Reviews by ngoshawk

iFi GO Link MAX ($79): What exactly is MAX?

GO Link Max

Intro:

I have reviewed countless iFi products and still own the iDSD & iCAN Pro as one of my main desktop units. The recently reviewed GO Bar Kensie and Zen Phono3 are among my favorites of late, with both worthy of ownership. The Kensie is VASTLY powerful and worth a look for its options (even with the price), while the Zen Phono3 would be my go-to choice for those without a phono stage on an amplifier should you need a basic one.

Most of my reviews are now on Headfonics, so it is nice to be given a chance by an old friend to fill my blog with gear. I thank Lawrance and iFi for the opportunity to do the GO Link MAX review and will provide an honest assessment. I am pretty sure the unit is a loaner, which is all right, too.

Specs:
In The Box:
GO Link MAX
USB-A adaptor
Lightning adaptor
Owners manual
Warranty card

Comparisons/Gear used:
iFi GO Link ($59)
Meze 99Classics w/ DDHiFi BC150B 4.4bal cable
Drop x Campfire Audio Dark Star w/ DDHiFi Air Nyx Net 4.4 Pentaconn
Campfire Audio Solaris 2020 w/ same DDHiFi cable (hint, forthcoming review)
iPhone 13 Pro Max
MBP (briefly)

Music:
Tidal MQA
Tommy Emmanuel
Talking Heads
David Byrne
Steely Dan

Unboxing:

As per typical of iFi, the GO Link MAX (henceforth known as Max) comes in an environmentally small package, well protected with a plethora of information on the box. Included are the necessary features along with decoding levels and companies used for the gear. Typical iFi and I like this approach.
Each adaptor is protected within its own pocket, while the Max is protected on the other side in the same manner.
Short and sweet. Well protected.



Technology:

With dual ESS ES9219 Sabre DAC chips, each side remains discrete and fully balanced, much like a high-end DAP or desktop unit. The balanced circuitry even carries over to the S-balanced 3.5mm jack.

Supporting HiRes True Nativeâ for up to DSD256, and PCM384 along with DXD384 sound capabilities. With up to 242mW, the Max is purportedly 5x more powerful than my MBP.

With DRE (Dynamic Range Enhancement) the Max adds up to an additional 6 dB of sound to boot. In-house tech eliminates jitter much like a dedicated desktop unit or DAP.

Design & Build:

Dongles are by nature small. The Max (belying its name) is no different coming in at 14.5g and 150x15x10mm in size. The typically longer cable between the USB-C connection and the Max is almost another trademark of iFi (to me), which allows it to double back on your phone without issue. Some will probably add a small amount of Velcro for attaching the Max to the back of their phone.

The darker gray-green color looks good, highlighting the single LED on one side, which shows bit-rate (Green, Yellow, Cyan, or Blue).

The curved top combined with the flat back makes for an ease of holding that is greatly appreciated. With enough edge on both the top and bottom, I never felt like the unit would slip. The front end carries that sexy cable to the USB-C connection, while the other end holds the gold-lined 3.5 s-balanced and 4.4mm balanced jacks.
That’s it. Your only clue that the unit is on would be the green light when it connects to your source. That light would then, of course, change depending on the sampling rate of the song being played.

The premium feel of the Max is what you would expect from all iFi products: solid, functional, and svelte.



Sound Impressions:

Summary:

The best intention of an addition to your listening source is to get out of the way or enhance what you are listening to. If that added device alters or changes what you hear, it can either go painfully disastrous or incredibly right.

Thankfully, the Max falls into the first impression part: it enhances and gets out of the way simultaneously. The added grunt to my iPhone 13 Pro Max is appreciated, and the dual ESS Sabre chips make their collective voices heard positively. The midrange is enhanced with a forward thrust that the stock cannot match. The treble reaches a bit higher without becoming grating. An air of sparkle adds to that upper-end emphasis. Bass is typical Sabre in lusciousness.
My preferred listening is smoothness in character, and the Max follows that character overall.



moar:

I typically do not use dongles, even though I have the Cayin RU7 and RU6 at my disposal. To me, they are amongst the best, along with the Questyle M12/M15 sound-wise. They also cost a good penny or two.

iFi takes another approach with the GO-series, making them affordable with trickle-down technology. Following the highly successful GO Link, the Max adds 3.5 S-balanced and a bit more power. I find I do not miss the customization options of the Kensie, especially knowing the cost differential. The Max simply GOes about its business without bother or need to adjust. Want more volume? Turn it up. Less? Turn it down.

The bass line follows the source input. If there is a preponderance of low-end, the Max enhances that with a bit deeper reach and a smoothing of the character that does not dissuade from the thoroughly vibrant midrange. Pushed forward a bit more than I would like; it is in the midrange where I found what to me is the major fault of the Max: volume discrepancy.

On my iPhone 13 Pro Max, raising or lowering the volume by a notch afforded channel imbalance. I also found that if I immediately raised (or lowered) the volume by a notch, the discrepancy was gone. This did not happen on my MBP, and I chalk it up to the volume input limitations of the iPhone.



Past that, the treble gives a good accounting of itself with excellent reach and enough sparkle to balance forward with that midrange forward nature. In other words, the treble push (sparkle) is just enough to tame the midrange forwardness a bit, balancing the act.

Of course, the ESS chips also round that top-end off just enough in a smoothness that enhances that dichotomous effect of treble sparkle and midrange forwardness.
There is enough differentiation from the normality of my Smartphone to add positively to my listening experience.



Soundstage, Imaging, & Layering:

This is harder for me due to the limitations of the iPhone (and my hearing). I find that the Max expands laterally from the norm, allowing instruments to spread out without becoming too thin (ESS effect, I’ll call it). The height carries forth with an in-head to slightly above-my-head feel, which is not overly expansive nor too short.
The depth is the hardest for me to judge, but hopefully, this will help. The layering is such that by spreading out width-wise each note is afforded a proper space to breathe up and down, but also enhancing the depth as well in note weight. That weight is just right, giving the effect of a proper 3D-effect that is neither too expansive (or thin), nor too small (confining and congested).



Pairings:

My favorite pairing was with the Meze 99Classics hooked to the DDHiFi BC150B 4.4bal cable. This gave me enough headroom to play with the volume without it becoming too loud too quickly. The bass from The Mavericks The Years Will Not Be Kind came across as simply intoxicating with the trio. I found myself replaying this song (and any Mavericks song) over and over, enjoying that lush tonality coupled with the sumptuous midrange coming forth.

The Campfire Audio Solaris 2020 is one of my favorite all-time IEMs, carrying that traditional CFA booming bass coupled with scintillating treble notes that border on the sizzle of a Mexican restaurant grill. You hear it, almost recoiling, but feel compelled to envelop yourself in the feeling. The downside is that the too-forward midrange of the Max coupled with the Solaris 2020 prevents me from raising the volume to Meze-like levels (most of the time).

When I reviewed the Drop x Campfire Audio Dark Star for Headfonics, I found it to be typically CFA, combining parts of the Vega (gorgeous bass levels) and hallucinogenic upper-end notes from the Andromeda. Looking at the site’s user review score compared to mine, it looks like I may have underestimated the little critter. That bass is familial in resemblance and makes Andy Wood & Joe Bonamassa’s Moaning Lisa come across as not only highly listenable at high levels but also made my feet dance along in a jig. That’s about as good as it gets.

The goal of an addition to our listening is to enhance our listening, and the Max has largely done that.



Comparisons:

iFi GO Link MAX ($79) v iFi GO Link ($59):

Directly from my GO Link review: To me, these critters are the hardest to judge. Either they color sound or they do not. Either they provide adequate power or they do not. Either they improve the sound quality, or I cannot tell. To me, a good Dongle/DAC provides the sound necessary to interpret the original mastered recording as the artist meant. Tailoring that sound should be up to the individual user in other ways, not the device. That said, my current favorite Dongle/DAC provides a rich, warm signature, which I prefer. The GO Link does not. And that is good. The iFi presents the music with a refreshing crispness and detail that allows the music to flower through in full color.

The beneficial aspect of the GO Link is that it fails to color the sound emanating from within. It presents what is sent through it without judging or changing the sound. I respect this, for if I want to change anything, I will do it myself. Clear, crisp details emerge from my iPhone, usually only derived from using expensive headphones/IEMs or my current favorite, the Klipsch/Earmicro T10 Bespoke. That, of course, costs a heckuva lot more.
The differentiation between the two is that the ESS Sabre of the Max smooths the sound to my liking. Not that I did not like the GO Link, to the contrary, I find its simplicity one of its best features. But when faced against its younger son, the additional power, ESS chips, and 4.4bal connection make it worthy of the family GO Link moniker. The old man would be proud of the son (or mother/daughter, the line still holds true).

finale:

This review is long in coming due to other review obligations, and as usual, Lawrance et al. have been extremely patient. Most of the time that patience is rewarded. Here? Absolutely.

The GO Link MAX carries double the power of its older kin and doubles the headphone connections. Having the 4.4bal is a no-brainer to me since the vast majority of us have moved there (yes, I still have a plethora of 2.5mm balanced…). Not forgetting the heritage by including the 3.5mm jack makes for something that the vast majority of us have and carry daily. And that is the point. We have it, we use it, and they gave it to us.

A caveat is the channel imbalance I had using my iPhone. It could be the dinosaur-like volume change levels of my “old iPhone 13” that is the problem, but I must mention that regardless. That problem was less prevalent on my MBP but still present to a point. Only when Smartphones get to synchronous, smooth, non-leveled volume changes will that come about.

Other than that, I can highly recommend the iFi GO Link MAX as an affordable balanced dongle that carries a smoothing texture to the sound that may not be for all. But the additional power can make one overlook that if you try.

I again thank Lawrance and iFi for the continued opportunity to review their products. It is worth it.

Kiwi Ears KE4 ($199): A first for me, but hopefully not a last.
4.3 stars.



KE4


Intro:

This is the first model from Kiwi Ears that I have heard. Many have waxed about previous models, and I did come to appreciate what the company brought to the market with this model. I also realize some of the company's past iterations can be polarizing. This unit will be judged on its merits, alone. The unit is mine to keep as I see fit, but may be asked back for at any time. This unit will not be flipped after reviewing, as that is still really, REALLY uncool to do.

I thank Kiwiears for the opportunity to review the KE4 and look forward to more options in the future.


Specs:

Drivers: 2 Balanced Armatures, 2 Dynamic Drivers, 1 Knowles RAD-33518, 1 Customized RAB-32257
Driver Details: 1 Uitra-High Frequency Driver, 1 Mid-High Frequency Driver, 2 Low Frequency Drivers
Crossover: 3-Way Crossover Network
Sensitivity: 102dB (±1dB)
Impedance: 28 ohms


In The Box:

Kiwi Ears KE4
3.5mm se cable
Case
3x silicon tips
2x Nozzle filters



Gear Used/Compared:

Shanling MG100 ($159)
QoA Aviation ($199)
LetShuoer Cadenza 4 ($249)

HiBy R4
MBP/HiBy FD5


Music used:

Yes.



Unboxing:

The KE4 comes in a small, mostly square box with the venerable slide-off paperboard sleeve. With the IEM on the front, measurements on the side, and other information on the back, it is par for the course.

Taking the sleeve off and lifting the lid, you are presented with a protective foam/paperboard cradle housing the IEMs. Underneath, the case carries the cable, tips, and nozzle filters.

There is nothing special about it, but I like the efficiency of the packaging.



Design/Tech details:

The bass is handled by dual dynamic drivers, while the midrange and lower treble use a customized RAB-32257 balanced armature driver. A Knowles RAD-33518 balanced armature driver carries the upper treble region, rounding out the four drivers per side.

A 3-way crossover network ties the drivers together, which also operate via three independent sound tubes.

The larger black shells carry a silver faceplate on the back, along with a nib on the inside. There is also a grated vent hole for the dual dynamic drivers, which you could theoretically apply to the nozzle filters. Since four are included, you could vary the amount of bass by covering the vent hole, nozzle, or both.

Some say the fit is exceptional. I found it a tad big for my ears, and the nib to be a bit big. I would have preferred a smaller nib, which I believe could have countered the larger size, and pressure I felt when wearing for long sessions.

The 2-pin connection is tight, and one must take care when connecting the cables, but once done, microphonics are non-existent, and isolation was excellent using the included medium tips. I found no driver flex upon inserting either, as some have noted in their reviews.

The molded resin shells, combined with the flexible, pliable cable, make for an understated IEM, that could bely what follows.





Sound Impressions:

Listening impressions were made on the HiBy R4 and MBP/HiBy FD5 combinations, along with the Cayin N6ii, A01 motherboard.

Summary:

Some have labeled the KE4 as open with a more neutral signature, while others mention a smoother, bass-oriented signature. Tip choice plays a part in this, but the signature is not neutral to me other than the fairly smooth sound graphs that many produce. I find the good bass bleeds into the lower mids, which can either enhance or hinder your experience whether you like that or not. To me, the mids are the star, and this hinders slightly, but the bass quality is such that it can also be a positive.



Timbre:

As mentioned above, many find the sound neutral, with a smooth character that promotes a bit of warmth. I do find there is some warmth to the signature, but the bass overrides the neutral character to me. The dual dynamic driver allows the low end to shine with a good thump. The midbass is full and robust, mimicking the “Harmon target,” which, in this case, I like. The bulbous feel to it allows that thump to drive the foundation without promoting too much into the lower midrange.

The tight control of that bass in a speedy attack and decay allows the lower mids to shine. I find this to be the best part of the signature, as others have mentioned (there are many parts in which we agree). Vocal treatment is especially good here, as are acoustic guitar sounds in this range. Again, the word control comes to mind, which may seem a bit antithetical to the warmer signature. At least in my mind.

The natural character of the whole midrange is one of the best I have heard of late, and never did I tire of listening at multiple volume levels. That warmth in the upper midrange may not be to everyone’s liking, but for me, it hits all of the sweet spots in warmth, and a lack of intrusion upon my listening enjoyment.

The 3-6 kHz region is elevated, and some will not like this hit, but to me, it promotes the movement into the lower treble regions without becoming gritty or too obtuse. That said, female vocals in this region can come off slightly harsh, but I make it a point to listen to the whole signature without focusing on any seemingly short temperamental discrepancies. Some will like that fuller note of female vocals and the weight that grit provides. I am one of those who do.



There is a push in the upper treble, which mimics the push down low, making for a more U-shaped signature than a tighter V-shaped one. This leads to the smoother, more laidback character of the overall signature to me.

A term thrown around, which I was not previously aware of, is “new meta” in IEM tuning, which adds to the midrange tuning, moving slightly away from the typical Harman Target. What I find here is that the midrange is sumptuous to me, while the “more typical” high and low tuning affords a coherent overall signature. I am a fan of not using the Harman Target as a choice, especially since I prefer a warmer signature. And in that regard, the KE4 matches my preferences.



Staging & Dynamics:

With a smoother signature IEM, you run the risk of not having clearly defined layers, which can hinder transient response across the spectrum. The KE4 does suffer in that regard, but I find the melding of those layers as complimentary to each other as opposed to separating. Since the character, to me, is slightly smoother, it is natural to have less differentiation in the layers, presenting a more thoroughly mixed signature than defined layers.

This hurts in defining the exact placing of instruments, but again, I look at the overall signature as opposed to the individual parts. If a more analytically accurate signature is what you want, then you should probably look elsewhere. The KE4 is about musicality across the three dimensions, and it does so with aplomb.

Griffin Silver in his excellent review of the KE4 for Headphones.com mentioned this regarding soundstage: “Now, spaciousness or “soundstage” are very subjective qualities. Even if we hear the tone fairly similarly between us, we’re not guaranteed to unpack the same features the exact same way. For example, instead of perceiving a difference between tonal regions as “distance,” I could very well see a listener perceiving this kind of tone as just “claustrophobic due to excess lower midrange, or a deficit in the upper midrange.” That said, KE4 struck me as one of the more spacious IEMs I’ve tried, so if you’re the kind of listener that cares about that, KE4 might end up being a good choice for that.”

I have to agree with this assessment and understand the necessity of quantifying soundstage for listeners. We hear things differently, and perceive “distances” of stage differently, too. As such, I agree that the KE4 presents itself as



Pairings:

The KE4 paired easily with everything I tried, from my MBP to the HiBy R4 and FD5 (tethered to my MBP). It also worked well with my older Cayin N6ii.

I never felt a lack of power using any sources, and the sound coming through matched my observations above. I also wouldn’t say there was a single favorite of mine, which means it scales quite well across sources.



Select Comparisons:

Shanling MG100 ($159)


Courtesy of my Headfonics review

MG100

When I reviewed the MG100, it was a step back in the right direction for Shanling, one of my favorite companies. I also felt the price point was quite good, too, making for a very good listen. Much of what is listed below comes straight from my Headfonics review but with added comparisons between the MG100 and KE4.


Technical:

The Shanling MG100 uses a 10mm dynamic driver and HCCAW voice coil with a lightweight temperature-resistant ceramic diaphragm enclosed within a dual magnet design.

Instead of the MG800’s titanium, the MG100 reverts to a 7000-series aluminum carved on a 5-axis CNC machine for the sound chamber.

The MG100 is rated for an impedance of 16Ω and sensitivity of 113+/-3 dB @1kHz making it an easy-to-drive IEM out of most sources, be it a dongle or a DAP.

Add in two filter choices in brass for a balanced/universal sound or stainless steel for a bassy engaging signature, and the MG100 has the additional benefit of being able to offer two distinct sound signatures.


Design:

One good thing I know about metal is that 6000-series and 7000-series aluminum are light and easy to work with. This means it is perfect for the housing on the MG100.

Using 5-axis CNC machining for precise shaping, the aluminum allows for consistency in manufacturing. You can also tailor the sound chambers acoustically, which is what Shanling has done in the smaller teardrop-shaped shell.

The MG100 build quality is top-notch with deep glossy black coloring, which, while fingerprint-prone, does look stunning in a subdued manner.

A single vent hole is hidden on top of the faceplate, and the precise fitting of the two “halves” allows for the MMCX connection point to fit into its slot without issue.

The screw-in filter choices also function without bother, and I switched between the brass and stainless steel easily. Mounting any of the four choices of tips was fairly easy, and secure due to the quality craftsmanship and a good lip on the nozzle.


Performance:

When I heard the older ME100, I quickly discovered that Shanling was taking the build and sound of their IEMs seriously. Since then, Shanling has developed many new IEMs, most at a higher price.

The MG100 I like to think hearkens back to the company’s roots: quality sound and build at an affordable price.

Understanding that tip and filter choice change the signature, sometimes dramatically; the MG100 comes across with two distinct signatures, changed a bit by tip choice (as expected).

I found the bass-oriented (stainless steel) filter to indeed enhance the MG100 bass amount. The thumping bass did bleed into the mids, but not without control. I enjoyed the enhanced low-end and bass ear tips as well.

The brass filter (balanced) added distinct textural notes to the music, with better definition and clarity, which was missing with the bass filter. The ear tip choice was the same (bass tips), which made the change a bit more remarkable to me.

Compared to the KE4, the MG100 is much more energetic, with a thinner note quality. The midrange is pushed up and forward, almost too much in comparison. This has what I would consider a more “Far East” energy to it, and while it does not fit my tuning preferences, it still comes across as accurate.

I found the bass to be under tight control, more so than the KE4, but in less quantity. That note control carried across the spectrum, making the MG100 sound a bit more accurate, but with thinner note qualities to it. I will admit I prefer the KE4 to the MG100 after listening extensively.


QoA Aviation ($199)

Courtesy of my Headfonics review

Aviation

The Aviation was the first QoA product I had heard, and I came away impressed by its full note, with adequate bass. I can see why many are impressed by the marque, and feel this is a very good competitor to the KE4.

Technical:

The QoA Aviation is a 4-driver per side universal IEM with a bulbous fitting shell. It houses one dynamic driver. (8mm, full range), and three balanced armatures (dual Knowles 32873 drivers for midrange and treble response, and one Knowles 33518 for the ultra-high frequency band).

The Aviation has a sensitivity of 118 dB @1kHz and a somewhat high (for an IEM) 39Ω impedance rating, but overall, it is a sensitive and fairly easy-to-drive IEM on paper.

Design:

The Aviation has a 3D-molded, printed shell smoothed by hand polishing. It comes in two stunning hand-painted colors, Mirage and Galaxy (our review sample). The typical conch nub is present to help fit inside your ear.

The three-piece unit fits together smoothly due to hand polishing. A vent hole is on the back side, as opposed to the inside, allowing the dynamic driver to breathe.

The silver nozzle has an ornate silver ring around the three-hole patterned sound tubes, which is the first I have seen. Those sound tubes are inset into a molded form and set inside the nozzle ring.

The overall design is as expected at this price. I had no trouble wearing the Aviation for long periods, even if the bulbous shape was a bit larger than I preferred. The unit stuck out slightly from my ears, but not by an unacceptable amount.

Performance:

The QoA Aviation presents a vibrant, smooth character with an even frequency response. A small peak at 3kHz gives resolve to the upper mid-region.

Another fairly steep peak at the 8kHz region (then drop) adds brilliance in the treble region but without too much peakiness or sparkle. The drop after the 8kHz peak makes for a vibrant, but not overly exuberant, signature.

To me, the tuning is very similar to the KE4 but with more of a veiled sound. The bass is under better control to me as well, without carrying into the lower mids, which may fit some tastes better. The KE4 comes across as smoother overall, but the Aviation has an organic feel to it, which seems slightly more detailed. I cannot say I have a preference, other than there is a certain note of analytical artificial quality to the percussion instruments on the Aviation.



LetShuoer Cadenza 4 ($249)

Cadenza 4

I also came away impressed with the S15’s “little brother.” The full noted signature comes across with an energetic response, which makes for a pleasant, peppy listen.

Technical:

The Cadenza4 is a hybrid universal in-ear monitor using a 10mm dual-chambered beryllium-coated dynamic driver and 3 BA drivers.

The proprietary dynamic driver exhibits the qualities of being lightweight and exceptionally rigid. You get a mix of BA drivers, 1 from Sonion and 2 from Knowles using a series of 3D printed nanometer acoustic tubes combined with a 4-way electronic crossover.

The Cadenza4 has an impedance of 15Ω @1kHz and a sensitivity rating of 102 db/Vrms so it is quite an easy IEM to drive.

Design:

The Cadenza 4 is made from a 3D-printed resin, in a typical teardrop shape, with a larger nub to help with fit. A narrow nozzle helps with insertion, and the overall quality is good with three well-fitting parts. The faceplate shines in silver with the LETSHUOER logo in black on both the left and right sides. The Fit of the faceplate seems off, but when you feel for a gap between the shell and faceplate there isn’t one.

The shell fits nearly flush in my average-sized ears, with no discomfort, which led to long listening sessions. Thankfully there is a dedicated sheath for an ear hook, too. This made the cable lay in a much better position behind my ear, even wearing my reading glasses.

There are minor microphonics associated with the cable, but not as much as some in this category. The cable has a clear plastic rectangular cinch, which works quite well above the burnished silver Y-splitter. The two-wire cable contains 392 strands per cable of silver-plated monocrystalline copper.

As many companies are doing, there are three jacks included as mentioned above. Instead of sliding in, complete with a slot and having a screw cover; the Cadenza 4 only has the slide-in part. But I did not worry about it coming loose since the two parts fit together with good pressure.

The cable laid nicely when unwound, but it did take a bit to do so. I found that if you ran your hand down the cable as you unwound it, the shape immediately went straight.

Combine all of this, and I think the Cadenza 4 fits and functions very well.

Performance:

The Cadenza 4 sounds more towards the neutral part of the sound spectrum, with a natural uncolored feel to it, which departs from some of LETSHUOER’s previous offerings. While not bass-shy, it evenly presents both ends to make for that balanced signature. Think “just right” in the realm of Goldilocks.

There is no denying the full noted signature of the Cadenza 4. Coming through thick and layered, it may be too much for some. The bass hits fairly low but is under excellent control when compared to the KE4, but there seems to be a lack of vibrancy to it. The Cadenza 4 comes across as safe, without a lot of excitement comparatively.

I also note that tendency for an artificial quality to the percussion here, something that lacks an organic feel to it. Even though the KE4 sounds much more laidback, I preferred it due to what I might call a boring signature for the Cadenza 4, comparatively.



finale:

As stated above, this is my first encounter with the Kiwi Ears brand. I came away impressed with pretty much everything about the brand and the KE4. The low end comes across with gusto and bite, even if there is a slight bleed into the mids.

And to me, that midrange is the star. Vocals come across with sublime levels of clarity and detail in a thoroughly organic and accurate manner. Instruments in the same plane sound sumptuous in a complimentary fashion, making for an almost lusty quality to it.

While I do wish for a bit more bite up top and a further stretched treble note (which is odd for me to say since I prefer a more rolled-off top end), which might make this the best in class. As such, it is still at or near the top but misses that final polish.

Another way to look at that though, is the smooth laidback character compliments the midrange like not much else that is out. This is an IEM equally at home for the commute in the morning, giving you confidence as you start the day; or once you return for that sit down with your favorite single malt. The KE4 can fulfill both roles, without bother and that may be its best quality.

I thank Kiwiears for the opportunity to review one of their fine wares. I thoroughly enjoyed the listen and look forward to their future endeavors.

Cheers.

SJY Horizon ($999): A unique-looking headphone, with superb sound.



SJY Horizon

Musicteck

Intro:

I have never heard of any headphones from SJY, but I noted the devoted following after Musicteck contacted me about a review. It is telling that Z-Reviews has such high words for the marque and this model in particular, stating point blank that he thought the Umi was a fabulous model. Then, he was astounded by the model here, the Horizon.

So, when Musicteck contacted me about reviewing one of Jeffrey’s headphones, I quickly accepted, reading what I could and watching the review mentioned above. When someone such as Z-Reviews calls the Horizon the “most detailed set of headphones” he has on his wall, that means something.

While I awaited the arrival, I read what I could but found a small but devoted following and a commensurate amount of material online. Suffice it to say, that as unique as the design is, the sound is up there in regards to some of the headphones I consider the best. There is a reason these are called, “a mini-Abyss at ¼ the price.”

Upon arrival, the unit was checked to ensure all was good. I then let it play for a minimum of 75 hours before any critical assessment was made. I am not sure if the model I received was brand new, or only new, but the burn in is something I continue to do.



Specs:

• Cable: Balanced 4-pin XLR
• Weight: 410g +/- 5g
• Sensitivity: 88db/Mv
• Impedance: 15 Ohm

In The Box:

SJY Horizon
XLR 4-pin cable
That’s it

Gear Used/Compared:

ZMF Eikon ($1399)
Audeze LCD-3 ($2299)
Crosszone CZ10E ($1000)

HiBy R4/XDuoo TA30
MBP/HiBy FD5
MBP/iFi Pro iDSD/iCAN



Unboxing:

Opening the box, I was met with the Horizon tucked neatly and safely into a soft foam cutout, with the adjusting slider tucked between the two layers. I did find that the brass top needed further screwing in for one reason or another.

Presented with the headphones was the included XLR 4-pin balanced headphone cable, but no case.



Design/Tech details:

Square. It's not what you might expect outside of a Stax headphone, but here it is. The ear pads are magnetically held, and I did find out that the second-gen headphones carry a slightly different magnetic pull with more force for holding the pads in place. I still knocked the pads a couple of times before I acclimated myself with where to grab the unit.

The open-backed design can come in black (like mine), purple, or with a custom design. I did note that some early models carried ornate wood patterns, which would have been cool to see.

The headphones are heavy, but not so much that I did not find them comfortable for long periods of listening, thanks to the dual headband mechanism. The inner band is made of stiff leather, while the outer band is shaped aluminum. Comfort is the key with a heavier headphone such as these, and I found no issue with long-term listening.

The aluminum carries into the yokes, with clearly labeled “L” and “R” on the back side of those yokes. This makes it eminently readable when putting the Horizon on, and there was no need to search for the label.

The build shows its hand-built quality with small “discrepancies,” lending a somewhat patinaed look that carries on the elegance. With the pads off, you can see the gold-encrusted diaphragm, adding a bit more to that elegant look.

The headphones are still heavy, but the square ear pads make for a comfortable fit. The ear cups can swivel 360 degrees, which did take a bit of getting used to, and initially, I kept knocking the pads off. After several uses, I was used to the mechanisms.

The in-house made driver carries high-grade magnets with an aluminum frame.

Even with the large square shape, I never found the Horizon to be too large, and I could easily manage them when off my head. I will note that unless you hold both ear cups, one (or both) will swivel, which could hit something. I know because they did...



Sound Impressions:

All impressions were made using the HiBy R4, HiBy FD5, XDuoo TA-30, iFi iDSD Pro/iCAN Pro combo, and MBP. Comparisons were made to the ZMF Eikon, Audeze LCD-3, and Crosszone CZ-10E. The cables used were the included XLR 4-pin, the Crosszone 6.35mm se, a 4.4mm bal cable from Double Helix (for my Kennerton Magni V2), and a 4-pin XLR fro LQi.

Summary:

Details. Detail retrieval with exceptional clarity. This is one of the very best-balanced headphone signatures I have ever heard. Period. Without prominence in any segment, the Horizon promotes a thoroughly natural and organic signature, with a concise quality that carries exceptional clarity throughout.

I found myself reaching for the volume knob to turn it up and see where my tolerances lie. The amplifiers I used broke down before I did. That is until I paired the iFi combo listed. This immediately became my favorite pair, allowing the Horizon to shine with a warm signature I appreciate through the tubes and the ability to run the solid state as needed. Bass reached deep and controlled. The top end shone without the hint of sibilance or tizziness. The midrange also felt strangely linear, pushing slightly forward without becoming lifted as so often happens.

I quickly found out that while some amplification units work, others make the Horizon sing like it should. Finding that combination can be an exercise in multitudes, but it is well worth the effort. I did appreciate most that entered the fray, but one clearly stood above the rest.



Timbre:

With the level of detail retrieval that the Horizon has, one would expect it to lean towards an analytical sound. But it does not. Instead, the SJY presents an exceptionally musical signature that puts the emotive effect on par with that musically adept clarity. I find that the levels of detail are as good as anything I have tried this side of the Meze Empyrean (which, to me, is very detailed, yet musical).

There is an amount of warmth to the signature, which can seemingly get lost in the level of detail present. But to me, this is the emotive part, driving the musicality forward in an additive effect to that exceptional detail we hear. The organic nature of the signature is seemingly counterintuitive to the clarity and detail, but that flowing signature plays across the spectrum, providing the platform for the levels of detail heard to simply put, shine.

Staging & Dynamics:

The height in the soundstage can seem artificially high, but to me that is by design, highlighting the melodious midrange, which to use the word again is exceptional. Very good width and depth afford the whole picture to be naturally placed within scope; which in turn allows each instrument or vocal to be heard distinctly, adding to the clarity I hear.

Punctuating drum strikes or cymbal hits come across as accurate with nary a hint of artificiality or too much sizzle. Accurate and succinct, the snare hits define the musical foundation. This was a case again where I could continue to raise the volume level without the bother of anything becoming strident, strained, or peaky. I continued to be amazed.

Male vocals carried the lower midrange with aplomb and accuracy. I found you could easily discern the breathiness in the notes and intake of breaths. Note weight did not become thin, either. Good heft, without becoming bloated, ruled the reggae notes of Sublime on “Feel Like That,” while the deep bass drum hits covered the low end without becoming intrusive.

Female vocal songs such as Youn Sun Nah’s version of “Favorite Things” came across as black between notes, and I could feel her voice punch that black void, producing a melodic sound that was tender yet eerily pulsating in their presence. This level of accuracy was startling. But not because it was of such a pulsating quality as to hinder the music but because that pulsating was entrancing. Accuracy barely began to describe what I was hearing.



Pairings:

Finding the right source equipment for the Horizon is an exercise in adjusting your attitude. While some of what I found that could power the Horizon worked, those sources did not satiate my listening pleasures enough. I think this is one of the more cumbersome headphones in which to find the right synergy that I have done of late. But the exercise was worth it. Boy was it worth it.

By far, my favorite pairing was using the iFi Pro iDSD & iCAN Pro combination. Alternating between full-on tube sound and solid state, I found that solid-state operation drove the Horizon to higher volume levels (switching between the two and leaving the volume set), providing a bit more airiness to the notes, with additional space offered for the vibrant but still full note to breath. This allowed the levels of detail to flourish without becoming strident or artificial. Astounding levels of detail continued as the volume knob was pushed higher and higher, where sometimes that increase in volume can overcome detail.

The full tube sound, on the other hand, added warmth, which is my preferred signature. But it did so without losing note weight or becoming bloated. To me, the bass treatment was better using the Tube+ option, adding the right amount of grit and depth to the low end, complimenting the rest of the signature quite nicely.

The XDuoo TA-30 is an exercise in how much is too much. Outrageously conservative in their power rating, the TA-30 has enough juice to bring headphones to their knees. The Horizon, on the other hand, did the old “come at me bro” in response. Since the

TA-30 has only a 6.35mm se jack, so the sound was not as fulfilling to me. The level of detail was certainly there, but notes came across as thinner but more succinct with quicker response than the iFi combo. This is not a bad thing, and the tube sound emanating from the TA-30 would be an exceptional pairing for classical music to me. This would allow the Horizon to promote its delicate levels of clarity while filling the air with a succinct personality that matches classical music.

I found that while the HiBy FD5 could surprisingly drive the Horizon to adequate levels of listening, it was quite stressed in doing so. On Class-A, the FD5 became almost too hot to touch, it was working so hard. Running Class-AB the unit was slightly cooler, but still plenty warm. Class AB also presents my least favorite pairing, with just adequate levels of detail and a transient response that seemed slow.

Select Comparisons:

Audeze LCD-3 ($1945):

This may not seem like a fair fight, but since the technology is similar, plus the LCD-3 is the bar against I judge all headphones such as the Horizon, it is fair to me. An older design, but still one of my all-time favorite headphones that I don’t get to listen to enough.

Technical:

Having an impedance of “only” 100 ohms makes the planar driver of the LCD-3 much easier to drive (I almost forgot to lower the volume when I plugged it in). The 106mm fazor management planar magnetic driver carries a sensitivity of 101 dB/1mW, making it more sensitive than the Horizon as well. So, two strikes against the Horizon, right? Having a much higher driving level and a lower sensitivity would certainly make you think so.

That is of course not the whole equation, though.

Design:

Some think Audeze headphones carry a larger ugliness to them that cannot make up for the handcrafted wood. That is certainly their right, but to me, the LCD-3 exudes grace, elegance, and performance all the same. It is large and heavy, but the suspension system alleviates that as it should.

When looking at the somewhat flimsy leather band, which acts as the under suspension you think that can’t possibly work. But working in concert with the aluminum headband, it does. Some find that when properly adjusted, the two bands do not touch. When I have them adjusted, they touch, but it is not a bother.

Every part exudes a quality that a flagship should, from the hand-polished wood cups to the stanchions, anodized yoke, and suspension system show the level of care used when producing their headphones. The pads are thick but do get hot in warm weather. But I can wear the LCD-3 all day without bother, and the clamp pressure exuded makes for a proper fit, without being like a clamp, or falling off during movement.

I would rate the build quality above the Horizon a bit, but for twice the price, that isn’t unexpected.

Performance:

The LCD-3 carries a typical large planar driver signature that is pure, natural, and accurate. The level of detail wrought from the LCD-3 would make an English teacher blush. I would rate it on par with the Horizon but with a bit less note weight. Mind you, Audeze is known for carrying excellent weight in attack and decay, but the LCD-3 falls slightly behind the Horizon in note weight.

Where the LCd-3 shines in its level of presentation. Dynamically accurate and vibrant, without becoming strident or overly weighted towards either end, the LCD-3 combines the best of legendary Audeze bass quality and a treble note that is essentially legendary as well. This is still my favorite all-time headphone, but the Horizon has made me think twice about that because it seemingly can compete. And compete well. Pulsating bass drives me to raise the volume, just like the Horizon does.



Crosszone CZ10E ($999):

The Crosszone CZ10E, along with the CZ8A came to me, and I will admit I was not ready for their unique driver arrangement and quality of sound offered. The CZ8A might be the higher-end model, that carries a bit better sound as well, the it was the CZ10E that stole me away, with its energetic, vibrant personality that presented an extremely musical quality that now matches how I feel about the Horizon.

Both are quality offerings at a similar price. The CZ10E is of course a closed-back headphone and could provide the perfect complement to the Horizon.

Technical:

Running three dynamic drivers (two at 35mm, one for low-frequency notes like a woofer and the other for the opposite channel; and one at 23mm for high-frequency notes like a tweeter), with one presenting the audio sound from the opposite channel, the CZ10E presents a unique “speaker-like” set-up with its sound. Purported (and verified by me) to be one of the most speaker-like headphones due to the feeding of the opposite sound signature to each ear, the baffles surrounding the headphone act to further diffuse and properly place the sound, presenting a 3D dimensionality to it that is hard to replicate short of a home system.

With a lower impedance at 75 ohms and a decidedly higher sensitivity at 99dB, the CZ10E is also easier to drive than the Horizon.

Design:

The unique driver arrangement makes for an interesting shape, to say the least. Triangular-ovoid in shape, the cups fit surprisingly well, with excellent comfort to boot. The spring-laden suspension system is made for lighter clamping pressure but is more accurate in placing that pressure on your head. Thus, the headphones could be worn for long periods without bother and not too much pressure.

That swing-out clamp makes the headphones easy to put on and take off. Since most of us move the headphones out, stressing the headband a bit, this is alleviated by that swinging clamp. The headband could use a bit more cushioning to me, but the pressure was never a problem, since it was spread evenly across the top of my head and ears.

Performance:

The Crosszone is an acquired taste for some. Mimicking a two-channel system has its merits and its pitfalls. Should it fall short, it can be catastrophic. But when it works. It can be a unique experience that promotes sound at the highest level.

After acclimating to the sound, I came to appreciate the holographic nature of that cross-driver, which added a layer to the out-of-head experience. Bass reaches low and is controlled. But not so much as to be analytical or thin in quality. The bass does not carry over into the mids, either.

I find the midrange to be the star, carrying beautiful guitar reverence and vocals that sing the way a master recording should. Allowed to stretch the airiness of sound quality, both male & female vocals have a lilt to them that is delicate, but forceful. An elusive balance indeed.

The treble reaches high enough, without a strident nature, to promote extension I appreciate without it becoming grating or too high. That reach stretches the soundstage height as well, while those mids add depth. I can raise the volume on the Crosszone’s almost as easily as the Horizon.

I will admit that some songs can come across a bit veiled or rather flat. But this could be because of how the overall presentation occurs, filling in the necessary space with that holographic effect may spread note quality out giving that false flat feel.

Completely complementary to each other, pairing of both would be a fantastic choice.



ZMF Eikon ($1399):

The Eikon came, left, and returned to my stable when I realized what a mistake I had made. I will admit I purchased a used set for another Headfonics review, and I am glad I did. The sound of this closed-back headphone comes quite close to mimicking an open-back set, and I really like the way Zach & company makes headphones.

Technical:

With a frequency response of 10hz – 30000 kHz, an impedance of 300 Ohms, and a sensitivity of 98dB/mW, the Eikon is harder to drive but not as hard as the Horizon to get quality sound from. I found the iFi Pro duo can handle the details quite nicely when called upon, at a much lower level to attain the same qualities.

Design:

The Eikon is gorgeous. I happened upon the same Camphor wood for my second model, too. I was looking for another wood, but when this one came about, I realized that I would be quite happy with it.

The Eikon is quite heavy, and it better have a very good suspension system to support it. The Eikon does. A thicker leather band under the headband strap immediately tells you this headphone means business. The thick padding under the headband is appreciated as well, allowing for long listening sessions without bother.

Of the two pads included, I preferred the suede pads for comfort and a bit better bass quantity to me. While they can get a bit warm, I appreciated that the suede also allowed the ear cups to breathe.

The yokes are a mix of plastic and aluminum that holds the stanchions in place once adjusted. I found the adjusting mechanism to be almost too tight, but realize that I would rather have it that way than too loose. And, if you dare, a small flat-headed screw allows for a slight adjustment of the tension.

The black gloss of yoke, stanchion, and rivets adds to the upscale look, and I am not worried in the least about any potential rubbing. The Eikon carries that upscale look to it, and the performance can back it up.

Performance:

When I first put these back on, I relished the quantity of detail retrieval had across many genres. Succinct, tight, and controlled, but without becoming too thin or fragile. The right amount of note weight is had across the board.

I think the sheer speed at which the bass decays plays a large part in that accuracy and wonderful transient response. If the bass were to linger any longer, the signature would become slow and muddy to me. ZMF has struck the right balance here with an extraordinary midrange coupled with the bass to present one of my favorite signatures when it comes to a more neutral, natural & organically smooth presentation.

Vocals come across as sumptuous and satiating without becoming slow or too molasses-like. The Eikon can present an attacking, provocative vocal sound when the song calls for it.

But don’t let that smooth character make you think it cannot perform accurately or is too far away from an accurate signature. That would be a big mistake.



finale:

The SJY Horizon has some extremely tough competition at hand. Simply including the models above shows that. But when I put these back on to write this final bit, I realized that the Horizon can fit right in, and mostly without bother.

It is hard to drive, so you had better have a solid-state or tube amplifier that can be run by a nuclear power unit...almost. But, if you do, the Horizon simply sings. Of the models compared above, this is the only one where I continually reached for the volume knob to raise the level.

When properly driven, the Horizon becomes something truly special. A sound comes about that is near-spiritual in presentation. The level of detail retrieval can bring a sinner to their knees, crying “Hallelujah!” while repenting completely. A cliché or outwardly sentimental spray of words, but I do mean it in earnest.

It is not perfect. I had issues with the ear cups swinging like a wind chime in a breeze. I also had issues with the adjusting mechanism, but a simple tightening of the Allen head would take care of that, similarly to the Eikon. I also wish the 4-pin XLR cable was a foot longer. The included cable is meant for near amplification use only. But, considering many of us have longer cables, that is a small concern.

The sound quality coming forth overshadows any “discrepancies” that may be had without a doubt, and bother.

But what I can say to finish this, is that the Horizon is absolutely one of the very best headphones I have reviewed. Ever.

Edifier Stax S10 ($299): A TWS to compete with the best? You bet.


Stax S10

Intro:

Recently, having come off the Edifier Stax Spirit S5 review, I was eager to try the new TWS earbud from the company. The Spirit S5 took the good parts of the S3, making them better while enhancing the sound, too. I came away very impressed with the new model. So, when offered the S10 for review, I wholeheartedly agreed. I knew nothing about it and thought this would be a good opportunity to try a TWS earbud from Edifier after several wireless headphone models.

The S10 is mine to keep, but may be asked back for any reason. This will not play into my review, nor should it. Plus, this unit will not be flipped. That is still majorly uncool.

The unit was checked for functionality and then played on various devices for 75 hours before critical listening happened. I have always believed that the user is interested in how the unit sounds “down the road,” and not just in a new condition.

Specs:

12mm modular planar magnetic driver
Qualcomm QCC5181 Bluetooth SoC BT 5.4
Bluetooth Protocol: A2DP, AVRCP, HFP
Charging Port: USB-C (Type-C) Input: 5V⎓ 200 mA (Earphones), 5V⎓ 1A (Charging Case)
Charging Time: About 1.5 hours
Frequency Response: 20Hz - 40kHz
IP Rating: IP54
Playtime: ANC ON: 18 hours, ANC OFF: 28 hours (15 min for 2hrs playtime)
Audio Codecs: LHDC 5.0, LDAC, aptX™ Lossless, aptX™ Adaptive, aptX™ Voice, Snapdragon Sound™, AAC, SBC
Sound Pressure Level: 92 ± 3 dB(A)
Net Weight: Approx. 56g

In The Box:

Edifier Stax S10
Case
USB-C charging cable
Ear tips in 5 sizes
Owner's manual
Quick start guide

Gear Used/Compared:

UM U-Free TWS ($349)
AK UW100MKII TWS ($299)
Bowers & Wilkins Pi7 S2 ($399)

iPhone 13 Pro Max
HiBy R4
MBP

Unboxing:

The unboxing experience of Edifier products has always been top class, and the S10 is no different. From a hard cover slide-off sleeve to the same material of the inner box, it is solid and upscale.

Removing the top lid, you are first presented with an "envelope" that contains the manual and quick start guide. Underneath, you are presented with the case, and the buds inside. Below are pegs, which hold the various sized (and color coordinated) ear tips.

Lifting the plastic formed cutout, you have a box, which contains the charging cable (on the short side), and a nice carrying pouch for keeping the case and cable in together. A thoughtful inclusion.

Nothing frilly, nothing missing. That to me typifies Edifier in their presentation.





Design:

The S10 carries the shape of older BT devices before they were turned into earbuds. I was not a fan of the shape until I put this particular set in my ear. Knowing the fit is one direction, the fit is very good.

Smooth, glossy, black plastic abound on the earbuds, and they do draw fingerprints, unfortunately. The “face plate” does carry a sparkly black tint to it, which is subdued and classy to me. There is also a microphone hole on that face plate.

The bulbous chamber backs the shorter nozzles, making for that good fit of which I spoke. The long flange does not carry any controls on the faceplate, which hopefully can be fixed in the next iteration. To me, that surface is begging for slide volume controls much like the current crop of wireless headphones have.

The actual control center lies on the flange’s top side. A press of the control area activates the necessary functions. This to me could be better thought out, with the incorporation of that fabulous face plate in my opinion.

Handling the TWS units was easy, too, with good tactility due to the sharper shape of the flanges. Upon removal, the sound does stop, which is pretty typical and much appreciated.

The shape also carries three microphones per side, with one just above the nozzle, one on the front of the flange (closer to your mouth), and one on the faceplate.




Tech Highlights:

The 12mm planar driver is purported to be the first of its kind with ANC. Its ultra-thin diaphragm 2μm polymer substrate is engineered for fast and accurate transient responses, which planars are known for. The push/pull magnet ensures equal forces across all movements, further stabilizing sound reproduction.

Using the company’s patented 2nd generation EqualMass™ wiring technology for steady piston-motion planar driver performance also aids in the speed of sound reproduction. This symmetric supporting wire stabilizes the diaphragm for a more uniform response.

With a total thickness of 10μm, the S10 driver system presents itself as highly musical.

Each pair is calibrated together to ensure musical accuracy across both sides, something they also do on the S5 headphones.



Wireless Connectivity:

Qualcomm’s QCC5181 chipset drives BT5.4, allowing for CODEC support of LHDC 5.0, LDAC, aptX™ Lossless, aptX™ Adaptive, aptX™ Voice, Snapdragon Sound™, AAC, and SBC. Snapdragon sound can only be used currently with devices that support such technology. I did not have anything of the sort in-house.

With the ability to multi-connect, you can play music on your laptop or DAP and then answer a call on your Smartphone. Returning to music is automatically taken care of once the call ends.

Qualcomm’s 3rd generation adaptive ANC comes with the S10 and can be toggled on or off within the ConneX app. I used the adaptive ANC for the majority of the testing period.



Battery Life:

When using ANC, battery life (with case) is limited to 18 hours. Using ANC off allows up to 28 hours of usage with the case. A 15-minute charge in the case will yield 2 hours of listening.

I do wish that TWS earbud battery technology would catch up to some of the monstrous levels afforded on wireless headphones. Hopefully, that day is coming.

App:

At first glance, the app seems quite rudimentary. Delving further into the settings, you are presented with a whole host of features and functions. Knowing this, I immediately entered the “Control settings” and set “volume up” for a double pinch on the left earbud and “volume down” on the right. I rarely use the FF or REW functions on wireless items, so this made sense to me.

You can also set press sensitivity and such things as “find my product” in the menus. Moving back to the main screen, you can access the noise cancellation controls as well as “Sound effects” (EQ), and game mode to keep latency low (89ms).

A custom EQ allows for four frequency bands to be adjusted, just like the S5 (which makes sense; it’s the same app), along with the level of Q-factor, which increases or decreases the center of the frequency involved. This can be used to make the notes “fatter” or “thinner” allowing an adjustment to attack and decay. I did play around with it on the S5 and found it useful. The involved frequencies can also be customized to better acclimate for your tastes by long pressing on the number at the bottom.

You can share your EQ settings via the “More” button at the top of the EQ screen.

Activating the EQ settings does cause the music to pause while the setting is adjusting. A minor annoyance to me.



Sound Impressions:

The following sound impressions were made using the S10 tethered to the iPhone 13 Pro Max, MBP, and HiBy R4. Comparisons are noted below. Impressions are listed here using no EQ other than the “dynamic” setting on the iPhone and R4. The MBP running Tidal was left to the hands of whatever Tidal threw its way.

Summary:

The Edifier Stax S10 comes across with a near-neutral sound with a punchy albeit not deep-reaching bass. Using the ConneX app, you can tailor the sound to your delight. The familiar planar sound in the upper mids takes to the forefront, presenting succinct “S” sounds without too much tizziness or sibilance. Mids sit slightly above the middle but could be mistaken for dead-center on many recordings. As such, it pulls the ends together, melding the sound signature into a cohesive mass of sound.

Tight bass lines almost hide the lack of true sub-bass reach, but if you listen you can quickly discern the true depth isn’t there like a dynamic driver. That said, when called upon, such as with hard-hitting bass drums, the presence you feel replicates the missing deep reach.



Timbre:

The S10 comes across as one of the lesser-colored TWS earbuds I have heard of late. While many espouse deep-reaching bass or artificially accented top end, the S10 provides the listener with a clear delineation that is neither too dry and analytical nor too musically colored in sound. Near-neutral in presentation, the sound presented allows the listener to discern good detail and clarity that many bass-heavy TWS earbuds can miss. I appreciate the lack of artificiality in the signature, which does come across as natural and organic, but without becoming too smooth or out of sorts.

On some planar units, the midrange “presence” can become a bit harsh and artificial to me, but the S10 presents the sound as mostly realistic, in a somewhat atypical manner. The level of clarity that comes through is quite good and on par with its peers, bettering some (see below). Suffice it to say, that the S10 fits in quite nicely in the group.

The slight warmth to the sound plays an additive role when using the “dynamic” EQ setting. This becomes obvious when using a device that does not have the ConneX app on it, such as my MBP. The “OG” sound coming forth on the MBP is quite pleasant, but lacks a bit of detail, even through Tidal. Good clarity helps to counter the lack of micro-details present, but I enjoyed using the app sound on dynamic through the R4 or my iPhone more than my MBP.

Staging & Dynamics:

The soundstage of the S10 is neither too big and grandiose nor too small. Almost equal in all dimensions allows for the music to spread out logically without skewing in any one direction. The midrange does afford a slight lift to the sound when music such as a saxophone or oboe is played, but not in such a manner that it comes across as in your face. Almost like a soloist moving to the front of the stage for emphasis.

Layering can suffer a lack of differentiation when the song becomes overly complex, but many fall prey to that without losing the good quality emanating from within. The S10 carries on with aplomb and good quality to the note weight, providing good definition and heft, which carries across the 3D stage. Differentiation suffers, as mentioned, but the quality offered is still quite good due to the added dynamics when using that particular EQ setting.

Instrument placement is still good, especially since that cubic experience in presentation allows a finite area to discern said placement. Periphery instruments such as percussive support instruments play their roles on the outer edge, with good depth filling that edge note. This allows the inner instruments to fill in the airy placings between. I found that the tuning led to a melding very near the center, but without feeling too intimate. A funneling effect leads to a narrower scope in presentation, but one that still carries the music accordingly.

Pairings:

My favorite pairing was the HiBy R4, which is now my go-to daily use DAP. I have better-sounding DAPs for sure, but the versatility adds to the equation. Especially since it is my newest DAP as well. An affordable DAP that can stream Tidal & Qobuz easily and play SD cards makes the R4 eminently adaptable. Using the ConneX app, I still used the “dynamic” setting on EQ, which made the bass reach lower, while using Tidal (which enhances bass anyway). I still found the sound to be a bit complicated when the music was, but on songs such as Ibrahim Maalouf’s “Fly with Me,” the individual solos came across as reaching and detailed. Solos such as the trumpets provided enough breathiness to give very good depth while affording space for the notes to linger when called upon.

My iPhone 13 Pro Max was next on the list, and the pairing functioned quite well together. The iPhone is of course limited to AAC CODECS, which makes for a less-than-perfect atmosphere. That said, I was able to play around with the EQ mimicking the Spirit S5’s customization, which added a bit more detail to the notes. This would be a very competent pairing, especially knowing phone calls can be handled well. As such, our son had no problem hearing me on a wind-driven wave day on the lake. I could hear him easily as well. Anymore, this does not seem to be an issue with most competent TWS earbuds. The S10 certainly falls into that category.

My least favorite pairing was with my MBP, even using Tidal or Qobuz. While the pairing worked to present the music, I found it to be a bit thin in note weight and a distinct lack of depth came about, which hindered the presence of the music. Maybe I am being too picky after the good luck of the two other sources listed above, but I could hear a distinct difference. I found it acceptable, but had I not heard the other two first, would most likely have appreciated the sound more.

Select Comparisons:

UM U-Free TWS:



Technical:

Using the Qualcomm® QCC5144 24bit/96kHz high-resolution audio chip, the U-Free has BT 5.0 along with a high magnet 10mm carbon nano Dynamic Driver plus the latest technology silver palladium bone conduction. Bone conduction has been around for a while in UM’s IEMs as well as others such as Fir Audio, to enhance the bass response. It works.

The included app allows you to customize EQ, update the firmware, and change ANC. Battery life (noise cancelation on) of approximately 7+14h (earbuds + charging case) and (noise cancelation off) 8+16h (earbuds + charging case) is a bit on the low side, but the unit is close to three years old. Multiple tips are included for more fit customization and I found myself using a smaller tip than usual for a deeper insertion into my ear.

Design:

I find the beige coloring to be a nice change from the normal all-black units. The shape is a bit bulbous, but I found the 10mm dynamic driver unit and sound chamber. With proper tip choice, the seal is better, giving a better fit, too.

Controls are on the faceplate, which makes for easy use and can be customized somewhat in the app.

There is excellent tactility to the case, making for an excellent feel without the fear of dropping it.

I recall that the U-Free was one of the first to include foam tips for better fit, and thankfully when mounted, still fit in the charging case. I remember lamenting that others did not do this and had to make the foam tips removable to accommodate proper fit when using those others.

Performance:

With a proper fit, the bass reaches deep and accurately, with some rumble, too. I found the level of clarity in the U-Free to be better overall than the S10, but lacked a bit of musicality, tending more towards accuracy than emotion, like the S10.

Clarity comes across as better without losing the weight of notes, giving more detail to the music, without becoming jumbled or conflagrated. I really like the tuning of most UM IEMs, having kept the UM Maestro V2 since I purchased it, and appreciate the family similarity here.

Where the Edifier goes for musicality and a naturally organic sound, the UM goes for accuracy with a distinctness of sound over the emotive effect. Both are very good at what they do, and you will have to decide which you prefer.


A&K UW100MKII:



Technical:

The A&K is the second iteration of the company’s TWS earbud, touting an AKM 32-bit DAC, a Knowles balanced armature driver, and Qualcomm’s QCC 5141 chipset. BT is 5.0, which while not the latest is still quite competent.

Multipoint connectivity allows the user to play from their computer and answer a phone call when needed, switching back automatically. A total of 29 hours of playback can be had when using the case, which is on par with the S10 and better than the U-Free.

Using passive ANC the UW100MKII does not use deliberate ANC, instead relying upon four levels of “ambient mode” to quell outside noises. The A&K even allows you to change the internal DAC filter much like their DAPs, ranging from Sharp Roll-off to Short Delay with its four settings.

Wireless charging is also supported in the case, when needed.

Design:

Another unique design, the faceplate carries a pentagonal shape, acting as the touch area for ambient mode, play/pause, etc. It is a large earbud, larger than the U-Free, but thankfully a multitude of tips is also included for achieving a proper fit. I used my regular-sized tips for the A&K and isolation was very good. The larger size did become a bit of a bother after longer sessions, though.

Performance:

The A&K lies between the UM and the S10 in terms of sound. With clarity closer to the S10, but muddied a bit, the A&K can come across as smooth as the S10. The level of detail retrieval is closer to the U-Free though. I found it a bit bass-boomy, too.

That extra bass can overshadow the sounds coming from the top end, making them seem withdrawn while hindering the midrange’s ability to push forward. That bass reach is low, but combined with the muddy character of attempting to be a basshead TWS earbud, covers what I consider one of the best midranges around in the TWS market.

A near-miss letdown by the veiled signature.


Bowers & Wilkins Pi7 S2:



Technical:

The Pi7 S2 carries a 9.2mm dynamic driver and a single balanced armature on each side. Adaptive Bluetooth through aptX comes about, with easy connection and re-connection when the unit is taken out of the case.

Battery life though, borders on horrendous at “up to 5 hours with ANC off.” In this day and age, that is unacceptable, even if the sound coming forth is exceptional. A total of 16 hours from the case can add to the use, and a 15-minute charge will yield 2 hours. Wireless charging is also supported.

ANC can be set to on, off, or auto, which is the company’s version of adaptive ANC. B&W has always been at the top along with Sony & Sennheiser, regarding their ANC technology and thankfully that carries down to the TWS earbuds. I will add that when engaged, the bass becomes quite boomy.

Design:

B&W has always had a flair for design dating back to their home speakers, and the Pi7 S2 carries that tradition on. With a round push-button-like platform, the Pi7 S2 carries touch controls on that round surface. The model I have is dark blue, which to me makes this the best-looking of the tested models.

The larger knob and earbud make it eminently grabbable, even if it sticks out a bit too much for my liking. Fit is excellent though, with different tips offered to accommodate almost everyone.

Performance:

There is no getting around the booming bass when ANC is engaged. Many manufacturers use the extra bass to cover external noises, and unfortunately, B&W is one of them. At least on their TWS earbuds. I do have a wireless headphone in for review that has ANC but does not hinder audio quality.

That deep-reaching bass is appreciated in genres such as jazz or blues but can hinder the levels of detail coming forth in others. Fortunately, B&W knows a thing or two about tuning, which can counter that with good levels of detail retrieval, and superb vocal treatments.

The Pi7 S2 has probably the best overall sound of the models here, falling slightly behind the U-Free in the level of clarity, but the musical nature of the sound coming forth makes up for that.

That said, it is much costlier, and if I were to go this route, I would skip the Pi7 S2 and go straight to the Pi8 (same price) or the new Pi8 for the same price.



finale:

Edifier is known for producing quality products at an affordable price. They also produce powered speakers and headphones, easily fitting into an upscale system. Wiljen has been privy to their high-end powered speakers and respects the effort. I have a pair of the company’s R1280T BT speakers and like the sound quite a lot.

Knowing this and knowing how I really like the Stax Spirit S5, I appreciate the tuning from the S10. With good detail retrieval and a wonderful midrange, the S10 comes across as natural, and organic but with warmth as well. This can be EQ’d out by choice from the app a bit, but compared to other quality offerings at this range, the S10 does fall behind in the level of clarity offered.

What it does bring is a very good fit, and the ability to customize controls, as good as any out there. The app is also a positive, what with the redesign, and while simplistic in EQ choices, the ability to provide a custom setting that can be carried across sources and other listening devices is a definite positive.

The sound is natural, organic, and without any unnecessary spikes that can come about from TWS devices. Those spikes can be seen as “countering” external noises, which is what ANC is for. The adaptive ANC of the S10 is the way of future ANC technology and it works well. Just like the rest of the S10.

While not head of the class in terms of audio performance (see comparisons), the Edifier Stax S10 does enough right to balance the discrepancies, making for a thoroughly enjoyable TWS earbud, and one that will see regular use in my rotation.

iFi GO Bar Kensei ($449): There are Dongles, and then there are Dongles.



GO Bar Kensei

Intro:

The original GO bar was lauded for excellent performance and features, which many others did not have. It was also fairly expensive compared to some competitors, which also performed favorably to it in comparison. While not the costliest, the GO bar Kensei can be placed in that vaunted group of upper-end dongles such as the Cayin RU6, RU7, and Questyle M12 & M15. All are excellent dongles, with many functioning nearly on par with their desktop brethren.

Here is where the GO bar Kensei may separate itself because while it does share some with the family, it goes its way on its own merits. iFi is known for utilizing technologies outside the “normal” portable audio world, and the Kensei is no exception. Here they use technology developed in concert with JVC/Kenwood bringing something unique into play.

I am a fan of iFi products, having tested and owned many including my TOTL Pro iDSD/iCAN models as my go-to home baseline. This will not hinder my review, and it may even make me more critical of the unit, since I own many of their products and have a certain level of expectations going in. The Kensei is a loaner unit and will be returned upon the finishing of this review.

Specs:



In The Box:


GO bar Kensei
USB-C to USB-C cable-10cm
USB-C to Lightning cable-10cm
Carrying pouch
Owner’s manual
USB-C to USB-A adapter
iFi warranty card



Gear Used/Compared:

iPhone 13 Pro Max
MBP
HiBy R4

Spirit Torino Twin Pulse IEM
CFA Solaris 2020
Meze 99Classics

Cayin RU6
Cayin RU7
Questyle M15



Tech Highlights:

The Kensei comes with the usual aspects associated with quality dongles/DACs, but also carries some tricks up its sleeve. First and foremost, the Kensei uses K2HD technology developed by JVC/Kenwood and modified to fit iFi’s needs over 18 months of collaborative work.

In a nutshell, K2HD seeks to restore what has been lost from the original masters when copying to digital representations. Purportedly harmonics and emotive effects are lost over numerous iterations from the original masters (this is why first pressings sound better than subsequent vinyl representations). Reviving that loss leads to a more organic, rich signature of the music revitalizing what the studio sound was meant to be when we hear the recordings. This iteration is a new version developed specifically for the Kensei and iFi.

The Bit-perfect 32-bit DAC chip developed by Cirrus Logic is capable of PCM up to 32bit/384kHx & DSD up to DSD256. The Kensei also supports 2x DXD and full MQA decoding.

The 16-core XMOS microcontroller offers support for the inbound sound also optimizing sound quality. With GMT (Global Master Timing) clock system for low jitter and the choice of four bespoke digital filters (GTO-my favorite on my Pro set), Bit-Perfect, Minimum Phase, and Standard) and two analog processing modes, the Kensei comes fit for use.

Throw in the usual iFi characteristics of Turbo mode (IEM Match off), XBass+, IEM Match (3.5mm se & 4.4mm bal), and XSpace and you have a highly tunable dongle.



Design:

Dongle/DACs are by nature small and mostly unobtrusive. The Kensei is no different, except for the look and heft. This is not a light dongle by comparison, and much of that can be attributed to the stainless-steel shell, which carries the bulk of the 65.5g weight. It also carries fingerprints. Coming in at 65x22x13.2mm it is slightly thicker than the Cayin RU7, but markedly heavier by almost 3x.

Carrying the Kensei script logo on one side, the other is side is all business with the nomenclature for all of the decoding choices and color LEDs, along with XBass+ & XSpace. The right side (as you look at the side with the LEDs) carries the function button on the top portion, which controls turning XBass+, XSpace, and actuating MQA on (long press). Below that are the volume up and down buttons, with the IEMatch toggle below that.



iFi has long held that a bit of fine-tuning could help with your jack of choice, and this is where IEMatch comes in. Switching to 3.5mm allows a synergistic approach with those headphones and IEMs that have a 3.5mm jack. Conversely, the 4.4mm bal does the same thing, dropping the volume level of either a bit. When in the off position the volume is raised back to “normal” or what is considered Turbo mode here. While not quite as brutal as the Turbo mode on iDSD Diablo or the older micro–Black Label, it does raise the volume enough to warrant me turning the volume down first.

The bottom carries the lined 3.5mm se and 4.4mm bal jacks while the top houses the USB-C connection port. Simple and straightforward to operate, it does carry extra weight compared to its competitors.



Wired Connectivity:

USB-C to USB-C

Using the included cable for connection to my MBP was seamless and permission was immediately asked to allow connection. Entering Tidal, the Kensei was already connected (which does not happen on some items I have reviewed of late).

The connection was stable, and the Kensei could easily lay on the desk next to the MBP with just the right length of the cable.

USB-C to Lightning

The same can be said about connecting to my iPhone, but the heft of the Kensei was felt more here. Permission was granted again and I was listening within a few seconds to Tidal and Qobuz.

Battery impact:

I was seeing 5-7% per hour on my MBP, and that much or more on my iPhone. Not the best, and not the worst I have encountered.

Sound Impressions:

All sound impressions were made on my iPhone 13 Pro Max, MBP, or HiBy R4 using a combination of the Spirit Torino Twin Pulse IEM, Campfire Audio Solaris 2020, or the Meze 99Classics.



Summary:

iFi products to me have always slanted a bit (or more) towards a warm, musical signature, with richness and an organic nature to them, which separates them from competitors. The Kensei, while sharing some of those characteristics comes across as musical but with a lighter hand in the overall sound signature. Brighter, compared to my desktop Pro duo, the Kensei immediately sounds more succinct in sound quality, with an accuracy that sets itself apart.

Both ends are lifted a bit, making for the typical V-shaped signature, but mids still come across as harmonious, melodic, and detailed; if a bit lifted and behind the extremes.

K2HD effect:

The K2 implementation makes the end product sound more natural to me, giving the overall sound signature a bit more clarity and detail. There is a slight amount of holography as well, with a more musical note to it.

The bass response becomes a bit more pronounced, with an increase in presence (especially with XBass+ on). The mids come forward while the treble gains some presence. Both seem to be “closer to true” than before.

The overall stage is more energized and the timbre becomes organic. Layering seems to take on levels not heard before, which becomes closer to the original. I found Pop and Rock work well here, but jazz also becomes more sensual in tonality.

I am a fan of vinyl and the Kensei embraces that vintage sound, albeit with excellent translation moving away from the “typical” analog sound often heard with devices that promote detail and clarity first and foremost.

Timbre:

There is what I call a “typical” iFi sound, which comes across as vibrant, detailed, and rich. But one not having the most clarity. There is a definite sound to it, which purists may not like; but as mentioned above the K2HD implementation goes a long way towards combining all of this into a coherent sound.

The Kensei lies on the warmer, richer side of life; with thicker notes giving a velvety touch to the music, but with sufficient clarity to satisfy most. While detail retrieval does suffer a bit as a result of this, the K2HD implementation and XSpace go a long way toward combining the best of both worlds. I am beginning to see the value of such a device, especially for those who may want something that works across many platforms and in many situations.

Think of the Go bar Kensei as a device pining to be a desktop unit besides a portable device.

Even without XBass+ and XSpace toggled on, the sound carries a good holographic feel to it, along with detail in its character. There is a solid if not depth-reaching bass line holding the foundation, with the mids coming forward. Treble reach carries good height without becoming grating or too much sizzle for my liking.

Add in XBass+ and XSpace though, and the sound be very immersive. This to me makes for the more typical iFi signature sound. Raising the volume becomes a necessity as you engross yourself in the music at hand.

Staging & Dynamics:

The soundstage without XSpace on is good, equally spread in all three dimensions to me. Adding XSpace to the equation makes for an out-of-head experience in all three dimensions. This adds to the holographic sound to me, allowing the layers to become more prevalent and discernible. Not in a separate way, but cohesive. Expressive notes come across with excellent heft and the right amount of thickness. All while not becoming thick or slow in response.

Transient response especially with XSpace takes on those extra detailed levels in a good way without becoming too expressive or sharp in shortness. I have always what appreciated XBass+ and XSpace can do, and this is no different. Some might think this added filtering makes for a less-than-realistic sound, but I would rather have the choice(s) of this than not. There are times when I leave both on and others where both are off or use one singularly. To me, that is the benefit of having that choice. Change when you feel like it.

Dynamically speaking this can compete with some of the best out there, including the Questyle M15, while also having the ability to change some “filters” to your choice.



Pairings:

For ease of use, while typing this out, I connected the iFi GO bar Kensei to my MBP, which of course limited its CODEC response. That said, Tidal still sounded full and vibrant with a rich character that made me appreciate the positive response hooked together. Playing with XSpace and XBass+ allowed me to tailor the sound to my liking, even with those limitations.

Switching to my iPhone 13 Pro Max with similar limitations still afforded me better sound than without, by a good amount. Transient response was faster, with better clarity coming forth, without losing the depth of the notes. iFi’s traditional note-weight heft shone through without becoming drippy. XSpace and XBass+ were a wonderful treat, but not needed as much with this pairing. I still used both regularly, especially when the song needed more volume to satiate my appetite.

Moving to a non-iOS device in the HiBy R4 allowed me to experience more options to stretch the legs and strengths of the Kensei. All music had to be played through the USB Audio Pro app, but logging into Tidal and Qobuz was easy and play within the app was seamless across SD card and the streaming platforms.

The R4 carries a bit of richness to its signature, but with a bit of flair to it, which I appreciate. Adding the Kensei into the equation raised that flair factor, adding depth to the low end as well. Mids were moved forward a bit using the Kensei, too. Playing Los Lonely Boys came across as raucous & fun, with a rich, warmer signature giving me an immersive effect.

IEMs/Headphones in use:

I leaned heavily on the Meze 99Classics with the DDHiFi BC150B 4.4mm bal cable and came away impressed. The only “fault” I can find with the OG 99’s is a tendency to sound a bit thin in sound signature. I still consider it one of the best bargains out there, especially used (my pair was used and it was in “as new” condition). A simple aftermarket cable and the addition of the Kensei have made me appreciate the versatility of the 99’s even more now. The Kensei took the 99’s positives and added an extra bit to each segment, which was greatly appreciated and could be “tuned” by turning both XBass+ or XSpace on or off.

When I reviewed the Spirit Torino Twin Pulse IEM, I came away impressed with the sound, while thinking I would like to try their headphones in the future. Until then, this will certainly do. Adding the Kensei to it, the vibrant tonality stuck out to me yet again. The Kensei comes across as typically iFi in its warmer signature, but the clarity coming forth adds to the Kensei’s reputation for quality along with the “house sound.” Using this pairing I gauged the sound equally impressive and palatable with and without XBass+ or XSpace turned on. While I did prefer both to be activated in this setup, the punctuating mids coming out filled in what I might consider the Spirit’s weaker point. The midrange is very, very good, but a bit behind the signature. Using the Kensei brought the whole into focus again, heightening my overall appreciation of both.

The CFA Solaris 2020 is a polarizing unit. When I reviewed Thomas’ copy, I came away with the positives of it being my favorite of the 2020 trio release. Tight control of the bass coupled with mids that define the CFA legacy were accentuated using the Kensei. Bass reached a bit deeper using XBass+, and the spatial awareness of the sound became a bit tighter and more detailed using XSpace. The DDHiFi Nyx Pro is an astounding cable for the price but does bring with it a punctuating midrange that may not be the best choice for the Solaris 2020. But I used it anyway, and combined with the Kensei it made for a thoroughly engaging signature, especially with electronic-oriented music such as Jamiroquai’s Deeper Underground. Punctuating treble notes and a solid bass foundation made me think I was in a fine Paris underground nightclub. A good mix again.



Select Comparisons:

You should ideally have 3 comparisons but 2 is ok also if you are short of options. If you only have one then talk to me as we can tailor something different.

Choice of comparisons should be a factor of similar price, similar features and ideally, brands people identify with but I know that is not always possible. Talk to me about this if you have concerns.

Cayin RU6



Technical

At $249, the RU6 is half the price of the Kensei, and much simpler. The RU6 is a 24-bit R-2R DAC, which comes with 48 resistors (23-R & 25-2R) per channel, totaling 96 resistors. As opposed to the typical Delta Sigma DAC, the R-2R is a ladder-back array as mentioned above. This can purportedly isolate potential feedback better making for a “purer” sound coming forth.

With power up to 138mW at 32ohms in 3.5 and 213mW at 32ohms in 4.4, that may not seem like much. Coupled with the device LO set at 100 typically, I found the power much more than adequate. The large SNR ratios of 113dB’s and 114dB’s (20Hz-20kHz, A-weighted) respectively played into the versatility of the RU6, too.

Design

At 65mm x 25.4mm x 13.7mm and 28g, the RU6 is slightly larger, but half the weight of the Kensei.

The black glossy plastic does make for a fingerprint magnet, but the orange case not only looks fabulous it gives you better tactility. Plus, with only three buttons to control, usage becomes second nature. The difference here from “typical” dongle/DACs is that the volume buttons are next to each other instead of sandwiching another control.

That last button (closest to the headphone jacks) controls access to the simple menu, which contains gain (H/L), sampling (NOS/OS), and the backlight. Accessing this functionality requires a long press, which keeps it from accidentally being pushed. This is especially good since gain is the first option.

Performance

While comparing some dongle/DACs in this price range, the RU6 quickly became my favorite along with the Questyle M12...until I heard the RU7. Separating that, the RU6 is vibrant and tantalizing in signature with a sound that may be too bright for some.

Digging deeper reveals that the forward nature of that sound is excellent detail retrieval and an increased level of clarity. Cayin knows a thing or two about producing portable devices, and the RU6 is a home run in the semi-affordable market.

The differences here are usable features and the definitive difference in sound signature. If you prefer a tighter, more accurate signature, the RU6 wins. But if you want a more immersive sound, one which can draw you in allowing some level of control; the Kensei wins to me going away. Both are excellent in their own right, though.

Cayin RU7

Technical

Currently on sale for roughly $220usd, the RU7 would be considered a steal for that price. With a 1-bit resistive ladder DAC configuration, Cayin continued its adaptability in forging a different path. Sharing some technology with an in-house item, as does the Questyle mentioned below. Nominally more powerful than the RU6, the output of 160mW on a 32Ω load, and balanced output of 400mW make for a very adequate jump across your devices.

Both the R-2R for the RU6 and the 1-bit for the RU7 were the first of any kind in the dongle/DAC world. There is a degree of similarity to how R-2R and the 1-bit work using matching 0.1% resistor ladder arrays for conversion. The 1-BIT DAC however benefits primarily apply to processing native 1-BIT DSD, as opposed to PCM, which is multibit. Arrayed in 128 pieces (4x32) the resistors go through a 3-level LPF conversion before being converted to a single-ended signal for volume adjustment. This is almost unheard of adding dynamic range and channel consistency not often heard at this level.

The RU7 with no FPGA differentiates between the two signals (PCM & DSD), adopting an “all-to-DSD” processing approach. That means both PCM and DSD get processed (upsampled) to DSD before being sent to the DAC, an approach that yields benefits in sound impressions well beyond what it should.

The RU7 decodes up to DSD256 natively as well as PCM up to 32BIT/384kHz, consistent with the RU6’s decoding capability.

Design

At 66m x 24mm x 12mm and 25g, it is lighter than the RU6, but roughly larger than the Kensei. The black glossy shape again carries fingerprints. I am again thankful for the good-looking green case, which adds looks and tactility to it.

The LCD screen also carries more sub-menus including “All to DSD,” which is the LPF mentioned above as well as output (PO/LO), gain (L/H), and backlight (complete with changeable timer).

Performance

I like the RU6 performance. I love the RU7 performance. Rich, and velvety but with finesse and substantive increases in clarity make this one of the best dongle/DACs out. Yes, there are newer ones, but the level of detail wrought from the 1-bit ladder array makes me a believer.

While not quite having the bass depth of either the RU6 or Kensei, the quality of sound makes up for that “lack” of reach down low. Mind you it is still there in plenty, but without the sub bass reach of the others.

Changing the DSD filter can alter the signature a bit when utilizing something that handles DSD, but is pretty useless on iOS devices. Nonetheless, the majority of the planet can enjoy the decoding levels.

If I had to choose between one, it would come down to features vs sound. There is no denying the absolute gem the RU7 is in terms of sound. Considered by many as one of the absolute best dongle/DACs out, I cannot deny that. The Kensei has filter-changing abilities, and slightly more power, which can sway some, but this will come down to whether you prefer pure unadulterated sound versus the ability to add spatial awareness and extra bass down low. I cannot decide.

Questyle M15

Image courtesy of Headfonics.com

Technical

At $250, the M15 comes in at half the price of the Kensei as well. Carrying the company-patented CMA (Current Mode Amplification) like its desktop units in 2 SiP modules, the familial sound here is as telling as iFi’s. Using the ES9281AC PRO chipset, the M15 goes for a different approach than many of today’s Cirrus Logic choices (but the same choice as the M12).

A 32-bit two-channel DAC make for use up to DSD256 native and PCM 32BIT/384kHz as well as an 8X MQA hardware unfolding capability. The Torex power management unit along with 11.97mW @ 300Ω (3.5mm se), and 22.60mW @ 300Ω (4.4mm bal), seem extraordinarily low, until you see that is at 300 Ω. The M15 provides plenty of power for most devices.

Design

At 61.8mm x 27.2mm x 12mm and 28.5g, it is bigger and heavier than the other two comparative efforts here. With an open side, you can see the insides at work, complete with a light denoting CODEC, but does fall behind the others at DSD128 only. I like the look of it and preferred it to the others due to the ability to see inside.

Performance

The Sabre-equipped chip M15 pretty much set the bar for sound when it came out. The then lofty price of $270 was “justified” due to its extraordinary sound emanating from within. I found myself not wanting to give back the loaner unit at the time, contemplating the selling of much of what was sitting on my desk as “desktop units.”

The levels of detail wrought from the M15 far surpassed pretty much any dongle out, and I still lament for a Questyle desktop unit such as the CMA15 or even the CMA12, they sound so good. For those looking at purely sound, this is the benchmark to me (RU7 is a close second). Levels of detail you thought were not possible from a dongle/DAC come forth with waves of euphonic clarity. Exacting sound is one thing, but to do so with emotive effects as well comes down to the tuning of that ESS Sabre chip and Questyle’s in-house engineers; which need to be given a hefty raise.

But a large downside does exist: when using an iPhone, you need the Apple camera adaptor to get proper power to the unit. The iPhone power sent to the M15 is insufficient to properly drive it or drive it at all according to multiple reviews (my results as well). Once this issue was taken care of, the functionality was fine. But to those of us using an iPhone, the levels of gain from a dongle pale in comparison to Android or Linux users. If this was on pure sound, the M15 would be my choice, but factor in the functionality issues (there is now an M15i that has corrected said issues) and lack of customizing and the Kensei makes a strong case for itself.



finale:

The iFi GO bar Kensei is the latest iteration of the venerable GO bar series. The OG GO bar cost a pretty penny itself, setting the bar (so to speak) high, while winning awards as the top dongle out. The Kensei, with its additional K2HD sound enhancements and new shell, raises that bar even higher.

Providing excellent sound to start with, the user can add bass or soundstage via a somewhat holographic effect tailoring the sound even further. To do this, the price has been raised. We are now entering into the category of solid-performing desktop DAC/amp units that have more connecting options and most likely provide more power. So where does the Kensei fit in?

The Kensei will provide the user with an excellent option to add more power to their Smartphone (which many now arguably do not need) or laptop, while also enhancing the sound coming forth. This is probably its greatest strength twice over: more power and enhanced sound. Who doesn’t want that for when you need to drive your hard-to-drive headphones through your laptop or Smartphone?

The downsides? The price for one, and the fingerprint-prone stainless-steel shell. Another downside to me is the small lettering on the Kensei which is also harder to see on that shiny surface. And (minor) like any portable iFi device, both sides are worth looking at, but one will be face down most of the time covering most likely the Japanese script.

But the positives, including the excellent IEMatch, more than make up for the cost increase. Especially when we consider the sound coming forth from the Kensei. For those looking at a portable solution that while heavy, provides excellent sound characteristics, plus the venerable XBass+ & XSpace; the Kensei is well worth a look and muscles its way to the top (or close to) of the dongle/DAC category.

I again thank Lawrance and iFi for the loan of the Kensei and appreciate their continued support. The Kensei will be missed, so I guess my desktop units will have to do it for now.

Cheers.

iFi Zen Phono 3 ($250): There are phono stages, and then there are phono stages.





Zen Phono 3


Intro:

The OG Zen Phono comes with high acclaim, at an affordable price. The update to the original carries extras that it has no reason to at this price. I have not heard the OG model, but I have read enough to know it carried a lofty banner for those who still spin their vinyl. And the praise was going beyond simple audio users, to include those with systems worthy of an average-priced home.

I am a fan of iFi, owning several units over the years and testing even more. The Pro iCAN & Pro iDSD still see regular use in my desktop system beyond comparisons. Am I biased? Maybe, but I also carry with me the ability to pick apart products, that should perform better from one of my favorite companies. It is because I am so familiar with that I can and will provide valid criticism where needed. And applause where needed as well.


Specs:



In The Box:

iFi Zen Phono 3
12V power cord
Purple dual RCA cables
Owner’s Manual
Quick start guide




Gear Used/Compared:

McIntosh MA6100 Int Amp
Klipsch Forte II
Denon DP1200 (AT ML540 MC)
Pro-Ject Debut Carbon Pro (Sumiko Rainier)

Cambridge Audio Alva Duo





Tech Highlights:

The Zen Phono 3 has a much better power supply over the Zen Air Phono, (not the mains adaptor but inside the unit) which gives a blacker background making it possible to hear more detail in music on your records, then, there is the option to match properly the phono stage with the phono cartridge as it has user selectable impedance (in the case of a moving coil phono cartridge) or user selectable capacitance (works for Moving Magnet phono cartridges) and also you can choose between 4 gains instead of only 2 from the Zen Air Phono.

With anywhere from 36dB-72dB of gain, the Phono3 carries enough gain for even the hardest-to-drive MC cartridge. I had no trouble running the higher-voltage Denon DL110, but I did not have a low-voltage MC cartridge on hand. The gain settings are controlled by a switch on the back, which can be in any of four settings. These settings mirror the four settings listed below for MM/MC cartridge settings.

An additional Load button controls your ability to use a variety of cartridges and match output impedance (within reason) accordingly for greater control of the synergistic response. The four settings can be used, but not across the board. On the MM and High-MC cartridge settings, only the 200pF can be used with the setting either on or off. For MC (excluding High-MC) any of the other three may be used ranging from 100ohm to 400ohm, and 1kohm; which are all for MC L/VL cartridges.

The subsonic filter provides -151dBV for the blackest background possible next to a CD or digital representation. I will note when I used the filter below in the listening segment. This filter system is intelligent enough to discern the warp sound of records vs the bass line of the music, giving that cleaner, darker background.




Unboxing:

The typically wonderful presentation of iFi products carries over to the Zen Phono 3. Protected in environmentally sustainable coarse paperboard, the Zen is protected in one part, while the accessories and power cord are in smaller cardboard boxes laden with the white “iFi” logo.

The outer sleeves of iFi products have always come with a plethora of information, replete with technology involved regarding the components. It may seem like overkill, but I would rather know right away what components make up the unit, than having to dig that information out.

Design:

Svelte and curvaceously angular at 158 x 115 x 35mm (6.2” x 4.6” x 1.4”) and only 456g (1lb), the Zen Phono3 carries on the familial look of curved surfaces (the first Zen Phono was in 2012), which started with the first-generation Zen DAC/Amp products. The downside is that the lettering and adjusting buttons are quite small. Thankfully, the lights on the center dial/wheel clearly show what “mode” the Phono3 is in from MM to three MC settings (high, low, very low). Since the Denon DL110 is a very high voltage (1.6mV) unit, I kept the unit on the High MC setting. I did try the others, but that did not do the cartridge justice.

To the right of the center wheel, which denotes what level of cartridge you have is the subsonic filter, which kicks in a -151dBV essentially dropping any warp on an album to zero, without losing the bass response.

The back carries dual RCA connections for input and output, along with the ground stub between. To the very right is the power plug, and between the input (from the turntable) and that is the gain selector switch for MM, MC-VH, MC-L, MC-VL (1-4). While it is a bit hard to get to, I appreciate the customization of that. This aspect is handled differently than the Cambridge Audio Alva Duo compared below.

I do wish for dual TT RCA hook-ups, for those of us who are lucky enough to have two tables, but understand that most will not. Not a big deal and this certainly covers amplifiers, which do not have a phono stage. Just make sure if you do, hook the Phono3 to an AUX or spare CD/Tuner input on the amplifier.



Wired Connectivity:

Connecting the Zen Phono3 to my McIntosh MA6100 was straightforward since it comes with just about dual RCA connections for everything. Using one of the two tuner (yes two) inputs allowed me a direct comparison between the existing phono stage in the Mac and the Phono3. Mind you, I have no issues whatsoever with the Mac phono stage other than it does not automatically take MC cartridge turntables.

This led me to the purchase of the Alva Duo, and will be compared together of course.

Sound Impressions:

Impressions were made using the Denon DP-1200 turntable with the Denon DL110 High MC cartridge connected. Comparisons were made with the Pro-Ject Debut Pro using the stock Sumiko Rainier cartridge as well as the phono stages of the McIntosh MA6100 and Cambridge Audio Alva Duo. Both turntables were hooked to all three options for comparison.

The Alva Duo can handle two turntables while the Phono3 only handles one.

Summary:

From the first listen of Peewee Russell & Coleman Hawkins on Jazz Reunion, the Phono3 presented a vibrant signature, with equal emphasis down low and up high. Not to be forgotten, the midrange came across as sublime but ever present, set slightly behind the ends. I found the jazz duo came across with a tone, which was additive to the McIntosh MA6100. Granted some of that could have been the excellent Denon DL110 HOMC, but there was a definite difference.

Saxophone notes came across as piercingly accurate, without becoming grating or overbearing. That piercing sound would be similar to having been at the show in person, rather than having too much sizzle. The treble notes punctuated the air, expanding the soundstage in the height category without losing coherence. Individual instruments were allowed to play their part, and even the audience experience came across as a small venue, with a presence where you were sitting right in the middle.

Timbre:

The iFi Zen Phono3 sits on the brighter side of listening, but this can add vibrancy to what may be duller recordings. Or it could allow those from within the digital realm to experience quality vinyl similarly. The Phono3 does not come across as analytical but rather accentuates the tonality already present. I sat back to enjoy the music rather than analyze it on the micro level.

That is not to say that the micro details were shorted, but rather the Phono3 put an emphasis on the synergistic response to the whole, without singling out one part. A cohesive response was had across the spectrum. The black background using the subsonic filter did a marvelous job of isolating any unwanted rumble. But did so without losing the texture or weight while keeping clarity at very high levels.

Playing the Shoji Yokouchi Trio’s seminal Greensleeves album was indeed a treat. Guitar work was tight and vibrant. The black background shone through here allowing the quieter parts of Moanin’ to come through unencumbered. I felt the need to raise the volume level and check to see if it was indeed that black. It was. The subsonic filter may be worth it alone.

Staging & Dynamics:

The soundstage from the Phono3 was another additive, expanding the height as mentioned above, and the width a bit. I found that this was most likely due to the vibrant tonality emanating from the system together as opposed to the smoother sound coming from without. Mind you, the MA6100 varies a bit from Mac’s traditional tube-like sound since it is solid state, but the company tuning is very evident in the smooth texture coming forth. I would also add that the excellent Denon DL110 adds to that vibrant texture (without losing the heft of notes) since it is a HOMC.

Regardless, the power of the Zen Phono3 allowed me to enjoy the sound without bother. Delicate passages came across as tight and accurate, while guitar work came through like I had the guitarist in the room. That is all we can ask of our musical interpretations when played, and the Phono3 does so with aplomb.

The resolution from the trio came across as accurate, without losing texture or weight. There was no truncation at all across the board. Sometimes this can happen when you introduce something, which adds vibrancy and an elevated volume level (considered artificial by some). Not here, the Phono3 allowed the music to come across as it should. Loud guitar solos came across as accurate, with excellent placement of notes within the soundstage. Drums were heard in their support roll and could be placed three-dimensionally with ease. I found myself listening critically for differences, but the Phono3 simply came along for the musical enjoyment.



Pairings:

Since I had a HOMC in the Denon DL100, I mounted that to the Denon DP-1200 first, which came my way via @audioloveyyc an acquaintance I have had the honor of knowing for several years. He was looking to upgrade (picked up a well-restored Thorens) and I obliged by taking the Denon “off his hands.” I do not regret that, and it pairs extremely well with the Pro-Ject Debut Pro, allowing me to mount differing cartridges when the urge hits.

The Denon/Denon combination hits very well, adding a certain vibrancy to the notes in its own right while staying true to the music. I can listen through the MA6100 phono stage, but it is not the best pairing. The Phono3 allows me to play with different settings and experimentations, tailoring the sound to my whims. The Phono3 added volume to the mix (of course), but lowered the black background to zero. Following on another review, I too raised the volume to max (with no album playing) and found nary a sound. The MA6100/Denon combo is good. The MA6100/Denon/iFi combo is fantastic.

The additional volume coming forth meant I did not have to rely upon raising the Mac to volumes, which my wife and our dog would not appreciate. This allowed me a certain level of comfort knowing I could hear all of the details from whatever I played, without bothering the household.

The Pro-Ject Debut Pro comes stock with a mid-level Sumiko Rainier MM cartridge, which exudes a certain amount of warmth to the sound. The Pro-Ject is a faster-paced sounding machine, with a bit thinner note quality to me over the Denon. The Sumiko cartridge evens the playing field out, and I have not bothered to change the cartridge. Knowing this, I was not expecting that much of a difference when plugged into the Phono3. Boy, was I wrong. Yes, that extra 36dB played its part, but with this setup, the midrange was the main beneficiary. Stronger and more forceful, without becoming shouty allowed me to hear the quieter parts without losing the overall signature. The subsonic filter again did its job, which allowed me to keep the volume at a modest level much like the Denon pairing.



Select Comparisons:

Cambridge Audio Alva Duo:

The Alva Duo was purchased ($349) due to my older Arcam integrated amplifier not having a phono stage. It receives very high marks for an affordable price. I did not want to spend an exorbitant amount, and it fit the bill. Once the MA6100 arrived though, it became shelf fodder. Pulling it out for this review has made me re-evaluate its use within the Mac system.

Technical:

With gains of 39dB for Mm and 60dB for MC cartridges, it falls a bit behind the Phono3 on the MC front, but ahead on the MM side. No matter, the volume needed was close enough to the same for both that I would call this a draw.

The Alva duo does not have a changeable load like the Phono3, staying at 100pF, which is markedly below any of the settings of the Phono3 as well. It does carry a balance knob for fine-tuning L/R issues. I have used it a small amount, but not enough to warrant its inclusion to me.

It does have better SNR at MM of >90dB and less for MC at >70dB. Hence the need to increase the volume level when using an MC cartridge I would suspect.

Design:

Similar in size to a small desktop amplifier at 48 x 215 x 159 mm (1.9 x 8.5 x 6.2") and 0.95kg (2.1 lbs.), it is about twice the size and twice the weight of the Phono3. The Alva also carries a headphone amplifier and a 6.35mm se jack for use in its own right. There is even a separate volume knob exclusively for that purpose.

The silver looks good and would fit into most systems smoothly. I do find the lettering on the front hard to read but with minimal functionality (a button for MM/MC and the headphone amplifier volume knob). The back though is a different story. With lettering both right side up and upside down, the user can easily see what needs to be done without moving the unit. This is an excellent feature that more should take note of and incorporate.

The Alva Duo is understated and good-looking at the same time. I appreciate the small points of fitting into your system and the two-way lettering. Both are nice touches.

Performance:

The Alva Duo is a top-notch performer, that can give even more expensive systems a flush of additional clarity to the sound. A spacious yet still cohesive presentation gives a bit more holographic effect to it over the Phono3. I found the expansion of the soundstage width-wise allowed for slightly better dynamics to come across over the Phono3, too. Where the Phono3 was energetic, the Alva was more mature, without losing details.

Those dynamics also allowed for sufficient weight to the notes, such as on Bob Marley’s Uprising album on the song Could You Be Loved. The electric guitar and Bob’s effervescent vocals came through with excellent character and detail. There is a smidge more smoothness to the character as well, what we might describe as a mature signature. Dynamically speaking right up there, but without losing heft to the notes.

Where the Phono3 presents a sparkling character overall, it loses out in soundstage to me, as well as overall note weight. This will come down to whether you want one or two phono inputs, and whether you want a dynamically presented character with verve; or one with a bit more maturity to the character. Both are excellent, but for my purposes having two phono inputs makes the decision easier.



McIntosh MA6100 Integrated Amplifier

Technical:

The MA6100 was produced from 1972-1979 (mine is from 1974) for a retail price of $699. The subsequent MA6200 retailed for $1899 with a modest increase in power and a completely new design. Call it more modern. Upon the purchase of mine, the gentleman in the Bay Area said a technician had serviced it and I have the receipts. After about a year-and-a-half of use, it developed a dropped left channel, and a weak phono 1. Taking it to my local shop, upon opening they asked if it had ever been serviced...I said yes, but you can fill in the blanks. Suffice it to say, it is good as new for a 50-year-old Mac.

At 70wpc the power comes across as underrated and I can easily drive my Klipsch Forte II’s. The phono stage on these early solid-state Macs was not the best, but I never found it lacking. With dual phono, dual tuner (aux to me), and dual tape deck RCA connections this unit tripped all the bells and whistles I could want.

With an input sensitivity and impedance of 2.5 mV at 1000 Hz, & 47,000 ohms respectively, the numbers are very close to the Phono3, hence it should (and does) work with the Denon DL110 HOMC.

Design:

There is no denying the flat-out gorgeous looks of older McIntosh units, including their “lowly” solid-state units. That glass face (expensive to replace and it can be a make or break to some on purchase) exudes sexiness when coupled with the near-patented McIntosh blue lighting. Logical in its layout of buttons and functions, the inclusion of dual tape, dual phono, dual tuner (AUX to me), and dual tape connections make it worth it.

Other than the technicals involved, there is no need to add anything in comparison.

Performance:

The MA6100 phono stages are very good but will win no awards in the sound category for some aficionados. I also have no qualms about it either. Other than the lack of an MC input, the phono stage performs admirably and I am completely satisfied with the performance.

I find the smooth warmer character of the MA6100 coming through the phono stage fits my listening style. Some have described the MA6100 sound as nearly neutral. Others have described the sound as warmer, and rich like other McIntosh items. I think this lies on the warmer side of life, but not like McIntosh’s traditional tube units. There is also sufficient detail to be had, but not class-leading.

That transfers into the phono stage, too with good clarity to the notes and a heft in the note weight, which gives your album an immersive effect. It is not the best in detailed sound, but the musical nature of the MA6100 through either the Pro-Ject or Denon (even with the Denon DL110) satisfies my needs. That said, the iFi Xen Phono3 carries with it better detail and more clarity, but without the complete immersive effect.

This hearkens back to a mature sound (like the Cambridge) of the MA6100 versus a more forthcoming, vibrancy that carries enough detail to bring your music forward.

If I did not have the Alva Duo, I could easily see the ifi Zen Phono3 as part of my McIntosh system, especially for use with MC cartridges. The synergy between the two would be positive on both accounts, especially knowing I can go back to the stock phono stage on the other phono input.



finale:

Not having heard the OG iFi Phono, I cannot say whether this one is better or not. What I can say is that the Phono3 does its job very well, allowing a multitude of cartridge options to be used with some effort involved in changing cartridges. For those who can, different head shells are a wonderful solution for switching between an MM or MC cartridge. Or two for variety.

The iFi Zen Phono3 is an excellent option for those who require an external phono stage or are not completely satisfied with the internal one (some have mentioned this). The Phono3 adds vibrancy and a level of clarity to the sound, which some units may not possess. The subsonic filter may be worth it alone for its brilliant black background, too.

The detail retrieval of the Phono3 is quite good too, but, due to the forward nature of the presentation, may move you away from an even textured presentation, pushing the upper end a bit too much on some albums. The Phono3 can also only handle one turntable at a time. Not a problem for many who have but one. But those same people may add a turntable in the future for variety and may be stuck with running one or the other on their home unit and one on the Zen Phono3. That may not be an issue for some, and worthy of a look, too. I could see the Phono3 hooked to an MC cartridge turntable, and an MM to the McIntosh filling my needs.

The iFi Zen Phono3’s positives far outweigh its negatives and should be considered as an option should you need an external phono stage. While it does not have the two-turntable option of a main competitor like the Cambridge Audio Alva Duo, the iFi presents enough positives to warrant a place in your system. And that alone might well be worth it. The iFi Zen Phono3 is an extraordinary piece of kit, that is worthy of entry into many of our systems from the beginning to mid-high-fi systems.

Sivga Que ($69): A planar IEM? Yes, please.


Que

"Que" in Chinese refers to the characters 麻雀, which means Sparrow.



Marketplace options:

Amazon-USA
AliExpress
Amazon-Japan

Intro:

Sivga has been trying to broaden their approach and appeal as of late, with their usual nicely made headphones, but now includes a planar IEM at an affordable price. Planar drivers seem to be the hot point currently along with Peizos, but this affordable unit relies on the tried-and-true dynamic driver of 10mm size with a single magnet dual cavity to boot. Will relying upon the steadfast approach of a DD help the Que muscle in the market? Read on to find out.

This unit was sent to me as a review unit, and the review is my own words only; for good or ill. Unless otherwise stated, the unit is mine to keep and may be asked back for at any time. The unit will not be sold on, as this is a really uncool thing to do too.



Specs:




In The Box:

Que IEM
Ear Tips x2 each: s, m, l
Leather carrying case
Instruction manual



Gear used/compared:

QoA Aviation ($199)
Shanling MG100 ($159)

HiBy R4
MBP



Songs used:

Tidal-jazz, blues, Tex-Mex, pop
Qobuz- same

Unboxing:

The Que comes in a tasteful smaller square box, complete with script and what I believe to be a dove on the box. The far east input is very evident, and quite well done.

Lifting the lid off the box reveals the case on the lower half and the IEMs highlighted on top in a protective foam insert. The lighter-colored North American Maple is very evident against the black foam, carrying on the tasteful look to the packaging when combined with the medium brown leather case.

Unzipping the case reveals the ear tips and the cable wrapped neatly with a Velcro strap.

A simple, elegant unboxing effort, with a focus on the IEM.



Technical highlights:

The Que features a powerful 10mm beryllium diaphragm dynamic driver with a strong magnet, purportedly delivering rich, immersive sound. The beryllium driver promotes quick responsive reactions to sound input, keeping the music tight to boot. By making a quick responsive driver, vibrational distortion is kept low, while delivering a rapid response and reaction allowing the music to be portrayed accurately.

This configuration helps optimize the acoustic performance by providing better control over the movement of the diaphragm, enhancing sound clarity, reducing distortion, and purportedly improving overall audio quality.

The North American Maple faceplate also acts to control the resonance of the sound in the back chamber, promoting a more natural sound signature. More dense woods might alter the signature with a darker sound, so the choice of maple makes perfect sense to keep the signature not only accurate but tighter in control and a bit lighter in response to quick-moving pieces.



Design/build/fit:

“Sound impression by genuine art,” is their mantra, and those of us who have seen and used their headphones appreciate the excellent build quality of the products. Giving an almost manufactured look to the hand-built process, the look and feel have been across the board excellent with Sivga products.

The white maple wood from North America is used for excellent harmonic resonance, as mentioned above, and the Que earphone resonates with a natural harmonic richness. Depth and tonal balance come about with the design of the zinc chambers and the use of the maple wood faceplate.

The zinc halves fit together well, but one of the ear pieces did not perfectly match on both halves. I could feel a bit of the lip where the two were connected, but this did not hinder fit or listening. The zinc chamber helps to keep weight in check as well, but I could feel good heft without it being too heavy.

The nozzle was not too long either, affording a good fit for me along with the long ear guide, which kept the cable in place while in use. Using the medium silicon tips, I could find a good balance between fit and isolation. I was also comfortable with the large-size ear tips but settled on the medium for the majority of the listening.

The overall look of the Que is one of simplicity and elegance with the wood faceplate accenting the zinc housing nicely.



Cable:

The 2-pin 0.78mm design of high-purity oxygen-free silver-plated copper helps to ensure maximum transmission of sound. Not groundbreaking mind you, but the cable is very pliable and easily workable in hand. Separation and clarity of the music are enhanced due to the Litz cable with vocals claiming to be clear and articulate as a result.

Microphonics were non-existent finishing off a very nice cable.



Sound Impressions:

All critical listening was done after a burn-in period of 75 hours. I do this with all listening devices, whether it may make a difference or not. I then put in a minimum of 50 hours of critical listening for the review. My goal is to give the listener impressions for what might be six months down the road.

All listening was done on either my MBP and Tidal or Qobuz; and the HiBy R4 using either Tidal or Qobuz. Where differences occur, they will be noted.



Summary:

The speediness of the beryllium diaphragm makes for quick hard-hitting bass, without becoming sluggish or running over into the mids too much. As such, the reach for the average-sized driver is low, but not class-leading. Nevertheless, that speed allows the Que to play bigger than it might.

The mids carry good weight with a proclivity to stay in line with the overall sound, neither too far forward or recessed. This is a nice change from in-your-face mids, which can detract. This also carries into the treble note, which does carry a bit of tizziness in the cymbal hit area. Other than that, the high notes play nicely across the sound signature, neither offending me nor making me jump too much for joy. Call this just right.

moar:

The market in which the Que plays is wrought with many, MANY models of which some stand out while many fail to impress. The Que thankfully falls into the former category to me.

I find the underlying bass line could be a bit elongated and thicker, but also realize that doing so would add a note of sluggish response to the sound characteristics. This is a fairly taut bass held together by that beryllium diaphragmed driver; which begs to be speedy in response. There is enough rumble in the bass to give that illusory feel to more depth, but this will never be called a basshead model.

As such, this blends with the mids smoothly most of the time. There is a bit of a flat response in snare drum hits, which can come across as lacking weight but the rest counters that, including male vocals; which carry good weight and note. Female vocals come across with alacrity without becoming boisterous, adding an alluring note to the signature. I wouldn’t go as far as sumptuous, but the hint of allure makes female vocal songs quite a treat.

The treble note is where I find the most fault, with the aforementioned tizziness, especially in cymbal note. There is an almost piezo-like treatment to cymbals which makes me hesitant to give full approval up top. That said, the extension is good, giving life to the highs with not only good airiness and reach, but a bit of sparkle mixed in. Even with the aforementioned faults, I like the tuning.



Soundstage/Imaging:

Added rumble down low helps to expand the depth and height of the soundstage, while the mids carry enough weight to expand the lateral dimension. Height carries up and a bit forward, but is countered by width in what I would call its best dimension. Playing the new Los Lonely Boys, I certainly liked that expansive sound making me remember when I saw them last on a hot August summer’s night at an outdoor venue. While the venue was more intimate, their sound was certainly not; surrounding us with lush Tex-Mex tones that had the whole audience dancing together in unison. And that was the point.

What the Que may lack in extreme dimensions, it more than makes up for with very good layering (especially for a DD) and very good spatial awareness, which translates into accurate imaging. I will of course admit I am a sucker for a good single dynamic driver for its simplicity.



Pairings/Synergy:

I found the Que made an excellent partner with my MPB on both Tidal and Qobuz, even though it was “only a 3.5mm se jack.” Sometimes that simplicity warrants an appreciation that goes well over a “fancier” setup. I will say that I spent approximately 50% of the time on each source, and came away impressed with how well the Que crossed devices.

While I appreciated the MPB pairing, it was using the HiBy R4 where the Que stepped out. Bass became a bit thick, but this made the Que into a raucous good time on the same Los Lonely Boys songs. I had been transformed back into the concert mentioned above to the point that my wife looked at me. All I had to do was mention Los Lonely Boys and she completely understood as she smiled. She’s a good one, she is.



Comparisons:

Both IEMs were compared using the 3.5mm se connections since the Que does not have a 4.4mm bal jack.

Sivga Que ($70) v QoA Aviation ($199):

The QoA Aviation is one of my favorite IEMs from the last year. The acrylic shell is gorgeous and functionally gives an excellent fit. The first thing I noticed is that the level of detail from the Aviation is certainly a step above the Que. Clarity from that detail is excellent but can get in the way of piercing notes in music. Punctuating guitar licks can come across as excellent and too much for my treble-sensitive ears at the same time.

I cannot fault the level of quality sound coming from the Aviation due to my deficiency, but it is easy to see the two when compared might be for different markets. The Aviation would make for an excellent commuting pair where the added detail could make the difference noticeable. That said, the raucous good time had from the Que might pump you up a bit more for your daily tasks. I appreciate both and see them as complementary to each other on different levels.

Sivga Que ($70) v Shanling MG100 ($159):

The MG100 is another one of my favorite IEMs of the last year as well, proving that good things can be had for less than two Ben’s. It does not have quite the same amount of bass as the Aviation but is nearly as good in detail retrieval. The mids are the highlight to me along with a richer signature. Bass is on par with the Que, in fact with a little less impact. The extension up top sets it apart from the Que, making for a bit more of an ethereal experience, which can be expected due to the price difference.

The biggest difference to me is that the MG100 is a fingerprint monster, where that good-looking glossy black shell looks like a well-used Smartphone screen. Not very appealing.

The MG100 does come across with an even signature, which some might find a bit bland, but I am a fan of Shanling’s tuning due to the rich character. The Que cannot match that, but again might best the MG100 in the fun factor. This is another case of different strokes for different folks.



finale:

The Sivga Que comes in at an affordable price, in a very crowded market. When comparing it upstream, it does carry some traits nicely due to the fun factor. When we look closely though, it does fall behind those of a higher level, especially on the detail & clarity front.

But, when taken of its mettle, the Que comes across as having a high fun factor to me, which is needed a good part of the time when we listen. It is not meant for that critical listening, but to get us through the day until we can sit back with our “higher-priced” offerings. And when taken in that vein, that fun factor may be what we need to get us through the day.

Based on its positives, I can recommend the Que, but you should be aware of its limitations, just like a Prius owner won’t go hunting for a Nissan GTR to drag race. Taken separately the Prius is excellent in its own lane, just like the Que is within its lane. And that might be enough.

Edifier STAX Spirit S5 ($499): An update to an already good headphone? More than that. Much more.



Stax S5

Intro:

I reviewed the Stax Spirit S3 some time ago and came away appreciating the sound qualities of it, even without ANC involved. The fit was good, and the build even with the plethora of plastic was good. Personally, I do not think it received the acclaim it should have. It was and is still a very good headphone.

When Edifier contacted me about reviewing the upcoming release of the S5, I wholeheartedly accepted knowing how much I liked the S3. The unit is mine to keep unless asked back for, and the review will list positives and negatives for good or ill. The review is my words and mine alone. If the start is anything to go off of, this will be a bang-up unit!

The unit was played with music for more than 75 hours to ascertain how it sounds “down the road” instead of new. This is the way I have always done it, and will not change.

I thank Edifier and Lesley for providing the review unit.


Specs:

Bluetooth: V5.4
Bluetooth Range: 10m
Audio Codecs: Snapdragon Sound, LHDC, LDAC, Qualcomm® aptX Lossless, Qualcomm® aptX™ Adaptive, Qualcomm® aptX™ HD, Qualcomm® aptX, LHDC, LDAC, AAC, SBC
Sound Pressure Level: 94 ± 3dBSPL(A)
Frequency Response: 10Hz-40kHz
Battery Life: Around 80hrs
Input: DC 5V ⎓ 2A


In The Box:

Edifier STAX Spirit S5
Carrying case
3.5mm aux cable
USB-C to USB-A cable
Mesh & leather ear pads
Owner’s manual



Gear Used/Compared:

HiBy R4
iPhone 13 Pro Max
MBP

B&W Px8
Edifier WH950NB
HiFiMan Edition XS

Songs used:

Tidal- pop, jazz, big band, female vocal
Qobuz-same as above




Tech Highlights:

The STAX Spirit S5’s planar magnetic driver features a flat, thin diaphragm with embedded wires, suspended in the magnetic gap. The diaphragm moves in a piston-like manner across the entire frequency spectrum due to this design. The diaphragm is light and purportedly has good transient response.

Edifier addresses the uneven distribution of the magnetic field, which can happen with other planar magnetic drivers who use wires of varying widths on the diaphragm, with a proprietary solution. With EqualMass™, Edifier takes the approach further. Connecting different numbers of wires with the same width in parallel, the EqualMass™ achieves a uniform driving force for all parts of the diaphragm while keeping its weight evenly distributed. This allows the diaphragm to move back and forth with the same motion and momentum, which reduces harmonic distortion to (purportedly) almost zero. In the 2nd gen of EqualMass™ wiring, the symmetric wiring structure further enhances the diaphragm's stability across the entire frequency spectrum.

To ensure uniformity in the magnetic field distribution across each planar magnetic driver, Edifier also developed a proprietary automatic toolset for calibrating and adjusting the magnet circuitry during production. This meticulous process guarantees that every set of S5 headphones delivers sound fidelity identical to the “golden sample” crafted by them. Essentially these specialized tools keep production uniform across the board.

In addition to LDAC and LHDC, the S5 also supports all audio codecs under the Snapdragon Sound Technology Suite, including aptX™ HD, aptX™ Adaptive, and aptX™ Lossless. It achieves a bitrate of up to 1.2 Mbps in Bluetooth® mode, delivering high-resolution (24-bit/96kHz) and end-to-end low-latency audio. It also supports the AAC codec for iOS devices.

Snapdragon sound using the Qualcomm® QCC5181 BT chip allows for lossless audio (aptX lossless) and surround sound-like experiences on devices so equipped. Low-latency gaming mode helps carry a true spatial awareness sound along with rapid response between the source and S5.

*I did find a latency problem when using the R4/S5 in BT mode, with a noticeable delay between voice and screen images during videos. This was quelled with repeated use and adjusting some of the menus listed below. After adjusting, the issue disappeared.



Unboxing:

The S5 comes with the same high-quality unboxing experience as the S3 did. A slide-out box mimics old reference books to me, and the feel is quite good. The outer box/sleeve also carries all of the requisite information, including a nice side shot of the S5. Tasteful and thankfully lacking too many distractions.

In the inner box, which has a lift-off cover, you are met with the S5, in a new case (more on that in a bit), surrounded by the mesh alternate pads in their sheath and the “accessories” box; which carry the USB-C and 3.5mm aux cable. The lambskin pads are mounted already.

Opening the case, you are met with the folded S5s and a movable padded shelf to hold the headband horizontally. There is also a curved pad, which goes between the two cups to prevent scarring. I found that curved pad nice, but somewhat of a bother to continually place properly. My gut tells me that most will forego that pad in daily use.

A nice inclusion is an earpad pick that looks quite like a guitar pick. Using this instead of the usual pulling of the pad to disengage from the earcup, I find this an excellent inclusion. While I have never ripped an earpad removing them, it only takes once...



Design:

The S5 mimics the S3 somewhat having an oval shape, but looks more refined to me. The outer earcup carries a genuine cowhide cover to help the user grasp the unit. Since most of us grab the sides, to me it is more ornamental and prevents the unit from looking too glossy. There are no touch controls on the cover like many manufacturers are moving to, but I do not mind.

The S5 exudes a higher-end look and feel to it, while still using a good amount of plastic to keep weight down.

The oval shape of the ear cups may be a bit narrow for some with larger ears, but I found the unit to be quite comfortable for long listening sessions. The thicker pads helped with that comfort level. And yes, the mesh pads are much cooler to wear. Using the pick to take the earpads off was easy and I appreciated the effort put in to protect the pads and earcups. Putting the mesh pads on was not quite so straightforward, though.

Instead of having slots to press the nubs into, there are raised areas, which coincide with the nubs. I found the easiest way to put pads on was to align the pad to the cup, and then press evenly across the whole pad. Once I figured that out, changing became much easier.

The slider moves quietly, and with a slight detent to it, which keeps the headphones in place. With a thinner band, I do wish for a bit more padding on the underside, but it never felt uncomfortable. The only pressure I felt was some under my ear where the bottom of the ear pad contacts. The shape of the unit when worn could be to blame, and the vertical spring of the ear cup within the yoke could be a little lower. That said, if it were, the clamping pressure might be a bit low to hold the headphones in place. A tradeoff I can accept the S5 the way it is.

The headband is a glossy metal, which carries fingerprints, unfortunately. A satin finish might hide those prints better, but this is the only place I found to be fingerprint-prone. The lettering and engraving of “Edifier” and “Stax Spirit” are tasteful, helping keep the upscale look to it.

A vent cutout lies on top of each ear cup, in concert with the overall look and feel, help to relieve pressure when you put on or take off the S5.



Controls:

The controls on the Stax Spirit S5 are rudimentary with the usual three-button cluster for play/pause, skip, and repeat, as well as volume levels. There’s also a Bluetooth pairing button for connecting with other devices. The Bluetooth pairing button also functions as a Mode switch. A single press cycles through the EQ presets, while two presses put the headphones in gaming mode for a low latency of 87ms.

Pressing the center button once allows the user to answer or hang up a phone call, while two presses of the same button will decline the call.

The S5 can pair with two BT devices simultaneously, which allows the user to answer phone calls on their Smartphone, and play music on their computer or another device (except as noted below).

On a TWS headphone at this price, you might expect more controls, or touch/swipe controls, but Edifier kept it simple for a reason, so you do not have to worry too much about the controls. I like that approach.



Battery:

During the break-in period, I did not charge the S5 allowing it to run on BT for 75 hours. I used the R4 plugged in so that it did not run out of battery power. I used one of my SD cards set on random for the duration. I then charged the unit upon completion of the burn-in for the testing. The unit showed 5% when plugged in and I opened the app on my iPhone, lending credence to the 80 hours.

During the test, I did not charge the unit and hit 75 hours again of listening. I used the USB-C to USB-C cable, which did charge the unit while I listened. As such, the unit still had plenty of battery left at the end of the testing period.



App:

The new EDIFIER ConneX app can be used on Android or iOS and is a completely new app from the EDIFIER Connect app.

The app is rudimentary at first glance, with four choices for EQ settings, labeled “sound effects.” You can also put the device into gaming mode for a lower latency response on games and videos. But underneath the layers are where the fun begins.

By clicking on the nut next to the name on the front page, you are presented with multiple options ranging from the user manual to customizing controls, HD audio codec LDAC & LHDC, multipoint connection, Bluetooth settings, and the factory settings (reset).

Multipoint connection must be enabled via a toggle for the function to work, and for good reason. Bandwidth limitations using BT do not allow for it to be engaged when setting either LDAC or LHDC on their highest sampling rate. Setting each of those sampling rates focuses the energy on providing the best audio quality being played, and this takes precedence over multiple connected devices.

A nice feature of the customized EQ effects gives the user an option to tailor the four-band settings. If you prefer, you can leave the four at 100Hz, 2000mHz, 4000Hz, and 8000Hz (+/-3dBs). By touching the numbered rectangle button, you can customize each bandwidth. Yes, it is only four bands, but customizing for specific tastes comes across as a positive to me. The Q-factor can be adjusted on all four bandwidths as well, giving essentially a customizing tool for attack and decay at each band. The larger the Q-factor, the narrower the bandwidth (the effect on that particular bandwidth), and vice versa. The range goes from 0.5-2.0, with the default settings at 0.7.



Bluetooth:

BT5.4 connection was straightforward, allowing two devices to be connected without issue when the switch was on within the app.

Sound Impressions:

All sound impressions were made on an iPhone 13 Pro Max, MBP, or HiBy R4 using both BT and wired connections of USB-C, or 3.5mm aux.

Summary:

The S5 betters the STAX S3 in most categories, save for deep-reaching bass. The S5 carries the lows with aplomb and authority; just not quite as deeply. The rest of the signature more than makes up for that, with smooth, rich mids carrying songs, while vocals sound vibrant and have plenty of character. The soundstage comes across as representative of a mostly cubic form, with none of the dimensions carrying too far.



Timbre:

The lambskin pads fill the sound with a smoother character as expected but it never becomes mushy or soft. There is plenty of detail to be had across the spectrum, and I especially like how the mids carry that smoothness tying both ends together.

Deeper-reaching bass notes carry good weight and authority, without becoming bloated or overbearing. There is some bleed into the mids, but that does not overshadow the character of either. This can be changed by using the four sound effect modes, which alter what you will hear. In original mode, the sound is vibrant and detailed, while dynamic mode does the same but with the bass bleed mentioned above while pushing the signature forward.

Monitor mode comes across as analytical, like it should but I find it loses its three dimensional shape in response. The sound is clean, crisp, and clear but too much the other way for my tastes. As a result, I bounced between original and dynamic.

The speed of notes might seemingly truncate notes, making them thinner; but using the EQ settings helps to quell those fears. Note weight carries on the planar design, providing good heft without becoming slow. The note decay helps to keep the traditional facets of a planar design in slowing the character, but the EqualMass™ design shows that the terms speed and accuracy can come about in a portable TWS planar headphone.



Staging & Dynamics:

The soundstage varies across the four sound effect modes enough to make a difference, but not enough to diminish the sound coming out of each. Dynamic spread the sound across the three dimensions the most to me, filling space the most as you might expect. Monitor mode on the other hand lost width and depth to my ears.

Call it a case of Goldilocks And The Three Bears.

Cabled audio:

BT sound has come quite far, and the BT 5.4 used on the S5 is no different. But while the gap is shrinking between cabled and BT in models such as this, there is still some catching up to do.

Using the USB-C to USB-C on my MBP (I used another cable than the one provided), I could tell the difference. Instrument separation was a bit better, with those that might fade into the background a bit on BT coming forth with good results. Layering became a bit more complex as well, which combined with the instrument separation makes for a headphone that would fit right into the cabled market.

The S5 when cabled using the USB-C to USB-C sounds like a more mature version of the S3, with better detail retrieval and a cohesion of the sound, which I find more enticing as well. The S5 will also charge from the source it is connected to while using the USB cable, but not while using the 3.5mm aux cable. When disconnecting either cable, the S5’s default is to turn off (complete with a vocal message), so going back to BT the unit must be turned back on.



Pairings:

When using the highest sampling rate, you cannot connect two devices, which is a real limitation for me. However, the opposite side of that is excellent sound quality when you use the highest sampling rates.

I found that I equally liked all three sources used but for different reasons. The HiBy R4 has some limitations but paired exceptionally well with the S5. Taking advantage of the Class-A amplifier and the BT 5.4 made for a wonderfully deep reaching low end, vibrant mids, and a smooth top end. To me, it represented a typical planar sound. Using either original or dynamic EQ settings afforded me a quality that is on par with some of the best TWS headphones to date.

Paired with my iPhone 13 Pro Max was typical of a smartphone-connected BT headphone, and I enjoyed the sound almost as much as the R4. Not quite as vibrant, but equally deep; the limitations of the Apple device did stand out. This is where the Android-based HiBy shone better to me.

For my MBP, I used the cabled connection exclusively, and mostly the USB-C to USB-C cable. The differences are noted above in sound quality, and going back and forth between the R4 and MBP allowed me to enjoy the best of both worlds.


Select Comparisons:


Edifier STAX Spirit S3

Technical:

Comparative Specs:

Data chart courtesy of Neowin’s review.

Design:

The S3 comes across with a more budgetary look but is still of good quality. The overall look seems to be more edgy, too. The headband has aluminum slide-outs for adjustment, which look a bit pedestrian comparatively. Two sets of pads are included so personalizing is similar to the S5. The lambskin pads seem a smidge thinner on the S3 as well.

Where the S5 may be oriented towards home listening first, the S3 might go the opposite direction, and be meant for portable use first.

The build quality is good but is a step down from the S5. The headband can creak while adjusting or putting on and taking off, which has been corrected on the S5.

Performance:

The biggest difference between the two is the soundstage becomes larger overall and better detail retrieval & imaging. This gives the listener the ability to better place the instruments while allowing the music to better fill the space.

Bass hits just as hard but with better control. There is a more mature sound on the S5, and this may or may not be what you want. Call it moving “upscale” in sound quality. The engineers listened, making the overall package better in sound qualities to me. Where the S3 carries a certain edge to the song, the S5 comes across as more developed. I still like the edginess of the S3, and find it a very nice compliment to others within this price bracket, but there is no denying that the S5 is aiming higher.



B&W Px8

When I reviewed the Px8, I did so in concert with the WH1000XM5 and Bathys. I found the Bathys to have the best overall sound, the 1000XM5 to have the best ANC out, and the Px8 my favorite choice because it combines both. If I had to choose one, it would have been the Sony for the pure economy of choice, but I have sent that my son’s way and kept the Px8.

Technical:

With a 40mm dynamic driver and a limited run time of 30 hours, you can easily see how far the market has come. You can also run the Px8s with either the USB-C cable or 3.5mm aux cable, similar to the S5.

The Px8 also carries four microphones strictly for ANC control, and two to be used for phone calls. The ANC of the Px8 does fall behind the class-leading Sony & Sennheiser, but the main focus similar to the S5 is on the audio quality.

Design:

Everything about the Px8 exudes luxury. From its weight (it is quite hefty) to the materials used and craftsmanship, the B&W promotes the high-end quality the company is known for.

The gorgeous burnished metal pairs very well with the black leather and black metal parts of the ear cups and stanchions. The padded leather of the ear cups envelop your ears like a fine evening chair in which you take your scotch. That superb fit and finish carry over into the one-piece headband, which could use a bit more plushness to it. While the headband is smooth, I do wish for a bit more padding.

Adjusting the headband is by look since there are no marks or detents. While I appreciate the simplicity, getting the two sides even is an exercise in judgment. One I would prefer to be perfect. Not a big deal when taken as a whole, and short of spending four figures, the Px8 is the most luxurious TWS headphone out currently. That said, I feel I could wear the S5 for longer periods without bother, whether it be due to the better cushioning or lighter weight. Regardless, the Px8 was acceptable, while the S5 is exemplary.

Performance:

The deep-reaching bass of the Px8 is either its highlight or panacea depending upon who you talk to. Some like the deep sub-bass, while others find it intrudes into the wonderful mids. This can of course be EQ’d out in BT mode. I prefer a solid bassline with good reach, and the Px8 delivers that.

The mids come across as smooth and rich, especially female vocals. This does not hinder the top end either as there is good reach. The mids can be a bit too far forward, which some may not like. The soundstage is among the best out there as well, with no cramped feeling as all parts were allowed to expand in three dimensions.

This was the first headphone where I could see the gap between wired sound and BT sound closing. When using a USB-C to USB-C connection, there is a certain holography to the sound, which does not occur on BT. I also note that I had to raise the volume while wired to achieve the same seat-of-the-pants level.

If pure sound is what you want, along with ANC that is fairly adequate, the Px8 is one at which to look. Its battery life cannot hold a candle to the S5 (80hrs vs 30hrs) but it also (used to) costs a pretty penny more than the S5 and is going on 2+ years old. Since the price now falls right in line with the S5, that might be a fairly tough decision. The BT performance and USB-C audio performance of the S5 can certainly hold its own, though.



HiFiMan Edition XS

Yes, the Edition XS is a wired headphone, but it also carries a planar driver. An older model now replaced with a much more expensive model, the Edition XS carries a smooth signature, lightweight at 405g, and a very good fit. You can even use the HiFiMan Bluemini BT module to make it a wireless headphone, so the comparison is valid in my opinion.

Technical:

With a frequency response of 8Hz-50kHz, the Edition XS promotes a broad spectrum with which the music can play. The lower impedance of 18Ω and a sensitivity of 92dB make it easier to drive, but you need good power to make it sound its best.

The weight of 14.28Oz (405g) makes it exceptionally light, but that does come as a cost in the construction.

Design:

While the Edition XS is indeed light in weight, it is not the best-looking headphone out and looks (and feels) rather cheap. HiFiMan went through a phase where the sound mattered first (IMO) and the quality was second. I think they got the user’s message and newer models are more in line with our desires and expectations. The model I have is the older version, and while I like the look, it carries a low-end feel and build.

The ear cups are large and cavernous. So much so that fit might be an issue with the headphone sliding around, were it not for the tighter clamp pressure. The oval shape does allow the headphone to sit comfortably for long periods.

The headband creaks like a wooden ship on a November Lake Superior storm. The silver coating on the earcups is fading away like the coating on a Bic pen might, too. Adjusting the headphone is clunky, and feels low-end as well. I wish for better quality materials all around, especially knowing the cost of these rivals Beats or Bose offerings at the time. But...the sound...

Performance:

The sound coming forth makes up for the budgetary mindset of everything else to me. As an open-air headphone, this isn’t a fair competition, but when you consider the driver's price and makeup of the driver it makes sense. A larger driver as well.

Open sounding while providing decent reach down low, the Edition XS carries a spacious sound that allows the layering to show through. The sound isn’t thinner comparatively, but rather a bit speedier and less smooth. Succinct note weight provides an accuracy that the S5 cannot match. However, considering that the S5s tune is smoother and richer, that does not matter much.

This will come down to whether you want the portability at an expense, or a sound that is quite inviting, with sub-par build quality and a lack of portability. Suffice it is to say that I like both.



finale:

The STAX Spirit S3 was a quality offering, showing that Edifier intended to move upscale. The sound was a solid alternative to others on the market, and the price placed it as a real alternative to those offerings. The STAX Spirit S5 builds upon the foundation of the S3, moving upscale even more.

What shortcomings I had with the S3 (creaky headband, good but not great materials) have been mostly corrected on the S5. The simplicity of use, gorgeous laidback looks, and USB-C sound that makes one forget this is a BT headphone make all the difference to me. I find that compared to the B&W Px8, the S5 can hold its own earning a place in the upper reaches of BT headphones with excellent build, quality build materials, a better app experience, and the sound to back it all up.

If your device can support Snapdragon sound, that is an even greater advantage. The choice of having higher bitrates at the expense of dual connectivity is somewhat odd until you realize that isolating the sound to ensure the quality makes sense. I do wish it could do both, but can accept the limitations because the headphones are so good.

The Edifier STAX Spirit S5 is a very good headphone in the BT market and one that can handle cabled audio at the price with some very good alternatives. I recommend that you give the S5 a listen if you are in the market for something such as this.

Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700): A Japanese masterpiece, which mimics our home setting

CZ-8A

Intro: Crosszone is not known by many outside of the Far East market, and then seemingly in smaller circles. There is another review out regarding the “Enhanced” version, which to my knowledge is the only other dedicated review. Others are sure to follow.

Crosszone was started by Robert Lai of Asia Optical (English translation), which focuses on 3D LIDAR tech, along with other optics. From this, “CROSSZONE was established in Japan in 2016 by Asia Optical, which has extensive experience in developing and manufacturing optical products, like the ones mentioned. CZ-1 is the pioneer product of CROSSZONE and has received very good evaluations from reviewers and customers since. We hope to carry forward the concept of CZ-1 and are committed to continue developing high-quality music equipment,” quoted from their site with my interpretations thrown in as well.

The CZ-1 was well respected in the top-tier market with its unique (or so it seems) technology. The CZ-10 is an “affordable” model, while the tested CZ-8A seemingly splits the difference. After some critique, the “Enhanced” versions of the two latter models came about. With finer-tuned bass response, the pair retail for the same price as their previous models. Consider this an evolution, instead of a replacement of the models.

The review samples were sent to me (with @Wiljen to follow) for review purposes. Both models are ours to keep, but may be asked back for at any time. We agree to provide an unbiased review, noting all for good or ill. Also included was the company’s 4.4mm bal cable for comparative purposes.

I reference my Headfonics reviews below for comparative purposes only, but this particular review is not associated with Headfonics and is known. This is for my independent blog, along with @Headpie & @wiljen’s site, and here on Head-Fi at the independent request of Crosszone.

If the initial listening is anything to be an entry into the review, I note that the CZ-8A is off to a good start.



Specs:



In The Box:

CZ-8A
3.5mm se 1.5m long cable
6.35mm se 3.5m long cable
Owner’s manual
Warranty card
Display case

4.4mm bal cable-sent for review purposes with both headphones



Gear used/compared:

MacBook Pro/iFi Diablo 2
MacBook Pro/EarMen Angel
MacBook Pro/DA-Art Aquila III
MacBook Pro/FiiO K9 Pro ESS
Shanling M6 Pro
Cayin N6ii mk2

Kennerton Rögnir ($3200)
Audeze LCD-3 ($2200)
ZMF Eikon ($1400)
Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000)


Music used:

Tidal: Jazz, Daily Discovery (which varies)
Qobuz: Jazz, Pop, Rock


Unboxing:

The Crosszone comes in a box, much like ZMF has in the past, without a case. The black outer glossy enclosed paperboard exclosure includes a picture of the model on the front and the included items on the back. Understated, and I appreciate that the box does not become lavishly burdened with undue information.

Inside, the softer material, a clamshell-lidded box has a nice feel to it with “Crosszone” in gold gilding across the front. When opened, you are met with the instructions and warranty card in slots under the lid. Below, you find the velvet-like covered material set over a form-fitting medium-weight foam insert. The headphones lay flat inside the bottom portion of the box, and both cables are set into another cutout above. Elegantly simple, but no case other than the display case is included.

The CZ-8A is well protected.



Technology:

Truth be told, you could insert how a three-way speaker functions and get essentially the same methodology behind the CZ models. But of course, it isn’t that simple.

While traveling, Mr. Lai noted that most conventional headphones focused on the “inside the head” experience, losing what could be a better soundstage, if one mimics the two-channel home system. Using “Acoustic Resonance Technology” (ART) and “Acoustic Delay Chambers” (ADC) to achieve this natural and spatial sound field, “External Sound Localization” gives the user an out-of-head experience, mimicking that 2-channel experience. The CZ models function using the following technology.

Dual beryllium drivers (each with a brass ring for isolation and stabilization purposes) are used for each ear cup, with the 23mm dynamic driver focused on high frequencies; while the 40mm dynamic driver handles the low-end. Called direct channeling, this is no different from existing headphones. What adds to the technology is another 35mm beryllium cross-feed driver, which brings in the sound from the opposite ear cup, with a very slight delay.

The low-end driver for each side and the cross-driver have a small centered divot, acting like a lens. This further “delays” potential interferences, and is by design working in concert with the other technology. There are also four holes of equal size on the front curve of the driver, complete with two more sound wave control guides (baffles) acting like an acoustic focusing lens, which delays the sounds and adjusts the wavefront reaching the listener’s ear.

This is where it gets fun, with the ADC delaying the opposite channel sounds. The designed outer cover of the headphones is used for the ADC effect. The CZ-8A places ADC within that outer cover and wraps it with aluminum. The shielding effect of this cover reduces the effect of electromagnetic noise on the drivers and allows for purportedly a “clear and detailed playback of sounds.”

The shape of the ear pads in their triangular form allows those drivers to exercise their mettle, without becoming encumbered by the intrusiveness, which can happen sometimes with pads. There are also two “IV-like” tubes set into each ear pad, tucked under the padding; which act to guide the sound enhancing the spatial character of the sound.



A dual “baffle” system in front of the angled 23mm high-frequency driver (smaller closest, larger in back) also delays the signal a smidge, adding depth and extra soundstage. I will note that those baffles do rub on the mesh cover of the ear cup, and I was afraid my ear might rub on the baffles. They did not, but I do worry about the longevity of the mesh fabric.

There is also a smaller duct behind the two larger drivers (and tucked beneath the ear pad slightly), which also reflects sound, mimicking what a two-channel system might do when the sound waves bounce off a side or back wall. Another duct, just between each side’s dual drivers (and larger than the back duct) also directs sound for the opposite side, giving a broader soundstage, too.



Sensitivity:

With an impedance of 75 ohms and a sensitivity of only about 100dB/mW; the CZ-8A is a bit harder to drive. This could easily fall in with vintage higher-impedance headphones such as AKG models, which demand a large shot of voltage to drive if it had any higher impedance. The listening sources’ power aspects were adjusted accordingly to accommodate the higher impedance.


Build/Fit:

The first thing I noticed when taking the CZ-8A’s out of the box was the heft. They seemed to be on par with many Audeze headphones in weight. And as it turned out, feel as well. That’s a good thing. Made mostly of aluminum alloy, I get why it feels hefty but wears lightly.

I will also admit that I have never reviewed a headphone, which contains a hinge such as this on the stanchion. I fully understand why it is this way, with the spring-loaded design meant to put pressure in the right place.

The headphone strap allows for further adjusting, but the leather padded band under the headband never felt out of place. As George noted in his video review, this system affords the user the ability to wear the headphones with the ear cups higher or lower as needed, simply by adjusting the band.

The aluminum also carries “speckles” in the texture, which allows for a better grasp of the unit. The gold-colored rings around the outside of the cup almost made me miss the unequal-length vent slots (four of them on the cup’s backside) on the top portion of each cup.



The build quality is absolutely top tier, and warrants the level of flagship, were it not for the CZ-1. I liken this to Volkswagen several years ago making all of their interiors from the bottom Golf to the top Passat luxurious, because every driver deserves it. The same holds for these headphones.

The fit ended up being quite good, with little weight felt on top of my head in long 5–6-hour sessions, even while wearing a hat. Many manufacturers (I’m looking at you Sennheiser) could benefit from a design study of the Crosszone models.



Cable(s):

All three cables come as twisted OFC Litz wiring, with a see-thru woven mesh tube protecting the dual strands. You can get custom cables for differing 4.4 bal approaches, as well as XLR or different lengths. I will note that I was a bit skeptical of the feel of the cable until I attached each. There is absolutely no microphonics, which is wonderful. I cannot count the number of times while reviewing TOTL headphones when the house cable had microphonics, even a bit.

I am unsure of the wind or strand count per side, but the cable seems to be on the average size.



Sound:

All listening was done after 75+ hours of burn-in time. I occasionally checked, and will note up front that the sound seemed to open up after this time. Gone was a flatter response. I prefaced each check by listening to the LETSHUOER Cadenza 4 (also in for review) so that I had the same baseline of listening. I can confidently add that there was a difference.

Listening was done using my MBP tethered to the excellent iFi Diablo 2 (BT to my MBP and cabled), equally excellent EarMen Angel (tethered), and the Shanling M6 Pro along with the Cayin N6ii mk2.



Summary:

OOTB, I found the sound unusual, mimicking a small venue with vintage speakers in their repertoire. After burning the unit in, I found that the flatter response seemingly disappeared, opening up the soundstage as advertised.

Bass was a focal point of the “enhanced” version, and the lows came across as authoritative but controlled. The midrange lifted the soundstage, while the treble area filled the gaps. That small venue with vintage speakers sounded more enticing with each hour.


moar:

One of the main emphases of the Enhanced versions is getting the bass under control, without losing quantity. The bass hits fairly deep, with a good punch into the sub-bass level, but still lacks that overall authoritative grunt. That is actually OK, since reference headphones such as the Eikon have excellent control of the bass as well, without the grunt of say, an LCD-3. It is impactful, and detailed, which keeps it from bleeding into the midrange. Taken singularly, the bass is quite good, with good reach and a respectable impactful, punchy amount.

The midrange carries the uplift in sound signature, without becoming shouty or overshadowing. The tone stays natural but is also prone to a peak around the 1.5 kHz mark, without coloring, or impacting too much either male or female voices. I agree with George’s assessment that the mids carry forward. A bit too much for me, but since they are presented naturally; they do not become intimidating or impede my satisfaction. Well-defined note weight gives the midrange an authoritative sound, but without becoming too impactful; instead presenting the tonality through that weight as natural with a touch of “vibrant warmth.”



If I boiled the treble down to one word, it would be musical. I never felt it became grating or tedious, no matter what the source was, which can be a rarer trait in this range. I say that, because one of my all-time favorite headphones, the Kennerton Rögnir sounds fabulous to me, but can become tedious in the upper range on some songs. I never felt that way with the CZ-8A, as that accuracy of reach carried the musical tonality smoothly across the midrange.

Sometimes tying the ends to the middle can be cumbersome, but not here as other than the “a bit too forward for me” midrange, the melding of notes together gives good attack and decay for a proper weight of notes. I find I can raise the volume on songs, which while using other combinations I cannot. Especially for that intolerance, I have up top. This is a big deal to me.


Soundstage:

There is much ado about exactly what the Crosszone headphones do to the soundstage. Especially since they are marketed to replicate your two-channel system, and essentially the point of their methodology.

Meant to replicate your home system, with an all-encompassing soundstage; the angle and placement of the drivers and associated support mechanisms do a very good job of this. I found the width to be beyond my head, but not excessively. Too much width and you lose note definition, placement, and weight to me. In that regard, the CZ-8A does an admirable job. Height is flat-out excellent. Again, too much, and the layers become so stretched that notes become elongated vertically while maintaining their width. This can lead to excessively thin notes, even falsely. The CZ-8A presents a natural tendency to the height, which allows the notes to breathe organically, but with a good vibrant character; defining the space commendably.

The depth carries the goodies too, with very good depth, without becoming cavernous or removing the listener too far from the stage of the music. This affords placement of the instruments to be accurately located, and given the necessary space to breathe.

When taken together, layering and separation allow all involved instruments and notes to carry on without distraction, or bother. I won’t say that this is the best soundstage I have heard, but I will say that this is one of the best treatments given to promote the music equally well across the listening spectrum.



Pairings:

CZ-8A Enhanced & MBP/iFi Diablo 2 ($1299):

The Diablo2 is a beast. Not like the OG Black Label, but a tamer beast that provides plenty of power and connections. iFi chose to smooth the signature a bit from the OG Diablo while keeping the brighter aspects. What I heard was that the pairing allowed the mids to still stay prominent, while offering an added bit of emphasis down low. Slightly deeper in reach, along with a slight improvement in reach up top afforded a more open setting for the notes to breathe.

Running the pairing on high gain, I was able to attain respectable volume levels just below the ½-way mark. This allowed the CZ-8A to breathe a bit more freely than some pairings, without losing its weighted, open character. When called upon, I could raise the volume without straining my ears, or the sound emanating from the pairings. I found this agreeable, and an easy desktop setup.



CZ-8A Enahnced & MBP/FiiO K9 Pro ESS ($799):

The FiiO comes across as vibrant and technically savvy, what with the new ESS chip implementation. Compared to the warmer, richer signature of the K9 AKM, the ESS version promotes a vibrant tendency without losing detail retrieval. This additional level of clarity (between the FiiO models) played together well with the CZ-8A, losing a bit down low in the process. Running in high gain, I was comfortable between 1000-1300 volume-wise, song-dependent.

I cannot say that the FiiO added any more clarity to the, but allowed the positives of the CZ-8A to shine through without hindrance. Succinct piano notes and banjo notes on Chick Correa & Bela Fleck’s Remembrance still came across naturally, but with an added succinct tonality that showed the technical side of the CZ-8a’s performance. This was another positive pairing.


Image courtesy of zococity.es

CZ-8A Enhanced & YULONG DA-ART Aquila III ($999):

When I reviewed the Aquila III, I noted the added refinement from V2, but also added that the older model was still excellent. The Aquila III is a brilliant desktop DAC/Amp, providing gobs of power and clarity to back up the price.

The pairing added an openness that was lacking in the previous two pairings, but that comes down to the tune of each previous amplifier. Where the others went for richness or a vibrant tonality; the Aquila III goes for all-out clarity of that detail. But without losing note weight or a musicality of sound. This pairing was my favorite desktop setup, and I could happily listen to the Aquila III pull more clarity out of the CZ-8A. And do so without losing the low end.

You might think the clarity might make for a top end, which becomes strident or grating. This did not happen, even at ear-splitting levels. Even on my preferred “Slow” filter, the sound was rich with detail, and the vibrancy of the Crosszone’s midrange came across with alacrity.


Image courtesy of ngoshawksounds & Headfonics.com

CZ-8A Enhanced & EarMen Angel ($799):

I am a fan of EarMen products. The Sparrow and TR-AMP still see regular use in reviews and for personal listening. But the first one I reach for would be this, the Angel. It reminds me of my OG iFi micro–Black Label in its sheer power but with a better-refined character. Where Diablo 2 goes for vibrancy, the Angel goes for character-building authority. But with a bit added below, too. Running on high gain, I never had to go beyond the lower end of yellow on the volume wheel (equates to less than 50%).

The Diablo 2 paired with the CZ-8A has a more open sound, but the Angel focuses your attention more on the details of the song. This allows the magic of the Crosszone to work without bother, where the others add their own merits (which isn’t bad). A bit of soundstage is lost with this focus, but the sound was so sweet, I did not mind. Where the Diablo and FiiO provide additive bits and pieces, the Aquila III & Angel allow for the character of the CZ-8A to show through, with minimal additions.

To me, this was the closest pairing to the Aquila III, and my favorite “portable” pairing.


Image courtesy of Headfonics.com

CZ-8A Enhanced & Shanling M6 Pro ($759):

I will openly admit I am a Shanling fan. I own or have owned several, and still consider the M6 Pro a vital (vibrant?) part of my review repertoire. Not the most detailed, or newest, but I like it, and that is what matters.

The Shanling mimics the warmth of Diablo 2, but with a smoother texture to the notes. Running the Dual DAC, on “Turbo,” I found there was not a lack of power. I did have to run the volume, north of 50% to get the listening levels, where I thought the CZ-8A deserved to be. Going this route, the battery was the only impedance, dropping accordingly. But that was not the point.

What was the point, is that the pairing provided probably the smoothest character of any tested here. Yes, the Shanling lacks in micro-detail refinement, but I did not care, for the sweetness of sound emanating forth was very pleasant. And complimentary to the powerful Angel above.

As a true portable setup, this would do nicely, if you do not mind the lack of micro-details or clarity that a more refined setup can bring. I certainly didn’t.



CZ-8A Enhanced & Cayin N6ii mk2 ($1199):

I also keep this “relic” (four years old...) around because I have the A01, T01, and E01 motherboards. For pure sound, I use the E01; but for this purpose, I installed the A01 because it had a 4.4mm bal jack. The level of detail between the two is noticeable, making the A01 quite complimentary to the Crosszone, where the E01 would provide warmth (Shanling-like, but more detailed).

This was the most detailed of my true portable setups, and the only thing lacking was the true power needed to properly drive the CZ-8A. I find that regardless of the headphones being reviewed. What was present though, was micro-detail to almost make the Aquila III jealous. Providing detail in the gaps of the CZ-8A’s tuning made the pairing a good listen. I appreciated how the Cayin handled the top end, adding a bit of clarity without becoming strident. This made for a very complimentary pairing to a desktop (or even other DAP) setup, allowing the notes to reach their proper weight, and adding a bit of clarity as well.


Image courtesy of cayin.com

Comparisons:

Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700) v Kennerton Rögnir ($3200):

I am in love with the Rögnir and its sound. Yes, I know the bashing it has received for its “improper tuning” according to graphs, etc. I don’t care, because ultimately it is what the user likes, not some graph that points out discrepancies.

The detail coming out of the Rögnir compared to the Crosszone makes for an interesting comparison. The Rögnir provides a more vibrant signature, which highlights the midrange detail better while also giving the user a very good, tight low end. Where the Crosszone adds a bit better sub-bass reach to me, the Kennerton adds accuracy. Comparing the soundstage, the Kennerton can hold its own (except for width), due to the closed-back cup tuning (in my opinion), but this is where I do have an issue with the tuning. That added emphasis in the upper midrange and lower treble can give me trouble when I raise the volume. This is not the case with the CZ-8A, which handles large volume increases more handily.

But, when a song such as Hugh Laurie’s St. James Infirmary comes on, I relish the Kennerton, which can carry the piano notes with soul.



Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700) v Audeze LCD-3 ($2200, at the time):

My favorite open-backed headphone is the LCD-3. The tuning fits my listening as well as the Rögnir. The two complement each other perfectly. The planar technology provides a good platform of comparison since both of these headphones take an approach, which may take a bit of getting used to. The legendary “Audeze bass” cannot be matched by the Crosszone in either depth or quality. But that does not mean the CZ-8A is lacking. It simply means that the LCD-3 does it better for my tastes.

Where the Audeze is a hard fit comfort-wise, the CZ-8A sits comfortably. The larger pad openings on the LCD-3 mean you can attain an excellent fit, but the weight is felt more, regardless. The midrange on the LCD-3 comes across smoother and more to my liking, with enough detail to keep me interested. And does so, without being elevated like the Crosszone.

The top end of both comes across as a bit different, too. Where the Audeze goes for a slight rounding, without losing extension or detail (really it does to me), the Crosszone comes across with a bit more vibrancy and a slightly better reach, while still being somewhat polite. Where the Audeze seems fuller in sound, the Crosszone allows each aspect to function on its own merits.

The Crosszone almost feels like it will fall off when I put it on right after the Audeze, but I know that is just coming from the sheer mass of the LCD-3. It is heavy but wears extremely well. The Crosszone allows the fit to come across as softer, but without bother.


Imgae courtesy of ngoshawksounds & Headfonics.com

Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700) v ZMF Eikon ($1400):

The Eikon makes an appearance in my line-up after purchasing another second-hand model. I foolishly sold my previous pair. Using the LQi XLR cable for comparative purposes, the Eikon presents a full, deep-reaching signature with a better low-end grunt than the CZ-8A. Where the Crosszone goes for accuracy, the Eikon goes for emotion and depth. Some do report a slight bleed into the mids, but I find this part of the warm character of the closed-back ZMF.

Harder to drive than the CZ-8A, you need a quality source such as the Aquila III to drive it properly. As such, I noted a 10dB difference in the volume needed to attain the level by my seat-of-the-pants assessment. The midrange is a bit more frontal than the Crosszone, but not lifted. Treble reach is glorious, with enough vibrant quality to satisfy my liking. I do appreciate that while the reach is good, it does not become strident like the Rögnir when I raise the volume.

The soundstage of the Eikon is surprisingly good for a closed-back, but Zack & CO know a thing or two about tuning signatures to get the most out of the beautiful wood cups. Where the Crosszone provides the two-channel effect, the Eikon provides the emotion. Where the CZ-8A provides the emphasis on a smooth overall signature, the Eikon provides for your sensory inputs. Again, the fit of the Eikon while good, makes me realize just how good the CZ-8A fits, without bother. I can wear both for long periods, but the Crosszone melts away more.


Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700) v Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000):

With much of the same technology, except for the baffle on the lower driver, the tuning is similar but different. Where the CZ-8A goes for two-channel levels of detail while allowing the signature to breathe, the CZ-10 leans more towards the Eikon’s emotive responses. I find the bass reaches almost as low as the Eikon, but with less authority. This plays well into the tuning since it does not hinder the midrange.

The CZ-8A is tuned more towards the accuracy of the overall signature, whereas the CZ-10 is tuned for what I will call an immersive “fun” sound. For a $1k headphone, the sound is very, very good and in my upcoming review will make further judgments about it.

Suffice to say, the two provide a complementary approach for the company. Where the CZ-8A goes for accuracy of placement and making sure the listener gets the absolute most out of the soundstage, the CZ-10 Enhanced goes for a more engaging signature, with a bit of flair.

This is not a slight on either signature either, just a way the company goes about tuning to different levels of their models.


Image courtesy of ZMF Headphones

finale:

The CZ-8AE is the middle child of the Crosszone lineup. The calm, thinking model, taming the younger sibling while grounding the more expensive, older sibling. Mediator, negotiator, and easygoing are traits of the middle child along with innovation, independence, and self-motivation to drive all of that. When thought of that way, the CZ-8AE works quite well as the calming effect of the family. Taking the best of both ends and melding the signature into a smooth, detailed presentation is quite a trick, and does so well in the Enhanced model.

The details come across as succinct but not short or analytic. Instead, they come across with an exactness that presents the music in a manner, that pleases the senses of detail while calming the smoothness of a well-aired single-malt in the evening. A rare case of doing its job with alacrity and precision but without presence and soul beyond the emotive response.

And here is where the CZ-8AE bridges the gap between entry-level and flagship models presenting the listener with a distinct character not wrought from mainstream headphones. Another company’s opinion on what a quality headphone should sound like, and Crosszone succeeds in my book without question.

I mentioned in the CZ-10E that I had a preference, but would not tell you. I still do, but that gap seems to shrink every time I listen to the duo back-to-back and that is a good thing for it bodes well on Crosszone’s offerings.

I thank Crosszone for the opportunity to review two of their models, they were well worth the effort and pleasure while listening.


Cheers.

This is a review of the "Enhanced" version, with upgrades as listed below.

Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000): An update on the “budget” model.

CZ-10

Intro: Crosszone is not known by many of those outside of the Far East market, and then seemingly in smaller circles. There is another review out regarding the “Enhanced” version, which to my knowledge is the only other dedicated review. Others are sure to follow.


*History from the site, and the same as the CZ-8A review.


Crosszone was started by Robert Lai of Asia Optical (English translation), which focuses on 3D LIDAR tech, along with other optics. From this, “CROSSZONE was established in Japan in 2016 by Asia Optical, which has extensive experience in developing and manufacturing optical products, like the ones mentioned. CZ-1 is the pioneer product of CROSSZONE and has received very good evaluations from reviewers and customers since. We hope to carry forward the concept of CZ-1 and are committed to continue developing high-quality music equipment,” quoted from their site with my interpretations thrown in as well.

The CZ-1 was well respected in the top-tier market with its unique (or so it seems) technology. The CZ-10 is the “affordable” model, while the previously reviewed CZ-8A seemingly splits the difference. After some critique, the “Enhanced” versions of the two latter models came about. With finer-tuned bass response, the pair retail for the same price as their previous models. Consider this an evolution, instead of a replacement of the models.

The review samples were sent to me (with @Wiljen to follow) for review purposes. Both models are ours to keep, but may be asked back for at any time. We agree to provide an unbiased review, noting all for good or ill. Also included was the company’s 4.4mm bal cable for comparative purposes.

I reference my Headfonics reviews below for comparative purposes only, but this particular review is not associated with Headfonics and is known as such. This is for my independent blog, along with @Headpie & @wiljen’s site, and here on Head-Fi at the independent request of Crosszone.

If the initial listening is anything to be an entry into the review, I note that I prefer the CZ-10 from the initial listen. That may change and could be due to my listening preference(s).



Specs:



In The Box:

CZ-10 Enhanced
3.5mm se 1.5m long cable
6.35mm se 3.5m long cable
Owner’s manual
Warranty card
Display case
4.4mm bal cable



Gear used/compared:

MacBook Pro/iFi Diablo2
MacBook Pro/EarMen Angel
MacBook Pro/DA-Art Aquila III
MacBook Pro/FiiO K9 Pro ESS
Shanling M6 Pro
Cayin N6ii mk2

Campfire Audio Cascade ($899)
ZMF Eikon ($1400)
Kennerton Magni V2 ($690)
Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700)

Music used:

Tidal: Jazz, Daily Discovery (which varies)
Qobuz: Jazz, Pop, Rock


Unboxing:

The Crosszone comes in a box, much like ZMF presents their wares, without a case. The black outer glossy enclosed paperboard exclosure includes a picture of the model on the front and included items on the back. Understated, and I appreciate that the box does not become lavishly burdened with undue information.

Inside, the softer materialled clamshell-lidded box has a nice feel to it with “Crosszone” in gold gilding across the front. When opened, you are met with the instructions and warranty card in slots under the lid. Below, you find the velvet-like covered material set over a form-fitting medium-weight foam insert. The headphones lay flat inside the box, and both cables are set into another cutout above. Elegantly simple, but no case other than the display case is included.

The CZ-10 Enhanced is well protected, just like the CZ-8A Enhanced.



Technology:

Truth be told, you could insert how a three-way speaker functions and get essentially the same methodology behind the CZ models. But of course, it isn’t that simple.

While traveling, Mr. Lai noted that most conventional headphones focused on the “inside the head” experience, losing what could be a better soundstage, if one mimics the two-channel home system. Using “Acoustic Resonance Technology” (ART) and “Acoustic Delay Chambers” (ADC) to achieve this natural and spatial sound field, “External Sound Localization” gives the user an out-of-head experience, mimicking that 2-channel experience. The CZ models function using the following methodology.

Dual beryllium drivers (each with a brass ring for isolation and stabilization purposes) are used for each ear cup, with the 23mm dynamic driver focused on high frequencies; while the 40mm dynamic driver handles the low-end. Called direct channeling, this is no different from existing headphones. What adds to the technology is another 35mm beryllium cross-feed driver, which brings in the sound from the opposite ear cup, with a very slight delay.

The low-end driver for each side and the cross-driver have a small centered divot, acting like a lens. This further “delays” potential interferences, and is by design working in concert with the other technology. There are also four holes of equal size on the front curve of the driver but without the two sound wave control guides (baffles) of the CZ-8A.

This is where it gets fun, with the ADC delaying the opposite channel sounds. The designed outer cover of the headphones is used for this effect. The CZ-10 Enhanced places the ADC within that outer cover and wraps it with aluminum. The shielding effect of this cover reduces the effect of electromagnetic noise on the drivers and allows purportedly for a “clear and detailed playback of sounds.”

The shape of the ear pads in their triangular form allows those drivers to exercise their mettle, without being encumbered by the intrusiveness, which happens sometimes with pads. The CZ-10E does not carry either set of baffles, which help guide the sound waves on the CZ-8AE.

The CZ-10E lacks the smaller duct behind the two larger drivers of the CZ-8AE. There is the duct just between each side’s dual drivers (and larger than the back duct) though, which directs sound for the opposite side, giving a broader soundstage, too.



Sensitivity:

With an impedance of 75 ohms and a sensitivity of only about 99dB/mW; the CZ-10E holds the same harder-to-drive mantra of its big brother. This too, could easily fall into the vintage higher-impedance headphones such as AKG models, which demand a large shot of voltage to drive if it had an even higher impedance. The listening sources’ power aspects were adjusted accordingly to accommodate the higher impedance.


Build/Fit:

The first thing I noticed when taking the CZ-10Es out of the box was the heft, which was slightly less than the CZ-8AE (50g less). They seemed to be on par with many Audeze headphones in weight, but less than equivalent ZMF models. The feel was still quite good of the unit. Made mostly of aluminum alloy, I get why it feels hefty but wears lightly, just like its more expensive cousins.

This is now the second headphone, which contains a hinge such as this for adjusting. I fully understand why the design is this way, with the spring-loaded design meant to put pressure in the right place. The clamping pressure is identical to the slightly heavier CZ-8AE.

The headphone strap allows for further adjusting, but the leather padded band under the headband never felt out of place. As George noted in his video review (again, regurgitating), this system affords the user the ability to wear the headphones higher or lower as needed, simply by adjusting the band.

The aluminum also carries “speckles” in the texture like the CZ-8AE, which allows for a better grasp of the unit. The gold-colored bar runs like a laser set across the outside of the cup. Missing are the 4 unequal length vent slots, replaced by two longer ones oriented towards the back while wearing.

The build quality is top-tier and warrants its place in this ever-crowded price sector. I liken this to Volkswagen several years ago making all of their interiors from the bottom Golf to the top Passat luxurious, because every driver deserves it. The same holds for these headphones.

Fit ended up being quite good, with little weight felt on top of my head in long 5–6-hour sessions, even while wearing a hat. Many manufacturers (I’m looking at you Sennheiser) could benefit from a design study of the Crosszone models.



Cable(s):

All three cables come as twisted OFC Litz wiring, with a see-thru mesh tube protecting the dual strands. You can get custom cables for differing 4.4 bal approaches, as well as XLR or different lengths. I will note that I was a bit skeptical of the feel until I attached each. There is absolutely no microphonics, which is wonderful. I cannot count the number of times while reviewing headphones at this price when the house cable had microphonics, even a bit.

I am unsure of the wind or strand count per side, but the cabler seems to be on the average size.



Sound:

All listening was done after 75+ hours of burn-in time (just like the CZ-8AE). I occasionally checked, and will note up front that the sound seemed to open up after time. I prefaced each check by listening to the Shanling MG100 this time instead of the LETSHUOER so that I had the same baseline of listening. I can confidently add that there was a difference.

Listening was done using my MBP tethered to the excellent EarMen Angel, YULONG DA-ART Aquila III, FiiO K9 Pro ESS, and the Shanling M6 Pro along with the Cayin N6ii mk2.



Summary:

OOTB, I found the sound to have a bit more mainstream tuning than the CZ-8AE but it still mimicked a small venue with speakers (not vintage this time). After burning the unit in I found the CZ-10E opened its soundstage as advertised.

While enhanced bass was still a focal point of this version, the lows came across as authoritative but controlled, and more engaging. The midrange lifted the soundstage but not as much as the CZ-8AE, while the treble area filled in the gaps; with a bit sharper tonality. The small venue speakers’ sound came across as more engaging with each hour.

The CZ-10E to me is the more fun sounding headphone of the two Crosszone’s in for review. Where the CZ-8AE focuses on detail retrieval, the CZ-10E focuses on engagement.

moar:

One of the main emphases of the Enhanced versions is getting the bass under control, without losing quantity. The bass hits fairly deep (source-dependent), with a good punch into the sub-bass level, with more authority; helping make that engaging sound. This is OK since reference headphones such as the Eikon have excellent control of the bass but without the grunt that the bass-cannon Cascade can provide. It is impactful, and detailed, with a slight bleed into the mids; which helps with the engaging signature. Taken singularly, the bass is good, with a decent reach and a respectable impactful, punchy amount; countering the CZ-8AE’s better “quality.”

The midrange carries the slighter uplift in sound signature, without becoming too shouty or overshadowing. There is a more piercing aspect to it than the finer-tuned CZ-8AE, but comes with an added layer of holography, which the more expensive cousin doesn’t carry.



The tone stays organic but is also prone to a peak around the 2.5 kHz mark, with coloring, that impacts female voices. I agree with George’s assessment (again) that the mids carry forward. A bit too much for me (more than the CZ-8AE), but with that organic feeling; they do not impede my satisfaction too much. Well-defined note weight gives the midrange an authoritative sound, but without becoming too impactful; instead presenting the tonality through that weight as natural with a touch of “vibrant warmth.” Source-dependent, they can become a bit shouty, which means you only need to turn the volume down; or pair it with a warmer source.

The treble still tends to be musical. It does have less control though. Compared to the Kennerton Rögnir, which sounds fabulous, but becomes tedious in the upper range on some songs, the CZ-10E does not warrant that as much. It is more similar to the Magni V2 than the Rögnir. The musical, fun tonality carried a mostly smooth sound across the treble range.

Sometimes tying the ends to the middle can be cumbersome, but unlike the CZ-8AE the CZ-10E does not mix the ends as well. I find I can raise the volume on some songs while on other combinations I cannot. Due to my treble intolerance, I had to match the source more closely than the CZ-8AE.



Soundstage:

There is much ado about exactly what the Crosszone headphones do to the soundstage. Especially since they are marketed to replicate your two-channel system, and essentially the point of their methodology.

Meant to replicate your home system, with an all-encompassing soundstage; the angle and placement of the drivers and associated support mechanisms do a very good job of this. I found the width to be beyond my head, but not excessively. Too much width and you lose note definition, placement, and weight to me. The CZ-10E carried instruments further away from the center to me, adding not only to the holography I heard but expansion of the soundstage. This can be construed as engaging but without completely enveloping you.

Height is flat-out excellent. Again, too much, and the layers become so stretched that notes become elongated vertically while maintaining their width. This can lead to excessively thin notes, even falsely. The CZ-10E presents a naturalness to the height, which allows the notes to breathe organically, but with a good vibrant character; defining the space commendably. This is especially true when added to the width I mentioned above. More so than the CZ-8AE.

The depth carries the goodies too, with very good depth, but without becoming cavernous or removing the listener too far from the stage of the music. This affords placement of the instruments to be accurately located, and given the necessary space to breathe. Add in the holographic effect and you “mimic” the cavernous nature of a well-tuned concert hall.

When taken together, layering and separation allow all involved instruments and notes to carry the spaciousness wrought by that holographic effect.





Pairings:

CZ-10E Enhanced & MBP/iFi Diablo 2 ($1299):

The Diablo2 is a beast. Not like the OG Black Label, but a tamer beast that provides plenty of power and connections. iFi chose to smooth the signature a bit from the OG Diablo while keeping the brighter aspects. What I heard was that the pairing allowed the mids to still stay prominent but without the shoutiness from some of the other pairings here. Slightly deeper in reach (but flatter), along with a slight improvement in reach up top afforded a more open setting for the notes to breathe.

Running the pairing on medium gain, I was able to attain quite a respectable volume level just at the ½-way mark. This allowed the CZ-10E to shine, but felt a bit compressed, without losing too much of the note weight. When called upon, I could raise the volume without straining my ears (unlike the Aquila III). I found this agreeable, and an easy desktop setup.

This is the kind of pairing that I feel the CZ-10E aches for. Power, but without being shouty or in your face. Yes, the signature of the headphones is engaging, and fun; but pairing two loud siblings is not a good take. I talked about “appropriate pairings” and the Diablo 2 would be one of those, without a second thought.



CZ-10 Enhanced & MBP/FiiO K9 Pro ESS ($799):

The FiiO comes across as vibrant and technically savvy, what with the new ESS chip implementation. Compared to the warmer, richer signature of the K9 AKM, the ESS version promotes a vibrant tendency without losing detail retrieval. This additional level of clarity (between the FiiO models) played together well with the CZ-8A, losing a bit down low in the process. Running in high gain, I was comfortable between 1000-1300 volume-wise, song-dependent.

I can say that the FiiO added more clarity, but did so in a manner that became a bit more engaging and also a bit more upper-end intolerant. Smooth sax notes on Coleman Hawkins Nighthawk came across as natural and sumptuous but with an adding too much to the tonality. This was another positive pairing. Conversely, Norah Jones Don’t Know Why sounded fantastic, but when she reached for notes, I reached for the volume knob. Less so than on the CZ-8AE. Mind you, the organic synergy of her voice through the combination made me play the song over and over to “ensure” I had heard that correctly.


CZ-10 Enhanced & YULONG DA-ART Aquila III ($999):

When I reviewed the Aquila III, I noted the added refinement from V2 but also added that the older model was still excellent. The Aquila III is a brilliant desktop DAC/Amp, providing gobs of power and clarity to back up the price.

The pairing did not add quite the appeal as the CZ-8AE did. While I appreciated the added detail coming out of the Aquila III, it almost became too much. I preferred a warmer option to the excellent detail coming out of the Aquila III.

I found that even on the “Slow” filter, the added note quality up top was not handled as well as the more expensive cousin. On Chick Corea & Bela Fleck’s excellent Remembrance, the added detail was excellent but came across as not as engaging as the FiiO. This may seem odd since both are tuned for clarity. But this goes to show that the YULONG carries that extra level of detail the FiiO cannot match.

Even though the FiiO may not be on par detail-wise as the Aquila III, I preferred that pairing.



CZ-10 Enhanced & EarMen Angel ($799):

I am a fan of EarMen products. The Sparrow and TR-AMP still see regular use in reviews and for personal listening. But the first one I reach for would be this, the Angel. It reminds me of my OG iFi micro–Black Label in its sheer power but with a better-refined character. Where Diablo 2 goes for vibrancy, the Angel goes for character-building authority. But with a bit added below, too. Running on high gain, I never had to go beyond the lower end of yellow on the volume wheel (equates to less than 50%).

The Diablo 2 paired with the CZ-8A has a more open sound, but the Angel focuses your attention more on the details of the song. This allows the magic of the Crosszone to work without bother, where the others add their own merits (which isn’t bad). A bit of soundstage is lost with this focus, but the sound was so sweet, I did not mind. Where the Diablo and FiiO provide additive bits and pieces, the Aquila III & Angel allow for the character of the CZ-8A to show through, with minimal additions.

To me, this was the closest pairing to the Aquila III, and my favorite “portable” pairing.


Courtesy of EarMen website

CZ-10 Enhanced & Shanling M6 Pro ($759):

I will openly admit I am a Shanling fan. I own or have owned several, and still consider the M6 Pro a vital (vibrant?) part of my review repertoire. Not the most detailed, or newest, but I like it, and that is what matters.

The Shanling mimics the warmth of Diablo 2, but with a smoother texture to the notes. Running the Dual DAC, on “Turbo,” I found there was not a lack of power. I did have to run the volume, north of 50% to get the listening levels, where I thought the CZ-8A deserved to be. Going this route, the battery was the only impedance, dropping accordingly. But that was not the point.

What was the point, is that the pairing provided probably the smoothest character of any tested here. Yes, the Shanling lacks in micro-detail refinement, but I did not care, for the sweetness of sound emanating forth was very pleasant. And complimentary to the powerful Angel above.

As a true portable setup, this would do nicely, if you do not mind the lack of micro-details or clarity that a more refined setup can bring. I certainly didn’t.



CZ-10 Enhanced & Cayin N6ii mk2 ($1199):

I also keep this “relic” (four years old...) around because I have the A01, T01, and E01 motherboards. For pure sound, I use the E01; but for this purpose, I installed the A01 because it had a 4.4mm bal jack. The level of detail between the two is noticeable, making the A01 quite complimentary to the Crosszone, where the E01 would provide warmth (Shanling-like, but more detailed).

This was the most detailed of my true portable setups, and the only thing lacking was the true power needed to properly drive the CZ-8A. I find that regardless of the headphones being reviewed. What was present though, was micro-detail to almost make the Aquila III jealous. Providing detail in the gaps of the CZ-8A’s tuning made the pairing a good listen. I appreciated how the Cayin handled the top end, adding a bit of clarity without becoming strident. This made for a very complimentary pairing to a desktop (or even other DAP) setup, allowing the notes to reach their proper weight, and adding a bit of clarity as well.


Comparisons:

Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000) v Campfire Audio Cascade ($899):

The Cascade is one of my all-time favorite closed-back headphones. The first headphone from Campfire Audio, the tune was most definitely oriented toward those who prefer bass cannons. And it does not fail in that regard.

Foldable for portability, the possibility of adding aftermarket cables made it quite the choice some years ago. And to me it still is. Not the most detailed, but ever so engaging in presentation you had no choice but to pay attention to the music emanating from within.

If this were down to levels of detail, the Crosszone would win in spades. But if we delve deeper into the engaging aspect of why we listen, it becomes less clear. Some find the Cascade middling in performance, whereas I find it thoroughly engaging and worthy of a fine cigar and a bourbon at the end of an especially trying day.

Where the CZ-10E provides an engaging, accurate sound to help you focus, the Cascade helps you forget. Raising the volume comes easier on the Cascade, too. I find when using the Cascade, I listen to a harder-edged music genre as easily as smooth jazz or blues. The Cascade can help you disassociate from reality for a while either with emotive force or a laidback style. The Crosszone helps you focus more on the tasks at hand. Both are excellent at what they do.



Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000) v ZMF Eikon ($1400):

I foolishly sold my previous pair of Eikon. I now have another pair back. While not quite as visceral in bass as the Atrium, I preferred the better control of the sound signature here. And that should not fool you, there is plenty down low with which to agree.

This is probably the closest competition for the likes of the Crosszone in my opinion. When aiming for a marker such as the ZMF, you had better consider its merits. The signature is detailed, with a push slightly up and forward to the mids, which highlights instrumental-based music. And does so quite well. Whereas the CZ-10E comes across with slightly better detail and clarity, it loses in note weight. The Eikon just hits right.

The Crosszone is more midcentric, with an even pull up top and down low, making for a more holographic effect to the signature. The level of detail wrought from Latin music makes for an almost unfair comparison, except when you take emotion into play. While the Crosszone comes across as accurate and holographic, the Eikon presents a more emotive aspect, like the Cascade. Mind you, this is my preference, and should not dissuade you from the absolutely glorious sound coming forth from the mids in the CZ-10E.

The Eikon wears heavier and makes for the choice of ear pads paramount in your listening decision (and ZMF provides many). The Crosszone is more plug and play, but neither should be discounted for a lack of merits here.


Courtesy of ZMF website

Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000) v Kennerton Magni V2 ($690):

I will admit I was a bit bothered when I purchased the Magni when I found out it was not the newest iteration. No matter, I have grown to appreciate and love its signature. Brighter than the CZ-10E, but with almost as much bass down low, and better control; the Magni is a very good closed-back headphone.

While it may not have the detailed retrieval of the CZ-10E, it carries the elevated midrange, but with more verve. And herein lies its Achilles heel to me; the midrange is overemphasized to me. This means I cannot turn the volume knob up as easily as the Cascade or CZ-10E, limiting my true enjoyment. Where it does shine is in succinct, accuracy when coupled with a source, which can come across with detail and clarity. It also works well with a warmer source, providing a richness to it, that the CZ-10E almost carries naturally.

You have to be pickier with choosing the right source with the Magni, making it more specific in use than the cross-platform CZ-10E. While I still really like the Magni V2, the Crosszone’s versatility cannot be discounted as a major benefit. When I am in the mood for something specific, the Magni V2 appears in my rotation. But for a more versatile listening pleasure, the CZ-10E presents itself more readily.


Courtesy of Kennerton website

Crosszone CZ-10 Enhanced ($1000) v Crosszone CZ-8A Enhanced ($1700):

With much of the same technology, except for the baffle on the lower driver, the tuning is similar but different. Where the CZ-8A goes for two-channel levels of detail while allowing the signature to breathe, the CZ-10 leans more towards the Eikon’s emotive responses. I find the bass reaches almost as low as the Eikon, but with less authority. This plays well into the tuning since it does not hinder the midrange.

The CZ-8A is tuned more towards the accuracy of the overall signature, whereas the CZ-10 is tuned for what I will call an immersive “fun” sound. For a $1k headphone, the sound is very, very good and in my upcoming review will make further judgments about it.

Suffice to say, the two provide a complementary approach for the company. Where the CZ-8A goes for accuracy of placement and making sure the listener gets the absolute most out of the soundstage, the CZ-10 Enhanced goes for a more engaging signature, with a bit of flair.

This is not a slight on either signature either, just a way the company goes about tuning to different levels of their models.



finale:

I said earlier that I had a preference as to which of the Crosszone headphones I liked. I still do, but I also think it isn’t that easy. One is their “entry-level” headphone in the model reviewed here, the CZ-10 Enhanced. The other is the bridge between this model and the TOTL CZ-1, raising the bar so to speak; the CZ-8A Enhanced.

Each does their job well in their respective category. If you want the purer model, then the CZ-8A Enhanced would be the easy choice. But it isn’t easy for me, for when emotion comes into play (like with the Cascade & Magni V2 above), that factor tips the scales for me allowing the CZ-10 Enhanced to come out ahead. For an immersive listen I preferred the CZ-10 Enhanced. For visceral accuracy, the CZ-8A Enhanced is amongst the best I have heard of late. But this may be about emotions and engagement, and this is where the CZ-10 Enhanced can compete in the market alongside the Cascade and others at the point such as the LCD-2 or something comparable.

And therein lies the dilemma...do you go for the better clarity-driven sound, which clearly moves ahead in detail retrieval, or for the more viscerally engaging (yes, I used visceral in two different thought patterns) sound signature which comes across as potentially more appealing?

I won’t make that decision for you but know that either model serves its purpose well, with sound to back the comfort up for long sessions, no matter the choice.

As for my choice? I’m not going to tell you. Enjoy and make your own decision.

LETSHUOER Cadenza 4 ($249): Does Trickledown work? Me thinks so.

4.25

LETSHUOER Cadenza 4

Intro: Following on the heels of the successful Cadenza 12 (a wonderful TOTL), and the S15 (A smooth-sounding IEM), the Cadenza 4 tries to fit into a niche using both (IMO) IEMs as models. A hybrid that uses both DD and two types of BAs (Knowles & Sonion), the company uses the expertise from both models mentioned to fashion a high “low-end” model.

The Cadenza 4 was given to me for review. It is implied that the critter is mine, but may be asked back for any time. This of course bears no bearing upon my review. Plus, I still feel that flipping review units is uncool.


Specs:





In The Box:

Gear Used/Compared:

Cayin N6ii mkii
FiiO CP13
iFi Diablo2

Shanling MG100 ($159)
LETSHUOER S15 ($329)
QoA Aviation ($199)


Music:

Tidal-Jazz, Blues
Qobuz-same w/ Big Band & Norah Jones



Unboxing:

Just like the S15, the unboxing is Empire Ears-like, with a slide-out tray, which contains the IEM cable inside the case. To the right are the three interchangeable jacks (2.5mm bal, 3.5mm se, & 4.4mm bal). But above that, you get to see the Cadenza 4 set in a paperboard-covered soft foam insert (which takes some effort to retrieve).

Below that you have the instruction manual in an envelope along with a warranty card. The tips are stored initially inside the round case, with the cable. But, once the Cadenza 4 is mounted to the cable, you cannot get all of that back into the case comfortably. At least I couldn’t without smashing the tips. A good idea, but in need of a bit of fine-tuning.

That IEM case also seems a bit lower quality than the S15 case. I had a more difficult time screwing the lid back on, and the feel, while good tactility-wise, felt less luxurious.

LETSHUOER includes 6 sets of tips, including a mounted set on the IEM. The two types are vocal and balanced, coming in three different sizes – small, medium, and large.

The balanced tips have longer and thinner stems, making for a well...more balanced approach while restricting openness and the soundstage. The vocal tips are shorter and have thicker stems, enhancing the midrange with a more open sound, while showcasing vocals and adding grunt down low comparatively.



Build/Fit:

The Cadenza 4 is made from a 3D-printed resin, in a typical teardrop shape, with a larger nub to help with fit. A narrow nozzle helps with insertion, and the overall quality is good with three well-fitting parts. The faceplate shines in silver with the LETSHUOER logo in black on both the left and right sides. The Fit of the faceplate seems off, but when you feel for a gap between the shell and faceplate there isn’t one.

The shell fits nearly flush in my average-sized ears, with no discomfort, which led to long listening sessions. Thankfully there is a dedicated sheath for an ear hook, too. This made the cable lay in a much better position behind my ear, even wearing my reading glasses.

There are minor microphonics associated with the cable, but not as much as some in this category. The cable has a clear plastic rectangular cinch, which works quite well above the burnished silver Y-splitter. The two-wire cable contains 392 strands per cable of silver-plated monocrystalline copper.

As many companies are doing, there are three jacks included as mentioned above. Instead of sliding in, complete with a slot and having a screw cover; the Cadenza 4 only has the slide-in part. But I did not worry about it coming loose since the two parts fit together with good pressure.

The cable laid nicely when unwound, but it did take a bit to do so. I found that if you ran your hand down the cable as you unwound it, the shape immediately went straight.

Combine all of this, and I think the Cadenza 4 fits and functions very well.



Technology:

The Cadenza 4 contains a new proprietary 10mm dual-chambered beryllium-coated dynamic driver and 3 BA drivers (a single Sonion with dual Knowles drivers) making for a quad-driver hybrid in-ear monitor.

The 50-micrometer 3D-printed acoustic tube aids in fine-tuning the sound, while an electronic 4-way crossover network finalizes the process. Combined, this makes the Cadenza 4 easy to drive with an impedance of 15Ω @1kHz and a sensitivity rating of 102 db/Vrms.



Sound:

All listening was done on the sources mentioned above in combination to get the most out of determining the synergy of the Cadenza 4.

Summary:

The Cadenza 4 sounds more towards the neutral part of the sound spectrum, with a natural uncolored feel to it, which departs from some of LETSHUOER’s previous offerings. While not bass-shy, it evenly presents both ends to make for that balanced signature. Think “just right” in the realm of Goldilocks



moar:

Subbass goes fairly low, but without the impact that basshead-oriented IEMs may carry. Quality comes across as neutral. An upright bass instrument adds good girth down low, but more in the manner of coexisting with the overall signature as opposed to a foundation of weight. Since it does not reach as low as others, whose slant is for grunt; the quality of that bass must come across well. And it does. I found no bleed into the mids, which could overshadow or smear the connection. Complex pieces represent very good quality on the lows, not barging into the mids as noted. Good layering and texture to the notes help sort all of the above out, keeping the lows in tune.

The midrange comes with the clarity of notes that fits the overall character. Neutral, but allowing for good weight to the notes, which is aided by quick attack and decay; giving an illusion of thicker notes. While this may seem diametrically opposed, it isn’t due to the succinct nature with which those midrange notes promote a natural response. This aids in providing transparency to the notes and the illusion of a weightier note, which I find quite pleasing. Combine this into a natural-sounding timbre, and you get a thoroughly competent mid-range.



One thing I do wish for is a bit more sparkle up top. Coming from me, who does not favor too much in the treble region, this should not be considered a bad thing; only that if the top end had extended more, the overall signature would be presented with a bit more of an open signature; lending space to the whole sound. This should be taken into account only if you prefer a more detailed signature. And here is where that extra bit of extension may have helped define the signature. Bassheads will enjoy this. Those seeking succinct, accurate signatures may not like it so much.

The soundstage comes across as completely average. But in a good way. Layering & Separation is done very well, even with complex pieces. To me, this comes about from the more neutral overall character. This goes to show that even average can come across as excellent. The fault of this? Micro-detail suffers and the precision of notes. But this is not meant to be used as a reference tool; even with the nearer-neutral signature.



Pairings:

I found the Cadenza 4 easy to drive due to the impedance of 15Ω @1kHz and sensitivity of 102 dB/Vrms. While this is true, I found myself raising the volume to make for a more pleasing listen to me. Plus, the better the source, the better the Cadenza 4 seemingly sounded.

Having the sheer power of the iFi Diablo2, the Cadenza 4 sounded “best” of the “turbo” setting, while increasing the volume. “Nitro” provided little headroom with which to play, and using Turbo afforded me excellent control of the volume, per each song.

Clear amplifiers such as the Diablo2, or Cayin N6ii mkii DAP showed that with decent power doing the driving, the signature presents more down low while sending alacrity down the stream (better detail presentation).

Using the 4.4mm bal jack on the N6ii mkii, I found the pairing to be delightfully neutral, which is something I do not usually say when dealing with neutral. The level of details coming forth from the pairing made me appreciate how good the Cayin is, even as it moves into the geriatric section of its life.

Using the FiiO CP13 was an odd treat. Reviewing the CP13 for Headfonics I decided to combine the pair. While cassette tapes are coming back into style, there is no denying that the signature is VERY different from digital. I found the pairing worked well, with plenty of volume to be attained through the FiiO. Not the most detailed of the pairings here, I came away with an appreciation that the two could happily coexist together for a good listen.



Comparisons:

LETSHUOER Cadenza4 ($249) v Shanling MG100 ($159):

Not only have interchangeable jacks become common, interchangeable filters have as well. I did have a strong preference for the bass-oriented filters on the MG100, but the level of detail was still well ahead of the Cadenza 4. I also find the MG100 easier to drive, with a slightly better impedance and sensitivity of 16Ω and 113+/-3 dB @1kHz, respectfully.

That excessive bass does bleed into the mids, but a simple change to the balance filter quells that. Plus, the bleed did not inhibit the overall character of the MG100. The balance filter adds a bit more textural response to the sound as well, plus better detail and clarity.

This will come down to whether you like a more neutral signature or the ability to tailor the IEM to your preferred listening or flavored genre of choice.


LETSHUOER Cadenza4 ($249) v LETSHUOER S15 ($329):

Where the Cadenza 4 goes neutral, the S15 goes smooth and rich. There is no hiding behind the fact that the S15 will not cater to those seeking a reference signature. Maturity, but slower response come about in this signature. To me, this is an excellent choice for jazz with a smooth richness pervading my senses as Red Garland’s “Please Send Me Someone To Love” played. Deep sound from the upright bass is foundational instead of coexisting on the Cadenza 4.

I found the notes to have better texture, but the smooth character overrides this a bit. A thick richness pervades the listen as opposed to a neutral response that is used as a tool rather than engaging. Where the Cadenza 4 allows you to listen, the S15 engages you to relax and enjoy the sound. Quite different.




LETSHUOER Cadenza4 ($249) v QoA Aviation ($199):

Until the Aviation, I had never listened to a model from QoA. Needless to say, I came away with an impression of a decent listen for a good price. From my Headfonics review, the Aviation “...presents a vibrant, smooth character with an even frequency response. A small peak at 3kHz gives resolve to the upper mid-region.

Another fairly steep peak at the 8kHz region (then drop) adds brilliance in the treble region but without too much peakiness or sparkle. The drop after the 8kHz peak makes for a vibrant, but not overly exuberant, signature.”

The Aviation is also the most sensitive of those compared at 118 dB @1kHz and a somewhat high (for an IEM) 39Ω impedance rating. It was as easy to drive as the S15 and MG100, which were both easier than the Cadenza 4 (I cannot explain that, using a volume test of plug-and-play of each model into the iFi Diablo2 without changing volume levels).

There is more bass grunt and girth down low on the Aviation, which does bleed into the midrange. Richness pervaded the mids, with a smooth texture to them, which seems set a bit behind where the Cadenza 4 plays, even if I thought they were “powerfully forward.” This shows that the mids in the Cadenza 4 while more forward, present a more neutral flavor, which to me is more pleasing.

I would state that while the Aviation is a bit more vibrant than the Cadenza 4, it cannot match the level of detail coming out of the MG100.



finale:

I had to stop myself from comparing the Cadenza 4 to the S15 and Cadenza 12 (an extraordinarily good IEM) and judge the 4 on its merit. When doing this, the neutral flavoring comes across as quite competent and appreciated. Many “flavor of the month” IEMs come about with the grace of a used car advertisement in Chicago, aka LOUD!

The Cadenza 4 comes about with an understated accurate neutral tonality to its coloration (or lack of...). I appreciate this aspect and find myself reaching for the Cadenza 4 equally with the S15 when playing jazz. What little microphonics I could hear were easily countered by the sound signature, even if a bit harder to drive than what you might expect. The smooth, forward midrange comes to the front with any good jazz sax solo, making for a wonderful listen.

The combination of jacks affords the user the ability to change signatures a bit, or devices, omitting the need for multiple cables. The focus is then on the sound, where it should be. I find the Cadenza 4 to be a very competent IEM with a good build (which shows 3D printing is much better than even two years ago), looks, and sound to back up those goods.


I thank LETSHUOER for sending the sample and congratulate them on a very competent model.

iFi Diablo 2 ($1299)- The devil is in the details?

Diablo 2



Intro: iFi is an innovator. Presenting items that push the boundaries of what we need, the company clearly feels this path is working. I personally own the iDSD Pro and iCAN Pro for my reference desktop setup and still lament selling my OG micro iDSD Black Label. That thing was a beast. An untamed beast, which set the tone for transportable headphone amplifiers in the company stable. The OG Diablo was indeed an upgrade, taming the raw unfettered power of the original, without losing its character.

The Diablo 2 may not feel like a necessary item, especially to those who have ponied up for the first gen. But typical of iFi’s logic, there is enough new inside the Diablo 2 to warrant a look for those who may, while also drawing new customers into the fray.

I thank iFi and Lawrance for the loan of this device. After listening to it for approximately 75 hours, I have come to appreciate the lineage of its grandfather shining through on the grandson. Since it is a loaned unit, once it leaves I shall be reminiscing over my Pro Duo as a coping mechanism.

Caveat, since I am now part of the Headfonics team, my format has changed (for the better), but will add flavor like my blog reviews of old and some formatting from bygone days. Some things never change, nor should they...

Necessary items:

Gear Used/Tested:

FiiO GT3 (350 ohm)

Empire Ears Legend X

Spirit Torino Twin Pulse Beryllium IEM


Earmen Angel ($799)

OG xDSD ($399, priceless)

FiiO K9 Pro ESS ($799)

Centrance HiFi M8 V2 ($749)


Music:

Tidal-Jazz, Eilen Jewell, The Mavericks

Qobuz-Bill Evans, Sam Burckhardt & Lucas Montagnier

Etc

In The Box:

• Diablo 2
• USB-C cable
• USB-C-to-A adapter
• TOSLINK optical adapter
• 3.5mm to 6.3mm headphone adapter
• iTraveller carrying case
• User’s manual
• Inferno wings x4
• 5V iPower 2 charging wal wart

Specs (pulled from Headfonics review of Diablo 2):

• Qualcomm QCC518x 5.4 Bluetooth
• Dual Core Burr Brown chipset

• HI-RES support: 768k, DSD512, full MQA
• Bluetooth formats: aptX lossless, aptX adaptive, aptX, LDAC, LHDC/HWA, AAC, SBC
• Max output power 4.4mm: 19.2V / 611mW @600Ω or 12.87V / 5189mW @ 32Ω
• Max output power 3.5mm: 9.6V / 153mW @600Ω or 8.85V / 2450mW @ 32Ω
• RMS output power 4.4mm: 19.2V / 611mW @600Ω or 7.4V / 1710mW @32Ω or 11.5V / 2060mW @64Ω
• RMS output power 6.35mm: 9.6V / 150mW @600Ω or 8.1V / 2050mW @32Ω or 9.3V / 1360mW @64Ω
• xMEMS: 28Vpp (4.4mm output)
• Line out impedance: ≤ 200Ω
• SNR: ≥114db (A)
• DNR: ≥114db (A)
• THD+N: 0.002% @0DBFS 200kΩ
• Power consumption: Nitro 12W, Turbo 5W, Normal 2W, xMEMS 8W
• Battery: Lithium Polymer 4800mAh-up to 9 hours, and 5 hours to fully charge
• Dimensions: 166 x 85 x 28.5 mm
• Net weight: 455g (1lb)
• Digital inputs: 1x USB-C, 1x S/PDIF (optical/coax), Bluetooth 5.4
• Headphone outputs: 1x balanced 4.4mm / 1x 6.35mm
• Charging port: 1x USB-C

Unboxing:

As is typical with iFi, the unboxing is an experience to be had. Sliding off the glossy sleeve, you are met with the iFi logo-laden white box. Lifting the lid off, you are presented with the Diablo 2 wrapped carefully in parchment; tucked into a soft foam cutout.

Lifting the D2 out, you are met with another iFi item, the smile on the cardboard protective cover. Lifting that, you get the case (with the four Inferno wings) on one side, and split equally the power wall wart in one box and all of the adapters/accessories in the other.

Efficient, protected, and inclusive. iFi trademarks.

Build/Design:​

Going a different route has always been part of iFi’s DNA. The D2 is no different. The D2 departs from the more traditional log roll of the previous iterations, going for a slotted rounder shape with angular curves reminiscent of the Zen series.

iFi Audio includes brackets called “wings of Inferno,” which slip into the body's slots (only some of them) acting as stands. This makes for easier access on your desktop when properly placed I go back to my original word for the Black Label: a transportable device. It is still large for portable use, though. Keeping it in your attaché or backpack would work.

The front and rear angled panels give the D2 a certain cutting-edge design to the unit.

The iFi carries the typical company craftsmanship as well, with everything perfectly aligned and functional, without loose jacks or knobs.

Controls:​

The D2’s button placement and connection positions haven’t changed from the OG. The volume knob and headphone jacks are on the front along with a mode switch for adjusting gain and the additional xMEMS switch. All other connections are on the rear panel. The volume knob also has a lockout switch, so you do not accidentally bump it. This is a new feature and those who have had experience with iFi amplifiers know exactly what that means...

The Bluetooth function is selected by pressing a button on the rear panel, which also acts to switch sources between the USB input and the Bluetooth input.

Both panels on the D2 are packed full but have efficient use of space making for easy access to all jacks and functionality buttons. The front carries both 6.35mm single end and 4.4mm bal jacks. To the right is the mode switch that allows the user-selected gain modes (typically x3: normal, turbo, & nitro) and the volume knob.

The volume knob functions smoothly and has a good grip. As is typical of many analog pots, there is an unbalance between channels on the low end. This is alleviated by using the IEMatch switch on the bottom of the D2. You can leave it off (and have a noticeable unbalance), switch to 4.4bal (with a mostly even balance), or 6.35se (same results as 4.4bal) for better (or no) results.

The back panel carries the business ends of connectivity. You’ll notice two ports back there, a 4.4mm balanced connection and a 3.5mm SE connection, which act as both in and out. Until another reviewer pointed this out, it was not widely known to users, since it is not listed in the user manual.

This means that you can use the D2 with two separate components and access the DAC separately. You can then use the amplifier stage separately as well.

Tech Highlights:

The 16-core XMOS processor is pulled from the OG along with iFi Audio’s custom OV series op-amps, and a customized Burr Brown DAC section, which adds the necessary warmth to the sound. The Diablo 2 doesn't include the analog processing modes, XSpace, and XBass II, and it doesn't support digital filters other than Bit Perfect.

Also typical of iFi is the use of parts from the likes of TDK, Panasonic (expensive parts!), and Texas Instruments. If you have never immersed yourself on the page of a product from iFi, I highly recommend it, for the knowledge gained goes well beyond simply showcasing what and whose instruments are used packed inside.

Something called PureWave (fully balanced dual-mono circuitry), negative feedback, and differential mono design also carry over. I will admit that I have not heard the OG Diablo, so some of this will be new to me in this regard. According to their website, “Diablo 2 features PureWave, Servoless DirectDrive, OptimaLoop, and Advanced Jitter Reduction Technology, delivering exceptionally pure, detailed, and emotionally touching sound, these technologies elevate the performance to unparalleled heights, even challenging desktop DAC/amps.”

The visual circuitry changes with the addition of large 220µf capacitors within the circuitry. Rearranging the internals allows for the changes to fit smoothly into the mostly recognizable shape.

Bluetooth 5.4 receiving is another change, as well as the inclusion of an xMEMS capability switch on the front panel. I currently do not have anything capable of xMEMS, so this function will not be discussed.

An addition that continues from some of iFi’s other products is the iEMatch (Headfonics review link) feature that fixes a slight channel imbalance, which is common in analog volume pots at very low levels such as this. It worked, mostly.

The iFi Audio iDSD Diablo 2 runs most digital formats including MQA hardware unfolding. It can handle ‘Bitperfect’ PCM and DSD at up to 768kHz and DSD512.

Qualcomm’s QCC518x BT5.4 receiver handles many codecs including LDAC, aptX (including lossless and Adaptive), SBC, and AAC from transmitting sources such as mobile phones.

Amplification:​

iFi keeps their specs closer to the vest than most, and for good reason. Measurements of power should only be a guide, not gospel. I have heard plenty of so-called “low-power” amplifiers that would kick much more expensive units’ arses to the curb in comparison.

The power output rating of 5 watts is a peak rating, which occurs for a split second. Some say that peak power can improve transients and not overall sound quality to mention one caveat.

Having the three gain settings is a nice way to tailor your results for individual headphones and IEMs. You can expect a minimum of 2 watts RMS at 32Ω on the single-ended and the same on the balanced 4.4mm tap at 64Ω which is more than enough to drive most headphones comfortably. Max on the 4.4 is 611mW at 600Ω and 1710mW at 32Ω.

New D2 v OG V1:

The Diablo 2 has an improved power supply and amplifier that increases balanced power output at 32Ω by 50%+. There is also 4 times more output in balanced power compared to the single-ended at 600Ω.

The new model also features a more accurate analog volume pot along with xMEMS, BT Lossless (on available play units, which aren’t many right now), and other options such as the input/output options on the back (USB-C and 4.4bal).

All of this comes at a price increase of $300, though.

Battery Life:​

Rated for 8 hours, you will most likely get 5-6 hours depending upon volume and gain settings from the 4800mAh Lithium-Polymer battery. An included 5-volt BC v1.2 compliant charger can handle a rate of 1.9mA which translates into a few hours to charge the battery. I did read somewhere that it can take up to five hours for a full charge.

You can leave it plugged in when using it at your desk, and there is even an auto-off function, unlike the OG.


Wireless Connectivity:

Bluetooth:

BT5.4 using Qualcomm’s new QCC518x Bluetooth audio chip can support all CODECS including aptX Lossless, aptX Adaptive, aptX, LDACTM, LHDC/HWA, AAC, and SBC.

The connection was straightforward, and the switch on the back allows for easy switching between BT and a wired source. While not quite on par with a wired connection, the sound coming forth was quite good, closing the gap even more.


Wired Connectivity:

USB-DAC:

Connections include a USB-C on the back as well as a 4.4mm balanced in/out connection. The same holds for the 3.5nn single-ended connection on the back. Having the ability to connect two sources simultaneously allows the user to define what they want as the source, twofold. This would be convenient if you dislike changing cable often, as I do.

Add in the USB-C connection, and you could theoretically have three hooked up. I did not try that, though.



Sound Impressions:

All listening impressions were made with the Empire Ears Legend X, Spirit Torino Twin Pulse IEM, FiiO GT3 (350 ohm), ZMF Eikon, and AKG 240DF.

Summary:

As the name implies, the Diablo 2 is not shy about its signature. Running on the brighter, or hotter end of the spectrum, there is (to me) also the traditional iFi warmth and richness in the sound signature as well. Detail retrieval comes across with aplomb, rather than succinctly, making for a vibrant, rich character instead of a detail-driven cacophony of musical notes.

The high gain is also evident, reflecting iFi’s character for driving things into overdrive. Anytime you see “turbo” and “nitro” on the gain settings, it is not for the faint; nor to be made fun of. Through all of this, the clarity comes across as purposeful, instead of staccato-like. You engage within the music, instead of listening to it.

Timbre:

There is no getting away from the name and the sheer power the D2 can deliver. But as stated above, it is purposeful with detail to back the goods up. Richness pervades the tonality, and bass, which can reach low carries good weight without becoming intrusive or overdriven.

As the lows go, so do the highs. Spread evenly, you could be forgiven for thinking the response is near-neutral. Instead, there is an organic, heft to the note caliber, which gives you a naturalness that compliments the even tonality. I keep going back to my iFi Pro Duo for the signature equivalent but with a bit better detail retrieval. Mind you, the Pro duo has that luxurious tube sound, to compliment all involved.

The sparkle up top compliments the grunt down low, without overwhelming the middle range and that organic nature of it.

Staging & Dynamics:

With the excellent transient response, you are kept firmly aware across the FR curve, and there is a good weight to the notes, too. The speed and decay are shortened on most notes, making for a quick attack of sound, but without becoming thin or analytical. The vibrancy of the presentation allows the listener to gauge accurately where all of the instruments are playing and what plane they reside in.

All of this leads to an accuracy of sound, which steps away from the iFi Pro Duo, which is more about the overall presentation. Seemingly, the better the headphones or IEM, the better the response was, and I found myself moving upscale in my collection to see just how far the D2 could persuade pleasing music from.

The soundstage was lifted, but not overly; making for an uplifting presentation, which stretched the height. The width was excellent, and the depth was almost as good. This was not a cubic presentation, but rather a spacious one, which allowed the notes to breathe within the realm of the stage.

I never had a problem with power, either so I am one to give iFi a pass on any of those “transgressions,” with which others speak. Having the ability to run three gain levels allows the listener to use many within their spectrum of listening devices with great pleasure.



Comparisons:

iFi Diablo 2 ($1299) v iFi iDSD/iCAN Pro duo ($2999ish):

Long held as my “reference set,” the duo carries functionality that would still make many others blush. BT, WiFi, tube sound (and adjustability), along with 3D holography adjusting, and a multitude of filters. The ability to change on the fly makes this still one of my all-time favorite setups.

Truthfully, this isn’t really a fair competition when one looks at the price, but when you factor in age it becomes a bit clearer. The D2 is the “latest and greatest” from iFi, while the pair is their gold standard, even if it may be considered the grandfather of the company. And, as we know, if you come for the king, you best not miss.

The D2 while a brash youngster, takes lessons from the elder in showing off a mature presentation, but with an edge. Where the pair goes for an overall fluidity (and tubey goodness), the D2 goes for cutting-edge details with a vibrant character, that still exudes the familial organic sound (a bit).

You can drive both into oblivion, but both still hold their mettle when called upon to do so. Where the D2 dances a quicker-paced, response-oriented signature; the pair exude a maturity that the D2 cannot match. That is if you prefer that signature. As such, the two family members would complement each other very well whether on your desktop or save the D2 for “transportability.”


iFi Diablo 2 ($1299) v EarMen Angel ($799):

EarMen is known for making superb-sounding devices, which put much more expensive gear to shame. Having Auris as a parental company pays off, with trickledown tech, that can make others blush in jealousy. Except if your name happens to be iFi.

The EarMen does not boast the connectivity options of the D2, nor does it do BT, either. It simply connects and plays. And plays well. While not quite as much of a looker as the D2, it is under the skin where the magic lies.

Boasting almost as much power as the D2, you can run your ears to bleeding with the Angel, begging for mercy just as much as the D2. Where the D2 sounds rich, the Angel sounds vibrant. Where the D2 sounds accurate but smooth; the Angel sounds vibrant and detailed.

The Angel does SP/DIF connectivity as well as the D2, for those who may want to utilize either into another amplifier or two-channel system through this connection.

This will come down to whether you want a bit more vibrant, detailed signature (that may sound a bit thin to some) in the Angel, or the versatility and multiple gain settings of the D2 along with as much power.

Me? I’d like both, please.


iFi Diablo 2 ($1299) v iFi xDSD ($399):

There is no denying the familial heritage of the xDSD (and xCAN for that matter). I personally prefer the xDSD since it is a dedicated headphone amplifier. For sheer power, the xDSD is hard to beat in a size v punch comparison. Vibrant in character, but not as much so as the Angel; the xDSD shows off in power and accuracy instead of a mature sound.

With 3D+ and XBass, you can also add grunt down low along with some holography to the sound. But, when it comes to comparison, the D2 dwarfs the older cousin in sheer power and the ability to come across with the richness in signature that may be missing.


iFi Diablo 2 ($1299) v Centrance HiFi M8 V2 ($799):

The pairing of the M8 V2 and the Ampersand almost made me clean out my whole collection of desktop units, and replace all of them with the pair. Almost. Knowing that you could just as easily take the pair with you on the go made them all the more appealing. And that is kind of the point since Centrance started with on-stage gear for musicians.

That precision for musicians’ choice shows through in as detailed a signature as you will find in a portable/desktop setup at the price and beyond. I chose the M8 V2 as a comparison here due to the connectivity options; including BT, and it can hold its own against the D2 with everything, except sheer power.

Where the D2 goes for richness and power, the M8 V2 goes for accuracy and detail, but without thinning the notes. I have yet to find pretty much anything at the price, that can provide a sound as accurate as the Centrance, save maybe the Angel; but with a slight thinning of notes.

The D2 can compete against the more affordable M8 V2 due to connectivity options, and the gain settings, with a bit more power.



finale:

Having not heard the OG Diablo, but enough other iFi products over the years, I do feel that I can make a reasonable judgment as to the D2. If you don’t have a Diablo or iDSD micro–Black Label (I still miss mine...), the Diablo 2 is a powerful DAC/Amp with a hotter sound, decent battery life, and a bet against obsolescence in the future due to the inclusion of Lossless Audio, xMEMS, and the latest BT. You also get plenty of connectivity options, and enough power to run a small city.

But if you already have the Diablo? You may want to wait or purchase one of the iFi dedicated desktop units. Of course, having options is a good thing; and you could get both. Your call.

iFi GO Pod ($299): iFi lets us use our IEMs in a new light

GO Pod

Intro:

I am a fan of iFi. I have owned many of their products, and still own the iDSD/iCAN Pro models. Other models I have liked, and there are some I have not. When offered a review sample of the GO Pod, I accepted Lawrance’s gracious offer. What follows are my own words, for good or ill, and I thank Lawrance & iFi for the opportunity to try something new from them.


Specs:

DAC: Cirrus Logic Master-HiFi 32-bit DAC
Bluetooth Chipset: Qualcomm QCC5144 Bluetooth 5.2 (Snapdragon)
Supported Codecs: LDAC, LHDC/HWA, aptX Adaptive, aptX HD, aptX LL, aptX, ACC, SBC
Sampling Rate Support: Max. 24bit-96kHz
SNR: 32Ω ≥ 129dB (A) / 300Ω ≥ 132dB (A)
THD+N: ≤0.002% (1kHz/32Ω)
Auto Impedance Detection: 16Ω / 32Ω / 64Ω / 300Ω
Output Power: 120mW@32Ω; 4V@300Ω 16Ω: ≥0.98V/60mW 32Ω: ≥1.96V/120mW 64Ω: ≥2.77V/120mW 300Ω: ≥4.0V/53mW
Battery Capacity: 180 mAh Each Adapter + 1500 mAh Case
Battery Life: Up to 37 hours
Features: TWS Mirroring, Snapdragon Sound, IPX5, MMCX/2-pin, Qi Wireless Charging 5V/1A or 5V/2A + USB-C Fast Charging, cVc Mics, Single GO pod Mode & more.
Case Dimensions & Total Weight: Approx. 116 x 76 x 38.5 mm (4.6″ x 3″ x 1.5″), 126g
Ear Hook Dimensions & Total Weight: Approx. 43.5 x 16.4 x 9.5 mm (1.7″ x 0.6″ x 0.4″), 12g
MSRP: $399 ($299) USD/GBP


In The Box (complete IEM kit):

GO Pod
Charging case (W/ mood lighting)
Ear loops: 0.78mm, MMCX, Pentaconn ear
USB charging cable
Quickstart card
Instruction card


Gear Used:

Spirit Torino IEM Twin Pulse (2-pin)
Campfire Audio Solaris2020 (MMCX)
Campfire Audio Supermoon (Custom, MMCX)

iPhone 13 Pro Max


Unboxing:

ifi has a history of efficient, yet protective packaging and the GO Pod is no different. Truth be told, many of us keep the boxes in case we sell the item or move, or just like looking at the box.

A white sleeve covers the traditional white box, with the GO Pod’s prominently placed in near-life size on the front. One side showcases the large, cool case. The other side carries the internal circuitry wizardry, while the back shows the traditional specs and usage quick guide.

Sliding the sleeve off the traditional ifi logo in silver highlights the top. Removing the top, you are met with the case and the GO Pod inside with one of the three ear hook adapters. Underneath the case, you will find the other two types of adapters (I wish the T2 had been included for my UE Live...), wrapped around a post, and the USB charging cable next to the hooks. Underneath that lift-out section are the quick start guide, legal verbiage, and instruction sheet. Elegantly simple.



Build/Fit/Function:

The GO Pod system is two pieces, the main driving unit, and the ear hook connectivity piece in 0.78mm 2-pin, MMCX, T2, or Pentaconn arrangement. The set I have contains all but the T2, so my UE Live will not get to play along. The technicals of the driving unit will be covered below.

ifi is known for stellar construction no matter what the unit might be. The GO Pod follows this nicely, with more plastic than their other designs. But for good reason. This is an on-the-go BT receiver, which will most likely face tougher conditions than say the company headphone amplifiers. The GO Pod is water resistant as a result.

The unit is also on the larger size. I had trouble wearing it for the first hour, with the ear hook digging into the upper portion of my ear on the back size. I would have liked a more pliable shape, but understand the need for protective measures. The unit ended up sitting vertically behind my ear. I still had a fair bit of discomfort, but considered it barely acceptable for 1–2-hour sessions, IEM dependent (more on that below).

The connection to the driver unit is 0.78mm 2-pin, and to be honest a pain to connect. Inset rather deeply (for protective purposes), you must be very precise when connecting the ear hook of your choice. Numerous times I had to carefully hunt for the proper location, so I did not bend the pins or have only one connect before realizing it was mismatched. This is a design flaw to me, which needs addressing with a shallower hole. Once connected, the fit between the hook and driver was very good, though.

The GO Pod carries a lot of plastic, but it is well-constructed. An IPX5 rating gives you sweat protection, but do not expect waterproofness. Since I used my CFA Supermoon and UE Live, I did not chance any precipitation while using the GO Pod.

Not all is rosy in the fit department as mentioned, though. I found that wearing the GO Pod for anything longer than an hour or two was not pleasant due to the unflexing shape of the ear hook. It is not bendable. I understand why iFi did this, but it is too narrow for the vast majority of ears on this planet. As such, I rate the on-ear fit as poor. Add in that the “brains” part hangs behind the ear and that makes for a large bulbous object hanging from behind your ear.

Thankfully the sound makes up for this.

Functions are listed in the picture below, and are intuitive, once you use the GO Pods once or twice. I do wish all BT TWS devices used the same patterns for continuity’s sake, but the ifi works just fine.



I did have some issues with pairing, but the suggestion from my phone to “Forget Device” and reconnect was easy and took very little extra time. It was no big deal to me. Once I became acclimated to the location of the unit, I was able to use my hand to “hold” the sides of the GO Pod, and then actuate whichever function I desired.

Since the unit is larger, this did and does aid in accessing the controls. I do wish for a bit different tactility on the two buttons, though.


App:

The ifi-Gaia app is essentially worthless except for firmware updates, and two filter choices. To update firmware, you must still go to the ifi website and download the files. Then you can access them inside the app. Upon opening the app and connecting the GO Pods, I was prompted to go to the settings button at the bottom for the update. Once in settings though, the “Software Updates” showed 0 available. When clicking upon that, the “Select Update File” button was grayed out. I did click on it, which took me to another sub-menu, where there was nothing listed. I then touched the folder button in the top right, and the updated files were found there.

By clicking on the file, I was taken to an informational menu, with a grayed-out “Start” button. From there, updating was successful.



Technology:

Touted as “The first device in the world to support Hi-Res 96kHz/24bits with LDAC and Qualcomm Snapdragon Sound Bluetooth codecs on TWS,” the GO Pod comes with high aspirations. As we know ifi usually aims high and hits the target. aptX, AAC, and SBC codecs are supported as well.

Qualcomm’s 24-bit Snapdragon is TOTL, and with LDAC codec, wants to hit that top rung.

Space limitations of such a device mean that the “all-in-one” typical system comes with compromises. The proximity of each circuit to another comes with drawbacks such as signal infiltration, which can hinder audio quality. Much like a tube amplifier, which has an external power source “block” (think Woo Audio, etc), ifi designs each sub-component separately, then optimizes them all together. This promotes isolation of each required component but ensures all work together. This is not unlike what the Klipsch Bespoke T10 does with its motherboard. And it works.




Qualcomm’s top-tier QCC5144 module drives the BT 5.2 for the most current set-up available. The quad cores also help to minimize battery drain, a known BT issue with some. Qualcomm’s QC5100 TrueWireless Mirroring also sends a distinct signal to each channel (L & R). This allows the bud with the strongest connection to the BT source to act as the receiver. The other bud, then “mirrors” the signal. If the user moves locations (proximity to BT source), the GO Pod automatically detects this and changes to the bud with the strongest signal.

To minimize pre-echos and ringing artifacts, the DAC is designed with proprietary digital interpolation filters that support five digital filter responses. These user-selectable settings offer a degree of personal sonic tailoring. The iOS app only shows two filter choices, but latency can be tailored to enhance the gaming effect.

Not giving all control to the Qualcomm chip (even though it is excellent), the GO pod incorporates two Cirrus Logic MasterHIFI chips (one in the left pod, the other in the right). The 32-bit hi-res DAC chip is dedicated to single-channel digital-to-analogue signal conversion in the GO pod’s circuit design. This combines with a jitter-eradicating precision clock to deliver ultra-low distortion and high dynamic range. Put this all together and you get typical ifi quality.

With a power output of 120mW into 32 ohms, the balanced amplifier also automatically detects the IEM impedance; balancing the necessary power (read volume level) across four impedances; 16 ohms, 32 ohms, 64 ohms, and 300 ohms.

A built-in microphone, which utilizes Qualcomm’s cVc noise suppression technology, helps isolate your voice on phone calls, minimizing outside interference. A single mic takes care of business.

As you can see, ifi has done its homework.



Case:

Yes, the case deserves a special section. This has to be one of the coolest cases I have seen, BT or otherwise. The hard plastic case can easily sit on your desk plugged in, or be taken with you in your backpack or attaché case.

A 1500mAH rechargeable battery is built into the charging case, and a pair of GO pods will play for up to seven hours on a single charge. The case provides multiple recharges (up to 30 hours) to enable up to 35 hours (37 on the literature, and verified by me) of playing time. The case supports both Qi wireless charging and USB-C fast charging. The Qi ring is on the bottom, so you can still access the buds.

Opening the case, you are met with a superb blue-lit look, reminiscent of your lit footwell in your vehicle of choice. The partitions on each side are big enough to keep an IEM connected while charging, which is a nice thought. The lights on the side of the case denote how much “charging power” is left going from 1-4 temporary blinking lights.




The case is large, though, and not very conducive to carrying in anything outside of an attaché or book bag. The case also houses all of the different ear hook connections and the charging cable, so that is a nice tradeoff. Wireless charging is a plus, as well.


Sound:

Summary:

It is always hard to gauge sound qualities in something such as this since it depends so heavily upon the IEM connected to it. The best DAC will get out of the way, and let the source/IEM combination play their cards. Happily, the GO Pod does this.

While using the CFA Supermoon, the GO Pod provided enough energy, but it was obvious that the Supermoon needed more for its full benefit. Switching to the Solaris 2020, the volume level was turned down quickly, since it is much easier to drive. The IEM Spirit Torino split the difference. Regardless, there was plenty of power to drive the IEMs to ear-splitting levels.

moar:

As stated, this is a hard aspect to judge, since many factors come into play. A good DAC/amp will get out of the way, and the GO Pod did just that while providing plenty of power, to go along with the clean, detailed sound.

I cannot say I had a favorite pairing since each was different. The custom Supermoon was harder to get in and out, due to the shape, but the Solaris 2020 and Spirit Torino were as easy as a “regular” IEM.

Bass reached low and accurate levels in all three, with the excellent detail coming through in the Supermoon, while the deeper more guttural reach of the Solaris2020 shone. The GO Pod did provide a more detailed sound, due to the better DAC involved, but hooking the pods up to a dedicated DAP would make it even better.

Top-end reach matched whatever IEM was hooked, with the Solaris2020 providing me with silky-smooth listening, even if a bit rounded off. The details from the Supermoon sounded the “best,” but not quite as driven, due to the need for increased power. Again, the Spirit Torino was along for the ride, seemingly content to be the middle child, so to speak.

The above pairings show that while the three might not have been meant for such a device, the ifi could easily give your flagship-level IEMs a wireless choice.


finale:

The ifi GO Pod came to me with good aspirations, and after my lengthy testing I came away with the appreciation I knew it had garnered from others; and my respect. It is a solution to something, that we may not have known we needed (except for the other competitors), but provided me with a very good option for my portable listening. While I may not always take high-end IEMs along for this, knowing I can make it all the more worthwhile.

If ifi can solve the horrendous fit issues by making a bendable ear hook, this would be darn near perfect. Until then, I can still recommend it but know fit is an issue for me, along with the neglected app.

Regardless, the GO Pod provides the user with a viable option for portable listening that may suit your bill. I thank Lawrance and ifi for the review sample. This is one, which will see much use.

Kefine Klanar ($119): A new kid on the planar block.

Klanar

Audio46

HiFiGo

*Discounted to $89USD currently

Intro:

The Klanar is a new planar IEM from Kefine, Dongguan Kefine Electronics Technology, CO; Ltd. Using a 14.5mm “driver” with your choice of 3.5mm se or 4.4bal, it enters the ultra-competitive sub-$150usd market with high hopes.

The unit was sent to me pre-launch for an honest assessment. The words are mine and mine alone. I thank Kefine for the sample and know it may be asked to be returned at any time. Unless specified, it is mine to keep. The unit is now on sale.



Specs:

Transducer type: Planar wired IEM
Transducer size: 14.5mm
Frequency response: 20Hz-40kHz
Sensitivity: 105dB+/-3dB
Impedance: 16ohm
Connector: 0.78mm 2-pin, covered
Cable length: 1.2M


In The Box:

Klanar
Case
7 sets of silicon tips (UV-large hole, silicon-bass in s, m, l)
Velcro cinch wrap
Dual wrap cable



Gear Used:

Astell & Kern AK120 Titan


Music

Jazz
David Bowie
B.B. King


Unboxing:

A white sliding sleeve shows the Klanar is slightly larger-than-life size on the front and the measurements on the back. Sliding the sleeve off, you are met with a plain black box. Taking the top off showcases the IEM on top, with the cable attached, and wound through medium-soft foam to the case on the bottom half.

Inside the case is the rest of the cable along with a plastic bag of tips. The case is longer than deep and tall; and as a result, winding of the wire with IEM attached results in longer loops. Otherwise, the case is hard to zip closed. The zipper is hard enough, without that happening. Another 1/2'’ of height in the case would have made for a much easier-to-use case, without having to worry about smashing either the cable, tip, or IEM.


Build/Finish/Fit:

Since the Klanar uses a rather large driver in the 14.5mm planar unit, you would rightly expect the unit to be large. The Klanar isn’t. Stemming from a thinly shaped (0.2mm in some places) 5-axis CNC machined single-piece aluminum shell, the Klanar is not only light at 12.5g per earbud but small in shape. Fit as a result was quite good, with the longer nozzle inserting deep into my canal.

Two vent holes on the inner sides allow for air dispersion, with a tasteful-looking flat faceplate, laden with the simple Kefine name on it. Understated elegance. A longer hard plastic bent towards the back allows for the cable to exit the earbud higher, and the memory plastic sheath then takes effect. Although this arrangement made for a bit higher bend on my ear, the supple cable laid nicely behind my ear.

The materials look well-made and above cheaper plastic IEMs, which may adorn this price point. The cable color of black and copper (two wires in each), adds to the mature look. Subdued might be a better word. The dark color of cable and IEM help keep that theme.

Slight microphonics are heard through the cable, but only when moving quite a bit or actually thumping on the cable. That cable is a four-wire variety with 54 cores in each. Two wires (the black casing ones) are 0.05mm silver-plated Litz copper, while the other two are OFC copper of the same size and number. The cable was of good length, but another 6” (15cm) would not hurt for pocket use.

The Klanar fit flush into my ear, which was nice, and added to the excellent isolation using the stock medium bass tips.



Technology:

The Klanar uses a 14.5mm planar driver, with a PET composite diaphragm for speedy response. An N55 magnet rounds out the closed driver unit. As mentioned above, the CNC machined single aluminum piece not only makes for a lightweight shell but a smaller one, too. This definitely aids in the fit. With a sensitivity of 105 dB and a lower impedance of 16 Ohms, the Klanar is also easy to drive.



Sound:

Summary:

The Klanar is promoted as natural and balanced. Acoustic instruments are supposed to sound lifelike as a result. And mostly they do. Jazz piano, sax, or bass sound like you are present in the club. Bass is of good quality, with decent quality; but not as much deep extension as the literature promotes. The bass provides good weight to the notes, but I would not call it authoritative. Smooth mids and a good treble extension make for a pleasantly smooth signature, without much effort. All of the above is tip and depth insertion dependent, but generally within the same sphere of reference.

moar:

Promoted as one of if not the smallest planar IEM units on the market, I could wear the Klanar for hours without bother. Isolation was tip dependent, but very good, which gave me a better grasp of the sound signature.

The bass does have good weight, but it cannot compete with a dynamic driver of the same price range for sheer punch. That weight also translates into an accurate representation of instruments in the low range. I found upright bass’ to be quite good in which to listen as part of jazz recording solos. While sub bass was lacking overall, the sound was good due to the smooth presentation and enough detail to keep me involved.

The mids come across as detailed and pushed slightly forward, but not upward. Piano notes along with sax came across as realistic and natural, if not completely organic. The smooth character while presenting good detail and clarity also lacked a bit of note weight. Not enough to really bother me, but piano solos took on an almost isolated texture, which was good for the solo, but slightly disconnected. It really did not bother me, though.

The treble hit my sweet spot, without any harshness and that continued smooth character. The definition of cymbal hits was lacking, but if I had my preference, it would be for a treble, which does not grate on me. Cymbal crest hits seem almost digital-sounding and reserved. Detail was lacking, but here it is better to look at the whole, instead of the parts.



The soundstage was fairly wide with an out-of-head experience and good height; but not great. Depth seemed a bit lacking as well, making for a wider, shallower stage. Not bad, and good for instrumental pieces, which take up a large stage, but with not as much depth as I would have liked. As a result, instrumentation was good, with separation better. Working together this made for a smooth character, but lacking a bit of definition in overall signature.

The smooth timbre of the Klanar makes for a natural-sounding planar IEM. This provided me with a nice mellow characteristic only punctuated by the occasional lapse in the upper mid and lower treble area. The definition was left a bit wanting there as a result.


finale:

Kefine is a new start-up IEM manufacturer in the heart of the Shenzhen region of China. As a result, there are a multitude of other brands close at hand. This provides plenty of competition for the brand, and there are other planar IEMs out with which to compete.

I found the Klanar to be acceptable, but unspectacular in any area. The smooth character makes for an almost niche-defined style of listening. Jazz sounds good but with the shortcomings mentioned above. I did not mind knowing the unit’s price.

If you are looking for a detail-oriented IEM, you should look elsewhere. It isn’t that there is a lack of details present, but the focus is elsewhere, instead. There is enough vibrancy to the smooth character to make up for the lack of detailed sound, but do not expect top-tier clarity. That isn’t in the cards.

The Klanar is hard to define. It is affordable (but in a brutally packed price bracket). It is very well built (as are most nowadays). The fit is excellent and flush without bother. The smoothness of sound did draw me in somewhat, but I feel that really isn’t enough for most genres. This is good for jazz, or female vocal music, which relies upon smoothness for character. But that may not be enough. You will have to decide.

Thank you again to Kefine for the review sample of the Klanar. It can be found at the links above, but you will want to compare it to others in the price range. You may end up with others. Or you may end up with the Klanar. It is your choice.

Sivga Nightingale ($229): Sivga enters the planar market in IEMs

3.75, because HF doesn't differentiate closer than 0.5.


Nightingale


Intro:


Sivga is known for gorgeous-looking headphones, with a variety of sound signatures. The recent iterations of Luan and Oriole are stunning at which to look, with a sound that backs up the look. The Nightingale is the company’s first planar IEM, but continues the excellent looks with a hand-finished and polished wood faceplate. Does the sound match the looks? We shall see.


I thank Collin and Sivga for the sample, and continued support. The company is on a roll, and we shall see if the Nightingale matches this.


*As per my standards, the unit was burned in for a minimum of 75 hours. Whether you believe in the potential difference or not isn’t the question. This provides the listener with a potential listening aspect for down-the-road usage after the “new car smell” is gone.


Specs:


Style: In-ear


Driver type: Planar diaphragm


Driver size: φ14.5 mm


Frequency response: 20 Hz – 40K Hz


Sensitivity: 100 dB +/- 3 dB


Impedance: 16Ω+/-15%


Cable length: 1.2 M +/-0.2 M


Plug size: φ4.4 mm


Weight: 15g


In The Box:

• 1x SIVGA Nightingale
• 1x Hard carrying case
• 2x Eartip size M
• 2x Eartip size L
• 2x Eartip size S
• 1x Eartip case

Gear Used:


Shanling M6 Pro


Music:


Jazz


Classical, including piano movements


Portugal. The Man


Unboxing:


Sivga also has a reputation for excellent unboxing presentations. The Nightingale is no different, if a bit subdued. Personally, I prefer subdued elegance.


A black square box has a lid, which lifts off to reveal the inside. Other than a gold-laden SIVGA patch and Nightingale (“Night” “Gale/Wind”) with Mandarin script, the box sparkles in gold flecks; reminiscent of the night sky to keep the theme simple.


Removing the lid, you are met with the IEMs, wrapped in plastic stick-on material for protection, and a very nice case below. The top foam is hard to keep the shape, but removing that shows medium compression foam, which helps keep it all in place.


The black & gray crosshatch hard case holds the cable and a nice thin plastic folding tray for the extra tips. Seven sets are included with one already mounted on the Nightingale. Simple and elegant. Almost considered Sivga modus operandi at this point.


Build/Fit/Finish:


There is no denying Sivga’s build quality. There was a hiccup early in the production of some earlier headphones (wood issues), which was quickly addressed. Since then, the company has stayed on top of their QC. The Nightingale is no different.


With a faceplate cut of rare old remnant wood, and hand-polished you get a stunning look to start. The silver rim around it gives an elegant look, but I wonder how a darker bronze color might have looked. This might have continued the understated look. That silver rim accents the glossy black shell (with two ear-facing vent holes). A larger silver nozzle contains a gold spiral-patterned screen for protection, adding to the good looks. A silver rim also accents the jack where the covered 0.78mm 2-pin connection comes into the Nightingale.


The black soft PVC-sheathed cable of four-wire variety comes in 0.23mm 7-core 250D bullet-proof wire in copper. It does not tangle, either. An easy-to-use Y-splitter moves up to keep the Nightingale in place as well.


The teardrop (water droplet reminiscent) shaped shell also helps the user grasp the unit, which as we know can sometimes be an endeavor in itself. I noticed that the silver rim also has an open area right behind it, where the shell curves inward. This can also help the user grasp the unit on ingress & egress.


Technology:


The 14.5mm planar diaphragm is marked by dual magnets in front and behind. Those magnets are made of an iron-boron combination, which reportedly “significantly improves efficiency.” An aluminum coil combines with the composite diaphragm material making for a transparent treble note while purportedly expanding soundstage. The frame circuitry disc lies between the back magnets and the diaphragm, keeping a close eye on the driver.


The dual frames (between magnet and driver) are also CNC-machined magnesium alloy, which gives a speedy, more accurate response to sound input.


The Sound:


Summary:


Anytime a planar is used, there will be benefits and drawbacks. Speed in the notes is mostly good in these models. Bass can be a detriment to those IEMs or headphones not named Audeze. Balancing that act with very good sound, soundstage, and signature can be tough. The Nightingale succeeds more than it does not. The bass is tight and speedy, but there is a 9kHz rise, which can create some sibilance and an unnatural tone in the treble region. Cymbal hits tend to sound digital, without realism as a result. The bass is taut, and the mids are lifted and forward accounting for the noted sound above. The Nightingale is very, very good with classical works, especially piano works. Jazz works well, too. Pop and rock sounded “different” to me.


moar:


As noted in a recent Reddit thread, the FR of the Nightingale is extremely flat, except for the 9kHz jump. This is what I hear as well. Normally a flat FR bodes well for most music across the spectrum. Here not so much, as this leads to a lack of micro-details, even with the planar driver. Definition in the notes does not come across as crisp or well-defined, with a smoother response; that isn’t really all that smooth. The jump in the mid-treble region can hinder some genres such as the aforementioned in Pop and Rock, lending to a less-than-realistic signature.


The mids do come across as the best part, especially in piano works. Female vocals such as on Amado Mio from Pink Martini showcase the talents of the artist, and the supporting instruments do make way, allowing the highlight. But there is some sibilance. Strong, and fairly well defined, but lacking the cutting edge some female songs demand.


The bass is fairly strong, and I suspect foam tips would help here (I do not have any on hand…), lowering the floor; which would help separation even more. The speed and decay of the bass notes are powerful and succinct, but slightly thin due to the rapid response. This is more about reference, than tuning.


The treble as noted above, has that bite at 9kHz, which detracts from the “realism” factor. Timbre is slanted towards thinner as a result. There is sufficient air between notes, but separation suffers a bit due to the thinning. The soundstage is fairly complex with the extra top-end energy, making itself higher than deeper; with good width. I did find the sound to go beyond my ears, which did help with separation.


I can recommend the Nightingale for jazz recordings and piano works. Here is where the Sivga unit shined. The piano notes were strong and natural. Clarity and detail were at their best with works such as the noted ones. I can add that the Nightingale would be good for older recordings, where detail crispness is not of paramount importance. Male vocals were also good, with a warmth to them that added smoothing to the character.


Latin-esque music such as much of Pink Martini’s works sounded accurate, except for the items noted above. I was provided with good energy but of a richer variety than vibrant. Sometimes, a smooth character works in genres such as this, allowing the immersive effect to provide a calmer response. Where other IEMs would provide that “get up and go” energy, the Nightingale posits a calm attitude. Not bad, just different.


finale:


Coming off several very good to excellent headphones from Sivga, I had high hopes for the Nightingale. And for some genres, the Nightingale provides a character, which matches the music well. For others, it does not. This is a dichotomy of sorts, as lately, the IEMs I have had in were very good to excellent across genres. The Nightingale is more specific to the music presented such as piano, jazz, and classical works.


This is almost a brandy-snifter by-the-fire listening device, where you value the calming effect of the song after a hard day. That is not all bad, and neither is the Nightingale for a listening session such as that. It has some very decent good points for the music listed, and your opinion may be quite different for the genres I listed as “OK.” That is kind of the point of these, you like what you like; and my opinion may be different.


I again thank Collin and Sivga for the review sample, I do appreciate it. The company is on a roll, and this small hiccup should not stop them from moving forward.

Astell & Kern CA1000T ($2299): Nutube sounds adds to a legend

CA1000T


Intro:

While sitting at T.H.E. Show, in June a gentleman came up to the booth where will and I were sitting. I had just returned from my room with the outstanding CA1000, in preparation for returning it to our contact, Jason. As I was packing it up, I said, “I’m just packing this up, but if you want to hear this outstanding piece, I can remove it.” He replied,” actually I’m here to pick it up.” It was indeed Jason. In gushing over the CA1000, I mentioned how if I were to only have one device, which could be considered a DAP, a headphone amp and a streamer, it would be the CA1000. He then mentioned, “I can send you the CA1000T, if you like.” I said, “yes please.”

This review follows on the heels of the outstanding CA1000, which as stated above (is the truth) is an outstanding device. I thank Jason & Astell & Kern for the item, and upon finishing my time, the unit will be sent back (unfortunately).



CA1000 review


Specs:

General:

• Model: ACRO CA1000T
• Body Color: Rich Gray (Black)
• Body Material: Aluminum
• Display: 4.1 inch 720 x 1280 touch screen
• Supported Audio Formats: WAV, FLAC, WMA, MP3, OGG, APE, AAC, ALAC, AIFF, DFF, DSF, MQA
• Sample rate: PCM : 8kHz ~ 768kHz (8/16/24/32bits per Sample)
  DSD Native: DSD64(1bit 2.8MHz), Stereo / DSD128(1bit 5.6MHz), Stereo / DSD256(1bit 11.2MHz), DSD512(1bit, 22.4MHz) Stereo
• Output Level (Headphone Out):

[Low] Unbalanced 2Vrms / Balanced 4Vrms (Condition No Load)
[Mid] Unbalanced 4Vrms / Balanced 8Vrms (Condition No Load),
[High] Unbalanced 6Vrms / Balanced 12Vrms (Condition No Load),
[Super] Unbalanced 8Vrms / Balanced 15Vrms (Condition No Load)

• Output Level (RCA Out): 2Vrms (Condition No Load)
• Output Level (XLR Out): 4Vrms (Condition No Load)
• Recommended headphone impedance: 32 ohm – 600 ohm
• CPU: Quad-Core
• DAC: ESS ES9039MPRO x2 (Dual-DAC)
• Vacuum Tube: KORG Nutube 6P1 x2
• Decoding: Support up to 32bit / 768kHz Bit to Bit playback
• Headphone Outputs: Unbalanced (3.5mm, 6.35mm) / Balanced (2.5mm, 4.4mm)
• Analog Inputs: 4.4mm x1
• Analog Outputs: XLR (Stereo pair) x1, RCA (Stereo pair) x1
• Digital Inputs: Coaxial x1, Optical x1, USB(Type-C) x1
• Digital Outputs: Optical(3.5mm) x1, USB(Type-C) x1
• Wi-Fi: 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac (2.4/5GHz)
• Bluetooth: V5.0 (A2DP, AVRCP, Qualcomm® aptX™ HD, LDAC)
• Dimensions: 4.12"(104.9mm)[W] x 1.77"(45mm)[H] x 6.13"(155.8mm)[D]
• Weight: about 34.56oz (980g)
• Feature Enhancements: Firmware upgrade supported (OTA)
• Operating Temperature: 0℃ ~ + 40℃ (32℉~ 104℉)

Audio Specs:

• Frequency Response: ±0.031dB (Condition: 20Hz~20kHz) Unbalanced / ±0.029dB (Condition: 20Hz~20kHz) Balanced /

±0.033dB (Condition: 20Hz~20kHz) RCA / ±0.002dB (Condition: 20Hz~20kHz) XLR ±0.079dB (Condition: 20Hz~70kHz) Unbalanced / ±0.029dB (Condition: 20Hz~70kHz) Balanced /
±0.080dB (Condition: 20Hz~70kHz) RCA / ±0.008dB (Condition: 20Hz~70kHz) XLR

• S/N: 108dB @ 1kHz, Unbalanced / 112dB @ 1kHz, Balanced / 121dB @ 1kHz, RCA / 128dB @ 1kHz, XLR
• Crosstalk: -115dB @ 1kHz, Unbalanced / -112dB @ 1kHz, Balanced / -138dB @ 1kHz, RCA / -145dB @ 1kHz, XLR
• THD+N: 0.004% @ 1kHz, Unbalanced / 0.002% @ 1kHz, Balanced / 0.0005% @ 1kHz, RCA / 0.0003% @ 1kHz, XLR
• IMD SMPTE: 0.0007% 800Hz 10kHz (4:1) Unbalanced / 0.0007% 800Hz 10kHz (4:1) Balanced /0.0007% 800Hz 10kHz (4:1) RCA / /0.0007% 800Hz 10kHz (4:1) XLR
• Output Impedance: 3.5mm, 6.35mm (1ohm) / 2.5mm, 4.4mm (2ohm) / RCA (4ohm) / XLR (9ohm)

Clock Source:


Storage:

• Built-in Memory: 256GB [NAND]
• External Memory: microSD x1 (Max. 1TB)

Battery:

• Capacity: 10,100mAh 3.8V Li-Polymer
• Charge Time: about 5hours (9V / 3A PD2.0 Fast Charging)
• Playback Time: about 11hours (Standard: FLAC, 16bit, 44.1kHz, Unbalanced, Vol.40, LCD Off, OP AMP, Low Gain)
• 
  
• Supported OS: Windows 10, 11(32/64bit), MAC OS X 10.7 and up

In The Box:

ACRO CA1000T
USB-C charging cable
Owner’s manual
Screen protectors


Filter Response:

• Minimum phase (Default): Low latency, Minimal pre ringing and low passband ripple

• Linear Phase Apodizing: Full Image rejection by FS/2 to avoid any aliasing, with smooth roll-off starting before 20k
• 

• Linear Phase Fast Roll-Off: Most Common filter with clean suppression and high rejection, best for music with high transients. Provides crisp clean highs

• Linear Phase Slow Roll-Off: Low group delay and symmetrical inputs response. Less ringing than Linear phase fast roll off. Punchier bass than LPFR, with clean highs

• Minimum Phase Fast Roll-Off: Minimal Pre-Ringing, preferred for Imaging and soundstage. No aliasing in frequency domain. Stronger bass than Linear Phase, clean highs

• Minimum Phase Slow Roll-Off: Non Symetrical filter designed to minimize pre ringing. Strong punchy bass with good transient attacks

• Minimum Phase Slow Roll-Off: Low Dispersion Provides a nice balance of the low latency of Minimum phase filters and the Low Dispersion of Linear Phase filters. Minimal pre-ringing is added to achieve the low dispersion in the audio band

Technology:

One of the biggest differences between the CA1000 and the CA1000T are the Twin Triode KORG Nutube tubes (x2). Similar to the ones used in the Cayin C9, the A&K incorporates a system where you can run anywhere from full tube goodness, to full solid state. Keeping the channels separate also means the balanced sound can travel its own path instead of combining, then separating via a balanced transformer, thus keeping the circuits separate and without additional “conditioning.” An additional switch on the top-front (far right), brings up the sub-menu used to change the state of amplification, giving the user quick access. Much like DAP’s can be switched between dual DAC’s or Class A/AB using a switch, the A&K incorporates the touchscreen for help in deciding what level of tube or solid state (hybrid) you would like to use. This is only available for the headphone jacks on the front. The CA1000T offers a complete balanced circuit that separates left and right channels with two vacuum tubes via the dual DAC’s, creating a more natural and softer sound in the tube state. Those DAC’s by the way are the newest ESS, the dual ES9039MPRO promoting a more voluminous and vivid sound. MQA stereo hardware is incorporated into the chip as well. The roadmap below guides you through the usage of chips, OPAMP’s and Nutubes all the way to whichever end process you choose. The OPAMP’s used are A&K’s own design for enhanced, deeper bass response as well as clear highs. Combine all of the above at you get a max of 15Vrms regardless of output option.




The OP AMP mode (bottom left on sub-menu circle) puts Astell&Kern's AMP technology to use, delivering extreme clarity and dynamic sound, while TUBE AMP mode (bottom right on sub-menu circle) provides a uniquely warm and musical sound. HYBRID AMP mode (five options between OP AMP & Tube Amp, getting progressively more “tubish” as you go clockwise around the sub-menu circle), which is a first for digital audio players, enhances the resolution and clarity of the existing TUBE AMP mode to express more musical detail (the closer you are to solid state). Each of the five hybrid options does enhance musical detail, but the closer you get to the full tube sound, the less this is evident as one would expect.



As we know, while tubes sound fabulous to most of us, they are prone to external pressures from bumping and shocks. This gives off unwanted vibrational aspects to the sound we hear, essentially ruining the tube experience if not isolated. A&K has thought of that as well. To minimize and isolate this potential structural problem, both sides of the vacuum tube are fixed with flexible silicon covers minimizing shocks; while a magnetic force is used to physically separate it from the PCB. This offers greater stability and isolation when the tube is operational.




A&K’s Teraton Alpha provides patents, which essentially minimize distractions in any part of the working power unit to provide noise reduction when the device is in use, regardless of the source or option used (OP AMP or Nutube). This is also better audio wiring, which improves the crosstalk (mainly on the amp parts); a complete mute of unused channels (such as when in Nutube or solid-state mode), keeping noise levels at the lowest level while listening; and a silver plating shield can, which prevents various noise and electromagnetic interference from affecting the audio block.

Another nice feature is the “Crossfeed” widget, accessed from the dropdown menu in OS. In a headphone environment in which the left and right channels are clearly separated, ear fatigue may increase during prolonged listening. When you turn on Crossfeed, the experience of crisp, but comfortable sound begins (less long-term fatigue). Crossfeed mixes parts of the original signal from one channel and sends that signal to the opposite channel with a time difference to center the sound image, much like balanced or a holographic sound. Crossfeed can be changed in “Settings” (slider-based), with options such as Shelf Cutoff, Shelf Gain, and Mixer Level, allowing you to change the settings according to your listening preferences. You can even make your own custom settings as well.




A&K’s UI is a custom Google OS, with a familiar layout to the CA1000, but this time around, it is almost painfully slow. Especially when you use a third-party app such as Tidal or Qobuz (must be downloaded to a computer, then the .atk file dropped onto the A&K, then installed), located under “Services,” in the main Settings layout. The screen layout is quite good though, with easily manipulated sub-menus and options. Just slow. I also found that when I used Tidal, the volume knob sometimes failed to register quickly, causing me to scroll repeatedly to raise the volume. This was while charging, and I will investigate this further.

“ReplayGain,” which is also accessed via the dropdown menu from the top of the OS, automatically adjusts the volume of each song; matching volume levels between songs to the level you have set. This works across sources as well, ridding us of the annoying volume jump between different sources.

Coming with Roon Ready as well as MQA authorization, and AK’s File Drop (wireless transfer); the CA1000T supports native DSD512 up to 32bit, 768kHz; should you have that format. LDAC and aptxHD also gives you the latest formats from those source codes as well.

*A note about potential issues: while the unit was well packed, it came without the protective box, and assorted items. Only the CA1000T was sent, and it is fairly obvious from the looks that this unit has been handled by reviewers repeatedly. My hope is that they treated this well, but it does show signs of prior “heavy use,” to put it politely; along with the normal shipping company's "safe handling." To me, this is not any indication that A&K bears responsibility, and if this were my unit, it would be treated with the utmost care. As a result, the volume wheel stuck in high humidity situations coupled with the previous mentioned handling.



Physical Layout & Form:

On the front side (L to R): 1-3.5mm TRS output; 1-2.5mm TRRS, balanced output; 1-4.4mm Pentaconn, balanced output; and a 6.35mm TRS output.

The back:

• 2x mini-XLR outputs, balanced output, used with a set of monitor speakers
• 1x stereo RCA output, single-ended output, to connect another amplifier, or a set of speakers or into a system to be used such as my Yamaha CRX-E150 (it is all I have out currently due to the move)
• 1x coaxial in, to use the CA1000 T as a DAC
• 1x optical in, used as a DAC as well
• 1x 4.4mm Pentaconn In, for a balanced DAC when using the A&K as a headphone amp
• 2x USB-C, one for charging, one for DATA – USB3.1 compliant
• 1x micro-SD port to expand the internal storage to 1Tb, plus 256Gb of internal memory

The top:

• a 4.1” 720×1280 touch screen, the same found on some of the brand’s DAP
• 5x control buttons, power on/off, previous, play/pause, next, AMP (to switch between the three modes mentioned above)
• an illuminated Astell&Kern logo indicating the playback/amp mode (at the top, above the screen when lowered)- [Playback mode]: 16bit-red, 24bit-green, 32bit-blue, DSD-purple; [Amp mode]: OP AMP: red, Tube Amp: orange, Hybrid Amp: blue green

The CA1000T shares the same shell as the CA1000, with only the front & back panels (top actually) changed according to the included items. Also changed is a gold-accented inner volume ring in stainless steel, which they say gives a more luxurious look. Gold and black together do look good. If you are familiar with the CA1000, then you should have little issue with the layout and functioning. The only other change is the aforementioned “Astell&Kern” logo on the top center, which shows the amp color use and decoding color. A nice change, which I likened to the colors used to accent the Tone2 Pro from Khadas, under the control wheel (another fabulous unit).

The black (Rich Gray) color gives the unit a stealthy look and the highlighted logo on top lends a sense of purpose, especially when formats change. Compared side by side, the CA1000T looks more sinister, subdued and ready to hold a spot hidden on your desk; only to jump out when in use. While I like the black (better), the silver of the CA1000 shows off the angular surface more to me. Where the CA1000T is subdued, the CA1000 is curvaceously angular. Pick your poison.

Functionally speaking, you will have little issue, even if you are not familiar with the CA1000. Remember though, that third party apps such as Qobuz or Spotify must be downloaded onto an SD card, then installed from the card. I did that for Qobuz on the CA1000, but not the CA1000T, sticking with Tidal and SD cards, Tidal mainly.

I also used the RCA outs to my Yamaha small system, much like I did the CA1000 with the A-301, with no issues. I could have hooked the CA1000T into the excellent little Schiit Modi 2 Uber via optical S/PDIF, but saw no need; since the A&K DAC section was superior. Needless to say, that the performance digitally would have been of a cleaner nature when hooking up as a streamer. If I was to keep this (unfortunately not...), I would hook the CA1000T into my two-channel for streaming via optical and BT a set of powered speakers as well. An unfortunate aspect of my gear being packed away.



Sound:

Summary:

Whether utilized as a streamer, headphone amplifier or pre-amp; the CA1000T excels in the same way the CA1000 did. Except here you have the new ESS chips running the show as well as the Korg Nutubes with which to vary your source sound. My preference was straight Nutube listening, but the benefit of solid state cannot be understated: it is superb, and right up there with the best sources I have ever reviewed. Another reviewer stated that if he were to have one source to use as a headphone amp, streamer and pre-amp; the CA1000T would be it. This is exactly what I said about the CA1000, and repeat here.

moar:

*The SS/Hybrid/Nutube options are not available on the RCA connections I used. I am unsure of the others on the backside, due to a lack of testing.

There is no getting around the flexibility of the CA1000T with regard to changing the source sound you hear. Solid state allows the music to shine through unencumbered by anything. Isolation is excellent, and a black background is not only an expectation or demand; but reality. Crystalline in nature, with a decidedly excellent weight to the notes allows the music to shine based upon the engineer’s requirements. No hindering of sound is had. I do find that even though the sound is clear sonically, there is a slight volume drop going between solid state and full Nutube. Mids, while not suffering seem a bit behind the overall scheme in SS mode as well. Nutube pushes the mids forward for good or ill, and you can tailor that by going into the Hybrid mode.

Pretty much any skewing of sound can be had by going SS or Nutube, along with the five Hybrid choices with progressively more tube input going clockwise in choice. My second favorite choice was what I will call “setting one,” which is the first of the Hybrid settings, skewing more towards SS. The Nutube certainly still had a small effect, adding mids from the wonderful tubes to make a tube-like sound, which also presented excellent clarity and detail. Bass was taut and reached deeper due to the input, with a slight smoothing of character along with the mid-exuberance.



The best of both worlds was mid-Hybrid, with the SS still allowed to show off its clarity, while the Nutube added depth to the bass, and thickness to the mids, which for me were pushed a bit too far forward. This seemed odd, until I realized it was the excellent clarity, which seemed to bother me. I prefer a richer, warmer signature, which was provided in full-Nutube mode.

Each time you initiate Nutube mode from the settings, a red circle works its way around the sub-menu while the tubes pre-heat. Once done, you can indeed hear when the tubes kick in. A nice feature here is still in place as well. Double tap the screen from off, with the Amp sub-menu up and you return to that sub-menu. Yes, this is like a Smartphone, but having the ability to quickly change the SS/Nutube settings this way is a nice touch. Of course, hitting the on/off button will do that as well.



finale:

The A&K ACRO CA1000T is expensive. Even taken into consideration against other streaming devices of such character. But those other expensive streamers are really only a one trick pony. “Stream or die!,” they say. Meanwhile, the CA1000T turns into a DAP, much to the astonishment of the other top tier DAP’s. “What is this sorcery?!,” they say. Without a bother, the CA1000T, then hooks into the KANN MAX or my aged AK120 Titan, becoming a headphone amplifier. “Blasphemey!,” the well-known headphone amplifiers shout from their perch. The CA1000T then hooks into your two-channel as a pre-amp for whatever source you want injected into the soul of it. “WHaaaa?!?!,” the others shout, as they cower away knowing they cannot compete.

The CA1000T then uses its final trick to the nodding approval of your fine 50-year-old tube amplifier as it switches on the Nutube. For you see, that ancient wisdom coming forth from your Dynaco or McIntosh or other such sort knows. They see the ability to all of the above, with extraordinary abilities as a positive, not a single-tricked item, with added gizmos to show off. They know that the CA1000T is of the sort, that it can hold its place in any of those situations, without diminishing the results. Without jading those results, because the performance is less than others in whatever category is complaining. The A&K ACRO CA1000T gets it.

Many are tired of having a multitude of devices with which to care and use so that we get our “value” out of them. The A&K understands that it is expensive, but challenges you to add up all you have spent on individual items in the categories listed above, and understand that while those items are good to excellent; it can do all of that in one device. I personally would bet (and know) that the cost of all of those far surpasses the cost of the CA1000T, and one could arguably state that the A&K is a bargain. I dare you to use this argument with your significant other (or your own mind), saying you are saving money and getting rid of pieces as a result. To me, this is the true beauty of the CA1000T: they took the excellence of the CA1000 and improved upon it, making it a very noteworthy addition to the market, and one you should most definitely consider in any of the situations I listed above. It excels in them all.

I finish this while listening to Nat King Cole’s “L.O.V.E” on my Meze 99Classics with the excellent DDHiFi BC150B 4.4bal and the small Yamaha system of which I inserted the CA1000T. It is superb, and I would gladly pare my units down to make room for this in any situation. Especially if they could sort out a faster OS. To me, that is the only “major” flaw, and needs addressing to make the CA1000T near-perfect. Your opinion of course may differ, but it is well worth a hard, serious look to make that differentiation.

Thank you, Jason and A&K for the chance to hear the “upgrade” to the model I loved in the CA1000. The CA1000T is worth it.

Letshuoer Cadenza 12 ($2300): Is this worthy of the name flagship? Yes. Yes it is.

Cadenza 12

Intro:

When Will messaged me that he had what he considered to be one of the most resolving, thoroughly satisfying sounds he had heard in quite some time from an IEM, I let him go on for a bit. He then mentioned it was the Letshuoer Cadenza 12...I let that sink in...he talked some more, and I listened. My mind wandered to a previous model I had reviewed from the previous company (before the name change), the Tape. Some liked it, some loved it’s cassette-like looks and marveled at what was one of the first piezo’s out. I was at the opposite end. I will openly admit that I really, REALLY did not like the Tape. It’s sizzle up top, and lack of dynamics from my perspective made me wonder how the other reviewers could stand it. Then it occurred to me (like a Whack-A-Mole game), that my tastes differed from others and I could understand why some liked it. I’ll put this politely, I really did not like the Tape.

So as Will was expounding upon why the Cadenza 12 jumped to the top of his list, I appreciated his insight, for we usually agree on what we like and dislike; but come from two different favored sound signatures. So, after Will’s time, and review here on eCoustics, the unit was sent to me. He asked that I withhold judgement until I had a thorough listen. I trust his judgement, and his review creds, so I did. What follows are glowing words for the Cadenza 12 (C12), and astonishment at what I would personally call the “rebirth” of a company that now gets it. Astounding, indeed.

This unit will be sent to the next lucky reviewer when my time is up, and all I can say is that I will be sad for it to go. Very sad.



Specs:

In The Box:



Gear used/Compared:

Astell & Kern CA1000T
Shanling M6 Pro

Empire Ears Legend X
UE Live (Custom)


Songs:

Dark Side of the Moon
Tidal Jazz
Massive Attack
Pink Martini


Unboxing:

Once one hits a certain price point, there is an expectation of an unboxing event. A production really. The C12 does not disappoint. Coming in a mirrored silver sleeve, the unboxing is indeed an event from the beginning. Taking off the sleeve, a clamshell-like box clad in black reveals itself. A magnetic clasp holds the top in place. Once opened you are presented with an opaque cover sheet laden with the logo. Lifting that you discover the square case in one third, the IEM’s themselves in another, and a sterling Letshuoer dog, their mascot. This mascot doubles as a stand for your IEM when on your desktop for all to see. It is a heavy piece as well so mind where you place it.

Lifting the lower part where the IEM resides in soft foam, you are met with a paperboard wrapped sleeve around the dividers mentioned below. Under that you find slots for the three types of tips in s, m, l of Vocal, Bass & Balanced types. I favored the bass, and in medium size, which is one size smaller than I usually use due to the shape of my canal. As a result, seal and isolation were VERY good as a result.

Another reviewer noted setting aside 30 minutes for the unboxing. I cannot disagree, since time spent exploring is part of the overall experience. I will note that the soft layer of felt over the foam inserts looks quite cheap, and does not stay in place. To me this belies the overall expectations and involvement. A positive of the box is that Letshuoer included a flexible insert, so you can arrange the inside to accommodate many IEM’s or DAP’s (or dongles). This is good thinking and one could easily tuck this into your suitcase when traveling. A well thought out plan, and one I hope more manufacturers incorporate, instead of throwaway or simple cardboard. Investing a few pennies more per unit means a change in a couple of dollars. So be it.

I will mention that the felt cover of which I spoke above would become so much of an annoyance to me that it would end up in the trash receptacle. Opening the box, or removing anything from the case means that piece constantly moved; especially taking the logo stand out and accessing the tips. Throw it away...

The paperwork on the other hand is all premium and amongst the best I have seen in any flagship.





Technology:

The C12 is a hybrid IEM utilizing a single 10mm dynamic diver and eleven balanced armatures per ear. The dynamic driver uses an LSS Kevlar diaphragm for increased rigidity while reducing weight. Letshuoer feels that the C12 benefits from the higher performance driver in addition to the balanced armatures (ba’s).

The ba’s are a mix of Sonion and Knowles models. The Sonion are used for the mid-bass and midrange drivers, along with super-tweeters that are paired with the Knowles tweeters. In essence, the Sonion surround the Knowles frequency-wise. The six-way crossover and five handmade sound bores ensure that all those drivers remain in-phase and work together seamlessly focusing on the merits of each driver within their respective range.

Letshuoer could have gone for less expensive (but still very high quality) off-the-shelf drivers from both vendors (like many do, to the detriment of those models...) but instead decided to invest in custom drivers that took much longer to engineer and test.



Form/Fit/Build:

There is no denying two things about the C12: 1. It looks superb in the mirrored finish, and 2. It is big. To me this is not the largest IEM I have tried, but it is close. Tip rolling therefore makes it a necessity for proper fit. The nub on the conche becomes annoyingly blunt after longer sessions of two plus hours, and I find myself adjusting the unit near-constantly to avoid that.

Using the medium bass tips, helped to alleviate the conche pressure, but I could still feel it. The shell itself is gorgeous (but fingerprint prone...) due to the mirrored finish, laden with the “Letshuoer” name. I will say that between Will and myself, the faceplate is showing scratches, so a thicker or tougher coating might help.

In typical teardrop shape, there is a single small vent hole on the inside top of the shell, right next to the Phillips head screw; which gives access to the shell. Swooping toward one’s ear, the shape melds well with the fairly wide screened nozzle. A bit wider than I prefer, but when you consider all of the sound tubes and drivers, it can be excused. Thankfully there is a nice lip, which helps hold tips in place. The backside of the shell also carries (in faint lettering, which is near impossible to read) an “L” or “R” along with the model and serial numbers. My feeling is that Letshuoer wanted to give you the information, but not highlight that lettering too much.



The cable comes in 2-pin 0.78mm variety with a unique 4-pin attachment for the jacks. Included are 2.5bal, 3.5se and 4.4bal. What makes this unique is that the jack housing screws off (onto the cable), then you can pull the jack itself off. I would be careful doing so, and I could not achieve a tight fit when attaching the jack to the inserts. Orientation is paramount as well, to allow the screw on jack cover to mate properly. I novel idea, but with a couple of quirks. Build of the cable is fabulous and it comes stock with 204-strands of 6N Monocrystalline Copper and Silver in a hybrid weave configuration to reduce impedance and improve signal integrity. The hybrid cable is sturdy and well-built, despite being a little tough to work with (besides the attaching of jack tips) and not so forgiving at times. Above the Y-splitter, the wires are visible in shrink wrapped silicon. Below, the cable is shod in the same, but with a form-fitting cloth cover giving it that extra stiffness.

I would rate the overall quality of the IEM and cable as “nearly” worthy of a flagship moniker. Improvements would make this top of the class.



Sound:

Summary:

Going back to my ongoing discussion with Will, I appreciated what he said, and mostly agreed. Bass (especially using the bass tips of foam/silicon mix) reaches deep and well under control. There is good grunt, but controlled leading into sumptuous mids. Taylor Swift’s voice sound superb inside my head, and is clean, crisp and detailed. Pushed slightly forward and up to me, this is the highlight. Treble notes follow naturally with good reach and clarity; lending to a more smooth character than sheer quality. The C12 is different enough from others in this range that it can be considered based upon its pleasantly vibrant character and feel.



moar:

Bass while not reaching the nether regions of my Legend X nonetheless exist on quality. Note weight and dynamics rule the roost here instead of sheer quantity. I would call it engaging rather than having that eviscerating quality of sheer subwoofer power like the LX. As a result, there is a smooth push into the mids. The engagement of the low end could be attributed to a slightly slower decay, which to me mimics going deeper. A false sense of depth, kept well under control. The dynamic driver of common 10mm size does its job without overpowering or embarrassing the signature.

Those mids come is sweetly and with a vibrant smoothness not unlike the UE Live. Other have noted that the bass is their favorite part. For me it is the mids, which seems odd to me since I prefer the low end. Female vocals sound sweet and defined, but without becoming piercing. Lending to that smooth character there is still plenty of definition in the layer as conga drums and piano come across with that vibrant tonality such as on “No Hay Problema” from Pink Martini. A song such as this demands accurate representation, but also that sumptuousness Latin music is known for. The C12 does not disappoint.

Others have found the treble to be a bit short on quality, but with my upper hearing deficiencies, I appreciated the near-tamed response. I found the C12 represented cymbal hits accurately but with a bit of grain in the lower treble. This did not bother me, as there was not the added sparkle sometimes associated with the upper end as a cover for the less than tight control.

Rolling this all together, I find the soundstage to be taller than wide, with very good depth as well. Think of sitting near the mid-back point in a tall narrower venue. Still excellent seating and placing of sound, just not as wide as others in this range. To me this helps with dynamics. There can be more focus on the layers here instead of placement. The results come out the same, but the increased dynamics result in excellent sound. Once “Safe From Harm” by Massive Attack comes on, my senses face a cacophony of emotions and I reach for the volume knob...to turn it up.



Comparisons:

Letshuoer Cadenza 12 ($2200) v Empire Ears Legend X ($2300):

My unabashed love for the Legend X has been written about many times. The bass is (still) superb passed only by the LX EVO and Fir Audio M4/M5 & Elemental models. Adding the Eletech Socrates makes this my reference point for all comers. If there is one aspect, I would find lacking, it is overall clarity and detail. To me, this does suffer a bit from that marvelous bass response. The C12 does better here with more detail present, but keeping that “warmer” signature. Parenthetically speaking, because the LX is warmer while the C12 helps necessitate the warmer signature through excellent responsive mids and the treble note of which I spoke above. I still prefer the LX, but the C12 makes a worthy effort.


Letshuoer Cadenza 12 ($2200) v UE Live ($2400, Custom):

The UE Live was my first custom followed by the CFA Supermoon and UE Drop. Fit is very good, since this is oriented towards performers. The first difference to me is in the details. There is no comparison to me, the Live wins. The C12 is good. Very good. But it suffers from the multiple driver count to me, and trying to please many users (and genres). The UE Live is purpose-built for one thing: communicating as much information to the user (performer) as possible with the least number of distractions. As such, this really is not a fair comparison. That said, the C12 comes across with a more velvet-like signature, without becoming too warm or rich. Not as reference as the Live, but also with excellent dynamics and note weight. Where the Live might come across as “thin” due to the need to pass information along, the C12 adds a thicker signature. Both come across as very good, but from very different perspectives.



finale:

Going back to my opening, I came at the C12 with some trepidation, even with Will’s knowledgeable opinion. It is not that I didn’t trust him, it was the bad memory of the “other” one. But I also understood that Will does not throw platitudes and accolades around without warrant. So it was that I waited.

And what I heard from the off was a worthy candidate and then addition to the flagship moniker. The bass hits fairly hard, and with good character. The mids come across without offense, and the treble note hits my sweet spot (as in not offensive). With the proper tip, the Cadenza 12 is an excellent monitor for the price and should be considered in that near-rarified air of top-class IEM’s. Is it the best? No, but it wasn’t meant to be. This is an exercise in revitalization. And Letshuoer has largely succeeded. This is a very fine unit, just pitch that felt cover.

Sivga Luan ($299): The latest from a company that knows gorgeous.

Luan



Intro:

The Luan is the latest from Sivga, who are known for outstanding build quality and stellar looks. And they have mostly succeeded with the sound as well. I consider the Robin (SV021) & Oriole to be very fine models from the closed-back department, and the SV023 to represent a very fine open-back model. Looks are superb on the models, and the Luan follows suit in that department. With a seemingly standard 50mm dynamic driver (dd) for a headphone, the Luan had better excel in the sound department to succeed. Early impressions are that the Luan can.

The sample was sent to me by Sivga for review purposes, and no influence was had in the writing of this. All they ask is for an honest evaluation. The headphone is mine to keep, unless asked back for. Plus, flipping this is still really, really, REALLY uncool and unethical as well.


Specs:




In The Box:




Gear Used/Compared:

Astell & Kern CA1000T
Shanling M6 Pro

Meze 99 Classic (yes, closed back...)

Songs:

Tidal & Qobuz feed-
Jazz, Ziggy, The Mavericks, David Grisman Quintet


Unboxing:

Sivga has always had the unboxing aspect down pat. The Luan continues this tradition with a simple, straightforward, quality black box. The lid lifts off like a candy jar to unveil the tan leather carrying case, nestled in a soft foam insert. A cloth bag inside the case holds the cable, while the headphone snuggles in the confines of the contoured case.

A handle on the zipper of good length and feel provides added good looks, while allowing the user to carry the case in such a manner, or help with the zipper. I have always appreciated that the case is narrower where the headband lies, so that one can grip the case easily.

Typical subdues, quality Sivga unboxing experience.



Build/Fit/Form/Functions:

By now, most of know that Sivga provides top class quality, and craftsmanship for their wares. The Luan carries this tradition on, with excellent looks in either Mahogany color or black hand carved shells. CNC machined aluminum parts round out the rest in delicate looking, but sturdy material. That delicate nature carries over into the headband like the arches of a fine bridge. Double rails are flexible, but due to the shape hold the ear cups in place with very adequate clamping pressure. Plus, those sumptuous velvet-lined pads caress your cranial matter with a very good size as well as depth. Sometime the thicker pads, while soft give way too much, crushing onto the cups, or creating an overly hot condition. With the Luan, the pads crush just enough to provide excellent seal and comfort. That double rail headband also carries the sub-headband with it, made from leather as well on top and velvet on the side, which contacts our heads. A double suspension system, which can be adjusted well. Yes, many other headphones carry this system as well, but at this price the construction is impeccable.



Those fluffy pads flare out on the contact side making them wider than where the cup joins the shell. The perforated insides of the cups also flare out as well, yielding a larger chamber for the sound to fill. More on that in sound impressions, but my seat of the pants feeling is that there is an expansion of the sound as a result. I also feel that those pads might be a smidge too big due to the flare. I have no problem with them contacting my ear, but they do carry over just short of my jaw line. The headphone is so light though, that it doesn’t really matter. A slight oval shape also helps to fit most ears when properly worn. One reviewer stated, the Luan is absurdly great,” comfort-wise. I cannot disagree with that statement.

The cable comes in a single ended 3.5mm, with a 6.35mm jack adapter as well. Single ended 3.5mm jacks attach the cable to each cup. I have a 4.4mm bal cable from DDHiFi for my Meze 99 Classics, which I will try as well, since they will fit.

The leather case is again of stellar quality, and shaped like a buttock down low. I cannot hide my snickering when I say that, but it serves the purpose perfectly. Plus, that narrower area up top allows you to quickly grab the loaded case, unlike some other manufacturers overly-large cases.



Technology:

The 50mm dynamic driver has nickel coating at the edge of the diaphragm as well as a macromolecule of organic carbon fiber composite. This set up not only helps to absorb unwanted modulations, but makes for a speedy delivery of the sound; something many dd’s are not known for. Light weight and elasticity of the driver also allow for good speed in the sound. The open back allows for an expansive stage, while the driver provides good reach down low, and treble notes not normally associated with dd’s. A copper clad aluminum coil also helps aid in signature response, while (to me) providing a certain amount of warmth to the tune. An oversize magnet of NdFeB sized at 24.5mm assures the detail is passed along accurately and with excellent speed.



Sound:

Summary:

If you had told me that the Luan cost $299USD, after I had listened, I would have said one of two things: 1. Fabulous! Or 2. You are joking, right? Right?! Not only is the Luan amongst the most comfortable headphones I have ever tested, but the sound pierces the lower end of mid-fi with a sound, that while fairly neutral comes across with a mid-tonality that might be too far forward for some, and a bass that is a bit light; but made up for with wonderful detail. It seems that many manufacturers have the sound-thing down, and differences appear as their house tuning, or open v closed, or planar v dd. The Luan blurs those lines as well, with bass that is tight and fast, but does not reach as low as I would prefer. This is countered excellently by the superb mids, and clarity wrought from the emphasis here. Treble can run a bit hot, but rarely did I reach for the volume knob to turn the music down on a song, which carried such weight up top that bothered me. A rarity to me.

moar:

Another review mentioned that this unit will not be for bassheads. I guess begrudgingly, I would admit to being a near-basshead, lathering myself in the stellar bass from my Empire Ears Legend X. The Luan in no way matches that, but because the bass is taut and in control, the succinctness with which it presents the low end makes me nary miss the Legend X. On Massive Attacks “Safe From Harm” the bass line sets the stage and holds its own on the Luan. Something like the Campfire Audio Cascade would be sublime here, but the Luan shows its mettle by fast attack and a delay, which makes for the tautness of which I speak. I find no bleed into the mids, either; which aids in that near neutral sound of which I speak.

Those mids are superb for female vocals. Using the aforementioned song, the female voice sounds succinct and under control. Realism is a word I would use here, and combined with the male support vocal makes for a very nice vocal treatment. Male voices do lie slightly behind the female, but both a pushed forward due to the presence in those mids. I will add that hiss sounds such as “S” or soft “C’s” can come across with a bit of harshness, but not like others I have heard. Sharp snare hits or cymbal hits can carry that same sonic quality, but this really did not bother me, especially in concert with the overall sound signature.

Normally with something such as the Luan, the treble becomes too bitey for my tastes, and are a result of not only a V-shaped signature, but also to keep the overall presence in check. The Luan can be a bit hot for me, but not to the point of those multi-BA IEM’s, which seem to be coming back in as flavor of the month. I do not like a treble, which is too hot, and to me the mids help to keep that under control, mostly. A brighter song will cause me to lower the volume, but that seems to be song dependent.



This brings up an interesting note. Another reviewer stated that the Luan can play well across genres, and I agree. He goes on to say that while the ensuing sound may not be the best emanating from the Luan, it is inoffensive in presentation. While the Luan does not need much power to drive it, in fact the amount really does not change the signature, some genre such as jazz and pop do sound a bit better to me. This could also be one to use with EDM, and tame the upper end for when you simply want to listen, without the pumping up session. Conversely, Ziggy Marley on “Dragonfly” comes across as wonderfully musical through the Astell&Kern CA1000T and the Luan. Sometimes this song can become too much for me, and I am left wanting to raise the volume. Not here, as I can raise the volume without bother.

Soundstage is deeper than high, and a width of a slightly out of head experience. You can certainly tell it is an open-back headphone, but not so wide as to lose thickness in note or become too airy. This to me also plays into the feeling of overall sound quality, without becoming boring, or too harsh either.

Combined with the build, the Luan sound adds to its repertoire of goodness across many genres.



Comparisons:

Sivga Luan ($299) v Meze 99Classic ($309):

Yes, this is an open v closed, but a natural comparison not only due to the price, but most consider the 99C the benchmark at this price. I was able to find a mint condition 99C used (along with a couple of other gems), and have since added the excellent DDHiFi BC150B in 4.4bal for the cable. And yes, I tried the cable on both.

To me, the presentation of the 99C completely satiates ones need at this price, or well beyond. Details that a closed-back has no right of presenting, and a fit that is superb. Throw in the excellent build, and you can see why used variant are quickly snatched up. This is still a superb headphone. Where the Luan bests (to me) the 99C is in the presentation within space. The Luan give a bit more space for the instruments to breathe, as it should with the open back. But the two would be excellent compliments to each other and for the price of a mid-fi headphone you could easily justify having both. Your need for open and closed would be taken care of as well.

I do find the 99C reaches a bit deeper with slightly better control (which says more about how the Luan handles the low end than not). The Luan on the other hand would be just about perfect in this range if the mids were held back slightly. I find the Luan to be slightly richer in presentation as well; which says a lot for how Sivga has done their research. The lower treble is a little untamed on the Luan, but countered with better detail; and this makes for a tough decision.

I end this by going back and forth between the two on The Maverick’s “Things I Cannot Change.” The 99C comes across as a bit harsh, but slightly easier to drive. Switching to the Luan, I have to raise the volume knob to match the sensation (a comparison done by ear...). I appreciate both headphones on this song, and it highlights the difference perfectly. The 99C has better depth of sound down low, while coming across as a bit harsher in the mids. The Luan lacks the oomph down low, but even with the forward mids, sound more palatable to my tastes.



finale:

Sivga has it going form them. Getting past a couple of speedbumps has given way to open highway, with the top down and the desert surrounding them on a fine Spring day. The Luan comes across as thoroughly musical, even if the mids are a bit too forward for me. That can of course be EQ’d out should you desire. Bass can be dialed in as well. Mind you these are minor quibbles surrounding a $300 headphone. Yes, we should judge cost in our purchases, but when something such as the Luan comes along and you come away stating, that this is a damn fine headphone at the price, you can fully realize that this may be quite the bargain.

The Sivga Luan is a very good headphone, especially at the $300USD price. As such, this to me is yet another winner from their stable, melding excellent build quality with sound I find quite pleasing. As such, this should definitely be on your list if you are looking for an entry-level open-back headphone.

BQEYZ Winter ($239): The End Of It All?


Winter



Intro:

This culminates the seasonal cycle for BQEYZ, and that makes me sort of sad. But, the end of one run means something else is hopefully in the works. With each seasonal iteration, the sound was different. Some liked certain models, while disdaining others. Some thought each iteration while different yes, improved on the previous “season.” A third camp of listeners see each model clearly and could be held up on their own merits. I will say that I like all of the four iterations, and would be hard pressed to pick a favorite. That said, the interchangeable filters of the Fall move gently up on my list here.

You never had to worry about construction quality either, as all were of a build like they should be: top notch as well as good looking. This may be the finale, but I hope another line continues for BQEYX. I thank Elle for the sample, and continue to marvel at what this manufacturer produces.



Specs:

Driver: 12mm dynamic driver and 11.6mm PZT bone conduction
Impedance: 38Ω
Sensitivity: 113dB
Frequency: 5-40KHz
Cable Length: 1.2m
Connector Type: 0.78mm-2 Pin
Plug Type: 2.5/3.5/4.4mm available



In The Box:

BQEYZ
1.2m cable (3.5mm)
6 sets of silicon tips (s, m, l) in Atmosphere & Reference
Cleaning tool
Zippered case

Songs:

Jazz from Qobuz/Tidal
Massive Attack
Ziggy Marley
Jimmy Buffett on cassette (we are rewind)


Comparisons:

BQEYZ Autumn
Thieaudio Legacy 5


Unboxing:

Simple small packaging greeted me, with a tasteful near-midnight purple color. Specs on the back sleeve give a brief note of what is to come. Sliding the sleeve off, you find the Winter IEM’s nestled in soft foam on top, and a cover over the whole inner box. Open to the IEM’s, you can touch the gems within. Taking the cover off you find the excellent zippered case on the bottom half complete with the sets of tips mounted in a metal plate, and cleaning tool inside. Simple. Complete, with no unnecessary frills.



Build/Fit/Finish:

Traditionally known for excellent build qualities as well as fit, the Winter does not disappoint. While the nub on the inner shell seems longer than others I have tried, it does not bother me nearly as much as others which follow the same path. Harder, more angular edges between the faceplate and shell mean that grasping the IEM is easier as well. A singular vent hole on the inside lower side is the only break from the flowing look.

The Summer & Spring faceplates I likened to an ocean or breeze of air, what with the flowing pattern. Here though, the swoop on the black faceplate means an impending storm to me. You have most likely seen those dark winter storm clouds rolling in to bring heavy winter snows. Seeing that color of cloud in the sky, one knows you may as well settle in for the long haul, as this storm will bring copious amounts of that white jewel precipitation. Living up north, it is an excited expectation, if properly prepared.

The swoop on the faceplate help define the shape of the shell as well. Almost teardrop-like, there is a decidedly pointed bottom side, swooping forward, echoed by the green ring of emerald color; itself of stellar understated beauty. One not need be a diamond to show beauty.

The 49-core single crystal copper plated silver cable carries a tighter braid above the Y-splitter, while looseness carries the portion below in 4-strand braided fashion. Ending in a BQEYZ logo laden jack, in your choice of 2.5mm bal, 3.5mm se or 4.4mm bal rounds out the cable. The jack is longer as well, allowing a firm grasp for insertion & removal without becoming so long as to potentially bend (I have never bent a jack in my life).

Fit with the proper tip is top notch as well, but that nub did bother me a bit after longer sessions greater than two hours. A simple readjusting took care of that. Using a smaller Comply foam tip, the insertion depth was greater, allowing me better fit, isolation and fullness of sound.

As usual, the Winter follows the path set forth by the previous seasons, giving the user a thoroughly good-looking unit, with very good to excellent fit and finish as well.



Technology:

Bone conduction is not all that new, and some of the finest IEM’s I have heard and reviewed carry this tech. One only need think of Fir Audio and their “Element” models to understand how absolutely good this technology can sound. This technology, like a good piezo or planar has trickled down into the “more affordable” market of in-ears, and this can make for some interesting competition. With a large 11.6mm PZT bone conduction (bc) unit, BQEYZ is not messing about. Combine that with the larger-than-normal 12mm dynamic driver (dd) and you should be able to get a larger sound signature from the combination.

Here though, the bone conduction is used to compensate for the lack of mids and treble sounds coming out of the dd. The larger dd can carry its merits down low without having to worry about the upper end, since the bc accommodates that area of the sound spectrum. That bc is even designed in-house by BQEYZ, giving further credence to the development, instead of pawning that aspect to another company.


Sound:

Summary:

Succinct tight bass rides the wave of very good clarity when the song presents itself this way. I find the bass reaches low, but can bleed a bit into the mids; which is typical of a dd. Nonetheless, it is intoxicating, and the mids come across as full of verve and detail, giving way to a treble reach, which is not only pleasant but inviting. It can be a bit too sparkly when the song derides this aspect, which gives me pause due to my high treble intolerance. Soundstage affords the whole song to pervade the senses, with a good cubic feeling, but not cavernous. As a result, the presentation is full, and tied together without becoming too thin of note, save for the extended treble reach mentioned.



moar:

As previously mentioned, I like all iterations of the seasons, but for different reasons. The interchanging of filters on the Autumn lends a note of different colored leaves to the song. The Spring is sublime in presentation, and the Summer exudes a warm noted day to the senses. The Winter seems to be the tie that binds all together, and does so with aplomb. Not especially technically proficient, but involving instead, the Winter makes me want for cold days with snow falling and a nice Bailey-filled coffee as I look out upon the lake and snow falling.

On a song such as “No Hay Problema” by Pink Martini, there is the succinctness of which I mentioned, and the level of detail follows the staccato notes of piano and support conga drums. There is sufficient detail here in the song, and even with the sharper tones, enough delay in the bass to aid in giving a thicker texture to the song than it might purvey. Flowing deeper than others in this range thanks to the dd, the sub bass is full and draws you in with just enough rumble to give a foundational aspect that I appreciate. One could always EQ in more (I find no need...).

The mids come across with a warmth, but a revealing warmth to them that seems antithesis. Usually a warmth exudes a thicker, smoother texture; but on the Winter there certainly is the warmth, but the texture alludes to a precise nature in both female and male vocals, which is due to the bone conduction. Here the pairing of dd and bc works in concert to bring the best of both together. Even with the slight bleed into the mids from down low, the bc affords the smoothness to overlay without issue the duo vocals from Massive Attacks “Safe From Harm;” which presents a cacophony of euphoric musicality to the senses.

It is here though, that the treble note of which I speak can become a bit too much. On “S” and “C” sounds, there is that bit of bite, which bothers me just a bit. It could be the recording as well, but the Winter does seem to exacerbate that a bit. Nonetheless, the way mids meld into the upper end gives tribute to the BQEYZ engineers and their tuning of the EST Bone Conduction driver. I fully approve, especially since the synthesis between the bc and dd is so good. This would be a case of going against the driver war. It is not needed...

Soundstage is good and wide, but not amphitheater-wide. Pretty much cubic to me, with a bit more height provides me with very good placing of instruments and the note struck from all involved. Layering does falter a bit but not enough to make a jumbled mess. There is still very good detail, and the bc provides very good clarity to the overall sound signature. I find that even with the “limitations” listed above, I can comfortably turn the volume up on this, where on others using the same songs, I cannot. That to me means most of you will have no problem, since there is a high probability, you have better ears than me...



Comparisons:

BQEYZ Winter ($239) v BQEYZ Autumn ($199):

The Fall is a single 13mm dd with changeable filters (Bass, Normal, Treble). Until the Winter, this was my favorite of the seasonal BQEYZ offerings. I love single dd’s, and the changing of filters allowed me to tailor the sound a bit more. The treble tuning was indeed too hot for my tastes, and the normal too boring (smooth?). The bass tuning module allowed my music to reach even deeper, and without becoming harsh on the other end. I simply preferred this sound signature to the others...

...until the Winter came around. This is now my favorite of the seasons, with tuning, which fits me almost perfectly. Deep reaching bass, and the EST BC presents a wonderfully musical mid-section, smoothly moving towards the top, without issue. That said, much the way I mentioned the two Legacy versions above, the Autumn & Winter fall into the same listening patterns. If I want a smoother character, the Bass Filter of the Autumn and single dd provide me with what I want. If I still want that smooth characteristic of tune, but with better clarity, the Winter fills that “void.”

BQEYZ Winter ($239) v Thieaudio Legacy 5 ($249):

The Legacy 5 is a five-driver unit (single dd, 4 ba; 2-Sonion, 2-Bellsing), which gives me a more reference tuning but without becoming boring. To me that more neutral tuning presents details better than the Winter, but with less involvement. With the Winter, you feel the music. With the Legacy 5, you hear the music. Both a good, and the approach is good either way. I rotate between the Legacy 5 and Legacy 2 (and VE BIE Pro) as the units I wear when I mow. If the mowing is tough like this summer and it reminds me of mowing dirt, I wear the Legacy 5 because that hearing of the music guides me better. This may or may not make sense...if I were to wear the Winter while mowing under the same circumstances, I would probably come away with both anger and tears, since the music involved me so much. With the Legacy 5, that level of detail lets me finish the job in a very sensible manner.



finale:

The Winter brings to an end, the highly musical, but underappreciated line from BQEYZ to me. They may not garner the same levels of fan base as others from the Far East, but to me, the marque should definitely be in that same category of fan-favorites. Presenting a line just above entry level is tough. Many (most?) state point blank, “is this one much, MUCH better than my affordable unit?” To which I would answer, yes. Yes, it is. To me, the Winter culminates the line with the best (to me) sound in the range yet.

Musical such as I listen to “After Hours,” from Dizzy Gillespie, Sonny Stitt & Sonny Rollins makes me reach for the volume, and turn the song up when using the Winter. Those sax solos can melt one’s knees, and melt other IEM’s, which may not be up to the task as the volume goes north. Not the Winter, for it presents that cool natured smoothness as it should sound” with a realism that makes me strut like a cool cat wearing Ray Bans. But I will never be that cool, and the Winter will have to suffice to present me that way in my own little world.

The Winter is worth a serious look against its competition since the sound is different enough (note comparison above) to present you with a viable option. Many in this category simply regurgitate their version of a sound; which can be similar to the others. Not BQEYZ and the Winter. It is different enough to be worth nothing less than a good listen, even if only for comparative purposes.

I again thank Elle & BQEYZ for the Winter (and all of the Seasons!). This is a fabulous line of IEM’s, and I cannot wait to find out what their next project is.

Cheers all.

AliExpress: https://vi.aliexpress.com/item/1005004967936559.html?gatewayAdapt=glo2vnm
Linsoul: https://www.linsoul.com/products/bqeyz-winter