[sidecross]

I tend not use eq as it for me reduces the fuller dynamic of the recording as it was engineered. As I have previously wrote I find the q5 256 levels of volume adjustment to be the most important adjustment for listening to either the fh5 and the fa7. Even the fiio btr1k with 56 volume adjustments is not nearly enough for my listening pleasure.

This is what makes listening enjoyment an art as well as an applied technological science.

 

[mhoopes]

Think of it this way: EQ is being applied in the reproduction chain, no matter what you do. There is no ruler-flat pinna-compensated IEM solution in existence, and different earphone tunings, tips and canal shapes further shift the goalposts. If you want to hear the mastering engineer’s intent, you need to simulate their reproduction chain.

The FA7’s factory tuning is not what I would call “studio reference”. You can see it in the measurements. However, with EQ, I can get it a LOT closer. Closer than any tip or cable swap.

 

[SeeD]

After having done additional comparisons- this earphone is sooo close to being great. Guess for me, it will be a trade-off between veiled vocals and comfort.

What other earphone at a $500 price range and below has it all?

 

[sidecross]

Think of it this way: EQ is being applied in the reproduction chain, no matter what you do. There is no ruler-flat pinna-compensated IEM solution in existence, and different earphone tunings, tips and canal shapes further shift the goalposts. If you want to hear the mastering engineer’s intent, you need to simulate their reproduction chain.

The FA7’s factory tuning is not what I would call “studio reference”. You can see it in the measurements. However, with EQ, I can get it a LOT closer. Closer than any tip or cable swap.

I understand your reasoning and have no argument against it and agree with it.

As a former photojournalist working in the days of film there are many ways to process film and each has its use and favor. There is no reason to compare the work of an Ansel Adams to say the work of Robert Frank as to who knew how to use film and what the viewer could appreciate.

I do appreciate the comment about 'studio reference' and the fa7 tuning of this iem.

 

[mhoopes]

I understand your reasoning and have no argument against it and agree with it.

As a former photojournalist working in the days of film there are many ways to process film and each has its use and favor. There is no reason to compare the work of an Ansel Adams to say the work of Robert Frank as to who knew how to use film and what the viewer could appreciate.

I do appreciate the comment about 'studio reference' and the fa7 tuning of this iem.

That's an apt analogy. When I was a kid, I used to study the works of some of the noted photographic artists of the 20th century (Brandt, Cartier-Bresson, etc.). Ansel Adams was especially known for his processing work. All of us who've taken a camera to the Yosemite Valley have had the opportunity to frame the exact same shots. What's hanging in my house? Ansel's Half Dome, and not because it's necessarily more realistic or of higher fidelity than my versions.

 

[425455]

Despite the bass I think it's a very very good iem, and coming from Shure and Westone IEM's mainly, awesome value for money.

 

[sidecross]

FA7 Stock Cable

The stock cable fiio is an excellent choice and value for an iem at this price. I did however purchase the fiio lc-3.5c cable mainly for being lighter and easier to use and transport.

 

[SeeD]

Caliper batteries finally came in.
FA7 (measured with calipers): 5.15 mm (min), 5.65 mm (max), 4.55 mm (distance measured from dip in shell over crus helix to base of nozzle).
I'll repeat the last one for the FH5 later. I recall that I complained of interference with the inferior crus - perhaps it was the crus helix, instead?

That would be the major limiting factor for insertion depth. It's a bit more difficult to measure that accurately; perhaps FiiO could give us the numbers from their 3D models?

One of the reasons why the FA7s are so comfortable, for me at least, is that the nozzle diameter is small - as compared to the iBassos. There may be a only 1.5mm- 2mm difference in diameter, but that small amount make a big difference for insertion. I really like the iBassos IT01s, but that larger diameter nozzle kills it for me. I plan on keeping the FA7s and need to consider EQ, but don't want to carry around a tank. Here are the options I know of.....

- ES100 - recommended on here for its EQ capabilities, but it is bulky

- BTR3 - love the size, no EQ, but I read it will be offered soon? Anyone know any info on this?

Any other suggestions?

Thanks!

 

[sidecross]

I like using the fiio q5 with my iphone se, each can be placed in a different pocket and most needed controls using the blue-tooth mode can be done with the q5. This method has no eq except for any that might be on the iphone se.

 

[sidecross]

FA7 vs FH5

I listen to the new album: ‘Muscle Shoals: Small Town, Big Sound’ the last two days and the FA7 has a bigger sound stage than the FH5.

The bass of the FA7 is more balanced than the Fh5. It might be that the precise balance between a dynamic driver and balanced armatures is more difficult than combing four balanced armatures. Any other opinion?

The new material and process of manufacture of the fa7 body is an improvement in both weight and size as compared to the fh5.

For me the fa7 is an improvement, for others the changes might be slight and not in the direction that the new fh7 that fiio is now working on.

 

[Brooko]

Too thick in the mid-bass and lower midrange to be called balanced imho. The FA7 are a good earphone with music which doesn’t have a high bass presence, and if you EQ the hump out, they are amazing.

 

[sidecross]

I only meant to imply that the fa7 was more balanced to my ear and mind than the fh5.

My audio experience is shallow any misunderstanding is my inability to write more clearly.

 

[Brooko]

Your audio experience is fine - and just as valid as anyone else's

 

[SeeD]

In case anyone is interested, FiiO is going to release an EQ software update for their BTR3 in Feb.
Read this on the HeadFi page.

Makes my decision clear now.

 

[Kentavar8]

Hey everyone! I just want to share my experience with the FA7 after listening to them for about 20 hours. In addition to that, I will also make a short comparison between the FA7 and my Audiofly AF180 ($500) since both of them are quad BA.

In terms of packaging, accessories, build quality and design - I am beyond impressed. These look and feel like an extremely well build IEMs. Comfort is amazing, although I find the cables a little too robust over my ears and they tend to weight a bit after listening for a couple of hours. The reason why I decided to purchase these is first - the amazing reviews regarding the FA7, and second - I wanted a quad BA that reproduces a little bit more bass than my AF180's. To my surprise, after the first two songs that I played on the FA7, right away I was able to notice the HUGE emphasis on bass these have. It is way more impactful than I initially expected. Which brings me to my next point - sound. Too much bass, to the point where vocals and details are being overshadowed by it. Some songs work nicely, others not so much. I would lie if I say that I didn't enjoy the bass at times, but it is way too overwhelming for my listening preference. Another issue in terms of sound that personally bothered me a little bit is the reproduction of vocals. I cannot really explain or understand where that comes from, or maybe I've been spoiled by the AF180's phenomenal sharp vocals, but the vocals on the FA7 sound a bit artificial to me. As if there is a filter placed in order to make them sound smooth and less fatiguing, specifically in the highs region.

Despite the cons I mentioned above, these are definitely capable of better and more balanced sound after some EQ. I don't know why FiiO decided to add so much bass impact on supposedly a more balanced IEMs. To me they lean more towards the mass bass lover consumers, rather than audiophiles or people who enjoy a more realistic and balanced listening experience. The FA7 can depict details and provide a good soundstage and imaging, but I feel like the bass ruins the joy most of the time and doesn't let FA7's true capabilities to shine. Considering the $300 price, the overall performance, build quality, comfort, and design, make the FA7 an amazing value for people who prefer more bass-heavy IEMs who can still reproduce a lot of detail, soundstage, and overall a decent sound. I might sound too critical about them, but in fact, I really enjoyed the FA7. Unfortunately, not to the extent where they would be able to replace my previous AF180.

Audiofly AF180 vs FiiO FA7

The difference between these two is night and day. Where the FA7 comes with more fun and overall bassy performance, the AF180 to me is the definition of an extremely well-balanced and realistic sound. Unlike the AF180, the FA7 is more on the dark side, with veiled vocals and too much warmth in general. The AF180 can point every little detail in a song and I can tell right away where is the position of each instrument in the recording. Also, the soundstage is OUTSTANDING on the AF180. Once I close my eyes and listen to them, I truly experience the sound as if I'm sitting in the room with the singer and the band while they perform. The soundstage on the FA7 is definitely noticeable on certain tracks, but not as wide as the AF180. And as I mentioned above, the difference in the vocals is pretty big for me. I have never heard before more accurate vocal reproduction such as the AF180 reproduce. It's marvelous. I cannot be 100% certain what a truly realistic vocal might sound like on an IEMs, but the AF180 make me believe what I listen, to be just as accurate as it is in the recording studio. Also there is ABSOLUTELY NO FATIGUE with the 180s. I don't find the FA7 fatiguing 97% of the time, but for example "Shallow by Lady Gaga and Bradly Cooper" did cause some fatiguing towards the end of the track. In terms of details, the FA7 produces just as many details as the AF180s, the only difference is that with the FA7 I had to listen carefully in order to pick up some of the details in the back, while with the AF180 doesn't let you lose any detail out of sight.
I only wish the bass impact on the AF180's was a tiny bit more enhanced, but I feel like the FA7 made me appreciate the clarity and the balanced sound on the AF180 even more, so I think I can live without some extra bass in return for a more realistic listening experience. And lastly, in FA7's advantage, they completely blow away the AF180 in terms of build quality. From the cables to the actual body of the IEM, I would feel way more confident in FA7's durability.

In the case of these two, the $200 price difference is well justified by the performance of the AF180's, at least for me personally, which by any means does not make the FA7 a bad value. In fact, it is an amazing alternative for some who prefer a more budget-friendly quad BA high-end IEM. But for now, I would have to return them and will wait for FiiO's next releases. And lastly, I would encourage anyone to try the FA7 by themselves. We all have different preferences when it comes to sound!