[OceanOfLight]

How on God's green earth did my CCA Hydro end up getting shipped to the Netherlands? First time it's ever taken that route. It's gonna be awhile before I see those land in my mailbox. I bet the Project M get here quicker?

It happened to me a few times with AliExpress. Consider it an intermediate step: your package will go through import and export procedures in the Netherlands, and then continue on its way to your destination.

It may take some more days than usual, though.

 

[ToneDeafMonk]

How on God's green earth did my CCA Hydro end up getting shipped to the Netherlands? First time it's ever taken that route. It's gonna be awhile before I see those land in my mailbox. I bet the Project M get here quicker?

Shipping goes in cycles with AliExpress sometimes they ship from Netherlands and it takes forever sometimes I get stuff in 5 days from China to Canada

 

[nikbr]

Another suggestion can't hurt?

 

[OceanOfLight]

Hey everyone, I’ve been trying hard to suppress my curiosity because it’s like opening a whole new can of worms (similar to my previous post about cables). But I can’t hold back any longer - and maybe I like to open new cans of worms from time to time? - so I have to ask: Do you always stick with the default filter on your DACs, or do you have a preferred filter that you switch to whenever possible?

I know some people believe that filters are “invisible,” but in my experience, that’s not the case. For instance, when it comes to Linear Phase Filters, I’ve noticed a significant difference between the Fast and Slow options. The same applies when comparing Minimum Phase filters to Linear Phase ones. Despite the common understanding that filters only affect frequencies above 20 kHz (except for Slow Filters, which gradually drop within the audible range), my ears tell me otherwise. Why would I perceive differences if they were limited to the “inaudible” range?

What stands out most to me is how filters impact the “attack” and “decay”. Linear phase Slow filters offer a gentler attack and an airier presentation, while Linear Phase Fast Filters are sharper and quicker in both attack and decay, resulting in a cleaner but less airy sound. As for Minimum Phase Filters, they share the same characteristics I mentioned earlier for their Slow and Fast iterations, but compared to Linear Phase one their attack tends to be sharper and cleaner. However, their decay is generally slower—slower even than Linear Phase Slow Filters—leading to a more organic and richer overall sound. These are just a few of the distinctions I’ve observed. I decided to not go more in depth in this post because there are way too many in between Filters (Low ripple, Hybrid, Apodizing, etc.) and the post would end up being unnecessarily detailed and longer than it needs to be.

Now, to answer my own question: I tend to stick with the default filter on my DACs most of the time. After all, there must be a reason why the manufacturer chose a particular filter as the default. However, I also enjoy exploring different ones to take advantage of all the possibilities my DAC offers. Lately, I’ve been using mainly the Hybrid filter on my BTR15 and the Minimum Phase Fast filter on my KA17 (both default). Occasionally, I’d like to change them and use filters that I think better suit a particular IEM. For example, when I want to add a little more clarity to warmer-sounding IEMs, I switch to the Linear Phase Fast filter (or a variant of it). Alternatively, if the treble on an IEM is borderline too bright, I opt for a slow filter (either Linear Phase Slow or Minimal Phase Slow).

 

[activatorfly]

How on God's green earth did my CCA Hydro end up getting shipped to the Netherlands? First time it's ever taken that route. It's gonna be awhile before I see those land in my mailbox. I bet the Project M get here quicker?

Hope mine don't take a similar diversion via a party location in the Dam.....bringing along sub-woofers pumping out rumbling sub-bass Rhap music?...no problemo !!

 

[Nimweth]

@Nimweth I would call listening to this song ethereal. It takes you places while you're involved. Thanks for sharing. The ST7 indeed played this back with ethereal beauty.

Thanks. Jennifer Galatis is definitely worth checking out. I agree with you about the Black Cat, I have tried it out on a whole group of IEMs and they all sound better. It's my favourite cable at the moment. I have just connected it to the ST7 and will report back tomorrow.

 

[nikbr]

7000 of your nods of approval

Thank You All. I hope to provide more helpful and/or fun content moving forward!

 

[FreeWheelinAudioLuv2]

Shipping goes in cycles with AliExpress sometimes they ship from Netherlands and it takes forever sometimes I get stuff in 5 days from China to Canada

It happened to me a few times with AliExpress. Consider it an intermediate step: your package will go through import and export procedures in the Netherlands, and then continue on its way to your destination.

The TRN ST7 got here lightning fast for Ali. Literally a week. That's why I ordered again from TRN with the Medusa and Conch. See if history repeats itself? The KZ ZS10 pro 2 took one month to reach me. so it's always hit or miss shipping wise with Ali.

 

[droid23]

Hey everyone, I’ve been trying hard to suppress my curiosity because it’s like opening a whole new can of worms (similar to my previous post about cables). But I can’t hold back any longer - and maybe I like to open new cans of worms from time to time? - so I have to ask: Do you always stick with the default filter on your DACs, or do you have a preferred filter that you switch to whenever possible?

I know some people believe that filters are “invisible,” but in my experience, that’s not the case. For instance, when it comes to Linear Phase Filters, I’ve noticed a significant difference between the Fast and Slow options. The same applies when comparing Minimum Phase filters to Linear Phase ones. Despite the common understanding that filters only affect frequencies above 20 kHz (except for Slow Filters, which gradually drop within the audible range), my ears tell me otherwise. Why would I perceive differences if they were limited to the “inaudible” range?

What stands out most to me is how filters impact the “attack” and “decay”. Linear phase Slow filters offer a gentler attack and an airier presentation, while Linear Phase Fast Filters are sharper and quicker in both attack and decay, resulting in a cleaner but less airy sound. As for Minimum Phase Filters, they share the differences I mentioned earlier for Linear Phase filters, but their attack is even sharper and cleaner than Linear Phase Fast. However, their decay is slower—slower even than Linear Phase Slow Filters—leading to a more organic and richer overall sound. These are just a few of the distinctions I’ve observed.

Now, to answer my own question: I tend to stick with the default filter on my DACs most of the time. After all, there must be a reason why the manufacturer chose a particular filter as the default. However, I also enjoy exploring different settings to take advantage of all the possibilities my DAC offers. Lately, I’ve been using the Hybrid filter on my BTR15 and the Minimum Phase Fast filter on my KA17 (both default). Occasionally, though, when I want to add a little some more clarity to warmer sounding IEMs, I like to switch to the Linear Phase Fast filter on both of them.

Some short observations from my side:
The use of filters pretty much depends on the whole chain. The DAP or DAC, Amp, itself, the headphones and their drivability and overall sound signature, and to lesser but still applicable extents, the IEM tip, nozzle filter, cable, and last but not least, the music genre, resolution, and recording quality of the tracks you play. On top of all that there is a minor but sometimes also important (psycho)acoustical aspect, and that's your individual hearing constitution which can change on a daily basis and even can change intra day. That all given that you still have normal hearing... If not, and you typically already lost some higher FQs, the whole game changes and all hardware and software influences may vary and you have to take your individual type of hearing loss into account. Everyone hears different, physiologically, as well as psychologically.

The above is only a very incomplete and short list of factors which nevertheless play a crucial roll for your individual listening experience. In other words, there is no right or wrong, try yourself what suits you best. Jump around with settings or find your "lazy" middle ground and leave it as it is. Me for example, with my equipment and preferences, I mostly use fast roll off linear phase, the standard, basic FIR filter, and high gain... with nearly everything... because I'm also a bit lazy and want to primarily enjoy the music and not sit there and fiddle around 20 minutes before I start a listening session.

I know that was not the answer you hoped for, but for deep technicalities in what filters exactly do, you nearly have to study some books. Yes, it's actually so complicated if you wanna dig deep and you better have some decent physics and maths skills. I just use my ears and then I call it a day... even though I work in the hearing sciences and industry... Lol.

 

[o0genesis0o]

Hey everyone, I’ve been trying hard to suppress my curiosity because it’s like opening a whole new can of worms (similar to my previous post about cables). But I can’t hold back any longer - and maybe I like to open new cans of worms from time to time? - so I have to ask: Do you always stick with the default filter on your DACs, or do you have a preferred filter that you switch to whenever possible?

I know some people believe that filters are “invisible,” but in my experience, that’s not the case. For instance, when it comes to Linear Phase Filters, I’ve noticed a significant difference between the Fast and Slow options. The same applies when comparing Minimum Phase filters to Linear Phase ones. Despite the common understanding that filters only affect frequencies above 20 kHz (except for Slow Filters, which gradually drop within the audible range), my ears tell me otherwise. Why would I perceive differences if they were limited to the “inaudible” range?

What stands out most to me is how filters impact the “attack” and “decay”. Linear phase Slow filters offer a gentler attack and an airier presentation, while Linear Phase Fast Filters are sharper and quicker in both attack and decay, resulting in a cleaner but less airy sound. As for Minimum Phase Filters, they share the differences I mentioned earlier for Slow and Fast linear filters but, compared to them, their attack tends to be sharper and cleaner. However, their decay is slower—slower even than Linear Phase Slow Filters—leading to a more organic and richer overall sound. These are just a few of the distinctions I’ve observed. I decided to not go more in depth because there are way too many in between Filters (Low ripple, Hybrid, Apodizing, etc.) and the post would end up being unnecessarily detailed and longer than it needs to be.

Now, to answer my own question: I tend to stick with the default filter on my DACs most of the time. After all, there must be a reason why the manufacturer chose a particular filter as the default. However, I also enjoy exploring different settings to take advantage of all the possibilities my DAC offers. Lately, I’ve been using the Hybrid filter on my BTR15 and the Minimum Phase Fast filter on my KA17 (both default). Occasionally, though, when I want to add a little some more clarity to warmer sounding IEMs, I like to switch to the Linear Phase Fast filter on both of them.

I think it depends on the DAC. The RS6 sounds different, the DX300 sound different, most of my FiiO sounds the same, the R8II sound the same.

On DX300, you can circle between filters without looking at the screen. I did that multiple times and almost always land on the D2 (still have no idea what type that is), so I guess filter does make audible and practical difference with that one.

Personally, I don’t play with those filters. I mean reviewing DACs is annoying as is without having to AB all of those filters

 

[droid23]

and almost always land on the D2 (still have no idea what type that is)

Short delay Slow roll off

 

[HifiFrog]

@OceanOfLight Regarding the digital DAC filter modes:

Someone posted this interesting background article about the filter settings a while ago:
https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/blogs/how-to/how-to-pick-the-best-filter-setting-for-your-dac

Most interesting for me were the facts about the NOS filter (which means no filter or no oversampling):
It will "diminished top frequencies" because without oversampling/filters these frequencies can not be restored from the digital audio data.
It also adds "ultrasonic artifacts"

(The article has a TLDR section which I recommend reading if you play with filters)

 

[o0genesis0o]

@OceanOfLight Regarding the digital DAC filter modes:

Someone posted this interesting background article about the filter settings a while ago:
https://addictedtoaudio.com.au/blogs/how-to/how-to-pick-the-best-filter-setting-for-your-dac

Most interesting for me were the facts about the NOS filter (which means no filter or no oversampling):
It will "diminished top frequencies" because without oversampling/filters these frequencies can not be restored correctly from the data.
It also adds "ultrasonic artifacts"

(The article has a TLDR section which I recommend reading if you play with filters)

What I learned lately is that us “audiophile” do not like high fidelity that much class A, NOS, dark IEMs. We always try to cut down that “high res” info that modern gear is capable of producing.

 

[FastGecko5]

Quick comparison between SR5 and K5:

Very similar signatures, but SR5 is more sub bass focused while the K5 has more mid bass thump.

K5 has more articulate bass but SR5 seems to dig deeper. K5 and SR5 mids are very similar but the K5 has more natural timbre. I'm picking up BA timbre on the SR5 that isn't present in the K5. I'd say the SR5 is a bit darker than the K5 but neither are particularly airy or sparkly. K5 is more technically competent, it layers and images quite a bit better than the SR5. Detail retrieval is really close, I think I have to give it to the K5 though. Both IEMs are quite in your head but I think the K5 might actually inch ahead here as well. SR5 is MUCH more comfortable.

So I guess overall K5 is the winner for sound, good job EPZ. To be clear though they're very close. Like if the K5 is a 7.5 the SR5 is a 7.

Do note though that these are just really quick impressions from one quick listening session with the SR5. I'm gonna spend a lot more time with both IEMs and maybe write some actual reviews. I have a bunch more hybrids coming as well so I think I'll do a shootout? But I'll give quick impressions like this as stuff starts to show up.

Currently waiting for the ST7, Hydro, D41, and Flame.

 

[Knale]

Oh hey!

I'll have some impressions (and eventually a review) after I've gotten some listening in!