The Sennheiser IE 900 are a fantastic sounding single-dynamic driver earphones characterized by a neutral-bright, coehesive tonality with a natural timbre an incredible upper extension quality that will please the advanced audiophile for years to come.

The IE 900 are on our Wall of Excellence.

I thank Sennheiser USA for this loaner, which they generously let me use for 4 months. I thank Kazi for the measurements (kazi.squig.link/)

Introduction

I once ended up at the CES show at the Venetian in Las Vegas. This was rather coincidental, and I had been attracted more to the “adult fare” at the same hotel – also coincidentally. Having no tickets for either, I was restricted to the peripheral overflow suites. In one of them played a sophisticated stereo setup…lots of tubes and LEDs, monstrous cables and very large speakers. A huge system. The small crowd was ooh-ing and aah-ing.

Out of the speakers came…choral music by a choir. Very subtle and unspectacular. But it sounded natural and realistic. So much gear, so much investment, for so little result? I was scratching my head…and wrongly so.

What could be better than reproduction as close to the original as possible? We sit in modern concert halls listening to chamber music and symphonies, which never sounds flashier than nature allows. Isn’t that what audiophilia is all about?

I have listened to >$1000 earphones that sounded spectacular but also unrealistic: “perfumed”…and “glassy” to my ears. How good is a resolution beyond natural?

Sennheiser, a company established out of Germany’s ashes in 1945, have always stood for natural sound. My first headphones were the HD 414, today I treasure the HD 600 (introduced in 1997) and the HD 25 (introduced in 1989). Natural sound is obviously never obsolete.

In terms of in-ear monitors, Sennheiser came relatively late out of the starting blocks. They can pride themselves of inventing the earbuds (their famous M-series ), and added their first in-ear monitors parallel to the introduction of the iPhone…which had a very mushy bass.

In terms of technology, the company relies entirely on single-dynamic drivers for reasons of sonic cohesion and minimization of distortion: no BAs, no crossovers used.

Their 2015 Momentum in-ear had a decent V-shaped sound with too much bass and too little vocals for my taste. In 2019, Sennheiser introduced their pro line for musicians, which I analyzed to the hilt. In retrospect, I could only recommend the middle model Sennheiser IE 400 PRO as the best sounding of the lot.

The $350 Sennheiser IE 300, introduced in 2021, was aiming at the “consumer crowd”. At the time, Sennnheiser had experimented more with the sound chamber for improved clarity, which probably was the nucleus of their IE 600 and IE 900 developments, which reached the market in 2021. As a bonbon for the budget conscious, the 2023-introduce $150 Sennheiser IE 200 impress even the most critical listener – and they run circles about the IE 300.

Therefore, if you like the IE 900 (or IE 600) but can’t afford them, get the IE 200.

Specifications Sennheiser IE 900

Physical Things and Usability

I don’t want to be repetitive. You get information on the technical aspect in the above space, on the Sennheiser website, and right here in Alberto’s very thorough IE 900 analysis.

In the box you find:

The precision-milled and anodized aluminium housings follow the company’s IE 200 and (discontinued) IE 300 models, shape wise….and therefore comfort wise. Fit and comfort have highest priority for me, and the small earpieces score 10/10. No need for custom-made shells.

Unfortunately, all these models (and the IE 600 also) have the same silicone eartips which don’t fit my ears at all; I used long-stemmed Azla SednaEarFits (“toilet plungers”) instead, which also produce an excellent isolation. Sennheiser offers custom-made silicone eartips – but in Germany only.

Three cables are included for single-ended 3. 5mm, and balanced (2.5 mm, 4.4 mm) circuits. They are pretty non-descript in their visual appeal but pragmatic. The MMCX connectors are slightly different from the standard ones, you have to be careful when fitting third-party cables.

Tonality and Technicalities

The Sennheiser IE 900’s sonic signature can be characterized as neutral with a tinge of bright, organic, and close to the truth, with realistically rounded corners….meaning, a cello sounds like a cello and a trumpet like a trumpet: the note decay is just right. They excel with complex music (let’s say, by an orchestra) played on naturally amplified instruments (e.g. strings, wind instruments) and are truly is an iem for the purist.

What strikes me first whenever I plug the IE 900 into my ears is the fabulous treble extension and resolution, in a quality I have not experienced in an iem before. I typically don’t care much about treble, but this one is a real treat.

The low end is as it should be imho: nicely enveloping with a VERY deep extension, no mid bass hump, good composition down to the lowest frequencies. Good rumble down there, but not too thick. The bass is impactful and speedy, yet not smearing into the lower midrange. Great separation between them.

Always a good test for bass tightness is Ladi Geisler’s “Knackbass” in early 1960s Bert Kaempfert recordings (marvels of Germany sound engineering). And the IE 900s deliver it as it should be…bass guitars and drums are tight and crisp but without being overwhelming.

Voices are perceived as lean by some in the IE 900, but not to me. Male voices are certainly not fat, also not sharp, but rather realistic, well rounded, nuanced, and three-dimensionally well sculptured. The midrange also comes with great resolution, clarity, and transparency.

Female voices are full and well rounded/articular to my ears, and forward, more forward than in the HD 600 headphones. One of my standards is Stevie Nicks in “Dreams” from the Fleetwood Mac Rumours album.

Treble is one of the IE 900s outstanding features: very well resolving, very accentuated, cymbals come out better on the IE 900 as in all other earphones I have tested. They are in stark contrast to the robotic cymbals in planar-magnetic iems.

Trumpets, strings, electric guitars and pianos in the upper midrange are discreet and unobtrusive, fitting well into the mix.

Soundstage is very wide (“widescreen”) and tall, and somewhat deep, but not s as deep as, let’s say, the Dunu Zen. 3D imaging and microdynamics are excellent, you can really map the musicians on stage in 3D rather accurately.

When it comes to timbre, I cannot think of any Sennheiser headphone or earphone that hasn’t excelled in this respect. The IE 900 deliver music as close to the source as could be. Excellent clarity and transparency contribute to this without the artificial “glassiness” of most BA or hybrid earphones.

Bringing it all together, the IE 900 excel through their cohesion…the whole frequency spectrum is well balanced, nothing it overdone or neglected. Your money goes into realistic natural sonic production: music as is.

In comparison, my beloved Dunu Zen are easier to drive, bassier, therefore also narrower but deeper, stage wise, with a much spicier upper midrange. However their cymbals disappear in a hole compared to the IE 900. The final E5000 are harder to drive, warmer, have fuller male/female vocals, are bassier, but the bass is generally fuzzier (depending on source). They have a narrower stage and lack the IE 900’s treble extension.

The IE 600 are bit harder to drive than the IE 900. They are bassier, punchier, more V-shaped, and therefore more spectacular with a broader mass appeal…but they are also somewhat cruder (particularly in the treble) than the more finely woven and better imaging IE 900. The IE 600 are the exuberant teenager, and the IE 900 the more mature, laid back, older brother.

The Sennheiser IE 200 are harder to drive than the IE 900 with softer notes, a less intimate imags, and without the IE 900’s spectacular treble extension. They are nevertheless overall darn good and produce vocals very well, for example.

Concluding Remarks

The Sennheiser IE 900 are for purists, for listeners who want to enjoy music as close to the truth as possible. They don’t exaggarate and therefore don’t wow on a first listen (apart from the treble), they linger…and keep doing so. The IE 900 are clearly for the advanced listener, who dip deep into rather complex orchestral, vocal, and jazzy music.

The IE 900 may be pricey but they will hold their relevance and therefore value over the years to come. Similar to the HD 600 headphone series before, they are an investment in the future.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Sennheiser IE 900 Review (2) – From A Single Mould appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Die Sennheiser IE 900 sind ein fantastisch klingender, dynamischer Kopfhörer, der sich durch eine neutral-helle, zusammenhängende Tonalität mit einem natürlichen Timbre und einer unglaublichen oberen Erweiterungsqualität auszeichnet, die dem erfahrenen Audiophilen für die kommenden Jahre gefallen wird.

Die IE 900 hängen an unserer Wall of Excellence.

Ich danke Sennheiser USA für dieses Leihgerät, das sie mir großzügig für 4 Monate gebent haben. Ich danke Kazi für die Messungen.

Einführung

Ich bin einmal bei der CES-Show im Venetian in Las Vegas gelandet. Das war ziemlich zufällig, und ich war mehr von der “Erwachsenenkost” im selben Hotel angezogen worden – auch zufällig. Da ich auch keine Tickets hatte, war ich auf die peripheren Überlauf-Suiten beschränkt. In einem von ihnen spielte ein ausgeklügeltes Stereo-Setup… viele Röhren und LEDs, monströse Kabel und sehr große Lautsprecher. Ein riesiges System. Die kleine Menge war ooh-ing und aah-ing.

Aus den Lautsprechern kam… Chormusik von einem Chor. Sehr subtil und unspektakulär. Aber es klang natürlich und realistisch. So viel Ausrüstung, so viel Investition, für so wenig Ergebnis? Ich habe mich am Kopf gekratzt… und das zu Unrecht.

Was könnte besser sein, als die Reproduktion so nah wie möglich am Original zu sein? Wir sitzen in modernen Konzertsälen und hören Kammermusik und Symphonien, die nie auffälliger klingen, als es die Natur erlaubt. Ist es nicht das, worum es bei Audiophilie geht?

Ich habe mir >1000-Dollar-Kopfhörer angehört, die spektakulär, aber auch unrealistisch klangen: parfümiert… und “glasig” in meinen Ohren. Wie gut ist eine Auflösung jenseits der Natürlichen?

Sennheiser, ein 1945 aus der Asche Deutschlands gegründetes Unternehmen, hat sich schon immer für natürlichen Klang eingesetzt. Meine ersten Kopfhörer waren die HD 414, heute schätze ich die HD 600 (eingeführt 1997) und die HD 25 (eingeführt 1988/89?). Natürlicher Klang ist offensichtlich nie veraltet.

In Bezug auf In-Ear-Monitore kam Sennheiser relativ spät aus den Startblöcken. Sie können stolz darauf sein, die Ohrhörer (ihre berühmte M-Serie) zu erfinden, und fügten ihre ersten In-Ear-Monitore parallel zur Einführung des iPhone hinzu… das einen sehr matschigen Bass hatte.

Ihr 2015 Momentum In-Ear hatte einen anständigen V-förmigen Sound mit zu viel Bass und zu wenig Gesang für meinen Geschmack. Im Jahr 2019 stellte Sennheiser seine Pro-Linie für Musiker vor, die ich bis zum Anschlag analysiert habe. Im Nachhinein konnte ich das mittlere Modell Sennheiser IE 400 PRO nur als den besten Klang der Menge empfehlen.

Der 350-Dollar- Sennheiser IE 300, der 2021 eingeführt wurde, zielte auf die “Verbrauchermenge” ab. Zu der Zeit hatte Sennnheiser mehr mit der Schallkammer für eine verbesserte Klarheit experimentiert, die wahrscheinlich der Kern ihrer Entwicklungen IE 600 und IE 900 war, die 2021 auf den Markt kamen. 

Als Bonbon für die budgetbewusste beeindruckt der 2023 eingeführte 150 $ Sennheiser IE 200 selbst den kritischsten Zuhörer – und sie führen Kreise über den IE 300.

Wenn Sie also die IE 900 (oder IE 600) mögen, sie sich aber nicht leisten können, holen Sie sich die IE 200.

Physische Dinge und Benutzerfreundlichkeit

Ich möchte mich nicht wiederholen. Informationen zum technischen Aspekt erhalten Sie im obigen Bereich, auf der Sennheiser-Website und genau hier in Albertos sehr gründlicher IE 900-Analyse.

In der Box finden Sie:

Die präzisionsgefrästen und eloxierten Aluminiumgehäuse folgen den Modellen IE 200 und (abgesetzt) IE 300 des Unternehmens, formtechnisch … und damit komfortmäßig. Passform und Komfort haben für mich höchste Priorität, und die kleinen Ohrhörer punkten 10/10. Keine Notwendigkeit für maßgeschneiderte Muscheln.

Leider haben alle diese Modelle (und auch der IE 600) die gleichen Silikon-Ohrstöpsel, die überhaupt nicht zu meinen Ohren passen; ich habe stattdessen langgestiemte Azla SednaEarFits (“Toilettenkolben”) verwendet, die auch eine ausgezeichnete Isolierung erzeugen. Sennheiser bietet maßgeschneiderte Silikon-Ohrstöpsel an – aber nur in Deutschland.

Drei Kabel sind für einzelnde 3,5 mm und ausgeglichene (2,5 mm, 4,4 mm) Schaltkreise enthalten. Sie sind ziemlich unscheinbar in ihrer visuellen Anziehungskraft, aber pragmatisch. Die MMCX-Anschlüsse unterscheiden sich geringfügig von den Standardanschlüssen, Sie müssen beim Anbringen von Kabeln von Drittanbietern vorsichtig sein.

Tonalität und technische Details

Die Klangsignatur des Sennheiser IE 900 kann als neutral mit einem Hint von hell, organisch und nah an der Wahrheit charakterisiert werden, mit realistisch abgerundeten Ecken….das bedeutet, ein Cello klingt wie ein Cello und eine Trompete wie eine Trompete: Der Notenausklang ist genau richtig. Sie zeichnen sich durch komplexe Musik (sagen wir, von einem Orchester) aus, die auf natürlich verstärkten Instrumenten (z.B. Streicher, Blasinstrumente) gespielt wird, und sind wirklich ein Iem für die Puristen.

Was mir zuerst auffällt, wenn ich den IE 900 in meine Ohren stecke, ist die fabelhafte Hocherweiterung und Auflösung, in einer Qualität, die ich noch nie in einem Iem erlebt habe. Normalerweise kümmere ich mich nicht viel um die Dress, aber dieser ist ein echter Leckerbissen.

Das niedrige Ende ist so, wie es sein sollte: schön umhüllend mit einer SEHR tiefen Verlängerung, kein Mittelbass-Humpfel, gute Komposition bis hin zu den niedrigsten Frequenzen. Gutes Rumpeln da unten, aber nicht zu dick. Der Bass ist wirkungsvoll und schnell, schmiert sich aber nicht in die untere Mitte. Große Trennung zwischen ihnen.

Immer ein guter Test für die Bassdichtheit ist Ladi Geislers “Knackbass” in den frühen 1960er Jahren Bert Kaempfert Aufnahmen (Wunder von Deutschland Sound Engineering). Und die IE 900s liefern es so, wie es sein sollte… Bassgitarren und Schlagzeug sind eng und knackig, aber ohne überwältigend zu sein.

Stimmen werden von einigen im IE 900 als schlank wahrgenommen, aber nicht für mich. Männliche Stimmen sind sicherlich nicht fett, auch nicht scharf, sondern eher realistisch, gut abgerundet, nuanciert und dreidimensional gut skulpturiert. Der Mittelklasse kommt auch mit großer Auflösung, Klarheit und Transparenz.

Weibliche Stimmen sind voll und gut abgerundet/artikulal zu meinen Ohren und nach vorne, mehr nach vorne als in den HD 600-Kopfhörern. Einer meiner Standards ist Stevie Nicks in “Dreams” aus dem Fleetwood Mac Rumours Album.

Treble ist eine der herausragenden Funktionen der IE 900: sehr gut lösende, sehr akzentuierte Becken kommen auf dem IE 900 besser heraus wie bei allen anderen Kopfhörern, die ich getestet habe. Sie stehen in krassem Gegensatz zu den Roboterbecken in planar-magnetischen Iems.

Trompeten, Streicher, E-Gitarren und Klaviere in der oberen Mitte sind diskret und unaufdringlich und passen gut in den Mix.

Die Klangbühne ist sehr breit (“Widescreen”) und groß und etwas tief, aber nicht so tief wie, sagen wir, das Dunu Zen. 3D-Bildgebung und Mikrodynamik sind ausgezeichnet, man kann die Musiker auf der Bühne wirklich ziemlich genau in 3D abbilden.

Wenn es um das Timbre geht, kann ich mir keinen Sennheiser-Kopfhörer oder -Kopfhörer vorstellen, der sich in dieser Hinsicht nicht ausgezeichnet hat. Der IE 900 liefert Musik so nah an der Quelle, wie sie sein könnte. Ausgezeichnete Klarheit und Transparenz tragen dazu bei, ohne die künstliche “Glasigkeit” der meisten BA- oder Hybrid-Ohrhörer.

Wenn man alles zusammenbringt, zeichnet sich der IE 900 durch seinen Zusammenhalt aus… das gesamte Frequenzspektrum ist gut ausbalanciert, nichts, was es übertrieben oder vernachlässigt. Ihr Geld fließt in realistische natürliche Klangproduktion: Musik, wie sie ist.

Im Vergleich dazu sind meine geliebten Dunu Zen leichter anzutreiben…mit mehr Bass, daher auch schmaler, aber tiefer, stufenmäßig, mit einem viel schärferen oberen Mittelbereich. Ihre Becken verschwinden jedoch im Vergleich zum IE 900 in einem Loch. Die letzten E5000 sind schwieriger zu fahren, wärmer, haben einen volleren männlichen/weiblichen Gesang, sind Bassiser, aber der Bass ist im Allgemeinen fuzzier (je nach Quelle). Sie haben eine schmalere Stufe und es fehlt die Doppelverlängerung des IE 900.

Der IE 600 lassen sich etwas schwieriger antreiben als der IE 900. Sie sind bassigzer, druckvoller, V-förmiger und daher spektakulärer mit einer breiteren Massenanziehungskraft… aber sie sind auch etwas grober (insbesondere in den Höhen) als die feiner gewebte und bessere Bildgebung IE 900. Der IE 600 ist der überschwängliche Teenager und der IE 900 der reifere, entspanntere, ältere Bruder.

Der Sennheiser IE 200 ist schwieriger zu treiben als der IE 900 mit weicheren Noten, weniger intimen Bildern und ohne die spektakuläre Doppelverlängerung des IE 900. Sie sind dennoch insgesamt verdammt gut und produzieren zum Beispiel den Gesang sehr gut.

Abschließende Bemerkungen

Die Sennheiser IE 900 sind für Puristen, für Zuhörer, die Musik so nah wie möglich an der Wahrheit genießen wollen. Sie übertreiben nicht und begeistern daher nicht beim ersten Hören (abgesont der Doppel), sie verweilen … und tun es weiter. Die IE 900 sind eindeutig für den fortgeschrittenen Zuhörer, der tief in ziemlich komplexe Orchester-, Gesangs- und Jazzmusik eintaucht.

Der IE 900 mag teuer sein, aber er wird seine Relevanz und damit seinen Wert in den kommenden Jahren behalten. Ähnlich wie bei der vorherigen HD 600-Kopfhörerserie sind sie eine Investition in die Zukunft.

Bis zum nächsten Mal…keep on listening!

The post Sennheiser IE 900 Rezension – Aus Einem Guss appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Gear of the Year: audioreviews.org is soon completing its 5th year. We are still six dedicated and competent authors located all over the western hemisphere, catering to a mature, discerning readership. Our list of earphone reviews is approaching 450 and our Wall of Excellence (WoE) is better decorated than the Christmas tree at NYC’s Rockefeller Center. Since any product on our WoE is backed by more than one opinion, it should give you confidence in your buying decisions.

However, our WoE is not a bunch of “best of” lists as we have not tested all competitors in each category. Such claims would be presumptuous.

We did, sadly, lose our single sponsor HifiGo (and some more suppliers) over our reviews of their gear. But hey, our critical, realistic approach sets us apart from 98% of the blogosphere (we think). We rather deal with companies that have confidence in their products.

Whatever gear passes our test must be somewhat good. We still don’t do Google ads, affiliate links, and we don’t allow trackers…we are no salespeople, we honour your reading pleasure and your privacy. We are simply audio aficionados.

Thank you for your patronage in 2023! Enjoy this read and we wish you a happy and successful 2024!

Hey, feel free to let us know your personal favourites of 2023 in the comments section below.

We thank our 2023 Partners

And here we go…that’s what we enjoyed in 2023…published by author in the order of submission…and purely subjective.

Loomis Johnson…Chicago, USA

Wiim Mini AirPlay 2 Wifi Streamer—the onboard DAC is just fair, and the app is quirky (if very ambitious), but through its digital out this is a genuinely excellent streamer  for less than a hundo.

BGVP DM9 IEM—energetic and massive sounding, these are head and shoulders above any other IEM I’ve heard this year. Richly priced at $600 and worth every penny.

Sony WH-1000XM5 Wireless Headphones—Bose has marginally better ANC and Sennheiser a longer battery and better UI, but overall the XM5 would be my pick if (god forbid) I could own only one TWS.

Oladance Wearable Stereo Open Ear Headphones —eons better than any bone-conduction model out there, these come close to good in-ear TWS models for sound quality, with a rich warm sound and a big 3D stage. Hall of Fame material.

SMSL D0400  DAC/Headphone Amp—a tad more detailed (if not necessarily better-sounding) than the godlike SU-9, the inclusion of balanced out and an excellent onboard headphone amp makes this my pick among SMSL’s myriad offerings.

Truthear Shio DAC/Dongle—well featured, balanced dongle won’t make your counterfeit Beats sound like Carnegie Hall, but it sounds just slightly more transparent than its ubiquitous price peers.

JBL Boombox 3 Portable Bluetooth Speaker— rather than spending ten grand to mod the sound system on his 100k pontoon boat, a very wealthy friend of mine dropped $349 on one of these. He couldn’t be happier. Link two together and you’ll be in hip-hop heaven.

Eagle Rare 10-Year Bourbon—if this was an IEM, we’d deem it “musical, balanced and fully coherent.” People are asking stupid prices for this in the secondary market, but if you can find it anywhere near its $40 SRP, buy it.

Dreamcloud Premier Rest Hybrid Mattress—the downside of buying a really good mattress is that it’ll sap your ambition faster than a meth habit. If, however, like me your ambition is to lay around and watch professional basketball, this is a necessary acquisition.

Jürgen Kraus…Calgary, CANADA

Short and sweet, as I am mainly still using my 2022 gear. And the best gear is the gear one uses after all. 2023 added a few excellent products to my daily listening. Oladance TWS Pro wearables were most impressive…and useful…a home theatre on your ears you don’t even feel. I can listen to these all day.

In terms of earphones, the Sennheiser IE 900 impressed me most because of their natural, cohesive presentation, their incredible treble quality, and their wonderful dosage across the frequency spectrum. I preferred them much more over the IE 600, which offer the same Harman type tuning we have experienced so often before. Both were sadly loaners. I also love the well-balanced Sennheiser IE 200, which are tuning wise closer to the IE 900 than to the IE 600.

Also very natural sounding are the Akoustyx S6, but they do need some modding to tame the upper midrange. As to budget TWS, I do have a pair of Moondrop Space Travel by my bedside, for talk radio and classical music. They have a very composed and nuanced presentation…and they fit me well.

Also by my bedside is the EarMan CH-Amp/Tradutto combination for driving my HD 600 and final Sonorous III. I equipped the HD 600 with a Hart Audio 4.4 mm balanced cable. Also great is the SMSL DO200 MKII DAC, which I use on my desk.

As a movable desktop stack (between sofa and kitchen table) serves the very good sounding Moondrop DiscDream CD player. A great idea to reconsider this technology — looking forward to another premium Walkman.

An honorouble mention goes to the very versatile TempoTec Serenade X Digital Desktop Player, and TempoTec as a company, as they don’t get lost in countless models of the same…no they offer one model of each product, and each is well thought out. A big step up for them in the last two years.

As a guilty pleasure, I indulged myself with USB cables for audio usage from AudioQuest (Forest), IKEA, and Monoprice. I love USB cables. And this combination of brands doesn’t leave room for the usual shitstorm by naysayers.

And hey, Loomis, we just acquired an Endy mattress. Made in Canada, of course.

Alberto Pittaluga…Bologna, ITALY

Given I’m not one of those world-famous tiktokers I guess it’s preliminary worth remembering that I have a sharp inclination to carefully avoid wasting time on even assessing “stuff” which doesn’t apriori seem to qualify for a serious upgrade to whatever I already own – an attitude of mine that applies across the board of course, not certainly to audio gear only. Such information is I presume key to better understand the following list.

Proceeding by categories, and starting with cans, towards the end of the year I got a pair of Sennheiser HD800. These were quite a lot anticipated to upgrade my pleasure on my particular library vs the HD600 – and that’s of course what happened. As a side bonus I had yet another chance to touch how important fresh pads and a decent cable are for sound optimisation, let alone how tough still is finding an overall more exquisite timbre then the one coming off my Groove.

Shrinking size down to IEMs, my trip to Munich earlier this year got me very curious about Sennheiser’s relatively recent IEM introductions, and that’s where the curiosity to assess IE900 and (from a different source) IE600 came up from.

The latter impressed me almost as much as the former, however when it comes to stunning V-shaped IEM encounters happened this year nothing beats – and I reckon will hardly beat tomorrow – Intime Sho DD.

The other major IEM acquisition of the year is represented by final B3, and their ability to capture the auditioner and port him onto the jazz stage. Honorable mention goes to Akoustykx S6 (and their “magic” Earlocks).

In terms of source gear, I completed my collection of DAPs by acquiring a Sony WM-1A, of course instantly flashing MrWalkman WM1Z signature onto it. For a number of reasons its sonic features are at the same time in line and complementary to those of my other standards: Questyle QP1R and QP2R.

Sometimes it does bring an audible improvement, other times it doesn’t – it depends on the apriori situation of the system you plug it onto. I’m talking about AudioQuest’s Jitterbug. My (quite articulated) home setup is clearly in the benefitted category, and that’s why 3 of these are now stable part of it.

Source gear honorable mention goes to a tiny-budgeted device, Ifi GO Link. That, and IEMs with a balanced cable and a 3.5mm TRRS adapter, right away became my blind buy rec to those individuals which every now and then, attracted by the gear they often see me fiddling with, ask me to indicate “something nice and inexpensive to get started with”.

Looking in retrospect what I just recapped (and I genuinely did it “live”, now, for the mere sake of putting these notes together) none of my 2023 preferred tech comes from chifi-land. The white-bearded badly-aging old continent nerd in me shily shruddered in realising it

Durwood…Chicago, USA

Kefine Klanar

Redefines what a planar can do, the Timeless 7Hz was great but it also had that overblown upper air treble that made it standout. The Klanar on the other hand dials everything down delivering similar quality bass and while not as treble exciting is better balanced, target curve crowd pleasing retaining the technical precision and quick transient delivery of the planar driver.

Moondrop Blessing Dusk 2 

Fits snugly staying in place, great technical details, with enough bass to keep me interested.

BGVP DM9

While I do not own many top tier earphones, I have listened to plenty at shows and know that they best anything I have in the $300 realm. The bass hump is well controlled and balanced nicely in the midbass/sub-bass transition region. The elevated treble plateau keeps them energized and engaging delivering maximum resolution and clarity.

SMSL DO400 DAC/AMP

Extreme value premium desktop DAC melding a powerful headphone amp. I miss the quick control of a potentiometer volume knob of a split dac/amp solution, but it is worth the feature rich resolving DAC and potent headphone amp drive.

Truthear SHIO DAC

Just as powerful as any of the dongles out there it sounds the most blended qualities of a dongle dac without leaning too warm, bassy, thin or sharp. Not head and shoulders above the LG G8, but can turn any USB-C phone into an excellent DAP for an average price.

Oladance OWS Sport

A new category of open-ear sports headphones that offers other uses while avoiding disadvantages of in-ear pressure, ear canal phobias, and isolation, earbud compromises, and over ears isolation and sweatiness. Balanced sound quality that trades low-end bass for open awareness without the lackluster bone conduction competition. Review coming soon, they know what they are doing.

TWS????

Still looking for a TWS all-rounder. I want them to fit tight without loosening slowly, excellent tonality and have good ANC. A blend of the Sony WF-1000XM3 ANC with the sound of the Moondrop Alice combined with the fitment of the KZ ZXS Pro.

When browsing the local classifieds this year I scored some very excellent sounding vintage ADS L570/2 and lesser known local midwest unicorn relic well tuned, amazing imaging cherry veneer Amrita Elan (I think) that my buddy is still scorning me over not “allowing” him to buy them instead- no worries we are still friends. He would love to get his hands on the 3 way model with isobaric woofers anyway.

Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir…Munich, GERMANY

This year passed by in the blink of an eye, but fortunately I managed to listen to hundreds of devices in this rather short span. My personal collection also went through some radical changes, so without further ado…

Firstly, I finally upgraded my reference gear, both portable and desktop. On the portable side, it’s now Lotoo PAW Gold Touch paired with the venerable Cayin C9. The desktop, meanwhile, is the recently-retired Questyle CMA Twelve Master. Having tried numerous TOTL setups so far, these two fit my needs the most. I may add a tube amp down the line, but that’s for the future.

On the IEM side of things, my daily drivers include Sennheiser IE 900 and the (discontinued) Softears Turii. The IE 900 are perhaps the most advanced in terms of driver tech, and the Turii have such a unique, spacious sound that it belies the single dynamic setup. They have received the most “ear time” this year, and will likely continue to do so in the coming year.

On the TWS side of things, I am impressed by the Beats Studio Buds Plus. For once, a Beats product is actually decent enough to be a daily driver. Apart from the middling noise cancellation, there is little I’d change about them given the price tag.

Finally, I have streamlined my headphones collection and ended up purchasing a modded Sennheiser HD 800. These hold up tremendously well against the planar magnetic behemoths even now, and the staging and imaging are unparalleled in the sub-$2000 space. I was also pleasantly surprised by Sennheiser HD 660S2, though the price tag is a bit higher than I’d prefer.

This year, I finally managed to audition the Sennheiser HE-1 for almost an hour. It was a surreal experience and I can definitely see (or hear) why these are so mythical. That being said, the Warwick Acoustics Aperio are no slouch either and trade blows with the supreme Sennheisers.

But the one pair of headphones that I can call my “personal endgame” are none other than Warwick Bravura. They get dangerously close to the summit-fi behemoths and fortunately, come pre-built as a system so you can save on the cost of an energizer or accompanying pre-amps to further flavor the sound.

Notable mentions: Campfire Audio Supermoon (perhaps the best sounding planar IEMs), Softears Twilight (fantastic single DD), Effect Audio Code 23 (the best copper cable I have ever tried, despite the challenging ergonomics), iFi Go Blu (fantastic little dongle), Cayin RU7 (replaced Questyle M15 for my portable use).

Biodegraded…Vancouver, CANADA

Environmentally friendly, as his name implies, he stuck to his 2021 gear…again. Gives us carbon credits.

Gear of the Year 2022

The post Gear Of The Year 2023 – Our Personal Favourites appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $139 TempoTec IM05 is a 4+1 iem with fabulous imaging qualities that may have a tad too much bass for some.

The TempoTec IM05 was kindly supplied by the manufacturer for my review – and I thank them for that. You can purchase it from TempoTec Official Store .

Introduction

TempoTec’s claim to small fame came with their budget dongle DACs that were unbeatable at their price. For example, their $40 Sonata HD Pro came with all accessories to even work with iPhone.

Recently, the company has expanded gear wise and simultaneously moved out of the budget realm. They now feature the excellent V6 dap, the great Serenade X desktop streamer, and the March III M3 desktop DAC/amp. One device per category, all mid-fi, and all surprisingly good.

With the IM05 (IM stands for “Impromptu”, 05 for the number of drivers), TempoTec enters yet another category: earphones. And TL;DR, they do another good job. No rookie mistakes, the IM05 is a mature product. It was actually designed to harmonize with the V6 DAP.

Specifications TempoTec IM05

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces with plenty of silicone tips, a fancy cable, a very roomy storage case, and the paperwork. The earpieces are large but light, they are comfortable, fit me well, and they isolate well, too. The cable is gorgoeous both haptically and functionally (“pliable”).

Tonality and Technicalities

The TempoTec IM05 is warmish sounding with a good depth and headroom and a decent timbre (considering it has 4 BAs), but with a “broad” lower mid bass that smears into the lower midrange. It sounds nothing like the graph implies, paradoxically.

Yep, the bass is the polarizing feature, with its strong cat buckle (in the graph) that culminates at the transition mid-bass/sub-bass. This makes for a thick and somewhat punchy midbass, but with a rather subtle impact and intensity that does not torture my eardrums. The Azul Performer 5 does the opposite.

TempoTec offer this kind of bass lift also in their V6 DAP and March III M3 DAC/amp. It appears to be part of their house sound. In fact, the $4000 Fir Audio iems offer a similar bass impact.

Bass lines are generally on the rich side. Extension into the sub-bass is average but, paradoxically, the lowest frequencies are leaner than the mid bass. There is always a subtle but never annoying rumble down there.

The bass smears into the midrange which has the positive effect that it re-inforces male and female voices alike, but it also cuts into the midrange transparency. Strangely enough, vocals are not recessed but rather intimate, despite the mickey mouse ears in the upper midrange’s graph segment.

There is also no shoutiness. I can only explain this by the balance between elevated bass and upper midrange in combination with the recessed treble.

Somebody tuned these iems by ear and not by graph, obviously. And it works. Vocals are very well rendered and nicely layered, they have a 3D effect and are almost holographic. They are neither thick or thin but are nicely intimate and rather articulate.

Treble is subtle overall, the extension is..well..not well extended. The high notes are somewhat swept under the carpet. Older listeners like me won’t probably care that much.

That combination of modest treble and extension and bass lift make for a deep but not too wide (but wide enough) stage. Midrange resolution is excellent as long as there is no strong bass superimposed. Separation and layering are also very good, not to forget the outstanding imaging. When listening to concerts with interaction of musicians and audience, I always feel I am in the building or stadium.

In comparison, the $150 single DD Sennheiser IE 150 are more fluid with a more emphasized midrange, but they have flatter staging and less resolution. The LETSHUOER S12 is less holographic with lesser imaging but somewhat smoother (after micropore tape mod).

The IKKO OH10 on our Wall of Fame plays vocals leaner, sharper, and more recessed, at similar imaging qualities. The Dunu Talos has a wider stage but lacks depth in comparison, and the notes are leaner. The first model in my collection to beat the I M05 is the $650 LETSHUOER EJ07 in that its sonic presentation is somewhat smoother with better rounded notes, but the IM05 is still better imaging.

The discontinued $699 Dunu Zen is better resolving but has an upper midrange glare. I prefer the IM05 over the lesser imaging and resolving Moondrop KATO. In summary, the IM05 are also head and shoulders above most $150-200 ChiFi fare I have tested, at least in terms of imaging.

Concluding Remarks

The TempoTec IM05 is an enjoyable 4+1 iem with an agreeable sonic signature. I have auditioned way more than 500 iems, but never had exactly this listening experience, so it is somewhat mainstream with new features, particularly the bass (though it may be considered being too boosted by some).

Since it is the company’s first iem, many analysts may “laud a good initial effort” while tacitly recommending the reader to wait for the “Pro” version. This is not necessary for the IM05, TempoTec got it right on the first try, as is the case with their V6 dap, Serenade X streamer, and March III M3 DAC/amp.

It was a pleasure testing the IEM05, an outright inspiration following my bundle of 10 Chifi iems that landed on my desk just before Christmas. TempoTec keep surprising.

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post TempoTec IM05 Review – Uniquely Mainstream appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $129 TempoTec March III M3 is a versatile natural sounding and powerful balanced DAC/amp (wired, BT) that drives even 300 Ω headphones well. It runs on 5V from your computer, the stock power supply, or a fancy third party one.

The TempoTec March III M3 was kindly provided by the manufacturer for my analysis, and I thank them for that. You find more information on the TempoTec website.

Introduction

TempoTec are a Chinese company established by audiophiles. They claim to have a multinational team from China, Taiwan, Korea, and Germany. The company originally made a name for itself by budget dongle DACs…cheap, ok, great value, but not necessarily high end. This, unfortunately, stuck with them for the longest time.

Lately, the company left the starting blocks and released impressive “midfi” products that convinced by innovative quality features at attractive prices.

First was the TempoTec V6, a very good sounding digital analog player at an incredible $300. Next came their $269 Serenade X, a desktop streamer with essentially unlimited features. And last but not least, there is the forthcoming IM05 4+1 earphone, their first…but it is a good one.

The March III M3 is TempoTec’s first DAC/amp, which once again undercuts its competition in price, but not in quality.

TempoTec are becoming serious competitors to brands such as Topping, SMSL, and possibly FiiO. But in contrast to these companies, TempoTec are confident to score with one model of each: streamer, dap, DAC/amp…instead of offering us the same in multiple different flavours. A very positive sign.

Let’s have a good look at the March II M3’s specs. What makes the device special?

Specifications TempoTec March III M3

Physical Things

In the package are the unit, a 5V/2A power supply, 2 USB-A-C cables, and the paperwork. The device and all buttons are made of metal, the front is almost completely covered with glass. The March III M3 is rather small and relatively light – easy to be carried around on travel and to be used in hotel rooms or the office.

Technology

The March III M3 sports an Asahi Kasai DAC chip (most competitors use ES Tech Sabre chips) for decoding, and 4 OPA1688 operational amps by Texas Instruments for amplification. For readers who dwell on DAC chips making the sound: they don’t. This combination of quality DAC and opamps costs you and me around $15 USD, and is probably much cheaper in bulk [ES Tech chips are not much different]. TempoTec does not give us details on the other components.

The March III M3 comes with a 5V/2A power supply with USB-A port. Alternatively, you can power the device from your computer or a power bank, or a fancy third-party power supply such as the $99 ifi Audio iPowerX or the $59 Allo Nirvana or the $43 BRZ.

Replacing the stock power supply with the iPowerX enriches the sound, it adds body…though it may be a cost prohibitive upgrade. Just try all the 5V power supplies that came with your tablet or phone. The lowest current I used in my test was 1.2A for the BRZ.

Front Panel

The front contains all control and monitoring functions: the two headphone sockets (3.5 mm single ended and 4.4 mm balanced), the on/off/volume knob, an OLED screen (small but crisp) and three buttons: Mode (wired/BT), Gain (low/high), and Bass (on/off). Most of the front panel is glass. The brandname “TempoTec” is nowhere to be found.

Back Panel: I/O

In the back are two USB-C ports (one for 5 V power, the other for connecting a music source), analog RCA outputs (for powered speakers), and digital SPDIF out (coaxial, optical)

Functionality and Operation

The TempoTec March III M3 is an unusually versatile device.

It does

• play music into headphones from different sources (Phone/tablet, computer)
• accepts digital music wired or per BT
• output an analog signal through its balanced and single-ended circuits into headphones
• output an analog signal per RCA into powered loudspeakers
• output a digital signal into another DAC via SPDIF (coaxial, optical)
• works as a BT receiver

It does not

• drive most unpowered speakers
• power the hungriest planar magnetic headphones

The unit is switched on and off by pushing and holding down the volume knob. The Mode button toggles between wired and BT operations, the gain can be adjusted to low and high (use low gain as much as possible as any high gain compresses dynamics), and bass button adds…you got it…bass.

And the added bass totally contorts the timbre. It is awful and you better leave it off….unless you need some serious “boom boom”. Actually, even without the bass button, there is more than plenty of bass, naturally.

Wired

You can operate headphones through the two headphone jacks. The balanced 4.4 m circuit is much more powerful and provides an overall better sound. Only use the 3.5 mm one, if you don’t have a headphone with a 4.4 mm plug.

If you have powered near-field speakers, they are connected to the RCA ports in the back.

If you can’t be bothered with the DAC/amp functionality at all, you have the option to connect the March III M3 to an external amp. This is a truly rare feature in this price category.

Bluetooth

The March III M3 is also a Bluetooth receiver. It features the latest Bluetooth 5.2 and handles all common codecs (SBC 328 kbps, AAC 256 kbps, LDAC 990 kbps). It operates over a distance up to 30 m. This is useful when the unit is used with powered speakers when the headphone cable is longer than one’s arms. The M3 never lost reception while I was walking with my iPhone music source all over the two floors of my 2000 sq ft house.

It becomes really interesting when the March III M3 is connected via a different DAC to a room-filling stereo system. In this case, the device’s own DAC and amp are disabled and it works as a BT receiver only.

Amplification

Power is not measured but always calculated from voltage, current, and resistance. TempoTec list a power of 630 mW @ 4 V/32 Ω for the balanced circuit, and 310 mW @ 2 V/32 Ω. But 630 mW power require a voltage of 4.5 V, at 4 V, it is only 500 mW (accordingly, the SE power should be 250 mW). Therefore, either the given voltage or power are wrong…which does not matter in the end.

The March III M3’s volume scale goes from 0 to 100. In practical use, the device drives the 300 Ω Sennheiser HD 600 on high gain at a volume of up to 95 (for quiet recordings); it needs a volume of 80 to be loud for average recordings, and 65 for moderate level on the balanced circuit. This is pretty impressive considering the headphone’s sound quality is not suffering at high volumes. The sensitive Final Sonorous III gets away with a volume of 30. The HD 600 don’t run well on the weaker single ended circuit.

Most iems need about 30 on balanced and 40 on single ended. Unless you have a hungry planar magnetic, the March III M3 handles the rest.

Sound

The March III M3’s sound quality is actually surprising(ly good): it is not harsh and analytical as many of its budget peers’, but rather…erm…”musical” with well rounded notes. Many would claim that the lack of “Sabre glare” is ascribed to the Asahi Kasai AK4493SEQ chip, but life ain’t that easy, friends.

The overall tonality is slightly warm with an elevated low end, similar to TempoTec’s V6 dap.

Bass is indeed lifted a bit and not the fastest. It may occasionally smear into the midrange, which is probably the M3’s weakest point – but it is not dramatic. Transparency is otherwise good. The stage is wide and tall but not very deep.

The balanced circuit adds power and also depth to the image. The single-ended image is more two dimensional…and BT operation removes a bit of richness and extension on both ends, but is overall still pretty good.

In order to characterize the March III M3 in more detail, let’s compare it to the $250 EarMen TR-Amp, a battery operated DAC/amp with a single-ended circuit only. The TR-Amp does not offer BT and has slightly weaker amplification. At twice the price, you’d expect better components in the EarMen, and therefore better sound quality.

Both do indeed sound different. The TR-Amp is less bassy, has a crisper attack, better note definition (“sounds sharper”), better resolution and transparency, and better 3-D reconstruction overall. The March III M3 has softer notes, a wider but shallower stage, and lags the TR-Amp in terms of separation and layering.

The TR-amp is technically and analytically better but the March III M3 is more soulful and sweeter sounding…at half the price. I enjoy both.

Concluding Remarks

With the March III M3, TempoTec has pulled another white rabbit out of their hat. It it a complete, good-sounding and attractive looking DAC/amp and BT receiver that works well with most full-sized headphones and essentially all iems. What sets is apart from its immediate competition are its low price and digital outputs.

I cannot think of a comparable competitive device below $200. I really like this little rascal a lot. It is right up my alley.

The March III M3 joins the V6 dap and the Serenade X as a great, enjoyable product at a reasonable price.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Gallery

The post TempoTec March III M3 Review – Mach III appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $150 Sennheiser IE 200 is a well tuned, great sounding single DD with a perfect timbre that beats even some of its more expensive siblings. Now on our Wall of Excellence.

The Sennheiser IE 200 was provided by their US distributor upon my request. And I thank them for that.

Introduction

Sennheiser have been known to us mainly for their headphones. Their HD 25 have been in production since 1988, and their HD 600 (my go-tos) since 1997. The company, established in 1945, obviously knows what they are doing. And although they are from Germany, Asia is their biggest market. Sennheiser is some kind of a status symbol there, like Mercedes or BMW.

But when it comes to earphones, they may have been a bit slow. Sennheiser may have invented the earbuds, which may have prevented them from catching on to the earphone market fast. Their early models had a thick and fuzzy bass tied to a classic V-shape, like the CX 300B MKII or the Momentum In Ear.

This changed somewhat in 2019 with the release of the Pro series, designed for musicians: the $99 IE 40 Pro, $349 IE 400 Pro, and $599 IE 500 Pro. Strangely enough, the IE 400 Pro sounded the best of the lot. The $300 IE 300 followed a year later, which featured a new shell design with new silicon eartips. The difference between all these models is discussed here.

Sennheiser maintained the IE 300’s shell shape for their recent super premium models IE 600 and IE 900, but also for the $150 IE 200.

TL;DR: the Sennheiser IE 200 are the company’s best sounding iems below the IE 600 and IE 900 – they run circles around their more expensive Pro series. The company finally got some affordable in-ears 100% right.

Specifications Sennheiser IE 200

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a cable with 3.5 mm plug, 2 sets of eartips (S/M/L), a storage pouch and the paperwork. The IE 200’s earpieces have the same dimensions and other physical properties as the IE 300’s: they are inconspicuous, haptic wise, although Sennheiser certainly know their polycarbonates. The shells are small and light, you can even wear them in bed, and they are very comfortable.

What also contributes to comfort and fit are the shapeable earhooks…they don’t feature that kind of memory wire that cuts the circulation in your ears off. There are only two iems outside the Sennheiser family I have auditioned (out of >500) that are similarly small and comfortable: the discontinued Brainwavz B200 and Beyerdynamic Soul Byrd.

The cable is fairly basic: let’s say, it works. It tangles up easily and once it has, you are in for some fun. From my conversations with the company, Sennheiser appear to have never cared about fancy looking cables, they are all about pragmatism. Fitting a third-party cable is difficult as the MMCX sockets are recessed. I could not find a single “upgrade” cable in my stash that fits, not even that from the IE 500 Pro would do.

Just like in the IE 300, Sennheiser changed their standard silicone eartips to a kind that doesn’t provide seal for many users, including myself. I therefore once again deployed the SpinFit CP100 tips, which work extremely well with the IE 200 (and my ears).

Tonality and Technicalities

Reviewers typically subdivide the sonic characteristics of a device into “lows, mids, and highs”, then elaborate on the soundstage, in order to lose the reader in comparisons with other recent models. A useful synthesis is too frequently missing and the reader is scratching their head, wondering how the product actually sounds overall, whether it justifies its price, and what’s missing to a true stellar premium product.

Some never care about usability at all. What good is great sound when these little rascals are uncomfortable in our ears?

The Sennheiser IE 200 make the case for a holistic approach…before going into details: they are perfectly tuned iems with a perfect timbre that only fall short of super premium iems by their lack of super headroom, super staging, and they have possibly a somewhat too dry of a sound. The sonic quality difference is probably mostly in the shells’ cavity and not the driver.

Nevertheless, this model is so good that I have used almost no other iem in the last weeks. I could stop here. But, what makes the perfect tuning? After all, even an experienced company such as Sennheiser had failed to produce a decent sounding set of affordable in-ears for the longest time.

Well…comes a young acoustician by the name of Anders Hed and changes it all. And the IE 200 are only his first effort.

What makes the tuning of the IE 200 special? Alone from the graph you can guess the fluidity and smoothness of the sound, considering timbre has never been an issue for Sennheiser. They don’t use balanced armature drivers because of potential crossover issues.

Bass is rather subtle with a natural decay, mids are in the foreground with good note definition and decent (but not optimal) note weight. At the high end, that tizziness in the uppermost registers of the IE 300 is gone, the treble is sweet.

Where the IE 200 falls off the super-premium wagon is a comparatively shallow staging (wide, not deep) and a lack of sheen. But all of this is more than compensated for by the aforementioned fluidity, which makes for an irresistible listening experience. A great rare example of a very enjoyable product independent of price.

IE 200 and IE 300 share the same driver (as far as I know), but the tuning obviously makes the difference.

The IE 200 does not have the lower midrange congestion and treble spike of the IE 300 or the veil of earlier models such as the IE 500 Pro. It is a transparent sounding, well resolving iem with a great timbre.

Remains the question which of my iems are better? Only two, the discontinued $700 Dunu Zen, and the $650 LETSHUOER EJ07M. The Zen have more depth and more sparkle (but also an upper midrange glare), and better microdynamics and micro detail, and the EJ07M is a better resolving jack of all trades. But the IE 200 are smaller and lighter, and therefore more comfortable.

Concluding Remarks

The Sennheiser IE 200 may be the company’s answer to mid-price ChiFi, considering Asia is their biggest market. And boy did they get it right this time. There is no competition for the IE 200 in their class, sonically and comfort wise. Period! They are earphones for real music lovers and one of the most impressive iems I have auditioned in a long time.

Sennheiser shows that tuning by trained professionals pays off. They know what they are doing (I am repeating myself). No need to replace the IE 200 with an update next year…which also builds and/or retains customer confidence.

Gut gemacht! Sehr gut sogar! Wall of Excellence! Done!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post Sennheiser IE 200 Review – Back On Top appeared first on Music For The Masses.

I recently spent quite some time reassessing from scratch all of my analog cables, aiming at spotting the most beneficial pairing for each, with particular regards to the IEM cables of my preferred drivers.

This article is the first of a (short) series on such topic. It covers Dunu’s DUW-02S IEM cable.

You can find it from multiple sources including Dunu’s own website of course. A reliable, and even economically convenient outlet is Hifigo, which lists them for $79,00 (and puts them on sale quite often, too).

At-a-glance Card

One-off introduction

These articles of mine about cables will be very short, much shorter than an average piece regarding a pair of IEMs or Headphones.

For this one first piece of the series, however, I reckon a general introduction is due. I will put it in this first article only. Boy scout word.

Let’s go.

I won’t begin to articulate on audio cables (analog and digital, by the way) making a difference or not. They do, period. If you believe the opposite you are welcome to consider me a moron. In such case do yourself a favor and quit this page immediately.

That said, cable effects can be quite varied.

Sometimes, especially in a low end configuration, the difference a cable makes is lost in the big ocean of noise and distortion, or is somehow made irrelevant by the other elements in the audio chain (from the track recording quality, to the transport, all the way to the transducers).

In some other cases, [some of] the virtuous differences cables introduce correspond to weak spots in some other component of the stack, and this results into a negative instead of a positive effect.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly when in conjunction with modest budget (let’s say <3000€ overall) chains, the most frequent difference a cable makes is a negative one, simply due to its bad quality – either in terms of conductive components, or even most frequently in construction quality, or both.

With all this in mind a first problem about cables is: where the heck do I get the information on which cable(s) I better avoid, and which I better get ?

Look around you: how many sources can you name whose opinions about audio gear historically lead you towards purchases which, once put on personal use, turned out to accurately match what you thought you would get based on what you had read?

Now, assuming the answer to the previous question is a number greather than 0 : how many of such sources cover the cables topic, even only occasionally ?

Good. Now you know why I had to go through almost naked hands on this, experimenting in first person, of course in small steps.

Very much expectedly I had to kiss quite a few frogs before even understanding how a frog looks like – let alone getting a princess up.

This piece is about the qualities of one particular IEM cable (more articles will follow about other models) so I won’t go into specific details about all the frogs I kissed the cables I bought (and binned).

It might however be quite interesting to recap the passages of the process I went through:

One: every single one of the <75$ IEM cables I tested (in total surely more than 150 different models, if I factor stock cables in) introduced some or a lot of distortion / negative coloration.

Two: Same can sadly be stated for quite a few more expensive ones, too :(.

Three: I identified an extremely short list (less than 5 models) of <75$ IEM cables offering at least “some” positive sonic benefit. Sadly, those come alongside other distortive side effects. Pairing such cables within an audio chain which is somehow not particularly sensitive to their particular negative effects does result in a moderate bottomline benefit. Joy.

And lastly, four: I identified an (for now) even shorter list of >75$ IEM cables offering way more obvious sonic benefits, and hardly any negative ones. Biiiiigger joy.

From all this I drew a couple of quite logical conclusions:

One: cheap cables come with statistically cheap quality. Unsurprising, isn’t it. Surely by searching a lot I might be lucky and find more gold straws in the haystack – but that’s simply not me: in Las Vegas I wouldn’t be a penny machine gambler. I am not going to spend one more euro researching “rarely decent, wonderfully inexpensive cables” – same as I won’t be looking for the next budget priced “giant killer” (??!?) IEM, or DAC, or DAP of course. I can’t be arsed, really, and that’s final.

Two: higher tier cables are a very risky but at least more rewarding gamble. There are uninspiring, and even downright crappy expensive cables, and that’s the damned risky bit. But, there are also very good ones, which do make a big difference when paired to the IEMs I love.

This article is about one of those, until now the least expensive one I found by the way.

Features and description

Physicals and their impacts

DUW-02S is an IEM cable, in the very common length of 1.2m.

Its conductors are high purity silver-plated OCC copper wires, arranged in Type-1 Litz configuration. Conductors are structured in 4 cores, each one protected inside a non-declared polymer sheath, brided together.

The overall result is very lightweight, soft, with great haptics. It’s also very smoothly flexibly, it doesn’t tend to “keep the shape”, and it’s almost impervious to tangling. Simply put: it’s very “pleasing” when in service.

On the IEM end DUW-02S features (fixed) terminations: either MMCX or (protruded) 0.78mm 2pin plug models are available. Either model must be selected apriori, IEM terminations can’t be swapped later.

The 0.78 2pin plug is long enough to perfectly fit Final Audio A-series connectors (known to be particularly recessed). On the flip side, when plugged onto un-recessed 2pin female connectors (e.g. those on Ikko OH10, or many other IEMs) the aesthetic effect is less than ideal, and the total connector length is on the edge of inconvenience, too.

Regarding MMCX connections, all Dunu cables I tried (3 different models, a dozen total different samples, and counting) always proved mechanically slick, convincingly firm and reliable when stuck onto the female MMCX sockets found on so many IEMs, diverse by brand and model.

A special mention deserve Intime MMCX IEMs : DUW-02S plugs into Miyabi, Miyabi-II, Yo, and Sho DD housings “better” than those drivers’ own stock cables (!). This does not happen with Intime IEMs only, indeed, but in Intime’s case it happens all the times.

One last note about the IEM end is about ear guides: I find their shape too “tight”. That’s totally subjective of course, and in facts it happens with many other cable brands/models in my case. YMMV.

On the host side, DUW-02S features Dunu’s proprietary, patented modular plug system named “Q-Lock PLUS”.

Unlike pretty much all of their lower priced competitors I assessed to date, Dunu’s Q-Lock system offers seriously firm, reliable connections, free from any risk for the cable to slip off the back of the end-plug in conjunction with an even modest pulling force.

If something, I very occasionally got the opposite: on the various Dunu cables I assessed some plugs required a little bit higher insertion force when applied to the cable, and/or the Q-Lock ring sliding felt not perfectly fluidly. In no occasion however such relative hardness turned into connection failure or impossibility, so I can’t fairly book any of this as a non-conformity.

DUW-02S comes commercially bundled with a 3.5mm TRS (single ended) Q-Lock plug. It is not possible to opt for a different standard plug when purchasing the cable.

It is indeed possible to buy extra plugs, first of all those with 2.5mm TRRS or 4.4mm TRRRS balanced analog terminations, the special 3.5mm TRRS balanced analog (fantastic option, to fully exploit Ifi’s S-Balanced architecture, e.g. on their GO link dongle), or the Digital special plug, which includes a mini DAC-AMP inside and is in its turn available either with a USB-C or a (genuine Apple certified) Lightning male plug.

Dunu’s Q-Lock modular plugs are a major benefit if I look at my preferred host gear collection. DUW-02S is the least expensive amongst Dunu cables featuring it.

Sonic impact

And finally after all this bla bla here we come to the main course. The sonic benefits brought along by DUW-02S are:

• Tighter and fuller midbass notes. Notes are better rounded, and slammier.
• Higher central mids resolution.
• Improved note and instrument separation, especially in the midrange
• Some improvement on stage depth.
• More vivid high mids.

Such benefits are in some cases just blatant, other times more modest, but they are always there pairing DUW-02S with my preferred drivers, namely

• Final B3 and E5000, vs stock final C106 cable
• Final E4000, vs stock final C112 cable
• Final A3000, A4000 vs stock final 2pin black sheathed cable
• Final A5000 vs stock final 2pin braided cable
• Intime Miyabi, Miyabi MK-II, Sho DD Halloween, Sho DD and Yo Electro, vs both Intime-M Sound and Intime-M Drum cables
• Tanchjim Oxygen vs stock 2pin cable (easy win : Oxy’s stock cable is horrible)
• Ikko OH10 vs Ikko stock 2pin cable

I feel it’s particularly worth to underline how DUW-02S makes final B3 and E5000 “sound better” on all counts in comparison with their original final C106 cables (same bundle on both models), retailing for twice the price of the DUW-02S. Ditto for A5000, in comparison with their newly designed, braided stock cable.

Even most importantly: out of all those I tried, to my experience DUW-02S is the least expensive cable bringing multiple, consistent sonic benefits to all those IEMs, systematically doing better than their relevant stock cables. All other more or even much more affordable cables I tried on those same drivers either don’t improve over stock cables, or they do, but very lightly and partially, and always introducing some (negative) side effect too.

For example: there are cheap cables improving on bass tightening, but overexciting highmids at the same time. Others nicely add on note body across the spectrm, but cut on microdynamics in the process. Etcetera.

Talking about limitations, DUW-02S tend to give high-mids some more beer while keeping a more than decent control on them. However when pairing with signatures already featuring important elevations on 3 – 4KHz they might get too hot. Intime Miyabi is an example of such a borderline situation: DUW-02S is still a good pair for me, probably won’t be for a more high-mids sensitive person. Akoustyx S6 + DUW-02S is instead beyond acceptable.

And lastly, I found one single case which I tend to consider an “absolute lack of synergy”, and that’s final F7200 + DUW-02S. Compared with stock final C071 cable pairing we have improved midbass but too hot high-mids and most central mides moved wwway too much forward. A no-no.

Considerations & conclusions

While IEM cables are not something to start bothering with until reaching a certain stability in one’s audio tastes and equipment fleet, they may indeed bring obvious sonic improvements once properly identified and paired with selected drivers.

The bad news, if you wish, is that inexpensive cables are in the overwhelming majority of the cases a pure waste of money – so much so that I tend to recommend everyone to totally disregard the topic until he/she feels ready to get involved with cables costing 75-100$ at the very least.

In hindsight, I would actually do the same if it weren’t for the (partial) need of swapping fixed-terminated 3.5mm stock cables with balanced terminated ones to enable pairing to some sources. Not that this can be considered vital: a 50$ driver will stay a 50$ driver even if better amped, or driven by a better DAC. Nevertheless, now that I identified some at-least-half-decent budget cables I basically crystallised them as my “safe cheap harbors”, and I use them when I need a “balanced swap” on a driver I’m reviewing or whatever I am not particularly committed to. A future article of this series will be dedicated to them.

The more expensive cables market does instead offer good, and very good options, if mixed and hidden amonst pure lemons. Same to what happens on any other market, after all…

Dunu’s DUW-02S is until now my least expensive find in terms of an IEM cable bringing evident sonic benefits to most of my preferred drivers, very few and occasional sonic caveats, reliable modular host termination technology, very high quality MMCX implementation, and convincing general construction quality.

At $79 plus the cost of extra modular plugs DUW-02S is not something I would recommend buying to pair with a sub-100$ driver. However, the improvement it brings to quite a few mid-tier IEMs (those I explicitly listed above and some more others…) makes for an obivous recommendation when in search of an effective way to improve on an already loved mid tier driver.

Hifigo offered me a modest “reviewer discount” on DUW-02S, as always without expectations strings attached in terms of my subsequent review contents, and I thank them for both things.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post DUW-02S Headphone Cable Review – Most Affordable Significant Upgrade appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The $120 NiceHCK F1 is a well-resolving planar magnetic earphone that follows the current trend. It essentially sounds like my “modded” LETSHUOER S12.

The $120 NiceHCK F1 planar magnetic earphone was kindly provided by the NiceHCK Audio Store for my analysis – and I thank them for that. You can purchase it at the NiceHCK Audio Store.

Introduction

NiceHCK are an aliexpress company that made their name with $3 earbuds (before the current inflation) and annual Fukubukuro offerings: a surprise bag (“Wundertüte”) containing a mystery new-release earphone at a discount price. They are also quite renowned for their accessories, first and foremost their earphone cables. Good quality at reasonable prices.

While their iems are always interesting, they have been hit and miss throughout history. We have reviewed quite a few of their products.

Loomis and I, in our sonic youth, had a soft spot for their $12 NiceHCK Bro single DD. And I found their $140 NiceHCK M6 offered a sniff into the world of premium iems – at the time. The company’s most prominent effort was/is the NX7 series that recently culminated in the MK4. M6 and NX7 MK4 suffered from a slow bass, a flaw the F1 avoids.

As NiceHCK’s contribution to the current planar magnetics trend, the F1 is actually a good sounding earphone.

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

In the box are the earpieces, a cable, 2 generous sets of silicon eartips, a lavish pleather storage box, a velcro tie, and the paperwork. The OCC silver-plated cable is absolutely gorgeous with a perfect flexibility and probably costs $30-40 by itself.

The rugged earpieces are made of CnC machined aluminum alloy in the tradition of the 2018 NiceHCK M6 for example. Their cylindrical shape is very similar to my beloved Dunu Zen, just a bit smaller.

The generous sets of eartips are generic – they came with all previous MK4 models, too. NiceHCK should make some effort selecting eartips that optimizes the sound of a particular model (ok, ok, Sennheiser does the same).

The colour combination and faceplate have a retro appeal to me (retro being 2018). The nozzles are a bit short but once I have inserted them deep into my ear canals, they stay i there, and give me a good seal. The shells are comfortable for me over longer listening sessions. Isolation is average.

Just like with many other planars, the F1 are not very sensitive and work best with decent amplification

Tonality and Technicalities

The NiceHCK F1 comes with three different screw-on tuning filters, silver, black, and gold. Each filter creates a different sonic flavour. The silver filter delivers the most balanced and most realistic musical reproduction and is used for this sound analysis.

The gold filter adds an upper midrange spike that introduces a brightness that is fatiguing to the western ear. And the black filter enriches the lower midrange but leaves a particularly thick bass perception.

The F1 rides on the bandwagon of the the current planar magnetic hype, and it does so actually quite well. In the “olden days” there were two end members of sound signature, “neutral” and “fun”. The first meant the item was analytical and sterile as it lacked bass, and the second referred to a bassy V-shaped signature with recessed vocals.

Updating this terminology to today’s standards means “technical” vs. “agreeable (or musical)”. The NiceHCK F1 straddles the thin line between the two.

The F1’s bass is on the satisfying, robust side with a slightly blurry midbass hump, which is not pounding fatiguingly but rather subtly against my eardrums. A reasonably pleasant but slightly unfocused punch (it could be a bit tighter), which bleeds into the lower midrange. This adds robustness to the sound an contrast to the less bassy Dunu Talos.

The midrange is on the clean, more technical side, but not as lean or analytical as in the LETSHUOER S12 for example. It is richer but also not as sharply etched out and articulate as in the S12 or 7Hz Timeless. With the silver and black filters, the upper midrange is not shouty.

Treble rolls off rather early and is a bit robotic, typical for planar magnetics.

Bringing this all together – the human ear processes the whole frequency spectrum in context – this amounts to a slightly bassy sound with a reasonably well resolving midrange, which allows the listener to turn up the volume without regrets.

In terms of technicalities, the “agreeable/musical” part sacrifices some technical capabilities. The marginally blurry, bleeding bass and the lack of treble extension narrow the stage. Midrange resolution and clarity are very good as long as it is not affected by the bass. Separation and layering are also best in the midrange and treble, but lag behind at the bottom end of the frequency spectrum..

Timbre is a bit on the “planar magnetic” side, which means it is a bit metallic…but still good enough for enjoying acoustic sets.

Apart from the bass, the F1 are very good iems. The LETSHUOER S12, in comparison, has a tighter bass, but leaner mids, and is less “musical”. But with its current “micropore mod” (which removed spice from the S12’s upper midrange and thickened the bass) both sound almost identical (and they have almost the same frequency response). I would not be surprised if S12 and F1 had the same driver, just use different filtering.

The Dunu Talos is less bassy than the F1 and S12, has a much wider stage, and comes across as a bit sharper and spicier in the upper midrange (but there’s always micropore tape). I’d not put a newspaper between the three. In any case does the F1 not need any modding, but possibly some better eartips.

Concluding Remarks

After my criticism of their recent models, NiceHCK have pulled out a good and useful planar-magnetic earphone in the F1. While my analysis may be nitpicking, they are quite enjoyable for recreational listening.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Gallery

The post NiceHCK F1 Review – Bandwagonesque appeared first on Music For The Masses.

At-a-glance Card

Important foreword

I feel it’s appropriate to extend an informative preamble here, you’ll understand why as you read on.

As you might (or might not?) know, the people at final do take a quite scientific approach to acoustics, and to their headphones design in consequence. If you didn’t yet, I warmly recommend you to spend a couple of hours (or more) on this article.

Until a few years ago final’s strategy line was to develop “in-ear versions” of their flagship D8000 headphones aiming at delivering something as close as possible to the “allrounder” archetipe. Such was, and still is, their E-series.

Later on, final took a different approach: investigating specific musical genres and their listeners’ preferences and/or requirements as a basis to develop IEMs focused on each particular situation.

Final A- and B- series are the results of such different strategy.

Final shared some more detail regarding their studies and consequent choices.

First and foremost they put attention on the aspect of “distance perception”.

When listening to some musical genres – namely orchestral classical or big band jazz – more than others spatiality is key. Thinking to the “real thing” (the orchestra in the theatre) you expect, and therefore you want , to “feel” their music “in a big room”, and perceive the different distance the various instruments or instrument grups are placed at from your seat, and from each other.

Oppositely, when one listens to hard rock, pop, or even small-group jazz (think to a trio in a smokey canteen) widespread 3D spacing is not important as indeed it does not correspond to “the real thing”. In such situation you indeed expect a group of voices playing physically close to one another, and what you want is not hearing them artificially scattered here or there, rather you want them to be rendered “sonically well separated” from one another.

When at a live venue of a small group you do in facts always discern the guitar from the bass and the voice even if they are all standing on a stage less than 10 square meters – such discernment capability is instead too often “lost in translation” while we listen to corresponding audio tracks.

Another key element that final focused on is what techies call the sound’s “dynamic range”.

Vulgarly translated, think to dynamic range as the number of distinguishable shades of a certain physical quantity. A box with 12 colored pencils from dark red to black is an example of a much tighter dynamic range compared to a big box of 144 Caran d’Ache, still going from dark red to same black.

Ported onto audio terms, a wider dynamic range sound is what you want to appreciate all the most minute variations Maria Callas was able to issue while warbling, or Uto Ughi can deliver from a Guarnieri del Gesù.

Oddly enough, in some cases a wider dynamic range is less desireable. Using only 12 colored pencils, in facts, it is much easier to tell a red from an orange, even if they are drawn one adjacent to the other, for the simple reason that there is apriori only “one” red and “one” orange in your palette, not a dozen different intermediate nuances of each.

When you have “a lot of space” in between two color (or sounds) spots, one blue the other red, you can have each reproduced with more subtle nuances. Oppositely if the two spots are closer to one another, or even overlapping each other, your first priority is to avoid they mix into a violet!

Thinking in these terms, orchestral music, or anyhow music composed of many “voices”, be them acoustic or electronic, coming from multiple, spread-out physical positions will better require higher space reconstruction and dynamic range capabilities.

Oppositely, music generated by very few instruments/voices/sources playing shoulder-to-shoulder will rather want all voices to be “more or less in the same spot”, and that’s when the highest available proweness in rendering them clearly distinct from one another becomes crucial.

The B series has been developed exactly thinking to such last mentioned applicative scenario: small groups acting on physically small stages, with overlapping sounds and voices – calling for relatively lesser need for “spatial amplitude” in exchange for much higher sonic separation capabilities.

This graph taken from final’s web site is at this point quite readable.

The term “Clarity” in this case is used in the sense of “being able to tell different sounds apart from one another”.

For completeness: the opposite scenario is the typical big orchestral setup, involving many voices positioned on a quite (or very!) sizeable physical stage. In such case priority #1 is rendering the amplitude of the original, real scene. Technically, translates into micro-managing sound timing, and rendering distant sounds as clean and articulated as close ones. That is final A-series ballpark, instead.

At the end of this lengthy preamble, I hope I made its very reason obvious: don’t blame your Fiat Panda turtle speed and deafening noise if your purpose is covering 50.000 KM/year on motorways, nor criticise your BMW 530 if costs your a pretty penny of gas in the messy downtown traffic.

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Questyle M15 / E1DA 9038SG3 / Questyle CMA-400i – Stock Final E tips – Dunu DUW-02S silver plated cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC and DSD 64/128/256 tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

B3 are just a bit on the bright side of neutral, with a presentation I would call roughly W-shaped. The timbre is very interesting: notes are clear and bodied, detailed and meaty – not simply “analogue”, rather “organically lifelike”. Veeery different from what’s commonly called “BA timbre”.

Sub-Bass

Sub-bass reflects the inherent limitations of BA drivers: its extreme end is in facts modestly rolled off. Not a big deal for my tastes: standup bass rumble is there anyhow. I can make it a bit more evident with some light EQing, which B3 bear with a certain tranquillity.

Mid Bass

Mid bass is very good but before that it’s… surprising. The BA driver reserverd to B3’s mid and low frequencies yields solid body and relaxed-calibrated transients, delivering still fast and punchy yet – very uncommonly for a BA – textured, flowery and meaty notes. For my personal taste B3’s midbass is at times even a tad too “imperative” – first time I hear such situation on a BA driver. Again, this can be easily corrected by some light EQing.

Mids

Mids are just spectactular: moderately forward, bodied, textured, articulated. Acoustic piano, guitar and tenor sax benefit most from this tuning.

Male Vocals

Baritones on B3 sound natural if just a whiff too much bodied to come across as “totally” realistic. Tenors are better in this sense: less “flowery” then baritones while still very much organic.

Female Vocals

Opposite to the male case, female voices are very good and cured, yet a purist might say they could use a bit more butter. And that’s true, in a sense, but in such case the rest of the tones “around” the soprano would have to be adapted too, to avoid losing coherence.

Highs

One of the two BA drivers is exclusively dedicated to this segment, with the quite obvious target of delivering an engaging and detailed experience while staying rigorously south of excesses. And boy did they succeed! A very good compromise has been reached here between note body and fine granularity, livelyness and unoffensiveness.

Technicalities

Soundstage

Unsurprisingly considering their apriori design choices, B3’s soundstage is not more than average for it price class. It is however, if modestly, extended in all directions including some depth. Caveat: stage size also depends on fit – deeper push-in = narrower scene, as always.

Imaging

All instruments are well cut-out from the ensemble – for how closed-in may it be – and realistically cast on the scene with good body, to a very organic result.

Details

Detail retrieval is very good on B3, however you shouldn’t expect a “detail monster” effect, whereby details are thrown at you as “the first thing you hear”. It’s indeed the other way around here: on the frontline you hear main-bodied notes, while back layers bring you the details that complement the sound richness.

That’s very likely the consequence of the precise tuning choices operated in particular on the trebles, where as I mentioned above an evident succeeded effort has been applied to delivered the highest possible energy while never scanting into excess and fatigue.

Instrument separation

Layering and instrument separation is arguably where B3 deliver their best. Capitalising on their timbre clarity, on the accuracy of their tonal calibration, and – why not – on particular driving hardware features, they deliver a really uncommon separation quality. If their design purpose was to render small, closed-in groups with the maximum single-voice definition, they no doubt hit the bullseye here.

Driveability

It’s not so easy to drive the B3 due to quite modest sensitivity (102dB/mw). Nothing as hard as a nasty planar however – a modestly amplified source is basically enough.

Physicals

Build

Housings are produced by Metal Injection Moulding, a process involving mixing steel powder with another element to form a resin which is then moulded at high temperature into the desired shape. The result is solid and sturdy, and aesthetically very pleasing at least for my tastes.

Fit

A 3-contact-point fit between the housing and the outer ear has been designed by final aiming at the best compromise between wearing firmness and light stress accumulation over time.

The design idea is quite brilliant to be honest, the rationale being: you need (just) 3 grip points to obtain stability. One is the eartip umbrella, inside the canal. Another one is the housing’s short front side vs the tragus.

And the third can be any one of the possible 4 contact spots between the housing’s shaped back side and the concha – depending on one’s ear particular shape that of course will happen on one or another position. I would say that for my experience it works as intended.

What I just find sub-ideal is the nozzle length which is a tad too short and makes tip selection pickier than it should. In my case the working trick luckily “just” stays in choosing a bigger size for my left ear: that gets me a firm grip and seal even if the tip stops “just in” the canal, relieving the need to push the housings too much into my left concha.

Comfort

B3’s particular housings size, their 3-point-fit design, and their external finish all contribute to a good comfort once I found my right “personal” position.

Isolation

Passive isolation is quite nice once B3 are properly fitted, but not more than that as the housings are not designed to “fill up” the concha, which would of course block more of the leak.

Cable

Stock cable is Final C106, a Junkosha silver plated copper with fixed 3.5 termination – it’s the same cable bundled as stock on A8000 and E5000. I recently focused how sonically limited such cable is – it’s at best on par with some quite cheap chifi alternatives, with the bad difference of it retailing for like 200$ when purchased alone.

In addition to that no modular termination plugs are available, so pairing B3 to a balanced source requires swapping it anyhow. To this day in 2023, and for packages like B3 starting to cost around 500$ list, I think final could do better.

After some cable rolling for my experience better stay on silver plated – pure copper “combs” B3’s trebles a bit too much – so I find Dunu DUW-02S an adequate quality option for B3. Compared to stock layering and note contouring get obviously better, and bass is better defined, less flowery.

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

I’ll list a few comparisons down here, trying to be (for once) quite succint while hopefully informative enough

final B1 (€699 EU list)

Insofar as another member of the B-series, B1 follows the same apriori musical pairing indications as B3. Featuring a Dynamic driver in the mid & low frequencis in lieu of B3’s BA driver, B1’s timbre is full and lush, tonality is obviously warm and V-shaped, their bass is viscerally deep and authoritative (even too much), mids are more recessed, and trebles are relaxed. If B3 pleases those like me longing for organic, unadultered acoustic renditions, B1 obviously caters to people liking bass-colored, energetic playbacks. B1 is also very tricky to drive, requiring much more current than most portable sources are able to deliver, and when underbiased they sound dark and quite ugly (E5000, anyone?).

final F7200 (€ 469 EU list)

To me F7200 are [even more] specialised drivers, particularly dedicated to vocal performances like songwriters singers etc. Pretty much the single best driver I ever heard on that application. B3 offer more bodied, natural and more extended bass, and a bit better trebles.

Intime Miyabi (JPY 21000 + import costs)

Miyabi offer a more “classical-all-rounder” presentation with stronger bass personality, and those unique piezo-trebles-without-piezo-timbre. A close call on layering and separation with the edge probably in Miyabi’s favour, if not by much. Mids are better on B3, which also deliver “silkier” notes all over the spectrum, but cost twice as much.

final A5000 (€ 299 EU list)

As I tried to outline in the foreword up above, A-series stems from a polar-opposite design intention (rendering big bands instead of small groups) – no wonder then how B3 and A5000 sound different like day and night. A5000 draws a much wider space, and cast instruments all over it with a lot of clean air in-between one another. Notes are dryer on A5000 all accross the spectrum, its timbre is leaner, detail retrieval is “more upfront”. High mids and trebles may be “hot” for some on A5000, which do react very positively to EQ however. TL;DR: A5000 and B3 are fundamentally “complementary”.

iBasso IT04 (€ 499,00)

IT04, too, feature particular proweness on layering / separation, and prefer casting a more intimate scene with band elements imaged as more closed-in to one another. A very good job was done on IT04 bringing the 3 BA driver’s tonality close to their DD one, which however deprives IT04 of that little % of “treble life” which is there on B3 instead. IT04 has an open-V shape, warm-ish presentation in lieu of B3’s more W-shaped, bright-neutral one.

Oriveti OH500 (€ 499,00)

OH500 offer a U-shaped, warmer presentation compared to B3. Both ends (bass and treble) are more evident on OH500. Layering, separation and detail retrieval are better on B3, more so in the low end. OH500 are (even) pickier to drive then B3.

Dunu EST112 (€ 489,00)

EST112 has slower and fuzzier (bur more visceral) bass, not as full vocals and a bit more tamed trebles (which are in my books EST112 Achille’s heel tbh) compare to B3. Stage casting is a bit wider on EST112, layering is better on B3.

Considerations & conclusions

B3’s main cyphre is realism. When applied to the music they were designed for they gift their owner a stunning sense of physical presence on the scene. Instruments and players are cast near you such that you can almost reach out and touch them.

Even more importantly, B3 deliver a note discernment capability over the music being played which gets surprisingly close to that of your own ears when you are sitting in the front lines of a live venue. All of this paired with a deliciously organic timbre on a bright-neutral tonality.

As my eighteen readers know I am not a collector. Life is too short, and I have too little free time to spend any of that on second-best options, when I am lucky enough to have more than one availalble. B3 are part of my (very) short best-option list.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

P.S. – for the record: as any truly affectionated user knows spelling, “final Co., Ltd.” lowercase (“final”) is not a typo 

The post Final B3 Review – Realism For Real appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The ifi Audio Go bar was supplied by the company for my review – and I thank them for that. You find more information on the Go bar’s product page.

Introduction

My first portable DAC/amp was (and still is) the ifi Audio iDSD nano Black Label (which I treated in my hip-dac review). It was a safe buy as it had won quite a few awards – and it is still available. The nano BL is a microcosm of what ifi Audio stands for: classic shape, integrated IE Match, house sound. It is still my standard for headphone measurements.

The nano BL is a rather blocky device with limited portability, it is rather transportable. It is reasonably powerful and can drive headphones up to 300 ohm easily.

In contrast, the Go bar is a small device as it does not contain a battery. It draws its current from its source, that is a phone/tablet or a computer. This has its pros and cons as will be discussed below.

Alberto has already taken apart the Go bar’s technical and functional aspects in very great detail. I therefore would like to add and give my 5 cents where we differ – and possibly simplify some details. After all any review is to a large extent subjective.

What is most important to me is functionality, especially when it comes to miniature devices. How does the Go bar fare in the wide field of applications I’d like to use it for?

Specifications

Physical Things and Usability

The Go bar probably received its name from a pun derived from its portability (“Go”) and its form factor (“gold bar”). And it has the dimensions of a Bounty chocolate bar. In the box are the Go bar with a nifty leather case, 2 high-quality OTG (“On The Go”) cables with adapter, and the paperwork. That’s all you need to connect the Go bar to any computer, Android device, even iOS devices. No other accessories required.

The build quality, haptic, and mechanisms of all parts are outstanding. The chassis is made of alloy, workmanship is impeccable, the the button mechanisms are precise. Same with cables and USB adapter, which feel premium. Physically, the Go bar is high end.

Functionality and Operation

As to the Go bar’s “standard staples”: it features two circuits, a single-ended 3.5 mm one, and the ever emerging balanced with 4.4 mm socket. Although the 3.5 mm is S-balanced, the true 4.4 mm balanced circuit has better generally better specs and is more powerful. Try using mainly this one, that’s where the Go bar’s value is.

The Go bar features a 16-core XMOS micro controller with proprietary firmware to optimize the analog output quality through synergy with the Cirrus DAC. It features a precision clock to minimize jitter.

There are 4 different digital filter options available to minimize unwanted sonic artifacts:

• BP’ (Cyan): Bit-Perfect: no digital filtering, no pre or post ringing
• ‘STD’ (Red): Standard, modest filtering, modest pre and post ringing
• ‘MIN’ (Yellow): Minimum phase, slow roll-off, minimum pre and post ringing
• ‘GTO’ (White): Gibbs Transient-Optimised: upsampled to 352/384kHz, minimum filtering, no pre ringing, minimum post ringing

Ringing relates to an unwanted echo effect before (pre-) and after (post-) a note. Post ringing is actually a normal artifact of human hearing, pre ringing is not. Many claim pre ringing is not audible. This is a tricky topic and you are advised to rely on your ears.

In some aspects, the Go bar is the most complete dongle on the market as it has functionality no competitor offers: IEMatch, S-balanced, XBass, and XSpace.

IEMatch is an extremely useful tool for low-impedance iems in that it increases output impedance done by resistors dampening the amplifier. It removes hiss from very sensitive iems, for example the 16 ohm Dunu Zen. Check out Alberto’s detailed description of IEMatch in his Go bar review as well as his article dedicated to this tech feature.

XBass elevates the frequencies close to the sub-bass, adding a dry punch which can be quite enjoyable. The company calls it “an analogue bass boost to ‘add back’ lost bass response for more accurate reproduction of the original.”

XSpace, as you could imagine, adds headroom. It is, in their own words “a holographic sound field to open up your music to give you the spaciousness of a live concert.“

S-balanced (Single-Ended Compatible Balanced) means that the listener gets the benefits of a balanced circuit (2 amplifiers) with a normal 3.5 mm TRS plug (also with 3.5 mm TRRS).

Turbo is ifi Audio’s fancy term for high gain: it adds 6 dB to the signal. This is quite impressive considering the dedicated Helm dB12 adds maximally 12 dB.

Last but not least, the Go bar’s firmware is user updatable. It can be downloaded here.

Amplification and Power Management

Power management is not very efficient. The Go bar draws more than twice the current as the AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, and 50% more than the comparable Questyle M15. Most iPhones allow only a draw of 100 mA, which is below the Go bar’s 140 mA. My iPhone SE (1st gen.) does work with the Go bar, albeit with greatly reduced power.

In any way will phones not be the ideal partner for the Go bar. Any dongle without a battery can only be a compromise: those with low current draw (AudioQuest DragonFlys) will be easy on your phone’s battery, but may not be able to handle low-impedance/inefficient headphones well. Current hogs like the Go bar will have a more powerful performance, but will empty the host battery fast, or will not work with the host at all.

The best compromise is the Questyle M15, which has both acceptable current draw and much power. ifi Audio’s next step should be to reduce Go bar’s energy consumption, possibly even with a firmware update.

In terms of amplification power, the Go bar delivers 475mW@32Ω and 7.2V@600Ω on its balanced circuit, and 300mW@32Ω; 3.8V@600Ω on its single-ended circuit. Ignoring the single-ended circuit (it should only be used in emergency cases) the superior balanced circuit drives low-impedance iems such as my Final E5000 and Final A3000 very well, and it also handles the 300 ohm Sennheiser HD 600 with ease.

I have not tested any more demanding devices but would have my doubts that Go bar does justice to powerhungry planar magnetic headphones.

Sound

The Go bar follows the tradition of previous ifi DAC/amps in that it has a neutral signature with a light tinge of warmth. Call it “tepid”. It is less warm, more neutral, crisper and swifter than the nano BL. More like the excellent hip-dac. I took my time: >4 months of testing (apologies to ifi Audio).

The Go bar’s notes are like its build: accentuated, articulate, controlled, composed, cohesive, detailed, clean. The sound is from a single mold. The sonic image is of good clarity and detail. Extension at both ends is good however subtle, never overwhelming or intrusive. Treble is “sweet”.

The sound is substantially better with the balanced circuit. Comparing the sonic image to a picture means clear well defined lines with a good depth – and no overpixelation.

Comparisons

Go bar, Audioquest DragonFly Cobalt, and Questyle M15 have one thing in common: lots of proprietary engineering that elevates them from the mass of dongles. All of these are very good but have different purposes and different features. A direct comparison is difficult as all of them, being without battery, are a compromise.

AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt

This is actually an unfair comparison – unfair to both. The Cobalt is designed for low current draw to work with iPhone, and it is therefore of limited power. It therefore lacks the “greedy” balanced circuit. The Go bar will not work well with iPhone but delivers much more power on the computer than the Cobalt.

Even before it comes to sound quality, the user will distinguish the two based on their different purposes. Both are no real competitors but complementary. In the limited overlap both have (for example 32 ohm earphones), the Cobalt is probably unbeatable, sonically, with its rich, textured, detailed sound. The Go bar is more composed but a bit more analytical, the Cobalt is more “musical”.

Questyle M15

The M15 is a more fitting competitor. It also features 3.5 mm single-ended and 4.4 mm balanced circuits. It cannot reach the Go bar in terms of its superb build and haptic, or in the quality of the included cables. In terms of design, the M15 features 2 standard ESS SoCs with two of Questyle’s own Current Mode Amplification modules.

The M15 has its tonal emphasis in the midrange, the Go bar more in the lower frequencies. I’d assign the Go Bar a marginally better articulation/accentuation, and the M15 a more organic presentation, although both come really close in terms of sound quality.

The biggest difference between the two are the features: Go Bar has XBass, Space, and selectable digital filters – but the M15 has a more effective power management (less battery drain) and works better with iPhone. Also different is the operation: the Go bar bypasses the phone/computers internal volume control completely…it is handled entirely by its buttons.

Both Go bar and M15 are less portable than the DragonFly Cobalt. Alberto also threw the Apogee Groove into the mix, which only works with single dynamic drivers and essentially not with phones. So it is of very limited use. But it offers an unbeatable spatial reconstruction – and no features whatsoever.

In summary, the Go bar may be the most polished and accentuated sounding of the lot, but, as always, it comes down to personal taste, which to choose.

Concluding Remarks

The ifi Audio Go bar is the equivalent of a comprehensive no-hassle package. Everything is of very high quality: the build including the button mechanism, the included adapter and cables, the functionality (including IEMatch, XBass and XSpace), the power, and, of course, the sound.

It is one of these rare things you can buy blind. Just I did with its older brother, the iDSD nano BL. Oh, in the meantime the Go bar has caught up to his older brother in terms of awards.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

The ifi Audio Go bar was supplied by the company for my review – and I thank them for that. You find more information on the Go bar’s product page.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post ifi Audio GO bar Review (2) – Comprehensive No-Hassle Package appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Die ifi Audio Go-Bar wurde mir von der Firma für meinen Test zur Verfügung gestellt – dafür danke ich ihnen. Mehr Informationen finden Sie auf der Produktseite.

Der Author diese Artikels ist in Deutschland geboren und aufgewachsen, hat aber mehr als die Hälfte seines Lebens in Kanada verbracht. Ihm ging das geschwollene Gelaber der meisten deutschen Rezenten auf den Geist. Daher dieser Versuch: ist immer noch etwas hölzern, da aus dem Englischen übersetzt. Die Original Artikel findet man hier.

Einführung

Mein erster tragbarer DAC/Verstärker war (und ist immer noch) der ifi Audio iDSD nano Black Label (den ich in meiner hip-dac-Rezension behandelt habe). Es war ein sicherer Kauf, da er einige Preise gewonnen hatte – und er ist immer noch erhältlich. Der nano BL ist ein Mikrokosmos dessen, wofür ifi Audio steht: klassische Form, integriertes IE Match, Hausklang. Er ist immer noch mein Standard für Kopfhörermessungen. 

Der nano BL ist ein eher klobiges Gerät mit begrenzter Tragbarkeit, er ist mehr transportabel als alles andere. Er ist aber recht leistungsstark und kann Kopfhörer bis 300 Ohm problemlos ansteuern. 

Im Gegensatz dazu ist der Go bar ein kleines Gerät, da er keine Batterie enthält. Er bezieht seinen Strom aus seinem Quellgerät, also einem Telefon/Tablet oder einem Computer. Das hat seine Vor- und Nachteile, wie wir weiter unten besprechen werden. 

Co-blogger Alberto hat die technischen und funktionellen Aspekte des Go bar bereits sehr detailliert auseinandergenommen. Ich möchte daher meine 5 Cents hinzufügen und sagen, wo wir uns unterscheiden – und möglicherweise einige Details vereinfachen. Schließlich ist jede Bewertung zu einem großen Teil subjektiv.

Das Wichtigste für mich ist die Funktionalität, gerade bei Miniaturgeräten. Wie schlägt sich der Go bar in dem weiten Feld der Anwendungen, für die ich ihn einsetzen möchte?

Technische Daten des Go bar

Physische Dinge und Benutzerfreundlichkeit

Der Go bar erhielt seinen Namen wahrscheinlich von einem Wortspiel zwischen seiner Tragbarkeit (“Go”) und seinem Formfaktor (“Goldbarren”). Und er hat die Abmessungen eines Bounty Schokoriegels.

In der Schachtel befinden sich der Go bar mit einer schicken Ledertasche, 2 OTG (“On The Go”) Kabel mit Adapter und der Papierkram. Das ist alles, was Sie brauchen, um den Go bar an jeden Computer, jedes Android-Gerät und sogar an iOS-Geräte anzuschließen. Es ist kein weiteres Zubehör erforderlich. 

Die Verarbeitungsqualität, Haptik und Mechanik aller Teile sind hervorragend. Das Gehäuse ist aus einer Legierung gefertigt, die Verarbeitung ist tadellos, die Tastenmechanismen sind präzise. Das Gleiche gilt für Kabel und USB-Adapter, die sich hochwertig anfühlen. Physisch ist der Go Bar High-End.

Funktionsweise und Betrieb

Zu den “Standards” des Go bar: er verfügt über zwei Schaltkreise, einen “single-ended” asymmetrischen 3.5-mm Schaltkreis und den immer beliebter werdenden “balanced” symmetrischen Schaltkreis mit 4.4-mm Anschluss. Obwohl der 3.5-mm-Schaltkreis “S-balanced” ist, hat der 4.4 mm Schaltkreis allgemein bessere Spezifikationen und ist leistungsfähiger. Versuchen Sie, hauptsächlich diesen zu verwenden, denn darin liegt der Wert des Go bar. 

Der Go bar verfügt über einen 16-Kern-XMOS-Mikrocontroller mit proprietärer Firmware zur Optimierung der analogen Ausgangsqualität durch Synergie mit dem Cirrus DAC. Er verfügt über einen Präzisionstakt, um Jitter zu minimieren. 

Es stehen 4 verschiedene digitale Filteroptionen zur Verfügung, um unerwünschte klangliche Artefakte zu minimieren:

• BP’ (Cyan): Bit-Perfect: no digital filtering, no pre or post ringing
• ‘STD’ (Red): Standard, modest filtering, modest pre and post ringing
• ‘MIN’ (Yellow): Minimum phase, slow roll-off, minimum pre and post ringing
• ‘GTO’ (White): Gibbs Transient-Optimised: upsampled to 352/384kHz, minimum filtering, no pre ringing, minimum post ringing

Beim “Ringing” handelt es sich um einen unerwünschten Echoeffekt vor (pre-) und nach (post-) einem Ton. Nachklingeln ist eigentlich ein normales Artefakt des menschlichen Gehörs, Vorklingeln nicht. Viele behaupten, Vorklingeln sei nicht hörbar. Dies ist ein heikles Thema und Sie sollten sich auf Ihre Ohren verlassen.

In mancher Hinsicht ist der Go bar der vollständigste Dongle auf dem Markt, da er über Funktionen verfügt, die kein Mitbewerber bietet: IEMatch, S-balanced, XBass und XSpace.

IEMatch ist ein äußerst nützliches Werkzeug für niederohmige Verstärker, da es die Ausgangsimpedanz durch Widerstände erhöht, die den Verstärker dämpfen. Es entfernt das Rauschen von sehr empfindlichen Kopfhörern, z.B. dem 16 Ohm Dunu Zen. Sehen Sie sich Albertos detaillierte Beschreibung von IEMatch in seinem Go bar Artikel sowie seinen Artikel zu diesem technischen Feature an.

XBass hebt die Frequenzen in der Nähe des Subbasses an und fügt einen trockenen Kick hinzu, der sehr angenehm sein kann. Das Unternehmen nennt es “eine analoge Bassverstärkung, um verloren gegangene Basswiedergabe für eine genauere Reproduktion des Originals ‘zurückzugeben’.”

XSpace fügt, wie Sie sich vorstellen können, Headroom hinzu. Es ist, in ihren eigenen Worten, “ein holografisches Klangfeld, das Ihre Musik öffnet und Ihnen die Räumlichkeit eines Live-Konzerts gibt.”

S-balanced (Single-Ended Compatible Balanced) bedeutet, dass der Hörer die Vorteile einer symmetrischen Schaltung (2 Verstärker) mit einem normalen 3,5 mm TRS-Stecker (auch mit 3,5 mm TRRS) erhält.

Turbo ist ifi Audios schicke Bezeichnung für High Gain: Es fügt dem Signal 6 dB hinzu. Das ist ziemlich beeindruckend, wenn man bedenkt, dass der nur-Verstärker (ohne DAC) Helm dB12 maximal 12 dB hinzufügt.

Zu guter letzt ist die Firmware der Go Bar vom Benutzer aktualisierbar. Sie kann hier heruntergeladen werden.

Verstärkung und Strom Management

Das Strommanagement ist nicht sehr effizient. Der Go bar zieht mehr als doppelt so viel Strom wie der AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt und 50 % mehr als der vergleichbare Questyle M15. Die meisten iPhones erlauben nur eine Stromaufnahme von 100 mA, was unter den 140 mA der Go Bar liegt. Mein iPhone SE (1. Generation) funktioniert mit dem Go-Bar, wenn auch mit stark reduzierter Leistung. 

Auf jeden Fall sind Handys nicht der ideale Partner für den Go Bar. Jeder Dongle ohne Akku kann nur ein Kompromiss sein: Dongles mit geringer Stromaufnahme (AudioQuest DragonFlys) schonen zwar den Akku des Handys, können aber möglicherweise nicht gut mit niederohmigen/ineffizienten Kopfhörern umgehen. Stromfresser wie der Go Bar sind zwar leistungsfähiger, leeren aber den Akku des Quellgeräts schnell oder funktionieren überhaupt nicht damit.

Das Beste aus beiden Welten ist der Questyle M15, der sowohl eine akzeptable Stromaufnahme als auch viel Leistung hat. ifi Audios nächster Schritt sollte sein, den Energieverbrauch des Go bar zu reduzieren, möglicherweise sogar mit einem Firmware-Update.

Was die Verstärkungsleistung betrifft, so liefert der Go bar 475mW@32Ω und 7.2V@600Ω in seinem symmetrischen Schaltkreis und 300mW@32Ω; 3.8V@600Ω in seinem asymmetrischen Schaltkreis. Ignoriert man letzteren (er sollte nur in Notfällen verwendet werden), treibt der überlegene balanced Schaltkreis niederohmige/ineffiziente Hörer wie meine Final E5000 und Final A3000 Kopfhörer sehr gut an, und er bewältigt auch den 300 Ω Sennheiser HD 600 mit Leichtigkeit.

Ich habe keine anspruchsvolleren Hörer getestet, aber ich hätte meine Zweifel, dass Go bar den leistungshungrigen planar-magnetischen Kopfhörern gerecht wird.

Sound

Der Go bar folgt der Tradition früherer ifi DAC/Verstärker, indem er eine neutrale Signatur mit einem leichten Hauch von Wärme aufweist. Nennen Sie es “lauwarm”. Er ist weniger warm, neutraler, knackiger und flotter als der nano BL. Mehr wie der ausgezeichnete hip-dac. Ich habe mir Zeit zum testen gelassen: >4 Monate (Entschuldigung an ifi Audio)…”gut Ding braucht Weil.”

Die Töne des Go bar sind wie sein Aufbau: akzentuiert, artikuliert, kontrolliert, komponiert, zusammenhängend, detailliert, sauber. Der Klang ist aus einem Guss. Das Klangbild ist von guter Klarheit und Detailtreue. Die Erweiterung an beiden Enden ist gut, aber subtil, niemals überwältigend oder aufdringlich. Die Höhen sind “sweet”. Der “balanced/symmetrische” Klang ist wesentlich besser als auf dem single-ended/asymmetrischen Schaltkreis. Vergleicht man das Klangbild mit einem Foto, so erkennt man klare, gut definierte Linien mit einer guten Tiefe – und keine Überpixelierung.

Vergleiche

Go bar, Audioquest DragonFly Cobalt und Questyle M15 haben eines gemeinsam: viel eigene Qualitätstechnik, die sie von der Masse der “Dongles” abhebt. Alle diese Geräte sind sehr gut, haben aber unterschiedliche Zwecke und Funktionen. Ein direkter Vergleich ist schwierig, da sie alle (ohne Batterie!) einen Kompromiss darstellen.

AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt

Dies ist eigentlich ein unfairer Vergleich – für beide. Der Cobalt ist für eine geringe Stromaufnahme ausgelegt, um mit dem iPhone zu arbeiten, und hat daher eine begrenzte Leistung. Ihm fehlt daher ein “balanced/asymmetrischer” Schaltkreis. Der Go Bar funktioniert nicht gut mit dem iPhone, liefert aber viel mehr Leistung auf dem Computer. 

Noch bevor es um die Klangqualität geht, wird der Benutzer die beiden aufgrund ihrer unterschiedlichen Zwecke unterscheiden. Sie sind keine echten Konkurrenten, sondern ergänzen sich. In der begrenzten Überlappung, die beide haben (z. B. 32 ohm-Kopfhörer), ist der Cobalt mit seinem vollen, strukturierten und detaillierten Klang wahrscheinlich unschlagbar. Der Go bar ist ruhiger, aber etwas analytischer, der Cobalt ist “musikalischer”.

Questyle M15

Der M15 ist ein passenderer Konkurrent. Er verfügt ebenfalls über 3,5 mm single-ended- und 4,4 mm balanced Schaltkreise. Er kommt nicht an den Go Bar heran, was seine hervorragende Verarbeitung und Haptik oder die Qualität der mitgelieferten Kabel angeht. Konstruktiv verfügt der M15 über 2 Standard-ESS-SoCs mit zwei Questyle-eigenen Current-Mode-Verstärkungsmodulen.

Der M15 hat seinen klanglichen Schwerpunkt in den Mitten, der Go Bar eher in den unteren Frequenzen. Ich würde dem Go Bar eine geringfügig bessere Artikulation/Akzentuierung zuschreiben, obwohl beide in Bezug auf die Klangqualität sehr nahe beieinander liegen.

Der größte Unterschied zwischen den beiden sind die Funktionen: Der Go Bar hat XBass, Space und wählbare Digitalfilter – aber der M15 hat ein effektiveres Energiemanagement (weniger Batterieverbrauch) und funktioniert besser mit dem iPhone. Ein weiterer Unterschied ist die Bedienung: Die Go Bar umgeht die interne Lautstärkeregelung des Telefons/Computers komplett… sie wird vollständig über die Tasten gesteuert.

Sowohl Go bar als auch M15 sind weniger tragbar als der DragonFly Cobalt. Alberto warf auch den Apogee Groove in die Runde, der nur mit einzelnen dynamischen Treibern funktioniert und grundsätzlich nicht mit Handys. Es ist also nur sehr begrenzt einsetzbar. Aber es bietet eine unschlagbare räumliche Rekonstruktion – und überhaupt keine Features.

Zusammenfassend lässt sich sagen, dass die Go-Bar vielleicht der ausgefeilteste und akzentuierteste Klang von allen ist.

Abschliessende Bemerkungen

Der ifi Audio Go bar ist das Äquivalent eines Rundum-Sorglos-Pakets. Alles ist von sehr hoher Qualität: der Aufbau einschließlich des Tastenmechanismus, der mitgelieferte Adapter und die Kabel, die Funktionalität (einschließlich IEMatch, XBass und XSpace), die Leistung und natürlich der Klang. 

Es ist eines dieser seltenen Dinge, die man blind kaufen kann. So wie ich es mit seinem älteren Bruder, dem iDSD nano BL, getan habe. Oh, in der Zwischenzeit hat der Go bar seinen älteren Bruder in Sachen Auszeichnungen eingeholt.

Contact us!

Disclaimer

Der ifi Audio Go Barwurde von der Firma für meine Analyse zur Verfügung gestellt – und ich danke ihnen dafür. Weitere Informationen finden Sie auf der Produktseite der Go Bar. 

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post ifi Audio GO bar Test – Rundum-Sorglos Paket appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Heavy, bulky design
– No line-in/amp-only function
– Picky about USB cables
– Not for very sensitive IEMs

INTRODUCTION

EarMen has made a name with its source gears, and the Angel is the flagship “portable” DAC-Amp offering in its lineup. This also happens to be the first Earmen product I’ll be reviewing, so there’s that.

From a market-positioning perspective, the Angel fills the niche of “portable powerhouse” DAC-Amps that have rather high output power, albeit in a less pocket-friendly manner compared to typical dongles. Usually the idea is to power inefficient planars and high impedance dynamic drivers while on-the-go, or perhaps to settle for a minimal setup that can be moved around in a pinch.

Does the Earmen Angel manage to carve a spot for itself, or is the first attempt at a powerhouse dongle a forgettable one? Let’s find out.

Note: the ratings given will be subjective to the price tier. Earmen was kind enough to provide me the Angel for review.

Headphones and IEMs used: Sennheiser HD650, Hifiman Arya Stealth, Hifiman HE-6se V2, Moondrop Venus, Dunu Zen, Final E5000

Price, while reviewed: $800. Can be bought from Earmen’s Official Store.

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

PACKAGING AND ACCESSORIES

I received the Angel without any retail package, since back then a retail package was not even designed yet. So please check other reviews over at head-fi for a proper visual depiction of the packaging and accessories.

BUILD QUALITY

Exceptional, in one word. The blue finish is unique and makes the Angel stand out from a myriad of similarly-toned devices. I imagine this colorway could be divisive, but I find it flashy while being tasteful. A very fine line that Earmen manages to tread well.

The entire build is a three piece construction, with the front and back “caps” being held by 4 screws. The middle shell is milled out of a single piece of aluminum. The front panel of the device has the output jacks (4.4mm and 3.5mm respectively), gain switch, pre-amp mode selector, LED indicator, and the rotary encoder.

The rotary encoder has very smooth feedback with precise “steps” that have the right amount of feedback. It also doubles as the power buttons, since pressing it down is how you turn on or off the device. There is a slight wobble to the wheel for this reason but it’s very common for wheels that can be pressed downwards.

The LED indicator flashes between alternating colors depending on the input selected, the sampling rate/format of the file etc. A more detailed description can be found in the following.

The back houses two USB type-C ports: one for charging, and one for data transmission. The separated inputs are great to avoid any potential interference between the power and data lines, but poses a new challenge: finding a USB type-C cable that works. I have 7 different USB type-C cables, all but one failed to connect the Angel to my PC.

Another oddity is the situation with fast chargers. Basically – the Angel do not charge at all with fast chargers. I tried three different fast chargers, two of them supported USB PD and another supported Quick-Charge 3.0. No dice. In the end, I got success by charging for a regular 5V-2A adapter which was excruciatingly slow.

Update: it turns out that Earmen recommends charging with 5V-2A chargers in the manual. So this limitation is by design.

Full recharge takes over 3 hours. Quite a long time, but the Angel holds charge really well. Standby drain is practically negligible. Moreover, the amp section does not even engage if no headphones are connected, so that’s another nifty power-saving feature.

Now let’s move on the other ports on the back. You have the COAX/TOSLINK input, and finally two line-out ports in balanced or single-ended flavor. A curious omission here is a line-in. That way it would be possible to use the Angel as an amp alone. But alas.

Overall, flagship-grade build quality with no qualms whatsoever regarding the workmanship.

USABILITY

The Angel is rather substantial in size. You can grab it in one hand, but stacking together with a phone, for example, is quite impractical. I find the Angel more suited as a sort of “transportable” device than something truly portable. The 340gm of weight definitely hints toward that direction.

Battery life has been within expectations for a device of its class. When powering the Sennheiser HD650 and Hifiman Arya SE, the Angel lasted me about 7 hours on a single charge. The 2x3000mAh battery pack does the job, though I suspect using IEMs will yield slightly better results. Nonetheless, expect to charge every other day if you are a frequent user.

Another nifty usability feature is how the rotary encoder works. It acts as a fully digital potentiometer for one, and the volume is automatically reset to zero every time you unplug something or turn the unit off.

As a result, the chances of accidentally blasting your ears with high volume becomes diminutive. It does make volume-matching and comparing between multiple IEMs/headphones a chore, but that’s something you don’t do every day.

The dial also works as pre-amp volume control when the line-out voltage is set to “pre-out” via the switch on the front. Setting it to “direct” turns on fixed-voltage line-out mode instead, which is useful when connecting external amps.

SPECIFICATIONS

Earmen does not specify the exact current at a specific load on their website. So I asked them for those figures and they told me that the output power of Angel is:

• Single-ended: 1.62W @32 Ohm
• Balanced: 2.25W @32 Ohm

The Sabre ES9038Q2M is used as the DAC chip, which is the highest end 2-channel Sabre DAC. The rest of the specs are as follows:

TONALITY AND TECHNICALITIES

I find describing the tonality of digital sources a futile exercise, as most of the characteristics depend on the pairing with various headphones and IEMs. Nonetheless, there are some commonalities between all pairings, and in general the Earmen Angel has a “Reference” tuning. Which is another speak for: they are neutral and does not really emphasize on any frequencies.

There is a bit of “excitement” up top, which can be evident while pairing with some warm/laid-back gears, but it’s not overdone. The upper-mids/lower-treble show a hint of the infamous “Sabre glare”, though it’s not distracting and well under control. The staging was consistently wider than average. Rest of it is how it should be – uncolored, close to neutral.

PAIRING NOTES

IEMs

The Angel pairs well with moderately sensitive IEMs with 16ohms or higher impedance. Anything lower with high sensitivity, and you will notice some hiss. Anything lower with low sensitivity (ala Final E5000), you’ll notice that IEMs sound underpowered.

I noticed some hiss with the Campfire Holocene and Dunu Zen (when using Gain+ mode especially). Granted – this DAC-Amp is way overkill for those sensitive IEMs but certain products in this category manages to handle IEMs just as well. I find the Angel to be more geared towards headphone use than IEMs for this reason.

On the positive side, output impedance is lower than 1ohm, so you should not have issues with multi-BA or hybrid IEMs having their frequency response thrown off.

A surprise exception was the current crop of planar IEMs, which paired wonderfully. Dynamics were spot on, and the staging was somewhat widened (a weakness of most if not all planar magnetic IEMs in the current market, the non-Audeze ones that is).

Headphones

Powering headphones is where the Angel flexes its muscles, especially planar magnetic headphones that do not require absurd wattage.

I have tried a number of Hifiman planars with the Angel and apart from the HE-6se V2 (83dB/mW @ 50 ohms) – the rest of them were adequately powered. The pairing with Arya SE was something exceptional. Great bass slam, enveloping headstage, precise imaging, no harshness in treble – just wonderful all around. If you own an Arya SE – try the Angel.

Sennheiser’s high impedance dynamics were driven well too. The HD650 lacked the warmth and tactility that you get on an OTL tube amp, but it sounded as good as on any solid state amp. There is plenty of voltage swing here to fully power the drivers (usually HD650 and the likes require >= 6Vrms to sound their best, I will link to the calculations here if I can find them again).

A note about the Gain+ mode here: it adds some distortion to the sound which might be distracting esp on planars. I did not need to use the Gain+ mode that much but your mileage may vary. I’d recommend not using it until you absolutely need to.

Overall, if you are predominantly a headphone user, the Earmen Angel will be a fantastic source for most of them, unless all you own are the Hifiman Susvara, Abyss 1266, HEDDPHONE V2, or the likes. In which case – none of the portable sources can really help.

As standalone DAC

The DAC section is very competent and competes well with other desktop DACs in this range, e.g. SMSL M400. While those desktop DACs have more outputs and features like filter selection, the sonic differences are fairly minimal considering the massive difference in footprint. There’s also MQA decoding capabilities for those who believe in MQA.

As a result, I can see the Angel being a transportable all-in-one while on the go, and a nifty DAC connected to some powerful headphone amps when at home or desk. You may have to invest into some 4.4mm to XLR cables but the flexibility on offer is excellent.

COMPARISONS

vs iFi xDSD Gryphon

The iFi xDSD Gryphon has become one of the most popular portable DAC-Amps around. We reviewed it and found it to be a great all-rounder.

When it comes to build quality, both are exceptional. The Gryphon has a sleeker, more modern design, whereas the Angel has the subtlety of a muscle car. Poor car analogies aside, the weight difference between them is substantial, with the Gryphon being over 100gm lighter.

Despite the lighter weight, I don’t think Gryphon makes a suitable “stack” either, since the wide footprint makes it awkward to hold the phone and the Gryphon together. To aid in that, iFi has added Bluetooth DAC functionalities to Gryphon, which is absent on the Angel. Gryphon also has the ability to select different filters, and the on-screen display is a helpful addition.

The volume pot on the Gryphon is analog, vs the digital rotary encoder on the Angel. Gryphon also has hardware EQ functionalities which are fun to use.

The Angel has been on the backfoot until now, but it hits back with sheer output power. Planar magnetic and high impedance dynamics are far better driven on the Angel, with loads of headroom to spare. The DAC section is also better overall, with noticeably wider stage and better dynamics when connected to external amps.

The Gryphon pairs better with IEMs, and the IEMatch switch is another helpful addition. To summarize: for predominantly IEM usage and BT capabilities, the Gryphon is the better choice. For using as a standalone DAC and to power planars or high impedance dynamics – the Angel is a no-brainer.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The summary kind of writes itself – if you are a predominantly headphone user, and need something to carry on the go or act as a solid DAC when on the desk, the Earmen Angel is one of the best options out there. The build is excellent, the usability features handy, and the price is rather competitive when you consider the overall market of such devices.

The biggest downside here is the slight hiss with sensitive IEMs, and the lack of a line-in which would allow DAP users to use the Angel as an amp. Given the target demography, these are not deal breakers, as when connected to external amps or full-size cans the Angel just shine.

I think that the Earmen Angel will gain a following over time, as devices of their class usually do. As such, I have no qualms to recommend the Angel for headphone users who need something portable.

MY VERDICT

4.25/5

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get it from Earmen Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

PHOTOGRAPHY

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Earmen Angel Review – Future Cult Classics appeared first on Music For The Masses.

OH5 can be bought from Ikko’s website for approx $495 before promos. There’s a nice giveaway promo going on right now, and I have been hinted that a xmas promo is also coming up so stay tuned on their website in the coming days

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Apogee Groove / Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / E1DA 9038SG3 / Questyle M15 – Radius Deepmount tips – Stock cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

OH5’s tonality is warm-balanced, and the timbre is bodied and polished.

Sub-Bass

Sub bass is there but doesnt shine enough. Looking at the graph it does not seem too much rolled off but from actual audition you can check that rumble may use some help to be more evident, and this also impacts negatively on spatial drawing of course. Mid bass elevation tends to cover it, too.

Mid Bass

OH5 have an evidently enhanced mid bass which is key to their global tonality in a positive sense on one hand, but paired to somehow “dampened” transients it also contributes to limitating overall resolving power.

Mids

OH5 mids are very well positioned in terms or relative relation with bass and trebles – not forward, not recessed – to the general purpose of obtaining a globally balanced, horizontally-calibrated presentation (much more so than the graph seems to say). Their tonality is very well “centered”. Highmids ramp up quite rapidly and deliver quite some energy, thus sometimes (although rarely) resulting in some minor inconsistency with the mid and lower ones. Those overly sensitive to 3KHz might be a bit “touched” on some tracks (I’m not in that category, rather the other way around), yet I cound’t hear sibilance which is great of course.

Male Vocals

Vocals on OH5 are good, with particular regards to male vocals. While midbass sometimes gets too close (and does sometimes overlap baritones) they come across very organic, especially on tenor registers.

Female Vocals

Female vocals are also good. A clear preference has been given to energy vs smoothness here. Purists of flutey sopranos may not consider OH5 as top of the block – but apart from that this is another spot where a good job has been made on the OH5.

Highs

OH5’s treble is nice, somewhat airy, and most of all energetic, sparkly while also staying combed, smooth though, so they are in the end not offensive while still staying engaging. The 4.5KHz peak gets hot at times, and depending on eartips selection and/or personal preference/sensibility it may want to be tamed by surgical equing. Other then that, a nice job was done here.

Technicalities

Soundstage

OH5 draw an average sized stage, with a decent width, some height but very limited depth.

Imaging

Macro dynamics (imaging) is good, although primarily in the sense of stereo separation given their flat-ish spatial rendering capabilities. Central panned instruments and/or mono tracks, suffer from OH5’s limitation in terms of layering/separation.

Details

Detail retrieval, like instrument separation, is dramatically sub-average for this price class. It’s quite evident that the entire tuners’ effort has been concentrated on delivering tonal pleasantness and a specific musicality tone, sacrificing resolution and analithical skills.

Instrument separation

Layering and instrument separation are the other major Achille’s heels of OH5, together with detail retrieval as previously noted. There’s little chance to appreciate various voices’ / instruments’ nuances in their singular identities even on acoustic, well mastered, uncompressed tracks.

Driveability

It’s not difficult to drive OH5 as their sensitivity is relevant, and their impedance is on a level where many amps deliver their best current, or near that. A decent phone should be enough, and surely not particularly powerful sources will be.

Physicals

Build

Housings offer a convincing impression of solidity, and sport a very pleasing design style.

Fit

In my case OH5’s shape and size are the right shape and size to fit my concha without difficulty, filling it up almost completely. The nozzles are not very long so long stem tips are in order for me as pushing the housings in beyond a certain point is a no go. In the end I settled for Radius Deepmount.

Comfort

As long as I adopt long stemmed tips, OH5 are very comfy for me once fit. Their weight is also “right” (not too light to “disappear”, not to heavy). They’d become unbearable however if equipped with short stemmed tips, as their housings would hit my antitragus (this is a common issue I have with similar shaped housings e.g. Final A and B series, Tanchjim Oxygen, etc especially on my left ear)

Isolation

As housings do fill my conchas quite well, some level of passive isolation is achieved in my case.

Cable

I found stock cable is quite nice. In addition to good sonic behaviour and very nice haptics, it comes with a modular plug system and 3 termination plugs included in the package (3.5, 2.5 and 4.4). Modular plugs miss a lock-in mechanism but they seem quite firm in position anyway so all OK on that front too.

After further experience with cables etc I must amend as follows. Stock cable is OK from the construction quality standpoint. In terms of sonic pairing it clearly contributes to OH5’s general “more musical than technical” presentation. After rotating lowend and less-lowend cables, I can for example say that pairing a Dunu DUW-02S impacts quite evidently in terms of snappier transients, wider stage, better note contour and layering. 

Specifications (declared)

Considerations and hints

What positively hits you about OH5 is its musicality. Somehow the tuners managed to reach a particular tonal balance, adding a quite personal color to the music being played, and such color is indeed pleasing. The sound coming from OH5 is bodied, vibrant, warm and enveloping. It’s energetic but also rounded off, smooth – there’s no sharp edge, no rigid brick wall, and no floppy surface either.

You got to love OH5’s particular color to appreciate that, of course, which might not happen to you. If you do like its timbre, however, chances are you might develop a particular affection for OH5.

On the flip side, I find OH5 compromise quite dramatically on key technicalities, first of all layering and instrument separation. I am no EQ guru, so I couldn’t (and I wouldn’t) find out inhowmuch the situation is due to aposteriori tuning or to the driver’s specific nature. What I did is play with Roon’s PEQ and after some fiddling I could devine some touch-ups wich make the situation a bit better (for my tastes of course)

Low shelf    55Hz  4dB   0.71
Peak        150Hz -3dB   0.5
Peak        950Hz  1.3dB 1
Peak       4500Hz -2dB   2

The 150Hz demotion helps making midbass much more polite and somewhat faster. The low shelf adds some missing “rumble tail” to bass notes. The 950Hz (or thereabout) pushup also helps de-dampening midbass and lowmids and the 4.5K dip takes some hotness away from metal notes.

All those figures are not carved in stone, take them as ballpark values, but if you try you will hear instrument separation and clarity improving, a more detailed bass, and a quite evident opening on stage drawing especially in the depth direction. Play with values to learn how sensible each one is to the final result.

An alternative possible intervention is adopting TRI Clarion eartips. In such case the pushdown on 150Hz or thereabout is not needed anymore, however a more generous dampening intervention gets required on the highmids – I would add a -2dB or so to 3Khz for example, in that case.

Lastly: some care is in order about ideal source pairings. OH5 do not welcome bass-strong sources too much. Questyle M15 or QP1R, and E1DA 9038xx dongles all OK. Groove on the other hand excites OH5’s “artistic” midbass too much, yielding a too dark result, thus not even being able to help OH5 on adding space depth which is amongst Groove’s specialties in general.

Comparisons

Final E4000 ($149)

The epitome of IEMs featuring strong musical personality (color) which grew on me since the day I got them and won’t ever leave me, even now that I have technically better alternatives, are Final E4000. And guess what: E4000 and OH5’s personal “voicings” offer quote a few common points.

Both are warm, smooth, musically “pop” and deliver a very particular balance between smoothness and strenght, energy and pampering. Compared to OH5, E4000 are… more japanese: silkier, a bit (even) more elegant in a sense. OH5 feel more energetic – in a good sense.

OH5 are braver on the trebles compared to E4000, even at the cost of minorly overdoing sometimes. E4000 on the other hand are very good at layering and separation, where OH5 is dramatically lacking, especially on the mid and low segments.

E4000 are much more demanding in terms of source power, and they have the not secondary advantage of costing one third of what OH5 do.

Oriolus Isabellae ($500 street price)

Isabellae’s musical personality is evidently different from OH5’s insofar as they deliver a V shape presentation, with relatively recessed mids and important, enhanced sub bass and bass (for the connoisseurs: something more in the ballpark of Ikko’s other model, the OH10). This alone of course already imprints a big part of the comparison between the two products.

Beyond that, Isabellae’s high mids are smoother, and trebles are less energetic, yet airier compared to OH5. Mid bass is definitely more textured and detailed on Isabellae, while still staying on the relaxed and buttery side in general. Sub bass is OK out of the box on Isabellae while it requires some help on OH5. Most of all, layering, resolution and detail retrieval is obvisouly better on Isabellae, which are also equivalently undemanding in terms of source power as OH5 are.

Dunu ZEN ($699)

Zen’s bass is arguably as good as the industry gets at least until pulling Softears stuff to the comparison table: perfectly calibrated mix of punchyness and body, volume and texture. ZEN also has beyond outstandind microdynamics and layering capabilities – on both fronts, that’s very much unlike what happens on OH5. On the opposite end, trebles are marginally but perceivably airier on OH5, although highmid sensitives as previously noted my consider that segment on the limit or even a bit beyond their preference. Taken as a whole, OH5 have a stronger musical personality (love or hate, of course), ZEN are more “technical”, and 40%+ more expensive. I’m referring to original ZEN model, not the subsequent Pro version (which I find less nice then its sibling).

Conclusions

OH5 are a nicely and coherently colored set. As such, they can be target of “unquenchable hatred and indomitable love” – like that other well known invididual from some 200 years ago, you know – depending on one’s own ego. Simply put, if you are the uncurably curious audiophile addict you may want to check these, knowing chances are you might viscerally love them, or find them as being “not your cup of tea”. I hope my article did convey at least some hints to educate your guess before you actually carry that out.

In summary OH5 deliver a bodied, vibrant, warm and enveloping musical experience. They are energetic while also smoothed. An evident accurate job has been carried out behind the curtains here to get to such point.

Their major downside is on resolving power and layering proweness, which can be helped a bit albeit not solved – without revolutionising the entire presentation – by means of some surgical EQ as I also tried to hint you about, here above.

The OH5 sample covered in this article has been delivered to me courtesy of Ikko staff which I warmly thank once again for the opportunity.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Ikko OH5 Asgard Review – Music Better Than The Rest appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Gear of the Year: 2022 marks the blog’s fourth year. We collectively published 100-150 articles, mainly product reviews, but also technical information (such as earphone modding). Apart from receiving review units from manufacturers and sellers, we also purchased a lot…and we borrowed from audiophile friends and colleagues.

Our list of earphone reviews is going towards 400, which is a very useful database. And one of the world’s biggest. In the DAC and amplification department we have also reached a respectable 70.

While we shrank from 8 to 6 authors, we essentially doubled our viewer numbers and currently record well over 1000 daily individual blog visitors (1377 on Black Friday 2022). But we remain humble, continue viewing our hobby as labour of love and focus on information for you, the reader, while not selling out.

Another very popular list is our Wall of Excellence, which hosts gear not approved by one of us, but by the whole team. This is a useful filter for you and should give you confidence in your buying decisions.

And yes, we searched for and found an exclusive sponsor in HiFiGo, who help us with our basic operating cost (web hosting). We still chip a lot of our own money in for mailing between us reviewers, import charges etc.

By having a single sponsor (and not Google ads) paying us a moderate flat fee, we don’t rely on viewer numbers. For you, this means no popups and no ads between paragraphs, nothing in your way when reading our articles. All advertisement takes place in the top toolbar and the sidebar. Feel free to check it out.

We also continue refraining from affiliate links as it still leaves a bad taste in our mouths.

As at the end of the previous years, we list our our personal favourites of 2022 – the portable audio we personally enjoyed most. There are no rules, we just tell you what we like. It does not have to be the latest. After all, the gear we use most is the best for us. Between us, the Dunu Zen, 7Hz Timeless, Final ZE3000, and Questyle M15 received the most mentionings. The Questyle M15 appears to be the most highly acclaimed dongle in the blogosphere period and may as well be the “Product of the Year” all around.

We don’t publish any “best of” lists as we have not tested all competitors in each category.

Enjoy this read and we wish you a happy and successful 2023!

We thank

And here we go…that’s what we enjoyed in 2022…

Alberto Pittaluga… Bologna, ITALY

My 18 readers know that I’m much more into enjoying better sound than into getting excited about sidegrades or other small changes from my existing preferences. I am the polar opposite of a marketing hype target individual – on pretty much any topic by the way. I mean: try and sell me a “better” (?) Moka coffee machine…

With that in mind, and considering that I’m not into this since yesterday evening, it’s quite logical that the list of the really significant items out of all those I come across over a year’s time is short. Here’s what I found in 2022 which is worth recommending.

IEMS

Intime Miyabi – a great piece of engineering ticking most if not all boxes for my tastes. Beyond details, one of the absolute best sound delivery experiences one can buy (well… some personal initiative is required to fetch it from Japan) below 500$… spending less than half of it. My report here.

RHA CL2 – I heard quite a few planar IEMs, and not a single one “closes the door” for me. Long story short, none offers me a well-articulated-enough sound experience out of the box, and none carries a driver good enough to be equalised into something I really like. The sole exception I ever came across yet is this RHA CL2 – a dated model indeed, which I had the venture to audition this year for my first time. More on this on my piece about it.

DAC/AMP Dongles

Questyle M15 – no doubt the “best overall quality” battery-less DAC/AMP (“dongle”) at any price. Paired with a small transport easily makes all sub-800$, and most sub-2K$ DAPs pointless in terms of sound quality delivery (some may still prefer “some” DAP for better pocketability convenience or specific features). Firstly reviewed in depth by Jurgen here, you can read my incremental notes here.

E1DA 9038SG3 and 9038D – the M15 is what it is, but it also is relatively expensive (almost 300€ once delivered to Italy). My previous experience taught that me that exclusively higher-tier (and price) dongles are able to deliver sound qualities worth investing in more money than the 9$ price tag asked for an Apple Dongle ($9). Then I found these two gems which fulfill the need for incredibly clean and powerful sound for less than half M15’s price, and 90% of its proficiency.

Biodegraded…Vancouver, CANADA

7Hz Timeless:
Despite a somewhat elevated and loose midbass, these have great overall tonal balance, smooth mids, excellent instrument separation and layering, and speed. Macrodynamics are on the soft side, which might not be for everybody; and the fit will be problematic for people with concha bowls on the smaller side. They work best with warmer, dynamic sources.

Durwood…Chicago, USA

Swimming in dongles I don’t have a favorite, Moodrop Dawn has the selectable gain, others like the Shanling UP3 have single and balanced outputs and controls. Take your pick. I would like selectable gain AND single ended/balanced outputs.

Desktop DAC goes to the SMSL C200 for best value and sound that hangs near the top dogs. I personally prefer separate pieces for the ability to have more connection options and swapping but for near double the price I don’t see double the performance. The SMSL SU-9 is excellent for me I ended up buying one on the second hand market. The SMSL DO100/HO100 is great too and bit more user friendly for the size.

For earphones I still love my Shozy Form 1.4 for the bass tuning, warm signature and superb fitment YMMV. There are lots of excellent performers if just factoring in sound and technical merits including the 7Hz Timeless and Moondrop Kato, but I struggle keeping them in place. For those starting out or not a lot to spend, my budget pick for what is available would be the CCA Lyra.

For TWS, I only have 3 pairs to compare-but if I don’t need ANC, I would pick the Moondrop Alice all day everyday. Review coming soon, they are a wireless Kato and they nailed all the important features (sound, battery life, control, fitment), form follows function.

Jürgen Kraus…Calgary, CANADA

In terms of earphones, I continue liking the JVC HA-FDX1, the Dunu Zen, and the Final E5000. The Zen remain my go-tos. New on my list are the LETSHUOER EJ7M (great allrounders), the Final A3000 & E3000, and the very articulate Dunu Talos. But the earphone I used most in 2022 is the superb Final ZE3000 TWS.

As to headphones, my Sennheiser HD 600 have received company by the Final Sonorous III. On the budget side, I added the excellent KTXPro1 to my Koss selection (Porta Pros, KPHi-30, and KSC75).

I am principally a “portable guy” who used to operate his iPhone with a dongle, mainly the AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt. Whilst the Cobalt remains a standard staple of mine, the excellent Questyle M15 (and here too) is a great alternative for my higher current-drawing headphones/earphones – and my personal product of the year 2022.

For driving full-sized headphones and single DD items, nothing beats the Apogee Groove. For Bluetooth DAC/amp, I exclusively use the very mature Qudelix-5K. And for earphone testing, I am still holding on to the totally underappreciated Earstudio HUD100.

The Hidizs AP80 Pro-X has proven a great dap for me, no matter if used alone or as transport with a dongle. The Sony NW-A55 with Mr Walkman firmware also remains in my collection of favourites. And the very crisp sounding Questyle QP1R remains my flagship dap. The biggest surprise for me was the Tempotec V6 dap…essentially a $500 device at half price.

For my desktop setup, I am holding on to EarMen Tradutto DAC in combination with the Burson Funk amp and AudioQuest analog and digital interconnects.

Kazi Mahbub Mutakabbir…Munich, GERMANY

Just like that, another year went by. This year was special for me as I got to visit High End Munich 2021 (which happened after a 3-year hiatus) and also got to meet some great reviewers and legends of the industry in person.

Best Headphones: This year, I have slowly transitioned from portable audio into desktop audio. A knock-on effect of that has been my growing headphone collection. What used to be a mere 4 headphones last year, has grown into a whooping 25 now.

Yup, I need another shelf.

Speaking of the best headphones, Hifiman HE-6se V2 got the most use this year from me. I still use the Sennheiser HD650 whenever I feel like relaxing, but for my playlist – the Hifimans absolutely slap!

That being said, they aren’t the best headphones that I’ve tried this year. That recognition goes to the venerable Stax SR-X9000. Still underrated in the summit-fi segment, these overtook Susvara for me in almost every aspect. They are build better, has better sense of space, bass is better defined and slams a bit harder, and of course – the ethereal treble is an absolute joy.

Too bad that the price tag (with energizer) makes these nigh-unobtainable for me. Doesn’t make them any less awesome, though.

Best IEMs: Dunu Zen remains my daily driver, and they scale tremendously with desk sources, so I am a happy camper.

Speaking of camps, Campfire Audio Holocene has sneaked their way into my daily rotation. Probably my most favorite Campfire Audio IEMs, ever. They deserve a lengthy, long-term review, which is in the pipeline.

This year I also had to wade through loads of “meh” IEMs, each mimicking a certain “scientifically perfect” (lol) curve in one way or another, and each sounding boring and unremarkable. But the one IEMs that kept the fire alive was the Softears Turii.

Exceptional in almost every sense, their fit is the biggest concern, but with Spinfit W1 tips (excellent tips btw, recommended) I found them stable enough to enjoy outdoors. Too bad that they’re discontinued.

The Softears Twilight is a spiritual successor of sorts. Doesn’t have the crazy sense of space that the Turii portray, but pretty much beats every other single dynamic I’ve tried under USD $1000 (and I have tried nearly all of the hyped ones by now). So yeah, Softears, take a bow!

Desktop DAC and Amp: Questyle CMA Fifteen takes the cake for the best all-in-one system that I’ve heard. Near-endgame for 99% out there I’d say. Drives almost everything with authority. What’s not to like? Oh yes, the price. Something’s gotta give after all.

As for standalone units, the best solid-state amp I’ve tried: Zaehl HM1. As for the best tube amp: Feliks Envy, or the Feliks Euforia AE. Two very different price-points, but both about the best tube amps you can buy right now.

DACs are a bit difficult for me to judge, and the ones I’ve tried this year couldn’t replace the Holo May L3 I tried last year, so that one still reigns supreme.

Portable DAC/Amp: Questyle came outta nowhere with the M15 (and here too) and seized the day. Nothing else comes close, really. On the higher side of the price, Chord Mojo 2 is an excellent device. For using with IEMs and moderately efficient headphones – that’s all you’ll ever need. The DAC section is kilobuck-level as well.

Surprise of the Year: Final ZE3000.

I do not like wireless stuff at all, mostly because of how poor and compressed 99% of them sound. This one caught be off-guard. I bought them only to review them, fully expecting to put them up for sale once the review is done.

Now, three months later, I carry them everywhere and despite the finicky touch controls, I keep coming back to them. Only the Sony WH-1000XM4 sound as good as them, and they cost 2x the price. To think that Final would come up with one of the best TWS IEMs around – didn’t see that one coming.

Then again, who else would be that methodical?

Loomis Johnson…Chicago, USA

IEMs:

Moondrop Starfield—my default rec to folks who ask me which <$100 phone to buy…big-sounding, with seamless coherence and as lot of PRAT.

7Hz Timeless—polarizing and imperfect (there’s some stridency at the highest frequencies), but technically very accomplished and highly resolving. The more I hear ‘em the more I dig ‘em.

Tin HiFi TWS Buds 3—light on features (no app, no ANC) but beautifully built and a really engaging listen, with very good imaging and instrument placement.

AXS Audio Professional Wireless Earbuds—generic-looking, with a modest soundstage, but probably the best-sounding TWS I’ve heard to date. 

Portable DAC/Dongles:

Xumee USB-C—lots of power and surprising finesse for less than the price of a six pack.

Hidisz S3Pro—a really refined performer which synergizes well with anything under 150 oHm.

Headphones:

1More Sonoflow Wireless ANC—you can pay a lot more for punchier sound or more tech features, but these are an awful lot of headphone for the money, with good noise-cancelling, an unforced natural tonality and fantastic battery life.

Koss KTXPro1—uber-comfortable and musical as hell; for $19 there’s no reason everyone shouldn’t own a pair.

Bluetooth Speakers:

Oontz Angle 3—diminutive, seemingly indestructible cheapo with surprisingly good bass output and an enveloping 3D soundstage.

Edifier R1280DB Bookshelf Speakers—I gave a set of these to the owner of a cannabis dispensary, whose customers rave incessantly about how good they sound even before imbibing.

Desktop DAC:

SMSL SU-6—a more than capable DAC, with excellent bass control and a very detailed (if occasionally overbright) high end; digital preamp and Bluetooth functionality are big plusses. Outstanding value.

KopiOkaya…SINGAPORE

The editor: although KopiOkaya retired a year ago (on his own terms), he keeps his eartips compendium up to date. His list has been a cornerstone of this block and its most successful article. It currently records somewhere between 80,000 and 100,000 views.

Best under $50 IEM:

7HZ SALNOTES ZERO

Best under $100 IEM:

DUNU KIMA

Best IEM of 2022:

SOFTEARS TURII Ti

Best dongle DAC/AMP of 2022:

QUESTYLE M15 (here and here)

Best portable DAP of 2022:

TEMPOTEC V6

Best budget DAC/AMP combo:

SMSL SH-9 THX AAA-888

Best desktop DAC of the 2022:

HOLO MAY KTE (KITSUNE EDITION)

Best desktop headphone amp of 2022:

QUESTYLE CMA FIFTEEN

Best eartips of the 2022

SPINFIT W1

Most outstanding audio product of 2022:

QUESTYLE M15 (here and here)

And This Was The Previous Year:

The post Gear Of The Year 2022 – Our Personal Favourites appeared first on Music For The Masses.

A device gets attached to this Wall of Excellence when based on our private and of course subjective experience it performs so well within its technical and price category as to even discourage considering homologous alternatives.

If it ain’t here, WE don’t want it!

Please note that our WoE will not be limited to devices we actually published a review of. Nonetheless, all WoE devices have for long time been or still are part of our operative gear.

We start small and plan to expand our wall according to merit.

This Site is being consistently updated…please bookmark it and keep checking back!

LATEST ADDITIONS: Qudelix-5K, Questyle M15, E1DA 9038SG3.

In-Ear Monitors

Past excellences, now discontinued or superseded

Headphones

Digital Audio Players (“DAPs”)

Desktop Amplifiers

Desktop DACs

Desktop Integrated Headphone DAC/AMPs

Portable Headphone Amplifiers

Portable Integrated Headphone DAC/AMPs

Headphone DAC/AMP “Dongles”

Dongles are little DAC/amps without battery that are powered by their source device.

Past excellences, now discontinued or superseded

Accessories

The post Wall Of Excellence DRAFT appeared first on Music For The Masses.

この記事の時点では、Miyabiはメーカーサイトで21.450,00円で販売されています。

「Intime Acoustic “は、欧米では全く知られていないブランドです。というのも、このブランドは非常に小さな会社で、その事業範囲は日本に限られているからです。前回の記事では、この会社について、またその技術（開発され、時にはオーナーが特許を取得したもの）についての情報をいくつか紹介しました。読者の便宜を図るため、適宜更新しながら、ここにその情報を再掲する。

同社

Intime Acousticは、高崎市（JPN）に拠点を置く、かなり若い（2016年設立）株式会社オゼイドが所有するブランドです。その本業は、実は製造ではなく、コンサルティング。

オーナー兼主要開発者の渡辺義幸氏は、35年以上にわたって圧電材料を使ったデバイスやアプリケーションに携わってきた経験を持つ。

彼の会社名「ozeid」（あるいはウェブドメイン名「o2aid」）を180度回転させてみてください。どうでしょう？ 

とはいえ、渡辺さんは、その実力の一端をイヤホンという形で、若いユーザー（渡辺さんの子供のように若い）に伝え、「日本のいい音」を伝えたいと考えているようです。

キーテクノロジー

Miyabiは、Intimeの他のモデルと同様に、10mmダイナミックドライバーと、高音域/トップオクターブを担当する特殊なセラミックツイーターのデュアルドライバーシステムをベースにしています。

Sora 2に搭載されている技術については、非常に興味深い内容がいくつもありますが、その中から主なものをピックアップしてご紹介します。

1 – “縦型スーパーツィーター”

VSTは、最も一般的に採用されている酸化チタンではなく、ある種の特殊な積層セラミックスでできています。

基本的に、積層セラミックスは振動をよりコントロールしやすいとされています。

従来のスーパーツイーターは可聴域外の音を再生するため、いわゆる「スーパー・ツイーター」と呼ばれるものですが、このIntimeのバリエーションは、そのキャリブレーションに加えて、一般的ではない素材選択により、異なる挙動を示し、倍音を再生し、可聴域の最高域に効果的に貢献します。

Miyabiは、このようなトゥイーターの「第3世代VST2」を搭載しています。渡辺氏によると、デュアルセラミックスの採用により、音圧感度を維持したままヒステリシス特性を最小化することに成功したとのことだ。

例えば3rd VSTでは、ピアノの倍音が豊かになり、サックスの飛び跳ねるような音も鮮明になるという。前作のVST（Sora 2）をベースにしたモデルを所有している私が言うのもなんですが、本当にそうなんです。

2 – グラフェンコーティング

ダイナミックドライバーにはグラフェンコーティングが施されており、渡辺氏によれば、このグラフェンコーティングが中高音域をコントロールされたパワーと鮮明さで再生する理由の一つであるとのことです。

3 – 真鍮製ハウジング

Soraシリーズとは異なり、Miyabiのハウジングは真鍮製です。渡辺氏によると、この選択はMIYABIの特徴である柔らかく深いサスティーンと低音再生に寄与しているとのこと。因果関係が正しいかどうかは分からないが、結果は間違いなく良い。

4 – HDSS

Ti3、Sora、Sora2と同様、Miyabiにも採用されているもう一つの独自技術（特許取得済み）は、High Definition Sound Standardの略で「HDSS」と呼ばれるものです。

これは筐体内部の音の反射を抑え、よりクリーンな出力を実現するためのものです。

音波の中にはハウジング内部で乱反射し、ダイナミックドライバーの振動板に衝突して、本来の目的から外れてしまうものもあります。HDSSテクノロジーでは、ハウジング内部の音はより制御され、振動板をランダムに「攻撃」することはなく、ダイナミックドライバーは信号源に「のみ」反応し、本来の動きをすることができます。

これにより、音のリアルさが増し、疲労が軽減されるとインテイムは述べています。しかし、これにはマイナス面もあります。ダイナミックドライバーの振動から高域を除去しすぎる傾向があるのです。

そこで、セラミックVST2の解像度とグラフェンコートDDの中高域のチューニングを慎重に調整し、輪郭のしっかりした、調和のとれた中高域と広い空間表現力を持つ低音を実現することが、MIYAVIが実現した大きなポイントです。

一目でわかるカード

フルデバイスカード

テストセットアップ

ソースはこちら Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Tempotec V1 + E1DA 9038D – 純正チップ、RHA Dual Density Siliconチップ、Radius Deepmountチップ – XINSH 8 Core 4N pure silver+6N single crystal copper cable – ロスレス 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

シグネチャー解析

トーナル

Miyabiの音色はマイルドなV系で、中低音と高音に控えめな段差があり、中音は処理されていないが、すべてがうまく相互調整されていて、全体として非常に心地よい表現をしている。

最も重要なことは、MIYABIが極めて「自然な」（「有機的な」）音質を提供することです。アコースティック楽器は、パリで言うところの「生」「自然」であり、聴き手には、後処理で欠点を補う前の音が届いているような、独特の「演奏現場の臨場感」を与えてくれるのです。

私のように99％アコースティックジャズを聴いている人間にとって、このようなユニークで中毒性のある体験は、すぐに貴重な財産に変わります。

サブベース

サブベースは適度に伸び、スピード感があるが、ミッドベースと比べるとパワーがやや劣る。自立した低音を再生するには十分な性能だ。

中低音

Miyabiの中低音は、速くてスラミーでありながら、明瞭で質感のある音です。中音域を大切にしながらも、しっかりとしたボディを持った低音に仕上がっている。

たまに、男性ボーカルやギターが控えめに聴こえることがあるが、これは特定の音楽ジャンルやセレクトによるもの。

ミッド

Miyabiの中音域は有機的で、リアルで、非常によく変調され、質感があります。ピアノ、チェロ、ギターは非常に自然に表現される。

中高域はエネルギッシュで艶があるが、疲労感は少ない。少なくとも私の感覚では、中高域は個人差が大きい領域だ。

男性ヴォーカル

男性ボーカル（特にテナー）は、非常によく表現され、質感があり、有機的である。低音は、特に混み合った箇所、特に非楽器が絡む箇所では、中低音と部分的にぶつかることがある。

女性ボーカル

Miyabiの女性ボーカルは男性ボーカルよりもさらに素晴らしく、オーガニックでボディがあり、時にフルート的でさえあります。シビランスに悩まされることなく、ドライバーの優れた高音域のチューニングが活かされています。

トレブル

高音域は、間違いなくMIYABIが最高のものを提供する2つの領域のうちの1つです。他のピエゾトゥイーターもいくつか聴きましたが、渡辺氏のドライバーに匹敵するようなものはありませんでした。

しかし、ほとんどの場合、IntimeのVSTはエネルギッシュで、ダイナミックで、きらびやかで、空気感がよく、ディテールがはっきりしていて、特に中毒性のあるエネルギッシュな高音を提供します。

この「有機的でブラッシーな音色」の一部は、ハウジングが真鍮で作られていることにも起因していると思います。

技術的なこと

サウンドステージ

みやびのステージの投影は非常に良い。水平方向に非常によく伸び、格別の高さを示し、奥行きも非常によい。

イメージング

MIYABIの音像は、優れた楽器セパレーションも手伝って、端正で緻密、実にリアルなものです。

詳細

Miyabiは、スペクトルのすべてのセグメントから詳細な情報を取得します。低音はこの価格帯のドライバーとしては非常に優れていますが、中音、ボーカル、高音から出る特別な熟練度に直面すると、ほとんど見劣りします。

機器分離

高音域と並んでMIYABIが得意とするのが、楽器分離です。

すべての音色が見事に核融合され、まるでステージ上、あるいはステージの目の前にいるような臨場感で重なり合い、さまざまな演奏家、そのパフォーマンス、能力、そしてミス（！）が一緒に起こっているのがほとんど「見える」ような感覚に陥ります。

Miyabiが提供するものと同等以上のしっかりとしたノートボディと結びついた分離の明瞭さは、私の経験では、Dunu ZenのようなIEM（Miyabiの+4倍の予算）に関わるまで遭遇することはできないでしょう。

ドライバビリティ

Miyabiの感度は控えめなので、自明でないアンプが必要です。過度なものではありませんが、スマートフォンに頼るのは避けた方が良いでしょう。

しかし、インピーダンスはそれほど低くないので、MIYABIが必要とするパワーを供給できるソース、ダックアンプ、ドングルが豊富にあることは良いニュースです。

物理的側面

ビルド

ハウジングは無垢の真鍮製で、「真鍮のような」暖かく有機的なアコースティックな音色を実現することを意図しています。

バックエンドは亀甲色の樹脂で、「匠」と呼ばれる日本の技術で成形されています。そのため、色合いにばらつきがあり、同じものが2つとありません。この樹脂製のバックエンドと真鍮製のメインチャンバーが、非常にスタイリッシュなアンサンブルを生み出しています。雅 “とは、まさに “エレガント、スタイリッシュ “という意味です。

フィット感

Miyabiのような太い弾丸型は、私にとってとてもフィットしやすいものです。

純正チップは音質的には良いのですが、少し柔らかすぎるようで、ハウジングの重さや形状などと相まって、なぜか左耳のドライバーが左耳の中で密閉性を失いがちなのです。

数十の選択肢の中から「いつもの」長くて退屈なローテーションをした後、MiyabiのケースではRHAのデュアルデンシティ・シリコンチップが私にとって最も効果的であることを発見したのです。

快適性

非常に主観的です。個人的には、すべての弾丸型ハウジングと同じように、非常に快適だと思います。

アイソレーション

弾丸の形状からコンチャのシールドはありませんが、それでも彼らの「太った」体型はプラスに働きます。

ケーブル

渡辺さんも苦労されたのでしょうが、純正ケーブルでは感動がありませんでした。いろいろ試した結果、引き出しにあったXINSHの8芯ハイブリッド（4N純銀＋6N単結晶銅）に落ち着きました。

また、IEMハウジングのMMCXコネクターは、Intimeが自社開発したものであることも重要です。この選択は彼らが良かれと思ってしたことだと思いますが、私が試したサードパーティ製のケーブルはすべて同じようにクリックできるわけではなく、中には接続が不安定になるものさえありました（私が持っている他のすべてのMMCX IEMに同じケーブルを接続した場合とは異なります）。渡辺さんは、この点について調べたほうがいいかもしれませんね。

仕様

比較対象

Tanchjim Oxygen ($ 250)

Miyabiは全体的に暖かく、中低音にアクセントがあるのに対し、Oxygenは高音に柔らかいアクセントがあるものの、よりバランスよくニュートラルな印象です。Miyabiの生々しい音色や色付けはOxygenには全くなく、ほとんど透明である。

楽器の分離とマイクロダイナミクスは、混み合った中低域を除き、どこでもMiyabiが有利で、どちらも（理由は異なるが）業界最高レベルである。高音域の表現はMiyabiの方がより有機的で、特に金属楽器はOxygenの方が細部まできれいに再現されます。

Ikko OH1S ($ 159)

OH1SとMiyabiの比較でまず気づくのは、明らかにOH1Sの方が音の重みが薄いということです。OH1Sは、MIYABIのエネルギッシュで筋肉質で “Thetral “なサウンドと比べると、よりスリムで表現力が乏しく、色気もない。

OH1SのDDはMIYABIに比べると速いが解像度は高くないので、OH1Sの中低音は膨張しないが、質感や有機性は明らかに劣る。何よりも楽器の分離がMIYABIに軍配が上がる。OH1Sは高域の侵襲が強く、MIYABIのエネルギッシュで抑制の効いた高域に比べると、時折ショッパイ音に聞こえることがある。

Ikko OH10 ($ 199)

OH10はMIYABIに比べ、サブバスは盛り上がっていますが、ミッドバスは少なめです。そして何より、OH10はMIYABIに比べ低音のスピード感があり、ドライな印象があるため、すっきりしている反面、表現力や質感に乏しい印象があります。また、これだけ綺麗なのに、低音を含めた全帯域の分離はMIYABIの方がOH10より良い。

OH10は音の重さも無駄がなく、音色も生意気ではない。管楽器やハイハット、クラッシュの生々しさはMIYABIに比べるとかなり劣る。中音はかなり引っ込んでいて、ボーカルも比較にならない（意図的にそうしているのだろう）。

Dunu Zen ($700)

Zenの低音はMiyabiに比べてスピード感があり、よりコントロールされている。楽器の分離はMIYABIが優れているが、ZENの方が全帯域で優れている。Zenの音色は暖かみがあるが、音色は極めてニュートラルである。Miyabiは中低域がやや太いだけでなく、中高域の音像が重く、金管楽器のような音色を持つため、より暖かみがある。

中高域はZenの方がすっきりしているが、エネルギッシュで表情豊かな感じはない。上の方はMiyabiの方が断然空気感がある。細部の再現性はZenの方が優れているが、高価格帯の製品にありがちな差はない。

考察と結論

5～600ドル以下のIEMで、MIYABIのように高度に洗練された技術、有機的で生き生きとした音色、エネルギッシュな表現力を同等に心地よくミックスしてくれるものは、そう多くはないでしょう。そして、Miyabiの200ドル以下の価格では、さらに少ないでしょう。

私にとっては、これは素晴らしい素材だ。私は、Miyabiを優秀作品の壁に貼り付けることを検討するために、コブロガーたちの意見を集める作業を開始しました。

この記事で紹介したMIYABIのサンプルは、個人的に購入したもので、渡辺氏とは一切コンタクトがありません。

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Intime Miyabi 雅 アンティーム レビュ- 唯一無二の特別感 appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Al momento della pubblicazione di questo articolo le Miyabi sono in vendita sul sito del produttore, in Giappone, per 21.450,00 Yen, cioè circa 150 €. Ne servono altri 30 circa per farsi inoltrare il pacchetto da un servizio come Tenso, o simili.

“Intime Acoustic” è un marchio per nulla noto in Occidente, essendo di proprietà di un’azienda molto piccola, e che limita il proprio orizzonte commerciale al Giappone, dove ha sede. Nel mio articolo precedente ho dedicato qualche riga all’azienda, e alla sua tecnologia (sviluppata e in parte anche brevettata dal titolare). Riporto qui sotto molte di quelle informazioni, con gli aggiornamenti del caso.

Intime Acoustic, alias Ozeid Co., alias O2aid.com…

Intime Acoustic è un marchio di proprietà di Ozeid Co., Ltd., un’azienda relativamente giovane (fondata nel 2016) con sede a Takasaki City in Giappone. La sua attività principale non è la produzione, in realtà, ma la consulenza.

Il titolare, e direttore tecnico è il sig. Yoshiyuki Watanabe, forte di 35 e più anni di esperienza a proposito di macchine, sistemi e applicazioni che utilizzano materiali piezoelettrici.

Cosa si ottiene ribaltando di 180° il nome “ozeid” (e ancor meglio il nome “o2aid”) ?… 

Qualche anno fa Watanabe-san decise di applicare la sua competenza alla produzione di auricolari, con l’obbiettivo di compiacere utenti giovani – come i suoi figli – a cui trasferire “il bel suono del Giappone“.

Tecnologie principali

Analogamente ad altri modelli della gamma Intime, le Miyabi sono basate su sistema a doppio trasduttore: uno a membrana dinamica da 10mm dedicato alle basse e medie frequenze, più un tweeter alquanto speciale, in ceramica, responsabile della resa delle alte frequenze e dell’ultima ottava.

Sono disponibili un bel po’ di dettagli tecnici interessanti a proposito della tecnologia all’interno delle Miyabi, cerco di sintetizzarli.

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

Il VST è realizzato da una qualche specie laminato ceramico, una scelta molto diversa rispetto all’ossido di titanio più comunemente utilizzato allo scopo.

In sintesi le lamine ceramiche offrono maggior possibilità di controllo delle vibrazioni.

I “super tweeters” convenzionali sono chiamati così perché riproducono suoni fuori della gamma udibile. Intime ne ha realizzato una variante che, grazie al diverso materiale e alle loro calibrazioni, ha un comportamento diverso e riproduce sfumature udibili, contribuendo così efficacemente alla resa della parte più alta dello spettro.

Sulle Miyabi sono installati tweeters “VST2 di terza generazione”. Secondo l’ing. Watanabe le migliorie in questa evoluzione del progetto consistono nell’adozione di doppia ceramica, che minimizza il comportamento isteretico a parità di sensibilità alla pressione sonora.

I tweeter VST di terza generazione offrono mogliori sfumature sulle note del pianoforte, e migliore nitidezza sui salti tonale di un sassofono. Possedendo io un modello basato su una precedente versione di VST (Sora 2) posso in effetti confermare l’esistenza delle migliorie.

2 – Rivestimento in grafene

Sulla membrana dinamica del trasduttore principale è applicato un rivestimento in grafene che – sempre secondo Watanabe – è tra i motivi che portano i suoi trasduttori dinamici a riprodurre le frequenze medie e medioalte con ottimo controllo e buona definizione.

3 – Struttura esterna in ottone

A differenza di quanto avviene per la linea Sora, la carrozzeria delle IEM Miyabi è realizzata in ottone. Secondo Watanabe l’ottone contribuisce ad ammorbidire il suono e ad approfondire la resa dei bassi e il sustain delle note. Non so certificare che la relazione causa-effetto sia quella, ma il risultato c’è, ed è buono.

4 – HDSS

Un’altra tecnologia originale (e brevettata, in realtà) adottata all’interno delle Miyabi, come anche all’interno di altri modelli Intime come Ti3, Sora, Sora2, è denominata “HDSS” come “High Definition Sound Standard”.

Il suo scopo è eliminare i suoni riflessi all’interno della struttura degli auricolari, producendo un suono più pulito.

All’interno della struttura dell’auricolare, normalmente alcune onde sonore vengono riflesse dalle pareti e rimbalzano sul diaframma del trasduttore, producendo dissonanza rispetto al risultato voluto. Grazie alla tecnologia HDSS la propagazione del suono all’interno della struttura viene tenuta sotto controllo, e si evita che questo “investa” il diaframma del trasduttore in modo incontrollato, il quale quindi si troverà a vibrare “solo” in conseguenza del segnale elettrico che riceve – esattamente come dovrebbe – senza “ulteriori” fonti spurie di energia.

L’accorgimento – secondo Intime – aumenta il realismo del suono e riduce l’affaticamento sull’impianto uditivo dell’utilizzatore. Ha tuttavia un contro: tende a “ripulire” un po’ troppo le vibrazioni del trasduttore dinamico, eliminando troppa parte delle alte frequenze.

E’ qui che viene in soccorso l’accurata calibrazione tra il tweeter ceramico VST2 e la parte di medie e medio-alte frequenze riprodotte dal trasduttore dinamico arricchito col grafene. Il risultato è un basso con profilo compatto e nitido, una gamma medio-alta armoniosa e una ampia riproduzione spaziale – tutte cose effettivamente presenti sulle Miyabi !

A colpo d’occhio

Scheda completa

Ambienti di prova

Fonti: Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Tempotec V1 + E1DA 9038D – Terminali silicone Spinfit CP-145 – cavo Dunu DUW-02S – tracce audio 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC.

Analisi della caratteristica sonora

Tonalità

La caratteristica tonale delle Miyabi è una V morbida, con modeste accentuazioni sui bassi medi e sui medi alti, medie frequenze non incassate, il tutto ben reciprocamente calibrato tanto da offrire una presentazione complessivamente molto piacevole.

Più importante ancora, le Miyabi offrono un timbro in-cre-di-bil-men-te “bio” (“naturale”), tanto che possono a volte sembrare eccessivamente intransigenti, quasi “grezze”. Gli strumenti acustici vengono trasmessi con un suono percepito come originario, “nudo”, nature – offrendo la sensazione davvero realistica di “presenza sulla scena”, di ricezione del suono prima di qualsiasi elaborazione di pulizia e pettinatura delle imperfezioni.

Per chi come me ascolta per il 99% del suo tempo jazz acustico le Miyabi offrono un’esperienza originale che produce assuefazione e le rende rapidamente un elemento preziosissimo del proprio ambiente audio.

Sub-Basso

Il sub-basso delle Miyabi è moderatamente esteso, veloce, ed un pochino meno evidente rispetto al basso medio. Più che adeguato alla resa del contrabbasso acustico.

Basso medio

Il basso medio delle Miyabi è veloce e potente, eppure articulato e dotato di trama. E’ evidentemente accentuato rispetto alla neutralità, il che offre un ottimo corpo p.es. al contrabbasso riuscendo però a restare quasi sempre rispettoso dell’autonomia della gamma media .

Solo occasionalmente e/o in alcuni generi musicali può capitare di trovare le gamme medie, le voci umane e le chitarre un po’ soggiogate al basso medio.

Medi

Le medie frequenze trasmesse dalle Miyabi sono naturali, realistiche, ben modulate e offrono una ottima tramatura – tutto ciò senza essere eccessivamente avanti nella presentazione generale. Pianoforte, violoncello e chitarra sono tutti resi in modo eccezionalmente naturale.

Le frequenze medio-alte sono energiche e luminose, pur restando sempre non affaticanti – quanto meno per i miei gusti, YMMV (conosciamo la questione: i medio-alti sono una di quelle aree sonore dove la sensibilità personale gioca un ruolo importante nel gradimento).

Voci maschili

Le voci maschili, con particolare riguardo ai tenori, sono rese molto bene, realisticamente naturali e dotate di buona trama. Le voci baritonali e basse possono occasionalmente entrare in conflitto con i toni bassi medi in passaggi musicali particolarmente affollati, specialmente quando sono coinvolti strumenti non acustici.

Voci femminili

Le voci femminili sono rese dalle Miyabi ancor meglio di quelle maschili: naturali, corpose, a volte quasi flautate. Non scadono mai nel sibilante, sembrano proprio tra i migliori risultati dell’ottima calibrazione dei medio alti eseguita sui trasduttori.

Alti

Senza dubblio gli alti sono tra gli aspetti per i quali le Miyabi offrono il meglio. Ho ascoltato più di qualche altro auricolare con tweeter piezo, e nessuno è all’altezza di quanto l’ottimo ing Watanabe è in grado di spremere dalle sue creazioni.

C’è un leggeriiiiiissimo “timbro piezo” che spunta molto raramente qua e là, ma nella quasi totalità del tempo d’ascolto i VST Intime regalano alti energici, dinamici, scoppiettanti, alquanto ariosi, ben dettagliati e soprattutto godevolissimi.

Mi piace credere che parte del timbro “ottone naturale” delle Miyabi sia legato al fatto che la struttura della camera acustica sia in effetti… in ottone.

Tecnicità

Palcoscenico

La proiezione scenica delle Miyabi è ottima. Lo spazio è molto ampio orizzontalmente, eccezionalmente esteso verticalmente, ed offre una buona profondità.

Immagine sonora

Anche grazie all’eccezionale capacità di separazione strumentale, l’immagine sonora proiettata dalle Miyabi è pulita, precisa e molto realistica.

Dettagli

Le Miyabi trasmettono una miriade di dettagli sonori da tutti i segmenti dello spettro. La risoluzione sui bassi, seppure molto buona in termini assoluti per auricolari di questa classe di prezzo, quasi impallidisce poi rispetto al risultato offerto sulle medie frequenze, le voci, e gli alti.

Separazione strumentale

Unitamente alle alte frequenze, la separazione strumentale è l’altra area di eccellenza assoluta per le Miyabi, che in questo offrono risultati che possono essere ritrovati solo su alcuni (!) prodotti di classe e prezzo (!!) molto, molto superiori.

Tutti gli strumenti sono spettacolarmente enucleati gli uni dagli altri, e stratificati in modo che all’ascoltatore arrivi una sensazione molto realistica di presenza sulla scena, o immediamente di fronte ad essa. E’ quasi possibile “vedere” i vari suonatori, la loro performance, e i loro errori (!).

Per trovare un livello di pulizia nella separazione strumentale associata a ottima corposità delle note superiore a quanto ascolto sulle Miyabi devo, per mia esperienza, “scomodare” auricolari come le Dunu Zen – a circa 4 volte il costo di un paio di Miyabi.

Pilotabilità

Le Miyabi hanno una sensibilità alquanto modesta (100dB/mW) richiedono quindi un’amplificazione non banalissima. Nulla di eccessivo, ma è meglio evitare di fare affidamento sulle capacità interne di un normale smartphone.

Una buona notizia è che la loro impedenza non è ultra-bassa. C’è quindi quasi l’imbarazzo della scelta di fonti, dac/amp o dongle capaci di produrre la potenza d’uscita necessaria a fare cantare correttamente le Miyabi.

Aspetti fisici

Struttura

La carrozzeria e la camera acustica delle Miyabi sono in ottone, con il dichiarato intento di offrire un timbro acustico tiepido, naturale, simile appunto ad un ottone.

La parte posteriore è in resina color tartaruga, stampata con una tecnica giapponese chiamata Takumi. Il risultato è una colorazione casualmente variegata che rende ogni paio unico naturalmente. L’accoppiata tra il retro in resina e la camera acustica frontale in ottone ha uno stile estetico alquanto piacevole. Miyabi in giapponese vuole in effetti dire qualcosa di simile a “elegante”.

Indossabilità

Le IEM a forma di proiettile (grasso, in questo caso) sono molto comode per me.

I terminali in silicone forniti a corredo sono di buona qualità ma li trovo un pochino troppo morbidi, e se a questo aggiungo che gli auricolari non sono leggerissimi, mi succede che usando quelli l’auricolare sinistro tende a perdere aderenza dal canale uditivo (il mio sinistro è un po’ più ampio del destro).

Dopo la “solita” lunga e noiosa rotazione tra le 3 dozzine di terminali di vario tipo che ho a disposizione alla fine mi sono deciso per gli Spinfit CP-145.

Comfort

Molto soggettivo. Personalmente le trovo molto confortevoli, come mi capita per molti se non tutti gli auricolari a forma di proiettile.

Isolamento

La forma a proiettile non offre schermatura della conca naturalmente, anche se il calibro decisamente “grasso” un pochino aiuta.

Cavo

Nonostante lo sforzo che anche in questo l’ing Watanabe ha sicuramente profuso, il cavo fornito a corredo non mi ha impressionato per qualità. Dopo varie prove ho scelto un Dunu DUW-02S che effettivamente migliora sensibilmente le Miyabi in termini di apertura sonora, separazione e stratificazione.

Credo sia altresì importante notare come non tutti i cavi di terza parte che ho provato sulle mie Miyabi offrissero un “click” ugualmente convincente al momento della connessione alle prese MMCX, e in un paio di casi la connessione stessa si è dimostrata persino instabile (al contrario di quanto avviene quando gli stessi cavi sono connessi a un qualsiasi altro paio di IEM tra quelle che possiedo). Un punto di attenzione per l’ing. Watanabe.

In ultimo: ho notizia che da una certa data in avanti Ozeid ha iniziato ad offrire il proprio cavo top di gamma (“M Kanade”) a corredo delle Miyabi. Mi riservo di provarne uno per verificare una molto migliore sinergia rispetto all’ M Sound che ho ricevuto insieme alle mie Miyabi, di produzione precedente.

Specifiche (dichiarate dal costruttore)

Confronti

Tanchjim Oxygen (250 $)

Le Miyabi sono complessivamente più calde, con un evidente accento sui bassi medi. Le Oxygen sono più bilanciate-neutre, e se un accento mostrano sta piuttosto sui medi alti. Il timbro ottonale delle Miyabi è totalmente assente dalle Oxygen, che sono fondamentalmente trasparenti.

Separazione strumentale e microdinamica sono a favore delle Miyabi praticamente sempre, tranne in casi di passaggi particolarmente fitti di varie voci sui bassi medi – situazione nella quale né Miyabi né Oxygen, per diversi motivi, esprimono il meglio. La resa degli alti è più naturale sulle Miyabi, con particolare riguardo agli strumenti metallici – sulle Oxygen invece si presentano più puliti anche se un pochino meno dettagliati.

Ikko OH1S (159 $)

La prima cosa che si nota confrontando le OH1S con le Miyabi è l’evidente minor corpo nelle note delle prime. Le OH1S suonano più magre e quindi meno espressive, per contro meno colorate, a fronte delle Miyabi più energiche, muscolari e “teatrali”.

Il trasduttore dinamico delle OH1S è più veloce ma non ha maggiore risoluzione di quello sulle Miyabi. Perciò il basso delle OH1S è meno gonfio ma si presenta anche meno naturale e meno strutturato. Soprattutto: la separazione strumentale è totalmente a favore delle Miyabi. Le OH1S hanno medi alti più invasivi, che a volte possono presentarsi troppo squillanti, a fronte di quelli più energici, ma più controllati, delle Miyabi.

Ikko OH10 (199 $)

Sulle OH10 il sub basso è più elevato, ma il basso medio lo è meno rispetto alle Miyabi. Soprattutto, il basso delle OH10 è più veloce e asciutto e quindi suona più pulito da un lato, ma meno espressivo e strutturato dall’altro. Inoltre, anche nonostante questa maggior pulizia delle OH10, la separazione strumentale delle Miyabi su tutto lo spettro – inclusi i bassi – resta superiore.

Sulle OH10 le note hanno corpo più magro, e il timbro ottonale è assente. Gli strumenti a fiato e i piatti suonano meno vividi che sulle Miyabi. I medi sulle OH10 sono molto più indietro, e le voci umane non sono nemmeno confrontabili a quelle delle Miyabi (intenzionalmente, aggiungerei).

Dunu Zen (700$)

Il basso delle Zen è più veloce di quello delle Miyabi, e più controllato, ed offre migliore microdinamica. La separazione strumentale, seppure ottima sulle Miyabi, è ancor migliore sulle Zen, su tutto lo spettro. Le Zen hanno una tonalità tiepida, ma il loro timbro è naturale. Le Miyabi sono più calde, non solo a causa del basso medio più corposo ma soprattutto al maggior corpo delle note medie e medio alte, e al timbro ottonale.

I medi alti sono più puliti sulle Zen ma anche meno energici ed espressivi. Le Miyabi sono inoltre più ariose in alto. Le Zen offrono miglior dettaglio su tutto lo spettro, sebbene la differenza in questo rispetto alle Miyabi non corrisponda alla differenza tra i loro prezzi.

Considerazioni e conclusioni

Non conosco molte IEM che costino meno di 5-600$ e in grado di offrire un simile mix di tecnicità altamente raffinate e timbro naturale, vivo ed ergetico. Ed ancor meno ne conosco se cerco tra quelle che costano meno di 200$, come le Miyabi.

Per me questo è materiale eccellente. Ho avviato il processo di raccolta delle opinioni dei coblogger al fine dell’inserimento delle Miyabi sul Wall of Excellence.

Il campione Miyabi di cui parlo in questo articolo è un acquisto personale. Non sono incorsi contatti con il sig Watanabe.

La versione originale di questo, come per tutti gli altri miei articoli, è in lingua inglese.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Recensione Di Intime Miyabi – Speciale Unicità appeared first on Music For The Masses.

At the time of this article, Miyabi sells on the manufacturer’s site for JPY 21.450,00 which is approximately $ 150. Add another $ 30 to have that reforwaded to EU / USA by a service like Tenso or equivalent.

“Intime Acoustic” is not a known brand at all in the west, as it comes from a very small company limiting its commercial horizon to Japan, where it’s based. In my previous article I spent some lines about the company, and about the technology (developed, and sometimes even patented by the company’s owner) involved. I’m echoing such information here below, with appropriate updates, for the reader’s convenience.

Intime Acoustic, a.k.a. Ozeid Co., a.k.a O2aid.com…

Intime Acoustic is a brand owned by Ozeid Co., Ltd., a quite young (2016-founded) Takasaki City (JPN) based company. Its main business is actually not manufacturing, but consulting.

The owner and key developer Mr Yoshiyuki Watanabe has 35+ years of experience on devices and applications that use piezoelectric materials.

Rotate his company name “ozeid” (or even better its web domain name “o2aid”) by 180°. What do you read ? 

That said, mr Watanabe also decided to deliver some of his competence in form of earphones, targeting young users – young like his children – aiming to convey (in his own words) “the good sound of Japan“.

Key technologies

Similarly to other models in Intime lineup, Miyabi is based on a dual-driver system including a 10mm dynamic driver, and a somewhat special ceramic tweeter taking care of the upper treble / top octave end.

A number of very interesting details are available regarding the technology inside Sora 2, let me summarise what the main claims are.

1 – “Vertical Super Tweeter”

VST is made of some sort of special laminated ceramics, instead of the most commonly adopted titanium oxide.

Fundamentally, laminated ceramics is supposed to offer more controllable vibrations.

Conventional “super tweeters” are so-called as they reproduce sounds outside the audible range, but this Intime’s variation, thanks to the uncommon material selection in addition to their calibrations, has a different behaviour and reproduces overtones, effectively contributing to the highest-end part of the audible spectrum.

The Miyabi feature “third-generation VST2” of such tweeters. According to mr Watanabe the improvement has to do with adopting dual ceramics, which ensures that the hysteresis characteristics are minimized, while sound pressure sensitivity is maintained.

For example, 3rd VST is supposed to offer richer overtones on piano notes, and crisper notes on a jumping saxophone. Owning a model based on a previous VST iteration (Sora 2) I can testify this is really the case.

2 – Graphene coating

A graphene coating has been applied to the Dynamic Driver unit, which – always according to mr Watanabe – is amongst the reasons why his drivers reproduce mid-high range frequencies with controlled power and good definition.

3 – Brass housings

Unlike what happens on the Sora line, Miyabi housings are made of brass. According to mr Watanabe, this choice contributes to delivery Miyabi’s signature soft, deep sustain and bass reproduction. I don’t know if the cause-effect liaison is right, but the result definitely is good.

4 – HDSS

Another unique (and patented, actually) technology adopted inside Miyabi, as much as inside Ti3, Sora, Sora2 too, is called “HDSS” as in High Definition Sound Standard.

Its purpose is to suppress sound reflections inside the housing, resulting in cleaner output.

Some sound waves are commonly uncontrolledly reflected inside the housing, impacting onto the dynamic driver diaphragm, causing dissonance from the intended purpose. With HDSS technology, the sound inside the housings is more controlled and does not “invest” the diaphragm randomly, allowing the dynamic driver to move “only” as a consequence to the signal source, as indeed it should.

This – according to Intime – increases sound realism and decreases fatigue. It has a down side though: it tends to purge too much of the high frequencies off the dynamic driver vibration.

This is where a careful calibration between the resolution of the ceramic VST2 and the mid-high range tuning of the graphene coated DD becomes vital, resulting in a bass with a solid outline, harmonious mid-high range and wide spatial expression – as in facts Miyabi does deliver, big time !

At-a-glance Card

Full Device Card

Test setup

Sources: Sony NW-A55 mrWalkman / Questyle QP1R / Tempotec V1 + E1DA 9038D – Spinfit CP-145 tips – Dunu DUW-02S cable – lossless 16-24/44.1-192 FLAC tracks.

Signature analysis

Tonality

Miyabi’s tonality is a mild V, with modest bumps in the midbass and highmids, and unrecessed mids, all well reciprocally calibrated to offer a very pleasant overall presentation.

Most importantly, Miyabi offer an in-cre-di-bly “natural” (“organic”) timbre, so much that some may find it excessively unforgiving, almost “crude”. Acoustic instruments come across sort of raw, unadultered, nature they’d say in Paris – which grants the auditioner a unique “presence on the performance scene” sensation, as if sound were delivered to them prior to any postprocessing combing imperfections or such.

For someone like me listening for 99% of his time to acoustic jazz this is a unique, addictive experience which quickly turns into an invaluable asset.

Sub-Bass

Sub bass is moderately extended, fast, but a bit subduded in power vs midbass. More then adequate to render standup bass.

Mid Bass

Miyabi’s midbass is fast and slammy, yet articulated and textured. It’s evidently bumped up, offering very solid body to standup bass while staying respectful of mids at virtually all times.

Only occasionally and/or on specific musical genres or selections male vocals or guitars may come accross a bit subdued.

Mids

Miyabi’s mids are organic, realistic, very well modulated and textured – this in spite of them not being particularly forward. Pianos, cellos and guitars are very naturally rendered.

High mids are energetic and shiny, but always south of fatiguing – at least in my books, YMMV (we know the drill: highmids are one of those areas where personal sensitivity varies a lot).

Male Vocals

Male vocals, with particular regards to tenors, are very well rendered, textured and credibly organic. Bass voices may occasionally partially conflict with midbass on particularly crowded passages, especially when non-acoustic instruments are involed.

Female Vocals

Miyabi’s female vocals are even better than male: organic, bodied, at times even flutey. Never scanting into sibilance, they take advantage of the driver’s superb highmids tuning.

Highs

Trebles are no doubt one of the two areas on which Miyabi offers their best. I did hear a few other piezo tweeters, but simply not one holds a candle to what mr Watanabe can make his drivers deliver.

There is a veeeery faint “piezo timbre” occasionally emerging, but for the vast majority of the cases Intime’s VST deliver energetic, dynamic, sparkly, quite airy, well detailed and most of all addictively energetic treble.

I like to assume that part of the “organically brassy timbre” result is also due to the housings being made of… brass, indeed.

Technicalities

Soundstage

Miyabi’s stage projection is very good. The room is very well extended horizontally, shows an exceptional height, and very good depth.

Imaging

Helped by outstanding instrument separation, Miyabi’s imaging is neat, precise and very realistic.

Details

Miyabi retrieve tons of detail from all segments of the spectrum. The bass part, while very good in absolute terms for a driver of this price category, almost pales when faced with the special proficiency coming out from mids, vocals and trebles.

Instrument separation

Together with treble, instrument separation is the other area on which Miyabi deliver a quality which can only be found on selected, much higher class (and price) competition.

All voices are spectacularly enucleated from one another, and layered in a way that the auditioner has a very realist sensation of being on the stage, or just in front of it, and can almost “see” the various players, their performance, abilities, and mistakes (!) happening together.

Separation clarity coupled to solid note body similar or better to what Miyabi offers cannot be encountered for my experience until engaging with IEMs the like of Dunu Zen – at +-4 times Miyabi’s budget.

Driveability

Miyabi’s sensitivity is modest so they do call for some non-trivial amping. Nothing excessive, don’t worry, but it’s best not to rely on a mere smartphone in their case.

A piece of good news is however that their impedance is not ultra-low, so there’s a thicker flock of sources, dac-amps and dongles which are able to deliver the power Miyabi requires.

Physicals

Build

Housings are made of solid brass, with the declared intention to deliver a “brass-like”, warm-ish, organic, acoustic timbre.

Their back end is in tortoise-color resin, moulded adopting a japanese tecnique called Takumi. The result is uneven in terms of colouring, resulting in no two units be identical. The resin back-end paired with the brass main chambers make for a quite stylish ensemble. Miyabi is indeed japanese for “elegant, stylish”.

Fit

Fat bullet shapes like Miyabi’s are very easy to fit for me.

Stock tips are good in terms of sound results but I found them a tad too soft, which paired with the housings’ weight, their shape etc, for whatever reason makes my left driver tend to lose its seal inside my left ear.

After the “usual” lenghty and boring rotation amongst a couple of dozen alternatives I settled on Spinfit CP-145.

Comfort

Very subjective. I personally find them extremely comfortable, like for most if not all bullet shaped housings.

Isolation

No concha shielding due to bullet shape, but their “fat” build contributes positively nonetheless.

Cable

In spite of the effort that I’m sure mr Watanabe put on it, too, I wasn’t impressed by the stock cable. After some trials, I settled onto a Dunu DUW-02S which is significantly upgrading the Miyabi in terms of spatial openness, layering and separation.

It’s also important to note that not all third party cables I tried onto my Miyabi clicked the same way, and a couple of them even resulted in unstable connectivity (unlike what happens when the same cable is connected to all other MMCX IEMs I have). Mr Watanabe may want to look into this.

Last but probably not least, I understand Ozeid is now bundling their high end cable (M Kanade) with Miyabi. Looking forward into getting one to check a very likely better pairing.

Specifications (declared)

Comparisons

Tanchjim Oxygen ($ 250)

Miyabi is overall warmer, with an evident accent on midbass compared to Oxygen which is more balanced-neutral, if something with a soft accent on highmids. Miyabi’s brassy timbre and coloration is totally absent on Oxygen, which is mostly transparent.

Instrument separation and microdynamics are in favour of Miyabi everywhere except on crowded midbass passages, where neither – for different causes – is at the industry’s best. Treble rendering is more organic on Miyabi, with special regards to metal instruments – Oxygen on the other hand comes across cleaner if a tad less detailed.

Ikko OH1S ($ 159)

The first thing one notices about OH1S vs Miyabi is the obviously thinner note weight delivered by the former. OH1S sounds leaner and therefore less expressive if also less colored compared with the more energetic, muscular and “thetral” Miyabi.

OH1S DD is faster but not better resolving compared to Miyabi’s so OH1S’s midbass is less inflated but also evidently less textured and organic. Most of all, instrument separation is all in favor of Miyabi. OH1S also has more invasive highmids which may occasionally sound shoutier compared to the energetic but controlled ones on Miyabi.

Ikko OH10 ($ 199)

OH10’s sub bass is more elevated but midbass is less compared to Miyabi. Most of all, OH10’s bass is faster and dryer compared to Miyabi’s so it sounds cleaner on one end, but less expressive and textured on the other. Also, even in spite of such higher cleanness, Miyabi’s separation all over the spectrum including the bass is better compared to OH10’s.

OH10’s note weight is also leaner and the timbre is not brassy. Wind instruments and hihats and crashes sound much less vivid compared to Miyabi. Mids are much more recessed and vocals are not even comparable (by design, I would say).

Dunu Zen ($700)

Zen’s bass is faster compared to Miyabi’s, and more controlled. Instrument separation, though superb on Miyabi, is better on Zen all along the spectrum. Zen’s tonality is warm, but its timbre is quite neutral. Miyabi is warmer, not only due to somewhat fatter midbass but mainly due to heavier note body on the mids and highmids, and its brass-metallic timbre.

High mids are cleaner on Zen but also less energetic and expressive. Miyabi is definitely airier up above. Zen has a better detail retrieval all over the spectrum, although not by the same margin as its higher price tag might suggest.

Considerations & conclusions

I can’t name many IEMs costing less than $5-600 and delivering an equivalently pleasant mix of highly refined technicalities, organic, lifelike timbre and energetic presentation like Miyabi do. And even less at Miyabi’s sub-200$ price.

To me this is excellent material. I initiated the process to collect cobloggers’ opinions to consider sticking Miyabi on our Wall of Excellence.

The Miyabi sample I reported about in this article is a personal purchase, no contact incurred with Mr Watanabe.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post Intime Miyabi 雅 アンティーム Review – Uniquely Special appeared first on Music For The Masses.