iFi audio nano iDSD Black Label

First of all, I need to apologize to all because I am not a headphone person, I have very budget headphones which I use only out of nessecity and my review will appear so poor in comparison with so many experts in this forum. I am posting in this forum simply because it is required as part of the loan review process. However, I will do the review in an informal way from the point of view of simple consumer that offers an honest opinion in order to help other consumers at his level to choose a product and I hope some of you will find this review somewhat useful. More importantly, I hope I will provide useful consumer feedback to Ifi audio to design new products that fullfil some additional requirements of a silent budget audiophile minority (or maybe a majority...)

To start with, my biggest concern regarding this device is the battery life. I thought that I had a default product since in any of my listening sessions I did not exceeded 2 hours of continuous listening. On my conserns Ifi responded with the following message :


'10 hours playback is possible but on low volume / headphone etc.
Charging time is around 3 hours'

It is true that I was listening on high volume because i liked the combination of using IEMatch and raising the volume a lot (without IEmatch the volume is so loud in lower settings) but I got this response after I returned the unit so simply I do not know if that is the case.
However, 2 hours battery life is a bit of deal breaker for me but I am not sure if this is the result of faulty unit or let's say an "illegitimate" usage from me.

Someone can avoid using the battery for instance if using a desktop or laptop or Network adapter like the raspberry pi or the USBridge. However, you need the battery for a connection with an ios device like the iPad or iPhone and although is not strictly required for practical reasons with an android device too.

I am an extremely happy owner of the ifi ione DAC so in my case I was interested in the mobile abilities of the nano Black. In my home set up the ione DAC is simply a dream so I would only consider to buy the nano for mobile use with my android phone or the iPad trying to reproduce the situation I experience in home for which I will discuss more thoroughly later.

The headphones I used in my testing are the following:

1) AKG Y50 50£
2) soundmagic e10c 40£
3) sennheiser hd 202 25£

All of them I consider them very good for the price but clearly belong in the super budget category and probably they do not do any justice to the quality/power of nano. However, the nano is a relatively affordable dac so this may make sense as well. If I had 1000£ headphone I would consider a lot more expensive dac/amplifiers and not even blink to buy the mojo, maybe the Hugo as well.

To my view the rivals to ifi nano Black are the mojo (because is so hyped and roughly the same footprint) and the audioquest dragonflys third generation.

Both Dragonflys, red or black, have the perfect footprint for me for mobile use and I would definitely have bought one over the two if I had an iPhone instead of my android phone. As it is widely known from forums the android system is not compatible with these DACs and you need the UAPP in order to enjoy the full benefit of these DACs. Unfortunately, it seems that this is the case for the Nano black. Is working great with UAPP but not so well outside the app. I heard some clicks and pops from time to time and although in the beginning I thought is the otg cable responsible now i believe is the android system so screwed for proper usb audio without an appropriate app. Recently, I discovered that I have problems with using my dragonfly even with my UAPP so I couldn't do a comparison between dragonfly and nano on my phone. I can't use it in my iOS devices because v1.2 takes so much power so I did a direct comparison only with my surface book where the nano black smoked in sound quality the dragonfly v1.2. (although to be completely honest the dragonfly was not used for much time at this point) but since I had done similar comparisons in the past between ione and dragonfly I call it a day after a few minutes of comparison. Which brings to my first observation, that in a desktop/laptop situation the nano black is so much better and easily justifies its lager footprint. Usually, in a laptop situation I use the tidal desktop app which I find very powerful with the exclusive mode and the MQA Decoding functionality. After updating the nano firmware the MQA in the latest firmware version the rendering could be used providing a noticeable improvement in MQA tidal master songs. I believe this is the strongest point of the nano black. In a desktop/laptop situation with MQA where it really thrives and has the biggest delta with a non MQA dac. It would be interesting to compare with the red version in an MQA setting but that was not possible in my case.

Because in my home set up ione was so much an improvement and better definitely than any of my previous DACs I am always wishing ifi to bring at least some portion of this sound quality to a dragonfly like form. For people like me with budget headphones that do not require a lot of power convenience is of ultimate importance. Another alternative, is to utilize the nano form factor with the Bluetooth functionality of ione. I am not fun of Bluetooth in home even in the best version available which is the ione implementation. Using usbridge or even raspberry pi provides so much more quality after paying the introductory price(in time) of setting up a system like that.

But on the road where the ambient noise plays an important role and where compromises can be made this can be excellent solution. Even in the nano form you can have nano in one pocket phone in the other and go even in the gym.

On the iPad, nano is good as well but the tidal app does not utilise fully the abilities of this dac. The blue cable provided in the box has excellent sound quality but behaves as a diva. With my iPad most of the times did not work. When it works is very good but only when it works. Maybe loves usb 3 ports more. I have similar experience with the blue usb supplied with my ione.

I used the nano also in my home set up where I did not spend a lot of comparison time between this and the usb input of ione. I took as a given that they sound very similar and this is also confirmed by a brief observation more or less. So I am taking the liberty to comment on the sound quality of the nano dac from my previous experience from the ione and combine my experiences.

My home set up consists of a marantz 6005 pm amplifier (300£) and a tannoy DC6T speakers that I got on offer for 250£ and voted best speakers for few years in the 800-1500£ category by the what hifi magazine. A very budget system again with some potential. However, before using the ifi dac or the ipurifier I was somewhat in disbelief for the ability of these speakers. I thought that maybe the amp was not able to realise the full potential or simply they were overestimated. I had also the belief that all budget DACs sound more or less the same so no further music satisfaction could be achieved until I upgrade my system considerably. That was before ifi arrived in town. First with the ipurifier and then with ione. Immediately, the improvement was substantial the amp and the speakers made an unbelievable combination that defied their price. Further tweaks, like a tube preamplifier, good RCA cables and the USBridge elevated the sound even further. If my speakers on 250£ pounds deserve every single penny the same is true for the ifi products. The ifi DACs transform the sound in two ways. One is through their ipurifier technology and the other through the DAC section.

The sound signature of this dac I believe depends very much on the synergy. In my home set up with the warm marantz, the tube preamplifier section and my RCA cables the sound is warm, dynamic, transparent powerful and full of energy. Another way to put it is that the sound transformed to the equivalent sound of a hifi system that is one price category above without being fatiguing so you can listen for many hours.

However, the ifi dac alone in a different system or the black alone with my headphones had a different behaviour and someone could say that it has neither excess warmness nor brightness. This is a positive for me, because it can be manipulated according to tastes. As such, I was getting more pleasure from my home set up rather than using the nano black with my laptop. Another observation, is that the nano black played better with the power supply taken from an ifi ipower through a usbridge and jitterbug than its internal power from its battery.

This brings me to the following conclusions.

1) An excellent DAC in absolute levels however you need to read other reviews (as I will do) for a comparison with the biggest rivals such as mojo and dragonfly red.

2) Not very transportable. I prefer/need so much more the small factor of dragonfly. Alternatively, it needs the Bluetooth functionality to be truly convenient. If IFI manages to do that can make a budget Poly/Mojo killer with the nano form factor.

3) For home set up I definitely prefer ione. It has the same sound quality and offers so much more functionality. The spdif implementation is from another planet and elevates the TV system to extraordinary levels.

4) The battery for me is the big question. Nobody complained so far so maybe is my unit or I was doing something wrong. But 2 hours is two little this is an issue for me. The point is that it sounds so good that you want to raise the volume, if that deplates the battery excessively what is the point then?

5) It would be nice to have MQA Decoding functionality as well. With UAPP you can have tidal with mobile devices and with Kodi/tidal 2 add on in home without a PC.

6) The sound signature of IFI I believe is one of the best in the market and the one I clearly prefer. Please package this in more devices of different forms.

7) The volume knob is a big plus for me and the strongest advantage against dacs like the mojo. For me it feels like the throttle in a bike. You give more when you need or want and the feeling is amazing. Maybe this is why I had two hours of battery only in my listening sessions. Ifi please NEVER remove the knob from your devices when needed.

Probably, I will not buy this device simply because it does not cover my mobile needs but if it covers your requirements then I really recommend this product. I do not know if it is the best dac under 500£ and how compares with all its rivals but I know that: it sounds really really good in order to write a review 4 hours before new year Eve!

Happy new year everyone!

Review - iFi Nano iDSD BL (4.5 stars is my actual rating, that didn't seem to be an option when submitting)

Hello HF -

Full disclosure - iFi supplied the unit free of charge for a review period of apx. 7 days. This is a completely unbiased review and iFi was very clear that they wanted honest and unbiased review.

Before starting I want to note when I reference a “unit” I mean the unit being reviewed - “iFi Nano,,,”. I also call it the Nano and iFi. If I am talking about something that isn’t the iFi I call it by name. iFi - please simplify the naming conventions? We are getting into BMW/Mercedes levels of silly model names.

Intro -

To start - I plan to write this focused on the “feeling” of using the equipment, as opposed to technical listening type info. There are many more qualified than I, and many in general, who can and will write about specifics of frequency response, strong/weak points of sound reproductions, etc. I plan to review this based much more on the “feeling” of the sound relative to what I know and other equipment. As such, I should give a little summary of the W/H’s of how I listen so you can get a basis for your listening habits v mine.


I listen to classic/modern/indie/alt rock and then pop music the most. Withing that, the vast majority is rock music. No modern/radio country really. Not much classical. Some jazz. I prefer a little bias of the highs and lows, a “jazz/r&b” sig if you will, scooped mids some extra bass but close to neutral. My favorite headphones are my HD-650s and my Pinnacle P1s. I also love my Etymotic HF5’s. I have Grado Sr80s and also loved my (recently sold) Fidelio X1s. I also like my Monk +’s and my UE6000s. My normal equipment includes a Ray Samuels Audio (RSA) The Predator portable DAC/Amp, and a Schiit Magni 2 amp for home/wired use. I also have my LG V30, which is fantastic.


I like warm sound. I really appreciate separation and soundstage.


To me - “mid-fi” means pieces of equipment in about the $300-500 range. I apply that same descriptor to headphones / amps / DACs.


First Impressions / Unboxing -


Sturdy, quality build, compact packaging. Everything fits tight (very tight).

The build quality on the unit feels great right off the bat. Its light but the casing feels very sturdy in the hand. It turns on with a satisfying “click” on the volume and my first time plugging into the unit (¼” cable to 650s, USB out from my laptop) the ports felt very sturdy. The only input is a USB connection, the unit has a USB-A male plug. This will turn out to be a very frustrating aspect of getting going.


Hours into the session, I want to get up and get a snack and clean up. Normally I would throw my kit into my pockets and walk around like a weirdo with cables hanging off of me into my pants. Unfortunately I can’t do that here with what I got out of the box - reminding me again of frustration instead of the super pleasant listening experience.


My job has trained me to offer at least some solution when discussing a problem, thus - what would I like to see included. Why are we using a male USB-A? Regardless, if you use this as your ONLY input - include a female to male A adapter. I would like to see at the least an option to get going with a USB micro, even that would be way late to the party. I can’t imagine the reason for not making this with a USB-C input and probably a USB C. It’s 2018, USB-C is here to stay, and offers so many perks over older USB types.

Offer a little upcharge to get lightning if its a money thing, USB-C shouldn’t be a barrier in 2018. Get this stuff in the box - nobody buying this will blink at a $10 increase in cost to get cabling that is actually useful. Also, if I don’t have the cable/adaptor to get this going you’ve messed up! I have cables on cables on cables and adaptors on adaptors on cables on cable(y) adaptors. I know that sounds silly, but I rarely can’t come up with some cable or cable combo to get what I need in a pinch. In addition to “audiophile” stuff, I am a musician and have worked in studios - I really have a pretty stupid amount of cables laying around.


Usage - initial thoughts


I quickly noticed the lack of ability to get an analog input to the unit and just check out the amp portion. My regular portable dac/amp (Ray Samuels RSA Predator) has the option to input 3.5mm and just use the amp. I like this option as sometimes I don’t have the necessary digital cable handy, and my new LG V30 is a very capable DAC.Using only the amp also has battery benefits over running as a DAC/AMP. This could be a specific use-case scenario for this reviewer - but in my experience I would not be the only one having these thoughts.


Sound / Comps -


The sound has very good separation. I notice this right away casually listening as I set up for writing and a focused listening session.


The following is almost a “stream of consciousness” section while I was listening to songs I know well. For readers sake, I edited some afterwards.


I hear birds in the background of Frank Ocean’s “Pink + White”, during the last verse/chorus, that I honestly never noticed before. I had only ever noticed this sound at the very end of the song. The unit makes it sound like they are overhead, just behind me, and a little on my left. I love when equipment allows me to feel like I could close my eyes and point to where the instrument (sound, whatever) is “in the room”.

I get a tight, but large feeling, soundstage using this unit. The sound seems to tighten up my 650s, where some equipment give them a little bit of a “loose” warm feel. I think the attack and decay here is sharper than I normally hear out of the 650s, but still warm and fun.


In Bon Iver’s “For Emma” I can clearly hear the different guitar takes, strumming patterns, stereo separation in the mix. It affords me the ability to generally tell the difference between what is likely Justin using different guitars/mics/recording techniques. It adds to the complexity of the sound (in a good, even great, way). To a “lay” user, I think they would hear this as incredibly detailed and pleasing. To me it is also very pleasing, but I hear every little up/down strum flourish very well. Did I mention I love the separation and soundstage on this unit? Because I do.


Switching back to my V30 only (same file) the sound is equally clear, possibly a little more neutral. The separation is good, but the soundstage is closer together. As the instruments comes together it still sounds great, but there is less directional definition and I also hear a less detail in things like the up/down strum pattern and multiple guitar takes mixed together. I do prefer the listening on the iFi. Both very quality, but a warmer and bigger sound on the iFi. To me, that's a great quality.


On “All Night” - Bey’s vocals sound just about equal across the V30 to iFi. I will say that, again, the soundstage is better on the iFi - Bey sounds like she is “in front” of the band moreso with the unit than just off the v30. I enjoy the song quite a bit, it seems to really “hit” where pop music ashould. To me this dac/amp has wide appeal for how it handles sound.


Compared to the V30 and Schiit combo - I think the iFi is actually more fun. The bass sounds to me like it’s “jumping” around more - like its more live and present than the song via the phone/schiit. The bass is a little flatter and less lively, its separated less, and the vocals get lost in the mids more with the v30/schiit combo than in the iFi to 650 combo.


Switching over to my most used IEM’s, MeeAudio Pinnacle P1s, I still get a great soundstage with QOTSA’s “Like Clockwork” sounding wide and deep. The vocal on this track sounds excellent - this amp really allows a vocal track to shine, reproducing Homme’s raspy croon as well as anything I have used.


Listening to Julien Bakers “Shadowboxing” again shows off the excellent mid-range on the Nano. With the bassy electric having full separation from her breathy and powerful vocal you can really appreciate the quality of the simple production on the album - you could be listening on IEMs or hearing the song at your favorite sounding venue. There is very much a “live sound” presence the Nano brings to the table - very accurate but not the clinical sound that is sometimes a product of focusing on neutral and accurate sound reproduction.


Compared to the same listening on my Predator, the iDSD is less warm, equally detailed and with a more pleasing soundstage to my ears. This dac/amp really rewards quality recordings, it seems more than happy to allow the listener to hear and appreciate every nuance of a song. I hear this the most on a recording like Daft Punk’s “Game of Love” - where subtle background synth lines are very present and small percussion accents very easy to hear.


Where I find the first (sound) shortcoming of this amp is when I dig into my hip-hop/rap collection. I listen to a good bit of music in this genre, but its production values frequently don’t play nice with audiophile gear, which I suppose is part of the reason anyone buys Beats. I do not get a lively, bassy feel at all. The bass is actually quiet and seems generally pushed towards the back of the mix, leaving the mids hanging out to dry. Compared to rap through my Predator, and even the V30 alone, this sound is flat and boring.It does not inspire me to want to get up and dance, just to take a review break and get my bass/dance/party fix quickly on a different setup.


On Tool’s “The Pot” the excellent soundstage in on full display again. It’s like the band is playing in a circle around my head. It sounds great! - percussion is crystal clear, bass is heavy and accurate, vocals show Maynard’s range and authenticity, and and Jones’ guitar is beautiful.


Listening to Bon Iver’s “22, A Million”, I am reminded of the respect paid to great production by this unit. If an artist wanted you to hear a guitar noodle, in the background, clearly overshadowed by a vocal flourish after - you will hear it just like that. For me, one of the greatest parts of accurate audio reproduction isn’t the pomp and circumstance of a totally unbiased, neutral sound, but hearing what your (__enter artist of choice__) wanted you to hear. To understate it to the extreme, a multitude of people, from the artist to the series of engineers, all work very hard to get a specific sound to you. To me, it’s seeing a Van Gogh in person vs seeing an excellent print. If possible, I want the original, all day every day. With audio, I can have (very nearly) that. The Nano 100% moves you towards that goal.


My current most used setup at home is my phone (LG V30) into my Schiit Magni 2, to my 650s. I’ve really enjoyed this setup a lot. The same songs, computer to Nano, to 650s, sound so much more full and warm through the latter. Turned to what I’d appxmate as 60%, the Nano drives the crap out of y 650s - in the best possible way.


I have, and I’m sure will, loved the Magni 2. Schiit is a great company in the scheme of mid/hi end audio. On this front, I’d take the sound out of the Nano hands down. I didn’t find tracks to deter me from that position despite trying to (in audio, the negative is easier to prove than the positive). I get a ton of clarity and beauty from the V30/Schiit, but the warmth and separation I get from the Nano is far better. By no means take this as a deterrent from picking up either of those pieces of kit, but if the choice involves the Nano v those options/something similar - get the nano. It is great. I really, really, love the sound from this unit.





Listening options -


Plugging the unit into my laptop (older Yoga Pro) it was picked up immediately and I had no issues getting music going pretty much right away. There is plenty of headroom here using my 650s. I am ½ volume, “Direct” out, and these cans are bumping. I’ve spent countless hours on these cans and have a good feel for when they are really being driven, pushed a little but in the sweet spot. The iFi delivers here in spades. It really drives these, plenty of room to spare, and I feel like this matchup is an especially good one. We’ll see as I move on to other options.


Battery -


I am not the first in the review chain, and the unit was sent with a full charge. The holidays meant I had a little less time with the unit than I qould have liked. The battery seemed well above average.


Features -


IE Match / Direct - I have read up on the IE Match feature, from iFi and also some user generated info, and I am still not sure this is as important a feature as it is made out to be. I may not have quite the diversity of headphone/impedance types to really benefit. What I can speak to is what I perceive as a difference in the sound. There is a level difference between them, where I needed to turn up the volume to get to the same listening level output while using IE Match.


After matching listening levels, using the IEMatch sounds, to me, almost like dropping the blanket over the music. I hear a little less crispness using IE Match, and it does also seem to temper some of the more harsh highs. The ladder is especially noticeable when listening to something like Kanye’s “Jesus Walks” and in general more noticeable on radio pop type songs. I also hear some muddling of the L/R separation that I enjoy so much from the Nanos other output. I detect a narrowing of the soundstage, with the music feeling more like it's being played AT me instead of WITH me. Its less immersive and I feel less engaged.


Overall, I preferred the sound from the “Direct” output and used that much more during my time with the Nano. Again, I might be a specific use case situation where this feature isn’t very beneficial - but I also don’t fully understand what this feature adds overall.


Final thoughts -

I would buy this unit. In fact, I might buy this unit. I live in the “mid-fi” space (a hilarious name for a spot where people spend car-payments worth of dough on unnecessary equipment) but this represents a likely upgrade for anyone living at or below that spot. Its very similar to my RSA, but newer, more adaptable, and better prepared for the future. I hate the cabling situation - it's just silly in 2018 - but as an audio nerd I’ll happily research and buy yet more equipment to correct that problem. For the price, I don’t know I would have a better “jack of all trades” rec over this.. If this is in your financial wheelhouse, and you are wanting a versatile and portable option, buy it.


TL;DR version -


Pros -

• great soundstage and separation
  • Vocals are excellent!
• Compatibility with all current hi-res file types
  
  
• Build quality and feature set
  
  
• Looks (its good lookin’ !)
  
  
• Price

Cons -

• The digital input, cable situation! (an easy fix, please fix it??)
  
  
• Inability to use it w/o DAC

My hand shot-up when I saw that iFi had arranged a global head-fi tour of their new addition to their range of bewilderingly-named (seriously, keeping-up with which acronym is which is tough…) small headphone DAC/amp combos – the iFi Nano iDSD Black Label. There’s been nothing but praise for the Micro - the, err, slightly “less small” portable DAC/amp from iFi that’s been swaying would-be Chord Mojo users, and blowing people away with its head-melting ability to pump a whole four watts into 16 ohms, plus super-talented DAC that can handle just about any file type thrown its way. For me, the Micro was not quite ‘micro’ enough for me to want to comfortably stack on-the-go, and perhaps slightly more than I wanted to spend at the time.



But at $200, the Nano BL is a pretty appealing proposition on paper alone:



Features/Specifications:

General
Input(rear): USB2.0 type A “OTG” Socket (with iPurifier® technology built-in)
Output(rear)； 1 x Audio fixed line out L+R 3.5mm
Digital Filter: 2 positions, 2 filters
Outputs(front): 2 x Headphone Audio 3.5mm one direct and one with iFi iEMatch® integrated

DAC
DAC: DSD, DXD, PCM DAC by Burr Brown Bit-Perfect DSD processing, Bit-Perfect DXD processing
Clock: Low-jitter crystal clock
Audio Formats: DSD 256/128/64/12.4/11.2/6.2/5.6/3.1/2.8
DXD 384/352.8kHz
PCM 384/352.8/192/176.4/96/88.2/48/44.1kHz
MQA 88.2/96/176.4/192kHz filters
Filter–PCM: Listen(transient optimised minimum phase)
Measure(frequency response optmised)
–DSD: Listen(extended bandwidth transient optimised)
Measure (narrow bandwidth, low output band noise optimised)
–DXD: Fixed Bit-Perfect Processing
–MQA: Fixed MQA Filter

Headphone Amplifier
Amplifier: Dual Mono 2 x 285mW Direct Drive, coupling capacitor free circuit for highest fidelity
Volume Control: 3.5mm TRRS with Balanced compatible wiring
Dynamic Range(including DAC): > 109dB(A) @ 3v (Direct)
> 107dB(A) @ 0.5V (iEMatch®)
THD &N (@ 125mW/30R): < 0.005%
Max. Output (<10% THD): > 3.5V @ 600Ω Load (Direct) (20mW/600Ω)
> 2.9V @ 30Ω Load (Direct) (285mW/30Ω)
> 1.7V @ 15Ω Load (Direct) (200mW/15Ω)
Output Impedance : < = 1Ω (Direct)
< = 4Ω (iEMatchsup>®)
Channel Separation: > 79dB @ 600Ω Load (Direct)
> 79dB @ 15Ω Load (Direct) (1kHz, TRRS plug Balanced wiring)

Line Output
Dynamic Range(Line): > 109dB(A)
THD & N(0dBFS Line): < 0.004%
Output Voltage(Line): : 2.15V (+/-0.05V)
Output Impedance: < 240Ω
Channel Separation: > 99dB (@ 1kHz)
Jitter(correlated): Below test set limit

Dimensions
96(l) x 64(w) x 25.5(h)mm
Weight: 139g (0.31 Ibs)

So, the same DAC-section from its brethren, in a smaller package, at a $200 asking price? Sign me up! I decided that when my week review-time came with the Nano BL, that I was going to look to answer the following questions:

1. POWER? Sure, at 285mW @ 30ohms, it’s no slouch. But how will it handle higher-Z cans being thrown at it?

2. LIVEABILITY? Can this portable-in-mind DAC/amp combo really work in a “stack” on a day-to-day basis? And for those looking for a do-it-all DAC/amp, could this possibly be the only desktop peripheral you’ll ever need?

3. TO MOJO, OR NOT TO MOJO? The size, dimensions and capabilities of the Nano aim it squarely at Chord’s wunderkind. The Nano already has a $379 headstart on the Mojo (currently $579 on amazon). But other things being equal, how does it perform head-to-head?



Presentation and form-factor

It’s a solid-feeling little deck-of-cards-sized metal black box and reassuringly well-built – and perhaps a little lighter than I was expecting. So light, in fact, that when I had it performing desktop duties, the fairly girth-y USB cable supplied with it tended to move it across my desktop and it wouldn’t really want to stay in-place. So it’s nice and portable in terms of footprint, and heft.



On the “front side”, there’s two 3.5mm headphone outputs – ‘IEMatch’; and ‘Direct’. The former is designed for use with high-sensitivity IEMs (as its name suggests…) for “…reduced background noise and matched-gain.”. The latter directs the full output of the Dual Mono 2 x 285mW Direct Drive into regular sensitivity headphones.

Alongside the 2 x headphone outputs is a rather tactile, “proper” volume knob. The knob “clicks” to take care of powering the Nano BL on/off, as well as volume-duties for headphones.

Adorning the front panel is a multi-coloured LED that indicates battery-status, and audio-format playback. Chord Mojo users will sympathise with having to memorise which colour denotes which mode, but it’s fairly straightforward.

Flip-around to the “rear” side, and there’s a 3.5mm Line Output for sending the output from the DAC section to another amplifier/component; a switch to flick between “MEASURE” and “LISTEN” filters; and a rather curious full-sized male USB input to handle both data and charging duties. More on this later.



Ergonomics and real-world ‘liveability’

There’s generally two kinds of on-the-go audiophiles – “Stackers”, and “DAP-pers”. The Nano BL is pitched at the former group, in that it’s designed to easily pair/stack with a source (either a smartphone; DAP; or laptop/PC); to provide better digital decoding, playback, and amplification for headphones, or for use upstream from powered monitors or other two-channel systems. And because of its diminutive form-factor, taking it with you on-the-go is easy. Right?

Mobile use

The first test I had with the Nano BL out of the box was to attach it to my Samsung S7 Edge, playing FLAC files through USB Audio Player Pro. Luckily I was able to ‘plug-and-play’ right away, because I happened to have a USB-A female to USB-micro OTG adapter handy lying around.



Mobile users beware – the Nano BL doesn’t come with a mobile-ready cable. At first I thought this to be a major oversight, but realised that there’s a mix of mobile users out there with either USB-micro; USB-C; or Lightning compatible smartphones. So rather than packing no less than 4 x connections into the box (including the full-sized PC connection included), it’s incumbent on the consumer to grab the one that best fits their set-up. Just make sure you know this beforehand or you could be stuck with an expensive paperweight while waiting on a cable to arrive, or for your next store visit!

Still, the USB-male input is a little confounding, as its recessed connection means that bulkier USB cables won’t necessarily “dock” with it flush, and may not even fit at all.

Anyhow, pairing the Nano BL with the S7 Edge was a breeze, and started playback right away. It’s not exactly a “pocketable” stack – in fact it’s pretty thick when stacked back-to-back, so if you’re out and about you’ll need to hold them (pretty firmly) in the palm of your hand.

iFi rate the battery life for the Nano BL at 10 hours - I never came even close to running it down, so can't really comment on it but have no reason to doubt that it's achievable. On thing I only realised after my time with the Nano BL was up, was that if you switch it on before plugging into USB power, it'll continue to run off battery power. Whereas if you plug it in first and then switch it on, it'll charge/run off USB power.

So yes, it’s “portable” alright, but perhaps “transportable” is a little more accurate – it’s perfect for taking with you; un-packing; and hooking-up with your source in a hotel-room; flight; or café for killer sound wherever you happen to find yourself. Like parked outside with a nice beer and a pair of Meze 99 Classics…for example.



One minor quibble with mobile-use is with regards to that otherwise excellently-tactile volume-knob – it’s easily bumped in bags; crowds; or by just about anything – meaning you can suddenly have a rather-large surge in volume unexpectedly…

Desktop use

I spent most of my time with the Nano BL on my desktop at work, or as a part of my main full-sized set-up at home. The small footprint and easy to use volume control mean it’s great for static use, and (depending on your requirements) it really could be the only DAC/amp you need. When thinking about similarly-priced set-ups such as a Schiit Magni/Modi combination; or an Objective O2 – it really doesn’t lose out in terms of form-factor, and certainly weighs-in a lot smaller.



I spent the majority of desktop use with the Nano BL connected to my 15” Macbook Pro, with either Roon or Tidal (desktop app) as a source. I used it to both power my headphones directly, or to use it up-stream as a standalone DAC sending a line-out signal to my Bottlehead Crack OTL and Schiit Magni 3 amps.



The only thing to note about line-out desktop use in DAC-only mode, is that you won’t be able to control volume from the unit itself as a pre-amp – it’s a fixed signal, and you’ll need to attenuate volume elsewhere. A switchable line-out/pre-out would have been nice, but at $200 you can’t really complain.

Sound quality and performance

I’m not a huge believer in wildly-fluctuating sonic character between DACs, so I’ll only briefly remark that the Nano BL’s DAC sounds expectedly transparent, detailed, and spacious when used in DAC-only mode. It’s highly-capable in that it handles a wide range of formats: PCM (up to 384kHz), DSD (up to 256), and also MQA – which is an interesting selling-point if that sort of thing interests you. I’m not exactly a huge proponent of proprietary formats, and don’t believe there’s any problem that needs solving with FLAC or other open/lossless sources. I did have to give the Nano BL a firmware update in order to be able to play MQA files through the Tidal desktop app, which sounded “great” - but not any different really to PCM, to my ears anyhow. MQA however does reward with a nice magenta glow on the LED on the front-panel.



Using it to power headphones directly, the first thing I threw at the Nano BL were my Grado GR10 IEMs as I was keen to hear the ‘IEMatch’ feature unique to iFi. Unfortunately my review unit seemed to only be sending a signal to one-channel through this output, so the rest of my listening was via the ‘Direct’ output. Fortunately I didn’t experience any hiss/imbalance whatsoever so was happily able to get (otherwise) full use out of the Nano BL before sending it back to the local Australian distributor.



Low-impedance cans sounded predictably excellent, including the aforementioned GR10’s, as well as my Meze 12 Classic IEMs; and moving onto full-sized cans – my Grado GH1s, Beyerdynamic DT1350s, and Meze’s 99 Classics, which I particularly enjoyed for a real (trans)portable treat.

The real test, for me, was to see if the Nano BL was happy to push my harder-to-drive headphones without clipping, struggling, or degrading sound quality. It immediately proved to me that yes, it can – easily. I tested it using my 250ohm Beyerdynamic DT1770s, and my 300ohm ZMF Eikons and Sennheiser HD650s, and it never broke a sweat. I got to unbearably-loud volume on the Senns at just past 12 o’clock. I will say that my Schiit Magni 3 does open up the treble detail and controls bass a little better, but that’s sending a full 430mWPC at 300ohms – I’m not sure of the Nano’s equivalent output at that impedence, but the manual does state that it’s only pushing-out 20mW @ 600ohms.



I switched between the ‘…frequency response optimised’ “MEASURE” and ‘transient optimized minimum phased’ “LISTEN” filters to see how that affected the sound. I was unable to hear any noticeable difference, but your mileage may vary, of course.

As a solid-state amplifier it’s devoid of colouration and provides a clean, neutral window on music. Without beating around the bush, it sounds bloody excellent. Would it struggle with low-sensitivity planars? Probably, but that’s expecting too much from a $200 all-in-one tiny unit.

Nano vs Mojo

They’re both small little black boxes. Both very capable DAC sections. Both capable of easily driving headphones well and stacking with mobile devices.



So what pulls them apart?

‘Wins’ for the Mojo:

- More connectivity options – USB; co-ax; optical
- More power – puts out 720mW @ 8ohms
- 2 x parallel headphone outputs, capable of both full headphone-output and variable line-out duties
- Able to pair with the (somewhat under-baked and controversial) ‘Poly’ streamer/player

‘Wins’ for the Nano BL:

- Proper, tactile volume knob
- IEMatch capability for high-sensitivity IEMs (if it works properly)
- Sends fully-balanced TRRS wiring all the way through to the 3.5mm output
- MQA-capable (although controversial, it’s a trick that the Chord simply can’t do)
- It’s $379 cheaper

That last ‘win’ for the Nano BL is the clincher – if you’re in the market for a small do-it-all DAC/amp, grabbing the iFi device and pocketing the change is a no-brainer, unless you’re:

a) A believer in the bragging-rights (or sonic difference) of the Chord proprietary FPGA DAC
b) In love with the design of the Mojo (who doesn’t love the shiny colourful balls?)
c) Interested in creating an all-in-one ‘MojoPoly’ DAC/Amp/Player/Streamer

Now I happen to be a Mojo owner, as that was the product that best fitted my needs at the time. I also was interested in the Poly at the time, and did indeed end up buying that as well. My experience with life with the MojoPoly is best left for another review, but if I had my time again and was only interested in the DAC/Amp itself, I would likely have saved myself a few hundred bucks and been completely thrilled with the iFi Nano iDSD Black Label (confusing nomenclature and all…).

The form factor is approximately that of a Chord Mojo, the weight is nicely like half as much, the battery is easily better – honestly difficult to make worse then Mojo on that… – and there’s quite some additional perimetral features too, all for less than half of Mojo’s price. How will this compare sound-quality wise?

With this question I approached an ifi nano iDSD BL USB DAC-AMP, and this article is about how it went for me.


Input

nano iDSD BL is a USB DAC-AMP, and more precisely USB is its sole input. No SPDIF digital input option, nor analogue inputs or any kind by that matter (aka: the device can’t be used as a mere amp).

Like all USB DAC-AMPs it can be plugged onto just about any USB-capable source such as a PC a Laptop a phone or a tablet, and it will be “seen” as an audio card. Full Windows 10 support requires a driver, which is freely downloadable from ifi’s site.

Nano iDSD BL’s USB 2.0 digital input connector is quite uncommon: it’s actually a USB A male installed in a recess of the chassis’ back panel. Due to that, the cable to connect to the nano iDSD BL needs to have a Female (!) USB A termination on the device end, in lieu of the usual Male one.

A few USB OTG cables with different terminations are bundled within the package. (Ah by the way… if you don’t know what OTG technically means, read here. You might discover why that otherwise good cable of yours refuses to work with your phone…)

• USB-A Female to USB3.0-A Male, 1m long, usually good to connect to a PC
• USB-A Female to USB-C Male, 15cm long, good to connect to a PC or a phone or other transports
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female, 15cm long
• USB-A Female to USB-B Female adapter (same as above, but no short cable in the middle)

No Apple cable is supplied – Lightning or 30-pin – so that’ll have to be purchased separately if needed. Neither is a micro-USB adapter (or cable) supplied, useful to hook onto non last-gen phones and tablets.

Boring cabling apart, something of paramount importance is behind the USB input port: nano iDSD BL incorporates most of the features offered by ifi iPurifier3, the company’s standalone USB “cleanser” which takes care of reclocking, rebalancing and regenerating the USB signal on the fly.

Especially when connecting to noisy hosts like a PC or a Laptop the sound quality improvement is totally apparent and, at least in my experience, the sole reason not to employ an iPurifier3, a galvanic separator, and a cleaner power supply on the input gates of a good DAC is their relatively high cost – which indeed in the case of a budget DAC can easily exceed its price… even a few times over.

According to nano iDSD BL literature and some answers I got from their tech people, the device includes the same REBalancer as the original iPurifier, together with some additional USB buffering circuitry (market-named “Zero Jitter”) which pursues the same ends of the REClocking part inside iPurifier3. Considering an iPurifier3 is separately sold for € 130+, including many of its functionalities inside the nano iDSD BL (€ 230-ish) is a great value proposition.


Outputs

On the output side, nano iDSD BL has 3 ports: two 3.5mm females are on the front panel, one labelled “Direct” the other “iEMatch”, and the third one – on the back panel – is a 3.5mm Line Out.

The font panel “Direct” port unassumingly presents itself like just any single-ended analogue output port, and indeed it does work as such when you plug a 3.5mm single-ended terminated IEM or Headphone cable on it.

Direct output specs are quite interesting:

• Output impedance is nicely lower than 1 Ω
• Supported load impedances range from 15 Ω to a whopping 600 Ω – an uncommonly extended range on this price bracket, especially on the high end.
• Output power is not bad: 20mW (> 3.5V) @ 600 Ω load, 285mW (> 2.9V) @ 30 Ω load and 200mW (> 1.7V) @ 15 Ω Load.
• The declared system dynamic range is > 109dB (@3V) and THD+N is listed as <0.005% (-86dB).

While both latest values are not particularly impressive, they are definitely in-line with the product price bracket and it’s also worth noting that thanks to the above-mentioned built-in “purification” features nano iDSD BL will do its job on an “apriori less noisy” digital signal. This made me expect better results than what printed numbers say and as I’ll report later I was kinda right.

Two very important additional things are now to be noted about output.

First: the iEMatch port.


Inside nano iDSD BL ifi put a modified iEMatch circuit, offering non user-selectable -16dB attenuation and 4Ω output impedance. Is it as effective as the standalone version? Let’s see:

1. As for reducing noise floor (hiss) audibility on extra sensitive IEMs the benefit is entirely there: -16dB is quite bearable attenuation vs nano iDSD BL’s max power so yes it’s well calibrated, it works big time. Indeed, I just recently used it to tame hiss from possibly the “hissiest” IEM I ever auditioned: TRN BA8 – which I wrote about here.
2. As for maximising resolution connected with digital-domain volume control : no, you don’t get that from nano iDSD BL’s iEMatch port… for the simple reason that nano iDSD BL already has analogue volume control (a feature normally implemented on higher tier models). iEMatch can’t “fix” what is not broke in the first place
3. As, finally, for impedance matching… well, I have my doubts here. 4Ω output impedance is… if you ask me not low at all when it comes to managing extra-low (<16Ω) impedance IEMs, and anyhow it’s more than 4 times higher than the Direct port’s own impedance, declared at <1Ω. Penon Sphere (6 Ω) does in fact sound more open, un-veiled and simply “better” on the Direct port vs. on the iEMatch port.

Synthetically: nano iDSD BL’s “iEMatch output port” is nice to have, although just for reducing / removing hiss from too-sensitive IEMs.

Second: S-Balanced wiring.


Many non-entry-level budget-tier balanced-scheme source devices offer both headphone output options, via two separate ports: one for balance-ended cables, the other for single-ended cables.

Ifi adopted a smart in-between option called “S-Balanced” (short for “Single-ended compatible Balanced”). Refer to their own whitepaper for a nice technical description. It is included in ifi Pro iCAN, xCAN, xDSD and nano iDSD BL.

As a consequence, instead of the usual dual separated output ports on the chassis, a cabling scheme is put in place behind the 3.5mm phone port on nano iDSD BL :

• When plugging 3.5mm TRS plugs – aka the ordinary 3.5 male connectors found at the end of 99.9% budget fixed-cable IEMs, and modular single-ended cables alike – the port delivers “normal” single-ended output. All single ended drivers on the market will seemlessly work in there. In addition to that, thanks to how internal cabling is designed, they will also get 50% reduced crosstalk – for free.
• When plugging 3.5mm TRRS plugs, aka “Hifiman 3.5mm standard” (see here) – the port delivers full “balanced-ended” output to balanced-cabled drivers, resulting in quite apparently cleaner and more dynamic sound.
  3.5mm TRRS termination is very uncommon on today’s balanced IEMs and Headphones, so I needed to procure myself an adapter to exploit that (and you won’t be lucky enough to already have one in your drawer either, I’m afraid).

This is nice as it delivers full balanced-ended quality, and even improves single-ended quality a little bit, while keeping full backwards compatibility, all without requiring further faceplate space for an extra female connector.

Add that such dual-standard “trick” is applied both behind the Direct and the iEMatch port, too !

On the flip side, I find it odd that no 3.5 TRRS adapter is included inside nano iDSD BL’s box. Ok maybe I shouldn’t expect one to be bundled for free, but why none is available as an orderable SKU# from ifi ?


Other features

Nano iDSD BL supports a wide range of digital input formats and moreover resolutions: DSD up to 256, PCM up to 384KHz and – drumroll here – MQA up to 192KHz.

I’m not at all interested into MQA so I’m not going to assess that – and even if I did I would have zero comparative experience to rely on.

On the back panel a small switch also allows the user to choose between two filters labelled “Listen” and “Measure”. The Listen option enables a Minimum Phase bezier filter, while the Measure option switches to a Linear Phase Transient-Aligned filter.


This image is just for reference.
This is not a plot of nano iDSD BL’s actual filters.

The topic may become too technical but let me try to simplify: a Minimum Phase filter makes sound “behave” more closely to our human auditory system – which is incapable of perceiving vibrations before an impulse, and tends to like when those following it over time are smoother – and is therefore by many called “more musical”. A Linear Phase filter yields a little bit edgier notes, which is indeed preferred by a population of listeners, but most of all comes handy when submitting the device to sampling and measuring, hence its given label name (“Measure”).

One more very important note is deserved about available firmware versions and their differences.

When I acquired it, my nano iDSD BL unit carried the latest available fw, version 5.3c. I looked into possible firmware variations and I found something quite interesting, as follows:

https://ifi-audio.com/firmware/unified-firmware-for-various-products/

As you can read on ifi’s PDF paper linked above, Gibb’s Transient Optimised (GTO) filter is supposed to be an upgrade to the previous Minimum Phase Filter. There’s much more to it, read the paper

Long story short again: by downgrading from 5.3c to 5.3, thus going back to the “original” Minimum and Linear Phase filters and their upsampling algorithms I perceive a distinct sound output improvement! May be a matter of tastes of course, or maybe related to the GTO upsampling being less refined (yet) than its predecessors. Be as it may, to me it sounds better, and I settled to 5.3.

Lastly, the form factor is not “ultrasmall” nor “ultrathin” but it stays very easily transportable, and pocketable – at least in terms of coat pockets. With a little intention it can be “paired” with another device, also exploiting the 2 rubber bands found in the box. Weight is also quite light (139g) and the 1200mAh battery offers up to 10h of theoretical life, which I could test down to 7-8hrs max which is good in its class.


How does it sound…

After all these structural descriptions it’s finally time to go back to the prologue and assess how this light (also quite money-wise) device performs in terms of sound output.

…as a DAC-AMP ?

Much like in virtually all other cases I encountered, true-balanced output is better than single ended on nano iDSD BL too. Once the 3.5 trrs adapter riddle gets sorted, using nano iDSD BL’s true-balanced features is a strong recommendation: soundstage, imaging and most of all dynamics get significantly better.

Even on its balanced Direct output nano iDSD BL’s general tonality is warm, and timbre is dark-ish. Bass is well bodied in positive, yet relatively slow in negative, this predominantly resulting in some bleeding into the mids. Trebles lack some sparkle, not a masterpiece but better than the bass. Range extension is by-laterally, deifinitely on par with devices on this price bracket at least as far as my experience goes. Soundstage and imaging are on the average mark for the price.

…as a DAC, with another AMP ?

Nano iDSD BL’s Line Out port offers surprising better quality.

Plugging the amazing little amp that I use as my “hyperportable transparency reference” (iBasso T3) in, nano iDSD BL’s sound presentation changes dramatically: “darkness” goes away and the general timbre becomes definitely neutral, tonality keeps a modest, possibly welcome warmth, treble suddenly becomes airy and unoffensively sparkly. Clarity goes up 2 notches, soundstage gets airier, separation gets much better too. By the way: T3 is single-ended only!

So putting it simply: nano iDSD BL internal amp does not seem to offer justice to the quality of its dac, which in facts seems capable to kick much above its weight.

…(unfairly) compared to the Mojo ?

I started the day asking myself if this device could hold a candle to Mojo sound-wise though. How about that? Simply put: as a standalone unit the answer is “not by a mile”, while as a DAC to be complemented by a decent (or even good, why not) external amp the score changes quite a bit.

Compared to nano iDSD BL’s Direct full-balanced output Mojo’s output wins hands down an all counts: bilateral extension, bass and treble control, clarity, soundstage, imaging. It simply partakes to a higher class, full stop.

Escaping from nano iDSD BL’s internal amp via the LO port, and adopting an even inexpensive amp as the above mentioned iBasso T3, the gap reduces big time. Mojo still wins by definition, extension and its outstanding (unique in its bracket, possibly) capacity to manage background voices with incredible clarity, but the timbres and tonalities become at least comparable, in the same ballpark so to say.

…or vs to other “more in-line” alternatives ?

Ok nano iDSD BL is not a Mojo. Where does it stand then ?

Let’s run another head to head comparison: Fiio BTR5 DAC/AMP.

The two devices are apriori not really equivalent in terms of intended use, and features: BTR5 is indeed marketed as a BT DAC-AMP for IEMs mainly, with some complimentary USB connectivity but that’s all, nano iDSD BL as an easily portable USB device supporting MQA, higher DSD and PCM resolutions, and high impedance cans. Still, BTR5 gained vast market appreciation in terms of high-sound-quality-for-its-price, and being its price roughly 40% less than nano iDSD BL’s I’m stimulated to compare the two, using BTR5 as a USB device in this case of course.

Compared to nano iDSD BL, BTR5 bass is less bodied (but also less bleeding), mids and highmids come up much less controlled, grainy, and raising volume makes them edge quite quickly. Stage on BTR5 is evidently narrower, imaging is more congested, instruments come accross less defined and separated. BTR5’s dynamics, while not bad per se, are also a notch below nano iDSD BL’s.

Such comparison refers to both devices’ balanced outputs by the way, using a pair of TIN T4 as IEMs.

Let me try another comparison I have at easy hand: my ol’ Fiio X3 mk-III.

I find it interesting as a comparison as I’ll be using X3 as a standalone device, not connected to my PC and therefore apriori unaffected by USB noise. As X3’s balanced output is – as an exception to what commonly happens – not really better then its single ended one, I’ll run this comparison on both devices’ single ended channels for a change. I’ll use a pair of final E1000 as supremely neutral drivers.

X3 comes out as a further bit warmer (nano iDSD BL’s SE already being such), and its trebles are even less extended – which on the up side makes it nigh-impossible to make X3 go edgy let alone screamy. X3’s soundstage is also a bit less extended, imaging is on par. Simply put: the two devices’ single ended phone out are definitely comparable in terms of overall quality.

Now let’s compare the two devices’ Line Outs – always with the help of my iBasso T3.

X3’s tonality stays almost unmodified, trebles become just a little bit edgier but it’s a nuance; soundstage, imaging and separation get better.

On the other hand, as previously noted, nano iDSD BL gets much better when its LO is exploited: bass is cleaner and faster, bleeding is very modest, treble still unextended but much airier, detailed and engaging, soundstage and separation get 2 notches up.


Winding down

Alas!… ifi nano iDSD BL does not sound on par with Mojo, costing 2.5X more. Is it really a problem? Of course not.

Its phone output quality, especially on the full-balanced side, is in line with its price bracket, and offers the significant extra advantage of the built-in iEMatch circuitry proving decisive to cope with extrasensitive IEMs hiss, paired with direct support – and enough muscle power – for 600 Ohm headphone on the opposite end.

Its DAC – taken alone – is more than good, I’d call it outstanding actually. Its reconstruction quality is not so easy to find at this price in a semi-pocketable device. Those – like me – who want to pull the max out of nano iDSD BL in terms of sound quality will pair it with a portable amp, and will get a very significant device for a quite affordable overall price.

I used to own a Micro iDSD Black Label and decided to downsize to this a while after I stopped owning or using any full size headphones. I figured that I only use IEMs, so this will be fine. It does not sound BAD. Don't get me wrong. It just isn't anywhere near what it's all cracked up to me.

I have a Behringer Xenyx302 USB mixer with a 1/4" headphone output. You can buy this at any store right now for under $80.

I am sorry to say (for iFi's sake), but the Nano BL is notably inferior to the Xenyx302 in every way. The bass slams harder and more precisely on the Xenyx302. The upper midrange is heavily smoothed over on the Nano BL, so you actually get better detailing from the Xenyx302. The treble does not seem to be notably different on either. The greater all around clarity coming from the Xenyx302 truly shocked me. This was not the great sound I remembered from the Micro iDSD because there is no way such a low end device should be able to outperform the Nano BL.

I thought this couldn't be true so I did a blind A/B with the help of a second person and a passive signal switching box, and was able to pick out the Xenyx302 each time. I then went on to compare them side by side for the next four days. I would listen to an album on one and then switch to the other.

The only situation the Xenyx302 did not come ahead of the Nano BL was with multi-driver (BA) IEMs. The higher output impedance of the Xenyx302 which is surely designed with 32-600 ohm full size headphones in mind did not play as nicely with these IEMs. I would imagine adding something like an iFi IEMatch to the Xenyx302 output would solve this.

In the end, the Nano BL might be what you need, but given that iFi has new products in the same price range as a Nano BL, and given that any number of cheaper DACs with headphone outputs seem to outperform the Nano BL in many characteristics, I am left wondering, "What went wrong?".

Preamble
Bought with my money and RRP

Packaging
Good, great inclusions in the box.

Build
Very good build.
No complaints here

Sound
:/.
A/B between the nano and my apple usb dongle both running through my ipad pro. I could not tell any difference between the tracks i was playing (Tidal Master/Hifi). The Amp in the nano is of course better and as such was able to provide more power on tap, but other than that, it was not a large enough improvement to warrant the $285 difference in price.

Sumamry
I'll keep this very short and to the point. I do not think the nano is worth the price. I think if one were to sit down and A/B between this and a lightning dongle, the sound difference would not be dicernable. Heck, i would even go as far as to say the Apple dongle at times sounded better.