About:

• Release year: 2023
• Country of manufacture: China
• Price: $299
• Structure: open, over-ear
• Dynamic element: 60mm (beryllium coated DLC membrane (Diamond-Like Carbon) and N52 magnets)
• Impedance: 350 ohms
• Sensitivity: 105 dB/mW
• Weight: 395 g (self-weighed without cable)
• Connector type: 2 x 3.5 mm
• Comes with: 3 meter long cable with interchangeable connector (3.5 mm and 4.4 mm), 6.35 mm adapter and 4-pin XLR adapter, hard shell case and replacement pads

FiiO ( link to the manufacturer's page ) has been manufacturing headphone amplifiers and mobile players for over 15 years. In recent years, the product selection has also included several in-ear headphones and one full-size Bluetooth headphone. The recently released FT3 model, priced at 300 euros, is the manufacturer's first attempt to expand its market to include wired hi-fi headphones. I received the headphones for testing directly from FiiO.

Product packaging​

I usually don't care much about the packaging. However, FiiO deserves a special mention, because the FT3 model was exceptionally well packed. Inside the large cardboard box was another box supported by plastic corner protectors, inside which the actual sales packaging of the headphones was revealed. In fact, I can't remember if I've ever opened triple-packaged headphones before.

FT3 comes with a nice set of accessories. The hard-shell transport case is stylish and certainly sturdy enough to protect the headphones. It also comes with two earpads, one of which is artificial leather and the other suede material. However, the number one star of the equipment is the headphone cable, which is completely different from all the cables I've used before. I'll tell you more about it in a moment.

Build Quality and Comfort​

I had formed a pretty strong opinion about the design based on the photos I've seen online. I think that FT3 looks more like a gaming headset than a normal "hifi-headphone". Of course, it could be that I'm too old-fashioned to appreciate this flashier design.

When I first took the headphones out of the package, they felt cold all over – no wonder, because all the parts are made of metal. Even the slightly unusual appearance doesn't bother me so much anymore when I can experience the quality of the parts with my own hands. The structure is sturdy, and there don't seem to be any parts that could be expected to break easily. FT3 might be the best built headphone in its price range.

The special design of the cups is not only a whim of the marketing department. I opened the headphones and was amazed how much effort Fiio has put into tuning the acoustics. The inside of the cups is full of small pyramids, the purpose of which is probably to prevent the generation of standing waves. FT3 is not very open in structure, so calling it semi-open could be justified. However, the definition has no practical meaning, because the headphones leak and let sounds through like any other open-back headphone.

​

Headband​

The headband of the headphones adjusts its height automatically. The headband feels pleasant against the head, and I don't feel pressure on the top of the head even after prolonged use. At 395 grams, the FT3 is not exactly light, but the weight is distributed on the head more evenly than for example Focal's headphones of the same weight. As a small suggestion for improvement, I would like if strap was easy to remove strap for washing. Straps suede-like inner surface will probably get dirty over time.

Self-adjusting headbands are usually very comfortable to use, but their elasticity may loosen over time. However, I have no real reason to doubt durability of FiiO's headband. Its structure seems sturdier than, for example, AKG's headphones that have suspension mechanism built with very thin rubber bands.

Earpads​

The headphones come with artificial leather and suede covered earpads. Pads are well put together and materials are pretty good. The diameter of the ear hole is about 5.5 cm, so they're definately not big but still have a reasonable amount of space for the ears. A more oval shape would be ergonomically better, but I don't think most people will have problems fitting their ears inside the pads.

Unfortunately debth of the earpads is only less than two centimeters. My own ears don't touch the inside of the headphones, but the extra thickness would definately make the pads feel more comfortable. I hope Fiio will use larger earpads with their future offerings or even release aftermarket earpads that could be bought seperately. On the other hand earpads are crucial for headphones tuning so there might have been a sound related reason for using these rather small earpads.

​

Unique cable​

The 3-meter fabric-covered cable uses dual entry 3.5mm connectors. What makes the cable unique is its replaceable head (3.5 mm or 4.4 mm), which is usually only found in some more expensive in-ear headphones. The FT3 also comes with two adapters, so you can listen with all the following connectors without changing the cable:

• 3.5 mm
• 6.35 mm
• 4.4 mm
• 4-pin-XLR

I was worried that the replaceable connectors would have bad contact or that connectors would be too tight. Luckily adapter system turned out to be really easy to use, and so far there have been no problems. The only thing that bothers me is the length of the cable in situations where the amplifier is located close to me.
FT3's cable is also special because Fiio has paid alot of attention on the materials. The cable is OYAIDE HPC-23T which was manufactured by Furukawa. It utilizes Furukawas PCOCC-A method (I think it's just manufacturer's own trade name for OCC copper). What makes the situation interesting is that Furukawa stopped making OCC cables back in 2013. FiiO bought the remaining cables from OYAIDE for $46,000, knowing it would need some kind of cables sooner or later for their upcoming headphones. I'm not much of a cable person but it's a nice background story.

​

Sound Quality​

Measuring equipment used complies with IEC711 standard. The graphs use Harman's target curve (2018 version) that is based on scientific research and it should be a a good generalization of what kind of frequency response sounds good for majority of people. The frequency response of the FT3 can also be compared with other measured headphones using the comparison tool .

Frequency response:​

Bass​

Many open-back dynamic headphones have difficulties in reproducing subbass frequencies, but FiiO has clearly invested in solving the problem – bass extension on FT3 is spectacular. FT3 goes down to 20hz easily.

The suede pads emphasize the midbass. Bass does not leak over the low-mids in a distracting way. To my ears FT3 with Suede pads sounds less bassy than measurements suggest. With artificial leather pads, the mid-bass emphasis is smaller. , Presentation actually reminds me of planar headphones, which usually reproduce bass more linearly than dynamic headphones.

FT3 delivers on bass quantity. Unfortunately there is some room for improvement in bass quality. 60mm drivers are huge but they don't seem to move air in the same way as smaller suspended edge drivers from Fostex, Denon and Focal. Bass does not hit very hard and I rarely notice myself paying extra attention on complex bass notes. It's very different experience than for example Fostex TR-X00 or iBasso SR2.

I don't mean bass on FT3 is bad, it definately is not. Bass is well controlled and cup resonances are very low. Not to forget the best in class subbass extension for a dynamic open-back headphone. Bass still hits harder than on many planar headphones such as Hifiman Ananda or Goldplanar GL2000. FT3 just lacks the grip, sustain and slam of the best in it's price range.

Midrange​

The midrange is very close to Harman's target response, so FT3 is likely to impress people who like Beyerdynamic DT880, Sennheiser hd600 or AKG K371. If Harman's target response is considered ideal, the FT3 is almost perfect, especially with artificial leather pads. With suede pads, the sound becomes a little more V-shaped, because the lower frequencies are emphasized and the frequency range between 300–800 Hz is tuned down a bit. Midrange is clear, uncolored and unoffensive.

Treble​

I'm bit undecided how I like the higher frequencies on FT3. The treble is bit bright, but still at an acceptable level for my taste. FT3 may be too bright for those who have issues with Sennheiser HD600 or Hifiman HE400se for example. If the Beyerdynamic DT990 or the Philips Fidelio X3 don't make your ears bleed, the FT3 won't either.
There is a small, maybe 2db peak at 11 kHZ but in the measurements it's amplified by internal resonance of the measuring device. So the 10dB peak is not real.

As for treble quality, I have no complaints. In my opinion, the resolution is clearly better than most $300 headphones. There is also a hint of beryllium timbre, which is most apparent and when listening to cymbals. Maybe I'm just imagining it but I've always thought that berylliym adds some extra sheen on fading high notes and it makes metallic instruments sound more realistic.

Soundstage​

The FT3's soundstage is well proportioned and about average in size. Imaging quite accurate and the movements of the sound sources are also clearly noticeable. The most impressive thing is the general magnitude of the sounds, everything sounds BIG. In this regard FT3 resembles planar headphones and somewhat also the Sennheiser HD800. Soundstage is of course smaller than on HD800 or large planars. You can also get a bigger soundstage for a cheaper with large AKG headphones or with Hifiman HE5XX. Still, the FT3 is by no means bad, as its soundstage is clearly larger than the Sennheiser HD600 or any of the Focal headphones.

Resolution​

Background is quite dark, and I don't detect echoes caused by the physical structure of the headphones. The reproduction is less veiled than average, which is probably largely due to the well balanced frequency response. Evaluating the resolution of FT3 would require a proper reference. I imagine comparison with Hifiman Sundara would be useful, but unfortunately I don't have Sundaras anymore because Sash Tres 45ohm took it's place as my reference headphone in this price range. In my opinion, the Tres sounds more transparent than the slightly more expensive Hifiman Edition XS , so it's no surprise that FiiO's $300 FT3 can't challenge Tres. However, I don't feel like I'm missing out on any details or fine nyances with FT3 like I do with iBasso SR2 for example.

From memory I would say that the FT3 does not separate sounds as clearly as the Sundara, but it is an improvement over more affordable dynamic headphone models, such as the Beyerdynamic DT900 Pro X and Philips Fidelio X2. Differences are not huge though. I think differences in resolution become more apparent with pricier headphones. With affordable headphones is usually just differences in frequency response not in actual resolution itself. If I was looking for highly resolving and detailed headphone I would propably skip all headphones under $1000 anyway and start saving up for something like Sennheiser HD800(S), Hifiman Arya, Hedd HEDDPhone or Focal Clear(MG).

​

Dynamics :​

In terms of macrodynamics, the FT3 is decent but nothing special. For me, punchy sound is extremely important. I like Focal Utopia and Hifiman HE6 for that reason but headphones with calmer macrodynamics such as Sennheiser HD800 and Hifiman HE1000 V2 don't impress me that much. For average listener I'm sure FT3's dynamics are just fine.

I don't think there are any issues with transients, so FT3 does not sound slow or saggy. The only thing that's missing is slam and impact, so I think the word "polite" is apt to describing the general presentation. Of course, it must be remembered that other cheaper headphones are usually not any better. FT3 does not stand out from the crowd in any negative way, if compared to headphones like Hifiman Sundara or Sennheiser HD600.

​

Amplification​

High impedance of 350 ohms is not a big deal, because thanks to the high sensitivity (105 dB/mW), FT3 works fine on almost any equipment. Even my laptop was able to push FT3 to loud volumes. I listened to FT3 the most with a Shanling M6 Pro DAP and a Creative Sound Blaster X4, which is designed primarily for gaming. Both devices work well with FT3.

I also tried a few other amps. Topping L30 II and the Nitsch X Schiit Magni Piety performed very well but there was little difference in sound quality compared to the Sound Blaster and Shanling. The Magni Piety seemed to smooth out the treble a bit but at the same time the reproduction of high frequencies lost precision, sounding fragile.

I also wanted to test how well the FT3 scales with more expensive amplifiers, so I tried it with Ferrum Audio OOR. I would like to say that it sounded better than inexpensive amplifiers, but in reality the differences were small. It would seem that the FT3 does not necessarily scale much with "better" equipment. For a $300 headphones, this is mainly a good thing.

High-impedance headphones are often paired with tube amplifiers. The Trafomatic Audio Experience Head One I tried sounded excellent with FT3. This was the only pairing where I experienced a clear change in sound quality with better dynamics. Unfortunately Trafomatic did not tame the treble at all. I was hoping it would soothe out things a bit. Overall, this was still clearly the best pairing I tried.

​

Comparison with other headphones​

​

FiiO FT3 vs Sennheiser HD6XX​

Prices: $300 vs. $220

Frequency responses:​

Differences in bass reproduction, midrange and treble​

The FT3 beats Sennheiser's in terms of bass reproduction. The HD6XX's bass feels a little stronger, but overall the FT3 is much more convincing.

FiiO's mids sound a little cleaner, and the vocalist is more clearly separated from the background. However, the performance is not as intimate as in the HD6XX, which almost pushes the singer into the listener's arms. When it comes to reproducing mid-range and especially vocal performances, Sennheiser's HD600 series still hasn't found a winner, even though many have tried in the past 20 years.

In my opinion, the HD6XX's balance of mids and highs is almost perfect. FT3, on the other hand, sounds more "snappy" due to its stronger treble. I think the HD6XX sounds more natural, but someone else might like the sparklier sound of the FT3. As for treble quality both headphones are among the best in their price class. HD6XX is primarily known for its superb mids but it's often forgotten it also has excellent treble balance and surprisingly good resolution.

Other differences in sound​

The small soundstage is known weakness of the HD600 series. HD6XX is certainly no match for the FT3's soundstage. With HD6XX I can clearly hear two drivers next to my ears. FT3 can portray exact locations for sounds but HD6XX is known for it's "three blob" imaging.

As for dynamics, I find FiiO and Sennheiser to be equal. Neither shine at macrodynamics, but I'd say that the HD6XX has a slightly punchier sound. However, the difference is small and it is largely explained by the Sennheisers boosted mid-bass.

The difference in the resolution is also small. I can't really say one is more detailed or accurate. The HD6XX sounds a little more muffled and veiled, but that doesn't seem to have an effect on how detailed the sound is compared to the FT3. The situation changes a little if the HD6XX is used with a very good amplifier. FT3 doesn't scale that much with better gear.

​

Luckily, I don't have to pick my favorite…​

Between the two, it's really hard to say which one I like more. The FT3 feels nicer due to it's metal build, but Sennheiser's design has proven to be durable over many years. The HD6XX is also slightly more comfortable in my opinion due to its lighter weight and larger earpads. FT3's strengths are subbass reproduction and a better soundstage. The HD6XX's midrange is considered legendary for a reason. My own preferences eventually gravitate towards FiiO, because of the better soundstage and a less veiled sound. If I were to listen to headphones only with a good OTL tube amplifier, I might prefer the HD6XX.

​

FiiO FT3 vs. Audio-Technica R70x​

Prices: $300 vs. $300

Frequency responses:​

Differences in sound quality​

Audio-Technica's ATH-R70x is quite similar to FiiO's FT3 in terms of frequency response. The most obvious differences are the FT3's stronger subbass and the R70x's slightly withdrawn 4–6 kHz area, or the so-called presence range. Because of the latter, the R70x sounds oddly nasal and slightly veiled. The more emphasized treble of the FT3 makes it lively and fresh, while the R70x is more laid back. I personally find the R70x's peacefull presentation more natural but not necessarely better sounding.

The R70x sounds more open than FiiO, but its soundstage is slightly smaller. I've always thought that R70X's has one of the strangest imaging qualities I've come across: the R70x's soundstage has quite a lot of depth, but the sounds that are supposed to be at the front are placed too far to the sides and sometimes even behind my shoulders. The end result sounds strange compared to the more coherent soundstage of FT3. There's also a grandeur to the FT3's reproduction that the R70x lacks, that BIG sound I was talking about earlier.

In terms of dynamics both headphones are equally restrained, while the separation of sounds is a notch clearer in the FT3. The FT3 reproduces sounds more accurately in all frequency ranges. For example, the reverberations of instruments are more natural.

This time choosing a favorite is easy​

While the R70x is a good headphone for its price it's no contest this time. Apart from better treble balance I don't think R70X does anything better than FT3. Audio-Technica's earpads are smaller, so it cant beat FT3 even in comfort. Small earpads on R70X are a real shame, because with more comfortable pads and a more "normal" headband, the R70x could be one of the most comfortable headphones in the world, considering its modest weight of 210 grams.

Summary​

FiiO's FT3 convinced me with its balanced sound. The build quality is propably best I've seen for $300. Versatile cable, nice case and two earpads increase the overall value even more. I wish FT3 had more puncy dynamics but other than that there are no other major flaws in it's sound quality.

In many ways, the FT3 is an excellent choice for those looking for their first high quality headphones. Close to Harman tuning should please the majority of people. Because of that I think FT3 is a fairly safe choice for those who don't yet know what kind of sound they like.

With the FT3, the beginner hobbyist also doesn't have to stress about getting a suitable amplifier, because FT3 works well with allmost everything. FT3 also work seamlessly with slightly older electronics. For example older stereo amplifiers and home theater equipment often have a high output impedance that does not work well with low impedance headphones. FT3 is 350 ohm headphone so it can be connected to those devices without the frequency response changing due to impedance mismatch.

Thanks to its versatility, FT3 is a welcome addition to the market. I consider it a viable alternative to favorite headphones like Hifiman Sundara and Sennheiser HD6XX. Well done FiiO!

​

Since the introduction of Sash Deux Ukranian one man headphone manufacturer Studio Audio Sound Handmade has made some name for itself. You can read my review of Sash Deux here and dedicated Sash thread can be found here. Manufacturers facebook page is here.

Like with it's predecessor purchasing the headphones begins with choosing the preferred cable termination, finish for the wood parts and size of the optional semiopen/closed back cups. Sash Deux had only the option of thin wood cups very much like on Audeze LCD-XC. Tres has three different sizes and optional spacer part which would make the cups even bigger.

Headphones cost $350+$20 for worldwide shipping. Closed back and semi-open cups cost $50. So pricewise Sash Tres is still competing with planars like Hifiman Sundara and Verum One. I'm glad Sash did not go overboard increasing the price over the previous model. Sash Deux also sold for $350 so closed back being optional on Tres, price difference is just the cost of having to buy the closed cups seperately. Tres have a new driver, earpads and headband so modest price increase is a very welcome change in the headphone market. As a nice extra Sash offers $50 discount for old customers when they buy new headphones.

Build quality and comfort:

Aesthetically not much has changed since the Deux. Open version cup dimensions are still the same. It's a big headphone. According to my kitchen scale the weight is 490g without cable. It is a lot but not unusual. Reported weight of Audeze LCD-2c is 550g and the Audeze's are made of plastic. I think more apt comparison would the wooden LCD-2 which according to Audeze weights 595g or 580g depending on the wood type. Verum One, similar size planar but plastic cups weights 520g. So 490g is not bad for a big wooden planar however people who are sensitive to heavy headphones would be better served with Hifiman Sundara which is only 372g.


Sash Tres closed back looks huge even next to JVC DX700...

...and even bigger next to Beyerdynamic T1.

Earpad system has remained unchanged. I'll just quote myself from the Deux review: "Earpads attachement is a simple twist lock system. Definately nicer than glue system used by Audeze or system used by Hifiman. Hifiman system is basically simple but I don't like how one has to bend the attaching ring a bit and every time take a risk of breaking it. My only gripe with the earpad system is that the ring is glued on the earpad. So no aftermarket earpads unless one is willing to do some diy. I hope in the future models that ring will be removable like on Fostex headphones or better yet, removable Verum style magnet ring."




Pads itself are now different. Pads on Tres are thicker and softer than ones on Deux. There is also bigger angle in the pads. The pads are definately improved but in my opinion they are still not as good as they should be. Foam kind of collapses and after a while it there will be some pressure felt. Good quality memory foam would solve this problem. Sasha(Lyah - guy who makes the headphones) told me that he is currently working on alternative earpads (perforated leather, Velour, Hybrid). Hopefully new pads will be better for long term comfort. As they are the pads are not bad but average at best.


Headband has also been redeveloped. It does not look that different from the Deux headband but because of the different shape it is much better for people with larger heads. It is still made of plastic which in my opinion does not match the luxurious look of the headphones. I think the headband padding has not changed. It is well padded but since it glued to headband it might eventually come off because headband will bend when worn. New headband also has screws which can be tightened to fix the yokes in a desired position. People who have owned older Audeze LCD headphones now what I mean.


New headband is curved and taller. Tres fitted with semi-open cups.

With this kind of big headphones suspension strap headband design would be more comfortable. Good news is that Sasha is working on that. Here are some prototype pictures.


Yokes have gone through a small redesign too. Metal is now good bit thinner than on Deux. I suppose it is to reduce weight but I think the old design was better. Thicker metal looks better imo and this new desing brought up a new problem. Thin metal does not fully keep its form and keeps moving away from the cups. This will cause a slight pulling force on the screws which makes the screws turn over time. Every now and then I have to tighten the screws. Not the biggest design error but annoying nonetheless.



Besides the new pads and headband build has not changed. Grilles are still plastic and attached with four allen screws. Metal grille would in my opinion look more classy but seeing that people seem to be into 3d-printing custom grilles on their headphones these days it seems using plastic is not a problem for many.

Quality of the woodwork is excellent as it was with the Deux. My Tres are colored in wenge and I wanted Sasha not to over do the coating so alot of the woodgrain would still be visible despite the dark color. Cups are made of oak which is currently the only wood option.

Cable is the same it was on Deux. Mini-xlr to whatever jack people prefer. It's a nice cloth covered cable with a metal splitter. Cable microphonics are low and it does not seem to tangle easily. I like that the cable is built in house not sourced from alibaba like it is too often the case. Weird enough, I just talked with a fellow Tres owner and he showed me a picture of insulation material coming through the cable exterior. Luckily cable is not completely broken so he can still use the headphones. Cable is not woven very tight so there is a real possibility that this won't be a one time incident.

My cable with 6.3mm jack. I think that is the same Beyerdynamic uses on T1.


Sound quality:


Tres (black) frequency response with Sennheiser hd650 (red) for reference. Nevermind those dips at 5-6khz as it is known minidsp ears glitch. That treble peak near 16khz on Sennheiser is propably a problem with my particular ears unit.


If we think Audeze housesound at one end for darker sounding planars and Hifiman at the other end with the light and ethereal sound Sash Tres would be something inbetween. Despite my measurements showing roll of from 800hz to lower treble region Tres is definately not a dark sounding headphone. Previously I have described these as rather dark sounding but not at Audeze territory dark. I don't know what has changed, my perception of dark/neutral/bright or the headphones but I withdraw everything I've said about these being dark. These might appear dark after listening something like Beyerdynamic DT1990 but pretty much anything does.

BASS:

Bass extension is average for a planar. I was told that with redesigning the drivers Sasha aimed to improve subbass extension and slam. Sash Deux had a firmer (too tight for some) clamp and because of that the seal was better which results in better bass response. I think subbass is about the same now as it was on Deux so with lesser clamp I'd say new driver does work the way intended. Bass slam is not particularly great but better than on Verum or any Hifiman headphones I've heard (All HE400 variations, Sundara, HE560, Ananda).

MIDS:

Sash Deux had a problem with midrange peaks at 1khz and near 500hz. Particularly that 1khz region made them very aggressive sounding and with some music it could be too much. Tres is still a very midforwad headphone but problem with Deux has mostly been fixed. There is still a peak at 600hz-800hz but it's not as bad as it was with Deux but it would still need some taming.

Overall mids have very nice clarity without any thinnes to them. For sake of comparison I think Hifiman Sundara is about as transparent (as in not having veil) but it does not have enough body. Beyerdynamic DT1990 sounds thicker than Sundara but is veiled compared to Tres. In my experience no other headphone near this price reaches this level of midrange realism. There is however this annoying slight glare of sorts howering over the presentation. It is not present at all times but when it is there I find it very annoying. To my ears it sometimes comes of as a "metallic haze" other times it's more like a distant reverb. I think it is the same issue dispite it can manifest itself in different ways. It's not drastic but it is there. I suspect it is ringing somewhere around 1khz but since I suck at measuring I can't verify it at this moment. It's a shame really because without that the midrange on these would be exceptionally good. It might be worth looking into dampening the cups more, or trying other earpads in case that glare is not caused by driver design itself. On the other hand it seems I'm the only one bothered by this issue so in this case I don't see many people willing to tinker with their headphones. Tres with closed cups don't have this problem or not atleast enough to bother me which suggests it is likely some resonance which could be treated.

HIGHS:

I have mixed feelings about treble performance. Highs are bit uneven but luckily not sibilant or piercing. It's nice to have all that air on top but overall I think overall treble presence is too much for my taste. Treble on Tres does not make a number of itself not for good or bad. Could be worse I suppose and truth be told I can't think of a affordable headphone with particularly impressive treble.

SOUNDSTAGE AND IMAGING:

I don't know if it is because of the new driver, new pads or combination of both but soundstage has improved from the Deux. Presentation is quite unique. It reminds me of diffuse style soundstage such as on Sennheiser HD800 or Verum One. Tres however don't go all the way to that direction as it still maintains more traditional presentation which allows more pinpoint imaging without everything blending together too much.

COMPARISONS:

Hifiman Sundara



I'm a fan of Sundara's and I've often recommended them to people looking for headphones under $500. For $350 Sundaras normally go for it's one of the best value headphones around.

With Sash Deux Sundara's still had a place in my collection but after getting the Tres that changed. Sundara had upper hand on Deux in soundstage and it's airier sound but with Tres having a bigger soundstage and equally clear and airy sound I can't think of a reason to own Sundara anymore. To my ears Sundara does nothing better than Tres. Except for being lighter and more comfortable.

Audeze LCD-1



This is propably a comparison I should not be making as I consider LCD-1 to be a major disappointment. I had hoped it would capture atleast some of the "Audeze magic" which it's bigger brothers are known for but in my opinion it did no such thing.

Even though Tres is not a bass master in the planar world it easily outperforms LCD-1 in this regard. My crappy measurements don't show it but to my ears extension, slam and bass solidity are much better on Tres.

LCD-1 sounds veiled and allmost congested compared to Tres. Only thing it has going for it is the portability and lighter weight. LCD-1 is a (a lot) smaller headphone so it was unlikely it could complete with a proper full size headphone. Comparing these two is not entirely out of line. LCD-1 is a openback planar with big (90mm according to Audeze) driver and at $399 it also costs a bit more than Tres.


LCD-1 is petite compared to Sash Tres

Audeze LCD-2 Classic




Since it's clear LCD-1 can't compete with the Tres it is natural to proceed to a higher end Audeze. LCD-2c (msrp $799) is whole another beast compared to LCD-1. Tres can't compete with that famous Audeze bass. Again it can't be seen with my crappy measurements but bass on Audeze extends lower (or atleast it maintains the "rumble" better). Audeze slams harder and does better job seperating different bassnotes. It's just no contest.

When progressing towards midrange things take turn in Tres favor. LCD-2c has trace of nasality which made me sell LCD-3f last year. It's not as bad on LCD-2c but it's there. Tres sound more clear and detailed making LCD-2c sound completely muffled in comparison. I must admit though that Audeze does what it does in good taste. Even though I don't like what I hear it does not give me a vibe of a bad headphone. It's just not what I like (except for the bass).

Regarding treble I think it's up to what one prefers. My preferred treble quantity is somewhere between the two. I think Audeze's more toned down treble gives music more room to breathe compared to occasionally excessive treble on Tres. Theoretically this would give Audeze an opportunity to represent fine details and nyances better than Tres. Unfortunately to Audeze, Tres is most of the time more capable of extruding small details from music even when with the treble masking other frequencies on occasion.

Soundstage is bigger on Tres, both width and debth. Audeze has more proportionate soundstage with debth being more in line with the width. Tres places a listener further back and Audeze has more intimate presentation. Once again neither is better with preferred style being up to the listener. I prefer the Tres because I'm bit of a nut for large soundstages and because I listen to alot of music from 70's and 80's. Music with extreme left/right stereo panning can sound weird on Audeze because sounds just creep too close to my ears.

Because Tres is very similar to Audeze in it's design it's worth saying few things about the build quality. Pads on Audeze are top notch, propably one of the best on the market with the exception of ZMF stuff. They're very comfortable and provide an excellent seal around the ears. Tres can't compete with that. Suspension headband on Audeze is great too. It looks good and feels great to wear. Not that Tres has a bad headband, it just is not same premium league. When taking the price into equation it makes sense. LCD-2c is $799, headband and yoke rods cost $155 when bought seperately. So even though soundwise I would not take LCD-2c's over the Tres, regarding build and comfort there are things gained if one were to spend over double the money.


iBasso SR1



The iBasso SR1 is one of the lesser known headphones out there but it is also my favorite dynamic headphone under $500 (I'm unclear about current pricing and availability of Fostex TR-X00, it's another fine dynamic near $500) so I really wanted to do this comparison. iBasso SR1 was a limited run headphone. Only 500 were made and price was $499.

SR1 is a laid back easy to listen headphone with VERY good bass, especially for a open back dynamic headphone. It has 50mm bio-cellulose driver with suspension edges. Very similar to Fostex so bass performance is not all that surprising. Tres can outperform SR1's bass with fast paced music (black/death metal etc) but it does not have the same impact or not even the seemingly endless extension SR1's have.

SR1's have a nice gradually downwards sloping mids which give the mids a sense of body. Tres do that too but not in such refined manner. I really like the mids on SR1 but once again Tres excell in clarity over competition. Next to the Tres veil on SR1 is obvious.

Treble on SR1 is mellow but it lack air up top making them sound a bit...well, dead. In the graph one can see treble being pretty much gone around 16khz. That is not a measurement glitch. Sr1 really has a well audible frequency range from 10hz to 16khz! It is not that bad of course because not much goes on up there and most people over 30 can't hear beyond that anyway. Unfortunately lack of energy in the highest regions does affect the overall sound of the headphones making this problem for SR1.

Soundstage on SR1 is quite intimate. Tres is in another level completely. Imaging on SR1 is very good but it doesn't quite compete with tres.

SR1 will remain in my "stable" for relaxed listening as I find it's tonality more agreeable to my ears then other laid back headphones such as Audeze or Audioquest Nighthawk. From pure performance standpoint it can't compete with Sash Tres. For me excellent bass performance can't make up for lack of air in the treble, veil in the midrange and small(ish) soundstage. I can we'll understand if someone would take SR1 over the Tres as it is still very good at what it does; providing mellow sound with great bass.


Using Sash Tres as a closed back headphone

Closed cups are attached with four screws after removing the plastic grille used in open version. It will use different longer screws as cups are so thick. With Sash Deux you could use the same screws. In theory it is simple but sometimes it takes a while to get it right. It's a handmade headphone not precision crafted in some high tech facility so there is certain amount of irregularity with the dimensions. It's propably within 1mm but when you want to attach a round thing with four screws it will take some wiggling to make the cups fit. Other times it works at one try. Not a big problem but it would be nice if there was a faster way to change between the cups.

Interchangeable cups have been the thing that really sets Sash headphones apart the competition. Unfortunately with Sash Deux it was poorly implemented. It just did not sound good. I'm glad to report that it is not the case with Sash Tres.

It wan't turn the headphones into Tres with isolation but sonics change in a drastic way. Closed back Tres is very V-shaped. I think it's good thing as this really makes it a two in one headphone. If you don't care for V-shaped response just save the $50.

So how V-shaped is it exactly? It's close to Campfire Audio Cascade sound after removing the white filter. That is too much for many people but some people (me included) like it. I used Cascade's without the white filter for a long time and in many ways I preferred it over Fostex TH900.



Unfortunately I realized the similarity later when I had allready sold the Cascades so I can't do a proper comparison. It would have been nice because just going by what I remember of Cascades I can't say I recall it being clearly superior to Tres. What I do remember is that Tres as closed back had a bigger soundstage than Cascade. Closed Tres actually has bigger soundstage than Tres open. It is also strangely three dimensional if not the most accurate with imaging. It is very fun with electronic music that has a lot of effects coming in from different directions.

I wish I could do more comparisons but only closed headphone I have that is comparable to Tres is Aeon Flow Closed.

Tres closed vs AFC



Bass on Tres closed sounds allmost like a bass from a traditional dynamic headphone next to AFC. Tres is agressive and punchy with percussion. There is a sense of actual HIT but with AFC it is more of light touch. On low notes Tres hits harder but AFC has better bass defination. It's kind of fun sound vs monitor type of situation. This difference is made even bigger by the audible resonances that Tres has in it's wood cups. It's not entirely unwanted resonance but just something that colors the sound.

The differences in presentation are consistent in every area. AFO sounds bit veiled in comparison but Tres can come off as grainy next to smooth presentation of AFC. This is the same for both mids and highs. This makes me listen to the headphones differently. With Tres I tend to lower the volume while listening with AFC I crank it up.

I think that AFC is technically the more correct headphone here. Personally I find AFC's to sound quite dead so I much prefer the Tres here. Despite being near "perfect" AFC is just not engaging at all. To turn it opposite if one really enjoys AFC, Tres might be too much to handle with it's brighter treble, cup reflections and grain.



Tuning/modding the Tres

I have not had the time to experiment with the different cups, spacers and dampening material as much as I'd like. What I found out is that all the cups have this similar trait. They all introduce a same midrange dip at some area. With open cups its at the upper mids area, with closed it is at the center and with semi-open it is at low mids. That makes the semi-open cups sound quite weird and pretty much unlistenable.

I think if someone took the time these headphones could be improved with better dampening materials and perhaps with pads that provide a better seal (thinking Audeze lcd-2 pads here).

Open version has only a thin felt behind the driver for dust protection, closed and semi open cups are dampened only with stuff that looks like cotton pads. I'm sure there could be improvements easy made here.

AMPLIFICATION REQUIREMENTS and Gear Used in this review:

Specifications reported by the manufacturer are these: Impedance: 16 ohms - Sensitivity: 96dB/1mw (at Drum Reference Point) - Minimum power requirement: >100mW - Recommended power level: >250mW

I used the headphones with SPL Phonitor 2730, Gustard H10, SMSL SP200 and Burson Soloist SL. All those amplifiers worked fine and I have no preference over those. For portable amps I tested Chord Mojo and Audioquest Dragonfly red. Mojo was decent at best and Dragonfly was not up for the task, there was Audible distortion.

Dacs used:
Schiit bifrost multibit (don't remember which gen)
Hegel HD10
SMSL SU-8



CONCLUSION

For the price Sash Tres is the best combination of clarity and spaciousness while maintaining proper bass and fullness in the midrange. In many ways this is the best headphone I have heard for under $500 and competitive with headphons beyond that even. For my preferences I have not heard better headphone unless I go to Hifiman Ananda (about $700 in USA, still $999 in europe). Closed back alternative sounds good too but will be too colored for people who don't enjoy v-shaped response. Affordable parts and customization options will offer people with modding urges good times. Buying a "audiophile" (I hate that word) level headphones at affordable price is always a compromise, heck..buying even TOTL stuff is a compromise to some extent. Sash Tres is not a perfect headphone but for me it compromises least on the things I find most important on a headphone.

*These headphones were purchased by me directly from Sash (Studio Audio Sound Handmade) and I receive no compensation for this review.



In spring I 2019 came across some fine looking headphones in one of those facebook headphone groups. That same headphone started showing up more an more often in my feed. I found the official facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Studio-Audio-Sound-Handmade-300941327300195/
and contacted Sasha Lyah, the maker of the headphones. Turns out it's a commercial built on order DIY planar headphones that cost $350. With google translate I had managed to read few reviews. Most often Sasha's headphones are compared to Audeze lcd-2. Reviews were favorable and since I'm a nut for underground headphones I took a change and ordered a set.

Sasha told me it would take three weeks for him to build an unit. It was a cool experience. I had an option to choose between different woods (went with oak), level of varnish I want on the headphones (went with shiny) and cable termination of my choosing. He send me pictures through the process so I could see what is going on. This was one of a kind customer service


Build quality and comfort:

It is my understanding that version with leather covered housing is called V2 and one made entirely of wood is V3. I chose the leather version. Grilles are made of plastic. I would have preferred metal but it still does look nice. According to Sasha plastic was chosen to reduce weight.

Grilles and wood cups connect to the housing with four allen key screws. Changing between the closed and open versions is simple but it might take a while to properly align the holes for the screws.

Yokes are metal and headband is made of plastic. All plastic headband seems a bit weird but it works really well and seems durable. Headband has a soft leather padding on it. Suspension headband would have been better considering these are not small headphones. Luckily there are no hot spots so I can't fault this designs comfort.

Cups rotate in all directions. Handy feature incase there is not a headphone stand nearby.


Clamping force is quite firm and people with larger heads might have problems. Tight clamping does help with weight distribution and for me Deux is quite comfortable.



Earpads are a bit stiff but soften after a while of use. Earpads attachement is a simple twist lock system. Definately nicer than glue system used by Audeze or system used by Hifiman. Hifiman system is basically simple but I don't like how one has to bend the attaching ring a bit and every time take a risk of breaking it. My only gripe with the earpad system is that the ring is glued on the earpad. So no aftermarket earpads unless one is willing to do some diy. I hope in the future models that ring will be removable like on Fostex headphones or better yet, removable Verum style magnet ring.



For a cable I chose 3.5mm 2x 4pin xlr like on Audeze LCD-series. Cloth covered cable has slight microphonics but not to a degree it bothers me. Overall it's a really nice cable and it is a nice touch to have a in house built cable. At this relatively affordable price I was expecting some bulk cable out of aliexpress.



Woodwork on the cups is very nice. There is variety of different finishes to choose from and I got exactly what I wanted. Also the leather parts on the cups are very well done. While there is certain diy vibe present I feel Sash is a step above the competition here. If I did not know better and someone told me these were $1000 I would not blink.







Sound quality:

Overall tonality of Deux is bit hard to pin down. It's a midrange centric headphone but sounds kind of dark at times because of suckout at upper midrange and lower treble. Depending on recording Deux can come of either dark or even bright, sharp or piercing. There is some peak near 1khz that can induce fatique rather easily. With some albums it's a close call whether Deux sounds energetic or too agressive. Besides that peak near 1khz I'm pretty happy with the midrange. There is bit of a haze to sound but in this price range that is more of a rule than exception. Personally I prefer more linear upper midrange but fans of more laid back presentation will be happy with Deux.

I'm really digging the bass on these. It can't match the bass on most Audeze's or surprisingly good bass performance by Brainwavz Alara but it's more robust than bass on any of the hifimans I've owned(he400/he400i/he4xx/560/sundara/ananda). Bass is well extended and slams quite hard, better than Verum 1 for example.

Highs are well implemented. There is occasional splashiness but overall I like balance of highs better than on most headphones.

Amps:

With Sash Deux I've mostly used Gustard H10, which has been my preferred pairing. However differences between Gustard, SMSL SP200, Burson Soloist SL and SPL Phonitor 2730 were pretty much nonexistent to my ears. Chord Mojo was barely suitable for the Deux and Audioquest Dragonfly Red was a definately lacking. With Audioquest there was clearly audible distortion. Most portable amps just cant power low impedance planars like Deux and Verum1.

It has been reported that Schiit Lyr 3 is a bad match for Sash Deux and DNA starlett and ECP DSHA3f pair well with the Deux. Majority of people looking into this headphone propably don't have such expensive amplifiers but it does seem Deux can be quite picky about amps. Would be nice to hear these one day out of a top tier amp.

Comparisons:

Hifiman Sundara, Verum 1, Sash Deux, iBasso SR1. Prior to release of Sash Tres these were my favorite sub $500 headphones.


HIFIMAN SUNDARA

Besides being affordable planar headphones these two don't have much in common. Sundara is brighter, more spacious sounding of the two. Deux has fuller mids and better bass impact. Sundara does sound quite thin in comparison and for that reason I personally prefer the Deux. If big soundstage, transparency and detail retrival is priority Sundara is likely the better choice.



VERUM 1

Verum vs Sash Deux is a interesting comparison. Both are $350 Ukranian planars and both are very good at what they do. I think Verum is more middle of the road good headphone but Sash Deux is more capable of really impressing a person if one likes what it does. I think technically Deux is the better headphone.

Verums have very nice overall balance. Not bright like low end hifimans or dark like audeze, brainwavz alara or mr.speakers AFO. Tonally Verum is definately the most balanced sounding Planar I've heard. In comparison Deux are bit of a mess, especially considering that nasty 1khz peak.

Verum's have bigger and more diffuse soundstage than the Deux. Deux has harder hitting bass.

Overall I find it hard to tell which headphone is "better". For short listening sessions I'd propably go with Verum but if I have time to get used to the sound of Sash Deux and access to eq, I'd propably choose them.






AUDEZE LCD-3f



Like I said Audeze lcd-2 has been common point of comparison for the Deux. I never had LCD-2 and Deux at the same time so I can't do a direct comparison but I have LCD-3f. Comparing $1945 headphone to a $350 headphone is quite stupid but perhaps usefull to someone. However it must be stated that I was not a fan of LCD-3f. Either it just was not for me or I had a bad pair. There are reports of heavy unit to unit variation between Audeze's.

Compared to Sundara and Verum 1 Sash sounds a bit veiled but coming from Audeze it is the opposite. Sash maintains the full sound of Audeze but it's a step towards brighter and more lively sound. LCD-3f is not just overly smooth it is borderline nasal sounding. It's just too buttery, surypy to a point it does not sound real at all.

Even though I prefer Deux over Audeze's I have to say LCD-3f is objectively the better headphone. Most notable difference is that Audeze more bass slam and mids and highs are more resolving by a good margin. Imaging and soundstage qualities are quite similar but LCD-3f has notably darker background.



Sash Deux Closed Back

I have to admit that I have not listened to the closed back version much. In some ways it is quite an opposite to the sound of open back Deux. As you can see the frequency response looks really weird with a huge hole at the center. It does not sound quite as bad it looks but that does not save much.

Wood cups look gorgeous but for similar price there are a lot better alternatives such as Fostex x00 series or Audeze EL-8 titanium.



CONCLUSION:

Despite it's flaws Sash Deux is a very competent headphone. Depending on preferencess it can be the headphone for people looking an openback headphone below $500. However with the introduction of Sash Tres, Deux is bit of obsolete in my opinion. I'll do a more thorough comparison on my Sash Tres review but shot version is that Tres fixes the sonic flaws of Deux and offers improved comfort for people with larger heads with a new headband design. So if it wasn't for Tres I would give my highest recommendation to Sash Deux.

Hifiman HE560 (Adorama versions)



Unit I have here was bought used. To my knowledge it is Adorama version of HE560. V3 to be exact. According to Hifiman the drivers are the same as on original HE560 so to some extent this review should apply on other versions too. I think Adorama HE560 was $199 for a short period off time, more common price was a bit higher. As I write this both V2 and V3 are $899 on Adorama. Even if the discount prices were only temporary it did create seconhand market in which HE560 can be easily acquired for $200.


Build quality and comfort:

If you have ever handled Hifiman Sundara, you know what is necessary to know about build quality off Adorama HE560. I red somewhere that V3 has more extension room on the headband than V2. I have not tried measuring the two but on my head Sundara and V3 behave the same way. Both are quite comfortable. I can adjust them to proper size without a problem. They clamp quite tight and some people might have problems with it. I don't mind the clamp but these definately don't vanish on my head. You know you are wearing headphones. Weight is nicely distributed and for a planar they're not heavy. I don't have experience with original HE560 but to my head both HE400i and HE560 V3 are equally comfortable. So the changes in design are more about durability than added comfort.



Design itself feels cheap. Sundara style headband is nice but the cups don't look like something you would want on a $899 headphone. That orange color is a matter of taste but I find it gaudy. Attach a mic and a flashing led and these look more like $50 gaming headset than a serious audiophile headphone. Funny enough I came across I-rocks headsets that I suppose are rebranded Hifiman's. They look like this:



Cable is dual entry connected with 3.5mm plugs with 6,35mm plug at the amplifier end. I wish they had kept 2.5mm connectors so one could use old hifiman cables but with Sundara also having 3.5mm connectors it makes sense.



When talking about build quality on most Hifiman headphones you can't really do it without mentioning quality control. Reason why prices on Adorama HE560 succumbed so low was that the quality control was non-existent. Many units had dead drivers on arrival and a lot broke in first few weeks. If prices for Adorama HE560 come down again I would advise to think twice. Even though there is warranty you might just get another faulty unit in return. Many of us don't have the time and nerves for that cycle of returns. I't might be better to save a few bucks and buy a used unit with some hours on it. It seems that faulty drivers die quite soon so an unit that has been previously used quite a bit is more likely to withstand long term use.


I encourage to do a proper research before investing on HE560 because of the quality control problems. I'm not an expert on these matters but there is a lot off information available.


Sound quality:

HE560 frequency response. Measured with minidsp H.E.A.R.S.




I find HE560 to be a bit bright sounding headphone. Treble is not particularly peaky or sibilant. However I must admit that I prefer darker sounding headphones, so getting used to HE560 signature after Audeze LCD-3 took a while. Treble emphasis seems to be at it highest at 4khz and 10khz. I'm not that sensitive to those areas and in my experience emphasis on 7-9khz region is worse as it can introduce quite a bit of sibilance. So like said, despite the bright tonality HE560 is not a sibilant headphone and I don't find them fatiguing to listen. I much prefer this approach to the one provided by another planar, Brainwavz Alara. Alara was just way too dark but not in a good way like Audeze headphones or Audioquest Nighthawk's.

Midrange on HE560 is pretty much flawless. I'd say they sound bit too ”dry” and I do prefer something with more body to the sound but HE560 does deliver a coherent sound whatever music I'm listening to. I prefer mids on iBasso SR1 but iBasso does have exceptionally nice midrange. There is no sibilance(HD700), shoutiness(DT1990) or noteworthy grain(ath-R70x) to the sound.

HE560 is not as detailed nor does it have the soundstage of Sennheiser HD800 but for fraction of the price it does get pretty darn close. It is still a step behind HD800 when thinking about how well defined different sound sources are. HD800 sounds faster, more resolving and has a darker background from which the music appears. I'm bad at describing this kind of stuff but major difference between HD800 midrange presenation and HE560 is the ability to deliver the virtual space for music. HD800 is just more transparent, there is very little between me and the music. HE560 is more traditional ”looking into the music” with headphones instead of really feeling you are in the, in the audience. However just the fact HE560 can be compared to HD800 speaks volumes. Of course HE560 used to cost a lot more but now that it is available for $300 it is heck of a bargain. Only thing diminishing the bargain factor is ironically Hifiman Sundara. I find Sundara to be a direct upgrade over HE560. Take everything I've said about HE560 and add 5% of quality and you have Sundara's.

Here is HE560 measured with Sundara's. Volume was not perfectly matched but you get the idea.


Talking about Sundara's there is one are I find HE560 outperforming it's successor(OK, technically Sundara is HE400i successor). Bass on HE560 is better extended, more present and in other aspects equal to my ears compared to Sundara. It would be fun to experiment how much of the difference comes from different earpads and how much is caused by the Sundara's new lighter diaphgram. Bass on HE560 is not on par with marvelous bass on Brainwavz Alara but among other affordable planars it is top notch. Out of dynamics I enjoy bass on iBasso SR1 more because it has such a kick to it but when talking about sheer speed and ability hande complex bass sequences HE560 and Alara are the best I've heard for the price.

HE560 vs Alara:



Few words about amping:

HE560 is not very difficult to drive. Of course it one should not try to pair it with a smartphone. Which you can't of course because of the 6.35mm plug. Chord Mojo does a decent job driving them but my beefier desktop amps (SPL phonitor, Gustard H10, Burson Soloist) do a better job. With Sundara the difference is still there but it is not as big. My favorite amp for HE560 is the cheapest one; first generation Schiit Vali. I feel that even though Vali is a tube hybrid not a full tube amp, it does clean the edges out a bit and make HE560 more enjoyable to listen. If someone purchases HE560 for $250 and Vali+Modi combo for $250 it is a $500 setup that is near impossible to beat.





Conclusions:

HE560 has technicalities that were on par with many flagship headphones just five years ago. Now that it has been made available by Adorama for fraction of it's original cost, it is one of the best deals in the headphone game. On the downside there is the increased lack of quality control. This is something to take seriously. I won't let the quality control affect the final rating of this headphone. If I did I'd propably rate these 1/5 and that would not be fair either. If you are not dead set on needing the little extra bass that HE560 has over Sundara I'd advice to wait for a discount and get Sundaras for $350.

Sennheiser HD700: Mini Review



Build quality and comfort:

Just by the looks and holding one at your hand, one can guess that this is not a headphone designed for the price range it is now. HD700 has this same futuristic design as it's big brother HD800. It's just smaller in size but the family resemblance is there. Can't argue with the design. Ear cups are shaped like an ear, not round, triangle or oval.



I actually find hd 700 to be more comfortable than hd 800. HD800 is quite a bulky beast. It engulfes most of my head and feels quite intrusive even. Suede on HD 700 might not match luxury of alcantara on hd800 but it is very high quality and extremely pleasent against skin.



On some aspects I even find hd700 to be superior to hd800. HD800 has exotic lemo connectors where as hd700 uses more traditional 2.5mm X 2 to 6.3mm connection. HD700 cable is more common, so spares don't cost as much. And when you actually take a look, HD700 cable looks better. Plug has some design effort going on and the Y-splitter has some details too. Quite funny how they neglected this aspect with HD800. However I find HD800 cable to be more convenient, it just somehow rolls better into a circle and is easier to store.




For design and comfort HD700 is best in it's class. I can't find anything bad about it. It is light, it is comfortable and about equal to it's a lot more expensive big brother.





Sound Quality:

Let's take a listen. First thing that I pay attention with hd700 is the soundstage. Surely it can't match hd800 somewhat legendary soundstage. However among it's similarly priced peers hd700 soundstage is very good. Imaging is accurate but not to the level of Brainwavz alara or Hifiman Sundara in my opinion. HD700 does easily beat both when talking about the soundstage size though.



Bass on HD700 is tight and precise but it does roll of too early. I't starts rolling of after 100hz which is unaccebtable performance if compared to planars or better dynamics in this prize range. What bass is there, is tight and punchy but it just lacks presence.



With the midrange hd700 has some issues too. Gradyally downwards sloping response gives the mids some body but it does that to an extent it becomes a bit too dark.



Highs are notorius for their peakyness. And it is true. Treble peak around 7khz region makes these allmost unbearable with some recordings.

Here is hd700 frequency response measured with hd650 for comparison. That peak on hd650 measurement is not there in reality. It's a measurement glitch.




Conclusions:


I won't go into further detail because at this point it is clear, that Sennheiser dropped ball on this one. HD700 does not have the bass to please the bass crowd. Mids are quite laid back and have nice smoot tone to them which is killed by the treble peak. Someone said that HD700 is a combination of what is wrong with HD650 and HD800 and I have to agree. I't takes some effort to make a headphone that is bass light, dark and exceedingly bright. With it's original msrp of about $900 HD700 is a bad joke. Now that they cost about 1/3 of the original price, I still can't recommend them. Even if one wants a headphone with treble peak HD700 would not be my first choice. Beyerdynamic DT1990 has that traditional peaky beyer treble but it also is a better headphone than HD700. Only if build quality and comfort is an utmost priority only then HD700 is something to consider.

These headphones were provided by brainwavz as a part of Alara review tour and have now been sent back to Brainwavz. I want to thank Brainwavz for providing this opportunity and thanks also to Dobrescu George for helping to organize the tour.

Whats in the box?

Box that the headphones are housed in is surprisingly small. Here it is next to a hifiman box that has more common size for a fullsize headphones.
.

Carry case provided looks also tiny. Dimensions to fit the headphones are perfect.




They come with extra set of earpads and a strap which I suppose is for carrying the case.


There is of course the detachable cable and 6.3mm adapter.




Build quality and comfort


They're heavy. Planar tech and lots of metal. Edges on the cups are quite sharp but not sharp enough to cut you. I think it might have been intentional move to make those so sharp because the look is bit plasticky but those sharp edges remind you are holding a piece made of solid metal. So very cool.


Immaculate attention to detail





Earpads are pleather on the outside, perforated on the inside and average quality ”velour” on the top. Very much like on hifiman he400i. Brainwavz pads on top and HE400i at the bottom.



Pads are a bit slim and not very responsive. Quite funny how a company that is known for their great earpads can't provide similar quality pads with their headphones. It was the same with HM100. Good thing they provide two sets of pads. Some users might want to remove the connector ring and replace the pads with better ones. That connector ring is genious by the way. It makes replacing the pads very easy and fast. There is no twisting, bending or wondering if you aligned them properly. Hifiman and some other manufacters should take a note!





Cable is very basic. Double entry 3.5mm to 3.5mm with a screw on adaptar. It does look nice and lack of propretiary connectors always makes me happy. If that cable is available for purchase seperately, I might get one for my Onkyo A800.



Yokes are of plastic. Headband is covered with pleather. There are no markers on the headband retractor which is always a shame but not uncommon. On top of the headband there is the brainwavz logo.



So let's talk about the headband little more because it is something truly special. Unfortunately in a negative way. The headband is huge! I wear the headphones with about 0,5cm extended or not at all. I have about average size male head. My wife can't use these at all. These don't fit my mini dsp H.E.A.R.S measuring system without putting something between the headband and the headrest part.





Because of the weight and large headband I don't get the grip I'd like. Alara's feel a bit loose on my head.

I find such a design fault quite problematic. It is hard to perfect sound or reach ultimate comfort. What is not hard is making a headband of proper size. This is just poor engineering or plain not care at all attitude. I't makes me think if they can't do the easy things right how are they going to deal with more demanding issues. Brainwavz hm100 has a common problem with loose headband adjuster. Please get the headband right next time. This is pretty ridiculous.


Sound quality


Bass.. Oh, yes! These have definately the best bass I have heard amongst inexpensive planars. Bass has similar body, weight and extension as LCD-3. Alara's play fast guitar notes with defination and can still fill the space with rumbling sub bass without becoming a mess. Individual sources of bass are clearly apparent with minimal blending. I must say I was not expecting to hear bass like this. If I only had one headphone and it had a bass like this, I would not mind at all.

So lets take a quick look on the measured frequency response. Channel balance is quite good. It is mostly within 2db. It's no Sennheiser HD800 but better than most headphones at this price range.




There is a clear drop from 1khz to 2.5khz. That is quite common, especially for a planar but what I find problematic is that response is quite low up to 10khz. Maybe a headphone with a better resolving powers could pull that off but sadly, Alara's can't. End result is plain sound with lacking dynamics and faulty timbre. One of my favorite headphones, iBasso SR1's, has similar upper mid/highs response but sounds just splendid...and ironically extremely dynamic. So it is not just the tuning that is the problem here. There is something else I just can't put my finger on.

About the timbre... Think of an instrument that should have a metallic tone. Some sort of a metallic maracas for example. Alara's will make it sound more like a washboard instrument. There is this wooden or perhaps plasticky tone partly because of lacking 2khz-7khz area.

Tchaikovsky's violen concerto sounds plain. Guns 'N' Roses "November Rain" has no pompous epic presentation that it is known for. Mids and highs are quite a lackluster compared to the bass that is propably best one can get for $500.

So what's good about Alara's sound, besides the excellent bass. I have to bring up the imaging qualities. Soundstage is quite small, even for a low(ish) end planar but the imaging is very accurate. I had a thought that this is what Sennheiser HD800 imaging would be like, if it were shrunk to pocket size.


About amplifiers

Most of the time I used Alara's with Chord Mojo attached to my cellphone playing Tidal. Most of the critical listening was done with high quality files using Hegel HD10 as a dac and SPL Phonitor and Burson Soloist for amps. I'd love to say something more "professional" like how Soloist emphasizes regions from x-y but bass sounds tubby and Phonitor has better spatial cues and better control off the drivers which translates into emphasized 2xΔ. But to my ears; They all sound the same. Alara's need SOME external amplification but they're not particularly picky about it.

Comparisons

Lets make a few quick comparisons against the planars I have at hand and also Ollo S4 as it has similar dark(ish) tonality and Sennheiser HD650 as it is propably the most used reference headphone ever.




Brainwavz Alara vs Hifiman Sundara



Sundara has been applauded for it's build quality. Surely it is an upgrade over previous hifimans but next to Alara it does look and feel like a bare prototype. There is no contest there. However because of Alara's over sized headband, sundaras are a lot more comfortable.

When looking at the measurement Alara's superb bass is again obvious. Sundara's are clearly brighter sounding headphones. Sundaras have a lot bigger soundstage, allmost equal imaging, better timbral balance and proper dynamics. For me Sundaras are better sounding headphones.



Brainwavz Alara vs Hifiman HE560



HE560 I have is new version. It is V3 to my knowledge. As far as I know all the new versions have the same drivers as the original one. Build quality comparison is a bit useless here. HE560 V3 is basically the same as Sundara but V3 has plastic cups and lesser quality earpads. Obviously Alara is in different class.

HE560 does better in the bass department than Sundara. However bass on Alara is still better. Like said before, I find bass on Alara truly exceptional. It is more in the range of $2000 Audeze's than with $500 Hifiman's. HE560 can sound painfully bright even, but it can be tamed with proper amping. Alara and HE560 are complete opposites with their treble presentations. If I had to choose I would take the overly bright highs on HE560 because of proper timbre. HE560 is pretty much sounds like sundara with more V-shaped soundsignature so it is no surprise I prefer HE560 over Alara.


Brainwavz Alara vs Hifiman HE400i



So when we move a step down in hifiman's (discontinued) product range we get HE400i. HE400i is built out of cheaper materials than HE560 so comparison against alara is pointless. HE400i is ridiculously cheap though these days. New ones can be had for $199 and used ones cost close to nothing.

HE400i sounds much like unrefined HE560 with lacking bass. There is a steep change in sound quality between HE560 and HE400i. What is sadder for Alara is that I rather take HE400i over them. HE400i is quite bass light, especially for a planar but it has decent (not good) soundstage, good clarity and proper timbre. All of which Alara's lack.



Brainwavz Alara vs Ollo S4



I can't get a fresh measurement of the Ollo's right now as my rig started acting up. Here is however old measurement I've made. Don't get confused as it has the Audioquest Nighthawk chart in it too.

Ollo is a tad bit darker headphone than Alara's but Ollos still maintain all the details and dynamics. Infact S4 is one of the most dynamically engaging headphones I've heard. It is quite spectacular in that sense. Ollo's have a lush relaxing but detailed sound where as Alara sounds boring in comparion. S4's are bassy and I love their bass presentation. However once again, from technical perspective Alara's bass can't be matched.

Both are built great. Ollo with more retro touch and Alara has more industrial look. I prefer Ollo's but it is up to taste as both are top notch.

Brainwavz Alara vs Sennheiser HD650



HD650 feels plasticy in comparison. Luxurious build materials are not what have kept them among most favored headphones through couple of decades.


Looking at the graph there are quite a bit tonal similarities. Sennheiser does however "fix" the issues what Alara has. And it's not just about the frequency response. Even though Alara does have somewhat clearer midrange hd650 does sound more refined. Then there is of course the difference in timbre realism. HD650 does have extremely realistic timbre (regardless of price range) and Alara has big troubles in this area.

Conclusions

I have to say, I'm bit sad about all this. Alara's have top notch build quality and superb bass. Lot of thought has went into designing these headphones. Oversized headband and weird treble manage to ruin otherwise fine headphones. Alara's had potential to be a true classic but they fall short in some key areas that make me prefer headphones that cost a lot less. For $499 Alara should deliver more.

I want to thank Wiesław Kurnicki from Eufonika and @Claus-DK from hoved-fi.dk giving me a change to test this amplifier as a part of hoved-fi.dk's review tour. After my test period amplifier was sent to a next reviewer and I received no compensation for my review.

Prologue

I have to admit I'm no expert when it comes to headphone amplifiers. Especially tube amplifiers. I've been using SPL Phonitor for about five years now without feeling a need to upgrade or try anything else. First desktop amp I had was xiangsheng dac-01a (aka Grant Fidelity DAC-09/Maveric Audio Tube Magic DAC), then I moved on to Lehmann Rhinelander and Schiit Vali. Every amp better than the last until I got phonitor and was finally happy. As a portable amp I've been using Chord Mojo for a while now.

So, what is Eufonika Model H7?

Long story short: Its a OTL tube headpone amplifier build and designed in Poland. H7 uses 6N1P & 6N13S tubes and retails for £299 which translates to 332,65€ and $383,43. If you read this, you propably know more about OTL design and the tubes than I do so I won't get into details. Specs are as follows:

Input impedance: 10 kohm
Sensitivity: 700 mV
Frequency range: 15 Hz - 300 kHz
Output power: 300 mW
Optimal headphone impedance: 50 - 600 ohm
Built-in headphone socket: 6.3mm + 3.5mm adapter
Power supply: 220V - 230V AC
Power consumption: 50 VA
Dimensions: 350x200x125 [mm]



Build quality:

It is pretty much what you get from the picture. A beatiful thing in a wooden casing with a metal top plate. Design is simple and tastefull in my opinion. It has some diy vibe to it but looks very professional. It does make the Lehmann Rhinelander I mentioned earlier look like a tincan with rca sockets. And yes, Rhinelander is the more expensive one.

So lets dig a little deeper on the build of Model H7. It is quite large, only a tad smaller than SPL phonitor.


Air vents are cleverly placed underneath the amplifier. Great design because you don't want dust to get inside the amplifier. As you can see Phonitor is nothing but perforated metal on the sides and top. Every six months I take the amplifier apart and try to get rid of the dust that got inside.

Not much to say really, its simple but classy without going overboard. It looks like a object with a purpose not some design ornament to decorate your house.

It looks even better whan the lights go out and tubes start shining.


Volume adjuster has nice hefty feel to it. It is not as nice as one on SPL phonitor but it feels solid and does what is supposed to do. Very easy to adjust the volume even by small amounts. I wish it had some numbers for positions but can't complaing considering the price. I'm glad money that went into designing and building this amplifier was not spent on something as irrelevant as volume knob.


Quite standard 6,35mm socket. Nothing extraordinary about it. However this is the only gripe I have regarding the build quality. I wish the red release switch was on front of the plug. When it is behind a hefty plug like Sennheiser hd800 on the picture it is bit tricky to reach. It is quite difficult position and I have to use quite a bit of force to make the connector release the headphone plug. I don't know if it is because of faulty part or heavy use of the review unit but I noticed that rubber feet on the right front corner is lower than others. Amplifier does stand even even without that rubber foot but the amp does tilt towards right front corner when pressed. Either case, constantly appying pressing force to the right corner could have caused this anomaly. If that is the case I wish Eufonika will find better rubber feets for their future models.




Sound quality:

This is what matters. How it sounds. And boy was I in for a surprise. First of all I was expecting somewhat less power. Simply put I was expecting I would have to push Model H7 louder with Sennheiser HD800 to reach same volume levels as I do with SPL Phonitor. Phonitor afterall is a $1500 amplifier designed for running high impedance headphones. If going just by sheer numbers it has crazy 1.6W at @600ohm's. With that and SPL's 120v rail system it is quite a piece of kit. Ok, its just numbers, I know. But those are numbers hardly any amp can match regardless of price. Yet, here we are. Model H7 does have more room to spare than Phonitors. Without measuring I'd estimate that with hd800 Model H7 reaches good listening volume 10-15% earlier than phonitor. Same also happened with my lower impedance headphones.

Actually there is not so much to say about the sound quality. It does what it is supposed to do, amplify a signal. Of course it has it's tube traits. I tested Model H7 with Beyerdynamic DT770 pro 80ohm, a headphone I think greatly suffers from tizzy highs and occasional sibilance. Model H7 actually made Beyers quite compelling sounding headphones.

SPL phonitor is considered a neutral but easy to listen amplifier. Very much like Model H7. I don't think Eufonikas spread butter on sound where it does not belong. Something I did kind of expect it to do, especially with lower impedance headphones. Model H7 performed really well with iBasso SR1 that has only 22ohm impedance. It was great with JVC HA-DX1000 with 64ohm impedance and only failed with Audioquest Nighthawk Carbons which have 25ohm impedance. That in my opinion is only because Nighthawks have a "creamy" tonality by their own and just a hint of extra warmth pushes them over the edge from creamy to...well, slimy.

So sound quality considered Model H7 goes toe toe with a lot more expensive SPL Phonitor. Compared to Chord Mojo Eufonikas have better authority to the sound. Regardless of headphones Model H7 sounds more robust, lifelike and bigger than Mojo. Sure, Mojo is just a portable amplifier(and dac) but it does cost quite a bit more than H7 so some sort of comparison is called for. When compared to Phonitor I have difficulties figuring out what it does better to justify the price difference. Besides SPL's exemplary build quality and extra knobs( crossfeed, mono switch etc) I could not really come up with anything. I think, MAYBE Phonitors do a slightly better job at spreading the stage and imaging but the difference is so small that it might aswell be in my head.

I wish I had some other harder to drive headphones at hand. Only headphone that proved to be difficult for phonitor has so far been akg k340 which is notoriously one of the most difficult headphones to drive well. And Phonitor did do a pretty decent job with it too. Would have been fun to see if H7 could have lured more bass out of AKG's than SPL could. Again regarding how H7 does with Sennheiser HD800 I can't compliment it high enough. Phonitors are considered one of the best solid state amps for HD800 and Model H7 easily performs at the same level. Bright and somewhat thin tonality remains but I can't really say bass is lacking like it occasionally feels with Chord Mojo. Just going by my memory I'd say both Phonitor and Model H7 are better match for HD800 than Sennheiser's own HDVD800.

Conclusion

Model H7 is a well built, easy to listen and very powerfull amplifier that does not just excell with high impedance headphones but works well with many lower impedance headphones too. I'f I was to build an audiophile headphone rig for "cheap" I would propably get a decent affordable dac, used hd800 and model h7 and be done with it.

Will I be buying a unit for myself? Well..Even how much I like H7 it is not THE amp for me. I enjoy crossfeed on Phonitor too much and tube amp with too small kids is just too risky. Either it would be burned hands, shattered glass or electric shock. I wish that in the future Eufonika will offer a metal cage for their amplifiers as an accessory available to be bought for extra cost.

Urbanite on-ears were released in 2014. Msrp was $199. In 2018 new pair can be bought for $100. Used ones are allmost worthless. I paid 25€ for my mint unit and sold it for the same price.

Build & comfort

I find looks of urbanite bit peculiar. I'm sure some people will find these more appealing then I do. Headband sticks out from my head so much that I might as well wear full size headphones if appearence is a factor.

In pictures urbanites look plasticky but in reality they're rugged and well built headphones. I was surprised by the quality of materials.

I think these are more comfortable than most on-ear headphones. Not quite as comfortable as kef m500 or ultralight portables such as koss porta pro. Earpads are memory foam with very nice suede like fabric. Silicone(?) Padded headband is not ideal because it is heavy and perhaps bit slippery.

When folded headphones are very compact.




Sound quality

Urbanites have a well balanced sound. These are not studio headphones but I was expecting more bass. Bass is boosted but it is tastefully done. Highs are bit shelved and midrange sounds clear with proper body. Bass does not leak into mids too much. All in all urbanites are a punchy sounding headphones which to me sound more exiting than sennheiser momentum over ear v1.

Unfortunately urbanites have exceptionally tiny soundstage. Might be worst I've ever encountered. It is so bad in your head experience that it makes these headphones unlistenable for me.

I think it might have something to do with sennheisers double housing design. Inside the cups is another housing in which driver is placed. This design allows the inner housing to have bass reflex system while outer housing minimizes sound leakage.

I might be wrong to blame the dual enclosure system but I was unimpressed by the soundstage on momentums and hd229 both of which have similar design.

Conclusion

At $100 or less urbanites are a good portable headphones for those who are ok with the small soundstage and imo weird looks. At this price there are better sounding headphones but few, if any are as solidly built as sennheisers. For me personally these were disappointing headphones. Thus only a 2.5/5 score.

P7 was released in 2013 with a price tag of $399. Later it got replaced by p7 wireless which evolved into b&w px a noice cancelling bluetooth headphones. P9 is b&w's current wired flagship headphone.

Build & Comfort:

Classy combination of metal and leather. Earpads are attached with magnets. I love this design! Magnet is quite strong so when pads attach they make a satisfying "clock" sound. Hard to describe but it is very cool. All in all P7 feels really rugged, even the folding mechanism. I just wish these were smaller. These look gorgeous on desk but on my head these are pretty big and stick out more than I'd like. P7 clamps firmly on my head. Just enough to keep these bit heavy headphones from falling off and provide good isolation. I think these are very comfortable headphones.





Sound quality:

Classic V. Prominent bass, sparkling highs and recessed mids. Bass kicks with authority with proper extension. Presentation is bit "rounded" and midbass heavy. I would not describe the bass particularly textured. But fun it definately is.

Highs are boosted but I don't experience any shrillness. For a biocell drivers I'd say P7 is well behaved on higher frequencies. I think it easily bests denon d5000 and audioquest Nighthawk in treble quality coming close to the level of Sony mdr-sa5000 .

Mids are the weak point of this otherwise good headphone. Mids have decent clarity but they lack authority. At worst P7 can sound puny.




Conclusion:

It is near impossible to find new units these days(2018) I don't think P7 has the sound worth $399. I think Audeze Sine is only portable headphone with sound to match such price.

Luckily P7 wireless version had the same mrsp so used wired versions have been pretty cheap on eBay. $150 for a good condition P7 is a bargain especially if your favorite music is more bass than midrange driven. For allrounder portable I prefer kef m500 over P7 because of kef's better mids.

I've been a fan of brainwavz headphones for a long time. To be more precise I'm a fan of yoga, a taiwanese manufacturer who makes the headphones for brainwavz. Previous yoga/brainwavz headphones have been great performers in the budget category. When I heard hm100 was about to be released I was very eager to hear what they had achieved.



Build quality & accessories.

Hm5 is known for providing nice set of accessories and hm100 is no different. They come with two cables and extra set of velour earpads. Included carry case has been upgraded to a hard case. Shorter cable is similar to the hm5 cable and longer one is a beefy cloth covered one that has a certain high end feel to it.


For a $199 headphones these look really nice. Even though wood is more common material in headphones then it was five years ago it still is mostly seen in expensive headphones. In combination with beyerdynamic style metal headband these look exactly like how I like my headphones.

These are pretty big headphones, alot bigger than hm5. Here are dissasembled cups for comparison.


Amphiteather design. Similar Fischer audio uses on their upgrade cups for fa003.

Unfortunately craftmanship is not equal to materials used. Wood around the metal ring is poorly cut and the ring itself is not properly brushed. Finishing on the metal hinges is average at best. It's not like one could get a cut but it's not good either.

Biggest problem is how loose the headband sliders are. I need to put the headphones on my head before adjusting them to a final position. First I thought I just got a bad pair but it appears I'm not only one with this problem.

Earpads are also a disappointment. Brainwavz is known for their great earpads but hm100 pads are not one of those. Compared to old hm5 (jaycar version of the same headphone), hm100 pads have different foam. It does not act like memory foam at all. Pleather feels more plasticky and less premium. The attaching part is thinner and I doubt these could take extensive stretching original hm5 pads can.



Comfort

People who could not take firm clamp of original hm5 will be happy to hear hm100 does not clamp as hard. There is still fair bit of clamping and pressure around ears is not perfectly divided. Headband also has more padding. Like I said pads have been downgraded but they're still comfortable. Hm100 is not uncomfortable headphone to wear but it definately does not disappear on your head either.

Sound

First thing that many people will notice is these are a lot brighter than hm5. There has been a debate if newer hm5's and other rebrands are brighter than old ones but old ones are definately bit on the dark side. Old hm5 is not just dark but does mask a lot off what is going on in the higher frequencies. Hm100 fixes all that. Hm100 sounds extremely detailed. Maybe more than anything I've heard in this price range.

Midrange does sounds quite even.. These sound bit thin maybe and lack some meat around the bones partly because of slightly elevated upper mids and treble. These don't send shivers down my spine but are captivating enough to keep listening.

Bass is bit disappointing. I's hard to describe what is it that I don't like about it but is just don't feel right. It does not go very deep which is not a deal breaker it's just unimpressive in general. Bass lacks punch and sounds too soft, fluffy. Quantity is there but it just does not KICK.

Soundstage deserves an extra mention. These have a very big soundstage. Among the best I've heard amongst closed headphones. Slow paced dire straits songs with guitar far on the horizon sound amazing. Same goes for most peacefull acoustic music.

Take my measurements with a heavy grain of salt. I'm still figuring out things. But I do feel the graph does pretty well show tonal differences between hm5 and hm100.

All in all these would not be bad headphones but these have one more fault that pretty much ruins everything. These are only good for low volume listening. When volume increases hm100 becomes sibilant quite fast. To make it worse these start to distort. It's not rattling bass one would expect but it is there on every frequency. Either it is qc problem or hm100 is just a flawed headphone.


Conclusion

With large soundstage and ability retrieve small details these had a lot off potential. Sadly with iffy build quality, disappointing bass performance and sibilance at louder volumes, these fall short of the competition.

1. Edit: Since the price of S4 is currently only 289€ I've updated the rating from 4.5 to 5. I also added proper fr measurement I did and added some comments about the perceived neutrality as measurements don't look neutral.
2. 
   
3. Olloaudio is a new headphone manufacturer from Slovenia. Product that sets them apart from others is their BSE(body sound experience) system that is a tactile subwoofer pillow which helps the user to feel the bass instead of just hearing it. However now I'll be focusing only on their hps s4 headphones. These headphones were received from ollo via their endorsement program. I got a 50% discount for publishing my honest opinion on the headphones and I will receive no further compensation.
4. 
   Introduction
   
   Ollo Audio HPS S4 headphones
   
   
   Price: 349e
   Speaker size: 50mm open back design
   Frequency range: 20-22kHz flat response design
   SPL: 112dB hearing threshold
   Impedance: 32ohm
   Ear cups outer diameter: 86mm
   Ear cups inner diameter: 70mm
   Ear cups material: Walnut
   Headband material: Stainless steel and Italian leather
   Ear pads size: 90mm
   Ear pads material: Acoustic foam, extra elasticity artificial leather
   Cable termination: detachable 2m long Y 2.5mm mini jack
   Connector: 3.5mm jack with adapter to 6.3mm jack
   Servicable: Every part of HPS S4 is replacable with home tools
   
   Gear used in this review:
   
   Hegel hd10
   SPL phonitor
   Topping NX1
   Audioquest dragonfly black v 1.5
   My diy PC
   OnePlus 6
   
   Music of various genres with Spotify premium or flac from pc. Pretty much everything from dimmu borgir to paw patrol theme song.
   
   
   After receiving the headphones allmost two months ago I've been using them as my main headphones. It took me a long long time to get a proper impression because before ollo's I had been using mostly sennheiser hd800, Grado sr325i and akg k701. All known to be bright headphones. Ollos have more of a darker tone so it was quite a change.
   
   Before talking more about ollo's tonality, lets take a look at the headphones.
   
   Build quality:
   
   There is no way around it. These are exceptionally well built headphones. Everything except the pads is made of wood, metal or genuine leather. Housings are handcrafted walnut. They're not polished or treated to shine. Headband arch is stainless steel, back of the housing is made of aluminium and so is the baffle/driver cover. Headband is italian leather and earpads are some sorth of fake leather with microsuede like texture. I like the the looks. It is fancy enough but also looks like a robust studio equipment. Something that is ment to be worn and used instead of just being gazed upon.
   
   
   
   
   What I particularly like is the cup design. Instead of rings made of wood Ollo's uses a solid piece of wood in which the driver is installed. There is no seperate mounting baffle for the driver and wood part is not just a ring. I think this design will add to durability a lot. Wooden rings are known to break when the wood dries too much. I think that will never be an issue with this design. In the picture below you can see how the headphones are built and how the driver is inserted. The black ”baffle” on top of the driver is aluminium.
   
   
   
   
   
   The headband is quite normal self adjusting headband. Similar to the likes of used in many AKG headphones for example. The shape looks weird in pictures but it is soft and adjusts to my head perfectly. Only thing I can fault the headband is that they have a small area underneath the band that is sown together.
   
   
   
   I thought the stitch was there because the headband leather had a hole in it but according to Ollo that is how they fix the elastic inside. It does not look good but of course nobody can see it underneath there. It is a small thing but I hope they come up with a better design in the future.
   
   Headband arch is made of steel. It has a durable feeling to it and I don't think I could break it even if I tried. Bad thing is that the arch is highly microphonic. Microphonic is kind of an understatement...if you plug the arch while it is on your head you get ringing that lasts for 15 seconds! Not that it would affect anything on a normal listening but on principle alone one would like the housing and the headband to be silent and free of possible side noises. I asked Ollo about the headband and according to them the headband does not affect the sound quality. They had actually done measurements about it so propably I'm worried over nothing.
   
   Cool thing about the headband arch is you can hang them everywhere. Smallest headphone holder ever:
   
   
   
   
   Pads look a bit cheap in contrast to other parts. They're made of artificial leather but the material is nothing like traditional pleather you get on most headphones. To me the pads feel more like microsuede than leather. I'll talk more about the pads later.
   
   One thing worth nothing is that as stock S4's come with red fabric cover that is there to tame the highs. Nice and easy way to tune the headphones.
   
   
   
   
   Headphones have a dual entry Y-split 2.5mm connections with 3.5mm connector at the end.
   
   Dual 2.5mm is a smart move. Getting replacement cables is easy since sennheiser hd700, oppo, velodyne, denon, audioquest etc use the same connectors. It seems to me it has become a industry standard over 3.5mm dual connectors. Cable itself is very basic. Nothing fancy. Metal plugs with vowen plastic cover on cable and rubber after the split. You can get one for 20 bucks on ebay. But it works and I'm glad cost of headphones comes from other things than from a fancy cable.
   
   All in all these are exceptionally well crafted headphones. Pads are not fancy and headband arch resonates sound but besides that these are one of the best built headphones I've seen regardless of price range. It's a nice mixture of luxury materials with a design suited for professional use. Rugged but beautifull.
   
   Comfort
   
   The self adjusting headband is propably the most comfortable I've ever encountered. Not that there is anything particularly wrong with the designs used by hifiman, akg or audio-technica but in my opinion Ollo is a step above. The headband looks weird when not worn but because it is so soft and bendy it perfectly adjusts to ones head shape. There is zero pressure on the top of the head.
   
   
   
   Clamping force is mediocre or slightly loose. I have a medium small- medium sized male head. That is no measurement, but you get what I mean. I would personally prefer a tighter fit. These don't fall off when doing some basic home choirs but If I tilt my head fast these might fall off. Luckily steel design allows users to bend the headband to their preferred grip.
   
   The earpads are where the problems begin. Like I mentioned before I don't really feel that earpads are on par with other design look wise. Unfortunately they're not that comfortable either. For my somewhat pointy average sized ears these are quite good but after 30 minutes or so I have to adjust them. People with larger ears will have bigger problems with these. These are no way on-ears but one might have to tuck the ears in a bit which is not ideal for comfor nor for the sound quality.
   
   I contacted OLLO and asked why they went with seemingly subparr earpads. They said they tested 20-30 earpads and these were the only ones that sound good enough. I believe that. I tried bunch of other pads. All velour pads are a no go definately. HM5 pleather pads sounded decent, other pleather pads collapsed soundstage or otherwise affect sound in negative way.
   
   The pads are not absolutely horrid but at $400 standards are quite high. However some of the competition does even worse. Onkyo a800b is less comfortable and one rarely mentions comfort and grado foam pads in a same sentence. In a way I even find Sennheiser hd800 to be less comfortable than Ollo's. Hd800 is just so huge that it feels like I have dinner plates on the side of my head.
   
   I hope that in the future ollo figures out how to maintain the soundquality and introduce headphones with more comfortable pads.
   
   
   Sound
5. Update: Here is a fr measurement with ollo and audioquest nighthawk carbon in same picture. I chose nighthawks because remarkable tonal resemblance.

It is obvious that S4 has elevated bass and as such not that neutral. Nighthawks have this overly thick sound and lower midrange gets affected by bass. This is not the case with S4's. Ollo's have more upper midrange presence which adds to clarity alot.

According to ollo these were designed to be ”neutral and brutally honest”. According to Ollo hd650 is closest tonally to shp s4 than any other headphone but sennheisers have slightly brighter treble. I think people who like audioquest headphones might also appreciate the ollo sound.

That pretty much describes the soundsignature. To my ears OLLO's are very natural sounding headphones with hefty midbass and somewhat dark tone. There is never any sibilance.

I can't help to feel I could use a bit more energy at top. It is all there but I'd just like more sparkle and air up top. On occasion these feel kind of closed in. On the other hand I never feel that way when listening very good quality recordings. Usually unforgiving headphones are the brighter ones. Ollo's have a fresh perspective on that. For example meat loaf: bat out of hell, is far from being an audiophile approved masterpiece. I'ts a muddy album with boosted highs. Bright headphones make it sound lively but ollos just reveal the bad quality underneath. With S4's highs are more in line with the rest of the sound spectrum revealing how bad it is all done. Meat Loaf is just one example. These completely ruin a lot off my favorite music... Old Iron Maiden etc. And that is a good thing for a headphones designed for studio use. Not so good thing for using these headphones for sheer music enjoyment.

Soundstage is mediocre in size but it is very proportionate. Everything is imaged very well in space. Many headphones have excess width with lacking debth making them sound unnatural. OLLO's have very well defines soundstage allbeit a bit small. Since these were designed for studio use I think this kind of presentation comes in handy when switching from monitors to headphones. The superstereo effect is one of the major downfalls on headphones and it makes sense to have it minimized on a headphone like this even if it has it's drawbacks. Unfortunately these are not resolving enough for good vertical positioning. I must say though that in my experience no headphones are in this price range.

Sonically S4's biggest downfall is the bass. On one hand it is linear and well extended. Very well extended for an open back dynamic headphone. It does not have the "grip" planar's have but for a mid priced dynamic headphone it is very impressive. Unfortunately there are time I feel bass becomes a bit blurry and honky. I think it is just some particular frequency that triggers the effect because it does not seem to happen with any particular genre of music nor is it dependent on how bassy or fast the music is. It is by no means an persistent issue, just something that happens every once in a while and I found it bothering.

Without something to compare headphones with, it is just all words without substance. So I compared Ollo's to some of the open headphones I have at the moment.Ollo S4 vs Onkyo a800

Well regarded and similarly priced onkyo's are a good headphones to compare. Both are open back and easy to drive 32ohm dynamic headphones. Onkyo's are considered by many to be an upgraded version of well known Philips Fidelio X2. Both headphones are made by Gibson so it does make sense. Onkyos are a very nice headphones indeed. However I can't help to feel that compared to Ollo's Onkyo's have somewhat distant sound. I don't mean a large soundstage with back row presentation but something that is just a bit unnatural with a800. It is kind of like sound is coming from a tunnel.

Bass performance on both headphones is very good for open headphones but I think Ollo's are still step ahead here. On the subbass region Onkyo's start dropping quite drastically as Ollo's just keep on going.
Onkyo's are not bright headphones but they definately have more treble presence than ollo's. I find onkyo's sound a bit unrefined up top compared to ollo's.

For someone looking for neutral but with fun treble tilt Onkyo is a better choice but if one prefers more natural midrange and linear bass Ollo's are obviously better headphones.

Ollo S4's vs AKG K701

K701 can be had for 150€ these days and along with hifiman he400i I think it is propably the best bargain one can get these days. AKG's sound cleaner on midrange compared to Ollo's but they lack the natural heft Ollo's have. Particularly piano music is a lot more impressive on Ollo's. Ollo's can't match the huge soundstage of AKG's nor the detail retrival qualities. K701 is known for lacking bass and it is obvious that Ollo's have hands down better bass performance. Ollo's also sound more natural on highs, K701 tends to be bit grainy at times. I think Ollo's are step above K701 but considering the low price of K701 it depends on ones preferences if Ollo's are worth the extra money.

Ollo s4's vs Beyerdynamic DT880 (2003)

Considered by some to be one of the finest headphones beyerdynamic has ever produced, old 2003 version of classic dt880 is not a headphone to be neglected. It is indeed a fine headphone offering a larger soundstage than Ollo's. Beyerdynamic has a clean, clear sound and Ollo's do sound quite murky in comparison. It is quite the same as with akg 701. It is also same in a way how Ollo easily outperforms beyerdynamic in the bass department like it did with AKG's. Same goes for the midrange. Ollo's have mids that integrate to highs so well that headphones like k701 and dt880 sound kind of like two way hybrids with bad crossover implementation. Then again we have the price issue and I must say these old dt880's are no slouch when that is taken in consideration. However it is clear that Ollo s4's is the better of the two.

Ollo S4 vs Grado sr325i (gold 50th anniversary edition)

I'm quite of a fan of these Grado's. I've had some experience with their headphones and I don't think this old sr325i is much worse than RS2e I had couple of years ago. I never had the change to compare the two side by side but that is just the feeling I have, so take it with a grain of salt.

Anyway... Grados are a formidable opponent to Ollo. Grados have very fun punchy bass, it is not as well extended as Ollo's but it is more fun. Also the bass on grados never gets honky like I've mentioned is the case with Ollo. 10 point's for grado!

Both have exceptionally beautifull midrange. Presentation is different but both sound just great. Compared to akg and beyerdynamic, Grados sound more beefy, robust. Very similar to Ollo's in that regard.

Sr325i's are often regarded as brightest off all grados. It makes them fun, in a way. However if one tries to be objective it must be said that highs on sr325i's are way over the top, ridiculous even. It is all fun, cool and exciting until you listen to Metallica: carage inc or something similar.

Because of the excessive highs Grado's sound airy but they can't really match the soundstage of Ollo's. Width is about the same but grados have little to none soundstage debth.
So yeah... Obviously Ollo's are the better of the two.

Ollo S4's vs Sennheiser HD800

This comparison does not make much sense because of the price difference but since all the headphones above were cheaper why not compare Ollo's to a more expensive one.

It is obvious that hd800 is a step or two above ollos. HD800 sounds so clear and effortless that Ollo's can't match that. Ollo's have an edge in overall tonality. HD800 is in a sense faulty headphone with it's treble peaks etc. Ollo's are more consistent and...well, "neutral". Ollo's also have better bass extension. Comparing these two would be like comparing hd650 and hd800 so I won't go any further.

Conclusion:

Ollo S4's are headphones with exceptional build quality with some comfort issues. Similar sound quality might be available for less $ but without the materials and craftmanship that is invested in these headphones. Ollo's have become a valuable reference headphones for me and I understand why many professionals love them.