Backstory and Disclaimer:
I reviewed the Shanling M3S back in 2017 and wasn't a fan of its wheel based UI. So when Shanling released the M2X, which had a touch screen based UI, it got me interested and I personally got in touch with them, expressing my interest regarding the M2X. Shanling was kind enough to provide me an M2X free of charge in exchange for a review on Twister6.com and Head-Fi.

Review:
M2X is an entry-level to mid-range DAP from Shanling that retails for $220. For full specifications, please visit Shanling's M2X page. The device comes packaged in a typical cardboard style box that most DAPs in this price range come in these days. Shanling was kind to include a leather case for my unit, but the retail units don’t come with one and can be purchased separately for $18. The device also comes with a pre-installed screen protector. Apart from the device, there is a USB-A to USB-C cable and some documentation included in the box. I put my unit for charge for a couple of hours and powered it on to check out the UI. Unlike the wheel based UI on the M3S, which made me cringe every time I would have to use the device, the touch screen based UI of the M2X is quite intuitive and took no more than 30 mins to get comfortable with it. And most importantly, it has been a breeze to use the device. While it is no smartphone level of snappiness and smoothness, it is very much a polished UI. You interact with the screen through touch and swipe gestures. On any screen, swiping right from the left edge is the back navigation. And swiping up from the bottom edge takes you to the home page. Home page is a list of icons such as ‘All Songs’, ‘Albums’, Artists’, ‘Settings’ and etc, which you can customize based on your needs. On the bottom of the home screen, you have the ‘Now Playing’ bar, so from any screen, you could navigate to the Now Playing screen with a swipe and a touch.


On the right hand side of the device, there is a volume wheel, which doubles as a Power/Wake button. On the left hand side, there are the Play/Pause and Skip buttons, and the micro-SD card slot. Apart from the good UI, what makes interacting with the device even more pleasant is the physical size and weight of the player. While the high-end players offer top class sound, most of those are not exactly ergonomic. So I always like to have a compact DAP around for times when convenience takes higher priority over sound quality. But that doesn’t mean I don't prioritize sound quality for such players. While I don't expect a $200 player to perform at the level of the high end DAPs, I have a couple of criteria in terms of sound performance, which I expect the player to meet, if not exceed. For example, the signature should be balanced without straying too far into warm or bright territories, and it shouldn’t have any compromises in the non-tonal aspects. The M2X definitely meets my expectations in these 2 criteria. The signature overall is balanced with a tilt towards a warm and smooth sound. The warm sound is a result of smooth treble, rather than a boosted bass, so it doesn’t have any muddiness or bloat. Some would find its extensions on either ends, not quite at the level of more expensive players. But that is me nitpicking because it doesn't have any apparent roll-off. There is sufficient body to the notes without sounding thick, which results in good transparency in the midrange. The treble, as I stated earlier, is a bit on the smoother side, so the player belongs to the forgiving camp. As an extension, don’t expect flagship level of details and resolution.

On the non-tonal aspects such as stage expansion, separation, layering and imaging, M2X performs as expected without any weaknesses or issues. But if I have to nitpick, the presentation can come across just a tad on the softer side. So people looking for a lean or bright or energetic sounding source need not apply. Overall the sound is coherent without any major flaws and definitely meets my overall expectations, and even exceeding it in a couple of aspects. When you are spending $220 on a dedicated DAP, you should expect it to perform at least on the same level as your smartphone’s HO or dongle. In comparing the M2X with my iPhone XR+dongle, I hear a blacker background, larger stage, tighter bass, better separation and transparency on the M2X. Of course the differences aren't night and day, but definitely noticeable. The real advantage of the M2X over my iPhone’s dongle is with regards to output power. Compared to the dongle, M2X outputs more power, which provides more headroom for volume adjustment when pairing with medium sensitive headphones and IEMs. For example, with my Final E5000, I am close to hitting the max volume on certain albums, when running from my iPhone dongle. Where as on the M2X, I am only little past the half mark on the same album, roughly volume matched using my ear. And switching over to the 2.5mm balanced only increases the difference as the balanced port of the M2X outputs more power than the 3.5mm SE for the same load. The Balanced port also provides a slightly larger stage and better transparency. M2X also performs admirably on the other end of the spectrum, wherein, it has a super low noise floor, which helps sensitive IEMs to not pick up hiss. My EE Phantom is a super sensitive IEM and picks up hiss very easily. On the M2X though, I only hear an almost inaudible hiss.


As for the bells and whistles on the device, it’s more or less the same as what M3S offered, except for a couple of addition and subtraction. M2X is equipped with 2-way Bluetooth, so you can pair it with your wireless headphones, or it can act as a Bluetooth receiver to stream music from your smartphone or PC. I tested both use-cases using my Sony WH-1000XM3 and my iPhone XR. Pairing was straight forward and I did not experience any drop-outs or break-up within a reasonable distance. The device supports some of the highly preferred wireless audio protocols such as APTx and LDAC. The device is also equipped with WiFi and a Tidal client, so you can stream music directly on your M2X. I don’t have a Tidal account, so I am unable to share my thoughts on it. Please check out the M2X thread on head-fi for more info on the Tidal client on the device. The device doesn't have an FM tuner, but it’s not surprising, as most DAP in the market seems to not have one. My only issue with the device when it comes to features is the EQ. The EQ itself is more than effective. But the problem is, the device doesn’t automatically adjust the preamp gain when EQ is enabled. So when you bump up any frequency band by a few dBs, you either run into distortion or clipping. On the other hand, if you using the EQ only to knock down any bands, you shouldn’t have this problem. So apart from those, you get the other standard I/O functions like USB-DAC, Line Out and Digital Out. I would say M2X has got all your bases covered. As for the battery, I get somewhere around 9 hours and I wish it was slightly better. But I am willing to forego a bit of battery life for the device being so ergonomic and light.

Compared to the M3S, I feel the sound quality of both devices lie in the same ball park. M2X does seem to sound slightly fuller, but has softer dynamics. I am really splitting hairs here. M3S' outputs a little more power, but this shouldn't be a deciding factor between the 2, as the difference is not huge. M3S also has slightly better battery life. Feature wise, as I already mentioned both sport more or less the same features, except for the Tidal client on the M2X. As for the UI, there's no competition; M2X handily beats the M3S. Overall. I'd pick the M2X anyday over the M3S.


Conclusion:
I would like to thank Shanling for providing the M2X for review. There are a lot of good devices in the market these days. For a device to stand out and be great, it should not only provide a pleasant experience when using it, but should make you come back for more. And M2X has been just that since I received it. For reference, I couldn’t say the same about the M3S because of its painful-to-use, wheel based UI. Given that M2X offers good sound quality, easy-to-use UI and comes with loaded with many good/useful features, it really is a complete package device. I haven’t tested any other recent DAPs in the $200 range, so I won't make statements like; ‘M2X is the best DAP in the segment”. However, having used the device for the past few weeks, and how much I enjoy using it, I highly recommend the Shanling M2X to anyone looking for a DAP in the $200-$250 price point.

Purchase Link: MusicTeck or Amazon.

Acknowledgement:
I would like to thank Simgot for providing me with a pair of the Simgot EM2 free of charge in exchange for my review.

Introduction:
I reviewed the Simgot's EN700PRO, which was a single DD IEM with a very nice balanced tuning. When I learnt Simgot was coming out with a hybrid line-up, I was looking forward to it. After reading reviews on EM3 and EM5 which appear to be brightly tuned IEMs, I knew they were not my cup of tea. So when Simgot reached out to me if I was interested in reviewing either the EM3 or the EM5, I turned down the offer in the beginning of 2018. I was told that they were coming out with the EM2 in a few months, which they thought would better suit my taste. Around fall of 2018, they shipped the EM2 to me and I had been caught up with some work that I couldn't get to the review sooner.

Packaging, Accessories and Cable:
You get the standard accessories that you get with all Simgot IEMs. A beautiful brown leather case and 6 x sets of eartips (3 x Bass Tips and 3 x Upper-Mid and High Tips). Simgot’s brown leather case is the probably one of the best stock cases one can get these days. Unlike most cases, which turn out to be not very practical for everyday use, Simgot’s leather case is hard enough to protect your IEMs from falls, is slim enough to fit your pocket, and the magnetic flap makes it a breeze to access the storage compartment for stowing or retrieving the IEM. I just can’t stress how much I love this case. And the best part is, it does all that and looks very sophisticated with the brown leather finish. As for the included cable, it is very flexible but is slightly prone to tangling. As the IEM is worn with the cable running over the ear, microphonics is almost non-existent.



Comfort and Isolation:
Both, comfort and isolation are very good for a universal IEM. As these are lighter than the EN700PRO, these sit more comfortably in my ears.

Source Matching and Hiss:
EM2s are very efficient and sensitive and they play just fine even out of a smartphone. These don’t hiss like some of the multi-BA IEMs, but pairing these with amps that have a high noise floor will make the IEM to pick up some hiss. But that is the case with most IEMs. So in terms of balance between ease to drive and hiss, EM2 works just ideally.



Sound:
EM2 has a bit of a U shaped signature, which is a result of slightly bumped up mid-bass and lower-treble. I am typically not a fan of U shaped signatures, but there are some IEMs with a U shaped signature that actually sound good. Unfortunately, EM2 isn’t one of those good sounding U shaped IEMs. As the enhancement in the lows are focussed towards mid-bass and lower-mids, EM2 creates boomy bass and thick notes. There is decent sub-bass as the DD driver helps with the extension. While the mid-bass is boomy, the impact and slams are palpable and nice, adding a fun factor to the sound.

The warm and thick sounding mids work well for male vocals and lower harmonic instruments. But there is a lack of balance between lower and upper mids that the warmth and thickness cast a veil. This is due to insufficient upper-mids. So the female vocals and instruments with majority of frequencies lying in the upper-mid region sound dull and lacking in articulation. While the lower treble bump tries to compensate for that, it doesn’t do a great job and ends up sounding bright.

As for non-tonal aspects such as separation, layering and soundstage, EM2 performs at a level of what you can expect from a $100 IEM. Meaning, it is going to be noticeably better than the earbuds that come with your smartphone, but not as good as some of the champion IEMs in the price range.

Comparison:
Vs EN700Pro:
Compared to the EM2, 700 is more balanced sounding. It is a more coherent sounding IEM with better balance not only on the entire spectrum, but also within bass, mids and treble. As a whole EN700Pro is more accurate sounding than the EM2. While one might think that the EM2 might work better for genres like electronic and pop, as a result of EM2’s U Shaped signature, those genres still work better on the 700, as it sounds energetic. 700 also does the non-tonal aspects like soundstage and separation slightly better than the EM2.



Conclusion:
I can’t recommend the EM2, when the EN700Pro is available for the same price. While Simgot is trying to offer something different with its hybrid series IEMs, they probably need to rethink the tuning of the EM2. While the EM2 is in no way a bad IEM, they have not surpassed their own EN700Pro.

Amazon Link: https://www.amazon.com/Headphones-SIMGOT-Detachable-Noise-Isolating-Smartphones/dp/B07JXZD7LG

Acknowledgement:
I would like to thank Ruizu for providing the X18 free of charge in exchange for a review

Introduction:
Ruizu is a brand based in China that manufactures compact MP3 players. While they have been on the market for a few years now, their product line up seems to have matured in terms of features. For example the X18 and other current generation players have bluetooth while the previous generations players do not. Its important to note that X18 is not a high-resolution player targeted at discerning audiophiles. Its more of a convenient music player targeted for people who need a standalone music player, without the audiophilic demands such as sound quality, driving power and support for Hi-Res and DSD.


Hardware and UI:
The X18 is a lightweight, compact MP3 player, which makes it gym ready. As it does not have a clipping/strapping mechanism, you’ll need a pocket to hold the device. It sports a simple candy bar style with a 1.5inch Low Resolution color screen, which occupies the top half of the front panel. While the screen is easy to read indoors, it may not be bright and vibrant enough for outdoor use. Right below the screen and occupying the lower half of the front side is a D-Pad. While the D-Pad buttons are firm and clicky, you need to click hard on the buttons for the device to register the click. The volume buttons are located on the lower, right side, which can make it a little challenging to reach when you are holding the device in your hand. In the bottom, there is a 3.5mm Headphone port, an On-Off switch and a micro-USB port.

The device runs a minimalistic operating system, like the one you would see on Sandisk MP3 players. During my time with the X18, I did not run into any bugs. While I was glad for the lack of bugs, I was far from impressed by the speed and responsiveness of the UI. Apart from the system not registering soft clicks of buttons, the UI itself is on the slower side. Also there are other quirks about the UI that makes the user experience not so pleasant. For example, when you are on the lock screen, it is impossible to play/pause or skip tracks. You’d have to go to the now playing screen in order to perform these actions. Also, from the lock screen, it takes at least 2 clicks to even take you to the Now Playing screen. So if you need to play/pause of skip tracks, there is a minimum of 3 clicks involved, which is counter intuitive for an MP3 player like this one. One thing to note is, the D-Pad acts as a music control keys on the Now Playing screen, while it doubles as a navigation keys when you are in the menu. You may find it a little confusing a first, but you get used to it soon.

Hardware Score: 7/10
UI & UX Score: 5/10


Battery and Memory Storage:
Ruizu claims a total battery life time of roughly around 100Hrs. While I cannot confirm the number, I can say that, after close to 30Hrs of use, the battery indicator has gone down from 3/3 to 2/3 bars. Battery life is probably the biggest strengths of the device. While 8GB internal memory and support for 128GB external memory may not match the capacity of your iPod classics, its still ample memory to hold plenty of music albums. But moving forward, hopefully Ruizu considers increasing the internal memory capacity or adding a second card slot while also supporting higher capacity SD cards.

Battery Score: 10/10
Storage Score: 8/10

Features:
As I mentioned at the top, the player comes packed with a handful of features apart from the local music playback capability. Bluetooth and FM Tuner (Radio) work flawlessly as you would expect. Just remember you can’t use FM Tuner when you use a bluetooth headphone, as the device needs a headphone connected to the device, which would double as the FM receiver/antenna. To make things easy, there is a ear-bud included in the packaging for quick musical pleasure. It is not anything fancy. It plays music loud enough, acts as an antenna for FM Radio and does its job well. Nothing more, nothing less. I am still on the fence about Alarm Clock and Picture Viewer as I would never use those features on a regular basis. They probably might come in handy someday, we’ll see. But the one feature which I felt is completely unnecessary is the E-Book Reader. I don’t see anyone using the tiny screen on the X18 to read a book. Regardless, you really can’t fault the device when it comes to features as it doesn’t compromise on the necessary features.

Features Score: 10/10

Music Playback:
X18 is not an audiophile focussed digital audio player. Meaning, sound quality, driving power and Hi-Res format support are not its prime objectives. You need to remember this is just an MP3 player that focusses on convenience and lets you listen to your favourite MP3 files, while at home or while out and about. I tried playing CD Quality (16/44) lossless FALC files and it worked fine. Hi-Res files were a hit or a miss (mostly misses). I would stick to MP3 and CD Quality FLAC files. The stored music can be browsed through Folders or through categories (Artists, Albums and Genres).

The sound quality is on par with my 5 year old Sandisk Sansa player. I am pretty sure some of the recent smartphones that sport good DAC chips probably sound better. But again, this is not a player built for best sound quality. All that said, music playback is straight forward and no complaints there. As for the driving power, X18 has sufficient power to drive earbuds and easy-to-drive IEMs. If you have hard to drive phones, you want to look into totally different category of players.

Music Playback Score: 8/10

Ruizu X18 vs SanDisk Sansa Clip Zip:
SanDisk really set the bar too high for players of this category. In terms of size, the Sansa player is literally half the size of Ruizu. Ruizu does have a model that is as small as Sansa players. Sansa also comes with a clip on the back so that you could attach it to your shirt/pants/backpack. One feature that the Sansa player lacks that the X18 has is the Bluetooth. But keep in mind the current generations SanDisk players have bluetooth. As a whole, Sansa player is just a more mature and refined product in terms of UI, UX and ease of use. The UI is more responsive and snappier. And the player responds to button clicks immediately and it doesn’t require you to press hard on the buttons to recognise a click. Sound quality, driving power and memory capacity are almost the same on both the devices. X18 does have the advantage in terms of battery longevity. I don’t think even the current generation SanDisk players offer anything close to 100hrs of music playback. So if battery life is important, X18 may be the player to go. If not, I would recommend the SanDisk players due to their more mature UI and UX.



Conclusion:
Although the X18 packs a handful of features and amazing battery life, in its current form, I am unable to recommend the X18 full heartedly, when there are similar players from other brands, which sport the same set of features but offer a better UI and UX. On the other hand, if you are in a geographic location where you do not have access to better players, I don’t have a problem recommending the X18. The responsiveness of the buttons and UI, and the music controls in lock screen and navigation still need to be improved to make the UI and UX better and more refined.

Acknowledgement:
I would like to thank FLC Technologies and MusicTeck for providing the FLC 8N IEM for the review. This review was originally posted on Twister6.com back in August.

Introduction:
Tuning Systems on IEMs have existed for many years (AKG K3003, RHA T20, Dunu IEMs, Sennheiser IE80, ES Velvet etc) and is implemented in many ways. But not a single IEM came even close to FLC 8S’ 36 possible tuning options when it was released in 2015. Although, I would argue that some of the combinations wouldn’t be practical or applicable for real time use, it takes a brilliant mind (Forrest Wei) to come up with such a sophisticated tuning system. But the tuning system was only part of the reason for 8S’ success. It was its inherent sound quality and performance that contributed to IEM’s success for the most part. And with the customizable tuning options on top of that, one were able to get close to their preferred signature. Leaving the sound aspect aside, there were a couple of quibbles about the FLC’s hardware. For some people, the shape did not provide a perfectly comfortable fit. And the cable was simply too finicky and microphonic.

After 3 years of working on a successor, FLC recently launched an update to the 8S called the FLC 8N. The 8N follows along the same concept of the 8S which is, 36 different tuning options achieved through mixing and matching 10 pairs of swappable filters on the body of the IEM. The external shape of the IEM has gone through a complete redesign and the cable seems to have gone through some changes too. While I won’t be able to comment on the nature of the changes and the differences between the 8N and the 8S, what I can do is, offer my objective + subjective view on the 8N and how it performs for a $360 IEM. Let’s find out.


Accessories:
Leaving the IEM+Cable aside, what you get in the box are the usual suspects; a case, cleaning tool, shirt clip and a few pairs of ear tips, plus the tuning system. The round metal case is hard and feels like it could even take a bullet and still survive. But for my personal use, this is a bit of a cumbersome case due to its weight. But I have seen some people on the forum preferring such cases. As for the ear tips, you get a total of 8 pairs. 4 pairs of white tips and 4 more pairs of black tips of sizes; XS, S, M and L.

As for items that make up the tuning system; you get a total of 10 pairs of filters. These filters are housed in a compact metal canister that looks like a lip-balm stick. You also get a small tweezer that helps to change the Ultra-Low-Frequency (ULF) filters and Low-Frequency (Filters). You also get a spare filter for each of the rubber ULF and LF filters, just in case you lose one of these (yes, you can easily lose the ULF and LF filters if you are not careful). A manual that gives you an index of the filters and other basic information about the IEM is also included.


Looks, Build, Comfort, Isolation and Cable:
I am not a fan of the electric-blue color of the IEM. I personally would have preferred a more neutral color like grey, black or silver. But the build feels sturdy and the finish seems decent. The finish may not be perfect like what you’d see on Sennheisers, but nothing to complain here. As the IEM is light, small in size and is contoured with smooth curves, it is super comfortable to wear. The isolation is not top notch, but when music is playing, it is pretty good. Just don’t expect custom IEM level of isolation.

The cable is again a dark blue color to accent the vivid blue shell of the IEM. It is a bit springy and feels a little plasticky. But other than that, from a functional perspective, it is a very good cable. Meaning, it doesn’t tangle that easily and is not microphonic (at least when worn over ear). So it does look like FLC has made some improvements. As to what kind of sockets the IEM uses, I was neither able to confirm nor deny as I thought it was best left untouched.

Sound:
For sound impressions, I would like to begin with the default configuration, which is; Gunmetal + Grey + Gold (Med ULF + Med LF + Most MF & Med HF). In this configuration, the sound of the 8N is warm, balanced and smooth. This results in a relaxed and fatigue-free listening experience. The bass is slightly enhanced and has a gradual downward slope into the center mid-range. The result is a warm and well integrated bass into the mid-range that provides warmth and body without creating a veil. Sub-bass and mid-bass balance each other out well that, there is satisfactory level of impact, as well as warmth/body without one over powering the other. Also, as the 8N uses DD for the low-end, you get the nice natural decay.

Although, the Gold filter is the one that offers most MF, the mid-range is actually a touch relaxed. The mid-range is sufficiently bodied and is slightly warm in tone, as the upper-mids are slightly smoothed down. If you are someone who finds the 15dB rise in the 3kHz on headphones/IEMs a bit shouty or harsh, you will feel right at home on the 8N, because this bump is rather polite on the 8N. But it is sufficient in amplitude to provide overtone reach and solidity for the vocals, while keeping them rounded and smooth. But for these reasons, the transparency in the mid-range, although good enough, is not of high class. While I would say the mid-range is slightly laid-back their positioning is not backward. So they offer good presence, but just subtly polite without causing any aggressiveness.

The treble follows along the same line as the mid-range and stays smooth with a gentle peak in the lower treble, which is followed by a toned down upper treble. The lower treble makes it up by providing sufficient articulation to the notes and maintaining the balance in the signature. The downside of the upper treble being toned down is, the resolution is not very high and you won’t get the feeling of finesse you experience on high end IEMs. As the resolution and transparency are not of the highest order, this is not an IEM geared towards detail retrieval. But what you get in return is a smooth, laid-back sound that is very forgiving of poorly recorded material.

FLC claims that one of the areas of improvement on the 8N, over the 8s is the soundstage. Although I cannot comment on whether it is an improvement or not, all I can say is that the soundstage on the 8N is spectacular. It is not just very spacious, but also open and airy, almost approaching CA Andromeda level soundstage. This just might have dethroned the IE80 from the sub $400 category soundstage-king position. The stage has sufficient depth to an extent it doesn’t sound flat. With the help of the soundstage, the instrument separation is really excellent on the lateral plane, although layering may not be its forte. The whole presentation of the IEM just keeps you immersed in the music.

Tuning System:
FLC 8N has a 3 point tuning system. What that means is, you can tune 3 distinct frequency ranges of the IEM at the same time. This is achieved though swappable tuning filters. You get; 3 x Ultra Low Frequency filters (ULF), 3 x Low Frequency filters (LF) and 4 x Mid Frequency & High Frequency filters (MF & HF). The port for the ULF is located on the inner side of the IEM that faces your ear. The port for the LF filters is on the faceplate of the IEM shell. The MF & HF filters are screwed in at the nozzle of the IEM.



Ultra-Low Frequency and Low Frequency Filters (ULF & LF):
ULF – ULF filters are the ones those look like a rivet and are made of plastic. These filters primarily affect the lower bass and the sub-bass region, which are all frequencies below the 100Hz. This filter determines the sub-bass extension, power, rumble and weight of the impact. You get 3 pairs of filters: 1) Red = Most ULF, 2) Gunmetal = Med ULF and 3) White = Min ULF.

LF – LF filters are the ones made of rubber with a small flange on one end. These filters primarily affect the mid-bass, upper-bass and lower-mid regions, which are frequencies between 100Hz to 700Hz. These filters determine the warmth, weight and body of the notes in the lower mids. You get 3 LF filters, but the color codes are different. 1) Black = Most LF, 2) Grey = Med LF and 3) Transparent = Low LF.

When it comes to ULF and LF filters, these need to be analyzed in combo rather than individually. This is because they go hand in hand and the result they produce are relative to each other.

Red + Black (Most ULF + Most LF)
This is the bassiest combo and meant for bass lovers. You get great sub-bass extension, lots of sub-bass power, rumble and impact. The bass starts to bleed a little into the mids and starts to tighten the stage that the instrument separation is not the best. Bass takes a dark tone and the pace of the IEM is slowest on this combo.

Gunmetal + Black (Med ULF + Most LF)
This combo is more like a more controlled version of the above one. There is adequate sub-bass power and impact supporting the warm and thick upper-bass and lower-mids. This is not the cleanest sounding combo, but works well if you want to unleash male vocals.

Transparent + Black (Less ULF + Most LF)
This combo creates a bump in the upper-bass region and makes the IEM to sound thick and syrupy. This creates a veil over the mid-range. Not the best combo, unless an upper-bass bump is exactly what you are looking for.

Red + Grey (Most ULF + Med LF)
This combo has a slightly enhanced bass response, but with strong bass impact and power. Sub-bass kind of steals the attention with the bass impact and power. This combo actually quite nice for electronic music when paired with the Green MF&HF filter as it creates a nice U shaped sound.

Gunmetal + Grey (Med ULF + Med LF)
This is the default combo. This combo gives a slightly enhanced bass that is slightly warm and full-bodied with good sub-bass extension. Sub-bass and mid-bass don’t fight for attention and so there is a nice balance in low end of the spectrum. This is a very versatile combo that would work for all genres. It just won’t give you any extreme effect.

Transparent + Grey (Less ULF + Med LF)
This is another good combo that works well for male vocals as it is warm and the sub-bass is rolled off and the impact and rumbles take a back seat. The notes are not too warm and thick, so you don’t have the congestion and veiling problem like the Transparent+Black combo.

Red + White (Most ULF + Less LF)
With the White LF filter, bass becomes very neutral. But with the Red filter, you still get some nice impact and sub-bass power. This is also another combo that would work well for electronic music if you prefer slightly leaner bass notes.

Gunmetal + White (Med ULF + Less LF)
This is another highly recommended combo. You get a neutral level bass with good the sub-bass extension but without strong impacts and rumble from the sub-bass. What this combo also does is, because the bass is nicely controlled, it lets the mid-range pop out a little more, so that you don’t feel it is too relaxed in the upper-mids, as you would on the Gunmetal+Grey combo. You get nice separation and an airy stage. This is not only the best combo for classical, but is also one of the versatile combos. People preferring some warmth may prefer the Gunmetal+Grey combo over this one. But if you like a neutral, ruler flat bass that goes well into the sub-bass, this is just the combo you need.

Transparent + White (Min ULF + Less ULF)
This is really a bass light combo with the mid-range in the spotlight. Bass lacks body, warmth and weight. But if you like lean bass and want to get a mid-centric signature, this might work.

Mid Frequency & High Frequency Filter:
These are the screw able metal filters. These filters affect the upper-mids, lower-treble and the center-treble, which are frequencies between 1kHz to 10kHz. These don’t have much of an impact on the upper treble, so do not expect to customize the upper-treble per your preference. As I already discussed how the Gold filter sounds in the sound impressions section, let’s see what changes are observed when going from the Gold filter to the other 3 filters. Btw Gold filter is Most MF & Less HF.

Switching from Gold to Green (Less MF & Max HF)
This relaxes the mid-range further, but brings up the treble noticeably. If you want to improve the articulation in the treble or if you are shooting for a bright and airy treble, or if you are trying to get to a U shaped sound, this is the filter you would choose.

Switching from Gold to Gunmetal (Med MF & Med HF)
Compared to the Gold filter, the Gunmetal filter relaxes the mid-range further, while keeping the treble at the same level. This creates an even more laidback sound. Can come in handy if you want a completely forgiving and a too laidback sound.

Switching from Gold to Blue (Less MF & Less HF)
Blue just shelves the mid-range and the treble down even further compared to the Gunmetal. I seriously wonder why this filter even exists. Because even the Gunmetal filter is already relaxed enough. Unless all you want to hear is bass and lower harmonics of an instrument/vocals, I can’t imagine anyone using this filter. Although one could argue it can be used to create a light sound signature when used in combination with Transparent+White filters, you could achieve that with the Gunmetal filter already.

FLC should have made this filter into a Most MF & Most HF filter, as I feel that is what is missing in FLC’s configuration.

Possible Combos for some Popular Signatures:
- Warm and Balanced: Gunmetal + Grey + Gold
- Neutral Balanced: Gunmetal + White + Gold, Transparent + Grey + Gold
- Mid-Centric: Transparent + White + Gold
- Treble-Centric: Gunmetal + White + Green, Transparent + White +Green
- V/U shaped: Red + Grey + Green, Red + Black + Green
- Balanced with Strong Bass: Red + Black + Gold, Red + Grey + Gold
- Dark and Bassy: Red + Black + Gold, Red + Black + Gunmetal
- Warm and Thick: Gunmetal + Black + Gold, Transparent + Black + Gold



Comparisons:

FLC 8N vs IE80S:
IE80S has a U shaped signature as a result of enhanced bass and treble (6kHz peak). In terms of tuning capabilities, it only has a bass tuning knob to adjust the sub bass. There is no way to bring the mid-range forward or reduce its 6kHz treble peak. This makes the IE80S not the best IEM for some genres. For example, the vocals sound recessed and the instruments do not sound accurate nor natural. This is purely a fun tuning.

The 8N on the other hand, because of its highly tunable feature, makes it a more versatile IEM than the IE80S. Even with the Green filter which is Med MF & Most HF, the mid-range is not as recessed as on the IE80S. While neither IEMs qualify to be called as accurate sounding IEM, 8N can get close to sounding accurate and has better transparency than the IE80S.

In terms of resolution, both are almost on the same level. One of the greatest strengths of the IE80S is its soundstage. 8N has a similar level of soundstage. But because the stage is not warmed up by the bass, it sounds more open and airy. This also results in better separation on the 8N. So in terms of sound quality, it is not even a contest. 8N takes the win with a comfortable margin.

In terms of physical features, 8N offers better comfort and more isolation. IE80S on the other hand has better build quality, reliability and a better cable.

FLC 8N (Gunmetal, Grey, Gold) vs Simgot EN700 Pro:
While 8N’s signature in the Gunmetal+Grey+Gold combo can be described as warm, balanced and laidback, 700P’s tuning is more neutral-like with a slightly enhanced bass. The bass response on these 2 IEMs are almost similar in the sense that both have similar level of impact and power. But 700P’s bass is warmer. But the overall bass quality is better on the FLC.

8N goes for a laidback sound with a slightly relaxed mids and treble. Whereas 700P goes for a more accurate sound with better presence in the mid-range, particularly in the upper mids and has a slightly brighter treble. There are no filters for 8N that can reproduce this tuning (because the green filter may help bring the treble up, but it relaxes the mid-range further). Due to these differences, 700P is just more transparent in the mid-range and is less forgiving in the treble.

8N has a more spacious soundstage and better overall resolution. As a result, 8N displays better instrument separation. 8N also has a darker background and a more precise imaging than the 700P. Overall, 8N is a bit laidback and musical in nature that you can play some of the poorly recorded tracks and not be punished. While the 700P does have a slightly enhanced bass to inject some fun aspect into the sound, it is still a more serious tuning. Both are balanced sounding and very versatile IEMs. 8N is laidback, whereas the 700N is engaging.

Source Pairings, Sensitivity and Hiss:
The 8N is not a demanding IEM when it comes to power. It just sings even straight out of a smartphone. Any current generation DAPs should have more than enough juice to drive the FLC sufficiently. When I tried the 8N on the Hugo 2 and the desktop amp, there was a nice jump in performance. But there was a slight hiss. But its hiss performance is well within the acceptable standard. Meaning, while it does hiss with sources that are powerful or have a high noise floor, it is hiss free from most portable sources.

As for tonal synergy, as the IEM is already laidback in character, it is better to stay away from sources that have a laidback or a soft sound. Also best to avoid thin sounding sources as it destroys the character of the 8N making the presentation feel empty.


Critical Comments and Suggestions:
- Replace Less Mid & Less HF filter with a Most Mid + Most LF filter
- Build quality and finish could be slightly better
- A more neutral color for the shell would be nice

​

Conclusion:
The portable audio has seen some accelerated progress over the few years with so many competitors entering the market. With such high competition, in order to survive, let alone succeed, manufacturers have been coming out with really nice products for very competitive prices. So it is not difficult to come across a nice product in the mid-fi segment. But there are some products that stand out from the rest of the competition, as they do things right and offer a little more than that. And FLC 8N is one such gem in the mid-fi realm.

While the signature of the 8N is completely neutral, its signature is not too far from the natural response of a speaker in a room. It is balanced and smooth and is just an easy listen. It may not be the most accurate IEM. But it immerses you in your music with a large stage and a musical signature. You could say, this is the fun sound done right. It may not be suitable for someone looking for accuracy or neutrality. But, if you are in the market for a balanced and smooth sounding IEM in the $500 price range, just get the FLC 8N, choose a filter combo that suits your preference and works for your music and take a break from this hobby.

Purchase Link:
MusicTeck Store: https://shop.musicteck.com/products/flc8n-the-latest-version-of-flc8
Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Balanced-Arm...1&sr=8-2&keywords=flc8n&tag=3340693-headfi-20

Acknowledgement:
I would like to thank Sennheiser for providing the IE80S for review. This review was originally posted on Twister6's review blog and now I would like to share it on Head-Fi.

Introduction:
Sennheiser hardly needs an introduction in the headphone community. Although, they may be best known for their over-ear headphones, their portfolio is not limited to just headphones. Sennheiser has a line-up of IEMs and earbuds in various price ranges, suitable for different use cases and budget. Among the IEM collection, the models from the IE line-up seem to be made for the audiophile market. Until Q3, 2017, the IE line-up consisted of IE60, IE8i, IE80 and IE800. In Q4, 2017, Sennheiser added 2 new models, namely the IE80S and IE800S, which are updates to the IE80 and IE800.

The original IE80 that was released back in 2011, has been a popular IEM among audiophiles, preferring a warm and smooth sound. But the main attraction of the IE80 was its large soundstage. To this day, many manufacturers are still playing catch up to match its soundstage. But like any product, it wasn’t perfect. The biggest and the most common complaint however was with regards to its enhanced upper-bass, which cast a veil on its mid-range. After 8 years, Sennheiser has finally released an update to the IE80. An update that many of us have been eagerly waiting for. An update that will tell us if Sennheiser listens to its customers’ complaints. Let’s find out.

Going forth into the review, I will be referring to the IE80S as 80S.




Packaging and Accessories:
The 80S comes with an adequate set of accessories, such as a carry case, selection of ear-tips and cleaning tool. When Sennheiser announced the 80S, I was anxious to find out if they repeated the mistake of including the same case that came with the IE80. That case was an anti-thesis of practicality. I was relieved when I found out that the 80S comes with a semi-hard zipper case. This zipper case, does a fine job of fitting the IEM and seems quite capable of protecting the internal contents. But you should know that, this is not a small zipper case that you could easily fit in your denim pocket. The case actually measures 6” x 4” x 1.5”. Yes that is a large case. Right out of the box, there are foam inserts that are stuck to the inside of the case. But you can easily remove the foam. Once the foam is removed, it can comfortably fit a DAP, or a portable DAC/Amp on one side, and hold the 80S on the other. This case makes a lot of sense especially if you carry a DAP. But it won’t hold your 4” screen smartphones. While this case may not be ideal for someone who prefers a small case, you could at least put this case to use at home to store audiophile accessories.

As for ear-tips, you get 3 x pairs of each type: silicone, dual flanges and Comply foam. Foams give you a smoother, warmer and woolly sound. Silicone tips make the sound a little open, brighter and less thick. I could never get a good seal with the dual flange tips. One of the most preferred after-market ear-tips for the IE80 is the Spiral dots. And I can confidently say, it works great for the 80S too. You also get a cleaning tool, which has a flat wedge on the other end, to adjust the bass dial on the IEM. The last item is a set of pre-shaped ear-hooks, which helps the cable stay in place over your ears, during workouts.


Build Quality, Fit, Comfort and Isolation:
If you thought that the IE80S looks good in pictures, it looks even better in person. That is due to the quality of BOM used on the IEM, as well as the perfect finish. I have been quite appreciative of the build quality of my IE80. But 80S takes it up a notch. The cable on the 80S is thicker and has a matte finish, compared to IE80’s cable. There aren’t any micro-phonics, when the cable is worn over-ear. The stress relief on right connector of the cable is red in color, to let you easily distinguish between left and right. It is also terminated with a straight 3.5mm connector that is thin. So if your phone case has a narrow cutout for the 3.5mm port, you wouldn’t have to worry.

As the overall shape and size of the 80S is, no different than the IE80, the fit, comfort and isolation is the same. It has a short nozzle with a flange at the tip that helps to hold the ear-tip in place. The fit is fairly shallow. As a result, the isolation is less than average. Being small in size and light in weight, this is a very comfortable IEM. It sits sufficiently flush in your ears, that you shouldn’t have a problem if you fell asleep with the 80S.


(The Stock Case without the Foam Insert)


Sound:
While I had owned many entry level Sennheiser earbuds during my college days, it wasn’t until I got my IE80 back in 2015, that I got hooked on to this hobby. Although, I have upgraded my setup since then, the IE80 remains to be one IEM, I keep going back to for its warm, soothing and relaxed sound. And the 80S continues on the same path, but with a touch more balance in the tuning and lower distortion characteristics.

The tuning of the 80S is quite similar to that of the IE80, with a slightly enhanced bass and a treble bump, resulting in a U shaped sound. Given the tuning choice, it isn’t an IEM that would be applicable for critical listening, as it is quite far from a neutral signature. The stock tuning makes it a great IEM for a very easy listening. And it is quite versatile of genres, if you are okay with listening with a colored signature. It is a fun type of tuning that works well for genres like; Pop, Electronic, Techno, and Psychedelic. It also works alright for Rock, Hip-Hop and Metal. Some genres that don’t work well are country, jazz and classical.

The biggest complaint from the community, about the IE80 was, the IEM had a significant mid-bass/upper-bass bump that not only cast a veil on the mid-range, but it also made the mid-range muddy. Many of us on Head-Fi and other audio forums, resorted to doing the tape-mod (applying a small piece of tape over the bass dial) to control the mid-bass, to bring the mid-range slightly forward and thereby improving the mid-range transparency. While the tape-mod helped reduce the warmth, there was still a bit of muddiness in the mid-range. The 80S not only has a more controlled bass that lets the mid-range pop out better, but it also seems to have better distortion characteristics, that seems to remove that muddiness in the mid-range.

The 80S has an enhanced bass section, with a tilt towards mid-bass. Although it may not be as bassy as its predecessor, 80S is still a bassy IEM. It becomes evident, if you compare it to an IEM with neutral bass. As a result, it is responsible for the warmth in the presentation and the thickness in the lower-mids. As it is a DD IEM with an enhanced bass region, what you get is that natural bass decay and an easily perceivable sub-bass extension. The bass is not completely clean nor agile. This is a bass for people preferring warmth and power. As a result of reduced bass on the 80S, the bass is no longer over-powering the rest of the spectrum, like what you find on the IE80.

For those who find the bass on the 80S insufficient, you do have the option to increase it, using the Bass Dial that sits on the faceplate of the IEM. Although, it is marked as 5 discrete steps, it is really a continuous adjustment that goes smoothly from Level 1 (Minimum), all the way upto Level 5 (Maximum). My sound impressions is based on the bass dial set at Level 1 (Minimum). Dialing up the bass, increases the quantity of lower-bass and sub-bass frequencies (20-100Hz). As a result, sub-bass is now more prominent, bass now goes deeper, bass notes gain weight & size and the rumbles are heavier. The bass region starts to take a darker tone.

The mid-range on the 80S is a definite improvement over the IE80. IE80’s midrange was not just recessed, but it lacked definition and transparency. The mid-range on the 80S sounds clearer and more resolving in comparison to the IE80. But still, the mid-range is fairly recessed compared to the bass and the treble peak. Asa result, the vocals do not have the immediacy, size and density. So this is not an IEM I would pick for vocals, especially the female vocals as they may sound delicate. But given the enhanced bass, there is a certain thickness to the mid-range that helps the presence adequately, especially the male vocals. The mid-range overall is a bit relaxed. If you are looking for an engaging mid-range, something like the Simgot EN700Pro might be the better suited one.

The treble on the original IE80 was anything but bright. It did have a small peak in the lower treble at around 6kHz. The peak has followed suit on to the 80S. On the IE80, this peak was hardly noticeable for 2 reasons. One, it wasn’t a very prominent peak, and two, the warmth from the bass masked the brightness from this peak. On the 80S though, the peak seems more prominent, as the peak by itself seems to be a dialed up by a few dBs. And the reduction in the warmth in the bass doesn’t mask it completely. Whether this brightness is a positive or a negative aspect, depends on one’s preference and tolerance for the treble. While there is definite brightness from this peak, it doesn’t put the IEM in the ‘Bright IEM’ category. It’s still a warm IEM, with some brightness showing its head once in a while. Except for this peak, the treble is linear and smooth otherwise. It also has better treble extension than the IE80 that makes the notes feel more complete. The controlled warmth and brighter treble, allows the 80S to retrieve more details than the IE80. As a consequence it is not as forgiving as the IE80.

One of the biggest highlights about the IE80 was its huge soundstage and the 80S is no different. Many IEMs in the price range have come close to match or surpass the width. But what makes 80S’ stage special is its depth. Although, there is not an abundance of air in the stage, the depth makes the stage appear more 3D. While the imaging is not pin-point precise, it has a certain realism due to the instruments in a 3D space. The abundant space allows for good instrument separation and layering. But the IEM can tend to congestion as it is warm and its speed is not the best.

I should also add that, the 80S is an IEM that works great for watching movies and gaming, due to its spacious soundstage and powerful bass. Watching action movies in particular, is a very engaging experience on the 80S. If you play First Person Shooter games, you would know that you have a strategic advantage, if you were able to locate the enemies from their foot-steps. As 80S’ stage is 3D in nature, it is able to locate the enemies from the depth perspective and not just from width perspective.




Power Requirements, Hiss and Source Matching:
One of the nice things about the IE80 is, it is quite efficient and doesn’t desire power to sound good. But the problem was, the IEM picked up hiss with some noisy and powerful sources, as it was too sensitive. Sennheiser went ahead and made the 80S less efficient and less sensitive. As a result, it needs a few more positive clicks on the volume, to get to the same level of loudness you got on the IE80. So, it’s slightly more difficult to drive now, but it is still within the comfortable powering levels of your smartphone. For example, I listen to the IE80 at 2 clicks on the volume on my iPhone 6. With the 80S, I am at 4 clicks, which still gives me plenty of headroom for volume adjustment. But the best part about making the 80S less sensitive is, it no longer hisses like the IE80.

Unlike some DD IEMs like the Rhapsodio Galaxy or Dita Dream, which require really powerful sources to unleash their true performance, the 80S doesn’t require a powerful source to sound good. So the source pairing basically comes down to synergy with the source in terms of tonality. Given IE80’s warm tone and thickness, it is better to use a neutral source. But due to the slightly prominent 6kHz peak, avoiding bright sources would be a good idea. So a neutral source, that is smooth in the treble like the Shanling M3S would be an ideal source for the 80S.


Comparisons:
IE80S vs IE80:
TL;DR: The 80S is a more refined and an improved version of the IE80. It is less warm in the bass, clearer in the midrange and brighter in the treble. But it still maintains the same stage.

The IE80 is warmer and looser in bass. It doesn’t have the definition and detail of the 80S. But the IE80’s bass has more authority. Once the IE80 is tape-modded, the bass quantity is reduced to the same level as the stock 80S. While the tape mod on the IE80 helps control the bass, it still doesn’t help get rid of the mushy and veiled mid-range. 80S is free of this mushiness and veil for the most part, as it is more resolving and transparent. Imagine taking IE80’s midrange and maintaining its laidback nature, but improving its clarity and resolution. That is exactly how the 80S sounds in the mid-range. So the vocals and the instruments in the mid-range sound clearer and have better presence. The treble is slightly brighter on the 80S, and it helps the IEM retrieve more details. 80S also has better treble extension which improves the overall technical capability of the IEM. In terms of staging, separation and imaging, both IEMs seem to have the same amount of space, but the 80S is a step forward in terms of background blackness, separation and imaging precision.

IE80S vs Simgot EN700 Pro:
Both these IEMs are very different in their tunings and so their use case would be quite different. 80S’ U shaped signature makes it a fun and laidback IEM, which is great for enjoying genres like; modern pop, electronic, psychedelic etc. The 700Pro has a more balanced tuning, that is more serious in nature, and will be better suited for classical, rock, blues etc. 700Pro is also the better one for critical listening or monitoring, as it is less colored and gets close to neutrality. For watching action, sci-fi and adventure movies, I’d pick the 80S. But for drama, or any genre where vocals are important, I’d go with the 700Pro.

Both the IEMs have an enhanced bass region. But 700Pro’s bass is not as enhanced as 80S’ bass. And so it is not as warm nor thick as the 80S. The midrange on the 80S is warm and relaxed in nature. It also sounds slightly veiled. 700Pro’s mid-range is more forward, sounds clearer and is better articulated. Actually, it is slightly bright due to the tilt towards the upper-mids. As a result, female vocals and instruments, come across more melodically on the 700Pro, while the male vocals have more body and authority on the 80S. The treble resolution is similar on both the IEMs. There is a bit of brightness in the treble region on both the IEMS that help with the articulation and details. But the 700Pro showcases better details as it is less warm and is more transparent in the mid-range and treble.

700Pro’s soundstage is very wide and is quite airy, but it lacks depth. The 80S provides a more holographic feel due to its 3D structure of the stage. The left-right instrument separation is better on the 700Pro. Not that the separation on the 80S is poorer, but it’s not as easy to perceive the separation due to the warmth from the bass and the recessed mid-range. But 80S has the advantage in the layering due to its better depth. In terms of imaging, both seem to have the same level of precision. But the 80S provides a more natural sense of imaging, in accordance to its 3D soundstage.




Critical Comments & Suggestions:
- In an attempt to improve the sense of clarity and detail retrieval, Sennheiser seems to have increased the 6kHz peak by a few dBs. While some might welcome this change, this peak is going to be bright for some listener.
- Sennheiser could have explored other tunings than simply revising IE80’s tuning. There are other versions of U shaped tuning that are more versatile.
- The IEM market has become highly competitive and many manufacturers have caught up to the competition in the recent years. A headphone giant like Sennheiser needs to start pushing boundaries, rather than just fixing the negatives or making incremental upgrades to the existing line-up.


Protect Yourself from Counterfeits:
One of the challenges that Sennheiser has been facing for many years with their high-end IEMs (IE8, IE80, IE800) is that, these models have been counterfeited and sold online for very tempting prices. If you find a price that looks too-good-to-be-true, then it most likely is a counterfeit. Protect yourself by buying the IE80S from Sennheiser or, authorized retailers of Sennheiser products.

Product Link on Manufacturer's Website: https://en-us.sennheiser.com/earphones-in-ear-headphones-ie-80-s
Price Price: $349.99




Conclusion:
Sennheiser IE80S is a clear improvement over its predecessor, as result of the controlled bass, more resolving mid-range and a slightly brighter treble, that helps with bringing more details to the presentation. It also retains the large stage that the IE80 is popular for, and improves the imaging precision further. You could say, it is an improved IE80 across the board. So yes, it looks like Sennheiser does listen to its customers. But, make no mistake, it is still an IE80 at core. So if you had a chance to try the IE80 sometime, and did not like its tuning at all, the 80S is probably not going to work either. On the other hand, if you are looking for an improved IE80 or, a very reliable and versatile IEM that has a warm and laidback sound, with a large soundstage, IE80S may be a great buy, as it also a very reliable IEM.

Acknowledgement:
I would like to thank Andrew from www.MusicTeck.com for sending me the Simgot EN700 PRO for review.

Introduction:
Simgot is an IEM manufacturer from China that caught the attention of many audiophiles due to their IEM's faceplate design resembling the HiFiMan's HE1000 headphone. Their first IEM from Simgot to hit the market was EN700, followed by a Bass version called the EN700 BASS. But it wasn't until Simgot came out with the PRO version, that the community stopped and looked as they had come with a pretty nicely tuned IEM that would satisfy the audiophiles.

Build, Fit, Cable and Accessories:
700Pro is made of aluminium with good build and finish. The quality of finish is actually very nice. The inner side of the shell is curved and smooth that makes the fit very comfortable. The size of shells are somewhere between medium and large and so may not fit securely if your ears are super small. But it shouldn't be of any concern for most users. The nozzle is neither too long nor short, which makes the IEM sit securely in the ears. In terms of isolation, it can depend on the tips. But overall, do not expect Shure or Westone level of isolation.

The included cable seems fine when worn as it is light and flexible. While it doesn't exhibit cable memory, it does tend to tangle. The IEM comes with an adequate set of accessories that in my books is sufficient. Not too many nor too less. My favourite accessory though is the included leather flip case. While it does not offer protection like a Pelican case, this case is compact and practical and does a decent job of protecting. There are 2 sets of ear-tips; Bass and Mid-Treble that come in 3 sizes; S, M and L. I prefer the bass tips as the other ear-tips makes the 700Pro further bright.


Sound:
700Pro's signature is fairly balanced, with a slightly enhanced bass and upper-mids/treble. It is meticulously tuned such that the signature doesn’t drift to a 'V' shaped tuning. But for the same reason, its tone is not neutral, nor can it be categorized into a single bucket. It has some warmth originating from the bass and some brightness coming from the lower treble. The warmth and brightness cancel each other on some cases. But one most tracks, one is dominant over the other. For example, the Dark Knight Rises album is a slightly warm/dark album and when listening to this album, the 700 Pro displays a warm and smooth persona. On the other hand, I have some music albums that are energetic in the upper-mids and lower treble, where the 700Pro starts to show its brightness.

The presentation and placement of the instruments is a touch forward than neutral. This results in a very engaging presentation, but also lets the IEM get aggressive once in a while. The soundstage is quite wide, ensuring more than adequate space for instrument separation and imaging. But where the stage lacks is in its depth. I personally would have preferred to sacrifice a touch of width for some depth, as it can provide a more 3-D stage and allow for better layering of instruments. So EN700Pro’s stage in general is a flat wide screen. The resolution and imaging is decent and befitting the price tag. Aided with a clear mid-range, the IEM displays a very clear musical image with sufficient air and space.

Laying the foundation to its sound, is a stupendous bass tuning, that is slightly north of neutral. It’s a tastefully tuned bass for those looking for a low end that walks a fine line between power and technicality. The entire bass range is enhanced and is linear, only slightly sloping downwards from the sub-bass into the mids, which works really well as it maintains a nice balance within the bass region. The result is a palpable sub-bass power that helps with dynamics and rumbles, complemented with adequate warmth from the mid-bass and upper-bass. The warmth continues into the lower mid-range but in a controlled manner, so as to retain the warmth and body for the instruments. But the warmth is equally counter-acted by the slightly prominent upper mids, which takes a proud role to establish clarity in the presentation.

Bridging either sides of the mid-ranges, is the center-midrange, that is slightly forward and displaying good presence. It picks up the color of warmth of brightness depending on the type of instrument and vocal. For example, the male vocals and instruments whose frequencies predominantly lie in the lower mid-range (jazz, electric guitar) are warm with a touch of clarity. While the female vocals and instruments like piano, acoustic guitar are bright with a bit of body. The forwardness of the center midrange ensures density and weight of the instrument and vocal images. Overall it’s a well done midrange, for those preferring a full bodied and yet a clear sounding mid-range. It may not suit the audience preferring something warmer and natural, nor would it suit someone who prefer a dry and reference type mid-range.

The treble extension again is decent and you get what you pay for. So what it lacks in the upper treble extension, it compensates it with controlled prominence in the lower and middle treble that render good air and sparkle. But the IEM shouldn’t be taken as sparkly, or an exciting IEM. It is more of a clear sounding treble focussed on clarity and articulation. The IEM is forgiving for the most part, but poor recordings are not going to be smoothed out. In fact, the EN700Pro falls on the slightly serious side of things due to its signature and the presentation style. As a result, it works great for classical, rock, jazz and acoustic instruments based genres. But it is not an IEM I would pick for listening to EDM, Pop or Electronic music. It is not that it doesn’t play well with those genres. In fact, because of its balanced tuning, it works well with all the genres without being partial. But because of the lack of the fun factor, it doesn’t do justice.

What is described above is the general characteristic of the IEM. With the included Bass and Mid/Treble ear tips, its signature can be modified to a small extent. But it mostly it remains the same IEM. With the Bass tips, the 700 gains a touch more power in the bass and a bit of warmth fills the upper bass and lower midrange. With the Mids/Treble, the bass is more close to neutral, and the mids/treble region get some prominence as a result. The perceived clarity is increased and the tone shifts to the bright side further. This works great for classical music. But for Rock or Jazz, the Bass tips worked better.

Power Requirement and Hiss:
When it comes to power requirement, the IEM is not power hungry. Even your everyday smartphone should be sufficient to not just push the 700Pro to sufficiently loud levels, but also makes it sound good. With a good DAP, the IEM scales better. But investing a couple of hundreds of dollars on a DAP for a $150 IEM is not a sound financial decision. But if you have a nice source, the IEM does scale well. LPG is a good device to test for hiss, as some of the hyper-sensitive multi-BA IEMs pick up the noise floor of LPG’s class-A amp. The EN700Pro however remains silent on the LPG even on high gain.


Comparison:
EN700Pro vs Sennheiser IE80:
Both are very differently tuned iems. The 700Pro goes for a balanced tuning with a touch of brightness in the upper midrange and sounds neutral-bright. The IE80 on the other hand has a U shaped tuning that is bass heavy. IE80 has a more natural stage with good width and depth. 700Pro's stage is just as wide but is not as deep as IE80's stage. Overall IE80 presents a more 3-D stage in which it images its instruments, where as 700Pro only does a flat, wide stage. IE80 is a bit more relaxed in its presentation, relative to the more forward and engaging presentation of the 700Pro.

IE80's bass is considerably more in quantity than 700Pro's bass. With an elevated bass, it reaches the subbass more effortlessly although its bass enhancement is in the midbass region. So Ie80's bass sounds more powerful, thick and warm. 700Pro's bass is more taut and has better balance throughout the bass region. The elevated and bloated bass combined with the recessed mids make for a very veiled mids that lack transparency on the IE80. 700Pro's midrange is more forward and transparent. The vocals also have better articulation on the 700Pro in line with its elevated upper-mids. The treble once again is more clear and more articulated on the 700Pro. IE80's treble is smoother and not as detailed as the 700Pro. IE80 is one of the most forgiving IEMs I have tried. 700Pro has a bit of an aggressive character and s less forgiving.

For a relaxed listening, I'd pick the IE80, but for serious listening or critical listening, I'd pick the 700Pro. Not that the 700Pro is analytical. But it presents a truer image of music in direct comparison to the IE80. IE80 is also something I could use for gaming and action movies. But for drama movies, I'd pick the 700Pro for the better vocal presentation.

Conclusion:
Simgot seems to have produced a solid IEM and is heading in the right direction. The EN700 PRO not only impresses you with its strengths like its bass, wide soundstage and clear sound, but it also goes for a tuning, that has the qualities to effortlessly impress an audiophile. The balanced tuning works well with a wide variety of genres, and sounds quite nicely even out of your smartphone, that it won't send you on a goose chase into upgrading cables and DAPs. I highly recommend the EN700 PEO if you are in the market for a $150clear sounding IEM with a balanced tuning.

Purchase Link: https://shop.musicteck.com/collections/simgot/products/simgot-en700-pro-in-ear-headphone

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I would once again like to thank @Barra for letting me take part in the Dream tour and, giving me the opportunity to try the IEM.

INTRODUCTION:
Dita Audio has always had a fan base for its DD bass and the importance they give to the build, aesthetics and cable. While the company did release a couple of limited edition Truth versions for a higher mark-up, the IEMs that made the primary line-up were still a mid-tier category, at least in terms of the pricing. And from what I have heard, their IEMs punch above their pricepoint and was another one of the reasons for the company's reputation.

The Dream was a much awaited flagship from Dita. It was not just a flagship, but Dita collaborated with 2 other companies to make the IEM even special. The brand K2 Craft might not ring many bells in the Western Hemisphere. It is a company that makes custom metal faceplates for Custom IEMs. The man behind the K2 Craft is Kazuhiro Oya. I read that the titanium shell of the Dream was designed by Kazuhiro himself. The second collaboration was with Van Den Hul, a Dutch cable manufacturer to create the cable for the IEM. This is also the first time their IEM sports a removable cable.

HARDWARE, FIT, COMFORT & CABLE:
Dream sports an uninspiring matte black finish, that actually looks sophisticated when brand new in box. But the moment you lay your hands/fingers on it, it loses its appeal as the shell is a finger print magnet. The oils from your fingers smudge the beauty. The finish is good but nowhere close to Noble Katana, which still holds the title for best shell finish when it comes to hi-fi IEMs in my books. The size of the shell itself is small and doesn't protrude when worn. Although the shell is small in size, the angle of the nozzle might not offer the best fit for some ears.

While the shell of the IEM didn't impress me much, I was never at a point where I felt like complaining. But once you get to the cable section, starts all the frustration. First, the cable connector on the IEM is loose that the cable kept sliding off. I heard that they fixed this issue to an extent in the more recent batches. My second complaint is with the ergonomics of the cable. It is very springy and not easy to handle and store. It also tangles with the IEM, but it wasn't too bad. But the good thing is, it is not microphonic.

SOUND:
The general impression I had on the Dita IEMs was, they had phenomenal bass due to the DD and a sparkly and bright treble to increase its detail retrieval. In essence a slight U shaped signature. And the Dream follows along the same path. But I wouldn't call the Dream as a U shaped IEM as it would throw a wrong idea. But its mid-range is definitely does not sit on the same row as the bass and the treble (upper-mids and lower treble) as they are more prominent in the presentation.

When Nic published his Dream review as part of the shoot out and saw him comparing Dream's bass to Rhapsodio Galaxy's bass, I messaged him immediately. Because, Galaxy's bass is one of the best bass I have heard in an IEM, due to its sub-bass extension and excellent balance between technicality and authority. He said, Dream is the only DD IEM in the shootout, whose bass came close to Galaxy's bass. And since then, I wanted to try the Dream, if not for anything else, just for the bass. And sure enough, Dream's bass impressed me from day one.

In terms of quantity, it is a bit north of neutral from the overall tuning giving a solid foundation to the rest of the spectrum. It is able to reach far down in the sub-bass hence the dynamics is excellent. But it is a bass oriented towards sub than the mid-bass, and so, there is a slight darkness that looms in the bass. As a result, this is not a bass that yields a helping hand to the mid-range with warmth and body. Regardless, the bass has very good technicalities with good speed and definition.

The mid-range of the Dream falls on the dry side of things and is also slightly bright due to the brighter upper-mids. There is decent density, but due to the lack of warmth and body, the mid-range lacks naturalness and emotion. It is a mid-range that is geared towards articulation and clarity. So there is plenty of details and resolution in the mid-range. So you could expect female vocals to sound melodious and the strings to carry the crunch. But for the same reason, it might sound sharp.

The entire treble is not bright, but the brightness does exist due to the elevated upper-mids and lower-treble. This makes the IEM not so forgiving of poorly recorded material. The treble is nicely detailed and has sufficient air and sparkle. But, Dream is not an IEM that comes to mind when I think of airy and sparkly treble that works for excitement. The treble extension is very good and contributes to resolution, separation and imaging.

Dream paints a very clean picture of music. As the instrument sizes are not too big, the separation is also nice and does not tend to congestion in most cases. With a spacious stage that has good dimensions on all 3 axes, it can create a holographic feel, especially if the music content have it in them (for example; binalural recordings). The imaging is very fixed and satisfying, except every now and then I desired a slightly larger instrument images to ease the perception and focus.


SENSITIVITY, POWER REQUIREMENTS & SOURCE PAIRINGS:
The IEM is not too difficult to drive so it should go to loud volumes even on your smartphone. And I got no hiss out of my LPG. What I keep hearing about certain DD IEMs is that they would lack dynamics and body and would sound bright if not driven by a powerful source. I found that to be true with the Rhapsodio Galaxy. With the Dream though, I didn't have the time to test this. But given that my source was LPG, I was not limited in terms of power. But generally, a powerful source is advised. Also from what I have heard, Sony WM1Z via 4.4 Balanced seems to be a common favorite pairing for the Dream. Or any other powerful source that has a warm/smooth toe should be a good pairing with the Dream.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Dream is not an IEM if you are after a mid-centric signature or something that specializes in vocals. While it does have good vocal articulation, it does not have the weight and authority in the vocals that render a natural sense. Given its unique signature, it is not an IEM that I would recommend based on music genre. But if I were to nit-pick, it works well for classical and orchestra based music. So, what it basically comes down to is, an individual's preference for this kind of signature. I know some head-fiers who enjoy their Dream for all kinds of genre. On the other hand, if this signature is not your cup of tea, there is no point in trying to make it work for any specific genre. It is that black and white. You either like it for what it is, or simply don't. There's no grey area here.

COMPARISONS:
Dream vs U18:
Dream is a single DD IEM, where as, the U18 is an 18 x BA IEM. Both fall on either end of the spectrum when it comes to Driver Configuration. While their sound presentation might not fall on opposite ends, they do carry very different presentations.

Both construct very large stages that are holographic, with a neutral positioning of instruments in the stage (neither forward nor laidback) with the Dream may be sightly behind that of U18's positioning. While the overall stage sizes are large, U18's stage appears larger due to the phenomenal width and the airiness, thanks to its airy treble. The Dream however, constructs a more 3 dimensional stage with better depth than the U18. Despite having better depth than the U18, the layering capabilities of the Dream is only on par with the U18. Both have dark backgrounds and belong to the top tier, when it comes to imaging and instrument separation.

U18's bass might possibly be one of the best BA bass as it combines authority and speed. But what it lacks is Dream's natural decay and effortless sub-bass extension. U18 has slightly more bass quantity and better mid-bass warmth resulting in a warmer and fuller bass that continues in the mid-range. While bass as such is better on the Dream, U18's bass works more coherently with the rest of the spectrum.

U18's mid-range may not be classified as completely natural, but when compared to Dream's mid-range, it has slightly more warmth and body, resulting in a more palpable and enjoyable mid-range. Dream's mid-range is oriented towards upepr mid-range and so prioritizes articulation and clarity. U18 maintains equal articulation and clarity, but it balances it well with some warmth and so it does not err towards dryness. The density is also on the similar level, so the vocals carry good weight.

In the treble, U18 is brighter throughout the treble band and extends further in terms of high treble extension. But its a controlled form of brightness that doesn't easily lead to sibilance or sharpness. Dream on the other hand is bright due to a pronounced upper-mids and lower-treble. Since this stands above the rest of the neighboring frequency, it tends to sibilance and sharpness more frequently than the U18, despite the U18 being overall brighter in the treble. U18 also possesses a more sparkly and airy treble that adds excitement and the dream lacks this. In terms of resolution and detail retrieval, Dream may be a touch behind the U18.


CONCLUSION:
Dream has its strengths and those strengths are easily the selling point of the IEM. But the drawback of the IEM is those strengths stand alone to shine in their own respects, rather than working together with the signature to be a rather versatile monitor. But I do know people who appreciate this kind of tuning. So if you are looking for a single DD based IEM with amazing bass, excellent detail retrieval, good staging and imaging, and prefer your mid-range to be articulated but dry in nature, Dream is an IEM you need to consider.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I’d like to thank Calvin at Music Sanctuary for a discount on the purchase of the cable, in exchange for my honest review on the cable.

INTRODUCTION:
In the cable market, what I have noticed is, the cables that get the most attention are either the expensive hi-fi cables or the entry-level upgrade cables. So it is essential for a cable manufacturer to have a compelling contender as the entry level cable. The No.5 is PW Audio’s entry level upgrade cable made of OCC Copper Litz wires.

BUILD & COMFORT:
The build quality of the No.5 is top notch. The quality of the materials used, the finish and the sturdiness leave no place for any remarks. The cable is flexible and void of cable memory, which contributes significantly to the ease of use and storing. This also helps to wind these into pretty coils for photos. The thickness of the cable is around average for a 4-Wire cable and is light in weight.

The IEM end does not have memory wires, but does have pre-shaped tubings to help the over-ear wearing. The cable I received came with a wooden choke, which I prefer over a metal choke that I have seen in some pictures, as I am assuming the metal choke would be a tad heavier and might tug on the cable. Microphonics is again zero. All these factors add up to a very pleasant experience of using the cable.


SOUND:
No.5 does so many things well, but its priority is timbre. It is willing to sacrifice some of the exciting aspects for a more mature sound. This is not a cable that will make your jaws drop with its soundstage or blow you away with resolution. But it captivates you with a sense of rightness in the tuning as it is quite linear in its signature. That is not to say that it is completely a neutral cable. Its tone actually falls on the warm side due to the inherent warmth in the midrange and a smooth treble. But because it maintains a linearity from bass and all the way to the the treble, the warmth strictly stays within the note and doesn’t shroud the midrange.

As the bass on the No.5 is tilted towards the mid-bass, the dynamics and power are not the stand out traits of the cable. It does however offer good rumble, as the lower bass is still adequately present. Mid-bass takes control of the bass with good punch and offers a touch of richness to the presentation. But it is not necessarily enhanced to sound overly warm and draws the line before it makes the sound woolly.

The midrange is this cable’s forte, because of the transparency and the naturalness it is able to portray. It is not the kind of pseudo-transparency that is achieved through boosted upper-mid or treble. But the kind of transparency, that is achieved through linearity in the midrange, allowing instruments and the vocals to be portrayed without any coloration. This transparency and the linearity results in excellent timbre, that is not quite common among entry level cables. The note structure in the midrange are full bodied and nicely articulated to portray sufficient details as well.

The treble is rather linear with moderate extension and so the resolution is good, but not a highlight of the cable. Treble extends a helping hand to the mid-range to maintain the natural timbre, by not venturing into brightness. And so this is not a cable that you choose for sparkle or excitement. Overall the treble falls on the smoother and forgiving side.

Soundstage may not be as holographic as on hi-fi cables, such as the Leonidas or 1960. Although it only constructs a decent sized stage, the stage is quite clean and well organized. But don’t misinterpret the stage to be small. It’s defintiely larger than stock OFC cables. It’s just that it can’t compete with the big guys. The imaging is very good for an entry level cable, but again, expecting high quality precise imaging from a $150 cable my be too much to ask for.

WHAT TO EXPECT COMING FROM A STOCK CABLE:
The 2 most common types of stock cables, that IEM manufacturers bundle with the IEMs are OFC and SPC. OFC is a copper cable with average purity that usually has a veiled and mushy sound, typically holding back the capabilities of the IEM. Because of the veil, the cable prevents the IEM to showcase its true definition and makes the stage appear clustered.

The SPC cables on the other hand, do bring some exciting aspects to the table, such as a dynamic bass and improved clarity, resolution and soundstage. They usually have a mild U shaped signature due to the bass and treble being more pronounced in the presentation. And because they don't support the midrange adequately, they often lack in tone and timbre. To me, the shortcomings of most SPC cables trump their own benefits, except when you are precisely after the very signature and presentation that SPC cables offer.

No.5 vc OFC:
Coming from an OFC cable, you would notice improvements across the board. Starting from the bass, the bass would have better definition on the No.5 with better textures/layers. What you would have perceived as single, mushy, rounded note, would open up to be finer layers of bass. The mid-range will sound more transparent and you will be able to identify instruments, as they would have better timbre and not sound like plain notes. The treble might be smooth on the No.5, but is still more articulated and detailed than an OFC cable. No.5 will also have a better stage in terms of space and imaging with better separation of instruments. There is not one aspect where OFC cable has an advantage over the No.5 in terms of sound quality.

No.5 vs SPC:
Coming from the SPC, you'll hear a more linear and gentle presentation that is free of stress in the upper midrange and treble. The bass of most SPC cables would be focused on the sub-bass, as the mid-bass is often countered by the brightness. And because of that, SPC cables' bass will carry more power and dynamics while lacking the required warmth. No.5 on the other hand will have a warmer and a softer bass in direct comparison. SPC cables typically present an articulated but stressed mid-range that is void of warmth. They sound very clear and nuanced but usually lack the naturalness and fall on the thin side. No.5 on the other hand presents a more natural mid-range with full body and warmth. Think of solid state amps vs tube amps. The same trend follows in the treble. SPC cables usually have a brighter treble and so will sound more articulated there. No.5 will be a touch smoother and forgiving.

SPC cables exist in various grades. Depending on the grade, they exhibit different level of resolution, separation, stage and imaging. For example, the SPC cable that is included with the LCD-i4 is of high grade and exhibit very good resolution and staging. So against such an SPC, No.5’s resolution and stage can’t keep up. But with low grade or medium grade SPC cables, like the ones that come with Simgot EN700Pro or the AAW W900, No.5 would offer anywhere between decent to marginal improvement in terms of stage and resolution.

Given the difference in signature and presentation, the choice between an SPC cable and the No.5 will come down to a matter of preference and use case. For example, if you listen to a lot of electronic music, SPC might be a better choice as the No.5 wouldn’t offer the excitement and the dynamics that a SPC would. On the other hand, if the type of music you listen to involves acoustic instruments and vocals, where timbre is a priority, No.5 might be the better choice.

PAIRINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Because of the linear signature and the slightly warm tone, the cable is typically a good all rounder cable, ideal for being a step up from a stock cable, especially an OFC cable. But if I have to be very specific, the cable is highly recommended for music genre that prioritizes instrument and vocal timbre. The cable could also be used to bring out the mid-range in IEMs like U18 or Fourte, where the bass and treble try to steal the show. And pairing the No.5 with a mid-centric IEM, would let the IEM showcase the mid-range prowess. But given the cable’s nature, it may not be the ideal cable for genres where an energetic sound may be preferred. As stated in the above section, No.5 may not be the best cable for synthetic or electronic type music.


CONCLUSION:
Very few reviewers have stressed on the importance of the tone and timbre in a musical presentation. The pursuit for timbre seems to have been mostly lost in the midst of recent trend, with people going after monstrous soundstages and unheard details. But every now and then, we come across a gear that sounds right. You could say it has a sound of a tube amp that is done right. Meaning it has a gentle warmth in the midrange that makes the music beautiful and inviting. So if you are in the market for an entry level cable that offers improvement throughout the board, with a priority in timbre and tonal balance, No.5 should be on top of your list.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
I would like to thank Andrew from MusicTeck for sending me the M3S for review. I would also like to thank Frankie from Shanling for reaching out to me and helping me with some of the questions I had on the device.

INTRODUCTION:
M3S is Shanling's entry level DAP in the $300 tier. Unlike the first generation M3 which was on the bulky side, M3S is a complete overhaul in terms of design and functionality. The M3S comes in a sleek streamlined body packed with plenty of features.


HARDWARE: (10/10)
The all-black design of the Black version of the M3S looks nothing short of stunning. The build feels solid and the quality of the finish around the device is top notch. The place where the screen meets the body and the posts, all look flawless. The shape of the device is rather distinct due to it being almost twice in height than its width. But that doesn’t stop the device from feeling comfortable in the palm. The fact that the device has a narrow device has 2 advantages. One, It makes it easy to pocket it and remove it and two, people with small palm would find it comfortable to handle the device. I did not measure the battery precisely. But based on some rough estimation, I was getting around 11-13Hrs on SE. I do not own any Balanced Cables. So couldn’t test the battery span on BAL.

SCREEN, SOFTWARE & GUI: (9/10)
The screen once again is very brilliant and bright enough to be used outdoors. The software is very reminiscent of my Fiio X3ii, which is minimal but reliable and stable. For someone new to this device, may take a couple of days to remember where the options are located. It is a very straight forward and an easy to use UI. I did not notice any lags or slowing down.

TURN WHEEL & BUTTONS: (6/10)
Interacting with the device using the turn wheel was my only critic about the device. While the turn wheel works flawlessly without skipping or overshooting, there are 3 aspects about it which don’t really support the otherwise wonderful UI.

1. It doubles as a volume control as well as the navigation tool. It acts as the volume control on the Now Playing screen and when the screen is turned off. While you are in the menu options and file browse, the turn wheel acts as the navigation wheel as well as the selector. One downside to this is, you can’t adjust volume when you are not in the Now Playing screen. The short cut is to hit the power button to turn the screen off and then you can adjust the volume.

2. Size and Location: While I don’t see most users complaining about using the turn wheel, my experience with using the turn wheel in conjunction with the back button located on the side was not exactly a plant experience. I much prefer the large scroll wheel on my Fiio X3ii or the D-Pad on my Paw Gold.

3. The buttons are easy to access without the case. With the case on, it can take a little getting used to get the Front Skip, Play/Pause and Back Skip buttons correct. So using the buttons in conjunction with the wheel can make the interaction with the device a little complex.


SOUND: (9/10)
As I do not have a Balanced cable, all my testing was done on Single Ended. I was hoping to acquire a Balanced cable, but then I realized there are people who wouldn’t want to invest in additional cables or the balanced ecosystem. And so I decided to do the review in SE only. The good news is, the device sounds impressive even on Single Ended.

M3S sound presentation can be described as neutral. It is not just neutral in its tone and signature, but also in its note body and placement. As a result the device doesn’t carry any coloration and does not impose a character on the sound. What stands out about the device is its stage and instrument separation. In my experience with entry level DAPs until now, the improvement in stage and separation over a smartphone is difficult to discern. But M3S was a surprise. In addition, the well separated instruments maintain good timbre, especially the instruments on the side stage, which can often lose focus in devices with large soundstage. Such is not the case here.

The linear nature of its tuning reflects in all parts of its signature. So the bass on the M3S does not lean towards sub nor mid bass. But it balances out both well resulting in good bass tone. The best words to describe its bass hits are tight and controlled. As a result there is no warmth bleeding into the presentation. The device could use a touch more power in the bass section to have better dynamics. But I am really splitting hairs with that sentence, as it should not be misinterpreted as the device sounding soft, because it is not.

The midrange is once again very linear without any warm or bright coloration from the lower or upper bass respectively. And so the device presents a transparent midrange with very good instrument timbre. While the timbre of vocals is equally good, the device doesn’t have that last bit of weight in the vocals. Once again splitting hairs here, as it shouldn’t be taken too literally as the vocals are really well articulated. The treble again is neutral with good extension and does not have any brightness or glaring character. Although it should be noted that, because the device is void of warmth, pairing a bright earphone or headphone with the M3S can bring out the brightness more evidently. But if you are using a neutral or a warm sounding pair of phone, M3S is quite forgiving for the most part.

The stage the M3S presents is wide and spacious. It is wider than deep. The depth may not be a stand out aspect, button start noticing the depth when you go back and forth between your smartphone. The separation is quite effortless while maintaining a focussed presentation. The space between the instruments are dark enough to lock the instruments in place for a good imaging. Although a touch more height in the stage could have helped. I may be demanding too much there. But that is only because the device impresses you with its sound. And all this just on Single Ended. From what I have read, going balanced would give you certain welcomes instruments such as a slightly larger stage, improved separation and transparency.

HISS & DRIVING POWER: (9/10)
My Sennheiser IE80 is my tool for determining hiss on sources, as it hisses with noisy sources but not necessarily with powerful sources. On the M3S there is almost no hiss. I say almost because, if you have a very sensitive ear, you may be able to hear an almost inaudible hiss in a completely silent room. Else, the device is completely silent.

As for the driving power, I tried driving the HD800S and HD6XX on High Gain. M3S drove the HPs without any problem. I was around 40-45/80 on the volume setting. Sure they would scale up on a desktop amp. But the HP did not by any chance sound underwhelming or lacking power. I couldn’t test the devices driving power with any of the full-size Planar Magnetics, as I do not own any.


FEATURES:
EQUALIZER:
M3S has the conventional 10 band EQ. Each band can be adjusted between +6dB and -6dB. The device offers 8 presets that could be customized. In addition, there is one more custom EQ setting. In my testing the EQ on the M3S is very effective. It would have been nice if the adjustment went beyond 6dB on both directions. But 6 dB is not too bad when the EQ is effective enough.

WIRELESS FEATURES:
BLUETOOTH: (Reliability: 9/10)
Bluetooth playback on bluetooth headphones or speakers is quite straight forward and works seamlessly. I did not use it a lot, but during the short times I used it, I did not experience any connection drops.
HiBy: (Reliability and Intuitiveness: 9/10, Sound Quality: 9/10)
HiBy allows you to control the music on your M3S wirelessly from your smartphone. There were one or 2 times when I tried to click around the app, the app quit unexpectedly. Also, sometimes I experienced some noise from RF/EMI interference. Turning the HiBy Off killed the noise immediately.
WIRELESS STREAMING/DAC: (Reliability: 7/10, Sound Quality: 6/10)
This is no different than pairing your bluetooth headphone or speaker with your smartphone. Except, this time the M3S is on the receiving end. This allows you to stream music you have on your phone or PC wirelessly over to the M3S. While this sounds like an interesting feature, the sound quality is not really great. But it is to be expected given the low bit-rate, digital-data-stream sent from the smartphone to the M3S.

WIRED:
USB DAC: (Score: 10/10)
Worked seamless with my MacBook. MacBook does not require any driver. Windows PC may require driver installation for the PC to recognize M3S. Make sure the USB setting on the M3S is set to DAC mode.
LINE OUT: (Score: 9/10)
The Line Out function works as expected and flawlessly. It is a fixed line-out though. It would have been nice if it was variable Line-Out.
DIGITAL-OUT:
This is something I was not able to test. But the device can act as digital transport and output a digital signal via its USB-C port.


COMPARISON:
M3S vs Fiio X3ii:
X3ii and M3S have a similar OS and UI in terms of menu options and navigation. One of the weakness of the X3ii is its dull display that can be hard to view in outdoors. M3S’ display is more brilliant and offers better visibility even outdoors. Despite the better screen, the user experience of M3S is bogged down by its turn wheel. Fiio is considerably better in terms of user experience, because the giant scroll wheel on the front is easier to use and plus, it has dedicated buttons for volume control. In terms of power, the difference between the 2 devices is not much on the SE of M3S. But the M3S should be a bit more powerful in Balanced. Both are silent devices when it comes to hiss as I hear little to no hiss on both of them.

In terms of sound, they sound very similar in their tone, signature and note structure. The differences mainly lie in the technicalities. M3S sounds more resolved and transparent giving raise to better timbre realism and timbre. M3S’ stage is wider and cleaner with better instrument separation and layering.

UI and UX: X3ii – 9; M3S – 7
Features: X3ii – 8; M3S – 9
Sound: X3ii – 8; M3S – 9

M3S vs iPhone 6:
Comparing the operation, UI and UX of iphone and M3S may not be fair as it would be apples to oranges comparison. In terms of sound, M3S offers a better overall sound quality over the iPhone. iPhone sounds warmer and thicker in comparison to the more neutral presentation of the M3S. iPhone has an enhanced low end resulting in the bass having a greater impact but lacking definition and tightness of M3S’ bass. M3S is more transparent and resolving in the mid-range, which is evident from the more realistic tone and timbre. M3S sounds slightly brighter in comparison due to it having more energy on the upper-midrange. But that is only because the iPhone has a smoother upper-mid-range. M3S’ treble is better articulated and more detailed compared to iPhone’s treble. Despite having a more detailed treble, M3S is just as smooth as the iPhone, because of which both are equally forgiving. M3S really pulls ahead in the soundstage department presenting a very spacious and wide stage compared to iPhone’s stage. Also noticeable is M3S’ ability to portray slightly better depth than the iPhone 6.

Sound: iPhone 6 – 7.5, M3S – 9


PAIRINGS:
Being a neutral sounding device it is not partial to any particular genre of music nor headphones of any signature. Although I would advise caution against paying with bright phones as the brightness can stand out due to the lack of warmth. So it all comes down to one’s personal taste. I personally prefer some warmth and weight in the mid-range and some power in the bass. But then, I also know people who prefer a slightly lean signature. M3S sound presentation sits right in between and so it should play pretty well with all genres and most headphones/IEMs.

CONCLUSION:
M3S offers an impressive sound and tons of features in a tiny beautiful package, almost like a swiss army knife. The sound quality is a clear step-up over a smartphone and plenty of power that could drive 300 Ohm Sennheiser headphones. My only gripe with the device is trying to use the turn wheel, to navigate through the menu, because of which I am taking away half-star. If you are in the market for a neutral sounding DAP, with good sound quality and plenty of features, M3S will do more than just meeting your needs and exceeding your expectations.

INTRODUCTION:
Following the success of their entry into the portable in-ear market, with the introduction of iSine 10 and 20, Audeze has added a flagship IEM to its line-up called the LCD i4. The i4 follows the same form factor as the iSine series, but borrows some of the technology gone into Audeze’s full-size flagship, the LCD-4. This has allowed Audeze to achieve a higher level of performance on the i4 than the iSine series.

BUILD, STOCK CABLE & CASE:
i4’s build feels very solid as its housing is made of metal. The front and back metal casings are glued together to form one sturdy unit. While the build is solid, the finish does not offer a premium quality, as glue marks are visible between seams.

The included cable is well made and follows a design that focuses on utility over looks. It seems sturdily made that it can take a beating or 2. Despite being sturdy, the cable is light, flexible and free of cable memory ensuring very good ergonomics. The cable can tend to tangling if not wound into a small coil for storing or. Having a wider coil should help prevent tangling. The connectors on the i4's end are the 0.78mm 2-pin connectors found on most IEMs. The source end comes with a 3.5mm Single Ended termination.

The included case is made of brown leather that does a decent job for storing and carrying. It fits the i4 comfortably inside it. While the i4 is sturdily built, the leather case doesn’t have sufficient padding nor is hard enough to offer good protection for the i4. I would rather store and carry my i4 in a hard pelican case that provides good protection.

FIT, COMFORT & ISOLATION:
The fit and comfort of the i4 is dependent on an individual's ear anatomy. It should fit the most population but I can also see the solution not fitting ideally for a small crowd. The key to getting a comfortable fit is, to find the right tip and the correct angle of the ear hooks, such that the ear hook actually rests on your ears and helps distribute weight evenly. Else the entire weight of the unit will burdened at the point where the eartip meets the ear. While 12g is not much, it can become uncomfortable over a period of time without an ideal fit.

One other possible comfort issue is, when the rear of the i4 touches/presses against the ear pinna for a prolonged time which can cause soreness at the area of contact. Periodically resetting the position of the i4 in the ear, or taking breaks every 30 mins could also solve this.

As for isolation, i4 offers none. You could wear the i4 and have a normal conversation. Although it lacks isolation, it doesn’t leak sound like open-back, full-size headphones.


SOUND:
If you have read that the i4 doesn’t sound like an IEM, you’ve read it right. It does not fit into the traditional IEM category, as it borrows some design cues and features of full size headphones, such as; the large planar-magnetic driver and the open-back grill design. For these reasons, i4’s presentation actually bears resemblance to that of full-size headphones. For starters, the stage and the presentation of the i4 is very grander and airier than what is found on IEMs. In addition, it is able to adjust its presentation that ranges anywhere between intimate and super spacious. And so, its presentation feels more natural.

The imaging is another specialty of the i4. Making use of a 3D and open-back space, i4 is able to locate instruments at various depths and heights within the stage, giving the impression of unexplored layers in stage (especially for someone coming from IEMs). Separation is done very effortless in the abundant space and leaves no possibility for congestion. But still it maintains a very coherent and focused presentation as the size of the instrument images it presents are quite large.

It is important to know that i4’s stock tuning is not the final intended tuning of Audeze. I will explain why in the next section. But for this section, I will describe the stock tuning. i4's stock tuning can be described as balanced, except for a lack of presence in the upper-midrange (2kHz to 6kHz). While the lower-treble is not a victim of this dip, it is a touch subdued than neutral. As a result, i4’s overall tone is neutral-warm in nature. Despite the upper-midrange dip, what helps restore balance in the top end spectrum is the good treble extension, and a small peak in the mid-treble.

Bass is one of the areas where planar drivers shine and i4 doesn’t shy away to display its talents here. Its a powerful and dynamic bass, despite being neutral in quantity. What helps the i4 achieve this is, its 30mm driver, that extends well into the sub-bass frequencies without roll-off. The bass is linear throughout and so it doesn’t tilt towards excess warmth or darkness. The balance in the bass tuning yields a very accurate tone and timbre in the bass. Having a very low distortion in the bass region helps i4 achieve excellent speed while still maintaining the warmth. Its a very high quality bass, that combines the speed of the BA, but retaining the extension and authority of a DD.

Apart from yielding a solid foundation, the bass also makes sure, it supports the full mid-range with the necessary body and warmth. While the mid-range is neither thin nor thick, it could use a touch more warmth and body from the bass. The lack of the upper-midrange results in the device sound a little dull and lacking in transparency. The main victims of this are the female vocals and instruments whose fundamentals and overtones lie in the upper-midrange frequencies. So female vocals and instruments like piano and acoustic guitar, sound delicate and lack a bit of energy. While the bass and lower-midrange help offer the size and warmth for the instruments, the upper-midrange dip makes these instruments sound flat as they lack density and weight (that is usually provided by the 2-4kHz range).

i4 has a very interesting treble because, it is not an accurate, but its tone is very pleasant even on the stock tuning. Although the treble lacks a touch of presence in the lower treble region, it is quite linear and extends all the way into the upper treble, resulting in very good extension. This extension and a tiny peak around 10kHz make up a tiny bit for restoring articulation that is otherwise lost in the dip. It is not a very sparkly or a bright treble. And so the i4 is quite forgiving of poor recordings. At the same time it may lack some excitement that a sparkly treble might offer. When i4 is paired with a DAP or cable (Leonidas) that have a prominent upper-treble, the phone starts to show a bright tone.

While I cover why DSP/EQ is needed for the i4 in the next section, here is how it sounds with Audeze's Reveal Plugins/Roon Presets. Upon engaging the plug-in, i4 immediately starts to sound more accurate in its signature. The upper-midrange is restored which improves a lot of aspects in the presentation. The mid-range becomes more defined and clear. The vocals and instruments gain density and no longer have flat images. The treble becomes more linear without any sacrifice to the extension. So the overall resolution is retained, while the overall treble is a touch smoother. Bass gets a tiny boost and that results in a tiny bit of warmth. This warmth also makes sure it counters any brightness added by restoring the upper-midrange. Similar results can be achieved using your own EQ settings. See next section for my recommended EQ setting.

REVEAL PLUGINS, ROON PRESENT AND EQ:
As stated in the previous section, the stock tuning of the i4 is not Audeze's final intended tuning for the i4. This is because, i4’s physical design doesn’t allow Audeze to quite achieve a perfect headphone-target-curve. A headphone-target-curve is a frequency response corresponding to how the frequency response of a flat sounding speaker will be perceived at the eardrum. While there are different philosophies and approaches to arriving at a headphone-target-curve, it is essential for a headphone to follow this tuning for it to sound correct.

Besides the design constraints, Audeze managed to get close as possible to a headphone-target-curve. This allows users to enjoy the i4 even without the DSP or EQ. However, the DSP built into the Reveal Plug-Ins and Roon Presets for LCD i4, applies a EQ to the digital signal that it essentially corrects the tuning of the i4 and gets its frequency response to Audeze's version of headphone-target-curve.

The EQ recommendations from KMann at Audeze and other members on the i4 thread, basically tries to mimic the EQ correction in the Reveal Pug-In's or Roon Preset's DSP. While a manual EQ doesn't quite yield the same result as the DSP, it gets close enough. Next best thing to the DSP is using a Parametric EQ. With a 10-Band Graphical EQ, it doesn't give you the necessary frequency bands to make the adjustment. Here are some EQ recommendations for Parametric EQ and simple 10-Band EQ. Please use this as a baseline and adjust the frequencies according to what sounds good to your ears.


To read further on this subject, please read page #2 of Tyll’s iSine 20 review on Innerfidelity. Although, the discussion is on the iSine 20, LCD-i4 shares the same philosophy as the iSine 20 when it comes to its design. Audeze has confirmed that i4’s and iSine20’s tuning are not 100% same.

CIPHER V2 CABLE for LCD i4:
The cipher V2 cable for the i4 is terminated with a lightning connector at the source's end and is purposed to be used with iOS devices only (iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad). It tends to tangle a little bit but not much. The cable's Y split is actually a console, which houses a DAC/Amp. This DAC/Amp console also has 4 buttons: 1) Volume Up, 2) Play/Pause/Answer/Decline, 3) Volume Down and 4) Mute/UnMute.

The purposes of the DAC/Amp in the cipher cable are 2 fold; 1) The DAC applies an EQ correction (similar to the Reveal Plugin and Roon preset) prior to the digital to analog conversion. 2) The amp gives a slight boost to the analog signal, so that the i4 doesn't feel under-powered.

While the DAC in the cipher cable may not be as good as devices such as Mojo or a iDSD, the fact that it helps the i4 achieve a balanced tuning, helps the i4 achieve accurate timbre makes the cable a very compelling accessory, especially if you are someone who values timbre.


POWER REQUIREMENT & SOURCE PAIRING:
One of the wrong message that seems to have been perpetuated in the forums is, that i4 requires a powerful source to sound good. While i4 could totally take advantage of high-end desktop amp's performance, it really doesn’t require a lot of power to be driven well. Rather, what it needs is a, transparent source. With the iPhone or Macbook/PC, you get what you would expect. A decent sound quality that is neither top notch nor too bad.

I mostly used the i4 with my Lotoo Paw Gold and a Sony WM1Z. I engaged High Gain on both devices so that it gave me enough headroom for volume adjustment and also to eliminate any chance of i4 lacking required power in Low Gain. Between the 2 DAPs, I preferred the pairing with the 1Z as it presented a more pleasing tone with some warmth and smoothness. 1Z also helped the stage of the i4 to really shine. 1Z only has a 10-Band EQ, so I couldn't do an extensive EQ correction. I applied the EQ setting that I have shared in the previous section and it did the job quite well. It wasn't necessarily accurate in tone or realistic in timbre, but it was a more pleasing experience.

The pairing with the Lotoo Paw Gold can be a matter of taste. On the one hand it provides PMEQ with which one could arrive at a better EQ correction for i4. Also, the device by default has a very realistic timbre and is very dynamic. On the other hand, LPG's tone is quite bright and the upper mid-range is slightly stressed. So it affects the effortless presentation of the i4 a tiny bit. Because i4 has a space spacious stage, LPG's aggressive presentation doesn't affect the i4's overall presentation like it affects my Zeus. So the i4 doesn't necessarily become aggressive, but does feel a little stressed.

Because of i4’s neutral warm tone and the fact that it doesn't need a whole lot of power to be driven well, the earphone is not picky when it comes to source pairing. But if you are a desktop user, a music application supporting Audeze’s Reveal plug-in or using Roon and using a good DAC in the chain would yield best results, as you would get the benefit of the fidelity of a good DAC, while at the same time, the EQ in the DSP helps achieve a balanced tuning. The most popular DAC pairing for the i4 seems to be the Hugo 2. While I did not have a chance to test the i4 extensively on the Hugo 2, I did try it briefly at a friend's house and reviewed the Hugo 2 back in August. Given Hugo 2's accurate timbre and presentation, it should be a great pairing with the i4.

COMPARISONS:
Please note that, with DSP/EQ, i4’s tuning is more balanced, that it sounds more accurate in tone and timbre than either Zeus or HD800S. The note structure is also generally better on the i4 with good weight and body than the other 2 phones. The following comparisons are to provide an idea on how the stock tuning and the general presentation of the i4, compares with the Zeus and the HD800S.

i4 vs Zeus-XIV-ADEL:
While it is not fair to compare the Zeus to the i4, this comparison is just to give an idea on how the i4 differs from IEMs. i4 sounds considerably large in its soundstage and presentation than the Zeus. The spatial separation of instruments is better on the i4 in accordance to its spacious stage and airiness. Regarding the presentation, i4 sounds more natural than the Zeus. i4’s overall tone is warm while Zeus’ follows a neutral tone with a touch of brightness.

The bass department is i4’s strength while it is Zeus’ weakness. Zeus’ BA bass is technical in nature but it doesn’t stand a chance against the powerful and dynamic bass of the i4. The bass tone is accurate on both while the bass instruments on the i4 have a more natural sense. Zeus’ places the midrange forward, while i4’s is neutral in placement. Zeus’ midrange comes across a bit thin in comparison to the full bodied midrange of the i4.

Zeus’ upper midrange has better clarity and transparency than the withdrawn upper midrange of the i4. One of Zeus’ strengths is its vocals as it presents very powerful vocals. On the i4, while the male vocals sound really good, its female vocals lack some melody in the overtones. Lower treble is sparkly on the Zeus, while it is slightly smoother on the i4 due to its slight lack of presence. While the i4’s treble extension is better, Zeus displays better resolution and detail retrieval in the treble region because of better isolation. While Zeus’ treble is not too bright or harsh, it is not quite as forgiving as the i4.

i4 vs HD800S:
In this comparison, the places have shifted. This time around, it is unfair for the i4 as the HD800S presents a larger and a more natural presentation than the i4. Some members had stated that i4’s stage rivals some of the full size headphones. But 800S certainly does not belong to that list. 800S has a tendency to sound withdrawn on certain tracks as it could pull the presentation all the way back to the rear. But the i4 manages to maintain the required forwardness in the presentation.

Although 800S's tuning is much more complete than the i4’s tuning, the 800S is generally more bright in tone. While i4’s default tuning may not be perfect, its overall tone is more natural because of its warmth. The midrange body is also fuller and natural on the i4 compared to the thinner midrange on the HD800S. Similar to the Zeus, HD800S upper midrange is clearer with better density in the vocals, than the vocals on the i4.

HD800S’s bass sounds equally authoritative due to its larger driver size. But i4’s bass is more cleaner and is free of distortion compared to the slightly mushy bass on the 800S. The 800S bass is not generally wooly but it feels so when in comparison with the i4. In the treble, 800S is considerably brighter and thinner. It is also over-articulated and is not accurate or natural. i4’s treble is more linear and is more natural although it is still not accurate.


GENERAL CONS AND THINGS TO CONSIDER:
- For the premium price, the finish of the unit could be more robust. Especially the may the plates re bound together using glue feels inadequate for a item of this price and stature
- More varieties and shapes and sizes of earhooks and ear tips could be designed and developed to make the earphone more comfortable
- Lacks isolation to be a perfectly portable device
- If you are someone not interested in using DSP/EQ, the stock tuning may not suit your needs

RECOMMENDTIONS:
The i4 is probably one of the best set of portable headphones I have heard until now. So it comes highly recommended from me. But as the facts stand, in order to tap the true potential of the i4, it requires some DSP/EQ and a decent source. And so, it may not be the ideal earphone for everyone. If you are someone who likes to enjoy the default tuning of your gear, there is a possibility that the i4's stock tuning may not work for you.

Also, the i4 needs isolation to make sure the details are not compromised. It may not make sense to accept the i4 as an IEM as it lacks isolation. But it should be seen as open-back headphone in a very portable form. So if isolation is paramount, once again the i4 may not work for you.

On the other hand, if you are looking for a very portable headphone and are willing to engage DSO or EQ, and if isolation is not important, I heartily recommend the Audeze LCD-i4.

CONCLUSION:
With a headphone-like presentation and a warm tuning, i4 presents a very enjoyable listening experience in a tiny form factor, that fits inside a 1010 Pelican case. While the DSP/EQ is not absolutely necessary, engaging it brings balance to the tuning, which in turn makes the timbre very accurate. As a result, the Audeze LCD i4 sounds literally flawless, that this has become my new reference headphone. It is not the type of reference that is clinical or analytical. But the kind of reference that is close to neutral in tuning but with the right timbre of instruments and vocals.

One could argue that engaging the DSP/EQ can be viewed as a hassle. But we audiophiles go to great extents to get the best sound out of gear. In the case of the i4, all it needs is some DSP or EQ to get to perfection. The initial setup may be a bit inconvenient. But once setup, the result is exponentially rewarding.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
I would like to thank @Barra and @x_RELIC_x for giving me this opportunity to be part of the Hugo2 review tour. I truly enjoyed my time with the Hugo 2.

INTRODUCTION:
Chord and their products need very little introduction. Hugo and Mojo revolutionized the portable audio realm with their sound quality and driving power in a small portable package. Hugo 2 is an update to the original Hugo DAC. While the original Hugo was already great in terms of sound quality and power, Chord wanted to push the envelope further by incorporating Rob's new code and bumping the output power. But the Hugo 1 had some areas that could be improved. Chord took the feedback from the customers and has tried to address those in the Hugo 2.

HARDWARE, UI, BATTERY & BLUETOOTH:
As plenty of information on Hugo 2 is available on the internet, I would like to skip the details and go over some key points that I would like to mention/highlight with regards to hardware, UI, battery and bluetooth:

1. The size of the device is smaller than how it appears in the pictures. It weighs close to a pound (500g), but because the weight is evenly distributed, it doesn't feel particularly hefty. While the design works really well for desktop use, it doesn't feel quite ideal for stacking or portable use. Chord has stuck to Single Ended ports (3.5mm and 6.3mm) which helps to not getting into the Balanced ecosystem.

2. The UI is peculiar and may not be conventional. But it is actually quite intuitive once you get the hang of it. But I have to admit that it can be quite flashy and conspicuous when used in the public. The brightness of the lights can be switched between Bright and Dim modes. With the Hugo 2, Chord made sure the Dim setting is actually dim unlike the Mojo's dim setting which was still bright to an extent. Also, unlike the orbs (balls) on the Mojo which rotate freely, the orbs on the Hugo2 are fixed and do not rotate. I was quite skeptical about the rattling that many users had reported. But I did not find it to be bad. I guess I was expecting the worst.

3. I did not measure the battery standby time, but I got around 7-8Hrs of playback using a mix of MP3 and FLAC files. This is one aspect that is a downgrade from the original Hugo, which offered close to a 14Hrs of playback on a single charge. It's good that Chord switched to micro-USB port for charging this time over the DC port in Hugo 1. Although the device did not get overly hot while charging, it did get warm. But listening while charging made the device quite warm and borderline hot.

4. The Bluetooth mode does not have a great sound quality. But it is a nice to have feature during times when you find yourself without a cable to connect your Hugo 2 to your smartphone/PC or you own one of that smartphones that lack the 3.5mm jack and you didn't bring along the adapter to connect the adapater.

SOUND IMPRESSIONS:

Update to Sound: May 10, 2019:
Since posting this review, I have tried a friends Hugo 2 and have personally purchased a Hugo 2. And both these units sound quite different from the loaner unit based on which this review was written. The unit I own and my friend's unit sound a bit thin and bright. The technicality is still amazing. For example, aspects such as micro & macro dynamics, instrument separation & layering, stage depth, imaging precision, resolution and transparency are still top notch. But what is different is, my unit does not have the natural tone and realistic timbre that was so good about the loaner unit. The loaner unit had a nice balance between technicality and tonality. But my unit priorities technicality and ends up sounding analytical.

Hugo 2 has a very natural sound that is present through out its signature. It is an effortless sound without any stress or congestion. A sound that is easy on your ears and will keep you immersed in the music. But what truly is special about the Hugo 2 is its realistic timbre. Timbre is possibly one of the most difficult aspect to reproduce as it is a culmination of resolution, transparency, tone, tuning balance, speed and timing. Hugo 2 has all these qualities in the right amount which helps the device in recreating beautiful natural timbre. It starts with a balance in tuning without any emphasis or de-emphasis in any frequency range. While the tuning is completely neutral, there is a touch of warmth that originates from the mid-range notes that sets a very natural tone.

The bass on the Hugo 2 is dynamic and powerful. It is the kind of power that originates from its ability to go deep and not relying on the boosted low end. Without prioritizing between sub and mid-bass, Hugo 2 displays great balance in the bass region. And the result is an accurate bass tone. It is also a well articulated bass that provides the required body and warmth to the presentation.

The mid-range is where Hugo 2 sets itself apart from the remainder of its competition. And what helps the mid-range to achieve this feat is the note structure. With sumptuous body and precisely timed attack and decays, the notes sound amazingly right. But what is truly impressive is the way the information within the notes are presented in layers in an effortless manner. It reveals so much information within the note that the mid-range of other devices sound compressed.

This note structure also yields a touch of warmth to the mid-range that keeps the tone alive and beautiful. The result is a timbre that is very realistic and natural in flow. The instruments and vocals carry excellent transparency and articulation without sacrificing the power in the lower harmonics. And so it is a very engaging mid-range which is further supported by the neutral placement of the mid-range.

Treble is the hidden hero of the spectrum, as it plays a significant role in maintaining the naturalness in the sound. Just like the rest of the spectrum, it is linear in tuning with excellent extension. With adequate quantity of treble, the sound is very detailed and airy. And it also has a certain smoothness as it is free of edginess in the notes. By being so, it not only maintains a natural tone but also helps the mid-range retain the note structure without adding any unwanted stress. While it is forgiving for the most part, is a little unforgiving of poorly recorded material due to its high resolution and transparency.

Hugo2's presents a very large stage with excellent dimensions on all 3 directions. With the abundant space and high resolution, instrument separation and layering is a walk in the park for the device. The stage may not be as enormous as some of the desktop amps, but it is plenty big for a portable device. And most importantly, the stage displays excellent coherency without losing focus on instruments located on the far edges of the stage. With a black background and precise placements of the instrument, the quality of imaging is very high.


FILTERS:
The White and the Green Filters (Incisive Filters) represent Hugo 2's fullest potential. Going from these filters down to the Orange and Red Filters (Warm Filters) results in a deterioration in overall sound quality. The tone loses its brilliance and the notes get compressed that leads to a loss in articulation. As a result, the timbre is less realistic. The stage becomes slightly smaller and the imaging is not as accurate as on the Incisive Filters. Hugo 2 is to be experienced on the Incisive Filters. Buying the device and using the warm filters will be doing injustice to the device.

CROSSFEED:
Crossfeed was one of the biggest highlights of the device. Once the crossfeed is turned ON and set to Max (Blue), the device merges two disjointed musical pictures (L and R) into a single coherent picture. This is done by bringing the side stage instruments closer to the center stage and merging the instrument images from L and R channels into single images of the instruments. As a result, the imaging gains further precision and the instrument focus is improved. The stage shrinks in width only to expand in the depth and height making the stage more 3 dimensional. As a whole, the musical picture not only sounds very coherent but also becomes easier to follow.

Turning the corssfeed off splits the unified picture into two and it starts sounding less coherent and artificially wide. But those who prefer a panned out stage in the left and right directions may not like the crossfeed effect.

DRIVING POWER & HISS:
I tested the Hugo only with IEMs. All the IEMs I tested (Zeus, IE80, W900) were quite efficient and sensitive. Driving the IEMs with authority was an easy task for the Hugo 2 as the device is very powerful. In fact, the problem was quite the opposite. Hugo 2 was too powerful for the IEMs that, the volume control did not provide enough headroom to finely adjust the volume on the IEMs. The IEMs got louder than 85dB within a few steps on the volume wheel.

Sennheiser IE80 is my tool for testing hiss on devices. When testing with the Hugo 2, I did not hear any hiss on my IE80 under normal conditions. In a totally silent and isolated room, I was able to detect a very feeble hiss when no music was playing.

HUGO 2 vs LPG:
LPG is known for its resolution and its driving power. It is a device that is not to be taken lightly. But Hugo 2 is more than just a formidable opponent. Hugo2 vs LPG is truly a clash of the Single Ended Titans. Both the devices share some similarities in the general presentation, but are also quite different. Both the devices have an engaging character. But LPG has a forward sound and is more aggressive with its presentation. In comparison, Hugo 2 is a bit relaxed with its neutral placement. Both devices have excellent 3 dimensional stages and display similar levels of imaging precision, separation and layering. But Hugo 2's stage is overall more spacious and pulls ahead in the imaging aspect when the crossfeed is engaged.

LPG's signature seems to follow a slight 'U' shape compared to the, more linear signature of the Hugo2. Because the treble on the LPG is prominent, the tone of the device falls on the bright side. Where as, Hugo 2's tone is neutral with a touch of warmth. LPG's bass sounds more authoritative but that is only because it has a slightly enhanced bass. Hugo 2's bass is neutral in quantity and slam. Both devices not only display excellent definition and power in the low end but also have an accurate bass tone.

LPG's mid-range sounds stressed and compressed compared to the effortless and articulated mid-range of the Hugo 2. Hugo 2's mid-range is also slightly warmer and has better transparency. And so, Hugo 2 is able to portray a more realistic timbre than the LPG. Vocals are great on both, but again, vocals on the Hugo 2 is slightly more natural, warm and better articulated. In the treble region, LPG is overall brighter and adds a bit of bite to the sound with the sharp edges of the notes. Hugo 2's treble is not only less bright but is also free of edginess even though it is equally resolved. And so, even on the White Filter, Hugo 2 is more forgiving than the LPG.

In terms of overall sound quality, Hugo 2 is definitely better than the LPG with its more natural presentation and realistic timbre. The choice between LPG and Hugo 2 can also be dependent on other factors. LPG has a world-class built-in Parametric EQ. It also works better for IEMs because of its finer volume adjustment. Apart from these factors, music preference could also play a role. If you listen to the kind of music where timbre is not of high importance but a more energetic sound is needed, LPG may be the way to go. On the other hand, if you listen to classical music or genres involving acoustic instruments and you prioritize timbre, Hugo 2 would be the ideal choice.
UPGRADING FROM THE MOJO:
Many members have stated that the Hugo 2 is a definite improvement over the Mojo in terms of Sound Quality. But there are also other practical things to consider if you are planning on upgrading from the Mojo to the Hugo 2. For one, Hugo 2 is not as portable as the Mojo in terms of size and weight. Also, the battery life is slightly less than the Mojo. But what would be a real deal breaker is the form of the Hugo 2. While the Mojo has a form factor designed to be conveniently stacked on smartphones/DAPs with easy access to volume buttons, Hugo 2 carries more of a desktop friendly design. It wouldn't be as easy to stack devices on top of the Hugo 2 due to the location of the volume wheel on the top surface. Just something to think about.

PAIRINGS:
As I mentioned earlier in the 'Driving Power' section, the device may be too powerful for IEMs. That does not mean that it wont work for IEMs. I would just advise caution and recommend paying attention to the volume level on the device whenever you plug an IEM into the device. And some of those DD IEMs which benefit from that extra power would also work great on the Hugo 2.

Hugo 2 is not too picky when it comes to headphones or music because of its neutral nature. But using a bright headphone may lead to harshness as the device is not completely forgiving, especially when listening to poorly recorded material. As for the types of music, rock, classical, symphony or any music involving acoustic instruments and vocals should truly shine via Hugo 2.

CONCLUSION:
Hugo 2 represents the pinnacle of audio quality in a portable form without the need for an additional amp, as it carries plenty of power under its own hood. But what really makes the Hugo 2 stand out of its competition and its older brothers is, its ability to portray a very realistic timbre. In the past I have struggled to point to a device and say,"this is what neutral should sound like". But I shouldn't have that trouble anymore now that I know that the Hugo 2 exists. Hugo 2 is not just an example for neutrality, but one where neutrality meets naturalness. And for the same reason, it is not just a great device for audiophiles to enjoy their music, but it also qualifies as an excellent reference tool for engineers and artists to be used at the studio.

INTRODUCTION:
Paw Gold is a high resolution music player from the brand Lotoo, owned by, Beijing Infomedia Electronic Technology Co. Ltd.. The device sports an industrial looking design, with a focus on functionality. The gold accents suggest the premium stature of the product. Given the fact that, the device has been around for 2 years, and quite a lot of information on the device can be found on the internet (LPG Thread, Head-Fi Reviews, Manufacturer’s Website), let me take the liberty, to jump straight into the sound impressions of the device.
 

---

SOUND:
LPG has a dynamic and full-bodied sound. Lotoo calls the Paw Gold a Reference Player. While it has many qualities to be a reference player, it is not one in the strictest sense, because it’s not completely neutral in its tone and presentation. While shooting for an honest rendering of music, it leans towards excitement and precision of individual notes, with its neutral-bright tone and a forward presentation.
 
SIGNATURE:
The bass on the LPG is neutral in quantity, but is powerful in impact. The device is able to render layers in the bass, while keeping it quick and clean, resulting in a clean stage. If the bass is not sufficient to the listener’s preference, the EQ helps add ample of bass. Despite being neutral in quantity, it still provides the necessary body and warmth to the lower midrange. 
 
The lower midrange is neutral, in line with the lower frequencies. But there is a lift in the center midrange, which brings the stage position slightly forward than neutral. This also helps retain the body of the notes throughout the midrange band. In the upper midrange, the sound is a bit energetic. Although this adds vigor to the music, it can tend to sibilance/fatigue. The midrange in general is very resolving and transparent with excellent instrument and vocal timbre.
 
The treble is slightly above neutral with a lot of sparkle and has very good extension. The energetic upper midrange and the tuned-up treble, bring the brightness to the tone, making the sound quite exciting. It also improves the sense of precision and technicality. Despite the brightness, the overall tone isn't affected much, due to the balance maintained by the adequate lower frequencies and the full body mids. 
 
TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES:
The stage on the LPG is not too wide, but is very deep and tall, resulting in a box like 3-dimensional soundstage. The forward sound, combined with the average width, makes the presentation, quite intimate. This makes the listening experience engaging, but can also get aggressive with music or headphones with a similar nature. Despite the small stage, the instrument separation, layering and imaging is quite impressive due to the depth and resolution. 
 
The level of transparency and detail retrieval is very high in the presentation. It brings out every nuance in the recording, but at the same time it can be very revealing, putting the device in the unforgiving category. One of LPG's outstanding qualities, is its note articulation and PRaT (Pace Rhythm and Timing). The notes are full bodied and effortless in its progression. In terms of speed, it is able to handle fast paced music and complex passages with ease. Despite the technical flair, the device offers an immersive musical experience, when paired with the right headphone and music.
 

---

LOTOO PAW GOLD vs CHORD MOJO:
At the time of this review, LPG retails for, almost 4 times the price of the Mojo. So it may be an unfair comparison. But I want to compare these 2 devices, because they share a few similarities. Both the devices are quite small in dimensions, but pack quite some driving power. LPG can deliver 500 mW into a 32 Ohm load, and the Mojo can deliver 600 mW into the same. Also, unlike most of the competing portable audio devices, which are moving towards the TRRS quasi-balanced ports, these 2 devices deliver their best performance out of the regular 3.5 mm stereo ports. 
 
But their similarities don’t stop there. Both create full bodied notes in a stage, that is averagely wide and the presentation on both the devices is quite engaging. While the note structure and attack is similar on both (at least in the mid-range), LPG has better note releases. LPG overall has better resolution and transparency. It retrieves more details and is more revealing. But Mojo is more forgiving than the LPG and is less fatiguing. Although the stage width is about the same on both the devices, LPG has the edge in terms of depth and height. LPG also has an advantage in terms of separation, layering, imaging and precision.
 
Bass quantity is similar on both the devices, but LPG’s bass has more authority and dynamism. Mojo’s low end can be made to do that, but only using a source or DAP with a good EQ. Moving on to the mid-range, Mojo’s lower mid-range is slightly thicker and creates a warmer atmosphere and LPG’s lower mid-range is neutral. In the center midrange, both have a slight lift that gives the forward presentation, but LPG has a truer tone and, creates cleaner notes. In the upper mid-range, both the devices are energetic. The forward presentation and the energetic mid-range make both the devices, create an engaging listening experience. Above the upper midrange, the devices depart ways once again, with the LPG taking a slightly brighter approach on the treble and the Mojo taking a softer approach. 
 
Overall, both the devices share a similar music presentation, with the LPG being brighter and, slightly ahead of the Mojo in terms of technical capabilities. But Mojo is warmer, smoother and easy to listen to. 
 

---

DRIVING POWER AND BACKGROUND HISS:
LPG has a powerful class-A amp under the hood, which is able to output an analog signal of power 500 mW per channel into a 32 Ohm load. As I do not own full-size headphones, I am not able to test how well it drives demanding full-size headphones. But many have reported, that it does drive full-size headphones like HD800 and HE1000 really well.
 
Based on the specifications, the device should be capable of driving even the low-sensitive and inefficient IEMs. My two IEMs (Sennheiser IE80 and Empire Ears Zeus XIV-ADEL) are very efficient and sensitive. So the LPG drives them both with no problem. On the flip side, there is a noticeable hiss on the Zeus. The hiss is noticeable only when no music is playing or, during silent passages in tracks. But Zeus may not be the ideal IEM, to gauge a source's hiss level, as Zeus is one of the most sensitive IEMs in the market, and it hisses with many high power sources.
 
IE80 is a sensitive single Dynamic Driver IEM, that is a good tool to test for hiss, as it can pick up hiss with noisy sources (for example: Sony NWZ-A15). On the LPG, IE80 exhibits a very minimal hiss.
 
IEM PAIRING:
Given the fact that LPG is slightly bright and has a forward presentation, it pairs quite well with warm and laid back IEMs such as my Sennheiser IE80. Another popular IEM I could think of that would pair well with the LPG is the U12. The brightness in the device’s tone, helps the separation and articulation of notes on the IE80. It also helps tighten up the bass and adds definition in the mids. It does not necessarily transform the IE80 into a superior IEM, but improves the IEM's SQ on all fronts.
 
Zeus is a forward sounding, mid-centric IEM. When paired with a warm source like an iPhone or the Mojo, it sounds smooth. But pairing it with LPG reveals its open tone in the treble region. While the Zeus+LPG combo can be quite powerful and engaging, it can get quite aggressive with fast paced music. But it brings the best out of the Zeus. The stage, is not exactly holographic, but is quite expansive and instruments have very good separation and placement. It helps add some punch to Zeus’s bass and lifts the treble response. The mids are very transparent and quite upfront.
 
MUSIC CHOICES:
LPG handles most of the music with suave. It has the transparency that works well with acoustic instruments based music such as Rock and Classical. And due to its exciting presentation, it also works great for Pop, Electronic and Trance.
 
But there are a few exceptions, for which LPG may not be an ideal player. It may not work best for live or symphony based music, which require a very spanned out soundstage and airiness. Because of LPG's fast and engaging presentation, fast paced music like hard rock and heavy metal can get quite tiring if you are a sensitive listener.
 
Also, the device is not quite forgiving with poorly recorded/mastered material. It is quite revealing of sibilance, noise and other artifacts, which can affect the overall listening experience. While I have not tested or compared DSD and Hi-Res content, it shows improvement when played RedBook lossless format (16/44.1) over the MP3 counterparts.

---

OTHER COMMENDABLE QUALITIES/FEATURES OF THE PLAYER:
- The build quality of the player is very sturdy. The material of the panel protecting the screen is made from scratch resistant sapphire crystal.
- The Parametric EQ on the player can come in quite handy if you’d like to tweak the sound to your preference. If you already own the LPG or planning to buy, I highly recommend reading the article linked in this post. It clearly explains how the EQ on the device works.
- The player takes in a full size SD card and can support upto 2TB. Although, the largest capacity currently available in the market is 512GB.
- Battery life for music playback comes close to 12hrs from 100% to 5%. Also the battery monitoring features are quite helpful in the device.
- The UI on the device, although simple, is very reliable and stable. It gets the job done with ease.
- The button layout is again simple and you can get to the Now Playing screen with just 1 or 2 clicks of the same button.
- The device is actually quite smaller than what it appears in the pictures (although it is quite thick and heavy).
 
CONS & POSSIBLE AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT FOR THE SUCCESSOR:
- The soundstage of the player could be slightly wider.
- The presentation could be less forward.
- Charging method (switch to USB charging in the future).
- Lacking in accessories like screen-protectors and case for the premium price being charged.
 

---

CONCLUSION:
LPG is truly a top tier music player and, delivers performance in spades, with its highly resolving DAC section and a powerful Amp section. It is a no compromise player, when you consider just the Sound Quality, Driving Power and the non-streaming music playback capability. And it is for that reason, this player deserves a 5-Star rating, despite the few shortcomings. While it misses the absolute reference mark in terms of the signature, it still qualifies as one in my books, due to its technical prowess. While high in technical abilities, it also makes for a great musical device with exciting signature and an engaging presentation. If you are in the market for a high end music player and your sound preference matches, what I have described above, and you don’t care for music streaming, the Lotoo Paw Gold is all you need.
 

---

INTRODUCTION:
I would like to thank @Jack Vang of Empire Ears, for the discount on my purchase of the Zeus-XIV-ADEL Custom IEM and for giving me the opportunity to review the IEM. I would also like to thank Steve Keeley aka @Canyon Runner of Asius Technologies, for providing me with MAM and B1 ADEL modules for the review.

Empire Ears launched the Zeus, the first 14 driver production model IEM, around the end of 2015. Halfway into 2016, they launched a retuned Zeus, called the Zeus-R. In September, 2016, EE announced they will be partnering with Asius Technologies, to incorporate the ADEL technology in their IEMs. They shipped the first Zeus-ADEL IEM around the end of October, 2016.

---

ZEUS-XIV-ADEL:
The IEM being reviewed here is the Zeus-XIV-ADEL, which is simply the ADEL version of the original Zeus-XIV. The IEM retails for USD 2429.99. It has 14 BA drivers per side, with a 7-way crossover and, incorporates the ADEL technology in the form of user replaceable ADEL modules. For the cable connection, it uses the standard 0.78mm 2 pin connectors.

---

BUILD, FIT & ISOLATION:
The build quality and finish of the ZXA is impeccable. As with any custom IEMs, a good set of ear impression is imperative, in getting the fit right. I did experience a bit of discomfort, for the first few of days, after I received the IEM. But things settled down, in about a week and, the fit has been great since then. Isolation is as good as or slightly better than a properly sealed universal IEM. Isolation of custom IEMs is dependent on the fit and the canal length of the IEM. The length of the canals on my ZXA is on the medium side. That and the fact, that the ZXA is an ADEL fitted IEM, there is a slight compromise in isolation. If isolation is paramount, you may want to request for long canal portions for your IEM and get a MAM and use it in the Fully-Closed position.

STOCK CABLE:
I requested Jack not to include the BTG Starlight cable with my order, as I was purchasing a different upgrade cable for the ZXA. But my IEM did come with the 64” black stock cable. The stock cable is flexible, comfortable and seems durable. Microphonics from the cable is minimal.

---

SOUND:
The ADEL version of the Zeus-XIV is no longer a warm, mid-centric IEM. The ADEL attenuates the bass on the XIV-ADEL to an extent that the mid-range loses some warmth and body, and the treble gains a slight prominence in the presentation. The signature, departs from purely mid-centric to a reference version of mid-centric.As a result, the tonality is going to range between neutral to neutral-bright, depending on the source (and cable) pairings.

But where XIV-ADEL truly shines is in its technical performance. With a massive soundstage, phenomenal separation and high transparency, it outclasses many of its competition and sets a new standard for hi-fi.

Bass:
The bass on the XIV-ADEL is neither powerful nor warm. In the process of reducing pneumatic pressure, the ADEL technology attenuates the bass quantity. The attenuation is greater, the farther you move down the frequency range. And so, the sub-bass gets affected the most, resulting in sub-bass roll-off and the rumbles being less apparent in the presentation.

The quantity of the mid-bass manages to linger in the neutral range, although its impact is compromised to be on the softer side. The tight and quick punches, result in a clean bass presentation. This allows the IEM to display excellent texture and definition. While the bass resolution does not belong to the elite class, it is still of very high order. Between the authoritative or technical classification, XIV-ADEL's bass falls on the technical side.

Mid-Range:
The mid-range is not warm, but it isn't altogether dry either. It lacks some sub-section, as a result of attenuated bass. And so the instrument images aren’t as solid as its non-ADEL counterpart. But the note body is still satisfying, as the lower-mids and the center-mids provide adequate thickness and note size respectively.

Between the vocals and instruments, XIV-ADEL leans more towards the vocals. This is achieved through bigger and denser vocal size and not through forward vocal placement. The overall tone is neutral and the instrument timbres are quite accurate. But the airiness in the presentation, prevents the timbre to reach the utmost precision. Regardless, its a highly transparent and resolving mid-range.

Treble:
Following a neutrally tuned upper-mids, there is a lift in the lower treble. This lift puts the overall treble on the bright side, but it ensures the notes are well articulated and the stage remains clean. The extension is also very good and the treble tone is quite realistic.

Brightness, resolution and transparency, are the perfect recipe for detail retrieval. As the XIV-ADEL possesses all 3, detail retrieval becomes a second nature for the IEM. And consequently it is also unforgiving. It's smooth with well recorded tracks and warm sources. But with poor recordings and bright source (or cable) pairings, it won't hold back.

Stage:
One of the most outstanding features of the XIV-ADEL is its spacious and airy soundstage. With enormous dimensions on all 3 axes, its stage is not only 3-Dimensional, but also holographic. While many recent hi-fi IEMs seem to have caught up to the stage depth of the Zeus, I have not heard any other IEM that can do stage height like the Zeus. And the same can be said about the instrument separation and layering of the XIV-ADEL. The precision of the imaging as well as the distribution of the instruments is top class as well.

---

CABLE UPGRADE:
Being a very sensitive and a transparent IEM, Zeus benefits from cable upgrade. After some research and reading, I purchased an Effect Audio Leonidas. It is a 4 wire litz construction with silver and gold plated silver wires. This is what I hear, when I switch from the stock cable to the Leonidas:

The overall tonality loses some more warmth and the sound becomes more transparent. The bass becomes tighter and has better definition. The mid-range loses some body and becomes less warm. There is now better texture and details. The treble region is more detailed. The overall resolution is improved and so, there is an increase in precision and definition in the presentation. The stage becomes wider by a small margin, but there is a noticeable improvement in stage depth and height. Imaging also improves in accordance with higher precision and increased depth and height. The timbre sounds more natural. That combined with improved resolution, increases realism in the presentation.

The Leonidas boosts the clarity and technical aspects of the IEM and improves the overall definition. But it still keeps the XIV-ADEL in the unforgiving region. If you are looking to restore balance in the XIV-ADEL's tone, you may want to look into a cable that is either warm or mid-centric.

EFFICIENCY, SENSITIVITY & SOURCE:
At 21 Ohm impedance and 119 dB sensitivity, XIV-ADEL is very sensitive and efficient. On all my sources, just a few steps from zero on the volume, is sufficient to drive the XIV-ADEL to pretty loud volume. The downside is, it picks up background noise from powerful sources in the form of hiss. The hiss isn’t noticeable when the music is on. But there are tracks with silent passages where the hiss becomes noticeable and bothering. The hiss on my iPhone is very minimal.

With a neutral-bright tone and an unforgiving character, a source that leans on the bright side may like the Lotoo Paw Gold may not be the ideal pairing. But it should go on the record, that with well recorded tracks, the LPG and XIV-ADEL pairing is splendid. It pairs really well with warm sources. I found the pairing with the Mojo a toss-up as it was good for the most part, except for times when the recordings were of very poor quality.

---

COMPARISONS:
Zeus-XIV vs Zeus-XIV-ADEL (B1 Module):
The XIV and the XIV-ADEL are quite different in many aspects. While the XIV is a warm, mid-centric IEM, the XIV-ADEL is a reference version of mid-centric. XIV's bass is above neutral and is warm in nature. It's sub-bass is also more apparent in the presentation. XIV-ADEL's bass in comparison is rather polite. XIV is warmer and has more body and thickness in the mid-range. Where as the XIV-ADEL has better clarity in the mid-range, due to reduced warmth and body. The transparency is a tie on both IEMs. XIV's transparency rises from a tonal balance and timbral accuracy. XIV-ADEL's transparency arises from its lack of warmth and clean stage. In the treble, the XIV-ADEL is perceived as slightly brighter, due to bass attenuation from the ADEL. While the XIV trumps the XIV-ADEL in terms of naturalness, tone, timbre accuracy and imaging accuracy, the XIV-ADEL pulls ahead of the XIV, in terms of stage, airiness, separation and layering.

The decision between the ADEL or non-ADEL will come down to each person's priorities in the sound presentation. If precision and tone are high priorities, choose the non-ADEL. For a spacious and airy presentation, choose the ADEL.

Zeus-XIV-ADEL (B1 Module + Stock Cable) vs 64 Audio A10 (B1 Module + Stock Cable):
XIV-ADEL and the A10 have different tunings. A10 has a warm tone with the slight boost in bass. XIV-ADEL has a mid-centric tuning. Because of the slight bass boost, A10 has more bass than the XIV-ADEL. The mid-range on the A10 is laidback, while XIV-ADEL’s mid-range is engaging. Treble quantity is similar on both. Stage width is also similar but, the XIV-ADEL has slightly better depth and height. A10 has very good separation, layering and imaging, but XIV-ADEL seems to do those things better, by a small margin, because of better precision. XIV-ADEL is more transparent and has more details. XIV-ADEL is more engaging, while A10 is more relaxing.

---

CONCLUSION:
Zeus-XIV-ADEL is truly a remarkable IEM with outstanding technical capabilities. Although a bit of naturalness and precision is lost in the presentation, the added airiness, space and separation compensates for the loss. The level of transparency, instrument layering and imaging is really something to experience on this IEM. With a price tag around $2400, the IEM is not cheap. But if your budget is flexible and you are in the market for a high performance IEM, that excels in technicalities, the Zeus-XIV-ADEL is an excellent choice.

---

INTRODUCTION:
A couple of months back, I had a chance to compare a few IEM upgrade cables and, I realized a good upgrade cable could unlock the real potential of an IEM. Even before I ordered my Empire Ears Zeus Custom IEM, I was sure I wanted an upgrade cable to go with it. After all, I had read that Zeus scales higher with a good cable.
 
After some research I decided to buy a cable from Effect Audio. Jack helped me get in touch with Suyang and Eric of Effect Audio, who assisted me with my purchase. Eric was very responsive to my emails and was kind to offer a discount on the purchase in exchange for an honest review. After some online research and, a few email exchanges with Eric, I decided to get the Leonidas.
 
THE COMPANY AND THE CABLE:
Effect Audio is a cable manufacturer located in Singapore. Their product catalog includes a line-up of IEMs & Headphones Upgrade Cables, Interconnect Cables, Accessories and a few IEMs. Apart from the sound aspect, their products are also known for the looks and build quality.
http://www.effectaudio.com/
 
Leonidas is the first product from the Heritage series of upgrade cables for IEMs. It is a Litz construction using Pure Silver and Gold Plated Silver Hybrid configuration. It is made using scarce materials and uses a special geometry. Effect Audio team is very proud of the Leonidas cable. The cable retails for $800.
http://www.effectaudio.com/upgrade-cables/iem-cables/iem-heritage-series/leonidas.html
 
 
I will be referring to the Leonidas as “Leo” for the rest of the review.
 
BUILD QUALITY AND LOOKS: Score: 9/10
Leo is built really well and looks amazing. To read more on the physical details of the cable, I have shared some physical impressions of the cable on the Effect Audio thread here:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/787717/effect-audio-cables-thread/180#post_13101784
 
COMFORT AND HANDLING: Score: 9/10
Leo is flexible and has almost zero cable memory. There is a wire sleeving at the IEM end to provide the over-ear shape and there is no memory wire. All this combined, makes Leo a very comfortable and a easy-to-handle cable.
 
MICROPHONICS: Score: 9/10
Almost zero microphonics from the cable portion below the Y splitter. There is some minimal microphonics above the Y splitter.
 
SOUND IMPRESSIONS: Score: 9/10
For the sound impressions;
- I will be pairing it with my Zeus-XIV-ADEL Custom IEM
- I will be comparing it with the stock cable that came with my EE Zeus
- I will using the Chord Mojo as the source
 
 
TONALITY AND SIGNATURE:
Leo, overall has a neutral tone without emphasizing any frequency segment. The note thickness is neither thick nor lean. The stock cable has a warm and smooth sound, while Leo has a cleaner and textured sound.
 
Starting with the low frequencies, Leo's bass is neutral, tight, and well defined. In comparison, bass on the stock cable is warm and slightly loose. The better definition and the lack of warmth on the Leo, allows for better bass texture. Bass decay is quicker on the Leo, while the notes linger a bit longer on the stock cable.
 
Leo has clear and uncolored mids, sometimes venturing the territory of dryness. The stock cable, because of its warmth, has a slight veil over the mids. The notes on the stock cable, have more body in comparison to the Leo. Leo presents a transparent midrange and brings out more details in the mids.
 
The treble on the stock cable is neutral for the most part with a bit of sparkle. While Leo’s treble is also neutral, it leans on the natural and smooth side of neutral. Treble extension is better on the Leo. Simply in terms of overall quality, Leo’s treble is better. But there are times, when I do enjoy the sparkly treble on the stock cable. Leo’s treble, does not tend to sibilance. The stock cable borderlines sibilance, occasionally.
 
RESOLUTION, TRANSPARENCY AND PRECISION:
In line with good definitions and treble extension, Leo is a high resolution cable that carries high level of transparency and precision. The high transparency and precision brings out more details and accuracy to the presentation. In comparison, the stock cable sounds colored and lacks precision.
 
SOUNDSTAGE, INSTRUMENTS AND PRESENTATION:
Leo has a slightly better soundstage width than the stock cable, but it pulls clearly ahead, when it comes to stage depth and height and presents a more 3-Dimensional space. Because of the lack of warmth from bass or any coloration, Leo’s stage is cleaner and airier.
 
The cleaner stage on the Leo provides better separation. As a result of better depth, Leo has better layering of instruments. That combined with the precision results in a more accurate imaging. The presentation distance of the stock cable can be considered neutral in placement, while Leo’s presentation in comparison, is placed slightly away from the listener.
 
PAIRING:
Please be aware that, all the above stated impressions are based on the pairing with the Zeus-XIV-ADEL IEM. The result may vary with other IEMs. Being a neutral cable, Leo should pair well with a wide variety of IEMs.
 
CONCLUSION:
I would like to thank Eric for the discount on my purchase and, the opportunity to review the Leonidas cable. The level of sound improvement that Leonidas adds to my Zeus is pretty significant. At $800, the cable is not cheap but, to me it is The Whole Package Cable, because it not only improves the sound quality, but scores very well on the comfort and build aspects. If you are in the market for an ergonomic cable with the aforementioned sound characteristics, Leo is a solid choice and an easy recommendation.
 
 

INTRODUCTION:
I received the Soundaware M1 Pro as part of the US Review Tour: 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/816896/review-tour-for-soundaware-2016m1-m1pro-femto-dual-clocks-digital-player-with-proprietary-fpga-architecture
 
Many thanks to Soundaware, for offering this wonderful opportunity to review their product. What follows is my honest review of the product.
 
HARDWARE:
The unit had a solid build with excellent finishes. UI interface itself was Ok. The responsiveness of the firmware is not great. It takes one to few seconds on certain actions to react. But the firmware itself was stable and reliable. I did not experience any crashes or hiccups or hang-ups in the matter of 2 weeks. The current theme is not great because of the color. Hopefully that and the responsiveness speed will be rectified in the upcoming FW updates. The volume and power buttons were a bit narrow and it was kind of quirky to use at times. The front buttons were fine and easy to use. But changing the layout of the D-pad to a typical circular d-pad would improve user experience further. In terms of battery, the unit lasted around 8-10 Hrs on a single charge.
 
POWER AND HISS:
The 2 IEMs I own, Sennheiser IE80 and Rhapsodio Galaxy have 16 Ohm impedance and are pretty sensitive at 125 dB and 112 dB respectively. The only source that these 2 IEMs don’t hiss is with my Fiio X3ii on Low Gain. On the M1 Pro these 2 IEms had a very feeble hiss, the same level I hear on the Mojo and Fiio X3ii on High Gain. The hiss level did not increase when I switched to Medium or High Gain settings on the M1 Pro. Rhapsodio Galaxy, although a sensitive IEM, loves a lot of power in the form of current to sound good. It sounds 6/10 on my iPhone/Macbook, 7/10 on the Fiio X3ii, 8.5/10 on the Chord Mojo. M1 Pro did not have any trouble driving it and so it sounded very good, so I would give it a 8.5/10.
 
IEMS AND FILES USED:
- Rhapsodio Galaxy and IE80
- 320 kbps MP3 and 16/44 FLACs
 
SOUND:
M1 Pro is tuned for listening pleasure and it does exactly that. If you are looking for Reference/Analytical DAP, you may want to look into these 2 models offered by Soundware: M1 Pro Studio or M1 Vitality. Overall M1 pro has a slightly warm and smooth sound. It derives some of its warmth from the soft note articulation. Bass and treble had nice texture and airiness respectively. They are controlled though, to help with the pleasing listening experience. Mids were lush, but slightly laid back and lacks a bit of body than what I would call neutral. Soundstage was wide and the presentation as a whole was a little laid back and airy.
 
Technical aspects such as imaging, separation, layering, detail retrieval are aspects that I consider it to be strengths of the M1 Pro. But the speed, transparency, resolution are not quite on the same level, which makes sense, as improving those areas would yield a more reference class sound. As a result of all this, M1 Pro is pretty forgiving. Sound quality as whole was excellent.
 
M1 PRO vs MOJO:
Both M1 Pro and the Mojo use FPGA technology for digital to analog conversion. But both players sound very different than they are similar. The only similarity being the warm sound, but even there, Mojo derives its warmth from the full bodied forward mids while M1 pro derives its warmth from the soft notes and controlled treble. Mojo has a narrow soundstage with an intimate presentation. M1 Pro has a wider soundstage and slightly laidback presentation. Mojo can portray depth consistently while M1 Pro can match the depth when it is in the track. M1 Pro has darker spaces between instruments. Separation, imaging and detail retrieval were pretty much the same on both the devices. But in terms of other technical aspects like the transparency, layering, resolution, Mojo had the advantage. And one area that Mojo was clearly ahead is the dynamics. Rhapsodio Galaxy can be bright and unforgiving sometimes and pairing it with M1 Pro was much more forgiving than the Mojo.
 
AS A DIGITAL SOURCE FOR DACs:
M1 PRO vs FIIO X3ii:
I had heard claims that M1 Pro has a very clean Digital Section which makes it a very good Digital Source/Transport for DACs and was better than some of its counterparts in that respect. I was curious to find this out myself. So I compared M1 pro and the Fiio X3ii both acting as Digital Source for my Chord Mojo. It is a pretty fair test because both the devices use co-axial to output digital signal. And I heard it. M1 Pro was indeed better than the Fiio X3ii. M1 Pro was slightly cleaner, more open and more transparent than the Fiio X3ii.
 
WHAT I LOVED ABOUT M1 PRO:
- Overall Sound Quality
- Detailed yet smooth sound
- Soundstage
- Build Quality
 
AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT:
- Wider side buttons and better front button lay out
- UI (Theme and Responsiveness)
- Mids could be a bit more forward
 
RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION:
If you are in the market for a neutral-warm sounding player in the $750 range, I suggest you look into the M1 Pro. And if you already own a DAC that can take a coaxial input, the you have a double win. The Firmware, is not completely robust. But I heard that the company is working hard to getting it more refined with the future FW updates. If you own any energetic set of IEMs or Headphones and are looking for a source that might help tame the energy a bit, M1 Pro is a very easy recommendation. On the other hand if you have a laidback IEM/Headphone you may want to look into M1 Pro Studio or M1 Vitality versions.
 

INTRODUCTION:
 
Vibro Labs announced a review tour for their IEM, Aria in the US and I did not want to miss the chance. The first time I heard the name Vibro was when someone mentioned their IEM measuring equipment Vibro Veritas, which is an affordable equipment that anyone (with some learning definitely) can use to measure their IEM's characteristics such as Frequency Response etc. (I am sure it can measure many more aspects but my knowledge on the subject is limited). And then when I googled for Vibro, what showed up in the video results, piqued my interest even more. Vibro had posted a video on youtube on how to build your own BA IEM. I was pretty impressed with the company's educative attitude. Then when I heard that they had launched an IEM, I was very curious as to how it sounded and definitely wanted to give it a listen. So when the opportunity presented itself, I did not take a second to think.
 
The terms of the agreement was that each participant of the tour would have a chance to audition the Aria universal IEM for 7 days. In return the participant will have to write an honest review after the audition on Head-Fi. Hence here is me fulfilling my terms, by offering my honest review. If you'd like to learn more about the review tour, please check out this thread.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/811929/vibro-labs-introduction-usa-tour-and-head-fi-discount
 
SPECIFICATIONS & PRODUCT INFO:
 
http://vibrolabs.com/

---

 
HARDWARE & FIT:
 
The universal version of Aria I received for review, had a Burl wooden faceplate and 3-D printed shell in smoke color. It was well built and I couldn’t find any flaw with the finish. I liked that the nozzle on the universal had a flange in the end so that tips wouldn’t slip off. The tour package came with Comply tips. I prefer Silicone tips over Foam. JVC Spiral Dots fit like a glove and offered good seal and comfort. The contours of the IEM is smooth and curved through out, so the overall comfort was very good. The light ewight of the IEM helped with the comfort aspect further. The cable that came included was a generic braided cable that comes included with most of the Custom IEMs. It had the 2 pins connector on the IEM side, that goes into the regular sockets on the Aria. There are many memory wires out there that I hate but I had no issues with the one on the Aria. On the source side it was a regular right-angle 3.5mm stereo plug.
 
SENSITIVITY, HISS & DRIVEABILITY:
 
Aria is a very efficient IEM. At 15Ohm impedance and 110dB sensitivity, Aria was easily driven to loud levels even by an average smartphone. There was very faint hiss with my iPhone 6. It was so faint that I am not sure if many of you would even notice. On my Fiio X3ii in Low Gain, it was dead silent but on High Gain, I was able to hear a faint hiss similar to what I heard on the iPhone.
 

---

 
SOUND:
 
Before I received the Aria for review I wanted to understand its tuning. I felt the description of Aria’s signature on Vibro's website was a little loosely defined, so I approached the maker of Aria, Luke Pighetti himself and here is a snippet of our conversation:
 
MY QUESTION:
Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleWings 
  @Luke Pighetti, how would you describe the tuning of the Aria? I am asking this, so that I will know what to expect as I am receiving it today. I did read the 'Signature' part on the Aria's product page on your website. It mentions Controlled Bass, Deep Lows, Sloping Mids, High without Harshness of Sibilance and Good Extensions on both ends. But overall, how would you describe its tuning?
 
a) Balanced 
b) V Shaped (Elevated Lows and Highs with Polite Mids or something similar)
c) Bass-Centric , Mids-Centric or Treble-Centric
 
If these 3 don't apply or you would like to pick one and would like expand on it, please feel free to describe it in your own terms. 
 
Thanks,
 
EagleWings

Click to expand...

 
LUKE'S RESPONSE:

​If I were going to pidgeon-hole it, I would say somewhere between balanced and U-shaped. To delve in deeper, the goal of Aria is to present top extension with controlled and smooth subbass, preserving microdetails and allowing articulate subbass landscapes to form. This type of tune is certainly versatile, but I think it does best with electronic music which has a very complex bassline that is usually lost in the fray of inarticulate low end that you see in a lot of hybrids and Knowles CI based earphones. I find that Aria opens up a whole new world of appreciation for complex subbass while still retaining complex microdetails.
 
And I know that makes it sound like some crazy vee-shaped signature, but the really crazy thing about Aria is that it is relaxing, non-fatiguing, and it's still very versatile. Hard to explain, really. I think you'll enjoy it. It's a unique signature.
 
In short, Aria preserves complexity in regions that are often overlooked or over driven, and presents it effortlessly.
 
Kind of rambling, it's hot in the shop today, hope that's helpful!

Click to expand...

 
SIGNATURE & TUNING:
In short Aria has a smooth, dynamic sound without any harshness that is suitable for most music genres.
 
The first thing that stood out was, the extensions on both ends. The bass was quick, controlled and had good texture. The sub-bass had good reverb and went deep. The speed and sub-bass reverb really helped with the bass texture and tonality. Because of the quick and controlled bass there was hardly any excessive warmth bleeding over to the mids. The bass did not have the slam and authority of a DD IEM, but had good punch and did not feel soft. I felt there was a slight dip in the upper bass/lower mids, that sometimes made male vocals sound as if lacking body or laid back. The middle and upper mids had good body enough to sound pleasing but not trending towards thinness or thickness. I'd say the right amount of body and thickness there.
 
Female vocals and instruments sounded very good with good definition and dynamics. Tonality and transparency was very satisfying that I did not feel like the Aria needed the Mojo to please me. (Although I wish I did have the Mojo with me to see how well the Aria could scale up. Had to send the Mojo to the retailer for a replacement). I really loved the treble on the Aria. Plenty of air and sparkle but not even a slight bit of harshness. Like I mentioned earlier the treble extension was really good. It was not a bright IEM but has good resolution in the treble details and presents it in a smooth manner. The treble on the Aria was better than my 64Audio A10.
 
 
TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES:
Now in terms of technical capabilities, it was really up there. A few months, back I tried a $600 multi-BA IEM that really set the bars really high for technical capabilities. (And No, it’s not the Savant... Hint.. it was a 3-Driver, IEM from a French Manufacturer). Although Aria may not reach that level of technicality, I think it performs better or on par with other IEMs in same price range. The soundstage was pretty wide and deep to give the sense that the music was not inside your head. I really liked the presentation on this one. It was neither upfront nor laid-back and for the purpose of the review I’d like to call this positioning the Goldilock zone. The presentation and soundstage helped instruments to space out and not feel congested.
 
The instruments were well separated and layered and the imaging if not very precise, was very convincing even through the Fiio X3ii. The timbre and transparency was really nice that made the vocals and instruments sounded very natural. (Once I again I wish I had the Mojo for this one as well). In terms of detail and resolution, it had plenty details to give you the Audiophile like resolution, but not enough for reference like sound or analytical listening. Aria is revealing enough to portray a true tonality, but draws the line there and stays on the side of being forgiving for the most part. In terms of speed, Aria is excellent in adapting to the music being played and is one of its strengths. It plays fast songs really well without lagging behind, while also capable of handling slow tempos with a humble composure. Overall, the note thickness was neither thick nor thin and the sound had good amount of body. IMO, all the above characteristics makes the Aria a versatile IEM and an excellent performer for its price range.
 

---

 
COMAPRISONS:
ARIA vs SENNHEISER IE80:
The bass on the IE80 in comparison is soft and slow. But being a DD IEM, has better decay. The mids is not a strong pursuit of IE80 and so falls short there where Aria is better with its dynamic and detailed mids. Treble wise, Aria has better definition and sparkle but both have a very airy treble. IE80 has a slightly wider and deeper soundstage. IE80 also has a very airy presentation that gives it a laid back sound versus Aria’s Goldilock zone presentation. No ideal winner here, but would come down to one’s preference. In other technical abilities, Aria has an upper hand over the IE80. In terms of Dynamics and Transparency it is clearly better than the colored IE80.
 
ARIA vs 64 AUDIO A10:
My A10 arrived after a refit just a few hours before I was about to ship the Aria so the comparison was very brief. Aria has better bass depth and punch. While A10’s bass has better texture and sounds like a bass coming from a speaker, versus Aria’s bass sounds like listening on a headphone. A10 has better mids than the Aria in terms of definition and note thickness. Treble is one of the 3 areas where Aria is better than the A10. The second aspect being the speed. A10 couldn’t keep up with the speed of Aria on fast paced songs. And the 3[size=11.6667px]rd[/size] being the extensions. A10’s lows and highs do not extend as good as Aria.
In terms of technical capabilities A10 had an upper hand. This is where A10’s hefty price tag sets it apart. On certain aspects like transparency, timbre, imaging, instrument separation, layering and soundstage the difference is clear. In terms of resolution, detail retrieval the difference is only marginal. A10, just like the IE80 has a slightly laidback presentation. And based on the type of music/track, my preference shuttled between A10’s laidback presentation and Aria’s Goldilock presentation. It is an unfair comparison given that A10 retails for x3 times the price of Aria. And when it comes to price/performance ratio, Aria is a clear winner.
 
 

---

 
CONCLUSION:
Unlike many manufacturers who offer an array of IEMs, Vibro offers just one model. It must have been a challenge for Luke to make this IEM into something that would click for a wide audience and I’d have to say that his efforts have paid off. Not only is Aria a versatile IEM, I found it handled many genres I threw at it with aplomb. The top and low end extensions, speed, dynamics and versatility make this an easy recommendation, if you are in the market for a $600 IEM to enjoy your music. And the comfort goes a long way as an extra cherry on top. Except for the slight dip in the lower mids, I honestly couldn't find any fault with it's sound. And if you are a fan of wooden faceplates, be sure to check Aria out.
 
And one thing that needs a definite mention is that, Aria is every bit what Luke and his website describes it to be. I have had some recent experience of trying few IEMs that were different from the manufacturer's description. But that was not the case with the Aria. It lives up to their words and satisfies the listener. What else could we ask for?
 
I would like to thank Luke for giving me this great opportunity to review his creation.
 

PRODUCT INFO:
Following their success with the Hugo DAC, Chord Electronics released a much more portable solution, targeted at mobile users, called the Mojo. MoJo stands for Mobile Joy. It retails for $599.

---

 
INTRODUCTION:
Just within a few months, after I bought a set of Sennheiser IE80 and a Fiio X3ii, I wanted to upgrade to a High-End setup. I demoed and bought the 64-Audio A-10. When I demoed the A-10, I felt the A-10 was not performing to the best of its capabilities. Twister6 who owns a 64 Audio U-12 (Universal form of the A-12 which is just a darker version of A-10), brought to my attention, that the X3ii was an average source for these IEMs and, I would benefit from a better source. I did not want to spend more than $800. I started looking around and, there were close to 10 options, but I kept coming back to, these 3 options: Chord Mojo, Onkyo DP-X1 and Fiio X7. 
 
MY LISTENING SETUP AND USE-CASE:
99% of my listening is done indoors, at my desk at the office or home. To shuttle my gear between the office and home, I prefer a very portable setup. I only own and use IEMs for portability and ease of use factors. Similarly, I prefer a portable source gear. Fiio X3ii for music I own and iPhone 6 for streaming works good enough
 
WHY I CHOSE CHORD MOJO OVER OTHER DAPs:
Although a dedicated DAP would have proved to be more practical based on my above requirement, I did not want to deal with issues regarding UI, when I already owned 2 devices (iPhone 6 and Fiio X3ii) with excellent UI. If I was buying the Mojo, the trade off would be to carry an additional device and the corresponding cables. I weighed the options and decided to get the Mojo.
 

---

SOUND:
IEMs: 64-Audio A-10  |  MUSIC GENRE: Multiple and Varying  |  FILE FORMAT: 16/44 FLACs and 320 kbps MP3 (16/44)  |  FILE SOURCE: Macbook, Windows 7 PC
 
In short, I would describe Mojo's sound as highly resolving yet smooth, with great clarity, musicality, natural tonality and a 3-D presentation. The sound quality of Mojo as a whole, is truly impeccable.
 
This review is based on Mojo being paired with my 64-Audio A-10 Custom IEM. Mojo and A-10 go hand in hand in exposing each other's strengths. Mojo arrived a few days after my A-10 was delivered. During those couple of days, I was using my A-10 with Fiio X3ii and iPhone 6. I was a little underwhelmed with the performance and, was a little anxious on, what kind/level of improvements, Mojo would bring to the A-10. To my delight, the improvement was significant.
 
The first thing I noticed was the un-real (or should I say very realistic) imaging, instrument separation and layering. This is one of the strengths of the A-10. And Mojo makes sure it provides every ounce of juice, A-10 requires to display those strengths. This combo sounds so good, in this aspect that sometimes, I just lose concentration on the musical aspect of the track and, start observing the instruments. I am able to point in the direction, where an instrument is played. I was not able to do the same on the Fiio X3ii. The sound-stage width seems to be the same between Mojo, X3ii and iPhone 6. I was not too impressed with A10's soundstage depth initially. But the depth in the music presentation that Mojo renders, offers a sense of increase in sound-stage depth. The transparency and timbre were improved as well. It is amazing how Mojo can be very resolving and, yet manages to sound very smooth. The dynamics is also very good and a step-up over the Fiio X3ii and iPhone 6. 
 
To my ears, the tuning seems to be neutral, as it does not enhance any particular frequency. People in the ADEL IEMs thread were talking about hearing textured bass. When I demoed the A10, I certainly did not hear this texture, nor did I hear it, when my A10 first arrived. Then comes Mojo and I can hear this texture. It adds a lot of natural tonality to the mids, that the instruments and vocals sound very natural. It maintains a good treble quantity on the A10 and,, does not have the tendency to make the sound bright to give an impression of more sparkle. It basically shows what is in the track and presents it in a natural way. 
 
 
 

---

 
POWER & HISS:
Given that I only own IEMs and do not own any hard-to-drive headphones, I do not need too much power and am not able to test it either. As far as hiss goes, I can hear a very slight background hiss on my A-10. But it is not bad given the fact that the A-10's impedance is 18 Ohm and has a sensitivity of 117 dB. Now the problem arises when I start thinking about IEMs that have a lower impedance rating and higher sensitivity.
 
BIT-PERFECT SIGNAL:
Ok, this is a very critical aspect. For Mojo to perform its very best, it needs to be fed a bit-perfect signal. These days, manufacturers of consumer electronics, seem to be keen on up-sampling the digital signal. Up-sampling refers to taking the original signal and increasing the bit depth and frequency. Bit-perfect refers to feeding the original signal as it were without modifying it.
 
So if you are planning on using your Mojo, with your PC or Mac or Smartphone or iOS devices, please make sure you check the Mojo thread on Head-Fi, to research how you can get bit-perfect signal out of your device. This is where DAPs have a certain advantage (except the DAPs running full version Android and do Digital Out through USB). DAPs like Fiio X3ii/X5ii, iBasso DX80, AK models can act as a reliable transport to carry your music with you in a potable package, at the same time, not having to worry about up-sampling as these devices do bit-perfect.
 
COMPARISONS:
FiiO X3ii & iPHONE 6: Fiio X3ii and iPhone are pretty much on the same plateau, when it comes to Sound Quality. Mojo when fed bit-perfect and used with a High-End IEM, displays clear improvement in all areas. Especially the technical capabilities and presentation. The imaging, instruments, tonality, transparency and timbre are on a level above. The soundstage width seems to be the same on all 3 devices, while there is an improvement in the depth on Mojo. The whole presentation itself seems more 3-Dimensional on the Mojo, while it sounds a bit flat on the iPhone and X3ii. Mojo presents sound in a natural analogous way, while X3ii and iPhone sound more digital.
 
 

---

 
CONCLUSION:
Mojo is truly an amazing device that can bring the best out of your IEMs and headphones (as long as they are not too difficult to drive). You can get better results out of it if you could invest in better set of IEMs/Headphones. But the most critical factor is the bit-perfect signal for the Mojo to perform to the best of its capabilities. It is small, portable, easy to use and does exactly what it is meant to do.
 
The device is Built Like a Tank, Crafted Like a Jewel & Performs Like a Marvel. I set out on getting an End-Game-For-Now setup. And that is exactly, what I have got with the Chord Mojo and the 64-Audio A-10 combo.
 
 

---

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK:
- @twister6 who encouraged me to purchase a good source for my IEM and few other members who pointed me in the direction of Mojo and answered my questions that helped me in the purchase.
 
- Members on Mojo thread, especially @Mython and @x RELIC x , whose helpful posts helped me a great deal in getting the maximum performance out of my Mojo.

---

DISCLAIMER: 
I purchased the A-10 Custom IEM from 64-Audio directly, as a part of the ‘Audio Enthusiast Program’, that was run by 64-Audio in March 2016. The terms of this promotion were: ‘the buyer will be offered a 15% discount off the price of any ADEL IEM at the time of purchase, under the agreement that, the buyer promises to write an honest, unbiased review’.

---

PRODUCT INFO & SPECIFICATIONS:
A-10 is a 10 Driver Custom fitted IEM from 64-Audio, featuring the ADEL Technology. Per 64-Audio's website, this is a reference monitor, suitable for Studio Use, Critical Listening and Audiophiles.
 
DRIVERS: 10 x Balanced Armature Drivers – 2 x Low, 4 x Mid, 4 x High
CROSSOVER: 3 Way Passive Crossover
SENSITIVITY: 117 dB
IMPEDANCE: 18 Ohm
FREQUENCY RESPONSE: 10 Hz – 20 kHz
ISOLATION WITH B1 MODULE: -10 dB, Passive
SHELL MATERIAL: Hypoallergenic Hard Acrylic
BORES: Quad Bore (4)
CABLE: 2-Pin Generic Braided Cable with 3.5 mm Plug
RETAIL PRICE: $1,799.00
 
PRODUCT PAGE: https://www.64audio.com/product/1964-A10-Custom-In-Ear-Monitor
 

---

INTRODUCTION:
PURCHASE STORY:
Just within a few months, after I bought a set of Sennheiser IE80 and Fiio X3ii, I wanted to upgrade to a High-End setup. I decided to take the Custom IEM route and, started to look on Head-Fi. Kaye2 brought the 64Audio ADEL IEMs to my attention. I had a chance to demo the A-10 and the A-12 through 64-Audio’s Demo Program. After demoing both, I ended up choosing the A-10.
 
REASONS WHY I CHOSE 64-AUDIO: U.S Based (I am currently located in the US), 15% Discount and Excellent Customer Service (from personal experience during the Demo Program)
REASONS WHY I CHOSE A-10 IEM: Top-Class and Fatigue-Free Sound, Balanced Tuning and, Other Strengths I mentioned in the PROS Section
 
ABOUT ME:
I am a 27 y/o male. My hearing sensitivity ranges from 24 Hz to 17 kHz. I listen to a variety of genre (Rock, R&B, Acoustic, Instrumental, Classical, Blues and Pop). Less than a year ago, I used to prefer a ‘V’ Shaped and Dark Tuning in headphones. Lately, I have come to prefer a more Balanced Tuning. because of my life-style and convenience factors, I only own and use IEMs.
 
SOURCE DETAILS:
SOURCE GEAR: Mojo, Fiio X3ii and iPhone 6
FILE FORMATS: 16/44 FLACs and 320 kbps MP3 (16/44)
MUSIC GENRE: Multiple and Varying
 

---

HARDWARE:
BUILD & FINISH:
64-Audio now employs a 3-D printed process to make the shells (Interesting Fact: Even their Universal Versions are 3-D printed with acrylic material and are not plastic/polymer molded). I opted for a simple design: Charcoal Shells and Face-plates and No Logo or Art. The build feels solid. I have not seen many other Custom built IEMs, so I do not know how it compares to other manufacturers. The finish is excellent. The buffing really provides a smooth reflective surface that can be seen in some of the attached pictures.
 
 
CABLE:
The cable is the generic braided cable that looks similar to the cable, which most manufactures use for their Custom IEMs. By default, 64-Audio goes with recessed sockets, for their A series Custom IEMs, unless the shape/size of the ear doesn’t permit it, in which case, regular sockets are used. IEM termination of the cable is the regular 2-pin with memory wire and tubing. The 'Y' split is just a, simple heat-shrunk piece of tube. The source termination is the conventional right-angled 3.5 mm plug. I do most of the listening at my desk, and have not experienced micro-phonics from this cable.
 
 
FIT, COMFORT & ISOLATION:
Typical to any custom IEM, these provide a glove-like fit and, I am able to get a good seal on both sides. The comfort is also very good, but it took me a week to get used to this tight fit. The smooth curves and surfaces ensure easy insertion and removal. With the B1 Modules rated at -10dB isolation, the isolation is fairly good on these IEMs. Once again, since most of my use is indoors at my desk in a noise free environment, the isolation these IEMs provide are sufficient for my use.  
 
ACCESSORIES:
The IEM comes with just the essential accessories. Nothing more and nothing less. 1 x Hard Case, 1 x Dehumidifier, 1 X IEM Cleaning Tool and 1 x Shirt Clip. (The picture below does not show the Dehumidifier and the Cleaning Tool. The Dehumidifier, is still inside the protective wrap, it came in and, I seem to have misplaced the Cleaning Tool). The most interesting accessory is the case. It is built like a tank and is very functional. The IEMs itself will be placed inside a secured chamber that is lined with rubber for protection. There is a center island, around which the cable can be wound and, there are sockets to secure the 3.5mm jack in place. These sockets also act as ear-tip holders (will come handy for Universal IEMs). There are also sockets to hold 2 pairs of ADEL modules. There are indents and places to hold the dehumidifier, the shirt clip and the cleaning tool. Although very functional, it is not practical for my everyday use. I just like to wind the cable around my fingers and put it inside a clam-shell box and so I bought a Pelican 1010 case to store and carry my A-10.
 

---

SOUND:
A-10’s sound, in short, can be described as balanced, smooth, musical, airy and laid-back. There is a lot of air in the sound and, this air has a significant impact on how the IEM sounds/presents its sound.
 
TUNING & TONALITY:
A-10 has a balanced tuning, with an ever-so-slight boost in the low-end, just enough to add ever-so-slight warmth and musicality to the sound. 64-Audio markets the A-10 as a neutral IEM. Although the A-10 sounds balanced, to my ears, these do not sound perfectly neutral.
 
I love the bass on the A-10. It is tight, quick and has a lot of quality to it, than mere quantity. The low-end extension is good for a BA. The sub-bass has nice rumble and texture, but doesn’t go/dig deep. To get a feel of the bass texture, one must listen to the Radioactive track by Imagine Dragons. The reverb that I hear is amazing. The air actually helps the bass to offer this feeling of reverbs and texture. The mid-bass is very clean and, does not bleed into the mids. Zero Bleed. Remember, this is an ADEL module fitted IEM, and the ADEL module’s effect is prominent on the bass. You lose out a little bit on the slam and authority, but on the bright side, you get a well-textured and a fatigue free bass. (I will talk more about the fatigue-free aspect in the ADEL Module section). Decay may not be on par with the Dynamic Drivers, but is very good for a BA. Given that there only 2 BA drivers employed for low end, one might get an impression that the IEM is bass light. But the bass drivers on this IEM are, twice the size of the mid/high drivers. So it is really not going to miss out on the bass.
 
Mids on this IEM is sweet and captivating. The notes are lush without sounding thick nor thin. This adds a bit of a musicality factor. I wouldn’t want to change the mids even a bit, because it sounds just perfect. The same goes for the vocals. The quantity itself is right, but the air that we discussed earlier, makes it seem, like the vocals are a bit laid-back. This IEM may not impress people who are looking for a forward/intimate vocal presentation.
 
The highs have good extension and texture. It is airy and, has a lot of sparkle. It is a controlled treble, meaning, it does not have any bothering peaks, nor a splashy/tinny/metallic sound (something I am concerned about BA IEMs). I can go on for hours listening to this IEM and feel zero fatigue. But that does not mean this IEM lacks treble quantity. It has plenty of treble to satisfy a regular listener. Just not to the level, to satisfy a treble-head, or someone who prefers a bright tuning.  
 
TRANSPARENCY & TIMBRE:
The transparency and timbre, is good, but not exactly the most outstanding feature of this IEM, and needs a good source to perform well in this aspect. The vocals and the instruments sound natural. The other aspect of transparency is, the ability to reveal everything in the recording. I feel the A-10 strikes a good balance here, when you are just listening to music and, not critically analyzing the recording. It is forgiving in general, but if there are some big enough flaws, it is going to reveal those. This is one of the reasons, why I feel the A-10 is an excellent Audiophile IEM and not ideal for Monitoring.
 
RESOLUTION, DETAIL & CLARITY:
A-10 is a very resolving monitor and, it has plenty of details, but it is not necessarily a detail monster. Some IEMs have a bright tuning/thin notes to give an impression, that it has plenty of details and clarity. But 64-Audio did not take that approach here with the A-10. Rather, they made a product that is capable of reproducing all the details with great resolution and clarity and, still sound smooth. Some of the notes that are distant or, low in amplitude or, thin are just mixed in the air. It takes a while to get used to catching these fine details in the air. And, once you start seeing the details in the air, you start to appreciate how this IEM delivers sound, as it helps in the smoothness I mentioned earlier.
 
SOUND-STAGE & PRESENTATION:
A-10 has a very wide sound-stage, but not necessarily the widest. Here, the ADEL module does something interesting. It makes the edge-notes (notes originating from the edges/corners of the stage) sound farther from the center-stage that gives an impression of a wider sound-stage. The height is also good, but the depth is only average. And, if the recording is good, the notes sound so real, that it feels like, the instruments are being played right next to you. The presentation is very airy and laid-back. The air helps giving a sense of openness to the presentation. This also helps in the perception of a natural presentation of the sound.
 
IMAGING, INSTRUMENT SEPARATION & LAYERING:
Okay, I was waiting to get to this part. This is really something to experience on this IEM. They say ‘it’s all about music’. But lately, I seem to forget about the music and, I just sit and observe, how well this IEM + Mojo combo renders the imaging and the instruments. There are some albums, which typically don’t get much of my listening time. These albums are earning new appreciation from a technical stand point. You can literally point your hand in the direction, where the instrument seems to be playing. And to add on top of that, is the separation and layering that seem to be structured like individual notes suspended on strings arranged in layers in a 3-D space.
 

---

ADEL MODULE:
I do not want to talk about the working mechanism of the ADEL, as I am not technically sound to completely understand how it works, nor how it impacts the sound and our hearing. I just want to talk about, what my experience is with the ADEL module. I ordered my A-10 with the B1 module. B1 has only a single ADEL membrane. 64-Audio claims that the B1, provides better texture in the mids and, adds sparkle to the highs, while reducing the boom from the low registers, in comparison to the S1 Module (S1 has 2 ADEL membranes in the module). I do not have the S1 module, so I am not able to offer a comparison. As for some of the claims of 64-Audio, regarding the immediate benefits of ADEL, here is my opinion and observations, based on my experience:
 
1. REDUCES PNEUMATIC PRESSURE: This claim seems to be true, as I am not experiencing fatigue from thumping bass on bass heavy tracks. I owned a set of Earsonics Velvets for a brief time. Velvets have a sound tuning knob. With this knob set at lowest bass setting, the bass I heard on the Velvets, seems to be similar in quantity, with what I am hearing on the A-10. But the bass impact on the Velvets, would pound my eardrums and tire me out easily, and was one of the reasons why I returned it. But I have not experienced any such thing with the A-10. 
 
2. FATIGUE-FREE LISTENING: The above point and the fact that the treble is tuned to sound very pleasant, results in a Fatigue-Free listening experience.
 
3. LISTEN TO MUSIC AT LOWER VOLUME: I am unable to validate this claim objectively, as there are a lot of variables involved such as; acoustic reflex, mastering volume of albums etc. I increase or decrease the volume based on what I am hearing. My IE80 has a lower impedance and higher sensitivity than the A-10. When playing from Mojo, I listen to the IE80 a few clicks lower than, the volume setting that I use for A-10.
 
4. 3-D SOUND-STAGE: My answer is Yes and No. Yes, because the sound-stage is very wide and has a good height and a decent depth and the 3-D imaging makes it seem 3-D. No because, the average depth of the sound-stage, holds back the IEM to give the 3-D Holographic Sound-stage.
 
5. PHASE CORRECTION: Unable to validate this claim. All I can say is, everything seems to sound coherent.

---

EFFICIENCY & SENSITIVITY:
At 18 Ohm Impedance and, 117 dB Sensitivity, A-10 is a very efficient IEM and, does not need an additional amp to be driven sufficiently to loud volumes. It does not have any hiss with my X3ii, but has a very-slight hiss with the iPhone 6 and Mojo, that is only noticeable in a totally silent environment. Chances are, some of you might not even notice the hiss. I am just too sensitive about hiss. As this is a multi-BA IEM, it is advisable to use a source with a Low Output Impedance.
 
SOURCE MATCHING AND COMPARISON:
FiiO X3ii & iPHONE 6: Although there are some differences in SQ, between X3ii and iPhone 6, the gap is hardly noticeable, when using the A-10. X3ii can be bright and grainy sometimes, while the iPhone 6 is smooth throughout. These 2 devices have sufficient power to drive the A-10. What I really love about the X3ii, is its clean output. Zero hiss even on High Gain. But the sound quality itself, is not great out of these devices.
 
CHORD MOJO: My A-10 arrived a couple of days earlier than the Mojo. And for those few days, I was using the A-10 from the X3ii and iPhone 6. I was kind of underwhelmed by the performance. And I was not sure, what improvements Mojo would bring. But I was certainly surprised when I plugged it into the Mojo and hit play (Note: To get the best out of the Mojo, you need to feed bit-perfect). Mojo gives what the A-10 deserves. Not sure if the A-10 benefits from the power output of the Mojo, but it certainly benefits from the DAC section. It brings more clarity, detail, natural tone and timbre. It improves the imaging, instrument separation and layering to an extent that A-10 is taken to a whole new level. If you are planning on getting an A-10 (or its brother A-12), my advice to you is, invest in a good source as well.
 
 
COMPARISON WITH OTHER IEM(S):
64-AUDIO A-10 (with B1 Module) vs SENNHEISER IE80 (with Tape-Mod): A-10 sounds like an elder and mature brother of the IE80. Both have many similarities in the sound characteristics, such as: airy and laid-back presentation, lush notes and smooth sound. The bass and treble quantities are similar, but the A-10 has better quality. A-10 has better texture and, less boom in the bass. It has finer nuances in the treble. The bass is also tight and clean on the A-10 that it does not bleed into the mids. IE80’s biggest weakness is, the loose bass with the mid-bass bump that bleeds into the, already recessed mids. The mids on the A-10 are certainly clearer, forward and textured compared to muddy mids of the IE80.
 
The transparency and timbre is also a clear step-up over the IE80. Although IE80 has a wide sound-stage, A-10’s sound-stage is wider. A-10 also wins in terms of the sound-stage depth. IE80 sounds a bit flat in comparison. Resolution, Detail Retrieval, Clarity, Imaging, Instrument Separation and Layering are aspects in which the A-10 is many steps ahead of the IE80. I have always considered IE80 to be a technically capable IEM. But A-10 is on another level. If there is one area where IE80 has an advantage, it is the decay. It feels very fluid and effortless. So yes, A-10 is a clear upgrade over the IE80 (provided you match it with a good source).
 

---

IS THE 64-AUDIO A-10 IEM FOR YOU?:
YES, IF ALL OR MANY OF THE CONDITIONS APPLY:
- You are looking for high performance high-end IEM, with a balanced tuning, yet fun sounding, without an analytical character
- You prefer a smooth, relaxing and laid-back sound
- You prefer texture and layers in the bass rather than slam and authority
- You are looking for IEM that excels in technical capabilities especially the imaging, instrument separation and layering
- You want a fatigue-free sound
 
NO, IF ALL OR MANY OF THE CONDITIONS APPLY:
- You are looking for a perfectly neutral monitor with analytical character
- You want a very resolving IEM that exposes all the details/flaws in the recording
- You prefer an energetic sound and, most of your music are fast-paced
- You are looking for something with a bright tuning or great treble quantity
- You prefer slamming and authoritative bass
- You want an IEM with a upfront overall/vocal presentation 

---

CONCLUSION:
64-Audio markets A-10, as a neutral reference monitor and seems to be overlooked for the very same reason. But, I see it, as an amazing audiophile IEM. It has a balanced sound, without a bright tuning or thin notes, yet has incredible detail and resolution that is not fatiguing to listen to, even for hours. The sound is lush and smooth and retains good texture. ADEL module adds some benefits over the already excellent sounding IEM. What sets this IEM really apart, is the technical capabilities. Especially the sound-stage, imaging, instrument separation and layering. If you want to do justice to this IEM, do invest in a good source (I can’t stress this point enough) and you will be rewarded greatly. I set out on getting an End-Game-For-Now setup. And that is exactly, what I have got with the 64-Audio A-10 and the Chord Mojo.
 

---

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK;
- @kaye23 for bringing 64 Audio ADEL IEMs to my attention
- @Canyon Runner (Steve), who announced the 'Audio Enthisiast Program' here on Head-Fi that aided the purchase and answered some of my questions on the ADEL IEMs thread
- Isabel at 64-Audio for helping me with the Demo Program and also the order process
- Other members on the ADEL IEMs thread, who helped me, by answering questions and, encouraging me to purchase a good source that has led to, me enjoying the A-10 immensely
 
 

---