is.

Cue Jensy (Head-Fi's “White Lotus”) sending me a PM asking if I'd like to take the new HD800S for a spin for a week, and write a review based on what I'd heard. Of course I jumped at the chance, keen to hear what changes Sennheiser had made, and what the initial fuss was all about.

So a week ago I received the HD800S, and since then I've been steadily putting them through their paces, and in that time they've made me completely change my idea of what my audio chain will look like in the long term. So if you don't mind accompanying me on a little journey, we'll take a look at the HD800S and why (for me) it has become end-game.

ABOUT SENNHEISER
I'm not going to go into too much detail in this section – because I'd imagine practically everyone must know who Sennheiser is. The company was formed in 1945 by Fritz Sennheiser and seven fellow engineers, and their first product was actually a voltmeter. In 1946 they built their first microphone, and by 1955 the company had grown to 250 employees. As the company grew, so did their product range, and in 1968 they have been credited with introducing the world's first open headphones. Sennheiser has been a pioneer in high end audio, always pushing the boundaries, and several of their products have reached legendary status over a number of years – especially the incomparable HD600 and HD650 (still popular almost 2 decades on), the HD800 (widely regarded as one of the World's best dynamic headphones, and of course the Orpheus (1 & 2) – statement electrostats built with no budget restraints and designed to be the best headphone the world has experienced.

Sennheiser now has more than 2700 employees globally and an annual turnover of almost 700m Euro. Not bad for a company that started from such small beginnings just 70 years ago. And the vision that drives the company is still as strong today:
We are shaping today the audio world of tomorrow - that is the ambition that we and our company live by from day to day. This vision statement describes what we are hoping to achieve together. The foundation for this is our history, our culture of innovation and our passion for excellence.

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with a tour review sample of the HD800S by Sennheiser and facilitated by Jensy for the purposes of review. I am not affiliated with Sennheiser in any way, nor do I make any financial gain, and this is my opinion of the HD800S after just over a week with them. The HD800S will be returned this week to the next tour recipient.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays). My usual listening level is around 65-75 dB.

For the purposes of this review – I have used the HD800S out of many sources – including my iDSD (desktop), FiiO X7, L&P LP5, and utilised both solid state amplifiers (FiiO K5 + E17K, and iFi iDSD) and tube amplifiers (LD MKIV and Venture Electronics Enterprise. This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

		[size=inherit][/size]
Outer box - front cover	Outer box rear cover	Certificate of authenticity + diffuse field frequency response

The Sennheiser HD800S come in an unmistakably Sennheiser box, consisting of outer printed sleeve / box over an inner protective case. The outer box measures 273 x 350 x 150mm, is relatively thin cardboard, and is all black except for the distinctive Sennheiser blue logo on the lower front. The front also features in image of the left hand ear-cup, and the simple slogan “crafter for perfection”. There are some barcodes on the back and sides, along with logos for the Hi-Res Audio standard and their own 2 year warranty.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Outer box	Inner box	Manual and cleaning cloth

Opening the outer box/sleeve reveals the inner case, which is essentially a well internally padded hinged lid hard case. Also revealed are the comprehensive manual, a cleaning cloth, and USB key which has an electronic copy of the authenticity certificate and frequency response, and also a full electronic copy of the manual. The manual also contains full specifications and other information (in multiple languages) about the HD800S – and I've quickly photographed the English section in case anyone is interested.

		[size=inherit][/size]

Opening the case reveals the new look HD800S in all its glory, safely nestled in a form fitting foam enclosure covered with black satiny material. There is a balanced cable in another bag, and also the main single ended cable nestling in its own indentation (which is covered by its own foam cover – to keep everything snug and secure).

		[size=inherit][/size]
First opening	Single ended cable exposed (balanced is in bag)	Cable bag - both cables and USB key

The overall package is simple yet elegant. Unfortunately I have no balanced amp which can utilise the balanced connection – but for some this will be an added bonus.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Sennheiser)

RRP	Normally 1700 USD – currently at USD1579 (Amazon)
Type	Circum-aural dynamic stereo headphones
Driver	56mm ring radiator transducers
Frequency Range	10 to 44100 Hz (-3 dB), 4 to 51000 Hz (-10 dB)
Nominal Impedance	300 ohm
SPL at 1kHz	102dB (1 Vrms)
THD	< 0.02% (1 kHz, 1 Vrms)
Weight	330g (headphones only)
Cable Material	Silver plated OFC, balanced, shielded, para-aramid reinforced 3m
Cable - Termination	Two - 1 x 6.3mm gold plated SE and 1 x XLR 4 balanced

FREQUENCY GRAPH
Unfortunately I have no way of properly measuring the HD800S – my measuring system is only designed for IEMs, and I would not attempt to try for crude measurements on such a precision headphone. Lucky for me, Tyll (Innerfidelity) has already measured them, so I have included their graphs for both the HD800 and HD800s. For more on Tyll's methods of measuring, please visit the Innerfidelity website, which is an absolute wealth of information regarding measurements, what they are, and how to interpret them.


HD800S graph courtesy of Innerfidelity	HD800 (original) graph courtesy of Innerfidelity

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other headphones also using Tyll's graphs for similar reference.

What I’m hearing from the HD800S:

Excellent sub-bass extension which has enough slam to clearly rumble, but is in perfect balance with the rest of the spectrum.
Slightly elevated mid-bass with enough punch to be highly enjoyable, but not enough to dominate. Again the bass sounds perfectly natural to me – if maybe slightly elevated.
Crystal clear mid-range which equally portrays amazing timbre and depth in both male and female vocals
Mildly emphasised upper mid-range which gives a slightly euphonic and sweet air – particularly to female vocals. This adds some euphonic warmth, but does seem to overly colour the sound.
The lower treble may be slightly elevated, particularly around 6 kHz but to me it is not overdone at all, and the clarity and extension of the treble overall is quite breathtaking.
Overall the HD800S is a headphone which has amazing levels of vocal clarity, but also enough bottom end to sound completely natural, and maybe ever so slightly warm. And this is the strength of the HD800S – the clarity, speed, timbre and depth of the bass, yet the presence, air and clarity of the mid-range and lower treble – without any perceived masking at all.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN / TECHNOLOGY
The overall look of the Sennheiser HD800S (which is a continuation of the HD800 and to a lesser extent the HD700) could be described as futuristic, perhaps slightly sci-fi, but always distinctive. I know people who regard it as a bit pretentious, and others who love the unmistakable design. I fall very much in the latter camp – and the one thing I always liked about some of the Colour-ware HD800 mods was how good the black looked. Well this time The HD800S frame is primarily in black and to me it looks gorgeous.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Stainless steel band with engraving	Headband padding thickness	Better view of padding

The build is really good too, and a lot of the things we don't see all ultimately deliver sonically. Starting with the headband assembly, it consists of a 22mm width of sprung stainless steel which has the serial number and model designation engraved in it. This sits atop a 45mm wide and 10mm high padded underside with microfibre covering. It is very soft and very comfortable, and for me has good weight distribution. What you don't see is the layered metal and plastic construction is especially designed to dampen or attenuate vibrations to the ear-cups – so that the drivers are completely isolated from unwanted distortion.

The extenders look at first glance to be plastic, but research into the construction reveals that they are actually a special polymer initially developed within the aerospace industry, with the sole purpose of contributing qualities of high strength and at the same time light weight. The yokes are made from the same material, and are hinged to allow the cups to swivel on 4 axis. I have no problem adjusting quickly and easily for a fantastic seal.

		[size=inherit][/size]
HD800S side on	Extender looks like plastic but is in fact a high-tech polymer	Yoke assembly with 4 axis swivel

The cups themselves are D shaped, with the ear-pads well padded and covered by the same extremely comfortable micro-fibre outer. They measure externally 120mm high and 110mm wide at the outer pads. Internally the pads have 75mm of available height and 60mm of available cavity with a depth of approximately 25-30mm, so my ears never come close to touching either the edge of the pads or the protective mesh over the transducer.

The transducer itself is 56mm (which Sennheiser tells us is the largest to be used in a dynamic headphone), is a ring radiator design, and is encased in stainless steel for further dampening of unwanted vibration. Sennheiser also goes on to describe their new absorber technology innovation which is designed to absorb resonance so that bass will not mask higher frequencies, and also prevents any higher peaks in the lower treble. The inner cup is also designed so that sound waves will enter the ear on a slight angle to enhance the perception of spatial awareness, and create a more natural 3D sound.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Interior of the cups	Right hand ear cup	Closer view of the driver enclosure

The outer cup is made of the same high grade polymer, with an inner fine silver mesh to protect the transducers and allow the headphone to breathe. And there is a final black honey comb mesh directly over the drivers for protection and ideal airflow.

Each of the yokes has a left and right designator printed in silver on the rear, and adjacent to this is the cable socket. These connectors are a barrel type which is unique to the HD800 and HD800S, and consists of a single male plug (on each side) with two recessed pins, which fits perfectly into a slotted receptacle socket on the HD800S. When mated, they fit extremely firmly together.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Connector and connector socket	Single ended cable	Jack and connectors

The cable is 3m long (there are two of them), and both utilise silver plated copper wiring which is in balanced configuration (separate signal and ground for each side). The wires are then shielded and covered with a para-aramid outer sheath (so it is either Kevlar or Twaron fibres) which provides and exceptional strength to weight ratio. There is extremely good cable relief at both the earphone connectors and at the single-ended or XLR jack.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Balanced cable	4 pin XLR connector	Close up of headphone male connector - "L" marking

The build on the HD800S is exceptional, and I can't see any flaws

FIT / COMFORT
I've already covered the cup dimensions and covering, and apart from one small issue, they are quite possible the most comfortable headphones I've worn. Unfortunately I wear glasses and the clamp force (while by no means excessive) is enough to force my glasses onto the bridge of my nose. If I take the glasses off, the comfort is quite simply amazing – good distribution of weight, really soft pads, and the sort of headphone I can quite literally wear for hours.

The answer to the glasses issue is of course to slightly bend the headband to relieve a little of the clamping pressure – but unfortunately for now (because it is a tour unit) I've had to persevere with the slight discomfort. Not Sennheisers fault, and very fixable if it was my own pair. Something to note anyway.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the HD800S. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my iFi iDSD both as DAC and amp.

For the record – on most tracks, during my listening evaluation the volume level on the HD800S measured at the ear was around 60-70dB A-weighted. The room was fairly quiet, and I simply had no reason to add more volume (there was enough clarity definition not to look for any more volume). Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Relativities

Sub-bass – well extended, and able to stretch to extremely low frequencies in a sine sweep. Slightly recessed comparative to mid-bass, but enough presence for rumble, and very good impact.
Mid-bass – slightly elevated compared to sub-bass and lower mid-range, but a natural hump which doesn't sound too boomy or over done. No bleed into mid-range, and speed is amazing. Impact is very good. Adds some warmth to the overall signature – but again very natural sounding.
Lower mid-range – sounds reasonably flat to me (which is good). Might be the slightest bit recessed compared to slightly elevated mid-bass but in perfect balance. Texture and tonality with vocals is incredible, as is clarity.
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but utilising the natural rise which lends to great cohesion between upper and lower mid-range. Clarity and air carry incredible detail, and female vocalists in particular have a touch of euphony in their presentation. For me the mid-range on the HD800S is simply sublime.
Lower treble – detailed, extended, maybe slightly on the bright and airy side, but not peaky at all, and in perfect harmony to the rest of the sonic signature. Cymbals especially are a joy to behold, with the decay from hits, or softer brush strokes (Jazz) sounding very alive, and definitely realistic.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

I have heard nothing with this level of clarity whilst maintaining a balanced overall signature.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have life-like presence, no early truncation on decay.
Excellent portrayal of both texture and tone throughout the spectrum
Micro details clearly presented – from the sounds of fingers sliding on strings through to singers drawing a breath. Life-like.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Again I'm lost for superlatives here. I haven't heard anything which images quite like the HD800S (maybe the original HD800). The word which keeps coming to me is precision.
Directional queues are stunning, and portrayed outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – excellent width and depth. I should note here that I have heard headphones (AKG) which portray more width with Binaural tracks, but the actual impression is wrong because the instruments simply aren't as far away as portrayed. I use Amber Rubarth's binaural album Sessions from the 7^th Ward, and I know from video footage how they've positioned the instruments. The HD800S manages incredible realism with Amber's tracks, and for me that is far more important than the illusion of width that isn't really there.
Completely spherically presented stage with impressive width depth and height
Holographic and compelling sense of immersion both with applause section of Loreena McKennit's live recording of “Dante's Prayer” (the HD800S has me sitting in the crowd with the applause washing around me), and also the very spatial “Let it Rain” from Amanda Marshall.

Other Strengths

Tonality and timbre are incredible. The only other headphone I have heard which comes close to the overall tonality and timbre of the HD800S is Sennheiser's own HD600. My mother played both violin and piano, my brother and I both played guitar (he was actually in a band in his younger years), and I have grown up around live instruments and live performances my entire life.
One of my mother and grandmother's favourites piano pieces was Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata. I have Wilhelm Kempff's excellent performance, and what I'm hearing takes me back to my youth (just the player and the actual instrument are clearly superior).
Likewise with guitar – as a self taught amateur, I am intimately familiar with how a real acoustic guitar sounds – and especially the realism of fingers on strings, the sharp edges of a picked string, and even the rap of fingers on the body. With Nils Lofgren's Acoustic Live album, it is as though I am in the room with him – and it is completely realistic.
Brilliant with both male and female vocals
Excellent with dynamic music – especially if it has some bass slam (incredible with rock)
Genre master – I enjoyed it with all genres tested – from classical, jazz and blues to electronic, grunge and pop. I haven't heard a better headphone with my favourite band (Pearl Jam). Eddie's voice has perfect timbre and texture, and the detail in the cymbals and acoustic guitar in “Elderly Woman Behind the Counter ...” is utterly addicting.
My favourite though is female vocals – they have been a passion of mine for as long as I can remember, and it is this area which for me personally I have not heard any IEM or headphone portray more perfectly than the HD800S. It's really hard to describe simply how good the HD800S is – but for me when listening to an artist like Sarah Jarosz (if you haven't heard her before be sure to check out “Build Me Up From Bones”), the mix of realism and detail without the cost of pure tonality – for me it is end game.

Weaknesses

Sonically I haven't been able to spot any in my week with this headphone. Perhaps I need more time.
This is a question which may be asked so I'll pre-empt. The HD800S doesn't mask sibilance – it will portray it if it is in the recording. But that's all it does – portray honestly – neither enhancing or masking. I don't see this as a weakness of the headphone
Apart from sonically – the only other weakness is the initial clamp force – which can be easily alleviated by adjustment of the headband.

SOURCE / AMPLIFICATION
The HD800 was always described by others as needing a synergistic source and amp combo to get the best out of them. And I have to admit when I originally spent time with the original HD800, I liked it best out of my LD MKIV OTL tube amp. Interestingly enough when I had it at a NZ Head-Fi Meet a couple of years ago, there were two sources at my table which proved very popular with the HD800 – the Little Dot, and also the L&P LP5 DAP. I tried various amplifiers (properly volume matching with an SPL meter and test tones), with the aim at seeing what level of amplification was required, and what (subjectively) I preferred with the HD800S.

Desktop
For a desktop solution, I tried Venture Electronic's $800 Enterprise tube amp, and also my LD MKIV. Both sounded incredible with the HD800S, a good sense of dynamics and detail, but both were also a little softer in presentation – almost relaxed compared to my initial testing with iFi's iDSD. Later during my comparisons with the T1 and HD600 it reinforced that I still prefer both with an OTL tube amp (especially the HD600 + Enterprise pairing), but with the HD800S I've been finding that consistently I'm preferring the SS iDSD's amplifier section over the use of tubes. The presentation of the iDSD is similar, but there seems to be slightly sharper and clearer definition, and for me the HD800S is perfect as it is without any extra smoothing. Swapping rapidly between the two was easy too – as I was simply using the DAC section of the iDSD for both, so once volume matched it was simply a matter of hot-swapping.


HD800S and Little Dot Mark IV	HD800S and VE Enterprise

My next test as a desktop was to utilise FiiO's K5 – first with the E17K (real budget set-up), and then with the X7. The K5 + E17K was a revelation on how good the HD800S could sound on a relatively modest set-up, and is more a testament to the versatility of the HD800S. This time when switching between LD MKIV (or Enterprise) and the K5 + E17K there was very little noticeable difference. Both sounded very good, very clean, and slightly on the smooth side. However neither matched up to the overall definition and tonality of the iDSD. Keeping the K5 and switching to X7, and this time a little more depth and overall definition was present, but again fast switching with the OTLs yielded little significant advantage.


Unlikely combo - HD800S + FiiOs K5 & E17K	My preference - HD800S and iFi iDSD

The tough part was trying to compare the iDSD to the K5 + E17k or X7 – it just took too much time to swap out the sources. But the one thing I kept coming back to was the overall tonality of the iDSD by itself. For my tastes it is a perfect pairing with the HD800S and one that I feel no need to look at upgrading. This suits me perfectly as it it the ultimate small form factor for a desk set-up which keeps clutter to a minimum. So my subjective desktop rankings from the gear tested – ranked from top to bottom would look like this:

iDSD + HD800S
iDSD + LD MKIV/VE Enterprise + HD800S
K5+X7 (with or without the OTLs) + HD800S
K5+E17K (with or without the OTLs) + HD800S

Edit 28 Sept - My own pair of HD800S arrived, and I spent a couple of hours with them and the Enterprise. If anyone wants an idea of how revealing the HD800S are, I finally noticed a low level bit of noise with the Enterprise and no music playing. Basically the amp is picking up some USB noise from the mouse. Spent the next 2 hours trouble shooting - including changing cables. Suddenly had a brainwave and removed the iPurifier 2 from the iDSD (I won one in a competition, and thought - why not?). Not sure if the iPurifier2 is faulty - but suddenly the distortion was gone, and everything is back to crystal clear again. Retried some of my comparisons, and now I'd put the HD800S + iDSD, and HD800 + iDSD + Enterprise on the same plane. They are both excellent - slight variations in tone - but both incredibly transparent. And in this scenario, the Enterprise pulls ahead of the Little Dot as well.

New order of preference (desktop)

iDSD + HD800S = iDSD + VE Enterprise + HD800S
iDSD + LD MKIV + HD800S
K5+X7 (with or without the OTLs) + HD800S
K5+E17K (with or without the OTLs) + HD800S

Portable Devices
You're kidding right Brooko? No actually – the HD800S is a pretty benign load if the player has a half decent amplification system, and one of the things I love doing is trying it with a reasonable portable source.

First up was the FiiO X7 – with the AM3 module – but running single ended. I realise the AM2A and AM5 modules are more powerful – but I just like the linearity of the AM3 module better and think it pairs far better with the HD800S. At a volume level of 70-75/120 on low gain I am getting my target SPL of 60-70 db A-weighted, with peaks around 75 dB. The sound is incredibly well layered and dynamic, and this set-up would be perfect for taking the HD800S to another room or outside on the deck during a quiet sunny day.


Another surprising combo - X7 + AM3 and HD800S	HD800S and Luxury & Precision LP5 = sublime

Next was the Luxury & Precision L5 Pro. Approximately 40/60 on high gain (it still has another gain level to go) nets around the same volume as the X7 + AM3, and again this presentation is eminently listen-able and thoroughly enjoyable. Compared to the X7, the LP5 Pro is perhaps a little smoother overall, and maybe also a little more laid back. The dynamics and depth of presentation are alls till there – but for my tastes, it is just a little behind the X7 in terms of overall fidelity with the HD800S.

Lastly was the TOTL Luxury & Precision LP5. And it is with this DAP that the HD800S absolutely shines. I'd taken this DAP to a meet previously – and had a couple of HD800 owners tell me that it rivalled their home desktops systems. Unfortunately the pot doesn't have markings but I'd estimate I'm only at ¼ of the overall pot for similar volume levels. And I have to agree with the others who tried the original HD800 with the LP5 – it truly is fantastic sound, and when I eventually get my HD800S, this is the combo which I am likely to use often when I'm not at my desktop. The sense of depth and immersion is every bit as good as the iDSD – phenomenal performance for a transportable set-up.

OTHER USES
This is getting a little long, so I'll try and be a little more concise with this.

Gaming
Truly excellent – especially with FPS. The first thing you notice is the clarity, the second is the completely 3D imaging and positional awareness. But its the third factor which really drew me n, and that is the overall tonality. The bottom end of the HD800S is truly magnificent and very much immersive – but it does this without masking detail of what is happening around you. I also used the HD800S with Darin Fong's Out Of Your Head low latency gaming preset, and that simply further added to the overall sense of space. Thoroughly recommended, although it is clearly a expensive option for a TOTL gaming experience.

Movies
Again I combined the HD800S with the iDSD and Darin's OOYH and settled down to watch “Inception”. I love this move both for it's score, and also some of the dramatic and dynamic audio moments in the movie. With this set-up, the movie was totally immersive, and TBH I'd prefer utilising the HD800 than using our modest Sony speaker set-up at home. Again – recommended.

COMPARISONS
For this section I only really wanted to compare the HD800S to my two favourite open headphones – the legendary HD600 and the Beyerdynamic T1 (original).

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was this time with the iDSD and also the LP5. All comparisons were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter first.

HD800S vs T1

[size=inherit][/size]
HD800S and Beyerdynamic T1 graphs	The HD800S and Beyer T1

These two TOTL dynamic headphones both have impeccable build and overall comfort, although for subjective looks, I'd probably take the sleek black look of the HD800S if I had the choice. In terms of sonic ability, the T1 is slightly brighter and peakier overall – with the HD800S having no less clarity and resolution, but a more balanced signature overall. And that is where the HD800S strength lies for me – brilliance in overall resolution yet without the overall brightness which now seems a little unnatural with the T1. Bass is actually very similar, although the HD800S bass seems to have a little more body, and a litle more extension. In terms of imaging, they both perform incredibly well with very precise positional cues – but the HD800 has a slightly larger sound-stage in terms of width, depth and height. The other big difference comes down to price. If we look at the 2^nd hand market, you can pick up a T1 nowadays for around $550-$600 USD, and an equivalent HD800S would be just under double that price.

So is the added fidelity and tonality worth the outlay? I guess that is a personal question for each of us. If you don't mind a brighter signature, and this is your first foray into the upper tiers of dynamic headphones, the T1 represents incredible value for money. I still very much enjoy what it brings to the table. But the HD800s for me brings those last illusive traits to the table – true tonality and timbre. And for me personally it does represent end-game, so it is with regret that the T1 will move on.

HD800S vs HD600

[size=inherit][/size]
HD800S and HD600 graphs	The HD800S and legendary HD600

Hardly a fair fight I'd imagine a lot of people are thinking – yet I think in the retuned HD800S, Sennheiser has actually created a sonic signature very much akin to the HD600's overall tone, timbre and texture. If we look first at the two in terms of build and comfort, the HD800S is clearly the better built headphone, but you really can't fault the HD600 for its modularity, and also for its ability to withstand the test of time. Mine is probably more than 10 years old, and apart from changes in pads, headband padding, and one failed driver, it is still in incredible condition. For comfort overall, I rank a well broken in HD600 and HD800 pretty similar. The secret to both is relaxing the clamp. The HD600 is definitely lighter, and this may appeal to some.

In terms of tonality the two are very similar with the HD800S having more bass extension, better bass definition, and better impression of overall speed and precision. The mid-ranges are similar, yet also different – with both having similar tonality, but the HD600 appearing just a little hazy in comparison. And the mid-range is where the definition and clarity of the HD800S again shows its strengths – but it is the HD600 which appears brighter, and also appears slightly less natural (in the vocal presence area), and its the first time I think I've ever said that about the HD600. The HD800S just sounds more life-like. In terms of imaging and sound-stage, the HD800S again is more expansive, clearer, and more defined – but these are not massive differences. Finally again we look at price, and this time the difference is a gulf with the HD800S being 4-5 times the price of an HD600 on the used market.

So again, is it worth the outlay? Well considering I said last time (after my 3^rd purchase of the HD600) that this time they were keepers, I now find myself eating my words. Someone else will end up getting a well loved but in great condition HD600, and I will move onto the HD800S. And although I will look back fondly on the HD600, and I still truly believe it is one of the greatest dynamic headphones Sennheiser has released, ultimately the HD800S moves me more. For my tastes it does everything perfectly.

SENNHEISER HD800S - SUMMARY

And here I am at the end of my time with the HD800S, and it hasn't been a “wow” experience over the last week, but instead a growing realisation that for my tastes, this headphone does very little (if anything) wrong, and everything (for my tastes) right.

From design and build through to fit and finish, the HD800S is definitely TOTL and one of the best dynamic circum-aural open headphones you can buy today.

Whilst we all know the previous strengths of imaging and sound-stage from the original HD800, the thing Sennheiser has addressed with this updated version centers more on tonality and balance. With added extension (particularly into the bass, a touch more warmth, and a reduction in the peak at 6 kHz, Sennheiser has addressed some of the perceived shortcomings of the earlier model. This feels like more of a music lovers headphone as a result, and for me personally seems more like a vastly improved HD600. Overall the balance, tonality and timbre are simply sublime, and all I could personally want in a headphone.

One of the best things about the HD800S is that its not particularly picky (IMO) regarding source or amplification. It sounds really good out of practically everything I've tried, and sublime out of the iDSD and also the LP5 – which really was a clincher. So for me, my time with tube amps is essentially over for now. There is a certain romanticism with tubes which I will miss, although I’m going to love having a little more space on my desk again.

I mentioned in my previous comparison of the T1 and HD600 vs the original HD800 that it was probably a headphone that I'd end up getting long term – but that it wasn't a priority issue at the time. The HD800S moved me in a way that the HD800 original failed to do – and as a result this afternoon I managed to find a nearly new HD800S locally, and have purchased it (waiting shipping advice now). All that is left for me to do now is sell my T1, HD600 and AKG K553 + likely the Little Dot, and whatever else I need to sell in order to get back on-side with my lovely wife again.

Its very hard to look at assigning a ranking for this review because it is a large sum of money to outlay, and because comparatively there are cheaper options out there which deliver a lot of what the HD800S represents. But value will be relative to individual perception, and as I stated in my title – these are end-game for me (essentially they tick every one of my boxes). I've heard many fine headphones in my time on Head-Fi – including the LCD2 and 3, top line Grados, and many others – particularly at our local meet. For me nothing has captured me like the HD800S has. It is very hard to find real faults with it. Yes it is expensive, but to me it is utterly worth the outlay.

I'd like to end by thanking Sennheiser for the chance to review the HD800S, and also Matt for making it possible.

HD800S. End Game. Definitely.

I may have spoken too soon! I remembered a number of folks on here talking about Sonarworks. Using that program, the HD800 and HD800S sound VERY similar now. There are still some differences, but neither is universally better. So now I'm thinking I may be smarter to stick with the HD800. Thoughts?

Well if you like the sound of the HD800S and need the HD800 + Sonarworks to get an equivalent - then personally I'd be just buying the HD800S. Otherwise you're always tied to Sonarworks. But that is just me .......

a little late to the ballgame here, but this is a great review! I have the HD800s showing up in a couple of days can't wait!!

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

This community never ceases to surprise me at times. I've slowly built a name for myself as a reviewer over the last couple of years, but sometimes my location can count against me, and being isolated means that opportunities do not always come my way. I also don't solicit reviews - preferring manufacturers come to me.

Anyway – I was having a friendly debate on the forums about cables and their effect on audio, and that night I got a PM from Head-Fier flinkenick (you'll also know him as Nic from The Headphone List). Nic is a big believer in cables, and we actually had a great PM conversation (respect shown on both sides) about cables and their effect on IEMs. I'm afraid I'm yet to be convinced – unless there are changes in frequency or phase which affect the frequency response (and it is measurable). During our conversation, Nic firstly talked about getting me some cables so that I could test different ones for myself. But in the end he must have talked to Sammy from Rhapsodio – and instead I received a sample of the Rhapsodio RTi1 to review.

At this point I'd just like to shout out to both Sammy and Nic, and thank them for the opportunity to review the RTi1. It's really nice when these opportunities come out of the blue.

ABOUT RHAPSODIO
From what I've been able to glean from various sources on the net, Rhapsodio is an Audio Company headed by main designer and enthusiast Chun Yin Mak Mak (also known as Sammy, or SolarSammy here on Head-Fi). The company was formed in early 2012 after Sammy found it difficult to find an IEM which suited his own particular tastes. This led to him experimenting with various BA and Dynamic set-ups, and culminated in release of the of the RDB and EOL series IEMs. Slowly gaining popularity, Sammy then developed his own technology (dubbed UltraMag) and this led to the release of the RTi1 in mid 2014.

Rhapsodio is based in Hong Kong and at the time of writing has 25 products listed on their website – 9 different IEMs, 15 different cables and an amplifier. This is a direct translation from their website – but I thought it gave a little insight into what drives Sammy:

RHAPSODIO (fantasy studio headphones) name is derived from Rhapsody with studios, meaning mad pursuit of the true voice of the movement between the studio. As the name suggests, our product design is based on acoustic-oriented, whimsical skills by creating headset, headphone upgrade cable, headphones, amplifiers and other acoustic showcase products!

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with a review sample of the Rhapsodio RTi1 by Sammy (via Nic) for the purposes of review. I offered to send it back to Nic on completion of the review, but he advised that the unit is a review sample and that I can keep it – so it is freely given, and gratefully accepted. I am not affiliated with Rhapsodio or Nic in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from this review, and it is my subjective opinion of the RTi1.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

For the purposes of this review – I used the RTi1 out of many sources – including my iDSD (desktop), FiiO X7, X3ii + E17K, L&P LP5, L5 Pro, L3 and even my iPhone 5S. Although I tested them with an amplifier (at different times I used the E17K, Q1 and IMS HVA), I do not think they benefit from additional amplification. In the time I have spent with the RTi1, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I have become more used to the signature of this IEM as I use them more often (brain burn-in). I've now had the RTi1 since late May 2016.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The RTi1 I have with me is not stock – so all I can comment on is what I was sent. I do suggest visiting the website for a better idea of the usual accessories included with the RTi1 - http://www.rhapsodiostore.com/products/rti1-ultramag-u-iem


The pelican style case	Side view

The RTi1 arrived to me in a nice sturdy 125 x 85 x 40mm Pelican style case – with padded interior and clear lid. Its a perfect fit for the RTi1 and OCC mk2 cable, and I appreciate Nic taking the time to ensure these had a safe and secure trip over. The normal case for a pair of RTi1 would be Rhapsodio's aluminium case with similar sizing (photo courtesy of Rhapsodio's website).

Apart from the RTi1, I also received Sammy's OCC mk2 cable and leather snap on cable tie (which is actually pretty functional with this cable), and a pack of Spin-fit tips.


RTi1 & OCC mk2 cable revealed	RTi1 + cable + tie

The total package with the stock RTi1 is equally sparse, and I guess the one thing I'd suggest Sammy consider would simply be a small variety of tips – especially Crystal or some other type of foam tips.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Rhapsodio)

	RTi1
Cost	Normally 800 USD – currently at USD600 with upgrade cable
Type	Single 8mm titanium dynamic driver
Frequency Range	10Hz to 23 kHz
Impedance	16 ohm
Sensitivity	95dB /mV
Cable	(non stock) OCC mk2 1.2m
Connectors	2 pin – recessed sockets (CM)
Jack	3.5mm gold plated brass, straight jack
Weight	Approx 37g (cable is 29g, earpieces + tips are 8g)
IEM Shell	CNC milled aluminium (2 piece)

FREQUENCY GRAPH

The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference. The graphs in this section are the RTi1 measured with Crystal foam tips (they give me the most consistent measurement with Veritas)


Frequency response and channel matching	CSD graph

What I’m hearing:

Slightly elevated mid-bass with enough punch to be highly enjoyable, but not enough to dominate.
Pretty good extension into sub-bass with enough rumble to be present but also balanced. Nothing is missing.
Slightly recessed lower mid-range, complimented by a rise into upper mid-range which is moderate enough to sound quite natural and very coherent – with good presence for harmonics (particular with female vocals). Because it is not a steep rise, male vocals do not sound too thin.
Upper mid-range is mildly emphasised, and this adds some euphonic warmth, but does not overly colour the sound.
There is a spike at 5-6 kHz which can give some bite particularly to cymbals and hi-hats, and edge to stringed instruments. It took quiet a while for me initially to get used to this. The spike may cause issues for some, but I don't notice it any more (brain burn-in), and I find now that it's instead giving a nice bit of air. Depending on the recording (if its hot or bright), it can make some tracks appear overly vivid and etched.
A bit of recession in the lower treble, but climbing to another small peak at around 9 kHz. This is a much smaller peak, and I've had no issues with sibilance.
Overall it is an IEM with a mild V or U shaped signature – with warm but natural sounding bottom end, clean and clear vocal area, and somewhat smooth upper end which also manages to portray upper end detail (cymbal decay) extremely well.

I included the CSD also, and you will see evidence of some mild ringing at 5-6 and 9 kHz, but comparatively little overall bass bleed into the mid-range frequencies (which is good considering the mid-bass hump.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
The Rhapsodio RTi1 is an interesting design. Overall it is quite a small lateral footprint (externally looks like a ½ circle and measure 17mm across and just 13mm in height). But when you turn it side on, it reveals an 11-12mm depth which flares out to about 19mm if you take the whole nozzle assembly into account. The outer shell is CNC'd aluminium which is then milled to an ergonomic shape. It is two piece with an approx 1.5mm faceplate keeping everything in. The application of the plate is very good and although the seam is visible, it is also very smooth, and pretty seamless as far as feel goes.


Outer face and Rhapsodio engraving	Side view showing 2 piece construction

The milling and finish on this pair is actually pretty good – but the buffed aluminium almost gives a home-made feel to them and this is accentuated by a couple of minor imperfections in this pair (around the socket). For all that (and the extremely light weight – just 4g each earpiece) the RT1i shell is very sturdy.

The Rhapsodio logo and name is very subtly engraved into the external plate on both sides, there is also a logo adjacent to the sockets, and the model number is engraved onto the rear left hand earpiece, close to the sockets.


Top view - sockets and internal face	RTi1 model number engraving and rear view

The nozzle sort of flares out from the body, is quite short, has a very good lip, mesh screen, and is 6mm in diameter. This means that T400 Comply tips are quite a tight fit, Crystal foams fit well, and most silicones also fit pretty well including Spin-fits if you jam them on hard enough. The nozzle has a wide flare, but also smooth tapered lip, so sadly for me Sony Isolation tips would not stay in place. Because of the depth of the body, and the shortness of the nozzle, they are quite a shallow fit – we'll cover this in the next section.


Internal moulding for comfort	Nozzle

Internally the RTi1 houses an 8mm dynamic driver with a titanium diaphragm capsule, and this I think is part of the reason for the RTi1's exceptional clarity. The second part is Rhapsodio's “UltraMag” technology. This is apparently (and I may not have this 100%) a combination of the titanium drivers and utilising magnetic fields within the housing to enhance driver reaction. It evidently also assists with transmission of the sound waves. I have to admit, the translations on UltraMag are pretty difficult to read, and there appears to be very little technical data available – so we'll just leave it as a titanium driver with UltraMag tech. You can draw your own inferences, or perhaps contact Sammy direct for a more technical description.


2 pin connectors	Y split and cinch

The connector socket is 2 pin, and is recessed. At first glance the socket looks pretty roughly cut, but then you realise that there is actually a plastic inner sheath in the socket, and the reason it looks a little DIY is because one of the corners looks slightly out of alignment. This is intentional though, and the slight gap is actually the port or vent for the dynamic driver (it took me ages to find it – so it is quite cleverly placed). The pins themselves are 2 prong (I tried briefly with my Curve and U6 – but they are thicker than both). The fit is reasonably snug, and they seem quite secure once mated.


Main cable braid	Gold plated brass and fibreglass jack

The cable I have is the OCC mk2, and it is extremely well made, and looks gorgeous. It is 1.2m long and consists of 2 sets of twisted pairs into a beautifully braided quad. The connectors have a nice simple strain relief, and have a pre-curved loop of memory sheath which naturally hangs over my ears. The Y-split and sheath are a mix of stainless steel and carbon fibre which are fairly weighty but work well. The jack is gold plated standard 3.5mm and the casing is a mix of brass and carbon fibre. The jack is also iPhone case friendly. The cable itself is very flexible, and encased in a PPE outer sheath which is nice to the touch. There are slight micro-phonics when fitted over ear, but if you snug the able inside clothing it pretty much disappears.


You can just see the vent in top left corner of socket	Natural loop on the cable

Overall, there are parts of the build which look a little rustic at times – but overall the Rti1 exudes an air of sturdiness and longevity. These were built to last.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually I have trouble with silicone tips and shallow fitting earphones. Sure enough – my first couple of attempts with Spin-fits weren't successful, so I knew I was going to have to go to foam tips. The RTi1's wider nozzle means that most standard silicone tips fit pretty well – but the lack of a real edge to the lip means that unfortunately hybrid tips like the Trinity Kombi or Sony Isolation tips tend to come off. Other silicone tips which fit the nozzles well included Ostry tuning tips and Spiral Dots.


Spin fits and Ostry tips - good fit	Spiral dots were good, Sony Isolation tips didn't stay on.

Crystal tips fit fairly well – but potentially could slide off (especially if they are a bit older). Comply T400s fit really well – you have to force them to get them on, but they worked well once in place. But surprisingly the tips I ended up using wee once again Shure Olives (large). I tend to use these now for all shallow fitting earphones, and because they are wider, they give me a great seal every time. You wouldn't think they would fit the nozzle – but if you persevere, eventually they stretch – and for me the time taken was worth it. Perfect seal, and perfect comfort. I had read that some people thought the RTi1 were a little bass light – and all I could think was that they aren't getting a good seal. IMO the bass on the RTi1 is great – and I think the graphs show this too.


Comply T400 (left) and Crystal foam (right)	Shure Olives actually fit!

Isolation with the RTi1 will depend on the seal you achieve and the tip type. I would call the isolation above average for a dynamic driver. With music playing, isolation is really good. With nothing playing I can barely hear the keys on the keyboard as I type.

Comfort for me is wonderful – the RTi1s are another of those designs which disappear when worn. The inner shape of the shell is genius (very smooth and nicely contoured). They sit flush with my outer ear, and are extremely easy to sleep in. My only issue (with the shallow fit) is occasionally having to push them back in my ears – as they can work themselves out over time.


Shallow but very good seal accomplished with large Olives	Yours truly with RTi1 securely fitted

So the RTi1 looks good when worn (that cable!), has an extremely good build, and is comfortable to wear. How do they sound?

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Rhapsodio RTi1. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, and Shure's large Olive tips.


The L&P family and RTi1	FiiO - X3ii and E17K main test rig at top

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 17-19/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-70 dB (with peaks around 75 dB). Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

I'm trying a slightly different format when it comes to sound – mainly to try and give the reader a little more useful information. We'll start with relativities.

Relativities

Sub-bass – slightly recessed comparative to mid-bass, but enough presence for rumble, and very good impact. Good extension for a dynamic driver
Mid-bass – elevated compared to sub-bass and lower mid-range, but a natural hump which doesn't sound too boomy or over done. No noticeable bleed into mid-range, and speed is very good for a dynamic driver. Impact is very good. Definitely adds some warmth to the overall signature.
Lower mid-range – recessed compared to both bass and upper mid-range, but does not sound overly thin or too diffuse with male vocals. There is very good texture with deeper male vocals – just a little more distance (which to me sounds quite good).
Upper mid-range – elevated compared to lower mid-range, but equal in intensity/volume to bass. The first thing I have to commend Sammy on is the gradual rise from lower mid-range to the first peak at about 3.5 kHz. There can be a tendency to overly elevate this section quite quickly, and while it does tend to give female vocals a nice sweetness, it can also lean out the lower mid-range if the change is steep. Sammy has used a gradual and steady rise with the RTi1, and this gives great body and air to female vocals – but it is never over done. The upper mid-range on the RTi1 is (for me) one of the best qualities of this IEM. World class.
Lower treble – hard to describe. There is an early peak at around 6 kHz which gives a lot of air and shimmer to cymbals. But following this peak, there is a gradual roll off which gives a smooth upper end, whilst still maintaining great levels of detail and clarity. I personally find this a really good tuning now – although some could find the 6 kHz peak a little too much.

Resolution / Detail / Clarity

Very good with micro detail, and able to resolve finer details well without spotlighting or over-emphasising.
Cymbal hits and decay on cymbals have good presence, but (depending on the recording) sometimes the decay after the initial crash can be truncated slightly
Mid-bass can very slightly mask or mute really fine details – it is all there, just a little further back in the mix
Not a detail monster – instead a clean and clear monitor with good resolution portrayed naturally.

Sound-stage, Imaging

Very good directional queues, and just outside the periphery of my head space with binaural tracks – so average to good width and depth
Spherically presented stage – slightly more emphasis on width than depth, but definitely not one dimensional
Holographic and compelling sense of immersion both with applause section of “Dante's Prayer”, and also “Let it Rain”

Strengths

Very good sense of overall naturalness in tonality – slightly on the warmer side,. But also very clear and clean.
Good with both male and female vocals
Excellent with dynamic music – especially if it has bass slam
Very good with acoustic music and gives strings good sense of air when plucked, and nice edge when strummed.
Extremely good with female vocals, lending a slight air of euphony and sweetness – without over doing it.
Genre master – I enjoyed it with all genres tested – from classical, jazz and blues to electronic, grunge and pop.

Weaknesses

On hotter recordings can tend to sizzle a little, and occasionally hit a peak which is just too vivid
Can expose sibilance if it is in a recording – this is not an attribute inherent to the RTi1 – but rather a fault of the recording. The RTi1 simply exposes it.
At lower listening levels it tended to lose some of it's vitality, and is an IEM I found that worked best for me at about 4-5 dB above my normal very low listening range.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The RTi1 is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I've tried them with pretty much every DAP or amp at my disposal. Depending on the recording I found that most of the time I was setting the level at around 35-40% on my iPhone 5S to reach my normal listening range of 65-75 dB.


E17K, Q1, IMS HVA and iFi iDSD	E17K + X3ii

I tried various amplifiers (properly volume matching with an SPL meter and test tones) but I couldn't discern any obvious changes or differences in dynamics or presentation. Saying that though, I enjoyed the tonality of the IMS HVA, and also pairing FiiO's Q1 with my iPhone 5S. From my tests, the RTi1 neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification.

EQUALISATION
To be honest I don't think may owners would be equalising the RTi1, but in the interest of completeness, I did use the tone controls on the E17K to do a rough and ready bass reduction (-4 bass). If you are finding the RTi1 a little warm, this simple cut works really well, flattening the overall signature and giving a very clean and clear tilt. Keeping the -4 bass in play, I did the same with the treble setting (-4). this really balanced the overall signature and made for a very relaxed and enjoyable setting. The RTi1 (like most earphones) reacts well to EQ and can be tuned to individual user preferences.

COMPARISONS
I wanted to be fair with this – but I don't own a lot of top tier dynamic universals – so I chose instead to test it against my favourite earphone (the Adel U6 which I own), the Fidue Sirius (which is coming up shortly on my review schedule), and the Pai Audio MR3 which is up for review late next week. I also included a quick reference section on the Mee Audio P1 – because I knew that the signatures are somewhat similar, and I wanted to see just how much more the RTi1 delivered at a different price tier.

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the RTi1 used Shure Olives. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

RTi1 (~$600 current promo) vs 64Audio Adel U6 (~ $899)


RTi1 and 64Audio Adel U6	Frequency graphs

This pits a top single dynamic against a 6 driver per side BA set-up. Starting with accessories and overall package – the U6 dominates with inclusion of cleaning tool, tips, quality case and Adel module. Moving to build, and the RTi1 is definitely the more solid of the two while the U6 is slightly more polished. Cable goes to the RTi1 but at a cost of additional weight. For fit and comfort, it is a tie. Both fit exceptionally well and I have no issues with overall comfort.

Sonically the U6 of course offers a lot of different options, and you can even control tonality by the use of impedance adaptors. The RTi1 is definitely more V shaped with a warmer bottom end, but also a more vivid and euphonic presentation of vocal presence. The U6 is flatter overall with better balance. Both are very clean and clear. The U6 exhibits a wider, deeper and more holographic stage. I can listen to the U6 at lower volume levels – but prefer the RTi1 with more volume. My overall preference lies with the U6, but that does not stop me appreciating the Rti1's obvious strengths in this side-by-side comparison.

RTi1 (~$600 current promo) vs Fidue Sirius (~ $899)


Rti1 and Fidue Sirius	Frequency graphs

This time the RTi1 goes up against Fidue's latest flagship, the 5 driver hybrid Sirius. The Sirius absolutely nails the accessory and overall package comparison – especially with the adaptors, tip range, and case. And again with overall build quality – the Sirius comes out on top with it's clean and professional design vs the RTi1's more DIY looks. For cable choice – both are quality, but I actually prefer both the look and flexibility of the Rhapsodio cable. For fit and overall comfort, the RTi1 wins by quite a margin (you'll see why when I review the Sirius). Lets just say that I know when I am wearing the Sirius where with the RTi1 I need less adjustment to be completely comfortable.

Sonically the Sirius is an interesting earphone, and bass response will depend on your own anatomy, and how much the internal bass port is covered by your ears. I measured with a completely open port, and a fully covered port – for me (when worn), the reality lies somewhere in between. When going backward and forward the Rti1 actually sounds like the more balanced and natural sounding IEM with the slight bottom end warmth and natural progression from lower to upper mids combining well to appear more tonally correct overall. It's just a little more relaxed than the Sirius. Comparatively the Sirius has more sub-bass than mid-bass emphasis (with my own fit), but the mid-range is where the biggest difference is. The Sirius is very vivid with a real emphasis on vocals. It is undoubtedly cleaner and clearer in the mid-range, but it is also leaner, and can sometimes even get a little shouty (it is better for me at lower listening volumes). I've also heard a lot of people talk about the Sirius wide sound stage – but for me in both width and depth, the RTi1 portrays a better overall stage. Vocals sit back a little, they aren't as etched, and overall the RTi1 is the easier earphone to relax with. As far as preference goes, a lot will depend on how you normally listen. At lower volumes, the Sirius is the more exciting and vivid listen. But if you do listen at a slightly more moderate to high volume, you may find the Sirius a little too much to handle at times. For overall coherency – I actually prefer the RTi1.

RTi1 (~$600 current promo) vs Pai Audio MR3 (~ $200)


Rti1 and Pai Audio MR3	Frequency graphs

The what – I hear you ask? The MR3 is a triple driver BA from Pai Audio, and I included it because I've been listening to it for the last couple of weeks, and I really like it. Is the comparison fair? Probably not – but I'm doing it anyway.

Both have a very sparse overall accessory package – so we'll call both a little underwhelming. For build – the RTi1 is definitely a lot more solid (metal vs translucent plastic), and the addition of the exceptional cable on the RTi1 is something the MR3 cannot begin to match. But for fit and comfort, the MR3 is one of the most exceptionally comfortable IEMs I've ever worn. The MR3 should be the poster child for designing a shell for overall comfort.

Sonically although the graphs aren't totally different, the overall signatures are very different. The MR3 is quite lean, balanced and slightly bright – but with the same excellent transition from lower to upper mids. Switching to the RTi1 and once again I'm struck by how much more natural the RTi1 sounds. Although the mid-bass is elevated, it just sounds right, and in fact when I gave the MR3 a small bass tweak, it was amazing how much different it sounded. Both are very clean and clear, although the Rti1 does have better resolution particularly in terms of decay and overall detail with cymbal hits. But what surprises me here is how good the MR3 is. To me the RTi1 is definitely still a class above, and although it isn't 3 times as good as the price difference indicates, it is enough IMO to justify the premium.

RTi1 (~$600 current promo) vs MEE P1 (~ $200)

This one is simply here because I recognised similar curves when I eventually measured the RTi1, and I immediately wanted to do a quick comparison. The MEE P1 has overall a better accessory package, similar build quality, and similar fit and comfort. Sonically the two IEMs are extremely similar, and are really more alike than different. Sub-bass and mid-bass are so similar they may as well be twins. And even the transition from lower to upper mid-range is virtually the same. Where the difference lies is in nuance and presentation of lower treble detail. When comparing these two I can suddenly see why Sammy has his 6 kHz peak. The difference is in the presentation of the finer points of detail such as decay and air. If you want to know about what 90-95% of the RTi1 sounds like – then go listen to the MEE P1. Now a lot will be suggesting where is the premium, and I will let individuals answer that for themselves. For a start there is the cable (although the P1 cable is also quality IMO). Then there is that last 5-10% the RTi1 has naturally. I could undoubtedly EQ the P1 and get them very close – but (in my opinion) this comes down to an anomaly. The MEE P1 is an exceptional IEM which is completely undervalued for what it delivers. The RTi1 is an exceptionally well tuned dynamic IEM which probably sits well in its current price bracket.

Which leads us to ……

MY THOUGHTS ON VALUE
If we look at all of the comparisons and comments so far, and also consider other top DD IEMs (eg the Campfire Lyra at $750), then you can see that the overall tuning and build quality of the Rti1 sit comfortably at a price of $500-$600, and in fact at this price level the RTi1 is a good value proposition. If I was told today that I had to give up all my other IEMs and only listen to the RTi1 from this point onward, I would not be disappointed. Where the RTi1 would struggle would be in it's initial price category of $800-$1000. And that's true of a lot of gear that has been around for a couple of years – it slowly loses perceived value as newer IEMs and newer tech emerges. But at it's current promo price of $600 with an appropriate upgrade cable – I see real value in the RTi1. It is an IEM I absolutely enjoy.

RHAPSODIO RTi1 - SUMMARY

The RTi1 from Rhapsodio is the first of their IEMs I've had the chance to test, and I must say it has been an absolute privilege.
The RTi1 comes with a rather sparse accessory package (which could and should be improved IMO), and sports a finish that might look a little DIY, but seems incredibly well built to me. It also fits me very well and is extremely comfortable for longer listening sessions.

The cable is a work of art, and I've had many compliments on it's aesthetics so far (my wife and daughter both think it is absolutely gorgeous).

Sonically the RTi1 has a mild V shape, but one that tends to sound natural rather than overly fun or too dynamic. It has an exceptionally well tuned mid-range, and is the ideal monitor for kicking backing and relaxing – with a generous amount of detail mixed with a creamy smoothness which is absolutely addicting.

From a value POV, at it's current promo price of $600 and including an upgraded cable, it represents good value, and for some may very well represent end-game.

Easy recommendation in it's current price bracket, and I'd like to take the time to thank Nic and Sammy for giving me this opportunity.

[size=inherit]

[/size]

I guess that's up to Sammy

TBH I don't think Paul would like the Solar. It is a bass heavy monitor, pretty far from neutral.

@flinkenick

@flinkenick yea its too bassy for paul tastes but the technical performance of solar is better than k10. well galaxy may be the one

For larger (1200 x 800) images, click any picture

INTRODUCTION

I'm not going to go through a lot of preamble with this review – mainly because for this device, you don't need to know about my known bias or musical preferences.

Sunny from FiiO approached me a few months ago to discuss putting the DK1 through its paces, and when I saw it, my initial thought was that it was an ideal accessory for their DAP and DAC/amp range. And the thing that really appealed was having something on my desktop that I could use both as access to the storage/library (via USB), and also as a means of charging the device.

I've now had the device with me for almost 3 months, and in that time it has become a regularly used accessory. Here's my thoughts on the DK1.

ABOUT FIIO
By now, most Head-Fi members should know about the FiiO Electronics Company. If you don’t, here’s a very short summary. FiiO was first founded in 2007. Their first offerings were some extremely low cost portable amplifiers – which were sometimes critiqued by some seasoned Head-Fiers as being low budget “toys”. But FiiO has spent a lot of time with the community here, and continued to listen to their potential buyers, adopt our ideas, and grow their product range. They debuted their first DAP (the X3) in 2013, and despite some early hiccups with developing the UI, have worked with their customer base to continually develop the firmware for a better user experience. The X3 was followed by the X5, X1, X3 2nd Gen (X3ii), X5 2nd Gen (X5ii), M3 and X7. They also have a full range of amplifiers, DAC/amps, cables and are starting to develop earphones.

FiiO’s products have followed a very simple formula since 2007 – affordable, stylish, well built, functional, measuring well, and most importantly sounding good.

DISCLAIMER
The DK1 was provided to me gratis as a review sample. I used to make it clear to FiiO in the past that I did regard any product they sent me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request (but often bought review samples which I really liked). They have insisted I keep any and all samples they send now, so I acknowledge now that the DK1 I have is supplied and gifted completely free of any charge or obligation. I thank FiiO for their generosity. I actually won a prize in a Head-Fi give-away of a 2^nd DK1, and as much as I would have liked to keep it, returned it so someone else could get the pleasure.

SOME PRODUCT MENTIONED IN THIS REVIEW
This review is essentially about the DK1 FiiO dock – however I have tested it with many different FiiO products. For ease of use in looking up any of the components, I suggest following any of the following links to my other reviews:

This is a purely subjective review of the DJ1 dock – my preference, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own views.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The DK1 arrived in a retail box and lid measuring approximately 138 x 125 x 107mm. The lid or outer cover is white with red and black print. On the front of the box is a picture of the DK1, and on the rear are QR codes which will take you to FiiO’s website or Facebook page.


Front of the retail box	Rear of the retail box

The inner (or bottom half of the box) is FiiO red with a black cardboard inner frame which securely holds the DK1 in place, and also the accessories. The accessories consist of a USB cord as well as warranty card and instruction manual (in English and Chinese).

There no need for anything further IMO as this is all that is required to have a functional dock. If FiiO did want to include anything at a later date as an optional accessory – a simple 3.5mm stereo to RCA (pair) cable would be a nice touch (for attaching to an amplifier) – but at the DK1's price point (USD 20.00) I have no problem with supplying my own.

BUILD / DESIGN
Before we continue – just a quick note on my unit. On the rear is a switch designated for balanced output. This has been removed from the final retail version. I tested it briefly and appears to work on this unit – but for the purposes of this review (and because it is not offered in this configuration) I will from this point imagine it is not there.


DK1 from the front	DK1 from the rear

The DK1 is a pretty simple but elegant set-up. The base is a 115mm circle of silver coloured aluminium alloy which stands approximately 15mm high. Underneath is a non-slip rubber ring which helps to prevent any scratching of the surface you have it resting on, and also making sure it doesn't slide around.

The FiiO logo is printed in front with a subtle white print. Behind this approximately 40mm from the front edge is a swivel USB connector for the docking mechanism of selected FiiO devices. This dock allows a swivel backward of 25 degrees so that once docked, the back of any docked device rests on the curved back piece. The USB micro B (11 pin) connector is also spring loaded – so that when not plugged it always sits upright (essentially making it easier to plug something). It is quite well thought out.


Rear connection ports (balanced switch doesn't appear on the retail units)	Connector and curved back rest

At the rear top of the base is 75mm section of curved plastic which acts as a back rest for any docked device (and therefore takes pressure off the connector). The whole set-up is pretty simple, but also very effective. And although the dock connector is spring loaded to sit upright – the natural weight of any docked device is enough for it so sit back comfortably on the rest. Again – a cleverly designed feature.

At the rear side of the circular base are two ports – one mini-USB for USB input, and the other a 3.5mm jack for line-out. The included USB cable is 1m in length, but is a little thick and can tend to limit flexibility with positioning the DK1, so I've opted to use a more flexible and thinner (and slightly longer) generic USB cable for my desktop use.

MY SET-UP
Before we get into use and connectivity, it's probably best to describe my set-up for testing, and indeed my usual everyday set-up for audio. My PC is a home built system running an i5-4690K processor, 16 Gb RAM, with an SSD for the OS (running Linux Mint KDE), and a couple of hard drives for data. I use very quiet low speed Noctua fans, and the whole system is set-up so I can get the most out of it for my audio needs (measuring and listening). Most of the time I use my iFi Micro iDSD – both as a headphone amp, and also feeding either my desktop monitors (JBL LSR305s) or a secondary tube amp (mine is a LD MKIV, but lately it has been a review unit – VE's Enterprise). I also have the FiiO K5 dock and amplifier which I use as a secondary option for testing and playback when necessary. For software, I use a paid copy of JRiver's Media Center for Linux – which allows me to choose resolution or up-sample on the fly to whichever DAC I choose.

For most of this testing I simply used the DK1, and fed the line-out into either the FiiO K5 or VE Enterprise.

WHAT DO I LOOK FOR IN A DOCK
Well lets look first at what FiiO described as the real world use of the DK1. They claim quite simply:

Its a docking station that is plug and play for their compatible USB devices (E17K, X1, X3ii, X5ii and X7) – allowing synchronous transmission of data.
It allows convenient charging of the above products when docked
It has line-out ability to an amplifier or set of powered speakers

So what would I be looking for primarily?

My first requirement is as a simple charging station
My second is an easy way to transfer songs to and from the libraries on the respective devices
My third would be a small and elegant and simple footprint (not taking too much space)
My fourth would be as a simple USB dock to allow access to the DAC section on my devices – but personally I am less interested in this than most of you may be. All the same, it would be something I would definitely check.
And lastly – it should be easy to set-up, if I ever wanted to use it transportably.

CONNECTIVITY (DOCK)
Fortunately I have all the devices FiiO listed at my disposal. So what worked and what didn't?

E17K


E17K docked and ready to go	Top ports are also easily accessed

The easiest to dock – just sit it in and tip it back. Line-out worked perfectly (input set to USB), and the best thing was that because of the location, the headphone-out is also accessible. So it is easy to also simply use the amp section of the E17K which also allows you to use the tone controls. A great option and elegant solution for a desktop system on a budget. Charging was also simple – plug it, forget it, and take it off the next day when you need it (portably).

X1
Easy to dock and access both the micro-sdxc storage, and charge the unit. Plugging it and disengaging the access to USB storage allows playing direct from the X1 via the line-out (or the headphone out). The nice thing about this is that it makes the X1 a really nice options simply as a docked player. When disengaged the X1 will automatically power off too – which is quite nice.

X3ii / X5ii


X3ii also docked perfectly	And even strapped together, you can charge either the E17K or X3ii

Both worked well when I switched to Windows but for some strange reason neither DAC is recognised by my Linux system (this is a kernel issue with my system rather than a FiiO issue. I could fix it with a simple kernel recompile). This is peculiar to my system so I wouldn't worry too much about it (as I don't use them for their DACs anyway). Other than that glitch with Linux, both are easy to dock and like the X1 you have access to the internal library of the devices (storage plus as a player), they both charge, and also access to their headphone out ports. They also give the option of automatically powering of once undocked. A small note to those with the original rubber/latex cases – you will need to remove them to access the dock properly. But if you are using a stacking unit (I use the HS12 with the E17K)

X7


X7 was able to be docked with the case	Side view of the X7 docked

Worked perfectly – easy access to DAC, storage, and charging. The best part – you can leave the case on if you have one. You can also directly play from the X7 too. The only thing you don't have is access to the X7's headphone-out, as this is at the bottom of the unit.

Other devices
I also tried docking the FiiO K1, A3, Q1, X5 (original), the Cozoy Aegis, IMS HVA, and Luxury& Precision LP5, L5 Pro and L3. The K1 wouldn't fit at all – but most of the others actually docked OK. Sadly none of these devices worked – DAC, charging or data access (not that it was expected). The DK1 is definitely a FiiO only device.

DK1 SUMMARY / FINAL THOUGHTS

So after a couple of months, what are my thoughts? Well firstly – its still sitting on my desktop and I use it often.

What I love about it -

Sleek looks and relatively minimal foot-print
Ease of docking X7, X1, X3ii, X5ii and E17K – for both charging and access to the storage/library
If I need to, it is simple to set-up for DAC use, and I've used it a few times with the E17K so far.

The DK1 does what it says, and for the ridiculously low price of USD 20.00. In fact there is a high change I'll but another one at some stage – simply because it would be handy to have a second one at work. For those who are invested in the FiiO ecosystem I can thoroughly recommend this little dock. Even if you just use it as a changing station, you'll find it is simply far handier than going searching for a cable.

And for those who ask the obvious question - "I already have the K5, is it worth getting a DK1 as well?". This will depend solely on the number of devices you have. With me regularly using 3-4 FiiO devices at a time, having two units I can use as charging stations or data access points is simply brilliant. However - if you are using the FiiO device as your main amp in a desktop situation, and need the additional amplification - definitely stick with the K5. For anyone else - especially if you are going to a secondary amp and using your FiiO device as DAC only - the DK1 is an almost perfect solution IMO.

FINAL THANKS
Once again thanks to Sunny at FiiO for giving me a chance to try the DK1.

Just use the line-out to the line-in of your stereo. That is what it is intended for. No flaw. If FiiO intended for the DK1 to have a digital out (so it could be used as a transport dock) they would have advertised it in the specs. You are simply trying to use it in a way it was not designed to do (the DK1)

I don't want to use the line out I want to play hi res flac files in to my own DAC and Mono Block amplifier. If it was made clear that the coaxial output was disabled when docked then I would not have bought it, How ever it was only £20 so It doesn't bother me that much. I was just posting to inform other people of this detail.

To the folks that have this, I'm thinking of using one to mount in a car for a high end audio system where the FiiO M11 or similar plays DSD/Flac files through car audio system. Do you mind writing here the dimensions of this unit? Like diameter, etc? I'm trying to see if it would fit in a cup holder. Thanks!

For larger (1200 x 800) images, click any picture

INTRODUCTION

A lot of you will see the style and information with this review as being pretty similar to the one I have done on the previous AM2, AM3 and AM5 amplifier modules. The reality is that a lot of the physical aspects are very much the same. So for similarity I can't do much about it. I can assure you however that I performed the same testing, and the same comparisons I've done previously. I reviewed FiiO's TOTL Android based touch screen DAP – the X7 – in early November 2015, the AM2 module in February 2016, the AM5 module in May 2016, and the AM3 module in July 2016.

Please note that the X7 (with subsequent firmware updates) is now a much more complete DAP than when first released. I can now go artist, album, track, the DAC works beautifully, the blue light can be turned off, the battery indicator seems to be a lot more accurate, and with the release of most of the amplifier modules, there is plenty of choice for no matter what headphones you are driving.

It is not perfect, and there are still some bugs to be squashed, but for overall SQ compared to functionality, I still find the X7 and its ecosystem of swappable amplifier modules to be extremely good value.

ABOUT FIIO
By now, most Head-Fi members should know about the FiiO Electronics Company. If you don’t, here’s a very short summary. FiiO was first founded in 2007. Their first offerings were some extremely low cost portable amplifiers – which were sometimes critiqued by some seasoned Head-Fiers as being low budget “toys”. But FiiO has spent a lot of time with the community here, and continued to listen to their potential buyers, adopt our ideas, and grow their product range. They debuted their first DAP (the X3) in 2013, and despite some early hiccups with developing the UI, have worked with their customer base to continually develop the firmware for a better user experience. The X3 was followed by the X5, X1, X3 2nd Gen (X3ii), X5 2nd Gen (X5ii), M3 and X7. They also have a full range of amplifiers, DAC/amps, cables and are starting to develop earphones.

FiiO’s products have followed a very simple formula since 2007 – affordable, stylish, well built, functional, measuring well, and most importantly sounding good.

DISCLAIMER
The X7 and add on AM2A module were provided to me gratis as a review samples. I have made it clear to FiiO in the past that I did regard any product they sent me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. I have continued to use X7 and its modules for follow up reviews, and I recently inquired if I could purchase the devices from FiiO. They have insisted I keep the X7 + modules for my own use. So I acknowledge now that the X7 I have is supplied and gifted completely free of any charge or obligation. I thank FiiO for their generosity.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be skeptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

REGARDING THE X7
This review is essentially about the AM2A medium power amp module released by FiiO for the X7. For a detailed look at the features of the X7, and a quick run-down on the AM1 (default) IEM module, I would recommend you read my X7 review or indeed any of the 30 something reviews on the X7 currently listed.

This is a purely subjective review of the AM2A medium power amplifier module – my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own views.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The AM2A arrived in the usual small black retail box measuring approximately 90 x 120 x 25mm. On the front of the sleeve is a picture of the bottom half of the X7 with AM2A module attached and some text telling you that this is the AM2A amplifier module. One notable addition now is the “Hi-Res Audio sticker”. On the rear of the box are QR codes which will take you to FiiO’s website or Facebook page.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Retail box front	Retail box rear	The new "Hi Res Audio" indicator

Removing the outer packaging reveals a plain tin box with a nice powder coated finish. Removing the lid reveals a black cardboard envelope, and under this is a foam cut-out with the AM2A module nestled safely inside.

Inside the envelope is a warranty booklet in multiple languages, a full set of stickers (which match the ones from the X7), and 2 replacement screws. The stickers are a nice touch and show FiiO are thinking about their customers. If you’ve brought and applied stickers to your X7 already, the last thing you’d want is a new amp module with no adornments. Although I don’t use them, I can appreciate the foresight. The other new addition is a set of 3 “Hi-Res Audio” stickers (presumably so you can affix them to the X7 if you wanted).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Powder coated tin	FiiO Envelope with Accessories	The module in its foam enclosure

As far as the AM2A goes, the other nice thing to note once again is the rubber dust cover/protector over the connection pins. So far almost everything is a mirror of the AM2 and AM5 modules, and this includes the lack of specifications on the packaging. The good thing is that FiiO have already listed the specs for the AM2A in the X7 section on their website (although they are missing a couple of power output settings). One last thing before we conclude this section – the case is actually large enough to store 3 modules. So my suggestion for FiiO would be to modify at least one of their releases to give that option. If not, then you can modify yourselves (see below).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Full accessory package	Manual, screws, sticker envelope and Hi-Res stickers	My modified case for carrying multiple modules

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
The table below lists most of the relevant specifications. I have (as a comparison) also listed specifications from the default AM1 and also the AM2 and AM5 modules.

	AM1 Module	AM2 Module	AM2A Module	AM5 Module
Dimensions	~ 64 x 25 x 16mm	~ 64 x 25 x 16mm	~ 64 x 25 x 16mm	~ 64 x 25 x 16mm
Weight	29g	32g	32g	32g
Voltage amplification	OPA1612	Muses02	AD8620	Muses02
Current Drive	AD8397	Buf634	AD8397ARDZ	TPA6120 A2
S/N (H/O)	≥115 dB (A-Weight)	≥118 dB (A-Weight)	≥118 dB (A-Weight)	≥120 dB (A-Weight)
THD+N (H/O)	<0.0008% (32Ω/1 kHz)	<0.001% (32Ω/1 kHz)	<0.002% (32Ω/1 kHz)	<0.001% (32Ω/1 kHz)
Output into 16 ohms	>200 mW (16Ω/1 kHz)	>350 mW (16Ω/1 kHz)	Not stated	>800 mW (16Ω/1 kHz)
Output into 32 ohms	>100 mW (32Ω/1 kHz)	>300 mW (32Ω/1 kHz)	>420 mW (32Ω/1 kHz)	>500 mW (32Ω/1 kHz)
Output into 300 ohms	>10 mW (300Ω/1 kHz)	>30 mW (300Ω/1 kHz)	Not stated	>55 mW (300Ω/1 kHz)
H/O impedance	<0.2 Ω (32Ω)	<0.5 Ω (32Ω)	<0.3 Ω (32Ω)	<0.5 Ω (32Ω)
Peak output voltage	>5.2 Vp-p	>8.8 Vp-p	>10.6 Vp-p	>11 Vp-p
Peak output current	>250 mA	>250 mA	>250 mA	>250 mA
Channel Separation	>73 dB (32Ω/1 kHz)	>72 dB (32Ω/1 kHz)	>73 dB (32Ω/1 kHz)	>72 dB (32Ω/1 kHz)
Play time	9 hours+	8 hours+	7.5 hours	6 hours+

BUILD / DESIGN
The AM2A has the same dimensions as the AM1, AM2, and AM5. The main differences are internal. The AM2A follows the same look of the AM2 and AM5 with a darker shade of the powdered titanium appearance. Otherwise they all look and feel identical. The AM2, AM2A, AM3 and AM5 colouring appears to be the same. There is white text on the back of each designating the model number.


Headphone out and USB port	Internal connector board

Replacing the modules is extremely easy – just a matter of using the small hex screwdriver included with the X7 – undoing two screws, sliding one module out, and sliding the new module in. The fit on the AM2A is perfectly flush, and the only thing very apparent with the AM2A fitted is the change in colour (compared to X7). This of course disappears when used with a cover for the X7 (if owned).


Side view	Underside - with product ID

DESIGN – INTERNALS
Although you can’t see them, it is probably a good idea to mention the internal electronics (also see the table above). The AM2A was a user modification to the original AM1 low power amplifier, and because of its popularity among DIYers in China, FiiO decided to release it as another option. It uses a similar current drive AD8397 ARDZ OP amp (the AM1 was an AD8397), but swaps the original OPA1612 chip with the AD8620 from Analog Devices – which has a much higher output voltage. This in turn gives higher output into a 32 ohm load. The original AM1 output was 100 mW into 32 ohms, this modified amplifier module is 420 mW and the actual AM2 is 300 mW. Because of the higher power output, the decision was made to release it as an AM2S rather than an AM1A option.


Colour difference of the amp module	Which disappears when the case is used

The AM2A continues FiiO's delivery of low noise and low impedance – ideal for both IEMs and low to medium powered headphones. Whilst the AM5 still has most powerful single ended output of the X7's amplifier modules into 32 ohms (AM5 = 500 mW vs AM2A = 420 mW), the AM2A with its 420 mW into 32 ohm sits closer to the AM5 output than the AM2.

POWER OUTPUT – REAL WORLD
So the specs are listed above, but what does that mean in the real world? Once again my HD600 was the ideal test device – with its 300 ohm impedance and sensitivity/SPL of 97dB at 1 kHz / 1V rms. The HD600 isn't an overly hard load to drive – how would the AM2A handle it?

To perform this test I used a 1 kHz test tone, my trusty SPL meter, and rigged up a harness so I could hold the HD600 and SPL meter in place – meaning I only had to swap the amplifier modules out to compare. To get a reasonable listening level for me, I pre-calibrated the X7 with AM2A module, and for my normal 65-75 dB listening level (A-weighted), found that 70/120 on low gain was my ideal listening level for music. I then set about comparing the 3 modules with this output in mind.

The first test was using 70/120 volume, low gain, no EQ, and a 1kHz test tone:

AM1 = 68.8 dB
AM2 = 74.2 dB
AM5 = 74.5 dB
AM2A = 75.7 dB – quite staggering

The second test was designed to tax the amplifiers, again using the HD600, low gain, no EQ and a 1 kHz test tone. But this time the aim was to get the SPL meter to hit 95 dB.

AM1 = 120/120, and could only manage 93.3dB – very creditable all the same
AM2 = 112/120
AM5 = 112/120
AM2A = 109/120

So once again in real world testing the AM2A actually outperforms the AM5 amplifier into the HD600. This module has some pretty good power output!

BATTERY LIFE
Although FiiO publishes their own real world tests with their modules, I also like to conduct my own. I noticed FiiO uses relatively easy to drive IEMs and ear-buds – and achieved “+7.5 hours” at 52/120.

For my test I again used the HD600 and simply left it at 70/120 (which would be my normal listening level) and left the X7 running looped tracks. The screen was off, as was Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Gain was low and no EQ. Mode used was FiiO's Pure Music mode. My test managed 7 hours and 20 minutes – so I'd suggest FiiO's figures a re pretty accurate. Of course your results are going to vary depending on the volume you use, the load you're driving, the amount of screen time you have on, and the apps you have running.

SONICS (subjective)
So here we are again, after covering the specs, build, power and effect on battery life. I'll repeat what I said last time - my ears are probably not as sensitive as many of you, I volume match very closely, and I’m subject to the same amounts of potential placebo as all humans. The swapping for the comparisons were as quick as I could make them to preserve auditory memory (same procedure as before – screws undone – swap units, adjust volumes to the pre-set levels, and listen). I varied between rapid swapping (portions of a track about 10-15 seconds) and longer listening periods (a full track at a time). The exercise was made more difficult by the low-volume bug that exists with the X7 currently (first seconds of a track when switching amps plays quieter).

I used a mix of my usual test tracks - http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks and concentrated mainly on tracks exposing detail, dynamic contrast, sound-stage, bass quantity and vocal quality. I'm just going to summarise here – rather than go through section by section – because a lot of the time the results were so close that in the end I was guessing.

Remember this is pretty subjective!

AM2A vs AM1
The AM1 is definitely the leaner, more linear presentation. The AM2A is noticeably warmer and sounds more full. Bass also sounds a little weightier – not like having a boost on or anything, but more like the whole signature has more body and warmth. I tried to compare other things like sound-stage or imaging, and the volume delay just made it too hard to try and pick. For me - the main difference is simply tonality, with the AM2A being warmer and smoother.

AM2A vs AM2
The change here was a little closer, but again the difference was quite noticeable. The main thing that kept coming through was the warmer tonality of the AM2A (and of course the difference in power/volume). Overall the AM2A is warmer and smoother – its a bit like comparing the Gen5 iPod Classic to the Gen 7. The funny thing though is that its not a smooth syrupy or muddy sound – its just warmer. Still has good levels of clarity.

AM2A vs AM5
Similar to the comparison with the AM2, and once again the AM2A sounds warmer and smoother overall. In contrast the AM5 sounds a little more vivid or vibrant particularly through the mid-range, but also a little thinner.

MY PREFERENCES
Really hard to call, and the funny thing is that I can get used to each of the modules quite quickly (within a few tracks), and then they each sound quite natural. If I had to choose just two modules of all of the ones FiiO has on offer at the moment, I'd probably go AM3 and AM2A. The AM2A for my higher impedance single ended cans, and the AM3 for IEMs or balanced operation. The two sound very different – AM3 is a lot cleaner and more linear than the warmer fuller AM2A, but that again is part of the reason for choosing these two. It would pretty much cover most bases.

GRAPHS
As usual I wanted to measure the output of the AM2A and compare it to the AM1, AM2 and AM5. The roll-off you'll see is the X7's DAC section filters, and I've once again included the very linear E17K for reference. As per my earlier SPL tests we can see the slight differences in volume, and also the relative linearity of each of the amplifier modules.


Module comparison - frequency response	My attempt at measuring distortion - FiiO's output is lower than I can measure

I also wanted to try measuring the AM2A's distortion level - but unfortunately I was again undone by the quality of my sound card. The measurements simply show the limits of the measuring device - as we know FiiO's measurements on proper equipment show lower figures than I'm recording. The good news is that the distortion figures are below the limits of audibility anyway - the AM2A is a clean and resolving amplifier section.

AM2A SUMMARY / FINAL THOUGHTS

Once again I'll keep this short, as I’ve pretty much already summarised everything – but once again to put it in a couple of sentences …..

The AM2A module (like the AM1, AM2 and AM5 modules) has a great build, is easy to fit, and measures as well as it sounds (check FiiO's specs). It will cost you some battery life from the original AM1 and AM2, but this is because of the higher voltage output. And the cost in battery life does mean you'll have no problems driving headphones like my HD600.

Tonally the AM2A is closer to the AM2 and AM5 than the more linear AM1 or AM3. It is a little warmer and fuller sounding than the AM2 or AM5 to my ears. At an approximate release price of USD 99.00, if you own the X7 and are looking for a fuller warmer sound, and particularly if you are driving full sized headphones that require e little more voltage, then IMO the AM2A is an excellent choice.

FINAL THANKS
Once again thanks to Sunny at FiiO for giving me a chance to try the AM2A.

Hi Brooko - Nice detailed review, as always! I hope you can indulge me with a couple of questions...

1) I'm now in a position to compare am2 and am1 amps. I know I probably can't do this reliably with only one X7 given the time it'll take to swap the amps and adjust the volume but I'm going to take my best shot at it. Do you know if it's safe to hot-swap the amps on the X7? i.e., can I safely pull one amp out and plug the other in without powering off the X7 in between? I don't want my X7 to do a Galaxy Note 7 impersonation ;-)

2) How did you make your FR measurements? Are these into an infinite-impedance load and if so, how do you do this? Is the X7 HO feeding directly into some very high-impedance SPL meter?

Thanks. I just hot swapped the modules I had. It's probably not recommended, but it was the only way I could meaningfully compare without too much delay. WRT to frequency measurements - it's just X7 as DAC, and then loopback to a soundcard (which has been calibrated to measure flat). I now have some impedance adaptors - so I could probably redo the measurements next time under load. These ones were just straight loopback though.

Thanks Brooko! I will risk some hot-swapping in the name of science ;-)

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I've been working with Trinity (Trinity Audio Engineering) for a couple of years now. I don't get paid, but I do get listened to, and it has given me the opportunity to be part of the development process. Basically I try the new prototypes, give my feedback, and then it is up to Bob (the man who is the brains behind Trinity's product range) who ultimately makes the decisions on how to proceed – and whether to incorporate our feedback (myself and a couple of other Head-Fiers) along the way.

The underlying vision and philosophy behind Trinity is that high quality audio should be affordable to everyone – and without compromising on build or materials. And just because it is high quality – it shouldn’t mean it has to be high cost.

Bob has been incredibly busy over the last couple of years, and this has led to the release of the original range (Hyperion, Techne and Delta original), and since progressed to the Atlas and Delta V2, and now the latest releases of the Phantom/Master series (Sabre, Master4, Master6, Phantom Air and Hunter – I should have most of these soon). One thing I really appreciate with a company like Trinity, and a designer like Bob, is the willingness to involve his consumers in some design decisions, so that the end result is (hopefully) exactly what the target audience is looking for.

I count myself incredibly lucky to have been able to work with Bob on this project – via email, PM and phone – and must admit a little personal pride in what Trinity have achieved. So without further comment – let’s have a look at the new Sabre – the first of the Trinity IEMs to employ push/pull dual dynamic drivers.

DISCLAIMER
I was provided with the final model of the Sabre on its completion. These were given free of charge for the purposes of reviewing them after the public release. Bob does not expect them back. In the past I have purchased Hyperion (2) and both versions of the Delta (V1 and V2), but have been also provided free review samples (either prototypes or finals) of the Hyperion, Techne, and Atlas.

Apart from my obvious involvement in feedback on the development, I am not otherwise affiliated with Trinity in any way, nor do I make any financial gain from my contributions.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

For the purposes of this review - I mainly used the Sabre straight from the headphone-out socket of my FiiO X3ii + E17K, and also used (at different times) my iPhone 5S, and a variety of the other DAPs I have around me. Although I tested them with an amplifier, I do not think they benefit from additional amplification (I use mine mainly for consistency when reviewing and also to extend battery life on the X3ii). In the time I have spent with the Sabre, I have noticed no changes in the overall sonic presentation, but am aware that I am also becoming more used to the signature of the Sabre as I use them more often (brain burn-in).

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The Sabre arrived in a slightly different Trinity retail “book style” retail box – still measuring 125 x 190 x 55mm – but this time in a darker charcoal grey with red and silver text. The box is well presented, with the Trinity logo and model (SABRE) on the front cover, and specifications, accessories and a little about the Sabre on the back. There is also a window so you can see the Sabres nestled nicely in their foam cut out.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Slightly different look Trinity retail box	Rear panel	Inside the "book cover" type box

Opening the front flap reveals a foam inner with appropriate cut-outs to house the Sabre, carry case, provided tips, and filters.

The entire package is massively comprehensive and includes:

The Sabre
The Trinity zippered carry case
5 pairs of long tuning filters
5 pairs of short tuning filters
4 sets of silicone tips (1 pr small, 2 pr medium and 1 pr large)
1 set of dual flange silicone tips
2 sets of foam tips (1 pr med and 1 pr large)
1 multi braid cable with formable ear-guides, 1 standard multi braid cable (no ear-guides), and one cloth covered microphone enabled cable
1 shirt clip
1 straight to right angle jack converter
1 fold-out manual
My Sabre did not come with Spin-fit tips, but I understand that Bob is now including these also.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Foam cut out and contents	Full accessory range	Manual, clip and adaptors

The Trinity standard case is black, has an internal mesh pouch for tips etc, is triangular shaped, and zips to open/close. It is reasonably spacious, has a good mix of both flexibility and strength – so it is comfortable to pocket, but still protects your IEMs really well.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Tips	Filters - long and small	Sabres and 2 filter sizes

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Trinity)

	Sabre
Cost	GBP 125 / USD 165, but GBP 100 / USD 130 with Head-Fi discount
Type	Dual 7mm Titanium Dynamic Drivers in Push-Pull Config
Frequency Range	20 Hz – 20 Khz
Impedance	16 ohm
Sensitivity	108 +/-3dB @ 1kHz 1mW
Cables	3 ofc – 2 x Trinity braid, 1 cloth with mic/remote/vol controls
Connectors	2 pin proprietary – but can fit after-market
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, straight jack (with right angle adaptor)
Weight	Approx 18g with standard cable, long filter and Kombi tips in place
IEM Shell	CNC polished aluminium

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the IEC 711 standard on my budget.


Default frequency response - gold long filters (both channels)	CSD plot - gold long filters

The graphs are provided merely as a point of discussion, and later in the review I've included comparisons to other IEMs for similar reference. The graphs in this section are the Sabre with gold (or middle) long filter. I will discuss all filters and their effects in the “filter” section of the review

What I’m hearing:

Mildly elevated bass response, mainly mid-bass, but with good definition.
Typically “Trinity House Sound” slightly recessed lower mid-range (relative to bass), with comparatively lean lower-mids, and raised upper-mids – particularly in the presence area from 2-4 kHz. This leaves deeper vocals a little thin in body but quite clean and clear.
Upper mid-range is emphasised, and this does colour female vocals (adds euphonic warmth), and indeed female vocals are a little more full.
A bit of recession in the lower treble, but climbing to a peak at around 8-9 kHz. Quite smooth for the most part, but can expose sibilance in some tracks.
Overall it is a V shaped signature with warmer bottom end, clean and clear vocal area, and somewhat smooth upper end which also manages to portray upper end detail (cymbals ) pretty well.

I included the CSD also, and you will see evidence of some ringing at 5 and 9 kHz, but comparatively little overall bass bleed into the mid-range frequencies (which is good considering the mid-bass hump with the gold filter).

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
The Sabre is quite different to Trinity's previous designs, and this time consists of a circular 15-16mm polished aluminium alloy shell with a vertical/angled forward cable exit and forward angled nozzle. The shell on this pair is gun-metal, nicely polished, and very smooth (no rough angles) – so it is very comfortable when worn. It's depth is approx 10mm.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Sabres - internal face, no filters	Sabres - from the rear	Sabres - showing external face, sides and vent

The shell is two piece with a visible but well matched seam (more on this later). The external face is flat, and has the Trinity name/logo on both earpieces. The interior face is nicely rounded with easily seen left and right earpiece markers. On the side of each ear piece is a single port of vent for the dynamic drivers.

The nozzle socket is approximately 5m in diameter and takes the skinnier type nozzle filters (also utilised on the original Atlas and Techne). The nozzles extend out and up or forward on an approx 45 degree angle (depending on how forward you wear the cable when over ear). The shorter filters have an exposed length of approx 5mm, whilst the longer ones extend this out to almost 8mm – and this has a massive difference for me in achieving a comfortable seal. The filter ends are approx 5mm in diameter and covered in a stainless steel mesh. There are 5 sets of tuning filters included, each in short and long lengths. We'll look at them in more detail later in the review. Each filter this time has a small rubber ring to aid in getting a proper lock once threaded.

		[size=inherit][/size]
With filters attached	Short vs long filters	Connectors - 2 pin

The connector socket is 2 pin, and is exposed/raised. The Trinity male connectors are sheathed with the pins protected by the sheathing, and there is a small tab on the interior of the socket so that the Trinity cables can only go in one way (so you can't wire them out of phase – its a neat solution). The cables connectors are quite tight to mate together, and may require a lot of pushing and wriggling on the first couple of attempts. The good news is that you can also use some standard 2 pin cables (see pictures of the FiiO balanced 2 pin cable RC-UE2B). I had to modify the FiiO cable slightly – but it fits pretty well.

There are three cables included – the standard Trinity multi-braid cable (1.3m), a second Trinity multi-braid, but this one has moldable ear guides) and a cloth covered single button remote and mic cable (1.4m) – with separate volume controls.

The multi-braid cables are both practically identical with the only difference being the moldable ear guides. These work pretty well, but I've found that the standard cable fits and hangs over ear so well that I simply don't use the other cable. Both have Trinity's excellent braid – consisting of 4 OFC wires – both sets of two tight woven into a spring like weave. These two weaves are then woven again together below the Y-split. The end result is an extremely flexible, and gorgeous looking cable with virtually no memory. The weave also gives it strength. So far in my testing (over-ear), cable noise is minimal – unless it comes into contact with a rough surface (zipper etc). The cable can be slightly tangle prone – but careful winding and storage solves that easily.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Standard Trinity braided cable	With moldable ear guides	Cloth cable, mic and control unit

The jack, y-split and connector housing are all a brushed aluminium which looks pretty classy IMO. All have very good strain relief, and the Y-split has a cinch which works extremely well. The jacks are gold plated, straight, and very smart-phone case friendly.

The secondary cable is cloth covered, very slightly longer than the standard cable (1.4m), has a 4 pole straight jack, and this time has a combined single button for track control, volume up and down controls, and microphone port on the left hand earpiece. The push button control is a universal standard (one-click pause/play, two click next track, three click previous track, and press and hold activates Siri for me). The control unit hangs about 10-12cm below my ear if worn over ear, so just below my chin. The microphone is pretty clear, and I had no problems being clearly understood when calling my wife. The cable is slightly micro-phonic but this disappears with careful management. The volume controls are universal and worked on both my iPhone and my wife's Galaxy. The control unit worked perfectly on both – except for the previous track not working on Android (seems to be a common problem). One of the nice things about this cable is that it also perfectly fits my Delta V2 – and it is the one I often prefer to use for the Delta (the volume controls are really handy).

All in all the build quality is pretty good – but I would be remiss if I didn't mention a couple of small issues. The first one has been mentioned by a relatively small number of owners – I can sometimes get connection issues with one of the connectors on the cloth cable and the Sabre. I mentioned earlier that getting the connector all the way down can be quite problematic – and it is the case with that particular cable and the Sabre. The standard cables I have no issues with – they fit well. Funnily enough the cloth cable has no such issues with the Delta V2. If you do get this issue, simply drop Bob or Jake a line at Trinity Audio. They'll have advice how you can overcome it, and if it happens consistently their quality service will make sure the problem is fixed.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Modded FiiO cable fits well for balanced use with the L&P L3	Or the X7 + AM3	Cracked casing showing dual drivers - easy fix with glue

The other issue has happened to both earpieces. They may have had an issue with one particular batch and glueing the two sides. Both sides have cracked open on me. The fix is easy, and one you can make yourself. A small smear of elephant glue or epoxy around the shell internal join, and stick them back together. For me it's worked perfectly on both earpieces and I've had no issues since. It did give me an opportunity to take a quick snap of the drivers – so I've included that for anyone interested.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. If I was using the shorter filters on the Sabre it would be a shallow fit, and I would tend to have issues. With the longer filters, the extra length has meant I get a perfect seal every time, and most tips have been successful (with a couple of caveats). My usual preference is for the included Crystal foam tips – but I often found that they would slip off the nozzle and remain in my ear. Because of the small diameter of the nozzles, this mean also Spiral Dots suffer the same issue. But I got good results with Spin-fits, Ostry tuning tips. Comply 200, Shure Olives, and either Sony Isolation or the new Trinity Kombi tips (although even those slipped off the nozzle sometimes). My go to with the Sabres most of the time is theKombi tips – providing good fit, durability and seal. Depending on the seal achieved there is sometimes mild driver flex.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Ostry or Spin-Fit tips fit well	Standard Trinity silicone were good but Cyrstal foams come off	Trinity Kombis are good, but my favourite are Shure Olives

Isolation with the Sabre will depend on the seal you achieve and insertion depth. I would call the isolation average for a dynamic driver. With music playing, isolation is pretty good. With nothing playing I can faintly hear the keys on the keyboard as I type.

Comfort for me is excellent – the Sabres are one of those designs which simply disappear when worn. They sit well within my outer ear (inside the external ear cavity – between tragus and anti-tragus), and are extremely easy to sleep in. On my recent business trip, I used the Sabres practically every day, and I often slept with them intact in hotel rooms etc. The photo bleow shows the original prototype I had - but the fit is the same.

So the Sabre looks good, has a pretty nice build, and is comfortable to wear. Let’s have a look at the filters, and then move onto sonic impressions.

SABRE FILTER SYSTEM
The Sabre comes with 5 sets of filters in two different lengths. Each of the short filters stand just under 7mm tall (4-5mm when exposed), with a 4-5mm diameter threaded base, and 5mm nozzle. The filter screws easily into the main body of the Sabre, and can be replaced for different tuning. This time the filters come with rubber rings for easy locking when tightening. Most of the filters have a very small tuning vent located toward and just above the threaded section. The vents control the bass quantity.

The long filters are just over 10mm tall from bass to tip (7mm exposed when fitted) and have the same diameter and outward appearance. There has sometimes been small variances in some of the filters (getting those micro holes is not always easy), but generally the actual channel matching has always been excellent.


The 5 long filters	Short vs tall

Lets have a look at the shorter filters first. On my pairs each filter changes the mid and sub bass from about 200 Hz down – with the bass quantity ranging from highest to lowest – Red, Orange, Gun-metal, Gold and Purple. All of the short filters are near identical from about 300 Hz up. Even with the gold or purple filters, mid-bass is around 10 dB above the mid-range at 1 kHz. The red and orange filters are another 5-6 dB above that – particularly with the sub-bass around 40-60 Hz.

The longer filters on my set are somewhat similar with minor variations in the upper treble (from the short filters), but generally the same shape curve overall. The difference with my set is that this time gold and gun-metal swap places for bass response – and also the response particularly with the purple and gun-metal are a lot flatter. For me this is great, because I really like a much more neutral bass response with just a slight mid-bass hump. This also brings the mid-range recession to far more manageable levels, and balances the overall signature a lot more.


Short filter frequency responses	Long filter frequency responses

Rather than go through each filter, I'll let the graphs speak for themselves. Suffice it to say, if your preference is for deep impactful sub and mid-bass, the red and orange filters will easily deliver. If you prefer more balance, then the purple filter may be more to your liking.

The spare filters are housed in the now familiar little aluminium tubes with the screw on caps. This is brilliant as the tubes fit neatly in the case pocket so that your filters are always with you – and the tubes should be big enough so that they won’t get easily lost. The tubes this time are a little skinnier and a little longer – and will accommodate a full set of 4 (2 long and 2 short) for each colour.

My favourite of the filters is the long purple, but my one wish is that the Sabre had damped filter options. Lets take a look at that now …

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Trinity Sabre. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii + E17K as source, the purple filter in place, and Bob's Trinity Kombi tips.

For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 17-19/60 (on low gain) which was giving me an average SPL around 65-70 dB (with peaks around 75 dB). Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Thoughts on General Signature
The sound signature of the Sabre is very much Trinity's “house sound” - with typically forward upper-mids, slightly recessed lower-mids and bass that can be either quite robust (red/orange filters) especially with respect to sub-bass, or dialled back to be more of a gentle mid-bass hump (purple filter). There are two main peaks around 4 kHz and 8-9 kHz and depending on your sensitivity to these particular frequencies, could enhance sibilance.

Overall Detail / Clarity
Tracks used: Gaucho, Sultans of Swing, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town

Overall balance and clarity is somewhat dependent on the filter used. At the two extremes, the red filter gives very much a bass enhanced V shaped signature, and upper register detail can occasionally be subdued or masked. The purple filter is the complete opposite with a much drier and leaner presentation which tends to expose all details – but can be a little lean.
Detail retrieval, particularly around the mid and especially upper-mid frequencies is very good.
Both guitar and brass instruments (sax) have very good presence.
Vocals tend to be presented fairly well – with female vocals having slightly more body.

Sound-stage, Imaging, and Sibilance Test
Tracks used: Tundra, Dante’s Prayer, Let it Rain

Very good directional queues, and just outside the periphery of my head space – so average width and depth
Good spherically presented stage – not too much emphasis on width at the cost of depth
Imaging is very clean and clear and separation of instruments is very good – especially with purple or gun-metal filters.
Contrast between vocals, piano and cello is excellent with Dante's Prayer. Loreena's vocals are really nice with the Sabre, although there is a touch of sibilance for me at higher volumes.
Immersion (applause section of Dante's Prayer) is extremely good with the impression that crowd is around you (you are sitting right in it). There is very slightly more width than depth. “Let It Rain” also had a very holographic presentation – spatial ability is very good.
Sibilance is present in “Let It Rain” - I know it exists in the recording – and the peaks for me are revealing it (and it can be quite sharp).

Bass Quality and Quantity
Tracks used: Bleeding Muddy Water, Royals

Personally I find the bass impact from both purple and gun-metal filters to be more than sufficient with good speed and reasonable impact.
Switching to the red filter and the Sabre becomes a bass monster – warm lower end with visceral impact.
With the red filters there is an increase in quantity but a drop in quality (less texture and slight signs of mid-range bloom)
Average to good speed and bass resolution with purple filters. Slower and less resolving with red filters.
With red filters there is massive sub-bass for tracks like “Royals”, and when the really low bass kicks in there is a lot of rumble (too much for me – but some will no doubt love it). With the purple filters bass is far more balanced and there is still some sufficient sub-bass rumble, but subdued.
With both filters there is good separation between mid-bass impact and vocals with “Royals” - Ella's voice still comes through quite clear.

Female Vocals
Tracks used : Aventine, Strong, For You, Human, The Bad In Each Other, Howl, Safer, Light as a Feather, Don’t Wake me Up, Ship To Wreck.

Really nice transition from lower-mids to upper-mids – this is one of the strengths of the Sabre. Very vivid though, the mid-range is not subdued in any way.
Very euphonic presentation with plenty of air and a definite touch of sweetness (colouration) to female vocals
Very good contrast between vocals and lower pitch of instruments like cello
No signs of stridency with Aventine and Strong
Good contrast with tracks having more dynamic impact (Feist, FaTM) – and even with the purple filters, the presentation is extremely vivid and a lot of fun.
Seems to be brilliant with all female vocals and in particular slower jazzy type music from artists such as Gabriella Cilmi, Norah Jones and Sarah Jarosz.

Male Vocals / Rock
Tracks used: Away From the Sun, Art for Art’s Sake, Broken Wings, Hotel California, Boulevard of Broken Dreams, Keith Don’t Go, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town.

Differences between red and purple filters more pronounced – with red having male vocals appear a little thinner (comparative to bass), while the purple sounds a little more balanced.
Male vocals feel as if they have just a little distance than female counterparts.
Brilliant portrayal of classic rock artists like 10CC and Jethro Tull (that upper mid-range boost really makes older recordings pop). Mix of detail and tonality is very good.
Fantastic with acoustic tracks – stand-outs were Eagle's “Hotel California” and Nils Lofgren's “Keith Don't Go”. Really good with stringed instruments.
Very good dynamic contrast with rock tracks, and the bass can be dialled up or down depending on the filter chosen.
With purple filters, Pearl Jam was very enjoyable – texture on Eddie's vocals was really good – just maybe the slightest touch thin (overall tone/timbre). Cymbal decay and detail was excellent in this track.

Genre Specific Notes

Very good with everything I tried, and I found myself enjoying almost everything with the purple filters – but then swapping out gold or orange for bassier tracks if I wanted more impact.
Only critique with some recordings was that if sibilance was present it did tend to be emphasised for me. One of the tracks that was really quite sharp was Adele's “Turning Tables”
Overall very vivid presentation with every genre I tried, and I particularly enjoyed the presentation of both jazz and blues.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The Sabre is easily powered straight out of the portable devices I have, and I haven’t experienced any issues with the iPhone 5S, or any of the FiiO DAPs. With typical pop/rock songs on the iP5S at a volume level of around 30-35%, on the E17K around 17-20/60 on low gain. I did try amping with the E17K, but noticed no obvious signs of improvement. I also used the IMS Hybrid Valve Amp with the purple filters and I did really enjoy that overall presentation (perhaps smoothing the upper end a little – or that was how it seemed to me). Form my tests, the Sabre neither benefits from nor needs additional amplification.

EQUALISATION

You can alter the bass to your liking with the filter system, but it is the upper mid-range and lower treble which are just a little over-done to my tastes. So as I was using the E17K, I simply used the purple filter, and then applied -8 treble adjustment. It definitely took away a lot of the additional vividness or colouration, and for me was a welcome adjustment overall. I'd imagine most may prefer the default frequency response – but for me the extra balance is just about perfect. I've graphed the two so you can see what the adjustment did to the overall frequency response.

COMPARISONS
When the Sabre came out, the introductory specials made it a very low ~$110 (an incredible bargain). It is now at a regular price of USD 165, but this comes down to approx $130 with Head-Fi 20% discount. So to compare I decided to use the two of its siblings (the exceptional Delta V2 and also the Atlas), and for a similarly priced and tuned IEM, DUNU's Titan 5. I've avoided higher priced IEMs like the FLC8S simply because it wouldn't be fair at over double the price.

All of these comparisons are very subjective – and influenced by my own preference, physiology and bias. Comparison was once again with the X3ii + E17K, and the Sabre had the purple long filters. All IEMs were volume matched with a 1 kHz tone and using a proper SPL meter.

Sabre (~$130 with discount) vs Delta V2 (~ $120 with discount)


Sabre and Delta V2	Frequency response comparison

Build quality is comparable on both. Fit and comfort fall more to the Sabre – and especially so for those with smaller ears. Accessory package similar. Sonically both are excellent. They share a very similar overall signature, with the Sabre just being a little more vivid and accentuated through the upper mid-range. Overall though, I find the Delta to have greater configurability with the tuning, and the ability to tame and balance out the upper mid-range and lower treble is what makes the Delta so good.

Sabre (~$130 with discount) vs Dunu Titan 5 (~ $139)


Sabre and Titan 5	Frequency response comparison

Both again have very good build quality, and accessory package, and this time on overall fit and comfort I would call a tie. Sonically both have similar signatures with the T5 having a little flatter and quicker bass, and also more overall extension. Both have very vivid signatures, especially in the upper mid-range. Lower treble peaks are relatively pronounced in both, and preference here may be dependent on where your own personal trigger points for sibilance lie. I tend to be very tolerant of peaks at 6-7 kHz, but have issues higher. Two fantastic earphones at two incredible prices. Both represent excellent value.

Sabre (~$130 with discount) vs Atlas (~ $175 with discount)


Sabre and Atlas (pictured are my leaner "specials")	Frequency response comparison

Again both are pretty evenly matched in terms of build and accessories. The Atlas has the slightly more ergonomic shape overall and also has the water-resistant coating. In terms of signature, the standard Atlas is bassier and warmer – but both undoubtedly share the Trinity house sound with upper mid-range. If I was to choose between the standard Atlas and Sabre, my choice would be with the Sabre – it has the same vivid mid-range, but less bass emphasis. But I also have my special Atlas (with the lower bass response), and as you can see in the graph this aligns the bass closely to the Sabre response. When pairing this with the slightly better shape and comfort, and the slightly lower peaks, I would personally take my Black Atlas (remember this is a slightly different tuning though).

TRINITY SABRE - SUMMARY

The Trinity Sabre is the first dual dynamic push pull IEM I've heard, and it has been a pleasure and privilege to put it through it's paces.

The build is typical Trinity with precision machined aluminium shells, some great cable choices, and a filter system which is very handy for adjusting the bass to suit either a very V shaped or comparatively more balanced signature. The build is pretty good overall, but as I mentioned earlier, I have had some minor single issues with the cable connector and shell joins.

What sits Trinity above some other manufacturers though is their willingness to communicate with the Community here, and allow input into making their products better. They also have top notch customer service – and if anything breaks or has issues, they respond quickly to make it right again.

The Sabre has a bass response you can vary to your own personal tastes, a vivid and sweet mid-range which is coloured in the upper mid-range, and particularly good with female vocals. The lower treble may have issues for some (especially the peak around 9 kHz), but it does respond very well to EQ.

In it's price range, the Sabre once again represent really great value, and my only deductions are for the minor issues with build, and the connectors. It is an easy recommendation for anyone who really enjoys the Trinity house sound, and well worth its comparatively low price. 4 stars from me.

My thanks once again to Bob for the chance to be involved in both development and review.

Hi Sergey - yes as far as I know the coupon can be used on the Sabre.

Hi Brooko. Thanks for a detailed review!
How would you compare them to MEE Pinnacle P1? What about Trinity Phantom Master 4?
I'm looking for an IEM in a price range up to 250 USD to replace my Phonak Audeo PFE 112.

Hi - sorry for the delay in replying. I haven't heard the Master 4 unfortunately. Compared to the P1:
- Build quality is better on P1, accessories are about same
- Sabre is much easier to drive
- Fit and comfort pretty good on both
- Sabre is of course configurable with the filters, so difficult to match - but they are extremely similar if you use the gold long filter. Sabre is more mid-centric (more forward mid-range) and brighter overall.

Hope that hekps

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

A little earlier this year (March) I received a PM out of the blue from Teo of Lend Me Ur Ears. While I'd heard their company mentioned by quite a few Head-Fiers and featured in other reviews, I'd never had the opportunity to try any of their offerings before. So when Teo asked me to have a listen to their house brand Alpha & Delta D2 I was naturally interested. The pack arrived in late April – the A&D D2 along with the V-Sonic VSD3S and VSD2SI (which I'll review at another stage).

ABOUT LEND ME UR EARS (LMUE)
Lend Me Ur Ears is a combined retail and on-line store which opened in December 2011 in Singapore. Their web store is located at www.lendmeurears.com and their web store in particular has grown in popularity over the last 5 years and now stocks a large number of audio products from a multitude of well known manufacturers – including the likes of DUNU, Fidue, and FLC. They have an Amazon store-front in both Canada and the US for some products also. One of the services they offer is free shipping and international warranty on all items purchased from them – which I thing is a pretty nice touch. I like their mission statement too – short and simple:
“Lend Me UR ears only have one mission: That is to bring quality audio products to the masses and providing good customer service in the process.”

Alpha & Delta is LMUE's house brand – which kicked of with the A&D AD01 IEM in 2015. This was followed by the A&D D2 in 2016 – and it is this “sports model” I'm reviewing today.

DISCLAIMER
The Alpha & Delta D2m that I’m reviewing today was provided to me gratis as a review sample. I have made it clear to Teo that I still regard any product they send me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. Teo told me to keep them though (he wouldn't want them back) – so they are a freely given sample for the purpose of reviewing.

I do not make any financial gain from this review – it is has been written simply as my way of providing feedback both to the Head-Fi community and also LMUE themselves. I have now had the A&D D2m since May 2016. They are currently available from LMUE or their Amazon store-front for approx USD 30.00. Mine is the microphone version.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

Over the last few months – I’ve used the A&D D2m from a variety of sources, but for this review, I’ve mainly used it with my iPhone 5S and FiiO X1 or M3. I've used a smart-phone and value oriented DAPs as this is likely to be more in-line with the target audience.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The Alpha & Delta D2m arrived in a 100 x 155 x 53mm retail box. The box has a grey background with red highlights and easy to read white text. On the front of the box is a picture of the Alpha & Delta D2m as well as a highlighted image of the on-cable mic and controls. There is also a couple of blurbs which touch on the isolation, the IPX 4 sweat resistance, and the fact that these are designed for a more active lifestyle (music : sports : play).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Front of retail box	Rear of retail box	Inner packaging

Opening the outer packaging reveals a clear plastic moulded inner containing the accessories, a zippered clamshell case, and the Alpha & Delta D2m.

Full list of accessories:

The Alpha & Delta D2m earphones
Zippered clamshell case
A shirt clip
3 pairs of hybrid silicone ear tips (S,M,L)
3 pairs of black silicone ear tips (S,M,L)
2 pairs of generic crystal foam tips
User manual and warranty

		[size=inherit][/size]
Full accessories included	Clamshell case and Alpha and Delta D2m	Included tips

Considering the value price of the Alpha & Delta D2m – the accessory package is good value.

The carry case is a hard mesh covered zippered clamshell with an internal pocket – and easily carries spare tips and the D2m. The case is quite sturdy and should offer reasonable protection to the IEMs. It is by no means a flat or small clamshell – but I still consider it pocket-able.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From LMUE)

Drivers	Dynamic 10mm
Shell	Black matte soft touch plastic
Rated Impedance	16 ohm
Frequency Range	10 Hz – 20 kHz
Sensitivity	95 dB +/- 3 dB / mW @ 1 kHz
Cable	1.2m copper with mic and volume / track controls
Jack	3.5mm, straight, gold plated
Weight	14g with tips attached
Fitting	Ergonomic, over ear.

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. Ken Ball (ALO/Campfire) graciously provided me with measurement data which I have used to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators, we measured the same set of IEMs, and I built my calibration curve from shared data). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the 711 standard on my budget.

I measured both channels, and driver matching is reasonably good for an IEM at this price level – well done Alpha & Delta.


Frequency plot and channel matching	CSD chart

What I’m hearing:

Very elevated bass response – both mid and low bass
Comparatively recessed mid-range (relative to bass), with comparatively lean lower-mids, and raised upper-mids – particularly in the presence area from 2-3 kHz. This leaves vocals a little thin in body but very clean and clear.
Clear lower treble which portrays sibilance if it is present in a track, but does not accentuate it. There is a certain amount of crispness to the lower treble (peaks at 5 kHz and 9 kHz).
Overall it is a V shaped signature with warm bottom end, and somewhat thin but crisp and clean top end.
I included the CSD also, and you will see evidence of some bass bleed through into the mid-range frequencies.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
The Alpha & Delta D2m are an over-ear design. The body is a rounded oblong shape, measuring approx 16-17mm across, 18mm from the top of the cable exit to bottom, and approx 10mm in width (not counting the nozzle). The nozzle extends approx 8mm, angled forward from the main body. It is just over 5mm in width and encased in a very fine mesh and its open end. The nozzle has a slight lip (I would have preferred something a little more pronounced – we'll discuss this when we look at tip options).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Inner face showing porting	Good forward angle on the nozzles	Nozzle mesh

The casing is two piece, but the two pieces are joined really nicely (practically seamless). The body is nicely rounded with no sharp edges, and is comfortable worn. On the outside main body face on both earpieces is the Alpha & Delta logo in red – which looks pretty classy printed on the matt black. The surface of the IEM is a “soft feel” plastic which is IPX4 water resistant, so it is ideal for a fitness or sports oriented IEM. There is a single bass port or vent on the internal side.

The cable exit has excellent strain relief. And is coloured red on the right hand side for easy identification (although ergonomically it can only be warn one way anyway). Its a nice touch though. There is a preformed 85mm loop of flexible memory wire at each exit – designed to drape over your ears instead of you actually forming it for perfect fit. Personally I find this great for an exercise IEM as it just seems to sit naturally and you can have them fitting well in seconds. The cable is 1.2m long and has an on-cable control and mic unit where the Y-split would normally be (there is a cinch just above this unit which is easy to use and holds quite well).

		[size=inherit][/size]
Angled from the rear	Rear view - you can see the fit will be quite shallow	External side view

The on cable controls work perfectly with my iPhone 5S, allowing volume changing, and also play/pause (one push), next track (two pushes), and previous track (three pushes). A single long push also activates Siri which is really handy. The volume control is a sliding resistor set-up, so will work with any source. It's only real issue is that there is a lot of play on the volume control – but a very small change can have quite an effect on the overall volume. All the same it is nice to have an all-in-one-unit. I also tried the D2m with my wife's Galaxy, and everything worked perfectly (including volume controls) except for the previous track (3 pushes) – it simply advanced the track and either paused or played (depending what was active). With the FiiO M3 the track buttons also worked perfectly, but not with the FiiO X1 (must be a FiiO issue). I also tested the Alpha & Delta D2m with taking a call (with my wife), and it was reasonably clear at both ends. There was the usual hollow sound on my end due to the isolation and bone conduction. All up I'd rate the mic quality at about 3/5.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Control unit with mic and volume control	Jack is very smartphone friendly	Even with a case

The cable itself is very slightly micro-phonic, but this can be eliminated by tucking under clothing, or using the cinch. The cable is copper encased with a soft sheathing, and despite its thinness between control unit and earpiece, still appears to be relatively strong/sturdy. The jack is a 4 pole 3.5mm gold plated straight entry with very good strain relief, and a svelte / skinny profile. It easily fit my iPhone 5S plus case, and should fit most sources with cases intact.

All in all – very good build and design for the price point.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. I initially tried the large silicone tips included, and it was impossible for me to get a seal because of the shallow fit. I also tried a large pair of crystal foams, and had a good seal – but an issue with the tips not holding on to the nozzles (coming off in my ear). Eventually I used large Shure Olives and they gave me an extremely good seal, and great comfort. For the record, the D2m nozzle takes a Comply T200 stem type – and unfortunately I had no large fit to try.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Ostry tips fit well, Spiral Dots slipped off.	Spin-Fits & Sony Isolation/Trinity Kombi tips both fit well	Crystal foam tips slipped off, but large Shure Olives fit perfectly for me.

I tried my usual selection of tips to ascertain what would fit. Spin-fits, Ostry tuning tips, Sony Isolation / Trinity Kombi, and any silicone with a small bore fit pretty well (to the nozzle). Crystal foams, Spiral Dots, and anything with a slightly wider bore would come off because of the shallow lip. Fortunately for me the Shure Olives were perfect, but for future LMUE should look into slightly extending the lip to anchor tips better. I'd also suggest a longer nozzle (even 2-3mm) which would make the fit a little less shallow.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The lip on the nozzles just needs to be slightly wider / more prominent	Fit is wonderful and very comfortable	You can easily lie down with them intact

Isolation is better than average with a good seal (probably because of the internal port), and comfort for me is truly excellent. The Alpha & Delta D2m are nicely rounded internally, and there are no sharp protruding edges. They sit inside my outer ear, so it would be possible to lie on my side with them, and I would have no issues sleeping with them intact.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Alpha & Delta D2m. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done my iPhone 5S and FiiO X1.

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Thoughts on General Signature
As I outlined above in my comments in the frequency section, the Alpha & Delta D2m has quite a V or U shaped signature with the main frequency boosts in the mid and sub-bass, and also in the upper mid-range and lower treble (2-3 kHz, 5-6 kHz and 9 kHz). As such it tends to sound (for me anyway) a little thin through the mid-range with a lot of bottom end warmth, but quite clean and clear vocal presence. The comparative dip in the vocal range does give a sense of space or distance, and tendency toward sibilance will depend on your own individual sensitivity.

Overall Detail / Clarity
Tracks used: Gaucho, Sultans of Swing, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town

Overall detail retrieval is quite good, but higher level lower treble detail tends to be masked by the bass to a certain extent.
Bass is dominant, but vocals are clean and clear, as is anything prominent in the mid-range (including horn, sax, guitar etc)
Cymbals are there, but subdued, and the normal decay tails off very quickly and is easily over-powered by the mid and sub-bass (bass guitar very dominant on Sultans)
Cymbals which are usually extremely prominent on PJ's “Elderly Woman ….” definitely sit back a little and tend to be a little flat. Still sounds OK – but veiled compared to how this track sounds with an IEM with more frequency balance.

Sound-stage & Imaging (+ Sibilance)
Tracks used: Tundra, Dante’s Prayer, Let it Rain

There is a slight sense of distance – but it is still very much in head, and I would call it an intimate experience rather than expansive
Sense of stage width and depth is narrow and on the small side.
Separation and general imaging is pretty good – this is the clarity in the upper mid-range and lower treble at work.
The applause section at the end of “Dante's Prayer” is actually pretty good, and I didn't expect this. It isn't hugely immersive, but the smallish stage projected is quite realistic.
Let it Rain is nicely holographic. The warmth of the bass effectively masks the sibilance which I know is in the track. A nice listening experience though.

Bass Quality and Quantity
Tracks used: Bleeding Muddy Water, Royals

Marks vocals sounded a little distant, but there was good overall bass impact. I wasn't overly impressed with texture in the vocal area.
There is some bass bleed through the mid-range area
Bass had very big impact with “Royals” (visceral) and sub-bass was prominent and dominant. It was also a little on the slow side. Ella's vocals were pretty clear though – so the D2m is cleaner and clearer with female vocals
For those looking simply for impact (quantity), I think the D2m will suit you well.

Female Vocals
Tracks used : Aventine, Strong, For You, Human, The Bad In Each Other, Howl, Safer, Light as a Feather, Mile on the Moon.

Really nice tuning for female vocals – sweet and a euphonic
No hollowness or stridency – even with difficult tracks like “Aventine”
Vocals are very clear.
Good contrast with high impact tracks (Feist, FatM) – and lovers of female rock with good beat will be impressed
Overall quite impressed with female vocals – definitely a strong-point (Norah was fantastic)

Male Vocals
Track used: Away From the Sun, Art for Art’s Sake, Broken Wings, Diary of Jane, Hotel California, Keith Don’t Go, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town.

Compared to my female vocalists, I often had to turn the volume up with my favourite male vocalists - just because sometimes the vocals were too distant initially.
Older rock tracks were very good – the upper mid-range lift really helped with artists like 10CC, and the V shaped nature of the D2m made for a fun listen.
Bass is dynamic, and reasonably hard hitting – which should be great for the gym with rock tracks. Acoustic tracks (or anything with less bass) shone quite well – but that is my preference for more balance kicking in. “Hotel California” (live version) was really good.
I covered PJ earlier. It actually wasn't a bad rendition of the track, but Vedders vocals were just a little thin and lacking in texture. By no means bad – but I'm finding the bass a little one-dimensional.

Other Genres

Alt Rock was very artist dependent – good with Porcupine Tree and Wilsons higher pitched vocals, and well recorded tracks. Pink Floyd could be a little bass guitar dominant and wouldn't be my first choice.
Jazz / Blues – the D2m were actually pretty good. The fundamental detail was there – but just missing some of the high level (slow decay of cymbals etc). Enjoyable though, and the sax on the Portico Quartet tracks was very enjoyable.
Rap / Hip-hop / Electronic – again lovers of bass quantity with these genres will find the D2m really good. It is definitely a fun listen with the V shaped signature giving both high impact, and also reasonable clarity. Trance was a heck of a lot of fun with the D2m – especially anything with female supporting vocals.
Pop – again the V shape will help a lot of modern Pop music. Adele was pretty good, very clean and clear. Coldplay was also a lot of fun – and the contrast between the bass line and vocals (whilst not my taste) will appeal to many.
Indie – generally pretty good. Better with higher pitched vocals, and this applied to both Band of Horses and Wildlight.
Classical – a mixed bag here. Solo cello and solo piano were generally very good. Anything requiring more a more expansive presentation suffered a little.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The Alpha & Delta D2m is very easily powered straight out of virtually any portable device, and I didn’t experience any issues with any of the DAPs I tested (iPhone 5S, or any of the FiiOs). With the iPhone I was between 30 and 40% on most tracks, and with the X1 around 25-30/120. I did test the X1 with both the FiiO E17K and E11K (A3), and I couldn’t say it added anything sonically once volume matched.

EQUALISATION
To be fair, anyone buying the Alpha & Delta D2m will be doing so for a specific signature, so this section may be a little superfluous – but it is part of my testing regime, so I make sure I cover it. For this test I used the X3ii + E17K, and just used the tone controls. All I wanted to do here was just tone the bass down a little and see how the mid-range reacted. So using the E17K tone controls I gave the bass -6 dB. The result was pretty good. The bass still had a lot of impact – but the mid-range was a lot cleaner and clearer. I went back to PJ and Vedder again, and the transformation was amazing. Vedder's voice now had texture, and cymbals suddenly had the decay that was missing (confirming to me it was simply a matter of the bass masking the detail which was actually all there in the first place). With EQ – the D2m is a gorgeous sounding IEM.

COMPARISONS
I wasn't too sure what to compare with for this section, but given that the overall signature is reasonably close to that of the Alpha & Delta Jive, and also it is being marketed as a “Sports Earphone” I thought the three candidates would be the Jive, XF200 and T-Peos Raisel.

Please note that these are all very subjective, so please take my personal bias into account (see the “about me” section). When testing, I volume matched first at 1 kHz using an SPL meter and test tones. The Alpha & Delta D2m was unequalised.

Alpha & Delta D2m $30.00 vs Brainwavz Jive $25.00

[size=inherit][/size]
Alpha & Delta D2m vs Brainwavz Jive	Frequency response comparison

Both have a very good build with little between the aluminium shell of the Jive and soft finish of the D2m. Fit and comfort go marginally to the D2m – both are really comfortable to wear. Sonically both have similar signatures with the Jive being slightly more V shaped, and also a little on the colder, leaner side. Comparatively the D2m are a little fuller and leaner. Despite the price difference (which is pretty small) the overall package of the D2m – especially the fit – would tend to have me recommending it slightly ahead.

Alpha & Delta D2m $30.00 vs Brainwavz XF-200 $25.00


Alpha & Delta D2m vs Brainwavz XF-200	Frequency response comparison

These two IEMs have the same target market and both are advertised as a sports earphone. Build quality is similar overall – with the XF-200 utilising a clear hard plastic housing while the D2 has the matt softer rubbery finish. Both have an ergonomic fit with looped cable guides, but to me the D2m is more comfortable overall, and is easier to get a great fit. Both have similar bass responses relative to their lower mid-ranges, and the main difference is in the upper mid-range. The XF-200 is once again more V-shaped and the D2m as a result sounds slightly more balanced (still with a very bassy tilt though). This is a tough one to call – but I prefer the fit and finish of the D2m a little more.

Alpha & Delta D2m $30.00 vs T Peos Rasiel $40.00


Alpha & Delta D2m vs T Peos Rasiel	Frequency response comparison

Again a lot of similarity in the signatures. The Rasiel has the better overall build (durability) and cable, while the Alpha & Delta D2m has the in-line controls and once again the more comfortable fit. Bass is somewhat similar between the two with the Raisel having comparatively more bass impact, and more resultant bleed. Where the Alpha & Delta D2m is reasonably clean and clear, the Rasiel tends to be a bit more comparatively subdued in the lower treble. This gives a smoother presentation, but also accentuates the bass a lot more, and this is the downfall of the Raisel – there is simply way too much warmth. The D2m is cheaper, has a better fit, and a more appealing signature – so its no real contest for me.

ALPHA & DELTA D2M – VALUE & SUMMARY

The Alpha & Delta D2m delivers quite an attractive overall package for a comparatively low cost. The build is very good with attention to detail where it matters. The two things I would change is a slightly better lip on the nozzle and also a slightly longer nozzle (to allow more options for workable tip selections). Comfort is phenomenal (I can forget I am wearing them).

Sonically the Alpha & Delta D2m is quite V shaped with a bassy and warm bottom end, yet overall lean and clear mid-range. It is very good with female vocals, but a little less so with male vocalists for my tastes. Bass quantity is good, but the bass itself can be a little one-dimensional (too much quantity can mask texture), and there is some bleed in the lower mid-range, and also the lower treble.

The D2m does respond incredibly well to EQ though, and a little reduction in the overall bass really does change the signature if you are looking for some better balance.

For the extremely low price of USD 30.00, the Alpha & Delta D2m is quite a good package and I can see where it could very well attract a following among exercise enthusiasts with its exciting/fun V shape, comfortable fit and on-cable controls.

The problem I have with it is for my own particular tastes there is simply a little too much bass. None-the-less it is a good earphone, and for the package it offers, I'd have no problems giving 3.75-4.0 stars or around 75-80%. If you are prepared to EQ though, it is very easy to transform the D2m into a 5 star IEM for the price, and that is spectacular value in my books.

My thanks once again to Teo – this is a pretty amazing IEM for the cost. I'd love to see what you could do with a slightly bigger budget in mind!

Nice review Paul, mine were absconded by my 15 year old, seems that little extra boom got his attention ;-)

For larger views of any of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

Firstly I'd like to acknowledge Head-fier Ajaxander (Andy) and also Ken Ball from ALO/Campfire for making this short review possible. Andy's a fellow Kiwi (New Zealander) and his pair of Novas had an issue, so were sent back for repair. He knew I was keen on hearing them, so he arranged for Ken to send them back to me to evaluate after repair, and I would then get them to Andy once I'd finished.

The second reason I really wanted to listen to this pair is that Ken agree to measure them on his own equipment, and then also send the data file so I could make a proper calibration curve for my Veritas set-up. Ken didn't need to do this – it was going above and beyond, but I am extremely, incredibly grateful for him doing this.

So far I've heard Campfire's Lyra, Orion, and Jupiter (I chose not to review the Jupiter as I had issues with it's sonic signature and my own particular physiology / bias / sensitivity – which would have made any review overly skewed). I've heard prototypes of the Andromeda, and hope to hear and review a final version at some stage in the future. The Orion (single BA) was my favourite in the Campfire line-up, and I was really hoping for a continuation of the sound signature in Campfire's dual BA Nova.

Unfortunately for this review – I've only been able to use these for a week – so please take this into account. These are short term impressions.

ABOUT CAMPFIRE AUDIO
Campfire Audio is a partner company or off-shoot to ALO Audio, and is run by ALO's CEO and founder Ken Ball, and a small team of like-minded enthusiasts and engineers. Ken of course is the CEO and founder of ALO Audio (2006) and ALO is very well known for creating high quality audio components – including cables, amplifiers and all manner of other audio equipment. Ken founded Campfire Audio in 2015 – with a vision of creating extremely high quality earphones with excellence in design, materials and of course sound quality.

DISCLAIMER
The Campfire Audio Nova was provided to me for review as a loaner. I get to use it for about 7 days then it goes to its owner. There is no actual obligation to write about it or review it. I am not affiliated to Campfire or ALO Audio in any way, and this is my subjective opinion of the Nova.

The Campfire Audio Nova can be sourced directly from Campfire Audio for USD 499, and if you were lucky enough to get in on the earlier Massdrop, they were selling for a shade under $350.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyer T1, Sennheiser HD600, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be skeptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

Over the last week I’ve used the Nova paired with most of the sources I have at my disposal – from my iPhone to the L3 and X7. But for the review I’ve used mainly my X3ii + E17K, and also the X7. In the time I’ve been using the Nova, I haven’t noticed any sonic change. And although I used the Nova coupled with several different amplifiers, they are easily driven, and will pair nicely with most sources straight from the headphone out.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The Nova's arrived to me in only the carry case – and without the accessories. But for the purposes of providing a complete and informative review, and because I have reviewed other Campfire products previously (and know the accessory contents), I've listed what you will receive below.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Retail box (photo provided with assistance of Jackpot77)	Full package contents (photo provided with assistance of Jackpot77	Tips, pin and cleaning brush

The Novas will in their distinctive 76 x 116 x 65 mm rainbow coloured thin cardboard retail hinged lid box. The box has the same 70’s psychedelic vibe about the patterning on it – kind of swirly and very distinctive (this time kind of orangey and grey). The top (lid) simply has the word Nova and a short description, and the front face has a picture of the Nova.

Opening the lid will reveal the canvas Campfire Audio case – which is very sturdy, but more “jacket or bag pocketable” than trousers. It measures approx. 75 x 115 x 40 mm. The case has a woven canvas outer, is zipped on 3 sides, and when opened reveals a soft wool interior which will definitely protect and preserve your IEMs. Despite the outside being canvas outer material, it is quite strong, and pretty rigid.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The very good Campfire canvas case	Wool padding inside	Litz cable and Campfire Novas

Under the case will be a hidden compartment which reveals the accessories. These include:

S/M/L silicone tips
S/M/L generic foam tips (Crystal foam type)
S/M/L genuine Comply T400 tips
A cleaning brush / wax remover
A Campfire Audio logo clothing button / pin
Campfire’s foldout user manual (incl care instructions and warranty info)

You really won’t need any more than what is included, as the cinch on the cable negates the need for a shirt clip. And while I note the omission of an airline adapter or 3.5-6.3 mm adapter, really speaking – how many of us actually use these (plus they are easy to pick up for a very small outlay).

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From Campfire’s website)

I’ve listed below the main specifications for the Campfire Nova.

Type	Twin Balanced Armature full range drivers
Current Retail	$499 (Campfire Website)
Freq Range	10 Hz – 19 kHz
Impedance	22 ohm (@ 1kHz)
Sensitivity	114 dB SPL /mW @ 1 kHz
Jack	3.5mm gold plated, 90 deg
Cable	1.2m, removable (MMCX) – silver plated copper (ALO Litz Cable)
Weight	24g including cable and tips
IEM Shell	CNC aluminium
Body shape / fit	Ergonomic, cable over ear

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. As alluded to earlier, Ken has graciously provided me with measurement data for the same set of Nova, and I have used this to recalibrate my Veritas so that it mimics an IEC 711 measurement standard (Ken uses two separate BK ear simulators in a configuration I can only dream about and envy him for). I do not claim that this data is 100% accurate, but it is very consistent, and is as close as I can get to the 711 standard on my budget.


Nova frequency response and channel matching	Nova in comparison to Orion

What I’m hearing (subjective).

Very (wonderfully) linear bass response with virtually no roll-off in the sub-bass. It's not emphasised in any way shape or form – just really well balanced.
Extremely clean and coherent mid-range with a small dip in the fundamental range (around the 1 kHz, and then subsequent rise in the presence area (from 1-2 kHz with a peak in the 2-3 kHz range) – which gives female vocals a lift in the presence or overtone area.
Well extended but smooth lower treble which falls well short of excessive sibilance (for me) and remains detailed with sufficient air for clarity.
Overall I’d say that the Nova has a wonderfully well balanced frequency response. Vocals are in perfect harmony with bass, and while the treble response is smooth, there is still plenty of detail (cymbal decay is very good).
I would imagine that some who prefer more etched upper end detail may find these slightly smooth. To me they are really well balanced for vocal lovers.

The channel matching on this pair of Novas is exceptional (and some of the differences shown in my measurements are likely to be minor differences in seating each ear piece). They are practically identical. When Ken says his team hand-pick and match the drivers, it isn’t just “marketing speak”.

BUILD & DESIGN
I really enjoy a simple, clean design. The Novas share a very similar design to similar earphones in the Campfire range – especially the likes of the Orion. Campfire uses a full machined aluminium enclosure. Each shell is taken from a solid block of aircraft grade aluminium and then each small batch is CNC machined and finished – with the process talking around 9 hours. After that they are anodised.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Rear face plates and new torx screws	Side view showing depth and angles on the nozzles	Internal face views

Physically each shell measures approximately 21mm in length, 16 mm in height and has a depth of approx. 19mm (including the nozzle). The nozzle itself is angled slightly forward and slightly up, extends approx. 6-7mm from the main body, and has an external diameter of 6mm. The shape is very ergonomic, and the Nova is designed to be used with the cable over ear. The IEM shell is 3 pieces in total – nozzle, shell and back plate – with the plate secured by 3 small torx screws (a change from the hex used in the Orion). There are L/R marking on the inside of both ear pieces and the Campfire logo is also discretely engraved on the outer face. The finish is silver matt, the entire shell is precision cut – and these look understated but beautiful all the same (they appeal to my subjective tastes anyway)

		[size=inherit][/size]
Angled rear view	The very good MMCX connectors	Cable attached securely

At the top of the shell is a beryllium coated MMCX connector, and when used with the supplied silver plated copper ALO Litz cable, the connection is made with a reassuring click. The cables do rotate in their sockets, but the connection itself seems to be very robust. Unfortunately this is one of those things that only time can be the judge of – but the craftsmanship and material used seem to indicate longevity (to me anyway).

As I mentioned, the cable is ALO’s new “Litz”. It utilises individually enameled strands of high purity sliver-plated copper wire, which are then combined into 4 separate conductors, which are in turn encased in a durable medical grade PVC outer jacket. The cable is extremely flexible and light-weight, has stunningly low microphonics (practically non-existent), and virtually no annoying memory issues. The male MMCX connector is again beryllium coated, fits very snugly, and has either a blue or red dot on the connector to indicate L/R. There is a 80mm length of memory wire for over-ear wear, and I’ve found this very malleable, but also holds its shape very well. The cable is approximately 1.2m long, and consists of two twisted pairs above the Y split which continue as a twisted quad right through to the jack. The Y split is small and light and houses an in-built cinch which works really well (easy to move yet holds its position well when cinched). The jack is 3.5mm, right angled, and has clear rubber housing. Strain relief is excellent. The jack will also fit my iPhone 5S with case in place, although YMMV as the diameter of the rubber base is around 6mm. I like this cable so much, I am genuinely tempted to purchase it separately for some of my other MMCX based IEMs.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Connectors and forming memory wire	Y-split and cinch	Lower cable and right angled jack

So both aesthetically and physically I am highly impressed with the build and overall design.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
Fit for me is fantastic – the shells are very ergonomic in shape, and this includes the angle of the nozzles and also the placement of the cable exits. The shells (when fitted) do not extend outside my outer ear, and I have no issues lying down with the Nova. The memory wire is also really well implemented here so that snugging the wires properly is easy. The fit is relatively shallow, so for me I need to resort to my larger tips. If it was possible to extend the nozzle length by a couple of mm, it would really help the overall fit I think.

This leads me to comfort and I'm in two minds about this. I was mildly critical of the internally angled design utilised in Campfire's Orion and Jupiter. My ears are soft, smooth, and have a lot of curved surfaces. I’d bet yours do to. The interior of the Nova shell has a series of hard angular edges. I first noted this with the Jupiter, and it continued with the Orion and now the Nova. The Lyra lacked these edges and was extremely comfortable for me.

		[size=inherit][/size]
U6 vs Primacy vs Nova vs P1 vs Pai MR3	Same selection - you can easily see the issue with comfort	With the right tip (large Shure Olive), the comfort is "OK"

However, the hard edges (if they do cause comfort issues with you) can be overcome. The secret is simply to use a larger tip which effectively seals without having to push the IEM body hard into your ears. With the Nova, I've already found my ideal – the large Shure Olives (and yes they do fit – you just need to work at getting them on). This gives me a wonderful 100% seal with a little looser fit in the outer ear. Anyway, I’m not really bothered by fit any more – but I do think it is something that can be improved upon. The Nova doesn’t feel as though it disappears like some of my other IEMs. It is probably the only critique I have regarding design.

As far as isolation goes, it will be tip dependent. For me, using large Shure Olives tips, the isolation is excellent – at least as good as using my q-Jays (deep insertion – wonderful isolaters), and I would use the Nova on long haul air travel.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Spin fits and Spiral Dots	Ostry tuning tip and Sony Isolation	Crystal foam and large Shure Olives

Those who’ve read my reviews will know that I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. This is often even more of an issue with shallow fitting IEMs. I tried my usual selection of silicones and found varying degrees of success. Tip matching will always be personal preference – but here are some of the tips which fir pretty well.

Sony Isolation / Trinity Kombi tips – great isolation and seal, but did tend to have to be inserted with Nova internal face more against my ear.
Crystal foams / Comply foams – great fit, isolation and comfort. Using wider tips allowed me to maintain the looser fit in ear.
Spin-fits – extra length allowed me to use a looser fit while maintaining seal, but isolation was not as good as other options.
Ostry tuning tips – good seal and reasonable in terms of maintaining looser fit in ear. Best silicone tips I tried.
Spiral Dots -very good seal, and did help to provide a little more upper end emphasis. If the core of these was a little longer (to allow looser fit in ear) these would be perfect.
Large Shure Olives. You need to stretch the core to get them on, but they are perfect for me for shallow fitting IEMs. Perfect isolation, longevity with continual use, comfort and allowance of a looser fit in ear all adds up to a perfect tip choice. YMMV.

So everything is practically perfect with the possible exception of perfect comfort. And it’s not bad, just not as good as it could be.

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the Campfire Audio Nova. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my FiiO X3ii and E17K and large Shure Olive tips. For the record – on most tracks, the volume level on the E17K was around 14/15/60 on low gain which was giving me an average SPL of around 70 dB (mostly 65-75 dB) and peaks at around 80dB (A weighted measurements from my SPL meter).

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Initial Thoughts
The first time I heard the Nova, my initial impression was “these are how a dual BA should be tuned”. Very good speed, wonderful sense of balance, really nice clarity – but nothing too etched or overly spot-lit. At the time I'd been coming from spending considerable time with some slightly warmer, smoother earphones – so this also had some bearing on my impressions. The more I've used the Nova, the more I've come to appreciate the overall sense of balance. They are probably a little smoother than I'd normally like – yet once you get used to this, it is very easy to get lost in the overall tonality. So lets look at my subjective impressions ina little more detail.

Overall Detail / Clarity
Tracks used: Gaucho, Sultans of Swing, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town

Really excellent overall tonal balance. Bass is perfectly balanced and if anything the overall emphasis is on the mid-range than anything else
Very good detail retrieval, high level details are present but not overly spot-lit or etched
Cymbals have reasonable presence (perhaps slightly muted) but wonderful sense of decay. Pearl Jam's “Elderly Woman ….” is full of cymbal action, and the decay on each hit is stunningly well articulated.
Guitar is very good with just the right amount of emphasis and good edge to notes
Resolution is good. Overall the upper end (lower treble) is smooth rather than accentuated.

Sound-stage & Imaging (+ Sibilance)
Tracks used: Tundra, Dante’s Prayer, Let it Rain

Not a huge sense of width or depth. With the binaural track “Tundra” the sense of instrument placement is very precise, but it is more in-head than projected out of head.
Reasonable of width and depth (smallish stage, but well represented / circular). More intimate than expansive
Imaging is very precise and overall separation of instruments is clean
Immersion is good (applause section of Dante's Prayer) with impression that crowd is either side of you – width is stronger than depth
Some sibilance is revealed in “Let It Rain” - but not overly magnified. It is present in the track anyway, and the Nova does a good job of softening or masking it slightly. The track is a lot smoother than I've noticed on other earphones – yet all the detail continues to be there. Not as holographic overall than I have heard – and this could be the bump in the vocal area (forward mid-range) lending more to intimacy in the perceived sound-stage.

Bass Quality and Quantity
Tracks used: Bleeding Muddy Water, Royals, You Know I'm No Good

Mid-bass has reasonable impact – but it is not visceral or hard hitting. Some may find this presentation a little bass light (I don't).
Overall bass speed is very good, no sign of excess “boom” or bleed into the mid-range.
Nice projection of bass timbre and reasonable texture (Mark's vocals in “Muddy Waters”). Mark's vocals have good overall presentation, but not as coarse or conveying as much raw emotion as other earphones have been able to do. Enjoyable overall listen though.
Enough sub-bass for rumble to be audible, but not emphasised (“Royals”)
Again good separation between mid-bass thump (which is actually quite good when you get used to it) and vocals (“Royals”). Ella's vocals are very clear and slightly euphonic. Really enjoyable track.
I finished with Amy Winehouse – just to recheck the contrast between bass and mid-range, and the Nova really does this extremely well. Vocals are clean and clear and the actual bass slam is pretty good.

Female Vocals
Tracks used : Aventine, Strong, For You, Human, The Bad In Each Other, Howl, Safer, Light as a Feather, Mile on the Moon.

Brilliant transition from lower-mids to upper-mids (among the best I've heard to date). Aventine was excellent with sweet vocal presentation, good contract with the deeper dulcet tones of the cello, and no signs of stridency.
London Grammar's “Strong” is a brilliant track which can sometimes appear a little sharp in the upper registers (its in the recording). With the Nova, once again the actual pitch and tonality was brilliant, and the added presence really gives female vocals an almost ethereal sweetness. But the smoothness again seems to be masking the sharpness which exists in the track – but without taking anything away from the vocals. And it is this which makes the Nova quite addictive so far – a real vocal lovers IEM.
Nice bass slam and good contrast with vocals in rock tracks (Feist, FaTM).
Goose-bump moment with “Safer” (Cilmi) – slower jazzy / soul track. Smooth, creamy, and so easy to listen to. Likewise Norah was a definite winner.
I finished with Sarah Jarosz (slower folk like – but very melodic). Tonally brilliant, and the sort of presentation I could listen to for hours.

Male Vocals
Track used: Away From the Sun, Art for Art’s Sake, Broken Wings, Diary of Jane, Hotel California, Keith Don’t Go, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town.

Once again the balance is wonderful – with good dynamic slam from the bass, nice edge to guitar, and vocals front and centered.
Male vocals have really good body and good timbre/texture.
Older classic rock (10CC) has good sense of detail, and the real beauty again with the Nova is the mid-range presentation. It really makes older recordings very present and alive.
Speed with faster tracks is very good – easily handled complex guitar (Breaking Benjamin), whilst keeping the vocals separate and also very clear.
Acoustic rock is wonderful – and the rendition of “Hotel California” (live) was fantastic. Still intimate, but the overall imaging and separation was exquisite.
Stunning with Vedder (Pearl Jam). This time the texture and tonality was 100%. Great clarity on cymbals (not quite as bright as I am used to), but the decay was captured perfectly.

Other Genres

I loved the Nova with Alt Rock (Floyd and Porcupine Tree) because sometimes the detail can get lost if the balance isn't right. PF's “Money” can sometimes seem a little washed out with other earphones, but the mid-range on the Nova ensures this never happens.
Really good with both Blues and Jazz (the overall tonal balance again). With jazz in particular I'm amazed at the overall detail present even though it is smoothed a little in the lower treble. Double bass is nice and deep, whilst sax is smooth and easy to listen to (Portico Quartet), but it is the cymbals I keep going back to. When you can easily hear the brush, and the decay sometimes lingers …….. Magical!
OK with both Hip-hop and Electronic, and enjoyable also with Trance, but bass is not visceral, nor is it enhanced. I guess this depends on what your preference is. I'm happy with the speed and overall balance – but if you're looking for impact, then the Nova probably won't deliver. Lighter electronic (the Flashbulb) and Trip-Hop (Little Dragon) was really enjoyable for me.
Mainstream Pop was pretty good. I have some modern Pop music I really enjoy (Coldplay / Adele etc), and some of it just isn't that well mastered. The Nova really helps with this – by concentrating on the mid-range and smoothing off some of the bumps on the way. Adele live at the Albert Hall was a great example of this – extremely enjoyable.
I'm a bit of an Indie fan, and lets face it, like Pop – some of the recording quality can be a bit up and down. Indie can also often be recorded a little hotter – and here once again the Nova shines. Band of Horses and Wildlight were just wonderful with the Nova.
Classical was very good with the Nova, but maybe lacking in a sense of overall depth with larger orchestral pieces. The sense of tonality was very good though, and with everything from violin to cello, piano to oboe etc was really well presented. Intimate – but enjoyable none-the-less. My one minor critique is I would personally prefer a little more lower treble (air/presence with violins).

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
As I alluded to earlier, the Nova is easily driven out of a smartphone or DAP, and on my iPhone 5S I’m sitting around 20% for my normal listening level (65-75 dB).

I also volume matched and compared X3ii vs X3ii + E17K, and there was no discernible audible difference in dynamic presentation – so I think it is pretty safe to say that extra amping won’t be necessary. Based on the specs alone (22 ohm and 114dB SPL), straight out of the headphone-out of most sources should be more than enough. My favourite source was probably L&P's L3 – with the Jazz EQ (which seems to slightly bump the lower treble).

Because of the high sensitivity of the Nova I thought it best to also test for hiss or noise. With my tinnitus, I can hear anything (it is below my hearing threshold) so I employed the super sensitive hearing of my 13 year old daughter and 15 year old son. Both were able to hear faint low level noise which they described more as being like static than hiss – and this was at very low levels of volume on both the E17K and X3ii by itself. This disappeared when music was playing – but I've noted for the reviews sake anyway.

RESPONSE TO EQ?
Although I didn’t play around a lot with EQ, I did want to see what could be done with the bass using a simple EQ (tone controls on the E17K). Firstly I went back to some Eminem after giving the bass control +6. This time the bass impact was a lot more visceral, and this was without killing the mid-range. So a nice gain if you are prepared to EQ.

So what about resetting back to neutral again and adding a little more lower treble (+6 on the E17K). For this track I went back to Amanda Marshall's let it rain to see what the effect would be. It definitely lifts and lights up some of the lower treble area, and for my personal tastes I would possibly use a +4 or +6 treble setting with the Nova if my mood was for a lighter airier presentation (it sometimes is).

So the Nova responds very well to EQ – although to be honest I think most will be happy with the overall default balance.

COMPARISONS
I wanted to try a mix of different IEM options against the Nova. So this time I picked a selection of what I thought was similarly tuned IEMs at various price brackets. As always, the IEMs were compared after volume matching (SPL meter and test tones), but the comparisons are completely subjective. For these tests I used the X3ii and E17K – simply because it is easier to volume match with this combo. Unfortunately I didn't have a lot to compare with in the same price bracket – as I don't really have anything in the $500 bracket which is similar.

For anyone who may look at past reviews of the IEMs I'm comparing here, and notice the graphs are different – this is simply because of the use of the IEC 711 compensation.

Nova $499 vs MEE P1 $180-200


Campfire Nova and MEE Pinnacle P1	Comparative frequency graphs

The first comparison is with an IEM I reviewed very recently – the MEE P1 – and compares a full range dynamic to the dual BA Nova. Both have extremely good build quality – and very good accessories. Overall fit / comfort I would give to the MEE P1 – it just disappears when worn. The P1 is definitely harder to drive. Sonically the P1 is noticeably more V shaped when comparing the two side by side – exhibiting a warmer bottom end, but also a more lively top end. The P1 is noticeably more distant in the primary vocal range – especially with male vocals, and I think the Nova has the better transition between upper and lower mid-range to present both male and female vocals well. This would be a really tough one to judge – if they were both at the same price level I would tend to side with the Nova on sonics alone. But if you take price into account, the MEE P1 really does deliver a lot as an overall package.

Nova $499 vs Alclair Curve $250


Campfire Nova and Alclair Curve (updated tuning)	Comparative frequency graphs

This time we see a comparison between two very good dual BA earphones. Nova wins on overall build quality – given the metal enclosures and superior cable. The Nova also comes with a better overall accessory package. For overall fit and comfort, the Curve is very hard to beat – there are few which can come close in any price range. Sonically the Curve has a little more oomph / warmth in the bottom end, and is also a little sharper up top (lower treble). Both are reasonably balanced overall – with the Curve exhibiting a mild v-shape vs the Nova's flatter more balanced approach. This one once again is quite a hard one to pick a clear winner. Overall I like the Nova's sonic balance a little better, but if you're on a tighter budget, and like a similar signature with just a little more bass and upper end emphasis – the Curve should definitely be on your list to audition. At roughly half the price of the Nova – it is hard not to look at the Curve as a pretty good competitor.

Nova $499 vs DN2000J $299.


Campfire Nova and DUNU DN-2000J	Comparative frequency graphs

This time the dual BA Nova is up against a triple hybrid. The build on both is exceptional, but the Nova pulls ahead with its overall precision and of course the excellent cable. The accessories would be pretty evenly matched, and this is repeated with fit and comfort (although the DUNU may be just slightly more comfortable) . Sonically the two have a similar overall bottom end and lower mid-range, but in the upper mid-range and lower treble, the DUNU is a lot brighter. Because of this, the Nova does sound less coloured / more natural. The one thing the 2000J does extremely well is provide an incredible listening experience for low volume listeners – and at lower volumes the Nova really doesn't beat it for me. But at louder listening volumes (where the 2000J can be overly bright), I'd be picking the Nova.

Nova $499 vs Oriveti Primacy $299


Campfire Nova and Oriveti Primacy	Comparative frequency graphs

The Primacy is another triple hybrid with extremely good build, and a comprehensive accessory package. And once again the Nova would be my pick for overall build quality, whilst the Primacy wins on fit and comfort (its another that disappears in your ears). Sonically the two are very close in overall signature with the main difference being the smoothness of the Nova's upper end vs the slight heat in the lower treble from the Primacy. For me – my preference would be the Nova's fuller signature and transition between lower and upper mid-range.

Nova $499 vs DUNU DN2002 $370


Campfire Nova and DUNU DN-2002	Comparative frequency graphs

The DN2002 is a quad driver hybrid, and of all the IEMs I've shown comparisons to, has the most closely matched overall signature. In terms of build quality and accessories, both IEMs are extremely robust with great overall packages in terms of quality and content. I'd give the build marginally to the Nova, but for fit and comfort I'd say it was pretty even (with the Nova perhaps even marginally ahead with the right tips). Sonically the two are very close, with the Nova showing a little more bass extension. The 2002 does have a peak at 9 kHz but I find it hardly noticeable, and if anything the 2002 can sound the smoother of the two at times. The Nova does have a little more mid-range emphasis – especially with female vocals. Sonically this is too close to call – they are slightly different representations of similar signatures. The Nova is beautifully clean and present, but the 2002 is a little easier to just relax and let the music wash over you.

Nova $499 vs Jays q-Jays $399


Campfire Nova and Jays q-Jays	Comparative frequency graphs

I saved this one for last because it is the closest matched on price, and because the overall quality shows in both. In terms of build – I would call a draw. The Nova has the more visually appealing cable and overall aesthetics, but in terms of actual build I'd put the new Jays up against most other IEMs. They are small, unassuming and extremely well built. In terms of overall fit and comfort, it is not close – the q-Jays win by some margin. They disappear when worn, and unfortunately for me – the Nova's don't. And its not that the Novas are bad – its just that the q-Jays are better. Accessories are evenly matched.

Sonically we once again have two similar sounding earphones with the comparative bass response being very evenly matched. In the upper mid-range, the Nova are very slightly brighter and sound comparatively cleaner – but the real difference is in the lower treble. The q-Jays have a peak at around 7kHz. If you're sensitive to it (I'm not), then you'll find the q-Jays too hot, and possibly a little likely to show enhanced sibilance – where the Nova will be just as clear and clean, but without the upper end peak. If the Novas had a rounded inner face (for comfort) and were around $100 cheaper, my preference would be the Nova's signature. But it's not, and the q-Jays do practically everything else right, plus I can wear them for hours. So for now the q-Jays remain my choice.

CAMPFIRE AUDIO NOVA – SUMMARY

So here we are again, and time to summarise my short experience with the Nova.

The Nova is an incredibly well built twin BA IEM, with a very good ergonomic fit, and also one of the best quality cables I've come across. A quick note on the cable too – it retails on ALO’s site for $149 if sold separately.

As far as fit and comfort goes, the fit for me is superb, but the comfort could be better with a few hard angles on the internal face making longer term listening sessions occasionally uncomfortable. YMMV in this regard. I know I sound like a broken record – but it is the one facet of the Campfire IEMs which if changed would have me looking at purchasing one.

Sonically the Nova is wonderfully balanced and quite neutral with very linear bass, an extremely coherent and well-tuned mid-range which delivers very clear vocals, and a smooth but articulate lower treble. The thing which amazes me with the Nova is the clarity which Ken has achieved, and the resultant sense of detail – but also the way it is delivered. Sonically it is very clear, but also quite smooth. And how he does this and retains such realism in cymbal decay has me scratching my head – but in wonderment rather than puzzlement. In terms of tuning, the Nova is indeed a gem.

At a current RRP of USD 499, the Nova represents reasonable value (in my opinion) in what it delivers in terms of overall quality of build, fit and sonics. Comfort could be better – but is manageable through tip selection. Where the Nova will struggle is with some of the comparative offerings which are available nowadays. I'm not suggesting at all that it is poor value – but I do think that Ken had the Massdrop price pretty much spot-on. At around the $400 price level it would make a much better overall value proposition compared to the competition.

One thing I haven’t mentioned is the dedication and service of the Campfire Audio team. In my dealing to date, I have been very impressed by their willingness to take critique on board, and above all to constructively engage with their market audience, and ultimately improve the final product.

So would I buy these, and would I recommend them to others? If the comfort issues are eventually addressed I'd definitely consider getting a pair. The Nova is very close to my ideal signature and is superbly versatile with most music I listen to. Four stars from me with the only question marks being on comfort and also price.

Once again I’d like to thank Ken and Andy for making this opportunity available. I owe you gentlemen a debt of gratitude – and especially Ken for his generous help with my measurement set-up.


Novas with L&P L3 and "Jazz EQ" = magic	The beautifully clean and clear Nova

Great Review, just ordered Novas

That's one really thorough (and useful) review! Are you familiar with ATH IM02? How do they compare?

Thanks - unfortunately no - haven't heard any of the IM range. Maybe try Twister6. I think Alex has heard most of them.

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I'd watched the growth of MEE Audio over the years, first as Meelectronics, and then more recently as MEE Audio. In that time they've released a lot of “budget” products , and I've read the various reviews with passing interest. But it wasn't until MEE released the P1 Pinnacle (their flagship), and I read some of the reviews that they were getting that I began to take real interest in the company. My friend Alex (Twister6) has had a long term relationship with MEE, and it was during one of our many PMs that he told me I needed to try the P1. But Alex went further, and actually got in touch with Mike to suggest that he contact me. Mike duly did so and I've had the MEE P1 now since April.

ABOUT MEE AUDIO
I actually found it pretty hard to get a lot of information online about Meelectronics or MEE Audio. They were founded in 2005 as Meelectronics, and in 2009 decided to focus on headphones, earphones and accessories – both wired and wireless. As their legacy name no longer described the direction of the company, in 2015 it was shortened to simply MEE Audio – or Music Enjoyment for Everyone. MEE Audio are based in California, and already have an extensive product range including both full sized and in-ear audio products, both wired and wireless. Their Company Overview section gives an insight into how they see themselves:

MEE is home to a group of audio enthusiasts who enjoy hearing music at its absolute best. We spread our passion by crafting innovative high-performance audio gear in order to let music inspire everyone as it inspires us. Where others see a pair of headphones, we see the final step in experiencing music as it was meant to be. This is why we obsess over every detail of how our products look, feel, and sound, bringing you the ultimate listening experience.

Today I'll be looking at the Pinnacle P1 – their flagship IEM. MEE Audio can be found on the web (http://www.meeaudio.com/pinnacle) or on facebook (https://www.facebook.com/MEEaudio/)

DISCLAIMER
The MEE Pinnacle P1 that I’m reviewing today was provided to me gratis as a review sample. I have made it clear to Mike that I still regard any product they send me as their sole property and available for return any time at their request. Mike told me to keep them though (he wouldn't want them back) – so they are a freely given sample for the purpose of reviewing.

I do not make any financial gain from this review – it is has been written simply as my way of providing feedback both to the Head-Fi community and also MEE themselves.

I have now had the MEE P1 since April 2016. They are currently available from Amazon for USD 180.00 (https://www.amazon.com/MEE-audio-Audiophile-Headphones-Detachable/dp/B01A60I4P6)

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

Over the last few months – I’ve used the MEE P1 from a variety of sources, but for this review, I’ve mainly used it with my FiiO X3ii and E17K, FiiO X7, and L&P L3.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The MEE Pinnacle P1 arrived in a relatively large 163 x 210 x 66mm retail box. The box has a white, black and grey outer sleeve which has a photograph of the P1 on the front, list of specs and accessories on the side, and description of the main features of build and design on the rear.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Front of retail sleeve	Rear of retail sleeve	Inner box (foldout)

Removing the sleeve reveals a black matt box with the two sides pivoting to reveal the actual contents. The whole experience screams “flagship” to me, and I had to keep reminding myself that this was a sub $200 ear phone I was reviewing.

Inside the box safely nestled in a foam insert are the P1 earpieces. In the center is the P1 carry case, and in two secondary boxes sits the cables and tip range. Below the foam insert there is also a 3.5mm to 6.3mm adaptor.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Inside inner box	Accessories	Tips and cables

Full list of accessories:

The MEE Pinnacle P1 earphones
Magnetically sealed leather carry case
2 pairs of dual flange and 1 pair triple flange silicone ear tips
3 pairs of single flange silicone ear tips (S,M,L)
3 pairs of genuine comply foam tips (S,M,L)
3.5 to 6.3mm adaptor
shirt clip
One four conductor braided cable with in-line mic and remote
One four conductor silver plater copper braided cable
Comprehensive product manual

Considering the value price of the MEE Pinnacle P1 – the accessory package is more than simply good value IMO. The including of two quality cables and also the quality of the carry case represents superb overall value.

		[size=inherit][/size]
The carry case with magnetic clasp	SPC cable left, and OFC cable right (in-line controls)	The MEE P1

The carry case is a rectangular 80 x 80 x 30 mm leather case with a lift up flap and magnetic closing tab. The serial number is printed on a stainless badge on the front. The inside is lined with a soft velvet like inner material. While the case isn't 100% rigid, it offers more than enough general protection, and is amply sized to house the MEE P1 and cable (which can be a little bulky).

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
(From MEE Audio)

Drivers	Dynamic 10mm (copper clad aluminium voice coil)
Shell	Die cast zinc alloy
Rated Impedance	50 ohm @ 1 kHz
Frequency Range	20 Hz – 20 kHz
Sensitivity	96 dB +/- 3 dB / mW @ 1 kHz
Cable type/connectors	Removable - MMCX
Cable (headset)	1.3m OCC with mic and single button control
Cable (premium)	1.3m SPC
Jack	3.5mm, right angled, gold plated
Weight	13g (earpiece only), 29g (earpiece and cable)
Fitting	Ergonomic, over ear.

FREQUENCY GRAPH
The graphs below are generated using the Vibro Veritas coupler and ARTA software. I must stress that they aren’t calibrated to IEC measurement standards, but the raw data I’m getting has been very consistent, and is actually not too far away from the raw data measured by other systems except for above 4-5 kHz where it shows significantly lower than measurements performed on a properly calibrated rig. So when reading the graphs, don’t take them as gospel – or at least remember that the area above 4-5 kHz will likely be significantly higher. It is my aim to get this system calibrated at some stage in the future.

I measured both channels, and driver matching is extremely good – well done MEE.

What I’m hearing:

Natural bass response – slight mid-bass hump, and normal dynamic slow roll-off at sub-bass
Some distance on the lower mids – indicating a slight recession in the 1-2 kHz area
Elevation in the upper mid-range providing a little sweetness to female vocals (harmonics)
Smooth lower treble (maybe a little hint of recession / roll-off) which remains quite detailed but also very easy to listen to and non fatiguing
Overall it is a slightly V shaped signature with some slight warmth in the mid-bass, clean and clear vocals, and just the tiniest hint of brightness in the upper mid-range.

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
The Shell
The MEE Pinnacle P1 are a great example of how a stellar build does not need to be expensive. The shells are a 3 piece affair – 2 halves are polished zinc alloy, and then there is a stainless nozzle. And for an ergonomically designed shell, these are pretty small. Just 18mm in length, and about the same in height with a total depth of about 15mm (the nozzle extends a further 7mm). The shell itself is jelly bean shaped, and because it is so small, can be worn up or down, simply by swapping the cable sides.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Nozzles and front of shell	Rear of shell	Inner port, inner face (smooth), and nozzles

The internal surface is beautifully polished and the edges are wonderfully rounded – which makes the fit very comfortable. There is a single port on each internal side – for venting the driver. The nozzle is approximately 5mm in diameter, with a generous lip, and although the nozzle length is relatively short (promoting a more shallow fit), the way the body is shaped allows you to push the nozzle end into the ear a little more, thereby promoting a better seal and deeper insertion depth. The nozzle is also slightly angled forward which also helps with overall fit. Its a clever design.

The outer body is the same polished zinc, but this time with a few subtle angles and the MEE logo printed on both earpieces. The reason MEE used the zinc alloy is because it is more rigid and has better impact resistance than aluminium, but is a lot lighter than stainless steel.


MMCX connectors	SPC cable attached

Each earpiece uses a standard MMCX connector, and I've had no problems swapping in cables from ALO or FiiO as alternatives. The connection points do rotate but (so far) seem to be reasonably stable (I'm always just a little wary about the longevity of MMCX connectors).

Internals
MEE used their own proprietary 10mm moving coil dynamic driver – which has a reasonably high 50 ohm impedance. The reason for the higher impedance was to allow more controlled driver movement - especially at the extremes of the frequency range. In combination with the driver choice, MEE also utilises what they term an “acoustic diffuser” - which uses a series of micro chambers and baffles to control the high frequency sound waves. This is supposed to allow the higher frequencies to resonate before they reach the ear, which leads to detail and clarity, but without the cost of brittleness or harshness. This tech is patented by MEE, and the overall signature (to me anyway) is detailed but smooth – so it does seem to be working.

Cables
The cable tech for both included cables (OFC with controls and SPC without) is 4 separate conductors. Twisted pairs to each ear pieces, and combined to a twisted quad below the Y split. The connectors have a rigid rubberised plastic sheathing with L/R embossed appropriately. There is approximately 47 cm from the ear-piece to the Y-split, which is reasonably long (for me hangs just below my sternum). There is not a lot of strain relief at the connectors, and the rest of the cable has a measure of relief (semi rigid rubber at both ends of the Y-split and also the jack). The braid is nice and tight, and when worn over ear the weight of the cable is enough to hold it in place. There is a cinch which is very effective on the premium cable – a little less so on the the remote cable (does not cinch tight).

		[size=inherit][/size]
The OFC cable with remote and in-line mic	The SPC cable	Both cables are brilliantly braided and excellent quality

The remote cable with mic has a single push button control which works pretty well with my iPhone 5S, allowing play/pause (one push), next track (two pushes), and previous track (three pushes). A single long push also activates Siri which is really handy. I also tried them with my Wife's Galaxy, and everything worked perfectly except for the previous track (3 pushes) – it simply advanced the track and either paused or played (depending what was active). I also tested the MEE Pinnacle P1 with taking a call (with my wife), and it was reasonably clear at both ends. There was the usual hollow sound on my end due to the isolation and slight bone conduction.

The Jack is a right angled gold plated 3.5mm which is very smart-phone case friendly and has good strain relief. Both cables are superbly well built, and exhibit pretty low microphonics when worn over ear.

FIT / COMFORT / ISOLATION
I have one ear canal slightly different to the other one (my right is very slightly smaller) - so I tend to find that usually single silicon flanges don't fit overly well. I initially tried the large silicone tips included, and they were surprisingly good. I did have some vacuum issues though (too much of a seal). I had more success with Ostry tuning tips, and the nozzle lip easily also allowed use of Spin-fits, Sony Hybrids, Sony Isolation tips (or Trinity Kombis), and both Crystal foams or Comply foams. In the end I used Crystal foams as they gave me the best combo of consistent fit, consistent seal, and no vacuum issues.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Ostry tuning tip and Trinity Kombi	Spin-fit and Spiral Dot	My favourite - Crystal foams

Isolation is better than average for a dynamic driver (YMMV depending on tips you use), and I've used these in public transport with pretty good success. Comfort for me is absolutely excellent. The MEE Pinnacle P1 are nicely rounded internally, and there are no sharp protruding edges, so after a while they quite literally disappear for me. They sit inside my outer ear, so it is easy to lie on my side with them, and I have no issues sleeping with them intact.

ERRATA (BURN IN / CABLE IMPROVEMENTS)
I noticed that when these were first released, there were some comments regarding improvement with burn in, and also with changing the cable. Being the stubborn objectivist, this gave me an ideal opportunity to measure both claims.

Burn-in
This was a simple one. Record the frequency response OOTB with my usual measuring equipment, and then take the same measurements 3 months later (after 100 + hours use). The graph is shown below (right channel). There will be some minor variations due to seating on the coupler – but as you can see, any changes are extremely tiny and will be more to do with seating on the measuring equipment. And likewise, you'll get more change from differing insertion depths in your own ears, or use of different tips, than any perceived effects from burn in. So when someone suggests the MEE P1 need burn in – simply smile politely and ignore them

Cable Changes
I suspected that MEEs custom dynamic driver would be pretty stable – especially as far as impedance goes. While I couldn't measure this, I could measure the effect of different cables to see what if any changes there would be. So for this exercise I measured the included OFC and SPC cables, the FiiO RC-SE1B cable (with a balanced to SE adaptor), the ALO Tinsel, and also an OFC Trinity cable. As you can see from the graph below, there were very slight changes in actual volume (which indicates slight changes in impedance of the cables). But when volume matched, the cables all show the same frequency response. So again – if anyone indicates a more expensive cable as giving better sound-stage, vibrancy, bass/mids/treble etc – simply smile, ignore them, and adjust the volume. It should net the same results.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Raw data 5 cables	Left to right - FiiO SPC, Trinity OFC, ALO Tinsel SPC, MEE SPC	All cables after volume matching

SOUND QUALITY
The following is what I hear from the MEE Pinnacle P1. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). Most of the testing at this point (unless otherwise stated) was done with my X3ii and E17K.

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

Thoughts on General Signature
As I outlined above in my comments in the frequency section, the MEE Pinnacle P1 has a mild V or U shaped signature with the main frequency boosts in the mid-bass, and also in the upper mid-range. As such it tends to sound (for me anyway) a little distant through the mid-range, but with a warmish bottom end, and also some sweetness particularly with female vocalists. The comparative dip in the vocal range gives a sense of space or distance, and the relative dip in lower treble ensures there is no excessive sibilance. Overall the MEE P1 is quite natural sounding to me – with a hint of warmth and smoothness.

Overall Detail / Clarity
Tracks used: Gaucho, Sultans of Swing, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town

Good sense of overall tonal balance. Bass is not obtrusive
Good detail retrieval, high level details are there but not overly highlighted
Cymbals have reasonable presence (perhaps slightly muted) but good sense of decay
Guitar is very good with just the right amount of fundamentals and nice edge to notes
Resolution is good but overall the upper end is smooth

Sound-stage & Imaging (+ Sibilance)
Tracks used: Tundra, Dante’s Prayer, Let it Rain

Spacious sound which gives impression of being slightly projected out of head
Good sense of width and depth. This could be the added sense of note decay at work.
Imaging is very precise and overall separation of instruments is clean
Immersion is excellent (applause section of Dante's Prayer) with impression that crowd is right around you – width is slightly stronger than depth
Some sibilance is revealed in “Let It Rain” - but not overly magnified. It is present in the track anyway, and the MEE P1 does a reasonable job of softening or masking it. The overall holographic nature of the track “Let it Rain” is very well portrayed though – really enjoyable.

Bass Quality and Quantity
Tracks used: Bleeding Muddy Water, Royals

Mid-bass has good impact without going into excess
Sub-bass slam is just a little flat and not really boomy at all. No signs of bleed into the mid-range of either sub or mid-bass.
Good projection of bass timbre and texture (Mark's vocals in “Muddy Waters”). Mark's vocals have great overall presentation, and I this present well (the dark and broody nature of this blues track) on the MEE P1.
Enough sub-bass for rumble to be audible, but slightly subdued (“Royals”)
Again good separation between mid-bass thump and vocals (“Royals”). Ella's vocals are very clear and slightly euphonic.

Female Vocals
Tracks used : Aventine, Strong, For You, Human, The Bad In Each Other, Howl, Safer, Light as a Feather, Don’t Wake me Up, Ship To Wreck.

Very good transition from lower-mids to upper-mids (although I would prefer the rise into the upper mids to occur slightly earlier). Aventine was good with sweet vocal presentation and this is often a hard track to get right.
Really nice contrast between vocals and lower pitch of instruments like cello (Aventine).
No signs of stridency, and presented all of my female vocalists extremely well. MEE P1 strikes a good balance between a natural overall sound, with just a touch of upper mid-range colouration.
Very good contrast with rock tracks (Feist, FaTM) with a bit of bass slam.
Particularly good with slower, more soulful vocals (Cilmi - “Safer”)

Male Vocals
Track used: Away From the Sun, Art for Art’s Sake, Broken Wings, Hotel California, Keith Don’t Go, Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town.

Good dynamic slam from the bass
Male vocals have plenty of body and good timbre/texture – and just the perception of a little distance
Seems to be very good with all forms of Rock – and extremely good with acoustic guitar
Portrayed Vedder (Pearl Jam) well. Excellent texture and tonality. Good clarity on cymbals – although again not quite as bright as I am used to.

Other Genres

The MEE P1 was good with Alt Rock (Floyd and Porcupine Tree) with good overall balance. The one thing I personally would prefer is just a little more brightness – but this is personal preference only.
Great with both Blues and Jazz and again I'm struck by the overall tonal balance. Again I find the bass practically perfect (very natural sounding), but would prefer just a little more presence up top – but there is still great detail overall. Sax is really smooth (Portico Quartet), and I'm loving the contrast with double bass and cymbals.
Really good with both Hip-hop and Electronic, and very enjoyable with trance (bass is not visceral but it doesn't need to be IMO). Some may prefer more bass impact (particularly sub-bass) with these genres, but to me it doesn't sound the slightest thin or anaemic. Lighter electronic (the Flashbulb) was incredibly good.
Pop was well presented – Adele live at the Albert Hall was very enjoyable and the smoothness even helped a little. Likewise the MEE P1 seems to present Indie brilliantly. The smooth top end seems to really suit some of the hotter recorded Indie artists I like – just toning down some of the recordings while still retaining the overall essence of the recording.
Classical was brilliant with the MEE P1 and I really would recommend them for this genre. The sense of space and both width and depth really captivates larger orchestral pieces. Solo cello (Zoe Keating) was fantastic, and again the overall tonality and sense of balance make listening really easy. My one minor critique is that once again I would personally prefer a little more lower treble (air/presence with violins).

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
The MEE Pinnacle P1 is not an easy load to drive with 50 ohm impedance and 96 dB sensitivity (1 mW at 1 kHz). With normal pop or rock, it is very listenable straight out of my iPhone 5S, but does require about 50% volume to reach my normal listening level (about 65-70 dB). With more dynamic and quietly recorded tracks, it needs a lot more volume, and you could find yourself running out of headroom.

The MEE P1 is one IEM I would definitely recommend considering the use of additional amplification, or at least a DAP with reasonable output power. All of my dedicated DAPs have no problems driving the P1 though – and it sounded especially good with both the FiiOs and L&P range.

COMPARISONS
Please note that these are all very subjective, so please take my personal bias into account (see the “about me” section). When testing, I volume matched first at 1 kHz using an SPL meter and test tones. The MEE Pinnacle P1 was unequalised.

MEE Pinnacle P1 $180 vs DUNU Titan 5 $139


MEE P1 and DUNU Titan 5	Comparative measurements

Both are built very well – but the P1 has better overall build quality, fit and isolation. They have similar balance in terms of bass quantity relative to mid-range, and both have an upper mid-range emphasis. The main difference is in terms of lower treble and overall tonality where the Titan5 is a little brighter and cleaner sounding, vs the P1 being warmer and smoother. The Titan5 is obviously quite a bit cheaper, and this will come down to preference.

MEE Pinnacle P1 $180 vs Trinity Delta V2 $130


MEE P1 and Trinity Delta V2	Comparative measurements

Again both are built extremely well – but again the P1 has better overall build quality, fit and isolation. For this test I used the gun-metal filters on the Delta, and the two IEMs actually sound incredibly similar. The difference would be that the Delta V2 has a very slightly brighter upper treble (sounds slightly cleaner), but does not sound quite as spacious overall. The main debate here would be the ergonomic fit of the P1 vs the cheaper price and configurable tunability of the Delta V2. For those with larger / wider ears, I do think the Delta V2 is probably the better value – but for those with smaller ears or canals – the P1 is probably the safer option.

MEE Pinnacle P1 $180 vs Trinity Sabre $165


MEE P1 and Trinity Sabre	Comparative measurements

This one was really interesting because again the MEE P1 sounds very similar to the Sabre in terms of overall tonality – but with the Sabre sounding brighter overall and more vivid. Both have very good build quality, fit and comfort. You get tunability with the Sabre filters vs the slightly better build quality of the P1. Preference for this one comes down to how you prefer your mid-range.

MEE Pinnacle P1 $180 vs Alclair Curve2 $249


MEE P1 and Alclair Curve 2	Comparative measurements

Moving up the value chain and this time the P1 is up against Alclair's Curve (dual BA). Build quality and overall accessory package goes to the P1 once again – but this time the fit goes to the extremely ergonomic Curve. Sonically both have a smooth and well balanced signature. The difference is mainly in the upper mid-range where the P1 has more emphasis and brings a little more upper end detail. I often EQ my Curve to boost this area, so the added emphasis of the P1 is appreciated.

MEE Pinnacle P1 $180 vs DUNU DN2000J $280


MEE P1 and DUNU DN-2000J	Comparative measurements

So how does the P1 fare against DUNU's 2000J – a triple hybrid (and one of my favourite IEMs sonically). Overall build materials are evenly matched, as is the accessory range provided. The P1 does have the replaceable cables which are of better quality. As far as fit goes, I would take the P1 in a heart-beat. Much more comfortable than the 2000J's cartridge type shells. Sonically the two IEMs are quite different. The P1 appears reasonably balanced but smooth, whereas the 2000J is reasonably balanced but bright. For my tastes, I find the 2000J's bass is faster and cleaner, and I like the transition from lower to upper mids better. The P1 has the better perception of space (sound-stage). Ultimately I prefer the 2000J's overall sonics and brighter signature, but the P1 does sit comfortably at least at the level of its higher priced counterparts – and this is quite an achievement.

MEE PINNACLE P1 – VALUE & SUMMARY

The MEE Pinnacle P1 was a revelation to me, and the thing I find hardest to reconcile is the overall package you get (accessories, build quality, sound signature etc) for such a relatively small outlay.

The MEE Pinnacle P1 is extremely well built with an ergonomic over-ear design. The P1 comes with a very good accessory package including a quality case and two cable choices.

Sonically the P1 is slightly V shaped but still relatively balanced and quite natural sounding – but on the smooth side of things. It has very good sense of both width and depth and for my tastes was suitable for most genres of music.

If I had not known the price, and was judging purely on sonics and overall package, I would have guessed the Pinnacle P1 to be in the $300-$350 bracket. For it to retail at $180-$200 makes it an easy IEM to recommend, and I would have no issues suggesting it as an option to friends or family. For me, the P1 is easily one of the best IEMs (for sonic performance and overall value) I have tried this year.

My thanks once again to Mike at MEE and also Alex (Twister6) for recommending that Mike send me a sample.

If I upgraded to this from my present Sennheiser CX 5.00 will I get a very significant improvement (provided it is driven properly)?

Cmahesh - its difficult for me to say, as I haven't heard the CX5. I would be surprised if there wasn't an improvement though.

Can a LG phone drive them? LG g7 to be exact. They're on sale for 110 dollars on massdrop. Would they still be a worthwhile purchase? Or are the newer iems around 100 dollars better?

For larger views of the photos (1200 x 800) - please click on the individual images

INTRODUCTION

I'm a guy who likes hearing new gear, but who is also actually pretty happy with my own set-up at the moment. My main desk-top set-up is not high end – but I can easily lose myself in the moment with music, and ultimately that's what I think we all strive for. My main system for some time has been the iFI Micro iDSD, and I sometimes choose to pair it with Little Dot MK IV, and usually with my HD600 or Beyer T1. Nowadays I run a Linux system, and have a paid copy of J River Media Center 21 for Linux.

Then in March this year, Felix from Pro-Ject Audio contacted me out of the blue to ask me if I'd like to have a listen to their Pro-Ject DAC Box RS. They describe it as a reference-class D/A converter, but with some interesting features:

Dual Texas Instruments PCM-1792 DAC chips
Selectable filters
Double DSD capable
Multiple inputs (up to 9)
Both tube and solid state output

So after a bit of discussion I agreed to give it a good run, and in late April it arrived. So through May and June I've been using it as part of my daily system. Hopefully this review will give you some information on who Pro-Ject Audio is, and my personal thoughts on the DAC Box RS.

ABOUT PRO-JECT AUDIO
I have a confession to make – before Felix contacted me, I had no idea who Pro-Ject Audio was, and that included what they made. While I was waiting for the DAC Box RS to arrive, I had plenty of time to do some research into the Company, and also to acquaint myself with what they do. My first search on their website revealed very little – just that they seem to have some pretty nice looking systems, and that they are a division of Audio Tuning Vertriebs GmbH, and are based in Austria. Time to do some more digging!

After a bit more research I found out that Pro-Ject Audio has been around for more than 25 years (started in 1990). The founder (Heinz Lichtenegger) partnered with a turntable factory in a small town called Litovel (Czechoslovakia), and set about refining a line of low-cost, well designed turntables for lovers of vinyl. They still have the same team today, and still use the same factory, and have now branched out into a full product range – which includes digital and analogue audio systems, and covers everything from budget to high-end systems. What seems to be a feature of their product lines though is simple and clean European styling, and well designed components with good measurements and equally good sound. Their philosophy is simple. Their products should be:

simple to use
have true HiFi stereo sound
be great value
have long term stability

The DAC Box RS I'm reviewing today is from their Reference Series. You can view their full product range from their website: http://www.box-designs.com/

DISCLAIMER
The DAC Box RS is a loaner review unit, and as such will be returned to Pro-Ject Audio at the completion of the review. I did not solicit the review unit – Pro-Ject Audio approached me for the review. I am not associated with them in any way, get no financial gain from the review, and this is my honest opinion of the DAC Box RS.

PREAMBLE - 'ABOUT ME'.

I'm a 49 year old music lover. I don't say audiophile – I just love my music. Over the last couple of years, I have slowly changed from cheaper listening set-ups to my current set-up. I vary my listening from portables (including the FiiO X5ii, X3ii, X7, LP5 Pro and L3, and iPhone 5S) to my desk-top's set-up (PC > USB > iFi iDSD). Dpending on my mood I also use my LD MK IV. I also use a portable set-up at work – usually either X3ii/X7/L3 > HP, or PC > E17K > HP. My main full sized headphones at the time of writing are the Beyerdynamic T1, Sennheiser HD600 & HD630VB, and AKG K553. Most of my portable listening is done with IEMs, and lately it has mainly been with the Jays q-Jays, Alclair Curve2 and Adel U6. A full list of the gear I have owned (past and present is listed in my Head-Fi profile).

I have very eclectic music tastes listening to a variety from classical/opera and jazz, to grunge and general rock. I listen to a lot of blues, jazz, folk music, classic rock, indie and alternative rock. I am particularly fond of female vocals. I generally tend toward cans that are relatively neutral/balanced, but I do have a fondness for clarity, and suspect I might have slight ‘treble-head’ preferences. I am not treble sensitive (at all), and in the past have really enjoyed headphones like the K701, SR325i, and of course the T1 and DT880. I have a specific sensitivity to the 2-3 kHz frequency area (most humans do) but my sensitivity is particularly strong, and I tend to like a relatively flat mid-range with slight elevation in the upper-mids around this area.

I have extensively tested myself (ABX) and I find aac256 or higher to be completely transparent. I do use exclusively red-book 16/44.1 if space is not an issue. All of my music is legally purchased (mostly CD – the rest FLAC purchased on-line). I tend to be sceptical about audiophile ‘claims’, don’t generally believe in burn-in, have never heard a difference with different cables, and would rather test myself blind on perceived differences. I am not a ‘golden eared listener’. I suffer from mild tinnitus, and at 49, my hearing is less than perfect (it only extends to around 14 kHz nowadays).

I’ve used the DAC Box RS mainly with my Linux PC System, primarily with the HD600, and mostly using either my LD MKIV OTL Tube amp, or VE's Enterprise tube amp (another review unit). I also used the DAC Box RS with my Windows 10 system and using digital DAPs as transports. For comparison purposes I primarily used my iFi iDSD – both as a competitive device, and also utilising it's excellent amp section to further evaluate the DAC Box RS.

This is a purely subjective review - my gear, my ears, and my experience. Please take it all with a grain of salt - especially if it does not match your own experience.

THE REVIEW

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES
The DAC Box RS came in a large white corrugated cardboard packing/shipping box measuring 300 x 387 x 153mm. Inside this was two perfectly fitting secondary boxes. The smaller contained the plugs and accessories – while the larger contained the DAC Box RS. Both were beautifully lined with heavy duty foam to ensure the unit arrives in pristine condition.

		[size=inherit][/size]
Very plain but appropriate packaging	The excellent foam padding	Very securely packed DAC Box RS

The full list of contents includes:

DAC Box RS
Power cord and AC/DC adaptor unit
Infrared remote control unit
Single sheet explaining front panel layout and rear inputs/outputs


Even the cords are well padded	The power cord and converter	Mini XLR power connector

My understanding is that normally there would be a driver CD for Windows use, but this wasn't included for the review unit. The Windows DAC drivers are easily found on Pro-Ject's website. All in all a little sparse as far as contents go – but functional. I would have liked at least to have had a USB cable included, but fortunately I had my choice of USB, coaxial or optical cables on hand.


Included documentation is clear	and very easy to understand.	The remote control

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS & FEATURES
(From Pro-Ject)

Product	DAC Box RS – Digital to Analog converter
RRP	USD 1099
DAC Chipset	Dual Texas Instruments PCM-1792
PCM	Up to 24bit/192kHz asynchronous USB (XMOS technology)
Oversampling?	Up to 8X
PCM rates	2/44,1/48/88,2/96/176,2/192 kHz,(optical up to 96kHz)
DSD	Single or double DSD (up to DSD 128) over PCM
Filters	2 selectable digital filters (optimum frequency & optimum phase)
Balanced?	Fully balanced analogue audio circuitry
Freq Response	20Hz - 50kHz (+0/-1dB)
THD	0.005% solid state out 0.25% tube out
SNR	100 dB
Output stage	Selectable 6922 tube or solid state
Inputs	2x coax (S/PDIF), 4x optical ,1x USB B, 1x AES/EBU, 1x I²S
Outputs	RCA, XLR (balanced), Clock Out (for other Pro-Ject products)
Dimensions	205 x 200 x 70mm
Weight	1.01 kg
Casing	Anodised aluminium frame and casing

BUILD QUALITY / DESIGN
The DAC Box RS is a simple but elegant looking unit. The fit and finish is exceptional – very clean lines, and everything fits precisely. It looks as though it should be quite weighty, but is surprisingly light (1 Kg), but still give the feel of solidity and precision. The case has slightly rounded corners on the primary sides, and any printing is quite easy to read.


Left front panel on/off & infra-red	Input indicators and sample rates	Toggles to change input, filter and SS or tube

The front face (left to right) consists of:

on/off switch
IR receiver port
(top row) DSD indicator, then PCM sample rate indicator (44/48/88/96/176/192)
(bottom row) source input (1-9)
source selection toggle switch
digital filter toggle switch (steep/sharp or slow/optimum phase)
output toggle switch (tube or solid state)


Remote next to infrared indicator	Entire front panel	Corner view showing excellent fitting of panels

The LED lights are a soft blue and quite small. They are easy to see but at the same time are quite unobtrusive. The toggle switches are firm but also very stable.

The side panels are plain and just have a series of ventilation slots.


Entire rear panel	Closer look at inputs on the left	Closer look at inputs on the right

The rear panel from left to right consists of jacks and sockets for the various inputs and outputs. These are (from left to right):

(top) input 1 = USB connection (USB B socket)
(bottom) input 2 = sonic connector (for Pro-Ject products)
(bottom) input 3 = S/PDIF connector AES/EBU
(top) = power connector – 20V 3 pin mini XLR type connector
(top) = clock output (for Pro-Ject products)
(bottom) inputs 4 and 5 = two standard RCA coaxial connectors
(bottom) inputs 6 to 9 – 4 standard optical inputs
(top) R and L analog RCA outputs
(bottom) R and L balanced XLR outputs

So far I have tested only the USB, coaxial, and optical inputs – and had success with everything. For output, I have only been able to use the standard RCA analogue outputs as I don't have fully balanced topology to test with.


Side panels and ventilation	Underneath	Sitting next to my monitor

The power supply consists of a walwart, 20V/3A DC converter and cord which is long enough for the converter to sit on the floor while the power cable runs up to the DAC with plenty of length to spare (1.4m from plug to converter and another 1.4m from converter to power plug). One of my few issues with this unit though is the mini XLR power connector with this sample unit. It is very hard to remove (I think the actual jack is faulty). Not something to judge to harshly as I'm sure Pro-Ject would replace it with no questions asked.

All in all the externals are pretty much faultless – and a myriad of connection options. If there was one thing I would have loved though, it would have been a second set of standard RCA outputs, and the ability to switch or toggle between them. This would be ideal for someone with a dual amp set-up and perhaps might be a design option for Pro-Ject Audio to consider at some stage.

INTERNAL DESIGN
Taking a peak inside the chassis, the entire layout is very clean and quite impressive. The single main board occupies the entire floor area of the chassis. At the front left are the two 6922 tubes housed on two individual daughter boards.


Looking from front to rear	Looking from left to right side	Dual DAC daughter card

There are two ribbon cables – one from left front panel and one from the right front panel, both connecting to the mainboard close to center-right. These will house the IR circuitry, selector switch signals and of course the LED circuitry. There is a single large twisted pair of cables from the power input to the front of the board.

Apart from that the main board consists of mainly discreet circuitry, caps and transistors – very cleanly laid out, and unobstructed. To the right of the main board are 4 daughter boards mounted vertically, and these house some of the USB interface and also the actual dual DAC chips (so it is a full balanced DAC design).


Looking from rear to front panel	Looking from right to left side	Close up of the tubes on their daughter board

The DACs used are dual PCM 1792 which are among the best that TI produces and have exceptionally low noise and high SNR capabilities. They are capable of sample rates for PCM of up to 24/192, and also up to double DSD. Optical input is “limited” at 24/96. The dual DACs also have 8 x oversampling ability, and a choice of filters. At position 1 the filter is phase optimised (or sharp roll-off), and at position 2 the filter is frequency optimised (or slow roll off). The filters are applied for both PCM and DSD playback.

DRIVERS / USAGE / REMOTE
Windows 10
The DAC Box RS is pretty easy to set-up and use. For Windows 10 it was just a matter of downloading the driver from the ProJect website, a quick install, set the sample rate in the Windows mixer, and away you go. I also set-up Foobar 2000 for the DSD usage -both native and upsampling, and it was a pretty easy and painless process (helped that I had done it before). About the only issue I very occasionally encountered with Windows was that maybe 3 times so far I have booted into Windows and the DAC Box RS hasn't been recognised at all. This was a simple matter of a reboot to get it to reappear. More likely to be a Windows issue than the DAC Box RS – but I shall note it anyway.

Linux (Mint/Debian)
I switched back to Linux for my main system around 6 months ago – and it is now the environment I do most of my testing and reviewing on. The DAC Box RS is completely driver-less under Linux (they are already written into the kernel). It was recognised as soon as plugged, and the only thing I had to do (just once so it now stays this way) was run ALSO configuration and permanently un-mute it (thanks to Felix for helping me through this). For my audio player, I've been using J-River's Media Center 21 for Linux. I know there are free options – but I like the ease of use of upsampling, and it was a pretty cheap investment for such a good programme. I've had zero issues with Linux and the DAC Box RS, and for the last 3 months have often been rocking out with it, the VE Enterprise, and my HD600s.

Remote / Usage
Usage is simple with my Linux set-up. Boot up, turn the DAC Box RS on with the small remote which is supplied (with it you can control power, source input, and mute). The remote does have volume controls – but I'm guess that is for use with a ProJect amp in tandem. If you're going to be using the tube output – wait for the tubes to warm up, select source, choose your amp, plug your headphones and press play on your media player. I've tested the DAC Box RS primarily with the computers USB, but I also used an optical feed direct from my motherboard, and also digital out from my FiiO players (X3ii and X5ii). In each case, playback was flawless, and there was no issues with drop-outs or quality issues. Most of the time though, I've stuck with USB – simply because it has handled everything I've thrown at it from redbook to DSD.

MEASUREMENTS
My kit isn't good enough to measure high quality DACs. The limiting factor is my external sound card. Most of the DACs I try to measure simply have a noise floor lower than my sound card – so I end up effectively measuring my sound card. But I do use it for measuring an approximate frequency response, for measuring the effects of filters, and to at least take THD measurements (to check that there is nothing wrong)

Filters
I've engaged the filters and flicked them back and forth quite a few times trying to hear a difference between the phase optimised (or sharp roll-off) and frequency optimised (or slow roll off). If you're playing DSD, it is immediately noticeable, but that is simply because there is a volume difference between the two settings. For the PCM – they appear to be exactly volume matched, and although I've tried, I can't detect anything. Because my hearing tops out at 14-15 kHz, I suspect if there was difference I wouldn't notice it anyway. So I borrowed my daughters almost perfect hearing (she can still hear all the way to 20 kHz – which amazes me) – and she couldn't detect anything either. So onto the loopback – and using both tube or SS output, both graphs show almost identical output. Essentially you may hear something if your hearing is perfect (this could manifest itself in distortion) – but I think most of us will conclude that both filters sound the same.

Freq Response
Now if you've seen the first two graphs you're going to be saying “what's that roll-off!!”. Well its what shows on my equipment, and while I use is as an indicator, it may not be perfect. So I also measured the E17K's DAC – which I know is close to ruler flat, and also the X7 – which I know has a slow shallow roll from about 10K. On the same equipment and same settings, the DAC Box RS appears to roll off earlier, and also in greater volume. I have no reason to expect this measurement is false. As far as effective delta goes, my gear is showing a 10dB roll-off at about 16kHz or so. I'll talk more about this when I get to sound.


DAC Box RS vs X7 vs E17K	Filter comparison (close up)	Tube vs SS (close up)

Distortion
I know the DAC Box RS SS output measures below the capability of my sound card, so this experiment was simply to check and see if I could see the difference in the harmonic distortion between SS and tube output. And the measurements show this pretty clearly. The tube output had a SNR difference of about 10dB and a THD measurement one order higher. What surprised me though was how clean the tube setting measured. This is pretty impressive, and the noise floor does indeed seem to be around 100 dB down – eve on my inferior equipment.


SS distortion measurement	Tube distortion measurement

SOUND QUALITY (SUBJECTIVE)
The following is what I hear from the DAC Box RS. YMMV – and probably will – as my tastes are likely different to yours (read the preamble I gave earlier for a baseline). For my testing I've used a variety of headphones and amps – but for the completely critical test I used the E17K as amp (due its linearity), and also as a DAC for comparison for the same reasons. For headphones for critical listening I used the HD630VB sealed headphones – mainly because they are a benign load for the E17K, and also because they are a very good pair of headphones for evaluation – essentially having a pretty flat frequency response (once dialed in).
I choose not to comment on bass, mids, treble, and most definitely not sound-stage – simply because IMO when we are talking about an amp or DAC – they shouldn’t be discussed. An DAC's job is to decode the signal with as low distortion as possible, and output as linear signal as possible. If it is doing its job properly, there is no effect on bass, mids, or treble. And IME a DAC does not affect soundstage (unless there is DSP or crossfeed in play) – that is solely the realm of the transducers and the actual recording.

Tracks used were across a variety of genres – and most can be viewed in this list http://www.head-fi.org/a/brookos-test-tracks.

The DAC Box RS (via the linear E17K) is simply a really nice combo to listen to. With music I know really well (eg test tracks like Sultans of Swing) the measurable roll-off is showing no loss in detail, the opposite is in fact true. Detailing is crisp and clear, and I'm able to very clear hear the shimmery decay of cymbals and minute clicks and taps of the drum sticks. And I guess this may well be the low distortion at work because the lingering impression is one of a rich and well balanced sound signature. The DAC is in effect getting out of the way and allowing the music to shine.

Switching between tube and solid state, and there is a very slight softening in overall tonality, almost as though the top end has been rolled a little more. But there is no muddiness or masking when going to tube – this really is a linear output, and the differences are very small when flicking between the two. Emma notices a little more than me (her significantly better hearing in play) – she says one sounds bit brighter, but she prefers the tube output. Me – I can't really tell the difference apart from that very slight softening, and it really depends on which amp I have paired as to my preferences. With the E17K it is the tube output. With the LD MKIV or Enterprise, I usually switch to the SS.

With the right kind of music, it is very easy to lose track of what you're trying to concentrate on – and that for me says more about this DAC than anything else. Any device which helps me lose my way in the music is a good DAC.

COMPARISONS
Again this will be pretty subjective. I've chose to compare the DAC output against the E17K and also iDSD – using the E17ks amp output each time and sticking to the HD630VB. It's pretty hard to compare – as each change takes about 30 seconds, it is completely sighted, and subject to all of my limitations and bias.

DAC Box RS Vs E17K
It took me quite a bit of back and forth, and this should have probably been the easiest to pick – but the delays in switching took a while. The main difference between the two appears to be that the E17K simply sounds a little more crisp and brighter, where the DAC Box RS is tonally a little warmer and smoother. And the funny thing here is that despite loving neutrality, I'm drawn into the music just a little more with the DAC Box RS. There is again no loss off detail, but the presentation of that detail is subjectively presented subtly different. With the E17K its as if there is more of white light which is exposing any flaws, and the DAC Box RS has one of those slightly coloured “warm tone” lights – giving the same output, but a slightly more relaxed setting. As much as I love the E17K's no-nonsense presentation, I'm enjoying the DAC Box RS a little more.

DAC Box RS vs iFi Micro iDSD
This took me a long time and track after track. I had the iDSD's IEM match set to off, and filter set to bit-perfect. Like the E17K, the iDSD sounds slightly clearer, crisper, brighter – but this time it is a marginal, and the differences a lot more subtle. And I'm not really sure if the differences I'm hearing are there at all. The iDSD (to me anyway) sounds very similar to the DAC Box RS – and if anything that is a big thumbs up to the RS, as I happen to think the iDSD has a wonderful DAC. I get lost in the music frequently with both.

SPECIAL PAIRING
I would be remiss in mentioning the pairing that I have listened to a lot over the last few months. On the odd occasions I have had free time, I have combined the DAC Box RS with my PC (via USB), and then to the Venture Electronics Enterprise tube amp. Usually I use my HD600s, and the media player of choice has been J-River's Media Center 21. With the DAC Box RS, I can choose to run bit perfect, or upsample – and the nice thing is that I can do this without having to jump through hoops with daemon settings within the ALSA or Pulse stacks.

I know from my testing that the real magic with this combo has been the Enterprise itself, but the entire system matches extremely well together, and I have had more unexpected “wow” moments in the last 3 months with this combo than in the last 1-2 years. I could see myself calling it quits with a system like this. Its pretty close to end-game for me.

DAC Box RS – SUMMARY

My time with the DAC Box RS has been a thoroughly enjoyable one, and I should probably apologise to Felix for taking so long with it. I really appreciate his patience – they have never pushed me.

As far as build, aesthetics and size goes, the DAC Box is a premium little rack unit with a classy (timeless) simplicity which really appeals to the minimalist in me. Everything is well laid out and easy to read and control. One of the things I would pick at (and it could just be this unit) is the mini XLR plug (for power) being difficult to remove, but lets face it, most of the time you'll be plugging this unit and then forgetting it anyway.
Usage is easy, and it is quite versatile with the options of tube or solid state output.

The amount of inputs (9) is quite staggering and to be honest I wasn't able to do justice to full use of it – but as a DAC at the heart of a home media center the RS would be an ideal solution. One thing I would have personally loved to have seen would have been an extra set of RCA outputs and the ability to switch output between the two. I'm not sure if I'm the only one who would use two amps and like to be able to switch without swapping cables – but it might be something to consider. Oh, the DAC Box RS also has true balanced output also for those who need it.

As far as audio performance goes, it subjectively delivers a rich, smooth, but still detailed and highly immersive experience. Objectively the upper registers are rolled off a little – but it does not seem to detract from presentation of detail. At a retail price of around USD 1100, the DAC Box RS is not cheap, and for a straight desktop solution there will be cheaper options out there which may appeal more (especially as far as size goes). On performance, it was at least as good as my iDSD – but my iDSD is considerably cheaper, and contains a very good amplifier.

Where the DAC Box RS shines though is at the heart of a media system – and when our teenagers eventually leave the nest in another 6-8 years, this type of device is exactly the sort of unit I would be looking for.
So how to rate it? Well given I'd really like one (just not for my current needs), you can probably tell I really enjoyed this unit. For its intended use (which is more media-center oriented than desktop) it is an easy recommendation. Yes you can probably get cheaper solutions if you're on a tighter budget. But it doesn't stop this particular device being an easy 4 stars. The only real caveat is the price.

FINAL THOUGHTS
I'd just like to give a late shout out to Felix and thank him for the use of this unit. I'll try to get it back to the distributors quickly. Felix, if you have something with similar performance, but which combines a DAC and amp in similar form factor, I think it would be a fantastic desktop solution. I've loved every minute with this unit, and will be genuinely sad to see it go.

EDIT : Felix has contacted and they do have a combined unit (DAC/amp) - the Pre Box RS Digital, and for a cheaper option - the MaiA so I'll definitely be checking them out at some stage!

Be aware that ONLY the XLR-outputs are volume controlled, the RCA outputs are FIXED volume!

KDS315 Jesteś w błędzie. W DAC Box RS wyjścia RCA i XLR mają stały poziom i nie można ich regulować.

Wyjścia xlr i rca są nieregulowane.