Syllable S101

More and more phones are ditching the 3.5mm jack as manufacutrers succumb to the epidemic of courage that began in Cupertino. In response, 2019 has seen a wave of Bluetooth headphones released and prices have tumbled. If you're going wireless you might as well go all the way, and for in-ear headphones this means the variety called True Wireless Stereo (TWS). These have moved on a lot since Apple's clumsy AirPods design, and there are now a large number of players offering sets at very attractive prices.

I'm reviewing a pair of these at the low end of the market, which allows a concrete comparison. One is the widely-praised and well-known QCY T1 (which is probably identical to the SoundPeats True Free+ that has been reviewed elsewhere), the other is the Syllable S101, which hasn't received as much attention.

The QCY T1 earbud comes in two versions, which seem to differ only in terms of the battery capacity in the charging station. I will be reviewing the QS2 model, with a 800mAh reserve. The unit uses a single dynamic driver fed by a BT 5.0 Realtek RTL8763B chip capable of SBC and AAC codecs. The unit is rated at 4 hours of life on a single charge, and with the charging station claims a total of 32 hours play time. it has an IPX4 rating.

The S101 uses two dynamic drivers with a crossover and a BT 5.0 Qualcomm QCC3020 chip handling the signal. This can handle SBC, AAC and AptX. It claims 10 hours playback on a single charge, with the 500mAh charging station and claims a 50 hour total play time. It has an IPX6 rating. Confusingly, Syllable's Aliexpress store has several listings for the S101, one of which is named just 'S101', another is 'Original S101' and a third is '2019 New S101'. But I can see no difference between these apart from the text used in the listing title. FWIW, the one tested here is the 'Original S101', but I think they're all the same.

Both sets were ordered from the respective official store on Aliexpress. The QCY QS2 cost me £15.99, and the Syllable S101 was £26.64. Both came via Aliexpress Standard Shipping and arrived in the UK in under 10 days.

Box

The QCY comes in a fairly non-descript card box, but the more expensive Syllable box is more impressive, with the case carried inside a larger foam insert. This might be relevant if you're looking for a gift, but most people are just going to throw this stuff away. Both sets come with the bare minimum of accessories: a USB charging cable and 3 pairs of earbud tips (S, M and L).

Build quality / charging case

The cases are roughly the same size, with the QCY being slightly longer and deeper, but also slightly shorter. Both have translucent lids which allow you to see the status of the LEDs on the earbuds inside. Both charge via a micro-USB port on the back.

The QCY is plastic, and makes no attempt to hide it. The earbuds are a plastic shell with one large button on the outer face. The charging case is all plastic as well and there's a slight play in the lid. It seems fairly sturdy, however: I managed to drop it a few times onto the pavement with no sign of damage. There are two LEDs on the front that indicate the battery level while charging, but remain off until the battery drops low, at which point they warn you by blinking every 30 seconds (which can be easy to miss). The well for the earbud tips is quite shallow, the buds will fit in with the supplied generic olive tips, but you will struggle to get alternative tips to fit, and they need to have a short eartube. With a bit of searching I managed to find a long-flange tip (I think this was from my old Havi B3s) that fit and gave a better seal in my ear.

The Syllable S101's case is immediately more impressive. The bottom is made of metal with the top being thick translucent plastic. The lid fits perfectly and feels robust. Most importantly, it has a deep well for the tips of the earbuds. This is very nice and I had no problems putting on a pair of KZ Starline tips. Even foam tips would fit with a little encouragement. Given the importance of finding a tips that will give a good fit, the flexibility offered by the deeper well is a serious plus. The case has four LEDs on the front to indicate level of charge, which can be checked by pressing a button on the back.

It should be noted that the two sets differ in the way they interact with the charging case. The QCY earbuds disconnect and start to charge as soon as they hit the gold pogo pins in the charging cradle. The S101s only do so when the lid of the case is closed. When you open the case lid the S101s react by powering up and starting to connect, but this only happens with the QCY after physically removing them from the case. Both units light up like a Christmas tree when searching for a signal, but once connected the lights are turned off.

Fit


As shown in the picture, the S101s are significantly bulkier than the QCY earbuds. The body of the QCYs fits neatly in the concha and very little of it sticks out. You can use them while lying with your ear on a pillow, though there is a small amount of pressure. I've seen one review on YouTube that stated they would fit under a motorbike helmet. The S101s, on the other hand, stick out noticeably. Wearing them while resting the ear on a pillow is possible, but rather uncomfortable and I very much doubt they'd fit under a helmet. There's a small plastic lug that rests on the inside of the antitragus to give some support, but most of the fit is determined by friction from the tip with the earcanal. I haven't tested while doing strenous activity, but I didn't experience any real problem getting either to stay in place.

Neither set has ANC, but a good fit with the right tips provides enough noise isolation for ordinary purposes.

Controls
The QCY has a large button on the outer face of the earbud. The S101 has a much smaller single button. Both are physical, which I prefer as capacitative touch controls will fail if your finger is moist. Some people have complained about pressure on the button causing the earbud to press into the ear uncomfortably, but I didn't experience any discomfort on using the buttons with either set. Both offer play/pause, phone answer/hangup, track skip forward/back and assistant; the S101 additionally supports volume control. The S101's manual is rather opaque and it took some experimetation to work out the control scheme - short press: play/pause; long press ~1s: track skip (right: forward, left: back); double press: volume control (right: up, left: down); triple press: assistant; longer press ~4s: turn off. The QCY uses a double press for track skip instead, and, combined with the larger button, I found it noticeably easier to use. The small button on the S101 is a little fiddly and you have to put in some effort to learn the right amount of time to press it in order to get the track skip function without turning it off.

The S101 uses voice messages (in English) to signal power, pairing and connection, whereas the QCY uses tones.

Volume
The S101s offer volume control on the earbuds themselves, and when everything's maxxed out these things can go LOUD. The QCY have no volume control and are solely dependent on the phone setting. With everything cranked up, the S101s are 11.45dB louder than the QCYs (tested with a 1kHz sine wave). That is a lot of extra volume. Having said that, the QCYs are loud enough for almost all purposes, and I had no problem getting a comfortable listening level, though I had to set the phone volume to 80% or so.

The volume control on the S101s has 16 steps then mute, with most steps being -3dB, except for two of them. Thus if full volume is 0dB, lowering it will give you:
-3 dB, -6dB, -9dB, -11dB, -14dB, -17dB, -20dB, -23dB, -24dB, -26dB, -29dB, -32dB, -35dB, -38dB, -41dB, -44dB, mute

Unsuprisingly, the upper volume levels on the S101 introduce some hiss, though this is only just noticeable and not intrusive, and produce slightly more harmonic distortion. But I found that the distortion plateued from about the 4th step down, and that reduced the hiss to a level that was inaudible against the ambient background.

I didin't notice any hiss when using the QCY with my Android phone, though strangely it was moderately noticeable when I briefly tried it on my iPad.

Connection
I ran these from a Pocophone F1 with a Qualcomm 845 SoC. Both are Bluetooth 5.0 devices, as is the phone. The QCY can handle SBC and AAC codes, though strangely it would only connect to my Pocophone using SBC (an old OnePlus 2 running Lineage had no problems getting AAC however). Given that Bluetooth AAC on Android is a dog's dinner I wasn't too concerned about this. The S101 automatically connected using the AptX codec (no current TWS offers AptX HD). With modern Qualcomm chips acting as both source and sink, I was hoping that this would enable Qualcomm's True Wireless Stereo Plus mode with the S101, in which both earbuds connect directly to the phone rather than one connecting to the phone and then relaying the data to the other earbud. I don't know of any way to test this, but did notice that the right earbud remained charging slightly longer than the left, which suggests it is acting as the master connection point.

The QCY's connection is ... adequate. Once it's connected properly it will work fine most of the time until it suddenly throws a fit. These disconnects can range from brief crackles to a paroxysm of stuttering which could only be fixed by pausing the player (which presumably allows the buffers to reset and lets the buds renegotiate their connection). I noticed more connection problems with the left earbud, possibly because I wear glasses with metal arms, which might interfere with the relayed signal. Having said this, the QCY's connection was generally quite acceptable.

The S101 connection is markedly superior. It's not perfect, but the worst I suffered was a short crackle of less tham half a second. This is one of the improvements I was hoping for in buying a device running a Qualcomm chip, and my hope was fulfilled.

Both buds connect automatically on removing them from the charging case, though occasionally this failed and I needed to go into the Bluetooth menu on my phone to get them to link up. Again, this happened less frequently with the Q101. Both boast a range of 10m, but I didin't test that because there are too many other variables that can affect connection quality.

I didn't bother testing the mic quality. Both are adequate for calls and I was only interested in the audio quality for listening.

Sound
Measurements
Raw Frequency Response


It looks like someone ordered the extra bass, with a side-order of low-end. Both sets try to impress with masses of bass grunt, and while this makes a splash at first it soon becomes tiresome. Luckily, this can easily be remedied. The raw frequency repsonses shown here are each an average of 5 separate measures recorded by playing the sweep on my phone and then importing this ito Room EQ Wizard as an offline measurement. Apart from the exaggerated bass, the principal feature is a degree of mismatch in the driver repsonses. Unfortunately this is going to happen with cheap headphones, which generally aren't matched carefully at the factory. While this is undesireable, I didn't notice it subjectively.

All results are shown unsmoothed, and it should be noted that with proper smoothing that relfects the ear's actual frequency acuity many of the peaks smooth out considerably.


To correct the response curves I averaged the response from right and left 'phones. I set up low-shelf filters to match the bass region and used REW's auomtaic optimisation function to handle the upper end. The target curve shown here is Olive & Welti's 2014 revision. The QCY could be matched quite easily, but the automatic results for the S101 included too many Q=5 notch filters. These were hand-optimised to use filters with a gentler slope. I use Neutron Music Player on Android, and have listed the code for each EQ below. This can be pasted into the eq_presets.xml file in the NeutronMP folder, just below the <eqp version="3"> tag. Make sure that the id values are unique and don't clash with any other presets you have in the file.
Poweramp is another popular Android music player, and is frankly prettier and easier to use than neutron. Unfortunately its inbuilt EQ isn't nearly as good, offering 10 bands with fixed frequencies and a fixed bandwidth at Q=1.5. Still, you can approximate a decent match with the following values:
Obviously, these values are only a guide, and there are many ways to get the EQ to give a similar result.


Harmonic distortion with EQ engaged is quite well controlled in each set, with generally very low values. The numbers given in the legend reflect THD at 1kHz. The QCY peaks at around 1.5% THD and the S101 at 0.89%, but both are quite acceptable. The distortion graphs reflect the entire playback chain, though the overwhelming bulk is 2nd harmonic from the speakers themselves.


Intermodulation distortion (DIN standard) is generally acceptable for both sets, but the S101 does show a lower spread of components and lower overall level.


Subjective assessment
I measured the levels from each earphone with the relevant EQ engaged and was able to macth volumes to within 1dB for the listening tests.

As with all subjective reviews, the following needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, as I didn't even attempt to perform a properly blinded assessment. Any differences are quite subtle.

It should be no surprise that there's very little difference in tonality, which just shows that the EQ matching is doing its job. For mormal listening I'd probably lift the low shelf filter a few dB to give a bit more bass, but for this comparison I stuck to the O&W curve.

Percussion Imaging test from the HeadFi Open Your Ears album: QCY seems a little more compressed in depth, with slightly less distinction between distances, especially with the close ones. The drum set feels more three-dimensional on the S101, and on the QCY the cymbals are a little splashy.

Laurie Anderson My Eyes: The S101 has more space around the instruments and feels less congested. The track features a changing sense of space that occurs as it moves metaphorically from the depths of the ocean to the heavens, and this distinction feels more apparent on the S101.

Belly, The Bees & Super-connected: Again, I found the S101 presented a slightly more convincing sense of space, with greater delineation of the instrument placing. Having said that, the S101 did suffer from some distracting sibilance, possibly related to its 8kHz peak, so I might need to go back and refine the EQ further.

The National, Quiet Light, Where is Her Head, Not in Kansas: The QCY seems ever-so-slightly dull and veiled on these tracks. The S101 is a little more involving and beguiling.

The Cure, Lovesong, Last Dance: The two sets are a lot closer on these tracks. In fact I might marginally prefer the QCY here, which seems better suited to the dense mix used here.

Radiohead, All I Need, Let Down: The S101 certainly sounds more poised and confident with these tracks. This is particularly noticeable on Let Down, where Yorke's anguished vocals sound a little strained on the QCY.

Suzanne Vega, Last Year's Troubles: This one is a wash and it's hard to say which I prefer. There is perhaps a slight emphasis to the sibilance with the S101, similar to that described earlier.

Gorillaz, Dare: Everything just seems a bit better defined on the S101. Whereas the QCY seems to blur the edges of the motoric beat the S101 drives it along and is more compelling.

Handel, Le Cantate Italiane Vol 1 Un pensiero voli (La Risonanza): Both sets are very listenable on this excellent recording. But the S101 gives a greater sense of space, with a clearer depiction of the ambient environment around the instruments, and greater definition of the soprano's modulation.

Bach, Brandenburg Concerto #3, III (Dunedin Consort, Butt): I chose this particular track as, under John Butt, it's a riotous assembly that can easily become chaotic if not handled well. The S101 puts in an exemplary performance, keeping the instruments well defined even in the busiest passages. The QCY makes a brave attempt, but just can't produce the same sure-footed rendition.

Obviously, any subjective review like this is inherently subject to a whole load of bias, and it should be clear that I'd decided I prefered the S101 fairly early on. I made my best effort to be impartial, but in the absence of a properly blinded methodology these assessments should be taken with care. Even if I did have assistants with deep wells of patience and diligence, the fit differed sufficiently between the two earphones that it was fairly easy to distinguish them just by the feel in my ear.

Summary
The QCY offers a smaller and more unobtrusive earpiece with a less fiddly control mechanism. The S101 offers better connection (with a phone running a modern Qualcomm chip at least), more volume, volume control, better battery life and a more impressive build quality.

Most importantly, the S101 sounds better, though the QCY certainly won't disappoint for non-critical listening. The important proviso is that you need to be prepared to correct the frequency response on both these devices to prevent the overblown bass swamping the sound.

Update
I did some further fiddling with the EQ this morning, and I think these settings give a better result and tame the slight sibilance I noted.