[Dalmonegrig]

tuning their internal DAC+AMP to the drivers is what all BT headphone manufacturers do, to get the best sound out of them.

Here, I completely agree with you.
The manufacturer of the DALI iO-12 in the User manual has indicated which connection option will provide the best sound quality. My experience with the DALI iO-12's numerous connectivity options supports this statement. Everyone can see my earlier posts.

I got the best sound from the DALI iO-12 with a direct USB connection to the Lumin U2 and from Roon Nucleus Plus (Qobuz) => USB => DALI iO-12 (direct DSP settings). In this USB connection, I used the setup mode DALI iO-12 (Hi-Fi + ANC Off). This sound quality is comparable to stationary or portable systems costing around 2-3K.
Аlthough they also play good via Bluetooth (аptX HD, codec affects sound quality), but not at the same level compared to a USB connection. It's a shame that the DALI iO-12s don't not support LDAC, LHDC, UAT Bluetooth codecs.
Besides, оnce again I compared the DALI iO-12 through 3.5 in passive mode and indeed, they have a more natural timbre sound with good amplification. I used Roon Nucleus Plus (Qobuz) => USB => Burson Audio Conductor 3X Reference =>DALI iO-12 (3,5 passive mode).

 

[subwoof3r]

Dali IO-12 ordered !
Can't wait to receive this "little" beast

 

[musingclouds]

Hey,


I'm very glad with all the tests and comparisons you have done.

In passive mode, what you hear is the sound that your DAC+AMP produce and you can tune that to make the headphones sound better. Perhaps those people who find the Dali IO-12 amazing in passive mode, have a DAC+AMP combination that drives them better / differently than what you have, or just a different tuning that they like better, or is more akin to the tuning of the Dali's built-in DAC+AMP combo.



I singled out this sentence to reply to because: tuning their internal DAC+AMP to the drivers is what all BT headphone manufacturers do, to get the best sound out of them.


Listen to the B&O H9i (my current cans that need replacing) in passive mode -- and they sound like crap, nothing like what they sound like in active mode (either USB-C or BT).

The much-praised Focal Bathys only have an active mode, even when hooking up an analogue wire, because in passive mode, again they sound like crap (there is one YouTube review who managed to listen to them in a purely passive mode despire everyone saying that doesn't work. And he said that they sound like crap in that mode. Listen to this video just past the 11 minute mark: ).


And your hunch is exactly mine too: if they put good drivers in a wireless headphone, same as they would put in a good wired headphone, and then put in a good DAC/AMP in there, we could get amazing sound.

So I've been paying attention to passive headphone performance recently when selecting a new BT headphone. And it doesn't need to be the most audiophile quality for me, I just have to like it enough to enjoy it!


Problem is, I think, that hardly anyone who has BT headphones will actually use them a lot in passive mode and that's why manufacturers don't invest a lot into that.

I decided to pick them up precisely because I’m going to do a lot of wired mode at home but also want the flexibility of Bluetooth on the go.

8 more days!

 

[Dalmonegrig]

So I've been paying attention to passive headphone performance recently when selecting a new BT headphone. And it doesn't need to be the most audiophile quality for me, I just have to like it enough to enjoy it!

Gold words!
If we compare the DALI iO-12 with wired full-size headphones, I can identify some of those that I have previously used for more than six months.
When I first listened to DALI iO-12 I immediately remembered Denon AH-D7000 (were top) and FitEar Togo 334. The sound of the above headphones (from memory) was comparable to the DALI iO-12 and I liked it.
I had Sony MDR-7510 SH and HIFIMAN Ananda v.1. Compared to these headphones, I would prefer the sound of the DALI iO-12.
And finally, the Meze Empyrean I and HiFiMan Susvara headphones, which I was lucky enough to also own.
Meze Empyrean I compared to DALI iO-12, there is parity.
HiFiMan Susvara are great for classical music, but not suitable for rock or electronic music (even with an amplifier specially designed for them by HiFiMan).
Therefore, for me, if I use the combination Roon Nucleus Plus (Qobuz) => USB => DALI iO-12 (direct DSP settings). In this USB connection, I used the setup mode DALI iO-12 (Hi-Fi + ANC Off). For me, I get excellent sound quality from the DALI iO-12 (this level is enough for me) and I like the sound (it involves me and I hear, not individual sounds, but music). DALI iO-12 successfully reproduce different musical genres.
Of course, there are many headphones at a higher level, but for me it is obvious that the DALI iO-12 headphones are unique!

 

[begor]

I also compared Dali IO-12 to wired headphones I own (or used to own):

• ZMF Atrium -- not close I'll probably end up keeping Atriums and IO-12 and sell almost everything else.
• Fostex TH900 MK2 -- I have love/hate relationships with these cans, so it's hard to judge. In their best TH900 blows everyone else away for me. I'd say though that IO-12 is more consistent across various genres/types of music.
• Meze 109 Pro -- they sound somewhat better than IO-12 across the range (including the comfort), but only barely so. I'd keep IO-12 if I had to choose between the two, just because they're wireless and the difference is not that big.
• ZMF Aeolus -- I'd prefer IO-12. Aeolus is great if you want warm lushness, but they often go to far. Also soundstage is easily better in IO-12 (remember that Aeolus is an open-back wired headphone!)
• DCA Aeon 2 Noire -- easily prefer IO-12. For me Aeon 2 is an ultimate anemic/dead headphone that removes every piece of joy out of music. Just my opinion, of course
• Denon 5200 -- I'd prefer IO-12. Overall sound balance is a bit off for me in 5200/7200/9200, but I used to enjoy them.
• PX8 -- not close, but in a worse way I used to really like PX8, but after a ~year of owning them they just become not satisfying at all. Too much muddy bass (can be somewhat fixed with EQ, but not completely), compared to IO-12 and non-existent soundstage.

Right not I'm listening to Dunu SA6 MK2 and again I'd rather use IO-12. And I own IO-12 for almost 3 months now, so it's unlikely a "new thing" kinda bias. Overall, I think I use IO-12 80% of my listening time. It's quite something how they manage to reproduce different genres of music (including a pretty complex ones, e.g. Swans -- The Glowing Man is absolutely phenomenal in IO-12) using "lo-fi" audio codecs (which happens to be a complete audiophile snake oily bull).

Now the only problem I have with IO-12 is they indeed only reasonable as home/office cans. The case is enormous and can barely fit in backpacks/bags that I own. For that reason I even considering buying Bose QC Ultra.
@angelom, I remember you had some opinions on these, can you TL;DR them please? I only look for _adequate_ sound, decent build quality and small case, not the greatest audiophile experience.

 

[aaronjensen]

Now the only problem I have with IO-12 is they indeed only reasonable as home/office cans. The case is enormous and can barely fit in backpacks/bags that I own. For that reason I even considering buying Bose QC Ultra.
@angelom, I remember you had some opinions on these, can you TL;DR them please? I only look for _adequate_ sound, decent build quality and small case, not the greatest audiophile experience.

I'm not angelom, but I did try them. If you ever use ANC without any music, there's a high enough noise floor (hiss) that it was annoying to me. They claim to have sidetone, but it doesn't work. The mics aren't great in the wind. Other than that, they were comfortable, and sounded pretty good. I returned them and have more or less settled on the Solitaire T as my all-in-one (I'm returning the Dali IO-12 too, though I did enjoy them).

 

[angelom]

Overall, I think I use IO-12 80% of my listening time. It's quite something how they manage to reproduce different genres of music (including a pretty complex ones, e.g. Swans -- The Glowing Man is absolutely phenomenal in IO-12) using "lo-fi" audio codecs (which happens to be a complete audiophile snake oily bull).

I cannot agree more with the last part of your comment -- sooooo much exaggeration about bit-rates and codecs differences in audio forums, supposed (professional) reviews and endless YT video 'reviews'.

For that reason I even considering buying Bose QC Ultra.
@angelom, I remember you had some opinions on these, can you TL;DR them please? I only look for _adequate_ sound, decent build quality and small case, not the greatest audiophile experience.

TL;DR -- Yes, buy the Bose QC Ultra, as complete package I recommend 100%.

More long TL;DR -- the QC Ultra is definitely NOT receiving the attention is deserving. The sound is very, very decent, and have sufficiently good EQ for sound modifications; is VERY comfortable; the case is sufficiently small and strong (headphone is foldable too). Design is actually very nice, I think. And even the Bose logo is very discreet! (I always prefer very discreet logos). And, spatial audio is surprisingly good, and in my opinion better than Apple's spatial audio for music, but I still prefer normal stereo for music. The QC Ultra Is have a couple of things that aren't great but not so important for not recommending to you.

 

[zolkis]

I also compared Dali IO-12 to wired headphones I own (or used to own):

• ZMF Atrium -- not close I'll probably end up keeping Atriums and IO-12 and sell almost everything else.
• Fostex TH900 MK2 -- I have love/hate relationships with these cans, so it's hard to judge. In their best TH900 blows everyone else away for me. I'd say though that IO-12 is more consistent across various genres/types of music.

That's giving some context, I see where you are coming from.

• Denon 5200 -- I'd prefer IO-12. Overall sound balance is a bit off for me in 5200/7200/9200, but I used to enjoy them.

[Off-topic] Good to have second opinion on the Denons - about the sound balance being off is kind of new to me. By measurements I see the D7200 among the most linear closed headphones I came across, and the D5200 is not far behind. The D9200 is more open and has more treble, which might be called "off", but it's still the closest tonality to my e-stats from a closed headphone (except the treble).
Anyway, when I compared the drivers against drivers, the Denons are far ahead. As a total solution, the IO-12 is pretty good, minus some small annoyances.

• PX8 -- not close, but in a worse way I used to really like PX8, but after a ~year of owning them they just become not satisfying at all. Too much muddy bass (can be somewhat fixed with EQ, but not completely), compared to IO-12 and non-existent soundstage.

Yes, I just freshly compared them, and agree. More about this later.
The Bose QC Ultra will be probably good enough for flights and commuting.

 

[angelom]

e.g. Swans -- The Glowing Man is absolutely phenomenal in IO-12

Very good 30-min track. I will listening to the rest of the album. Listening to this track is sometimes reminding me, in some strange way, of one unique album from 45 years previously (1971), 'Pawn Hearts' by Van der Graaf Generator. The music of this 2 albums is obviously different but I hearing some interesting parallels. Listen to the 25-min track 'A Plague of Lighthouse Keepers' (patience is required because you hearing many changes in the music) -- the rest of the album is superb. Fabulous reproduction with the iO-12!

 

[zolkis]

Some fresh impressions from comparing the Bathys, PX8, 5909, T+A ST, IO-12, in all their BT sound modes.

The first two got disqualified quite soon.
The Bathys didn't make a good impression in comparison with the rest this time (via BT, not in DAC mode).
The PX8 is still boomy and creamy, with confined sound stage. With ANC off and EQ they can be made sound acceptable. The boom is lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, which makes it more pleasant, but the muddiness kills it. EQ is a must, and it's not trivial.

The T+A ST sounded best in its high quality mode (obviously). There is lifted bass, but it's also lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, more pleasant, soft, deep bass droning with all music you throw at it... . I could live with it, the size is good, ANC is good, but IMHO it's worth about half its price. The IO-12 feels higher quality in everything, including the materials, finish, ergonomics and the overall musical experience.

The 5909 kept up the longest, in its passive mode. Although it also has a lifted bass in all modes, like the T+A ST, it's boom is deeper positioned and more pleasant than with the IO-12 w/ ANC. I was happy for a while, focusing on the music, but the problematic treble region killed my ears in a short while. Maybe as a consequence, the timbre was not as correct as with the IO-12. Sound stage was pretty good, not as wide as with the IO-12, but quite enjoyable. It has some small issues which when adding up, become too much.

After a few rounds it became clear the only headphone I would consider buying for the long term were the IO-12 and eventually the T+A, but I liked the IO-12 more often. If the T+A was about the same price as the PX8 (they feel like similar quality fit and finish), I would seriously consider it as a do-it-all wireless headphone.

I can bear the IO-12 small issues far longer than with the rest of the bunch above. It's not perfect, but I will try to tackle its small problems, and if not successful, I can use EQ.
If the IO-6 approaches this, it might be the wireless bargain to aim for... I need to test that, too.

Note this was a short session and these impressions might not be totally accurate. I think it was long enough for me to judge the qualities important to me, but I advise you listen for yourselves.

 

[angelom]

The T+A ST might be worth checking, too, but I don't have possibility to try it without buying it

So, only after 8 hours you already have fresh sound impressions about the Solitaire T??!

Some fresh impressions from comparing the Bathys, PX8, 5909, T+A ST, IO-12, in all their BT sound modes.

The first two got disqualified quite soon.
The Bathys didn't make a good impression in comparison with the rest this time (via BT, not in DAC mode).
The PX8 is still boomy and creamy, with confined sound stage. With ANC off and EQ they can be made sound acceptable. The boom is lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, which makes it more pleasant, but the muddiness kills it. EQ is a must, and it's not trivial.

The T+A ST sounded best in its high quality mode (obviously). There is lifted bass, but it's also lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, more pleasant, soft, deep bass droning with all music you throw at it... . I could live with it, the size is good, ANC is good, but IMHO it's worth about half its price. The IO-12 feels higher quality in everything, including the materials, finish, ergonomics and the overall musical experience.

The 5909 kept up the longest, in its passive mode. Although it also has a lifted bass in all modes, like the T+A ST, it's boom is deeper positioned and more pleasant than with the IO-12 w/ ANC. I was happy for a while, focusing on the music, but the problematic treble region killed my ears in a short while. Maybe as a consequence, the timbre was not as correct as with the IO-12. Sound stage was pretty good, not as wide as with the IO-12, but quite enjoyable. It has some small issues which when adding up, become too much.

After a few rounds it became clear the only headphone I would consider buying for the long term were the IO-12 and eventually the T+A, but I liked the IO-12 more often. If the T+A was about the same price as the PX8 (they feel like similar quality fit and finish), I would seriously consider it as a do-it-all wireless headphone.

I can bear the IO-12 small issues far longer than with the rest of the bunch above. It's not perfect, but I will try to tackle its small problems, and if not successful, I can use EQ.
If the IO-6 approaches this, it might be the wireless bargain to aim for... I need to test that, too.

Note this was a short session and these impressions might not be totally accurate. I think it was long enough for me to judge the qualities important to me, but I advise you listen for yourselves.

Is looking like we now agree a lot (but not completely) about sound impressions between all of this headphones. Strange.

Some comments, one of which I mentioning already 2 times here: Is apparent that the iO-12 having better construction quality. This is only apparent because I actually think the ST is have better construction quality (I owning for one year the ST and the iO-12 for almost 3 months now).

Is strange still that you keep comparing the sound of others headphones with the iO-12 in "hi-fi" setting and ANC On -- the "high quality" mode of the ST is only possible with ANC Off, for example. The ML 5909 is sounding completely different (with very elevated bass) when ANC is On, this is other example.

So, while is apparent that we now have very/more similar sound opinions, I must insisting that you comparing each headphone equally, meaning with ANC On or Off in all of this headphones (the 5909 with ANC On is very different from the iO-12 with ANC On, very more different than when both have ANC Off).

You must also researching the fully passive performance of the ST -- this headphone is primarily first designed like a very good wired-only headphone and the BT aspects is adding later in the design, and the "high quality' mode is have some very different tech (from normal BT) that you must investigating too. Several ST owners, with experience of very good wired-only headphones, speaking very well of the fully passive performance of the ST, and some thinking that the price, as complete package, is maybe very more than reasonable, some even saying is possibly cheap for what is offering in all different aspects.

 

[hifimanguy]

Some fresh impressions from comparing the Bathys, PX8, 5909, T+A ST, IO-12, in all their BT sound modes.

The first two got disqualified quite soon.
The Bathys didn't make a good impression in comparison with the rest this time (via BT, not in DAC mode).
The PX8 is still boomy and creamy, with confined sound stage. With ANC off and EQ they can be made sound acceptable. The boom is lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, which makes it more pleasant, but the muddiness kills it. EQ is a must, and it's not trivial.

The T+A ST sounded best in its high quality mode (obviously). There is lifted bass, but it's also lower positioned than with the IO-12 w/ ANC, more pleasant, soft, deep bass droning with all music you throw at it... . I could live with it, the size is good, ANC is good, but IMHO it's worth about half its price. The IO-12 feels higher quality in everything, including the materials, finish, ergonomics and the overall musical experience.

The 5909 kept up the longest, in its passive mode. Although it also has a lifted bass in all modes, like the T+A ST, it's boom is deeper positioned and more pleasant than with the IO-12 w/ ANC. I was happy for a while, focusing on the music, but the problematic treble region killed my ears in a short while. Maybe as a consequence, the timbre was not as correct as with the IO-12. Sound stage was pretty good, not as wide as with the IO-12, but quite enjoyable. It has some small issues which when adding up, become too much.

After a few rounds it became clear the only headphone I would consider buying for the long term were the IO-12 and eventually the T+A, but I liked the IO-12 more often. If the T+A was about the same price as the PX8 (they feel like similar quality fit and finish), I would seriously consider it as a do-it-all wireless headphone.

I can bear the IO-12 small issues far longer than with the rest of the bunch above. It's not perfect, but I will try to tackle its small problems, and if not successful, I can use EQ.
If the IO-6 approaches this, it might be the wireless bargain to aim for... I need to test that, too.

Note this was a short session and these impressions might not be totally accurate. I think it was long enough for me to judge the qualities important to me, but I advise you listen for yourselves.

Useful to know. Have you tried the DSR9BT by any chance? I have those and am looking to upgrade my bluetooth audio and wanna know how much better the sound quality actually is.....

 

[zolkis]

Useful to know. Have you tried the DSR9BT by any chance? I have those and am looking to upgrade my bluetooth audio and wanna know how much better the sound quality actually is.....

No, I have not tried these.

So, only after 8 hours you already have fresh sound impressions about the Solitaire T??!

Yes, I got lucky. Look hard and you sometimes find. Is it suspicious?

Is looking like we now agree a lot (but not completely) about sound impressions between all of this headphones. Strange.

Why is it strange?

Is strange still that you keep comparing the sound of others headphones with the iO-12 in "hi-fi" setting and ANC On -- the "high quality" mode of the ST is only possible with ANC Off, for example. The ML 5909 is sounding completely different (with very elevated bass) when ANC is On, this is other example.

Why is it strange? First, I did mention which mode I compared. Then, I am interested in using ANC.
Do you think everyone must use their headphones like you use them? That is the only canonical way to listen?
Are you offended if anyone dares criticizing any other modes of your beloved headphones that are not the mode you happen to like?

So, while is apparent that we now have very/more similar sound opinions, I must insisting that you comparing each headphone equally, meaning with ANC On or Off in all of this headphones (the 5909 with ANC On is very different from the iO-12 with ANC On, very more different than when both have ANC Off).

Again this obsession with ANC. Let me remind you the Dali IO-12 is an ANC headphone, and was meant to be used like that. I expect it works well with ANC.
I don't care what you assume about only being permitted to use the IO-12 with ANC off, so that you can read only positive comments about the IO-12.

Also, in each comparison it was mentioned what was compared. Not equally at all, but pursuing my interests. The Dali I used both w/ and wo/ ANC, but I only made comments about the w/ ANC. The not-Dali headphones were used also both with and without ANC (and other modes when applicable), but since ANC was way too boomy, I used their best possible mode to see if they could replace the IO-12 in any mode.

You must also researching the fully passive performance of the ST -- this headphone is primarily first designed like a very good wired-only headphone and the BT aspects is adding later in the design, and the "high quality' mode is have some very different tech (from normal BT) that you must investigating too. Several ST owners, with experience of very good wired-only headphones, speaking very well of the fully passive performance of the ST, and some thinking that the price, as complete package, is maybe very more than reasonable, some even saying is possibly cheap for what is offering in all different aspects.

Yeah, it's a good addition for someone looking for a single headphone, but as I have multiple wired headphones, I am not interested in wired modes in wireless headphones.

 

[angelom]

Yes, I got lucky. Look hard and you sometimes find. Is it suspicious?

Suspicious? I don't know, but a BIG coincidence, yes.

Why is it strange?

Is only curious.

Why is it strange? First, I did mention which mode I compared. Then, I am interested in using ANC.
Do you think everyone must use their headphones like you use them? That is the only canonical way to listen?
Are you offended if anyone dares criticizing any other modes of your beloved headphones that are not the mode you happen to like?

With your several posts isn't clear always which mode you're using and this isn't helpful and is sometimes confusing or misleading.

My preference mode is NOT important and yours isn't either. What is really important is being clear and specific about what modes we're using so that people reading our posts know as close as is possible what we are talking about.

Again this obsession with ANC. Let me remind you the Dali IO-12 is an ANC headphone, and was meant to be used like that. I expect it works well with ANC.
I don't care what you assume about only being permitted to use the IO-12 with ANC off, so that you can read only positive comments about the IO-12.

Also, in each comparison it was mentioned what was compared. Not equally at all, but pursuing my interests. The Dali I used both w/ and wo/ ANC, but I only made comments about the w/ ANC. The not-Dali headphones were used also both with and without ANC (and other modes when applicable), but since ANC was way too boomy, I used their best possible mode to see if they could replace the IO-12 in any mode.

No obsession with ANC, but ANC is affecting ALL of this headphones differently, and you're mixing ANC On here with other headphone/s with ANC off there. This is NOT helpful and maybe confusing. If you're only "pursuing your interests", then is even more important about speaking of your personal preferences AND being specific about settings for each headphone that you're comparing because, like I saying already, is getting easily confusing or misleading.

Also, you saying "...but since ANC was way too boomy" --- "too boomy" specifically with which headphone/s?? You're adding even more confusion with this lack of specificity.

Yeah, it's a good addition for someone looking for a single headphone, but as I have multiple wired headphones, I am not interested in wired modes in wireless headphones.

Maybe is a good thing, for avoiding even more confusion, that you specifying and saying something like "I don't testing fully passive mode in the ST because I have no interest in this mode, but in BT-only mode the px8 is very better value than the ST" (but then the px8 don't offering passive mode, and you don't testing ST in passive mode, a mode that ST users valuing a lot, by the way -- but a mode that you using, interestingly, for comparing the iO-12 with your wired headphones. Yes, strange)

 

[zolkis]

Maybe is a good thing, for avoiding even more confusion, that you specifying and saying something like "I don't testing fully passive mode in the ST because I have no interest in this mode

I don't need to say that. I said what mode I tested, and that's enough for what I shared.

Instead of criticizing why someone reviews stuff in this or that way, you could have constructively said that "in addition, the fully passive mode of the ST is good", because it does not invalidate what I said, but adds new information to it. No need to fuss about everything.