[osocan]

Very nicely put.

Adding some more impressions of camelot:
I don't have the WM1ZM2, but I can confirm that the WM1Z adds that correct dosage of warmth that makes Camelot sound solid (even better than WM1AM2). Also in comparison to WM1AM2, the WM1Z's sound quality is noticeably better and can hear some details & texture not present in the WM1AM2.

But to my ears, N30LE's sound quality leaves all of these far behind (doesn't mean the other daps don't sound good, it is that N30LE is so good with respect to sound). The sound is clean, while tastefully colored with the bass even lower. Also, N30LE is not dry nor boring.

N30LE is anything but dry and boring! Missing mine already. It’s back at Cayin for re-baising.

 

[Rockwell75]

Very nicely put.

Adding some more impressions of camelot:
I don't have the WM1ZM2, but I can confirm that the WM1Z adds that correct dosage of warmth that makes Camelot sound solid (even better than WM1AM2). Also in comparison to WM1AM2, the WM1Z's sound quality is noticeably better and can hear some details & texture not present in the WM1AM2.

Interesting about the 1ZM2...that's sort of the impression I've gotten from a few folks viz a viz that it doesn't quite live up to the OG in terms of sound or user experience.

But to my ears, N30LE's sound quality leaves all of these far behind (doesn't mean the other daps don't sound good, it is that N30LE is so good with respect to sound). The sound is clean, while tastefully colored with the bass going even lower. Also, N30LE is not dry nor boring.

I didn't get enough time with the N30 to have a sufficiently informed opinion, however the sheer size of the thing imho pretty much places it in desktop territory so as far as I'm concerned it's in a different category of use case than the 1Z.

 

[SoundFlow]

I’ve got fairly strong ongoing tinnitus, and I need much less poor quality upper mid/treble - it’s almost like hearing glare in those parts of the FR make me feel like I’m having a double strength tinnitus outburst. However if it’s high quality upper mids and treble, such as with Fei Wan, I have zero tinnitus triggering. So it depends on the nature of the brightness whether the friend shows up or not.

Ugh… especially listening before bed and then hearing the buzz when trying to sleep!

 

[Scubadevils]

I do believe that R2R implementation on the RS8 is just right for the Camelot. The sound reminds me of listening to cassette tapes but with superior clarity. The experience is heightened further with 320K files.

As for Sony, my first listen to the 1ZM2 was blah. I only warmed up to it when a/bing with other DAPs

As always, delighted to hear Camelot is working out well for you - definitely my IEM of the year, and indeed in this hobby… it sits in the Goldilocks zone for me.

In other news, I sold N7 - Shanling M6 Ultra and H7 to an extent will babysit this category of my sources for now, albeit of course being a step down but I’m debating my next DAP (or desktop… R2R DAC high on the list) move and doing some early spring cleaning - great DAP, loved every minute, but the hobby has firmly set teeth back in

On that note, I’ve ordered the Vortex Alida, simply due to what I perceive as a great style match with my inbound Loki… fingers crossed

 

[jwilliamhurst]

As always, delighted to hear Camelot is working out well for you - definitely my IEM of the year, and indeed in this hobby… it sits in the Goldilocks zone for me.

In other news, I sold N7 - Shanling M6 Ultra and H7 to an extent will babysit this category of my sources for now, albeit of course being a step down but I’m debating my next DAP (or desktop… R2R DAC high on the list) move and doing some early spring cleaning - great DAP, loved every minute, but the hobby has firmly set teeth back in

On that note, I’ve ordered the Vortex Alida, simply due to what I perceive as a great style match with my inbound Loki… fingers crossed

Those are going to look so good together.

 

[fejnomit]

Less would have been better before the tinnitus, just maybe..?

A good reminder for all of us in this hobby. Take care of your ears!

Mine came about from concert going in my teens and 20's. At least that's what my audiologist told me. Hundreds of shows where loudness was the key factor to my enjoyment.

I’ve got fairly strong ongoing tinnitus, and I need much less poor quality upper mid/treble - it’s almost like hearing glare in those parts of the FR make me feel like I’m having a double strength tinnitus outburst. However if it’s high quality upper mids and treble, such as with Fei Wan, I have zero tinnitus triggering. So it depends on the nature of the brightness whether the friend shows up or not.

I would imagine your tinnitus has a frequency range. I know mine does. An IEM that is boosted in that region is basically unlistenable to me. Sounds wrong in that range. Finally realized this after rejecting many highly-regarded sets. Still can't listen to them but I know it's not the IEM's fault now.

 

[ttt123]

I agree with this statement.

For me personally I've setup EAC so it does the secure ripping and then automatically converts them to FLAC. It also finds the basic tag information.

Then I take the FLACs to foobar apply tags from discogs and Musicbrainz, add Replaygain information and then use Album Art Downloader to find the best quality album ard and then the process is done.

Move it to the NAS and DAP, finished.

Just to add that WAV files do not need decoding, while FLAC files do, when playing on a DAP. So extra complexity/load on the DAP.
Recently, I did a comparison, and did find that WAV files do sound better.
The drawback is that you cannot append album art to WAV files.
A positive is that I stopped agonizing over the missing album art, as I listen to the music, mostly with the screen off. So the album art is a "nice", rather than an essential requirement.

 

[drftr]

Mine came about from concert going in my teens and 20's. At least that's what my audiologist told me. Hundreds of shows where loudness was the key factor to my enjoyment.

I would imagine your tinnitus has a frequency range. I know mine does. An IEM that is boosted in that region is basically unlistenable to me. Sounds wrong in that range. Finally realized this after rejecting many highly-regarded sets. Still can't listen to them but I know it's not the IEM's fault now.

That's why I asked mostly. I find most IEMs bright while they're just fine for others, and I wondered how other tinnitus friends fared on this.

Just to add that WAV files do not need decoding, while FLAC files do, when playing on a DAP. So extra complexity/load on the DAP.
Recently, I did a comparison, and did find that WAV files do sound better.
The drawback is that you cannot append album art to WAV files.
A positive is that I stopped agonizing over the missing album art, as I listen to the music, mostly with the screen off. So the album art is a "nice", rather than an essential requirement.

I never even added it. One worry less for the perfectionist inside of me.

drftr

 

[fiascogarcia]

Very nicely put.

Adding some more impressions of camelot:
I don't have the WM1ZM2, but I can confirm that the WM1Z adds that correct dosage of warmth that makes Camelot sound solid (even better than WM1AM2). Also in comparison to WM1AM2, the WM1Z's sound quality is noticeably better and can hear some details & texture not present in the WM1AM2.

But to my ears, N30LE's sound quality leaves all of these far behind (doesn't mean the other daps don't sound good, it is that N30LE is so good with respect to sound). The sound is clean, while tastefully colored with the bass going even lower. Also, N30LE is not dry nor boring.

DMP has the deepest bass I've found with Camelot. SOA offers better bass control of any of the cables I've tried, as long as your source isn't lacking in the lower regions. Baroque tips are a good match with Camelot for me.

 

[Chang]

There's a very sharp misconception surrounding the sp3k that unfortunately has become a bit of a...repeated because enough people said it type scenario. The sp3ks amp puts out 6.3vrms which is about 9volts. The m9+ puts out 6volts only, 3volts less on its balanced output, I believe it's turbo or headphone mode whatever it's called ups this by 1 to 2 volts, either way still less than the sp3ks output.

The sp3k is not going for a bombastic type approach to sound, it is neutral with an emphasis on clarity and detail. The common misconception also is that something like the 475 is powering or "scaling" an iem better, the majority of iems are far below 32 ohm impedance and require only a few watts to run, if even 1 watt in some cases which at 32ohms is going to be requiring a lot less than 9 volts. The 475 is simply causing better "dynamics" because it doesn't care about the same things the sp3k amp is designed to care about.

I'm sure I'll get flak but guess what, no iem needs a desktop amp to be powered properly, you just like loudness (or excessive bass focused quantity), it's the human ear problem.

Edit to add, the sp3k also goes up to freaking 150 volume. It has power, in spades, it just scales it slowly.

You really seem to have a clue and I want to believe you. But why does Chang recommend the M9+ for Storm and not the SP3000? According to him, the SP3000 is not strong enough, but the M9+ is.

Chang wrote this to me personally by e-mail: "As for DAPs, we have found SP3000 to not be very ideal for the STORM due to a combination of tonal character and a lack of power."

No idea what's going on here, but as I wrote earlier: the SP3000 is able to drive my HD800S better (-> dynamics and soundstage) than the CA1000T and ADI 2 Pro SE; both have much, much more power. So I am satisfied.

As mentioned in other comments, the Vrms specs provided by A&K are under no load conditions, so very little can actually be extrapolated from those specifications. Regardless, we believe the quality of power matters more than raw quantity. This is apparent in the HiFI world as well, like with "Naim watts", referring to the driving power of Naim amps despite their lower power output ratings relative to other amps. In the desktop space as well, a Topping A90 is more than powerful enough to drive even the Tungsten, but you won't see many people sticking with an A90 if they're running flagship headphones. Getting a IEM or headphone loud is not the same as driving it well.

This trend is starting to worrying me. My use case for the dap was mostly iem but if the tendency will go this direction there will be only few of them to drive them correctly. The iems nowadays are getting very hard to drive. And I am not talking about planar ones.

I think it's the exact opposite, this year has seen multiple extremely proficient and objectively top of their price bracket while beating out iems, both tonally and technically, well above their cost. Hard to drive = lazy/bad crossover, we are seeing an uptick of manufacturers properly creating impedance match/low impedance, within .1ohm, from 20hz-20khz regularly now and many iems releasing within the next 2 months tout the same tech. It is a must to adopt said technology and create proper crossovers that are efficient. Just like all of our technology, things should be requiring less power given our technological prowess and design capability, not more.

I’m not sure where the notion of a well-designed crossover equaling high sensitivity comes from, but having done the development alongside exchanging notes with many other industry members, the opposite tends to be more true, where extremely easy-to-drive IEMs can be indicative of overly rudimentary crossovers, reduced optimisation as a result of driver stacking for sensitivity, or, in the case of IEMs with ESTs, the ESTs basically having a negligible level of output and being included to add to the spec sheet.

Nice in-betweens can be found, like with the Trailli, for example, but it still sacrifices some sensitivity for optimal EST output and some impedance linearity for sensitivity. Due to size and power constraints, IEM design is a balancing act of optimising trade-offs. With improvements in technology, fewer trade-offs have to be made, but one of the reasons we started on STORM was realising that not much of the industry was really pushing towards that fine balance at the cutting edge.

In terms of design, for STORM in particular, two of our more important priorities were, one, making sure we pushed to the extreme limits of what is currently possible with IEMs, and two, building in a considerable level of future proofing.

To have an IEM really push the limit of what’s currently possible, it means being able to take advantage of any and every source that’s currently available on the market. Be it portable or summit-fi desktop gear, all of our designs thus far have an immense capacity to scale, with several of our clients plugging STORM into desktop stacks optimised for the most challenging headphones, like Susvara, and being quite blown away by the fact that they didn’t hit any scaling ceiling. STORM, with its emphasis on speaker-like staging and staging depth, is also one of the few IEMs well positioned to take full advantage of improvements in DAC upgrades, as one of the key benefits of higher-end DACs is improvement in stage depth and layering, an aspect that many IEMs fail to render properly. As with most devices designed for extreme performance, being at the bleeding edge often means putting up with some inconveniences. A Koenigsegg hypercar doesn't make for a great grocery shopping companion, in most cases a Prius would serve you better, maybe a BMW if you'd like something fancier. But I don't think anyone would expect a Prius or a luxury sedan to outperform the Koenigsegg on a track.

With that being said, we still believe that IEMs are primarily for portable use, so despite designing STORM to have minimal limits to scaling, we also did a lot of testing to ensure that even out of a simple dongle, STORM can be driven to a level that we feel surpasses, or is at least on par, with the very best IEMs out there on the same device. Of course, pairings still come into play, which is why we don’t recommend certain devices, especially those with limited current output. Regardless, there are many options at every tier that we recommend with STORM, even something as simple as the Hiby FC4 for a hundred bucks or so, or more portable devices like the R6Pro2 or Fiio Q15, still drive the STORM to a level of performance that we believe is comfortably ultra-flagship tier. And of course, as you feed it with a better chain, it only keeps getting better.

STORM was also designed to have a certain level of inbuilt future proofing. We believe that if you are spending this much on an ultra-flagship, it makes no sense that it will be made obsolete by the next latest and greatest six months down the line. Designing for this means creating something that is not just extremely technically proficient in the current market but also something that will be able to take advantage of improvements to chain components in the future, be it source, portable amps, cables, or tips. In our case, this means designing a crossover that is an order of magnitude more complex than most designs on the market, implementing a flat impedance design to ensure long-term compatibility with any future amps or amp designs, ensuring no driver is overstressed, and that there is a sufficient level of headroom.

I think just comparing the current crop of DAPs like the DX320max, N30, and even the R6Pro2, just to name a few, to older DAPs from a few years ago, it is evident that we haven’t even gotten close to the limit of what DAPs are capable of, not to mention the improvements in portable amplification as seen in the Tsuranagi and MK 475. Especially since we expect significant improvements in battery technology driven by electrification and the fast-growing wearable technology and portable computing (Steam Deck etc.) markets. Likewise, we expect more compact devices to continue to improve, with recent standouts for size to performance like the R6Pro2 and the M9+ coming to mind, both of which strike a nice balance of sound quality, usability and portability that would be pretty unimaginable form the perspective of someone in the SP1000/DX100/Terra Player era.

With this in mind, we find not pushing the limits to sell a design compromised around the limitations of today, just to sell you an upgrade in a year’s time when the next crop of more efficient and powerful devices appears, to be a disservice to the user. We simply don’t think improvements should be so marginal that flagships can be surpassed by the next crop of releases less than a year later, if peak performance is truly the main priority as many a marketing copy claim. This does not negate the relevance or importance of designs focused on portability, efficiency, and convenience, but I think it would also be sensible to recognise that progress made at the cutting edge also pushes forward the possibilities for designs optimised towards other use cases.

 

[Rockwell75]

As mentioned in other comments, the Vrms specs provided by A&K are under no load conditions, so very little can actually be extrapolated from those specifications. Regardless, we believe the quality of power matters more than raw quantity. This is apparent in the HiFI world as well, like with "Naim watts", referring to the driving power of Naim amps despite their lower power output ratings relative to other amps. In the desktop space as well, a Topping A90 is more than powerful enough to drive even the Tungsten, but you won't see many people sticking with an A90 if they're running flagship headphones. Getting a IEM or headphone loud is not the same as driving it well.



I’m not sure where the notion of a well-designed crossover equaling high sensitivity comes from, but having done the development alongside exchanging notes with many other industry members, the opposite tends to be more true, where extremely easy-to-drive IEMs can be indicative of overly rudimentary crossovers, reduced optimisation as a result of driver stacking for sensitivity, or, in the case of IEMs with ESTs, the ESTs basically having a negligible level of output and being included to add to the spec sheet.

Nice in-betweens can be found, like with the Trailli, for example, but it still sacrifices some sensitivity for optimal EST output and some impedance linearity for sensitivity. Due to size and power constraints, IEM design is a balancing act of optimising trade-offs. With improvements in technology, fewer trade-offs have to be made, but one of the reasons we started on STORM was realising that not much of the industry was really pushing towards that fine balance at the cutting edge.

In terms of design, for STORM in particular, two of our more important priorities were, one, making sure we pushed to the extreme limits of what is currently possible with IEMs, and two, building in a considerable level of future proofing.

To have an IEM really push the limit of what’s currently possible, it means being able to take advantage of any and every source that’s currently available on the market. Be it portable or summit-fi desktop gear, all of our designs thus far have an immense capacity to scale, with several of our clients plugging STORM into desktop stacks optimised for the most challenging headphones, like Susvara, and being quite blown away by the fact that they didn’t hit any scaling ceiling. STORM, with its emphasis on speaker-like staging and staging depth, is also one of the few IEMs well positioned to take full advantage of improvements in DAC upgrades, as one of the key benefits of higher-end DACs is improvement in stage depth and layering, an aspect that many IEMs fail to render properly. As with most devices designed for extreme performance, being at the bleeding edge often means putting up with some inconveniences. A Koenigsegg hypercar doesn't make for a great grocery shopping companion, in most cases a Prius would serve you better, maybe a BMW if you'd like something fancier. But I don't think anyone would expect a Prius or a luxury sedan to outperform the Koenigsegg on a track.

With that being said, we still believe that IEMs are primarily for portable use, so despite designing STORM to have minimal limits to scaling, we also did a lot of testing to ensure that even out of a simple dongle, STORM can be driven to a level that we feel surpasses, or is at least on par, with the very best IEMs out there on the same device. Of course, pairings still come into play, which is why we don’t recommend certain devices, especially those with limited current output. Regardless, there are many options at every tier that we recommend with STORM, even something as simple as the Hiby FC4 for a hundred bucks or so, or more portable devices like the R6Pro2 or Fiio Q15, still drive the STORM to a level of performance that we believe is comfortably ultra-flagship tier. And of course, as you feed it with a better chain, it only keeps getting better.

STORM was also designed to have a certain level of inbuilt future proofing. We believe that if you are spending this much on an ultra-flagship, it makes no sense that it will be made obsolete by the next latest and greatest six months down the line. Designing for this means creating something that is not just extremely technically proficient in the current market but also something that will be able to take advantage of improvements to chain components in the future, be it source, portable amps, cables, or tips. In our case, this means designing a crossover that is an order of magnitude more complex than most designs on the market, implementing a flat impedance design to ensure long-term compatibility with any future amps or amp designs, ensuring no driver is overstressed, and that there is a sufficient level of headroom.

I think just comparing the current crop of DAPs like the DX320max, N30, and even the R6Pro2, just to name a few, to older DAPs from a few years ago, it is evident that we haven’t even gotten close to the limit of what DAPs are capable of, not to mention the improvements in portable amplification as seen in the Tsuranagi and MK 475. Especially since we expect significant improvements in battery technology driven by electrification and the fast-growing wearable technology and portable computing (Steam Deck etc.) markets. Likewise, we expect more compact devices to continue to improve, with recent standouts for size to performance like the R6Pro2 and the M9+ coming to mind, both of which strike a nice balance of sound quality, usability and portability that would be pretty unimaginable form the perspective of someone in the SP1000/DX100/Terra Player era.

With this in mind, we find not pushing the limits to sell a design compromised around the limitations of today, just to sell you an upgrade in a year’s time when the next crop of more efficient and powerful devices appears, to be a disservice to the user. We simply don’t think improvements should be so marginal that flagships can be surpassed by the next crop of releases less than a year later, if peak performance is truly the main priority as many a marketing copy claim. This does not negate the relevance or importance of designs focused on portability, efficiency, and convenience, but I think it would also be sensible to recognise that progress made at the cutting edge also push forward the possibilities for designs optimised towards other use cases.

 

[jwilliamhurst]

As mentioned in other comments, the Vrms specs provided by A&K are under no load conditions, so very little can actually be extrapolated from those specifications. Regardless, we believe the quality of power matters more than raw quantity. This is apparent in the HiFI world as well, like with "Naim watts", referring to the driving power of Naim amps despite their lower power output ratings relative to other amps. In the desktop space as well, a Topping A90 is more than powerful enough to drive even the Tungsten, but you won't see many people sticking with an A90 if they're running flagship headphones. Getting a IEM or headphone loud is not the same as driving it well.



I’m not sure where the notion of a well-designed crossover equaling high sensitivity comes from, but having done the development alongside exchanging notes with many other industry members, the opposite tends to be more true, where extremely easy-to-drive IEMs can be indicative of overly rudimentary crossovers, reduced optimisation as a result of driver stacking for sensitivity, or, in the case of IEMs with ESTs, the ESTs basically having a negligible level of output and being included to add to the spec sheet.

Nice in-betweens can be found, like with the Trailli, for example, but it still sacrifices some sensitivity for optimal EST output and some impedance linearity for sensitivity. Due to size and power constraints, IEM design is a balancing act of optimising trade-offs. With improvements in technology, fewer trade-offs have to be made, but one of the reasons we started on STORM was realising that not much of the industry was really pushing towards that fine balance at the cutting edge.

In terms of design, for STORM in particular, two of our more important priorities were, one, making sure we pushed to the extreme limits of what is currently possible with IEMs, and two, building in a considerable level of future proofing.

To have an IEM really push the limit of what’s currently possible, it means being able to take advantage of any and every source that’s currently available on the market. Be it portable or summit-fi desktop gear, all of our designs thus far have an immense capacity to scale, with several of our clients plugging STORM into desktop stacks optimised for the most challenging headphones, like Susvara, and being quite blown away by the fact that they didn’t hit any scaling ceiling. STORM, with its emphasis on speaker-like staging and staging depth, is also one of the few IEMs well positioned to take full advantage of improvements in DAC upgrades, as one of the key benefits of higher-end DACs is improvement in stage depth and layering, an aspect that many IEMs fail to render properly. As with most devices designed for extreme performance, being at the bleeding edge often means putting up with some inconveniences. A Koenigsegg hypercar doesn't make for a great grocery shopping companion, in most cases a Prius would serve you better, maybe a BMW if you'd like something fancier. But I don't think anyone would expect a Prius or a luxury sedan to outperform the Koenigsegg on a track.

With that being said, we still believe that IEMs are primarily for portable use, so despite designing STORM to have minimal limits to scaling, we also did a lot of testing to ensure that even out of a simple dongle, STORM can be driven to a level that we feel surpasses, or is at least on par, with the very best IEMs out there on the same device. Of course, pairings still come into play, which is why we don’t recommend certain devices, especially those with limited current output. Regardless, there are many options at every tier that we recommend with STORM, even something as simple as the Hiby FC4 for a hundred bucks or so, or more portable devices like the R6Pro2 or Fiio Q15, still drive the STORM to a level of performance that we believe is comfortably ultra-flagship tier. And of course, as you feed it with a better chain, it only keeps getting better.

STORM was also designed to have a certain level of inbuilt future proofing. We believe that if you are spending this much on an ultra-flagship, it makes no sense that it will be made obsolete by the next latest and greatest six months down the line. Designing for this means creating something that is not just extremely technically proficient in the current market but also something that will be able to take advantage of improvements to chain components in the future, be it source, portable amps, cables, or tips. In our case, this means designing a crossover that is an order of magnitude more complex than most designs on the market, implementing a flat impedance design to ensure long-term compatibility with any future amps or amp designs, ensuring no driver is overstressed, and that there is a sufficient level of headroom.

I think just comparing the current crop of DAPs like the DX320max, N30, and even the R6Pro2, just to name a few, to older DAPs from a few years ago, it is evident that we haven’t even gotten close to the limit of what DAPs are capable of, not to mention the improvements in portable amplification as seen in the Tsuranagi and MK 475. Especially since we expect significant improvements in battery technology driven by electrification and the fast-growing wearable technology and portable computing (Steam Deck etc.) markets. Likewise, we expect more compact devices to continue to improve, with recent standouts for size to performance like the R6Pro2 and the M9+ coming to mind, both of which strike a nice balance of sound quality, usability and portability that would be pretty unimaginable form the perspective of someone in the SP1000/DX100/Terra Player era.

With this in mind, we find not pushing the limits to sell a design compromised around the limitations of today, just to sell you an upgrade in a year’s time when the next crop of more efficient and powerful devices appears, to be a disservice to the user. We simply don’t think improvements should be so marginal that flagships can be surpassed by the next crop of releases less than a year later, if peak performance is truly the main priority as many a marketing copy claim. This does not negate the relevance or importance of designs focused on portability, efficiency, and convenience, but I think it would also be sensible to recognise that progress made at the cutting edge also push forward the possibilities for designs optimised towards other use cases.

So many gold nuggets in here and I appreciate the transparency Subtonic/Nightjar has always maintained with its consumer base. Thank you for sharing all of this. I am still looking forward to the day I get to hear the Storm. This has further solidified my trust in your brand!

 

[Chang]

I'd also like to thank everyone for their support on my previous post, sometimes we're in the lab at some stupid hour in the dead of night wondering if anyone really cares that we are going the extra mile. So it really is quite heartening to see that others share our vision and appreciate the work we do and the effort we pour in.

I'll also respond to some queries that were kindly brought to my attention by various community members. With regards to the STORM tour unit, for now production capacity forecasts are lower than we expected, even with some production optimisations we've managed, the current projection is peak production of 10 units a month, with that in mind our priority will be getting units to clients, so it may be awhile before we have spare capacity to dedicate units for tours.

We are planning to start tours for Singularity, our refreshed cable line-up and Crimson between January and February though. More updates on that soon.

If I remember correctly I think @HiFiHawaii808 and @metaljem77 asked about the differences between the Mira and Mira mk2. For the mk2, some improvements have been made to the SPC used in the shield as well as the PVC used for the insulation. Sound wise, they are largely the same tonally, with some refinements to treble and slight improvement to technical performance relative to the original Mira.

There were also some questions about our new cables and the line-up refresh. The cables are ready and we are mainly waiting on the next batch of packaging. Once everything is ready we will also be starting the Mira trade in programme launch edition STORM owners who wish to upgrade to our new flagships, the Sovereign and Sovereign Symphony, or update to the Mira mk2. We will have information about the full line-up up on our website soon. In the mean time if anyone has any questions please feel free to email or DM me.

I still don't understand what's wrong with their stock cable. It's too thin I fear I could break it with a minimal force applied to it

As for this we kind of went in the opposite direction of our original line up as a lot of the feedback was that our cables were too bulky, the 2w Vanguard was designed to be low profile to the point where a user can forget that they're wearing it, similar to what Estron used to offer, just not to the same extreme, and with a greater emphasis on better handling while coiling the cable and better sound quality. The overall concept for Singularity was to have a compact shell and cable for ultimate comfort. For Singularity's shell as well, after gathering feedback it seemed a smaller shell would be more ideal for fitting into more ears, as Helios turned out to be too big for many. But as it turns out we underestimated how big some western ears do get and the small shell if Singularity, while perfect for some, also seems to be an issue for other. In most cases this can be solved with using a longer and larger tip like the Spinfit W1 or Azla Sednafit regular, but it seems there are still instances where some discomfort is still experienced. This is something we are definitely taking into account for future designs. As for the Vanguard 2w stock cable on Singularity, I can assure you that despite it's low profile, the cable can withstand a large amount of both tensile and shear forces. It would be pretty hard to break unless you take a blade to it.

 

[drftr]

There you have it. We're obsolete...

Great responses @Chang!

drftr

 

[HiFiHawaii808]

As mentioned in other comments, the Vrms specs provided by A&K are under no load conditions, so very little can actually be extrapolated from those specifications. Regardless, we believe the quality of power matters more than raw quantity. This is apparent in the HiFI world as well, like with "Naim watts", referring to the driving power of Naim amps despite their lower power output ratings relative to other amps. In the desktop space as well, a Topping A90 is more than powerful enough to drive even the Tungsten, but you won't see many people sticking with an A90 if they're running flagship headphones. Getting a IEM or headphone loud is not the same as driving it well.



I’m not sure where the notion of a well-designed crossover equaling high sensitivity comes from, but having done the development alongside exchanging notes with many other industry members, the opposite tends to be more true, where extremely easy-to-drive IEMs can be indicative of overly rudimentary crossovers, reduced optimisation as a result of driver stacking for sensitivity, or, in the case of IEMs with ESTs, the ESTs basically having a negligible level of output and being included to add to the spec sheet.

Nice in-betweens can be found, like with the Trailli, for example, but it still sacrifices some sensitivity for optimal EST output and some impedance linearity for sensitivity. Due to size and power constraints, IEM design is a balancing act of optimising trade-offs. With improvements in technology, fewer trade-offs have to be made, but one of the reasons we started on STORM was realising that not much of the industry was really pushing towards that fine balance at the cutting edge.

In terms of design, for STORM in particular, two of our more important priorities were, one, making sure we pushed to the extreme limits of what is currently possible with IEMs, and two, building in a considerable level of future proofing.

To have an IEM really push the limit of what’s currently possible, it means being able to take advantage of any and every source that’s currently available on the market. Be it portable or summit-fi desktop gear, all of our designs thus far have an immense capacity to scale, with several of our clients plugging STORM into desktop stacks optimised for the most challenging headphones, like Susvara, and being quite blown away by the fact that they didn’t hit any scaling ceiling. STORM, with its emphasis on speaker-like staging and staging depth, is also one of the few IEMs well positioned to take full advantage of improvements in DAC upgrades, as one of the key benefits of higher-end DACs is improvement in stage depth and layering, an aspect that many IEMs fail to render properly. As with most devices designed for extreme performance, being at the bleeding edge often means putting up with some inconveniences. A Koenigsegg hypercar doesn't make for a great grocery shopping companion, in most cases a Prius would serve you better, maybe a BMW if you'd like something fancier. But I don't think anyone would expect a Prius or a luxury sedan to outperform the Koenigsegg on a track.

With that being said, we still believe that IEMs are primarily for portable use, so despite designing STORM to have minimal limits to scaling, we also did a lot of testing to ensure that even out of a simple dongle, STORM can be driven to a level that we feel surpasses, or is at least on par, with the very best IEMs out there on the same device. Of course, pairings still come into play, which is why we don’t recommend certain devices, especially those with limited current output. Regardless, there are many options at every tier that we recommend with STORM, even something as simple as the Hiby FC4 for a hundred bucks or so, or more portable devices like the R6Pro2 or Fiio Q15, still drive the STORM to a level of performance that we believe is comfortably ultra-flagship tier. And of course, as you feed it with a better chain, it only keeps getting better.

STORM was also designed to have a certain level of inbuilt future proofing. We believe that if you are spending this much on an ultra-flagship, it makes no sense that it will be made obsolete by the next latest and greatest six months down the line. Designing for this means creating something that is not just extremely technically proficient in the current market but also something that will be able to take advantage of improvements to chain components in the future, be it source, portable amps, cables, or tips. In our case, this means designing a crossover that is an order of magnitude more complex than most designs on the market, implementing a flat impedance design to ensure long-term compatibility with any future amps or amp designs, ensuring no driver is overstressed, and that there is a sufficient level of headroom.

I think just comparing the current crop of DAPs like the DX320max, N30, and even the R6Pro2, just to name a few, to older DAPs from a few years ago, it is evident that we haven’t even gotten close to the limit of what DAPs are capable of, not to mention the improvements in portable amplification as seen in the Tsuranagi and MK 475. Especially since we expect significant improvements in battery technology driven by electrification and the fast-growing wearable technology and portable computing (Steam Deck etc.) markets. Likewise, we expect more compact devices to continue to improve, with recent standouts for size to performance like the R6Pro2 and the M9+ coming to mind, both of which strike a nice balance of sound quality, usability and portability that would be pretty unimaginable form the perspective of someone in the SP1000/DX100/Terra Player era.

With this in mind, we find not pushing the limits to sell a design compromised around the limitations of today, just to sell you an upgrade in a year’s time when the next crop of more efficient and powerful devices appears, to be a disservice to the user. We simply don’t think improvements should be so marginal that flagships can be surpassed by the next crop of releases less than a year later, if peak performance is truly the main priority as many a marketing copy claim. This does not negate the relevance or importance of designs focused on portability, efficiency, and convenience, but I think it would also be sensible to recognise that progress made at the cutting edge also pushes forward the possibilities for designs optimised towards other use cases.

Hmm. I think you just explained the technical reasons why I don't like the SP3K. I do like the SP2K. I have used a friends to demo amps and it did that fantastically well as a source. Perhaps A&K just needs to improve its amp section to be more competitive with the DAPs you mentioned. I have heard most of them and I do like those.