RikudouGoku
Member of the Trade: RikuBuds
The Datura pro is actually not a good bud unles you EQ it from what the others have said.
CHIFI LOVE Thread-A never ending IEM-Heaphones-DAP-Dongles Sound Value Quest
- Thread starter NymPHONOmaniac
- Start date
r31ya
Headphoneus Supremus
I'm genuinely interested in M10 because my first hybrids is iLuv S'More hybrids which have bullet shape as well.
the ever so kind dude at Jaben rec it to the ol-budgetless-student-me, i was only carrying $25 dollar to buy budget iem while asking to try $400 headset which they graciously humor me by let me audition bunch of headphone more than 10 times of my price range at the time.
Later he rec me iLuv S'more with its hybrids which is pretty impressive but then they rec it to be paired with CP100 which turns it awesome for me at the time.
Last edited:
Nimweth
Headphoneus Supremus
It is a shame that the excellent Cambridge Audio SE1 is now out of stock, this would have been a good one for you, single DD beryllium driver W shape with very good tonality. You may be able to find one second hand.I'm genuinely interested in M10 because my first hybrids is iLuv S'More hybrids which have bullet shape as well.
the ever so kind dude at Jaben rec it to the ol-budgetless-student-me, i was only carrying $25 dollar to buy budget iem while asking to try $400 headset which they graciously humor me by let me audition bunch of headphone more than 10 times of my price range at the time.
Later he rec me iLuv S'more with its hybrids which is pretty impressive but then they rec it to be paired with CP100 which turns it awesome for me at the time.
Barusu Lamperouge
Headphoneus Supremus
There are quite a few budget gems which are sadly no longer in production. If they don't mind fixed cable options then KZ ED9 is a gem for $9. It also comes with tuning filters that make an actual difference to sound. You can't go wrong with them. And KZ is always the best drug to lure people into the world of Chi-fiI'm genuinely interested in M10 because my first hybrids is iLuv S'More hybrids which have bullet shape as well.
the ever so kind dude at Jaben rec it to the ol-budgetless-student-me, i was only carrying $25 dollar to buy budget iem while asking to try $400 headset which they graciously humor me by let me audition bunch of headphone more than 10 times of my price range at the time.
Later he rec me iLuv S'more with its hybrids which is pretty impressive but then they rec it to be paired with CP100 which turns it awesome for me at the time.
KZ EDR1 was also great but the new version is just meh. Many folks don't talk about these old gems nowadays. Sigh.
Last edited:
I got it after reading a bunch of positive reviews, but what I got was simply terrible, not what was described on all reviews I read, and not worth the $2.23 I payed for it (also I ordered with mic, but got without mic, and L/R ears sound quite differently, something like my fake pair of MH755). I don't recommend getting them anymore
Barusu Lamperouge
Headphoneus Supremus
Yes. The retuned version is garbage. Pre 2014 version was genuinely fantastic. KZ changed the driver and tuning for the new version which killed it
AmericanSpirit
Member of the Trade: Night Oblivion
Agree about KBEar Steller, pretty good freebie buds! Nicely tuned neutral with no sub-bass which basically Steller is.
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
You've intrigued me
I got EDR1 (golden addition according to KZ store where I got it - everything looks the same to normal ones) for $6-7, did not happen to open it, but now I did.
My EDR1 sound decent right out of the package - definitely not for bassheads, but treble and mids are close to EDX to me, a bit simpler. ED9 are arguably better. So out of three: ED9, EDX and EDR1, I would recommend ED9 first then EDX and EDR1 close third.
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
OK. I was not sure that I should reply... and what exactly to answer... but here we are for a Friday night response:https://dsd-guide.com/sites/default/files/white-papers/DSD - the new addiction - v2.pdf
again, music is not figures and bytes, I’d just suggest listening by own ear for A/B test.
Believe it or not, I’m not a science noob, actually am a MIT grad.
Science is not all about parameters.
In my career, many aspect of business activities, human nature and natural phenomena are just simply too complicated to fit into a systematic algorithm, with known sets of variable parameters.
I feel it’s same for music and audio. Yes there is audio science, but it’s not a master key. It’s up to one’s mindset and decision, and my decision is not pulling too much science into music. Music is a living organism, we are still yet to be able to fit into some sort of algorithm, at least, not yet. Machine learning can do some sort of “redefining” from the learning dataset, but just not as innovative as humankind, at least for now.
1) Your link did not answer my question about how do your personally actually distinguish the "dynamic range" of different DAPs to select better ones from unnecessary expensive - I would really love to learn how to do it.
To digress into your old 2011 reference - back then the music industry was "on board" with DSD - to sell the same music to consumers in different "high-res" formats - SACD, DSD, etc.
Nowadays, the predominant mode is the "pay per use", so mp3/aac became very much acceptable (as they should) not to cram the downloads with unnecessary bits and bytes to provide those "150 dB" that we'll certainly get to in 3).
2) I am not sure why you mentioned your degree. Do they teach science differently in this program? (Self-censored this part not to go more into it...)
The science is indeed about parameters, reproducible measurements and math; and more so is the engineering - so that is why any management can't compensate for the current chip shortage that you've mentioned - to make chips, IEMs, amps requires tangible well-defined skills based exactly on those reproducible parameters.
3) I hope you never experience 150 dB (even 120 dB) - it will be mind blowing, not literally, but physically!
So if you take your favourite music and spread the dynamic range to 150 dB, it will be painfully unlistenable, as simple as this - the experience better not to be experienced. So 16 bit is perfectly enough, 24 is already redundant, but is often used for mastering to have some room for mishaps.
DSD is an interesting format, but given that it is not directly equalizable and do require more processing power for a hardly tangible difference - I personally will not bother to use it. With the lossy "audiophile" formats, MQA is struggling for their "claim to fame", as long as there are those who are willing to pay...
Lastly, your subjective experience is valuable and important, but trying to defy science based on personal feelings is just futile - this much should be painfully obvious, as those large dBs, where bigger is not better
JEHL
1000+ Head-Fier
This actually reminds me that when he's not using his Micro iDSD Black Label for testing purposes, Crinacle apparently drives his IER-Z1R with the Apple USB-C dongle. Wonder if his rationale is that since his average listening volume is 82dB then technically the 99dB SINAD of the dongle (among some more unreadable parameters) is overkill for him?OK. I was not sure that I should reply... and what exactly to answer... but here we are for a Friday night response:
1) Your link did not answer my question about how do your personally actually distinguish the "dynamic range" of different DAPs to select better ones from unnecessary expensive - I would really love to learn how to do it.
To digress into your old 2011 reference - back then the music industry was "on board" with DSD - to sell the same music to consumers in different "high-res" formats - SACD, DSD, etc.
Nowadays, the predominant mode is the "pay per use", so mp3/aac became very much acceptable (as they should) not to cram the downloads with unnecessary bits and bytes to provide those "150 dB" that we'll certainly get to in 3).
2) I am not sure why you mentioned your degree. Do they teach science differently in this program? (Self-censored this part not to go more into it...)
The science is indeed about parameters, reproducible measurements and math; and more so is the engineering - so that is why any management can't compensate for the current chip shortage that you've mentioned - to make chips, IEMs, amps requires tangible well-defined skills based exactly on those reproducible parameters.
3) I hope you never experience 150 dB (even 120 dB) - it will be mind blowing, not literally, but physically!
So if you take your favourite music and spread the dynamic range to 150 dB, it will be painfully unlistenable, as simple as this - the experience better not to be experienced. So 16 bit is perfectly enough, 24 is already redundant, but is often used for mastering to have some room for mishaps.
DSD is an interesting format, but given that it is not directly equalizable and do require more processing power for a hardly tangible difference - I personally will not bother to use it. With the lossy "audiophile" formats, MQA is struggling for their "claim to fame", as long as there are those who are willing to pay...
Lastly, your subjective experience is valuable and important, but trying to defy science based on personal feelings is just futile - this much should be painfully obvious, as those large dBs, where bigger is not better
To my understanding CD quality bottlenecks the dongle rather than the other way around. Should I guess that CD/DVD quality vs studio quality is its own can of worms?
Also I believe at some point the answer was that he should get headphones but are any IEMs in this price range good for FPS Multiplayer? I believe this means imaging would be more important than anything else?
Barusu Lamperouge
Headphoneus Supremus
I would agree to a point with that ranking. ED9 and EDX are clear of EDR1 for me.You've intrigued me
I got EDR1 (golden addition according to KZ store where I got it - everything looks the same to normal ones) for $6-7, did not happen to open it, but now I did.
My EDR1 sound decent right out of the package - definitely not for bassheads, but treble and mids are close to EDX to me, a bit simpler. ED9 are arguably better. So out of three: ED9, EDX and EDR1, I would recommend ED9 first then EDX and EDR1 close third.
EDX provides more convenience like replaceable cables which is a huge plus to the tangly and fragile cable of ED9. But sonically, it's very close between both of them. Nozzles do their magic for ED9 whereas replaceable cables gives longevity to EDX.
I do find ED9 tuning to be very mature whereas EDX is typical KZ budget tuning.
SNR has nothing to do with audio format. It's basically just a number that shows how much unwanted noise a given source has. Bigger numbers is always better, tho 100 is generally enough for most environments and music genres (if you listen to classic music in a very quiet environment you should go for 130, just to be sure you won't be hearing any unwanted hissing).
CD quality doesn't bottleneck the dongle. Idk what specs it even has, but scientifically you don't need anything better than 16bit/44.1 (16/48 if you're a superhuman). For just listening to music 16/44.1 should be more than enough, BUT if you intend to master the music you should use the best quality you can get. Even if you use any sort of DSP (such as EQ), you might want to use higher than CD quality, tho honestly, that's unnecessary. Better use a good player, such as Neutron, with good quality DSP, and if you're really afraid of audible distortions from EQ you can oversample x2, 4, 8 (x2 should be more than enough, unless you're doing some massive changes).
The only real reason to choose 24 over 16 bit would be that it probably has a higher chance of being well mastered/remastered. Also there's a chance that a 16bit flac is just a converted mp3 (don't ask why, idk, but people do this), or an improperly downsampled 24+ (without dithering, etc.). But as long as you have a good CD quality audio file, for listening purposes, it is no worse than studio quality. The format itself covers what the human ear can hear.
*you could list a reason, that one should use higher quality files because tho one may not here the difference, they may feel it (as in, get a Big driver than is capable of playing such frequencies, turn on at max volume 25khz (you won't here that), and believe me, you will Feel it). But that's kinda.. a weird point, especially since you usually listen to music in small iems, not using full body blasting speaker. Using higher than can hear frequencies 'might' tickle the inside of your ear I bit, but...
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
I can only tell what I know, experienced and think.
I would doubt CD quality is limiting, there are very few people that can distinguish 320 mp3 from flacs/wav, if there are truly blind tests and artefacts are not there, and levels are matched. I can barely distinguish 192.
For the dongles - I recently "played" with many, I got 5 different ones under $10 or so, and then Sonata HD pro, Hidizs S9, Shanling UA2, as well as BTR3K and BTR5.
Those under $10 have different noticeable background noise levels, other than an odd one that can be as enjoyable as all other mentioned, if the power is sufficient. I do not use Apple products in my life, but I would think the Apple dongle would be comparable or better to my odd $10 one.
So I can only applaud Crinacle for expressing in his position that music can be enjoyed ~99.9% as good with simple means.
I do feel sometimes that I very much enjoy listening to 24/96 files with my ~$400 chain and especially those magic blue cables, since it is a hobby after all
Last edited:
AmericanSpirit
Member of the Trade: Night Oblivion
Not gonna dig in too much:OK. I was not sure that I should reply... and what exactly to answer... but here we are for a Friday night response:
1) Your link did not answer my question about how do your personally actually distinguish the "dynamic range" of different DAPs to select better ones from unnecessary expensive - I would really love to learn how to do it.
To digress into your old 2011 reference - back then the music industry was "on board" with DSD - to sell the same music to consumers in different "high-res" formats - SACD, DSD, etc.
Nowadays, the predominant mode is the "pay per use", so mp3/aac became very much acceptable (as they should) not to cram the downloads with unnecessary bits and bytes to provide those "150 dB" that we'll certainly get to in 3).
2) I am not sure why you mentioned your degree. Do they teach science differently in this program? (Self-censored this part not to go more into it...)
The science is indeed about parameters, reproducible measurements and math; and more so is the engineering - so that is why any management can't compensate for the current chip shortage that you've mentioned - to make chips, IEMs, amps requires tangible well-defined skills based exactly on those reproducible parameters.
3) I hope you never experience 150 dB (even 120 dB) - it will be mind blowing, not literally, but physically!
So if you take your favourite music and spread the dynamic range to 150 dB, it will be painfully unlistenable, as simple as this - the experience better not to be experienced. So 16 bit is perfectly enough, 24 is already redundant, but is often used for mastering to have some room for mishaps.
DSD is an interesting format, but given that it is not directly equalizable and do require more processing power for a hardly tangible difference - I personally will not bother to use it. With the lossy "audiophile" formats, MQA is struggling for their "claim to fame", as long as there are those who are willing to pay...
Lastly, your subjective experience is valuable and important, but trying to defy science based on personal feelings is just futile - this much should be painfully obvious, as those large dBs, where bigger is not better
1) it’s not my assignment to walk through how DAP works, but you may take a look the circuit designs of BTR5 compared to ones like Shanghling M8, DAC, FPGA, Amps. They have different streams of processing digital to analog conversation. BTR5 is good amp indeed, just like VW Golf GTI for car, small and agile. But Golf GTI isn’t a Mercedes AMG E63S killer. They simply perform at different altitudes.
2) You speak as if I don’t have any scientific background, so I was just addressing I have the background. Science is a mean of catching strings from math/formulae, but I’m saying even at the best of best MIT, we are not able to “code” organic living things. Audio science is not as expensively studied as quantum mechanics, it has huge room to improve, I’m just saying, I’m not participating in this area though. I still want to leave audio into some non-science “feeling” domain.
Honestly are you listening music by numbers?
Like “Hmm! This third harmonics of G7minor code sounds so fantastic! Love it!”?
I don’t think too much about analytics when listening music, it’s a feeling domain.
For dynamic range illustration difference, It’s about same difference that can be visualized as dynamic range illustration on screens, it just a matter of it be on screen or in your ear (assuming proper DAP / Original mixing and mastering /IEM/ Tips/Cable is used, with only difference in sourcing format)
3) again, I’m not science noob, so this is redundant explanation to me. I play drum and can get quite loud close to 120db. Surely it hurts but I’m still alive by that 120db shock wave.
Each 10db it get double magnitude, amplifier with proper FPGA clocks with well tuned analog converter simulates better illustrations. It’s not too hard to compare good recording to tell BTR5 compared to M8. There are 10% of margin in sound quality improvement. You will surely admit that 10% improvement is inevitable difference of $100 player compared to $1600 one. Just a matter of willingness to cope that gap though. If your brain tells 16bits sound exactly same to 24bits, then we have no room to discuss...they sound different to my ear.
For audible frequencies, yes, by “current science” we are not supposed to hear above 20khz. Human were believe not sensitive to magnetic field. Not until recent researchers found human eye has a same sensor with birds, and is capable of seeing magnetic field. Our close relatives, Chimpanzees can hear sub-bass frequency which human are not “attested by current measuring equipments” to hear, that by science does not guarantee human can not hear “inaudible” sounds. Don’t mistake reality by a way of recapturing it(the
).You don’t need to limit human capability by existing theory, there is a room for extra assumptions. Maybe you work for experimental science domain and not a theoretical science fan, but we can agree science is not a perfect book, it’s just an approximation.
Again, I’ll emphasize, Science is just an approximation of real world.
Don’t mix this factual circumstance, Science does not equal to real world.
We use thing without knowing real logics behind, taking example of anesthesia. Not until very recent we found the logics and hints of the mechanism of anesthesia. That does not mean anesthesia is ineffective to relief pain until human “observe” the mechanisms behind.
Same to music, there are lots of undiscovered mechanisms beyond how music can affect living organisms, some study shows even plants are not out of scope to music. Some study shows music helps to synchronize the participants brain waves. We are just so behind the actual cause. You seemed limiting yourself with only observed scientific factual figures, it’s your own way of living, but hope this remind you there are thing beyond border line of modern science could solve, music is one of the those.
Try take MBTI test, I have a feeling you are ISTJ type. I’m INTP type, so we work under different principles. My main inputs are through intuition then logically processed to various outlets.
And let’s stop this off-topic discussion, it’s pointless, just enjoy your music, if you love science to back up your perception, so be it. You may contribute to open a new frontiers indeed
Last edited:
PhonoPhi
Headphoneus Supremus
1) The conversation started with you talking about the dynamic range of DAPs. I became very curios about it and asked. Your answer gave no information about it, just DSD. I do appreciate your experience in 3), it was instructive to know.
2) I do not assume anything about the people here and elsewhere. I try to learn from everyone.
The music is enjoyable as it is. The science helps to stay clear of many unsubstantiated claims that DSD files are better, spc cables can be distinguished, and the Earth is flat.
Sorry, if you brain can pretend to distinguish 24-bit files - if you ever venture to do blind tests (purely experiential thing actually) - you will realize the limitations. As good as your claim, I can postulate that my blue cables transform any music to 64+bit bit nirvana in my feelings
How would you prove me wrong and youself right??
We can discuss quantum mechanics and quantum computing as well in this context
3) To keep it brief here - science is as perfect either being able to make those chips, DAPs, DACs with the commercially viable yield or NOT - as simple black & white as this.
Users who are viewing this thread
