[greyforest]

ok just got a oriolus 1795 i will do a simple comparison here for future reference

Comparison between Es100, up4 , 1795

1795 is not as easy to use as es100 or up4, mainly because of the forward and backward buttons is the same as the volume button, very painful to operate as the volume adjustment is weird as well. Also during my 2 hour of usage the device powered off by some reason.

Sound: up4 sounds very warm and thick, with less detail is presented compared to es100 or 1795. But it is the one most easy to listen to, with zero harshness and quite forgiving for record quality.

Es100 among those three have the best horizontal soundstage and detail revealing, also the transparency wins quite a margin. With an competent app to eq the sound its a bargain and i would call it a low end dap killer.

1795 sounded warm with oriolus sound signatures(unique female vocal), slightly less detailed as es100 , narrower horizontal soundstage but with noticeable better vertical and frontal depth. There is some noises if you are using sensitive item or pushing the power to the maximum level. Overall it remains in the same league as es100, but noticeably less transparent compare to es100. I know there are people don’t care about transparency and would definitely consider 1795 to have better sound compare to es100. Besides all that The imaging is lager compare to es100, with an emphasis on low end.

Despite the larger size 1795 have less power than es100 with less battery time and longer charging time as well. (Yep the typec and wireless charging is completely useless because it only have 5w capability)

also tested usb-dac function of 1795, i would say it is better than the es100(usb-dac mode) with the soundstage widened imaging is improved as well.

So as conclusion I recommend es100 as the overall experience is much better than the others, if you only enjoy classical or jazz es100 is the best choice among the three. Up4 have a volume nob which is something the next gen es100 or q5k should definitely consider to add on. I only recommend anyone who have the need for a semi decent usb dac to get 1795 as the wireless experience is some what forgettable. Or you have a real passion for female vocal music with a iem that is dedicated for that as well.

The headphone i used for this test is final a8000 and audioquest nightowl.

 

[gravicap]

@greyforest Thanks for sharing your impression! Did you try balanced output of es100/1795?

 

[greyforest]

@greyforest Thanks for sharing your impression! Did you try balanced output of es100/1795?

All of the impressions is based on balanced output Of both devices , with aptx codec. I use cracked android 7.1 it does not have ldac. To be honest i like the se output on 1795 better than the bal. it just have more coherence and sounded much thicker as well.

 

[Mirakoolz]

Hi

Sincere apologies if im in the wrong thread, but;

im looking at adding Bluetooth to my PC to use with wireless earbuds and headphones.
would any USB Dongle available on eBay do? i'd like it to be long lasting by having support for the latest standards for audio - does one exist?

thanks in advance

 

[gravicap]

If anyone can compare oriolus 1795 to ifi xdsd - would be great to hear your impressions.

 

[ClieOS]

Hi

Sincere apologies if im in the wrong thread, but;

im looking at adding Bluetooth to my PC to use with wireless earbuds and headphones.
would any USB Dongle available on eBay do? i'd like it to be long lasting by having support for the latest standards for audio - does one exist?

thanks in advance

The best codec to get will be LDAC. But as far as I know, there is no Bluetooth USB dongle that support LDAC, or at least me search over the last year or two have yielded nothing. The best I have found is aptX-HD. There is a work-around which you can get LDAC support DAP that also support BT transmission, which can act like an USB dongle when connected to PC, but result tends to be much less stable than an actual USB dongle though still usable.

 

[SilverEars]

The best codec to get will be LDAC. But as far as I know, there is no Bluetooth USB dongle that support LDAC, or at least me search over the last year or two have yielded nothing. The best I have found is aptX-HD. There is a work-around which you can get LDAC support DAP that also support BT transmission, which can act like an USB dongle when connected to PC, but result tends to be much less stable than an actual USB dongle though still usable.

Another solution would be to use a portable device that is capable of streaming LDAC connected to the same network that the PC is connected to, and pull the music file stream from the PC to the portable device.

 

[mentega]

Hi guys,

I know this question is relevant only to those of you who have earphones with mmcx connectors but i was wondering if anyone could compare the bt receivers listed so far to the shure bluetooth cable V2?
It’s ridicoloiusly expensive when compared to say the ES100 or the Hiby W3. So i’m not shure if you are paying just for the brand or there is actually any improvement in sound quality.

Cheers

 

[ClieOS]

Hi guys,

I know this question is relevant only to those of you who have earphones with mmcx connectors but i was wondering if anyone could compare the bt receivers listed so far to the shure bluetooth cable V2?
It’s ridicoloiusly expensive when compared to say the ES100 or the Hiby W3. So i’m not shure if you are paying just for the brand or there is actually any improvement in sound quality.

Cheers

If you are referring Shure RMCE-BT2, my research indicates that it uses CSR8675 as an all-in-one solution. This particular chip is already used on most of the adapters listed in the 1st post and just about any BT adapter in the list with [ CSR8675 + xxx ] will beat it in SQ (* xxx = independent codec chip), including ES100 and W3.

 

[mentega]

If you are referring Shure RMCE-BT2, my research indicates that it uses CSR8675 as an all-in-one solution. This particular chip is already used on most of the adapters listed in the 1st post and just about any BT adapter in the list with [ CSR8675 + xxx ] will beat it in SQ (* xxx = independent codec chip), including ES100 and W3.[/QUOTE

Yes that’s what i was referring to.
So it seems that forking out more than 100 quid for the shure really doesnt make any sense when you can get say a w3 for half the price with theoretical better sq and also support to ldac.

thanks a lot for your answer mate

 

[mrnikt]

A question to HiBy W3 users.
On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help.
SO... would I , using HiBy W3, get good volume boost ??
Or are these matters unrelated ?

 

[peter123]

A question to HiBy W3 users.
On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help.
SO... would I , using HiBy W3, get good volume boost ??
Or are these matters unrelated ?

These matters should be unrelated but I've got no experience with the W3 an no nothing about its output specs so hopefully someone who owns it can help you better.

 

[ClieOS]

A question to HiBy W3 users.
On the second post, ClieOS wrote that " the volume control on the W3 itself actually control the software volume on your smartphone".
I struggle with Redmi Note 8T - loudness limitation. Until I used 16 Ohm IEMs everything was ok, but now switching to 32 Ohm Marshalls - volume is way to low. Even changing the region won't help.
SO... would I , using HiBy W3, get good volume boost ??
Or are these matters unrelated ?

You need to install 'Hiby Blue' app from Play Store, and you can use it to adjust hardware gain on the W3 (and also software volume limiter).

 

[Infoseeker]

Got the truly wireless Bluetooth modules, FiiO uTWS1 mmcx version to use with my Shuoer Tapes (104db sensitivity) .

These have a lower gain than my Trn B20s. I have to use them at full volume or 1 click from full volume.

I imagine these are setup like the older B20 model. Making them good more suitable for very sensitive iems. They probably will not hiss.

Too bad I don't own extreme sensitive iems.

 

[monsieurfromag3]

Got the truly wireless Bluetooth modules, FiiO uTWS1 mmcx version to use with my Shuoer Tapes (104db sensitivity) .

These have a lower gain than my Trn B20s. I have to use them at full volume or 1 click from full volume.

I imagine these are setup like the older B20 model. Making them good more suitable for very sensitive iems. They probably will not hiss.

Too bad I don't own extreme sensitive iems.

I am using the UTWS1 with the IMR R1, which are not too different from the Rah (about 32 ohms impedance and 108dB sensitivity), and can drive them very loud. I had the opposite issue from yours when I tried the Nuforce HEM8 (same impedance but 124dB sensitivity) where I get digital hiss.

My main issue with volume is how large the steps are - it means you have to keep your source close by to fine-tune.

How do you find comfort? Have you tried them with the Rah?